femicide and the patriarchal prerogative
- Ginsburg
- Feb 13, 2022
- 4 min read
Is it society’s moral imperative to continually quest for empathy toward murderers?
A common journalism trope: If the lead for an article is a question, the answer is usually no.
Femicide is a term coined from the Gangnam station murder of a twenty-three year old woman on March 17th, 2016, meaning "the killing of women or girls on account of their gender."
The italics are intentional, not to single the word "coined" as something to define (it means to invent or devise a new word or phrase) but rather to highlight how ridiculous this notion is:
"As the newspaper Hankook Ilbo observed, the Gangnam station murder 'is not the first incident of femicide, but it seems to be the first incident to be called femicide.'”
Regarding this murder as the first instance using the term "femicide" not only serves as a stark reminder of sexism in the justice system, but also disparages the victim with a harmful narrative of martyrdom- with her death catalyzing a patriarchal society to finally acknowledge the prevailing prejudice against women, by bypassing their initial justification.
Yes, justification.
Dr. Jinsook Kim’s article “Sticky Activism: The Gangnam Station Murder Case and New Feminist Practices against Misogyny and Femicide” remarks on the initial narrative of this murder being one of holistic tragedy:
“Similarly, police investigating the case concluded that the killing was not a hate crime against women but rather the tragic act of a mental patient with a history of schizophrenia.”
MBC Newsdesk, the nightly newscast of South Korea’s major broad-casting network, for example, in a headline described the murder as 'presumed the result of paranoia [i.e., mental illness], not misogyny.'”
It’s frightening. A conjured narrative of the loss of autonomy- the official statement subtle in its use of the word “tragic”- do they mean for the victim of femicide, or rather the murderer’s mental state? Could they mean both?
What results is the guise of social justice used to nullify victimization. According to the initial statements by the South Korean police shown above, the reasoning of schizophrenia and random violence is given more value than targeted motivation. Despite ignoring six men and attacking the one young woman he encountered, despite allegations that the murderer had been feeling ignored by women, despite the growing culture of leniency toward men who are unable to form relationships, the murder is given reasoning.
Femicide is not sporadic, politically de-emphasized violence against women, but rather an extension of a global social phenomenon: the validated misogynist.
Social pressure and mental illness are two of many reasons men have been justified in their sexist vendetta against women, and one needs to look no further than the involuntary celibate ("incel") movement and its mogul Elliot Rodger, who committed six counts of murder during the 2014 Isla Vista massacre, motivated by his insecurity and misogynistic views toward women. Rodger’s crimes are strikingly similar to the Gangnam station murder not just in what was committed, but also the narrative ran by the responding media that portrayed Rodger as a struggling, mentally anguished young man who took his own life after his murder spree. Holistic tragedy.
What is an "incel", anyway?
Incels are members an online worldwide movement of men who consider themselves unable to attract women. They thereby justify their hostility toward women and men who are sexually active due to their mental distress. To these insecure misogynists, Rodger became a figurehead and a pioneer, many considering him their founder. The massacre he committed being two years before the Gangnam station murder lends credibility to assuming that the murderer was part of incel culture and knew of Rodger, not unlike other murderers who directly credit him for their actions.
Rodger is regarded by incels as a revolutionary. Many who share a similar distaste for women are validated not only by Rodger’s movement, but the media’s depiction of his mental illness implying a lack of autonomy for his actions. Incels feel as though they're owed empathy regardless of their views or acts. It's not an unfounded assertion, because they are often given that empathy.
Does society’s extension of this empathy toward committers of femicide come from a sense of righteousness, or rather, a patriarchal subconscious?
The real victims of these crimes are the multiple dead men and women.
Another element of similarity between these two instances of femicide is the aspect of social media mobilization; but whereas social media propelled Rodger into a messiah for violent misogynists, women in South Korea used it to create a feminist movement:
“This important change in the categorization of the incident was made possible by women’s activism online and offline, especially the use of the sticky notes to express their emotions and responses regarding the incident and to make visible the gendered nature of the crime.
By way of example, the online hashtag #saranamatda (survived) was created for reporting everyday gender-based violence, and group pages called 'Gangnam Station Exit 10' were created on Facebook and Twitter to upload and share online the sticky notes left at the memorial site and announcing other actions in support of the victim.”
So, what’s the difference? Well, the incel movement also resulted in online mobilization, yet the popularized posts were not nearly as great in quantity. Femicide supporters rallied behind a one hundred and forty-one page manifesto created by Rodger.
A manifesto. It’s sickening; these misogynists believe themselves to be revolutionists against an oppressive system, as though their sexism is some kind of Marxian agenda.
Like two sides of the same coin, the initial murders in these two instances sparked immense reverberations through the internet, with one being an uprising against femicide and a patriarchal narrative, and the other a perpetuation of incel culture. Perhaps it is the death of both the victim of the Gangnam station murder and Rodger that immortalized them for the causes they created. Or maybe, it’s the narrative of leniency that has propelled Rodger into mogul status and placed the onus on women to be their own salvation.
The difference is that while it took masses of women to overthrow the mainstream media’s perception of the murder, it took only one man’s words to start a worldwide movement of continuous femicides, misogyny, and an internet culture designed to validate it all.
Right and wrong are muddied by patriarchy. The media has conflated egalitarian perspective with condoning femicide through the justification of mental anguish as a result of sexual failings.
Yet this journal posits: By constantly painting this violence as cyclical and looking for the gray, perhaps that which is black and white becomes muted. Sometimes, we as a society shouldn't expend the effort.
Sometimes, it just results in disparaging the true victims of patriarchy.
Comments