Most of the listings are in French but some events will certainly take place in other languages as well.

That would be when Marc Lepine murdered a chunk of his potential fellow students, all women, because he felt their presence denied him a place in their engineering course? You know, December sixth(6)?
edit:
More accurate details, 16 years on.

[ 05 December 2005: Message edited by: aRoused ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by aRoused:
[QB]Ah, me lawd. rsfarrell, no offense, but..

---

No offense to you, but I didn't have to ask. I chose to reveal my ignorance out of the hopes of finding out what it was and why I should care.

Canada doesn't get much airtime down here, and I expect that few people, even people who were adults when it happened (I wasn't) have ever heard about it.

Now a few more will.

December 6, 1989.
l'Ecole Polytechnique in Montreal.
"The Montreal Massacre"

Marc Lepine blamed women for his not getting into engineering so he walked into a class with a loaded rifle. He separated the men from the women and told the targeted group "I hate feminists" before he began firing on them. Then he left the class and shot every woman he could. He hit 27 people. 13 survived. The 14 women that died are remembered every year along with all the other women who have died from violence perpetrated by men.

Geneviève Bergeron, aged 21
Hélène Colgan, 23
Nathalie Croteau, 23
Barbara Daigneault, 22
Anne-Marie Edward, 21
Maud Haviernick, 29
Barbara Maria Klucznik, 31
Maryse Leclair, 23
Annie St.-Arneault, 23
Michèle Richard, 21
Maryse Laganière, 25
Anne-Marie Lemay, 22
Sonia Pelletier, 28
Annie Turcotte, 21

If I've made any errors or omissions I hope someone will correct me.

[ 06 December 2005: Message edited by: Accidental Altruist ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Accidental Altruist:
Geez. I'm only 2 years older than you and the event had a HUGE impact on me.

---

Rest in Peace.

I find it strange that so many people remember the name of the gunman, but so few the names of the victims.

Out of December 6th, the White Ribbon Campaign was formed. In a twisted way, Polytechnique acted as catalyst for a number of men to be active in addressing violence against women.

I was way over 18 and, although from Montreal, living away -- in Sudbury. Spending time with not very urban people, in an environment where jokes whose punchlines depended on homophobia (meaning homophobia, not homo-antagonism) or the normality of wife-beating were unexceptional.

When the news came, one of the themes of our reactions was "What the hell were the guys doing?!" Just letting that creep walk around? Reload? We'd work out how surely someone could have done something, thrown something, even alone, once it was clear he was actually shooting people. Oh we -- I -- had it worked out.

Just a few years later, in another place entirely, someone aimed a gun at me. A hold-up, of me and a couple of friends, in their house, by a gang of young guys with a large-calibre longarm that may have been home-made. In an environment where murders and rapes in such situations were unexceptional.

They had machetes too, but it was the gun that did it. I thought I was being cool and level-headed throughout the ten minutes or so of the incident -- the guys eventually left with the stereo and some change, no actual attack except a whack with the side of the machete blade on my male friend's bicep.

And then I realised I had not once thought of actually doing anything....

Not when they wanted the female friend (we did manage to refuse to move from in front of the hall to her room), not when the machete-swinger whacked my buddy, not one damn moment at all. That whack could have been a slice, for all I knew when it happened. And I was paralysed. Useless, the myriad prior fantasies while growing up of saving the day in such a confrontation notwithstanding, the myriad very good combat memoirs I'd read notwithstanding.

I hadn't had a fucking clue what those guys at the Polytechnique went through. Everything I'd said those years before with my Sudbury pals was, yes, ashes in my mouth.

Later, of course, I read of that poor bastard who was one of those guys, and a year or so later killed himself -- whose parents then killed themselves a year or so after that. And I felt the piece of shit that I had been, talking the way I did. I don't judge people any too quickly now, and if that's not exactly feminist it's the humanist that, in most poitical/social controversies these days, what is called feminism represents.

One womens name was, however, absent from that list and that was the women who's remains were found in Parkdale recently. She was unamed because she still does not have a name. No one has reported her missing and police have absolutely no idea who she may be.

While she may not have been killed at the hands of a husband or partner there is a strong possibilty that she was.

The fact that she remains unamed and aparently unmissed is to depressing for words.

[ 06 December 2005: Message edited by: indiemuse ]

My heart kind of froze because I hadn't wanted to talk about this, not yet. I asked him who told him, and he said his teacher told them today in school, that she read a text to the class (he's in grade 2).

He said, well, it was a long time ago, and probably those girls would have been grown up and would be old or even dead already anyways. I said no, they would be the same age as me; it was only 16 years ago, and I was in a university classroom that night, too.

We had a long talk about the anger and sadness and bad things people do; the bad ideas they can't chase out of their heads.

In contrast with the womyn being found in fields around Edmonton, or the womyn who went missing from the streets of Vancouver, the womyn of L'ecole Polytechnique were my peers in terms of class and societal position. They were also very obviouly the victims of sexism... hard to argue when the killer was screaming "I hate feminists". The deaths of the womyn of Edmonton and Vancouver are also very patently due to sexism, no less because the killer didn't scream his hatred for women, perhaps even more so.

The extreme hatred of womyn that results in men killing women is at one end of the spectrum. What is at the other? How about the typical bullying that goes on in pretty much every relationship I've been in. As a man I do it. It's not intentional, but I am (in retrospect) aware of it in myself. When I'm angry, I use threatening body language. It's just something I do. After the fact, I am ashamed of myself for doing it, but it's something that I think most men do. We don't have to abuse the womyn we love. At some point in the past, another 'less enlightened' man has done it for us. Based solely on my personal experience, most womyn have had some form of abusive boyfriend who has imprinted into their psyche that men are physically capable of hurting them. That abuse allows even those men who would never abuse womyn to take a kind of male privilege, the subconscious intimidation that takes place through body language and anger.

I can't speak for anyone but myself, but I hope other progressive men reading this see themselves (actually, I hope they don't, but suspect they will) in what I have written and examine the sexist things they do and attempt to address them, and most importantly try and change themselves. I'm far, far, far from perfect, but I try and catch myself. I don't always succeed. On December 6th I reflect on it a bit more... and every year I look back and realize that I've done a slight bit better than the year before.

quote:

---

Originally posted by skdadl:
Francine Pelletier's narrative of encountering people immediately afterwards - especially men - who did not get it, who refused to accept that the attack had anything to do with sexism.

---

It happened on Wednesday Dec. 6, 1989. On Thursday the Ontario legislature responded by standing for one minute's silence.

Our school board (I was a trustee then) met that Thursday night. We had no guidance from the Ministry of Education, since nothing like this had ever happened before, and no one could say how to react.

We trustees unanimously agreed to lower the flags at all the schools the next morning, although some of the board administration said there was no precedent for that.

Friday morning some principals in the rural east end of the county refused. They said the motion was illegal, because the Ministry has an official list of who the flag is lowered for, and 14 Quebec young women were not on that list. (I mean, they weren't even from Ontario.) Meanwhile, the government of Quebec and the City of Montreal had declared three days of mourning.

quote:

---

Originally posted by the grey:
Frustrating that it takes Warren Kinsella to point out that the Leaders have been talking about everything but this on the campaign trail today.

---

His mea culpa is up today.

quote:

---

NDP Leader Jack Layton attended the ceremony but stood discreetly in the back and declined interview requests, saying it was a day for women to speak out on violence.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Wilf Day:
We trustees unanimously agreed to lower the flags at all the schools the next morning, although some of the board administration said there was no precedent for that.

---

What a difference a progressive school board or staff makes. In the early nineties, I was nearly suspended for putting up "illegal" posters commemorating December 6 at my high school and running an "unsanctioned" fundraiser for a local women's shelter. I was told that violence against women was "political" and had no place in the school. I served my detention and ran the program again the next year. This time I had the support of the new female VP and suddenly December 6 was no longer a "political" issue. The only request: remember the names of those who died, not those who killed.

[edited to add a missing word]

[ 07 December 2005: Message edited by: beibhnn ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by m0nkyman:
The extreme hatred of womyn that results in men killing women is at one end of the spectrum. What is at the other? How about the typical bullying that goes on in pretty much every relationship I've been in. As a man I do it. It's not intentional, but I am (in retrospect) aware of it in myself. When I'm angry, I use threatening body language. It's just something I do. After the fact, I am ashamed of myself for doing it, but it's something that I think most men do. We don't have to abuse the womyn we love. At some point in the past, another 'less enlightened' man has done it for us. Based solely on my personal experience, most womyn have had some form of abusive boyfriend who has imprinted into their psyche that men are physically capable of hurting them. That abuse allows even those men who would never abuse womyn to take a kind of male privilege, the subconscious intimidation that takes place through body language and anger.

---

I know it's been 16 years, but WTF?

I just spent the last two hours interviewing young women at a community college in New Brunswick (for a podcast I'm involved with).

I talked to about eight women between the ages of 18-20.

NONE. ZERO. NADA. Had heard of the Montreal Massacre.

NOT ONE!?

I'm just sad right now. It was only 16 years ago....why aren't these kids being taught about this??

And why wasn't there anything done at the college to promote awareness? (I know why, one of the women I interviewed was the college's student council vice-president).

quote:

---

Originally posted by the grey:

The others spoke or issued statements.

---

I appreciate what Layton is saying, but did any of the female NDP members make a statement instead? I didn't hear anything. This, coupled with the fact that Layton was speaking in Montreal yesterday morning on a completely different topic, made it seem like no one from the NDP cared. (And I'm a supporter, so it makes me angry to have to point this out.)

Actually, I was very upset with the lack of media coverage in general. And the lack of people attending ceremonies. We have always closed our [anti-violence] agency to attend the ceremony at the university, but I know a lot of agencies aren't bothering anymore. I think that also speaks to the decline in advocacy around women's issues, but that's a whole 'nother topic.

quote:

---

Originally posted by MartinArendt:
I find it strange that so many people remember the name of the gunman, but so few the names of the victims.

---

(As well as any special circumstances; I remember when it dawned on me, as a lecturer with largeish classes, that whenver I mentioned rape there was likely to be someone in the class who had personal acquaintance with rape, directly or indirectly. Likewise other traumatic things, of course.)

That people get shot: even 2 year olds should know that. That when they're shot they tend to twitch & jerk, not necessary. Or even good, unless answering a real question. That women are often beaten by their men, or that children can be attacked by adults, any time. What exactly the attacking adults do, no, except as you think necessary for protection or, of course, in answer to real questions.

They remember information, but I think they're more affected by your mood ('affect', really) when talking.

quote:

---

Originally posted by dgrollins:
I have to post this somewhere....

I know it's been 16 years, but WTF?

I just spent the last two hours interviewing young women at a community college in New Brunswick (for a podcast I'm involved with).

I talked to about eight women between the ages of 18-20.

NONE. ZERO. NADA. Had heard of the Montreal Massacre.

NOT ONE!?

I'm just sad right now. It was only 16 years ago....why aren't these kids being taught about this??

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by dgrollins:

I talked to about eight women between the ages of 18-20.

NONE. ZERO. NADA. Had heard of the Montreal Massacre.

I'm just sad right now. It was only 16 years ago....why aren't these kids being taught about this??

Anyway...I just had to vent. Go about your business.

---

Sigh...

I had a conversation with a roommate (who, incidentally, I did not know before moving in here) on the 16th. I borrowed some ribbon from him, and said, hey...do you know why I'm wearing this ribbon? He had no idea, so I told him what had happened, and how it means that we need to address violence against women.

He responded by saying that some guy shooting people isn't the same as some guy beating his wife. I said it was a continuum of violence, related to the society we live in. He just kept saying that some guy shooting random people had nothing to do with beating somebody's wife, and that "they have memorials for everything, these days".

It went back and forth, and then he cut me off and said he didn't need a lecture. I said, "well, you asked"...he responded "yeah, but not for a lecture". I said "this is the way the world works, dude!" And stormed out of the house.

quote:

---

It went back and forth, and then he cut me off and said he didn't need a lecture. I said, "well, you asked"...he responded "yeah, but not for a lecture". I said "this is the way the world works, dude!" And stormed out of the house.

Maybe I was over-reacting...I don't know...I was really ticked, though.

---

You might never know what impact you'll have on your roommate's perceptions. How often do folks change their opinion in the heat of an argument or debate? Rarely does a spirited discussion turn a 180 with someone exclaiming, "You are right & I'm wrong!".

I agree with you that not only the Aboriginal street women Pickton murdered but even working-class women might not get such an outpouring as the Polytechnique victims did (though not all were actually "middle-class"). This is a valid issue and has been raised before. There have been many monuments and commemorations for the Vancouver victims, actually. One is by a local (Kahnawake) Mohawk artist, Ellen Gabriel.

On this board you will find threads about the Vancouver victims and about violence against indigenous and marginalised women.

Your other point strikes me as a red herring. I have attended many commemorations of Polytechnique, and never seen any where men were excluded.

quote:

---

Originally posted by lagatta:
Chubbles, the problem is that you are a recent-rabble-rouser wading in on a remembrance post, so I do find that a bit rude.

---

I'm not sure why it's rude, exactly. Is there a waiting period before you let newbies post?

quote:

---

I agree with you that not only the Aboriginal street women Pickton murdered but even working-class women might not get such an outpouring as the Polytechnique victims did (though not all were actually "middle-class").

---

If they were at university, they were in a position of privilege.

quote:

---

Your other point strikes me as a red herring. I have attended many commemorations of Polytechnique, and never seen any where men were excluded.

---

I'm referring to the commemoration held right after the tragedy. I can't remember what the result was but feminists did indeed try to bar these women's loved ones from attending the service.

quote:

---

Feminists do have the right to hold women-only events (just as racially discriminated groups have the right to hold Black-only, Aboriginal-only events etc.) to create their own space.

---

Of course, anybody has the right to discriminate in this way but outsiders also have the right to criticize the discrimination.

quote:

---

It is not "anti-male".

---

Look at the mandate of this board.

I was a student at Université de Montréal when the massacre occurred and was writing a graduate history exam that very evening. I don't remember any event right after the massacre, in Montréal, where male relatives of the victims were excluded and frankly can't imagine it happening.

As for your comment about the right for oppressed groups to caucus being "anti-male" (or anti-white, whatever) I think it is against the policy of this board and calling the moderators on it.

quote:

---

I'm referring to the commemoration held right after the tragedy. I can't remember what the result was but feminists did indeed try to bar these women's loved ones from attending the service.

---

Most of the women's loved ones were in Montréal or elsewhere in Québec (remember that some at least would have been in Poland).

quote:

---

these women were considered more valuable (and thus their deaths are more worthy of grieving) solely because they were middle-class and at university. I doubt the prostitutes that Robert Pickton murdered will get this kind of solemn remembrance.

---

Garbage. Not all deaths become public symbols, but the women murdered by Pickton, the women who have been murdered in Edmonton over the last several years, and the many aboriginal women murdered or disappeared across Canada have certainly become symbolic for Canadian feminists, as are the victims of the Polytechnique massacre.

quote:

---

Lepine was a sick kook

---

But the FORM and TARGET his paranoia took was violent and sexist.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Chubbles:
It seems to me anyway that these women were considered more valuable (and thus their deaths are more worthy of grieving) solely because they were middle-class and at university.

---

Don't know about other memorials, but the University of Toronto one commemorates the women massacred in Montreal and also the women (I think in Ontario, but it may be Toronto) killed by male violence that year. It's sad and powerful, and class has nothing to do with it.

That said, the December 6th memorials rightly focus on a single horrific and blatant attack on women. I agree with skdadl, saying that remembrance ceremonies privilege one group of murdered women against another is unacceptable. If you're going to make accusations of "discrimination" you should either (preferably both) a) back them up, and b) take a second to understand why women may feel the need to mourn this violence by a man attacking women, without having men around.

Added later:

quote:

---

It was very clear in news coverage here (in francophone and anglophone media) that Lépine was mentally ill, and that he had been severely abused as a child. But the FORM and TARGET his paranoia took was violent and sexist.

---

I don't understand this. A severely abused child grows up to be mentally ill. That's a tragedy too. That he became violent and sexist is just one possible result out of many. Do you only have sympathy for the mentally ill if they don't happen to commit crimes? That's not a distinction I'd be comfortable making.

Added later:

quote:

---

Don't know about other memorials, but the University of Toronto one commemorates the women massacred in Montreal and also the women (I think in Ontario, but it may be Toronto) killed by male violence that year. It's sad and powerful, and class has nothing to do with it.

---

I was referring to the attention that has been devoted to the Polytechnique victims versus other victims as class-based. I wasn't commenting on violence against females as being class-based.

quote:

---

That said, the December 6th memorials rightly focus on a single horrific and blatant attack on women. I agree with skdadl, saying that remembrance ceremonies privilege one group of murdered women against another is unacceptable. If you're going to make accusations of "discrimination" you should either (preferably both) a) back them up, and b) take a second to understand why women may feel the need to mourn this violence by a man attacking women, without having men around.

---

Actually, I don't believe that skdadl was saying that. I felt she was suggesting that my comments (as she misunderstood them) were unacceptable. As for the charge of discrimination, I think the facts speak for themselves. Again, compare these victims to Pickton's victims. And for the very last time, I was referring to the initial service. These men were these victims' loved ones and the exclusion (or threat of exclusion) was unbelievably hateful.

Added later:

quote:

---

The further suggestion that the very deaths of one group may be rationalized because they were "privileged" is despicable.

---

And, had I made such a rationalization, you could call it despicable. However, I did not. My point (and I'm surprised you missed it) is that the level of remembrance seems to be higher because the victims were privileged.

Added later:

quote:

---

Studying is not a privilege, it is a right.

---

Studying, sure. University attendance, no, or at least not as the word "right" is typically used.

[ 09 December 2005: Message edited by: Chubbles ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Wilf Day:
Here's last December's issue of The Commonwealth, the Saskatchewan NDP paper, that both sides of this debate can use. On the one hand, it does link the Polytechnique massacre with violence against Indigenous women in Canada. On the other hand, the Polytechnique is the main story while "Stolen Sisters" is the "Sidebar."

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by fast_twitch_neurons:
When Lepine ended up in that situation, he could have come to any conclusion... but nonly did he decide it was somebody else's fault, he decided it was feminism's fault. That's preposterous, and it's worthy to wonder how such ideas could grow in this society.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Chubbles:
Society didn't grow any such ideas. Lepine's twisted little mind fermented them.

---

quote:

---

Lepine was not that unusual. His suicide note reads like hundreds of familiar posts today to the newsgroup alt.feminism. The same misspelled, inarticulate fury at women who've changed the gender rules ends up in my personal e-mail box every other day from men who think my personal website focuses too much on women.

From my perspective, things have simply gotten worse, and all the promises made to my generation sound emptier and emptier. Yes, now I have more opportunity to do more with my life than I could have dreamed of in the 1950's. But I do so with pepper spray in my purse, and an unlisted phone number. My single girlfriends put male voices on their answering machines, get P.O. Boxes to use instead of physical addresses, and are arming themselves with handguns at an unprecedented rate. We accomplish more than our mothers every dreamed of in the midst of a war zone. A war against women.

This year was the first time I'd heard that Lepine left a suicide note, and the first time I had the opportunity to read it. Of course it sent chills up my spine, but not for the usual reasons. Others might say it was just the ramblings of a bitter madman, and that's chilling enough. But it sent chills up MY spine because I've read it all before! It's all over alt.feminism. It's the jerk who spewed violent hate mail at me after I brushed off his attempts at Internet romance. There are more than plenty other men who think and SPEAK UP this way. There are more than plenty of them who AGREE with Lepine's thoughts. There are more than plenty of them who've sought out women's public spaces on the Internet to voice their dissatisfaction with women's rights, to the point of drowning out the women and dismantling their cyberspace. It seems there are more every day. I see them on college campuses, and I read their thoughts in the newspaper.

Others might read this and come to the horrified realization that, if things don't improve, we might have another incident like the Montreal massacre. But we already do. It's just one man killing one girlfriend, or one wife, or one woman who brushes him off at a time. It's the violent reactions and potent anger aimed at women anytime we say "no", or "I'll do what I want to do." It's the professional male anthropologists who get annoyed when a female colleague studies the social implications of this event. It's the male anthropologist who says "do you really think anyone cares?" when the subject of political motivations behind the violence of women is brought up. (*) It's an army of men gathering together and called themselves Promise Keepers to non-violently take away women's rights.

---

Added later: And this quote from the above:

quote:

---

It's the violent reactions and potent anger aimed at women anytime we say "no", or "I'll do what I want to do."

---

is not an accurate description of society either.

[ 10 December 2005: Message edited by: Chubbles ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by fast_twitch_neurons:
No, everything would be much more simple if that was true don't you think? But the whole point is that complex ideas don't happen spontaneously, they don't occur in a vacuum. Planning an attack, finding a gun, staying focused throughout an ordeal, focusing the blame in such a discriminating manner... it's non-random.

It doesn't take society in general to be bad, you just need bad pockets and then bad things will simmer.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Chubbles:
Look, I know he's not the only sicko in the world who hates women. And I also know that a lot of people have trouble with feminism. But Lepine's sick, paranoid fantasy was not a result of an anti-woman society. It was the result of a devastating mental illness.

Added later: And this quote from the above:

is not an accurate description of society either.

[ 10 December 2005: Message edited by: Chubbles ]

---

quote:

---

But Lepine's sick, paranoid fantasy was not a result of an anti-woman society.

---

quote:

---

Born Gamil Gharbi, the son of a Muslim Algerian immigrant Liess Gharbi and Québécoise Monique Lépine,

---

From: Wikipedia

quote:

---

Lepine's sick, paranoid fantasy was not a result of an anti-woman society. It was the result of a devastating mental illness.

---

Let's not let him or society off the hook for violence against women, including the Montreal massacre. I was in university when it happened and all of us, particularly those of us involved in student politics and female (a.k.a. a bit higher profile) were deeply frightened as well. And I hate being afraid.

I've tried looking for it and haven't found anything except a couple of anecdotes (interestingly, one from a man criticizing a very fine 1999 column by Judy Rebick available here.)

And as for the special status of the Polytechnique massacre...it was novel; the victims were like the relatives or selves of most people who read/watch the news; and as a society we create tokens of things we care about -- this seems to be the main one for the implicit menace of tolerated men-on-women violence.

quote:

---

He was just a madman, they said. It had nothing to do with violence against women, they said. But we knew better. Why did we even have to argue the point? His suicide letter had a hit list of prominent feminists he wanted to kill. He shouted, "I hate feminists," as he fired. How much clearer could it be? If he had separated Jews from Gentiles and killed the Jews would anyone doubt it was a reflection of anti-semitism in the society? What would it take for society to recognize that too many men use violence to try and maintain their ancient domination of women? (my italics)

---

I'm not getting into the mentally ill/not debate, rather pointing out that when Mark Lepine's actions are ascribed to mental illness it diminishes the fact that this was an attack on feminists.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Tehanu:
One other quick question, Chubbles -- do you have a link or other documentation that says that families were excluded from memorial events right after the massacre?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Tehanu:
I'm not getting into the mentally ill/not debate, rather pointing out that when Mark Lepine's actions are ascribed to mental illness it diminishes the fact that this was an attack on feminists.

I've heard "I hate feminists" often enough from a wide array of people to recognize that there's a problem beyond the actions of one individual.

---

But pretending that Mark Lepine was just your average redneck diminishes the fact that he was extremely abused and became mentally ill. And, of course, I agree with you that we have a huge problem in this country and elsewhere. However, I don't think what happened at Polytechnique is indicative of that problem. When people say they hate "feminists" it's probably worth enquiring what they mean by that term. If all I knew about feminism was from reading the SCUM manifesto, then I'd hate feminists too.

Added later:

quote:

---

I'm uncomfortable with characterising Mark Lepine as a "sicko." Not to argue that he was or was not mentally ill, or that his act wasn't insane, but the fact remains that he attacked women while shouting "I hate feminists."

---

Indeed he did. And he was a sicko. He just wasn't pleasantly mentally ill the way we're more comfortable with.

Added later:

quote:

---

Hey...are you my roommate, Chubbles?!? (see my earlier post)

---

Martin, I think you'll find most roommates don't like to be browbeaten and lectured to. Your roommate didn't agree with you. So what?

Added later from the quote from Judy Rebick:

quote:

---

If he had separated Jews from Gentiles and killed the Jews would anyone doubt it was a reflection of anti-semitism in the society?

---

Yes, I would. It would certainly be a reflection on the killer's anti-semitism but not on society's.

[ 10 December 2005: Message edited by: Chubbles ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Tehanu:
I think I'm done with this discussion.

---

quote:

---

Actually, I don't but I distinctly remember it being discussed at the time. Whether or not, in the end, they allowed men at the service I just can't remember.

---

just cuz i've heard stuff discussed at dinner parties, on blogs, during meetings, in the grocery store checkout line - doesn't make any of it true.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Accidental Altruist:
just cuz i've heard stuff discussed at dinner parties, on blogs, during meetings, in the grocery store checkout line - doesn't make any of it true.

so.... your assertions regarding the exclusion of male relatives of the Polytechnic Massacre victims: discussed where, when and by whom?

---

Originally posted by Chubbles:

quote:

---

I was referring to these Polytechnique women's loved ones being turned away (or threatened with being turned away) from the initial service, an attitude which I found hateful, despicable and entirely anti-male.

---

Then we have:

quote:

---

I'm referring to the commemoration held right after the tragedy. I can't remember what the result was but feminists did indeed try to bar these women's loved ones from attending the service.

---

Then we go to:

quote:

---

Actually, I don't but I distinctly remember it being discussed at the time. Whether or not, in the end, they allowed men at the service I just can't remember.

---

Then:

quote:

---

Again, my only assertion was that male exclusion was a suggestion put forward. I didn't say it actually happened. To be honest with you, the reason I remembered that aspect so well was because the same thing happened at Jenny Field's funeral (in fact, Garp was murdered for attending) in John Irving's "The World According to Garp" and I always thought it was an excellent example of life imitating art.

---

I think this "hateful, despicable" and perhaps fictional incident is, indeed, "life imitating art".

Oh, and on a lighter note (!) Garp wasn't murdered for attending the funeral but rather later by Pooh in the school wrestling gym.

[ 11 December 2005: Message edited by: Tehanu ]

It isn't.

This was an anti-feminist and anti-woman attack which is proved by Lepine's own words which signify his intentions.

And let me bring this one level closer. As a woman, I'm fully aware that if I had been in that building that night, and if I had fallen under Lepine's gaze, he would have tried to kill me. Plain and simple. That makes it personal, fucking right, as it's personal to any woman who feels that.

On this thread, women seem to get this, and some men do as well. This isn't a feminist agenda draping itself or imposing itself onto a 16-year-old crime, this is from Lepine's own words, FFS.

I attended the December 6th Fund's annual dinner last night and want to share 2 things about that evening. First, Michele Landsberg's speech which was about which core Canadian values are adding to the destruction and violence of society today. She talked about how boys are raised, and how boys are taught masculinity and how that has to change. Very good speech.

The second thing is, the December 6th fund is 10 years old, having been formed 6 years after December 1989. The December 6th Fund has one purpose: to provide small (up to $750) interest-free loans to women and their children fleeing abusive and violent situations. The Fund helps between 60 to 70 women per year, plus their children. In the months and years after December 1989, feminists immediately made the connection between Lepine's non-random choice of killing women and violent men's non-random choice of abusing their female partners and children. And so the December 6th Fund began.

[ 11 December 2005: Message edited by: bigcitygal ]

I mean, it's one thing to post, make some comment, and that's the end of it. But to keep coming back over and over to try to hammer this point in...? Is it that important that you make this point? Is it so crucial? This is a memorial thread...why are you so insecure that you need to keep arguing, even when you've already lost? What are you so defensive about?

Also:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Chubbles:
quote:Hey...are you my roommate, Chubbles?!? (see my earlier post)

Martin, I think you'll find most roommates don't like to be browbeaten and lectured to. Your roommate didn't agree with you. So what?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Tehanu:
Oh, and on a lighter note (!) Garp wasn't murdered for attending the funeral but rather later by Pooh in the school wrestling gym.

---

I'm flattered by your efforts here (which prove nothing, btw, as my four statements are entirely consistent) but my point was that Garp had to dress in disguise as a women to attend his mother's funeral. His murderer caught him out and later murdered him.

Added later: And when I heard about the service for Polytechnique, I remember discussing the similarities to Garp.

[ 11 December 2005: Message edited by: Chubbles ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by fern hill:
You know, bigcitygal, I was thinking just the opposite -- that it's rather heartening that this year we got only one proponent of the lone-loony cause. Have a look a past remembrance threads. As I think lagatta said last year, December 6 brings out the haters.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Chubbles:

I'm not a hater and it's hateful for you to suggest that I am.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by MartinArendt:
What I don't understand is the depths some people will go to, in order to defend that Dec. 6 had nothing to do with violence against women, or that the events after the fact were "man-hating" or "exclusionary", or whatever.

I mean, it's one thing to post, make some comment, and that's the end of it. But to keep coming back over and over to try to hammer this point in...? Is it that important that you make this point? Is it so crucial? This is a memorial thread...why are you so insecure that you need to keep arguing, even when you've already lost? What are you so defensive about?

---

I guess because I made my post and people were really hostile. Now I'm painted as a woman hater. If people had said "yeah, I don't agree with you and here's why" that would be one thing but that's not how it is on babble. It's more like "you're a right wing asshole if you don't agree with everything we say."

quote:

---

If you live in a glass house, you should probably refrain from throwing stones, n'est pas?

---

I'm not lecturing, Martin. I said what I believe and why I believe it.

quote:

---

Originally posted by fern hill:
I did not call you a hater.

---

Here's what you posted:

quote:

---

You know, bigcitygal, I was thinking just the opposite -- that it's rather heartening that this year we got only one proponent of the lone-loony cause. Have a look a past remembrance threads. As I think lagatta said last year, December 6 brings out the haters.

---

The implication is clear. I'm the one proponent of the lone-loony which is good compared to previous years where we had lots of haters. What else was I supposed to think?

Added later:

quote:

---

This was an anti-feminist and anti-woman attack which is proved by Lepine's own words which signify his intentions.

---

Yes, of course. But it was an attack by Lepine, not by society. It's not like society ran out into the streets and cheered afterwards.

Added later:

quote:

---

In the months and years after December 1989, feminists immediately made the connection between Lepine's non-random choice of killing women and violent men's non-random choice of abusing their female partners and children.

---

And that's a connection that a lot of people just don't agree with.

[ 11 December 2005: Message edited by: Chubbles ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by fern hill:
I know what I wrote, Chubbles. Frankly, I didn't read enough of your posts to identify you as anything but a lone-loony proponent. Have a look at last year's threads. It was exhausting and upsetting. And I'm with Martin -- why do you keep coming back? If you're upset that the women are being 'used', stop using them to get whatever jollies you must be getting here.

---

It's not jollies. I'm appalled at what I read on this thread. You make "lone-loony proponent" sound like "conspiracy theorist" but in fact I think it's what the feminists are doing with this tragedy that's nuts.

Added later:

Could you explain how being a lone-loony proponent equates to being a hater? You obviously believe this because you quoted lagatta approvingly.

[ 11 December 2005: Message edited by: Chubbles ]

Male (and female) relatives were also on hand at the public mourning at the central hall of honour at Université de Montréal.

I think the stuff about excluding men from the original ceremonies is pure (and malicious) fabrication.

I'm sure all manner of groups (women's groups, faith groups, the Polish community, towns victims hailed from etc.) held ceremonies targeting their own groups. And don't see why that is a problem.

quote:

---

BCG:
This was an anti-feminist and anti-woman attack which is proved by Lepine's own words which signify his intentions.

---

quote:

---

Chub:
Yes, of course. But it was an attack by Lepine, not by society. It's not like society ran out into the streets and cheered afterwards.

---

quote:

---

BCG: In the months and years after December 1989, feminists immediately made the connection between Lepine's non-random choice of killing women and violent men's non-random choice of abusing their female partners and children.

---

quote:

---

Chub:And that's a connection that a lot of people just don't agree with

---

quote:

---

Okay, Chubby,

---

That's Chubbles to you, thanks.

quote:

---

What I meant by that is that ML himself framed his reasons for his violence as being anti-woman and anti-feminist, meaning not random, and that not everyone who was within gun range of him were at risk.

---

I agree.

quote:

---

Really? Aw, how lovely that "a lot of people" don't agree with that. I don't give a shit if people don't agree with it,

---

Well, you should. You should be making connections not turning people away.

quote:

---

Very smart feminists capitalized

---

That's what they did all right. "Capitalized" is exactly the right word.

First you say that "a lot of people disagree" with the connections that feminists made b/w the Dec 6 massacre and ongoing violence against women. I assume that you are a part of the "a lot of people".

Then you tell me to make connections.

Then you tell me:

quote:

---

The issue of violence against women is very real. I'd like to focus on ongoing systemic abuse of women, rather than a bizarre tragedy.

---

Not sure who you think you're fighting with. Have you been to the Dec 6 Fund Website?

Finally, I have worked in front lines, behind the scenes, and in many different ways in the violence against women movement since the mid 1980s. Nothing, or very little we did got any media attention. We knew the work was (and is) vitally important, so we continued, all the while knowing that larger media campaigns, public education and awareness, etc, were very much needed. Shelter and group home budgets can't hire publicists, dontcha know.

When Dec 6th 1989 happened, the media in Canada stood up and paid attention. So yeah, we capitalized on that. So what? It gets people talking, making the links, perhaps becoming more aware, perhaps prepared to make changes in their lives. Sounds good to me.

quote:

---

Okay Chubbles, you're confusing me.

---

Then let's work it out.

quote:

---

First you say that "a lot of people disagree" with the connections that feminists made b/w the Dec 6 massacre and ongoing violence against women. I assume that you are a part of the "a lot of people".

---

Yes.

quote:

---

Then you tell me to make connections.

---

I meant connections with people like myself who are very alert to violence against women but who don't believe this tragedy was a reflection of society as a whole.

quote:

---

When Dec 6th 1989 happened, the media in Canada stood up and paid attention. So yeah, we capitalized on that. So what? It gets people talking, making the links, perhaps becoming more aware, perhaps prepared to make changes in their lives. Sounds good to me.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Chubbles:
The issue of violence against women is very real. I'd like to focus on ongoing systemic abuse of women, rather than a bizarre tragedy.

---

(ed to add)About the posting which contrasted the media treatment of the literally hundreds of missing and murdered FN womyn, this is a painful topic to contemplate because it touches on the intersection of racialized and sexualized violence. While it is difficult to avoid setting up a competitive victimization scenario, I think it is important to note that for a long time, mysogenistic violence against racialized and marginalized womyn largely flew under the radar, while the L'ecole massacre struck us all with a very profound terror. Some FN and POC critics wondered if this was because the white middle class suddenly realized that they could be victims too, as opposed to stereotypical victim, the drunk Indian crack 'ho on Hastings who is much harder to identify with. I would just like to point out that this is all a part of the system of gendered violence, which is informed by a social structure of sexism, but differs in its racialized aspect.

[ 11 December 2005: Message edited by: Makwa ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Makwa:
Gee Chubbles (and thanx BCG for the soft spot - made me smile fondly for the bear I once was), for one who wishes to focus on systemic abuse of women, you seem to wish to deny the logical systemic argument. If abuse is systemic as you state, then the most egregious activities of abuse are therefore a part of that system, are they not?

---

No, not really. Lepine wasn't just an extreme anti-feminist. He was violent and nuts.

quote:

---

surely you can see how his mind set would have been formed within the context of a systemically mysogenistic society?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Makwa:
Gee Chubbles (and thanx BCG for the soft spot - made me smile fondly for the bear I once was), for one who wishes to focus on systemic abuse of women, you seem to wish to deny the logical systemic argument. If abuse is systemic as you state, then the most egregious activities of abuse are therefore a part of that system, are they not? Otherwise a systemic analysis has no merit. That's like saying, racism is systemic, but the Klan are just irrational actors who do not act on any perception of systemic racism. Lepine may or may not have been actively psychotic during his actions, but surely you can see how his mind set would have been formed within the context of a systemically mysogenistic society?

[ 11 December 2005: Message edited by: Makwa ]

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Chubbles:
Lepine wasn't just an extreme anti-feminist. He was violent and nuts.

---

Yeah, very few men do what ML did on that day. But enough men are actively violent towards their families everyday, or threatening, or verbally and emotionally abusive, which are all different kinds of violence. It's all not okay.

P.S. A friendly grrrrrrr to Makwa, my old buddy bear-o

[ 11 December 2005: Message edited by: bigcitygal ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Makwa:
Are these concepts somehow mutually exclusive?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by bigcitygal:
Though I never said it here, ML was on one end of a spectrum of our violent anti-woman culture. Played "Grand Theft Auto" lately? Gone into Toys R' Us lately? You don't have to agree, Chubbles old pal

---

But, bcg, you're having so much fun attacking and taking the moral high ground that you're not seeing that I do agree with you on the important stuff. There's lots and lots wrong with attitudes toward women in our society. I would never say otherwise.

quote:

---

but I don't agree that professional sports players make multi-million dollar salaries, and it doesn't change anything.

---

Sure but I'm doubting something which is far less clear and tangible than sports salaries, that is, that Lepine was a sicko, far removed from the rest of society.

quote:

---

Yeah, very few men do what ML did on that day. But enough men are actively violent towards their families everyday, or threatening, or verbally and emotionally abusive, which are all different kinds of violence. It's all not okay.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Sineed:
Okay, so let's see if I've got this straight: a man screams, "I hate feminists," and then guns down 14 women. And this act occurs in the context of a society in which violence against women is endemic. But these two facts have NOTHING WHATSOEVER to do with each other. Have I got that right?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Wilf Day:
Chubbles, you're losing your focus. If you were trying to remind us that over 500 Aboriginal women are missing and/or murdered in this country but the numbers may be as high as 1,000, yet 14 white women on the professional track get all the remembrance, I think many would call this a point worth making (although I defer to the women posting on this thread as to how to express that point.) But as to these other issues that are cropping up, I may be wrong, but they don't seem to be helpful to your point.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Sineed:
Surely you understand, Chubbles, that when you say there is no connection between violence against women and the Montreal massacre, it's as if you are saying we are just being paranoid?

---

Well, I certainly don't mean that and I'm sorry if it comes across that way. I honestly don't know what I got my knickers into a twist about except that I live in the vicinity of the Pickton murders and I felt (perhaps unfairly) that those murders were mostly written off. Upon reflection, that's a good reason to increase awareness of that issue rather than resent the much better awareness of the Polytechnique murders.

Added later: I have even heard people say of the Pickton victims that that's just life if you do drugs, live on the street and sell your body, as if these were choices for these women. If somebody suggested that the Polytechnique victims were asking for it, the speaker would get punched in the nose.

[ 11 December 2005: Message edited by: Chubbles ]

Honestly! What the hell is wrong with people?

quote:

---

Originally posted by Stargazer:
I cannot believe this person has chosen this time and this topic to spew such crap. Go away for god's sakes! You have contributed nothing here but more twisted logic than I care to read.

Honestly! What the hell is wrong with people?

Makwa, thanks so much for your comment and MonkeyMan yours was most appreciated as well.

---

And EFA, you really need to stop coming back under new aliases. Goodbye.

[ 11 December 2005: Message edited by: Michelle ]