Conference turris::womannotes-v3

    *ish*
    
    what a terrible thing.
    
    anyone have news as to the validity of the story?
    
    -Jody
    

    
    I just asked my source, what his source was.
    He named "The Boston Globe" and two radio stations.
    
    I guess it must be true.
    
    Rachael
    

    It was just a short article in this AM's paper - 19 women killed,
    hundreds injured, some claim that they were raped. The boys went
    on a rampage because the girls wouldn't join them in a strike
    against school officials. (It was at a Catholic school in Kenya.)
    

    Permission granted.  Mind if I join you?
    
    Meg

    permission to be angry now.
    
    this may be obvious, but WHY ISN'T THIS A HEADLINE?
    I would think that such a large-scale, misogonous event
    would be a CNN headline.  but NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOo.
    
    Rachael
    

I think I know why it is a headline.

When the women students were killed in Montreal, it was acceptable to make
a stink about it, because the man who killed them was a psychopath, a crazy,
a woman-hating loonie with a gun...but *these* men were just men!  They went
to a Catholic University, they were probably just ordinary college students...
it isn't sensation.  And if you make a stink about it, you are admitting 
that some *ordinary* *normal* men are women-killing misogynists.  You
certainly wouldn't want that getting around, because that will ruin the
image that the Montreal incident engendered: that only the rare psychopath
is a woman-hating killer.

Besides, the killings were in *Africa*, they are all barbarians down there
anyway, right?  I mean, you expect this sort of thing from those third-world
black folks, no big deal, right?

I'll join ya'll in the bathroom...

D!

    
    I heard the same story on NPR on the way home from work last night.  It 
    certainly hasn't had much prominence -- I didn't hear about it again
    this morning in my 40-minute commute.  I agree with D!'s theory about
    why it hasn't made the headlines -- too scary to think that so many men
    could become rapists if only given the opportunity.
    
    disgusted,
    
    Justine
    
    

    The incident confirmed for me what men mean when they use the
    term "bitch" -- a woman who will not give a man what he wants,
    when he wants it, for the price he wishes to pay, generally meaning
    for free.
    
    						Ann B.

    re: .9 (Ann)
    
         I find you exceptionally difficult to take, Ann.
    
    Frederick
    

    
    Please use this string to talk about what happened in Kenya --
    off-topic notes will be moved.
    
    Justine - comod
    

    This makes me angry and sad and disgusted.
    
    D! you're right on the mark about the lack of coverage. No one wants to
    admit that 'normal' men can do such a thing.
    manisha

    I heard the story on NPR both last night and this morning; on the WCVB
    [Boston, Ch.5] 6 o'clock news; and on CNN Headline News.  I also read
    it in my evening and morning papers -- yes it was there, but not bold
    type front page stuff.
    
    The reporting has been low-key, but "intense" where the subject of rape
    arises. By that I mean that rape has been mentioned as alleged, but
    unconfirmed in serious language and [where possible] in a serious and
    no-nonsense tone of voice -- the tone changed drastically when the
    subject of rape arose.
    
    In my memories of the Montreal massacre, the incident was neither
    headline-and-front-page in the print media no the lead story in the
    audio-visual newscasts.
    
    Let us not lose sight, by focusing _only_ upon rape or not-rape, of the
    incontrovertible fact that women have been beaten, trampled and killed
    because they would not make common cause with their male peers in a
    protest.  Women have died because they were 'disobliging.'
    
    Except on a personal level, I do not care _what_ guise the violence
    took.
    
    The underlying dynamic of punishing recalcitrant women, as if by
    _right_, is the real tragedy.
    
      Annie
    
    

    What would the world wide response have been if the genders had been
    reversed?
    
    Why?

    RE: .13

<    The underlying dynamic of punishing recalcitrant women, as if by
<    _right_, is the real tragedy.
    
    Thanks for getting the issue clear Annie.
    
    Is there someone who could post an article or transcript so at least
    some of the story is here?  We don't even know what the protest was
    orginally about, and it may be relevent.
    
    Peace,
    Allison

    
    

    in re .14

    It wouldn't have happened, and I find asking the question to have
    no point except to derail the discussion and be provocative.

    BJ

    Re .14: Why, it would have made headlines, under [to extend a
    previously-mentioned metaphor] the "Dog Bites Man" rule - i.e., it
    happens so rarely.
    
    Why do you ask?
    
    -b

    <set mode/ donning my nomex suit] ...>
    
    Don't know what the World would say, Herb; but I can honestly say that
    if the reverse had happened I would probably be a comod on the brink of
    insanity before the week-end arrived ...
    
    <set mode/ almost normal for me>
    
    If a group of women had stormed a men's residence hall to punish by
    trampling beating and murdering those within for not joining a protest
    it would be in 4-inch headlines in most of the newspapers of the world.
    
    It's news of the "man bites dog" variety. 
    
    I say this without rancour or prejudice, and without denying that there
    have been men beaten and killed by women.  However, the pattern of
    violence has been a predominantly male-dominated arena.  History is
    rich in cases of women suffering violence at the hands of men and the
    world saying, in effect, "oh dear, how sad" and going about its
    business -- the reverse is not generally true; so when it occurs, it is
    very much News.
    
      Annie

    
    Yes, Annie, thanks for that refocussing -- it is the violence, not just
    its form, that these women suffered because of their political
    decisions.  That is what's so despicable -- rape is just one of the
    weapons/tools of the (more) powerful.  It sounds like it was a horrible
    thing - for those killed and for those who survived.
    
    Justine

	Hi,

	Are we missing a crucial point here ?

	This region has for centuries treated women as chattels.  The
	colonial governments of the 19th century were the first
	exposure to the concepts of the rule of law the peoples of
	this region had ever seen.

	Despite the imposition of colonial rule, the areas distant
	from the large cities still maintained tribal traditions.
	You know:  ownership of slaves, massacres of competing tribes,
	trading women for cattle, and all the stuff the West 
	began to abandon in the 1700s.

	Rape and pillage are WRONG, but let us understand that when
	we place great value on preserving tribal traditions in 
	3rd world countries, we don't get to choose just the	
	"nice" ones ( pretty masks, entertaining dances, music, and
	pottery ).

	Despite the hatred for Western values displayed in universities
	today, the best thing that could happen for women in 
	Latin America, Russia, Africa, the Arab lands and elsewhere 
	would be a good dose of the thought that created the US Constitution.

	All men ( or even MOST men ) are not rapists.  There are animals
	in human form in every culture.  In the West, they are 
	mostly constrained by a combination of philosophy and law.
	In less enlightened regions, they may become leaders.

	Modern philosphies of freedom and individualism are 
	the most potent protectors of womens' sovereignty.

	Steve H

    i agree with those who think it would have been an earth-shaking event!
    That's why I posed the question.
    Thinking of the question in THAT fashion gives me an opportunity to get
    some insight in why so many of you are so exercised.

 Why didn't this create big headlines vs. the montreal massacre?

 1) lunatics are easier to accept than a large group of (ostensibly) educated
men behaving this way
 2) There is no gun or other object upon which to blame the violence "if only
he didn't have a nasty assault weapon..." therefore the problem is with the
people
 3) Misogyny is not taken seriously enough
 4) lack of television coverage on the scene
 5) this sort of behavior is more palatable from third worlders

    re.20
    
    No, I do not believe that we are "missing a crucial point here"
    
    I don't believe anyone here will argue against violence against women
    as a cultural norm. I believe, and do not think I'm alone, that is very
    _much_ a cultural norm.
    
    Rule of law be damned.  Violence against women is a cultural norm in
    so-called civilised western societies as well.  Despite laws, _minds_
    have yet to be changed.
    
      Annie
    

        >the best thing that could happen for women in Latin America, Russia, 
        >Africa, the Arab lands and elsewhere would be a good dose of the 
        >thought that created the US Constitution.

    Tell that to the Central Park Jogger, to the woman raped and murdered
    by a bunch of guys in Boston on Halloween, to Carol Stuart, to the
    women in shelters all over the country, to the women you know, (and
    every one of us knows many of them), who are "taught lessons" by their
    men.  The US Constitution doesn't protect women from the rage of men
    any more than your so called "tribal customs".  Open your eyes. 
    American men are no special breed.
    
    >All men ( or even MOST men ) are not rapists.
    
    The reasons *why* are important.  If it's merely lack of opportunity,
    lack of annonymity, lack of a catalyst, then they can't accept the
    credit for being "good guys", now can they?  An alcoholic may never
    take a drink but is still an alcoholic.  Saying that most men are not
    rapists can be kind of the same thing.  Given the right setting,
    *could* he?  *Would* he?  If so, then *is* he rapist or not?
    
    >Modern philosphies of freedom and individualism are the most potent 
    >protectors of womens' sovereignty.

    Sad, but true.  Inadequate as that is, it's all we've got.  Sorry, it
    isn't very comforting to know this.
    
    Sandy
    
         

>    What would the world wide response have been if the genders had been
>    reversed?

Well, we saw what a ruckus _Thelma and Louise_ caused....

Kathy

    
    
    RE: .24
    
    >The reasons *why* are important.  If it's merely lack of opportunity,
    >lack of annonymity, lack of a catalyst, then they can't accept the
    >credit for being "good guys", now can they?  An alcoholic may never
    >take a drink but is still an alcoholic.  Saying that most men are not
    >rapists can be kind of the same thing.  Given the right setting,
    >*could* he?  *Would* he?  If so, then *is* he rapist or not?
    
    All people that drink alcohol are not alcoholics.  An alcoholic becomes
    an alcoholic by being predisposed to such "vices."  The way they
    interact with their environment can lead to alcoholism.  There are
    people that can drink alcohol everyday of their lives and NEVER become
    an alcoholic.
    
    I don't think it's fair in the least to accuse all men of being
    potential rapists (as I feel you're doing in this paragraph, and as I
    feel many people in this conference do when they talk about the
    "misogynic society").  By doing so, we alienate those men who fight
    WITH US to fight rape.  It takes certain conditioning, certain
    experiences, and certain situations in order to spur a man to rape.  
    (We should be fighting THOSE conditionings, not men as a whole).
    
    Some men are predisposed, by their upbringing and experiences to be
    capable of it.  However, I know *many* men who, by THEIR experiences,
    are not capable of it.
    
    To accuse those men of potential rape is hideous, ugly, and
    detrimental to all I, as a woman, strive to achieve in this world. 
    
    Why can't we fight the real enemy instead of alienating the ally?
    
    kath

    > All people that drink alcohol are not alcoholics.
    
    I didn't say anything about people who drink alcohol.  I was using the 
    idea of an alcoholic who doesn't drink to make a point about the topic.  
    I was not making a commentary on alcoholism or drinking in any way at all.

    > I don't think it's fair in the least to accuse all men of being
    > potential rapists (as I feel you're doing in this paragraph

   Point taken.  But I made no such accusation, either.  I offered a 
   parallel, a little food for thought, on which one could draw their own 
   conclusions or refute my parallel.  If you feel the parallel doesn't wash, 
   fine.  But it's still "valid" and still has a right to be there.

   > By doing so, we alienate those men who fight WITH US to fight rape. 

   I don't think so anymore, I think this is just a pat phrase used too 
   much in notes.  Men who fight against rape are doing so because of 
   strong convictions and beliefs and not because they think women are so 
   nice to them that they feel compelled to do this in return.  I doubt very 
   much a man's strong conviction or belief can be just poofed away by a 
   phrase in a notesfile.  I don't believe their support is so fragile and 
   tenuous that we must walk softly and not say what we feel, (which they must 
   *already know*!), in order to not frighten them away.  You seem to 
   assume such men are doing us a favor and we should be nice and quiet in 
   return.  I say such men are doing so because they believe it's the right 
   thing to do.  I'm giving them more credit than you are, I'm letting them 
   own it.

   If men fight against rape, they must know and understand women's experience.
   And if that's the case, they know and understand our fear and our anger.

   >  (We should be fighting THOSE conditionings, not men as a whole).
    
   We are.  Or at least I am.

   > Why can't we fight the real enemy instead of alienating the ally?
    
   Can you always tell the difference, Kath?

   But to answer you, it's mostly because one has to define the real enemy 
   first and that process makes many people uncomfortable as has been proven 
   time and time again right here in notes.  Is it pornography?  Is it the 
   way people raise their sons?  Is it male ego?  Is it female obstinance?  
   Is it religion?  Is it a male sense of entitlement?  What *IS* the real
   enemy, Kath? 

   To find out, we need to *start* with brainstorming!  Let's let out the fear 
   and the rage, the rational and the irriational - it's only words!  And when 
   the dust settles and everything has been said, the truth will show itself 
   and we can set to the task of dealing with it.  Right now, whenever 
   anyone stops this kind of discussion, particularly with cries of "it 
   might alienate men", you are stopping the process at the outset and dashing 
   any hope of ever coming to any common understanding of this.  We are 
   supposedly a voting majority.  That means we don't *need* to step lightly 
   to keep male support, we should be able to do it ourselves.  And men who 
   fight rape should be doing so for their own reasons of conscience and not
   just to seem like a good guy and all.  We don't need to coddle such 
   genuine pioneers.  They are strong, they are going against the tide, they
   have the power of conviction going for them.  And they didn't get that 
   way by having no understanding of women's experience and attitude toward 
   the subject.  They don't *need* our support.  What they are doing is 
   fabulous for it's own sake.

   So sure it's going to hurt some, but the words don't hurt nearly as much as 
   the act.  And as Holly Hendrick's personal name once read, "the only way 
   out is through".  So let's get through it and not be so touchy about it.

   Sandy
    

    
    Alot of good points have been raised here.
    
    Pertaining to the culture in Kenya, I had several professors from
    Africa.  I believe that one was from Kenya and one from South
    Africa.  They had no problems with me and as they were educated
    people, and seemed comfortable with western views towards women.  I
    even knew one guy's wife, who was warm and confident.  I know of
    another woman, a software engineer, who moved to the US from
    Etheopia.  She said that women were mostly housewifes but that
    when she moves back, (actually she's going back to Tanzania), she'll
    still work.  All this info, indicates to me that these people are
    not savages.  We aren't talking about uneducated men.  These are
    the EDUCATED, PRIVILEDGED men of Kenya in a country where women are
    at least allowed to work.
    
    I think there are two reasons this hasn't received much hype.
    1.  many people believe that what happens in Kenya couldn't 
    possibly happen here.  We're too educated!
    2.  those who know that is untrue are afraid to say so.  Imagine
    the alarms this would raise!  Imagine a story on 60 minutes which
    explores the culture of Kenya, specifically of the educated in
    Kenya.  Then that story explains what lead to the situation and
    what happened.  Interviews the survivors...    Explores the class 
    hostilities evolving in our own culture and how hostilities are 
    historically vented on those physically weaker humans.  And 
    concludes that their culture isn't so far from ours.
    
    Now, this gives gun ownership a different angle, doesn't it.  What
    if those women had been armed?  (Perhaps this is for a different
    topic but I just wonder...)  At least they could have died fighting
    or prevented the whole thing.
    
    Rachael
    

    Kath,
    
    You wrote "Why can't we fight the real enemy instead of alienating
    the ally?"
    
    Yes, we would all rather fight the real enemy.  Our complaint is
    that we have no real way -- not even a hard one -- of distinguishing
    a real enemy from an ally.  Not one of us, nor any researcher has
    ever found any distinguishing characteristic or set of characteristics
    that mark the rapist, or highlight the guaranteed non-rapist.
    
    Naturally, this uncertainty shows up in negative ways when we write
    about this topic.  It's like living in Schroedinger's box:  There is
    currently NO WAY to predict if that uranium is going to fission or
    not.  We are not happy about this.
    
    						Ann B.
    
    P.S.  I believe that we are each born with a certain personality.  (Well,
    "personality" is too strong a word.  A few traits, added to extensively,
    modified as necessary as we grow, and like that.)  Some have a
    personality such that, if raised in a society such as ours, they will
    rape if certain conditions (which vary from individual to individual)
    are met.  (Geez.  Move over, Dr. Heisenberg.  Ann is being
    exemplarally vague.)

god this story is horrible.

has anyone been arrested?  I have neither seen nor heard any reports of this
story.  and what was the original protest over?  I do think that would be
relevant -- it can NEVER excuse such violence, but it might shed light on the
trigger.

thankfully, all men are not like this.  The men who did this ... well I'm not
sure what punishment they deserve, besides 'severe'.

    what follows is not for the squeamish
    
    There was a related(?) article in yesterday's Boston Globe. According
    to this article...
    In the 'third world' pregnancy is the 'number one killer' of women of
    child bearing age.
    I think there are ways to quibble with the statistics but a point that
    was made in the article is that fully 86 million third world women are
    'circumcised' and that for many of them the vaginal opening is stitched
    shut.
    The preceeding plus sloppy abortions were given as important
    contributors to this excessive death rate.

    If I may reply from the perspective of a survivor and an activist...
    
    Sandy and kath both have points to make, but I'm leaning closer to
    Sandy on the idea of alienating males...
    
    Those who do not give a damn about the issue are going to continue to
    not give a damn until something happens to make them care.  During
    Assault Awareness week at Dartmouth, I cannot remember the number of
    men I encountered who reacted this way:
    
    HIM: Dude, what's the red ribbon for?
    
    ME: Well, if you are a survivor of rape or assault or if you know
    someone, it's how we're showing support -- trying to get people to
    realize how widespread it --
    
    HIM: Well, I don't know anyone, soo...
    
    The sentence to complete that sentence would have been "And, of course,
    it could never happen to ME so why do I care?"
    
    Wrong.  Dead wrong.  If you know only a very few people you know
    survivors and *ANYONE* could become one.  By the end of the week, I was
    snapping back "Well, now you know ME.  Take a ribbon."
    
    Another example of this happened at the "Take Back the Night" march. 
    We went down frat row (where the President's house is ) and before we
    were all on the street, several houses had stereo speakers hanging out
    the windows to drown us out.
    
    They don't know.
    
    They don't care.
    
    They don't want to and nothing short than having it forced into their
    lives on a personal level will make them want to.
    
    Their ears are already closed, so how can they be alienated?  As for
    the men who do care, I think most of us whom I have necountered share a
    great deal of anger and concern, and know that we aren't necessarily
    included in the "all men" categories.  Personally, I've generalized
    that way myself becasue I have found the attitudes espoused by the
    majority of men I have known to be so infuriating.  Some friends of
    mine granted me honorary status in the "Loud Angry Castrating Bitch Society
    " We used to sit in the cafeteria and scare away the frat boys.
    
    Is it any wonder I have usually felt the most comfortable in what
    people would call women's spaces?
    
    just a few thoughts...
    
    -----
    \ D /
     \ /

    
    re .24, >>God bless America, huh?
    
    At least we have the rule of law and such acts result in prosecution
    here, unlike in these primitive countries that liberals are so fond of...
    
    By what logic does an atrocity in Kenya result in a putdown of the US?
    Why the US is responsible for all evil in the world, regardless who
    actually does it?
    
    Ah, the knee does jerk...
    

re .26, Kath-

>>   The reasons *why* are important.  If it's merely lack of opportunity,
>>   lack of annonymity, lack of a catalyst, then they can't accept the
>>   credit for being "good guys", now can they?  An alcoholic may never
>>   take a drink but is still an alcoholic.  Saying that most men are not
>>   rapists can be kind of the same thing.  Given the right setting,
>>   *could* he?  *Would* he?  If so, then *is* he rapist or not?
>    [...]
>    I don't think it's fair in the least to accuse all men of being
>    potential rapists (as I feel you're doing in this paragraph, and as I
>    feel many people in this conference do when they talk about the
>    "misogynic society").  By doing so, we alienate those men who fight
>    WITH US to fight rape.  It takes certain conditioning, certain
>    experiences, and certain situations in order to spur a man to rape.  
>    (We should be fighting THOSE conditionings, not men as a whole).
    

Nope, I'm not alienated by that. I think its true.  And I think you're
missing Sandy's point, your "conditionings" are her "*could he?  *Would he*?"
   
>    Some men are predisposed, by their upbringing and experiences to be
>    capable of it.  However, I know *many* men who, by THEIR experiences,
>    are not capable of it.
>    
>    To accuse those men of potential rape is hideous, ugly, and
>    detrimental to all I, as a woman, strive to achieve in this world. 

I don't get this, Kath.  What does it have to do with you?  Presume that 
some of us are working to understand rape and all its implications throughout 
society.  Well, I dunno the numbers off the top of my head, (and I consider the
numbers inconclusive anyway because the societal baggage causes severe under-
reporting of rapes in every culture on the globe) but its clear that rape is
a problem of male violence. And that men from all walks and ways of life and
from all cultures, do it.  And it doesn't matter if they were raised as poor
ghetto kids or as rich privileged spoiled brats or as cultured educated thugs
from Hyannisport, the cultural "conditionings" are universal.  RAPISTS COME
FROM EVERYWHERE.  We have to acknowledge and NAME THAT FACT, and live with it,
if we ever hope to change it.  I don't know what you're trying to achive in this
world, but getting men to recognize that rape is a problem of male violence in
all cultures isn't something that can be denied because its hideous.  Its got
to be done.

DougO

    > At least we have the rule of law and such acts result in prosecution
    > here,
    
    Sometimes.  Depends on the rapist, the woman, her behavior and her 
    clothing.  (I couldn't resist using the rhythm of "The Cook, the Thief, 
    His Wife", etc).  So what does that say about our wonderful
    constitution?  It's still interpreted and laws are still applied by
    mere humans who have the same biases, prejudices and hangups as
    everyone else. 
    
    Maybe in Kenya a rapist would be castrated for damaging some guy's goods.  
    It too stems from a sexist attitude but at least punishment would be swift 
    and guaranteed and for that matter, probably deterring!  Different strokes.
    The US may talk a better game, but individual American women are no more 
    safe than women anywhere else.  And for that matter, American soldiers
    have done plenty of mass raping and pillaging themselves, in addition
    to the individual atrocities they commit upon individual women at home.
    
    >By what logic does an atrocity in Kenya result in a putdown of the US?
    
    None.  What I said was a "putdown" to the allegation that this country was 
    better for women in this regard.  I pointed out why I thought that was
    not the case.
    
    >Why the US is responsible for all evil in the world, regardless who
    >actually does it?
    
    Oh, please.
    
    >Ah, the knee does jerk...
    
    Apparently!
    
    S.           
    

    
    I phoned NPR, (using my calling card, not on DEC's dime).
    (202)822-2000
    
    I explained my concern on why this wasn't being covered more
    in comparison to the Canadian incident.  The woman assured
    me that I was wrong and stated that coverage has to do with
    the amount of news on a given day.  Yesterday there was the 
    meeting of world powers, (I forget the name) about economic
    affairs, there was the agreement between Syria and Bush; the
    US troops moving out of Iraq and into Turkey all big issues.
    This simply took a back seat to those stories.  She took
    my name and address and my request for an indepth report like
    the one I described in an earlier note and she said she'd pass it
    on.  
    I went on to tell her that I/we all don't want this shoved
    under the rug because of some hidden agenda that NPR has.
    I citied the in-depth coverage of the Brady bill versus the
    2 second mention or the NRA bill.  Somehow, she wasn't quite
    so receptive to that.
    
    In any case, I have complained and requested and in depth
    report.  They have a reporter on location in Kenya who did
    the small report which was on NPR.  
    
    Also, by the way, it was a high school, not a college.
    I guess they go to high school in dorms over there.
    Rachael

     I haven't heard anything about this story other than what I 
     read here so, if someone would forgive my ignorance.  What 
     cause did these young men feel was so important that they
     would commit these aweful acts?  (I realize that this isn't
     what this whole conversation is about but I was just curious)
    
    Pam

    re .32/.35 & others
    
    I believe that the U.S. is, in large, a better place for women than
    many if not most countries.  But, I've never found that type of
    benchmarking a particularly valide way of determingin "good".  I mean
    if what you're comparing yourself (country, etc.) to sucks then ......
    
    It's my beleif that inspite of the progress which has been made in the
    U.S. judicial system with regards to crimes agianst women, we have a
    VERY LONG way to go before we can claim to be good in this area. I'll
    always remember the conversation I had with a defense attorney who told
    me that inspite of the rape shield laws, rape was still the easiest
    violent crime to defend.  He believed that this was caused by the
    societal attitudes towards victims and by the fact that male jurors
    could not comprehend the level of violation.  He said the closest
    "violation" that most men might expect to experience was having their
    house broken into.
    
    I'd like to believe that we've made progress in the 7 years since that
    conversation but I don't believe that we've made enough progress.  And
    I don't have any easy answeres as to how we get there faster. 
    
    Polly

    Rape is an extremely serious crime!  And not only did this story get
    little news coverage, but the recent rape of a 76 year old woman
    in NH got LESS news coverage than the SAME DAY story of the "stolen
    words" speech at a local college. Give me a break !!! So he forgot 
    to mention who the quotes belonged to!   That story of the old woman
    in NH really angred me !!!!!!!!!!
    
    Jack
    

    After reading my local newspaper last night without a mention, I began
    to think.  When they "withold" news, why do they do it?  Most often so
    as not to alarm.  So what are they saying in this case?  That we don't
    want to alarm women of what's really out there?  They feel it's quite
    alarming - too much so.  It may be worse than we think.  How many such
    stories don't even *get* this far down to the people?  I still have my
    little back page Globe article about a "routine" shipment of prostitutes 
    in the Phillipines, (little girls taken from their mothers, in case any of
    you have that automatic knee-jerk reaction that these women are having
    too much sex for us to care about them), that went wrong.  It seems
    they rotate them around the islands in shipping containers so that the
    men have a fresh crop every now and then to keep their, uh, interests
    up.  Someone forgot to punch holes in this particular shipping
    container and after it arrived in port, 4 days after departure, they
    opened the lid and found them dead, 28 of them, with their mouths open
    in a last gasp for air.  You know what the guy responsible said?  "This
    is just one routine shipment that didn't work out".  Ho hum.
    
    Bet the boys on that island had a lonely night waiting for the next
    shipment.  It must have been awful for them.
    
    S.

    Once again, I think it is important to get our terminology straight. 
    Those prostitutes who died in those shipping containers were simply
    examples of "collateral pimping damage".
    
    -- Mike

    re .40
    
    YOu're kinder than I am.  I tend to believe that news is printed/not
    printed not out of a concern for alarming the public but out of an
    interest in what sells papers
            

    re.42
    
    Somehow, I do not believe that 'kindness' was behind Sandy's assessment.
    Call it a hunch.  8^).
    
    While I agree with your basic premise that what sells gets printed, I
    do not believe that it's a 'market potential deficit' that keeps
    horrendous happenings to women out of the news so much as a distaste
    for having 'shortcomings in the myth' brought to light.
    
    Carol Stuart got major coverage -- pregnant white woman shot and killed
    in Mission Hill, alleged perpetrator young black man.  She was a "nice"
    woman [young, pretty, pregnant, married] and she was tragically
    taken from her husband -- yup, it fits the myth.
    
    Pamela Smart got major coverage [you _too_ can buy copies of the film
    of her trial] --  young attractive newlywed with affinity for metal
    music who seduces an immpresionable under-age young man and convinced
    him to kill her husband.  She is a classic "bad" woman able to seduce
    and manipulate an otherwise 'good' man to do what he would otherwise
    not do -- yup, that one in the mythology big-time as well.
    
    Little girls dying in a packing crate as part of rotation-consignment
    inventory isn't a part of the mythology.  They weren't bad little
    girls, but then they can't be called good little girls either -- after
    all they were whores; and let's not forget that this occurred in a
    "third world" location -- a different mythos apparently holds that the
    people of such locales are not as 'socially evolved' hence cannot be
    held to the same standard.
    
    Young women being trampled, beaten, raped, and murdered for not joining
    in a protest at their school doesn't fit either.  First this was a
    group activity, the perpetrators of the viciousness are essentially
    faceless and hence difficult to characterise. Second, the women can't
    be called "bad" [they respected authority], but they're not so "good"
    either [they weren't team-players]. 
    
    Of course this simplifies a bit, and is only one aspect. But _so_ much
    that can't be cast in the mold of popular icons just never gets
    coverage.
    
    If you report such icky news, people don't like to read it [after all
    it _is_ unpleasant stuff] and it just might give the fringe elements
    some substantiation to their contention that it happens frequently.
    Fringe elements with fodder often become pesky and strident.
    
      Annie

    Lemme try to remember...
    
    Monday night, going home, I think I heard the news.  The economic
    summit, the meeting with Gorbachev, that's about it.  I know I was
    listening for something on the Kenyan matter.  (My cousin and her
    husband run an agricultural college there.)
    
    Tuesday night, going home, I definitely heard the news.  The economic
    summit, the meeting with Gorbachev, the leases on U.S. military bases
    in the Phillipines, and assorted violence: 3 men wounded (Turkish; bomb),
    1,700 people killed (Chinese; flood), 30,000 fish killed (Californian;
    pesticide), 1 man died (Philadelphian; heart).
    
    So, why didn't this news fit on Monday?
    
    							Ann B.
    

    Several responses in this string ask what the original protest was
    about and indicate that they feel this knowledge would be relevant. 
    
    First, after doing some checking on my own with the papers and several
    radio stations, I am here to report that no one has been able to tell
    me what the men were desiring to protest beyond vague 'school
    administration decisions/policies' -- no idea of what the decision or
    policy might be regarding.  Yet.
    
    Second, after some thought I'm trying to understand why this bit of
    information is relevant.  And I would like those of you who do to try
    and help me understand why you believe that it is.
    
    From where I stand, a group of men went on a rampage against their
    female peers for not joining in a protest.  I want to explore the
    reasons why this happened.  I want to gain an understanding and
    possibly go forward from this event a little bit more capable of
    preventing a re-occurence [ok, a miniscule bit].
    
    The reason for the protest seems no more relevant to me than what I was
    wearing when I was raped.  That is to say, I don't believe that either
    the subject of the protest or my apparel can be called a contributing
    cause of the violence that followed.
    
    But yes, I would like to know what the protest was about. Even if I
    don't think it's particulary relevant, I find the total _lack_ of this
    information at news sources to be indicative of _another_ humungous
    mountain to climb ...
    
      Annie

    
    I have a theory on this.  I think that the news media publishes
    what it's paid to publish.  Not by us little people but by the
    Ted Turners of the world.
    
    Evidence:
    1. Brady Bill vs. computer system which would actually check criminal
    records in ALL states instantaneously.  (The computer system was
    NRA -backed, I might add.  ew yuck, NRA! cried the people with money)
    
    2. article in Newsweek stating that "Girls are going too far" when
    they write notes to boys asking boys to have sex with them.  Stating
    that these girls are much better, after therapy, as evidenced by the
    fact that they like boys to chase them now.  (What woman is going
    to buy the magazine after reading that.)  (how many times in high
    school did boys write rude notes to girls?)
    
    3. article in Newsweek stating that the decline of the American 
    family is due, in part, to the fact that most women refuse to
    stay home.  (again alienating liberated female readers.)
    
    (I have this guess that the backers of Newsweek are all having
    family troubles.)
    
    4. During the Bush/Dukakais race, all local stations reported half
    truths which I now fail to remember regarding Bush's stands.  The 
    only mostly complete news was on NPR.
    
    
    
    the news media sees us all as little clay pieces that they can
    mold to the shapes that their backers want us in.  They want
    us to be anti-gun, (to believe that guns kill and people don't
    have anything to do with it unless they are insane).  They want
    women to quit asserting themselves so they are blaming the fall
    of the American family, (the many divorces) on women.  (so we'll
    feel guilty and stay home.)  The newest thing is that people who
    work too hard loose everything, (ie: Regarding Henry, Arnie on LA
    Law, ThirtySomething's cute male ad person, and several articles
    in Readers Digest on the subject...).  I could go on and on with 
    the views that the media asserts on us.
    
    I think if they had published the Kenya incident, they would sell
    more papers, grab more listeners.  (Everybody likes to hear about
    people dying in huge numbers or mob incidents like at English
    soccer games.)  The backers simply didn't want this info out.
    
    Rachael

I've been reading the past three morning papers especially carefully,
I'd thought, trying to find any coverage of this story.  I finally called
the S J Mercury News this morning to discuss the apparent lack of coverage,
and a staffer directed me to yesterday's A section.  I did find it...in a
box with 4 other stories under a header, Foreign News In Brief, on p 9A 
(in a 12-page section).  The story was in 2 paragraphs, here it is:
======================================================================
Boys kill 19 girls at boarding school

Boys at a Roman Catholic boarding school in Kenya went on a late-night
rampage at a dormitory and killed 19 girls, according to news reports
Monday.  The Daily Nation said 67 girls were injured in the assault
Saturday night at St Kizito Mixed Secondary School in Meru, 105 miles
northeast of Nairobi.  Some of the injured girls said they were raped.

The newspaper said the girls either were trampled or suffocated during
the attack by more than 300 boys.  Students at the school range in age
from about 14 to 19 years.  According to the newspaper, the boys were 
angry because the girls had refused to join in a demonstration against
the headmaster, James Laibon, over the boys' exclusion from an athletic
competition Friday.
=======================================================================
So now we have the 'reason for the protest'.  Anybody still think it
has significance?
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
I notice the terminology "boys" and "girls".  Are adolescents from ages
14-19 not considered young adults in African cultures?

DougO

    there's a wall that MESA takes around with them that lists like a
    month's crimes against women in a given city area and there are
    HUNDREDS of articles that did make it....
    
    wonder how many there were that fell "off the page"
    
    -Jody
    

reminds me of 'wilding' -- no excuse at all, just an unreason.

I find it hard to accept the idea that these 'boys' should have diminished
responsibility because of their age.

    doesn't surprise me...makes me sick to my stomach but doesn't surprise
    me.
    
    a friend of mine at college *finally* got a hearing in front on the
    Committee on Standards to formally accuse her attacker of rape.  COS
    has the power to suspend or expel students.
    
    they heard her case during finals and decided to not do anything about
    it after graduation when there were no people left and no chance of
    getting the story in the daily paper.
    
    and then they try to tell us that they take these issues "very
    seriously"
    
    yeah. right. give me some rusty hedgeclippers. *i'll* show them
    "seriously"
    
    pissed-at-the-world-in-general-but-not-all-people-in-specific,
    
    Daniel

    
    re .47:
    
    Rachel was only talking about her theory of *why* the story of
    the NRA bill (and she used it as only *one* example) didn't make
    it to the news - not the merits or non-merits of it.  I'm not a
    moderator, but I think your reply definitely belongs in another
    topic and *not* this one.  Your reply has nothing to do with
    Rachel's reply.  Because if there was no merit to the bill, then
    the media *could* have discussed that aspect.
    

    thank you DougO, for finally supplying the 'reason for protest' -- it
    actually _does_ make sense in light of subsequent events.
    
    but I'm still skeptical as to its relevance.
    
      Annie

    
    re the reference to "wilding" -- yes, it does seem like that in terms
    of the behavior, but.... these boys (young men) *knew* these girls
    (young women) -- they were classmates*.  I guess that supports the
    belief that even acquaintance rape is a crime of violence and power.
    These young men were still able to objectify these young women enough
    to be able to commit this incredible violence against them.  I agree
    that the reason for the protest has no real relevance, though the
    triviality of it does make me feel even more disgusted.
    
    Justine
    
    
    *I suppose it's possible that males and females are somewhat segregated
    or that these were not actual classmates, but they were on the same
    campus, and I think it's safe to say that these young women were known
    to the young men.  

    I was one that asked about the story, thanks for reporting it.
    
    Rathole specific to this string... opinion.

    Why?  To find out what warrented the riot.  Was it about serious
    issues or a stupid athletic event.  I one that when I hear or read
    a news story I expect to hear the facts, all of them to the knowledge
    of the reporting source.  I was taught a news story has Who, What,
    When, and Where at a minimum.  Good reporting tries to include Why
    when it's not speculation.  It becomes an editorial if the Why is a
    guess or speculation on the part of the reporter.  The story when
    I heard it on the radio was not news but simply a headline, information
    was lacking.
    
    To continue, if the students had been protesting about a coed event
    or the women getting some privledge the men felt wasn't deserved
    that is as relevent as a protest about some athletic event.  We still
    don't know the content of the decision or why it polarized the students
    by sex as it did.  Granted this is all very cerebral but the question
    in my mind is still what happened and why isn't it reported.  
    
    Personally the deaths made me sick.
    
    Peace,
    Allison

    
    re .48
    
    the newpaper reported that "some of the girls said they
    were raped"!  UGH!!!!
    
    does this newspaper also report that "a person said they 
    were mugged"  or " a person said their house was burlarized"?
    
    see what I mean about newspapers putting in their own slant?
    
    Rachael
    

    I was waiting for someone to notice that.
    
    						Ann B.

    
    re .44
    
    probably the media's resident spin doctors couldn't figure out a 
    way to blame the US for it, so they went on to greener pastures.
    
    surely it would be far from NPR to bring discredit on a bastion
    of civil liberties like arap Moi's Kenya..
    

    
    
    	It seems like rape is the only crime that is "alleged" until
    proved to be "fact".   What the h*ll kind of "proof" do they need??!!
    
    	This is too much, I think I'll go be sick now...
    
    
    Debbi

Re: "said they were raped" and 'alleged"

Let us not go off the deep end, please.  As horrible as the incident in
Kenya is, let us address it with an open mind in re: facts versus
allegations.

In the US, under law, *every* crime is "alleged" until proven.  Simply
saying I've been robbed is not sufficient; I must demonstrate the truth
of my allegations to the satisfaction of the police.

Similarly, under US law, every arrested suspect is "alleged" by the
police to have committed a crime.  The prosecution must prove the
suspect's guilt beyond a reasonable doubt in all criminal cases.

Rape is among the hardest crimes to prove unless the perpetrator either
is caught in the act or leaves behind conclusive evidence such as semen
that can be tested for a DNA match.  (Even a DNA match isn't proof; a
nonmatch disqualifies the suspect, but a match, while more damning than
a blood-type match, is not categorical identification.)

I have seen in the newspapers within the past month reports of three
unrelated alleged rapes that were shown to be false claims.  I'm not
even thinking about saying all rape claims -- or even a *significant*
percentage of them -- are fraudulent, but I am in accord with the
responsible reporting style by which the Kenya incident has been called
"alleged" rape.  If the young women in question submit to medical
examination and are found to have semen in their bodies, that will lead
me to accept their claims more readily.  Without such proof, while I
do indeed *believe* that they were raped, I do not *know* that they
were.

-d

>I have seen in the newspapers within the past month reports of three
>unrelated alleged rapes that were shown to be false claims.

How can you prove a claim false? it seems to me that all you can do is fail
to prove it true.

If a woman was raped, but showed no signs of having been raped, took
her story to the police, and they laughed at her, that would make
the papers as an "alleged rape case that [was] show to be [a] false claim."
We can't *know* those claims were false, and given the ALREADY DEMONSTRATE
PROPENSITY of the legal system to not take the victims of rape seriously,
I would be much more inclined to believe, knowing nothing else about the
case, that the woman was raped by couldn't prove it, rather than that she
was lying.

Either one could be true: we have NO idea.  But I lean toward the latter.

D!

    -d
    
    If a semen sample taken from a woman's vagina shows a DNA match
    with the accused rapist, how is this not 100% proof? The only
    possible reason that I could think of is that all courts don't
    accept DNA testing or that the test was invalid due to some error.
    
    BJ

    So it's only rape if the guy, uh, "had a good time"?  If she fights him
    off "too soon" and gets away there was no rape?  You gotta wait?
    
    S.

    Also, because of the precise kind of treatment D! was referring too,
    many survivors take a while to go to the police.  The statute of
    limitations lasts longer than most sperm samples...
    
    -----
    \ D /
     \ /

    
    
    A suspect is innocent until proven guilty, so his involvement in the
    crime is alleged.  But I see no reason to doubt that a woman was raped
    if she says she was (until it's proven that she's lying).  It seems to
    me that we're quite like to see/hear:
    
         A man was robbed and beaten (or even a woman was robbed and
         beaten).
         A woman *claims* she was raped.
    
    Why do we so often doubt the woman's story?  
    
    Some might say that you can't prove you were raped (at least not
    easily).  Can you prove that your wallet was taken?  That your car
    was stolen?  Not easily, but that's more likely to be believed.  I bet
    false claims of car theft are more common that false claims of rape.
    
    Is anyone else as discouraged as I am?
    
        A pristine river is poisoned (perhaps ruined forever)
        Nuclear power plants are operating even though (many are) unsafe
        Women and children are starving in this country, but we have
        money to liberate a country that executes journalists and refugees
        Babies are being raped by men they trust and nobody seems to care
        Women stay in their abusive relationships because the police can't
        protect them if they try to leave or make him leave
        Young girls are used as prostitutes if they don't die en route
    
    
    Why don't more of us just go to bed and never get up again...?
    
    feeling pretty low, sad, and disgusted.  I am not interested in arguing
    about the things on my list.  I can be sad about those things if I
    want to, and nothing anyone says about the environment/education/health
    care president will get me over it.
    
    pulling up the covers now,
    
    Justine
                         

I forwarded this info (abot the rapes/attacks/killings in Kenya) to a friend
of mine who spent a couple of years in Kenya.

She said that she is not surprised; violence is prevalent in Kenya, 
and it is the big reason she chose not to go to the University of Kenya
(she really likes Kenya and wanted to stay.)  She says that things we 
would consider horrible happen there are the time, and we don't hear about
it; and that this incident probably seems more "bizare" than it is, without
the cultural context.  

Personally, I found this pretty disturbing.  I would rather think that
this sort of this *is* bizare - a rare, off-the-wall, unexplainable occurance -
than yet another example of violence so common it barely raises an eyebrow.

(She did say that usually the violence is not based on gender lines.)

D!

    OK, Gyns and Guys,
    
    Is the incident in Kenya about whether or not those who said they were
    raped were or were not raped?
    
    Or is the incident about the extreme violence perpetrated by a group of
    young men upon young women who didn't choose to protest the young men
    being banned from a sports competition?
    
    19 of the young women are DEAD.  they aren't 'allegedly dead.'  'Many
    more' [whatever number that means] were trampled and beaten.  the
    injuries aren't 'alleged injuries.'
    
    Some of the injured claim to have been raped.  Well call me silly and
    hysterical, but from where I sit this is a fairly serious injury.
    I believe that they are telling the truth.
    
    But if they aren't, SO F*ing WHAT?
    
    Does this mean that the dead aren't dead?  NO.
    
    Does this mean that the trampled and beaten aren't injured?  NO.
    
    Does this mean that the violent raid did not occur?  NO.
    
    Horrible as rape or false accusations of rape are, rape is only a
    component of this tragedy.
    
    If it will help, I'll slap my silly fingers every time I 'forget' to
    type 'alleged' before the r-word so we can get down to core issues and
    stop battling on the periphery.
    
      Annie

    
    I've moved discussions of false claims to a new note called Defining
    Rape (920).
    
    Please let's keep this note for talking about what happened in Kenya.
    
    Justine -- Womannotes Comod

Re: .67:

I agree that this is a horrible crime, whether or not the rapes that were
reported actually took place.

The topic of this note suuggests a different viewpoint, however, as it
mentions nothing about the girls who were killed, only those that claimed
rape.  The topic name might be changed as well, because, as far as I can
determine from the contents of this note, it is wrong.  The facts as
reported in 917.48 say that 19 died, 67 were injured and some of the
injured said they were raped.  It doesn't add up to "hundreds".

This is not to minimize the severity of the crime, only to say that
inaccurate reporting of the crime can distort the discussion of an
already inflammatory subject.

Ben

    
    As I understand it, hundreds of women were attacked:  Many of them were 
    raped and otherwise injured.  19 women were killed (perhaps the death 
    toll is higher now?).  It's believed that many of the dead were trampled 
    to death.
    
    Sickening and horrible for all -- the dead and the injured.  
    
    And even if Kenya is more violent than some other cultures, I *can*
    imagine it happening here -- your imaginations may vary.
    
    Justine  
                                                              

    
    All Things Considered has a segment dedicated to this today..

    
    
    SET HEAVY SARCASM/= ON
    
    
    	Just imagine what would have happened if these "young men" had 
    inflatable dolls to "play" with.????
    
    SET HEAVY SARCASM/= OFF
    
    
    It's not a giant leap of the imagination to see how something like 
    that could happen *here*.
    
    Justine--- You said exactly what I was trying to convey,  that the
    media a lot of times pre-judges what goes in the paper or on the 
    screen.
    
    
    Debbi

Africa is still a very violent place.  A friend just got back from 6 months
in Kenya, Sierra Leone, Zaire, and the Ivory Coast.  On day # one a thief
relieved him of the camera that he was carrying.  He was more careful
after that.  Had the adventure of a lifetime.  But its like going back
to the 1800's or farther in many places.  We see the nice stuff on the
evening news and in the magazines.  But the values are very different, and
human life is held in much lower regard.

I went to college with a man who had grown up in Nigeria in a grass hut,
fought as a rebel in their civil war, and managed to come to the US
to study to be an engineer.  Once you got past the veneer of "civilization"
that he learned at the missionary schools, his values were very very
different.

The world outside the US and Europe can be very dangerous, especially for
women.  Its not good, it just is.  Its changing, in some places women are
better off, in some places women are worse off.  It is folly to apply
US values everywhere.  You CAN chose not to travel to Kenya or any other
such place.  On the other hand, if you let your fears keep you at home,
you miss a lot of what life has to offer.  Everyone has to come to terms
with this on their own.

    re.74
    
    I do not 'apply US values' when I deplore what happened in Kenya.
    
    I wouldn't _begin_ to have the arrogance.  While living in the US: I
    was raped by a friend, my sister was beaten senseless and kicked in her
    pregnant stomach by her husband, I watched in horror while having my
    arms pinned as a friend was pummeled and tossed by group of men
    chanting "comunist whore" ... not to mention what I can read in the
    papers or hear on the news most any day.
    
    I am not sitting in my civilised and protected ivory tower castigating
    Kenyans for not providing such a lovely and safe place for women to
    live as I have been fortunate enough to experience.
    
    Not at all.
    
      Annie

    This kind of thing is why Amnesty International has a women's
    campaign. Amnesty studied refugees in the Africa. In one instance, they 
    studied a population moving across a border from one country to
    another. They noticed that there were very few women in the group.
    Why? The women had been killed or sold into slavery or forced
    into prostitution by the "security forces" that were supposed to
    be protecting them.
    
    Of refugees, 75 percent report rape by security forces in villages.
    However, only 7 percent reported rape as a reason for leaving their
    area. That means they take rape for granted.
    
    This is a truly depressing subject. Yet progress is beginning to be
    made to do something about it. Women are beginning to organize to
    combat this kind of thing and they are succeeding.
    
    Eileen
    

I'd like to add a historical and saddening footnote here.

If one knows anything of American history, one knows that
many many black men were lynched between the end of the civil
war through the 1930s.  But only last year did I run across the
fact that black women died in equal or greater numbers from
rape and murder.  

One is left to speculate whether our history books and documentaries
are just too polite to mention rape and murder, or indifferent.

    Meigs,
    
    History is written by the winners.  Witness the following quotation
    from the Curmudgeon's Dictionary:
    
    	history, n.  A detailed record of past events; or, more often, a
    	whitewashing of those same events.
    
    	    History is made at night.  Character is what you are in
    	    the dark.
    
    			- John Whorfin, character in film "The Adventures
    			  of Buckaroo Banzai Across the Eighth Dimension"
    
    It is not convenient to a population consisting primarily of whites
    that they, as a class, should be known as the rapists and murderers of
    blacks, male or female.  50 years ago, you would not have heard word
    one about hangings of black men, let alone about rapes and murders of
    black women.  Today you hear it, and tomorrow you will hear more of it.
    
    We as a nation are coming to realize that hiding our history isn't
    going to work.  Or, as has been said, "The only thing we learn from
    history is that we do not learn from history."  But it's a slow
    process, one that reflects Newton's first law of motion -- an object at
    rest tends to stay at rest, and an object in motion tends ot stay in
    motion, unless acted upon by an outside force.  With an object as big
    as the U.S., it takes a *big* outside force, or else it takes a small
    one acting over a very long time.
    
    -d

    update:  31 male students were arrested over the weekend in connection
    with the rioting.
    
    doctors report that 71 of the women were raped.
    
    \D/

    reply.70
    
    you will notice, when you read the base note, that it DOES
    state that 19 women were killed.
    
    The Boston Globe had stated in the July 15th paper that
    "hundreds were raped".
    
    so both the basenote and the title ARE correct.  Your local
    libary shold have a copy of the paper if you'd like to check
    it out. 
    
    Racahel
    

    
    Reprinted without permission.
    
    The Houston Chronicle, Tuesday, July 30 1991
    p. 7A
    
    RAPES BLAMED ON CHAUVINISM OF KENYA MEN
    
    By JANE PERLEZ
    New York Times
    
    
    MERU, Kenya -- Outwardly, ST. Kizito's coed boarding school, set in the
    coffee growing countryof northwestern Kenya, was much like any other in
    this African nation.
    
    The school was crowded, poorly managed, staffed with underpaid
    teachers, yet apparently calm.
    
    But one Saturday night this month, the boys at the school went on a
    spree of dormitory violence that reportedly began with a protest over
    fees and then ran on, unchecked by the local police or teachers.  the
    boys raped 71 teen-age schoolgirls, and 19 other girls died in the
    violence.  Since then, authorities have jailed 41 of the school's 306
    boys, and 29 were charged with manslaughter Monday, two with rape, and
    the other 10 were held without charge.
    
    The rampage July 13 has caused a furor among politicians, educators
    and others in Kenya, which prides itself on providing better education
    than most African nations.
    
    "This tragedy has underscored the abominable male chauvinism that
    dominates Kenyan social life," wrote Hilary Ng'Weno, editor in chief of
    The Weekly Review, the nation's most widely read magazine.
    
    "The lot of our women and girls is lamentable.  We treat them as
    second-class beings, good only for sexual gratification or burdensome
    chores.  We bring up our boys to have little or no respect for girls."
    
    Ng'Weno's magazine suggested that the rapes at St. Kizito might not be
    an isolated incident.
    
    According to accounts in the Kenyan press and by people here in Meru,
    the trouble started at St. Kizito wen the school's 271 girls--like the
    boys, aged 14-18--refused to join in a strike planned by the boys.  The
    boys complained that they had been humiliated when the school
    administration failed to pay the fees necessary for their participation
    in an interschool athletic competition.
    
    The police in Meru said the boys decided to take their anger out
    against the girls.  Sending that the boys might attack, all 271 girls
    sought protection by huddling in the biggest dormitory.
    
    The boys cut the electricity and phone lines and used large stones to
    knock down the doors to the dormitory.  Some of the boys reportedly
    were shrouded in sheets and carried flashlights, apparently to pick out
    girls whom they suspected of having sexual relations with school
    officials.
    
    In the stampede to escape, the police said, 19 of the girls were
    crushed to death or suffocated when beds collapsed on them.
    
    How many of the school's boys wtook part in the events that night is
    not clear.  Many politicians have blamed a breakdown in discipline and
    drug-taking for the incident.
    
    But The Kenya Times, a newspaper owned by the governing political
    party, has given prominence to the theory that the low status of women
    here was aroot cause.  Some experts on juveniles have agreed.
    
    It is an explanation that has resonance in a society in which women sit
    together in the front of buses to avoid molestation by men and in which
    educated urban women have to sit at home nights while their husbands
    take out girlfriends.
    
    In a report splashed across its front page, the newspaper said that the
    rape of girls at St. Kizito was a "common occurence" sanctioned by the
    principal and his staff.
    
    "If you are a girl, you take it and hope you don't get pregnant," said
    Francis Machira Apollos, a local probation officer.  "If girls hadn't
    died in this, we wouldn't have known about it."
    
    The principal, James Laiboni, told The Kenya Times: "In the past, the
    boys would scare the girls out of their dormitories and in the process
    they would get hold of them and drag them to the bush where they would
    'do their thing' and the matter would end there, with the students
    going back to their respective dormitories."
    
    The deputy principal, Joyce Kithira, was quoted by the paper as having
    told President Daniel arap Moi when he visited the destroyed dormitory:
    "The boys never meant any harm against the girls.  They just wanted to
    rape." 
    

    I am sick. 

    ;-(
     .
      .
       .
        .
         .
    
    

    >    "The boys never meant any harm against the girls.  They just wanted to
    >	  rape." 
    
    I can not understand this mind-set.  I am speechless, tongue-tied.
    
    E Grace

    It either means they don't equate rape with harm, or they wanted
    to rape someone _else_ (and their schoolmates were just handy.) 
    I don't know which possible interpretation bothers me more.

    the saddest part is the suggestion that the girls just take it, and are
    glad if they just don't get pregnant.
    
    

    :-[  :-[

One of the more exciting trips I have taken was to Kenya in 1986. I was part of
an organized tour for those interested in birds.  It was a wonderful adventure 
and I really fell in love with this country.  Our endless pursuit of birds took
us into some parts of the country other tourists rarely see.  The plight of the
women in these areas was disheartening.  

The most obvious thing was the fact that in the agricultural areas the women 
did all the work.  One day we were birding on a steep trail that led up the 
mountain to a small village.  It was October and the village was busy  
harvesting corn from a field down the road and hauling the stalks and the corn 
up to the village.  There was a constant parade of women going up the trail 
with huge bundles of corn on their heads.  The men of course did not humiliate
themselves by carrying burdens. They drove donkeys loaded with corn.  When 
the women reached the village, they turned around and went back for another 
load.  I guess the donkeys did too.

It was a frustrating scene because you know there is little you can do to
improve the situation.  What we can do is to continue to fight for women's
rights in this country.  The rest of the world admires and adopts our jazz,
rock music, blue jeans and t-shirts.  They also look to us for ideas on
Democracy and Human Rights. We must make sure that Human Rights includes
Women's Rights.

    	On Friday, I watched a lengthy CNN feature story about this.  It
    	may not have made big news over here at the time, but it has become
    	a focal point for the women's rights movement in Kenya.  The 19
    	young women who died are now considered to be martyrs to women's
    	rights - my understanding is that the date of their deaths will be
    	a national (unofficial?) memorial day in the years to come.
    
    	Several leaders from Kenya's women's rights movement appeared on
    	camera to describe the massacre as being part of the severe problem
    	of male violence against women in Kenya.  They stated that women
    	hold the status of second class citizens there.
    
    	They were also appalled by the school official's statement that
    	the boys "meant no harm" to the girls when they attacked their
    	dormitory (but MERELY wanted to rape them.)  The leaders of Kenya's
    	women's rights movement (and other Kenya citizens who appeared on
    	camera) said that the rape of women is such a common offense in
    	Kenya that it's barely regarded as any big deal.
    
    	Residents who live near the school (where the massacre took place)
    	said that it wasn't at all uncommon to hear the screams of some of
    	the girls at night while being raped.  On the night of the massacre,
    	the screams heard during the rapes and murders were considered a
    	fairly normal event by those who heard them.
    
    	Kenya's women's rights movement will make sure that these young
    	martyrs' deaths are not soon forgotten.
    
    	(By the way, 19 girls were killed, 71 were raped - and 39 boys are
    	being held on charges of manslaughter.)