DIY History | Transcribe | Campus Culture | Take Back the Night newspaper editorials and articles, 1982 | 1982-10-29 Liz Bird Editorial: "Was the rally a missed opportunity?"

Transcribe
Translate

Take Back the Night newspaper editorials and articles, 1982

1982-10-29 Liz Bird Editorial: "Was the rally a missed opportunity?"

Was the rally a missed opportunity? 
Liz Bird

SATURDAY'S " Women Take Back the Night" rally was a "great success" according to its organizers who spoke of the "anger," the "power" and the "joy" felt by women who took part. For many of those women, it seems to have been a genuinely liberating experience - one night in 365 when they were not afraid to walk through a notorious city park and through dark streets and alleys. 
The fear of rape and assault is something all women live with, all the time. No man can truly understand the fear that makes whole areas of town off-limits to women at night, the fear that rises to panic at the sound of footsteps coming from behind. Men's reactions to rape range from sensitivity through laughter to callousness and indifference. 
The symbolism of "taking back the night" is important - one night of real freedom from fear of men. On Saturday night, it was reported that a man felt fearful of passing through the park because he had heard assaults were taking place. Did it occur to him that most women are unable to pass through that park every night of the year because of that same fear of assault?
But nevertheless the rally leaves questions, not just about the event itself, but also about the direction the women's movement is taking in Iowa City.

THE RALLY's organizers stressed that if the event was to have any impact on the community as a whole they wanted interest to focus on the issue of violence against women. But what did the rally actually achieve, apart from a brief, though very positive experience for 250 women?
From the beginning, the organizers said they would not welcome either men or the media, and women physically kept both out. They later said that this decision was peripheral to the rally's purposes, and they blamed the media for focusing on this rather than the issue at hand. 
But were they really so naive that they thought the media would ignore the event, which was held in a public place? By banning the media, the effectively issued a challenge to journalists.
Most people would agree it would be inappropriate for camera to be amongst the women when they were discussing their personal experiences, but there were things the rally committee could have done to enable the media to cover the event unobtrusively and positively. Apparently they considered some of these alternatives, such as requesting in advance that women reporters be assigned. They also considered allowing a limited time for photographers to take some general pictures of the event. 

JOURNALISTS ARE not unreasonable or insensitive - the organizers could have cooperated with the media in advance, setting up some acceptable guidelines. Instead they decided that other considerations had priority, and asked the media to stay away. One wonders how the organizers would have reacted if, say, the Ku Klux Klan had set up a rally in a public park, denying access to blacks and the media. 
The committee was also unwise in physically excluding men, however understandable the motives. Having opted to hold the rally in public, they should have realized the implications of this - they were either naive or they were deliberately risking a confrontation. 
The impact of the committee's decisions has detracted from the rally's cause, and maybe even from the local women's movement as a whole. Many men have been alienated, and for more worthy reasons than mere bitterness at being excluded. Many would have liked to offer their support, either to individual women or to women in general. 
Unfortunately, and some of the rather offensive letters we have received here confirm this, it seems some men have strengthened their existing prejudices - calling the rally participants "dykes" and "man-haters." Even more sadly, many women who favor cooperation with men may also have been alienated. 

I FEAR THERE is a danger that the women's movement may be retreating into self-absorption, in which already aware women repeat the same ideas to each other, and from which the mainstream female population is becoming increasingly alienated. 
" Women's issues" have to become issues that are treated seriously by all people, just as eventually the unique perspectives of women's studies must be incorporated into the mainstream of education and research. 
The Take Back the Night committee missed an opportunity to put the issue before the community, and to advance the feminist cause. Many women were politicized and spurred into action by the feminist movement in the late 1960s and 70s. Now in the 80s the same women are going over the same ground. In those years at least some men became sensitized to women's issues - to alienate them, and with them many women, is ultimately self defeating. 
Women must continue to lead and define the Women's Movement; we still deperately need that movement. But we must also recognize that we are part of not apart from the whole community - society will not change its attitudes unless the women's movement perceived as a positive, vital force, leads the way. 

Bird is DI editorial page editor.

Saving...

Was the rally a missed opportunity? Liz Bird SATURDAY'S " Women Take Back the Night" rally was a "great success" according to its organizers who spoke of the "anger," the "power" and the "joy" felt by women who took part. For many of those women, it seems to have been a genuinely liberating experience - one night in 365 when they were not afraid to walk through a notorious city park and through dark streets and alleys. The fear of rape and assault is something all women live with, all the time. No man can truly understand the fear that makes whole areas of town off-limits to women at night, the fear that rises to panic at the sound of footsteps coming from behind. Men's reactions to rape range from sensitivity through laughter to callousness and indifference. The symbolism of "taking back the night" is important - one night of real freedom from fear of men. On Saturday night, it was reported that a man felt fearful of passing through the park because he had heard assaults were taking place. Did it occur to him that most women are unable to pass through that park every night of the year because of that same fear of assault? But nevertheless the rally leaves questions, not just about the event itself, but also about the direction the women's movement is taking in Iowa City. THE RALLY's organizers stressed that if the event was to have any impact on the community as a whole they wanted interest to focus on the issue of violence against women. But what did the rally actually achieve, apart from a brief, though very positive experience for 250 women? From the beginning, the organizers said they would not welcome either men or the media, and women physically kept both out. They later said that this decision was peripheral to the rally's purposes, and they blamed the media for focusing on this rather than the issue at hand. But were they really so naive that they thought the media would ignore the event, which was held in a public place? By banning the media, the effectively issued a challenge to journalists. Most people would agree it would be inappropriate for camera to be amongst the women when they were discussing their personal experiences, but there were things the rally committee could have done to enable the media to cover the event unobtrusively and positively. Apparently they considered some of these alternatives, such as requesting in advance that women reporters be assigned. They also considered allowing a limited time for photographers to take some general pictures of the event. JOURNALISTS ARE not unreasonable or insensitive - the organizers could have cooperated with the media in advance, setting up some acceptable guidelines. Instead they decided that other considerations had priority, and asked the media to stay away. One wonders how the organizers would have reacted if, say, the Ku Klux Klan had set up a rally in a public park, denying access to blacks and the media. The committee was also unwise in physically excluding men, however understandable the motives. Having opted to hold the rally in public, they should have realized the implications of this - they were either naive or they were deliberately risking a confrontation. The impact of the committee's decisions has detracted from the rally's cause, and maybe even from the local women's movement as a whole. Many men have been alienated, and for more worthy reasons than mere bitterness at being excluded. Many would have liked to offer their support, either to individual women or to women in general. Unfortunately, and some of the rather offensive letters we have received here confirm this, it seems some men have strengthened their existing prejudices - calling the rally participants "dykes" and "man-haters." Even more sadly, many women who favor cooperation with men may also have been alienated. I FEAR THERE is a danger that the women's movement may be retreating into self-absorption, in which already aware women repeat the same ideas to each other, and from which the mainstream female population is becoming increasingly alienated. " Women's issues" have to become issues that are treated seriously by all people, just as eventually the unique perspectives of women's studies must be incorporated into the mainstream of education and research. The Take Back the Night committee missed an opportunity to put the issue before the community, and to advance the feminist cause. Many women were politicized and spurred into action by the feminist movement in the late 1960s and 70s. Now in the 80s the same women are going over the same ground. In those years at least some men became sensitized to women's issues - to alienate them, and with them many women, is ultimately self defeating. Women must continue to lead and define the Women's Movement; we still deperately need that movement. But we must also recognize that we are part of not apart from the whole community - society will not change its attitudes unless the women's movement perceived as a positive, vital force, leads the way. Bird is DI editorial page editor.