Victims Versus
Victimhood
Weeks after Hurricane
Katrina, the anguish of its victims is still
painful to see. Even people hardened by years of
war and the sharp divisions within our culture,
reach into their hearts and www.redcross.org/donate/donate.html
pocketbooks at the sight of it.
Meanwhile, the claim of
victimhood has also emerged: the allegation that
blacks were www.udel.edu/PR/UDaily/2005/mar/discrimination092105.html
discriminated against in aid efforts. But that
accusation has generally met with weary
dismissal.
The difference in response
has made me wonder about the distinction between a
victim and victimhood, and whether the latter may
be on the political decline.
The standard dictionary
definition of www.google.com/search?hl=en&lr=&oi=defmore&defl=en&q=define:victim
a victim is "an unfortunate person who suffers from
some adverse circumstance" such as a crime or a
hurricane.
Victimhood is a relatively
recent term, not found in most older dictionaries.
It usually points to the ongoing and collective
victimization of a group.
Historically speaking,
many people have been wronged because of their
group identity. Blacks were enslaved; women were
legally excluded; such individuals were victims.
The idea of victimhood, however, caught political
fire long after slavery was abolished and women
acquired the vote. It persists even though the
institutions of society, such as the legal system,
have been purged of 'discrimination'. It persists
even though preference for minorities and women
have been imposed in the form of policies such as
affirmation action. Are those who claim victimhood
still victims in any meaningful sense?
Victim and victimhood: the
two terms get tangled up together and distinctions
need to be drawn.
Consider the example of a
woman who is beaten by her husband. She is clearly
a 'victim' in the traditional meaning of the word;
she deserves both compassion and
justice.
But many feminists argue
further for the battered woman's 'victimhood'. That
is, she is viewed as only one example of the wider
oppression all women experience from men and
society. She ceases to be a wronged individual and
becomes the symbol of a wronged category that
includes women who have never experienced violence
or may themselves be violent.
The shift from victim to
victimhood has important consequences. The primary
wrong is no longer inflicted on an individual but
upon a group. It is no longer committed by an
individual but by another group. The main remedy is
not restitution to a person but general reparations
to or special protection (privilege) for 'the
group.'
The phrase 'politics of'
tends to precede the word 'victimhood' because that
word is so often accompanied by a demand for social
justice. This remedy includes reparations or
privileges.
In short, the move from
victim to victimhood pushes the individual aside,
constructs society into warring groups and argues
for political remedies.
In his essay
www.carnegiecouncil.org/viewMedia.php/prmTemplateID/8/prmID/238
Human Rights and the Politics of Victimhood, Robert
Meister argues for such politics and epitomizes how
the idea has been used by the far left. A synopsis
of the essay states, "On the revolutionary side
[those arguing for victimhood and against the
'oppressive' system], the aim had been to
produce unreconciled victims who would continue to
struggle against the beneficiaries of past
injustice even after the perpetrators were
defeated."
Meister also hints at why
the politics of victimhood may be on the decline,
"the counterrevolutionary response was to exploit
the fear of passive beneficiaries
that they
would be treated no better than perpetrators should
the revolution prevail." Translation: men who've
never harmed a woman (passive beneficiaries) may
resist being stigmatized for the wrongs committed
by men who do batter. They may insist upon being
judged 'innocent' or 'guilty' based on their own
actions. They may resist having their sons and
daughters born into a political
category.
How did society lose sight
of individual victims and slide into the group
think of victimhood? Why did people allow
themselves and their children be stigmatized simply
because they were male, white, or otherwise the
member of a 'guilty' category?
To some extent, the answer
lies in the generosity that now pours toward
Katrina victims. When most people see genuine and
undeserved suffering, they feel compassion and they
want to help. That is almost a definition of
decency.
Consider once again the
example of battered women. In the '70s, when decent
people finally saw the extent of the problem and
heard the anguished stories firsthand, they were
outraged; they wanted to help. And without the
compassion that the average person extends toward
victims, little could have changed.
That compassion was
hijacked and politicized by the advocates of
victimhood with the goal of revolutionizing society
by redistributing power and status between groups
of people. They did not seek justice so much as
social justice. They spoke not of restitution but
of reparations. The original cry for protection
became a demand for privilege.
A result of decades of
victimhood politics can also be seen in the general
response to Katrina. Many people are no longer
listening to the cry of victimhood. Perhaps they
are weary of victims who never capmag.com/article.asp?ID=4255
heal but seem to embrace their 'oppression' as
a source of identity and self-worth. They could be
disgusted with blasts of anger which don't
distinguish between friend or foe. Perhaps they
want people to take some personal responsibility.
Or they could just be tired of feeling
'guilty.'
The response to Katrina
was heartening on many levels. One of them: it
demonstrated that society can still respond with
overwhelming kindness toward innocent victims. The
compassion fatigue that sometimes seems
overwhelming may be more a reaction to victimhood
than to victims. If so, as the politics of
victimhood fades, perhaps compassion will emerge
and shine.
©2007, Wendy
McElroy
* * *
Wendy
McElroy is the editor of ifeminists.com
and a research fellow for The Independent Institute
in Oakland, Calif. She is the author and editor of
many books and articles, including her latest book,
Liberty for Women: Freedom and Feminism in the
21st Century. She lives with her husband in
Canada. E-Mail.
Also, see her daily blog at www.zetetics.com/mac
Contact
Us |
Disclaimer
| Privacy
Statement
Menstuff®
Directory
Menstuff® is a registered trademark of Gordon
Clay
©1996-2023, Gordon Clay
|