Friday, February 20, 2009

Anyone know who this issue belongs to?

I'm gonna go straight to the point.




Why in the hell do people go through so much trouble trying to tell whether or not an issue belongs to a certain branch of activism as if the proper label on the issue determines its importance?




When Sean Bell was murdered by a group of cops as he and friends were coming out of a night club (the day before his wedding mind you) there were people in the feminist blogshpere who were trying to decide of his murder was a feminist issue.

Does it really fucking matter which branch of activism an event belongs to? If it "belonged" to the anti-racists would things change? If it "belonged" to the MRAs would the murder mean less? If it "belonged" to feminist does that suddenly mean that his murder was a serious issue? To the devil with that.

This man was killed a little over two years ago and people are still arguing over whether or not his murder is a feminist issue.

One of the arguing points mentioned by those who say it is is the fact that he left behind a widow. Are those people trying to say that the only reason his murder is worthy of the feminist label is because a woman was affect? (I suppose if his wife to be was killed and Sean and the child were left behind it would automatically be a feminist issue.) I guess it only warrants the "feminist issue" label if a woman was affected no matter how far you have to dig for the connection.

To all you people arguing over whether or not his murder (or any event for that matter) is a feminist issue, who gives a shit? A man was murdered for racist reasons. He left behind a widow and child. The widow and child need support and the racism needs to be dealt with. It is an issue plain and simple.
-->