A Hill East resident reported on a local listserv that she had been robbed while walking to her home from the Metro. In an email that was meant to warn others of her attack and possibly recover her stolen property, the victim reported that she was followed from the Stadium-Armory Metro to the 1600 block of A Street SE, where the attack occurred.
In response to her warning and her plea were questions about her level of attention: was the victim talking on a cell phone or listening to an mp3 player? (The victim said she was not talking on her phone or listening to music.) Also questioned were her actions: why hadn’t she knocked on a neighbor’s door if she knew she was being followed? Questions about the victims actions were tempered with apologies for being the victim of a crime and disclaimers about not being overly critical, but the posters asked their questions nonetheless.
In this world of internet anonymity, I can’t help but wonder if we are attacking our neighbors who are victims of crimes because we are so jaded by what we see in our fair city’s limits ?
Tell us what you think? While this particular victim was not guilty of listening to music or talking on her phone, should we judge our neighbors who ignore warnings and talk on their phones or listen to their iPods while walking alone day or night? Have we become so jaded by what we see and hear on the Hill that we ask questions first and offer sympathy later, if at all?
I am on that listserv and saw the posts by her neighbors and was flabbergasted. I am sure that some of the comments were meant to be suggestions of how to prevent crimes from happening, but when a neighbor has been mugged the ONLY response to that victim should be “I’m sorry, how can we help?”
I’m not on the list but can guess which one it is. These kind of questions are obnoxious and self-serving. Even when people don’t mean to be rude the basic psychology (per outreach training on rape issues way back when) is those asking want to differentiate themselves from the person who was attacked. If you can figure out what went wrong and what that person did that you don’t, you feel safer. Which is an understandable human desire. Dealing with these questions happened to me when I was mugged. The invasive questions to those I know that were also mugged included things like ‘are you in therapy now.’ Really? I’m all for destigmatizing mental health issues, but asking people you don’t know that kind of questions is over the top. Lecturing crime victims is annoying, because seriously, if they did “something wrong” do these questioners seriously believe that lecturing the person teaches them something they didn’t already learn from having been mugged?? Do they think the police didn’t mention these things and hearing it from every random person on the Hill will get the message across better?
I read the same email chain this morning and had a different reaction. I appreciated the original posting, and I thought the follow up was appropriate. Most everyone started by saying they were glad she wasn’t harmed. Yes, there were follow up questions about headphones/cell phone usage but they were in the context of concern, and the original poster wrote back with a helpful reply.
I also saw that line and was a bit bothered by the question about the iPod. However, I chalked up more to denial and insecurity — i.e., the poster didn’t want to admit to themselves that this could happen to just anyone leaving the Metro, and there must have been an obvious way in which the victim “messed up.” And actually, I appreciated the post about knocking on a neighbor’s door. In the heat of the moment, I’m not sure that would occur to me either, and so I’m happy to have that suggestion in my mind now.
Since reading the listserve and writing this post, I’ve thought about some of my reactions to posts about crime.
I’ve never attacked a poster who has been the victim of a crime–and there was obviously something about these posts that made me ask questions–but I have shared my experience as a victim of crimes in an attempt to offer a warning to others. I don’t know how my posts were perceived by the victim posting a message or other readers, but having learned that a u-lock and a cable lock together are a stronger deterrent to bike theft, I felt compelled to share what I learned when someone posted about a stolen bike. And when our house was robbed a few days after Christmas in 2007, I recall posting a message about the incident that also offered tips that the police shared with me. I’m sure I have since disclosed that I was the victim of a crime and offered those tips again. While I’ve never once felt that I was judging or blaming a victim, were my attempts at offering advice (something I should maybe do less, in all aspects of my life) perceived as judgement? Being a faceless name on a list and being easily misunderstood in print could mean a lot when commenting on someone’s post.
Of course outright blaming a victim is just wrong, in my opinion.
When I moved to the Hill, I was unaware that I had given up the right to listen to music in the evenings while I walk home.
cvd, you have a “right to listen to music” anytime you wish, but you also have a responsibility to take care of yourself. That applies whether you’re jogging on a suburban trail, hiking in the Rocky Mountain wilderness, in a parking garage late at night, or walking down your own street.
If you’re not alert and aware, you become an easier target and a potential public safety problem.
Technically on that listserv, people aren’t supposed to be anonymous, they’re supposed to give their first and last names and some locational information like a cross-street or even just the neighborhood.
Anon – I agree. There is no moral ambiguity here though. The irresponsible party is the thief.
If listening to music means you get robbed, then we have – for all intents and purposes – lost the right to listen to music.
I think one aspect of Kyra’s post that is particularly insightful is that there seems to be a safety of anonymity when posting something on a listserv or a blog. When we don’t have to see everyone’s reaction to our comments, we tend to be a little harsher and more critical than we would be if we were actually speaking to someone in person. The Hill seems to be notorious for this as I’ve met people in person whom I’ve interacted with online, on listservs, etc. and I can’t believe that they are the same people. It’s like an internet-age case of schizophrenia, and I think that’s a far more interesting point that Kyra brings up other than the specifics of this particular e-mail chain.
Thank you to Kyra for starting that conversation – it’s one that needs to be heard.
Having read the entire email exchange, I do believe there was no harm but an attempt to remind our fellow neighbors to be safe.
Speaking to someone’s earlier point about anonymity on listserves, I think it is amazing to watch people’s responses to postings. There was an especially spirited discussion about clearing parking spots during the snow that deeply sadden me. One of the pleasures of living on the Hill is the sense of community (and there is one) but I do feel posters to the listserve feel the need to post whatever they are feeling without the filters that are necessary when interacting in society.
Finally, if anyone (7 months pregnant or not) was standing in the street screaming, I pray that tons of people would come to her aid. Sad.