Nova Scotians are spending the weekend with heavy hearts as they mourn the loss of 22 innocent people in one of the worst mass shootings in our country’s history. Yet along with this sorrow, feminist activists in Nova Scotia and across the country are also feeling outraged because women and girls in this province continue to suffer such extreme violence at the hands of those closest to them in the one place where they should feel the most safety: their own communities. This violence, already present before the pandemic, has predictably increased and escalated since.
The RCMP have for the most part refused to provide relevant details to the broader public on the relationships between the murderer and some of the victims. In particular, there has been glaring silence surrounding the murderer’s violent treatment of his female partner. At an RCMP press conference Friday not a single one of the questions asked named the violence as misogynist violence.
Experts on gender-based violence have long pointed out that most mass murders begin with violence in the home. While friends and colleagues often struggle to pair the heinous violence with the person they assumed the murderer to be, women and girls closest to men who kill rarely experience that disconnect. It is often the wives and children of these men who are the first victims and the sustained abuse that they face is often the most obvious predictor of the murderer’s future mass violence. This abuse is not random. It is often an identifiable pattern of behaviour that begins days, months and even years before the killings.
Feminist advocates and experts in the field of gender-based violence working in Nova Scotia also know that the image of quaint rural communities being painted by the national media at this time is a false image. Violence is not unimaginable to rural Nova Scotians. Mi’kmaq and African Nova Scotians face racist violence and harassment in our communities and have for over a century. Our communities have never been free from violence. This claim to peaceful rural communities is the unspoken assumption that violence of this type is inherent to urban areas where there is a larger population of racialized people. When commenters state that this violence is unimaginable in a rural community, what they often mean is that this violence is unimaginable in a white community.
But the Canadian Femicide Observatory paints a different picture from this racist mythology. In their 2019 report #CallItFemicide, it analyzed all-male perpetrated homicides against women in Canada between 2016 and 2019. They found that non-urban areas, including rural areas and small towns, make up a disproportionately large percentage of femicides (the killing of women and girls because they are women and girls) in Canada. Moreover, women in non-urban areas are more likely to be killed as a result of gun violence than women in urban areas due to the widespread availability and ownership of long guns used for hunting in these areas.
Along with this image of peaceful rural communities, early media reports emphasized the murderer’s “passion for policing” and his acts of charity providing free dentures to a person in need. This deliberate softening of one of the worst mass shooters in our country’s history is quite obviously a result of his white, male, wealthy privilege. The same language and reporting would be unthinkable for a Muslim man accused of plotting a terrorist act or Black man involved in gang violence. And yet, research consistently shows that most mass shooters are white men. Why as a society have we failed to recognize the particular danger posed by this demographic?
It is now becoming clear that the mass shooting of Saturday, April 18 and 19 began with acts of violence towards the murderer’s female partner. He then went on to kill 22 innocent people: 12 women and one 17-year-old girl. This information is significant because it tells us that hatred for women fueled this act of mass murder. The use of multiple firearms, an RCMP uniform, and a stunningly accurate replica of an RCMP cruiser suggest that this crime was premeditated. The fact that the murders were spread out over a large area and several long hours of the evening and early morning suggest that this act was much more than out-of-control anger, a rampage, or the act of someone who lost their temper. This was no crime of passion. The plan and desire to kill multiple people was something sustained in the heart and mind of the murderer throughout the long hours of that night and the next morning. A deep and longstanding hatred of women was the fuel to this violent act.
A group of Nova Scotian feminist activists released a statement on Friday arguing that, “While not all of the victims in this mass shooting were women, all of the victims were victims of misogynist violence. We want to make it clear that misogyny—the hatred of women—affects all of us. Women are not the only innocent victims of this hatred that plagues our society. This mass shooting, and many other mass killings that we have witnessed throughout Canada’s history, show us that this hatred brings severe harm to so many of us. This hatred of women is ravaging our communities, our families, and our bodies. We want it to end.”
If we are ever to end heinous acts of mass killing we must first have the courage to name and recognize the misogyny in our communities and in our broader society. If we stay silent about this hatred, if extreme acts of violence against women and girls are treated as any other type of violence, if we fail to talk about the harm faced by so many women and girls in their own homes–these acts will only continue.
Related Stories
Nova Scotia in mourning: What we know about the victims
Make room for the chaos
Stay up to date on what we know about the Nova Scotia mass killings
We’re still calling it femicide
Every woman killed since Brad Johns said domestic violence wasn’t an epidemic in Nova Scotia
This article appears in Apr 1-30, 2020.
When this post came up in my news feed I deleted the two people who shared it from my friends list. I’m disappointed but not surprised to see the camps dig in to spin a tragedy to support their ideological narrative.
I read it through and I don’t understand what this article is supposed to solve. I sense the palpable lack of empathy for the murdered men. At the end of the article there’s a grand proclamation stating that slapping a label on this crime will in some way solve the problem of mass shootings. No data, not even a coherent theory of how this is supposed to work. It all just reads like the tone-deaf shame-n-blame chorus that feminism has degenerated into. It’s like the neo-conservative slogan of “never let a good tragedy go to waste.”
I used to be a feminist ally, now I’m just exhausted by feminism’s endless manipulative tone; the predictable sing-song of “men are ALWAYS to blame.” Maybe you didn’t get the memo Johanna but even your feminist thought leaders are observing the toxic effect these cliches are having on society. It leaves me feeling emotionally isolated from people who used to be friends and with no better understanding of women’s experience in this world.
Martin G. people like you are literally perpetuating the problem. Until men like you grow up and stop wasting your selfish energy obsessing over your own innocence and this “not all men” rhetoric, NOTHING will change. We get it, “not all men” (no one has ever said that). Until men stand by our side, domestic violence and tragedies like this will never end.
Don’t you dare tell me that the way the shooter executed Heidi Stevenson, the way he abused and tied up his girlfriend, or the “Incel” who killed in the Toronto van attacks, or the man who shot 14 women in the Montreal Massacre because he didn’t believe women should study as engineers- don’t you DARE tell me these are not because of misogynistic violence. If people had acted upon the red flags of the domestic abuse going on between the killer and his girlfriend (and the fact that an abuser had guns), perhaps this shooting could have been prevented. So, yes, this a “gender issue” as you put it. Because, as the article says, “most mass murders begin with violence in the home”.
Please, stop wasting energy on your own innocence, and start a conversation which will help the problem, instead of adding to it.
I do have to agree with Martin, instead of misogyny these killings suggest a hatred for humans, humanity, and existence in general. I don’t have a problem with calling something a misogynistic act, but mislabeling this tragedy risks the public missing the bigger picture.
This act was done by a male, clearly. The largest perpetrators of significant violence causing bodily harm, death, etc are males, for sure. Let’s call this what it is. Hatred for humanity. This person murdered people, out of hatred for humanity. That includes women, that includes men.
Let’s reserve the conversation about misogyny for when it really applies, because there is certainly no shortage of misogyny in the world. I just do not think thats what fuelled this attack.
Well written article. Thank you for the opinion.
The comments and reaction to the idea that the root of this crime stemmed from domestic violence shows society’s attitudes in general have a long way to go. Most news sites that are even willing to entertain the possibility that misogyny played a role here have closed their comment section. It appears we still can’t talk about the reality of male violence against women – even when mass shootings like this show both genders pay the price when no one does anything. Guaranteed that one of the first thoughts most females had when they read about this had was “bet he killed his wife/gf or ex first.” Even during the pandemic, one of the biggest issues at play is a huge rise in domestic violence. Why do so many males think it is ok to hit and beat females? What’s wrong with them?
Everyone is going after Martin’s knee-jerk comment (“Please, stop wasting energy on your own innocence” is such a perfect feminist line) but what about my concern below?
Let me put it more simply, how does this article help? Just answer me that. Please, walk me through it. Is there a statistic or a study that supports the conviction that using feminist cliches will move us closer to a solution to mass shootings? My concern is that calling mass shootings “Misogynist Killings” is just diversionary and unnecessary and kind of manipulative.
Let’s have a conversation with some real statistics shall we? Perhaps the fact that 98% of mass shootings are committed by men correlates with the fact of 98% of workplace fatalities are also men; meaning men bear the most dangerous responsibilities in our society. Or 75% of suicides are men. Similar stats for Homelessness, Drug Addiction and incarceration. By every statistical measure that we have, white women in North America are the safest mammals that have ever walked or crawled on Planet Earth. But what’s the favorite feminist line again? “We have a long way to go.”
“A deep and longstanding hatred of women was the fuel to this violent act.”
We may find out more, but so far, there is zero evidence for this…