Feminists Protest the Central Park Attacks! Central Park II, Part Three

June 22, 2000
By Nicholas Stix

Central Park II, Part Three

(This isn’t about the brutal, racist, April 19, 1989 black and Hispanic mob attacks and robberies of whites, and rape of a white woman in Central Park; it’s about the brutal, racist, June 11, 2000 black and Hispanic mob attacks, robberies and rapes of white women in Central Park.)

Feminist organizations were quick to protest. NOW, in particular, organized a protest on Sunday, June 18, in which its supporters attacked ... the police!

To a Martian, or someone unfamiliar with feminist organizations' craven cowardice in response to racist assaults on white women, attacking the police instead of the perpetrators, might seem evidence of mass psychosis. The problem for NOW is, that none -- as in zero -- of the perpetrators was white. After all, feminist organizations complain always of "privileged, white, heterosexual male behavior," especially in the comfort of college campuses. Had one of the 60 thugs been white, NOW could have singled him out for its wrath. Unfortunately, no "privileged, white, heterosexual males" had had the decency to accommodate feminists by attacking at least one white female. As recent history has shown, a black man could rape, murder, and dismember a white woman, and write a note calling for "death to all white bitches," and no feminist organization would decry black racism.

Feminists see themselves in alliance with black and Hispanic groups, an alliance that has been profitable in terms of power, propaganda, lucrative lawsuits, set-aside programs and discriminatory policies favoring women. However, it has also exacted a terrible price. For while white women have stuck to the bargain, blacks -- who have profited as much from it as the white women have -- have not. And so, blacks (especially black women) -- civilians and leaders alike -- routinely stab feminists in the back, by celebrating black violence against white women, whether in supporting wife-beater and wife-butcher O.J. Simpson, and cheering his 1995 acquittal of killing his wife, Nicole (since Ron Goldman was to feminists a non-person, he never entered into their calculations); by not only turning the young black men who gang-raped and beat almost to death a young woman in the 1989 Central Park Jogger case into folk heroes, but in engaging in a year-long campaign of public vilification against their victim; and in refraining from any criticism of the men who attacked white women on June 11, [2000] while roundly condemning the majority-white police force.

Every time such an assault takes place, white feminists are forced to eat crow by blacks' -- especially black women's -- embrace of the attackers. And white feminists have proved yet again -- as they did through their unflinching support of serial sexual abuser Bill Clinton -- that there is no depth to which they will not sink, to avoid criticizing those whom they perceive to be their political allies.

Virtually all of the victims were white. At a protest sponsored by the National Organization of Women last Sunday [June 18, 2000], seven days after the attacks, Rep. Carolyn Maloney proclaimed that, "these victims were different ages, different races and countries, but they were all women and that singled them out for these attacks."

Wrong, Congresswoman Maloney. To my knowledge, all but one of the victims were white. The exception was Brooklynite Jasmine Gonzalez, 25, who is Hispanic. Gonzalez has also charged that officers from whom she sought help ignored her. Gonzalez, who has produced a blood-stained Puerto Rican flag that she says she used to stab one of her would-be attackers, has cooperated with police.

At the NOW event, leaders of NOW and other feminist organizations spent most of their time excoriating the police, rather than the criminals, for the rampage. The majority of NYPD officers are white; upper-middle-class, white feminists do not fear white men, but live in terror of black men.

Some Hispanic feminists at the rally denounced "machismo," apparently unaware that it is the tradition of machismo that leads Hispanic men to go to the aid of women under attack in numbers wildly disproportionate to men from all other ethnic groups in New York. The lack of machismo does not lead to a reduction in attacks on women, but to a reduction of feelings of the obligation to protect women from attacks.