Rallying Against Violence

Can Take Back the Night be non-partisan?

It's a question that's been debated on both sides of the political spectrum. Every year on campus, it's a controversial subject, with articles and editorials about Take Back the Night appearing in publications ranging from The Crimson to Perspective to Peninsula. Does it empower women? Does it make them victims? Or is Take Back the Night merely a smoke screen for a militantly feminist anti-male agenda?

This year, protesters against Take Back the Night here at Harvard decided to express their disapproval in ways that went beyond the mere printed word. At last Thursday's rally in the MAC quadrangle three men marched up to the microphone and began to conduct what appeared to be their own version of a stand-up misogynistic comedy routine. Talking gleefully about their experiences at a pro-choice rally with "rabid feminists," the trio managed to remain at the microphone for about 30 seconds before hisses from the crowd and one woman's marching up to the microphone to verbalize her own disapproval made them decide that perhaps they should make a quick exit.

Criticism of Take Back the Night is nothing new. There have always been irate articles and editorials against it even at times the dismissal of TBTN as nothing more than a bunch of frustrated woman attenpting to vent their own anger on a "patriarchal" society. Yet those three men who marched up to the microphone were not doing so to generate debate, but to broadcast their own agenda. And it was neither the time--nor the place--for them to air their opinions.

Take Back the Night varies from university to university, and at Harvard, the rally and march traditionally comprise only one night of a week long series of events designed to educate the community about violence against women. This year, for example, speakers included Linda Fairstein, the head of the Manhattan district attorney's sex crimes unit, and Sarah Buell, former director of the domestic violence unit at the Suffolk Country D.A.'s office.

Yet those same three men who stood defiantly in front of the microphone weren't even attempting to enter into the discussion that had gone on during the Week preceding the rally. There had been plenty of opportunities for them to come to the events, plenty of chances for them to listen to the speakers and panelists and to question them. Yet they had remained silent until the last possible moment, and when they did choose to speak, it wasn't even about sexual violence, but about "rabid feminists" and prochoice rallies. For them, at least, Take Back the Night was nothing if not partisan.

It was heartening to see the number of men who attended this year's take Back the Night events, including the rally and subsequent march. It demonstrated that violence against women is an issue that both men and women can work together to combat. These men also provided a sharp contrast to the trio at the Microphone, who weren't attempting to forge any links of understanding between the sexes. They weren't even generating a constructive debate. They were just venting their own hostility.

Unfortunately, it is this hostility that is at the root of the prblem of sexual and domestic violence, and until this hostility is addressed, the efforts of both women and men to eradicate violence against women in our society will continue to be frustrated.

Hallie Z. Levine's column appears on alternate Tuesdays.