PDA

View Full Version : Teenagers Attack Cyclists in North Portland


lynnef
01-13-2007, 08:41 PM
http://www.katu.com/news/5184291.html

NEPcyclistic
01-13-2007, 11:11 PM
Thats just wrong...

jami
01-13-2007, 11:44 PM
sounds like a hate crime, like this one only yesterday:
http://koin.com/Global/story.asp?S=5932218

NEPcyclistic
01-14-2007, 01:24 AM
sounds like a hate crime, like this one only yesterday:
http://koin.com/Global/story.asp?S=5932218

What is wrong the kids these days. Video games, telephones, bad grammar, bad education, and now random acts of violence. Their only form of exercise is fighting now? Sad... so sad.

donnambr
01-14-2007, 08:31 AM
It seems the one woman who was injured the most does not have health insurance. Does anyone know how to go about donating money to help her pay for the medical bills? Is it just a matter of calling the television station?

NEPcyclistic
01-14-2007, 01:58 PM
It seems the one woman who was injured the most does not have health insurance. Does anyone know how to go about donating money to help her pay for the medical bills? Is it just a matter of calling the television station?

I would think KATU would know how to reach her.

Woodchuck
01-14-2007, 03:47 PM
Call the TV station to see if they would do a follow up story. They might be able to help start the ball rolling on getting her help with medical bills.

jami
01-15-2007, 09:35 AM
if she set up a paypal account (with an email address she doesn't mind getting spammed), i'd certainly kick in some money.

lack of health insurance is such a recurring theme with the bicycling set. remember to write your congresscritters and ask them to support health care access for everyone and take it into consideration come election time.

nepcyclistic, i think bad kids are timeless (and i loves me my cell phone and bad grammar). but two sets of violent teenage <I>girls</I> in two days worries me. the feminist in me hoped society was going the other direction, toward fewer kinds of violent people. given the last really brutish week in portland (including the firefighters and the football game beating death), testosterone is clearly winning.

NEPcyclistic
01-15-2007, 12:16 PM
nepcyclistic, i think bad kids are timeless (and i loves me my cell phone and bad grammar). but two sets of violent teenage <I>girls</I> in two days worries me. the feminist in me hoped society was going the other direction, toward fewer kinds of violent people. given the last really brutish week in portland (including the firefighters and the football game beating death), testosterone is clearly winning.

Yes, i agree, but the ability to use proper grammar is whats important. Being able to tell the difference.

steelsreal
01-18-2007, 03:47 PM
Hey there Jami.

You said: "the feminist in me hoped society was going the other direction, toward fewer kinds of violent people. given the last really brutish week in portland (including the firefighters and the football game beating death), testosterone is clearly winning."

What on earth does Feminism have to do with any of this? Perhaps you are confusing Pacifism with Feminism. Very different those two...

Secondly how does feminism correlate with fewer "kinds" of violent people? Is the goal to actually have fewer violent people? Or just fewer categories of them? Are we supposed to get rid of the male "kinds" of violent people and keep the female "kinds"? What happened to equal opportunities for women? Seems like with freedom to make choices comes the freedom to do horrible things like ganging up on defenseless cyclists.

Since at least one of the events in our "brutish" last week was estrogen fueled, how is it that testosterone is clearly winning? Are men to blame for these girls actions or themselves?

Your post seems to basically say this. Feminism=girls-peace-love-kumbaya. Testosterone=men-brutish-icky-icky-ewwwww. Are you 12 years old or what? Come on, is this your guiding philosophy? Snakes, snails and puppy-dog tails vs. sugar, spice, everything nice? Surely you know enough catty, back stabbing, self absorbed and vindictive women alongside enough caring, nurturing and respectful men to know this is total bullsh!t?

I was also under the observationally deduced and statistically proven belief that crime was decreasing in out city as well as throughout the country. I guess the tides must have turned. I will run out to get a gun and wage war upon testosterone first thing in the morning. Should I be worried about all men? Rich or poor? Just the white ones? What about all the republican, libertarian and christian women? The wealthy right leaning women? The politically apathetic women? Just the white ones? Just the ones who disagree with me at any given moment? I get confused about who is to blame, could you remind me as I am feeling overwhelmed!

I guess I am just baffled as to how this has anything to do with your gender based politics. Do you really view every event from the perspective of the lone, embattled, patriarchally oppressed feminist?

If so you need to venture out more often into the vast grey void between sociological and philosophical extremes.

A world inhabited by many wonderful, caring and compassionate people of both genders. Scattered around there are plenty of unaware and ignorant @sshats. Last I checked about half of them were women.

vseven
01-19-2007, 08:28 AM
Anyone other than me wonder if this guy has any protective orders against him ????

steelsreal
01-19-2007, 11:20 AM
Dearest Vseven,

I suppose you are referring to the post you made a while back? The one in which you shared quite a few completely untrue ideas and facts with the group? I am sorry if it was hard to be corrected, several other posters agreed with me and you apologized....

I simply take issue with people subtley derailing threads for their own agendas. These women being attacked by other women is a situation about as far removed from male/female gender issues and feminist ideologies as you can possibly get. Jami however felt the need to somehow bring feminism and testosterone (which I am assuming is a euphamism for men) into this issue. I found that to be ridiculous as well as insulting.

That now means I am a danger to others? For daring to speak in a manner that you disagree with? Do you somehow link unpopular discourse with violence? That is unbelievably frightening if true...

All i wanted to assert is that this disgusting assault on two human bikers who happen to be women, an attack perpetrated by other bi-pedal hominids in possesion of vaginas, has absolutely nothing to do with their gender!

I imagine that racial tensions and gentrification could conceivably be factors. Not to mention inequities in our public educational system. Perhaps the growing and horrific economic disparity in our great untied states of america. As far as I can tell all those issues affect men and women both... Either way I can not see any possible connection between feminism and Jamis bizzare rendering of its goals, to this particular drama.

Back to the original thread, any word on a paypal account for the injured cyclists? I noticed Jonathon posted today about some other recent friendly events in NoPo. Any follow up on what our publicly funded hall monitors(cops) are doing about this particular incident? If this went down at a bus stop, it would seem likely that these same people are regularly using this particular bus....

NEPcyclistic
01-19-2007, 05:05 PM
Back to the original thread, any word on a paypal account for the injured cyclists? I noticed Jonathon posted today about some other recent friendly events in NoPo. Any follow up on what our publicly funded hall monitors(cops) are doing about this particular incident? If this went down at a bus stop, it would seem likely that these same people are regularly using this particular bus....

yes, It was posted on the home page, at the end of the article about the attack, and comments of the original ran article.



Why do some people think guns are the answer to solving random attacks? When has a gun ever solved anything? When has shooting some one ever, ever, been the solution to a problem. If anything it escalates the problem. See the comments section of the the posted article about NO-PO attacks.

NEPcyclistic
01-19-2007, 07:11 PM
The last Critical Mass, and the "Peoples Ride," was small. It was my first time ever attending such a ride. I enjoyed it, but after all these posts about cyclists attacks, and comments the people are making, i have an idea.

Because of the police escorts and such on the critical mass rides, and since they follow critical mass when there is enough riders. Why doesn't Critical Mass, and the "Peoples Ride" that meets at Lent's Park all ride down to North Portland Where the attacks have been happening, and inform the police on the ride with us, what is happening. Make the bicycle presents known, and tell the neighborhoods that we aren't going away...

I have a picture in my head of 100s or thousands of cyclists going down into north portland and making our statements heard to the police and everyone else that has a problem with us...

Lets do this... any ideas...

steelsreal
01-19-2007, 08:20 PM
I do not really have an opinion on this. Just ideas....

My experience in over a decade of critical mass rides in dozens of cities, is all it does is piss people off. People who are already sympathetic smile and have a "right on" attitude. Damn the man and all that.

The folks that are predisposed to loathing anything different or foreign, just get pissed at us. Perhaps carrying that pent up rage to another day when they are alone on the road with a cyclist and relatively "unobserved".

More organized rides supported by communities and civil servants/protectors of the rich, sound like a great idea. I would show up. I am just not convinced it will make any difference....

It might even come across like a klan rally in Harlem. Or perhaps some barbecued veal at a vegan picnic. (hows that for derailling a thread?)

I think it would be better to involve the people we are trying to educate, as opposed to rubbing their noses in our right to the road. Create common bonds and convey ourselves as people, rather than a conquering army...

I honestly don't know what the answer is. I have experienced behaviour like this in many cities. I still prefer living in the more diverse parts of a town. It just goes with the territory, sad as that may be.

I am sure that dropping a black person into the middle of a whitey only area has similar, though probably more subtle and equally vicious results. Not so just a few decades ago... Just getting beat up would have been the lesser of many evils.

Poor/rich hetro/homo cool/nerd fat/skinny fur/nofur meat/veggy car/bike white/ black/purple/green etc.

So long as people are hung up on labeling themselves as well as others and excluding anyone different, this is what we will get. Our entire society and methods of relating with one another are built upon these mostly arbitrary distinctions. Remenber high school? This is what they were molding us into and here, we now find ourselves.

It sucks. I want it to go away, yet virtually all of us do it on a daily basis...

NEPcyclistic
01-20-2007, 02:25 AM
I do not really have an opinion on this. Just ideas....

My experience in over a decade of critical mass rides in dozens of cities, is all it does is piss people off. People who are already sympathetic smile and have a "right on" attitude. Damn the man and all that.

The folks that are predisposed to loathing anything different or foreign, just get pissed at us. Perhaps carrying that pent up rage to another day when they are alone on the road with a cyclist and relatively "unobserved".

More organized rides supported by communities and civil servants/protectors of the rich, sound like a great idea. I would show up. I am just not convinced it will make any difference....

It might even come across like a klan rally in Harlem. Or perhaps some barbecued veal at a vegan picnic. (hows that for derailling a thread?)

I think it would be better to involve the people we are trying to educate, as opposed to rubbing their noses in our right to the road. Create common bonds and convey ourselves as people, rather than a conquering army...

I honestly don't know what the answer is. I have experienced behaviour like this in many cities. I still prefer living in the more diverse parts of a town. It just goes with the territory, sad as that may be.

I am sure that dropping a black person into the middle of a whitey only area has similar, though probably more subtle and equally vicious results. Not so just a few decades ago... Just getting beat up would have been the lesser of many evils.

Poor/rich hetro/homo cool/nerd fat/skinny fur/nofur meat/veggy car/bike white/ black/purple/green etc.

So long as people are hung up on labeling themselves as well as others and excluding anyone different, this is what we will get. Our entire society and methods of relating with one another are built upon these mostly arbitrary distinctions. Remenber high school? This is what they were molding us into and here, we now find ourselves.

It sucks. I want it to go away, yet virtually all of us do it on a daily basis...



Well said... it was just a thought... i'd still like to see it happen though. it never did cross my mind that outsiders would look at it as a racially charged rally through black neighborhoods... i guess maybe its a lack of education, i don't know..............

jami
01-20-2007, 03:56 PM
the paypal account is ashlee2284[at]hotmail[dot]com, for anyone who missed it at the blog.

steelsreal, the fact that there were two attacks by groups of females in two days is surprising. why does it piss you off so much to have that pointed out more than other aspects of the incident?

as women approach their fair share of power, i thought there could be less violence, not more. the statistics i've seen never indicate that women commit their "fair" share of violence (50%) in any context. google them yourself -- i challenge you to find even one shred of good data contradicting that.

these incidents aside, i hope women continue to be statistically wayyy less violent than men.

steelsreal
01-21-2007, 11:47 AM
Do you even read what other people write? Or just skim through? Did you re-read your own words?

I never disputed that men commit more reported violence than women.

You stated that the feminist in you hoped the world was moving towards fewer kinds of violent people...

What on earth does that mean?

Secondly how exactly does that relate to three women attacking 2 other women?

I could see the relevence if to again use your own words- brutish, and testosterone fueled people had commted this crime... Feminism might then be relevant.

As it stands this incident proves that both men as well as women, given the right situation can be brutish and violent. That would seem to dislodge a major tenent of most feminists. As for statistics showing men and women commit equal violence? I am sure some mens empowerment propaganda machine has statistics that show that. Do I think it is the case? I don't know, I do not trust statistics for the most part. They are far too easy to twist to any given agenda.

I know that I have only personally been struck by women. My mom doled out the spankings in my house! I have had a girlfriend repeatedly punch and push me. What do you suppose would have happened if I defended myself? Fought back? Who would be arrested? Charged? Barred from returning to the home? Her? Do you actually believe that? I have been assaulted while breaking up a fight between three women, two of whom were brutally beating another woman. I did not report either of these events. Why would I? Society would not care or do anything about it. You are probably mad that I might have thought about striking a woman who was striking me. To be clear, I never thought of doing anything other than preventing injury to myself and her.

But I probably deserved it right? I was egging her on, asking for it? Sound eerily familiar?

You seen the sit-com schtick with a guy taking a frying pan to the head and everyone laughing? How about the guy getting kicked in the crotch? Do you see that same thing on a comedy show being perpetrated against women? Me neither.

I think men and women are equally vicious when provoked. I think men and women are equally vicious by design. I am just basing this on observations. I see aggressive and violent men and women on a daily basis. I think men have a much greater skill in inflicting gross harm, as we tend to be larger. I also think men are conditioned to absorb abuse, rather than report it. We are also less likely to be seriously hurt, so no trip to the hospital for the authorities to report for us. I think all violence is abhorent and should be judged as so by society. I do not feel that a woman punching a man is more excusable than a man punching a woman. How about you?

We are equal, women are not more equal than men. I would hope that this is obvious to everyone, apparently not. We are either the same, or we are different... Which is it? You seem to want to switch depending on the discussion and your agenda at the moment. Your words clearly show that you feel women to be morally superior to men.

Check out all your female senators voting for wars for another example. Or how about the majority of all voters (women) voting for all these scumbags. You do know that women vote more than men right?

The only relevance I see here is that feminism and racism are virtually identical. Both are holding a group of people up as objects of derision and ridicule. Both posit large hunks of their real as well as imagined problems on a particular group. One group defined by skin tone, another by their genitals. Fortunately more and more people see this, as shown by the complete lack of interest in extremist Feminism.

For the record Jami, I have nothing against women, just feminists. I am a humanist, a pacifist, a vegan and an equalitarian. Equal rights for all, regardless of gender, order in the food chain, skin color, etc. I think the inequalities between the wealthy and poor are a much larger problem than the remaining gender hurdles. I guess that makes me a class-ist... I also think indiscriminate violence against humans is a much greater problem. Read- carpet bombing and open-ended war.

I guess my biggest problem is with folks that view all events through a single lens. This is a very self-serving worldview. I mean if you are a feminine-ist, how can you clearly see the problems that plague men? If you are a wealthy conservative, how can you see the problems plagueing the poor or liberal? Defining yourself, by definition, limits you! Feminists, evangelicals christians, racists, myopic views all of them. This self serving world view has caused more problems in our history than anything else.

I am obviously a hypocrite. I am a humanist, a defining word. I am self-serving in that I am a human and I want to look out for those interests. I adore peace, so I am a pacifist, I assume that blinds me to the needs of warmongers. I am a vegan and do not see the world according to meat... I am an equalitarian and desperate for true equality, again self-serving... I want us to all be treated the same, all including me! My mother, my father, my friends both vagina equipped, as well as penis packing, my lovers and friends all of us on common ground with the same opportunities and protections.

You are a feminine-ist. Who are you looking out for with that nice little label?

You have proven this to me by relating these attacks to your feminist views. When have you stood up and argued against male on male violence? Female on male violence? Female on child violence? You can't even stand against female on female violence without dragging feminism and testosterone (men) into the discussion. Why can't you just stand against VIOLENCE! Stand for PEOPLE!

What the hell does what someone is carrying between their legs have to do with it? Unless, of course it is a bike!

bikey3
03-13-2007, 12:05 PM
Steelsreal,
I've been perusing the bikeportland forums this evening and have come across two of your lengthy posting battles. The first was a vegetarian vs. meat argument spurred by the mocking comments of another user. As a vegan for 4+ years, I fully enjoyed your dissection of anti-vegetarian rhetoric and argument points, and plan to save some for future discussions I'm bound to have due to my dietary choices. You bordered on ranting, but managed to keep it just at the border, and retain composure and intelligence throughout. I fully identify with the simmering rage that can begin to boil when meat-eaters pick fights with you, all based on asinine logic, so I'm definitely not passing judgment on the desire to rant on these issues. After reading your postings, I fancied you a victorious veggie vigilante.

I am assuming the risk of you articulately tearing me a new one with my comments on my second encounter to your postings, but I can't resist. I'm a self-identified feminist, but this does not make me unable to consider, appreciate and even agree with many of your critiques on feminism. I also do not blame men for all of the world's problems.

Indeed, seeing EVERYTHING through a feminist lens can sometimes lead to short-sighted views. No doubt, women can be just as capable of committing violent and abusive acts as men. And, most definitely, the assumption that feminism means viewing women as morally superior is a poor worldview and interpretation of feminist philosophy. Viewing men as the enemy is a huge roadblock within feminism, but it is certainly not how every feminist feels. I think Jami's use of testosterone was meant to imply aggressive behavior rather than "evil men", but I suppose in the context it was used I see how it could be construed that way.

However, comparing feminism to racism and disregarding anything the feminist movement has accomplished is misguided. Your personal experiences certainly prove that women can be abusive, and the men that are the victims of this abuse are not given appropriate support. Any violence is certainly abhorrent, and as you pointed out the reasons certain violent crimes are not given enough attention is due to stringent societal gender roles of which feminism consistently works to alleviate. There are certainly multiple inequalities present and atrocities committed locally and globally, but this does not make the goal of women's rights less important. Giving women worldwide a voice, safety, freedom, education and autonomy should fit right in with your humanist and pacifist ideals. Inequality between the wealthy and poor is a hugely important issue, and women and children are much more likely to be in poverty than men. Do not misunderstand these statements as an inflated concern for women and disregard for men; it just focuses on one portion of this gigantic and complex issue. Societies that have more egalitarian gender roles tend to be much less violent and much more healthy.

Men are more skilled at inflicting gross harm - I don't think this belittles the emotional harm a woman can inflict upon a man through physical violence and this certainly deserves more attention from our society. The feminist movement, arguably, may be the most likely to address this issue - I've had multiple conversations about exactly this with other feminists and in women's studies courses. However, spend some time at a battered women's shelter or rape crisis center and it will be impossible to not feel a grave sense of injustice, urgency, and importance for giving women's rights a voice.

Not all feminists are extremists, and you were unfair to Jami and feminism as a whole to lump it all into one big man-hating pot. It's really not as binding as you believe it to be. Feminists do stand up against violence towards all people, against war, and for people, regardless of gender. You can call it a label, I see it as an identity that helps ground me. A feminist outlook combined with identities of cyclist, north portland resident, educational reformer and fellow pacifist help me to grapple with the disturbing female-female violence occurring on Vancouver avenue. This incident provokes powerful reflections and concerns from any perspective, and is no less relevant to feminism than to humanism or pacifism or any other self-definition. I'm not sure why you chose to take a reference to feminism so personally, although society does seem to overwhelmingly view the term as a dirty word. Perhaps you've had bad experiences with feminists in the past - no doubt feminists are just as capable of being @sshats as anyone else. But it's unfair to denigrate an entire movement and group of people. This is very @sshat-like behavior.

Not that there's anything wrong with good ol' healthy debate, but for a self-proclaimed pacifist and humanist, you sure do like to tell people off! And make every effort to prove how stupid they are. Just sayin.

And I agree - a critical mass type of protest through north portland would not do much to get at the root of the simmering tensions in the area. Totally wrong message to send. I understand critical mass as making sure the establishment can't deny your presence and so hopefully improves infrastructure for bicyclists. It's not relevent to the N/NE situation. Becoming more involved in the community rather than defiantly staking a claim to it seems a better approach to improving attitudes towards bikers.

steelsreal
03-13-2007, 01:51 PM
Sorry, no argument for you here!

We are relatively close to being in agreement and I have more than said my thoughts on this issue. This form of communication lends itself to extremism. I am sure this discussion would have been framed very differently if we were all down at the pub!

Plunk me down at a table with a couple of Feminine-ists and we will get along famously. It is the collective ideaology and implementation through legislation and education that I have trouble with. These are the arenas where extremism and exclusion can cause great harm. To buffer any accidental or vengeful inequality in these areas, we suddenly need a men's movement. How about calling it Masculine-ism. Now we have two sides feeling the need to square off and this leads to gender warfare. Divisive. Black, white. Right, wrong. Left, right. This way of relating with each other is not known for bringing about our species finest moments. I would argue that this mindset has caused most of the major atrocities in our "herstory".

The second wave Feminine-ists have done an excellent job of destroying the good will towards the movement that was fostered in the 60's and 70's. I feel the third wavers have no hope of reclaiming any sense of fairness and justice for men under the current banner of "Feminism". Dworkin, Steinem and company have done too good a job in their warfare on men.

I think the womens movement was needed in our country. A few decades ago, I would have been right there with you. My personal view is that we have reached a point where a more inclusive movement needs to be embraced. Or perhaps created. Something that embraces our similarities instead of our differences. Many Feminine-ists I know are very concerned with language. Just look at the word "Feminism". Not really a rallying point for inclusion and solidarity...

By the way, you sound more like an Equalitarian than a Feminine-ist to me....