Number 341, October 16, 2005

 Tenth Anniversary Edition, Part 3 

Victims Versus Victimhood
by Wendy McElroy

Special to TLE




The standard dictionary definition of a victim is "an unfortunate person who suffers from some adverse circumstance" such as a crime or a hurricane.


Historically speaking, many people have been wronged because of their group identity. Blacks were enslaved, women were legally excluded—such individuals were victims. The idea of victimhood, however, caught political fire long after slavery was abolished and women acquired the vote. It persists even though the institutions of society, such as the legal system, have been purged of 'discrimination.' It persists even though preference for minorities and women have been imposed in the form of policies such as affirmative action. Are those who claim victimhood still victims in any meaningful sense?


Consider the example of a woman who is beaten by her husband. She is clearly a 'victim' in the traditional meaning of the word; she deserves both compassion and justice.

But many feminists argue further for the battered woman's 'victimhood.' That is, she is viewed as only one example of the wider oppression all women experience from men and society. She ceases to be a wronged individual and becomes the symbol of a wronged category that includes women who have never experienced violence or may themselves be violent.


The phrase 'politics of' tends to precede the word 'victimhood' because that word is so often accompanied by a demand for social justice. This remedy includes reparations or privileges.


In his essay "Human Rights and the Politics of Victimhood," Robert Meister argues for such politics and he epitomizes how the idea has been used by the far left.

A synopsis of the essay states, "On the revolutionary side [those arguing for victimhood and against the 'oppressive' system], the aim had been to produce unreconciled victims who would continue to struggle against the beneficiaries of past injustice even after the perpetrators were defeated."

Meister also hints at why the politics of victimhood may be on the decline: "The counterrevolutionary response was to exploit the fear of passive beneficiaries ... that they would be treated no better than perpetrators should the revolution prevail."

Translation: Men who've never harmed a woman (passive beneficiaries) may resist being stigmatized for the wrongs committed by men who do batter. They may insist upon being judged 'innocent' or 'guilty' based on their own actions. They may resist having their sons and daughters born into a political category.



Consider once again the example of battered women. In the '70s, when decent people finally saw the extent of the problem and heard the anguished stories firsthand, they were outraged; they wanted to help. And without the compassion that the average person extends toward victims, little could have changed.


A result of decades of victimhood politics can also be seen in the general response to Katrina. Many people are no longer listening to the cry of victimhood. Perhaps they are weary of victims who never heal but seem to embrace their 'oppression' as a source of identity and self-worth. They could be disgusted with blasts of anger which don't distinguish between friend or foe. Perhaps they want people to take some personal responsibility. Or they could just be tired of feeling 'guilty.'


Copyright © 2005 Wendy McElroy.
Wendy McElroy Home Page



Help Support TLE by patronizing our advertisers and affiliates.
We cheerfully accept donations!

to return to the previous article
Table of Contents