Post: #1

Arlington School Board member James Lander, who is up for reelection and being challenged by two other Democrats (Monique O’Grady and Maura McMahon), said the following:

James Lander Wrote:if all that education, if [UVA lacrosse player Yeardley Love, allegedly murdered by her former boyfriend George Huguely] wasn’t strong enough or educated enough to remove herself from a violent relationship then we have failed her as a society. Because if you are the smartest person with books but you can’t apply the knowledge then what good is it? I told my daughter when she went away to college, I want you to do well in the classroom but I also want you being smart enough not to get in the car when someone’s been drinking; be able to know when this is a dangerous situation and you need to step back.

He later apologized, and Arlington County Board member Katie Cristol responded to his apology.

James Lander Wrote:I sincerely apologize for my comments this morning during my radio interview on Arlington in the Morning. My words about the terrible tragedy that befell UVA student Yeardley Love were insensitive and inappropriate and do not reflect the realities faced by victims of domestic violence.

I made a terrible communication mistake and I want to set the record straight. What I said does not reflect my beliefs, values, or most importantly my heart. I know that Ms. Love was not the victim of poor choices or personal failings; she was the victim of a horrendous crime and her murderer is solely to blame.

Victims of domestic violence need our protection and support.

Moving forward I pledge to get involved with local organizations, such as Doorways for Women and Families to become better educated on the challenges of responding to the crisis of domestic violence. I know, that after this work I will be in a stronger position to ensure that the school system focuses appropriate attention on providing all of our young men and women with the tools they need to develop healthy relationships and be vigilant about their mental health. Arlington parents should expect no less from their school board members and APS.

Arlington County Board member Katie Cristol Wrote:I’ve spoken with James about his remarks on WERA this morning regarding Yeardley Love, and I appreciated his openness to hearing from me why his comments are so damaging to survivors of domestic violence and those working to end violence in our community. He is also open to continuing to be educated on the dynamics of intimate partner violence in Arlington, including further conversations with leaders at Doorways and a tour of the Revive Counseling Center for domestic violence and sexual assault survivors. Based on my collaboration with James on a variety of County and Schools topics, I know him to be open to dialogue and growth. I hope and believe he will come to a better understanding of this issue.

That said, given these comments, I cannot continue to support James’ reelection campaign. When it comes to domestic violence, misconceptions and stigma can literally be life-threatening, making it harder for survivors to seek help. Working with agency, nonprofit and community leaders through Project PEACE, I know that families and young people throughout our community experience domestic violence, unsafe dating relationships and intimate partner violence. They deserve, and need, to know that they are supported and respected by their community. This issue is simply too important, and the stakes are too high, for me to equivocate when I say that these comments are unacceptable.

This reminds me of Milogate. A man makes controversial statements, and then apologizes and pledges support for organizations to help victims, but it's too late. The leftists always respond with, "Well, we're glad you've finally listened and acknowledged your error, but your career is still over because we can't trust you after what you said."

But I think in these cases, the guy isn't even necessarily trying to save his career. He's just trying to get the attacks to stop because he can't take it anymore. So he surrenders unconditionally.

Ironically, sometimes apologizing attracts more attention to the "offensive" remarks than if the man who made them had doubled down by saying, "I said nothing wrong," or declined to comment further on the matter. At the very least, it generates another news cycle because then the reporters can write a story about the apology. Plus his attackers are able to get another word in by responding to his apology. His supporters, on the other hand, often feel like they can't really say much in his defense at that point, because he has already condemned himself and thrown himself on the mercy of the leftists.

The problem with throwing yourself on the mercy of any kind of court (whether a court of law, or the court of public opinion) is that you forgo the opportunity to negotiate a deal, or to force your adversaries to prove their case, or to argue that there are mitigating factors. It's just a tactic that many who are accused want to resort to as a way of getting their case over with (because they can't handle the emotional stress anymore) and avoiding seemingly remorseless or unrepentant.

I don't see that Lander said anything that bad. He prefaced his statements with "If," rather than making statements of fact. He didn't assert that his premises were true; he just said that if they were true, he would reach a certain conclusion from them.

Leftists are also always saying that political dissidents need to be sent to some sort of reeducation camp before they can be reintegrated into society. This makes leftists seem humanitarian and compassionate and merciful because they can say, "See how much we believe in redemption? We could've insisted that he be executed, or rot in prison for the rest of his life, but instead we gave him a second chance." They just do that, though, because they don't want to create a martyr. By the time the dissident finishes his reeducation, most people will have forgotten about him anyway. For example, by the time Comrade Landers finishes getting reeducated by Doorways for Women and Families to eliminate his counter-revolutionary tendencies, hardly anyone will remember him.

Post: #2

Only sensible way to deal with stuff like this:

Post: #3

I mean...hell, I don't even get why you would apologize in this situation. It's WAY to easy to flip this one and respond by saying that people angry at what he said are defenders of violence and rape, then run with that script.

Post: #4

(04-20-2017 12:43 PM)Easy_C Wrote:  I mean...hell, I don't even get why you would apologize in this situation. It's WAY to easy to flip this one and respond by saying that people angry at what he said are defenders of violence and rape, then run with that script.

It's probably because his erstwhile comrades in his own party were telling him he was a shitlord. When people are under attack from the people they considered friends and allies, that's usually when they're most likely to fold, because it's very demoralizing.

If he had only been attacked by members of the opposing party, he probably wouldn't have folded, because he would've figured, "They're just trying to score political points, but my supporters and I will stand strong."

Post: #5

More politicians are weighing in on this:

Delegate Mark Levine Wrote:I’ve spoken at length with James Lander. I believe his apology to be sincere. He sorely recognizes he needs more education on this issue, and that’s a good thing. I’m working on helping him get that education and to hear the painful words of survivors themselves. We need more than his apology. We need active learning and reaction. Fortunately, I’m confident that James will delve more deeply into this issue than he ever has before. That will turn this unfortunate gaffe into a very important learning experience for him, for Arlington, and for the entire community. Technically, I will hold my endorsement in abeyance to see how he reacts. But I have little doubt he will do the right thing. Not for some political reason but because he genuinely is coming to understand how severe this problem is, both in Arlington schools and in schools and homes all across the nation. I truly hope and expect Lander’s unfortunate statement will serve as a catalyst for positive change.

I highly doubt Levine's endorsement will be forthcoming.

Post: #6

I can think up a number of women who dated guys who physically and mentally abused them. All except one would "break up" and either go back to the same abuser or find a new guy who was as bad or worse. The one exception went on to marry one of the gentlest guys on the planet (they are still married).

Post: #7

(04-20-2017 12:43 PM)Easy_C Wrote:  I mean...hell, I don't even get why you would apologize in this situation. It's WAY to easy to flip this one and respond by saying that people angry at what he said are defenders of violence and rape, then run with that script.

Agreed. No apologies. Flip the script... RVF could save this man's life and dignity.

Post: #8

I think the problem that so many people have with this situation is that the girl (Yeardley Love) who he alluded to in the quoted portion was a cute and beloved UVA coed. Lander is out of Northern Virginia and both Love and the guy who killed her were from the general area (people here are obviously a bit more sensitive to the story). On top of this, according to the stories that I've read about the incident, Love had actually broken up with the boyfriend after a violent encounter, meaning, if true, that Lander's comparison wasn't really accurate.

Not trying to white knight, but I can understand some of the outrage.

Post: #9

According to Wikipedia, the relationship had ended. The guy already had an arrest record when the relationship began, too. Both the murderer and the victim appear to have been spoiled brats who'd had everything given to them. It sounds like a case of a girl wanting the bad boy and then finding out that the bad boys aren't so great after all.

Post: #10

(04-21-2017 02:01 AM)puckerman Wrote:  According to Wikipedia, the relationship had ended. The guy already had an arrest record when the relationship began, too. Both the murderer and the victim appear to have been spoiled brats who'd had everything given to them. It sounds like a case of a girl wanting the bad boy and then finding out that the bad boys aren't so great after all.

Wikipedia is usually based on media accounts, which often get the facts wrong or omit important details (often purposefully). To really find out the truth, sometimes you have to dig into the court records (which Wikipedia doesn't like to do, because those are primary sources). And even then, it's hard to find out the whole truth unless the defendant is cooperating with you and giving you all the sealed documents, like the presentence investigation report. PSIRs, too, though, are full of misleading hearsay that's usually biased against the defendant.

Where you usually get the best truth is from witness testimony where there's a full cross-examination, but even then, the truth is incomplete because most defense attorneys won't have the defendant himself testify. The defendant is usually (but not always) the one from whom you'll hear the version of what happened that's most favorable to his side. Also, in a case of alleged murder, he may be the only eyewitness to what he did or didn't do, who is still alive.

I've usually argued that it's BETTER to use primary sources on Wikipedia, because like in a game of telephone, with every layer of go-betweens you have separating you from the original source, you introduce more potential for spin, misinterpretation, misunderstanding, errors in transcription, etc. But Wikipedia's philosophy is that they want the people doing the interpretation of primary sources to be vetted journalists rather than anonymous Wikipedians. I don't see what the big deal is, as long as all Wikipedians have equal access to the primary sources.

In this case, the defendant had a whole theory about how she died that didn't involve his murdering her, but I guess the jury didn't see it that way.

I wonder, are there any systemic or cultural problems that could have contributed to her death, in the sense that sending girls away to college to fuck badboys renders them more vulnerable? What if she had gotten married instead, in a patriarchal society where she would've known that her place was to be her husband's property? If she'd been properly submissive, would her husband still have killed her, just because he wanted to take out his anger on her, or whatever? I just wonder how much domestic violence would still exist if women were obedient and respectful.

Also, I wonder, would women tend to be having sex with less abusive men, if they only had sex within an arranged marriage? I guess the example we can look to is India, where women do tend to be physically disciplined by their husbands, but is that a healthy form of physical discipline (that maybe the women even like), or is it the kind of violence that could kill them?

I think if we had a culture in which 18-year-old girls were marrying, say, men in their mid-30s to early 40s, families would tend to be more financially stable and there would be less domestic violence, because older men tend to be less violent. In India, I think the married couples tend to be pretty close in age. For example, Gandhi and his wife were both born in 1869.

Post: #11

Somebody needed to read SJWs Always Lie.

Post: #12

Yup, it's playing out exactly as Vox Day's book would predict. Now they're calling on him to resign:

Washington Post Wrote:Lander came under quick criticism from the chairwoman of the Arlington Commission on the Status of Women, Caroline Gary Romano, who called for his apology and resignation.

On Thursday morning, Romano said that even though he apologized, Lander should resign.

“The bottom line for me was what he did was victim-blaming,” she said in an interview. “It was as if to say there’s anything ever a victim can do to stop a perpetrator.”

So much for appeasement! They've reached stage 5 in the SJW playbook, "Press for Surrender".

Post: #13

Now they're going after a Fairfax County Public School Board member:



My guess is, she'll survive because she won't apologize.

Post: #14

(04-21-2017 09:00 AM)Jean Valjean Wrote:  Also, I wonder, would women tend to be having sex with less abusive men, if they only had sex within an arranged marriage? I guess the example we can look to is India, where women do tend to be physically disciplined by their husbands, but is that a healthy form of physical discipline (that maybe the women even like), or is it the kind of violence that could kill them?

India is probably the last place anyone should be looking for advice on problems like this.

Post: #15

UPDATE:

Inside Nova Wrote:O’Grady topples incumbent Lander in Arlington School Board caucus

Schools activist Monique O’Grady defeated incumbent School Board member James Lander in the Arlington County Democratic Committee endorsement caucus, which wrapped up three days of voting May 13.

O’Grady won 59 percent of the vote in the second round of the caucus, after candidate Maura McMahon had been eliminated and her votes reallocated between the two remaining candidates, Democratic officials said.

In the first round of voting, O’Grady had won 45.9 percent of the 5,970 votes cast, with Lander taking 35.5 percent and McMahon 16.2 percent.

In the second round, with McMahon eliminated, most of her her voters gravitated to O’Grady, who picked up 698 votes. Lander garnered just 217 of them.

O’Grady now moves on to the general election, where she will face Mike Webb and, potentially, other candidates.

Lander, who is in his second four-year term on the School Board, becomes the first incumbent Arlington Democrat to be knocked off in a party-nominating process in recent years. Four years ago, he narrowly survived a challenge from Barbara Kanninen, winning 51 percent of the vote. Kanninen went on to win a School Board seat the following year.

Lander’s term runs through Dec. 31.