Tag Archive | California

An old academic paper on a continuous problem women face: Street Harassment

I ran across an academic paper published in a Cornell University academic journal by a professor in 1993.  In it she discusses how the male-dominated field of law actually influences the lack of specific street harassment laws geared to protect women and thus contributes to gender-based discrimination.

Of course since then, several states have enacted sexual harassment laws which supplement the older general harassment statutes in various American states.  Several already have sexual misconduct, sexual offenses and harassment statutes that street harassing behavior would fall under as violation of the law.  So why is it still, in 2017 so rampant, why does law enforcement do not enforce these laws consistently? It is the same issue that women have dealt with several years ago and still do:  despite the United States claiming to be a modern democracy, women, especially those of color are still treated as second class citizens. Even where in law enforcement whether police officers or judges that have a greater population of female filled positions, sexual harassment offenses are not properly adjudicated.  There are political factors to consider:  women in law enforcement who want to fit in with the “boys” and thus view all citizens as suspect and untrustworthy–thus if a female police officer actually lead the helm in street harassment prevention and law enforcement she may appear bias or weak.  This rings true for female judges nd many of us have witnessed news reports regarding sexual assault in various branches of the military and how there is usually a cover up by male superior officers. It was only in the 1940s-1960s where many states repealed laws permitted the legal rape of their wives because women were considered property of the man.  Yet, this nation boasts of how modern it is in its treatment of women when it is no different than most nations it claims to lead in civil and human rights.  Technological advancement is not a substitute for the inhumane treatment and degradation of women.

The one thing I do disagree with is the use of the term feminist in defending a basic human rights.  Doing so, separates women as either less than or more than by claiming the rights to be special to women which is the antithesis of ‘equal rights.’ Women are human and the ability for freedom of assembly, freedom of movement, free to not have random strangers (whether male or female) put their hands on you, sexually assault or sexually harass you is a basic right of any man, woman and child.  To make street harassment solely about male perpetrators does a disservice.  There are closeted lesbians, child molesters, and overt homosexuals who will street harass and sexually assault members of the same gender and those victims deserves just as much protection under the law and freedom from street harassment as anyone else.   This is purely my perspective on the issue.  However, I do understand that most street harassment is against women and girls in general in the United States and most street harassers are black male “Christians”, whether in urban or suburban areas.

Anyway, I wanted to post the short academic paper from long ago to demonstrate how American society haven’t matured much and that its women are still under siege in this ‘modern democracy.’ http://scholarship.law.cornell.edu/facpub/142/

For those of you who do not links or being transferred to another webpage, I have provided the text of the article embedded below:

—————————————–

 

ARTICLE: STREET HARASSMENT AND THE INFORMAL GHETTOIZATION OF WOMEN.

NAME: Cynthia Grant Bowman *

BIO:

* Associate Professor of Law, Northwestern University School of Law. For their helpful comments on early drafts of this Article, I thank Mary Becker, Locke Bowman, Bernardine Dohrn, Leonard Rubinowitz, Morrison Torrey, and the members of the Chicago Feminist Law Teachers Colloquium. I am grateful also for the research assistance of Genevieve Daniels, Victoria Hinson, Sara Love, and Lyn Schollett. This Article is dedicated to the memory of my colleague Jim Haddad, a gentle man and good friend.

LEXISNEXIS SUMMARY:
… Until relatively recently, for example, no term even existed to describe what is now universally called “sexual harassment,” although the phenomenon itself was well known to women. … This Article examines another type of sexual harassment that profoundly affects women’s lives: the harassment of women in public places by men who are strangers to them, which I call “street harassment.” … Although street harassment encompasses a wide variety of behaviors, gestures, and comments, it has some defining characteristics: (1) the targets of street harassment are female; (2) the harassers are male; (3) the harassers are unacquainted with their targets; (4) the encounter is face to face; (5) the forum is a public one, such as a street, sidewalk, bus, bus station, taxi, or other place to which the public generally has access; but (6) the content of the speech, if any, is not intended as public discourse. … If as many as one out of three American women has been subjected to rape or an attempted sexual assault, the target of street harassment may well be a woman who carries this traumatic history within her. … Assault is an appropriate claim in such cases, and targets of street harassment should pursue claims with the aim of establishing a reasonable woman standard by which to measure the impact of the harasser’s conduct. …

HIGHLIGHT: The law often overlooks harms to women. One such harm is the harassment that women face when they travel along city streets and appear in other public places. This street harassment can have profound effects on women’s full participation in the public sphere. In this Article, Professor Bowman calls attention to these harms and proposes potential legal remedies for the harassment of women on the public streets. She begins by describing what street harassment involves and whom it affects and then discusses the legally cognizable harms to women and society. Next, she evaluates the criminal and civil laws that might be used to target harassment and describes their failings. Finally, she proposes new methods to stop street harassment and open the public sphere to women. Although Professor Bowman admits that her solutions are not foolproof (and may face severe constitutional attacks), she emphasizes that for the law to recognize the substantial burdens that street harassment places on women’s liberty, equality, and sense of self-dignity is a first step toward a solution.
A woman walks down a city street. A man whom she does not know makes an obscene noise or gesture. She counters with a retort or ignores him and walks on.
This is a common enough sequence of events. It happens every day of the year. . . . Superficially, this is a simple, ordinary encounter. . . .
But beneath the surface is a complexity of feeling, thought, and intention that, despite two decades of feminist theorizing and two millennia of women writing about women, we have just begun to decode. Hidden in this complexity are the personal and political contradictions of women’s lives, making the experience of street hassling the quintessential moment of femininity in our culture.
MURIEL DIMEN, SURVIVING SEXUAL CONTRADICTIONS n1

TEXT:
[*518] A recurrent theme of feminist jurisprudence is that the law fails to take seriously events which affect women’s lives. The law trivializes or simply ignores events that have a profound effect upon women’s consciousness, physical well-being, and freedom. Until relatively recently, for example, no term even existed to describe what is now universally called “sexual harassment,” although the phenomenon itself was well known to women. n2 Yet, within the brief period since the naming and describing of this phenomenon, the concept has entered the law as a form of sex discrimination forbidden under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. n3 The development of this legal concept and its embodiment in theories of liability has significantly affected popular understanding of acceptable modes of interaction in the workplace. n4 Thus, as Catharine MacKinnon has described, “the legal concept of sexual harassment reenters the society to participate [*519] in shaping the social definitions of what may be resisted or complained about, said aloud, or even felt.” n5
This Article examines another type of sexual harassment that profoundly affects women’s lives: the harassment of women in public places by men who are strangers to them, n6 which I call “street harassment.” n7 Street harassment is a phenomenon that has not generally been viewed by academics, judges, or legislators as a problem requiring legal redress, either because these mostly male observers have not noticed the behavior n8 or because they have considered it trivial and thus not within the proper scope of the law. n9 In Part I, therefore, I describe the very real harms of this widespread social phenomenon. I focus upon its effects and show how women experience street harassment — how being subjected to this intrusion feels from a woman’s point of view — and the consequences it has on our lives. n10 In [*520] Part II, I recast these harms into categories recognized by the law. In Part III, I examine a variety of concepts that current law might use to combat conduct of this sort, including assault, intentional infliction of emotional distress, invasion of privacy and the tort of intrusion, as well as the many statutes already on the books that prohibit intimidation or harassment and the use of abusive language on the streets. I then show how these legal categories, as they have been interpreted so far, have not in fact addressed the harms of street harassment.
From a feminist perspective, it is not surprising that existing legal concepts, fashioned primarily by male judges and legislators in light of the experiences encountered by men, fail to provide effective remedies for the peculiarly female-directed experience of street harassment. Nonetheless, this failure fundamentally contradicts the values underlying Anglo-American law, for the legal remedies available to women in this context are inadequate to secure even the most primary goods of a liberal democratic society. “[L]iberty,” as John Locke observed, “is to be free from restraint and violence from others; which cannot be where there is no law. . . .” n11 The liberty of women, in this most fundamental sense of freedom from restraint, is substantially limited by street harassment, which reduces their physical and geographical mobility and often prevents them from appearing alone in public places. n12 In this sense, street harassment accomplishes an informal ghettoization of women — a ghettoization to the private sphere of hearth and home.
The most fundamental definitions of liberty include the right of an individual to go where she chooses in spaces that are public. n13 Indeed, liberty of this sort is essential to equal participation in the affairs of the polis. n14 The security to move about in public, what Blackstone [*521] called “the power of locomotion,” n15 is one of the most basic civil rights; it is essential to the rights to assemble and petition for redress of grievances — the primary prerequisites to participation in public affairs and admission to the public realm. n16 Thus, when the law fails to protect women from street harassment, it deprives them of one of the basic goods for which government was ordained, leaving them in an Hobbesian wilderness men do not share. n17
In order to participate as equal citizens in the polis, women must reclaim the public space. Hence, my inquiry does not end simply with an analysis of the law’s current inadequacy in addressing the harms of street harassment. We must either fashion new legal concepts equal to this task or reformulate existing legal categories to make them apply to the experience of street harassment. This is one of the goals of what Robin West has called “reconstructive feminist jurisprudence”: to “reconstruct the reforms necessary to the safety and improvement of women’s lives in direct language that is true to our own experience [*522] and our own subjective lives.” n18 Therefore, in Part IV of this Article I propose a variety of ways in which we can use or reform the law to address street harassment. However, these potential legal remedies will only enter the law if women — as plaintiffs and as lawyers — determine collectively to adopt them.
I. STREET HARASSMENT: WHAT IT LOOKS LIKE FROM A FEMINIST PROSPECTIVE
The literature of law and social science is largely silent about the harassment of women in public places. The legal academy has not viewed street harassment as an issue worthy of attention, despite Robin West’s repeated depiction of it as a disempowering injury to women that is virtually unrecognized by the law:
[W]omen suffer unpunished and uncompensated sexual assaults continually. Women who live in urban areas and walk rather than drive or take taxis endure tortious or criminal sexual assaults daily. Although we have a trivializing phrase for these encounters — “street hassling” — these assaults are not at all trivial. They are frightening and threatening whispered messages of power and subjection. They are, in short, assaults. Yet, men who harass women on the street are not apprehended, they are not punished, the victims are not compensated, and no damages are paid. The entire transaction is entirely invisible to the state. n19

With the exception of one sociological discussion written in English n20 and one survey by two Austrian sociologists, n21 the study of street harassment has been carried out by a handful of scholars in the fields of speech, language, and communication. n22 In the face of this relative silence, any student of street harassment must supplement the academic literature with sources less typical of legal scholarship — popular magazines directed at female audiences, literature, movies, plays, and letters to the editor in large city newspapers — in which women [*523] have related their experiences with street harassment. n23 From these studies and stories, it is possible to construct an account of the harms of street harassment by describing the impact it has on its individual targets n24 and to assess the impact of street harassment upon women as a group, upon relations between the sexes, and upon society as a whole.
A. Toward a Working Definition of Street Harassment
A wide variety of behavior is included within the conduct generally considered by targets, survey respondents, and commentators to constitute street harassment. n25 It includes both verbal and nonverbal behavior, such as “wolf-whistles, leers, winks, grabs, pinches, catcalls and street remarks”; the remarks are frequently sexual in nature and comment evaluatively on a woman’s physical appearance or on her presence in public. n26 The comments range from “Hello, baby” to vulgar suggestions and outright threats, n27 such as “fucking bitch, fucking cunt,” n28 “[w]hite whore,” n29 or “you’re just a piece of meat to me, bitch.” n30 Although street harassment encompasses a wide variety of behaviors, gestures, and comments, it has some defining characteristics: (1) the targets of street harassment are female; n31 (2) the harassers are male; (3) the harassers are unacquainted with their targets; (4) the encounter is face to face; (5) the forum is a public one, such as a [*524] street, sidewalk, bus, bus station, taxi, or other place to which the public generally has access; n32 but (6) the content of the speech, if any, is not intended as public discourse. n33 Rather, the remarks are aimed at the individual (although the harasser may intend that they be overheard by comrades or passers-by), n34 and they are objectively degrading, objectifying, humiliating, and frequently threatening in nature.
Anthropologist Micaela di Leonardo has offered the best working definition of street harassment:
Street harassment occurs when one or more strange men accost one or more women . . . in a public place which is not the woman’s/women’s worksite. Through looks, words, or gestures the man asserts his right to intrude on the woman’s attention, defining her as a sexual object, and forcing her to interact with him. n35

Although I will attempt to improve upon this definition by making it more specific and in some ways narrower when I define street harassment as a legal term, n36 di Leonardo’s definition is excellent for its descriptive value. It offers an objective rather than subjective standard by which to define street harassment; it focusses upon the harasser’s actions rather than upon his intentions or perceptions; and it captures the experience of street harassment as intrusion.
One must turn to first-person accounts and to literature to get a sense of the experience of street harassment. The following description appeared in Mademoiselle magazine in 1984. It recounts the experiences of a woman who had been inclined as a girl to regard remarks from strange men or boys on the streets as complimentary:
[*525] The shift in [my] thinking started when I moved to Manhattan and discovered that the relatively innocuous “Hey, good-looking” of my suburban girlhood was the exception rather than the rule. For the most part, men simply approached me with crude propositions. The first time a man walked toward me, opened his mouth, began panting and jerked his crotch, I didn’t feel the least bit affirmed or desirable. I did feel embarrassed, humiliated, furious — and helpless. . . . It made me feel vulnerable and defenseless, as if I didn’t really have control over my own flesh. n37

Another woman reported the following interchange, which occurred when she was out walking, absorbed in serious thought, and passed two men on the sidewalk:
“Hey, why so serious, honey? Give us a little smile.” My sense of humor, he didn’t know, was temporarily out of service, so of course I didn’t give him a little smile. But in not smiling, I had again violated the code, provoking another seizure of silent suffering that became verbal. As I passed the sleeve on the street, it hissed a word at me, with the edge of anger to it, with a sharp rebuke in it: “Bitch.” n38

This account describes a common pattern, in which the target’s failure to response results in escalation and a superficially friendly interaction is transformed into one that is transparently hostile. n39
Finally, an example from a novel by Joyce Carol Oates:
False facts.
The detour around the construction, the mud, the planks, Elena walking carefully on one of the planks, and one of the men yelling at her. Cupping his hands to his mouth, yelling. Another man laughing. Another man laughing. Another man, stocky in his workclothes, throwing something at her that hadn’t enough weight to carry itself to her — just a crumpled-up paper bag, a lunch bag.
False facts: they didn’t really want to hurt her.
Didn’t hate her.
Didn’t want her dead.
False facts: the recitation of the weather around the country, the temperature recorded at all the airports. You believe it must mean something but it will not.
False facts: blood on instruments, no proof of pain. Proof only of blood. n40

[*526] One cannot help but note the thinly concealed violence underlying each of these encounters.
The interactions described above also reflect major deviations from what sociologists refer to as the norm of civil inattention among strangers in public places. n41 Typically, unacquainted persons passing on a public street, particularly in large cities, do not address one another, but instead perform an avoidance ritual: they make eye contact briefly from a distance of eight to ten feet, then avert their eyes and raise them again with a mid-distance focus on a point to the side of the passerby. n42 Staring at a stranger is a well-established cultural taboo. Indeed, Erving Goffman noted, “‘[t]he act of staring is a thing which one does not ordinarily do to another human being; it seems to put the object stared at in a class apart. One does not talk to a monkey in a zoo, or to a freak in a sideshow — one only stares.'” n43
Breaches of civil inattention that include a spoken component typically occur only when one encounters a person who is either very unusual (such as an individual carrying a couch, hopping on one foot, or dressed in costume) or unusually similar to oneself in some respect (for example, someone wearing the same college sweatshirt or driving the same make of car), or who is accompanied by someone or something in an “open” category, such as dogs or children. n44 Men seem to regard women generally as such “open persons.” Unlike men, women passing through public areas are subject to “markers of passage” that imply either that women are acting out of role simply by their presence in public or that a part of their role is in fact to be open to the public. n45 These “markers” emphasize that women, unlike men, belong in the private sphere, the sphere of domestic rather than public responsibility. n46 Ironically, men convey this message by intruding upon a woman’s privacy as she enters the public sphere.
Central to the freedom to be at ease in public spaces is the capacity to pass through them while retaining a certain zone of privacy and autonomy — a zone of interpersonal distance that is crossed only by mutual consent. If, by contrast, women are subject to violation of [*527] that zone of personal privacy when they enter public areas, that very invasion of privacy effectively drives women back into the private sphere, where they may avoid such violations. Thus, by turning women into objects of public attention when they are in public, harassers drive home the message that women belong only in the world of the private.
B. Is Street Harassment a New Phenomenon?
Rare but occasional mention in the case law demonstrates that the harassment of women in public places predates the modern period. n47 One particularly graphic account appears in the report of an 1875 suit for damages brought by a twenty-year-old schoolteacher against the Chicago & Northwestern Railroad for the unseemly behavior of its conductor:
The conductor then came and sat down near the plaintiff. . . . “He said, ‘I suppose you are married like all the rest of the school marms?’ I said, ‘No, I am not.’ Then he sat up nearer to me, and put his hand in my muff, and said, ‘There is room for two hands in this muff, aint there?’ I said, ‘No, sir, there is not for yours,’ and jerked my muff away. . . . I had the tassel of my muff in my hand, tossing it, and he said, ‘If you don’t stop twisting that, you will wear it all out.’ I said, ‘I don’t care if I do.’ He then said, ‘What makes you look so cross?’ I didn’t answer him, but turned away from him. Pretty soon he got up, and I supposed he was going away. He stepped to the side of my chair, threw his arms around me, and held my arms down. He threw his left arm around my shoulder, and took hold of my arm between the shoulder and left elbow with his right arm; he pressed his elbow on my right arm, and then commenced kissing me. I said, ‘Oh, let me go; you will kill me.’ He said, ‘I am not agoing to hurt you.’ Then I said, ‘Do let me go; I will jump out of the car, if you will.’ I tried to get up on my feet, and he pushed me back in the chair, and said, ‘I aint agoing to hurt you.’ Then I said, ‘What have I ever done to you, that you should treat me in this way?’ After [*528] he had kissed me five or six times, he said, ‘Look me in the eye, and tell me if you are mad.’ I said, ‘Yes, I am mad.'” n48

Many women reading this account in the 1990s would likely react to it with an empathetic identification drawn from similar experiences of sexual harassment. Although this encounter resulted in an outright assault — indeed, a battery — the imposition of unwanted attention of a type leading to assault is familiar to female passengers on buses and subway trains today. n49 For this reason, the story sounds remarkably modern.
With the advent of the “Second Wave” of the women’s movement in the 1970s and 1980s, personal accounts of street harassment began to appear in popular journals with some frequency. Harassment may also have become more offensive and frequent in these two decades. n50 The increase in harassment seems attributable, at least in part, to the many changes in women’s lives during this period, including their entry into the workforce in record numbers, the rise both in the age of first marriage and in the divorce rate, the delay of childbirth on the part of working women, public acceptance of unchaperoned women; and the outdoor nature of the physical fitness movement. n51 All of these changes increased the likelihood that women would be present in public areas and would be there unaccompanied by children or male escorts. n52 Periods of recession and unemployment also seem to be associated with increases in the incidence of street harassment — by literally placing men on the streets in many neighborhoods. In the opinion of some, a more general deterioration in public civility has also exacerbated the problem. n53 Thus, what may well be an age-old institution has become a particularly virulent and widespread practice in modern American cities.
[*529] C. The Geography of Street Harassment
Street harassment is a common occurrence in large urban areas. News articles and commentators report that street harassment is particularly frequent, intense, and sexually explicit in Washington, D.C. n54 Street harassment occurs both in the South of the United States and in the North. Florence King described her encounter with some “Good Ole Boys,” whom she described as a “Southern Wasp phenomenon” with a facility for double entendre:
Benches always draw the Good Ole Boys; any long seating arrangement in the South is bound to be full of them. Courthouse railings are their favorite hangout but a row of anything will do.
As I walked past them [in a bus station waiting room] it began.
“Shore would like to have that swing in my backyard.”
“You want me to help you with your box, li’l lady?”
“Hesh up, Alvin, that ain’t nice. Don’t you talk to her like that.”
“I just want to help her with her box, thass all.” n55
Indeed, street harassment is a worldwide phenomenon, n56 apparently absent only in small villages and under fundamentalist regimes in which women are literally veiled and seldom seen in public. n57 One graduate student from India told me, for example, that, in the more than one year during which she worked as a lawyer in New Delhi, she was harassed at least once every day; she attributed this harassment to the fact that she was wearing Western clothes and engaging in non-traditional pursuits. Newspaper reports support her account of the pervasiveness of this conduct, which is called “Eve teasing” in India. n58
Within American cities, harassment is more common in certain places than others. Construction sites are perennial problems, and [*530] the presence of street pornography in an area seems to increase the likelihood of hassling, perhaps by symbolically condoning sexist attitudes and behavior. n59 Some women report that they are spared stares and comments when they are in public places traditionally associated with the home, such as department stores, grocery stores, and churches; n60 but others write of unpleasant encounters in these places as well. n61 In addition, both personal and shared experiences reveal that men in trucks often harass women in cars. The 1991 movie Thelma and Louise graphically depicted this particular form of harassment. (The movie’s two female protagonists ultimately confront their harasser and blow up his truck, usually to the cheers of the audience.) n62 Case law and recent news articles show that taxicabs are also a common venue for harassment. n63
Benard and Schlaffer’s empirical study indicates that there are some places, such as small villages, in which street harassment does not occur. This discovery led the authors to conclude that harassment is confined to the “genuinely public world,” where people are strangers to one another. n64 Apparently if someone exists for you as an individual, [*531] you are less likely to harass her — a fact reflected in the proto-typical question used to confront harassers: “Would you want someone to treat your sister (or wife, or mother) this way?” n65
D. Harassers and Their Targets: Who Are They?
As should be clear from these accounts, the men who harass women in the street are not just construction workers; they include bus and taxi drivers, train conductors, males congregated on the streets, “Good Ole Boys,” and passers-by. The activity crosses lines of geography, religion, race, age, and class. As one observer has suggested, the only reason street harassment superficially appears to be an institution of working-class men is that their place of business is more often the street. n66 Benard and Schlaffer, who personally tested their hypotheses by acting as “testers” on the streets, reported that age, education, and income bore little relation to harassing behavior (although younger men tended to be more aggressive, and older men tended to lower their voices). n67
The target of street harassment is literally every woman between the age when her body begins to develop sexually and that undefined point when she is no longer assumed to be a sexual being because she is “too old.” Different women may experience street harassment in different ways, though. For a very young girl, it is one of her first lessons in what it means to be a sexual being — a confusing and shame-producing experience. According to Robin West:
Street hassling is also the earliest — and therefore the defining — lesson in the source of a girl’s disempowerment. If they haven’t learned it anywhere else, street hassling teaches girls that their sexuality implies their vulnerability. It is damaging to be pointed at, jeered at, and laughed at for one’s sexuality, and it is infantilizing to know you have to take it. n68

Lesbians are subjected to a uniquely offensive experience, as they are both “punished” for being women and assumed to be what they are [*532] not — heterosexual. On the other hand, if it is obvious that they are lesbian, men harass them for that status as well. n69
The experience of street harassment may also differ with the race, class, or ethnicity of the targeted woman and the history of gender interactions to which she has become accustomed. Although it would be impossible adequately to describe all of these disparate reactions, it is useful to note some differences between the harassment experience of African-American women and of European-American women. In many African-American communities, men and women engage in sexually oriented banter in public; several writers have pointed to similarities between street harassment and these forms of repartee. n70 Others conclude that African-American women are therefore not harmed by street remarks. n71 Yet, although “rapping” may resemble some forms of street harassment in some respects, this custom is also distinguishable from street harassment, because women are not ratified speakers in the typical harassment context, but are merely intended overhearers. n72 Furthermore, badinage, or humorous banter, is a mutually agreed-upon interaction, whereas street harassment takes place and persists even when the woman actively avoids interaction. n73 Finally, it should be noted that, although many African-American women respond assertively to rapping, they typically do not initiate it. Thus, even in this context, speech rights are asymmetrical. n74
Although African-American women may be familiar with forms of interaction similar to street harassment and thus may experience harassment as something akin to a familiar gender interaction, it does not necessarily follow that they like it. I have not located any accounts in which Black women stated that they enjoyed street harassment. Rather, it is clear from newspaper stories that African-American women suffer great pain from street harassment and that in many large cities such harassment can be both more frequent and more intense for them than for other women. n75 One African-American [*533] woman described the difference between the interactions to which she was accustomed and those that she encountered upon moving to Washington from the South:
I come from . . . the South. Where I’m from, black men and women address each other on the street. Those who don’t are considered rude, ill-bred and hateful of black tradition. So I once had no qualms about speaking to men on the street.
But in the past few months of living in Washington, I have lost the ability to discriminate between men who are being friendly and those who wish to do me harm. Now I view all gestures from men on the street as potential threats. All the car honks and “hey-baby” comments that I once considered just annoying are now ominous and alarming. n76

In short, despite familiarity with forms of interaction superficially similar to street harassment, African-American women are also offended by it.
Moreover, Black women are harassed by both white and Black men — experiences that evoke different historical associations. Historically, African-American women have been subjected to particularly virulent and degrading forms of harassment by white men. They were treated as the sexual property of their masters during slavery, and this attitude survived emancipation. n77 A typical modern interchange is described in a scene in Lorraine Hansberry’s To Be Young, Gifted and Black:
In these streets out there, any little white boy from Long Island or Westchester sees me and leans out of his car and yells — “Hey there, hot chocolate! Say there, Jezebel! Hey you — ‘Hundred Dollar Misunderstanding’! YOU! Bet you know where there’s a good time tonight. . . .” n78

bell hooks has accurately explained this exchange as premised upon the assumption that all Black women, regardless of their class, are prostitutes and are available as sex objects. n79 Thus, when African-American [*534] women are harassed on the street, the experience evokes a long history of disrespect, degradation, and inhumane sexual mistreatment to which Black women have been subjected over the years. One woman has tried to convey this message to African-American men who engage in street harassment:
I would like to address a special concern to those black men who are making the District a living hell for their sisters.
. . . Your lewd invitations and crude commands may seem funny to you, but the truth is that nothing comes closer to the slave-era mentality of white men toward black women.
Young black men yell at women who are mothers, “Come here, girl!” They whistle at women as if calling dogs. Even black children are not immune. I heard a grown man tell a 12-year-old, “I’ll be back when you get a little older, baby.” n80

Hence, despite familiarity with sexual repartee on the streets, Black women may in fact suffer more intensely from street harassment than other women, because it resonates with remnants of a slave-era mentality.
In sum, although women from different backgrounds may experience street harassment through the lens of different historical and personal experiences, at base it remains an unwelcome and painful event for us all. n81 In this sense, it is also a universalizing experience — one that virtually all women share. Indeed, its near-universality denotes the extent to which such harassment is simply accepted as normal and thus becomes invisible as a social problem. This invisibility may in turn account for the relative silence about street harassment in any form of legal literature.
II. WHAT ARE THE LEGALLY COGNIZABLE HARMS OF STREET HARASSMENT?
Although street harassment affects women’s psychological well-being and conduct, in the cold light of the law the question is whether this impact rises above the ordinary annoyances that citizens must [*535] endure as the price of living in society. n82 To answer this question, one must return to the accounts that women have given of their individual and collective experiences as targets on the street. These accounts demonstrate that street harassment not only has a significant impact upon the lives of women as individuals, but also has significant consequences for society as a whole.
A. The Impact of Street Harassment upon Women
Street harassment evokes from its targets emotional responses that range from moderate annoyance to intense fear. Two themes repeatedly appear in women’s responses to inquiries about the experience of harassment: the intrusion upon privacy and the fear of rape. For example, eight of the ten women interviewed by Carol Brooks Gardner referred to street harassment as an invasion of privacy, and an equal number mentioned similarities to rape. n83 Many women apparently view the issue as one of privacy and offer remarks such as: “‘Women have traditionally been considered weak and vulnerable, thus it is safe to intrude on their privacy. The reason I hate to be whistled at is I feel like that person is forcing his way into my space, whether I like it or not.'” n84 Other women point to women’s constant fear of rape and remark that there is no way of knowing which stranger will in fact turn out to be a rapist. n85 Thus, each time a strange man addresses a woman on the street, she must entertain the possibility that he might rape her.
Women have good reason to believe that street harassment can serve as a precursor to rape. Although most encounters may turn out [*536] to be innocuous, this fear is not unrealistic, given that as many as one in three women in our society have been victims of rape or attempted rape at some time in their lives. n86 Furthermore, rapists often harass women on the street and violate their personal space in order to determine which women are likely to be easy targets — a practice called “rape-testing.” n87 Because potential rapists frequently select their victims by looking for women who appear vulnerable to assault, they may approach a potential victim and “test” her by a variety of means, including making lewd or insinuating remarks, to see if she can be intimidated. n88 If the target reacts in a passive fashion to the harassment, the rapist may assume that she will probably not fight back, and he is more likely to rape her. n89 Thus, the connection between rape and harassment is not just in the mind of the woman.
Women who have been victims of rape are especially vulnerable to the harms that street harassment inflicts. If as many as one out of three American women has been subjected to rape or an attempted sexual assault, the target of street harassment may well be a woman who carries this traumatic history within her. Thus she may be both especially fearful and especially traumatized by an encounter on the streets. n90 Although a harasser generally cannot ascertain whether a particular target has been raped, the statistics on rape make this possibility of heightened injury foreseeable. Even if a target who has previously been raped reacts with fear or panic out of proportion to the nature of the remark addressed to her, hers is an “eggshell” shared [*537] by millions of women. n91 However, even if the injury were not so foreseeable, the harasser would still be liable. n92
Although women are deeply harmed by the fear street harassment arouses, their immediate reactions to it are often counterproductive. Women who are harassed on the street typically do not respond to the harasser but instead try to ignore him, or, more accurately, pretend to ignore him. Women may react this way because they are unwilling to admit their powerlessness in the situation, n93 are afraid of physical attack, n94 or are reluctant to draw attention to themselves or to be displeasing. n95 In other circumstances, they are simply annoyed and do not want to reward the harasser with a response, or they are embarrassed to have been treated in such a degrading manner. They freeze; they put on a blank face; they try to pretend that nothing is happening. n96 When women take these evasive actions in an effort to mask feelings of invasion, anger, humiliation, and fear, they suffer a psychological beating in the form of emotional distress and feelings of disempowerment. n97 By contrast, one study of rape victims revealed that women who resisted rape, even when they failed to prevent it, were less likely to feel depressed after the assault than those who did not resist; the women who resisted even experienced a degree of psychic liberation. n98 Thus, nonresponse to street harassment may impose its own costs.
Harassment also takes a toll on women’s self-esteem. Street harassment reduces women to sexual objects. The comments and conduct of a harasser then force this perception upon his target. One woman explained:
[*538] While it is true that for these men I am nothing but, let us say, “a nice piece of ass,” there is more involved in this encounter than their mere fragmented perception of me. They could, after all, have enjoyed me in silence. . . . But I must be made to know that I am “a nice piece of ass”; I must be made to see myself as they see me. n99

One author describes the reaction of women to being forced to perceive themselves as objects as a form of “madness”:
Being the Subject-as-Object is maddening. It is to be both Self and Other, and to be torn between them. In such a divided state of mind, one’s perceptions of others, of one’s relations to them, and of oneself become untrustworthy. This chaotic moment can seem like madness, to which one responds with a desperate struggle to understand and explain. When, then, a woman turns into the Subject-as-Object, as in street hassling, she can feel as though she were losing her mind. n100

Although “madness” might seem an extreme description, studies of sexual harassment in the workplace show that its victims suffer severe emotional distress, often accompanied by depression, anxiety, stress, loss of motivation, and guilt, as well as disgust, hurt, and anger. n101 Likewise, according to psychologists, women subjected to public insults on the street suffer a psychological toll from “‘feel[ing] degraded, embarrassed, angry and helpless.'” n102 Harassment may also teach women to be ashamed of their bodies and to associate their bodies with fear and humiliation. Not only does this result harm a woman’s self-esteem, but it may also interfere with her ability to be comfortable with her sexuality. n103
[*539] Finally, street harassment severely restricts the physical and geographical mobility of women. It not only diminishes a woman’s feelings of safety and comfort in public places, but also restricts her freedom of movement, depriving her of liberty and security in the public sphere. n104 Women avoid certain places, sites, or activities (biking and jogging are common examples) for years in order to escape harassment. n105 Students in Washington, D.C., take detours or beg rides in order to avoid being hassled. n106 Thus, harassment makes the urban environment uncomfortable, hostile, and frightening for women. n107 In this way, street harassment restricts women’s mobility in a way that substantially offsets the gains women have made in other spheres:
In an era when women are indeed exercising hard-won options in areas such as employment, childbearing, and politics, they often seem to be limited in simpler choices — whether to go to the movies alone, where to walk or jog, whether to answer the door or telephone. Can we measure the success of a social movement for equality if we do not include an assessment of the quality of life of the affected groups? . . . Without such freedom it is impossible to implement other choices. n108
Fears of rape as well as of harassment itself underlie these restrictions upon women’s mobility. It is usually difficult, however, to disentangle the effects of street harassment from the effects of fear of sexual assault. Harassment in dangerous areas, such as “dark alleys,” [*540] in fact arouses realistic fears of rape. Furthermore, all harassment takes place in a social context in which women are always conscious of the threat of rape. Consequently, any incident of harassment, no matter how “harmless,” both evokes and reinforces women’s legitimate fear of rape. n109 It does so by reminding women that they are vulnerable to attack and by demonstrating that any man may choose to invade a woman’s personal space, physically or psychologically, if he feels like it. n110 Thus, street harassment forms part of a whole spectrum of means by which men objectify women and assert coercive power over them, one which is even more invidious because it is so pervasive and appears, deceptively, to be trivial.
B. The Consequences of Street Harassment for Women, Gender, and Society
The fear, psychological trauma, and restrictions on personal liberty described above have obvious consequences for women as individuals. Not so obvious, perhaps, are the consequences suffered by society as a whole. In fact, the harms of street harassment extend to its impact upon the relationship between the sexes, upon the construction of gender in our society, and upon social and political relationships in general.
First, street harassment both increases women’s dependence on men and contributes to distrust and hostility between the sexes. For example, street harassment, and the related danger of sexual assault, encourage women to seek male escorts in public — men to protect them from harassment by other men — what Susan Griffin has referred to as the male “protection racket.” n111 Moreover, it is difficult for a man, however well-intentioned, to address an unfamiliar woman on the street without evoking some suspicion or fear in her, unless he goes to some lengths to assure her that he — unlike other unfamiliar males — is indeed trustworthy. n112 Thus, the possibility of harassment [*541] complicates casual communication and impedes solidarity among unacquainted men and women. n113
Second, contrary to the folk wisdom that “sticks and stones may break my bones but words will never hurt me,” language is instrumental in the construction of reality; language locates individuals within that reality and thus constructs their gender identities. n114 Women learn to associate their bodies with shame, fear, and humiliation. n115 Women also learn their place in society from language, and they learn that this place is not a public one. The remarks women hear from harassers on the street carry the implicit (and sometimes explicit) message that women do not belong in public, where they draw attention by their mere appearance, but rather in the private sphere, at home. As one woman who experienced street harassment explained:
Home was still the only place women didn’t need an excuse to be. . . . It [the street] was their [men’s] turf, the place where they belonged. Perhaps they hadn’t actually pissed at all the crosswalks like territorial tomcats, but then they didn’t have to. After all, who was going to challenge their domain? n116
Indeed, many analysts conclude that the intent of street harassers is, in fact, to remind women of their gender identity and their place in society. n117 Although it is dangerous to reason from effects to intentions, this hypothesis has explanatory power. In primitive societies, for example, women who obey the accepted rules of behavior are not sexually molested, while those who break the taboos are seen as asking for trouble. n118 Similarly, street harassment in modern cities keeps women in their place, reinforces the private-public split, and maintains a hierarchy of gender in everyday life. One writer describes this function as follows:
The first function of public harassment is to reinforce spatial boundaries that drastically limit women’s “sphere.” It clearly stakes out public space as male space. Women who want to be outside their [*542] homes must do so at their own risk and with the full knowledge that at any time they can be publicly humiliated or “complimented.” Women are at all times subject to public scrutiny. n119

The woman who is its target, of course, cannot know what psychological role harassment is fulfilling for the individual who accosts her; she is left simply with the message it conveys. For this reason, it seems safe to leap, if not from effect to intention, then from effect to social function and to conclude that “[h]arassment is a way of ensuring that women will not feel at ease, that they will remember their role as sexual beings available to men and not consider themselves equal citizens participating in public life.” n120 For those of us who believe in the ideal of equality, such a result is damaging not only to half of the human population, but to society as a whole.
In sum, the continuation and near-general tolerance of street harassment has serious consequences both for women and for society at large. It inflicts the most direct costs upon women, in the form of fear, emotional distress, feelings of disempowerment, and significant limitations upon their liberty, mobility, and hopes for equality. It also increases distrust between men and women and reinforces rigid gender roles, hierarchy, and the confinement of women to the private sphere. Street harassment thus performs a function as a social institution that is antithetical to the acceptance of women into American public life on terms equal to men.

 

Some thoughts: Special episode of Law & Order SVU and hypocritical Black violence

In a 2011 episode of Law & Order SVU, Terrence Howard guest stars as the Los Angeles Deputy ADA who treks to New York as a defense attorney for a relative accused of rape.  There are multiple generations involved in both sides and the white female victim being brainwashed with racial hatred by her grandfather her entire life. Both the victim and the accused are hauled off to jail for different crimes.

 

The black grandmother was a civil rights volunteer and activist during the 1960s in which the Ku Klux Klan gang-raped her and used the defense she was a prostitute.  This apparently was a tactic that was widespread as voter intimidation against blacks.

There is a poignant scene in which the grandmother poses the question to ADA Novak, “Have you ever been spat upon, looked at as less than human?” law and order svu

My honest thoughts, nearly every day, by black “Christians” (both male and female).  All I had to do was replace “spat” with “street and sexually harassed” and it would be accurate.  Here is a black woman asking a white woman has she ever been degraded because of her race, and now in the 2000’s it is a black woman who is a Sunni Muslim who can ask the same thing to black “Christians.”  The hypocrisy of Black American “Christians” in modern America is distasteful and is veiled by their own rhetoric to always play victim when they are actually the perpetrator.  This does not go unnoticed.  For some reason, black “Christians” who make up their own dogma believe they do not have to account for their actions.  Why? Because Democrats, which most them are always find a way to justify their behavior and blame the victim.  They are the first to squawk about black unity when they are the ones who destroy other blacks’ lives, communities and victimize other blacks as a whole.  These black “Christians” are quite aware of what they are doing and have no qualms to promote their hatred in Jesus name.  This is the vast majority of black “Christians” via street, sexual and workplace harassment of other Blacks.  There is nothing sanctified about them and quite the opposite.  They are demonic liars and would do ANYTHING to harm blacks for entertainment.  Black “Christians” today are sadistic ‘sell-outs’ despite their act of being the garrisons of black consciousness.

Street harassers have low self worth and No Integrity

Street harassers have low self worth and No Integrity which spells trouble for decent women who are minding their business and would like to be left alone.

Have you not noticed that a core group black “Christian” males cannot reasonably integrate properly into society? When everyone is quiet, in line, waiting for an order or waiting to conduct a transaction at a place of business, black males just have to bother a woman minding their business. It is nearly almost always black males who do not abide by proper social etiquette and laws–especially when it comes to women. They literally cannot just stand, sit, wait, be quiet and polite–and as some black women have stated, black males like to “start sh#@.”  Why is it second-nature to them that they lack discipline, respect and peace of mind so they try to rob others of it by disturbing their day? Why is it so easy for this core group of black male “Christians” to act  in this unacceptable manner with no qualms or remorse?

At first blush, black male street harassers may appear to be overconfident with their belief that if they ‘drop lines’ that the ‘situation’ they are ‘checking out’ will provide a desired response. There is no need to delve into what kind of woman would actually have a positive  response to a lowly negro buckdancing and basically begging for  certain types of attention and response  but it should be noted that most street harassers hate themselves, have bad character as well as low self-esteem. (though it still does not give them the right to violate a woman’s freedom of movement).

If you have noticed, most predatory black males find a sense of accomplishment even when a woman displays discomfort, irritation or fear of safety when street-sexually harassed. Why is that? They believe in and now embrace the mandingo stereotype promoted by white women during slavery and decades thereafter–which also contributed to them being lynched and castrated.  Most street harassers are criminals, ex-convicts, a product of single motherhood, low wage and/or blue collar undereducated workers (which in the old days men still had respect for family values, which is not the case now for the most part).  These days  the socio-economic strata corresponds to their incessant need to prove themselves with an irritating over the top machismo that is usually rejected by any decent-minded woman.  In other words, low-level black males with nothing to offer but disdain and irritation and a need for a mother with benefits are the primary street harassers in the United States.

No decent man with a healthy view of himself would attack, harm, verbally abuse a woman–especially a total stranger except for failure to receive a woman’s (who is an absolute stranger, very odd) external validation to compensate for his low self-esteem.  They are irrational and dangerous (black brute) to believe someone who is a total stranger has some sort of obligation to put themselves in danger to appease the insatiable ‘apes in heat’ proclivities. Simply put these are nasty black males.

A woman is not obligated to you because you need to prove something to yourself or your ‘boys.’

The next time you witness a black male street harasser invade a woman’s space, cat call, try to ‘slip up next to a woman stranger, jump in a woman’s stranger’s face like an ape in heat, know that he has self-worth and self-image issues which results in self-hate.   This is why most of the time they target professional, well to-do or self sufficient black women. It is a reminder of their failures and of all the things he cannot provide, decency definitely being one of them. So the licentious black male street harasser lashes out at the very black women he desires external validation from.  Also, notice that the more people who are present, the more of an audience he has to embarrass the target woman.  His low self-esteem relies on embarrassing a stranger–to debase someone to lift himself up.  One has to note that black male street harassers are mentally deficient  (that is why they ignore non verbal social cues of rejection as well), feel inadequate and are socially inappropriate.  Simply put, these are nasty black males who in their own eyes aren’t worth anything, thus, any stranger must conclude the same.  Among the ‘lines’ these vagrants will spew, which you can witness first-hand throughout various counties and metro areas in Maryland, are the following:

  1.  Hey girl or hey girl lemme talk to you.”
  2. Pssshhhht, you ain’t all that
  3. Lemme holla at you for a sec.
  4. Hey beautiful, you have a nice day.
  5. …or “you have a nice day.”  No woman needs some strange black “Christian” male jumping in their face, invading their space and forcefully attempt unwanted conversation when she was having a good day before you disrupted it.
  6. “Skew me”
  7. ” (it is excuse me but as mentioned before these are undereducated black males so English means nothing to them).
  8. “Come ov’r here for a minute.
  9. “Looking good.
  10. “Daaaayyyyyuuuuuuummmmmm
  11. “Ma’am,” with a neckroll and menacing tone.
  12. “Good morning,” in a tone that is threatening or attempts to exert illegitimate authority over a black woman (you better respond to me or else).
  13. “Hi, hi ya doin’?”
  14. “Hiyah”

Please also note that black “Christian” males actually do not believe in God, they are actually Satanists.  Saying such may appear extreme but if we take a look at their conduct and justification, they are demonic.  Most black males justify breaking the law and offending women by urging that ‘this is America, I can do whatever I want,’ or other nonsense.  Just like any other country the United States has laws, rules regulations and even societal expectations.  Beyond being offensive, their conduct is illegal–despite the lack of law enforcement.  The teachings of Satanism is to do whatever you want and that everything right, do the opposite of.  This doctrine is directly in sync with black males’ public conduct, so know when you are getting street harassed, it is not simply a black “Christian” male, but an evil force that is attempting to encompass you–this is why they find absolute joy and pride in intimidating and disrespecting Black women.  Only something of a devilish nature has this type of reaction of causing harm, whether mental, social or physical, to a total stranger who has done nothing to them except to protect themselves and indicate that they are NOT interested.  So keep your wits about you and know their reasoning that “it is a compliment” while you feel violated, a woman knows that a black male is trying to make something evil and disrespectful appear fair-seeming (see the oppposites?).  Black males justify their obvious disdain, disrespect and attempt to play mind-#@!% when they street harass and their mischief-making brings to them a sadistic merry that they can only understand.

Thus, brutish, black male street harassers have low self-worth, are entitled narcissists who believe that strangers are obligated to satiate their deviant desires–to violate the rights of black women.

If reality does not catch up with them,  the law surely will.

…even in 2017

The caricature of the hyper-sexualized black brute has become self-fulfilling prophecy. The true Black men of the past would be so ashamed and disgusted at what a core group of black American “Christian” males have morphed into the past several decades:

even in 2017

BLM Hypocrisy: Most Black “Christians” Violate Civil Rights of Sunni Muslim Black Americans-Protests Against Immigration Ban a Farce: PART II

Let’s discuss some of the “support” [*sarcasm intended] I as a Sunni Muslim Black American has received from Black “Christians” in Maryland and the District of Columbia over the years (in addition to the near daily street harassment):

1)      I already posted about a black guy shallow scratching the driver front door of my car for absolutely no reason except for minding my business and not responding to his attempt to solicit unwanted conversation.

2)      Oh, one early morning a dark-skinned Black “Christian”—well actually a Jehovah Witness who lived in my apartment building at the time deep scratched the passenger rear door of my car.  She was known for being crazy and none of the residents, regardless of religion liked her. Apparently she was so annoying that even her husband left her and never returned.  However, I was the only one who received the extra deluxe treatment of her vandalizing my car. At the time, I worked long hours and woke very early in the mornings. I saw her leaving the exact spot where the scratch was which was not there the night before and because I work late I left my car in a paid, supervised garage and no scratch was there until she was near my car. Unfortunately, the apartment building had no security cameras and I did not catch her in the middle of scratching my car though I reported it to my insurance company—guess who has to pay for this dark-skinned woman’s bigotry and hate crime:  me.

3)      One day I was walking, as usual in full hijab with a long tunic shirt (it was actually a shirtdress that goes to the knees) with a pair of wool trousers. Two dark-skinned black males intentionally trying to make me uncomfortably by yelling DAYUUUUUMMMM: and stared at my backside while I was waiting for the light to change so I could return to work.

4)      In Howard County, Maryland, a dark-skinned black “Christian” male stabbed my tire with some sort of bracket in the middle of the night. My car was parked in a row of several cars and mine was the only one vandalized. I went to Mr. Tire to describe how I found the metal bracket in the side wall and he agreed it was vandalism.

5)      I was waiting in line one day for a MATINEE movie at the AMC theatre at Columbia Mall, a dark-skinned black “Christian” female kept bumping into my purse which was the only thing that separated me from her. Each time I moved further away or adjusted my purse to clear more space she would intentionally try to touch me with her right hand—total stranger.

6)      One day I was at the East Columbia Public Library on 6600 Cradlerock Way, Columbia, Maryland.  Before current renovations, there were a line of computers that had a “15 minute limit” sign on them. At these computers who must stand because they are not intended for long term use.  I was standing alone in a line of several computers and none of the others were occupied.  A dark-skinned Black “Christian” woman came in right to the computer to my immediate right. I had an inkling she was a trouble-maker and attempted to ignore the negative energy.  I was using my right hand on the mouse and out of no where this black “Christian” female takes her left hand and snatches my hand off the mouse I was using. Apparently she was a sociopathic lesbian. I immediately snatched my hand back and exited the computer and used another one. Yes, these black “Christians” male and female who are total strangers in Maryland and the District of Columbia are mentally ill trouble making molesting street harassers who never face the consequences of their actions or charges because of black “Christian” criminal privilege.  This is when moral, decent people sympathize with rhetoric against ‘Liberals” because these are the types of people that vote Democrat.

7)      At the same library on another occasion, a dark skinned black “Christian” female was using one of the standing computers. I was already seated at one of the regular computers on the main floor that are parallel to the short-term use ones.  The black female “Christian” simply looked at me and yelled “sh*#” and “f@*#” , she then chuckled. I gave her a stern look and she left the library.

8)      One day I had an appointment for a strain at the Kaiser Medical Center, located at 1221 Mercantile Lane, Upper Marlboro, Maryland 20774. After being directed to the proper office I decided to use the elevator at the last minute. I was going up and the elevator was taking a long time to close. A black “Christian” butch female comes out of no where and hops on the elevator even though I realized she was going in the opposite direction.  She looked at me and did one of those threatening “Good morning” (think of the tone when someone says “you better not say anything” I’ll kick you’re a@#”) in that tone and flinched at me. I thought it was the oddest thing and was going to leave the elevator but now the elevator was working normally. The door was closed and I responded because she was going to hit me.  This was a total stranger, as all of them are.

Two of the black female “Christian” employees kept laughing and gossiping about me until I asked the one sitting that I was going to call the insurance who made my appointment and let them know that things were switched without my permission or notification to them.

The entire appointment was a disaster because a shady physical therapist (black male) changed my appointment without notifying me and my insurance company in which I initially had a female therapist. He was a dirty old black “Christian” male who was rude and disrespectful. None of the employees would not say directly but hinted that he was the one that switched my appointment so HE could do the therapy. I filed a formal complaint through the customer service of their underhanded activity.

9)      One day I was at the IHOP located at 7371 Assateague Drive, Jessup, Maryland 20794. It was a bright sunny day and I was getting out of my car in the parking lot. I was adjusting my purse and lock the door behind me when a dark skinned Black “Christian” male started walking rapidly towards me from a Northeasterly direction. Suddenly, a Latino man emerged from his white car which was parked to the right of mine, with out of state tags (Florida) and stood looking at the black “Christian” male. The vagrant immediately turned around and walked off the IHOP property. This one surprised me as I usually do not see Latinos in Maryland defend a Black woman, let alone a covered Sunni Muslim. Then again, he had out of state tags so different kind of Latino, but I was grateful.

10)   One day I was sitting in my car waiting for it to warm up. I noticed a bulged eye, dark-skinned black male walking around the parking lot but initially dismissed it. The black male was suddenly near my car. He walked over and stood in front of the driver right front of my car and stared at me hunched through the main window. He was so close to and in front of my car that had I began to drive he would have been ran over. I kept looking down because I could not drive with him in my way and if I got out my car then he would have said something inappropriate or followed me. Another black male “Christian” stranger acting the social deviant in broad daylight (morning).

11)   One day I was at the Macy’s in Columbia Mall, looking at some shoes in that department.  A dark-skinned, overweight black “Christian” female kept giving me a ‘dirty’ look. I ignored it. She then kept walking towards me backwards near one of the shoe displays and was trying to ‘pretend’ that she didn’t see me though I could tell she was trying to bump into me so she could instigate a fight. I moved AWAY from her and she turned to me in a loud voice and said “Don’t!” I looked at her like she was crazy and two other women saw the entire incident. One of them stared the black female troublemaker down. I walked to another section of the shoe department.

On another occasion, different year, I was at the same Macy’s and was looking for a Clarisonic spinbrush (which would later be stolen by a white woman at the YMCA in Ellicott City, Maryland).  I hadn’t realized that they were made in a variety of colors, so I was looking at different boxes making sure they all cost the same.  A dark-skinned black female came from behind and tried to start an uneasy conversation, then started to get loud. I found her annoying and disruptive and had a feeling she was trying to rob me. I called over a Macy’s employee concerning the product to which she responded and would be the person to ring my purchase at the register. As I took the product intentionally the long route, I noticed the dark-skinned black female following me for no reason. She wasn’t speaking to me, I did not know her and she actually followed me to the register counter with no product in hand and was standing in line instead in back of me.  The employee looked just as uncomfortable as I did, the black female kept staring at my product and my purse. When I had to pay using the card swipe machine is on the customer’s side and is not taken behind the counter. I had to take my entire hand to conceal the numbers on my card and swiped. She was still standing there while I immediately replaced my card in my wallet and the cashier gave me my purchase and my receipt. I was initially going to return to my car but thought it best to go into the mall where several people are around, when I did so, she disappeared.

Based on decades of experience, an observant must conclude that the vast majority of today’s Black “Christians” are evil troublemakers with no qualms of performing devilish conduct in  the open–black “Christian” privilege reigns in Maryland.  God’s standards does not, no matter how many hostile ‘Jesus’ yells these black “Christians” invoke at total strangers who are minding their business.