School board member apologizes for saying women shouldn't date violent abusers
04-20-2017, 12:13 PM
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:
He later apologized, and Arlington County Board member Katie Cristol responded to his apology.
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.
Quote: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.
Quote: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.
Quote: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.