Post by cerulean on May 11, 2018 0:26:13 GMT
Correct me if I am wrong but were there not also MALE victims of DeAngelo? I have read all about his attacks in great detail and I could've sworn there were some awfully masculine sounding names on that victims list too. And I am by no means some crusader for chest-beating patriarchal chauvinists or anything like that but some posters here (at least in this thread) seem to be conveniently glossing over the fact that he brutalized men too. How do you know his male victims didn't have small penises? One lady said his penis was larger than her husbands.
To shift the topic away from JJD's nub, there is a point that the male victims often get overlooked in these crimes. Michelle McNamara mentions this in her book as well. The women got to bear the brunt of his physical torment, no question, but the men also had to endure being completely rendered helpless while a stranger invaded their lives, taking advantage of his wife/girlfriend. At a time when men were generally expected to be providers and protectors, the terror and guilt would be unfathomable. Many marriages were ruined, and I'm sure many also turned to drugs and alcohol to cope. Truly everyone who crossed paths with this creep was a victim.
The thing is, most of their attacks pale in comparison to the women's. If anything is left out of the retelling of these attacks, its that a lot of men left the woman who they were with. There are obviousl y psychological reasons for it that realte to the attacks, as a whole, but the times were also very different in the 70s, and male attitudes toward rape victims were less than enlightened, to say the least.
Theres no question that the focus of his crimes is hatred against women and girls. He evolve to attacking the men and found it to his liking. But the focus of the crime is hatred of women. Go ask any LE or professional criminologist.
Ehhhuh... I fell for it. This is a discussion for another time. It doesnt belong here. Lets not feed the trolls.
SaveSaveSave