If you write a book on women who have been killed, on femicides, for instance, it is obvious: you are denouncing sexist violence, you are making visible a reality that is often hidden, you give women a voice.
I think this is one of the key questions of my book. Q: How can exploring the lives and crimes of women killers contribute to feminist inquiry?
How do different societies punish women who transgress gender norms? If you look at my book’s cases closely, critically, they are windows from where to examine the changing meaning of femininity and this is an important quest for feminism, although an uncomfortable one. I am just shedding light on a taboo topic, which allows us to examine what we consider normal and abnormal (and why), and how we react to that. It is important to clarify that I am not suggesting that there should be more female killers. We don’t raise an eyebrow if we see an armed man, but an armed woman? A murderer? That is unimaginable. Which basically tells us the following: we have normalised violence towards women to the point that those images, the ones that victimise women, are immediately and ‘naturally’ available to us. It is simple and telling: it’s easier to imagine a woman who has been murdered than a murderer woman. What does this misunderstanding suggest about the social positioning of women – and specifically women killers? Q: You begin When Women Kill by describing how people often mishear your book as being about women who have been murdered. Q&A with Alia Trabucco Zer án on When Women Kill: Four Crimes Retold (translated by Sophie Hughes).
0 kommentar(er)
