I must ask, why did Alyce permit her "friend" to release information to the press about her Emergency Room visit, along with such details as her diagnosis?
In order to garner sympathy to distract from her own bad behavior. It's a transparent tactic.
For example, one woman conning the skeptical community, Rebecca Watson, feels free to make disparaging and often sexist remarks, but she has made a career out of giving convention speeches about how mean people were to her on the internet alluding to "rape and death threats" that she never gets around to providing evidence of. Mostly, people are just reacting to her being an annoying narcissistic pill.
Recently a woman at a tech conference, Adria Richardson overheard two guys behind her making a joke about "having a big dongle" (a dongle is a computer component, she either didn't know that or, as it didn't serve her outrage, didn't care). She took it on herself to take a picture of the guys, tweets how sexually harassed she felt, had them escorted from the conference and eventually fired. The backlash against her ended with her own firing. Running the playbook, she began focusing on how harassed and threatened she felt.
The above, like LaViolette, feel eminently qualified to be the arbiter of male behavior -- as a subset of being arbiter of all things through nonsensical post-modernist "context" -- at all times and in all places and especially in conversations they weren't invited into. That may be what happens when a person never really grows up and thinks everyone is a stuffed animal at their own personal tea party.
Alyce LaViolette is simply doing the same thing. She went into court, lying and misrepresenting in order to at least mitigate the punishment of a violent murderer, slander the name of the victim and act out her own contemptuous fantasies of her own competence. Rather than owning the outrage against her, she has decided that she is beyond reproach and is, in fact, a victim.
Articles have come out about the reviews of her book as as sort of internet lynching, as if the "theory" of her writings can be separated from the "practice" of her testimony. We can't know how many people have been hurt by LaViolette by either following her biased advice, her family court testimony, and the groups she runs, but I suspect this case is simply the tip of the iceberg. The only thing left for the shameless is to play victim.
Guys can do the same thing, but women tend to get more sympathy in this tactic due to a sort of benign sexism where women are seen as less accountable and more deserving of protection. Of course, real women, like real men, suck it up and own their actions.
It's essentially the sympathetic blackmail version of saying "Hey, look, a squirrel!"
lease:
