A couple of weeks ago, a Las Vegas station broke the news about a local business selling the opportunity for men to hunt nude women with paint-balls. The business, supported by a website, was called, “Hunting for Bambi”. The news of this caused an immediate stir around the country and around the world. Many people were shocked that such a business could be legal and could actually be operating.

Not too long after the news broke, SNOPES, a site known for debunking urban legends and hoaxes, devoted a page to “Hunting for Bambi” and stated that it was unclear as to whether it was a hoax or not. They were awaiting more information.

At that same time, and in the week following, the owner of “Hunting for Bambi” went on local and national news, talk shows, radio, etc. One of the recurrent questions he was asked was whether or not it was real, i.e., were women really being hunted with paint balls? Many in the press and in the public were asserting that the hunt was a spoof and was actually a marketing strategy to sell videos (of men hunting women with paint-balls). The owner denied that it was a spoof. He said that hunts had taken place, men had paid thousands of dollars for such hunts, and orders for future hunts kept coming in.

Last week, I visited the SNOPES site again to see what they had decided. I was disappointed with what I read. SNOPES had declared unequivocally that it was a hoax. At first I was angry because just that day I had read that local law enforcement in Las Vegas was still investigating the business. When I read the reasons why SNOPES had decided it was a hoax, I was even angrier. But, then I realized that I couldn’t fault their ignorance, for they had fallen prey to something that is quite common in our culture – the invisibility of violence against women (VAW). Using two passages from their site as a reference, I will explain below.

The most explicit example of the invisibility of VAW is revealed in SNOPES’ opening line on the issue. It begins with the question, "Another cruel real-life example of the shocking degradation of women, or a big put-on?" Seemingly innocent enough, but what this really implies is that “Hunting for Bambi” constitutes "degradation of women" only if it is real. Apparently a video of men hunting naked women with paintballs is not degrading to women, but actually doing it is. This doesn’t make sense.

Isn’t equating women with animals to be hunted violent and degrading all by itself? “Hunting women” in real life is at best known as “stalking” and when the “hunt” proves “successful,” it is known as murder. These are not violent, degrading acts? Throw nudity into the mix and one has voyeurism at one end and sexual assault at the other. Again, these are not degrading and violent to women? If one needs proof of how violent and degrading these are, just ask a victim of three out of four of these crimes. Note that the victim of the fourth crime (murder) no longer has the ability to have an opinion.

To expose the invisibility of the cultural acceptance of violence against women in an “easier” way, just ask the following question: Would the opening question on the site have been the same if the video had been titled, "Hunting for Muslims?" Or how about, “Hunting for Jews?” or “Hunting for African-Americans?” Or, Hunting for _____________ (insert the name of your favorite minority group). Would it still be depicted as a “big put-on” if named any of these and if it was “only” a video? No outrage? No condemnation? Hardly, there would be collective national and possibly even international outrage if this had been the case. This is not hard to see. Seeing how the same should apply to women, however, reveals the invisibility and unacknowledged cultural acceptance of VAW.

The next piece of evidence lies in the statement beginning with, "what woman in her right mind would..." Again, seemingly innocent and nothing pejorative about it. Not so, however. It is actually quite naïve to conclude this.

For the past four years, I have worked in the field of domestic violence. Doing the work that I do, reading the social scientific literature that I have read, and making general daily observations, I know that women in their "right mind" do many things that are incomprehensible to those not in their situations. The "why doesn't she just leave?" mantra in the field of domestic violence is perhaps the best example of this.

When hearing about someone being abused by a partner, the first question usually asked is, “Well, hell, why doesn’t she just leave?” Well, she doesn't “just leave” for some very good reasons. Reasons, in fact, that reflect her being in her “right mind.” For instance, she will be homeless, she will have no financial resources, her children will have no home, their school will be disrupted, she will be seen as "breaking up the family," she may be threatened with deportation, she might be reported to child protective services, her family of origin will disown her, her church group will shun her, she will be "sinning," etc.

Do these sound like good reasons to not leave an abusive situation? Reasons that someone in their “right mind” might use to justify staying? Absolutely. Not that hard to figure out.

Actually, the question of “Why doesn’t she just leave?” is the entirely wrong question to ask. The real question is, "Why isn't the abuser held accountable?" Why does everyone expect the victim of the abuse to do something about it? When it comes to other violent crimes, do we expect the victim to do something about it? Imagine someone having just been assaulted in their home during a burglary and the police saying to the victim, "Sorry, Mr. Smith, you have to leave your home now because you have been assaulted and your home has been burglarized." Huh? Or what about a neighbor, after finding out that someone down the street had his car stolen, asking the question, “Good lord, we all know that this is a high crime area, why doesn’t John just move?”

So the question isn’t why would some woman in her right mind subject herself to this? The question is, “Why would anyone in their right mind want to subject women to this and why would anyone in their right mind think this would be okay?”

So, “Hunting for Bambi.” Hoax? Reality? Does it matter? No it doesn’t matter. Both are violent and degrading to women. Both are not okay. Both need to be taken off of our public radar screen as they support and promote violence against women.

John E. Glass, Ph.D. is a sociologist and the Chairperson of a Violence Against Women Committee in Texas. He can be reached at johneglass@yahoo.com.

###