If you live in or are from the Greater Rochester or Western New York area, you have likely heard of the tragic murder of SUNY Geneseo senior, Kelsey Annese (21), and Canadian-born volunteer firefighter Matthew Hutchinson (24) early Sunday morning. The killer, Colin Kingston (24), also a resident of Geneseo, was previously dating Annese before their breakup last week. Kingston entered the house where Annese and Hutchinson were, and stabbed both of them with a large knife before killing himself soon after.
I am not from Upstate New York, and did not know any of the three people involved. However, one of my best friends here at the University of Rochester went to high school with Annese and knew her through some AP classes. She knew about the event before most of the news reports had been released and was already extremely distraught by the time news stories began popping up. Unfortunately, the approach made by these networks only deepened the turmoil felt by the community, to the extent that even I, an outsider, am thoroughly outraged.
We see the familiar wording that positions Kingston as mentally unhinged and thus a victim within his taking of two people’s lives. He is described as “distraught” over the breakup, which we are reminded was initiated by Annese. We are asked to fondly remember Kingston’s position as the prodigal son of a Geneseo-famous dynasty. The Democrat and Chronicle reminds us that Kingston was well-liked by his high school teachers, as well as an important member of the Geneseo High School basketball team. Annese was also a basketball player, playing for SUNY Geneseo when she was murdered. But there is only one basketball coach interviewed in the Democrat and Chronicle—and it is the high school coach glowing over Kingston.
The trope is growing ever staler: star male athlete does the unthinkable, throws away everything his society has invested in him and so to save face, everyone rushes to defend his character. This is not meant to demonize this man, but rather to push back against the overwhelming onslaught of voices refusing to address his guilt.
Where are the quotes reinforcing Annese’s worth? Or Hutchinson’s, for that matter? Why does Kingston get several different people talking on behalf of his character while neither victim is given such a luxury? The reasoning behind the media’s approach to this case, as well as dozens of others in just the past decade, refers to how our society structures masculinity.
If this 24-year-old man cannot maintain his three-year heterosexual relationship, he is obviously a failure at masculinity. However, it can’t possibly be his fault; he has been raised to believe from birth that, as a heterosexual white man, he cannot inherently be flawed. Not in the same sense as queer people, women, or people of color. It thus cannot be his fault, but rather Annese’s. And she must be punished with that which men are told is their last resort in maintaining patriarchal dominance: physical violence.
When news networks claim this “incident” [murder] was done out of unrequited love, the underlying message is a continued blaming of the woman involved. As though somehow it’s her fault for not “giving the relationship a chance.” In reality, the most important message, and only logical message, should be a straightforward “murder is unjustifiable.”
Kingston’s actions were not done out of some wounded unconditional love, but rather out of a wounded masculine ego. This murder was not an act of passion, but rather one of cowardice and entitlement. To posit what the victims “could have done differently” is automatically to rationalize the murder of two people.
My heart goes out to the families affected by this tragedy.
