The Gender Politics of Abandoning Your Girlfriend on a Mountain
This post contains a video, which you can also view here. To support more videos like this, head to patreon.com/rebecca!
Transcript:
I’ve previously admitted my enjoyment of the true crime genre, so you may not be surprised by a recent news story I’ve been following: an Austrian man has been found guilty of gross negligent manslaughter after leaving his girlfriend on an Alpine mountain in bad weather, where she died. In blurbs prior to the conviction, I saw the gist of his story: it was a challenging overnight ascent up a steep mountain, the weather shifted unexpectedly, the girlfriend said she couldn’t go on, so he left her to go get help but by the time he was able to summon emergency services, she had died of hypothermia.
After he was convicted, I was surprised because who could fault him for not staying and possibly dying with her when there was a chance to save both their lives? And so I dug into the details, and dear lord did it send me down a rabbit hole that led unexpectedly to some deep conversations on misogyny, patriarchy, and gender relations. So let’s talk about all that!
I was so surprised by the conviction because initial blurbs left out some key details, which I’ll go through now. This is all based on court testimony as translated by others, and I found this article by Owen Clarke for Climbing.com particularly helpful.
In January, 36-year old Thomas Plamberger invited his girlfriend, 33-year old Kerstin Gurtner to ascend the tallest mountain in Austria: the Grossglockner, at a height of nearly 12,500 feet or just under 4,000 meters. It was obviously winter, which meant severe cold and snow and ice, but Plamberger had completed this ascent more than a dozen times, according to his court testimony, and he said that he believed that Gurtner had the necessary experience to do it with him.
They began at 6:45am, which is generally considered a bit late in the day for a climb this arduous, and started up the more challenging Southwest Ridge of the peak with the plan to then descend on the other, easier side that also featured a mountain hut just past the peak in case of emergencies. Gurtner, the less experienced of the two by far, was wearing snowboarding boots that are not generally suitable for these conditions because she hoped to use what’s known as a split board on the descent.
By 1:30pm they reached what is known (in English) as the “Breakfast Spot,” a resting point at about 11,600 feet or 3,550 meters that is considered a crucial turnaround spot because it marks the beginning of the most difficult section to climb. For that reason, there’s a warning sign posted that tells climbers “If it took you more than 3 hours to get here, turn back! Your life depends on it. Expect major difficulties from here on!” It took them nearly SEVEN hours to get there, but they decided to continue, as Plamberger stated they still felt fresh.
Four hours later at around 5:30pm, cell phone records reveal that Gurtner dialed the number “149.” That isn’t a working number, but it is very close to “140,” the number for emergency services in Austria. At 6:07pm, a text was sent from her phone to her mother stating ??“we’re down.”
The next update we get from Plamberger is at 10:30pm when they still hadn’t reached the peak. The winds had picked up to 45 miles or 72 kilometers per hour and the temperature with windchill was -4 Fahrenheit, or -20 Celsius. Around that time, authorities could see the couple was still on the mountain and so they sent a helicopter to get them. Plamberger waved them away because he says they both felt fine, despite the fact that rescuers could see that Gurtner was having trouble finding hand and footholds, and made only a few inches of progress in five minutes. Immediately after the helicopter left, he says that Gurtner suddenly and unexpectedly deteriorated, stating that she could not make the rest of the ascent.
For two hours after the helicopter left, alpine rescue services repeatedly tried to call Plamberger’s phone, which did have a signal and so the calls did go through. Despite Gurtner’s supposed sudden decline, he didn’t call them back until 12:35am. According to Plamberger, he requested help. According to the police, he was vague and noncommittal, and it was “definitely not an emergency call.” According to everyone, after that call he set his phone to “do not disturb” and put it back in his pocket as emergency services tried repeatedly to reach him back through calls, texts, and Whattsapp.
They spent the next 90 minutes huddled about 100 feet below the peak, at which point Plamberger stated that they both agreed the best course of action was for him to leave her there to go find rescue services. He left her with her heavy pack and snowboard still on her back, without finding any temporary shelter for her, and without wrapping her in their “bivvy bag,” which is a thin waterproof shell used for minimalist shelter.
It was two more hours before Plamberger called emergency services again at 3:30am, at which point he suggested they send another helicopter. However, the winds were too strong at that point so there was nothing to do but wait until rescuers could get to her by foot the next morning. Plamberger told them that he left her on flat terrain just below the summit–however, the rescuers found that in fact she had been left dangling from a rope 50 meters or 160 feet below the summit.
In the end, the judge in this case convicted Plamberger of gross negligence not necessarily for leaving Gurtner, but for a series of mistakes, any one of which could have caused this problem. He shouldn’t have waved off the helicopter. He should have checked his phone. He should have wrapped her in the bivvy and removed her pack before leaving.
And here’s where I get to the reason why I think this story has particularly horrified outdoorswomen: the judge found that while Plamberger was an experienced and competent solo climber, he was not prepared to lead an ascent like this:
“You are an excellent mountaineer,” (the judge) told Plamberger. “But you are also someone who struggles to switch from your own abilities to the abilities of others, and react accordingly.”
And this is where I tell you a final reveal from the trial, which the judge did NOT consider when rendering his verdict: an ex-girlfriend of Plamberger’s testified that in 2023, he did the exact same thing to her on the exact same mountain peak.
Now, when I first heard this I have to admit my true crime brain said “oh my god he tried to kill both of them!” But listen to what the ex had to say:
“The pair had been arguing during the climb, and she wanted to take a shortcut down. That’s when Plamberger bailed.
“Apparently, I was too slow for him, and suddenly he was gone,” Andrea B. recalled. “It was the middle of the night, I was completely alone, my headlamp went out, I was dizzy, I was yelling and screaming. I was all alone; he had gone ahead … That was also our last mountain tour.”
While the judge didn’t consider this relevant, a WHOLE lot of women did. Social media sites like TikTok are currently awash with women telling their own stories of men abandoning them on adventures, with the phrase “Alpine divorce” coming up often. That term was originally the title of a short story of a man trying to kill his wife during a trip to the Swiss apps, but these women’s posts make it clear that it isn’t a case of premeditated homicide. For instance, this woman. She later posted this video. Her boyfriend didn’t leave her in the hopes that she would die. He just didn’t give a shit. He wanted to run to the top of the mountain, and her experience simply did not factor into the equation.
There are also stories from women who say their partners asked them on a “hike” only to take them mountain climbing, which some might chalk up to a “boys will be boys” silliness but in fact is a tactic of abusers, who want to stress out their girlfriends and push them to their limits to see how much they can get away with…how easily they can violate consent.
And then there’s the woman who said she hiked up a mountain with a male friend who abandoned her after she rejected his sexual advances.
And now there’s Thomas Plamberger, someone who clearly does not possess the emotional regulation to help a partner through a difficult hike. The judge said he “struggles to switch from your own abilities to the abilities of others,” but to be clear, the actual problem in my opinion is that he does not view his partners as fully human or worth considering. Their inability to keep up with him makes him angry and so he punishes them by abandoning them in dangerous conditions. Twice! At least!
That’s my hypothesis, and also that of several expert mountaineers. In another article for Climbing that was written prior to the trial, Owen Clarke asked several respected climbers for their thoughts on the case. Damian Benegas said, “if you have more experience and fitness, your job is not to bring your partner to your level. Your job is to go down to their level.”
I think that’s true in many similar adventure sports that I’ve engaged in, sometimes with romantic partners but also even in the case of friends. When I take my inexperienced friends or partners hiking or surfing or cycling, I check in with them frequently. I give them ample opportunity to bail without guilt or shame. I carry extra water and snacks, I download maps. Hell, I hike with a backpack that my dog can fit inside in case he gets hurt or even just tired. People who care about you will do this for you. It’s not some little known ancient mountaineering wisdom only passed down to those who are worthy. It’s basic common sense and empathy.
Benegas went on to say that “climbing with a romantic partner can lead to an inherently fraught, complex dynamic. This is particularly true if one climber has significantly more or less experience than the other. “I don’t know what their relationship was like, outside of this climb,” he said, “but when you have male-female relationships climbing together, we see a lot of things go wrong.” One party may be eager to please, another eager to impress, and at the end of the day, no one is thinking rationally.”
Another expert added that “although it seems likely Gurtner was the less experienced of the two, she may have been able to save herself if she’d put her foot down. Presumably, she could have flagged down the police helicopter herself when it came to check on them. Or she could have called for help using her own phone. But instead, she seemed to have trusted Plamberger to make smart decisions until it was too late. “You need to always listen to the voice you have in your head,” Degoulet said. “As soon as you have doubts, express them. The mountains will always be there.”
And that’s where I have to point out that these culturally gendered stereotypes go both ways. Yes, a more experienced man in a relationship may be more likely to get fed up, to want to show off, to test boundaries, to want to punish or “neg.”
At the same time, a less experienced woman in a relationship may be more likely to go along to get along, to not make a big fuss, to place unearned trust in her partner, to not want to disappoint him.
EVERY more quiet, submissive person, man or woman, watching this video needs to understand that ultimately you are your best advocate. Do not put up with partners who test you, who violate your boundaries, or who treat you as lesser.
This all reminded me of this video I saw a few months ago. THAT is absolutely the correct energy. That man wanted to humiliate her on their first date and she stood up for herself. Had she gone along with it just to not make a scene, or to not seem like a humorless bitch, I guarantee you that he would not stop there. He wasn’t looking for an equal romantic partner. He was looking for a victim. And while things are getting better, our society still socially conditions women to be victims. It’s incredibly difficult to fight against this narrative but these stories show that it’s so important. We can’t protect ourselves against every form of male violence, but there are small ways that we can hone our judgment, stand up for ourselves, and avoid climbing that mountain in the first place.
After learning all of this about the Plamberger case, I went from being shocked that he was convicted to being disappointed that he got off with no jail time and a fine of €9,600, or about $11,300. I can only hope that enough women around the world hear about these details so that he never has the chance to get angry and abandon a woman in the Alps for a third time. Stay safe out there, ladies.
