Anti-Intellectualism

“Anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that my ignorance is just as good as your knowledge.” ~ Isaac Asimov

There is a slow spring of ignorance and lunacy gripping the nation.  This goes well beyond party lines and the same old rhetoric of demonizing the other side.  It rests within the hands of a few influential and very naughty people.  I choose naughty because some of them are simply irrevocably misinformed.  They are the ostriches in the sand refusing to lift their heads out.  Reason and logic be damned.  Then there are the really insidious people (like the Koch brothers) who spread virulent falsehoods intentionally for their own gain.

I honestly think somewhere there is a handbook called ‘the politics of stupidity’ built simply to induce fervor and hatred among those of low intelligence.  Chapter one is about using scare tactics to incite foolish actions.  Scare tactics are the weapons of morally bankrupt people.  Scare tactics divides people who could be united.  Scare tactics lets you justify any action, like torture, that thing expressly condemned by most of the civilized world and Geneva Convention.  Nope, it’s okay against suspected terrorists.  Maybe they were tried in a kangaroo court, sadly much less fun than an actual court comprised of kangaroos or their captain, maybe they were never tried, while held indefinitely and their crime was never published.  Maybe they can never escape and their supposed wrong doings won’t see the light as the same closed door court ruled it private.  Maybe scare tactics fuel big scary things like the military industrial machine and big business which helps elect the people who use it.

Then there is the audacity and hypocrisy of politicians like Chris Christie and Ted Cruz.  I’d like to write about a Democratic idiot here but these two really scream to be included.  Chris Christie is so full of bluster and nonsense that he thinks saying one thing and doing another is okay.  He made a career saying he was tough on corruption without really being all that tough on corruption it seems.  And New Jersey is rife with corruption as their bosses rival the economic squeezing and tactics of Tammany hall.  What upsets me is his arrogant confidence.  The bridge scandal shows his merciless heartless side.  Closing down lanes in Fort Lee definitely hurt people and very well may have killed people.  Paramedics could not reach people in time.  It is unsure whether during these incidents whether or not the person may have been resuscitated and saved but it certainly could have helped their chances.  Every second is precious to first responders.  Christie's excuses treat the public like petulant children.  He claims not to have known.  He does not deny the closures and that they were in fact lying about the cause and that they were unnecessary.  He instead states that he had no knowledge of this.  This means one of two distressing things.  The man who represents himself as hands on politician who gets things done and knows what is going on is a total lie and he has rogue employees.  This means he can’t handle his responsibilities and should not be in a position of power and is totally incompetent.  The other is that he did know what is going on that this is his best excuse.  He was caught in his cookie jar and his best thought is to say it wasn’t me.  He threw a people onto the sword and hopes the scandal will go away.  Even better he wants, or Fox News does, brownie points for handling things well while the scandal goes on.

Ted Cruz is a dangerous man who is dividing and already damaged and weakened Republican party.  The Tea Party faction is already biting the hand that feeds it and will eventually eat itself once the public finally sees the damage they have wrought.  Sadly they will have left an impressive legacy of hate and corporate indulgence.  Thank you Koch brothers (sarcasm!).  Cruz has twice for his own personal gain attempted to blockade the debt ceiling raise.  No one in their right mind thinks defaulting is good.  And defaulting is what would happen.  The United States would sink even lower in the eyes of the world and our economy which is attempting to limp to recovery would be dealt a very bad blow.  Poverty would increase and in turn homelessness and starvation.  Those are things generally thought of as bad.  His latest stunt forced people to know which Republicans backed down from lunacy.  Sadly this is looked at as a bad thing.  For some reason many within the Republican party seem to think taking their ball and going home is a good political maneuver.  That toying with the future of America’s wellbeing is simply a tool to reelection and power.

I remembered a dangerous Democrat: New York idiot Anthony Weiner.  Now I feel better.  This idiot thought that halfhearted apologies would wipe away former wrong doings.  Also he was arrogant enough to continue to do what got him trouble in the first place.  Now sexting is not necessarily something that gets in the way of holding office.  But this casts a light on your character.  A broken character is important to know in your elected officials.   This is why the Lewinski scandal was a big deal.  However unlike Bill Clinton, Anthony Weiner didn’t stop with the transgressions.  Unlike Clinton Weiner isn’t terribly good at what he does.  Also unlike Clinton Weiner wasn’t being investigated under a microscope.  The Lewinski scandal, for those that remember, started after an investigation into a Whitewater.  Nothing damning was found and the Gingrich led senate, frothing at the mouth, kept pushing for barbs to throw at Clinton.  The special investigator kept asking for more things to investigate and the sprawling investigation finally found the dress.  I do not want to condone what Bill Clinton did.  It was morally reprehensible, but it did not impede his work or his presidency.  Anthony Weiner, however, is a smug little scumbag who thinks he is above the law.  There is a big difference.  The odd thing is the same thing people revile Clinton for they celebrate in JFK.  But maybe that’s difference between banging interns and famous movie starlets.

But these actions are supported in part by the news conglomerates.  These monopolies of lies and falsehoods are gobbled up by individuals like Rupert Murdoch and simply live by their own rules.  They falsify, contort twist and misrepresent.  Many of these pundits have shelf lives, how Bill O'Reilly has managed to stay employed bewilders me, as their virulence and fervor can only be accepted so long.  And both sides are at fault.  Simply calling a man an idiot and a loser is not good enough.  Items like facts and data have to speak louder.  Sadly facts are ignored for fear and hate mongering.  Just ask Glenn Beck.  He would justify his ignorance by saying he was just stirring the pot and creating conversation a tactic that neatly dodged responsibility and repercussions.  Repercussions seem to be something heavily avoided.  News organizations give halfhearted apologies.

I don’t really get my news from mainstream media, left or right, anymore.   I mostly get it from the internet.  Which is why I constantly read about protests and riots (like the one in Kiev, Spain, Columbia, and Venezuela) that either never make it to the news or arrive months later.

But anti-intellectualism weaves itself throughout society.  It lets ignorance flourish and ignore criticism.  Facts become secondary to gut feelings and interpretations.  The thing about science is it is written down and can be countered with evidence.  There are plenty of corrupt (those funded with specific intentions which is counter to the spirit of science and intellectual curiosity) or incorrect studies.  This is why there are those who actively push for children not to have immunization shots and vaccinations.  This simply sickens me.  Parents who defy logic and hurt their own children for some ill-conceived notion.  These are often the same parents who won’t let their children be treated by modern methods.  They refuse lifesaving treatments like blood transfusions.  And these poor doctors and nurses have to deal with this horrid people midst their stressful lives.  Ask an ER doctor, or any doctor for that matter, their horror stories.  It’s enough to have a bad taste in your mouth about humanity.

If you don’t think scientific stupidity and confusion is wide spread or really that bad, you are mostly likely hopeful and, sadly, incorrect.  One out of every four American adults are actually unaware that the Earth orbits the Sun.  This hurts my brain and my soul.  It begs the question about whether these people simply never went to school or that it was never properly taught.  Hell, even the intro for The Big Bang Theory shows the planets and the earth revolving around the sun.  This isn’t some small notion that is not, say, universally shared by just about everyone (except apparent for 25% of the populace).

The next sentence then goes on the talk about that half of this same population thinks that antibiotics (that medicine that is specifically targets to bacterial infections) kills viruses.  Viruses and Bacteria are two wildly different things.  The human body is a carrier for countless beneficial and unique bacteria.  Not so much for viruses.  The story which hurt to read also include, thank goodness, some bright spots about positive endorsements for science and that the government should be involved in funding experimentation for the betterment of mankind.

http://www.iflscience.com/scientific-knoweldge-trails-support-0

The key, I think, is not to view this as science versus religion.  That is a battle that cannot be won.  Religion is a belief strongly encased within the hearts and minds. It is incorruptible to those that hold it dear.  It is beyond reproach.  Also some of these same people ignore the very advice given within their holy texts.  They pick and choose their sayings to support them.  The Bible is filled with inconsistencies.  There are sins that are ignored and others that are not seemingly at random (examples like shellfish, wearing clothes of mixed fiber and homosexuality being one often pointed out)*.

The problem fighting against the wrongs of religion is that the people who are carrying the banner are these whiny, smug Atheists.  Their problem is not that they have poor evidence and not that they lack logical arguments but that they lack humility and compassion.  You are attacking the very cornerstone of someone’s life and morality.  I want to agree with some of these assholes but I can’t bring myself to support, well, assholes.  People like Bill Nye are what we should aspire to be.  His debate over intelligent design and evolution showed acceptance, grace and compassion.  He did not slam or attack his opponent.  He did not belittle or begrudge he simply showed evidence and gave his opinions.  That is the key to enlightening others.  Everyone is on a different path and we don’t know where they are along it.  It is with ingenuity and compassion that anti-intellectualism will be felled.

*http://thecripplegate.com/shellfish-mixed-fabrics-and-homosexuality-picking-and-choosing/

Ben

There is No Friend Zone

I often hear, or read, about boys (I choose to use the word boys and not men for a specific reason) being stuck in the friend zone.  They lament that their perfect female friend doesn’t understand the depths of their love and that they should be together.  There are often two very specific problems with this kind complaint.
Firstly, you’re an idiot and that friend is allowed to make their own choice.  There is no destiny involved here, just your delusional sense of self-importance.  Secondly you probably didn’t voice your opinion and she isn’t a mind reader.  No one is, except for mind readers, if they happen to exist.

Being shy and nice doesn’t equate to being the one.  And being nice does not entitle you to the object of your fantasy.  And fantasy is a key word here.  Not that the woman is unattainable but that you heap all these praises on her raising her to demi god status.  She is no longer a human being but a thing, a fetish, totally unrealistic and far too perfect.  No person should have to live up to hype you created.

But, you ask, I do everything for her and she takes for granted why can’t she know that loving me is the right thing?  There are a few answers to this.  Only one of them is you being correct.  Another is that simply she is using you.  You have placed yourself into this master servant role willingly.  There is no contract that says hey hold my purse, go shopping with me, be a shoulder to cry on for like six months and then all of a sudden I’ll strip naked and fuck your brains out.  Nope, doesn’t happen.  You’re stuck there because you made that happen.  Accept being a friend-servant and never a boyfriend or move on.  More probably you never made a move and want to be near your beloved.  You never made it clear that your intentions were to wee her.  Maybe you write sappy poems or buy her presents but they are always calculated not to be too risky.  Asking a person out is risky.  It can be heart wrenching hearing a no.  It can be pure elation hearing a yes.  But if you always stay safe she won’t know your intentions.

If you keep hanging around you become a lead weight on her.  You might try to sabotage any perspective suitor who has the guts to ask.  You’re doing her no favors.  So get over yourself and ask.  Or, here’s a  novel idea, just be friends.  Being a friend isn’t a consolation prize.  And being a friend isn’t meant to be the path to romantic interlude.  This person owes you nothing.

Being a nice guy doesn’t mean being nice only for a prize (her love), it means being nice for the sake of being nice.  Being nice for a prize means you’re a dick.  You probably watched too many movies where the shy nerdy guy gets the girl at the end.  The problem with those movies is that it treats the woman as a prize.  By winning the game, or the election, or rallying the kids of the city they end up winning the heart of the girl.  That’s the job of the girl in these movies to reward the hero’s efforts.  That isn’t life.  Women aren’t a reward for a job well done.  There are two movie franchises I can think of where the hero didn’t get the girl but his friend did (Star Wars and Harry Potter) and I appreciated them all the more for that.

I know these things because I was idiot as a younger man.  That’s why you might have read some anger in these words.  They were not pointed at others as much as at a past self.  While I never placed myself in the friend zone exactly I never left my safe zone.  I was an admirer from afar.  It’s a weird, voyeuristic, hollow thing to be like that.  At one point in my life something just gave way.  I don’t remember the exact moment but I came to realize being so reserved and nervous about socializing did me no favors.  I liked people and I liked being around them.  I wanted to go to parties.  So I did.  I just stopped making excuses and stopped being safe.  It led to rejection, heart ache and sorrow but mostly it led to fun, to happiness and finally love.  I stopped admiring from afar and I never placed anyone so high up they were untouchable or sacrosanct.  We are all just imperfect people and I’m quite content with that.

So remember if you’re in the friend zone it’s because you made that choice not them.  Either ask them out, be a friend or walk away.  You’ll be happier in the end.

Ben

Pokémon Confuses Me

The world of Pokémon makes no sense to me.  I get the logistics of the fighting, of the card trading as well as RPG battles and all that.  What I don’t get is why young kids are traveling around unsupervised engaging in battle with wild monsters/animals.  The world itself makes less sense than rules governing the battles.  The battles all have reasonably complicated but balanced/thought out rules.  You have different types who are stronger or weaker against other types.  They can be leveled, upgraded, get new moves standard role playing nonsense.  It’s the world that makes no sense.  The whole place seems to hinge on these battles.  That seems to be what drives the economy entirely.  And it’s left to the kids.  The only thing that rings true is some evil mafia like organization trying to control the whole empire and win by stacking the deck behind the scenes.

Other games in the genre are rather ridiculous, magic how silly, but they make sense.  I can accept a world with wizards and goblins but without some manner of internal logic to hold it together it moves from odd to outright creepy.

Take Final Fantasy.  They have had countless games, spin offs, plenty of mistakes, but they generally keep to some internal plot and logic that makes sense.  There is life outside the adventure.  People in the world run towns, do the smithy-ing, farming, raising cattle or breeding chocobo (ostrich horse hybrids with their own theme music).  There is monarchies and established governments.  Why does this matter, it’s made up you ask.  Simple.  Because there is no frame of reference.  If everything is different it’s incomprehensible and worse still really awful plot devices can come out of nowhere and fix any problem.  “Oh, you can just use this magic water conveniently over there but never mentioned previously to now to fix the king”.  Fuck you lazy writing.  Fantasy/science fiction needs some stabilizing presence so their audience can understand what’s going on.  That’s why in movies that take place in some other realm or world we have some idiot the other characters keep talking to.  The new guy who is a moderately acceptable plot device used to explain to the audience through them what the rules are of the world.  Better than some hastily written words flashing across the screen or a bad narration.  Wonder why so many heroes are young people who know nothing of the world they live in?  Or that the story starts with some dude with amnesia, or some new student, a new recruit, and so on (see Hellboy, X-Men, The Matrix, Star Wars, Harry Potter, The Hobbit, and more).

How is it creepy you might ask?  Well for starters they let kids wander around the whole world by themselves, encouraging them to capture and enslave wild animals/monsters, and tell them to fight with people to progress.  I’m pretty sure most mature societies frown on encouraging kids to fight.  And they might be more than slightly obliged to oppose animal cruelty or risking your life capturing vicious beasts.

But only the Pokémon fight each other you state.  That’s right.  It’s also fucked up.  Is some ancient pact never referenced that means a Pokémon can’t attack some stupid kid.  And why is there no violence besides Pokémon on Pokémon violence?  You’d think in any society there is some conflict between humans that escalates to physical harm.  I’m not talking bar knifings or gangs of groin punching hooligans - watch out for the leather clad cock rockers – but it’s weird a place so inured to violence has it only in these strict confines.

Let’s encourage child endangerment.  Sure there is some weird law never stated that talks about Pokémon only hurting Pokémon but sometimes these creatures do outlandish enormous attacks.  Maybe there might be some repercussion.  They aren’t fighting in some vacuum.  It’s the reason in Dragonball Z they always flew out to some unpopulated area.  It’s the reason any super villain who wanted a chance with Superman would throw a bus of nuns at a bus of orphans to distract him.  But forget the weird monster battles these kids are wandering the world by themselves.  Never once are they chastised.  Rather they’re encouraged in sweat shop mentality to catch them all.  Is this their version of school?  I guess they might learn statistics, some strategic and critical thinking but that’s about it.  No history, no reading, no writing, just bullshit.

No adults do this even they could own at the sport and have all the power.  This is odd.  There are scumbags out there.  For every person who volunteers at the shelter there is some dickwad who cuts you off in traffic as they sip delicately from their overpriced premium coffee while flipping you the bird and listening to bad German techno.  You wonder why only kids can do battle.  Or maybe he kids are just stupid enough to do the hard work and capture the monsters and the adults harvest the fuckers for something else.  Maybe every time you bring one to the hospital there is some nefarious goings ons before they returned to you.  Maybe that’s why their always so excited for you to come pick them up.  Now I no longer trust vets as a side note.  Damn you crushing paranoia.

The game teaches that kidnapping and slavery are okay.  They totally aren’t.  I don’t know if every Pokémon has some Stockholm switch and they are chill with people forced into some magical sphere prison but it seems weird.  Worse still one Pokémon gets to just wander around freely with their trainer.  The rest can go fuck themselves.  Stay in your cage until I need you to beat the hell out of another one of your species.  And totally don’t rise up against us even though we robbed you of your freedom and use you for our gain.  It’s not like you have superpowers that keep getting stronger and we’re just flappy meat popsicles.  Seriously, why don’t they riot?  Maybe the magic ball just reprograms their brains.  In that case the poor wild Pokémon should organize and storm the cities and try to free their borged (borged is a word right?) cousins.

I have no comprehension of how their communication skills work.  These Pokémon only seem to communicate via saying their species name.  Not even their name their species name.  But they clearly understand their trainer’s wishes.  No Pokémon disagrees with your choice of attack, even its stupid, and does another one.  They clearly listen and comprehend, and sadly obey completely.  Why won’t you love me trainer, I do everything you ask!  More bewildering one of the monster/pets learned to speak our language.  Just one.  And he isn’t famous or praised for his rare ability.  Which muddies the water when thinking about individual personalities and self-awareness.  They can comprehend, they can learn but they have no yearning for anything but being controlled?

My caffeine addled brain is probably looking far too deeply into childrens’ programming but remember this is what the youth are watching.  This is the material that is in their heads as they begin to form higher thoughts like ethics, morals, and a right way to live.  While entertainment is never really to blame for kids’ actions it isn’t free from criticism either.  But most importantly it may be best for parents to understand what the hell your kids are ingesting.  Then again I wanted to be a Jedi when I grew up.  I don’t think the market has any opening for that and I have almost entirely stopped trying to move the remote control with my mind.

Ben

Die Hard or The Problem with Action Movies

The idea that sequels and reboots are endemic only to this period in time is laughable. Hollywood was founded on stealing ideas and remakes. In that period it was mostly stealing from plays and books. If you look at the film Nosferatu, now considered to be a classic, it was simply a way of making Dracula when the estate said no. They simply changed a few bits and went ahead anyway.  Actually there was plenty of stealing, literally.  They actually placed signs in the background of the film as proof one company filmed it and not others so another company couldn’t just steal the reels.  Not a surprise when you find out that film had Edison as an early proponent.

Every once and a while there is a benchmark film that defines, or rather redefines, a genre. Die Hard is one of those movies. Interestingly enough Die Hard started its gestation as a sequel to Commando. This is not entirely uncommon. Quite often a script, an idea, or another intellectual property will be transformed entirely and laid over onto existing characters. The laughable sequel Die Hard 2 was based on the book “58 minutes”. A better example of an extreme makeover is Beverly Hills Cop. It was originally a vehicle for Stallone. The movie was changed heavily once Eddie Murphy, then contractual allowed to still be funny, was attached and a good deal of the film, notably the supercop speech, was improvised.  Watch that scene and you’ll notice John Ashtone (Taggart) is squeezing his nose and looking down trying not to laugh.  Judge Reinhold (Billy Rosewood)  was apparently pinching his inner thigh.

But Die Hard was so good it ended up setting back action films for decades because it became a formula. What was fresh then is now a bit played out. But subsequent copycat films have failed to follow its subtlety and expert hand. Die Hard, even though it was an action film, was actually a good piece of cinema that still stands up.

The first two shots of the movie speak volumes.  They set up important elements of the story with nuance. The first shot is a of plane landing (going from the right of the screen to the left). This usually indicates coming from the east and entering the west. The second shot is a close up of wedding ring. This sets up the most important element of the film. This is the first struggle introduced in the movie. The terrorists/thieves are introduced after the marriage problems of the McClane’s.  Shortly after the films shows McClane’s gun, the suspicion of the passenger who has sitting next to him, and the enormous stuffed bear (although Iron Man 3 wins at the ridiculously sized stuffed bear contest).  McClane explains he is a cop and this soothes the passenger’s suspicion.  This is the guy who indirectly causes McClane to have bloody feet later in the movie.  He explains to deal with stress you makes fists with your feet on the carpet.

Most stories have two plots. Generally there is the external struggle and the internal struggle. The better stories untie these two often disparate struggles and have them strengthen each other. We watch our protagonist along his or her path as they attempt to get past their hurdles. In Die Hard we are first introduced to the complication of John McClane’s marriage. The proud New York City cop has to deal with the success of his wife.  He wants her to give up her high paying business job and move back to the East coast to only be a mother to his children and a wife to him. To him their success is his success. He is trapped in the older mentality of the husband being the solitary provider and the decision maker. But this is a movie emblematic of it’s time. Women are entering the work place (Holly), Japanese businesses (Nakatomi Corporation) are buying up America and coked out yuppies (Ellis) run rampant.

Part of what sets Die Hard apart from other films is the realism of its characters. They aren’t simply one note stand ins. They have realistic relationships and reactions. It isn’t just bad guy #4 and #5.  There is sympathy for the normally unlikable characters; like Hans, Ellis and Karl.  It also had innovative, at the time especially, camera work.  The uses of the frame helped subtly tell internal feelings.  This is what film can do and books can’t.  Books can tell the inner thoughts of the characters while film is not only limited to facial expression unless it is under the direction of hacks (more explosions to cover up my laziness and incompetence!).

When we first see Holly she is among the crowd far below President Takagi (a not so subtle spatial reference to his power over those below).  Shotly after in her office (Holly Genero) we see pictures of her with the kids.  Then the audience finally sees a picture of John linking the two characters.  She turns the chair to obscure that picture further hinting at the trouble between them.  Then she puts the picture down so John is obscured.  This is important much later as Hans doesn’t see the face and the link.

Meanwhile John is in the limo and sitting upfront with Argyle.  The film is desperately trying to show how likable but out of touch he is.  The shows he is unused to limos, that he is comfortable with the working man, resistant to trappings of class, and grouchy (but in an endearing way).  When John gets to the building and walks through the lax but ever present and sophisticated security he notices Holly is listed under Gennero, her maiden name, and not McClane.

The inevitable argument between the two ensues and Holly walks out.  John shows he is upset with himself and not just the situation by banging his head on the door frame.  At this time he is making the mistakes of walking around bare footed.

The terrorists are introduced to the sound of music as they are calmly and methodically entering the Nakatomi building.  Fun note the truck they arrive in has ‘Pacific Courier’ on it. This translates to ‘Bringer of Peace’.  The guards are quickly disposed of and they have started to take control. At this point we have no idea why they are there.  Previous to this it was simply a melodrama about a cop stuck in the past and his wife who is dangerously close to leaving as he is forcing a choice between a successful career she chose and the life he chose for her.  Now it becomes, almost reluctantly an action movie.  The terrorists show some really personality here which is useful so they aren’t in people’s minds simply dude with a shotgun, gun with funny hair, the one who talks.  We know that there are two brothers;  the nerdier one (Tony), made obvious by his glasses and the fact he is hacking into the phone lines; and the burlier one (Karl) who delights in pushing around Tony.  He pulls out chainsaw while he is brother is work forcing him to sweat and work rapidly.  He risks an alarm and jeopardizing the plan to tease his brother.

McClane escapes into the stairwell once the fireworks start sadly still in bare feet.  He tried to stop the whole thing by pulling the fire alarm by the switchboard now operated by the terrorists stops this attempt.  Nerdy brother Tony confronts McClane but dies in the confrontation.  McClane shows his sense of humor and dressed him in a santa outfit.  Ho Ho Ho indeed.  This gives Karl an immediate need to kill McClane beyond simply he is a bad guy and John is a good guy.  Yay layers!  Like an ogre, or onion.  Or a parfait.  Everyone loves a parfait.  But let’s ignore the scene by scene breakdown.

Die Hard can be enjoyed as a dude simply shooting other dudes.  But it is so much more than that.  We have smart inventive characters.  Plot twists.  Yeah, they aren’t terrorists they’re just thieves, really good thieves.  Plus it had some rather snappy dialogue.

Supervisor: [as McClane tries to call up police] Attention, whoever you are, this channel is reserved for emergency calls only.

John McClane: No fucking shit, lady. Does it sound like I'm ordering a pizza?

While John is battling the bad guys Holly is trying to remain hidden and not be a pawn in the game.  Her boss Takagi, whom she tried to protect, already died violently.  There was a nice touch with Karl and Theo (the hacker) betting over the ending of the negotiation.  She now gets to see the infuriating side of her husband as a good thing.  His never-ending stubbornness and sense of humor are good in this situation.  It reaffirms to her that he is out there trying to save everyone.

Ginny: [Karl smashes a table of glasses in fury] God. That man looks *really* pissed.

Holly Gennero McClane: He's still alive.

Ginny: What?

Holly Gennero McClane: Only John can drive somebody that crazy.

Now it seems ridiculous that a beat cop could eventually bring down a group of well-prepared bad guys replete with Hans Gruber at the helm.  But the film treads lightly here.  Treating it as every second that he could, and should by all rights, be dead.  The first person he killed (Tony) died accidently when his neck was broken).  He fails in jumping in the elevator shaft and barely makes it to the vent to crawl through.  His feet were bloody due to having to run through broken glass.  He struggles on valiantly each time only barely surviving.  Jumping off the building with the fire hose attached he doesn’t cleanly make it inside.  The glass repels him.  His bloody feet leave red imprints.  He has to shoot the glass to get inside and even then he almost dies when the metal part attached to the hose falls dragging him with it.  At the end he is outgunned but he still prevails by his snarky comments and catching Gruber off guard.  He tells a joke and the all laugh.  Giving him long enough to shoot one of the henchmen and wound Gruber.  But we’ll jump back to that.

In these types of movies there is always the guy on the inside who sympathizes with the hero who gives him encouragement and moral support while he is fighting alone.  In this case we have Al the Twinkie enthusiast.  Surprisingly twinkies have played an important role in two of my favorite movies.

Dr. Peter Venkman: How's the grid holding up?

Dr. Egon Spengler: Not good.

Winston Zeddemore: Tell him about the Twinkie.

Dr. Peter Venkman: What about the Twinkie?

But I digress.  Al and “Roy” (McClanes cowboy persona) are linked by camera framing.  Whenever we see someone in the film talk to another character over phone or walkie talkie we see them in their respective side of the frame; one on the left and the other on the right.  Although they aren’t in the same space they are joined by this framing.  It’s done the same with Hans and McClane but this sets them up as adversaries and opposites.  The moments of levity in the film allow dark moments like Al’s explanation of never firing a gun. He admits to having killed a kid.  This informs much about the character.

While John is street smart Hans is book smart.  While Hans is tactical John is quick witted.  They both test each other.  One of the best sequences is when McClane finds Hans and Hans pretend to be an employee.  Looking at the list of names on the wall by the elevator McClane quizzes him.  Hans responds Bill, Clay and we see on the wall W. Clay confirming his deceit.

Back to Hans last moments.  He grabs onto Holly securing in his graps her watch.  The watch introduced earlier by the smug, and now dead, Ellis, is a symbol of her choice of work over marriage.  John relases the watch from her simultaneously defeated the bad guys and resolving, metaphorically, their marriage issues.  Or at least for the time being.

A film this good left a lasting impression.  The following four entries into the series all looked up their predecessor and all failed spectacularly.  The fourth and fifth movies turned the down on his luck cop into a superhero.  In the fifth entry the heroes simply leap through windows unaware of how they might land to escape.  The second movie had boring plot twists, boring bad guys, and removed any and all subtlety.  Also it added crappy effects and bad camera work.  The third film was probably the closest to the first but had a rather unenlightened ending.

But Die Hard can be seen in countless other movies from karate films like The Raid: Redemption (die hard with kicking, also killing a dude with a door which was way more awesome than it sounds) or Jean Claudes rather boring Sudden Death (replace the Nakatomi building with a Hockey arena and add mullets, splits and bad acting, sorry Powers Boothe).  It can also be seen in the surprisingly not awful Dredd reboot which was creatively named Dredd.

The problem often times with imitation is missing the point.  You copy the swagger the style but not the substance.  Other films just put up a super hero, a nigh invulnerable demi god who cannot possibly lose.  The pleasure is not in the conflict or its resolution as there is no real conflict just a minor inconvenience.  The audience know the hero will win there is no suspense, no tension.  The hero waltzes through danger with nary a scratch.  But in Die Hard John McClane is all scratches, gun shots, bloody feet, narrow escapes and heaps of luck.  Other action movies focus on building up an icon who is so indomitably badass that the pantheon of bad guys thrown his way as fodder seem comical.

Is it fair to say that Die Hard has really ruined action movies?  Not really, but every hack no uses that as blueprint.  After Fight Club came out we had all these other movies starting near the end or featuring twist endings revealing the protagonist not to be who they think they are.  But Hollywood will simply continue to recycle ideas until they are used up and shallow husks.  Until then Die Hard will be my Christmas tradition.  YKYMF!

Ben

History is Interpreted

There are many times I dislike the current education system.  Usually because we as a country seem to be content ruining it.  My usual gripe is the whole test mentality.  We judge the students and the school by test scores.  Schools then predominantly try to get their kids study for the test instead of, say, teaching things like critical thinking, common sense and other useful skills but the shit some test maker thought was important.  Not to impugn the people who make tests but fuck them.  The thing you decide to use as a measurement of success not surprisingly becomes the measure of success.  The problem is that with education a real measurement of growth isn’t knowing you should write ‘regardless’ instead of ‘irregardless’ (it’s not a fucking word people).  Although that wouldn’t be a terrible place to start.

The thing that pisses me off is that history teachers and social studies teacher bored the living hell out of me.  They also taught garbage.  Not all of them mind you, but enough to upset me.  And this is a tragedy as history is shockingly interesting.  And not like the nerdy way of saying ‘hey, you should know this so won’t happen again’ (“Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it” ~ George Santayana )  and ‘history is cool’ (it is and fuck you for not thinking that) but just learning a few things about history can make you a well-rounded and better person (and chicks dig it).

Let me drop some knowledge on you.  You know that whole gentlemanly code thing.  Not chivalry to heck with that (although tipping your hat dates back to armed knights removing their visor). I mean being a man about town.  When you, present day you, walk with a lady (presuming you are a man, presuming you enjoy the company of ladies carnally and presuming that a lady doesn’t run away from you as long as we are presuming) you end up being on the street side of the sidewalk and lady is on the building side.  Odd that this is the way it’s done.  Some unknown Jungian thing where we peer into the collective unconscious?  Remember when you look into the collective unconscious, the abyss also looks into you or something like that (damn it Nietzsche stop confusing me).  No, it has to do with shit.  Well, with pails of it splashing into the street from the buildings above but shit nonetheless.  See cities and towns didn’t always have this nice thing called a sewer system.  Too bad we forgot most everything the Roman’s knew for a few centuries or so.  So people would fill their pots and fling the contents into the street.  We also didn’t know about this whole germ theory thing but more on that in a moment.  So the gents as they sauntered down the street with their intended they would stay nearer the every jostling pit of filth resembling a street.  Now imagine the whole laying down you coat so a lady can cross the way without sullying her boots or shoes.  Less appealing, right?  Oh good ,shit on the outside of my coat from the constant frothy buckets splashing from the filthy bastards above me into the foul street and laying it down every time the lady meets an intersection to get the inside all nice and juicy.  Old timey me would say, “Seriously we have to stop walking during bucket hour.  You’re totally buying me a new jacket once I’m done burning this one.”

People still believed in this thing called Miasma, or bad air, being the reason for ailments.  Yay, science, medicine and mysticism are best buddies forever.  What?  Mysticism is the thing that doesn’t belong.  Well, shoot.  Miasma was popular in Middle Ages, unsurprisingly, but also espoused in Roman times.  Usually considered to be more, you know, rational and learned.  The germ theory didn’t seem to gain ground until Louis Pasteur in 1860’s (that around the Civil War time for point of reference).  But he wasn’t the first guy to have ideas like this.  The ever crafty Italians had some people with wacky ideas, who hopefully the Papacy didn’t lock away in a tower for daring to advance society, like Girolamo Fracastoro.  Oh, he was born in the in 1470’s.  Yeah, and we can attribute the syphilis to him, or well, rather the name.  He subscribed to the theory of Atomism.  Not quite what we think of as atoms but getting there.

All those facts above, tenuously held together, to me are more interesting that the vast amount of information fed to me in history classes.  This is why history class as an adult pisses me off.  History is interesting.  And worse of all there is so much of it to look at.  And knowing history is like the best game of hey you’re an idiot and let me tell you why.  I highly recommend this game if you haven’t played it.  Caveat you actually have to know more than other people and not just sound like you do.  That’s the problem with this whole internet immediate gratification and delivery of possibly dubious knowledge.  So here are few items to help you play that game.  All basically say fuck you to ‘common knowledge’.  I put common knowledge in quotes because, well is even more dubious than internet sources unless it’s taken from the collective unconscious thing then it’s probably legit.

Look at this excerpt below from an article I found.  In your head, because aloud might be weird, say who first comes to mind.

“On March 2, 1955, [a young African American woman] was riding home on a city bus after school when a bus driver told her to give up her seat to a white passenger. She refused, saying, "It's my constitutional right to sit here as much as that lady. I paid my fare, it's my constitutional right."

Okay.  You’re wrong.  I know it’s mean but the above is about Claudette Colvin who predated Rosa Parks as a civil rights activist and hero but was forgotten by history.  She was an expecting single mother and fifteen years old.  So she eloquently stood up to an aggressor as young woman and later won a major victory for the movement when she went to court over the trouble which ensued.  But civil rights movement chose to celebrate Rosa Parks instead, who most definitely should be celebrated, but isn’t there room for two defiant African American women who did remarkably similar things and both helped this nation move forward.  Claudette was swept under the rug however and this is likely because a young single mother might not be the poster child envisioned.

http://www.biography.com/people/claudette-colvin-11378?page=1

Try this one on for size.  What does the empire of cushy furniture (the Ottomans) and the Irish potato famine have in common?  My first guess would be nothing.   But as this ‘he you’re an idiot and let me tell you why’ that is not correct.   The Ottoman Empire actually helped Ireland during the Potato Famine and defied the English blockade against the aid.  I didn’t even know the English blockaded Ireland to stop aid.  That never entered into my mind.  The whole famine as it was presented to me made rather silly sense.  How does an island starve?  You could fish, right?  It’s a bit more complicated than that and has to do with the English trying to fuck everything that isn’t English or something like that.  I’ll let the article tell you:

“Ottoman Sultan Abdulmecid sent five ships full of food supplies and funds as charity. However, the British administration did not give permission for these ships to enter the ports of Belfast or Dublin. […] these ships secretly discharged their load in Drogheda, a town approximately 70 miles north of Dublin.”

http://www.thepenmagazine.net/the-great-irish-famine-and-the-ottoman-humanitarian-aid-to-ireland/

Now here is tidbit you can throw at would be nutritionists and Atkins followers.  Who gives a shit what ancient man had to eat.  Marlene Zuk an evolutionary biologist, a title given to people who eschew activities like video games and professional wrestling for learning (those poor bastards), wrote a book telling people who think we should eat like primitive man to shut up as their stupidity voiced aloud might affect the gullible and foolish.  The book Paleofantasy (subtle as a hammer lady, er Dr., er, Dr. Lady?) basically says that there isn’t a need to live or eat as we once did it also dissolves some of the misinformation like the supposed paleodiet.  Apparently “researchers discovered evidence that people in Europe were grinding and cooking grain (a paleo-diet bugaboo) as far back as 30,000 years ago, even if they weren’t actually cultivating it.”  This information will surely piss of the anti-sugar fiends.

http://www.salon.com/2013/03/10/paleofantasy_stone_age_delusions/

I’ll throw another fact your way before we end the pseudo lecture.  This source, while I would not say it lacks merit or that it is spurious, is cited on Reddit.  This makes an immediate need for research.  As is often the case in society we fetishize something to the point where its truth is no longer called into question.  For some reason this became the case with swords.  Now don’t get me wrong swords are cool (heck, I studied the Chinese Broadsword, by study I mean learned to whack people with it in a dojo not read up on it) but they are romanticized so much we think all major battle were fought with them.  This is false.  Spears were the weapon of favor.  Samurai used spears, the Roman Legions used spears, and knights used spears.  Swords were not nearly as effective in large scale battles.  Also in the case of knights swords were rather useless against strong armor.  If they had a sword in combat they often used the pommel end to smash the attackers head.  Maybe in shield wall they might use small swords to cut under the shield and hack at ankles or groins but axes and hammers were preferred.  But this is swept away as swords are undeniably cooler.  Although Smash Brothers is a great argument for the effectiveness of the hammer as a weapon.

http://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/157upf/what_was_sword_fighting_actually_like_did_it/c7k1cd7

Now I hate using Buzzfeed as a source so I grabbed more than one for this knowledge nugget.  But the article, or rather the grouping a pictures with some hastily crayoned “fact” below illustrates a rather interesting point.  Sharks don’t really kill that many people.  Sharks are scary things.  They rank up their with the nightmare fuel that is spiders.  But just saying that means rather little.  Let’s have something measurable.  Metrics are important.  Every years a lot of people die often from embarrassing or frightfully awful ways.  Hippos every year kill more humans than sharks.  Hippos while they seem jubilant and too corpulent to be a problem (Fantasia is full of lies when it comes to Hippos as source by the way) they are in reality heinous killing machine.  They kill around 2,900 people a year.  Ignoring the Indiana Jones movie that never really happened ants are one of nature’s badasses.  They are like the Borg; efficient, remorseless and adaptable.  They kill more than sharks at 30 people per year.  Then there is deer.  You know Bambi.  And no, they aren’t smart enough to take vengeance for redneck hunters who mount heads on walls (yet).  They kill 130 people per year.  Even coconuts kill more than sharks (150 people per year).  This makes me immediate sad.  I would hate giving that eulogy.  Sharks only kill 5 people a year.  But because of the film Jaws, a damn fine movie, people generally kill the sons of bitches.  Peter Benchley, the books author (yes it was a book first you illiterate hobgoblin), is now a shark conservationist.

http://www.buzzfeed.com/awesomer/20-things-that-kill-more-people-than-sharks-every
http://www.bookyourdive.com/blog/2012/4/5/things-more-likely-to-kill-you-than-a-shark

So now that I’ve given you fodder to educate the masses, against their will if need be, you can do what I do - critically think about how we really interpret history.  We only know what has been written and recorded.  Things like book burnings, the raising of libraries, or just passing outright lies as fact (you think todays’ pundits have this cornered?) have given us the shreds of history to wade through.  History books do us a disservice by trying to sum up and group facts as if they are all encompassing.  I patiently tried not to throttle a teenager who insisted that nearly all people in Europe during the Middle Ages were illiterate.  I simply asked “how do you know?” and he stared at me with bovine intelligence.  He parroted what he saw in textbooks.  In my head only I continued the argument.   I knew further engaging him in argument further would not lead to any enlightenment for him or resolution for me.  George Carlin said, “Never argue with an idiot. They will only bring you down to their level and beat you with experience.” In my head I asked him if he thinks everything he reads is true.  In my head I asked him if only church officials knew how to read why would information counter to the church survive?  Obviously this is unfair as there are other cultures out there storing, adding and deleting information but don’t fuck with my argument.  I simply told him he was wrong, sting a few facts and turned away from him and started a conversation with someone who wouldn’t cause my mind to rot.  Stymied he continued arguing out loud to no one.  Fortunately ignorance is not always contagious. Truth isn’t always contagious either.  I can hope that truth (which as some urn once told me is beautiful) is sought out.  Seek on.

Ben

Gently Cuddle the Police, or Maybe Some Spooning

Is it really a surprise that our espionage agencies spy more than we think and spy on those whom we don't expect?  You are allowed to say yes, just understand this marks you as an idiot.  How did this happen?  Well, slowly and covertly or at times things like the Patriot Act.  Named thusly so we don’t notice the fact that it really the invasion act.  Or those pesky places like Gitmo that have people taken away and never heard from again.  The crimes and trials are never released because it’s too sensitive to reveal.  This is fine in some aspects but it is also allows the government a way of disposing of unwanted opinions and dissenters.  This is a perilous slide.  And no it isn’t from just some shadow organization that operates under cloak and dagger.  It’s from business people like the Koch brothers who buy politicians, universities and whatever they want to negate what they don’t like.  It’s from a few really tyrannical and misguided politicians who think it’s a good idea to keep tabs on everyone, heavily prosecute people for minor infractions, develop and entrench cronyism and several other items that make froth at the mouth with anger.  They get away with it through things like apathy cultivated by gluts of information, misinformation and 24 hour news that is more editorial than factual.

But let’s back up.  I shouldn’t load all the scary things into one paragraph, let’s lay them out one by one so the fear can gestate.  Man, that’s a dark sentiment.  I guess I’ll focus on one scary thing, the police and possibly the fact that NWA was at times correct about their four letter statement towards them.  Moving on we can start with the evolution of the police.  To most of us these are the guys that force us to tap our brakes when driving on the highway and give us small heart attacks when they end up following you until the turn off or pass you.  They are minor but necessary inconveniences in the grand scheme of things.  But lately it seems the mentality of the police is a bit meaner, a bit more aggressive, more like a them versus us mentality.  This manifests itself when cops seem to go out and look for trouble and force a confrontation.  Cough** Andrew Zimmerman ** cough.  Obviously an officer has the right to defend him or herself if they are in an ugly situation.  And it’s hard for a person sitting comfortable behind a monitor to say what level of violence to use when meeting this danger.  But there are specific steps and guidelines for use of force.  It starts with a base level like your voice and conflict de-escalation.  After then of course it immediate goes to your sidearm and deadly force.  Or, well, maybe pepper spray, or a nightstick (still deadly but with a lower mortality rate that guns).  But maybe this could be fixed with some better training around preventative measures and not creating, encouraging, or fostering an environment where the violence happens or escalates.  Simply put, stop fucking making the situation worse until the only answer is shooting someone.  If some idiot runs away because you scare them over an ounce of weed creating a deadly scenario is not in anyone’s best interest.  Think of the paper work.  Or that, you know, you killed someone over a small crime that a lot of people indulge in.

Think that scenario is a really overdoing it?  No, killing a man by mistaking a colostomy bag for a conspicuous bulge in his pants, that is over the edge.  Oh, yeah, the man who was 22 years old and had down syndrome.  So someone who processes information at a slower rate was involved in a violent death with the cops where he, had done nothing wrong and had no weapon.

http://libertycrier.com/22-year-old-syndrome-beaten-police-bulge-pants-colostomy-bag/

So maybe that is a one off.  That’s a pretty extreme example.  But it happened.  Maybe that might call for some severe turn around in training and behavior for the police departments across the nation.  But we aren’t fighting just some policy it’s a mentality, a culture.  A culture of violence and suppression.  Cops violently attacking peaceful student activists?  That happened in the sixties to national outcry and it’s been happening again.  There is a meme of a police officer casually pepper spraying students who were sitting.  I don’t know about you but I am not terrible dangerous when sitting on the ground without a weapon.  I mean I could be singing some atrocious folk music or awful and pretentious poetry slam recitals whatever that is, but really that’s about the worst of it.  I’m rather sure I have mentioned this gentleman, I hesitate to use that word but walking piece of excrement seems a tad judgmental, but he is worth mentioning as an enemy of decency.
I mentioned Zimmerman and the Trayvon Martin debacle which brings me to the somewhat horrifying stand your ground law.  What this means is you can use lethal force with having to attempt to extricate yourself from a dangerous situation.  You don’t need to attempt to leave.  That seems kinda bad.  If walking away stops the problem maybe you shouldn’t be allowed to shoot someone.

Oh, also stand your ground doesn’t seem to work all the time.  Odd that a black woman using that same tactic went to jail.  And yes, I am saying that there is racial motivation here.  But that statement is made lightly as I think all things should be examined.  It could be this lady is interpreting the law incorrectly and she should not be allowed to use deadly force in here circumstance, it could also be that it is easier to shoot to a black man and get away with it if you happen to not be black.  But it doesn seem that Florida is its own little microcosm of fucked up.

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2014/01/08/fla-mom-who-failed-in-bid-to-use-stand-your-ground-law-as-defense-faces-parole/

I am not in any way against the use of the proper amount of force.  I am just questioning, strongly, the choices made.  If someone stood in the way of me getting home to wife and I thought the only way out was violence that might kill the other person I would feel justified in doing so.  I might hesitate, which could be disastrous, but once I committed I would go through that person and I would show little mercy.  I think this an important distinction to make.  I also think it’s important to note that no job of mine has required me to be in situation where this might happen.

Back to the police.  My premise is that there is often a black and white mentality, an us (cops) versus them (criminals and suspects).  And sometimes this isn’t bad.  There are plenty of scum the cops have to deal with.  But they are still people who deserve to be treated something resembling decency.  Or then there is a time someone died in police custody over an allergy.  This case is a man who turned himself in over a misdemeanor charge for pot possession.  He died from a reaction to dairy, something that was brought up before he ate breakfast in jail.  Someone he complained about for quite some time.  Once being brought out for use of an inhaler.  But then ignored later because they thought he might be faking it.  Unsurprisingly after being ignored for some time he died.  Inattention caused a young man to die a totally preventable death.  But let us look at it from the side of the police.  This is some fresh faced whiny kid wasting their time. He is there on a misdemeanor and they have other pressing matters they need to deal with.  They already brought him out once and now he won’t quit wasting their time.  He is just some brat who is probably faking it.  Maybe so, but allergies are nothing to be ignored.  I know people who are so sensitive just taking a bite and spiting it out may still lead to a hospital trip.  And that indiscretion can’t be fixed.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/11/06/todays-drug-war-outrage-m_n_4225995.html?utm_hp_ref=tw

Or what about the whole knockless warrant thing?  Those are warrants that allow for entry without notification.  So the police do not have to identify themselves and can, and do, burst in weapons drawn making commotion.  This proves to be problematic for several reasons.  It is acceptable to react within this country violently to those that enter our homes in said fashion unannounced.  If it was an armed burglary it would be acceptable to protect yourself in violent methods.  It is also acceptable for a police officer once fired upon to fire back.  You can see where this is going and has happened.  People have their houses broken into, they don’t know it’s the cops.  They fire back, then the cops who know have few options left after it has escalated to a firefight shoot and kill the homeowner.  The cops have the right to fire back, I am not denying this.  What would be nice is if the situation didn’t happen.  The need for knockless warrants is over stated as these types of situations arrive from it.  There is the occasional need for entry without stating you are cop and simply barging in but there are only so many places this is necessary.  A drug bust is often not one of them.  Drugs are not a good thing but it isn’t akin to violent crime.  It only devolves to that because of search and seizure and America’s war on drugs.  A war we are in no winning.  A war that our neighbors are suffering for (look at what is happening in Latin and South America because of it), a war that is promoting street violence and a war that provides easy money for people with an ambiguous moral code.  If you conjure up in your mind someone who is growing their own pot in their house that image most likely does not equate to an evil criminal mastermind.  This is not a violent sociopath who needs several police officers to barge in announced in fear that stating their intention will cause harm or the subject will evade arrest.  I posit that knockless warrants in many, if not most, cases create more harm than good.

There is also the extreme use of force in calling the swat teams for situation that do not necessitate that show of force.  Seeing several well-armed and rather intimidating officers with large weapons pointed at you can cause many things besides simply unwanted bowel movements.  Like, for instance, fatal heart attacks.  Again I’m not saying SWAT teams are bad or unnecessary.  That is a blatantly false assertion in my opinion.  My opinion is that again these highly specialized teams are being over used for offenses and situations well below what I think is the necessary threshold to have such a reaction.

Violence begets violence.  This is a rather simple truth.  These are just a few examples of problems with unjustified force by police.  So it’s a known problem which needs to be fixed.  But is it simply a matter of implementing some better training.  That would accomplish a lot I am sure but this entrenched culture can’t simply be shrugged off.  It goes past training.  It comes around to things like repercussions and making sure there can’t be easy cover up.  You can’t simply allow an environment that does little to stop things planted evidence to justify a shooting or lying on the stand or falsification of records (he came in with that black eye and broken rib).

There is a way to accomplish this.  And a town in California figured it out.  Rialto, California has a new policy and its genius in its simplicity.  Cameras.  That’s it.  A simple camera mounted to sunglasses.  It can help the police as they now have video evidence of what happens and help the suspects as they now have video evidence of what going on.  Having a camera switched on might make an officer think twice about excessive force.  By might I mean it does.

“In the first year after the cameras were introduced here in February 2012, the number of complaints filed against officers fell by 88 percent compared with the previous 12 months. Use of force by officers fell by almost 60 percent over the same period.”

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/08/22/us/in-california-a-champion-for-police-cameras.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0

The article also makes mention of the racial profiling made legal in the form of New York City’s ill-fated stop and frisk program.  Something Bloomberg should be ashamed of but he is too busy trying to ruin fat and salt for people (not a terrible idea helping curb obesity just rather fascist in execution).  It’s an interesting comparison.  Our police departments are rather disparate in policy and behavior.  If New York is encouraging random search and seizure while Rialto is putting pressure on their officers for more transparency.  I hope we have more movement towards the Rialto way of thinking.  It would be nice to feel you can trust a cop.  It would be nice to think if them as bastions of public good.  And then we can stop fucking the police and just have a nice cuddle, with hot cocoa in front of the fire and everything.

Ben

The Problem with Bullying

Like countless others I was a victim of bullying throughout most of my formative years.  Like many others I didn’t quite know why.  Like many others I often found myself asking, among other things, if my tormentors were right in their assertions.  They were not right.  It took a long time to figure that out.  It took a long time to figure out that certain things marked me as a target and that I was viewed by other kids as prey.  I hesitate to say that bullying is an intrinsic part of the human condition but it may very well be.  It tends to coincide with jockeying for popularity and merit.  It tends to teach aggression and the power of persuasion.  It tends to instruct how you can influence others and manage social spheres.

I was bullied because of things like my learning disabilities and my attention deficit disorder.  I was also bullied because of my reactions to said bullying and my posture.  My reactions were exactly what my tormentors wanted.  Usually shrinking away from the confrontation, my face contorted in a mesh of defeat, sorrow and confusion.  Other times I was loud and upset, shrieking out at their viciousness.  Those times it seemed were the only ones the teacher would take notice.  Because I caused the disruption I was in trouble.  They would twist their faces in horrible smiles happy that not only had they hurt me but I got in trouble for it.  Had I been older when this started happening and more experienced I would have known how to handle it.  There was also the problem with my posture.  It was slightly slumped.  It showed no confidence in my demeanor.  Nothing about my body portrayed don’t mess with me.  Again things I wish I knew.

But something happened around seventh grade that helped.  A girl was being uncharacteristically mean to me.  She never spoke a word to me before and had never displayed any emotion in my direction, either good or ill.  Al of a sudden in Spanish class she started making fun of me.  Before I noticed what I was doing I turned to her and simply devastated what she was saying with humor.  She was completely off guard, stunned to silence.  I turned away hiding a smirk and ignored here for the rest of class.  She was silent and her clique was silent as well.  I had found my savior.  Quips.  It was still a bit of a struggle for the rest of my school day but by the time senior year of high school rolled around I wasn’t a scared little kid anymore.  I had faced my bullies and I made it out with my dignity intact.  Sadly it isn’t that easy for so many.  Sadly what happened to me is not uncommon and worse still is comparably light.

I think part of bullying mentality is to sever empathy.  Bullying causes crying, distress, depression, and, worst of all, suicide.  The perpetrators see either no connection with the harm they are doing or devalue certain people’s emotion.  That or they perversely enjoy the pain they cause knowing the emotional toll they make.  It all depends on the bully’s emotional maturity.

But there is another big problem with bullying that exists outside the dynamic between bully and those bullied.  It’s the rest of the people surrounding it.  Those that do nothing about it, those that encourage the bullying and those who actually punish the victims (especially if they speak out).

The term has come to be called victim-blaming.  That’s where people who have suffered are further expelled from social interactions and made to suffer more because they brought uncomfortable accusations to light.

The story (linked below) is an example of how a family who was wronged by one person is shut out by the community, ostracized and demonized for besmirching the name of a popular person.  Being attacked isn’t enough harm but having to be harassed, and not simply you but your whole family, just because you seek justice afterwards.  Worse still the case was dropped.  The cliff notes version is a 13 year old girl, coerced (but not forced) into drinking was raped by a 17 year old boy at a party.  Then she was left outside in 30 degree weather just outside her house overnight.  There was good chance that this second part could have killed her.  The family was then made fun of, taunted, the mother lost her job and the charges against the boy (and the others involved) were dropped.  This was most likely due to the boy’s family having deep connections to the community.  What strikes me is the girl who was assaulted and left for dead is blamed.  The community reacted violently to the idea of prosecuting the young man.

http://www.kansascity.com/2013/10/12/4549775/nightmare-in-maryville-teens-sexual.html

Sadly this is only one of several instances.  There is alos the case of bullying continuing on after the teen committed suicide.

http://mashable.com/2013/10/15/bullying-teen-brags-facebook/

But it is not simply the community who is at fault for this continued cycle of victimization it is the authorities themselves.  Police, it seems, treat sexual assault victims with no tact and nothing but suspicion.  Turning an already harrowing experience into something much worse.  And we wonder why there are so many young suicides and unreported sexual assaults.  Society it seems delights in not only making it difficult to move on from the trauma but to forcibly remind the young victims of what happened daily.  But not simply remind to smear their faces in it smugly and blame them for what befell them.

http://sexologist.tumblr.com/post/69181120051/i-accompanied-someone-to-the-police-station-to-report-a

Why is this happening now more than ever?  I’m not sure it is happening more, I simply don’t have the stats, but I do know that with social media we can distance ourselves from the reaction and the fallout.  Regardless of your capability for empathy you can’t see someone crying on the other side of Facebook.  The anonymity takes out the emotional response.  Some kids need to see what harm they cause the torment they create.  Some of them realize it’s wrong to bully by seeing that and making that emotional connection.  Some simply delight in the pain in some perverse manner.  But the internet takes away that reaction and only leaves the sense of doing something funny.  I think about it thusly.  Kids aren’t emotional intelligent enough to understand their actions oftentimes.  That’s part of the reason the knock out game exists.  They don’t think to the part of sucker punching someone to knock them out might have deadly consequences – like passing out while upright and hitting their head causing brain trauma resulting in death.  To them it’s simply something that is fun and they didn’t mean anything by it.  They have already run away by the time the victim falls or recovers.  Our dismay media conglomerates have done nothing but advertise and sensationalize this trend making it spread all the much faster to impressionable kids.  But the problem often is bad kids are caused by bad parents.  You only need to pass one test to become a parent, or fail it depending on your outlook.

But social media bullying isn’t relegated to kids only.  Wither twitter and Facebook and all these venues popular posters are able to influence mass swathes of people.  In this case a man with a popular twitter decide to take to task a rude airplane passenger.  I in no way disagree that the lady was rude, selfish jerk but was this the best method in which to deliver a lesson.  In that I heartily disagree.  He stole her anonymity here and posted it all over the internet.  He posted her name, her picture, as well as her words but all from his point of view.  He was judge, jury and executioner.  Sadly news sources seemed to delight and cheer him on.  I was rather disgusted.

http://huff.to/1ccdtuS

But, fortunately, as I have found for every rotten awful person there tends to be someone wonderful who stands up and fights for others.  Sadly they are often beaten savagely as in this man’s case.  A hero this man was brutalized for standing up for a bullied teen.  Even more importantly he said he made the right choice and would do so again.

http://touch.sun-sentinel.com/#section/-1/article/p2p-78238298/

I don’t tend to think of society as broken I simply see it teetering on edge and it needs more positive examples like the man above to counteract all the atrocities committed by the bullies, those who sweep the uncomfortable stories under the rug and those who lash out at having their perfect world disrupted.  I can hope bullying will get better.  But what I will do is stand up to those who I see doing it.  Step in when I see a fight happening.  Be like that man and help my community.  That is what I can and will do.  I hope others will feel and do the same.

Ben