Is the proof in the pudding?

So, there’s been another shooting involving a police officer and a citizen who was, of course, completely innocent. Do I know what actually happened? Nope, and neither does ANYONE else until the footage is released. And the saddest part? It won’t matter WHAT that footage shows, people will believe what they want to believe.

The biggest thing I have to say about all of it is this: All that’s happening with these “protests”, and I’m using that term VERY loosely, is that they are giving those people who say/believe that black people are violent, dangerous, animalistic, uncivilized, etc., the “proof” that they need to keep saying/believing so.

And if these “protesters” had any kind of sense, they’d realize that and it might stop at least half of them.

Nothing is going to change until the shooting stops. I will say that if I were a police officer, having seen how much violence has been pointed in my direction, I’d be jumpy and more likely to shoot. Mind you, I’m not a police officer and I haven’t had the training they have. But I can somewhat understand why it seems these shootings have gotten more prevalent.

But are they really? How much of it is the way it’s always been, but because of our social media environment we’re hearing about them, and getting “information” before any of the real facts can come out? Because once this stuff gets out there, people have already made up their mind about the “facts” so that when they actually do, they’re able to twist those facts to say what they want them to say. It’s this kind of thing that causes trials to be moved because they alleged can’t get a fair trial where the crime has been committed due to news and public opinion having already been set.

So, what does this all boil down to? I’m disgusted, and I know nothing is going to change until either the police stop trying to defend themselves against an enemy that has sometimes shown itself so they have to “jump the gun”, or the folks being shot start following direction when they’re stopped by police for whatever reason. One of the sides needs to back off… and, unfortunately I don’t see that happening.

And that scares me because it’s only going to get worse and worse… and we can’t afford to buy a house out away from everyone and put up a tall, electrified wall to keep anyone out.

Double standards

I’ve seen it time and time again. It’s ok to bash/flame/degrade certain groups, and people that do so often get defended when someone of that group tries to stand up for themselves/their group.

Why is this ok?

I want you to think of how many times you have said something derogatory about a general group of people: men, republicans, democrats, southerners, cat lovers… a group that it seems to be generally acceptable to be put down. Now, I want you to change that word to black, or mexican, or jewish… See how it’s suddenly not something to be defended anymore? Why? Why not be able to generally blame a nasty/vicious/stupid act on a group that you think shouldn’t be picked on? Where does the line get drawn?

When you’re not generally part of a group, and you only hear about that group from friends/news/jokes/anecdotes, why are you allowed to defend someone who has said something nasty or rude about that group? Sometimes going so far as to use another comment/joke/often talked about but maybe not as true as you think it really is to defend yourself/friend/person that you agree with?

I want y’all to think about that the next time you see a basher get called out on something. Before you defend them, would you defend them if they were saying something against a group you like?

Food for thought.

Hypocrite?

Definition of HYPOCRITE

1: a person who puts on a false appearance of virtue or religion

2: a person who acts in contradiction to his or her stated beliefs or feelings

With that out of the way, now… how can people boohoo about something happening to them and then turn around and do the same to someone else?

I HATE HATE HATE HATE generalizations.  Hate them with a passion. I know I’ve used them, and usually cringed afterwards for doing so. We all do it. It happens. But I would think that when someone is just been upset about themselves being grouped together with people have been bad and done bad by someone he calls a friend that was being “aggressive, angry and hateful” would not then turn around and say and do the same thing to another group of people, no matter if he didn’t have much respect for that group of people. Broadly saying a group “ fit the profile of a classic abuser”, and especially knowing that at least one of the folks you’re friends with is part of said group and doesn’t even remotely fit that profile…. AND that said person just ‘stood up for’ that person who was feeling pained for having to deal with that aggression and anger against his own group…

*sigh* Can we all just stop doing our damnedness to get the ‘other sides’ goat by linking to articles written by the most extreme of the group to ‘prove’ your point? All you’re proving is that you can really do good at reading on side of things and not look at the whole picture.

Good, congrats, bravo, you just succeeded at being a closed minded idiot. Here, have a cookie.

I really don’t link much for articles anymore, and then only link what I read and feel isn’t so terribly onsided as to use intimidation attempts or loaded words and emotions to paint ‘the other side’ with. If I see facts, I’ll point out those facts. If there’s a lot of fluff and uselessness around those facts, I’ll try to find an article that has just those facts with out all the baggage along with it that is nothing but opinion that I, and those that read the article I link, can form on their own once they get those facts.

*fume fume fume* Just. Drives. Me. Nuts….

Bias?

This happened to me earlier in the day and I’ve been letting it settle into my head before I actually made a post about it. Now I think I can intelligently blog about it without sounding like a self righteous idiot.

I don’t quite get the idea of bashing for the sake of bashing any side of any argument and believing that only your side is correct. I’ve talked before on Facebook about my disbelief of bringing something up in public and not actually wanting it discussed. I also just don’t get not wanting to hear any differing opinion.

Is it so hard to look at a different viewpoint of something? I often try to look at someone else’s opinion or view before I dismiss or discount it. I like to hear how other people view something, knowing it might be completely opposite to how I see things. I can’t say it’ll ever change my opinion, but is it so hard to give that respect to even fully read what someone else has said? Even knowing how things might be with the person who I had an issue with today, completely discounting her… I’ve seen so many times where someone will read the first sentence or two, or maybe even just a few words, and then ‘see what they want’ rather than reading what is actually been said.

Is this a fault of our online culture? Without body language, facial cues or having to look someone in the eye, do we just make assumptions of what the other person is actually saying, rather than reading what they’ve written down? Have we, as a people, become so closed minded that we lump everyone into groups that might or might not be accurate? Is this fair?

I think each of us are individuals. I know my general slant on things, I know I am biased in my beliefs, but I’ve come by that honestly. I decide on things not from what others tell me, but from how I feel on things. I could call myself a “conservative” when it comes to politics, but not all things to I agree with that group of folks. In fact, there are a lot of things I think the opposite. I vote for a candidate when it comes to that time, not a party. If a candidate says one thing but their record (actions, voting or otherwise) says another, I’m going to view them accordingly. As someone wise once said, “Talk is cheap.”

I think labels have really gotten out of control, and I think we would do best to look at the individual and what they actually act like and believe rather than assuming based on one or two things we know about that person. Some of my best friends feel very differently than I do on many issues, but I still count them as very close friends and don’t treat them differently (or at least try not to) because of those views. I often times learn from them. Another person’s way of seeing something can actually help us see something that we don’t see because of our own circumstances.

For example, I don’t tend to think of a parents’ point of view. I don’t have kids, I’m not close to kids and don’t think of the issues that might be present in the life of someone that has kids. In the same way, many people might not understand my thoughts of pets in their life. To some, it’s just an animal. To us, they are more than that. And then there are people that can see both sides and live both sides.

We’re all different. We’re not cookie cutter people, and that’s what makes the world go around.