The United States has a very strong contingent of citizens who claim that unrestricted gun rights are vital for a citizenry that wants to protect itself against a violent and tyrannical government. Eventually, the brutality of police to be found all over the country, and large scale violence against protesters in towns like Ferguson and Baltimore, has to be their proof of concept, right?
I mean, I am pretty darned leftist. I prefer guns controlled to just floating out there. I oppose open carry laws, and think a person needs a darned good reason for a concealed carry.
But if you wanted to sell me on the idea? Point to Ferguson. Point to Baltimore. Show me the government doing to its citizens PRECISELY what you predicted for years, and while I'd still have an ick feeling, I wouldn't really know how to respond.
But no one is. I have yet to hear a single comment from the sizeable gun lobby to that effect. Maybe I've just missed it and someone could send me a link. But honestly, I don't think it exists. And I think I know why.
The gun lobby isn't actually about a militia to protect us against the government. It's about enticing middle to upper class Americans to spend a LOT of money on guns due to fear. Fear of Government is a decent selling tactic, but the GOOD one is fear of the folks we see on TV.
Fear of people of the lower economic classes. Fear of urbanites. Fear of people of color. Fear of gangs. Fear of thugs. The NRA and the gun manufacturers they support know that so long as middle to upper class America continue to fear such people, they will continue to sell all the high-end guns and ammo they have. Sure, the occasional "the government is coming for your guns!" can get a good Black Friday sale going, but it is fear of those other people who really keep sales going.
And so we probably won't hear much from people saying that things would have gone better for Michael Brown or Eric Garner if they had been armed. The same people who champion the righteousness of Cliven Bundy's armed stand-off with the feds won't be shrugging and saying that Baltimore would be saner right now if the protesters all had open carry licenses.
Because arming the common citizen against a tyrannical government is not now, nor has it ever been, the primary guiding star of the proponents of gun rights. Because if it was, they would be championing the protestors, or encouraging them to arm themselves. They would be crowing that they were being proved right as we speak.
And they're not. So whatever it is they're really about, it's not that. I wonder how many of them will notice.
Monday, April 27, 2015
Monday, April 20, 2015
If you haven't watched Daredevil yet, you should.
I know, I know. Typically I leave this sort of thing for a Saturday Ramble and don't link it, rather, I just leave it up so people who care enough about what I think about things to find it on their own. But I will be linking this post so people hear it from me straight... you really, really ought to watch Daredevil.
Now the fact that I like Daredevil is probably no big surprise. I'm unashamed about being a huge fan of the Marvel Cinematic Universe and so long as it keeps on its current winning streak of great storytelling, I intend to stay that way. But typically I just recommend it and move on. Here, I'ma gonna get a bit preachy about it, because this is something I want to see succeed.
Daredevil is, to date, a 13 episode tv series set in the Marvel Cinematic Universe and produced by Netflix in collaboration with Disney/Marvel. It tells the story of Matt Murdoch, blinded when he was nine in a freak accident that, along with removing his sight, enhanced his other senses to superhuman levels. Matt lives in Hell's Kitchen, a poor neighborhood in New York that is still rebuilding after the destruction of the Battle of New York, as seen in the Avengers. Murdoch is going into business with his friend, Foggy Nelson, as Defense Attorneys by founding the law partnership of Nelson and Murdoch. After they aid her as their very first client by proving her innocence in a murder trial, they are joined by Karen Page, who becomes the firm's secretary. Murdoch uses his enhanced senses and martial arts training to distribute vigilante justice at night, while serving as a lawyer by day.
So why should you watch it, given all the other superhero fare out there, beyond me simply telling you over and over again that it's good?
1- Tone: The MCU's dedication to Silver Age joy in their adaptations has provided a great counterpoint to the "gritty realism" of DC's movie efforts, but it has created a certain lightness in tone that could easily be written off to escapism. Daredevil, like other similar projects Netflix and Marvel have planned, deals with more "street-level" issues that wouldn't fit an Iron Man or Thor. Specifically, the big bad of the series, Wilson Fisk (brilliantly portrayed by Vincent D'onofrio) is brutally and ruthlessly pursuing a plan, not of world domination or destruction, but gentrification of Hell's Kitchen. In a world where you regularly see references to the new Gods of this world (the money for funding gentrification efforts is actually largely being taken from charitable donations to rebuild New York after the events of the Avengers) it reminds us that smaller, but darker, issues such as human trafficking and worker exploitation are still a thing... and provides a hero to tackle such problems, not just by punching them, but by tackling them in court.
2- The Women: There are four primary female cast members. Karen Page is played by Deborah Ann Woll, Claire Temple played by Rosario Dawson, Lady Gao by Wai Ching Ho, and Vanessa Marianna as played by Ayelet Zurer. It would have been SO easy for them to fall into stereotypical female traps, but instead each serves as full characters in their own right.
Karen Page was the most likely to become a simple stereotype... after all, the attractive secretary to the two uncorruptable lawyers who saved her life would almost write itself in a standard tv script. But Karen is far more, pursuing her own investigations even when Murdoch and Foggy are spinning their wheels, and often with more success. Though she does get damsel in distressed once, it cannot be ignored that of the three times in the series that her life is actively at risk, SHE is the one who acts to save it, not needing rescue, but allies.
Claire Temple is a nurse who finds a masked Murdoch bleeding out in a dumpster, and becomes his medic when missions go bad, which is often. There is definite sexual tension between her and Murdoch, but again, she is an ally, not a story convenience, saving Matt more often than he saves her. Rosario Dawson's acting chops have been lauded before, but here I feel she is truly outdoing herself.
Gao is a mystery of the show, the elderly runner of a Triad heroin ring and, outside of Fisk, the most respected member of the group, whom even the VERY deadly Fisk feels the need to show extra respect to, showing complete control of herself even as Daredevil brings the empire crashing down around her.
Finally is Vanessa Marianna, the only true love interest of the three and in an interesting turnaround, interested in the villian, Fisk, serving as a capable ally, pulling him into the public spotlight and hamstringing the attempts of the heroes to bring him down, making him more dangerous and aiding him in putting a painful past behind him, and shocking Murdoch when he realizes; "There is someone who loves Fisk, who would mourn his loss."
If you want better roles for women in the Marvel Universe, Daredevil provides the best step forward since The Black Widow in Avengers and Cap 2.
3- The Budget: When you look carefully, it's obvious that Daredevil came to be on a shoestring, using stark set pieces and careful blocking to keep their production cuts down, relying instead on beautiful cinematography and sound to tell their stories, rather than massive special effects. In Agents of SHIELD, similar attempts led to an odd disjointed feeling between episodes, where the use of movie-quality special effects would mean a few talky episodes to keep price down. Daredevil, on the other hand, keeps a consistent tone and mix of words and action to deliver a great story that hides budget restrictions and delivers a product that is consistently good., even if it lacks the bells and whistles to be found in the movies.
So what, you might think? What that means is that Netflix and Marvel have found a way to keep stories relatively inexpensive to shoot while delivering a good product, meaning that if this model is successful, we can expect a far wider range of similar stories, ones that can take risks without risking making Uncle Disney pack away the movie and going back to safer pastures.
All of this to say, even if Daredevil doesn't sound exactly like YOUR thing, you should still try it. Let's blow up its view count and tell Disney/Marvel (and hopefully DC as well) that this is EXACTLY the kind of thing we are looking for.
Meanwhile, let's look forward to more Daredevil stories, as well as other projects that are slotted to end in a team up with him, including Jessica Jones, Luke Cage, and Iron Fist, to form the team the Defenders.
I know I am.
Now the fact that I like Daredevil is probably no big surprise. I'm unashamed about being a huge fan of the Marvel Cinematic Universe and so long as it keeps on its current winning streak of great storytelling, I intend to stay that way. But typically I just recommend it and move on. Here, I'ma gonna get a bit preachy about it, because this is something I want to see succeed.
Daredevil is, to date, a 13 episode tv series set in the Marvel Cinematic Universe and produced by Netflix in collaboration with Disney/Marvel. It tells the story of Matt Murdoch, blinded when he was nine in a freak accident that, along with removing his sight, enhanced his other senses to superhuman levels. Matt lives in Hell's Kitchen, a poor neighborhood in New York that is still rebuilding after the destruction of the Battle of New York, as seen in the Avengers. Murdoch is going into business with his friend, Foggy Nelson, as Defense Attorneys by founding the law partnership of Nelson and Murdoch. After they aid her as their very first client by proving her innocence in a murder trial, they are joined by Karen Page, who becomes the firm's secretary. Murdoch uses his enhanced senses and martial arts training to distribute vigilante justice at night, while serving as a lawyer by day.
So why should you watch it, given all the other superhero fare out there, beyond me simply telling you over and over again that it's good?
1- Tone: The MCU's dedication to Silver Age joy in their adaptations has provided a great counterpoint to the "gritty realism" of DC's movie efforts, but it has created a certain lightness in tone that could easily be written off to escapism. Daredevil, like other similar projects Netflix and Marvel have planned, deals with more "street-level" issues that wouldn't fit an Iron Man or Thor. Specifically, the big bad of the series, Wilson Fisk (brilliantly portrayed by Vincent D'onofrio) is brutally and ruthlessly pursuing a plan, not of world domination or destruction, but gentrification of Hell's Kitchen. In a world where you regularly see references to the new Gods of this world (the money for funding gentrification efforts is actually largely being taken from charitable donations to rebuild New York after the events of the Avengers) it reminds us that smaller, but darker, issues such as human trafficking and worker exploitation are still a thing... and provides a hero to tackle such problems, not just by punching them, but by tackling them in court.
2- The Women: There are four primary female cast members. Karen Page is played by Deborah Ann Woll, Claire Temple played by Rosario Dawson, Lady Gao by Wai Ching Ho, and Vanessa Marianna as played by Ayelet Zurer. It would have been SO easy for them to fall into stereotypical female traps, but instead each serves as full characters in their own right.
Karen Page was the most likely to become a simple stereotype... after all, the attractive secretary to the two uncorruptable lawyers who saved her life would almost write itself in a standard tv script. But Karen is far more, pursuing her own investigations even when Murdoch and Foggy are spinning their wheels, and often with more success. Though she does get damsel in distressed once, it cannot be ignored that of the three times in the series that her life is actively at risk, SHE is the one who acts to save it, not needing rescue, but allies.
Claire Temple is a nurse who finds a masked Murdoch bleeding out in a dumpster, and becomes his medic when missions go bad, which is often. There is definite sexual tension between her and Murdoch, but again, she is an ally, not a story convenience, saving Matt more often than he saves her. Rosario Dawson's acting chops have been lauded before, but here I feel she is truly outdoing herself.
Gao is a mystery of the show, the elderly runner of a Triad heroin ring and, outside of Fisk, the most respected member of the group, whom even the VERY deadly Fisk feels the need to show extra respect to, showing complete control of herself even as Daredevil brings the empire crashing down around her.
Finally is Vanessa Marianna, the only true love interest of the three and in an interesting turnaround, interested in the villian, Fisk, serving as a capable ally, pulling him into the public spotlight and hamstringing the attempts of the heroes to bring him down, making him more dangerous and aiding him in putting a painful past behind him, and shocking Murdoch when he realizes; "There is someone who loves Fisk, who would mourn his loss."
If you want better roles for women in the Marvel Universe, Daredevil provides the best step forward since The Black Widow in Avengers and Cap 2.
3- The Budget: When you look carefully, it's obvious that Daredevil came to be on a shoestring, using stark set pieces and careful blocking to keep their production cuts down, relying instead on beautiful cinematography and sound to tell their stories, rather than massive special effects. In Agents of SHIELD, similar attempts led to an odd disjointed feeling between episodes, where the use of movie-quality special effects would mean a few talky episodes to keep price down. Daredevil, on the other hand, keeps a consistent tone and mix of words and action to deliver a great story that hides budget restrictions and delivers a product that is consistently good., even if it lacks the bells and whistles to be found in the movies.
So what, you might think? What that means is that Netflix and Marvel have found a way to keep stories relatively inexpensive to shoot while delivering a good product, meaning that if this model is successful, we can expect a far wider range of similar stories, ones that can take risks without risking making Uncle Disney pack away the movie and going back to safer pastures.
All of this to say, even if Daredevil doesn't sound exactly like YOUR thing, you should still try it. Let's blow up its view count and tell Disney/Marvel (and hopefully DC as well) that this is EXACTLY the kind of thing we are looking for.
Meanwhile, let's look forward to more Daredevil stories, as well as other projects that are slotted to end in a team up with him, including Jessica Jones, Luke Cage, and Iron Fist, to form the team the Defenders.
I know I am.
Monday, April 13, 2015
A Pastor Shopping Guide for Atheists or the Otherwise Religiously Disinclined
I've seen it hundreds of times. A person who otherwise would have nothing to do with a minister suddenly finds themselves in need of one. Not for actual belief purposes, but to serve some other sort of purpose, like to perform a funeral for a loved one who wanted a Christian funeral.
The typical approach taken in this situation is; "It's all the same, anyway." So you grab whoever you can grab for the cheapest or the convenientest (totally a word) and then figure you don't have to worry about it. I mean, it's not like you believe in that God stuff, anyway, and so who cares what brand of God-drivel they spout, right?
Eh...
I can see the reasons behind such an approach and you do have a point, but this can also lead to some very awkward moments at family events, made all the more vexing BECAUSE YOU'RE PAYING FOR IT. This is especially problematic at funerals because you find yourself in a vulnerable place, mourning a loved one, and then this guy is gonna start spouting at you. And suddenly, even though you don't believe a word of it, you find that it still has the ability to hurt you.
This sort of thing makes me angry every time I see it, and I often try to chastise the offending pastor for it, but the fact of the matter is that some Pastor's believe that they are actually doing their jobs in this way. It's sickening, but it is a thing that exists.
So while I understand that for my atheists, or other similarly religiously disinclined people, having to shop for a pastor for the ceremony you've been saddled with can be about as appealing as going to an all-you-can-eat buffet while suffering from acute nausea, here are some questions you can ask along the way to prevent picking someone who will make a situation that is already uncomfortable for you even worse. Remember, my assumption here is that you are stuck, for one reason or another, with needing a Christian Funeral, despite your own personal beliefs.
1- "Are you going to try to convert me?" This is the big one. Ask it straight out and up front. You are burying a loved one, and what you absolutely do not need is some idiot using that vulnerability as an opportunity to bludgeon you into the faith. If they cannot give you a clear no, then leave. I am serious. If they vacillate on their answer AT ALL, go somewhere else.
2- "What Platforms does your church support?" There is far more to theology than a simple belief in God, and different people live their faiths out differently. You already know that you don't share a faith background with the pastor, but if there is some ideological ground you can meet on, then you are more likely to be able to relate to the pastor, and so maybe get some comfort out of what they have to say. Besides, if it turns out they support some platforms you really hate, why throw extra money their way to help them do it?
3- "Will you give a eulogy or a sermon?" This is a spin-off of the first, but important because some Pastor's can't tell the difference. The purpose of the eulogy is to aid in the fond, sad remembrance of the departed. The purpose of a sermon is to impart wisdom to the congregation. Wisdom is all well and good but when a Christian Pastor preaches to a crowd that they know is at least partially atheist, they often have trouble not slipping to evangelizing, and that is not what you need right now. You want a eulogizer, not a preacher. If your options are limited, and they waffle, tell them that no message is needed, and get a member of the family to give the eulogy.
Some other tips-
Churches aren't your only option. Contact local hospitals or hospices and ask to talk to their chaplains, who will have some experience in working with grief outside of a specifically Christian Context.Vet them like you would a pastor, but they are more likely to have the personality type you are looking for.
When the choice presents itself, with all other things being equal, choose a female clergy member over a male one. The nature of the beast simply means that of the two, the female is more likely to understand an outsiders position. We males still take a LOT for granted.
And finally for my believers... if you have an atheist loved one, I understand the desire to give them one more push towards belief through a will-and testatement left through a Pastor. I really do understand it... but don't do it. Pastors almost always go too far with this sort of thing, and leads to your loved one being hurt, rather than supported, when they are grieving your loss.
If you really want to aid them through a member of the clergy, give a message of your love. That's what they'll really need. For the rest, leave it to God. After all, WE believe that God will take care of them, whether they believe it or not.
The typical approach taken in this situation is; "It's all the same, anyway." So you grab whoever you can grab for the cheapest or the convenientest (totally a word) and then figure you don't have to worry about it. I mean, it's not like you believe in that God stuff, anyway, and so who cares what brand of God-drivel they spout, right?
Eh...
I can see the reasons behind such an approach and you do have a point, but this can also lead to some very awkward moments at family events, made all the more vexing BECAUSE YOU'RE PAYING FOR IT. This is especially problematic at funerals because you find yourself in a vulnerable place, mourning a loved one, and then this guy is gonna start spouting at you. And suddenly, even though you don't believe a word of it, you find that it still has the ability to hurt you.
This sort of thing makes me angry every time I see it, and I often try to chastise the offending pastor for it, but the fact of the matter is that some Pastor's believe that they are actually doing their jobs in this way. It's sickening, but it is a thing that exists.
So while I understand that for my atheists, or other similarly religiously disinclined people, having to shop for a pastor for the ceremony you've been saddled with can be about as appealing as going to an all-you-can-eat buffet while suffering from acute nausea, here are some questions you can ask along the way to prevent picking someone who will make a situation that is already uncomfortable for you even worse. Remember, my assumption here is that you are stuck, for one reason or another, with needing a Christian Funeral, despite your own personal beliefs.
1- "Are you going to try to convert me?" This is the big one. Ask it straight out and up front. You are burying a loved one, and what you absolutely do not need is some idiot using that vulnerability as an opportunity to bludgeon you into the faith. If they cannot give you a clear no, then leave. I am serious. If they vacillate on their answer AT ALL, go somewhere else.
2- "What Platforms does your church support?" There is far more to theology than a simple belief in God, and different people live their faiths out differently. You already know that you don't share a faith background with the pastor, but if there is some ideological ground you can meet on, then you are more likely to be able to relate to the pastor, and so maybe get some comfort out of what they have to say. Besides, if it turns out they support some platforms you really hate, why throw extra money their way to help them do it?
3- "Will you give a eulogy or a sermon?" This is a spin-off of the first, but important because some Pastor's can't tell the difference. The purpose of the eulogy is to aid in the fond, sad remembrance of the departed. The purpose of a sermon is to impart wisdom to the congregation. Wisdom is all well and good but when a Christian Pastor preaches to a crowd that they know is at least partially atheist, they often have trouble not slipping to evangelizing, and that is not what you need right now. You want a eulogizer, not a preacher. If your options are limited, and they waffle, tell them that no message is needed, and get a member of the family to give the eulogy.
Some other tips-
Churches aren't your only option. Contact local hospitals or hospices and ask to talk to their chaplains, who will have some experience in working with grief outside of a specifically Christian Context.Vet them like you would a pastor, but they are more likely to have the personality type you are looking for.
When the choice presents itself, with all other things being equal, choose a female clergy member over a male one. The nature of the beast simply means that of the two, the female is more likely to understand an outsiders position. We males still take a LOT for granted.
And finally for my believers... if you have an atheist loved one, I understand the desire to give them one more push towards belief through a will-and testatement left through a Pastor. I really do understand it... but don't do it. Pastors almost always go too far with this sort of thing, and leads to your loved one being hurt, rather than supported, when they are grieving your loss.
If you really want to aid them through a member of the clergy, give a message of your love. That's what they'll really need. For the rest, leave it to God. After all, WE believe that God will take care of them, whether they believe it or not.
Saturday, April 11, 2015
Saturday Ramble- Honesty Might NOT be the Best Policy.
I'm a little over honesty these days.
I know the internets are ALL ABOUT some honesty. It's held up as the highest possible standard in all things. Politicians are scum because we know they're liars. People who believe different than us are scum because they lie about politics, religion, etc. Even if they've just been duped by THEIR liar politicians, clergy, etc, well, that just makes them sheep.
But just because we have all these lying liars around us doesn't mean we'll let them damage OUR integrity. OH no. We will say what we believe to be true and we will say it strong, we will say it proud, even if it is the unpopular opinion because THAT IS JUST HOW AWESOME WE ARE!
YAY HONESTY!
Phhhhhbt.
You've all seen it. The person on the internet who opens up a sentence with "Well, to be perfectly honest..." and you just KNOW that they are about to be an asshole to someone? The person who then does the message board equivalent of backpedaling with their hands up by making some kind of comment about how they were JUST being HONEST and GOSH I wish you people were MATURE enough to handle it?
Let's all have our moment of nodding our heads in knowing judgement of "that guy." And then let's smack ourselves on the back of the hands because what we SHOULD have been doing is nodding in shame of "us."
Because you do it.
You.
The one reading this. (And yes, that includes me.)
We have, most of us, been that person.
Oh, the words might have been different. You might have used the phrase; "Well, technically," or "Just playin' the Devil's Advocate here..." or "Inconvenient truth time!" or "Well, if you did your research," or "Hey, check your privilege!" but at some point you have been an asshole to someone on the internet, you have KNOWN that you were being an asshole, and your internal rationalization for it was that you were being honest.
YAY HONESTY!
This all happens because honestly, it's pretty darn easy to be honest in certain situations. But I fail to see what is so virtuous about easy honesty.
The guy who takes naked pictures of a woman and posts them online as revenge is being honest. These are pics of her, he's mad at her. Totally truthful and straightforward. The others who look at those pictures despite knowing how violating that is to her are not lying, either. They believe it is all okay. Because they like looking at naked pictures of women.
The person who takes the private information of someone else and posts it on-line (doxxing) to open them up to RL harassment is being real honest, unless they fake the info. And when they say that they cannot control what people do with that info? Also completely honest.
These are, of course, extreme cases. There are varying levels of assholery, from the merely malicious to the downright harmful. But nearly ANYTHING can be justified with honesty so long as you believe in what you are doing, and how much do you actually do that would need justifying that you DON'T believe in?
The truly crazy thing? Is that we KNOW this. Pop Culture is full of people whose leading trait is being "perfectly honest", from Lady Catherine de Bourgh in Pride and Prejudice to a whole freaking faction in Divergent, and one and all they are seen as HIGHLY annoying. At best, they are Cassandras, forever telling the truth, but never listened to.
And what purpose does it serve, in the end? Despite the pedestal that we have apparently set Honesty on, no one is walking about encouraging others to just believe what anyone tells you. We know that we live in a world of lying liars. So it's not like our near universal dedication to the truth as we see it (maintained by most people I know) has actually made us any more truthful.
Far from not properly edifying our society, easy Honesty ALSO doesn't do a great deal to win arguments from day to day. Name one time an argument has been won on the internet by a "harsh truth." Name all the facts, studies, tests, witnesses, etc, that you like, all Honesty like that serves to achieve is either reinforcing those who agree with you; "Hah, they haven't read that study yet? They ARE all uninformed idiots!" or getting the opponent to dig in for a fight. "Crap, they might have a point. Well, darned if I'M going to give in to THAT asshole..."
Now, my point isn't to just be a liar without shame. It's just that we should probably stop thinking of honesty as justification for what we know are crappy actions. And so, with no further ado...
PASTOR DAN'S EXAMPLES OF WHEN HONESTY IS HORRIBLE
1. When your honesty is serving as a justification to say something horrible to someone. Seriously, just don't. If you know you are being horrible, don't be horrible.
2. You know that little tingle you get when you know that what you are about to say is gonna make someone else feel bad but make you feel great? I don't care how honest you're being. Don't say it. Even if they need to be told it (and here I mean they need the info, not to be socially edified) let someone else do it. Because that right there is undeniably going to be a horrible thing to say.
3. When your honest opinion means you get to treat an entire group of people as less than people carte blanche? That is undeniably going to be horrible. It doesn't matter if the group is female journalists, gay people, Republicans, or veterans, just keep it to yourself. No one else is going to benefit from it, honest or no.
4. When your honesty turns you into a message-board avenger. I get it, you see someone being horrible to someone else. It makes you angry, it makes you want to fight. But you know what? Like I said, you aren't going to flame them into another person, no matter how many after school specials have that effect on the starting antagonist. Feel free to give tons of energy to supporting the victim while IGNORING the horrible one and THEIR honesty.
5. When you know you shouldn't.
I feel like, most of the time, we KNOW we shouldn't say these things. Everything from the defensive way we post to the self-righteous indignation we muster afterwards SCREAMS that despite all of our honesty, we know that we are being horrible. And yet, we raise that shield high and scream our defiance because while everyone else is a lying liar or a blinkered sheep WE will have our integrity, or values, and incidentally, get to say whatever the hell we want.
Maybe it's time we stopped focusing so hard on being honest to others, in favor of, for once, being honest with ourselves.
I know the internets are ALL ABOUT some honesty. It's held up as the highest possible standard in all things. Politicians are scum because we know they're liars. People who believe different than us are scum because they lie about politics, religion, etc. Even if they've just been duped by THEIR liar politicians, clergy, etc, well, that just makes them sheep.
But just because we have all these lying liars around us doesn't mean we'll let them damage OUR integrity. OH no. We will say what we believe to be true and we will say it strong, we will say it proud, even if it is the unpopular opinion because THAT IS JUST HOW AWESOME WE ARE!
YAY HONESTY!
Phhhhhbt.
You've all seen it. The person on the internet who opens up a sentence with "Well, to be perfectly honest..." and you just KNOW that they are about to be an asshole to someone? The person who then does the message board equivalent of backpedaling with their hands up by making some kind of comment about how they were JUST being HONEST and GOSH I wish you people were MATURE enough to handle it?
Let's all have our moment of nodding our heads in knowing judgement of "that guy." And then let's smack ourselves on the back of the hands because what we SHOULD have been doing is nodding in shame of "us."
Because you do it.
You.
The one reading this. (And yes, that includes me.)
We have, most of us, been that person.
Oh, the words might have been different. You might have used the phrase; "Well, technically," or "Just playin' the Devil's Advocate here..." or "Inconvenient truth time!" or "Well, if you did your research," or "Hey, check your privilege!" but at some point you have been an asshole to someone on the internet, you have KNOWN that you were being an asshole, and your internal rationalization for it was that you were being honest.
YAY HONESTY!
This all happens because honestly, it's pretty darn easy to be honest in certain situations. But I fail to see what is so virtuous about easy honesty.
The guy who takes naked pictures of a woman and posts them online as revenge is being honest. These are pics of her, he's mad at her. Totally truthful and straightforward. The others who look at those pictures despite knowing how violating that is to her are not lying, either. They believe it is all okay. Because they like looking at naked pictures of women.
The person who takes the private information of someone else and posts it on-line (doxxing) to open them up to RL harassment is being real honest, unless they fake the info. And when they say that they cannot control what people do with that info? Also completely honest.
These are, of course, extreme cases. There are varying levels of assholery, from the merely malicious to the downright harmful. But nearly ANYTHING can be justified with honesty so long as you believe in what you are doing, and how much do you actually do that would need justifying that you DON'T believe in?
The truly crazy thing? Is that we KNOW this. Pop Culture is full of people whose leading trait is being "perfectly honest", from Lady Catherine de Bourgh in Pride and Prejudice to a whole freaking faction in Divergent, and one and all they are seen as HIGHLY annoying. At best, they are Cassandras, forever telling the truth, but never listened to.
And what purpose does it serve, in the end? Despite the pedestal that we have apparently set Honesty on, no one is walking about encouraging others to just believe what anyone tells you. We know that we live in a world of lying liars. So it's not like our near universal dedication to the truth as we see it (maintained by most people I know) has actually made us any more truthful.
Far from not properly edifying our society, easy Honesty ALSO doesn't do a great deal to win arguments from day to day. Name one time an argument has been won on the internet by a "harsh truth." Name all the facts, studies, tests, witnesses, etc, that you like, all Honesty like that serves to achieve is either reinforcing those who agree with you; "Hah, they haven't read that study yet? They ARE all uninformed idiots!" or getting the opponent to dig in for a fight. "Crap, they might have a point. Well, darned if I'M going to give in to THAT asshole..."
Now, my point isn't to just be a liar without shame. It's just that we should probably stop thinking of honesty as justification for what we know are crappy actions. And so, with no further ado...
PASTOR DAN'S EXAMPLES OF WHEN HONESTY IS HORRIBLE
1. When your honesty is serving as a justification to say something horrible to someone. Seriously, just don't. If you know you are being horrible, don't be horrible.
2. You know that little tingle you get when you know that what you are about to say is gonna make someone else feel bad but make you feel great? I don't care how honest you're being. Don't say it. Even if they need to be told it (and here I mean they need the info, not to be socially edified) let someone else do it. Because that right there is undeniably going to be a horrible thing to say.
3. When your honest opinion means you get to treat an entire group of people as less than people carte blanche? That is undeniably going to be horrible. It doesn't matter if the group is female journalists, gay people, Republicans, or veterans, just keep it to yourself. No one else is going to benefit from it, honest or no.
4. When your honesty turns you into a message-board avenger. I get it, you see someone being horrible to someone else. It makes you angry, it makes you want to fight. But you know what? Like I said, you aren't going to flame them into another person, no matter how many after school specials have that effect on the starting antagonist. Feel free to give tons of energy to supporting the victim while IGNORING the horrible one and THEIR honesty.
5. When you know you shouldn't.
I feel like, most of the time, we KNOW we shouldn't say these things. Everything from the defensive way we post to the self-righteous indignation we muster afterwards SCREAMS that despite all of our honesty, we know that we are being horrible. And yet, we raise that shield high and scream our defiance because while everyone else is a lying liar or a blinkered sheep WE will have our integrity, or values, and incidentally, get to say whatever the hell we want.
Maybe it's time we stopped focusing so hard on being honest to others, in favor of, for once, being honest with ourselves.
Wednesday, April 1, 2015
Doctor, cure thyself.
Whelp, Holy Week has gotten the best of me, it seems. I'm pretty tired and not at my best, so I think before I tackle all these questions I'm gonna try and get some sleep first. Thank you for your concern and no worries, everything will be fine. Don't forget to be awesome to everyone, now, and don't let stuff drive you apart. I'm not mad, neither should you be.
More to come later.
More to come later.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)