I'm asking, what is the point of saying "well, why do people care so much about X tragedy when Y is much worse??"
They're two separate issues. Caring about one doesn't make you care less about the other. And people who don't already care about Sandra Bland or Sam Dubose aren't going to care more if they stop caring about the lion.
That's not what people are saying. People are saying why do you care about X tragedy but NOT about Y tragedy?
But again, you could do this all day. Why do you post on FB about black people being killed by the police but not about immigrant workers being killed and abused with the tacit blessing of the government? Or about domestic violence? Or about any number of tragedies that occur in this country or in the world every day?
I'm saying that I don't see the point in comparing tragedies. The fact that many people don't care about the deaths of black people at the hands of police is a huge problem in itself - I don't see what the lion has to do with it.
I think that feelings people express in regard to an animal being slaughtered are extremely basic. The vast majority of people regardless of race, income, socioeconomic status etc. have simple feelings toward animals that are relatively uncomplicated- yet are very strong because animals are perceived to be our wards.
People's feelings toward other people are so complex, involving many, many layers of experience, family history, education, media, etc etc etc.
I think it's easy for most to respond strongly to Cecil because the feelings and thoughts they are expressing are so uncomplicated. They are not political. They are not steeped in decades of racism and exposure to historical views about race.
People aren't as quick to express feelings about Dubose not because they don't care- I truly believe that the majority of white America DOES care and knows it's an abomination, a tragedy- but because the expression of these feelings is more difficult for them to express and unfortunately, more likely to encounter argument or debate from the very vocal minority.
Look, the only white people in my facebook feed who post about #blacklivesmatter and issues of race are my husband (allegedly not white if you ask a lot of white people), my super-activisty friends/colleagues many of whom have multi or interracial families and people from this board.
The other 90% of the white people from my family, high school, college etc. are either 100% silent or post racist shit about rioting and not talking back to police officers.
I've been thinking about this a lot recently especially the white people I know living near me within "the city". They post about local/state politics and school board stuff and stupid "what its like to be a mom" articles but I don't think I've ever seen them post about racial topics. But then they turn around and talk about how they love their area and their community, bla bla bla.
Every time this comes up, I'm reminded by the apparent apathy of my facebook feed. The only thing I've seen about either of these stories is from people here and maybe 1-2 of my other FB friends who regularly post news articles and such. And anyone who posted about Cecil also posted about Sam DuBose and other current events.
I just wonder how people can be so out of touch with what is going on, and seemingly not give a shit. I used to think maybe they just didn't think facebook was the proper venue, but I'm starting to think most just don't give a fuck. Granted I haven't posted about either of these things, but was out of town and haven't posted much of anything on facebook feed. Generally, though, I do.
It's hard to believe, but some people legitimately don't pay attention. The day after SCOTUS's same-sex marriage ruling, a woman in a health and fitness group I'm part of on FB said, "What's with all the rainbow photos I'm seeing? Does it have anything to do with our fitness challenge?"
I believe people are just ignorant and want to remain ignorant, rather than being informed and apathetic, but it doesn't really matter either way. The bottom line is that neither group is being helpful.
I actually think a white man going to Africa to exploit Africa's natural beauty is the very essence of white western imperialistic racism. I think it's all intertwined: how westerners view Africa, how Americans view African Americans.
That's not what people are saying. People are saying why do you care about X tragedy but NOT about Y tragedy?
But again, you could do this all day. Why do you post on FB about black people being killed by the police but not about immigrant workers being killed and abused with the tacit blessing of the government? Or about domestic violence? Or about any number of tragedies that occur in this country or in the world every day?
I'm saying that I don't see the point in comparing tragedies. The fact that many people don't care about the deaths of black people at the hands of police is a huge problem in itself - I don't see what the lion has to do with it.
The lion story outrage just accentuates the point that they don't care.
I actually think a white man going to Africa to exploit Africa's natural beauty is the very essence of white western imperialistic racism. I think it's all intertwined: how westerners view Africa, how Americans view African Americans.
Thank you. I couldn't think how to phrase this.
I wasn't outraged by the killing of the lion itself. I'm more outraged by the systemic exploitation of Africa by white westerners.
I hollered when I saw that because it is absolutely the truth. Each time a black person is killed, the media uses the worst picture to depict why it's ok they were killed.
It's basically the same thing as the #IFTheyGunnedMeDown that trended on Twitter.
None of the examples you are using are happening in America to Americans. Is it so inconceivable that black people would want to be at least as valued as an animal in a foreign continent by their fellow Americans?
Would it be better if it were an American animal? Seriously, though, I understand your point, but it's not new that cute, fuzzy animals are valued more than humans. Just look at the outrage over Michael Vick's abuse of dogs and the general meh reaction over NFL players' abuse of their wives and girlfriends.
Actually I was flamed to high hell over that because I was asking that very question about the disproportionate responses. I would have hoped that we have evolved. Which it seems like for the most part we have. But I have to be honest the "can't we care about two things" is making me want to throw things.
I actually think a white man going to Africa to exploit Africa's natural beauty is the very essence of white western imperialistic racism. I think it's all intertwined: how westerners view Africa, how Americans view African Americans.
Thank you. I couldn't think how to phrase this.
I wasn't outraged by the killing of the lion itself. I'm more outraged by the systemic exploitation of Africa by white westerners.
Yes. This particular case is especially henious. It's not just that he killed a lion, which is legal under certain circumstances in Zimbabwe, but he lured a protected lion out of his preserve, shot him, wounded him, let him live injured for 40 hours, then finally killed him, then TRIED TO DESTROY THE LIONS ELECTRONIC TRACKER, so he wouldn't get caught. Then beheaded, skinned, and left the carcass to rot. He was in flagrant violation of Zimbabwe's laws and protocol on this. But when does western white man ever give a shit about Africa and their system governance? Their system of order? Just exploit, kill, take, rinse and repeat. Centuries upon centuries of the same western mentality.
and as an added clarification - I also agree with PP that a lot of americans just DONT care about sam or sandra or freddie etc because "they shouldnt have done X."
No they don't care because they don't value those lives. The "they shouldn't have done x" is just the excuse they give themselves for not caring.
I think that feelings people express in regard to an animal being slaughtered are extremely basic. The vast majority of people regardless of race, income, socioeconomic status etc. have simple feelings toward animals that are relatively uncomplicated- yet are very strong because animals are perceived to be our wards.
People's feelings toward other people are so complex, involving many, many layers of experience, family history, education, media, etc etc etc.
I think it's easy for most to respond strongly to Cecil because the feelings and thoughts they are expressing are so uncomplicated. They are not political. They are not steeped in decades of racism and exposure to historical views about race.
People aren't as quick to express feelings about Dubose not because they don't care- I truly believe that the majority of white America DOES care and knows it's an abomination, a tragedy- but because the expression of these feelings is more difficult for them to express and unfortunately, more likely to encounter argument or debate from the very vocal minority.
Would it be better if it were an American animal? Seriously, though, I understand your point, but it's not new that cute, fuzzy animals are valued more than humans. Just look at the outrage over Michael Vick's abuse of dogs and the general meh reaction over NFL players' abuse of their wives and girlfriends.
Actually I was flamed to high hell over that because I was asking that very question about the disproportionate responses. I would have hoped that we have evolved. Which it seems like for the most part we have. But I have to be honest the "can't we care about two things" is making me want to throw things.
I’m going to beat this drum in the background until the end of time.
This is the way it is because it’s easier for people to express their feelings of outrage over animals being hurt/abused/killed. We view them as innocent, we are their protectors and stewards.
The way we view other humans is evaluated by 1. What did they do? 2. Did they deserve it? 3. What is their history? 4. Have they committed crimes? We put together a mental notebook of who they are and what they’ve done before we decide to evaluate whether or not we should care if they’ve been killed or abused.
Nobody looked at Cecil and asked – Has he brutally killed before? Did he take good care of his cubs? Did he deserve to be shot because he wasn’t smart enough to know he was lured out of the safety of his park?
Long story short, nobody is evaluating the lion’s character and whether or not he deserved to die. We save that for people like Dubose.
You do realize we’re not comparing tragedies but the responses to said tragedies.
Black people aren’t mad that people are hurt that Mufasa died. They’re mad because someone was shot here and they don’t know Sam DuBose’s name but they know Cecil. They’ll protest for Cecil, they’ll cry out for Cecil. They can’t muster anything but silence or deflection for Sam DuBose/Tamir Rice/Sandra Bland/Eric Garner/etc. etc. etc.
I'mma bow out before I start becoming a stereotype because people are working my nerve on this today. So just assume going forward I agree with everything Smo is saying.
I think that feelings people express in regard to an animal being slaughtered are extremely basic. The vast majority of people regardless of race, income, socioeconomic status etc. have simple feelings toward animals that are relatively uncomplicated- yet are very strong because animals are perceived to be our wards.
People's feelings toward other people are so complex, involving many, many layers of experience, family history, education, media, etc etc etc.
I think it's easy for most to respond strongly to Cecil because the feelings and thoughts they are expressing are so uncomplicated. They are not political. They are not steeped in decades of racism and exposure to historical views about race.
People aren't as quick to express feelings about Dubose not because they don't care- I truly believe that the majority of white America DOES care and knows it's an abomination, a tragedy- but because the expression of these feelings is more difficult for them to express and unfortunately, more likely to encounter argument or debate from the very vocal minority.
No.
Why though? I'm not saying it's right to evaluate things this way- I'm saying that people's perception on the killing of an animal is formed in a different way than people's perception of the killing of black man.
That's why I think you see a disparity in the reactions that most people have.
I’m going to beat this drum in the background until the end of time.
This is the way it is because it’s easier for people to express their feelings of outrage over animals being hurt/abused/killed. We view them as innocent, we are their protectors and stewards.
The way we view other humans is evaluated by 1. What did they do? 2. Did they deserve it? 3. What is their history? 4. Have they committed crimes? We put together a mental notebook of who they are and what they’ve done before we decide to evaluate whether or not we should care if they’ve been killed or abused.
Nobody looked at Cecil and asked – Has he brutally killed before? Did he take good care of his cubs? Did he deserve to be shot because he wasn’t smart enough to know he was lured out of the safety of his park?
Long story short, nobody is evaluating the lion’s character and whether or not he deserved to die. We save that for people like Dubose.
That might work except fo Tamir Rice and Akai Gurley.
Value is assigned to people if they're white. Quite decidedly so.
I agree. That's kind of what I'm getting about the lion. People are assigning Cecil value because he's a lion. We aren't judging his death on the merits of his. We don't ask any questions when we find out he was killed.
The first reaction to a black man shot by a police officer is "Well what did he do to deserve it?"
Actually I was flamed to high hell over that because I was asking that very question about the disproportionate responses. I would have hoped that we have evolved. Which it seems like for the most part we have. But I have to be honest the "can't we care about two things" is making me want to throw things.
I’m going to beat this drum in the background until the end of time.
This is the way it is because it’s easier for people to express their feelings of outrage over animals being hurt/abused/killed. We view them as innocent, we are their protectors and stewards.
The way we view other humans is evaluated by 1. What did they do? 2. Did they deserve it? 3. What is their history? 4. Have they committed crimes? We put together a mental notebook of who they are and what they’ve done before we decide to evaluate whether or not we should care if they’ve been killed or abused.
Nobody looked at Cecil and asked – Has he brutally killed before? Did he take good care of his cubs? Did he deserve to be shot because he wasn’t smart enough to know he was lured out of the safety of his park?
Long story short, nobody is evaluating the lion’s character and whether or not he deserved to die. We save that for people like Dubose.
That is not true. There was a huge outpouring over sandy hook and those were human children. That happened to look like the majority. People saw those kids faces and said "that could have been my child" and we're rocked by that. 9 black people gunned down in a church, none of which their characters were tarnished had outrage from the black community. People didn't see them and say "that could have been my mother" they didn't feel the same. It is not because it is easy to sympathize with animals vs humans. It is easy to sympathize with humans that look like you than those that do not. Trying to weave this complicated narrative that is supposed to demonstrate some innate love humans have for animals to justify the disparate responses is a distraction. I don't think it is intentional on your part, but I while-heartedly disagree.
I’m going to beat this drum in the background until the end of time.
This is the way it is because it’s easier for people to express their feelings of outrage over animals being hurt/abused/killed. We view them as innocent, we are their protectors and stewards.
The way we view other humans is evaluated by 1. What did they do? 2. Did they deserve it? 3. What is their history? 4. Have they committed crimes? We put together a mental notebook of who they are and what they’ve done before we decide to evaluate whether or not we should care if they’ve been killed or abused.
Nobody looked at Cecil and asked – Has he brutally killed before? Did he take good care of his cubs? Did he deserve to be shot because he wasn’t smart enough to know he was lured out of the safety of his park?
Long story short, nobody is evaluating the lion’s character and whether or not he deserved to die. We save that for people like Dubose.
That is not true. There was a huge outpouring over sandy hook and those were human children. That happened to look like the majority. People saw those kids faces and said "that could have been my child" and we're rocked by that. 9 black people gunned down in a church, none of which their characters were tarnished had outrage from the black community. People didn't see them and say "that could have been my mother" they didn't feel the same. It is not because it is easy to sympathize with animals vs humans. It is easy to sympathize with humans that look like you than those that do not. Trying to weave this complicated narrative that is supposed to demonstrate some innate love humans have for animals to justify the disparate responses is a distraction. I don't think it is intentional on your part, but I while-heartedly disagree.
Ok, that's actually a really good point too though. I think we evaluate children in the same way we evaluate animals. They are innocent across the board, deserving of our protection, whereas adults must pass our internal "test" that determines if we should be outraged about their death or not.
I'm not really trying to justify the disparate responses- I swear. I think it's total bullshit that white america dismisses these deaths.
I think if Sandy Hook had been at an inner city school and the students all black, America would have reacted differently. I think there still would have been a strong reaction because of the children, but it would have been very different had it not happened at an elementary school in a white upperclass area.
Sadly, I agree with this. Which is fucked up beyond everything.
Ok, that's actually a really good point too though. I think we evaluate children in the same way we evaluate animals. They are innocent across the board, deserving of our protection, whereas adults must pass our internal "test" that determines if we should be outraged about their death or not.
I'm not really trying to justify the disparate responses- I swear. I think it's total bullshit that white america dismisses these deaths.
This is still a Tamir Rice instance. Black boys don't matter. He was a child. They are not innocent across the board.
Yeah, this is true. I think America (meaning white america) likely had a stronger reaction to Sandy Hook than they would have if it had been an all black school.
I hate that I am even typing that though, because we are talking about fucking kindergarteners.
I gonna say something kinda preachy and probably unpopular here, and then I'm not going to have time to defend it, so apologies in advance.
I think there's a lot of self-congratulatory back-patting by white ladies on CEP about these issues. They share a lot of echo-chamber op-eds that's either going to get liked and shared by their choir, or ignored (or worse, fought to the personal-insult-flinging death) by family members not in their political cohort. Our country is completely polarized and not willing to listen to, absorb, or internalize the arguments of the other side on ANY issue, and CEP is absolutely NOT immune to this (see: right vs left).
I don't share news stories or op-eds generally because I don't really see it changing anything; my style is more "preach the gospel, and when necessary use words". I'm not saying this is the only or most right tactic. But I also know that I have a LOT of work to do on myself and how I do my part to fix it.
But don't pretend that you don't have room to improve. Don't come in here thinking every article remotely critical of your cohort is invalid simply because every word doesn't apply to you. It's not all about you.
We have people right here, on this board, who yes, post articles about #blacklivesmatter (and maybe they didn't even say anything about Cecil!) but also immediately deflect suggestions that we might have a white male problem, that black women may have different feels about feminism than white women, or even that there are people out there who might value a lion over a black person. It's not about the articles you post to FB. We could all use a little more self-reflection.
I'm glad this comparison has been made. I love and adore many police officers, and in some cases speaking out about the ridiculous number of killings makes me feel anti cop. (Because in my recent Saturday night convo with friends, this is the direction it went).
MADE me feel anti cop, I should say.
The Cecil comparison pointed out to me that if I'm so heartbroken I need to voice it, so more people will share in the voice, and a collective national call to action will actually happen instead of the continued burying of heads in the sand.
Because while #notallcops, #toomanycops. #toomanyvictims.
Like the end of A Time To Kill and that famous line: "now imagine she was White."
I was really sad about the lion. I'm glad people were outraged. And you can definitely be sad and mad about two tragedies. But here is the thing, people (not you here) aren't expressing sadness and anger over two things, just over one. Just the lion. People need to get called out on that, look at it, chew it over, and own it. I agree with cookiemdough 100% about the church. There was not the same outrage and despair as with other shootings. I'm convinced that many White people simply can't really identify with the humanity of Black people as they can with other White people. I may get flamed for that, and I don't mean you all (KateAggie, for instance, is ride-or-die down for whatever) but I don't think it's true for all. It needs to be at least acknowledged.
I'mma bow out before I start becoming a stereotype because people are working my nerve on this today. So just assume going forward I agree with everything Smo is saying.
Hold up. I'm rolling with you.
Lol! Not the pocketbook!
Really though. I know I don't "go" here, but what's with "all crimes matter" responses? The reasons behind the disparate responses to the deaths of Cecil and Sam are pretty simple to understand, so what's the harm in pointing it out? I don't get it.
Now my personal take is that this current nonsense is simply more confirmation that a good proportion of white folks want to see fewer black folks in general. Saying they don't care when we die is a nicer way of saying that they don't like us. Don't want to hear from or about us. Don't want to live near us. And in our society, this is all perfectly acceptable. When you're acutely aware of this, and have been since you were born, the silence speaks volumes. I see no need to apologize for that.
I’m going to beat this drum in the background until the end of time.
This is the way it is because it’s easier for people to express their feelings of outrage over animals being hurt/abused/killed. We view them as innocent, we are their protectors and stewards.
The way we view other humans is evaluated by 1. What did they do? 2. Did they deserve it? 3. What is their history? 4. Have they committed crimes? We put together a mental notebook of who they are and what they’ve done before we decide to evaluate whether or not we should care if they’ve been killed or abused.
Nobody looked at Cecil and asked – Has he brutally killed before? Did he take good care of his cubs? Did he deserve to be shot because he wasn’t smart enough to know he was lured out of the safety of his park?
Long story short, nobody is evaluating the lion’s character and whether or not he deserved to die. We save that for people like Dubose.
That is not true. There was a huge outpouring over sandy hook and those were human children. That happened to look like the majority. People saw those kids faces and said "that could have been my child" and we're rocked by that. 9 black people gunned down in a church, none of which their characters were tarnished had outrage from the black community. People didn't see them and say "that could have been my mother" they didn't feel the same. It is not because it is easy to sympathize with animals vs humans. It is easy to sympathize with humans that look like you than those that do not. Trying to weave this complicated narrative that is supposed to demonstrate some innate love humans have for animals to justify the disparate responses is a distraction. I don't think it is intentional on your part, but I while-heartedly disagree.
I don't want to take anything away from your post because it has tremendous value, but I just wanted to highlight this part because I did feel that to an extent. I had a very specific thought of my mother. One of the victims was a librarian, and they were all obviously church-goers. My mother is a church-going librarian. Yes, she's white, so I recognize that she is unlikely to be the target of race-related violence, but the similarities between that victim and my mother still stirred an additional level of grief and empathy in me. This is someone like her. This is some place she would be. This is how she might spend an evening.
Really though. I know I don't "go" here, but what's with "all crimes matter" responses? The reasons behind the disparate responses to the deaths of Cecil and Sam are pretty simple to understand, so what's the harm in pointing it out? I don't get it.
Now my personal take is that this current nonsense is simply more confirmation that a good proportion of white folks want to see fewer black folks in general. Saying they don't care when we die is a nicer way of saying that they don't like us. Don't want to hear from or about us. Don't want to live near us. And in our society, this is all perfectly acceptable. When you're acutely aware of this, and have been since you were born, the silence speaks volumes. I see no need to apologize for that.
Really though. I know I don't "go" here, but what's with "all crimes matter" responses? The reasons behind the disparate responses to the deaths of Cecil and Sam are pretty simple to understand, so what's the harm in pointing it out? I don't get it.
Now my personal take is that this current nonsense is simply more confirmation that a good proportion of white folks want to see fewer black folks in general. Saying they don't care when we die is a nicer way of saying that they don't like us. Don't want to hear from or about us. Don't want to live near us. And in our society, this is all perfectly acceptable. When you're acutely aware of this, and have been since you were born, the silence speaks volumes. I see no need to apologize for that.
Who do we need to bribe to get you to go here?
(heart)
@koko, now we're going, for real lol! Come on.
Ha! I'm sure you could find some ML folks who would give me up for free. I feel like I'm stepping into the middle of a family argument here, so I'll bow out too. But damn, my feelings are kind of hurt for you guys! I guess my perspective is too skewed, because this just seems so simple to me. Oh well.
Post by lolobeth802 on Jul 30, 2015 12:24:31 GMT -5
eclaires I feel like you are part of a small few of proactive people on my Facebook feed. Like you said it's the general apathy. I feel like "ugh come on guys, this shit is important, this is the world we're leaving for our kids!!" I also feel other than my children and my church, Facebook is the only way to stand up and make things heard. Even then, I feel it often just gets scrolled over and ignored. And I know my frustration pales in comparison as a white person.