And thanks Potter. I getting less concerned aboout movies and more concerned about the interactive video games. Every year the screens get bigger and the pixels get smaller…the immersion into the unreal is becoming so real…it’s errie.

Maybe ROS can do a sequal to “Second Life,” – the Dark Side.

….the discussion of popular culture has a way of slipping from the particular to the general. Pious denunciations of movie violence can be expected to continue, even as it is unlikely that any serious attempt to curb it will ever be undertaken or that any causal or correlative link between on-screen mayhem and its real-life counterpart will ever be established (particularly since the Asian countries that produce gory and graphic movies, cartoons and comic books tend to have very low rates of actual violence). As “The Sopranos” and “The Departed” are worshiped and rewarded and the latest horror and serial-killer movies dominate the box office, scolds will continue to insist that representations of violence are not a matter of taste but of public morals and public health.

Millions of people meanwhile will continue to be entertained by spectacles of murder, indulging for a few hours in the visceral, amoral thrill of cinematic brutality and then going back to their peaceful, sane, non-threatening business. That we know the difference between reality and make-believe is evident in the shock and horror we feel when confronted with events like the one last Monday in Virginia.

I believe in Karma Squads. As well I have apologized several times for my own ill-considered remarks on these threads ( and have been deleted) and I can tell anyone who cannot bring themselves to apologize when they offend, that it does NOT hurt to do so.

Thank you also to Ben- I have appreciated your comments on this thread. Though few they are meaningful. I thought we WERE being much too judgmental about others’ responses to viiolence in the beginning of this thread. We obviously each have our own tolerance levels based on what we have been through and psychological make-up. When you said that mediated violence is a tool it struck a chord. A hammer can pound a nail in too.

You reminded me of the violence of nature….specifically one day when I was looking out of my window a red-tailed hawk swooped down in a flash and grabbed a grey squirrel in such a way that it was instantly killed. In one moment that life was out. I rushed out to try to save the squirrel ( too late) and that hawk an I stared at each other for an eternity before he gave up and flew away leaving me with a pounding heart. I have to say it was shocking but also beautiful- what it did to me, what it made me realize.

Anybody want to check out the Language, Class, Racism thread? I believe I’m the only chick over there at the moment.

Allison: “Your first posts on the subject seemed sensational.” I agree, they did sound quite sensational. I kind of cringed when I heard Chris quote me on the show. I chose to write with that particular tone mainly because I felt that violence was being universally spat-upon. I felt the need to defend a way of life which has served me very well in doing good.

Also, I saw the collective analysis going something like this: 1) Violence is unnatural. 2) There is violence in the media. 3) This causes people to be violent.

I wanted to bring a different perspective, namely that: 1) Violence is natural. 2) Media is one of many tools which people use to repress violence in their real lives. 3) This repression results in unhealthy releases of violence which often end up doing great harm.

Unfortunately, articulating these thoughts clearly has required 157 posts and a lot of self reflection. At the beginning of the thread, all I had to go on was a gut reaction that said “I don’t like where this conversation is going. I’m being told I’m evil, and I know I’m not.” So, yeah, my initial responses were a bit extreme. Thanks for sticking with the conversation for long enough that I could clarify.

I do equally or preferably enjoy watching my very old fish just breathe or the shadows of my neighborhood crows playing out their lives among rooftops to the sensational and mediated. Thankfully that’s how most days go on to be fairly uneventful and lucid, but the one day the crows hunted the pigeons in their nest underneath my apartment window is singularly haunting and poetic.

Early on much was discussed about reflexive responses to the shocking, and too often paired with judgments of each others reflexes. Though, most everyone who continued on afterward seemed to overcome that instinct – it’s an incredibly healthy community that starts a discussion on violence and follows further down the line to conversation about how we should treat each other. Cheers to that.

“RIGHT SPEECH is the ability to speak truthfully and harmlessly. Right speech comes naturally from Right Thought, since our speech is a direct expression of our thoughts. Our speech should never be cruel or hurtful to others. Our words should not create hatred, misunderstanding, or suffering. Right speech means that we do not lie, slander, or speak in ways that create resentment, conflict, division, or disharmony among individuals or groups. Right speech means not speaking in ways that are harsh, rude, impolite, abusive or malicious. We refrain from idle, useless, and foolish talk or gossip. In this way, we cultivate the ability to speak the truth; we learn to use words that are friendly, gentle, benevolent, and meaningful. Right speech means speaking kindly and wisely at the right time and place. When we are not able to speak in ways that are useful, kind, or uplifting, we may consider the wisdom of remaining in noble silence. Through Right Speech we cultivate ethical conduct (personal integrity), the essential foundation of the path.” Naljor Creations

If it wasn’t 2 am I would say something interesting, I’m sure. But it is, so… later y’all. Keep up the good work.

I’m enjoying the post-show-conversation. Not really capable or ordered or meta-thinking right now. Some random thoughts:

Bobo, thank you for continuing to expound on your thoughts/experiences re:violence. It’s a great example of why a dialogue of inquiry is important. Your first posts on the subject seemed sensational. Further posts dig into what you’re getting at in a way that people can glean something and connect to it.

Kate, I haven’t known protection either. I think that when you don’t have a protective father and no one around you protects you it results in a) you don’t even think you deserve it; and/or b) you don’t believe you would ever get it even if you did deserve it; and/or c) you have no idea how to ask for it; and/or d) you learn how to protect yourself; and/or d) because you don’t exude the expectation or know how to seek it you attract people that won’t provide it. I find that even in small ways, no one seems to protect me. I’m always seen as “strong enough to take care of myself.” (When really people just don’t like to face off) But it’s like finding a good life partner: you may not need one, but life is so much nicer with one. How much more could I do in the world if I was allowed to lower the armor knowing that others would protect me if needed? (Even in a yarn business I get attacked and no one steps up. it’s expected that I will do that for everyone, including myself.) It’s sad what people are willing to sacrifice – the most vital contributions of their fellow citizens – just so they can avoid confrontations. Anyway, my heart goes out to you.

Hopefully, I’ll be able to contribute more to the civil discourse thing later. I feel like I started it and have some responsibility to engage it and, well, sometimes I just don’t function as well as I’d like. (Damn metals breaking my brain…..)

My larger concern is the archetypal models Hollywood provides to impressionable young minds – and indiscriminately to the minds of gun-haters like me and to terribly compromised minds like that of Cho Seung-Hui.
Why do we make on-screen sex between consenting adults a matter of scandal and shame, while blithely ignoring the gruesome killings available to teens in slasher movies? How upside-down is that?

Anyway, I was gratified to read your thoughts, and am looking forward to more. Thanks again.

It saddens me to hear you say that you’ve never experience ‘protection’. You seem like someone who has devoted their entire life to protecting and healing other people. I wish you the best of luck in this endeavor, and I hope you’re able to feel safe sometimes (even with the pending apocalypse).

I’ll continue to look forward to reading your comments.

After a few times of this happening, and you having to make this agonizing decision, you decide to start bulking up. You start eating a lot and lifting weights, and by the time this situation happens again, you’re ready for it. This time you don’t have to chose between the man next to you and the four people. This time you can throw yourself in front of the trolley and hope that you have prepared enough to survive. I think that most people, if they were able, would throw themselves in front of the trolley instead of pushing the man next to them or letting the four people die.

This dilemma goes to the core of the value system of people who chose to prepare themselves for violence. From career soldiers to so-called ‘gun nuts’, many of these people chose to prepare themselves (bulk up), because they recognize that violence has happened before, and it probably will again (repetition of the dilemma). But these people are sick of having to let others die while they stand by. They are sick of feeling helpless in these situations (having to chose between the two awful options).

Ok, so maybe I’ve distorted the dilemma a bit to prove my point. *Shrug* Oh well. It has at least proved to be a fun distraction from trying to formulate a serious response to the profound, personal, and wonderful posts that everyone has been writing on this thread.

non-violence is never complete. I ate a bird yesterday. I’m going to go boil water right now and kill more micro-organisms than I even know. We can’t live without killing something. I think what it boils down to (no pun intended) is intention and respect for other living beings.

kate: I read slowly and can’t read it all either but I sure consider your voice a welcome addition to the ROS community.

Nick — the same to you, thank you so much. When I wrote to you on this thread, I imagined that I was talking to a very nice person with whom I had something in common and I appreciated your “company.” I didn’t respond to your discussion of metaphors, because I have a lot of trouble comprehending metaphor. I think maybe my mind doesn’t work that way, not easily at least. I write poetry, but all my metaphors are accidental. I am always amazed by the thought you put into your posts. If I don’t respond, it’s not for lack of appreciation. I feel like I’m not smart enough to engage in the discussion, in writing, at least. In person, I think we could have a great discussion.

I want to say to both of you that before I wrote on this site, I didn’t know many men who were as decent and moving as the two of you. And I have felt that way about jazzman and bobo — and Chris and Brendan. I’ve come into contact with some of the kindest men (of my whole life) on this site. So, while we’re talking so much about the jerks, I want to acknowledge the nice guys. And I’m sure I’m leaving out other people I’d like to name, and I hope I’m not hurting anyone’s feelings.

All my life, I’ve asked myself how would I have acted in a concentration camp. I imagine the questions are the same in the 3rd world or the 9th ward — or in countries wherer the US has invaded. And if you see violence on a continuum that begins with emotional/verbal/intellectual aggression, you can apply these lessons to any group of people, in any situation.

Like you, I appreciate stories from someone’s life, as I appreciated yours. Chris asked me recently what I meant by the phrase, “writing from the heart”, and your comment is a wonderful example of it. I don’t have much time to read these threads and I don’t read quickly enough, so I have to eliminate a lot — immediately, anyone who tends to be abusive or even obnoxious, and then, depending on the amount of time I have left, I read comments that are written from the heart. I go back for the more abstract, intellectual comments if I have the time. In all of that, if I write, I try to treat people decently, and I don’t always feel sure that I’m doing that. I just keep trying.

OK, well, I’m pretty hard core in the non-violent camp BUT I do confess that on one occasion I did succumb to an unpremeditated spontanious violent response when I slapped a man soundly across the face. It was like for just a minute I turned into Bette Davis. I confess. It was very satisfying. And because I am not a violent person this had quite a bit of shock value. The thing about violence is that it gets out of hand so easily and no one can predict where it will end. If he had hit me back I would have been in big trouble.

I do appreciate your thoughtfulness.

“I somehow managed to resolve some pretty tough confrontations, with some pretty bad people, without using violence” a applaud you for this. It takes keeping your wits sharp to calm down a heated situation without violence.

I realize that my views on violence are quite controversial and in the minority (especially at ROS).

However (and I really wish I didn’t have to say this), ad hominem attacks (plnelson 4/19) should really be beneath us as a community of learners. If you don’t like what I say, try to refute it (as many people have done very well and articulately on this thread). If my ideas were completely baseless and I was indeed a psychopath, wouldn’t humanity have experienced world peace a long time ago?

My thoughts on violence and my experiences with it come mainly from two places in my life. The first is the years of my life I’ve spent living in the developing world. I spent a lot of time interacting with people for whom violence was a part of daily life. Many of them were my friends. Before these experiences I was a pacifist. This period opened my eyes to the fact that pacifism is an extreme privilege which most of the world doesn’t have. And it doesn’t come for free (see some of my posts above).

The second source of my views on violence is the time that I recently spent in the 9th Ward of New Orleans. I was there helping to rebuild, or that’s what I had planned. I ended up, due to my physical size and leadership, coordinating security for the volunteer organization I was working with. The 9th Ward was a rough place before the storm, now it’s just ridiculous. It reminded me a lot of some of the 3rd world slums I spent time in, except it was more violent and less forgiving. I almost got killed a few times, but I never had to use physical violence myself. However, if I had felt it appropriate, I would not have hesitated to use violence to do my job. I was in charge of protecting other people (and myself as well), I did not take that role lightly. However, I’m also not a hot-head, and I somehow managed to resolve some pretty tough confrontations, with some pretty bad people, without using violence.

This is getting longer than I had intended. Quickly: Nick, Potter, Peggysue, Allison, I love the discussion over the past week. I am a huge fan of civil disobedience, and I have used it many times. But I don’t think it’s an all purpose tool. When the people on the other side of the line are willing to kill you, I don’t think civil disobedience is an appropriate method of protest. Also, violence is different from killing. It would take a lot for me to be able to kill a person. I’m not even sure if I could under any circumstances. Non-killing-violence, on the other hand, can be a very useful method of preserving your life and your rights.

I know I’m in the minority here, but I try to be respectful, and I hope you all will be as well. Engage me, challenge me, get pissed at me, but please try to keep the discussion productive instead of resorting to cheap insults and insinuations about my personal character.

And now to bring this back, here’s what I would like to contribute to the civil discourse definition:
1) –No Ad Hominem Arguments.– Ad Hominem means ‘to the person’. It’s a style of rhetorical argument which attempts to devalue a person’s ideas by attacking them personally while ignoring what they actually say. I think that a lot of the offensive, inconsiderate, and just-plain-dumb posts on ROS fall into this category.
2) –If your ideas are not self-evident, and/or they are being misconstrued, back them up with some stories from your life.– It’s a lot harder to misread the intent of a story than it is to misread a vague philosophical statement. A bit of a story often puts things in perspective and prevents people from lashing out at you (sometimes). Major props to Katemcshane for her stories on this thread, they have inspired some very self-reflective moments in my week.

I myself, as a man, have been rather shocked by some of the veiled and not-so-veiled sexism on the threads recently. I really hope we can find a way to sort this out soon, because it would be a real embarrassment if we lost any of the female voices on ROS due to this thoughtlessness. Oh yeah, and I wish I could speak for all men on this, but I know I can’t, so I’ll just speak for myself: I am not immune to sexism! Please, please, please, if I mistakenly let sexism slip into one of my posts, call me out on it. I might try to defend myself, but I can assure you that just being called on it will inspire some careful reflection on my part. None of us are immune to the cultural biases around us, and even the best intentioned man can become an accidental sexist sometimes. But really, just calling a person out on it can often separate the well-intentioned from the assholes.

I’m really glad this discussion is happening. It’s helped to articulate some of the uncomfortable feelings I’ve been having lately when reading certain posts. I’m sure if I was a woman I would have been able to identify the source a lot quicker. I like where this thread is going, though, and I’m excited to see things get better.

And probably for the same underlying reasons: the N-word is used not merely to dehumanize other humans, but to slur them for the temerity of being former properties that were emanicipated by outsiders.

Aren’t feminism and feminists are despised for exactly these reasons? Isn’t a word like ’slut’ nohting more than a slur implying that its target has slipped through the patriarchy’s frantic attempts to restrict her sexual behaviours, partners (in quantity expecially, which no man has to concern himself with limiting), and expressiveness?

This double standard must surely have had a large role in the woeful tale of Kathy Sierra — even though I know of no implication that she was anything but a normal, intelligent, highly successful person who just happened to be female.

Until we consign ’slut’ and its nasty cohorts ‘bitch’ and ‘whore’ to the same lexi-dungeon as the N-word, some men will feel intuitively justified in using them to vilify and dehumanize women.
It’s time for some consciousness-raising. Hell, it’s past time.