I will start with what seems like a diversion and write about inter-species revenge.
You have probably recently heard of an elephant fatally injuring a woman and returning to the funeral to trample the corpse some more.
http://www.ptinews.com/news/13439379_Odisha--Elephant-tramples-woman--then-her-corpse.html
Other stories have added details about the elephant trampling the family home, including killing goats, and the possible motive being that the dead woman would assist poachers by throwing rocks. Those details are not substantiated, though for people who were sure the woman did something awful, the possible assistant poaching provides the desired "A-ha!"
Elephants trampling humans is common enough in India (100 - 300 annually) that the trampling itself would not have made news. Returning to the funeral is what caused the first story to catch on, fascinating with the extremely personal nature.
Later details may just be enthusiastic fabrications, but this series of posts is considering how we react to things, including whether we try and understand, or whether we find the indignant judgment too delicious.
I have been more interested in the attempts to understand. I have definitely seen references to habitat loss bringing humans and nature closer together, leading to more conflicts. This thread was more specific and interesting:
https://twitter.com/bloomfilters/status/1537844061222187008
I thought it was an important thread because it was getting too easy to laugh at the death of a human being and possible displacement of an already grieving family. If the human did participate in the loss of the elephant's children, but she did it to feed her own children, then how do we feel? Economic circumstances and exploitation (and over policing of minorities) can really perpetuate desperation.
Then there was this other tweet, referring to increased aggression in elephants that saw a lot of family loss while young in the 80s and 90s:
https://twitter.com/GiddensVision/status/1537885730860478465
This appears to be a posting of a private message, so is also unsubstantiated. It may be referring to this study, which does track with increased violence toward other species (including humans but also rhinos):
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3874604/
That study was done with African elephants, so it's a different population. However, that the repeated trauma of losing loved ones, combined with having fewer family members around in adolescence, can result in greater aggression (with more complicated reasons relating to decision making and knowledge), carries a certain logic. Were there similar poaching issues in India in that same time period? India has also had a long tradition of using elephant labor. If the family members are being taken away rather than being killed for ivory, there is still trauma there.
It could be very tempting to spend some time extrapolating here about similar trends we might see among humans. My point is that even the most shocking stories don't happen in a vacuum. There are layers and background. If you just like being entertained -- "Wow! Fascinating!" -- that may not matter, though the layers could add interest. If you want things to be better, though... if you care about animals including humans... that may require paying more attention.
In that light, let's re-examine "the slap".
One interesting factor is that Chris Rock has a decades long history of making fun of Jada Pinkett Smith.
https://www.thethings.com/chris-rock-has-a-history-of-making-fun-of-jada-pinkett-smith/
I have since seen some speculation that Rock has an unrequited thing for her, but that is not a necessary explanation; it would not be at all surprising for a comedian who habitually punches down to get lazy about the targets and feel really comfortable exploiting misogynoir.
The other thing I only learned from Twitter is that Rock has a reputation making it acceptable for white people to laugh at Black People. I don't have an article exactly on that, but one of the complaints was Rock giving Louis C.K. permission to use the N-word, and this is a pretty good article on that:
What I did know on my own was that I have Chris Rock's 2009 documentary Good Hair. Even as some of the issues with the racism Black women face regarding their hair are treated, there is more time spent on the inconvenience to men. His conclusion that he will hope that his daughter is more concerned about what is in her head than on it is not really earned, especially if his daughter ever tries to get an office job. I would not expect him to have much empathy for how a woman might feel about losing her hair.
There were also comments about the microaggressions of that night, including Jane Campion's needing to reference the Williams sisters (which was Will Smith's movie) and put down their victories to prop up hers. Rock's comment may have been one straw too many.
Let us let us also remember the different between a slap and a punch. A slap is how you start a duel, and show disrespect; it is not likely to result in a serious injury, nor is it generally intended to. The Biblical injunction to turn the other cheek does not rule out self-defense, but is saying that maybe you don't have to worry about being disrespected, which is especially helpful when you legally can't.
Obviously, none of this condones the slap. If we are going to try and understand, though, then it is worth thinking about what is considered an appropriate masculine reaction to your wife being insulted. A lot of the "rules" of social behavior depend on everyone obeying them equally. That gives the advantage to the one who does not mind being a jerk. There are a lot of problems with that.
There is one last thing it might make sense to remember, though this will be more to the point for the next post: there is a historical tendency to over-police Black men. It goes along with the historic differentials in power and authority that might make ridiculing Black people in the service of white people tempting.
None of this happens in a vacuum.
No comments:
Post a Comment