![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
It has been a week for being pissed off, hasn't it?
Tuesday, 16 July 2013 08:20 pmFirst, the verdict in the trial of George Zimmerman. Turns out an adult can stalk and kill a random unarmed teenager, and Florida is perfectly okay with that. Of course, the law prefers that you be white when pulling the trigger.
Then the people saying the victim (that's the dead person, in case you're unclear) was a thug, that his Skittles were for purple drank and he smoked weed and glared at babies. You see, this is the 21st century, and we're supposed to judge people by the content of their character rather than the color of their skin. So if you can't cite the color of their skin as reason for suspicion, you instead defame their character and cite that as posthumous justification, even when it had not a goddamn thing to do with the events that unfolded. Even though Zimmerman couldn't have known it at the time, the kid had Skittles, and therefore was clearly up to no good.
Then there are the people grumbling that it's not a race issue or a gun law issue but a tragic mistake caused by one person's overreaction, though they debate whose. (I have trouble calling 'run away from the creepy dude following me in the dark, and if he corners me again come out swinging' an overreaction. I may be biased from having been followed in the dark by creepy dudes before.) I can't help but feel Zimmerman's overreaction was made possible, though, by concealed carry laws that let him play Batman (despite law enforcement and official Neighborhood Watch organizations asking volunteers not to arm themselves so as to avoid overzealous asshats accidentally shooting people) and self-defense laws that make it legally more defensible to kill someone than to fire a warning shot, and allow "drug dealers to avoid murder charges and gang members to walk free"--but God help you if you do cartwheels in the parking lot.
Ultimately, we turn for answers to the one source that always nails it:
So that's a terrible thing.
On the less pissed, more irritating front: people being outraged because other people aren't expressing appropriate outrage. Not the commenters who were so disappointed that nobody rioted (I can't even approach that, unless it's with Sharknado-themed fanfiction). No, it was a friend who huffed that people on Twitter had 'Goddammit, Florida' reactions and that jokes prevent us focusing on the real issues, which he also complained about when the news of NSA spying came out.
My reaction is less than sympathetic, because I'm a big believer in gallows humor and black comedy. There is no one 'right' reaction to terrible events, and we don't all have to tear our hair out and gnash our teeth in order to prove that we're feeling things 'right'. I crack jokes at funerals, and about terrifying political chicanery, and awful TV shows, and it doesn't mean I'm not upset or taking things seriously. It's just an absolutely normal, entirely common coping mechanism.
Also, because I didn't see him doing anything with his outrage except passing judgment on others about how they were expressing their feelings. I don't require folks to prove their bona fides with an itemized list of how they're helping the cause (because if you have to publicize your charitable deeds, you've probably missed the point), but in this case, you've got to admit that getting irritated at Twitter seems a far more effective way to avoid focusing on the real issues or doing anything real about them.
Also also, how can anybody get irritated at people sighing at yet another example of weird bullshit coming out of Florida? Just as people increasingly say, "Oh, Missouri" when our batshit legislators act up, the state has earned its reputation and its Fark tag.
Also3, this is the guy who breaks out the 'ching chong' hipster racism whenever I talk about editing jobs from Hong Kong and trolls Christians on Twitter for lulz, and he'd just asked me for more information about a comment I'd made on Wicca in hopes I'd point him at someone he could laugh at. It's a little hard to take his outrage over other people's inappropriate behavior seriously.
In the meantime, as someone who spends a lot of time emailing China and Australia (you know, the asterisk of evil), I am far more likely to be under the NSA's microscope than he is, and the idea of them reading my messages about pretty floral jumpers and Japanese movie stars is pretty damn hilarious. Back to the grind!
* I sometimes wonder if I'm using the proper method for citations--should I be citing volume/issue, should I be citing in-line sources, should I bother at all since this is a blog rather than an actual publication, etc. Nothing like quoting "Juror E6" to highlight the silliness of these worries.
Then the people saying the victim (that's the dead person, in case you're unclear) was a thug, that his Skittles were for purple drank and he smoked weed and glared at babies. You see, this is the 21st century, and we're supposed to judge people by the content of their character rather than the color of their skin. So if you can't cite the color of their skin as reason for suspicion, you instead defame their character and cite that as posthumous justification, even when it had not a goddamn thing to do with the events that unfolded. Even though Zimmerman couldn't have known it at the time, the kid had Skittles, and therefore was clearly up to no good.
Then there are the people grumbling that it's not a race issue or a gun law issue but a tragic mistake caused by one person's overreaction, though they debate whose. (I have trouble calling 'run away from the creepy dude following me in the dark, and if he corners me again come out swinging' an overreaction. I may be biased from having been followed in the dark by creepy dudes before.) I can't help but feel Zimmerman's overreaction was made possible, though, by concealed carry laws that let him play Batman (despite law enforcement and official Neighborhood Watch organizations asking volunteers not to arm themselves so as to avoid overzealous asshats accidentally shooting people) and self-defense laws that make it legally more defensible to kill someone than to fire a warning shot, and allow "drug dealers to avoid murder charges and gang members to walk free"--but God help you if you do cartwheels in the parking lot.
Ultimately, we turn for answers to the one source that always nails it:
"Look, I’m not an idiot. I know George Zimmerman shot an unarmed teenager to death—he admitted to it, for Christ’s sake. Zimmerman followed an innocent 17-year-old (we couldn’t take into consideration whether or not Martin was racially profiled, by the way, which was yet another little legal gem that was handed our way), called 911, was told by the operator not to pursue him, but instead began a physical altercation that ended in the young man’s death. And the state of Florida stipulated that, from a strict legal standpoint, George Zimmerman did nothing wrong. (Juror E6, "In Our Defense, These Were Some Pretty Fucked-Up Laws And We Were Ordered To Deliberate In Accordance With Them", The Onion 15 July 2013)*As a commenter on a tab I've now closed and forgotten put it, Zimmerman is morally but not legally responsible, and that's the fucking pain of it.
So that's a terrible thing.
On the less pissed, more irritating front: people being outraged because other people aren't expressing appropriate outrage. Not the commenters who were so disappointed that nobody rioted (I can't even approach that, unless it's with Sharknado-themed fanfiction). No, it was a friend who huffed that people on Twitter had 'Goddammit, Florida' reactions and that jokes prevent us focusing on the real issues, which he also complained about when the news of NSA spying came out.
My reaction is less than sympathetic, because I'm a big believer in gallows humor and black comedy. There is no one 'right' reaction to terrible events, and we don't all have to tear our hair out and gnash our teeth in order to prove that we're feeling things 'right'. I crack jokes at funerals, and about terrifying political chicanery, and awful TV shows, and it doesn't mean I'm not upset or taking things seriously. It's just an absolutely normal, entirely common coping mechanism.
Also, because I didn't see him doing anything with his outrage except passing judgment on others about how they were expressing their feelings. I don't require folks to prove their bona fides with an itemized list of how they're helping the cause (because if you have to publicize your charitable deeds, you've probably missed the point), but in this case, you've got to admit that getting irritated at Twitter seems a far more effective way to avoid focusing on the real issues or doing anything real about them.
Also also, how can anybody get irritated at people sighing at yet another example of weird bullshit coming out of Florida? Just as people increasingly say, "Oh, Missouri" when our batshit legislators act up, the state has earned its reputation and its Fark tag.
Also3, this is the guy who breaks out the 'ching chong' hipster racism whenever I talk about editing jobs from Hong Kong and trolls Christians on Twitter for lulz, and he'd just asked me for more information about a comment I'd made on Wicca in hopes I'd point him at someone he could laugh at. It's a little hard to take his outrage over other people's inappropriate behavior seriously.
In the meantime, as someone who spends a lot of time emailing China and Australia (you know, the asterisk of evil), I am far more likely to be under the NSA's microscope than he is, and the idea of them reading my messages about pretty floral jumpers and Japanese movie stars is pretty damn hilarious. Back to the grind!
* I sometimes wonder if I'm using the proper method for citations--should I be citing volume/issue, should I be citing in-line sources, should I bother at all since this is a blog rather than an actual publication, etc. Nothing like quoting "Juror E6" to highlight the silliness of these worries.
