lori k said:
But life can bring pleasure to so many as yours has even here to this forum more than you can know. Please know I mean this in all sincerity.
i know you do, and i'm sure it does, for many people. just not for me. even now my life is reasonably ok, if i get hit by a bus later today it'll be no odds on me because i'm quite happy to die whenever it happens. that's not to say i'm actively suicidal (at least not right now) but y'know, i don't really care either way.
country233 said:
My friend even mention it is weird because I generally dispise people, but yet am a pacifist. It is just the way I think.
i don't think that's weird at all. i'm a nihilist as far as my own life is concerned, i don't care too much about it, i'll do all kinds of damage to myself voluntarily and not care but that doesn't extend to other people. as much as i have a cynical outlook and generally think the human race is evil, i'm also a socialist which means i want fairness for everyone and despise that in capitalist societies some people are born with all kinds of disadvantages which continue to be exploited throughout their lifetime so they'll never get anywhere in life. to me that's just another form of abuse, although at governmental level. basically i go by js mill who said that no one should be stopped in freedom of expression unless they're harming someone else. well abusers are harming someone else and until governments and legal systems recognise that and limit abusers' freedoms, abused people have no option but to strike back if things get to that point. but governments and legal systems will never recognise this because they do it themselves on a wider scale, they screw people from the cradle to the grave (and not just in their own country) and reap all the rewards. anyone caught trying to fight back is imprisoned, oppressed or deemed mentally unstable. sometimes i think marx was right and that that *only* way to achieve genuine parity is by violent overthrow of the system. sadly in this day and age that is more difficult, partly because governments are so paranoid they react to anything with swift and harsh penalties, and partly due to apathy.
wow, that went a little off the direct topic, sorry, i guess my point is just that until abuse is curtailed on international/governmental level, we have very little chance of it being curtailed on an individual level. also that it's possible to be a cynic and nihilist but still value the importance of treating others fairly.
As for Flack's attitude, he's never exactly struck me as cocky per se... that's always been more Danny in my book. But I do think he's pretty confident, and he doesn't suffer fools gladly. I personally like his sarcasm and wit, but I can see how it could grate. To each their own... I know we all have our favorites!
mine too. i don't see cocky and snarky as the same thing at all, or sarcasm either. to me danny is far more cocky than flack.
but i suspect this view is influenced by a lifetime of seeing abusers taking advantage of people not just on a personal level but at governmental and international level - we are by nature a greedy and selfish race (ha, i'm so darwinian!) and most of us (especially governments) will stop at nothing to get what we want. so when i see a story in which someone who's been abused fights back, even if that involves murder, i have a little flicker of, well, something less miserable. i think it's important that people fight back, and it makes me incredibly angry when i see legal systems and governments that apparently favour abusers over abused (but of course they do because they're just as bad).
so in this particular case i have to side with the killer - partly because the way i see it killing is never as bad as systematic abuse. i think a lot of that is because i don't have this view that life itself is an inherently good thing. i don't think i'd ever kill anyone else (i've sure as hell considered it!) but that's less because i think life is "a good thing that must not be violated" but that my views on civil and human rights dictate that i don't have that kind of power over someone else's life. i don't see life as something to be valued particularly, i've tried ending mine several times, but it's wrong for anyone to have that kind of sway over another's life - and that is why abuse, parrticularly systematic, is so wrong. imho it's infinitely more wrong than killing someone.
I do think the difference in severity between continued abuse and murder is an interesting one. It's a very serious issue, and I think when it happens to a child (or anyone, really), it changes and shapes who they become. That at fourteen Jay didn't think there was any other way to save his siblings likely speaks (along with the scars) to the severity and duration of the abuse. I doubt if the events had just happened, and a fourteen-year-old killed a parent in the way under those same circumstances, that the kid would go to jail or even juvie. Maybe a psychiatric hospital, but I doubt prison.
it is an interesting point, the "which is worse?" aspect. for me, death is an easy thing, it's not something that scares me, in fact i positively welcome it, so for me years or decades of abuse (or indeed one abuse, such as a rape, sexual assault etc) are *infinitely* worse, more traumatic, more horrible etc than death. it's one reason i disagree with the death penalty: surely dying is easier than years of guilt and/or prison rape? if you want to really punish someone, go for the latter.
that said, i'm not sure i'd ever seriously advocate using prison rape as punishment! i think prison should be pretty harsh because although i'm a human rights fan i think people who do these things to an extent give up those rights. however.... the sad fact is that many many abusers were abused themselves, to the point where that kind of behaviour is normalised and they don't know any other way of life - it's a reminder that this kind of abuse has seriously long term consequences and can impact on future generations (because many abused kids go on to abuse their own kids). this is why it has to be recognised and stopped as early as possible.
as for psych hospitals, i tend to see them as punishment just as much as jail (what can i say? i'm a foucault fangirl!) and i think it'd be wrong to punish someone, especially a child, for reacting against extreme provocation. by all means provide counselling, therapy etc to make sure they know what they did was wrong and won't do it again, and indeed to try to alleviate the trauma of systematic abuse, but don't punish them. they've been punished enough already.
