Eff's Rambles (Archive)


In fairness, I should have said that a stated reason, later on, for going to war against Iraq was to "liberate" the Iraqi people.

I consider the title, "a war against the regime and not the state" a semantic waste of my time.

Maybe more on that later, or another day.

I do not know about anyone else, but I am uncomfortable with compliments. Being that I am obsessive compulsive, insecure and have adequacy issues, high remarks about my intelligence and looks, even modest to minor ones, make me uncomfortable. I start to wonder if people are easily impressed, need glasses, are mocking me; it just seems easier to deal with some put downs. A reason why it may be easier is not wanting to appear as vain. If you readily agree with a positive remark, you could look like you are self-absorbed. But how you react to an insult is defended to an extent by dignity. There is always modesty.

Here in the US, there is a media circus over the Kobe Bryant case. I do not know who is telling the truth. But what I do believe is that, of what little I've heard, the behavior of people connected with the case has been terrible.

Rumours abound.

Are friends on either side leaking things at the request of the accuser and accused?

Are the friends acting independently?

Are they friends?

One thing is certain, Kobe had sex with the accuser (he should not have). But this story, the type of which I would usually ignore, has made me rethink, not so much reconsider, an issue.

I have always disliked false accusations. My feeling is that such lying merits a penalty of great extremes because they can ruin lives. Perhaps sexistly, the main kind I would think of is a charge of rape against a man (whatever the actual charge against Kobe is irrelevant to my coming contention). Well, I still hold that few, but my empathy has grown more for the women in those situations, though I do not know if their claims are true in a given and unresolved case. What brought it about is the terrible treatment the accuser is getting. Her character is attacked constantly. Her friends seem to be against her or inept about what they are doing. But worst of all is how some people defending Kobe cannot see how they are being influenced by prejudice and false logic.

She should have known better than to go into the room of a celebrity. And she probably did.

Whatever it is she "should" have expected, she is equally right to expect a reasonable level of behavior from those she is with. Being aware of something does not mean ones actions are with the intent to benefit from that awareness. A quick example is of two gold prospectors. One of them is in a dangerous situation, the other makes a sincere effort to save him, but fails. The deceased one had a newly found claim, of which the other knew of. Although foul play is not an absurd suspicion, it is prejudice that dismisses the integrity of the living prospector and puts him beyond the level of suspect into being guilty. What seems to matter is not the person, but the knowledge. That single fact is enough to convict a man in the minds of some people. Who he is no longer matters. Knowledge by itself is not proof. The accuser's dignity is assaulted with stories and rumours about her mental state and sexual history.

If the accuser should be protected, why not the accused?

It's not an easy question to answer. ideally, no one would know of the identity of the accused and his accuser. However, I believe that it is unrealistic to expect that the identity of the accused can remain secret, and this becomes less so when he is famous. This may be an unfortunate circumstance, but the public is not the law. It is not fair for anyone to disparage the accuser based on what he sees as hypocrisy in the law. And mistreated she has been.


Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home


Online dictionary at www.Answers.com

Concise information in one click