Caring About Causes, Not People
Here are a bunch of nuts whose chief interest is in seeing themselves as the sort of righteous people who "deeply care" about issues like rape, and who don't actually, apparently, care much about people themselves. Check out these quotes:
'Virginia Montague, who leads the New York Coalition of 100 Black Women, called the unidentified maid "courageous" for coming forward to file charges against Strauss-Kahn.'
So even if she was lying in an effort to blackmail Strauss-Kahn, she is still courageous! Why? "We're talking about the face of women (who) have been victimized, too often judged by the media and public on rumors and innuendos..." The maid is not of any interest to Montague as a person. She is a type ("the face of women who have been victimized") and Montague wants to show us she is the sort of person who is outraged by the treatment of this type.
Or how about Salamishah Tillet? "They may be troubling but it doesn't mean that something horrific didn't happen in that hotel room -- and until we have evidence otherwise, I think we should continue." So Salamishah thinks we should prosecute people -- or does this only apply to rich, white guys who are accused by minority women? -- unless they can prove that a crime didn't happen!
I have no idea if Strauss-Kahn raped the maid. Neither do these "activists," but the difference is, they don't care. They want to see him punished "for the cause." Look, if anyone has a good idea what happened in that room besides the two people involved, it is the prosecutor's office investigating the case. It will be an embarrassment to them if they have to drop the case. If they do so anyway, that's pretty damned good evidence it should have been dropped.
'Virginia Montague, who leads the New York Coalition of 100 Black Women, called the unidentified maid "courageous" for coming forward to file charges against Strauss-Kahn.'
So even if she was lying in an effort to blackmail Strauss-Kahn, she is still courageous! Why? "We're talking about the face of women (who) have been victimized, too often judged by the media and public on rumors and innuendos..." The maid is not of any interest to Montague as a person. She is a type ("the face of women who have been victimized") and Montague wants to show us she is the sort of person who is outraged by the treatment of this type.
Or how about Salamishah Tillet? "They may be troubling but it doesn't mean that something horrific didn't happen in that hotel room -- and until we have evidence otherwise, I think we should continue." So Salamishah thinks we should prosecute people -- or does this only apply to rich, white guys who are accused by minority women? -- unless they can prove that a crime didn't happen!
I have no idea if Strauss-Kahn raped the maid. Neither do these "activists," but the difference is, they don't care. They want to see him punished "for the cause." Look, if anyone has a good idea what happened in that room besides the two people involved, it is the prosecutor's office investigating the case. It will be an embarrassment to them if they have to drop the case. If they do so anyway, that's pretty damned good evidence it should have been dropped.
I broach a sensitive topic, but historian Clyde Wilson often says that there were some American abolitionists who never cared about the plight of slaves.
ReplyDeleteMany of them had never lifted a finger to help slaves in their personal lives, but merely did it because it was "right and moral". It was an abstract Puritan thing.
Such moralists may have hindered the movement to end slavery.
Disclosure: Yes, Clyde Wilson is a self-professed South US partisan. He is a biased source, I admit.
That may be true, Prateek, I do not know.
ReplyDelete