Ok... First, for the benefit of those who don't *know* me... I'm a 6'1", 30 stone (well, not really, but I'm a fat bastard), American and I don't take much shit.
Now, some of you may remember that one of our first meats, I almost got into a mix with some one in SoHo because they decided that walking into me was, in someway, a good idea. After the guy 'punked' down and walked away, Samuel and (departed, but not forgotten) Paul.D said I was crazy because I 'could have been knifed'. I found this strange to a degree because, as I said at the time, if you act like a victim you will be a victim and tried to justified my reaction as such.
Now, fast forward a year and in a park on Bon-fire night these three 'youths' were letting off fireworks in a crowd of kids with reckless abandon. An elderly Indian fellow was the only one with the balls to tell them off. His reward? These three 'ard asses crowding around him telling him he was about to die from a 'right good kicking'... Now, there were literally hundreds of people around and they all just walked past without so much as a backward look. Me, being me, stepped in and broke it up and prevented this man (who was only looking out for his grandchildren) from getting beaten up. For the rest of the night, I couldn't, for the life of me, figure out why no one stepped in to help.
Here we are now, several months ago... I was in the Post Office, standing in a queue (what else would I be doing?). Behind me, these two guys kicked off and pushed an old lady to the floor in their 'posturing'. I, again, stepped in and pushed the instigator out of the door. I came back in and no one looked at me and even the guy behind the bullet proof glass didn't look up the whole time.
And, finally what makes me write this post, today I'm in Sainsbury's. I'm leaving with my trolley full of groceries and just as I get to the door there is a flurry of activity. I look down and there is this guy pining a girl to the ground and she is screaming whilst he has his hand raised. Now, I normally can handle 'volatile' situations with care. Not when it involves a guy hitting a girl though. I physically lifted the guy off the girl and threw him into the wall. I then, in my 'angry' voice proceeded to explain why hitting a woman was unacceptable. A security guard finally came up and 'diffused' the situation by saying "Ok, ok, ok... calm down... It's ok... I can smell a bit of alcohol so it's ok...." and took the guy's arm like he was ushering him at a wedding. I took this as my queue to leave as I thought it would be taking care of. I turned around and there was a small crowd staring at me. Some giving me the 'thumbs up', others giving that requisite "I was gonna step in, but you got there first" look, while others were looking at me like I was crazy for bothering to get involved.
Now... My question to follow up this long winded post. Why, is it that in these situations am I the one to step in to 'save the day' whilst others are happy to turn a blind eye and not lift a finger to protect a woman (not trying to be patronising before I get told that "woman don't need protecting by no man"...) or the elderly? At what point does your moral obligation to help prevent the abuse of someone outweigh your fear of getting involved? Am I just a stupid American who should ignore those around him and the abuse they have to suffer and further the stereotype of my nationality (judged by those who do the same)? How is it that a woman can be raped on a full train and no one helps? How can you justify your £2 a month to NSPCC being enough when you stand by and allow a child being beaten in front of you because they had the audacity to ask for a sweet?
Ahhhh, fuck it... I've gone and rambled again. So... What is it, if anything, that can push you to the point of valuing someone else's safety over yours?
Punching Fists: Racism, hitting a woman, endangering a child or the elderly will all get me to just this side of murder.
Posted by Octavia (Member # 398) on :
First off, I think props to you for stepping in in those situations. But you're a big bloke, sab. I would have hesitated (or not even thought about it) before getting involved in any of those, partly for fear for myself, but also because when it comes to physically stepping in, I simply don't have the size or the power to actually stop something going on. But, I would probably keep an eye, phone at the ready, in case calling large policemen would be of use. (Is it different for men? Do you feel worse for not helping simply because you're men and feel that in some way you should help?) Slightly tangentially, women's-safety officers used (way back in the mists of time) to tell women to shout "rape" (rather than "help" - not specific enough) in the event of being attacked. Then they discovered that people pretty much ignored that, so they told them to shout "fire" on the basis that people might think possessions of their own were endangered. Now they tell you to "try and catch someone's eye". I find this incredibly depressing.
The things that trigger my moral say-something buttons are much lower on the scale - but maybe more frequent. Litter-droppers, people barging in front of oldies on the Tube, general rudenesses like that. Small stuff, but I think it's a communal responsibility to maintain society at the basic level. I think when you look after the small stuff, the bigger stuff becomes less frequent? Isn't it about knowing you can get away with anything that increases the danger of big stuff happening?
Incidentally, perhaps you were made big so you can be The Knight.
Posted by Astromariner (Member # 446) on :
Sab, if you didn't already know about it, I thought you might be interested to know about the murder of Kitty Genovese in New York back in 1964. I know that people are murdered in NY with roughly the same frequency that people everywhere else have hot dinners, but this case was different because there were 38 witnesses, none of whom lifted a finger to help until after she was already dead; then there was a single phonecall to the police.
She was stabbed just outside her block of flats as she was heading home at night. The first time she was attacked, she screamed the place down, and her assailant ran away. Lights went on, curtains were twitched, but no alarm was raised, which allowed him to come back and attack her again. Again she cried for help, and more bedroom lights clicked on, and the guy runs off, and again the lights switched back off again and he came back and finally killed her.
Afterwards, her neighbours were asked why they didn't do more to help. One woman said she thought it was a lover's quarrel. Which you could understand, but for the fact that Kitty's pleas were helpfully specific - that she was being stabbed, and later, that she was dying. One guy said he was afraid, and his wife didn't want him to get involved; another thought of ringing the police, but was tired so he went back to bed.
It's a pack thing, I think. People don't want to stand out from the crowd - and, the more other people are around, the less likely it is that any one individual will think "I have to do something", because they assume that someone else will. Also, it's late, people have work in the morning. You know how it is.
[ 27.08.2004, 05:24: Message edited by: Astromariner ]
Posted by Physic (Member # 195) on :
I hear what you're saying Sab, and I'd like to think that in the situations you describe I'd have done much the same thing, though I guess you never really know until you're in that situation. As as already been mentioned however, physical stature and the amount of confidence you have in your ability to hold your own should things turn ugly are bound to be a major factor in whether you act, I'm not exactly a small guy myself and I'm relatively confident in my ability to look after myself, but as what happened to Ko' recently shows, you can never be too confident, and many people wouldn't.
I think there are mutiple facets to the reason why many people don't get involved though, cowardice and a desire to protect one-self above all else is assuredly the number one factor, but then you've got the scare-mongering of the press, bound to heighten peoples fears about the dangers inherent in getting involved, not to mention the law-suit culture which has developed over the years in this country, whereby you can wind up being sued for assault just for getting involved in such a situation. In the end I think it all adds up in many peoples' minds to 'better off letting the police/someone else deal with it'. A depressing thought really, especially if you ever find yourself the victim of such circumstances.
Posted by Boy Racer (Member # 498) on :
I've stepped in myself many a time in similar situations, but people are scared Sabian, simple as, and no matter how large or able to handle yourself you are it only takes a couple of punches or a single stab to the chest to do some serious damage.
Nice to know you're out there though fella.
[ 27.08.2004, 05:13: Message edited by: Boy Racer ]
Posted by Darryn.R (Member # 1) on :
Walking home one night after a concert with friends we stumbled through Southampton city centre without a care in the world when we came across a couple involved in what can only be called a heated argument.
So heated in fact that he (a large drunk) had punched her (a small screaming shrewish woman) right in the kisser causing her to have a bloody nose and a few smaller bruises/lacerations in the face area.
She screamed, he threw her around like a rag doll.
I and one of my friends stepped up, and although both much smaller than the large angry drunk we managed to wrestle him to the ground and pin him to the floor.
Rather than being thankful, the screaming she witch jumped on us and proceeded to scratch our faces with her long ragged nails whilst yelling:
"Gerrof my 'usband ya fuggin' cants"
Now, I always ask before jumping in.. Sometimes help well, it's just not wanted.
Posted by dang65 (Member # 102) on :
It's because fucking big Americans keep jumping in to 'defuse' every minor conflict that the world's in the state it's in right now!! Posted by Ringo (Member # 47) on :
For some reason, which I just can't work out, since reading Sab's post I have this urge to be lifted up and pinned to a wall by my throat. By Sabian. Let's not analyse that one, eh?
As for stepping in? Not in a situation which is already violent. I accept my station in life, I'm short and weak and completely unable to fight even the meakest of oponents. Hell even Thorn Davis could probably kick my arse.
I do usually say something when there's a group of kids who are swearing, and there are elderly people around, and I can be extremely scary towards kids who are playing kerbsies a little too close to my car. I don't think scaring 8 year olds is really what this is about though is it.
Posted by StevieX (Member # 91) on :
I don't think that the police are always a help in these situations.
Myself and a friend intervened once to stop someone else getting a kicking at the hands of three assailants. This quickly tured into a situation where the original victim legged it and the assilants' three mates turn up. Six on two. Sweet. I'm a pretty peacable guy (not small, can take care of myself to a point blah, blah, blah), but there was no way we were going to 'win'. Of course, the whole thing took place in front of many, many witnesses.
The insult to injury was that the police turned up, were too f*cking thick or wilful to see things for what they were (6 v. 2!!) and started trying to pass the whole thing off as drunken brawling. Neither my mate or I had drunk anything - I actually requested a breath test to establish this.
In the aftermath, the police were obstructive and threatening; making it clear that if my mate and I pressed charges then so would they; and they indicated a willingness to press a whole bunch of public order offence charges.
Net result, I think carefully about getting involved, and if the person on the receiving end is a police, then I'm going to make like Dionne Warwick and walk on by. Harsh, but true.
Posted by philomel (Member # 586) on :
I think, as a smallish girl, I’d be loathe to step in and try and break anything up. I’ve calmed situations between friends and strangers, but I don’t think I’d have the strength, authority or presence required to prevent two grown men (or women for that matter) smacking eachother. That said, I’m not sure what I’d do if I encountered that sort of violence. I’d be fairly ineffectual grabbing at flailing fists with my puny arms (for upper body strength read weakness) and would likely do more harm than good. But I’d feel awful if I just stood and watched, hands to mouth in horror, or averted my eyes and slunk away. Perhaps seek help from other sources? Call the police? I can’t say how I’d react as I’ve never been in the situation.
I have seen the aftermath, and knelt by a stranger bleeding copiously from the head in the high street. Which was all well and good until the group who’d bottled him came back and started on again. I was extremely thankful for the presence of my then boyfriend, who tried to defuse the situation and ended up being on the receiving end of a torrent of abuse (luckily not violence) himself.
I don’t know. Maybe adrenalin would take me over and I’d become a puppet to impulse, dumptackling the attacker and shoving them into submission with an agonizing armlock. But unlikely. And even if I did go beserk, a normal-sized man could probably grab me by the hair and slam my face into a pillar without breaking a sweat. So it would be unwise.
When breaking up a situation, do you have to use actual physical strength or will a few words do the job? When I’ve dragged my friends out of potential fights, it’s been a combination of hand round upper arm/wrist and a soothing litany of platitudes (directed at both parties).
Posted by kovacs (Member # 28) on :
quote:Originally posted by Astromariner: Sab, if you didn't already know about it, I thought you might be interested to know about the murder of Kitty Genovese in New York back in 1964. I know that people are murdered in NY with roughly the same frequency that people everywhere else have hot dinners, but this case was different because there were 38 witnesses, none of whom lifted a finger to help until after she was already dead; then there was a single phonecall to the police.
You might be interested to know that this real-life incident is used in 1986 graphic novel WATCHMEN as the motivation behind Kovacs' remaking as the vigilante 'Rorschach'.
Good thread and first post -- I certainly agree with what you did, Sabian, and in general I am equally minded to step in and help strangers.
At the moment I am still pretty wary of the slightest hint of violence, after the reality of how quickly and easily one human can hurt another was slammed into my face; an incident that made me realise just how fragile much of the human body is.
I don't regard myself as an especially easy target or a wimp, but two or three (I think) hard punches at the close range I took them, from someone who knows what he's doing, fucked me up badly. I think it would fuck you up too, frankly, if someone had landed the same punches on your face. You are a big guy but your cheekbone's as vulnerable as mine.
So I agree with you in principle and even in practice if I thought the odds were good would be inclined to help someone out in the situations you describe -- as long as I thought I had a handle on exactly who was right and who was wrong, which isn't always easy to grasp. Maybe I enjoy superhero and vigilante fictions because I do feel that someone should step in to help another person who's being bullied: maybe, on the other hand, reading that kind of thing has shaped my attitudes.
But anyway, at the moment I am more likely to channel this basic feeling that humans should help each other out into less exciting behaviour like carrying suitcases for old ladies and helping women with pushchairs. I think it's the same belief, that if you see someone in any difficulty and can make things easier for them, you should do so.
Posted by Modge (Member # 64) on :
I have never been in a situation like this. I once moved to sit next to a girl on a train who was being verbally hassled by a group of young men, which she was thankful for, but I don't know how dangerous the situation was.
I also once shouted a bunch of teenage schoolboys on a train who were scuffling and taunting each other. This was more out of annoyance (as they kept bumping into me and other passengers, it was hot, they were being noisy), but my surprisingly automatic "teacher-voice" snapping "will you just STOP it!" did produce some fearful looks from the boys, who did indeed 'stop it'. Maybe I am more 'powerful' than I think.
I would like to think that I would try to help if someone was being attacked, but I suspect it is something that very easy to think and a lot harder to do. I do know that I would be far less likely to intervene in a fight in Soho at 1am on Saturday morning than I would be if a child was being snatched outside Tescos in the middle of the afternoon.
Posted by Benny the Ball (Member # 694) on :
It's a tough one, being morale doesn't neccassarily make you safe. The drunken couple fighting is something that I've come across in the past. I agree with the mob mentality point mentioned above, on so many occasions I've seen people just freeze and watch something.
On two of the occasions that I have stepped in;
First one a group of drunken men tried to grab a girl and pull her into a taxi, I stepped in and got my head kicked in not only by the men in the cab but also by the taxi driver (obviously after a healthy tip).
Second time a drunken idiot in a toilet in a bar was kicking people as they walked past, I stopped someone from having a go at him and told his friend to take the drunken fool away before someone hit him. Later in the bar the drunk threw a glass in my face (luckily I was wearing specs at the time, so nothing in the eyes, but a nice scar across the nose).
However, on another occasion my mum stepped in on two men having a full blown row outside our house, threatening to get knives etc (and yes they were drunk), one of the men turned on her, and she punched him full in the jaw, sending his false teeth flying. The fighting soon ended.
Also when I was a kid someone was killed in a local park early in the morning, the police were only called when a few locals were woken up, and they were complaining about the noise.
Posted by Bailey (Member # 261) on :
I always want to help but am quite fearful of standing up to dangerous-seeming strangers. If a kid was being smacked and I said something, I would expect to be told it was none of my business and the kid to bear the brunt of more frustration. Similarly, if it's a fight scenario I'd be quite afraid of getting involved for fear of getting whacked for my trouble. I have called the police a few times, from the safety of my own home while bad things have happened in the street outside, but that's not really much good until they turn up 5 minutes later is it? I'd love to be more like Sabian and not stand for shit behaviour, but looking after myself tends to come first.
Posted by 2@ (Member # 715) on :
I would step in, like Sabian. I cannot bear the idea of standing by, and detest the fact that people will simply watch on while another person in systematically injured in front of them.
I am not a large guy, but am capable of taking care of myself. Three years ago I prevented two men from dragging a girl into a building. She was screaming, and no-one did anything. It got ugly fast, and I got the shit panned out of me, but managed to knock one of them out and call the cops while the other legged it.
That girl is now a good friend of mine, and she firmly believes that I saved her from being raped (and possibly worse) that day. The bloke I KO'd was presecuted, they tracked down his friend, and he was prosecuted too. Both turned out to have a history of violent sexual offences. They are in prison - I was a witness at their trial.
I took a hell of a beating, but I would do it again, instinctively. As everyone points out though, if the guy has a knife, I'll be in trouble.
Well done Sabian. Walk tall, because at least you help when it's needed. Glad to know you're out there.
Posted by kovacs (Member # 28) on :
quote:Originally posted by sabian: Paul.D said I was crazy because I 'could have been knifed'. I found this strange to a degree because, as I said at the time, if you act like a victim you will be a victim and tried to justified my reaction as such.
I just want to offer a mild counter to all the voices saying "you go Sabian", "wish I could be like Sabian", "good to know you're out there Sabian."
Sabian, you could have been knifed. You could have been followed by the guy's mates until you were alone (ie. without Norton for back-up) then overpowered. You do look intimidating but you're not the Thing. Your size and attitude are not a shield against a glass shoved in your face.
I'm afraid I don't believe only people who act like victims become victims of assault.
As I said above, I do admire you stepping in, in the situations you've outlined -- again with the proviso that we can't always judge who is in the right; whether the guy holding a struggling woman is trying to detain someone who just robbed his shop, whether the four guys pinning another down have just chased and caught an attempted rapist.
But you are a guy with a family. You're not charmed. You do have to weigh up the risk to your own safety when wading into this kind of situation. It's no consolation to your daughter that you did the right thing and played the hero, if you lose an eye or get your cheek slashed open.
Posted by 2@ (Member # 715) on :
Kovacs has a very good point - I guess we have a responsibility to ourselves, and to our familioes, not to take unnecessary risks. The chance that one of these scumbags is armed is one you run every time you intervene. It comes down to a highly personal choice - how much risk will you take. If there is time to call the cops, or get help, then this is the way to go.
But sometimes, fqailing to step in will mean someone's life is ruined. At that point, I would take the risk. In no way am I saying that this is something w all should do; it's a highly personal decision.
I'm still happy Sabian will step in. He just has to be very careful - as we all do.
Posted by sabian (Member # 6) on :
I'm not saying for a minute that I'm 'Unbreakable'... And I know that it doesn't take much for a fight to escalate to something more... BUT... I would rather be badly injured than to be safe and live with the knowledge that I let someone be hurt/killed/abused.
When I was younger, I watched my mom being beaten up by her drunk boyfriend and when I was 14 I finally had enough and threw him to the ground and informed him if he ever touched her again I'd kill him. 8 years later, he was still a 'model' partner.
It's just something I'm not prepared to allow to happen whilst I'm in a position to help. I've never had a great deal of tolerance when a man hits a woman... It's even more so now that I have 2 daughters (god save any future boyfriends who think it'd be clever to hit one of them)...
I also realise that everyone can not stop a violent situation... But, when there are crowds of people that don't do anything that bothers me.
Oh, I don't know... I don't know why I posted in the first place, just it bothered me all night and I wanted someone else's opinion to why, as a society, most people are happy to let bad things happen so long as they aren't involved....
Posted by Darryn.R (Member # 1) on :
Way to retag yourself ass kicking Yankie boy.. Posted by sabian (Member # 6) on :
heh... Well, after the move, all my stuff was gone so I thought instead of having a red x, I'd put something up that was appropriate!
I'll put back the flag tonight probably! If you don't like me doing it... Don't allow me to hotlink! Posted by kovacs (Member # 28) on :
quote:Originally posted by sabian: Oh, I don't know... I don't know why I posted in the first place, just it bothered me all night and I wanted someone else's opinion to why, as a society, most people are happy to let bad things happen so long as they aren't involved....
You needn't sound unhappy, Sabian. You have started a decent thread and really everyone who posted, including me, admires you for what you've done.
However, I think you've been lucky. And surprisingly, I agree with 2@.
quote:I guess we have a responsibility to ourselves, and to our families, not to take unnecessary risks.
quote:You: I would rather be badly injured than to be safe and live with the knowledge that I let someone be hurt/killed/abused.
I don't mean the below as a criticism of you, Sabian, but a more general point, because I think it's easy to remain unaware of or to forget exactly what the consequences of being punched can be.
Forgive me if, at the moment, I feel something of an expert on the possible effects of "street violence". I have tried to make a negative experience into a positive in as many ways as I can, and I think one of those ways is that I'm not as gung-ho and blase about damaging myself as I used to be.
Most every guy posting on this thread, again including me, has felt the need to include a disclaimer about how they can handle themselves. For the purposes of this example I will expand on mine. I've been in a few fights of one kind or another, motivated by a variety of reasons: robbery, someone starting on a friend of mine, my mouth getting me into trouble, territorial locals, strangers with aggression to take out on the first random they meet. I would never say I was a "good fighter" but one thing I would have claimed is that I can "take a punch". I've always had the attitude that if I get hit, OK no real bother...a few bruises is a manly badge anyway, and your body heals itself quickly enough.
Based on this perception of the potential risk (manageable pain, a bit of wincing, aches for a few days) then yes, I would have said it was usually worth stepping in to help someone out. I've never had anyone pull a knife, let alone a gun on me. What's the worst that could happen. It doesn't seem a massive price to pay for doing the right thing.
That's what I would have said three weeks ago. Until I took what could have been one or three punches right in my face (say two, for compromise) and over the past 20 days have been finding out what the consequences of something so quick and simple can be.
SAT night: immediate and fairly intense pain. SUN morning: really intense pain. vomiting blood. dizziness, shakes. three hours waiting for police and ambulance, four hours in A&E. next day written off totally. MON-WEDS: headaches and throbbing stopping me from doing any real work. goose-egg bump on cheekbone, flamboyant black eye, numb nose, cheek and lip. unable to eat with one side of mouth or wash that part of face. THURS: one hour at GP, four hours at hospital for X-rays. FRI: four hours at another hospital, shakes when they tell me I have to go into surgery Monday. SAT-SUN: increasing pain, inconvenience and general misery at state of face and personal situation. SUN: overnight in hospital ward, not a positive experience. MON: surgery followed by day of drugged weakness. inevitable pain in fixed cheekbone and sliced/stitched inside of mouth. TUES-WEDS: unable to eat much but soup, drink without straw or talk beyond mumble. constant need for painkillers. THURS-SUN: merciful improvement. MON: another 2 hours at hospital. TUES-THURS: start of trauma-related sinus pain. more pills. FRI: another hour with GP. continued sinus pain. NOW UNTIL 12 MONTHS: numbness in nose, cheek and upper lip. NOW UNTIL END OF MY MISERABLE LIFE: jokes about airport security/terminator/titanium man.
So that's almost three weeks of disruption to my normal life. Not just the unpleasant experience of hospital, but hours of waiting in hospitals and surgeries, days of having to take various pills, extended periods of not being able to eat or talk, continued discomfort even now, inability to work as normal.
And that's disregarding the actual pain. So even if anyone reading this is a stoic whose pain threshold is way higher than mine, or would like to think they can handle it better than me, your life can be really severely disrupted in many bad ways. By two punches to the face.
Sure, you can handle it. If I can handle it, so can you. You might think you could handle it better than me, with much less effete moaning.
There is almost some appeal in the ideal of masochism, of getting through damage to your body and being dead brave about it. I mean, I dig comics where the hero's costume gets burned and shredded right off his body, and he's trailing blood but he keeps going. I like all that Bruce Willis or Stallone routine where someone keeps taking it and getting up again, staggering with the last of his energy.
But there's another dimension to being physically damaged: how much it hurts and affects people who care about you. However tough I wanted to be about internalising the pain and shouldering through my injury, it's not just about the single individual who takes the beating. Unless you're a loner like the Punisher with nobody else in your life, this would also apply to you.
I had Modge trekking down to A&E with me while I was sicking up blood, and having to sit with me from 3am-7am making sure I didn't fall asleep; had her looking at my fucked-up face every day and looking after me when I got the shakes about surgery. I had her spending hours travelling to visit me in the hospital, and seeing me reduced to croaking out a few words before slumping back into sleep.
I had my parents preparing to postpone their holiday because they didn't want to leave until I was out of surgery. I had my grandma phoning every day and worrying every night. I had my brother involuntarily covering his face with his hands when he saw my collapsed cheek.
That's two punches. Two punches sending a shockwave not just through my life but through the lives of those closest to me.
And however much someone reading this might reassure themselves they're tougher than me, unless you can either block every punch before it impacts, dodge everything thrown at you or knock someone out before they have a chance to hit you, precisely the same thing could happen to you, in five seconds, without you seeing it coming. However hard you are, I doubt your cheek is any less fragile than mine.
So you can't just engage with a violent person or situation thinking "if I get hurt, I'll deal with it". Maybe you're fine with all the potential consequences to your own body, your emotional state and your lifestyle. But if you're injured, it ripples out to a lot of other people apart from yourself: anyone who cares about you is going to be deeply affected.
And at that point, I think stepping into a situation can actually become selfish, because you're risking the safety of someone other people care about, however much you think you can rationalise the damage to yourself. You're putting a body that is precious to other people in danger. Even if you think taking some injury yourself is something you can deal with, you're not the only one involved: your family and loved ones also have something at stake in it.
This isn't to say that the impulse to step in isn't noble and admirable. It is to point out that to risk injury to yourself with no thought of the anguish that injury could cause to people who love you is also selfish and irresponsible.
I've bored myself, sorry for the great length. Even if nobody gets anything from this post, though, I guess I needed to state something I've realised and didn't consider before.
Posted by Bailey (Member # 261) on :
I can see 2@ and Kovacs's POV here, as the girlfriend of someone who has, a couple of times, stepped up when trouble has kicked off. It's fucking scary, when the person you were with is suddenly off and holding back some evil bastard, or sprinting off down the road in pursuit of someone else, and you're left there going "Wha...?". For instance if we were walking along a high street late at night and someone ran up to me, jostled me a bit and made off with my handbag, I'd rather the person I was with stayed with me than leg it after them, because you don't know what someone will do if they're chased.. etc. It would be nice if we could persuade people not to be cnuts in the first place really.
Posted by Grianagh (Member # 583) on :
After reading the posts above and weighing them against my own reaction, I believe 'stepping in' may be a learned response.
Like Sabian, I am American. Unlike Sabian, I am 5'6 and less than 10 stone. I also have the same instinct to 'step in and help out the underdog' as Sabian outlined above. While in the states, I have been bruised, scraped and cut trying to help people who weren't grateful for the help. Then again, I have dished out the same amount of bruises, ect.
Perhaps it is the way we are raised? Force fed by smiling Uncle Sam asking us to 'save the little guy' while endangering ourselves and those we love? If we don't we are naughty boys and girls and should feel guilty.
[ 27.08.2004, 12:33: Message edited by: Grianagh ]
Posted by Octavia (Member # 398) on :
Top post, Kovacs.
Posted by Carter (Member # 426) on :
I don't know if I am being very naive, but I think it's all the more impressive that our colonial cousins would step in, giving the vastly higher incidence of handgun possession "over there".
I've stepped in a couple of times to very handbag affairs, but never sober. I really don't think I'd do anything of the sort in the US for fear of having my ass a cap popped in, or whatever it is...
Posted by damo (Member # 722) on :
nah, its not that bad. i've only been pulled on twice now.
Posted by Carter (Member # 426) on :
Yoinks!
Posted by damo (Member # 722) on :
not really. sorry i was trying to make myself interesting.
Posted by ally (Member # 600) on :
OK, so Sabian has taken risks with his personal safety. I think, though, that if more people were prepared to take risks with their personal safety, the need to do so would be lessened.
Bullies throwing fireworks, starting fights, pushing people to the ground, would be less likely to do so if the weight of social approbation was greater. They do in, in large part, because they know they can get away with it. One of the most successful security operations I ever saw was at a gig. When someone kicked off a large number of people, men and women, surrounded them and told them to calm down or leave. The situation was diffused quickly without a punch being thrown.
If everyone is too scared to intervene, for whatever reason, then aggression and hostility will continue and escalate, unchecked. I know this may sound a little old-fashioned, socialist, utopian, even, but we all need to take responsibility for our social and cultural environment. For that reason, Sabian, I salute you, and I'm right behind you too.
Posted by kovacs (Member # 28) on :
quote:Originally posted by ally: OK, so Sabian has taken risks with his personal safety.
Ally, did you read my post. I know it was long but I was trying to make the point that unless we are loner vigilantes, I don't entirely feel we're the only ones who should get to choose whether we risk our personal safety.
I've said more than once I admire Sabian's action in the examples he's given. But I'm a little bit wary of how blithely so many people are all, you're a hero mate, and we should all do what you did, shame other people don't wade in more!
Twenty days ago I didn't act like a coward, or a wimp: I wasn't foolhardy or overly-aggressive, or especially unlucky or unusual. My body is no more brittle than yours. I got hit in the face two times and I think I've made it abundantly clear how much it messed up the lives of my girlfriend and family for three weeks. (to date).
As I said, unless you think you have the powers to block, duck or stop every punch thrown at your face, the same could happen to you in five seconds, and whether you think the payoff is worth it or not (oh well, I'm in hospital having my face rebuilt but I've got my pride and social conscience intact), there are other people in your life to think about too.
Maybe stepping into a violent situation, if you have people in your life who care about your safety, your health, your survival, isn't just your choice to make.
Or maybe you're confident that everyone who cares about you would rather know you did the heroic thing, even if you're going to have a scar from one ear to the other for the rest of your life. Maybe I'm just a fucking milksop, a weak link in society because I'd think twice about taking the risk of putting myself (and my family) through the last 3 weeks again.
It's easy to feel superhuman, isn't it. It's easy to come out with the noble talk when you feel safe. I'd like to lend you the pain I've had in the side of my face for the last four days, and see what speeches you make.
Posted by kovacs (Member # 28) on :
I apologise for building up to a head of steam there but my painkillers aren't working for me just now.
Posted by damo (Member # 722) on :
dude shall we go smoke a bowl and talk about alice?
Posted by Samuelnorton (Member # 48) on :
This post got me thinking. I recall the time in London where Sabian ran into that vagrant. My fear was that as people like that are so unpredictable, they would attack anyone or anything in any situation. I don't think I would think twice about stepping away from someone like that if they tried to kick up a stink.
When "doing the right thing", I'll be honest and say that if I was seriously outnumbered, I'd probably turn the other way for fear of being pummelled. Perhaps I do value my life ahead of those of others; thinking this way peturbs me, but it would be dishonest for me to say otherwise. The one exception to this would be if Mrs N. was threatened in some way - if this ever happened I can quite easily see myself running into the mouth of the beast with little or no care for how I might end up.
For the most part, I do think it's all about numbers; if there are people around you who might think and feel the same way, the decision-making process is a lot easier. I've only ever intervened in anything once, when I was standing at a bus stop near Fulham Broadway station a couple of years ago - I and another guy were sitting there minding our own business when a dodgy-looking character (in hooded top, no less!) grabbed a bag from a young woman who was passing by and started pelting it down the road. I just said "did you see that?" to the guy sitting next to me, and without thinking we both charged down the street and after an easier-than-I-thought-it-would be chase caught the thief. We retrieved the stolen goods and the little shit - who couldn't have been a day over fourteen - ran off into the night. I handed the bag back to the grateful victim, and yes it did feel good. I felt like a citizen. Like Rohrschach, even.
I don't think I would have chased the thief had I been on my own, though - this actually disturbed me somewhat.
[ 27.08.2004, 19:37: Message edited by: Samuelnorton ]
Posted by damo (Member # 722) on :
hurrah.
Posted by sabian (Member # 6) on :
Kovacs, first let me say that I 'feel' your pain... I've never been a victim of anything criminal that has caused long term damage, but I have shattered many bones in my body over time and I can relate to the pain that is healing.
But, I feel this is why I get discouraged about posting long threads that aren't about computer stuff. I have a great deal of trouble putting my thoughts into coherent text and I can see how this thread is some sort of lyrical wax about how heroic I am. That was not my intention at all. Sometimes I wish I could just walk away, that's just not me.
Yes, there is my family to consider when I do stupid things like breaking up a fight. But, that said, since becoming a daddy I think a lot of what I do in this regard is linked somehow with showing/teaching my daughters that it isn't ok to just 'take it'... I am not a rich man and I never will be (come on double roll over)... I'll never be able to provide my kids with the kind of security that comes with having money... But, when I do have (I hope) is integrity and I want to pass that on to my children. Everyday I see kids being so disrespectful that it sickens me and I would absolutly hate myself if my kids ever behaved like that. I also have known/dated women who have been abused and/or raped and it would kill me if my kids had to suffer the emotional/physical stresses that these crimes cause. I know what I do isn't big nor clever... I don't do it for cudos or for a medal. I do it so that my children will know what it is to be part of a 'working' society (atleast in my view). To allow others to take it in the neck when you are in the position to help is unacceptable.
I want my kids to have the same self-respect/confidence that I have because, in truth, those are the only two things I have as a legacy to pass on and the only two things that have made it possible for me to survive this far. I have had knives and guns pulled on me in the past. I have been in knock-down-all-out fights before. I have seen the aftermath of violence on a grand scale. I have experienced the pain of my loved ones delivered by the hands of others.
I don't know if it's really a case of caring or not, though. I have walked on by before, when something like that has been occuring and I've felt pretty ashamed of myself afterwards, knowing that I could have tried to do something. I don't think this means I actually care less, it just means that I'm frankly afraid of the potential dangers to myself. It's a natural instinct for self preservation which prevents me from being able to intervene, not some lack of compassion.
I imagine people who have had a particularly nasty experience at the hands of such people, like Kovacs, will be able to empathise with the pain the victim is going through perhaps more than you or I ever could, but because of history, are perhaps even less able to fight that basic human instinct to protect oneself at all costs.
Of course there are people for whom I would gladly put my life on the line, and in that situation I don't think it would ever be a concious decision, but it just seems as if the people who do intervene for strangers are perhaps less inhibited by this natural insinct than others and can have a similar reaction to the one I would have if, say, I saw my mother being mugged.
Posted by ally (Member # 600) on :
quote: Or maybe you're confident that everyone who cares about you would rather know you did the heroic thing, even if you're going to have a scar from one ear to the other for the rest of your life. Maybe I'm just a fucking milksop, a weak link in society because I'd think twice about taking the risk of putting myself (and my family) through the last 3 weeks again. It's easy to feel superhuman, isn't it. It's easy to come out with the noble talk when you feel safe. I'd like to lend you the pain I've had in the side of my face for the last four days, and see what speeches you make.
Kovaks, I'm not trying to take anything away from your recent experience. No-one here is calling you a milksop, or anything else. You were the victim of a horrific assault. I have expressed my sympathy and support publicly, on these boards, and privately, in an email I sent you. I'm not belittling you, your situation, or the way in which you are dealing with it. Your argument about the impact an assault can have on the family of the victim as well as the victim him or her self, is a valid point to make in relation to issues of intervention in violent situations.
However, I do object to your tone when you say its easy to come out with noble talk when you feel safe. I appreciate you're in considerable pain and distress, but you don't have the monopoly on pain and distress. I may not have had surgery as a result of assault, but having been brought up in the sort of geographical and socio-cultural area that Louche works in, I've experienced more than my fair share of brutality. I have lived large parts of my life feeling very unsafe indeed, on a daily basis. I've been in a situation once where I was so scared I pissed myself. I've been in hospital, I've had broken bones. My "heroic speeches" come from a loathing of the culture of aggression, bullying, casual violence, precisely the culture that bred your assailants.
The question Sabian asked was would you intervene in a situation? Would you get involved? My answer to that is yes. I would. The level of my involvement is a judgement call that I would make in relation to a given situation. I wouldn't wade in fists flying every time. However, I can call the police, I can shout and scream, I can run for help, I can pick up a stick and hit someone across the back of the legs with it, I can administer first aid, I can make witness statements. Getting involved can happen on all sorts of levels. It's not about playing hero. Whatever your involvement is, though, it's got to be better than just walking away.
Posted by dervish (Member # 727) on :
I'm new so don't know if I can be so personal, but this a deep topic sabian and one I think every one has questioned themselves on at some time.
I have stepped in and helped and have been shit scared in retrospect and grateful I got way with it. Other times I have walked away and have despised myself afterwards for my cowardice.
Fear is a big factor and experiences like kovacs show it makes real sense to feel it, but I don't think it is so simple that fear explans it all. People who don't call the police from behind their curtains whilst someone is being murdered outside aren't being held back by fear.
I think we learn who we are at some fundamental level in our childhood. Our parents can teach it us, but there is a much more common way, and that is our own experince. I figure that if we see too much injustice in our own lives, or for those we care about in our childhood we have two ways to go, denial and growing a hard heart or hard-wiring into ourselves a feeling that injustice is wrong: a determination we won't let it happen when we have enough power to stop it.
I figure you learned early that you could stop injustice with enough bottle sabian. You know more than others that sometimes if you take a risk, it pays off. It balances the fear factor in you. The power of what you learned as a kid is goung stronger than any lesson you learned since, perhaps?
Maybe other people never had to learn it and so its harder for them to forget their fear; or maybe their hard wiring left them self-centred. Perhaps most people are so out in the middle of the two they are immoblised when these situations happen and its too late afterwards. (How many times that has happend to me.)
imo it isn't so much that you step in when others don't that makes you heroic, but that you want your kids to live in a world with integrity that gives you the edge with me. If more of us kids were brought up like that, than perhaps when one person like you started to fight back, there'd be a bigger crowd on your side supporting you.
Posted by kovacs (Member # 28) on :
I apologise for my tone, Ally. It was partly due to the fact that I felt like a vice was pressing ever harder into my temple and bridge of my nose with each word I typed, as a timely reminder of what violence can do. My post wasn't really meant as a direct riposte to you anyway, more an intervention against what seemed the dominant tone of the thread.
The irony is that despite seeming to epitomise the "step back, think twice and look after number one" approach in this thread, I do very much believe in the idea of people stepping in to help strangers -- whether that's backing them up when they're being bullied, or offering support in a more peaceable way. I do think our society would be generally better if we all looked out for others more, as well as for our own interests. Your post shows that there are indeed lots of ways, apart from putting up your fists, that you can be a good samaritan.
As another small example of "stepping in", quite recently I saw a cat writhing and yowling in the gutter near my home -- unfortunately crippled by a driver who didn't stop. While a couple of other people found out whose pet it was, knocked on her door and consoled the poor lady, I phoned the RSPCA and an emergency vet. Sadly or mercifully, by the time someone had brought out a cardboard box -- a small crowd now gathered around to help and to comfort -- the cat had stopped twitching. I put an In Sympathy card through the owner's letterbox next day and they posted me a thank you card the following week. For a short time, around the cat's death, there was quite a gratifying sense of community in the street.
So it might seem a mawkish story, but it could be used to show different types of "good deed". I am still very firmly behind the idea of doing what you can to help other people in trouble, and you're absolutely right that this needn't involve any kind of physical heroism -- after all, most of us don't have Sabian's bodily presence or perhaps his confidence.
My only real points, perhaps argued much too aggressively above, were that
a) we really should remember how easily we can get damaged, and bear it in mind -- not necessarily letting it put us off ever getting involved in a violent situation, but just as a caution and counterweight. There's no advantage at all in going to "rescue" some poor soul who's getting a beating, and becoming a second victim yourself.
b) we should also remember how much our friends and families suffer when we're injured. I'm sounding really banal but it's not something I really thought about before, as I said above...it's one thing to reckon "I can take a beating, so I'll take the risk and help" and another to bear in mind how it's going to affect the people who love you and have to look after you when you're bust-up.
Probably finally on this thread, because I think me talking about violence and fighting inevitably becomes too much about my personal situation right now, and so hinders any more objective discussion:
It's interesting how Philomel's moral question applies to this. On her thread, it seemed everyone would save a family member or loved one before they'd save a stranger.
In the kind of situation being posited on this thread, the question seems to be "would you risk injury to yourself in order to prevent or lessen injury to a stranger."
Laudably, a lot of people have said they would take that risk. I entirely understand it and in principle I definitely feel the same way myself...in practice I would be slightly warier than usual right now but it would still be my natural instinct.
But what if it wasn't you stepping in, but someone close to you: as this is mainly about men I suppose, consider your dad, brother or boyfriend.
He might not be able to face the idea that he walked on by to save his own skin.
But if it was a choice between him avoiding trouble and in so doing allowing a stranger to be hurt, OR stepping in, doing the principled thing and being severely injured, crippled or killed, wouldn't you opt for his safety over the stranger's?
If your dad was in hospital because he tried to stop someone getting a kicking, would "he did the right thing" be enough consolation to stop you wishing he'd walked off in the other direction?
I'm afraid I would opt for my dad's safety in this case. And my point is that your family would probably opt for you doing the same thing, if the alternative was having you badly injured. To repeat myself, I don't feel we have an absolutely independent choice over what danger we put ourselves in, and we should consider the effect that having the shit kicked out of us would have on people who care about us, as well as judging whether we personally think we can take it.
Posted by Octavia (Member # 398) on :
I've just asked myself that question, Ko, and been slightly surprised at the answer. I would regard a male friend with less respect if I was with them and they walked away from a situation that I thought they could/should have done something about. I should probably hedge that about with all sorts of "if"s, but if we were in the vicinity and someone vulnerable was being threatened, I'd be shocked if they didn't feel obliged to do something about it. Agreed, there are many levels of "doing something", but my desire for them/us to get involved in some way (with concomitant respect) would definitely outweigh potential harm possibilities.
It's not something that's ever arisen, so my feelings might be different in a real-life situation - I might also feel differently if a friend or I had ever had your sort of experience - but that's my gut reaction now.
Posted by ally (Member # 600) on :
quote: But what if it wasn't you stepping in, but someone close to you: as this is mainly about men I suppose, consider your dad, brother or boyfriend. He might not be able to face the idea that he walked on by to save his own skin. But if it was a choice between him avoiding trouble and in so doing allowing a stranger to be hurt, OR stepping in, doing the principled thing and being severely injured, crippled or killed, wouldn't you opt for his safety over the stranger's? If your dad was in hospital because he tried to stop someone getting a kicking, would "he did the right thing" be enough consolation to stop you wishing he'd walked off in the other direction? I'm afraid I would opt for my dad's safety in this case. And my point is that your family would probably opt for you doing the same thing, if the alternative was having you badly injured. To repeat myself, I don't feel we have an absolutely independent choice over what danger we put ourselves in, and we should consider the effect that having the shit kicked out of us would have on people who care about us, as well as judging whether we personally think we can take it.
I agree absolutely that an awareness of risk is essential. In the current social and cultural climate, where it seems as if the level of violence generally, and the use of weapons in particular, is growing in British cities, it would be foolhardy in the extreme not to consider the risks involved in intervention in an aggressive situation. The thing is, the level of risk is never a given. It is only available for consideration after the event. Also, for many people, your brain tells you to act before it tells you to consider the risk.
Like Octavia, I asked myself your question. I was unable to answer it because the choice is a hypothetical one. I would want my father/husband/friend to intervene. I would not want them to get hurt. To my mind though, the correlation between the two is by no means direct, or fixed.
I will concede that I am less likely to involve myself in a violent situation now than I was, say, five years ago. I would also be more concerned about the possible outcome if a friend was to intervene than I would have been in the past. I feel that the likelihood of assault is greater, and that the assault is likely to be more serious too.
Now, though, I have a mobile phone. I saw a fight a few weeks ago, and I was able to stand ten yards away from it and phone the police. They arrived in seconds. I could not have done that five years ago, because I didn't own a mobile phone then.
I think the principle of intervention and involvement is important, but I also agree with the point you're making about the possible outcomes. I know I would be more upset if Al was hurt than if I was myself. I know he would be more upset if I was hurt than if he was. You are absolutely right to point out that the effects of injury are felt by more people than just the injured. I think the consideration should be that, as the risks change over time, so your approach to involvement needs to adapt.
Posted by kovacs (Member # 28) on :
Well, maybe it comes down to the "could" in "could/should". For me, my response would almost work on a top-trumps system, where you calculate your odds against their stats very quickly.
So personally, if I was on my own and came across one guy threatening a woman, I would steam in without much thought. (Unless he clearly seemed armed or had mates around him.)
If it was two guys, I'd pause for longer. Other factors would come into play: is anyone else around, how big are the guys, could they be armed, do I have a phone to call the police, if I shout is anyone going to come running. (If it was two fifteen or sixteen year-olds, I reckon I'd still behave as in the first option above... I resist the idea of anyone, including myself, being intimidated by hard-nut kids)
If it was three guys or more: frankly, what's the point of me trying to fight them? As I said, you're just going to get two victims instead of one. That's not to say I wouldn't do anything, but that anything would be more like running off to get help, calling the cops or knocking on the nearest door.
You do have to use your noggin.
Posted by damo (Member # 722) on :
sorry that was just shite and adds nothing to this discussion.
[ 29.08.2004, 19:03: Message edited by: damo ]
Posted by Octavia (Member # 398) on :
quote:Originally posted by kovacs: You do have to use your noggin.
And not just as today's weapon of offence/defence of choice.
Posted by sabian (Member # 6) on :
This is another thing that I've found uniquely British (maybe else where too, but I only have the UK and the US as reference points). And, this probably would be suited to another thread entirely, but here it goes anyway.
quote:Originally posted by kovacs: As another small example of "stepping in", quite recently I saw a cat writhing and yowling in the gutter near my home -- unfortunately crippled by a driver who didn't stop. While a couple of other people found out whose pet it was, knocked on her door and consoled the poor lady, I phoned the RSPCA and an emergency vet. Sadly or mercifully, by the time someone had brought out a cardboard box -- a small crowd now gathered around to help and to comfort -- the cat had stopped twitching. I put an In Sympathy card through the owner's letterbox next day and they posted me a thank you card the following week. For a short time, around the cat's death, there was quite a gratifying sense of community in the street.
Suppose the cat in the gutter was a bicyclist or a pedestrian... In all honesty, how many of your 'community' would be there with you? I've always found it very 'weird' that animals are treated better here than humans are. I read somewhere (make me find the link, I dare you!) that monies donated to charity broke down in order of amounts: 1. Animals / Pets 2. Children 3. Mental health 4. Elderly
How many protests have been led in the name of Animal Protection versus protests against the despicable way that the elderly are treated? How can PETA have more 'clout' than the NSPCC? How many more times do I have to listen to a vegitarian's rant about why cancer treating drugs should not be tested on animals when hundreds, if not thousands, lay in a hospice waiting to die because there isn't any treatment for their illness?
I'm not taking anything away from your experience, Kovacs, but I am saying that I think the example doesn't fit here. It's easy to 'help' out a cat because there is no expectation of involvement. You stick around until the vet shows up or you donate your cash to Battersea, but that's the end of it. No potentional witness enquiries. No real physical risk to yourself. No involvement in the end result.
quote:Originally posted by kovacs: If your dad was in hospital because he tried to stop someone getting a kicking, would "he did the right thing" be enough consolation to stop you wishing he'd walked off in the other direction?
I would feel the same way I would if a loved one had died. Initially, I'd want to place blame on someone/something. I am an atheist through and through, but when someone I love dies, I guarentee the first thing I'll say is "Why God, why?". It is human nature to assign blame. So, had my father been put in hospital because he choose to help someone, yes I would think he should have walked by and not done anything. But, later, when the 'shock' of his conditioned wore off and I had time to rationalise what happened. I would be very happy that he did the 'right' thing. If he felt there was a need to step in, to the point where he could be harmed, then yes he should have and at all costs. It's not about *you* or your ego when you do stuff like this... It's just about doing what you feel is right and protecting those that need it.
If *everyone* worried more about their well-being or the feelings of their loved ones should something bad happen, we wouldn't have any police force, any fire service, doctors, or nurses (or, judging by the increased levels of violence in schools, even teachers). Kovacs, you say not thinking of your loved ones during times like this is selfish. I say worrying about those in your sphere of influence in someone else's time of needs is more-so.
This may sound weird coming from an American who, in priciple, despises all things 'hippy-like' and community spirit. But, because of this "ME" culture that has evolved from the 'free love' movement in the late 60s, society has gone to hell in a handbasket. Looking out for number 1 is ok sometimes... But, damnit, if I were in trouble I would hope someone had the courage to stand up and offer their assistance *before* I was stabbed/beaten/robbed, not after when the damage is done.
Posted by kovacs (Member # 28) on :
quote:Originally posted by sabian: Suppose the cat in the gutter was a bicyclist or a pedestrian... In all honesty, how many of your 'community' would be there with you?
I don't really agree with your suggestion that people would be more helpful and sympathetic towards a cat than a pedestrian. I saw a motorcyclist knocked off his bike a couple of months before the cat incident, and there was an equal-sized crowd of people trying to help, phoning the emergency services, reassuring the guy and so on. As it happened on Kensington High Street, there was far less chance for any sense of community than there would be on a little road where it's happened to your neighbour and your other neighbours are the ones who've come out to help.
I think you're on a different tack here, but no, I don't agree that a mown-down cat gets more attention than a human in a similar state.
quote: It's easy to 'help' out a cat because there is no expectation of involvement. You stick around until the vet shows up or you donate your cash to Battersea, but that's the end of it. No potentional witness enquiries. No real physical risk to yourself. No involvement in the end result.
This is to say that something is socially useful and morally good only in proportion to how much risk you're in yourself!
I reject that...I think that's a misguided attitude. You seem to be arguing that if you're not putting yourself in physical danger (not at risk of the cat's mates coming after you?) your behavior is "less worthy", because "easier", than something where you could get hurt.
Well, I'll accept that it's easier in some ways, in that you're not risking damage to yourself. In my cat example, obviously in a small way I spent money, time and effort in bothering to give the owner an In Sympathy card, and I expect it made her feel better in a small way about an important loss. I didn't step out in front of the car and try to force it to stop before it hit the cat, but I did something for a stranger and I think that's still a valid gesture.
On a less piddling scale than my little good deed, what about someone who helps with a soup kitchen for the homeless. They might give 8 hours a day on a voluntary basis to help feed people. They're not fighting or taking any punches... is that "easier" and not worth giving credit for?
And anyway, I would say that little things are important, as well as bigger things like putting your safety at risk for someone else. Stepping in to stop someone being physically bullied is an act of heroism, but isn't it also important to, say, do the shopping for a pensioner in your area, or even just a lot of tiny good acts like giving up your seat, opening doors for people, carrying their heavy bags?
You're linking your "stepping in" to a broader social picture -- the idea that it would be better if more people acted that way -- but I think smaller acts that don't involve physical risk also add up significantly to a better way of behaving and a better society.
quote:It's not about *you* or your ego when you do stuff like this... It's just about doing what you feel is right and protecting those that need it.
My whole point was it's not about *you*... it's about you and the people who care about you; the people who don't want you to get injured, crippled or killed by wading into danger. I'm not arguing that you should protect your ego and yourself at all costs. I'm arguing that you getting hurt has a huge effect on a lot of people close to you.
I was saying that the people close to you matter more, perhaps, than a stranger who needs your help. I know that's not really moral but it's how I would make that difficult decision.
quote:Kovacs, you say not thinking of your loved ones during times like this is selfish. I say worrying about those in your sphere of influence in someone else's time of needs is more-so.
Well, I can deal with the fact that we disagree here, and I hope you don't hold me in less regard for being more "selfish" in that I would have to put the interests of my more immediate social sphere before a total stranger's needs, if it came to a decision.
If saving someone from a beating was going to mean my family had me as a severely scarred and/or disabled shell for the rest of my life, I would choose the more "selfish" option there.
quote: But, because of this "ME" culture that has evolved from the 'free love' movement in the late 60s, society has gone to hell in a handbasket. Looking out for number 1 is ok sometimes... But, damnit, if I were in trouble I would hope someone had the courage to stand up and offer their assistance *before* I was stabbed/beaten/robbed, not after when the damage is done.
It's because you seem to be saying our individual behaviour affects society more broadly that I'm surprised if you look down upon or dismiss smaller acts of "goodness"... and regard them as lesser because they're "easy" and don't involve the risk of personal injury.
Posted by 2@ (Member # 715) on :
quote:Originally posted by kovacs: If it was three guys or more: frankly, what's the point of me trying to fight them? As I said, you're just going to get two victims instead of one. That's not to say I wouldn't do anything, but that anything would be more like running off to get help, calling the cops or knocking on the nearest door.
You do have to use your noggin.
On the money. The point of 'stepping in' is to help someone. If you are not suitably equipped to help (i.e. you'll simply take an additional beating), then stepping in is simply not an option. So to Plan B - getting help, as fast as you can.
Posted by Black Mask (Member # 185) on :
I'm stunned no-one has used the very obvious kovacs gag yet.
On Topic: Always carry a knife.
Posted by 2@ (Member # 715) on :
quote:Originally posted by Black Mask: I'm stunned no-one has used the very obvious kovacs gag yet.
On Topic: Always carry a knife.
Just like a wop. Brings a knife to a gunfight.
Posted by Roy (Member # 705) on :
So what is the very obvious (not to me) Kovacs gag?
![[Mad]](mad.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)