Defending the undefended

I was reluctant to use this story, because of the people insisting that it isn't real. That's why I appreciate that this article focuses on that part:

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/nbcblk/brickgate-revives-age-old-argument-black-men-women-rcna104423

A woman posted a video from the hospital saying that a man had asked her for her phone number, and when she refused he hit her with a brick. She focused on the men who were standing around and did not help her.

Perhaps it was that sense of being accused that caused so many men to respond. There were men saying she should have just given him her number, and women talking about their Google phone numbers, which they use to get out of giving their real numbers. 

I definitely remember some white men in politics saying that maybe if girls had just been nicer to Elliot Rodger, maybe he wouldn't have shot so many people.

There were men saying she deserved it. 

There were also men saying that they need to get home to their family, and why should they put their own selves at risk for some other woman? There were women answering that by pointing out that often a verbal warning from another man would suffice.  

I think that is largely true.

Safety concerns can be real. It's been a few years, but if you say "Tri-Met stabbing" Portland still remembers that when three men stood up to a man harassing two young Black women, all three were stabbed, two fatally.

https://jezebel.com/trimet-max-stabbing-victim-says-portland-has-a-white-sa-1795729516 

(Note: There have been at least two other stabbings that you might think of, but you will probably think of this one first.)

That danger can be real, but there is also a reason that these angry, violent men are choosing Black women. 

The "Brickgate" article's biggest weakness is that it never mentions misogynoir. 

There is prejudice, and that includes racism and sexism, and the feeling that you should be able to have people "lower" than you at your disposal; that you should be able to exert authority over them.

Beyond that, there is the way they combine. There is that there is also anti-Blackness on top of racism, and that sometimes it can be internalized. 

That it can feel safer to attack a Black woman than a white woman, or a Black man.

That there can be complicity among even those who would not attack, because they can still justify the attack, and work really hard to justify their own non-involvement.

I wrote not long ago that for a lot of things we rely upon convention and unwritten rules, like standing in line. There are people who prosper from trampling over those conventions because other people are more uncomfortable with addressing the violations than allowing them.

If someone cuts in front of me in line, maybe I don't care that much; if someone is about to be physically assaulted, I better not be okay with that.

I am grateful many people came to the defense of Damien Pickett; there should have been similar help for Roda Osman. Even just asking, "Do you need some help?" "What's going on?' could have been enough. A lot of the worst behavior fades away under attention.

 There is a lot in this about power dynamics, but yes, if there was a woman attacking a man for not giving her his phone number, yes, we should come to his defense too. It's harder to picture, isn't it?

There's a reason for that.

When feeling defensive

This was not what I thought I was going to write about today, but the sudden news story does relate:

https://www.sltrib.com/news/politics/2023/09/15/rare-public-rebuke-lds-church/

In rare public rebuke, LDS Church condemns Tim Ballard’s ‘morally unacceptable’ behavior

I am glad something was said, and hopeful that it can undo some of the damage that has been done.

I worry that it won't.

So many members were so enamored of Tim Ballard and so thrilled with the movie, that I am concerned they might have a hard time giving that up.

I think this might be a time to re-examine those feelings, and try to come up with something better.

First of all, a desire to protect children is good. 

Children are vulnerable. They don't generally have money or political power or physical strength. There is an expectation that their parents will protect them, but sometimes parents do not have the ability, sometimes they do not have the desire, and sometimes parents are the threat. 

Children are also still developing, where their experiences can have a more profound influence on them than similar experiences would have on an adult. 

Children should be nurtured and protected, and it is good to know that and want to help.

Next, examine that mania for Tim Ballard and Operation Underground Railroad.

The first question may be whether you had ignored previous signs. There were many articles indicating not only that the organization was misguided on how best to help trafficking victims but also that Ballard himself was not a reliable source of information.

This includes Ballard recently being asked to step down from OUR, and that much of the information that led to the public rebuke came from a criminal investigation.

It would be possible to decide Ballard was a good man but misguided, or that the organization was still good even if Ballard was flawed, but it is probably not a coincidence that the flawed person, the flawed mission, and the flawed organization all go together.

There may be room here to look at what sources of information you are using, and what frame of reference you have for taking in that information. That is a much bigger topic.

It would certainly also be possible to decide that this is persecution due to political correctness; denial seems to be the route Ballard himself is taking:

https://www.fox13now.com/news/local-news/tim-ballard-responds-to-condemnation-from-his-own-church

I hope that church members will respect the words of acting president of the Quorum of the Twelve, M. Russell Ballard over a man who has been let go by the organization he started, but I worry.

Threatened patriarchy's primary tool are pride and anger. They don't leave one full of charity and sensitive to the Spirit.

I have often thought that maybe the reason the church never openly condemned Trump was because so many people would choose Trump and leave the church, whereas maybe if they stayed those messages about welcoming immigrants and the worth of souls and not hating would touch their hearts.

Except they were spending more time listening to messages that hardened their hearts. Instead, many of the people who knew the hate was wrong became alienated.

I don't have answers for everything; that is not my role.

On an individual level, I can recommend searching the heart, and seeing what love you find in it. If you keep finding anger and condemnation of others, you are probably on the wrong track.

If you keep feeling more love, and you are getting answers for ways to serve better and to make things better, then that seems like a good position, and you will be able to find ways to help.

Those ways will probably not involve the armed storming of compounds or a lot of fistfights. More likely it will involve a listening ear, encouraging words, and making sure that people have food and clothing and shelter. Making sure children have enough to eat is a huge way of helping them and the world.

If at some point it is right for you to get into a fistfight, that's just a bonus.

Related posts:

https://preparedspork.blogspot.com/2023/07/the-sound-of-distraction-sound-of-hype.html

Fighting the good fight

There may be times when it is appropriate to fight, though it will probably not be a really cool fight with lots of cinematic moves and gunfire. Sometimes, it may just require words.

There are several recent examples that let us explore this. We are going to start with the one that ended up being kind of joyful, at least afterward: the Montgomery Riverfront Brawl

https://www.today.com/news/alabama-montgomery-riverfront-brawl-rcna98690

Perhaps you have seen the video.

Well, I say that like there was only one video, but as the original footage spread, people started sharing other angles, versions with special effects added, commentary, and re-enactments.

People found humor in it, but there are some really not funny things about it, too.

A dinner cruise was returning, and there was a private pontoon boat blocking the dock.

Two employees went to move the boat. There was a Black man and there was also a younger white one who doesn't figure as much in what you see. I don't think he was sure what to do. Pickett, the Black man, was the assistant boat captain so in more of a leadership role. Also, he would have had to respond somehow once he was hit in the face.

Now, I know there are some pretty strong traditions around letting someone else touch your boat, but making 200 people wait for half an hour and you are still ignoring requests to move your boat three steps, well, maybe you should consider yourselves lucky that all that happens is your boat being moved without any damage. 

Except they were drunk and entitled. And racist.

We will spend more time on that, but I want to touch on the response first.

Historically, a group of white people attacking a Black person has ended far too often in death. Pickett's defenders came quickly, but he already had bruised ribs and bumps on the head. 

That a Black man was successfully defended and that the police did not come in and start clubbing the Black people is huge, especially in the South. 

There is a disorderly conduct charge against one of the defenders. The folding chair was the most iconic part of the brawl, but perhaps it was over the top.

You will see that the mayor has refrained from calling the incident racially charged, but there are clear racial elements. 

In general, people rely on conventions, like not cutting in line. Politeness does not provide clear instructions for what to do when someone is violating those unspoken rules. There are people who benefit from ignoring those conventions.

That in itself might be race-neutral, but which people are more likely to do that is often tied in with privilege, as well as whom it is safe to do that to.

That these drunken white people felt safe ignoring a Black man who was not only right but acting in a professional capacity, and then felt safe assaulting him... that has a racial component.

Add to the mix that Donald Trump had just given a "fiery" speech in Montgomery four days earlier, and connections have been drawn between Trump rallies and hate crimes. 

https://www.local10.com/gallery/news/2023/08/05/trump-in-fiery-speech-in-alabama-boasts-he-needs-one-more-indictment-to-close-out-this-election

https://www.vox.com/2019/3/24/18279807/trump-hate-crimes-study-white-nationalism

So here is when you can get to defend people: when it is against oppression and against marginalization. 

There are going to be a lot of instincts that will feel inhibiting for that, and those are things we need to root out.

This will become more obvious as we talk about other incidents.

Related reading:

https://www.nytimes.com/2023/08/09/opinion/montgomery-brawl.html

Laban

Note: I assume that that most of my readers for this blog are also members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints, and so will be familiar with this story. If not, you can find it in the third and fourth chapters of 1 Nephi in the Book of Mormon:

https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/scriptures/bofm/1-ne/3?lang=eng

Continuing with violence, let's spend a little time on Laban in the Book of Mormon.

I recently saw a former member complaining about how good could Nephi or God really be, if they allow this cold-blooded murder. I can totally see the reasoning going the other way, with current members who believe they are good liking the idea of getting a chance to decapitate someone.

Usually, when we talk about the story, we focus on how important it was that they had the plates so that they could preserve their language and knowledge. I think we can take a moment to be grateful for the printing press and digital media storage and a variety of ways to maintain and share knowledge now. That was not the case for Lehi's family.

While we know that the brass plates contained writings of Isaiah and other records -- which obviously were recorded elsewhere because we got them in the Bible -- probably for proximity and scarcity, Laban's copy was the only option for Lehi's family. That importance is understood, and that understanding is important context.

We might not pay enough attention to the steps leading up to it. 

First, Laban was asked for the plates outright by Laman. Laban refused, called Laman a thief and threatened his life, but at this point Laban's head was still firmly attached to his shoulders.

Okay, he has no real motivation to give up the records, so the brothers move on to the next plan: offering Laban all of the family's gold, silver, and precious things in exchange.

We know the treasure appealed to Laban, because he stole it, and tried to have the brothers killed; then it's finders-keepers, right?

Laban could have kept his head and gotten treasure by just being a slightly better person. 

Generally when we are going over it, the emphasis is on how they didn't get the plates until Nephi was led by the Spirit; casting lots and coming up with their own plans did not work.

That is a fair point, but let's imagine that Nephi's first step was trying to be led by the Spirit... do you think he would have been led right to decapitation?

Laban appears to have been pretty despicable, but he still got multiple chances.

It's just not likely that you are going to get a chance to wail on someone. More to the point, you shouldn't want to.

We know that even when Jesus was driving the money changers from the temple, and had made a scourge, he still didn't hit the people selling doves or turn over that table; which could have terribly injured the birds. He just told their sellers to get the birds out. (John 2:16, and others)

More than once I have read stories in church magazines of members being robbed, and giving the money willingly or being kind to the mugger, and not only staying safe but sometimes helping the thief.

As familiar as I am with the urge to punch some jerk in the face, I know too much about the possibility of serious brain injury to do it under any but the most dire circumstances.

I'm not saying that in the event of someone raping or murdering your family that you have to let them. I do feel pretty comfortable saying that your wallet or the contents of your glove box or even your car are not worth someone else's life.

Too much desire to be violent -- to prove your toughness and strength and superiority -- well, these are the people who are more likely to annihilate their families than save them. It's not a short path to becoming a family annihilator, but along the way there are many thoughts and incidents that are not kind and loving.

I know sometimes a good fight looks fun, and there are times when self-defense is appropriate, but given our mandate to be like Christ, what kinds of thoughts and feelings should we be having?

Those will affect our actions.