BS: The victim is always guilty

Subject: RE: BS: The victim is always guilty
From: autolycus
Date: 27 Feb 07 - 07:10 AM

Bente (hallo) reminded me of a relevant bit of Marx Brothers.

   Groucho as new President (?) of Fredonia: We'll start with old business.

   member of Cabinet: What about the old taxes?

   G.:             That's new business.
No old business? Right,we'll move on to new business.

   m.o.c. again.   Now about those taxes.

   G:             Sorry,that's old business.




   The answer to not taking any responsibility isn't to get on with your job;it's to take your resposibility. Which people are not usually willing to do.

   That's because people confuse taking their responsibility with taking all responsibility - not the same thing.

   They also confuse taking any responsibility with being blamed - also not the same thing.

   Businesses and companies make the same mistakes,and are as much (if not more) into shifting responsibility elsewhere as anyone.

   journalists help in this process by having the question "So who's to blame?" to hand for every problem,thereby supporting that move by individuals.


   Zero MOstel satirised this when investigating the causes of World War 2,climaxing with the question,

   "And what was Pearl Harbour doing in the Pacific in the first place?"






       Ivor






      Ivor

Subject: RE: BS: The victim is always guilty
From: Grab
Date: 27 Feb 07 - 06:09 AM

while the construction and unifictaion of pictures to text was smashed to pieces.

In other words, only a partial backup.

Graham.

Subject: RE: BS: The victim is always guilty
From: Geoff the Duck
Date: 27 Feb 07 - 05:16 AM

Wayback machine can be very interesting and occasionally useful for finding informsation which used to be on a site which no longer exists. When Mudcat is down, you can read old threads from specific dates which have been archived there, for instance.
Sometimes it does not help, though. Some times the site owners have requested that the archive doesn't store their data. Sometimes there ate copyright disputes, so stuff cannot be kept. Sometimes, particularly with web sites where a blue clicky does not link directly to another web page but instead runs a script which does something, or refers you to a location which hasn't got an equivalent within the archive.
That said, the Internet Archive also contains stuff which is NOT the Wayback Machine. You can download Grateful Dead concert and other bands who have given the archive permission to freely distribute their work (there's a lot of bluegrass, punk rock and weird stuff).
Quack!
GtD.

Subject: RE: BS: The victim is always guilty
From: Uncle_DaveO
Date: 26 Feb 07 - 12:09 PM

Graham, I understood Donuel to say that he did back up, but that for reasons presently unknown the data is not now usable.

And besides that, the loss of the website was not merely the result of a technical glitch, but the malevolent action of the ISP. That's a risk which the normal person doesn't ordinarily contemplate, and I don't believe that contributory negligence (which is the legal name for the doctrine you're describing) applies against malicious acts.

Dave Oesterreich

Subject: RE: BS: The victim is always guilty
From: Grab
Date: 26 Feb 07 - 08:08 AM

Wow, so by losing your website (which you *should* have been smart enough to back up, so no sympathy there), you're in the same category as people who were subjected to unethical medical experimentation without their knowledge...

Is it just me, or does this not sound quite right?

Maybe there's a need to differentiate between "victims". Let's have some categories.

1) people who are acted against by someone else against their will or without their knowledge/consent, and thereby lose time/money/work/health/life;
2) people who are warned by someone else that there is a chance of something going wrong, but choose to take that chance, and thereby lose time/money/work/health/life;
3) people who lose time/money/work/health/life without warning from an event which could not reasonably have been foreseen.

Category (1) deserves the offender being punished. Victims of violence, theft, etc.

Category (3) deserves sympathy and assistance, but there's no-one available to punish. The people who died in the heatwave in France fit this category.

Category (2) deserves zero sympathy, zero assistance and zero punishment, because they're *not* victims. If you've chosen to take a risk, you can't claim to be a victim when it goes wrong. I'm afraid your loss of art off your website falls into category 2.

*EVERYONE* who has owned a computer for a significant time knows about backups. Shit happens, and if you fail to make backups, you're betting against failure. Someone who loses a bet is *not* a victim, they're just an unlucky gambler. If you were a schoolkid who'd never heard of backups, you might be able to argue for category (3) - but you're an adult with a lot of years' experience of using PCs, so that won't wash.

Graham.

Subject: RE: BS: The victim is always guilty
From: ragdall
Date: 25 Feb 07 - 05:28 PM

Geoff the Duck,
The Wayback Machine is awesome! Thank you for posting the link. It's the first I'd heard of it.

rags

Subject: RE: BS: The victim is always guilty
From: Donuel
Date: 25 Feb 07 - 10:36 AM

geof, Jon, bdfk

Thanks for the places to look.

There is one sonnet about a father and his son that I will continue to look for.

Subject: RE: BS: The victim is always guilty
From: Donuel
Date: 25 Feb 07 - 10:29 AM

Susan, you really get it.

Before I can ask others to see all the ways in which we are encouraged to VILLIFY THE VICTIM, I must see how I may be doing so my self.

In literature and the screen plays the anti hero victimizes people with applause and sympathy. Corperations victimize people with lawyers and more money than god. Some sad religious movements victimize people with a piety of greed. The legal system victimize the poor more often than the rich.

The first step to fight back was once captured in a movie phrase
"I sick and tired of it, and I'm not going to take it anymore!"

Susan, to be sick and tired of it, is not being mean. ITs being inlightened.


_________________________________________________________________

The rich and war makers need victims for their fule and will never apologize. They will never stop without resistence.

The unrepentant want the world to forget.
Japan does not want their people to know of the mass produced chemical and germ warfare. Their children were never told about Iwo Jima. They want to forget the mass produced murder and rape and torture.

It is not just being unrepentant but a fear of personal guilt that drives Germans to hide the where abouts of German war criminals.

The fear of guilt will drive many Americans to ignore and hide from the Bush atrocities. They too will remain unrepentant. The flag is a common hiding place. Religion is another sanctuary that forgives and sanctifies killers.

Who among us would willingly enter into self destruction?
The war supporters on every side will always be guilty in the eyes of the victims and the dead.
The war supporters will always want to see themselves as innocent.

To prevent the eternal eye for an eye retribution we are asked to forgive. For those of us who after much soul searching can not forgive, we must never let them forget.

For that reason I believe it is fair and just to ask war supporters if they feel any personal respondisibility for even a single death that resulted from the war they promoted.

If I ask George Bush or John Public, "Have you ever killed a man woman or child by suporting this pre emptive invasion?",

I will never expect an honest answer. I will never expect their repentence.

I just want to plant the question deep in their minds where it may secretly grow.

Subject: RE: BS: The victim is always guilty
From: The Fooles Troupe
Date: 24 Feb 07 - 04:47 PM

"Then Noise Man calls the police and presses charges against Sword Man for breaking and entering and for threatening him with a weapon! So the victim of the break-in is guilty of disturbing his neighbour (and of plain old smut-mindedness), and the victim of the noise disturbance is guilty of reacting to it by trying to stop a crime! "

So inconsiderate wanker who cannot be bothered to not annoy his neighbour - thru playing stuff too loud - wins out over caring neighbour who is trying to do the socially demanded thing.

No wonder people just put their fingers in their ears and ignore calls for help!

Subject: RE: BS: The victim is always guilty
From: wysiwyg
Date: 24 Feb 07 - 03:07 PM

Sharon, I think I'm going to springboard from my 1-4 as above, to your assessment of the phrasing, and go to:

"This is a Level ___ Screwing," meaning I will no longer look to how bad I think I was screwed, but how far long the line of dealing with it I think I am. (Internal talking to Self, in place of accusing Other.) I have a feeling that the Level 1 stuff feels so bad when it happens partly because it always seems so shocking, and has not yet been worked through or been subjected to getting older, wiser, sadder, and-- sometimes-- meaner. :~)

~Susan

Subject: RE: BS: The victim is always guilty
From: SharonA
Date: 24 Feb 07 - 01:40 PM

I guess so, Susan. Also see the phrase "sadder but wiser."

And I love your axiom for screwings 1, 2, 3 and 4 !

Anybody see the recent news story about the guy who heard noises coming from his upstairs neighbor's apartment that sounded like a rape-in-progress? The guy downstairs had no phone to call the police, so he grabbed the only weapon he had at hand -- an antique sword -- ran upstairs and banged on the neighbor's door. No answer. So Sword Man broke down the door, demanded to know where the woman was, and forced Noise Man at sword-point to tour the apartment and demonstrate that there was no rape victim. Turns out Noise Man had been watching a pornographic movie on TV at high volume.

Then Noise Man calls the police and presses charges against Sword Man for breaking and entering and for threatening him with a weapon! So the victim of the break-in is guilty of disturbing his neighbor (and of plain old smut-mindedness), and the victim of the noise disturbance is guilty of reacting to it by trying to stop a crime!

Subject: RE: BS: The victim is always guilty
From: wysiwyg
Date: 24 Feb 07 - 01:12 PM

We live in a blame culture, where nobody takes responsibility for their actions.

Here's another thread I welome, because it so-conveniently relates to something I have been musing about for quite awhile.

I've been around long enough to see several legal defenses based on how the perpetrator had, earlier, been victimized themselves into numb unthinking and, thus, could not have formed the intent required to prove culpability for the crime charged. And then a few years later, after the type of hurt done to the perpetrator has become a public cause with new laws, new shelters, and new professional specialties-- on Dr. Phil, yet! :~) -- that defense becomes no longer viable legally. Because "we all know better now, and if they got hurt that way they should have known by now where to get help and not need to be acting out about it anymore."

After several years of watching that pattern, and the ebb and flow of the court system's handling of cases, I started to wonder about the way people get blamed just in everyday life for the crap forced upon them, that they are somehow expected to have known better than to allow.

Hm.... at what point DO we expect ourselves (not "them") to know better?

The old phrase is, "Screw me once, shame on you. Screw me twice, shame on me." Sometimes it takes a number of times being mistreated before we recognize what was done, how it was done, and what it was in us that let it go on so long-- longer than twice, let's say.

I think because of the societal desire Giok said so well-- not to take responsibility--, that this has resulted in mutual blameshifting. "You shouldn't have done that to me" is answered with "You shouldn't have LET me, and therefore you WANTED that from me."

And I think that attitude doesn't allow for how people actually ARE-- learning beings who, hopefully, get smarter. Maybe not fast enbough to get smart between "screw me once" and "screw me twice." I know of one such situaiton in my own life, which I was blamed for perpetuating, that in all honesty I was just trying to figuire out, through some pretty heay flak from the present and from the past.

My thinking now is, "Screw me once, shame on you. Screw me twice, excuse ME for not reading your mind. Screw me three times, I'm still trying to figure out Screwing number one. Screw me FOUR times-- guess what, I'm SO ready for you now."

I wonder if anyone else would own up to knowing that continuum from the inside? "Ah, I'm older and wiser." Is THAT what that means?

~Susan

Subject: RE: BS: The victim is always guilty
From: Geoff the Duck
Date: 24 Feb 07 - 08:01 AM

Donuel, not sure what you have lost, but sometimes you can find dead web sites using the Wayback Machine, for instance I found THIS PAGEwithout much trouble. I had less success trying links for pictures you blickied from mudcat, but you may have a better idea of what you are looking for.
Quack!
GtD.

Subject: RE: BS: The victim is always guilty
From: kendall
Date: 24 Feb 07 - 07:30 AM

The credit card thing I blame on schools and parents. Why are we not being taught the use of and the dangers of using a credit card? We teach students math, why not teach them what happens if you don't do well in math?
I remember being in the book store of the University of Maine and watching a student puzzling ove her check book. She had no clue how to fill out a check!

Subject: RE: BS: The victim is always guilty
From: John MacKenzie
Date: 24 Feb 07 - 06:57 AM

We live in a blame culture, where nobody takes responsibility for their actions. Where they blame the conduct of children on their environment, and their violence on the video games they play. People who don't look where they are walking sue councils for broken paving slabs that they trip over. never is the truck driver who's truck broke it 10 minutes before the accident held to account. We expect these organisations to be omniscient, and hold them up as examples of uncaring bureaucracies.
We regard over claiming on insurance, and credit card crime as victimless, because the owner of the card is usually compensated for their loss. There is no such thing as a victimless crime, we all pay for it in the end, in higher bank and credit card charges.
Children have no touchstones in their lives any more, they don't have regular mealtimes or bedtimes, they appear to have no rules or to ignore any that are laid down. All we seem to do is complain about kids out of control, and forbid their parents from disciplining them in a manner that befits the behaviour.
We are a selfish and irresponsible society, and all we dream of is our 15 minutes of fame, and our lottery win, our hit record, our payment for our U Tube masterpiece, or anything else that will keep us going through life. Anything that is except working for a living, and earning an honest wage.

I know this doesn't apply to everybody, but it applies to far to many people for this world to continue to be tenable for many.

Giok

Subject: RE: BS: The victim is always guilty
From: bfdk
Date: 24 Feb 07 - 06:03 AM

They may also be cached still with Google. Try searching Google for file names of your work, then instead of hitting the link proper hit the "Cached" version. I haven't actually tried this myself, so I don't know how much or how little you can expect to find, though.

Regarding companies blaming the victims, we just had a very good example of that here over the past days. On Wednesday a severe snow storm hit Denmark, and it snowed for two days clean through. People were advised to stay indoors. Now, the people who missed planes, trains, ferries etc on account of the weather have been told that they can't get a refund on their bookings because the weather was "force majeure". On the other hand people who had booked accommodation, meals etc are being told that the weather was *not* "force majeure", and that they can *not* get a refund on bookings made, as they could have just set off from home earlier in order to get there..

Makes you wonder, doesn't it?

Best wishes,

Bente

Subject: RE: BS: The victim is always guilty
From: ragdall
Date: 24 Feb 07 - 04:56 AM

Donuel,
A person must make a conscious effort to save the online pages to his or her computer for them to be useful for back up. If you are very lucky, you may find cached versions in folders with the names which include "recent" or "cache".

If you can find any html pages from your site, you can retrieve the text you lost from them.

Subject: RE: BS: The victim is always guilty
From: Donuel
Date: 23 Feb 07 - 07:13 PM

Thats kindof you. There is much I don't know about what a computer saves.
I once accidently found the address' of all the web pages I had ever viewed.

____________________

Wounded war veterans, heros or victims?
IF they can't prove they were hurt by the "enemy" they are victims.

Subject: RE: BS: The victim is always guilty
From: ragdall
Date: 23 Feb 07 - 06:58 PM

I was reminded of this when I was blamed for the destruction of much of my art by my internet provider. Everyone assumes that backing up was my fault when in fact I have all sorts of back up while the construction and unifictaion of pictures to text was smashed to pieces. Putting a broken chandelier back together even if you have all the pieces is possible.

Donuel,
It's very sad that you lost the results of so much time and effort.

Are you talking about web pages? If you have backed up all the completed pages by saving them on your computer, you should be able to use them again and put them up on the same, or another, site very easily. If you need help with the method for doing so, please PM me?

rags

Subject: RE: BS: The victim is always guilty
From: Donuel
Date: 23 Feb 07 - 06:52 PM

I think I am the master of the obvious.

Subject: BS: The victim is always guilty
From: Donuel
Date: 23 Feb 07 - 06:45 PM

It was their choice...
You signed the cell phone contract...
The victim was in the wrong place...
The first ammendment does not apply to our customers...
Proper safety procedures and precautions were not taken...
They had a bad reaction to the drug...
It was water damage, so you're not covered by insurance...
We can raise your interest rate for any reason at any time...

Regulations to maintain the comfort and safety of our consumers would cost our customers dearly in the pocket book and make things much worse. (airline industry statement re: Customer bill of rights)


I suspect all the noise blaming victims comes from people and corporations who save money by having no or little liability for their actions.

I think we need a new word and definition for victimhood. The Power/Money that be, have already defiled the words liberal, union, regulation and even the DemoCRAT party.

As a society I see the notion that victims are to blame is gaining traction.

I was reminded of this when I was blamed for the destruction of much of my art by my internet provider. Everyone assumes that backing up was my fault when in fact I have all sorts of back up while the construction and unifictaion of pictures to text was smashed to pieces. Putting a broken chandelier back together even if you have all the pieces is possible.

No matter who you are, if you are a victim, you are screwed.

On the other hand there have been regulations to help victims that have been grossly misused by lawyers as in the case of asbestos lung damage.

Whenever we see compassion for victims it is a big human interest story like someone returning found cash. I think society throws victims into the loser bin. Victims are somehow not smart enough to evade danger or persecution.

Just ask MOST Katrina victims. They were even stripped of citizenship by being called refugees.




Name your victims:

name any global warming victim?

24,000 French elderly who died during a 6 day heat wave.


name US torture victims.

1,900 US military personell who became radiation exposure test subjects. (My sister was one of these. The results are too grumsome to repeat here.)

500 Tuskegee sphyillus test subjects, 200 retarded children from NE orphanages San Francisco germ warfare experiements...etc.

again I suspect all the noise blaming victims comes from people and corporations who save money by having no or little liability for their actions. I think we need a new word and definition for victimhood. The Power/Money that be, have already defiled the words liberal, union, regulation and even the DemoCRAT party.


My short list of corporations that create victims:
credit card companies
drug companies
weapon companies
Phillip Morris
Repulican think tanks (thinking up new victims)