Jump to content

Are You Showing Support for Black Lives Matter in Second Life?


You are about to reply to a thread that has been inactive for 588 days.

Please take a moment to consider if this thread is worth bumping.

Recommended Posts

It's important when damaging the human eye that we use natural as opposed to man-made chemicals. /silliness

Edited by Luna Bliss
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, Scylla Rhiadra said:

But there's also a lot of pretty justified anger behind at least some of the destruction.

I don't give a damn if they burn down a Target; I do care, as you obviously do, if a local ma and pa convenience store gets torched. And I worry, as do you, that the violence is counterproductive, which is certainly the view of right wing agitators who are trying to encourage it. I wish it would end.

I know I'll regret this, but...

The anger IS justified. That is Truth with a cap T. 

The destruction is not. Sorry, but assuming semi-normal brain function and being over the age of, let's guess ten, "we" know it is wrong to steal, vandalize, injure or murder. People can *think* all they want about hurting other people but it does not justify acting upon it. And no, we are not talking about a starving man stealing a loaf of bread.

I DO give a damn if they burn down a Target or a mom and pop, and I was extremely surprised to read you say otherwise. Yes, "they" is not a homogenous entity and it varies greatly who and why. I hope all the people behaving badly (NOT the peaceful protestors or those resisting arrest for that) are caught and FAIRLY treated under the law. That certainly does not mean a curbside execution for taking a WII or breaking a window.

The violence isn't just counterproductive. It is wrong. Full stop.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, Gatogateau said:

I DO give a damn if they burn down a Target or a mom and pop, and I was extremely surprised to read you say otherwise.

I get this. I've said, and will continue to say, that I am anti-violence, and that includes wanton and pointless destruction. And when I say that I don't give a damn if they burn down a Target, I was not saying that they should burn down all Targets, or Walmarts, or whatever -- just that box stores and the corporate machinery of Big Business are a) going to be able to recover pretty quickly from this, and b) that they are also, frankly, part of the larger problem.

I don't want to see anything burned down, to be honest. What I want is truly mass demonstrations of the peaceful kind that make it absolutely clear to those with the levers of power in their hands -- legal, executive, legislative, and corporate -- that they need to do something to address deep, deep problems that are, ultimately, the roots of systemic racism.

But, then, I speak from a position of, relatively speaking, extreme social and racial privilege. If I pass a glittering display of some garment or toy in a shop window, the odds are pretty good that I can afford to buy it -- because, after all, I'm very much a part of the target audience for glittering displays of consumer goods.

I remain absolutely committed to non-violent action. But I'm also not going to bring to bear against those who have been ruthlessly excluded and oppressed the harshest judgements about the sanctity of property that actually emanate from a system that has demonstrated over and over again that it doesn't care about black poverty, violence against blacks, exploitative labour practices that victimize black and brown skinned people (consider why Target and Walmart can offer such "cheap" goods), etc.

The "system," of which Target, Walmart, etc. are very much a part, has been smashing black people in the face for literally centuries. I don't want, and don't advocate for violence and destruction, but there are some pretty big mitigating factors that explain why some blacks might want to smash it right back.

And because I'm all about irony . . . Sony Playstation has announced their full support for BLM, and has refused to censure the protestors, including those who have been looting and destroying stores. When it was suggested to them (on Twitter) that this was going to result in the destruction of their own stores and merchandise, their response (again, on Twitter) was that "things can be replaced. Lives cannot."

Corporate PR, for sure. But also a truth.

Edited by Scylla Rhiadra
Because garble garble garble
  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I mentioned  earlier in the thread a very powerful interview with the writer Kimberley Latrice Jones  where she explains, very powerfully, why people are rioting and looting, and recommends we should be asking not, what are they trying to achieve, or even do we approve or not of what they're doing, but why they feel like rioting and looting in the first place. 

I saw this earlier.  What she has to say has force because she's saying it, and personally I'd rather amplify what she, and people like her, are saying than try to say things on their behalf.    

 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

57 minutes ago, Luna Bliss said:

I hope so. I just hope Trump doesn't start a war in the meantime.

Okay, I finally saw the video with the teargas.  Yes, it was blocked here for awhile.  I knew it would eventually surface.   I think it's unsafe in general for people to be near a president.  It's not safe for the people.  I'm not saying what he did was right though.  I just would not feel safe around presidents in a protest nor even challenging the police I would not feel safe doing that either.  I will tell you the story of my family and how they were brutalized by the police below if anyone wants to hear of a family's horrid ordeal.   

As far as war, I've heard a rumor of another cold war.   But, again, trying to get the facts while so much is going on the world and with the media constantly writing about Trump tweets, it's difficult to find much.  Sylvia posted a link for me to look at it.  I need to look into that link later on today.  

Regarding police brutality.  It reached my family.  No there aren't two sides here to tell the story but I will tell you my sister won a settlement of $100,000 by suing the police and that was the full amount sued for.  Now I will tell the story.  But, we are of European decent and Caucasian, 2nd generation Americans, with my nephew being 3rd generation American, so it's not BLM related.

My nephew was playing loud music one afternoon.  My sister asked my nephew to take the trash out which he did.  The time was about 4:30 in the afternoon, just before dinner time.  As my nephew is dumping the trash into the garbage outside, he is grabbed and throw down onto the ground by an undercover police officer who begins pummeling my nephew's face, damaging one of his eyes for the rest of his life.   My sister in the kitchen, hearing her son cry out, runs outside and tries to pull the undercover police officer off her son, but the undercover police officer begins to beat up my sister.   My sister didn't even fight back, well she's a three-pebble weakling like me, small boned, not very tall, 5 feet tall, no self defense training at that time.  The skirmish is witnessed by a neighbor.   The police are called.  What ensued is my sister and nephew being throw in jail, their bleeding wounds not even taken care of.  They sat in two different jail cells completely shocked and horrified and kind of dumb-struck from the beating or you could say "in shock".  I cannot tell all the details as it's my sisters and nephews story.  Both have had recurring nightmares for nearly 20 years.  I think all of this is indeed a great part of why my sister has been sick for seven years now - she wouldn't talk, wouldn't eat, wouldn't drink, wouldn't bathe, wouldn't move for days but just sit in one place not moving.  My sister still isn't all the way better but after being in the hospital for seven years, she is home now with her husband, and they just bought a new house.  Something to be a new beginning for them.  I hope my sister will get well some day.  She still doesn't want to talk but I still hold out hope she will one day.  Winning the lawsuit a long time ago was really pennies compared to what my sister and nephew have endured.

The undercover police officer said he beat up my nephew because he was playing loud music and it was upsetting his Mom.  The man nearly killed my nephew.  He lost.   My sister and nephew lost very badly too.  Things they may never ever recover from.  

 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Innula Zenovka said:

explains

What do you think, Innula?

Is it the last gasp of the patriarchy where the cruelty and injustice of our stratified society will be revealed?  A cruel society which allows those at the bottom layer to exist without adequate health care and food?  Or is it the beginning of an implosion of monumental proportions that will not resolve and will bring us nothing, the likes of which we've only begun to see?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Trying to get people to talk about the looting instead of police violence is concern trolling. It always comes up when people protest racism and police violence. Those looters are too radical, they'll turn off potential supporters. Colin Kaepernick is too radical, he'll turn off potential supporters. That communist Martin Luther King is too radical, he'll turn off potential supporters. Let's talk about that until you sit down and shut up and we can get back to ignoring you.

  • Like 4
  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, FairreLilette said:

The undercover police officer said he beat up my nephew because he was playing loud music and it was upsetting his Mom.  The man nearly killed my nephew.  He lost.   My sister and nephew lost very badly too.  Things they may never ever recover from.  

Thanks for sharing that personal example.

I have one too. My father was speeding on the highway when the police spotted him, and to avoid the  ticket he attempted to outrun them  (we teased him for days, joking that he must have lapsed into thinking he was Agent Zero or whatever the guy's name was in that detective series he loved to watch..lol).

Anyway, once the police caught him, they beat him up bad, bruises and bleeding all over the place. We freaked out when he returned all bloody. I mean they did that to an old, pudgy man who was no threat whatsoever, just to show their authority.

Edited by Luna Bliss
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Luna Bliss said:

What do you think, Innula?

Is it the last gasp of the patriarchy where the cruelty and injustice of our stratified society will be revealed?  A cruel society which allows those at the bottom layer to exist without adequate health care and food?  Or is it the beginning of an implosion of monumental proportions that will not resolve and will bring us nothing, the likes of which we've only begun to see?

http://www.ask8ball.net

  • Like 1
  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Lyssa Greymoon said:

Trying to get people to talk about the looting instead of police violence is concern trolling. It always comes up when people protest racism and police violence. Those looters are too radical, they'll turn off potential supporters. Colin Kaepernick is too radical, he'll turn off potential supporters. That communist Martin Luther King is too radical, he'll turn off potential supporters. Let's talk about that until you sit down and shut up and we can get back to ignoring you.

Excuse me?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Innula Zenovka said:
7 minutes ago, Luna Bliss said:

What do you think, Innula?

Is it the last gasp of the patriarchy where the cruelty and injustice of our stratified society will be revealed?  A cruel society which allows those at the bottom layer to exist without adequate health care and food?  Or is it the beginning of an implosion of monumental proportions that will not resolve and will bring us nothing, the likes of which we've only begun to see?

http://www.ask8ball.net

Innula you meaaanie!  I actually thought there would be some interesting detailed article to study when I clicked to view! lol

Link to comment
Share on other sites

37 minutes ago, Gatogateau said:

 ....

Poverty isn't a cliff someone falls off and suddenly can't afford food. It's stack of complicated interlocking situations, responsibilities and systems that form a trap. If you're only poor enough that skipping meals will get you and your family through the week, that's easy mode.

How messed up would your life have to be for there to be so little at stake that stealing from a target during a riot makes any sense at all. Think it though, you have 10 minutes, can only leave with what you can carry, the store is trashed and a hundred others are trying at the same time. Competition for limited high value items is intense and potentially violent (high value items are only high value at point of sale, second hand .. pennies on the dollar). Now do the same exercise for a shoprite (food only supermarket) with no big ticket items.

I've seen people risk their freedom running out of the local walmart with nothing but a dozen 'solid type' underarm deodorants or cheap soap (literal bars of soap). There is a set of personal circumstances where that makes sense.

Not being able to justify someone legging it out of target with 8 bottles of hair conditioner and a twix as sane and reasonable is the simplest example of privilege I know.

Edited by CoffeeDujour
  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Luna Bliss said:

Thanks for sharing that personal example.

I have one too. My father was speeding on the highway when the police spotted him, and to avoid the  ticket he attempted to outrun them  (we teased him for days, joking that he must have lapsed into thinking he was Agent Zero or whatever the guy's name was in that detective series he loved to watch..lol).

Anyway, once the police caught him, they beat him up bad, bruises and bleeding all over the place. We freaked out when he returned all bloody. I mean they did that to an old, pudgy man who was no threat whatsoever, just to show their authority.

We need an I hear you button.  Sorry to hear about your Dad.  That sucks!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

As far as the Los Angeles City Council and Mayor Garcetti who are allocating 150 million towards programs for the people instead of for police for the fiscal year ending 2021, they are also proposing a way for impartial hearings for more accountability instead of partial proceedings that mostly favor the officers.   If the police officer who beat up my nephew and sister had been in a police uniform and not undercover in street clothes, he most likely may have gotten off.  What all entails a new impartial hearing system, I'm not sure as it's all new just of a few short days ago.  

 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, Lyssa Greymoon said:

Trying to get people to talk about the looting instead of police violence is concern trolling. It always comes up when people protest racism and police violence. Those looters are too radical, they'll turn off potential supporters. Colin Kaepernick is too radical, he'll turn off potential supporters. That communist Martin Luther King is too radical, he'll turn off potential supporters. Let's talk about that until you sit down and shut up and we can get back to ignoring you.

I'm so sick of this!  What do you think the concern trolling is deflecting?  I get a sense it's more than racism, in some cases, or that there's additional nuance to it all.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, Scylla Rhiadra said:

I get this. I've said, and will continue to say, that I am anti-violence, and that includes wanton and pointless destruction. And when I say that I don't give a damn if they burn down a Target, I was not saying that they should burn down all Targets, or Walmarts, or whatever -- just that box stores and the corporate machinery of Big Business are a) going to be able to recover pretty quickly from this, and b) that they are also, frankly, part of the larger problem.

So, while I understand your position of justifiable damage, we will have to disagree on that. While my situation is in no way equivalent to systemic, centuries old discrimination of black people, because I'm still a white woman... my extreme poverty in the USA has shown me sides of things that you have really no way to have knowledge of unless you do experience it. I'm also seeing it through the lens of someone who has had ALL of the white privilege of a six-figure income. I have seen, experienced and damaged by the inequities inherent in The System, that if you play by the good-girl rules I was brought up with, you can and will be screwed. I was brought up with "If you do right, you work hard, get an education... You'll end up just fine. This is America, the land of opportunity for all." That was a lie. A brutal, harsh lie. 

I have been presented with opportunities to do things that according to the good-girl rules are just WRONG. Some are illegal. I understand the impulse, the desire, the justification for doing wrong in retaliation for being beaten over the head repeatedly by a system that is just broken. I can tell you I struggled and still struggle each and every day with those kinds of decisions. Doing wrong and technically illegal things to avoid being screwed and actually financially damaged (which can affect my housing and food and...)? I GET IT. And I can count my oppression in years, not centuries. So, I get it. I don't need it explained. I live it, somewhat, without the racial bias.

Looting is wrong. Period. Full stop. Vandalism is wrong, how wrong is dependent upon what it is. They are happening now. Like I wrote yesterday, trying to conflate the looting with the protests is wrong. They are two separate things that are concurrent. The looting etc should not and cannot affect the real issue, which are the things BLM are addressing.

BUT, if you talk looting, separately, then... you and I disagree. It is justifiable in thought, not action.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, CoffeeDujour said:

Poverty isn't a cliff someone falls off and suddenly can't afford food. It's stack of complicated interlocking situations, responsibilities and systems that form a trap. If you're only poor enough that skipping meals will get you and your family through the week, that's easy mode.

How messed up would your life have to be for there to be so little at stake that stealing from a target during a riot makes any sense at all. Think it though, you have 10 minutes, can only leave with what you can carry, the store is trashed and a hundred others are trying at the same time. Competition for limited high value items is intense and potentially violent (high value items are only high value at point of sale, second hand .. pennies on the dollar). Now do the same exercise for a shoprite (food only supermarket) with no big ticket items.

I've seen people risk their freedom running out of the local walmart with nothing but a dozen 'solid type' underarm deodorants or cheap soap (literal bars of soap). There is a set of personal circumstances where that makes sense.

Not being able to justify someone legging it out of target with 8 bottles of hair conditioner and a twix as sane and reasonable is the simplest example of privilege I know.

WTF?

How did anything I just write get THIS reaction?

And please read my just now posted response to Scylla about poverty. I'm assuming based on what you said that I know a tad more about it than you.

FFS. Does no one read context and words any more? Is it just "Oh, she mentioned looting! Looting has nothing to do with the protests! She must be a racist idiot! I will shut her down!"

FFS. I have said the looting and the protests are 2 different things. Repeatedly. Read the words. 

I get $16 a month for food... talk to me when YOU get a clue and read.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Gatogateau said:

And please read my just now posted response to Scylla about poverty.

It was in reference to, in continuation of, amplification of what you posted, not a slap down.

1 minute ago, Gatogateau said:

I'm assuming based on what you said that I know a tad more about it than you.

You would be assuming incorrectly.

1 minute ago, Gatogateau said:

FFS. Does no one read context and words any more? Is it just "Oh, she mentioned looting! Looting has nothing to do with the protests! She must be a racist idiot! I will shut her down!"

My post did not mention or even suggest that.

Not every reply is hostile.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, Lyssa Greymoon said:

Trying to get people to talk about the looting instead of police violence is concern trolling. It always comes up when people protest racism and police violence. Those looters are too radical, they'll turn off potential supporters. Colin Kaepernick is too radical, he'll turn off potential supporters. That communist Martin Luther King is too radical, he'll turn off potential supporters. Let's talk about that until you sit down and shut up and we can get back to ignoring you.

"concern troll In an argument (usually a political debate), a concern troll is someone who is on one side of the discussion, but pretends to be a supporter of the other side with "concerns". The idea behind this is that your opponents will take your arguments more seriously if they think you're an ally."

Had to look it up to get the full meaning.  So you're saying they aren't really on our side at all...

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, CoffeeDujour said:

It was in reference to, in continuation of, amplification of what you posted, not a slap down.

You would be assuming incorrectly.

My post did not mention or even suggest that.

Not every reply is hostile.

Well, I DO read. And if you don't think your reply to me was a hostile put down, then you need more classes in syntax. It was offensive. It was incorrect. I had nothing to do what I wrote about burning down a damned Target. It was in no way a continuation of my thoughts or words, if that was your intent you botched it beautifully.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, Gatogateau said:

WTF?

How did anything I just write get THIS reaction?

I think it's because you said "Excuse me?" after Lyssa's post describing the concern trolling people exhibit when they persist in discussing looting vs racial injustice.

* It's the poverty that might cause someone to loot.

Edited by Luna Bliss
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Now that I'm totally peeved by another example of "gosh, your type of political correctness as shown by the group think in this thread is just invalid, as are your thoughts and experiences because you dare say something that isn't 100% of the approved party line" and have I mentioned FU? Let me add this. I find this whole thing about "justifiable damages" as patronizing to the very groups you are claiming to be concerned about.

"Oh look at those poor people. They can't help themselves. We are so benevolent in our largesse that we will excuse anything on their behalf because the poor dears can't help it. It is in their nature. We will allow it." Fornicate that. Talk about speaking from a position of white privilege. That's pretty damn lily white.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Gatogateau said:

Now that I'm totally peeved by another example of "gosh, your type of political correctness as shown by the group think in this thread is just invalid, as are your thoughts and experiences because you dare say something that isn't 100% of the approved party line" and have I mentioned FU? Let me add this. I find this whole thing about "justifiable damages" as patronizing to the very groups you are claiming to be concerned about.

"Oh look at those poor people. They can't help themselves. We are so benevolent in our largesse that we will excuse anything on their behalf because the poor dears can't help it. It is in their nature. We will allow it." Fornicate that. Talk about speaking from a position of white privilege. That's pretty damn lily white.

I don't see it as justification for their acts.  I just understand it and have some sympathy. For them, the social contract was broken long ago (being treated with respect has been lacking, to say the least) and so why would they care about protecting the goods of society? A society that has never honored them? (A society, and its goods, that has never belonged to them).

Edited by Luna Bliss
  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

You are about to reply to a thread that has been inactive for 588 days.

Please take a moment to consider if this thread is worth bumping.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...