Log in

No account? Create an account

Previous Entry | Next Entry

You folks ought to be ashamed of how you acted. You ought to be wallowing in the shame for your utter lack of support for someone that was physically and vocally being attacked in your midst. Instead, you folks just got real quiet and watched the drama unfold and let it expand until I was forced to push my way out of the house entirely. I found it even harder to deal with that nobody at all even walked outside to see if I was ok. Instead, you all encircled the attacker and instigator and gave her your support. Nobody except my cousin came out after I came back for my jacket and shoes.

I found it apalling that my girlfriend felt she could do me more good by staying inside and defending me against the very fucking people that ought to have been supporting me in my right to say "I don't want to disucuss that at this party." Sure, one or two of you said that you thought she was projecting her own problems onto me, and they didn't think I had done anything wrong. Ok, great. NOW GO TELL HER THAT. Maybe if enough people tell her that what she did was not only illegal assault, but that it was --wrong--, then maybe she will realize that she did something that she shouldn't have, and might consider not inflicting the same treatment on the next poor hapless soul who happens to decide to stay openminded and respectful of the people that they call 'friends'.

So for my part of things, I stand like so: At least I had the human decency to -TALK- to William and hear his side of the story before condemning him to social death. I immediately regretted doing so, because it turned out that I was the one breaking the news of all of it to him. I completely ruined his night.

Now I ask you a question. You, those of you who have labelled William as a 'rapist', 'asshole', etc. You call yourselves adults? You condemn a man for something that the police don't even believe he did. If they did, there would have been charges. Stop and think about this for a minute. It's not as if he's a hard man to track down. Heck, I'll give you his phone number if you actually want to stop being a close-minded child and talk to him. I'm not saying that she is lying. I'm not saying that he didn't do it. I'm saying that I'm not going to take a side between two people I know, both of whom I considered friends before this. I'm pointing out the fact that none of you even gave him the benefit of a doubt. You just jumped on what she said, and ran with it. Every. single. last. one. of. you.

You should be ashamed.


Mar. 17th, 2005 08:50 am (UTC)
*Grin*: I am glad you found your soul mate.

Clarification: I believe that conflict and resolution are one of the best means for growth. Hence, befriending those who differ from you, knowing that you will differ on several levels, will help you both lead to growth as you expose each other to various aspects of life that you would have never sought out before. Thus you test each other, revealing your strengths and weaknesses, learning from them and enhancing your strengths, while removing or overcoming your weaknesses. If you never test yourself and your friends never test yourself, then you will never really be certain of who you are, because you will never really be certain of what you are capable of understanding and achieving.

Desired Understanding: I understand you core ethical values, however, what I was curious about is: are drunk drivers and hypocrites the only people you would exclude? What about those who endanger only themselves, like people who sky dive or swim with sharks? Or what about those with different codes of ethics, like some that are stricter than yours? Basically, what are the limits to your acceptance and how would you determine it if you do not test it?

Agreement: We have different values, as such it makes sense we have different definitions of what makes a friend and what does not, what is strong and what is weak.

Assessment: It appears like you and your friends are share the group spirit, which is much better than the group think, as it is based on a deeper level instead of the physical or mental which are more temporary. Thus, on certain levels you will disagree but on some core principles you will always agree. Like our brief comments on the English language, you have multiple dialects (friends) but all share the same basic principles thus allowing for all to communicate and agree on some level.
Mar. 17th, 2005 09:32 am (UTC)
drunk drivers are the easiest example. everyone knows its wrong & knows why, but some ppl still do it anyway. the lines are sometimes fuzzy bet what is & isnt accaptible levels of intoxication to drive at, which makes this all the more important. hypocricy isnt always bad, like parents' 'do as i say not as i do' to children. i just mean that i cant allow others around me to do unethical things that i wouldnt do, i'm not hypocritical in the sense that i hold everyone to the same values.

as far as those who engage in risk/thrill seeking behavs like sky diving: it's not as big of a deal. you cant say that someone can only harm themselves, bc if anyone cares for them, then when that person is hurt, it hurts also those who care about them. if someone dies skydiving, their family is upset. but it's not the same as engaging in unethical behaviours that dont have a purpose [one cannot argue that unethical drunk driving for thrill seeking purposes is the same as skydiving bc of the ethics/values involved in the possibility of senselessly hurting someone else who didn't ask to be in that situation, but was rather forced into it].

as far as diff codes of ethics--no prob, we all sometimes have diff standards. but my cores are pretty simple & involve not harming others for no reason or by irresponsibility.

Latest Month

November 2008