tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329595.post115772270011028926..comments2024-03-28T13:36:05.167-05:00Comments on Althouse: Who would watch the video of the stingray killing Steve Irwin?Ann Althousehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01630636239933008807noreply@blogger.comBlogger44125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329595.post-1157911928849080892006-09-10T13:12:00.000-05:002006-09-10T13:12:00.000-05:00Steve Irwin was the Atlas Shrugs of naturalists. H...Steve Irwin was the Atlas Shrugs of naturalists. He made his living with sensational video featuring foolish risk-taking and brushes with death. Running the video of his death would be silly and crass, but it would also be completely consistent with his longstanding policy of buying viewers with cheap thrills.Jerry Troutmanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10283114502727095500noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329595.post-1157779221214650202006-09-09T00:20:00.000-05:002006-09-09T00:20:00.000-05:00There are studies to the effect that young people ...<I>There are studies to the effect that young people are becoming inured to violence, but I don't think that will sway you.</I><BR/><BR/>There are psychological studies showing anything you'd care to claim; most psychologists are pseudoscientists, after all.<BR/><BR/>But the fact that we've yet to see any noticeable effect on either violent crime rates or public acceptance of violent acts, despite the last few decades being chock full of allegedly "desensitizing" violent stimuli, indicates that, studies notwithstanding, real-world children aren't getting desensitized to real-world violence.Revenanthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11374515200055384226noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329595.post-1157775612088455412006-09-08T23:20:00.000-05:002006-09-08T23:20:00.000-05:00Re: So you say. I disagree. Re: So you argue. I be...Re: <I>So you say. I disagree. </I><BR/><BR/>Re: <I>So you argue. I beg to differ.</I><BR/><BR/>Re: <I>There are studies to the effect that young people are becoming inured to violence, but I don't think that will sway you.</I><BR/><BR/>I could write a third post, but since you refuse to engage my arguments in any meaningful way, I don't think any additional words will sway you.altoids1306https://www.blogger.com/profile/01513456215095176970noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329595.post-1157767481526852432006-09-08T21:04:00.000-05:002006-09-08T21:04:00.000-05:00I think squeamishness is a childish character flaw...<I>I think squeamishness is a childish character flaw that should be overcome.</I><BR/><BR/>Ann, I agree with your comment about squeamishness, however I think the family should have the ultimate decision of whether or not that footage should be released.<BR/><BR/>Deep down I think that Steve would want it to be shown, however who knows to what extent or venue. I don't think that it should be something accessible to children, meaning not to show on normal TV. Perhaps in a DVD highlighting his life, a tribute if you will.illc0mmhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03052443692554884280noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329595.post-1157761271172205612006-09-08T19:21:00.000-05:002006-09-08T19:21:00.000-05:00tiggeril: not to mention watching them get born. ...tiggeril: not to mention watching them get born. Talk about the feminization of the world, remember the debate about whether men ought to compelled to witness childbirth? I read about it <A HREF="http://althouse.blogspot.com/2005/08/must-should-man-witness-childbirth.html" REL="nofollow">right here</A>. (God, I love Google.)ambahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12042450225428891273noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329595.post-1157760584998463052006-09-08T19:09:00.000-05:002006-09-08T19:09:00.000-05:00Jack Wayne, you're full of s**t (unless you're kid...Jack Wayne, you're full of s**t (unless you're kidding). Feminized the world may be, but "real men don't flinch from gore" is a caricature of the solution.ambahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12042450225428891273noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329595.post-1157759969437719232006-09-08T18:59:00.000-05:002006-09-08T18:59:00.000-05:00Jim, I'm inclined to think you are somehow trying ...Jim, I'm inclined to think you are somehow trying to be sarcastic, but I don't get it.Josephhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12594474501025558830noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329595.post-1157759877720696122006-09-08T18:57:00.000-05:002006-09-08T18:57:00.000-05:00Another take on this. I never wanted to see a beh...<A HREF="http://ambivablog.typepad.com/ambivablog/2006/09/taking_bets.html" REL="nofollow">Another take on this</A>. I never wanted to see a beheading, either. And yet I could not stop imagining the last moments of Nicole Simpson -- with the white dog howling -- and could not understand how, even months later, people could sit calmly in a courtroom and discuss it. The end of a life! It's an enormous thing.ambahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12042450225428891273noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329595.post-1157757414908943162006-09-08T18:16:00.000-05:002006-09-08T18:16:00.000-05:00Who would watch the video of the stingray killing ...<I>Who would watch the video of the stingray killing Steve Irwin?</I><BR/><BR/>I wouldn't. But since Irwin himself was fine with his death being filmed and shown, I don't have any moral or ethical problem with it being done.<BR/><BR/>But I don't want to watch the man die. I liked him, and his death is a sad thing for me.Revenanthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11374515200055384226noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329595.post-1157756652727861092006-09-08T18:04:00.000-05:002006-09-08T18:04:00.000-05:00Jim said..."Jesus... must be turning in his grave ...Jim said..."Jesus... must be turning in his grave over the thought of such abandonment."<BR/><BR/>Jesus, in his grave? <BR/><BR/>Well, you read everything else wrong, so I'm not surprised at this.Ann Althousehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01630636239933008807noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329595.post-1157753187914880772006-09-08T17:06:00.000-05:002006-09-08T17:06:00.000-05:00I'm already exposed to the risk of seeing somethin...I'm already exposed to the risk of seeing something gruesome every time I watch an auto race live on television. I don't look for things like that to happen, but I accept the fact that it can happen at anytime. That's the nature of the sport. <BR/><BR/>A good example is the Ayrton Senna accident at Imola in 1994. At the time, he was my favorite driver. I saw the accident on TV and although I knew what the final outcome was going to be, I couldn't turn away. <BR/><BR/>But would I go out of my way to see the Irwin death video? No.El Mas Chingónhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05149297079216397410noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329595.post-1157748911583990332006-09-08T15:55:00.000-05:002006-09-08T15:55:00.000-05:00Re: "But since I could possibly do or become...bas...Re: <I>"But since I could possibly do or become...basically anything, that's not much of an argument."</I><BR/><BR/>So you argue. I beg to differ.<BR/><BR/>I suggest that text and images can be very effective in changing minds. Perhaps you are different than most people in being immune to the recognized efficacy of propaganda. <BR/><BR/>There are studies to the effect that young people are becoming inured to violence, but I don't think that will sway you.KCFleminghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00124201866124646626noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329595.post-1157748183591575932006-09-08T15:43:00.000-05:002006-09-08T15:43:00.000-05:00Re: Pogo:Certainly, I could become desensitized to...Re: Pogo:<BR/><BR/>Certainly, I could become desensitized to actual violence. But since I <I>could possibly</I> do or become...basically anything, that's not much of an argument.<BR/><BR/>The difference between TV and real life is that violence in real life occurs with far lower frequency. People in gulags get desensitized, because of - guess what - higher frequency of violence!<BR/><BR/>And, in case the point was lost earlier, does "TV empathy" have value? If empathy is to reassure the subject that his/her feelings are understood, does it matter at all if I empathize with a televised subject who cannot possibly know whether I am watching him/her, much less empathising with him/her?<BR/><BR/>I haven't seen much, but I have seen death and blood (once). There is a big difference between seeing an image created by glowing phosphors and an actual human. Between sound created by paper cones and vocal cords. The sickly warm slickness of blood. In an age of digitized simulation, physical reality becomes more precious. Without desensitization to TV, how could I have enough energy to empathize with reality? (And I don't even watch much TV - ESPN and Food Network, mostly.)altoids1306https://www.blogger.com/profile/01513456215095176970noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329595.post-1157744854790427012006-09-08T14:47:00.000-05:002006-09-08T14:47:00.000-05:00Ann, if you can't stand gruesome, then you certain...Ann, if you can't stand gruesome, then you certainly wouldn't have attended the crucifixion of Jesus, even to give him water, I suppose. He must be turning in his grave over the thought of such abandonment.<BR/><BR/>What sets lawyers apart from scientists, besides brilliance, is curiosity. Ann, curiosity is good! It is the basis of much discovery.<BR/><BR/>You would make a Leonardo da Vinci who draws anatomy from imagination.<BR/><BR/>Folks who don't like looking at things like dead bodies, slaughterhouses, circumcisions, anal sex, childbirth, decapitations, crucifixions and the like might try just turning their heads, leaving the rest of us alone to participate in life!jimbinohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03416364723697446318noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329595.post-1157744352097860482006-09-08T14:39:00.000-05:002006-09-08T14:39:00.000-05:00I wouldn't watch this or any of the other videos m...I wouldn't watch this or any of the other videos mentioned, out of respect for the people involved. It bothers me greatly to think that if I suffered a public death, people would watch it and be titillated. <BR/><BR/>What else would you watch? Would you watch a video of a rape? Would you watch a video of a child being abused? You know, just to prove you're a man. Or to overcome your fastidiousness. Or to learn some lesson.<BR/><BR/>BTW, anyone who has watched the episode (or the video available online) of Steve Irwin bawling over Mary the crocodile who he "loved like he loved his own wife" would have trouble with these ridiculous statements about why he did what he did for a living and how he treated animals.Jenniferhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12824506338738265111noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329595.post-1157740691104273192006-09-08T13:38:00.000-05:002006-09-08T13:38:00.000-05:00"desensitzation""desensitzation"KCFleminghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00124201866124646626noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329595.post-1157740485218945272006-09-08T13:34:00.000-05:002006-09-08T13:34:00.000-05:00Re: "I've got plenty of empathy for what I see wit...Re: <I>"I've got plenty of empathy for what I see with my own eyes..."</I><BR/><BR/>So you say. I disagree. Anyone that can become inured to video violence enough to say <I>"there is almost nothing on TV (or any video image) that has any emotional impact on me"</I> can become inured to actual violence in front of them.<BR/><BR/>It just takes a little practice. Just ask the folks who ran the gulag how well densitization worked. I've seen enough violence in the ER knife & gun club and in movies to make that somewhat true in me. And I strongly suspect the proxy version (by video) is not going to prove edifying for the human race.<BR/><BR/><I>"And I don't think I'm a special case either."</I><BR/>That's my fear.<BR/>Empathy's a fragile thing, and increasingly rare, I think.KCFleminghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00124201866124646626noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329595.post-1157739073322362182006-09-08T13:11:00.000-05:002006-09-08T13:11:00.000-05:00Oddly enough, if I had the opportunity I'd watch i...Oddly enough, if I had the opportunity I'd watch it. But not for stupid kicks ("Hey! Let's see this guy kick the bucket!"); that'd be stupid, horrendous even. It'd be turning the event into nonsexual death porn. <BR/><BR/>I'd want to watch because, as a guy who's experience with wildlife isn't that broad, and mostly limited to inland animals, I'd want to see what a stingray can do, and observe it acting in defense. Knowledge, especially in relation to danger and life-and-death is not wasted. No, I don't see myself diving with the stingrays anytime soon; what I'm trying to say is that observing wildlife taking care of itself in general is useful information. Especially to those of us who don't get a whole lot of experience with it. We're all so disconnected from how wild animals react that we don't know how to behave when in close proximity to them.<BR/><BR/>And I may not be planning to dive with stingrays anytime at all, but you never know. Last spring, I didn't expect to go snorkling around a reef near Surigao del Sur in the Philippines - it was a last minute, "Hey! Since we're here, we should do this!" thing - but I went, totally not expecting to do anything of the sort.<BR/><BR/>So, I'd want to watch that video of Irwin, personally. But I'd hope that there'd be a difference between watching for kicks, as if we're watching one of those stupid college-girl webcam things we always get spammed about, or watching it respectfully. What you bring to the act of watching is what makes the difference between making that act a decent or depraved one.<BR/><BR/>I do admit, I'm completely willing to subside my desire to watch it to protect the privacy and sensibilities of Irwin's family. If they want to keep it out of the public, that's not a problem at all. It's completely their call. I'd only feel comfortable about watching it if the family gave their blessing. Otherwise, no.Tiborehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07360541843865827271noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329595.post-1157738649984485982006-09-08T13:04:00.000-05:002006-09-08T13:04:00.000-05:00Re: Pogo:It's not about empathy, it's about being ...Re: Pogo:<BR/><BR/>It's not about empathy, it's about being suseptable to media manipulation. I've got plenty of empathy for what I see with my own eyes, and for what doesn't involve voiceovers or dramatic soundtracks.<BR/><BR/>Should there be a moral difference between witnessing something and watching the video? Logically, no. But between the TV commercials for restless-leg-syndrome and the context-sensitive Amazon ads, the mind erects barriers of unreality.<BR/><BR/>This is not to say I'm amoral (and I feel no need to defend my morality). I just don't think "I feel your pain" has any value to televised subject who is unaware of your existence.<BR/><BR/>Perhaps it's not praiseworthy, but I'll say it again - there is almost nothing on TV (or any video image) that has any emotional impact on me. And I don't think I'm a special case either.altoids1306https://www.blogger.com/profile/01513456215095176970noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329595.post-1157735676353346382006-09-08T12:14:00.000-05:002006-09-08T12:14:00.000-05:00Mark-With Irwin's death, do you think it would cha...Mark-<BR/>With Irwin's death, do you think it would change the calculation if he had been eaten by a crocodile? As it is, death by sting ray is a complete freak accident. That is to say, is Treadwell's death is a message of "Don't feed the bears" but Irwin's is "Don't play with sting rays, even though they're actually pretty harmless"?Jeremyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14135112906704619414noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329595.post-1157734964715641022006-09-08T12:02:00.000-05:002006-09-08T12:02:00.000-05:00Some argued that it was important to watch at leas...<I>Some argued that it was important to watch at least one of the Islamic beheading videos because it exposed the danger posed by these people in a vividly real way that simply isn't possible with words alone.</I><BR/><BR/>I agree with this to some extent. I haven't watched the beheading because I am already quite alarmed at the threat we face from such people, and don't need the video to convince me. But I do think it might be instructive for people who take a more, say, breezy viewpoint of the terrorists: "Bush is the enemy" "It's a law-enforcement issue" etc.knoxhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13231876226573540476noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329595.post-1157733760201806472006-09-08T11:42:00.000-05:002006-09-08T11:42:00.000-05:00I think the distinction to be made between videos ...I think the distinction to be made between videos of deaths that are worth watching and those that are not is whether or not important emotional information is conveyed or not. What qualifies as "important" will depend on a person's point of view I suppose.<BR/><BR/>For instance, in the film "Grizzly Man", Timothy Treadwell gets eaten by a bear. We never hear the audio tape of him and his girlfriend being eaten. Personally I felt that was important information left out of the film that would have given a real emotional counterbalance to all the scenes of Treadwell coexisting peacefully with the animals. In my opinion, it is important that we viscerally understand the dangers of wild animals, including the danger of being eaten alive by grizzlies or stabbed in the heart by stingrays.<BR/><BR/>Some argued that it was important to watch at least one of the Islamic beheading videos because it exposed the danger posed by these people in a vividly real way that simply isn't possible with words alone.<BR/><BR/>On the other hand, there's no virtue in deadening your emotional responses by watching gore for the sake of gore. I think watching these kind of violent acts is only appropriate when there is a need to arouse ourselves to a vivid awareness of the dangers or realities of a situation. Sure, Treadwell and Irwin always told people not to try what they were doing themselves. But those were just words, while the visual images, with their much greater emotional impact, suggested it was possible to safely get up close and personal with wild animals. It seems appropriate that their violent deaths by wild animals also be widely viewed so that the dangerous reality of close encounters with wild animals is understood.MnMarkhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01110007186831549266noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329595.post-1157730721073516022006-09-08T10:52:00.000-05:002006-09-08T10:52:00.000-05:00I thought people quit being squeamish after they h...I thought people quit being squeamish after they had kids, what with the... material spewing from both ends of the critters.tiggerilhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03346441135198849332noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329595.post-1157730644386980802006-09-08T10:50:00.000-05:002006-09-08T10:50:00.000-05:00If the House can vote to ban the killing of horses...If the House can vote to ban the killing of horses for human consumption, surely they can vote to ban the video of a jackass being killed by a stingray.<BR/>Macho Man Goeshgoeshhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05781857563232791703noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329595.post-1157729842226787262006-09-08T10:37:00.000-05:002006-09-08T10:37:00.000-05:00Joseph Hovsep wrote: Second, how different is the ...Joseph Hovsep wrote: <I>Second, how different is the desire to watch these kinds of images from the desire to watch the World Trade Center attacks?</I><BR/><BR/>Consider the recorded images of the Hindenberg going down in flames. Thirty-six people died in that accident, but the footage gets shown over and over again, sometimes as part of a joke.<BR/><BR/>Or consider any of numerous images from WWII, especially images of Japanese Kamikazee attacking Allied ships. Every impact represents at least one death, and frequently many more, yet these get shown over and over again.<BR/><BR/>One thing that sets these examples apart from the footage of Irwin's death is that these images don't show an individual dying up close. Distance removes itimacy from the subject.<BR/><BR/>But still, there's more to it than that. I can think of three images from the Twentieth Century that capture the immediacy and intimacy of the moment of an individual's death, and one that captures an almost equally horrific moment. All three images have been widely shown, years after they lost relevancy to current events. <BR/><BR/>But we all know the images of <A HREF="http://www.pbs.org/wnet/americanmasters/database/capa_r.html" REL="nofollow">Federico Borrell's death in combat</A> even if we don't know his name. I don't even need to provide a link for Zapruder's film, since even those of us born years after the event have seen it repeatedly. <A HREF="http://www.nandotimes.com/nt/images/century/photos/century0258.html" REL="nofollow">The image</A> of Gen. Nguyen Ngoc Loan executing a Viet Cong captain named Bay Lop changed the fate of nations, even though <A HREF="http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/1998/07/15/national/main13979.shtml" REL="nofollow">the context</A> wasn't known at the time. And <A HREF="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kim_Phuc_Phan_Thi" REL="nofollow">Phan Thị Kim Phúc</A> has been seen naked, and terrified, by hundreds of millions of people, I suspect.<BR/><BR/>So why are these images acceptable, but Irwin's death scene would damage our humanity and moral sensibility? Perhaps if we just wait 34, or 38, or 43, or 70 years we can watch Irwin die without damaging our souls too much.Icepickhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09616554052707230326noreply@blogger.com