Obama's Public Support of Michael Vick

[suebee]

Originally Posted by dreadgeek

Diva:

Please see my post above regarding your last sentence. You can have the reaction that this man should be sent to, say, Egypt where there ARE no laws against torture and that he should be given a full and complete tour through the meaning of 'medieval torture methods' before being allowed to die and never ONCE have a single conscious thought about a 'big, scary black man'. I don't think you, Sachita, or anyone else involved in this discussion is consciously thinking "big scary black man" or "teach blacks a lesson about cruelty" but I DO think that it is reflexive for members of the American ethnic majority to view blacks and Latinos as more dangerous.

Now, since you mention the dogs, I'll say something else. Had it turned out that one of the dogs had turned on Mr. Vick and taken a bite out of his neck severing his jugular and causing his death, I would shrug my shoulders and say that he got what he deserved. If he were only maimed or disfigured, I'd still shrug and say that he got what he deserved.

But that's not what we are talking about. What we're talking about is what *society* should do with or about Mr. Vick and that is what my concern is--that and what our motivations are for wanting to do or not do something to, with or about him.

Cheers
Aj

Aj, I've missed the last several pages, but the first thing I saw when I logged on was the above comment. I know you can't necessarily separate the man's reality from his story. Obviously he's black, and that carries with it a whole complicated set of dynamics that wouldn't be the same if he'd been a white man. However, what YOU'VE been talking about is what society should do with or about Mr. Vick in the context of dealing with a black man. As a white woman in another country, while I may have some understanding of those dynamics, I see the situation through the eyes of a different reality. That doesn't in any way negate what you're saying. But since the man was convicted of a number of absolutely heinous crimes towards animals, my animal activist self sees THAT as the central point of the story. My belief system perhaps sees animals in a somewhat different light than others, but that doesn't mean that one set of beliefs/perception, what-have-you is any less important than any other. My belief system sees humans as PART of the world, not the centre of the world, and certainly not the only life form that counts. While it may be perfectly natural for us to give preference to matters involving our own species, if we don't come to an appreciation of the world of which we ar part of WE will (and I believe, already ARE) face the consequences of our arrogance.

I don't think that we need to have ONE conversation here. There are different aspects to this story that are important. It depends upon one's personal values/filter which part of the story we prioritize. But I AM sure that we can learn from each other in the process.