The other day, I explained that while I didn’t think her intentions were malicious, I thought it pretty cool of Twilight star Kristen Stewart to clarify why she used the word “psychotic” when she described some of the fan situations she’s experienced.
Psychotherapy Brown Bag owner Michael Anestis agreed, and chimed in with his thoughts about “ignorance” versus “malice,” asking what I thought about Senator Grassley’s comment on AIG executives and suicide. (In case you missed it, Senator Grassley remarked that AIG representatives should follow the Japanese example, take a deep bow , and then either “resign, or go commit suicide” – class act, that one.)
I’ll tell you what I think.
I think that even though the majority of the country is forming an AIG lynch mob, Senator Chuck Grassley’s comment was the very worst mix of both ignorance and malice. Where Kristen Stewart is an 18-year-old trying to get her bearings in the world of celebrity, Senator Grassley is a 75-year-old who’s served in the senate for 28 years. His “ignorance” can’t be blamed on youth and lack of experience, and he’s able to spread his malice from a government position.
I think that while there’s a bit of leeway when it comes to using words like “crazy,” “insane,” and some of their synonyms to describe certain shocking, unbelievable, or exciting events, there is absolutely no leeway whatsoever when it comes to suicide.
Suicide means death, Chuck, and death is permanent. Perhaps even more outrageous than your suicide suggestion is that you had the nerve to get defensive during an interview with NBC’s Domenico Montanaro, claiming “I hope you recognize rhetoric […] and I shouldn’t even have to answer that question….”:
Pressed by Shuster, who asked if Grassley had any regret for his phrasing, Grassley struck a defensive tone.
“I’ve stated that you oughta be able to tell rhetoric when you hear it,” the Iowa Republican said.
Seriously, Chuck? That is the line you’re going to feed us? That we are the ones who are ignorant? That we are so stupid we can’t “recognize rhetoric”?
Really?
You know what I can “recognize,” Chuck? I can recognize a man who clearly doesn’t understand the power of rhetoric or give a flying rat’s tail about how his tactlessness and insensitivity affects others. I can recognize a man who – instead of accepting fault and trying to make it right – is more interested in spinning his rhetoric so that the rest of us are left believing we were the ones in the wrong.
And we wonder why people like the writers over at Time think it’s perfectly acceptable to describe the current revamping of the DSM as “Redefining Crazy.” Give me a break. (Joyce Anestis made some excellent points about this, by the way.)
You’d do well, Chuck, to rethink your stance on whether or not we deserve your apology. If I were you, I’d start drafting one, like, yesterday. And don’t forget to include all the mental health advocates who’ve made it their mission to promote suicide awareness, the many people who’ve lost family members and friends to suicide, or the Japanese for even including their name in your ignorant, malicious “rhetoric.”
Postingan
Tidak ada komentar:
Posting Komentar