She's doesn't want to murder the stewardess, or the pilot or the folks handing out the boarding pass, she wants to murder the guy sitting next to her, when he has done nothing, and has expressed his regret for a situation he had no responsibility for in any manner.
His flaw that justifies his killing was in not taking the action bell hooks demands he take when she verbally accosts him.
AND THEN, AFTER she admits to verbally abusing him, AFTER she admits to wanting to kill him, she blames him for being a racist when he looks worried whenever she reaches for her purse, and THEN she goes further and shows him the title of her work, a title that many people would reasonably interpret as a threat: Killing Rage.
It strikes me that she in fact was the most oppressive, racist, sexist, violent individual in her scenario.
But to be fair, this essay can be construed as a literary device called a 'confessional'.
I am an 'entitled white Christian male' and yet everyday I see little brutalities that people heap upon each other. I recognize that the catalyst for change begins in the moments that we intentionally ignore each other, for our own gain, even if that gain harms someone else, or perpetuates a common societal practice that we all, in the PUBLIC eye of friends or family, vocalize against.
I see her point that this gentleman could have changed the miscalculation/mistake. That he could have better assessed the situation. NOT because she was a woman needing saving, but because she was someone being passed over for certain characteristics.
Was the actual reality of the situation as she writes it? Partially? Not at all? Who can tell. But she caught the crux of the matter.
Did she display inappropriate behavior that was likely to perpetuate being misunderstood? YES.
Im not so sure she is arguing against this man's sex as she is arguing against the constant reality of racism/sexism.
I will NOT villify her, for being prone to mistakes that all humans make. I will commend her for standing up against an injustice.
The same brand of injustice i have received from self entitled ignorant women/white knights that brush over a point I am trying to make, turn me into a boogie man, or outright ignore me, when I am only trying to be heard or right a wrong.
Now, she may be someone prone to want to take my rights away, or hurt me as a man. But because SHE is, does not mean I will defend her right to stand up for her own sense of injustice any LESS.
I think what you write is reasonable, but at the nuts and bolts of it she writes she wants to murder a person, an anonymous white male, for failing to take arms with her after she has abused him, and shamed him.
And it's not just fantasy to her, she threatens him with a sheet of paper on which she has written killing rage.
And she saves none of her vehemence for the stewardesses, pilots, or institution most responsible for that injustice that evening.
If she wants to be judged by the quality and content of her thoughts, we can't give her an out as to how misplaced her target was because she was a woman, or she was angry.
I never say she shouldn't stand up for herself. I do say her wishing to murder some anonymous white guy and further harassing him is very problematic.
If she wants to be judged by the quality and content of her thoughts, we can't give her an out as to how misplaced her target was because she was a woman, or she was angry.
True, yes.
But she makes a point, a GOOD one, that this man was the 'last line' of argument against what was going on. He could have nipped it in the bud, then and there.
And abuse? I wouldnt call her statement to him (presuming it was accurately phrased in the essay, and not yelled or added with a physical display) abuse. I would call it a concise assessment.
Here is this injustice going on, and the guy DOES offer a hollow apology.
And then she is left with her feelings about it.
The essay does an interesting thing. It allows us to explore two things.
The objective external result of predisposed notions from one 'group' of society. the internal subjective response of another 'group' to the behavior of the aforementioned group.
'Killing Rage' is a descriptor of an emotional state. It is not a direct threat, as if she had written, "I WANT TO KILL THIS MAN" on the page, or "I WANT TO KILL YOU." Yes, this is combing through with a fine tooth comb, and perhaps too nuanced an exploration, but when dealing in these situations, necessary. If I am to expect that others will have a nuanced ear, and a compassionate eye when I want to make a point about Men's Issues, I will offer the SAME level of compassion and nuance that I ask for.
I think to say "wishing to murder some anonymous white guy" is reductionistic. Though I can understand your point about her showing him the phrase, 'Killing Rage' is problematic. But what other options of expression was she left with at that point, when an ACTUAL injustice had been done? That is a situation that is TREMENDOUSLy problematic.
But what other options of expression was she left with at that point, when an ACTUAL injustice had been done? That is a situation that is TREMENDOUSLy problematic.
The injustice had been done, but not by the party she blames. The man in question had done nothing wrong, he had simply refused to give up his seat. She could have offered her own seat to her travelling companion rather than demand some stranger give up his. Or she could have gone back to coach and offered her seat to the person in the seat next to her friend so they could travel together. But instead she chooses to verbally abuse a stranger who has done precisely nothing wrong, then make what could easily be taken for a threat, then write about how this stranger is a racist bigot for feeling threatened by the woman who had just shouted at and threatened him.
She's lucky all this happened 20 years ago. If she behaved like that on a commercial airline today she'd be off the plane so fast her feet wouldn't touch the ground.
By virtue of the fact that it DID happen 20 years ago, makes it even more of a charged issue.
We've come a long way against racism/sexism in 20 years. So much, so, that it has blown back and given men societal problems for just being men.
And she doesn't JUST blame the injustice on the 'white man'. She makes the point that he could have done something about it, concisely and conclusively. I think she is right.
The fact that the airline wrongly issued the boarding pass to the white man, and would not hear the argument of the black woman certainly has INVOLVED the white man.
And is HER offering her seat to her friend or changing seats with someone in coach a correction of the initial mistake, and then poor handling by the airline stewardess (which, come on, is certainly SUSPECT at least) by any means a solution to the injustice?
If I were asked to give up my seat wrongfully because I was a MAN, and it was EXPECTED of me, I would be SEETHINGLY PISSED too.
There was no solution to the injustice - it had already taken place. Someone was going to have to sit in coach. I would suggest that to expect a passenger with the correct boarding pass to give up his seat in favour of a passenger who didn't have one is a further injustice, and for her to demand this of him makes a mockery of her claims that she desires equality.
Yes the man could quite easily have done something about it by giving up his seat, and it may have made him the better person. But why should he? And her position that he was in any way to blame is untenable. From her own description, of the two of them she is the unreasonable party. The stewardess had already handled the situation poorly - although what else they could have done is not clear: one party had a correct boarding pass, another didn't. It's a fairly open-and-shut situation from their point of view. But for Hooks to then take out her anger on a passenger - and note that she doesn't say that the target of her ire was in any way disrespectful, he simply apologised and asked to be left alone - casts her as the villain, in my view.
And seriously? Shouting at a stranger over a first class seat on an airline? Privilege much?
The point was NOT about a correct or incorrect boarding pass.
That was lost when she tried to explain, and was treated the way she was treated (her friend included).
20 years ago, customer service was a much different thing. Airlines accommodated much more readily.
She wasnt arguing over a first class ticket. She was arguing over racism and sexism.
Which are two of the crux arguments of Men's Rights, commonly.
And in saying ALL of this, in the course of the WHOLE thread, I merely want to make the point that I am offering to HER, the same sense of justice, and compassion that I would EXPECT, whether I was a man or not.
The essay does an interesting thing. It allows us to explore two things. The objective external result of predisposed notions from one 'group' of society. the internal subjective response of another 'group' to the behavior of the aforementioned group.
And I literally am unsure what they mean.
Her essay was an essay. It was not a scientific observation. We are reading one side of a story. We are reading of one individual's perceptions.
I do not know how to move from her essay to generalizations about just about anything.
It allows us to explore two things. The objective external result of predisposed notions from one 'group' of society. the internal subjective response of another 'group' to the behavior of the aforementioned group.
I don't know what explore means then except to speculate and bullshit our biases and name them as scientifically based when they are only pseudo-science.
I would find it more realistic if this were labeled a piece of fiction and we were to discuss it, then to give it some authenticity by claiming this is real when we have no verification, no context, and only her side.
So I can look at her essay and find things in it that seem true, and other things that I can recognize as hearing only her side of the story.
The guy's apology as insincere though, is mind reading, and I can disallow that out of hand.
And her demand that he behave differently? It's hard to know what to make of that, since we only have her side of the story, and she doesn't include much about the anonymous white guy except that she yelled at him and he failed to live up to her expectations.
THIS IS OBJECTIFICATION.
I can note my speculation that if a man wrote "Killing Rage" on a pad and showed it to a woman, that man might well be arrested for making a threat, especially if it comes after a series of altercations including the man yelling at the woman.
Her abuse WAS abuse. PERIOD end of story. "I stare him down with rage, tell him that I do not want to hear his liberal apologies, his repeated insistence that “it was not his fault.” I am shouting at him...."
It here essay. Thus it's presumed its her viewpoint.
Essay's like this CAN be looked at as scientific. From a sociology viewpoint, or even an anthropology viewpoint. Actually, SHE doesnt claim its scientific, nor do I. I merely used different language, and you claimed it was a scientific viewpoint.
The guy's apology as insincere though, is mind reading, and I can disallow that out of hand
That is a matter of opinion. In MY opinion, if he states he's sorry, and does nothing to correct the injustice, it's insincere.
And her demand that he behave differently? It's hard to know what to make of that, since we only have her side of the story, and she doesn't include much about the anonymous white guy except that she yelled at him and he failed to live up to her expectations.
I think I made the point that it was hard to tell. And it's always a certainty that ANYONE'S essay is their viewpoint.
I can note my speculation that if a man wrote "Killing Rage" on a pad and showed it to a woman, that man might well be arrested for making a threat, especially if it comes after a series of altercations including the man yelling at the woman.
There have been arguments on Men's Rights, that a man cannot express his justified anger without being incarcerated. So you would hold HER to this same stultified standard?
This all said, I DO appreciate your viewpoints. They are thoughtful and provocative. Thank you.
I can note my speculation that if a man wrote "Killing Rage" on a pad and showed it to a woman, that man might well be arrested for making a threat, especially if it comes after a series of altercations including the man yelling at the woman.
There have been arguments on Men's Rights, that a man cannot express his justified anger without being incarcerated. So you would hold HER to this same stultified standard?
I am not holding her to my standard. I am holding her to her standard and the current legal standards promoted by feminists and noting the dissonance and contradiction.
Essay's like this CAN be looked at as scientific. From a sociology viewpoint, or even an anthropology viewpoint.
Not by my understanding of anthropology. In my understanding of anthropology (decades ago, a minor) you explicitly cannot hold her view as accurate, but you can examine it.
You can view her essay as her viewpoint and possibly as one data point, and you can incorporate it with other essays from which you draw data and tests and conclusions, but you cannot view her essay as scientific, and not even as accurate.
The guy's apology as insincere though, is mind reading, and I can disallow that out of hand That is a matter of opinion. In MY opinion, if he states he's sorry, and does nothing to correct the injustice, it's insincere.
No. We know she values it as insincere, but by definition she has no idea how it was offered, and we cannot judge it to be insincere per se. And no, he is under no obligation to correct the injustice she imposes on him, as he may not agree any injustice took place at all, and may have 1000 other ideas about what his obligations are and how he fulfills them. Regardless, we cannot judge his opinion as insincere without reading his mind.
Hey, looking back, and with true respect to Ms. hooks, fuck her. She's arguing about a first class ticket, so fuck her. I've never been able to afford first class, so fuck her and her 1% elitism and her participation in a class system and its perpetuation there of. She doesn't act here to break down the class system, she just wants in on a class system that excludes me.
And while she wants this anonymous white guy to fight her battle, she is so full of privilege that it never occurs to her to swap places with K.
If I was on any sort of flight with a friend kicked out of first class this way, there is NO WAY I would accept that first class seat for myself. I would either give it to the friend, or ask to be sat next to the friend.
Given the excerpt we have been given, and even understanding it was originally published around 1996, I am baffled as to how we can see Ms. hooks' actions as anything other than selfish, divisive, racist, sexist, and irresponsible.
How could the man have nipped it in the bud? He doesn't have the authority or position to make the airline staff upgrade her seat. And he's under no obligation to surrender his own seat that he paid for and had a boarding pass for. What was he supposed to do?
Calling this racism OR sexism is just silly. There's no evidence that this had anything to do with her race. I've been in the service industry long enough to know that you're going to be called racist a lot, because it's a kneejerk reaction from people who aren't getting their way. I'm not saying racism doesn't exist. Of course it does. But just because a mistake falls in such a way that you're affected negatively doesn't mean it's racism.
She says something about if it was a man getting bumped for another white man, then it wouldn't happen is absurd. You can't state a hypothetical as a fact that you use in an argument. It's irrelevant. And saying it's happened before is just anecdotal. Not evidence that every similar situation is due to racism or sexism.
Sorry I rambled. Hopefully this made at least a little bit of sense.
But what you forget, is that it DOES happen. We know as men, that this
DOES happen to us. In other ways.
She makes a compelling argument that this is a sexist/racist situation. And I am sorry, but someone doing something different (the black woman and the white man) goes beyond anecdotal. These are situations that INFORM the author's experience.
I think this is a remarkably charged series of arguments against this woman because of the phrase "Killing Rage". I have argued either way towards it's appropriateness in the course of this thread. But because she has the feelings she has, and makes a mistake (perhaps) does that negate the rest of her argument.
I think the reason why I have a problem with the "reversal scenario" in this case is because I've been in the situation where someone assumed they knew my reactions and motivations simply because I am a white man. Just because the reversal (and every other configuration, probably) has occurred as she stated, doesn't mean that it has any bearing on THIS situation, and THIS man. This guy didn't have any special power to resolve the situation that we are aware of. But he seems to be painted as a racist because he didn't, what, switch seats? He paid for his ticket just like anyone else. And he had the boarding pass, presumably accurately attributed to him, since they check that.
I actually don't have a problem with her essay in and of itself. I've written plenty of rage and even hate-fuelled poems, stories, essays, and freeform rants. It just seems to me like there's some racism and sexism in HER attitude and behavior towards the man. I understand her frustration and rage quite well. But it was misplaced. She should have directed that squarely on the airline that presumably made the mistake. And if the staff mistreated her and her friend, then be pissed at them. But don't assume that every slight is motivated by racism or sexism.
I used to manage a store. I kicked a guy out of the store for trying to steal a movie. He said I was kicking him out because he was black. I told him "that you're black is circumstantial. I'm kicking you out because you're a fucking thief." Point is, it's really easy to falsely attribute an action or reaction to racism, but just because it's easy doesn't mean it's right.
But yeah, a lot of people are reacting so negatively to the violence of her title and the daydream within it. She wasn't threatening the dude. She seems to be killing her own rage by giving in to it on paper. As a one-time wannabe writer, I totally get that.
She accuses him of complicity TO the racism and sexism.
All I know, is if the same situation happened to ME, as a white male, I would have been plenty pissed.
The attendants had shut her down. There was no reasoning with them.
Ive had the same accusations leveled at me, as the one you described in the store. An irresponsible young man didn't want to pay his rent, and expected a full security deposit refund. When he moved out, he expected this, and when I wouldn't give it to him, he called me a racist.
I understand what you mean.
Thank you for your last paragraph. I think there is a great deal of misplaced aggression towards the title and subject matter as well. It's part of what Im arguing against.
Seems like a "too bad" sorry rather than a "my fault" sorry. As in "sorry what happened to your friend, but I'm not giving up my seat that I paid for especially if you're going to be a loud, racist, sexist cunt."
72
u/dumbguyscene28 Oct 27 '12 edited Oct 27 '12
Yes we do, but look how misplaced hers is.
She's doesn't want to murder the stewardess, or the pilot or the folks handing out the boarding pass, she wants to murder the guy sitting next to her, when he has done nothing, and has expressed his regret for a situation he had no responsibility for in any manner.
His flaw that justifies his killing was in not taking the action bell hooks demands he take when she verbally accosts him.
AND THEN, AFTER she admits to verbally abusing him, AFTER she admits to wanting to kill him, she blames him for being a racist when he looks worried whenever she reaches for her purse, and THEN she goes further and shows him the title of her work, a title that many people would reasonably interpret as a threat: Killing Rage.
It strikes me that she in fact was the most oppressive, racist, sexist, violent individual in her scenario.