In the Name of Violence

Once again, too many things to discuss. We spent today trying to define more terms - violence, coercion, force, and aggression. All words that are along the same line, but each have nuances and subtle difference that are hard to verbalize. To quote Justice Potter Stewart; "I'll know it when I see it." Now, he was referring to pornography - but the same concept can be applied to these ideas. There is a certain layer to violence and everything else here that is not necessarily logical or possible to put into words (let alone legislation!) but we "just know." As empathetic beings, we can feel in a way when something is violent. I guess this gets into the contextually dependent aspect Hatty brings to the table. We can tell, often by body language and cultural/contextual clues, when a physical act like shoving is playful or in the name of sport as opposed to an aggressive act of violence. 

Now this is not to say these instincts are always right. We can often convince ourselves because of context or behavior that something is okay even if it does seem a little off. For example, seeing aggressive physical or verbal actions between a married couple, or father and son, or similarly intimate and dependent relationships, is easy to excuse ("She was smiling, it's obviously okay." or "It's none of my business anyway."). Or we honestly believe something can't be considered violence because it's what our culture has taught us, or we have internalized the oppression. Example being male circumcision, which we discussed today, or the sort of things that are told to our girls about their bodies and selves.

On the other side of the spectrum, we can look at things outside our own culture and call it violence easily. And be dumbfounded when the members of that culture don't agree. Similar to the way Americans are disgusted by the notion of eating dog meat - a not-uncommon thing in many other countries. This is where things get tricky. Where is the line of "this is our tradition" as compared with the line of human right's violations? Who is really to judge? Don't get me wrong, I don't think tradition or culture is an excuse for violence or oppression. But when is our own idea of what is the "right way" to do things getting in the way of us making fair judgment? This is exactly what we were saying in class. Who is to say that because we are doing things "in the name of science" that is more valid than doing it for deeply ingrained religious reasons?

And with that I think I will sign off for today. Nothing is answered or even clarified in here - just ideas and more questions! All this contemplating and thinking myself in circles is starting to give me a headache!