About that viral video...

Events occurring and how they relate/affect Anabaptist faith and culture.
temporal1
Posts: 16664
Joined: Sat Oct 22, 2016 12:09 pm
Location: U.S. midwest and PNW
Affiliation: Christian other

Re: About that viral video...

Post by temporal1 »

Neto wrote:
Josh wrote:In Western culture we’re taught to look people in the eye and smile.

If one wants to go to DC and protest, one had probably best adapt to Western cultural norms. When I’m in other places I do my best to adapt to local expectations.
Yes, that is true.
(I am very aware of it, because I am often called out for not doing so enough, or not at all.)


But the point of the article (or rather my point in linking to it) is that maintaining eye contact for an extended period is considered rude or impolite. That is like trying to stare someone down - it is confrontational.

The difference for at least some native cultures (certainly Cheyenne) is that any eye contact (except perhaps a fleeting glance) is considered confrontational.

But never mind native cultural ideas - what happened in the case here was clear violation of accepted Western norms.

[An aside here regarding eye contact.
As mentioned in this article, and in relation to the most common accusation made against me for not looking people in the eyes - "not paying attention", at least according to the study reported in this article, you can listen better if the other person is NOT looking you in the eyes.

I'm not at all surprised by this finding.
If some here have read other studies which contradict this conclusion, I at least would certainly like to hear about it.]
this is all so fascinating. i agree.
i suppose, in my mind, in this instance, i cannot isolate the staring as the single deciding factor.
i’m not sure if you do. i would not presume that, either.

your personal accounts cause me to remember “a lesson” i had, years ago, as a young female. wife+mother, working outside our home, interacting with the public, all sorts of people, all ages.

i had a good friend i respected so much, we’re still friends! she was/is a veterinary doctor, a scientific mind, she knows animal behaviors, for sure! and, often compares animal/human traits.

she is a faithful Christian. not Anabaptist.

we were both married with children. one day, somehow, we were discussing .. men. :lol:
i mentioned, men seemed to tend to be (suggestive?) to me. i’m not sure of the exact words.

she was puzzled. “how so?”
i mentioned, when i talk with men, i look away, or i look down. i do not like to look them in the eye.
i wondered if this could be part of it? :?

she was abrupt!
she told me, “you just look them in the eye and let them know, ‘no!’ and you mean business!” :evil:
this was shocking to me. to be so aggressive. she’s far more black+white than i.

i had to think in her perspective. she had endured higher ed, earning a doctorate in a tough male dominated world. plus, animals, her study, animals definitely use their eyes, their voices/sounds, body language, and more non-verbal cues to navigate their worlds.

i wasn’t sure if i should share this.
but, maybe it is useful regarding this general question of eye contact. :?

btw. i don’t believe i ever “took on” my friend’s exact advice.
but, i try to be conscious of what my eyes and posture, i.e., looking away, or down, may be conveying.

i had not thought, if i look down/away, does this invite males to “come after” me?
you know, the hunt. :P
i mean, it’s real. i thought i was escaping, protecting myself. did they think, “prey?” :shock:
we are so complex. and, such amatuers!

when i was young, i believed being married with children WAS my protection.
in the past, i believe it was much more the case. today, it does not seem to matter. :(
to some, it may even seem a challenge to overcome. lots of twisted thinking out there, males+females.

i do use BRIEF eye-to-eye contact mostly to ensure the other person, male or female, gets the message i recognize their presence.

with young men, more than others, i sense they often feel invisible.
in a GLANCE, i try to convey, “i see you.” “you are real.”
which seems appreciated, and not provocative.

of course, i now have the bonus+freedom of being “older,” which helps remove various social dilemmas.
it’s not easy being young.

Joy,
if you see this, i have marveled and wondered how you might navigate these things in prison settings?! not everyone could do this. for myself, i’m sure it would be a train wreck.
i am too easily fooled, i’m too slow to foresee disasters. i so admire you. and appreciate your unique perspectives, insights, experiences. you are specially blessed.
:D
0 x
Most or all of this drama, humiliation, wasted taxpayer money could be spared -
with even modest attempt at presenting balanced facts from the start.


”We’re all just walking each other home.”
UNKNOWN
Joy
Posts: 1133
Joined: Mon Nov 07, 2016 11:06 pm
Location: Under His wings
Affiliation: Baptist

Re: About that viral video...

Post by Joy »

temporal1 wrote:
Joy,
if you see this, i have marveled and wondered how you might navigate these things in prison settings?! not everyone could do this. for myself, i’m sure it would be a train wreck.
i am too easily fooled, i’m too slow to foresee disasters. i so admire you. and appreciate your unique perspectives, insights, experiences. you are specially blessed.
:D
Well, I was pretty naive, having grown up in a very sheltered home. But I found early with prisoners that kindness in answer to improper suggestions is often misconstrued as weakness and/or vulnerability. But I learned, partly on my own, and partly from Christian guys filling me in on how men think, not to merely ignore such talk (in letters) as not worthy of an answer. That, I was told, would be interpreted as I really liked what they said :shock: but didn't want to admit it. So I've learned to be direct--a little less tactful, and a little more candid, and the outcome is better all around.
One guy on death row told me( in his mind) that all women who have written him want one of two things--either to talk sex, or to convert him. It seems the woman who asked me to write him wanted both. He told me she died a drug addict, having left or been kicked out by her drug dealing boyfriend--but she held her faith!! Um, I don't think so. Sad, so sad.
0 x
2Tim. 3:16,17 All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: That the man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works.
temporal1
Posts: 16664
Joined: Sat Oct 22, 2016 12:09 pm
Location: U.S. midwest and PNW
Affiliation: Christian other

Re: About that viral video...

Post by temporal1 »

Joy wrote:
temporal1 wrote: Joy,
if you see this, i have marveled and wondered how you might navigate these things in prison settings?! not everyone could do this. for myself, i’m sure it would be a train wreck.
i am too easily fooled, i’m too slow to foresee disasters. i so admire you. and appreciate your unique perspectives, insights, experiences. you are specially blessed.
:D
Well, I was pretty naive, having grown up in a very sheltered home.
But I found early with prisoners that kindness in answer to improper suggestions is often misconstrued as weakness and/or vulnerability.

But I learned, partly on my own, and partly from Christian guys filling me in on how men think, not to merely ignore such talk (in letters) as not worthy of an answer.
That, I was told, would be interpreted as I really liked what they said :shock:
but didn't want to admit it.
So I've learned to be direct--a little less tactful, and a little more candid, and the outcome is better all around.

One guy on death row told me( in his mind) that all women who have written him want one of two things--either to talk sex, or to convert him.

It seems the woman who asked me to write him wanted both.
He told me she died a drug addict, having left or been kicked out by her drug dealing boyfriend--but she held her faith!!

Um, I don't think so. Sad, so sad.
happy you saw this. i so appreciate it.
you must understand what my vet friend was saying? .. it aligns what you describe about directness.

i’m not sure i could do that. thus, i look down, turn away, and, mostly, avoid! :lol:
this is where this forum has been an unbefore-experienced outlet, the physical is removed.
i “write so much,” it might be difficult to imagine i would avoid+run. but, o.yes.i.do.

have you noticed anything specific to eye contact (Neto’s central interest).
there is power in eye contact. a lot of communication is through eyes.

when my grdaughter was born, before she spoke, her eyes and facial expressions were so clear,
i told my daughter, she has no need of language!

eye contact can determine power, dominance, submission, mood, direction, comfort-discomfort, there must be more.

in my husband’s last months, he almost could not speak. aphasia. :(

but, through his bright eyes, we communicated effectively. the hospice nurses were impressed.
eyes, facial expression, body language. by then, he had many limitations, he was bed ridden.
still. his brain was full of life. we communicated, shared gratitude, “joy,” :mrgreen:
lots of things, in spite of severe losses. what an experience.
0 x
Most or all of this drama, humiliation, wasted taxpayer money could be spared -
with even modest attempt at presenting balanced facts from the start.


”We’re all just walking each other home.”
UNKNOWN
User avatar
Robert
Site Janitor
Posts: 8665
Joined: Wed Oct 19, 2016 4:16 pm
Affiliation: Anabaptist

Re: About that viral video...

Post by Robert »

https://www.theblaze.com/news/nick-sand ... s-lawsuits
On Friday, his team of lawyers sent letters to more than 50 individuals, media companies, journalists, Hollywood celebrities, and Catholic organizations "as the first step in possible libel and defamation lawsuits," according to the Cincinnati Inquirer.
0 x
Try hard not to offend. Try harder not to be offended.
Just because you are paranoid, doesn't mean they are not after you.
I think I am funnier than I really am.
temporal1
Posts: 16664
Joined: Sat Oct 22, 2016 12:09 pm
Location: U.S. midwest and PNW
Affiliation: Christian other

Re: About that viral video...

Post by temporal1 »

Robert wrote:https://www.theblaze.com/news/nick-sand ... s-lawsuits
On Friday, his team of lawyers sent letters to more than 50 individuals, media companies, journalists, Hollywood celebrities, and Catholic organizations "as the first step in possible libel and defamation lawsuits," according to the Cincinnati Inquirer.
At the end of the report:
.. We want to change the conversation.
We don't want this to happen again.

We want to teach people a lesson," McMurtry said.

”There was a rush by the media to believe what it wanted to believe versus what actually happened."

Here is who the lawyers sent letters to:

The New York Times
The Washington Post
CNN
NPR
The Atlantic Media
The Guardian
TMZ
Capitol Hill Publishing Corp.
HBO
The Hill
Conde Nast
CQ
Heavy.com
Bustle.com
Warner Media
Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.)
Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.)
Kathy Griffen
Jim Carrey
Alyssa Milano
Bill Maher
CNN's Erin Burnett
CNN's Sara Sidner
CNN's Ana Cabrera
CNN's S.E. Cupp
CNN's Eliot C. McLaughlin
CNN's Amanda Watts
CNN's Emanuella Grinberg
WaPo's Michelle Boorstein
WaPo's Cleve R. Wootson Jr.
WaPo's Antonio Olivo
WaPo's Joe Heim
WaPo's Michael E. Miller
WaPo's Eli Rosenberg
WaPo's Isaac Stanley-Becker
WaPo's Kristine Phillips
NYT's Sarah Mervosh
NYT's Emily S. Rueb
NYT's Maggie Haberman
NYT's David Brooks
Shannon Doyne
Kurt Eichenwald
NBC's Andrea Mitchell
NBC's Savannah Guthrie
MSNBC's Joy Reid
NBC's Chuck Todd
The Guardian's Noah Berlatsky
NBC's Elisha Fieldstadt
The Associated Press' Eun Kyung Kim
Diocese of Covington
Diocese of Lexington
Archdiocese of Louisville
Diocese of Baltimore
Internet+social media “brakes?” Hope so. :)
0 x
Most or all of this drama, humiliation, wasted taxpayer money could be spared -
with even modest attempt at presenting balanced facts from the start.


”We’re all just walking each other home.”
UNKNOWN
User avatar
Robert
Site Janitor
Posts: 8665
Joined: Wed Oct 19, 2016 4:16 pm
Affiliation: Anabaptist

Re: About that viral video...

Post by Robert »

Image
0 x
Try hard not to offend. Try harder not to be offended.
Just because you are paranoid, doesn't mean they are not after you.
I think I am funnier than I really am.
temporal1
Posts: 16664
Joined: Sat Oct 22, 2016 12:09 pm
Location: U.S. midwest and PNW
Affiliation: Christian other

Re: About that viral video...

Post by temporal1 »

.. About a year later:

”CNN agrees to pay settlement to Nick Sandmann in libel suit”
https://hermancain.com/cnn-agrees-pay-s ... henewvoice
Herman Cain:
They’ll say it’s not an admission of guilt, but it’s certainly an admission that they weren’t confident about prevailing at trial:

CNN agreed Tuesday to settle a lawsuit with Covington Catholic student Nick Sandmann.

The amount of the settlement was not made public during a hearing at the federal courthouse in Covington, Kentucky.

Sandmann’s lawsuit sought $800 million from CNN, the Washington Post and NBC Universal.


Libel is hard to prove in court because you have to prove not only that they said negative and false things about you, but that they knew they were doing so and did it with malice. Slander is a little different, and I’m not entirely sure what Sandmann’s lawyers alleged.

But at the very least, he would have a strong case that CNN and other media were reckless in the way they portrayed him based on nothing more than a single still shot showing him face-to-face with Nathan Phillips.

You also have to keep in mind the context of this story blowing up.
The image of Sandmann and Phillips went viral on social media, and it was largely spread by liberals who were sure that Sandmann – with his MAGA hat – was smirking at and taunting the poor Native American.

The mainstream media basically co-opted this view of the photo and reported it accordingly.
It wasn’t until a day later when actual video of the incident emerged that everyone realized the still shot had been wildly misleading, and that the take of left-wingers who spread it on social media had been way off and extremely unfair to Nick Sandmann. .. ..
0 x
Most or all of this drama, humiliation, wasted taxpayer money could be spared -
with even modest attempt at presenting balanced facts from the start.


”We’re all just walking each other home.”
UNKNOWN
Post Reply