Wherein the Author Seems to Suggest He Likes People But Really He's a Misanthrope We Also Hear More About Woody Allen, Twitter and The Patty Hearst Documentary

That's Patty Hearst Who's Discussed Below

I like people…in theory. As Eric Hoffer once said (not to me, don’t even know the bloke to be perfectly honest) “It is easier to love humanity as a whole than to love one's neighbor.” This is especially true when you are commuting, as I’ve whined about endlessly before (not really endlessly otherwise I’d still be going on, I’m merely resuming previous rants and diatribes). When you are commuting, humanity proves to be a rather big nuisance. They get in your way, bump you, take up seats, sit next to you, smell, make noise and give you the stink eye. But people are at their worst on social media. I was recently called a “scum” a “Roy Moore voter” and worst of all “a supporter of child rape.” It was further suggested that people like me are the reason that child rape happens. All this because I tweeted some facts related to the disproven allegations of child molestation leveled many years ago against Woody Allen.

People hate facts. Okay people do like facts if they support their previously held position. If they serve to contradict their opinions, notions and ideas, then facts are either to be ignored or twisted or the person presenting them is to be slandered. Still I have to wonder at what the end game is for someone once they’ve called you “scum?”
 They’ve established their lack of interest in a discussion, and that they hold anyone with viewpoint differing from their own as the enemy. What do they gain by name calling? And by the way, if you are lawyer for a person charged with murder does that mean you support homicide? Not by my reckoning.

The actress and — I guess she’s an activist of sorts too — Asia Argento tweeted about Quentin Tarantino after Uma Thurman alleged that he had risked her life and physically abused her during the filming of the Kill Bill movies. She said, “fuck Quentin Tarantino forever.” What the hell does that even mean? A literalist might suppose that she advocates someone engage in intercourse with him throughout eternity, but clearly she was, shall we say, casting aspersions at the director. She really wants you to know that she loathes the man and probably feels that you should do. To what point? I understand anger but I also understand that from our anger we should try to make something positive. “Better to light a candle than the curse the darkness,” as John F. Kennedy famously said, quoting, well I’m not sure who, there seems to be disagreement over who said it first although it wasn’t JFK.

The #metoo movement is a force for positive change in liberating women from the horrors of sexual harassment and sexual violence. But there is also a lot of disparate anger that is being directed at individuals such as Woody Allen who either are innocent of any wrongdoing or who have not had their day in court. Due process is a sacred right in civilized societies. But today woe betide those accused, they are cast to the pit of hell for eternity. There seems no chance at redemption.

The venom against Allen is particularly vexing as is the stubborn stupidity of so many who assail him. Separate investigations cleared him of any wrongdoing. Doctors said there was no physical evidence of molestation. He passed a lie detector test. The terrible violation described by his accuser could not have happened at the time or in the place described and her story was inconsistent from the beginning and of course investigators believe that she had been coached. Yet by bringing up these nettlesome facts one is vilified and put in the enemy camp. Enemy. One side against the other. There is no shading, no nuance, no negations, no discussion, no seeking common ground. We are moving inexorably into a binary world. Choose a side. It has already manifest in our politics where conservatives long ago dropped any pretext of practicing the age old art of political compromise.

Samantha Geimer (now an author but also known as the 13 year old raped by Roman Polanski) said it best in a recent interview with Quilette: “If you choose not to pursue a case, if you cannot prove your allegations, then deciding to try your case in the court of public opinion decades later is a cop out. Dylan Farrow is not alone in her circumstances. But we have a justice system and the rule of law in our country and that is more important than one person’s desire to be ‘believed’ or to exact revenge. What kind of example is that for those who have made peace with their decisions and experiences? That you must have the belief of strangers to heal? That you can never be whole if the person you believe to have wronged you is not punished? It’s simply not true. Most of the time, people can find the strength to recover and move on with their lives. How is it healthy to leave your emotional well-being in the hands of others, or to insist on their belief and attack those who decline? It’s a kind of emotional blackmail. Dylan did nothing wrong, but now she will be judge and jury, blaming others for her pain. I’m afraid I don’t like it.”

One of the problems with something like #metoo is that it spends a lot of time and energy in the easy task of directing vitriol on perpetrators and not enough on the more time-consuming and difficult jobs of healing the victims and educating and enlightening. Simply putting the fear of god into men — while useful — is only one step towards empowering women and keeping them safe. Real change will come only through teaching what is appropriate. Indeed we still need something of a cultural shift from objectifying women and treating them as less than. A major step in the right direction would be if we had national leaders who stopped apologizing for abusers and started condemning them.

Suffice to say I sidetracked myself from original topic which was my love/hate relationship with the human race and how the worst of people often comes out on the internet. Last night I caught up with parts one and two of CNN’s six-part documentary on the Patty Hearst kidnapping. It is a topic I am well-versed in and has been near and dear to my heart since the time it actually took place. One of the first published pieces I ever wrote was about my connections to the Patty Hearst case, and this was when she was still on the lam. For example my father built the apartment from which she was abducted and had warned the owners that the locks were not very secure (I subsequently worked within a two minute walk from said apartment for 20 years). Also a college roommate grew up next door to one of the SLA members, Nancy Ling Perry. I watched on TV with him and another roomie the night that Perry died in an inferno set off during a shoot out with the police.

Last night after watching the first third of the documentary I was on Twitter (maybe I should know better) when I decided to check into the Patty Hearst hashtag that was displayed during the program. I was surprised to see that the majority of comments were blasts at Bill Harris, one of two kidnappers still alive, whose present-day commentary on the case formed much of the documentary. Watching him on the show I was struck but what a lucky break it was to have one of the people “who was there” available to share memories, particularly given the fact that Ms. Hearst and the rest of her brood steadfastly refused to comment.

Mr. Harris was assailed for, among other things, not being in jail and seemingly living comfortably. (He did serve seven years so he in fact “did his time.”) Some even commented that he was well-dressed. I suppose viewers expected or wanted him to be living in a ditch wearing rags. These viewers also didn’t care for his attitude, he seemed to show no remorse and in fact delighted in relating what happened. Goodness. Did they expect him to mumble, head bowed, supplicating himself before the camera, interjecting apologies for his past actions? To me he was an old guy telling war stories. In fact, I thought he was rather good at it. I enjoyed the hell out of his accounts. You can’t please all the people…..

From time to time I vow to either quit twitter, or more realistically, reduce the time I spend on it. Even if you’re careful about who you follow and you block or mute the idiots and any jackass you can’t stand, you’re still going to come across know-nothing idiots who are sanctimonious, smarmy, self-righteous or all three. It’s magnified when they disagree with you and even more so when they aren’t interested in those damn annoying facts. I have been successful at steering clear of the comments sections of virtually any website I visit. Those areas can be fetid cesspools of bigotry, stupidity and ignorance. Twitter though still has its value and is an excellent way to stay informed, get a chuckle and find links to stories of interest. If it weren't for some of the damn annoying tweeters.

All the preceding taken into consideration I still like people — after a fashion.