3 ms·
Sounds like you are blaming the victim.
by matthewbauer 9y ago
Sounds like you are blaming the victim.
- ben509 9y agoAs a general principal, there is no logical or moral reason why a victim should be beyond blame. The goal should be to judge the situation fairly; just as much as you don't want to automatically blame the victim, neither should you automatically find the victim blameless.
- anxrn 9y agoGive me one good reason why blaming a random Google employee lunching in the cafeteria is "fair". (Disclaimer: I witnessed the shooting today, so not quite unbiased)
- ravenstine 9y agoJust so we're clear, I'm not blaming a "random" Google employee, as you are suggesting. I don't want to downplay this tragedy, and I wouldn't say that anyone deserved it. It's horrible that you had to witness what happened, and I'm sorry to hear it.
- deleted 9y ago[deleted]
- ben509 9y agoWe consider crimes against young children to be particularly bad precisely because they're genuinely blameless. Once you get past childhood, though, you're a moral agent making choices. If you work at a company, yeah, you are in a small part contributing to their actions and by continuing to work there, assenting to those actions. After all, a random Googler lunching in the cafeteria wants the prestige associated with all the good things Google does, that's got to come with some measure of blame for the bad things Google does. You can't have it both ways.
- anxrn 9y agoSo, wanting to work at a reputed place for software engineering == endorsing every single policy the company (a collection of over 70K individuals) might adopt? To the point that you should be expected to take a bullet for it?
- ravenstine 9y agoYouTube as a company is the victim? Even if it was, as opposed to the individual employees involved, victims can play a role in situations that come to be. Making an observation about this is not victim-blaming, nor does it absolve the aggressor.
- billysielu 9y agoBoth sides are victims though.