Heroism, Part 2 -- Trying this again!
I am re-entering this log. After all the time I spent on it, it really frustrates me to no end that Yahoo kept buggering it up. I think because it did not like me copying in a definition of heroism from another website, so instead of doing that I will just pop in a couple links (since they all say basically the same time... I am sure that you will get the idea).
* snipping out of first two paragraphs of definition and explaination of why I did this re-do. Basically, thanks to the comments by The Manipulator and Jaime S *
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hero
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/heroism
I still think, even with the broadening of the field of what a hero is, that the term is way over used and given too freely to describe people, especially in regards to 1c (above). Yes, we like to think that motherhood is an admirable achievement, but we too often forget that just because a child comes from a woman’s womb, that woman is not automatically a great parent. It is often said of males, that anyone can be a father, but it takes work and effort to be a “Dad”. Too often we think that just because the woman carried the child in her body for 9 months that she automatically should be granted sole custody of the child if the mother and father were to have a divorce and separate. That used to be true, much to the sadness of many children in the past who had to deal with bad parenting from the mother. Today, courts are very well aware that the sex of the parent has nothing to do with the emotional and moral and parenting qualities of that person. Thus, by extension, we should realize that just giving birth does not automatically make one a “hero” in motherhood. Also, not every mother has a hard time of it. Are you going to say that the rich mother with a nanny to watch over her children and a butler and maid to look after her has the same time with parenting as the single mother that is working at two jobs to try to keep her three children fed and clothed? Of course not, and yet we often hear both of these women are held up to the same “heroic” standards simply because they gave birth. Little do we hear of the fathers that do the same. So, I do not buy these arguments because (1) they are too broad in definition, and (2) they are most often gender-biased. Yes, there are some women who are heroic in their parenting (and some men), but let us look at each as an example, not as the over all rule.
Next, there are the nurses, the firemen, the police officers, the paramedics and such. Those that are involved in service to all of us, who sacrifice their sweat and hours, and yes, sometimes blood and lives, for us, our health and our lives. Now, as far as the ‘sacrifice in danger’ goes, I will certainly give some leeway there. These people are often seen as being noble and thus “heroic”. But, are we going to say that for EVERY police officer (does Mark Furman ring a bell?) Or, for every nurse (Kristen Gilbert)? How many of us have read about the arsonist that turned out to be a fire-fighter? No, one cannot automatically call a person a hero just because of their occupation. We have to examine what that person does, individually, within that occupation before we can call what that person does as heroic. Much like my earlier example of soldiers, from the one that jumps on a grenade to save a comrade, to the one that is in a supply depot stacking boxes. Each is equally important to the military, yet one can be called a hero, and the other just a soldier (being an ex-soldier myself, I do understand the difference). This is not being said to lessen the attributes of those nurses and firemen, police officers and soldiers, only to better enhance the term of hero, when we award it accurately to those that truly deserve it. God bless nurses, I know that we certainly do need more of them, but I have talked to some pretty stupid and some pretty witless and some pretty selfish nurses in my career. Just as I have talked to some compassionate and helpful police officers, I have also talked to some dumb and lazy ones as well. Again, an uniform does not a hero make.
Then there is the idol type, the “hero” of the entertainment industry, the “hero” of the shallow and the idiotic. Those that think that Brittney Spears or Paris Hilton are heroes to thousands because they serve as role-models to these people that cannot look from their US Magazine to their local newspaper to see real examples of ‘heroic’ actions and sacrifice. We have people that see Sarah Palin as being ‘heroic’ politically because she “stands up to the media” with a wink and a smile, never mind that what she says either makes no sense at all and/or is proven to be an out and out lie. Some people would rather celebrate shallowness and hypocrisy, basing who they worship as their heroes on 8 second sound bites, or what they hear from the lips of ‘well educated’ and ‘fair-minded’ types such as Rush Limbaugh or Sean Hannity (*snark*). Too often people say a person is a hero to them, not because of that person’s actions, but because of the words of industries such as Faux News, er… Fox News of ‘We decide for you’, I mean “We report, you decide”.
Now, are there politicians who can be seen as ‘heroic’? If John McSame, err… Senator John McCain was the true “maverick” as he has been espousing, and has butted heads repeatedly and fought against his own party (instead of voting with Bush 90+ % of the time), then one could say that standing up for your values against your peers could be seen as being “heroic” in principle. Therein lies the rub. I don’t think one could ever call a politician a “hero”. Such principles too often change with the political winds. Not that such is always a bad thing. I live and learn and change my viewpoints as I grow. That is why I was never ever a fan of George W. Bush. He is too stubborn and never willing to learn, let alone change his views on something, regardless of the facts. I do not have an issue with a politician “flip-flopping” when they change their viewpoint on an issue based upon new evidence given in their decision making process, which is much different from the McCain flip-flopping based upon politics and saying one thing one day and then something else the next day, to appease possible voters. But, people point to McCain as being a hero because of his military record (without really looking at his full military record), and because he was shot down and spent a number of years as a POW. If that was the case, we have a lot of heroes in Guantanamo Bay. But then, we are looking at McCain in regards to the above definition (1a), not (1b)!
What about sports heroes then? Okay, I can see where some can be seen as taking that extra step, to play in the face of pain, and to sacrifice their bodies in order to gain victory. A quarterback playing with a separated shoulder, or a basketball player sticking on the court with torn ACL, I suppose they could be seen as being ‘heroic’ in their actions. But, does a ‘heroic act’ make one into an actual ‘hero’? How many people consider John Wayne a hero? I know that there are quite a number of people that view him as a “National Hero” because of the roles of heroes he played in MOVIES. Look how many items are sold with him and his likeness that are sold in celebration of his hero status. His home life and his personal views and acts were very rarely reported and either misunderstood or not even known by those that ‘worship’ his acts from the silver screen. (Okay, I tangented off the sports example a bit here, but it is related, I think).
We are too much a society that takes our information, which shapes our decisions and mindsets, from television nowadays. And I am not talking about people listening to hours of talk shows and news programs from various sources and different channels over a week or so to make a decision, but usually determining how they will look at an issue based upon a 10 second sound bite (if that). Our society (talking about the US of A where I live) is more about style then substance, more about speed then accuracy, more about me then you, more about the now then the what is to come. We are selfish and stupid (I do not use ignorant because being ignorant is not having the information, of not knowing. Stupid is having the information and yet still doing [or not doing] the act, or acting upon the correct information anyway). And, as a mirror to us and to what we value, our heroes are those that have our same outlooks and values, only MUCH MORE. Thus, Paris Hilton is the hero to the stupid, and Lindsey Lohan the hero to the superficial and Tom Cruise the hero to the egotistical and Sarah Palin to the ignorant, and John McCain the hero to those that just want the same. We want a hero that will look good on a poster on our wall, not a hero who we can shape our own morals to follow their particular values. It is not as glamorus to make a priest that feeds the homeless daily a hero, as it is to make Brett Favre our hero when he throws 4 touchdowns. It is easier to make a hero of the pitcher that throws the no hitter, then it is to make the woman that spends her afternoons feeding the elderly in their own homes and dining rooms. We award the title of ‘hero’ to those who entertain us on the screen, and not those that make the lives of others better, while sacrificing time from their own lives.
In the end, I can really only say who I feel is a hero. A hero really is someone that we, ourselves, make. While I do not see John McCain as a hero, you very well might. And that does not mean that you are wrong, or that I (or anyone else) should belittle that determination (which I suppose that I am guilty of in reference to the above paragraph. But then again, I never did say that I was perfect). Because, in the end, you will look at those qualities that you admire, making that person a role-model to you, and (hopefully) letting your viewpoints and decisions be steered because of your outlook on your hero(es). There is nothing wrong with calling your mother a hero, or your father, or your brother that is a fireman, or your sister who is a breast cancer survivor. There is no shame in saying that you consider Florida Gators quarterback Tim Tebow a hero because of what he does off the field as well as his actions on the field. Your heroes are yours, and mine are mine, and sometimes they are the same, but most often they are not. I may not agree with your choice(s), but there is not much I can really do because who we call a hero is not determined by our intellect, but our emotions and feelings. Thus, when our hero does/says something that “betrays” our hero-worship, we are crushed and/or furiously angry at the person, for what they did to US. We take it very personally. This is not the reaction of the intellect, but of the emotion. People like to say that they have ‘thought’ about who these people are and what they did or do to make them see them as a hero, but in the end, it comes down to how we feel about that person and/or their acts. And feelings are never something that are exactly ‘logical’.
Thus, heroes are never logical. They just are. However, I still wish that we would be a bit more discerning with who we award that title.
(Originally posted October 19th, 2008 on Yahoo 360)
* snipping out of first two paragraphs of definition and explaination of why I did this re-do. Basically, thanks to the comments by The Manipulator and Jaime S *
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hero
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/heroism
I still think, even with the broadening of the field of what a hero is, that the term is way over used and given too freely to describe people, especially in regards to 1c (above). Yes, we like to think that motherhood is an admirable achievement, but we too often forget that just because a child comes from a woman’s womb, that woman is not automatically a great parent. It is often said of males, that anyone can be a father, but it takes work and effort to be a “Dad”. Too often we think that just because the woman carried the child in her body for 9 months that she automatically should be granted sole custody of the child if the mother and father were to have a divorce and separate. That used to be true, much to the sadness of many children in the past who had to deal with bad parenting from the mother. Today, courts are very well aware that the sex of the parent has nothing to do with the emotional and moral and parenting qualities of that person. Thus, by extension, we should realize that just giving birth does not automatically make one a “hero” in motherhood. Also, not every mother has a hard time of it. Are you going to say that the rich mother with a nanny to watch over her children and a butler and maid to look after her has the same time with parenting as the single mother that is working at two jobs to try to keep her three children fed and clothed? Of course not, and yet we often hear both of these women are held up to the same “heroic” standards simply because they gave birth. Little do we hear of the fathers that do the same. So, I do not buy these arguments because (1) they are too broad in definition, and (2) they are most often gender-biased. Yes, there are some women who are heroic in their parenting (and some men), but let us look at each as an example, not as the over all rule.
Next, there are the nurses, the firemen, the police officers, the paramedics and such. Those that are involved in service to all of us, who sacrifice their sweat and hours, and yes, sometimes blood and lives, for us, our health and our lives. Now, as far as the ‘sacrifice in danger’ goes, I will certainly give some leeway there. These people are often seen as being noble and thus “heroic”. But, are we going to say that for EVERY police officer (does Mark Furman ring a bell?) Or, for every nurse (Kristen Gilbert)? How many of us have read about the arsonist that turned out to be a fire-fighter? No, one cannot automatically call a person a hero just because of their occupation. We have to examine what that person does, individually, within that occupation before we can call what that person does as heroic. Much like my earlier example of soldiers, from the one that jumps on a grenade to save a comrade, to the one that is in a supply depot stacking boxes. Each is equally important to the military, yet one can be called a hero, and the other just a soldier (being an ex-soldier myself, I do understand the difference). This is not being said to lessen the attributes of those nurses and firemen, police officers and soldiers, only to better enhance the term of hero, when we award it accurately to those that truly deserve it. God bless nurses, I know that we certainly do need more of them, but I have talked to some pretty stupid and some pretty witless and some pretty selfish nurses in my career. Just as I have talked to some compassionate and helpful police officers, I have also talked to some dumb and lazy ones as well. Again, an uniform does not a hero make.
Then there is the idol type, the “hero” of the entertainment industry, the “hero” of the shallow and the idiotic. Those that think that Brittney Spears or Paris Hilton are heroes to thousands because they serve as role-models to these people that cannot look from their US Magazine to their local newspaper to see real examples of ‘heroic’ actions and sacrifice. We have people that see Sarah Palin as being ‘heroic’ politically because she “stands up to the media” with a wink and a smile, never mind that what she says either makes no sense at all and/or is proven to be an out and out lie. Some people would rather celebrate shallowness and hypocrisy, basing who they worship as their heroes on 8 second sound bites, or what they hear from the lips of ‘well educated’ and ‘fair-minded’ types such as Rush Limbaugh or Sean Hannity (*snark*). Too often people say a person is a hero to them, not because of that person’s actions, but because of the words of industries such as Faux News, er… Fox News of ‘We decide for you’, I mean “We report, you decide”.
Now, are there politicians who can be seen as ‘heroic’? If John McSame, err… Senator John McCain was the true “maverick” as he has been espousing, and has butted heads repeatedly and fought against his own party (instead of voting with Bush 90+ % of the time), then one could say that standing up for your values against your peers could be seen as being “heroic” in principle. Therein lies the rub. I don’t think one could ever call a politician a “hero”. Such principles too often change with the political winds. Not that such is always a bad thing. I live and learn and change my viewpoints as I grow. That is why I was never ever a fan of George W. Bush. He is too stubborn and never willing to learn, let alone change his views on something, regardless of the facts. I do not have an issue with a politician “flip-flopping” when they change their viewpoint on an issue based upon new evidence given in their decision making process, which is much different from the McCain flip-flopping based upon politics and saying one thing one day and then something else the next day, to appease possible voters. But, people point to McCain as being a hero because of his military record (without really looking at his full military record), and because he was shot down and spent a number of years as a POW. If that was the case, we have a lot of heroes in Guantanamo Bay. But then, we are looking at McCain in regards to the above definition (1a), not (1b)!
What about sports heroes then? Okay, I can see where some can be seen as taking that extra step, to play in the face of pain, and to sacrifice their bodies in order to gain victory. A quarterback playing with a separated shoulder, or a basketball player sticking on the court with torn ACL, I suppose they could be seen as being ‘heroic’ in their actions. But, does a ‘heroic act’ make one into an actual ‘hero’? How many people consider John Wayne a hero? I know that there are quite a number of people that view him as a “National Hero” because of the roles of heroes he played in MOVIES. Look how many items are sold with him and his likeness that are sold in celebration of his hero status. His home life and his personal views and acts were very rarely reported and either misunderstood or not even known by those that ‘worship’ his acts from the silver screen. (Okay, I tangented off the sports example a bit here, but it is related, I think).
We are too much a society that takes our information, which shapes our decisions and mindsets, from television nowadays. And I am not talking about people listening to hours of talk shows and news programs from various sources and different channels over a week or so to make a decision, but usually determining how they will look at an issue based upon a 10 second sound bite (if that). Our society (talking about the US of A where I live) is more about style then substance, more about speed then accuracy, more about me then you, more about the now then the what is to come. We are selfish and stupid (I do not use ignorant because being ignorant is not having the information, of not knowing. Stupid is having the information and yet still doing [or not doing] the act, or acting upon the correct information anyway). And, as a mirror to us and to what we value, our heroes are those that have our same outlooks and values, only MUCH MORE. Thus, Paris Hilton is the hero to the stupid, and Lindsey Lohan the hero to the superficial and Tom Cruise the hero to the egotistical and Sarah Palin to the ignorant, and John McCain the hero to those that just want the same. We want a hero that will look good on a poster on our wall, not a hero who we can shape our own morals to follow their particular values. It is not as glamorus to make a priest that feeds the homeless daily a hero, as it is to make Brett Favre our hero when he throws 4 touchdowns. It is easier to make a hero of the pitcher that throws the no hitter, then it is to make the woman that spends her afternoons feeding the elderly in their own homes and dining rooms. We award the title of ‘hero’ to those who entertain us on the screen, and not those that make the lives of others better, while sacrificing time from their own lives.
In the end, I can really only say who I feel is a hero. A hero really is someone that we, ourselves, make. While I do not see John McCain as a hero, you very well might. And that does not mean that you are wrong, or that I (or anyone else) should belittle that determination (which I suppose that I am guilty of in reference to the above paragraph. But then again, I never did say that I was perfect). Because, in the end, you will look at those qualities that you admire, making that person a role-model to you, and (hopefully) letting your viewpoints and decisions be steered because of your outlook on your hero(es). There is nothing wrong with calling your mother a hero, or your father, or your brother that is a fireman, or your sister who is a breast cancer survivor. There is no shame in saying that you consider Florida Gators quarterback Tim Tebow a hero because of what he does off the field as well as his actions on the field. Your heroes are yours, and mine are mine, and sometimes they are the same, but most often they are not. I may not agree with your choice(s), but there is not much I can really do because who we call a hero is not determined by our intellect, but our emotions and feelings. Thus, when our hero does/says something that “betrays” our hero-worship, we are crushed and/or furiously angry at the person, for what they did to US. We take it very personally. This is not the reaction of the intellect, but of the emotion. People like to say that they have ‘thought’ about who these people are and what they did or do to make them see them as a hero, but in the end, it comes down to how we feel about that person and/or their acts. And feelings are never something that are exactly ‘logical’.
Thus, heroes are never logical. They just are. However, I still wish that we would be a bit more discerning with who we award that title.
(Originally posted October 19th, 2008 on Yahoo 360)
Comments
Post a Comment