Re: RAT Cheese it, the Fuzz!

["William Houts" <houts.w@ghc.org>]

>So, if I'm understanding correctly (and I KNOW you'll correct me if I'm 
>wrong), you've had experiences with many, many law enforcement officials who 
>speak of the violence in their early lives and in the next breath casually 
>mention the violence of their present occupations.  Allegedly these 
>conversations are taking place "cheek-to-jowel" in the garage of these law 
>enforcement buddies.

I've been away from the list for a couple of days and have had a few moments to think about this  discussion. My posts, I see, do have a vehement quality that I think is not very characteristic of me.  When my good friend Sylvain is saying, "Jesus, calm down!" I really have to stop and think.  And though you start out reasonably enough and then slide to condescension, I'll try to explain my point to you, and hopefully draw this thread to a conclusion.  


>Is your point simply that, in YOUR experience, you have noted that these 
>individuals are drawn somehow to law enforcement, and the violence which is a 
>part of that job, because of the violence they experienced earlier in their 
>lives?


It probably was notclear enough, but in the post which started this thread, I said that the comments about cops came from an email which I had originally  sent to a friend.  This friend had the advantage of knowing,as you did not,   that I'm not in the habit of making every-time-in-all-cases sorts of statements, and that the comments were understood to have limited application.  I wrongly assumed that this understanding would hold here.

You, of course, are incredulous at the mere idea of a youth spent in the company of many law enforcement people.  Well, I have no help for that.  Living in a small town nestled  between a mental hospital and a state penitentiary, with the police department about five blocks away, it was pretty much unavoidable. 

>point (or even if it's NOT), then I would simply re-direct 
>the question of who, exactly, is the spoiled brat child that can't read, 
>hear, or acknowledge that there is the possibility of experiences beyond your 
>own?

I'm afraid that would be you, my friend.


>My own experience does not involve o>il changes or ball fields, but I worked 
>for several years for the International Br>otherhood of Police Officers (one 
>of my many "day" jobs) and also came i>n contact with a significant number of 
>law enforcement officers from across th>e country.  Many of these individuals 
>were idiots.  Many may have even bee>n emotionally scarred at some point in 
>their past.  But many were incredibly int>elligent and well-balanced 
>individuals who felt very strongly that th>ey wanted to make a difference, 
>much like the protesters in Seattle did.  >I would completely disagree with 
>the generalization that you make based> on your experiences alone.  

No doubt you have known many fine police officers who were kind to small children and animals,and subscribed to Harper's Magazine.  I knew such people too; many of them.  Yes, of course I did.  I was not trying to say simply, "All cops are bad!" or even "ALL cops are the children of ABUSE!"   But from my experience, I have to say that while the relationship between early vilence and later occupation is not axiomatic, there is a correlation. 

You of course, do not want to credit my experiences  at all, or the conclusions drawn from them.  It's much more amusing to ridicule my  poor keggers and garage bull sessions, or  dismiss them out of hand.

 My perception is that there is a war-torn  liberal in your head calling down a Nuremberg on mine.      You are so keen on earning that gold star that you have gone to the other extreme:  all cops read HARPER'S.  Or whatever.

But having taken a couple of days to reflect upon this (very tiresome) thread,  I think that it's not really about the nature of cops at all, but the nature and use of generalizations.   

Jonathan tried to show the madness of my observations about cops by wheeling out the Weak Father Theory of Homosexuality, and then comparing the two.    All gays are such and such  : all cops are so and so.  Yes, yes, very silly.  Thank you, good night.

But there is some truth in such generalizations.  Not that generalization, particularly, but in many like it.  Being an arch-homosexual myself, in charge of Phase Two of the Plot to Subvert the World, and subject only to the commands of Miss Christopher Jeffries a.k.a. the Queen of Darkness, I should know. Some queens are --and thank the GODS for it!-- lisping limp- wristed showtune-belting Joan Crawford-impression-doing faggots. I was never granted these powers myself, I am not worthy.  But I recognize them  for the mysterious gay totems that they are. And so do you.

Now it's not that hard, if you are inclined to be honest, to infer similar patterns among (some) law enforcement officials.  Why do people do the things they do?  Perhaps some things are benign, or simply  inexplicable.  But most things are not,whether you were raised in Steilacoom, Washington or Pensacola, Florida.  There are often patterns behind the things we do, habits and attitudes learned in childhood.  I trust that this is not a controversial idea for you?

Unless you don't live in an ordered cosmos with discernible  patterns, but a chaos of random and discrete events, none of them bearing any relationship to or influence upon the other. If that is the case for you, then there is a philosophical difference between us far more profound than the origins of cops and homosexuals.  Or of homosexual cops.

Which is fine by me.  C'est la vie.


        --Bill


          

  

    in my  
    


I have two good friends who happen to be police officers - I've known them 
since we were in high school -- and I know what their lives were like when 
they were younger.  I also know that in both cases, they had moments (and 
continue to have moments) where they would be found in circumstances similar 
to those of the protesters, rather than the police, in Seattle.

So, you've got your experience.  And I've got mine.  So does Jonathan.  None 
of our voices, individually, however, mean enough to speak in an overarching 
sense with ANY kind of authority over what the condition as a whole is.

I can speak to the fact, however, that someone here needs to grow up.. and 
it's not Jonathan...  and realize that the world does not, in fact, revolve 
around a single set of experiences.  At least, that's MY experience.....

clearing a space on the door of my refrigerator....

tim