Well, my cousin was one of those badly injured in the bomb at Victoria station in London about 10 years ago. Immediately afterwards I felt a general rage at the violence by IRA. It made me furious that the government wasn't doing more to solve, or attempt to solve, the conflict in Northern Ireland. I did not feel, however, urge for revenge or wish ill upon others as punishment. I don't remember being aware of any particular satirical comments at the time though being aware (to some degree at least) with the larger issues I could be sensible enough to divorce my personal experience and national/international experience.

But... to actually answer your question, my view on terrorism and terrorist violence didn't change. I became more knowledgeable about the situation in Northern Ireland, if anything.

(Edited by Opiumia 26/03/2002 10:17)

Pausing only to say that, although I had a pretty good idea what this thread would be about, I am usually very wary of titles like 'As Requested', as they tend to accompany spam emails concerning the amorous antics of farmgirls or college students...

I have to say, firstly, that I don't consider either of my children to be major atrocities, not most of the time anyway. I have also tried not to let my status as a parent influence my views of issues like education or street crime. It was actually many years before Kira and Ben were born that, as I waited for a train to London and watched the other commuters, I was impressed by the fact that small toddlers shouldn't have to suffer because of adult feuds, however longstanding. If it takes the patter of tiny feet to broaden people's social consciences, then I would suggest that their views were overly parochial to start with.

So, the answer to the question, "Do you feel having a personal or emotional involvment in a certain subject matter has changed your opinon on it from how you felt before?", obviously can be 'yes', but it can also be 'no'.

Similarly, the answer to the query of how a person's perspective might change depending on their level of involvement with a major atrocity also depends on the situation. If GWB had responded to the challenge of September the 11th imaginatively, my perspective could very easily have changed, but as things stand, my cynicism was only reinforced (in much the same way as Tony Blair might have transformed my views about government and made anarchy seem less of an attractive prospect, but didn't).

And people don't always learn the right lessons from personal involvement. As I mentioned in IA, when the Birmingham Six were finally released, some of the relatives of those who died in the Birmingham pub bombings insisted that they should remain locked up, because "somebody should pay". The people who threw eggs at my family's house and, on one particularly memorable occasion at the height of the bombings, congregated outside our house like a large, sullen herd of cows, due to the fact that my parents were Irish, were also motivated by a curiously corrupted form of empathy.

I've a father who regards the British Army as hired killers who were too ignorant/twisted to get real jobs. I know people who think 'Our Boys' can do no wrong, and just need to be let off the leash to solve all Northern Ireland's problems. I myself cherish the freedom to accept that mistakes can be made by both sides in a conflict, without kissing away all hopes of rapprochement. To enjoy that freedom fully, though, I need to look at the whole picture, and that is what decides the level of involvement I'll enter into over any social/political issue.

---

by Joe
Pausing only to say that, although I had a pretty good idea what this thread would be about, I am usually very wary of titles like 'As Requested', as they tend to accompany spam emails concerning the amorous antics of farmgirls or college students...

But you still looked

I have to say, firstly, that I don't consider either of my children to be major atrocities, not most of the time anyway. I have also tried not to let my status as a parent influence my views of issues like education or street crime. It was actually many years before Kira and Ben were born that, as I waited for a train to London and watched the other commuters, I was impressed by the fact that small toddlers shouldn't have to suffer because of adult feuds, however longstanding. If it takes the patter of tiny feet to broaden people's social consciences, then I would suggest that their views were overly parochial to start with.

---

So am I taking it you mean I'm narrow minded because I used as my example my children? or that I belong to a parish ( sorry had to look it up and those were the two choices) Although I think it's less to do with narrow mindness it's more to do with life experiences ( and even less to do with parishes )

As for your other points I agree with you, and thats the point I've always tried to get across when I use it as an example in a discussion, None of us really know how much having personal involvment in a atrocity will effect our views on it, as each kind of atrocity will effect us in different ways. As you said the answer can be "yes" and it can be "no".

---

by Sweet-Sange
So am I taking it you mean I'm narrow minded because I used as my example my children?

---

No, I'm saying that you may have been before you had children, and that not everyone necessarily needs that impetus. Even singletons have nephews and nieces, and get broody, and wonder what kind of world this is to bring chidren into. Their opinions also count (after all, they pay taxes too, and don't get nearly as much help from the state that parents do).

---

by Joe
(quotes)
No, I'm saying that you may have been before you had children, and that not everyone necessarily needs that impetus. Even singletons have nephews and nieces, and get broody, and wonder what kind of world this is to bring chidren into. Their opinions also count (after all, they pay taxes too, and don't get nearly as much help from the state that parents do).

---

Have I said their opinon doesn't count? Infact I'm normaly the one being told my opinon is wrong(I must be an easy target)and to be honest I find it quiet insulting for you to say I may have been narrow minded before I had children. I used my children as "my" example, why it has to have holes picked in it I will never know.

---

by Sweet-Sange
I use this as my example as I can quiet clearly remeber crying at films when I was younger because and animal got hurt of suffered and not if the same happened to a child.

---

Okay, so maybe quite a while before you had children, but still...

I believe having direct involvement with something can change someone's feelings toward a particular issue. The fact is that even though we can empathize and try to figure out how participants might feel, not everything can occur to us until we've been there.

I didn't interpret Joe's phrase to be an attack on you Sange, just a general pronouncement that people need to be open-minded and conscious whether they're directly involved or not, whether they have children or not.

by Opiuma But... to actually answer your question, my view on terrorism and terrorist violence didn't change. I became more knowledgeable about the situation in Northern Ireland, if anything.

A sensible and logical response, as always Opiuma.

(Edited by Diandra 27/03/2002 18:45)

---

by Diandra
I believe having direct involvement with something can change someone's feelings toward a particular issue.

---

Indeed, that point was also raised in the suicide thread, with both Desire and Betty-Boop having different opinions until it directly affected them

---

by Diandra
The fact is that even though we can empathize and try to figure out how participants might feel, not everything can occur to us until we've been there.

---

Indeed, there are many things in life where you can only imagine what it would be like, but the only way you'll ever find out for real is if it happens to you personally.

---

by Sweet-Sange
(quotes)
Have I said their opinon doesn't count? Infact I'm normaly the one being told my opinon is wrong(I must be an easy target)and to be honest I find it quiet insulting for you to say I may have been narrow minded before I had children. I used my children as "my" example, why it has to have holes picked in it I will never know.

---

I'm sorry if you feel insulted, as I'm sure it wasn't Joes intention for his remark to be construed as a personal attack (I tend to think that if he wanted to be insulting, we'd know about it ), but here's a bit of reasoning for you...

Changing ones opinion on something, for whatever reason, necessarily means that you must think that your previous opinion was incorrect, right? Therefore, you must now think that your attitude towards children before you had any was wrong, otherwise you wouldn't have changed it. So I'm not sure why you take offence at Joes suggestion, when he expressed basically what you admitted yourself in your original post. Particularly since he's a fellow parent, and knows whereof he speaks far more than I do.

Myself? I can't think of any particular thing that's caused me to radically change my beliefs. I do have them, but being aware that I'm often wrong I'm also constantly re-evaluating them according to new evidence or persuasion. To take one example, which I never actually mentioned at the time, I was of the opinion that fox-hunting should be banned until I read the posts by Jayjay in that thread, which I thought were the best argument I've ever read for not banning it, and he's persuaded me of his point of view.
Not a huge life-changing thing, but a willingness to accept the validity of someone elses argument. Which to me is just as important.

That is exactly the thought that struck me a few hours ago, but the brain fug descended and I lost the capacity to retain information (even more so than usual, that is). Sweet-Sange's argument does seem to work against her...

Sorry, what I saying again?

The original question was whether people's views and opinions were changed by having a personal involvement in it; it's an interesting thought, as Joe points out, that it may also be that having a personal involvement in other areas can attract peoples attention where they may not previously have focused.Maybe that means that we're all of us narrow-minded in that sometimes we dont focus where we arent directly involved?

Are there other examples of peoples outlook changing through changing involvement in their lives, and as the original post stated, have their opinions and outlooks changed?

Actually this is an interesting point.. it's a lesser example than the way having children can change your world but I know personally that before it became apparent that I was going to be making my living from programming software I had very few qualms about pirated software. I would happily have used what I knew to be "non-official" software CDs even where I wouldn't have gone into a shop and taken the box off the shelf..

So is my opinion coloured by my personal interests? Yes.. maybe that made me immoral before my opinion changed but I can honestly say I believed myself to be justified in my views then just as I do now yet all I can see that has changed is which view was in my own personal interests! Worrying

(Edited by Julz 27/03/2002 23:26)

---

by Sweet-Sange
it's an interesting thought, as Joe points out, that it may also be that having a personal involvement in other areas can attract peoples attention where they may not previously have focused.

---

Did I say that?

I think I read what you were saying in much the same was as Sange did, Joe; Im interested to know what angle on the original topic you were actually taking?

It's worrying that if we dont accept changing opinions then we have to accept being close-minded, but as Dan says if we change our minds we're admitting we were wrong!

I think the problem comes in thinking opinions have to be black and white. That if you state an opinion you are actually saying that something is or is not correct.

I dont think "capital punishment is wrong", what Im really thinking to myself is "the arguments I've heard and my own thoughts lead me to believe that capital punishment is wrong". It'd be fairly arrogant ever to believe I knew -anything- with absolutely certainty to be correct, only that all the evidence and argument I can think of at the moment leads me to that conclusion. (And thinking that way also helps in admitting when you're wrong! ) What do you think?

(Edited by Julz 28/03/2002 15:39)

---

A sensible and logical response, as always Opiuma.

---

Aww, ta very much I do my best...