Pages

Friday, April 8, 2016

50 Shades of White Bear

Okay. To meet the word count on this thing, I decided to thoroughly answer some of the questions that were asked in class today.

 Is there a crime where your humanity is given up as part of the punishment?
              Well, I'd say any time you are committed for a crime, you rights are taken away, even your "unalienable rights" such as life and liberty. You are literally taken to jail (liberty, check) and depending on what you did and where you are, you can be put on death row (life, check). I would say you giving up your humanity IS your punishment. Nothing is rehabilitative about prison. Well, not in America anyway.

At what point was the punishment in White Bear too much?
              The punishment became too much when the calendar had been marked for the 19th time. I think if the punishment had to be done at all, one time would've been enough. I didn't really see the point of erasing Victoria's memory after having her live in terror for a day and then giving her the worst memory of herself. I would've just left her at the house with no family, no friends, and no full memory. I also realized the punishment became too much when the people of "justice" were planning the whole day while smiling and letting everyone know they can have fun with it. NEWS FLASH!  The only people that get pleasure from pain are sadists. Torture is fun, not punishment.

Because the film showed Victoria as a truly innocent person first, should she still be punished?
            Like my previous answer, Victoria was being tortured, and she didn't deserve that at all. It's nice that she got a taste of her own medicine, but a proper punishment would have sufficed.

Are the people punishing Victoria just as guilty as she is?
            Yes. End of story.
What was the point of her "punishment?"
            Entertainment.
Was the person being tortured the same person that committed the crime?
         Physically, Victoria was still Victoria. However, mentally, she was a different person. Because her memory was being erased every day, she had no recollection of killing anyone. Not to say she didn't commit a crime though. But I believe Victoria is not a truly evil person, even when she was committing the crime. Therefore, I believe after her memory was erased, she was being her true self. So, to answer the question, no.

2 comments:

Unknown said...

Victoria is an extreme case of the person who committed the crime vs. the person punished for it. However, if she hadn't gotten her memory wiped everyday after torture, would you also disagree with the practice. You said, "Well, I'd say any time you are committed for a crime, you rights are taken away, even your "unalienable rights" such as life and liberty." and "It's nice that she got a taste of her own medicine, but a proper punishment would have sufficed." So the disconnect for me is, what is a proper punishment that doesn't infringe upon one's unalienable rights.
"

Anonymous said...

About the last question answered: How can you say that Victoria is not a truly evil person was she was committing the crime? To me, the crime that she did was sufficient enough for death penalty or maybe even a day of this punishment. But to do this for 19 days, I'll agree with you that that is too much.