It was 1972 when Kim Phuc became famous. She was called, “the girl in the picture,” or, “Napalm Girl.” The famous photo, still available for viewing everywhere, shows a group of very frightened Vietnamese villagers running towards the camera. They include a girl, about ten years old, who had been directly in the path of a napalm explosion. Her clothing was all blown off of her, and she was covered in burns. She holds out her arms as if to keep burned skin from rubbing against burned skin. The expression on her face is pure desperation and terror.
Our news coverage was very different then. They tended to show everything. They certainly showed this photo on news programs of every visual medium. There were no questions of consent in those days. Nor were there any qualms about displaying a completely naked little girl. It was news! That's all there was to it.
No doubt about it, this photo had a powerful effect on people. While it is true that by 1972 the number of people who were firmly against that war had grown into a majority of Americans, there were still a lot of Americans sitting on the fence. They had been anti-demonstrator and pro-government, but they were starting to wonder. Richard Nixon was still the president, and there were a lot of Americans who still backed him 100% and were waving flags and attacking protesters. This photo moved many of the fence sitters into the anti-war camp.
I got to thinking about Ms. Kim the other day in connection with all of the mass shootings in my country. I, like most people, find the often shockingly successful school shootings completely horrifying. No offense to high school kids, but I find the mass murder of younger grade school children to be the worst category. Why not, I wondered, show the photos of those kids blown to shit by military grade ammunition, low-mass, high-energy bullets that would go right through most body armor? Wouldn't that help to change our ridiculously permissive gun laws? Why does anyone need an AR-15 anyway? If you think of a good reason, let me know.
Today, showing the photos is out of the question. The blown to shit children, of course, cannot consent. They are also far beyond caring if, or for what purpose, the photos are used, but that does not matter. Of the parents, many would talk about their privacy, and some, maybe quite a few, would hire lawyers who broached issues of copyright and money. Children's Rights groups would file Friend of the Court briefs complaining about the dignity of the children and their rights to their own images, and “adding insult to injury,” etc.
I wondered my way through this landscape of political correctness and the illogic of what passes for privacy and dignity these days, and then I came up against the deal breaker. We can't make these photos public. Without reference to the dead kids and their parents, I came to consider the effect that it would have on our living school children. They don't miss a trick. They have the Internet. All of the children in America would see the photos. Hell, they're already afraid to go to school, just from watching the stupid news coverage that we get already. They also know, and now they're sure, that their own “Protect and Serve” police forces WILL NOT LIFT A FINGER TO HELP THEM. If they saw the photos of the dead children, with those huge holes in them, and the blood everywhere, and the guts and brains splashed over the classroom, they'd never go to school again!
“Mom, no offense, but hell-to-the-NO on that shit. Uh-uh. No way.”
I guess it's “no” to showing the photos at this point. Then the usual script will play out. People will forget about Uvalde. These things only get fifteen-minutes of fame now anyway. Next week it will be a new crop of dead kids. The Republicans won't move an inch from their “freedom” agenda. They cherry-pick the Constitution just like they cherry-pick the Bible. They love that Second Amendment, but don't talk to them about Substantive Due Process. (For the uninitiated, that's abortion rights, and gay rights, and contraception, among other things.) Republicans hate activist judges, unless the activism is to overturn precedent that they don't like. (See also: Roe v. Wade.)
Re: the Bible, they love the parts about homosexuality bad, and women subservient to men good, but I notice that they do not grow beards, they do allow their wives to sleep in the house while they are menstruating, and they do love their pulled-pork sandwiches and their shrimp. They don't seem too worked up about fornication either, as long as it's them doing the fornicating. You can forget the New Testament all together. Keep a lid on all of that blessed are the poor shit, and welcoming the needy stranger. Jesus loves Trump! Prosperity Gospel my ass.
Miss Kim seems to have come down on her feet. Back in the 1980s, the Soviet were flying her from Cuba to Moscow and they stopped to refuel in Canada. Miss Kim and her new husband asked for political asylum in Canada, which was granted, and I'll bet that it was granted pretty damn quickly too. Welcome to Canada! After some much needed high-quality medical care on the old burn scars she regained her mobility and went on with her life. To her eternal credit, she is an activist for forgiveness and peace.
No comments:
Post a Comment