Over at Consumerist there is a ridiculous post about a woman, “Kelly,” whose recent movie-going experience was ruined by a couple of boorish and irresponsible parents who brought their pre-schooler to the movie and did nothing while he annoyed the woman, talking to her, nudging her, and generally being a nuisance. You can read her account of the whole fiasco here.
Apparently it never occurred to the woman, or her equally passive and impotent brother, who has apparently been writing indignant e-mails to Regal Theaters after the incident, to tell the couple that 1) they have no right to let their child interfere with other audience members trying to enjoy the movie, 2) they either need to control their child or leave, and 3) if they don’t, then she will go make such a fuss in the lobby with the staff that they will be asked to leave.
She did none of the above. Because of this, I have no sympathy for her, and a fair measure of contempt, since people like her and her bro are the reason why so many other people engage in outrageous conduct in public—because too many of us prefer to be indignant and suffer in silence rather that to do our duty as citizens and members of society, which is to call attention to unethical and anti-social conduct and demand that it stop. This is the duty to confront the jerks, bullies, scofflaws and boors among us, who make life uncomfortable, unpleasant and ugly. Those who shirk those duties, the weenies like “Kelly,” are the jerks’ compliant accomplices. They are lazy, passive, useless.
Consumerist writer Laura Northrup airs Kelly’s sad story and concludes,
“Yes, Kelly could have grabbed the mother’s attention and asked what she thought was going on, but we’ve all been in situations like this. Someone acts in a way that’s so far outside the boundaries of normal and rational human behavior that you don’t know what to say. What do you say?”
“What do you say?”
You say, “Stop this right now, or I will see that you are stopped.”
That’s what you say, every time.
It’s not that difficult, it is necessary, and it is your duty.
___________________________________
Pointer: Fark
Facts: Consumerist
Graphic: CNN
Ethics Alarms attempts to give proper attribution and credit to all sources of facts, analysis and other assistance that go into its blog posts. If you are aware of one I missed, or believe your own work was used in any way without proper attribution, please contact me, Jack Marshall, at jamproethics@verizon.net.
Ethics Alarms 
You are so correct. To often others look to others to settle their issues for them. To often individuals become part of the problem instead of a solution for not stepping to resolve. Then we complain on line because someone did this or that.
Believe often , people enjoy being passive because they themselves can later display emotions and gain some kind of sick satisfaction that is on the same level as the rude parents with the rude child.
I baffles me how inconsiderate people can be, God I would love to go see a movie in a theater, I haven’t in years because we do things as a family and we still have a toddler to contend with. I don’t understand how anyone could spend the money to go see a movie to only have it interrupted and not say something! I think as society we have scorned confrontation for so long that we have just become weak. Afraid of others reactions or that we may find ourselves the pariah. Thankfully for us we still know where we can find a couple of drive ins!
If there is one thing I have observed about radical Islamists, is that they are not afraid to engage in a confrontation, no matter how slight the insult. Perhaps we should emulate that feature.
We have NOT scorned confrontation. In the Sixties, students -read communist & socialist & other radicals- subverted regular speech & debate into confrontations, so that dialogue became difficult. TV helped with “sound bites,” which stop & stunt conversation by encapsulating concepts onto small sentences which allow no understanding.
Add to it the distinct possibility of the boyfriend having gone off to get his drug fix in the restrooms, plus the mother of the poor child going off right after for her own fix (I know what I am talking about, I stopped going to movie theaters in NYC because of the drugging & for-sale sex running in them.) Also, I would not have said anything unless I had been strapped. I’ve seen my share of armament in theaters. It doesn’t matter what neighborhood the venue is placed, it is dark, dangerous. I prefer to go to a movie only when I know the place is half-empty at least: no sense in suffering others…
Right on! Great post!
I think another factor at work here is the notion of it being some kind of virtue to be a victim. Thus, one courts sympathy for suffering in silence rather than risking confrontation to solve the problem.
Also, it sounds a bit like a common argument I have with Mrs. Zechman: Kelly was too focused on how she felt about the problem (her annoyance/anger/frustration) that she failed to address the actual problem at all.
–Dwayne
What she should have done is to act just like radical Islamists who see a cartoon of the prophet Mohammed.
Perhaps just a SLIGHT over-reaction…
The problem is that we have had beaten into our heads that confrontation is wrong. That no mater what you shouldn’t confront people about there actions even when those actions effect you. And god forbid you stand up and say something , then you are seen as an aggressive asshole. I personally think you should always confront people who wrong you or piss you off, that doesn’t mean getting in their face , just voice your displeasure with what they are saying or doing.
Well, you could certainly be a consultant or coach on THAT. Have you considered it?
The clients couldnt handle it. I would be too much like the Lee Emery in this.