Why we're more shocked by the terrorist attacks in Paris than in Beirut

I think one of the reasons why people are paying more attention to the attacks in Paris than the one in Beirut is because unfortunately, we’ve become desensitized to that sort of violence in the Middle East. The frequency of attacks there has created the perception of them being so commonplace that when such attacks occur, we no longer react to them like we would when they happen to an area where they're uncommon and stand out more prominently, like Paris. Obviously, of course, that doesn’t make the bombings in the Muslim world any less tragic than the attacks in Paris or elsewhere.

Is there a racial bias to it? Probably, but I want to point out that some of the victims were not white. At least fifteen of the victims were from Africa and Latin America. The number goes up depending on whether or not people from Portugal, Spain, and Turkey are considered non-white and who knows if all the victims from the U.S. and other European countries were themselves white. My point is that this isn't strictly a case of racial bias. Yes, there will be people who will be more effected by the attacks in Paris than in the Middle East because most of the victims were white, but it won't be the sole reason, which goes back to the desensitization.


Speaking of which, I believe the media is a big, big reason for this desensitization and racial bias. When was the last time you saw CNN, MSNBC, Fox, CBS, NBC, ABC, etc. report on the Middle East and Muslim world when it didn't involve DAESH or terrorism in general? Not for a long time, probably and that's the problem. If the news media only reports on the bad and not the good, then it creates a perception in the public mind that only bad things happen there and thus, the lack of response to terrorism there. But it isn't just the news that creates this perception, but the entertainment medium as well. Whenever you have a movie or an episode of a TV show set in a Muslim country, it almost always involves terrorists. Similarly, that country will be depicted with a dusty, open-air market that looks like it came from the 12th century, rather than showing any modern and sophisticated cities that almost all of these countries have. This helps create and reinforces the perception that countries with Muslim-majorities are backward, terrorist-ridden lands that need to be pitied and saved by the Western world. So basically, a contemporary version of the White Man's Burden for the late-20th and 21st centuries.

Is there a solution to this? Of course. If the news media did more human interest pieces about the culture and everyday lives of people in those countries and less on suicide bombings that contrary to news reports, don't happen all of the time, then perception would change. If the entertainment medium would show more positive depictions of Muslims (you know, as something other than terrorists bent on America's destruction), then maybe just maybe Islamophobia would decline. Media is a powerful entity that can create cohesion or disunity depending on how it's wielded and the reaction between the attacks in Paris and Beirut are an unfortunate example.

I hear that selfies are all the rage these days

So is giving handjobs in Church parking lots and selling meth behind your local 7-11, but one thing at a time!

Eh, it'll do.

Please subscribe!

(Credit: PvP)

It's not a funny strip, but I chuckled (darkly?) at the last panel. I think it's just the sudden switch from her ranting about Destiny and flipping the bird to her "Please subscribe!" at the end. I'm kind of hoping that the current storyline leads to Jade quitting PvP and becoming a full-time vlogger. I think it would be an interesting direction. The strip that comes after this seems to be pointing towards a conflict between her and Lucille, PvP's partner or owner (I actually forgot her role in the comic) over her vidya game opinions.

What did that lone doctor know?

You know those commercials for toothpaste and drugs where the voiceover goes "Nine out of ten doctors recommend/agree that you should use this product"? What's up with the lone dissenter? I don't care about the nine who gave a thumbs up, I just want to know why that other one didn't go with them. Did they know something that the rest of us didn't know or chose to overlook? Are they like "Hold up, this toothpaste can cause cancer of the everything" and the others are like "Nah, it'll be fine, man. Chill and let's collect that sweet, sweet payoff for reccing this cancer causing crap."

It's almost like that one star review on Amazon. All the others are four and five star, but then there's that single star and I don't know about you, but I always have to check those out over the latter because that may be the one honest reviewer.

Five star review: This lube worked great! Just a little squirt and I was able to demolish my wife's backdoor like nobody's business!

One star review: This lube turned my dick purple, then my dick fell off. Would not use again.

On the other hand, it could just be a troll who fires off a one star just to be an ass. "Never actually used product, I just hate everything."

Ginger or Mary-Ann from Gilligan's Island?

Definitely Mary-Ann. Dawn Wells was a babe.

Not Gilligan's Island, but who cares?

He'll save children, but not the British children

"I heard that motherfucker had like thirty goddamn dicks."