I think that we need to first DEFINE "bravery." Is it brave to face death? Or is brave to dodge it? Is it brave to address adversity or is brave to try to avoid it?
If we take the common military analogy, bravery is defined by facing one's mortality without concern for the self. The SELFLESS act of extending one's own peril in order to alleviate the danger to OTHERS.
The Case of the Purple Heart:
If this act is considered brave, then so would the soldiers who shot themselves in the foot to get out of military service. Those who did so, anticipated being killed in battle, like all their commrades. Thus, they inflicted a self-induced wound to bypass the high likelihood of injury or death from the hands of FATE.
It appears to me that self-inflicted wounds, while perhaps WISE or SHREWD cannot rise to the level of bravery since the only life she is saving is her own.
Brave would be DONATING organs to someone who was in need of them, at the risk of your safety.
Brave would be sacrificing something dear to you for the purposes of helping someone OTHER THAN ONE'S SELF live on.
This act is not news worthy except for its drastic, grotesque tabloid nature.
Jesus was brave.
Judas was not.
Martin Luther King was brave.
James Earl Ray was not.
John Lennon was brave.
Mahatma Gandhi was brave.
Joan of Arc was brave.
Ann Frank was brave.
Cutting one's self when one is NOT suffering a disease, not in peril, not at risk of death NOR is there anything or anyone ELSE in her life for which this act benefits beside herself. It is not brave in the classic sense. we as community should NOT name churches, build monuments or inscribe her name in the annals of history b/c of this act of self PRESERVATION.
Please, wake up and read your history. The world is SO full of heros such that this story shouldn't be raised up as some paen to womanhood and self sacrifice.
If we take the common military analogy, bravery is defined by facing one's mortality without concern for the self. The SELFLESS act of extending one's own peril in order to alleviate the danger to OTHERS.
The Case of the Purple Heart:
If this act is considered brave, then so would the soldiers who shot themselves in the foot to get out of military service. Those who did so, anticipated being killed in battle, like all their commrades. Thus, they inflicted a self-induced wound to bypass the high likelihood of injury or death from the hands of FATE.
It appears to me that self-inflicted wounds, while perhaps WISE or SHREWD cannot rise to the level of bravery since the only life she is saving is her own.
Brave would be DONATING organs to someone who was in need of them, at the risk of your safety.
Brave would be sacrificing something dear to you for the purposes of helping someone OTHER THAN ONE'S SELF live on.
This act is not news worthy except for its drastic, grotesque tabloid nature.
Jesus was brave.
Judas was not.
Martin Luther King was brave.
James Earl Ray was not.
John Lennon was brave.
Mahatma Gandhi was brave.
Joan of Arc was brave.
Ann Frank was brave.
Cutting one's self when one is NOT suffering a disease, not in peril, not at risk of death NOR is there anything or anyone ELSE in her life for which this act benefits beside herself. It is not brave in the classic sense. we as community should NOT name churches, build monuments or inscribe her name in the annals of history b/c of this act of self PRESERVATION.
Please, wake up and read your history. The world is SO full of heros such that this story shouldn't be raised up as some paen to womanhood and self sacrifice.
Please,