Quote:
Originally Posted by PepsiFree
Sure. In the first one you shrug and move on, a lesson is (hopefully) learned.
In the second, you assume intent to fit your own narrative of events you weren't involved in and stay unsatisified with the resolution forever. For what benefit? Unclear.
I'm still fine with option 1.
|
You're aware she saw the video a month ago though, right? At that point, even if she was deluded to think her narrative was correct initially, there was no longer an argument to be made.
The day she saw the video she should have issued an apology if she was actually a good person. She didn't. She let the wound to counter to fester, she knew the tweet was being shared and reposted, even if she had deleted the initial one. It takes a truly vile person to be responsible for an innocent person being called racist when you know that isn't the case. Then, probably with a threat of legal action or the release of the video, she released a carefully crafted "apology" and doubles up on it a week after that. I think you're naive to believe anything is done without knowing the video existed.
This is also the exact same thing she did three years ago which she knew boosted her career.
As for what benefit? I don't see the harm in calling out vile people for disgusting actions. Knowing that we don't support this type of stuff is important to let her (and others like her) know we don't condone them. As for fitting my narrative, well that's "my one-sided perception of the events" as Sunday would tell us but at least mine wasn't completely made up and actually had some facts to support it...