Man attacked by bear

[Guardian]

After reading through this topic (with quite an array of emotions -- my favorite being the comic relief), just wanted to throw in my 2 cents' worth. My parents live in northern Arkansas and are in their 80s. Several months ago, they called me and had a funny story. They had already retired for the evening (they live totally in the boonies about an hour away from the nearest town and usually go to bed around 9:00) when their front doorbell rang. I guess my dad got up and went towards the door asking "who is it?" He asked a few times then turned on the porch light and lo and behold a black bear had rung the doorbell. Hmmmmm.

I heard Census Bureau would hire anyone ....but that's getting a little ridiculous.

 

[Guardian]

It was actually my impression that Guardian had drawn that distinction as well, but now I'm a bit confused. I do not buy the idea that emotions should be invested in either man OR nature, no matter what.

I don't understand what you mean here? Emotions are simply bio-chemical responses to our thoughts. Our meatsacks come with a wide variety of emotions/brain chemical combinations as stock equipment....and they're all useful in their own way. If we don't invest them in man or nature, what do we do with them...sell them on ebay? ;D

It's the ignorance and unawareness of man that we fight, osit. All life CAN advance together, osit.

Agreed!

 

[Buddy]

Guardian, do you participate in the EE meditation program? This is kinda where it shines to me.

The way I see it, our social programming is the guilty party for teaching us how to introduce 'I' into every process, but when the subject turns to our painful memories, we often prefer to conceptualize or narrate them, rather than experience them. You are building a conceptual gap between the reality and the awareness viewing that reality.

NO offense intended Bud, but I think you might be building a conceptual gap between me and the bears that doesn't exist.

When you bring 'me' and 'my' into the picture while narrating what you've seen, you are identifying with the painful memories. That simply adds emphasis to them because now you are 'bound' with them.

Exactly! Good word... I'm "bound" to them. An assault on the bears is an assault on self/soul...just like this assault on the gulf is an assault on self/soul. "I" am nature and nature is "me" ... there is no separation, no imaginary line were one ends and the other begins...nor would I wish for there to be. I can't think of a better definition of "hell" than perceiving such a lack of connection as "reality."

Do the EE. Allow yourself to grieve for your 2d friends. You want to experience that thing fully in its natural and unadulterated form at some point, so that you can let them go. You won't forget.

Thank you for the suggestion. I do have to be VERY careful when and where I chose to experience certain things fully in their natural and unadulterated form.

You'll remember more and more objectively, osit.

We are discussing the possible slaughter of our 4 footed relatives for fun and profit. Please to tell how I'm not being objective?

The best answer I can offer is that where I am referring to dealing with emotions and feelings you are referring to the bears. It's not that you are wrong, it's that I'm not making myself understood. My apologies for that. I don't know if I can explain it any better than that at the moment. :(


EDIT:

It was actually my impression that Guardian had drawn that distinction as well, but now I'm a bit confused. I do not buy the idea that emotions should be invested in either man OR nature, no matter what.

I don't understand what you mean here?

I meant seeing in terms that pit one against the other instead of both at the same time. A workable solution would address the actual problem instead of directing anger at a person. Don't know if that is any more clearer.

 

[Guardian]

Or as the C's say,"Knowledge protects and Ignorance endangers"

I've never gotten a tattoo... but I think if I ever do, that's what it will say.

 

[Gimpy]

Exactly! You're aware of your surroundings AND your limitations, which is essential for survival in just about any situation but most especially when alone in the woods. You also know that your limp makes you look like easy prey.

Gimpy, I just noticed I was being an insensitive lout...and I'm SORRY!! I got mad at the thought of declaring open season on bears just because some idiot got mauled...and I didn't even stop to think how tough it must be on you to have a limp, not be able to go hiking in the woods, etc.

I think you're being silly. :P And I never take offense at the Truth. Its not possible, or responsible, to try to hare off into the wilds like I used to. Its something that's sorely missed, but developing a soul is more important, osit.

If my central nervous system were healed tomorrow, it would be a distraction to return to an old way of life, instead of pursuing the Work.

No, that's not easy to say, but its no less the Truth. ;)

And fwiw, without the deep connection to nature and all life, being as I am now would be impossible, and unBEARable. <--pun intended. :D

 

[Guardian]

I meant seeing in terms that pit one against the other instead of both at the same time. A workable solution would address the actual problem instead of directing anger at a person. Don't know if that is any more clearer.

Not really...but I'm working on it :)

Do you consider anger a tool? I mean REAL anger...when your hypothalamus is pumping so much go juice into your bloodstream that your veins bulge to the point you look like you're turning blue. When this particular body function occurs, do you control it and use it for something, or suppress/flush it out?

 

[Guardian]

I think you're being silly. :P And I never take offense at the Truth.

Thanks Gimpy, I really appreciate that quality in a person... it's very rare. Every time I get into trouble, offend someone, etc....it's for telling the truth at the wrong time or place. I haven't gotten in trouble for telling a lie since I was about 8, but I get into hot water or hurt someone's feelings by telling the truth at least once a month or so. :(

And fwiw, without the deep connection to nature and all life, being as I am now would be impossible, and unBEARable. <--pun intended. :D

GROANNNNN ...well I suppose someone had to say it

 

[Buddy]

Do you consider anger a tool? I mean REAL anger...when your hypothalamus is pumping so much go juice into your bloodstream that your veins bulge to the point you look like you're turning blue. When this particular body function occurs, do you control it and use it for something, or suppress/flush it out?

If I can't hold onto it for transmutation purposes, I have to allow myself to experience it fully, expressing it through the feeling and motor center, whether yelling, exercise, punching bag or whatnot. Once the intellectual center usurps the energy, one is a step closer to the "go get 'em and cut 'em down to size" thinking that CAN lead to revenge and retribution towards others.

At the very least, it can be intense enough to overwhelm any compassion towards certain other humans and set up a "Hatfield and McCoys" type of reciprocal loop.


Note: In case you may be wondering, I wasn't offended in any way either. My main concern was to try and express myself well enough to keep myself out of hot water and not to offend YOU. :)

 

[ScioAgapeOmnis]

Yes he did...a long list of very stupid mistakes, and then instead of taking responsibility for HIS mistakes, he blames the government for not allowing the mass slaughter of a threatened species.

Well you gotta consider that pathology is a disease of the mind/emotions, and people are running around essentially diseased. In another thread you pointed out that a rabid fox becomes "irrationally" violent, well here we have an example of a human who has been hurt and is irrationally vindictive towards what is essentially nature just being nature. Perhaps it would help to consider that he's not necessarily a "bad" person undeserving of life and health, but he's stupid, and he's infected by pathological thinking and emotional reactions - which is the norm I might add. Yes he's ignorant, and yes he has been hurt and isn't really being humble or rational at the moment, and yes life will probably give him the experiences he needs to hopefully smarten up - but I'm not sure it's right to not care about his suffering just because he happens to be a selfish idiot, something the pathocracy played a large role in. As the Bible says, "he knows not what he does".

And yeah it's very often that an animal hurts a person and is then "put down", which of course makes no sense because it's just being an animal, so killing it as "punishment" for being the only thing it can be is a testament to the irrational ego of people. But just as we sympathize with the animal, isn't this guy just a pathological human - doing/saying something a pathological dummy would do/say? Well, because he is a human we can argue he "ought" to know better, but we can say the same about most of humanity that allowed the psychopaths to have free reign with the world, hurting and killing countless humans and animals. Should we have no sympathy for the majority of the population too then? They "ought" to know better - but they don't, they are ignorant and pathological, they hurt themselves and one another in infinite ways, but just being diseased and not strong enough to resist and cure your disease doesn't make you unworthy of sympathy, love, and life. The universe will provide the catalysts and lessons, and yes it sometimes "brings the pain", but we shouldn't root for maximum destruction, we shouldn't not care just because "people brought it upon themselves" - their and our suffering is just there to teach us and wake up potentials that have been dormant, its purpose is not as punishment or for its own sake.

In my opinion, his initial stupidity and later refusal to acknowledge his own stupidity deserves to be mocked (exposed) for exactly what it is.

Exposed sure, but mocked, I'm not so sure. He may be an egoistic dummy, but he's a human, he's been seriously hurt, and we gotta have a heart and consider that it really could be any one of us in the same situation. We don't always end up in a situation where we are on top of all the threats and how to deal with them. Sometimes we find ourselves ignorant of the nature of the danger we face, and get hurt, and it doesn't mean everyone else should "root" for the danger to finish us off just because we were too unaware to know what to do to protect ourselves properly.

If you can't control yourself when comming into contact with wildlife, stay out of THEIR home!

Well not everyone who ever enters a forest is an expert at all the dangers in the forest. Ideally maybe they ought to be, but life is just more complicated than that, and people often do things that they don't fully understand the dangers of - they may be partially to blame, but still, have a heart!

Of course that's just me....in any such encounter, I'm probably going to be rooting for the bear.

That just comes off cold. You cared about Gimpy's limp but not about some person getting mauled nearly to death? How do you know Gimpy didn't get that limp because of a lack of awareness on her part? Did you consider that she could be partially or even fully to blame? If so, would you still care, or would you root for whatever hurt her, and hope for maximum damage?

 

[Gonzo]

Hi Guardian,

I get the feeling this is a powerfully emotional issue for you and perhaps an excellent opportunity to examine and observe yourself.

Did you notice you are putting an animal ahead of a fellow human and yet you know neither.

I feel you have made several assumptions and broad statements about this person and yet you know very little about him.

You seem so blinded by your emotions that you cannot muster an ounce of concern for him. And yet you assume the bear was perfectly in its right to do what it did.

I don't like seeing anything die, but I try to understand why some people chose to hunt and others are satisfied to leave the killing to slaughter facilities.

Is it possible that hunting is ok in some cases? Could this have been one of those cases?

Is it possible that the moratorium on the spring bear hunt has increased bear populations to the point that they are now found in places they would have never be seen before?

Is it possible that the reason the person made the comment about reinstating the bear hunt was because a bear attacked him in a place where bears had never been seen before and not because he was making excuses for mis mistakes?

I don't know these answers, so I try to consider several possibilities and only form a hypothesis once I have sufficient information. I certainly would not condemn a person on here say and circumstantial evidence.

Bear populations have been steadily growing since the spring bear hunt was stopped several years ago and many hunters are upset by it. Some say it has had a significant affect on deer populations in some areas.

I honestly don't know the truth and try to hold back on judgment either way.

Just some thoughts you might want to consider if interested.

Gonzo

 

[Gimpy]

Quote from: Guardian
Of course that's just me....in any such encounter, I'm probably going to be rooting for the bear.

Sao:
That just comes off cold. You cared about Gimpy's limp but not about some person getting mauled nearly to death? How do you know Gimpy didn't get that limp because of a lack of awareness on her part? Did you consider that she could be partially or even fully to blame? If so, would you still care, or would you root for whatever hurt her, and hope for maximum damage?

I got that limp from MS. How did I get that? I don't know, but am beginning to suspect many years of neurological damage from eating wheat, corn, and soy, among other nuerotoxic foods. That would stem from ignorance. ;)


I think Guardian is angry because the man could have prevented being mauled by taking simple precautions, which have been discussed. I get that. She's frustrated and fed up with idiots. I get that too. Its unfortunate this man got mauled. I've been attacked by dogs when I was a kid, and having an animal try to eat you can be horrific. Like Guardian, I don't feel sorry for him, either. Its just not there, because that is the risk you take going into the woods, that risk is always there.

That said, I have had people tell me that MS is my fault, that God is punishing me, yadda yadda yadda. I've even had people tell me I'm not sick at all, but a whiney malingerer, that I should be gotten rid of as a 'useless eater' et cet. "There's nothing wrong with you, get a job." is a common one. The worse the economy gets, the meaner people grow.



At the root of such accusations, when it comes to a disease process, is a real terror of ending up in the same place. Almost all the people who accuse me of the above know deep down that they are one accident or health issue away from being in the same situation, and they will do anything to make it, and me, go away so that it does not have to be faced. (Provided the person in question isn't a psychopath.)

When the abuse is particularly bad, my usual response is a calm "We'll see how you do, when its your turn." That generally ends the situation, and the person practically runs away.

This is one reason I don't go anywhere alone if it can be avoided. Eventually I'll shoot my mouth off and end up getting the crap beat out of me. (Or jail for defending myself, there's always that.) Just like the man going to the woods alone, that is the risk I take when I go out in public alone. If it ever happened that I get beat up or arrested for defending myself, that is just the price of 'doing business'.

It's not nice, or pretty, or even externally considerate, but that's the reality.

 

[Gonzo]

Gimpy, are you certain it was the man's fault for getting mauled by the bear? I can't say either way, so I'm kind of surprised to see such confidence in those who feel he brought it upon himself.

To me it could be like a young woman getting raped and then being told it's her fault for walking outside without pepper spray. After all, like you say, "the risk is always there."

There are areas in Ontario where bears are never, ever seen, and the only other beasties capable of harm are coyotes and wolves, which are rarely seen and even more rarely attack. So, many people are not accustomed to having to be protected from such attacks and it might seem a little paranoid to be fearful of such attacks, at least historically.

However, we are starting to see an increase in wild animal sightings in nontraditional areas, although they are limited to certain regions and not broadly reported. As well, there have been occasional attacks across the country, the potential reasons for which are debated by hunters, activists, government and academia in the few areas where such attacks have occurred. But, until attacks become more widespread, or until sightings become more prevalent, people have not yet developed a sense of fear or a need for protection.

We have bear country, where one would expect to find bears and then we have areas where bears have never been seen. I wouldn't think someone stupid or even foolish if they went into the forests in my area without any protection, but I would certainly feel differently in bear country.

You say you don't feel sorry for that person, "because that is the risk you take going into the woods, that risk is always there." Would you feel the same way if someone's mother were horribly wounded crossing the street? After all, the risk is always there.

I am honestly surprised at the lack of compassion and empathy.

Gonzo

 

[Nawd]

From what I have researched, the black bear population increased 10 fold after the spring hunts were cancelled;

For what it's worth, I don't like the idea of hunting and killing wildlife. However here in the states, it does minimize the deer population which lowers car accidents involving hitting deer.

I don't blame the man or the bear, it is that we humans are in their territories and they are in ours. We are all animals, and this stuff happens. Really can it be the fault of anyone involved?

Bears will be bears, people are animals, animals are food.

_http://pr-usa.net/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=402699&Itemid=33

For years, the Ontario Federation of Anglers and Hunters (O.F.A.H.) has warned the Ministry of Natural Resources (MNR) that the cancellation of the spring bear hunt and its replacement with the provincial Bear Wise Program would negatively impact public safety. Instead of managing Ontario's bears for optimal sustainable populations as it is mandated to do, the province has instead opted to try to manage people, with dismal, and sometimes near fatal results.
"To minimize the risks to people and maximize the benefits of this resource for society, the Ontario government needs to reinstate the spring bear hunt," said Terry Quinney, O.F.A.H. Provincial Manager of Fish and Wildlife Services. "It was a time-tested, successful bear management tool that also provided tens of millions of dollars in economic benefits before it was terminated, taking with it much-needed employment, particularly in northern and central Ontario."

Already this season, police have killed bears in London and Peterborough that presented a threat to people. In Severn Township, the search continues for the bear that inflicted extensive wounds on a Waubaushene man last week, in an apparently unprovoked attack.

In 1999, the province promptly and without scientific reason, cancelled the spring bear hunt, resulting in a ten-fold increase in occurrences of human-bear conflict - a fact backed by the MNR's own 2008 report. The O.F.A.H. believes that the cancellation of the spring bear hunt has undone many years of improved black bear management, and has instead, caused an increase in human-bear conflicts, resulting in more sows and cubs shot and wasted in the protection of property. MNR statistics reveal that human bear occurrences rose to 12,645 in 2007/2008, up from an average of 1,000 prior to 1999.

"We are convinced that human-bear conflicts can be minimized, by managing bear populations using a variety of tools, including area-specific quotas and an early season hunt," added Quinney. "Reinstating a well-managed spring hunt would provide positive benefits for all concerned - our black bear populations, the economies of northern and central Ontario, and the safety of the general public."

With over 100,000 members, subscribers and supporters, and 660 member clubs, the O.F.A.H. is the largest nonprofit, charitable, fishing, hunting and conservation-based organization in Ontario, and the voice of anglers and hunters. For more information, visit www.ofah.org

 

[Gimpy]

Gimpy, are you certain it was the man's fault for getting mauled by the bear?

Gonzo

Gonzo, where did I ever say this? If you look, I never said it was his fault. I said it was a risk everyone takes when entering the woods. How does that equal blaming him for getting chewed on? It doesn't.

Dawn's made the point better than I did in her response here:

I don't blame the man or the bear, it is that we humans are in their territories and they are in ours. We are all animals, and this stuff happens. Really can it be the fault of anyone involved?

Bears will be bears, people are animals, animals are food.

To me it could be like a young woman getting raped and then being told it's her fault for walking outside without pepper spray. After all, like you say, "the risk is always there."

You say you don't feel sorry for that person, "because that is the risk you take going into the woods, that risk is always there." Would you feel the same way if someone's mother were horribly wounded crossing the street? After all, the risk is always there.

I am honestly surprised at the lack of compassion and empathy.

Gonzo, if you want to tear your heart out every time something bad happens on the daily news, that's up to you. Fwiw, I do have a high level of empathy and compassion. Unlike you, I've learned through the school of hard knocks that letting that empathy and compassion rule my thinking and being is a recipe for disaster, illness, and a longing to leave this world by putting a bullet through my head.


When the goal of the Work is being able to DO, letting your emotions run away from you doesn't make any sense, does it?

The reality we currently live in is not a happy shiny place, and I choose to deal with it as it is, and not pity the lessons of others.

 

[Gonzo]

Hi Gimpy,

I derived the sense of you blaming the person because of your statement that it is just the risk of going out in the woods, which in my mind, equates a blaming of the victim, especially when you coloured your post with the earlier statement of rooting for a bear in such an encounter between bear and man and your mention of having no feelings for the man.

I must have read too much into your choice of words and apologize for coming to the wrong conclusion, if I did. But it did sound to me like you were blaming the victim.

I don't think that having empathy for someone is letting emotions rule you. If you think the work means not having empathy for fellow humans, then the Work will lead you to something close to psychopathy.

Perhaps you have become hardened through your experiences, which I can fully respect and understand, but do you honestly believe that by having no empathy for others you are being any less mechanical?

I often wonder if one of the reasons that many of us have a history of despising mankind for its conquest over nature and a preference instead for nature to beat man down, is actually another case of lizzie meddling, creating more divide and conquer. I had to make a concerted effort to rediscover humanity after hating it for so long.

But I'm there now and see humans as having little choice in being born into such an STS environment and trying to make the best of it - some do better than others. I can't blame anyone for not trying to awaken, considering the effectiveness of the control system. I just feel bad for them and I empathize with them and I have compassion for them.
Gonzo