Squid-fishing for the wily Taningia danae » « Beating up the Power Team After 35 years, you’d think he’d find a different subject Two photographs by the same photographer, taken on the same day of the year, with an unhappy subject at the center. What a bizarre coincidence. Personally, I think the first one was far more affecting and important. Share this:PrintEmailShare on TumblrTweet Squid-fishing for the wily Taningia danae » « Beating up the Power Team
I could not agree more PZ!
The first one remains one of the most effective photographs I’ve ever seen.
Tom Rees says
Since having children, I cannot bear to look at the Vietnam photo anymore. Awful, awful, awful photo. I thought she died, but I found out now that she survived (the internet is a marvellous thing…)
Who gives a damn about Paris Hilton?
Ed Darrell says
My father had a line he almost always used in parody, “Quit crying or I’ll give you something to cry about.”
Hilton has nothing to cry about, comparatively.
Who in the world noticed that coincidence?
Hank Fox says
From pathos to bathos in one photographer’s lifetime.
In some viewers (me, for instance) the two photos arouse polar opposites in compassion.
On the one hand, an innocent little girl’s tragic inclusion in something infinitely ugly, powerless even to maintain her dignity.
On the other, an almost infinitely rich woman sobs pathetically at a self-inflicted “tragedy” equivalent to a broken nail.
Worst thing is, there are probably quite a lot of people who would find the latter photograph more interesting. After all – that Vietnamese girl isn’t the spoiled celebutante heir of an enormous fortune, and hasn’t released a sex tape of herself…
The first photo is still shocking (as is the guy getting shot in the head at point blank).
Is the second photo of someone significant ? I think Hilton was mentioned – this is a hotel chain isn’t it ?
I don’t see what Agylen is getting at. What it really tells me is that the photographer of that legendary shot in Vietnam is reduced to selling pics of Paris crying for her mommy. Nick Ut is just making a living, I guess.
Last June 8 I was sitting in my office (making a living) just like I was on June 8 the year before and the year before that. Coincidence?
Who gives a damn about Paris Hilton?
Well not me but on the other hand I have no doubt that her tears are real. One of the things that really annoyed me about the whole Hilton affair is that, among all the public outcry, nobody thought of using it to make a point about prison.
It’s a well known fact that the UK where I live (and I think the US too) jail comparatively far more women than other western countries with disastrous consequences (women in jail are far more likely to self harm and commit suicide than men) and very little justification (very few of them are there because of violent crime).
Come on guys, forget your hatred – or spite – for La Hilton: a jail sentence for a traffic infraction?
Jail for violation of probation, actually. And you make it sound like she failed to yield at a rotary or something. The “traffic infraction” involved driving at high speed at night with her car headlights on a local road while under the influence of some kind of intoxicant. She was on probation for a prior DUI.
I’ve no particular emnity for Paris Hilton, but the fact is she has proven herself to be a danger to herself and to others. Is locking her up the solution? I don’t know. It might be the thing that keeps her from self-destructing one day. You just never know. A bottom is a very personal thing. (No derriere jokes, please.) Sometimes a person needs a wake-up call. Sometimes a “poor me” can morph into a “wow, I was so immature and irresponsible back then.”
Tears aren’t a bad thing. I don’t begrudge Paris her petty miseries. I’d be more alarmed (and disgusted) if she laughed it all off as nothing, frankly.
First, she was arrested and placed on probation for driving while intoxicated: hardly a mere “traffic infraction”. Second, she’s in jail for violating the terms of her probation and driving on a suspended license. Third, she got off far easier than either you or I would in the same circumstances.
If you want to argue about the unfair affects of prison on women, you might want to pick a different poster child.
Kristjan Wager says
It’s a jail sentence for risking the life of others through her actions. I have absolutely no sympathy for drunk drivers, and I would think that this is one of the cases where a jail sentece actually has a good effect on future behaviour.
I wonder how many scenes like that are taking place in Iraq today unphotographed or censored.
J Daley says
Ah, panem et circeses…
Goddammit will somebody who is good at photoshop please get off your lazy ass and put together a tasteless composite of these two photos?
Evolving Squid says
Women so often avoid paying the full price for their crimes just because they are female, it is sickening. Google up “Paul Bernardo” and “Karla Homolka”. Both at least equally guilty, and there is some thought that maybe Karla was more guilty, but he gets detained at Her Majesty’s pleasure while she gets 12 years… because, after all, a girl can’t be a fiend now can she. She’s out now, by the way after serving her full sentence (full points for that, at least).
Women get away with a lot because we generally assume that crimes are committed by men.
As for Her Skankiness, if that was some mere mortal like you or me – violating probation on our conviction for DUI, we would be thrown in the can without so much as a peep from a newspaper except maybe a single editorial comment that read “drunken jerk locked up where he belongs”. The administration of justice should not care whether or not she’s rich (or a skanky, attention-seeking whore). All it should care about is that the price for violating your probation is 45 days in the lock-up.
If you want to argue about the unfair affects of prison on women, you might want to pick a different poster child.
Ok, I’ll wait until another female celebrity is incarcerated, hopefully one you’ll find a bit more palatable.
My point was: nobody, as far as I know, used the Hilton affair – or would that be Hiltongate? – to speak up about what is becoming a huge problem. Granted that it could have a beneficial effect on Paris Hilton, but as you and Kseniya pointed out, she is hardly representative of the female jail population. (Ok, “poster child” point again, I am running in circles here…)
The number of women in jail has tripled in the US between ’87 and ’97. Ditto in the UK between ’91 and ’01. I don’t know how it has evolved since but I am not really optimistic. Most of these women have a history of psychiatric problems, non-violent drug addictions and/or childhood and sexual abuse. And once in jail they take their own lives in truly terrifying numbers. Does jail work for them? (And is it patronizing for me, a man, to even be asking the question?)
Myself, I sometimes think the whole Hilton affair is a godsend to liberals desperate to be seen as tough for a change.
Ugo Cei says
HPLC_Sean: I’m not getting at anything, just using what is only a coincidence to grab the occasion to post a picture that, when I read the story behind it, it almost made me cry.
As for Nick Hut, I agree with you, he’s just making a living. If people want pictures of Paris Hilton, he has every right to try to sell them, after having risked his butt in the Vietnam war, he deserves some easier work, I think.
Also, I’m not implying that people today paying more attention to Paris Hilton than, say, the war in Iraq, is necessary different from people in 1972 paying more attention to, say, Christina Onassis.
Probably, the more things change, the more they stay the same.
Ugo Cei: The one thing these two girls have in common is that Nick took the photo of them on the day of their worst suffering. They are finely juxtaposed one atop the other.
I hope Nick is making millions selling his images and I hope he is still collecting royalties from his legendary Vietnam photograph.
It still amazes me that celebu-trash, Are You Smarter Than A 5th Grader, and American Idol gets the attention it does while the suffering that is caused by the moronic White House Crusaders leaves most unmoved. All the garbage on television is just bait to lure your eyes off the crimes of the elite and their elected criminal henchmen.
Personally, I’m glad there aren’t more scenes of mayhem and carnage available to photographers. I’ll take a sobbing and befuddled Paris Hilton anytime over what’s happening in Iraq. And elsewhere.
I couldn’t care less whether Paris Hilton deserves what she got or got what she deserves. What offends me about this whole despicable mess is the attention given to it while the war in Iraq and all the other fiascos of incompetence are being basically ignored by both the so-called media and the public at large.
If I ran a news agency, I’d fire everyone that turned in a Paris Hilton report, I seriously would. Of course, the board of directors would have me out within the hour…
“Personally, I’m glad there aren’t more scenes of mayhem and carnage available to photographers.”
In other words, Ignorance is bliss?
Is your point that scenes of mayhem and carnage don’t exist anymore, or that you’d simply prefer not being aware of them?
My post above is a bit unclear. I mean, I’m glad there’s not MORE violence in the world than there already is. Not that we shouldn’t pay more attention to what there is already.
“Women so often avoid paying the full price for their crimes just because they are female, it is sickening.”
Man, if you’re going to lie at least try to make it plausible.
“Women get away with a lot because we generally assume that crimes are committed by men.”
Yeah, it’s not because such crimes ARE generally committed by men, or anything. It’s really an evil feminist conspiracy!!
*lol* Misogynists are funny.
Re #16. Karla Homolka plea bargined for a lesser sentence so they had a better case against Paul, stating she was beaten and cocerced. After she was sentenced the tapes of them both raping and killing surfaced. Paul’s lawyer kept them for a year and when he left the case the new lawyer handed them to police. By then it was too late to reconvict Karla. It wasn’t just because she was a girl it was partly because the lawyer did a unforgivable thing.
The whole story is beyond horrible.They both deserve a shovel across the back of the head.
Not that I care at all but maybe this will jolt poor Paris into the real world.
Let me put it this way: I’d rather see a crying Paris than a dead, blown up Paris whose body parts, along with many others, are scattered amongst the wreckage and aftermath of a suicide bomber.
The world is in a bad way today, but it could be–and quite possibly will be–much worse, right here in our own country.
However, I fully agree that our obsession with this crap, instead of focusing on real-world contemporary Vietnam-like atrocities, says a great deal about our priorities and our mindset.
Yeah, we need more liberals looking like complete idiots by defending not the problem of the guiltless or marginally innocent, but some 4 year old in an adult body that thinks the universe should give her everything, including a nice martini while she serves her time at home, instead of in a fracking jail cell. I mean, wouldn’t everyone love that. You get to sit at home and do any damn thing you want, save for leaving. I can certainly see why she would have intentionally had a “unspecified medical problem”, than convinced some fool sheriff to go against the judge’s ruling.
Seriously. This is just stupid. Pick someone that doesn’t manipulate everyone around them 24-7 so they don’t have to think, act responsibly or grow up, then get back to me about the “problems” their case exposes.
Mind you, she might have had a “real” medical problem, but I am inclined to bet its *not* something they couldn’t have dealt with at the jail, or that it was something stupid, like a mental break down, which doesn’t impress me much under the circumstances. What are we supposed to do, send her to her room without dinner?
Evolving Squid says
Hmm? What are you on about here? Nobody is talking about feminist conspiracies. Nor is anyone talking about men committing reprehensible crimes, which they do in droves.
The assertion is that women are punished more lightly for committing the same crimes as men time and time again. The example I gave was where a woman committed the same reprehensible crime as her male companion but was allowed a jammy plea bargain because they HAD to nail the man to the wall at any cost. In fact, they should both have been nailed to the wall. Better still, why not plea bargain the man and nail her to the wall, since the man was going down for other crimes anyway? This latter is a question that remains unanswered to this day.
There’s never been much question that Karla, as a single example, got the plea bargain in part because she was female and there was a predisposition to believe that she could not have been such a fiend. Later it would be shown that, in fact, she was at least the equal of Paul, and that a travesty of justice had occurred. By then, as someone else noted, it was too late to do anything about it. She couldn’t be reconvicted.
Has any man ever successfully used the “battered spouse” or any kind of “abused spouse” defence to lighten or mitigate his sentence for killing his wife? I can’t find such an example (maybe I’m not looking in the right spot). Or can men just not be subject to years of physical and emotional abuse at the hands of a woman that permits that defence for women?
It’s not just spousal abuse cases… you can find lots of examples like this one:
Pandering with a 12 year old… man gets 19 months and 5 years probation, woman gets suspended sentence and 3 years probation.
It’s not a feminist conspiracy that causes this, it is a cultural perception that women who commit crimes are somehow less responsible for their behaviour than men are. I would think feminists would reject that idea outright.
In fact, I think that in a “feminist conspiracy” world, women would probably be treated more fairly in this regard, and that would put more of them behind bars for longer.
Or at least one who’s hardship is something I can relate to. For chrissakes she could have hired someone to drive her around full-time without having to give up even a single martini and I’m supposed to feel bad for her because she insisted on driving with a suspended license and got caught?
My point is that a spoiled brat that flouts the law as if it doesn’t apply to her getting a slap on the wrist isn’t likely to motivate anyone to your cause. Poor Paris. Look how hard these 23 days of jail is on her without her servants, pedicures, expensive clothing and jewelry, and any of a thousand other luxuries that I will never, ever have, jail or not. Excuse me if I’m a little insensitive to her plight.
The news websites today all have the same story, where Paris says she’s going to stop acting dumb, because it’s no longer cute.
Um, it was an act?
It was cute?
But, really, I’ve come to the conclusion that prison is so darned tenth century. This just seems like a relic of the past. I don’t think our punishments are very creative; nor do they have the desired effect.
Don’t get me wrong, I’m not suggesting she go unpunished, or that she should be tortured, or something like that. But how about 90 days of home detention and working in a hospital emergency room, where she gets to clean up rooms of drunk driving victims; something that will really drive the point home?
There has to be a more effective way to punish people than sending them to the dungeon. Hasn’t our society gone past that point?
Another story today is the 21 year old who may be released because, when he was 17, he had sex with a 15 year old. Now, I know that, by definition, if the participants are underaged, it’s not really consensual, but come on, you’re going to fix that problem by sending prisoners to a state prison? That’s like sending a promising young rookie to training camp; he’ll be even “better” when he gets out. I assure you, that won’t be his last rape.
Prison is for criminals; other forms of punishment should apply to lesser criminals. I think being forced to work for 90 days in LA County Hospital would have done Paris way more good.
MikeM: That kid wouldn’t even have been commiting a crime in my state. To say it ‘wont be his last rape’ is making a pretty brutal assumption about the character of someone who was still legally a minor at the time of the offense. I’d certainly say his outlook on life is likely to be a lot less rosy then it was before his stay in the pen though.
As for the people asking if prision ‘works’ for women: at the risk of sounding cruel, prison isn’t meant to work for the people put into it. It’s supposed to ‘work’ for the people who aren’t IN jail.
The feminist conspiracy thing was me poking fun. it wasn’t to be taken seriously.
“The assertion is that women are punished more lightly for committing the same crimes as men time and time again.”
Which the link I provided refuted. There are many instances in which women are more harshly punished for committing the same crimes as men. The link provides on example. Another is child molestation – a man rapes a 10 year old girl and gets 10 months probation. A woman commits statutory rape against a 14 year old boy and gets 14 years. (google is our friend)
“The example I gave was where a woman committed the same reprehensible crime as her male companion but was allowed a jammy plea bargain because they HAD to nail the man to the wall at any cost. In fact, they should both have been nailed to the wall. ”
As it happens, I live in the So Ontario region and therefore know this case very well. Of course they should both have been nailed to the wall. As someone else as already pointed out, her getting a lighter sentence had little to do with her being female. Blame the crap justice system for her getting a lighter sentence not her sex. Why not bargain with the man and nail her to wall instead? Because rape is an almost exclusively male crime. In this case, Karla partipated and should not have been given the opportunity to plea bargain.
“It’s not a feminist conspiracy that causes this, it is a cultural perception that women who commit crimes are somehow less responsible for their behaviour than men are. I would think feminists would reject that idea outright.
In fact, I think that in a “feminist conspiracy” world, women would probably be treated more fairly in this regard, and that would put more of them behind bars for longer.”
On this we agree. Women who commit crimes are not less responsible for their crimes, when it can be proven that they were not, in fact, coerced or forced by someone else to partipate in them. (that last part applies to men as well)
WRT abuse – of course men can be victims. I see quite of few of them in my line of work. There’s more than most people think. And they do successfully use that against their spouses. Anyone who says differently is selling something.
I don’t think he committed rape; I think he committed STATUTORY rape, which is very, very different. It’s not the kind of thing 10 years in jail would correct.
When he gets out of state prison, he’ll probably be in fantastic physical shape, and will have been around genuine criminals “training” him, and he’ll probably have a huge chip on his shoulders to show the world what rape REALLY is.
I tell you, each time I visited a California state prison, for about 2 weeks after, I was the most law-abiding citizen you can imagine. But after about a year of surviving it, I think most people can’t handle life in the real world. Chances are they’ve taken a kid who needed some guidance and turned him into a career criminal.
Is that our goal? To take people who aren’t really criminals, and train them to be?
Prisons are FUBAR. We need to fix them, soon.
notthedroids- it won’t be me.
I really don’t understand the venom on both sides of this. Hilton was sent to jail for less time than a lot of people spend waiting for sentencing. She was getting off after about three weeks, HALF her sentence. Yup, she violated parole, was DUI with a suspended license. She didn’t get any more than any other repeat offender would have gotten.
The only thing she really gets MORE off is attention to her case. Why? Because of Monkey Pay per View behavior. Sure, we all love to love (or hate) the alphas, but the idea of the law is that they aren’t any better (or worse) than the rest of us. So the judge ENFORCED the law. And now the whole country seems to be talking about the poor little rich girl in jail when there is war in Iraq, starvation in Darfur, idiots attempting to usurp the education system, and so on.
Now we see these two photos side by side and it sparks a debate, NOT about the nature of suffering, NOT about war, even that war in particular, but over whether or not a woman who is beloved by the media and in the public eye should or should not be accountable to the law.
I expected better from the readers here.
Actually, I could see this being a transforming experience for Paris Hilton.
The girl (now woman) in the top picture
no doubt would have a lot to teach Paris Hilton, now that they share being photographed by the same man in their hour of dispair.
Kim Phuc Phan Thi is working on helping children who are victims of trauma. No doubt her foundation could use some of Paris Hilton’s wealth.
I agree with MikeM #32. 90 days working in a hospital, taking care of DWI victims would have been a better sentence.
Of course not, since it most likely wasn’t his first rape. Is there ANY EVIDENCE AT ALL other than the piddling two-year age difference and blockheaded circular reasoning from the current state of the law, that the sexual encounter in question was anything less than consensual?
As for Paris, I’m not sure I agree that this was appropriate; my personal position is that drunk driving should be prosecuted as attempted homicide.
The first picture makes a very powerful statement , however in the video of the same attack , one can that the skin is hanging off the child . NO WAR NO WAY … money for jobs , education , and welfare
Let’s take that as a given, for a goal. Now dive a little bit into what it means for a prison “to work,” from the viewpoint of we law abiding citizens who never will step inside one. The vast majority of inmates will be released in just a few years, with most of their lives ahead of them. When they are released, they once again become part of the population outside the walls. How do we want prison to have changed them?
I’m willing to be very generous and offer up some praise for the photographer for not trying to be stupid and pointlessly sentimental about an anniversary that very few people were planning to celebrate in the first place.
i think the first one puts the second one in context.
I have no particular sympathy for Hilton or any other drunk driver, but saying that she has nothing to cry about just because she isn’t running down the road naked with her burning skin hanging off of her seems to me to be setting the bar of what is a “legitimate” reason to feel unhappy a little high.
I’m at work so I can’t dig up a link but, erm
NEWSFLASH TO EVERYBODY WHO’S TALKING ABOUT THE RELEASE OF THE 21-YEAR OLD “RAPIST”:
He didn’t rape anybody. It was COMPLETELY CONSENSUAL. The whole case was a load of malarkey (and actually resulted in the law used to convict him being overturned).
Do your homework.
Paris is a spoiled brat who endangers/ed other peoples’ lives because to her, she’s the only one who matters. Pardon me while I fail to be at all sympathetic to her trauma, however bad she feels. Welcome to “being rich doesn’t excuse you”.
The top photo was worthy of notice and outrage. The bottom photo was worthy of mockery, if it’s worth anything at all — sorry, but yes. I don’t care how bad she feels now, it’s reasonably disgusting that she feels so bad simply because she is being forced to face consequences for bad behavior for possibly the first time in her life.
I do not think this was a particularly good/worthy/valid comparison to make, personally.
Having said all that, for Evolving Squid:
If you read around http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/prisons.htm –you will find that, although the number of women convicted of crimes (including both violent and property crimes) is far smaller than the number of men, possibly reflecting partly jury bias in conviction as well as a real difference in crime rates;
and although the average sentence for women is far shorter when it comes to property and theft crimes, possibly reflecting a judgement bias;
however, the number of women jailed for a first offence, or given jail time for a property crime rather than being forced to pay a fine, go on probation or serve a community service sentence, is far, far higher in proportion than for men for a comparable crime. Although men are often given longer jail terms for property crimes, they are far less often jailed for a first offence.
That there are differences in how the genders are treated is beyond doubt. That it is as simple as you make out is wrong.
People aren’t made of stone.
My mother’s high-school boyfriend did some hard time in California for “intent to distribute” (marijuana) circa 1980. His mistake was dealing drugs, but they threw the book at him because we was caught, by chance, within 100 (?) yards of a school. He wasn’t selling to kids, but it didn’t matter: it was statutory. She said the experience “changed him” (no kidding) but what did he do when he got out? He went back to college, got a masters degree, and now he’s a counselor. Asserting that a young guy who got sent up the river for statutory rape is surely going to come out a violent rapist is… a bit much. Do you really think so little of people, MikeM?
I’m totally with you on the non-prison sentence idea, though. It would be a truly valuable gift to Paris from the society of which she is, despite the distance between her and people like us, a member. When I was 8 years old, my dad got nailed for a DUI, and aside from two year loss of license, his sentence included two weeks in alcohol education and rehab, plus some number of hours of community service at a place that specialized in caring for people who’d sustained head injuries. It was a win-win, especially as compared with 60 days wasted in jail (which was the alternative).
Luna: Why is her upset so disgusting? As I said earlier, I’d be disgusted if she laughed it off as nothing. A door is opening for her, so I will reserve my disgust for the time when it becomes clear that she neglected, or declined, to ever step through it.
Daedalus: Thanks for posting the Kim Phuc Phan Thi link. That’s really cool. I didn’t know that about her. We really should be talking more about her… though in defense of the Paris topic, it does bring up several issues that don’t necessarily have anything to do with her.
The re-jailing of Paris on Friday makes a great bar exam question: What was she jailed for on Friday. Keep in mind that she had served her time and was legally released. This was NOT for DUI or probation or failure to appear.
In California, a Judge only controls the Court and only has power to sentence people; a Sheriff controls the jail and has the power to release people. If a Judge has a problem with the Sheriff, he can send out his Marshalls and jail the Sheriff for contempt of court.
At best, this was a hissy fight between a judge and a sheriff. Paris was legally released from jail and legally went home. Without a second trial (which is prohibited by our Constitution) the Judge had no grounds for a second sentence.
Wow, people are truly missing the point of my posts.
1) I do not think the 17 year old should have been thrown in the slammer. He was doing something that 17 year olds do these days: Having sex. It’s kind of a dumb thing to do, because the majority of 17 year olds are not ready to be parents. So he needed guidance, not a prison term. Get it?
2) State prisons DO change people. I’d come out of one mad. So when this kid comes out, because of the explosive atmosphere at these places, yeah, I believe he’s now way, way more likely to commit a crime than someone who has never been to state prison. Get it?
3) The majority of those in California state prisons ARE in for life sentences, and they have nothing to lose when they cause a riot. For my source on this, watch some of the National Geographic Explorer shows, particularly the one about California State Prison, Sacramento (formerly Folsom) that aired last night.
That kid should never have been thrown in jail. I can’t state that more clearly. But now, he is definitely more likely to rape a woman, or join a gang, or do drugs, than someone who has not been to jail, which is exactly why he never should have gone to jail.
I’ve made my points as explicitely as I can.
Having actually visited about 10 California state prisons, I think that, yes, actually, I am more qualified to point out that prisons don’t have the intended benefit. And this directly pertains to Paris Hilton.
What sentence would benefit Paris? Being forced to be a paid orderly at a county hospital for 8 weeks probably would have done the trick.
What sentence would have benefitted the 17 year old? Well, he never should have been charged with a crime, but how about working with foster kids for 8 weeks so he can see what happens to a lot of unwanted children (had his girlfriend gotten pregnant, that kid surely would have not been wanted)?
Throwing that 17 year old into jail for 10 years is way, way more likely to send him to the “dark side” than, say, learning that actions have consequences.
Anton Mates says
No, she was not. She was legally reassigned. The sheriff’s department explained when she was released from jail that she was still serving her time, and in fact that her original 45-day sentence had been reinstated; it’s just that she was permitted to serve it at home instead of in a cell.
The judge did not retry or resentence her. He merely ordered that she serve the rest of her existing sentence under the conditions that had originally been written into it.
No, he does not. A standing federal court order requires the sheriff to avoid overcrowding, and he is permitted to release prisoners in order to do so. He does not have the power to release prisoners for any reason whatsoever.
In this case, the sheriff cited medical problems, not overcrowding. If he had cited overcrowding, it’s possible that the judge would still be able to override him on individual cases, but that would probably require a higher court looking at the original court order. As it is, though, the sheriff simply overstepped his authority.
The photographer captured the face of true anguish with both photographs. If the photographs came with no story only the anguish pictured on their faces would you have any less or more compassion?
Keith Douglas says
MikeM: (re: FUBAR) Quite – and this is another area where the fundies and various other conservatives are going to go nuts, deny scientific research etc. as it comes in, slowly, that our punishment model doesn’t really cut it.
Kseniya — allow me to clarify. I find it disgusting that she has led a life where she has never had to face consequences for her bad behavior until now. Perhaps, deep down, she is a decent person who will be able to step beyond being a spoiled brat. But I am disgusted at the level of “spoiled” which has been hers up until now, if you understand what I’m saying. I imagine her introduction to harsh reality is so terribly traumatic right now at least in part because this is her first brush with it. Would have been a lot better for everyone involved if she had gone through this terrible type of trauma when she was three.