My emotional disability: I don't get the fury at the Irwin croc incident

[jpgray]

I saw the pictures. I read the long and often pithy debate. What in the name of all that is worth discussing is infuriating about this?

I see the picture, I think:

Irwin is between the baby and the croc. Many people (including his wife) are nearby. Irwin has much experience with crocodiles, and apparently knew this one from the egg.

He is securely holding the child, and he is holding him far out from the crocodile. Irwin, despite having a personal bravery with animals that seems to border on and at times enter into stupidity, has not lost a limb (or so much as a finger) to a croc. If the situation were truly as dangerous as people say, wouldn't Irwin be short a few limbs by now? If that croc could get to the arm furthest away from Irwin before he could react, isn't it rather remarkable that Irwin is alive at all?

When he dangles the baby into the croc's yawning mouth, then we'll talk. But I had no reason to doubt, both from watching his show and just using basic logic, that Irwin was in control of that situation. He is used to fleeing from angry crocodiles, and has always been able to escape with every limb intact.

So someone who really cares about this a great deal tell me why it is so outrageous, so I can at least understand a little bit. In one of the debates I read here, someone posted about other basic dangers to infants that are caused by poor parenting. If you are worried about children, shouldn't these cases, where the parent has neglected his/her child, generate more energy than a case where a crocodile expert held his baby four to six feet away from a crocodile? Or is the distinguishing feature Irwin's celebrity?

In my opinion, this shows more about our country's obsession with celebrity dramas--however manufactured--than it does about child safety.

[Forkboy]

1. I would have fed the croc the kid and saved the steak

:evilgrin:

Your last line is spot on!

[SlavesandBulldozers]

2. not that i really want to get into this

but did you see the image where he set the kid down next to the pool for a second with the croc sitting right there? That was the outrageous part.

I take a libertarian view on this one, if you want your kid eaten that's your business. If it had been my kid he was dangling in front of a crocodile, i'd git owt de ole jammy-pack and unload an entoyah cleep in his RETAAADED hed, blimey!

[jpgray]

4. Again, logic dictates he knows what he is doing

The man is still alive and whole, and so all are his kin, as far as I know. He has a daughter too, I believe, and I don't doubt she has had experiences with the crocs, even as this baby has had.

There is no established pattern of his behavior harming his family through proximity to crocs that I am aware of--he is an expert, there have been no injuries involving his children that I am aware of.

Personally, no, I would never do something of this sort because I know *zero* about crocs. But Irwin knows a great deal about crocs.

Here's an analogy: if I had no knowledge of cars, I would be shocked that parents take their children into these dangerous vehicles which crash and kill their occupants in astounding numbers every year. Because the dangers of cars are familiar to me, I don't think driving in a car is automatically a fatal situation. It can turn into one, if you don't know your business, and it can *appear* to be if you know nothing about the subject at all.

edit: all my opinion, of course. :hi:

[bearfartinthewoods]

33. i'm with you...the guy is a pro

of course it sort of sucks that he did it as part of his 'act' but circus people put their kids in their acts as soon as possible.

i didn't even freak when jacko 'dangled' his kid over the rail. anyone seriously think he'd drop his own kid?

[KDLarsen]

3. I don't get it either...

... I think that it was a stupid thing to do, but Irwin knows these creatures well enough to say when a croc is angry and when it's not.

And I agree, that last line is spot on - in one way or another, I think it's also the thing that caused Gropenator to get elected..

[Melodybe]

5. Steve Irwin knows what he is doing

He seems to have some freaky connection to the animals. My hubby and I watch his show from time to time and it is amazing to see him handle wild animals with such grace. Most of the time the animal fights a bit but mainly seems annoyed rather than threatened. I saw him hold a black mamba with no problems. He has NEVER been bitten by a poisonous snake, considering that he is in contact with them so often I find that truly remarkable. After watching him in some real dangerous positions like when his wife feel from the boat into croc infested waters, I don't doubt for a second that things were under his control. I feel sorry for him, he was doing what he loved and wanted to share it with his son, now the world is criticizing him for it.

[kcwayne]

46. Just like that poor bear expert that got himself and his companion eaten

You remember a couple of months ago when the nature photographer who had been working with a bunch of wild bears in Alaska and his companion went on a close up and personal photo shoot with some bears and ended up getting both of them killed and digested. This guy convinced everyone that he knew what he was doing too, and had a boatload of incredible photographs he had taken over the years to prove it.

[NewJeffCT]

50. He may know, but...

He may know what he is doing, but all it takes is one little slip or stumble on his part, or maybe a sudden, inadvertant cry from the baby, or a sudden twist, and who knows what can happen? He is human, after all. It can happen. (my 10 month old daughter is a little tiger at times and not always easy to hold...)

[Spentastic]

6. Hit the nail on the head

The media must have collectively cum in their pants when they saw this. After the MJ outrage, anyone doing anything out of the ordinary with a child was going to be publicly crucified.

Unless you are willing to believe that Irwin wished his son harm and was unaware of the risk he was taking then I'm afraid all of the outrage seems a little shrill.

Finally, I'd like to make the following observation. Some wild animals are more predicatble than others. Crocodiles tend in the vast majority of cases to react in certain ways to certain stimuli. This is what allows Irwin to do his "stunts" without being killed. It's virtually hardwired behaviour. Mammals tend to be more unpredictable.

[Indiana Democrat]

7. The problem is, he lied.

After the incident, he said, in his defense, "I have to teach my children to repect aligators and other animals".

OK...I can accept that, but...

The kid is 5 weeks old...He's not learning a DAMNED thing.

He did it as a stunt, nothing more. I know it's far-fetched, but what if he would have slipped? Or worse yet, became suddenly ill? That baby would have been gone in seconds...And in front of a crowd with children watching on.

He put that baby in danger via a stunt. It was irresponsible. At least as bad as Michael Jackson.

[xchrom]

8. some of us have fathers

who did some very dangerous stuff with us and we remember them fondly.
our fathers looked after us made sure we were safe -- but still took us on our thrill ride{for lack of a better term}.
my father did stuff with me that would have some people here pulling their collective hair out -- but i wouldn't change a thing. and my father was not irresponsible or reckless.
i see the irwin incident in much the same light.

[Indiana Democrat]

15. Really?

You can remember all the fun you had with your dad when you were 5 weeks old?

That's the point. I don't have a problem with him teaching his kids, or having fun with his kids, but a 5 week old is basically a slug...He's not learing anything about gators at 5 weeks.

[xchrom]

28. irwin like my father did not

hurt his kid. at all.
when irwin decides to ''teach'' his kids anything is his business -- and not mine.
he's not abusing them so i don't have a problem with it -- live and let live.

[Indiana Democrat]

32. I basically agree, but...

...He said, in his defense, that he needs to keep his informed of their surroundings...I can't argue with that...And as a former kid, I would to have LOVED to have grown-up like that.

But...

It was a 5 week old kid. And since we're just discussing stuff on this discussion forum, I'll discuss the simple fact that his 5 week old kid didn't learn a DAMNED thing for that experience...It was a publicity stunt, plain and simple.

[xchrom]

34. i'm just saying 5 weeks

or 5 years -- irwin did not hurt his child.
he hasn't hurt bindi.
are the lives of amazonian indian chidren so different?
or the lives of some farm children?

[Indiana Democrat]

55. Oh geeze...

What part of "He did it for a stunt" don't you understand?

Amazonian Indian Children?

Well, when they get their own TV show and no longer have to keep their children with them at all times for finacial reasons, we'll talk.

Farm children?

Show me one 5 week old farm kid who's out in front of dangerous livestock for no good reason and we'll talk.

[xchrom]

57. you think irwin's children

are the only chidren who have been in what you view as dangerous situations with their fathers? or that economics plays a role in this?
hardly -- and you know it. irwin did not hurt his child and all indications are that irwin loves and cares for his children and family. and that's all that counts.

[kcwayne]

17. Yeah, my Dad was a hoot

I remember when I was 4 years old when my dad was tossing me up in the air and catching me repeatedly. It was all in great fun. Then he dropped me and my forehead hit the sharp corner of a wooden chair. Fortunately I only needed 15 stitches and still have the scars 46 years later. But the incident could have just as easily killed me, or even left me unhurt. It was the luck of the draw.

My Dad had no malice, it was all about quality time with the kids (long before there was such a term as quality time). But mistakes and accidents happen. He felt awful about what happened, but imagine how much worse he would have felt if it had killed me.

[xchrom]

27. my father never hurt me

however i repeatedly went to the hospital for injuries i did to myself.

[FlaGranny]

9. I was outraged (a little) until I saw the photo.

My take is that he was holding his child while he was doing his job, much like anyone else might do. The baby was protected by Irwin's body. I certainly wouldn't do what he did because I have no experience with crocs, but I don't see that the baby was in the slightest danger - at least from what is shown in that photo.

[kcwayne]

12. Uh, crocs can move at 40 mph over short distances

If that croc had decided that the baby looked like a good tasty snack to tuck away, it could lunge and snap that baby out of Irwins arms faster than Irwin could have reacted.

Irwin may be the best qualified person on the planet for knowing when the croc is getting ready to make that lunge, but if he were distracted for even a second, the baby or Irwin are at risk.

Irwin's playing the odds. That's fine if its is arm or leg that gets lost in the transaction. But it is irresponsible to risk an infant that has no choice in the matter. Especially when it is being used for a stage prop to further interest in Irwins stunts.

[Terwilliger]

52. once again, YOU have made the determination...

and, effectively, dismissed Irwin's years of experience

Once again...he didn't feel the baby was in danger...his wife didn't feel the baby was in danger...and he is the father of that child and responsible for him/her (I don't know the sex of the kid)

[kcwayne]

59. Yes I have made the determination

that no one is infallible, and there are risks associated with risky behavior. Even the "great Irwin" has scars on his body (I don't watch the numbnut, so I am getting this from my daughter who has watched his show) from when he has been bitten. So even with all of his experience he has made mistakes. Unless I missed something where he has become a diety of some sort, he is human and has the potential to make more.

I could care less if Irwin wants to entertain people by hanging dead chickens around his neck and parading around in front of hungry carnivores. But he simply cannot take the risk of death or dismemberment of this act to zero just because he has experience. Putting a child that has no option to say no to accepting this risk in harms way for no better purpose than public entertainment is irresponsible. If the child were to be harmed or killed in such an act, Irwin should be prosecuted for child abuse or manslaughter.

[PsN2Wind]

41. Yeah

Just like "take your child to work" day.

[REP]

10. "Won't SOMEBODY Think of the Children!"

I don't get it either. Aren't there children in real danger? Did they ever find Rilya Wilson, or the other children lost by the Florida DCS?

[truthspeaker]

36. that's it exactly

easier to jump on a bandwagon to condemn a celebrity than to take a long, hard look at the complex problems facing many children in this country and elsewhere.

In particular, the "parents" who leave their kids in the car for five hours in the casino parking lot can feel better about themselves because they have a celebrity to condemn.

[Gman]

11. Roy of Siegfried & Roy thought he knew white tigers

and look what happened to him.

The point is that regardless of what Irwin thought, if that croc had gone for the baby and got it, there wouldn't have been a thing Irwin could have done.

That baby was food to the croc. While nothing happened which may seem to validate what Irwin claims about no danger, but it was nevertheless foolish to put a child in that type of real danger, regardless of what Irwin perceived.

If the croc had gotten the baby, Irwin would have been repeating, "I've never seen a croc do that before!"

[Spentastic]

13. Hmm

This is what it all boils down to isn't it?

"I've never seen a croc do that before!"

Based on his not inconsiderable experience Steve Irwin performed a risk assesment and decided that on the balance of evidence available to him that his own son was in little danger. Others with considerably less experience of large reptiles are disagreeing.

Life is risk. My parents did several risky things with me when I was a child. I've fallen out of trees, down cliffs, off motorbikes and broken loads of bones playing rugby (of which my parents fully approved).

I don't think Bob was in any more danger than most kids in Western society. In all likelyhood Bob will grow up happier than the vast majority of children worldwide.

[Darth_Kitten]

20. Why....

every child should be "croc savvy" when they are one month old. :eyes: Sorry, babies need to be protected.

[ElsewheresDaughter]

21. LOL...exactly

[Spentastic]

23. Oh

So you and your great knowledge of Crocodiles has decided that the child was at risk.

The justification from Irwin was admittedly bollocks. That doesn't mean the child was at significant risk of being eaten.

"babies need to be protected"

Just the ones with celebrity parents? What about the ones that the U.S happily drops high explosives on?

Phony misplaced outrage.

[Terwilliger]

53. Oh! Woe is us! We didn't think George Bush was a liar! We were tricked!

Yeah, I guess you have a point.

[ElsewheresDaughter]

14. can we say "michael jackson" dangling child over balcony? and

the difference in the level of the public/media outrage is telling...and why isn't tv lawyer Gloria - whatever her flippin last name is - calling for irwins children to be taken away from him like she did jackson's????

[NicoleM]

22. Probably because

Irwin lives in Australia. Gloria Allred practices in California. AFAIK she doesn't have much sway with child welfare authorities in Australia.

[kskiska]

39. Gloria doesn't have much sway in Germany, either

which is where the Michael Jackson incident occurred.

[NicoleM]

42. He is a resident of California.

She asked California child welfare authorities to investigate.

[Kellanved]

44. but the German authorities were about to act

Really, Jackson had to leave in a hurry. It was because the child-dangling and the zoo-visit. He visited the Berlin Zoo during winter, and Berlin during Winter means cold, with his kids wearing summer clothes.

[linazelle]

37. Baby dangling is all the rage in medialand....Irwin and Jackson

are media darlings...they media moguls from having to explain why more soldiers are dying in Iraq.

[ElsewheresDaughter]

40. oh absolutely "baby dangling" is a WMDistraction

[KFC]

45. Because Michael Jackson is a child molesting freak

Irwin is well-liked

[Killarney]

16. It's because we *saw* it

It's getting more attention because we saw it on video. Most cases of child abuse you don't see on video.

Remember how much attention the woman got when she hit her daughter in the carseat in the Target parking lot? Why did that get so much attention? That woman wasn't a celebrity. It was because we saw it on TV replayed over and over.

And, as a mother of a baby myself, when I see another child in danger or being hurt... I can't even describe the feeling. It's like my heart stops beating and my stomach lurches.

I also think that the reason some people have a hard time understanding the outcry is because they are not yet parents themselves. I've always loved children and would never want to see one hurt, but before I had a child myself the video wouldn't have affected me as much as it did now. You picture the baby as YOUR baby. It's frightening.

All cases of child abuse and endangerment generate rage from me. I think this one has gotten more attention because 1) it's on video and 2) it was on the news. How many other cases of child endangerment did you see on the news this week? For me, that was the only one.

Hope that helps explain.

[blondeatlast]

18. Because it showed appallingly bad judgment.

Nthing more, nothing less.

As a mom, I can tell you that he would have been sleeping in the croc pen for some time after that stunt, though.

[Terwilliger]

54. his wife didn't think so

but, of course, your opinion is more important than that of the mother of that child

[Darth_Kitten]

19. he was never in control of a croc.

NEVER. NEVER. NEVER.

it's not about celebrity drama, it's about parental stupidity. Pure and simple. And the idiots in the audience who cheered this bozo need to have their heads examined.

[Le Taz Hot]

24. Excellent, reasoned post

We don't see much of that around here anymore.

OK, I have to admit, I do like his show and I've seen several with him, his wife and his daughter when she was just an infant. I've seen them take trips together to all parts of the world and bring the baby along. I'm sorry, but how cool is that? To be exposed to different people, different cultures and all that wondrous wildlife from birth? It's obvious to even the most self-righteous that this IS a wonderful, caring, loving, family unit.

And I LOVE your point about the neglected children. Good goddess, go down to your local Child Protective Services -- they'll show you some kids in DESPERATE need of rescuing. I'm fairly sure none of them have been in a croc cage -- they've been through FAR worse -- unloved, abandoned, tortured -- it will turn your stomach as to what some people do to their own children.

Thank you for an excellent post.

[CatWoman]

35. Yeah

what Taz said!!!!

[SaddenedDem]

25. Simple comparison

A dog trainer, who trains guard dogs, takes his 1 month old child out to the dogs and dangles the child by the arms in front of the dogs.

Would you think that what appropriate behavior?

Do you think the authorities would leave the children with this man after being shown a video of the event?

There are 2 problems with this behavior:

1. No one, even the best "expert," can control the behavior of an animal unless they have them chained, leashed and restricted.

2. If a "common" man had exhibited the same behavior, he would be in jail and his children in a foster home. But because this is a "television hero" people come to his defense and make it a statement about political correctness.

Any way you look at it the man's behavior was stupid, reckless and irresponsible. For that alone, the child should be taken away and place in a safe environment.

[Spentastic]

30. For crying out loud

"A dog trainer, who trains guard dogs, takes his 1 month old child out to the dogs and dangles the child by the arms in front of the
dogs."

Er, what like people who have babies and dogs in the same house and then the dog kills the baby? Is anyone who owns a dog and has a baby irresponsible? Furthermore, Dogs are far less predictable than reptiles.

"1. No one, even the best "expert," can control the behavior of an animal unless they have them chained, leashed and restricted."

Says you. I'd guess by the fact that Irwin is still alive that he's been pretty good at predicting reactions thus far.

"2. If a "common" man had exhibited the same behavior, he would be in jail and his children in a foster home. But because this is a "television hero" people come to his defense and make it a statement about political correctness."

Once again says you. But the common man does not spend his life around Crocodiles does he? This has nothing to do with PC. It's got to do with people rushing to judgement on subjects and people that they know nothing about.

[grayrace]

26. 11 people have been killed by crocs in Australia since 1982

America loses that many to gun violence everyday. Where's the misplace outrage?

[kcwayne]

29. The outrage is institutionalized

with the largest police force and largest prison population per capita in the world.

No one was outraged by the 11 people killed by crocs down under for the same reason no one is outraged by the endless murders in the US. Namely, they aren't aware of them. The legal system handles a majority of the cases without intense media scrutiny, and there is simply no need or benefit to getting outraged over every one when the remedy is being handled systematically.

If the legal system were to treat murders the same way as croc deaths, you would see some outrage and vigilantes.

[RebelOne]

31. People are also equating it to the Michael Jackson balcony incident.

[gator_in_Ontario]

38. One more diversion

from what is really going on

[forgethell]

43. Steve did a fairly irresponsible thing.

Does it rise to the level of criminality? If I were on a jury, I would never convict him. If stupidity were criminalized, there wouldn't be enough people left for prison guards. If the child had been injurred or killed, there should be some punishment, but he wasn't so Steve should be let alone, hopefully to think a little about what he did, and why people are mad.

[lovedems]

47. He's the croc hunter! His dad was a croc hunter!

I am so convinced he knows what he is doing, I would let my kids (older than his) go into the pit with him. He is the croc hunter! I am sure there were many people we couldn't see on the camera ready to act if necessary and I don't think he would have let his baby get harmed. We probably but our children in more danger by putting them in a car then he did going into the croc pit. I don't get it either. As I keep repeating, HE IS THE CROC HUNTER!

[Catherine Vincent]

48. Accidents happen.

He was just lucky that time. I hope he doesn't do it again.

[proud patriot]

49. I support Steve Irwin

It is a parents responsibilty to teach
the child about the dangers that surround
him . This infant has crocs in the backyard
not a swimming pool. Like I taught my kid to swim
by the time he was 1 , it was my responsibilty
to teach him to hold his breathe underwater which
he was able to do at 8 months .

[Indiana Democrat]

56. Yeah...

I'm sure that 5 week old picked-up some great tips. Probably going to discuss those tips with his parents to make sure he's got them all straight.

[proud patriot]

58. My sons first lesson of holding his breath underwater was at 2 weeks

Now my son is seven and is a better swimmer than his
father who didn't grow up around swimming pools .

[ElsewheresDaughter]

60. PP your son's first lesson of breath holding was 9 months in the womb

:7

[adriennel]

51. it's his zoo, it's his kid

so technically, no harm, no foul.
but what he did was one of the stupidest parent tricks I have ever seen. chicken in one hand, tasty infant in the other, where's that croc? what if the croc lunged for the piece of meat in the other arm?

I just don't buy the theory that wild animals can be domesticated and the predatory threat can completely be removed. My house cat kills small animals after being an indoor cat for almost 10 years! Plus, I don't buy Sigfried's explanation that the tiger was trying to protect Roy and gently move him off-stage. When a cat bites into a neck and starts shaking it, it is trying to kill!

I respect Mr Irwin and his work. I do not believe anyone, including the Croc Hunter, can guarantee a wild animal will not attack.

[kutastha]

61. It's an obsession right now, along the lines of shark attacks

And Irwin took it to the limit. For comparison, I was at JFK the other day waiting for a Jet Blue flight, sop they had some Direct TV shows on the monitors. There was some wacky blooper-type sports show going on with different clips from different events. One highlight was this rodeo where 4-6 year old (helmeted, at least) children hung on to a sheep as it ran around the ring til they were either tossed or fell off, oftetimes because their face would butt up against the back of the sheep's head. I just sat there agape thinking "Is this entertainment?" and couldn't help but think of Irwin's escapade...

[coda]

62. He know crocs, but he don't know babies.

After several viewings, my thought(s).

"Criminy Steve, the baby is one month old....support his ****ing head you dipshit!"

[adriennel]

64. I thought the same thing

...if the kid's a month old, his head should not be flopping around like that! jeez.

[LTR]

63. I'm already sick of this

*YAWN* Another celeb controversy.

Kobe, Michael Jackson, Ben and J-Lo, Britney's wedding, and now the Croc Hunter.

No wonder people these days are stupid and uninformed. No wonder Bush has a 60% approval. America is being dumbed down by our moronic media!

Keep in mind, this stuff takes time away from the real stories.

I really don't care about Steve Irwin. Sure it was stupid to feed a croc while holding an infant. But does it really matter to us all?

That said, I still like the pic below: