A little while ago I posted about accepting reality. For the most part, I stand beside that post. We need to accept reality when it hits us in the face. But, there's another part to it. We can't just accept one peace of reality we have to accept it all.
One of my commenters, Rose M. Welch, pointed out that she didn't want to be judged by how well she can walk in high heels. Realistically speaking, walking in high heels means nothing. Judging someone by something like that is pointless and ignores much of reality behind those heels. I know little about Rose, just what I read in her posts, but she seems fairly intelligent. Paying attention to just the heels ignores that fact.
The opposite can also be true. Say someone (no longer talking about Rose here) is walking down the road and they're doing a damn good job of it in heels. What if that person is a gold digger? Oh, she'll hit on you, she'll say she loves you, but all she's just waiting around for you to die to get your money (possibly expediting the process). I'm sure that's a reality most people would want to know about.
This is why judging someone on looks is pointless and often counterproductive. Yes, they may have a different skin color, different hair color, different cloths, but what does that all mean? Realistically speaking, not much, at least not much useful.
There are times when you can't get all of reality. In those situations, you have to accept the reality that you don't know. Say you're out driving and someone in front of you is driving really slowly. We have two peaces of reality here; 1) they're in front of you and 2) they're slow. But, we don't have the important peace of reality, we don't have the answer to the question Why. Are they driving slowly because they're new to driving (probably a good thing to ease one's self into driving)? Are they driving slowly due to an inability to drive properly (probably shouldn't be on the road)? Are they driving slowly because they're trying to get a passenger to the hospital without shaking them to peaces? You don't know, so you probably shouldn't judge.
Granted, in that last example, if they're a hazard on the road (you don't go 25 in a 65mph zone, that can cause more problems), then since you don't know you should probably not squeal tire around them, flip them off, and shout a string of obscenities that would make a sailor blush.
This concept is also why the system of law is suppose to be so slow. It allows time for people to cool off and allow all of reality to come forth. "Do you solemnly state to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth so help you God?" There's a reason that middle part is there. There is also a reason why one of our founding fathers said "I'd rather see 10 guilty men go free then one innocent man in jail." They understood that we can't always see all of reality and that we should understand that and not punish someone for us not knowing.
So, next time you hear someone being arrested for some horrible crime, remember that you don't know all of the reality, nor does the court. That is why there is a trial, an attempt to get all of the reality, all of the truth. So don't judge them until they are convicted (even then, question it at least some). You never know, they may have been framed.