I’ve been feeling weirdly restrained lately, especially
online. There's been a lot of news online that I’ve had powerful feelings
about that I’ve just—swallowed. I haven’t blogged about it and I’ve barely
reacted to it on Facebook, either (aside from some passive ‘likes’ of things
other people have posted, and even those I’ve scaled back). And it’s been
wearing on me—while I tend not to get super opinionated online, having a voice
to talk about the things on my heart is essential to me, even if no one’s
reading. It’s not like I made a conscious choice to be quiet, either—I just
keep choking when I want to talk.
One reason is that I’ve had a lot of things going on in my
life that I’m not ready to talk about online yet, but they take up so much head
space that they keep encroaching on the rest of the things I want to talk about,
and it’s hard to untangle things. So sometimes it’s easier to just be quiet.
The other reason is that I’ve found myself afraid of my audience.
While we were visiting family over Christmas, I found out
that a couple (somewhat distant) family members had gotten upset by something
innocuous I had posted on Facebook that revealed that I supported (or at least,
didn’t not support) a political
candidate they found appalling. So appalling that they felt compelled to tell
another (closer) relative how appalled they were by my post, and this other relative then relayed
this information to me.
It came at a time when I was already feeling particularly
overexposed (due to those other things going on), and I wanted to shrink back
in myself and hide. It wasn’t the fault of the person who told me (or really
even the people who were upset by my post)—if I had been in a different
headspace at the time, I would have laughed it off and maybe cheerfully (and invisibly)
flipped off the offended party and gone on writing. But now I’m scheduled to
preach during one of our church’s mid-week Lenten services, and as I started
writing my sermon I realized how much I hadn’t been saying lately.
Ironically, the post that got people upset isn’t even the
sort of thing I can control or predict—it was a sci-fi joke
comparing a presidential candidate to an Asimovian robot—and there’s no way I
can self-censor enough to prevent that kind of misunderstanding or
overreaction. But I don’t want to unnecessarily
provoke conflicts, either. So it’s got me thinking about what sorts of posts I
would be willing to risk hearing, “So-and-so was really upset by Thing you
wrote last week” at family gatherings (because there’s a difference between
Anonymous Jerk online and Real Person you actually know).
I have some thoughts, but none particularly settled yet. Friends
who post things on Facebook beyond recipes and pictures of
cats/kids/dogs/bunnies: how do you decide which things are worth posting and
which things are worth letting slide?
Honestly, I'm probably in the "I only post recipes and pictures of happy innocuous things" camp. That's likely because I don't tell people what I think about controversial/political things in general, so why would I do that on the Internet? Kevin is "in the know," but aside from him, I keep things to myself. I guess it's because most of the time, I know few people will have their mind changed by a comment on their status. It does hurt to just keep scrolling instead of engaging sometimes (especially when it's someone that I loved and respected who has posted something so completely asinine it gives me a stress headache), but I think most hills aren't worth dying on or sacrificing good memories with that person for. I'm pretty skilled at self-censoring on the Internet and in person, so I'd say what has kept my newsfeed blissfully drama-free has been the rule "If there's any controversy associated with it, don't post about it. Even indirect controversy. Except vaccines." (Didn't say I was perfect.)
ReplyDeleteSo vaccines are your one thing that's worth it? ;-) Can I ask a little more about what about vaccines makes it worth the risk? Because I think that's the sort of thing I'm thinking about--what's my "vaccines" thing?
Delete(typing one-handed w/baby on arm) it's literally life and death, and facts are on my side. They may still disagree, but it's worth it to me since it could save even one life. For issues that aren't science based and no one will directly die as a result of ignorance or deliberate lies....eh. I probably will say something about car seats and SIDS prevention too (but those also fall into the same category). Maybe that's the easy way out, idk.
DeleteNo, I think that's along the lines of how I think (though ftr vaccines are one of those things I never touch, even though I have strong feelings about them, because I don't feel I have the credentials to really weigh in on it properly). For me, the life-and-death things have to do more with the spiritual side of it--respecting the humanity in other people. So, civil rights for marginalized groups, refugees, etc. It's less sciency, but the same kind of thing. 'Will someone getting this wrong be really bad for other people created in God's image? Probably ought to consider saying something."
DeleteI guess anytime you post that "publish" or "send" or whatever button, you have to be comfortable with the idea that a person may choose to not be friends with you anymore. If you can say, "yeah, worth it," then fire away. If not, then a pause is good. You're probably doing just fine; I've never found myself completely horrified by what you've posted! :-) (A periodic gut check of "why am I saying something? Is it because it really bothers me, or because I secretly want to stick it to that person -- I hate that guy" has never steered me wrong.)
Delete