I wrote a tweet this morning criticizing the current crop of so-called "religious freedom" legislation. If you're interested, it was going to say something like: "religious freedom means you get to choose your religious beliefs, it doesn't mean you get to discriminate against those who disagree," possibly to be followed up by one saying something like "if you are opposed to same-sex marriage, don't do it" -- a thought I borrowed more or less from Dan Savage, author of American Savage.
But I ended up not tweeting it, and here is the strange thing. It wasn't because I was worried I would offend my conservative followers. It will come as no surprise to any of them that I hold the typical liberal opinions, including support for gay marriage.
No, I didn't click on the "Tweet" button because I was worried about other liberals. It's a damn tricky thing to be a liberal these days. You can have the best of intentions, have your heart in the right place, have your liberal voting record framed, shined, and hanging up in plain view, but if you phrase your opinion even slightly wrong, all the ferocity of the politically correct thought police will come flaming down upon your head.
Of course, there is very little chance that one of my tweets will be noticed by anybody outside of my (thankfully) forgiving and supportive group of friends. But there's enough of a chance that after deliberating for a few minutes, I finally decided it wasn't worth the risk. I hang out on Twitter some, on Facebook a little more (since three of my favorite groups of women are hosted there), but for the most part I am a social media ignoramus. I'm just not savvy enough to make sure I say the right thing.
So I didn't say anything. And that is a sad commentary on the current state of American liberalism, which is after all, the arena where we should be encouraged and supported in being our unique, diverse, sometimes clumsy, selves.
We live in such inflammatory times, don't we? It makes me sad--- innocent blunders should be an opportunity for (civilized) discourse, and the opportunity to consider alternate points of view/opinions. But, the advent of talk radio shouting which bled into FOX etc. has created an atmosphere of stark division and conflict. I still believe that ALL of us have SO MUCH MORE IN COMMON with each other than the beliefs which separate us, but we've been railroaded by the media to see the world through ironclad lenses of "good" and "bad", "right" and "wrong". Too bad. I say tweet away! Your intelligence and good heart will win the day---
ReplyDeleteI absolutely agree with you. If we didn't have the extremists on both ends flaming up at every possible opportunity, I bet we would find that we all have much more in common than we think. But I'm not sure that you're right that intelligence and good heart will win the day. Maybe in the long run, the really long run, but there have been too many examples recently of people with the best of intentions who were raked over the coals anyway. (eg, http://bit.ly/1y5spZX). I should be more bold in expressing my opinions, though, you're right about that, and I've been working on it (hence, this post, for example).
DeleteInteresting link! "Whoreaphobia" is a word now? LOL. Here's where I think "intelligence and good heart" win the day---let's say you tweet something which is wrong footed, or misconstrued, and suddenly your tweet goes absolutely GLOBAL with the united voice of billions of people decrying your idiocy, et. al. So what? At the end of the day, what do the people who know you and love you think about you? Even after your goofed up tweet? They love you. They accept you. They are all that matters, not the world who DOES NOT KNOW YOU and WOULD JUDGE YOU based on 140 characters. In my limited experience, I've suffered ANGUISH because some people didn't like me, some people have been outright MEAN to me, have purposely set out to cause me embarrassment, pain etc. And, when I set my bruised ego and hurt feelings aside, what was left was "so?" Why should that be any of MY concern or MY business? Some people will use opportunity (Rashida Jones' tweet) to make their own case---but they just preyed on her fame, and used that as a platform. Otherwise their message would NOT be widely circulated (I think). My current self-censorship is around the issue of thinking that my sweet 2 year old labradoodle is somehow similar to my friends' sweet little (human) babies. People don't like that! Even if they are bemoaning the cost of child care, or health care, or teaching manners, etc.---they don't appreciate me saying, "Yeah, tell me about it…. Why, my little Homer just this morning chewed on the rug, and… " So, I still think it vigorously, but keep it all in my mind.
ReplyDeleteYou know, that is a good point. and especially the part about people preying on celebrities' fame for their own purposes. It makes it especially unlikely that anyone will notice my tweets, since they won't get any mileage out of raising a fuss about them. And fwiw, we've had many years where we paid far more in vet bills than we did in pediatrician bills for our kids, so I hear ya. And have I told you that Homer's Christmas is on our fridge? :-)
Deletemy most recent tweet was asking twitterdom at large a somewhat obscure question about Latin grammar. So far no one at all has replied or noticed. ha.
DeleteI must confess I don't have a twitter account and don't completely understand why it exists. It just seems so odd to me. As a former "journalist" -- can I say that if I have a Bachelor of Journalism degree -- it's my ever so humble opinion that the emergence of all this social media is largely responsible for the current polarization of our world. (Or at least here in the U.S. -- I think if you look at many places in the world, social media has merely exposed the extremes, not caused it. Ahh, but perhaps the exposure is what's caused the divisiveness in terms of inspiring people to rise up against it. Geez, I now understand how it's easy to get off topic when you intended to go down another road. Now, where was I? Oh, yes, time to close the parenthetical.) I especially think the potential for disaster is especially true in tweet world because of the number of characters limitation. Without context or the ability to have face to face discourse, don't tweets (at least in the political world) just become a battle of pithy sayings and gotchas. I find it disturbing that my elected representatives can't have differing opinions, then go sit behind a closed door and work out a compromise out of fear of a tweet or a FB post or some other instantaneous response that can be broadcast (is that the right word in today's world -- there goes the parenthetical again) to tens of thousands. So I find it's best for me to just keep my trap shut unless things are just so over the top I can' stand it. Every pot is allowed to boil over once in awhile. I have learned after twenty years of practicing law (okay, it's been more than 20, but after awhile it's like age, I just stopped counting) I have reluctantly acknowledged that lawyers who repeatedly! make the same argument, regardless of its basis in law, are often effective. It breaks my heart, but it's true. The image of a tenacious dog holding onto it's chew toy comes to mind. I don't know if the opposition just wears down and gives in or the judge just starts to believe it because he/she has heard it so many times, but it works. And that's a shame. I think that in the word of politics or retweets the same thing seems to occur. It's become too easy to coast along with the highway of information bits and suddenly be unable to see the vast amounts of other reality that is only a few feet off the highway. OMG. I have to stop now because that last sentence is ridiculous. Time to dry my hair and go back to work settling disputes between children with deceased parents. Love reading your blog, Barb. xxxooo
ReplyDeleteThanks, Drea! Twitter is a very strange thing. In some ways I like it way better than FB because it's equally as entertaining but not nearly as much of a time drag--I can sit down to check one thing on FB and still be there two hours later. Also, people who are good at writing tweets can be hilariously funny. But like you said, the potential for taking something out of context, or for ignoring facts in favor of getting "re-tweets" (shares) is huge. And of course when you only have 140 characters, nuances of meaning don't stand a chance. As you said, our continued obsession with narrowing down complicated ideas to FB posts and tweets that will get likes and shares and re-tweets does very little to solve any problem. (which is another good reason to keep my mouth shut) (p.s. I'm so glad to find someone who loves parentheses as much as I do.) (and thanks for reading, too.)
Delete