Go Play By Yourself: Friendships, Shutdowns and Quark

Type “mean-spirited memes” into your search line and nearly a
million “results” will appear. I reached a point yesterday when I had just had
enough of all of the gotchas, gibes and jabs being thrown across the political
spectrum. So I added my comment to a string under a friend’s post of Trump’s
misstatement that “…in a number of states the laws allow for a baby to be born
from his or her mother’s womb in the ninth month.” The remarks were made during
an address for the March for Life’s 45th rally. The President clearly meant to
say “torn,” not “born,” intending for his statement to decry late-term
abortions, as he did elsewhere in his address when he voiced support for the
Pain-Capable Unborn Child Protection Act.
Now granted, I could
have chosen a more mean-spirited meme to address, but I’d just had my fill and
wanted to engage in a meaningful conversation. I could easily have chosen a
“safer space” than the Facebook page of a hard-left leaning friend, but then I
would have missed the robust back and forth that followed.
I was a professor for
much of my career and I am a believer that we learn best when we come up
against that which challenges us; we learn when we have to wrestle with an
issue. I have friends across the entire political spectrum and my feed is
filled to the brim most days with nasty memes. My friend’s “calling someone out
on a misstatement” may have been one of the least offensive of the bunch, but
it provided a starting point for asking a series of questions starting with
this: what value is there in mean-spirited memes? Now I appreciate satire and
satire has certainly been employed, throughout history, to bring change. But
when does satire (the use of humor, irony, exaggeration, or ridicule to expose
and criticize people’s stupidity or vices, particularly in the context of
contemporary politics and other topical issues) cross a line? Do mean-spirited
memes move give and take conversations forward or are they shutdowners? Are
they just easy grenade-like toss-ats or can they be effective in bringing
change? And…can folks–on opposite ends of the spectrum–engage in debate without
resorting to name calling (which is how, as you’ll see, the following
conversation devolved)?
I launched in to the conversation on my friend’s Facebook page
by noting that mean-spirited memes do nothing but make those who create them
and those who share them look petty and mean. And I asked in relation to the
meme at hand, “would you want such memes to be created recounting every
misstatement of yours?”
Here’s where the
conversation went from there. I’ve done some condensing, but have remained true
to the gist.
“Petty and Mean are
Donald’s middle names,”one woman opined. “If he would actually think before he
speaks, there would be far fewer opportunities for such memes.”
My response: “So
incivility should be the response to perceived incivility? I’m reminded of a
quote from Martin Luther King Jr.: ‘Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only
light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that.’”
“No,”she answered.
“Reminding people of what he truly is like is not incivility. He should not be
allowed to just gloss over his disorganized and at times nonsensical sentences.
His lack of presidential qualities is embarrassing.”
A man chimed in with
this: “He flubbed up some words and was made fun of, but the words he meant to
speak are even more asinine than his mistaken quote…#1 it is a huge lie, there
are NO states that allow abortions that late in a pregnancy unless there is a
severe threat of death for the mother giving birth and that is an extremely
rare and understandable condition. #2. The problem isn’t that he flubbed some
words, the problem is that this idiot just spews out whatever he wants to say
whether it is true or not….. So he got teased for making a silly mistake, but
the truth is he should be vilified and reviled for trying to spread false and
dangerous propaganda about a subject he knows absolutely nothing about…. Please
Donna, stop defending this turd, it only makes you look bad.”
My response: “Memes like
this and your response do nothing but shut down conversations with those who
hold opposing opinions. You’re using the same tactics you say you revile in
Trump. I wasn’t defending Trump; I was commenting on the faulty approach of the
meme. Could you see MLK posting this? I think I commented on this meme and
others today because I’m tired of these mean-spirited slams being posted across
the political spectrum. These Molotov cocktails do nothing but inflame. I
appreciate satire. I just wish folks would talk to each other instead of
ranting at each other.”
My friend then popped
in: “Well I’m certainly not MLK, and never pretended to be. Lol I’m
with [the previous male responder] on this. Personally, I am a Roe vs
Wade supporter and believe it’s no ones [sic] business but a woman and her
physician as to how her medical decisions are made.”
The woman, who had
initially responded wrote, “Pro-life means supporting health care, early
childhood interventions, education, etc. Pro-birth or pro-fetus is something
else entirely.”
To which I responded,
“You know nothing about me. I’m pro-life in every way that can be understood,
and my entire history would bear that out.” My friend, who was a student of
mine many years ago, said she knew that to be true.
I then wrote: “I was not
defending Trump in posting my comment. Yes, Trump made a horrendous blunder. He
often says ridiculous things. Again, I’m just tired of people today talking at
each other rather than talking to each other. People–again, from across the
political spectrum–throw up memes like this and refuse to listen to one
another. The responses that have followed my initial post [ha-ha emojis among
them] prove my point. Many of them are hate-filled and derisive and those
responding have no idea who I am or what I think. They’ve leapt to conclusions
because I didn’t fall in lock step to celebrate this meme. I don’t celebrate
ANY mean-spirited memes no matter who posts them.”
A newcomer, who I’d
estimate to be a twenty-something, put ha-ha emojis on all my comments and then
wrote [I’m sharing her comments unedited]: “we don’t care what you celebrate or
don’t ‘My initial posts prove my point…’ No one really cares about your points
either This is Facebook and you’re wasting your time I sorta half read through
what you said, but after the grammatical errors I stopped You’re the world
Police of Facebook, right ? Here to condemn us all for being mean when really
you’re probably the biggest bully here Know what I do to a bully? I tell them
to fuck off I barely know [my friend who’d shared the meme] and she has
nothing to do with how I think Go play by yourself”
Quite coincidentally, my
friend noted that “our FB pages are our private playgrounds, where we can vent,
share, educate or just laugh at what tickles us.” Private playgrounds, it seems,
where people recreate and re-create publicly, and new arrivals are often
bullied and kicked to the curb as just so much refuse needing disposal.
Well, I then said:
“Thank you to those who engaged respectfully with me on here. I wish we could
have had a conversation around my initial comment on whether mean-spirited
memes have any value. I wasn’t looking to discuss Trump’s words or
pro-life/pro-choice issues and, if you look back at my comments, I hope you’ll
see I did my best to respond to each person with respect, honesty and caring
concern.”
My friend concluded this
portion of the conversation with these words [shared unedited]: “this is a very
emotionally charged issue, I do get what you’re saying about memes, but I
disagree that this meme falls into that spectrum and if it does so what, this
really is FB and that’s all. I have no problem with how you feel about this,
that is your right. But it is also Elizabeth’s right to feel the way she does,
she has her experiences as you have yours. She is one of the loveliest
woman I’ve eveh had the pleasure to know. Donna you knew exactly how my
friends would respond, we’ve been thru this before. I lean pretty far left and
I’m not a Christian so our friends are and will be very different. I must say
you win this one as it appears Lizzie has left my page. Thanks. SMH”
And I said, “As I’m not
welcome here, I will bow out as well.” Matthew 10:14 came to mind and I shook
the dust off my feet and unfriended my friend. But, as my friend’s page is set
to “public,” the twenty-something replied, “I haven’t left your page I barely respond to people
like Donna but I felt like putting someone in their place today People are so
afraid to look within and search for meaning and the in between I saw a great
shirt on a hiker yesterday and it said, ‘Make America Deep Again.’ Think about
it”
Yes, indeed, let’s think
about it.
After I posted this
entry, a friend wrote to tell me that he’d attended a lecture last week by a
visiting scholar, Armin Shimerman, from UCLA [USC], noting that “he [Shimerman]
teaches on Shakespeare and that was what his lecture was centered on. But more
specifically, he spoke on why we don’t understand Shakespeare today. He posits
that we, as a culture, have trouble understanding any literature predating
the 1800s. The reason for that: we no longer teach Rhetoric., the basis of all
the writings before that time. If we understood the rhetoric behind all the
things Shakespeare wrote, we could understand the story better. He pointed to
Aristotle’s three pillars of rhetoric: Logos, Pathos, and Ethos. The logic
behind statements, the believability of the person making the statements, and
the passion, or emotion being played on. I walked away from the lecture with my
eyes a little glazed over, but I gained much insight. To understand the use of
rhetoric, you can become much more persuasive in your life, and to not
understand what is being done, you can become much more vulnerable. This comes
to my mind as I view many rants and tirades on FB. There is little logos in any
meme, but the image used can evoke some sense of pathos. The heavy emphasis is
generally on the pathos, the trigger points and the words used. I too wish for
more thoughtful discussions and always appreciate your essays. BTW don’t
let the fact that Armin was also the actor that played Quark on DS9 detract
from his pathos.”
My response: “I
recognized the name, Armin Shimerman; I’m a Trekkie after all, though perhaps
not on your exalted level! Thank you for sharing his and your wise words. I
appreciate your wisdom and your caring concern. I have been reflecting on this
whole experience, taking it as a case study in how I might better engage with
those who are so quick to take offense and so unwilling to listen. I think my
initial post must have been seen as an attack, but that was certainly not my
intention. It seems often that, if you don’t fall lockstep into agreeing with whatever
camp is onto whatever meme, folks will move to shut you down, refusing to enter
into any kind of constructive debate. Not one person engaged with me on the
topic of my initial post, the whole point for my posting. They went all over
the map, down all kinds of rabbit holes and insulted me. Then they united to
force me to shut down. Sound familiar? Perhaps I should have given more thought
to how I would be heard and whether it was worth entering into this particular
fray.
The shutting down of
others, clearly seen in this exchange, provides a picture–in microcosm–of
what’s happening across our society.
My friend, in a
conversation that reopened a bit later on Facebook, told me she didn’t mean to
make me feel unwelcome. But, I reminded her that she had sided with the one who
had treated me reprehensibly. I was not made to feel welcome. I was castigated
for speaking, and that–I said–should frighten her because the shutting down of
free speech, the inability to engage in civil discourse in the public square (or
on a friend’s Facebook page) should be opposed with everything we’ve got.
But, then…
The entire tone of the
conversation on my friend’s Facebook page changed when another individual
stepped in to tell me that she respected my thoughts and considered them valid.
She went on to say: “I respect your statement and your question. I think
sometimes what appears to be mean-spirited is an expression of legitimate
frustration. I have to say that I don’t like name-calling and have had problems
hearing this on both sides. I really can’t appreciate the terms “Libtard” and ”
Rethuglicans” and so on…I don’t like the Trump referred to as “Cheeto” nor
Hillary as “Killary” and when I reflect on this… – I think it just seems so
juvenile. Like kids in the playground spewing names at each other. As an
educator, I find myself encouraging little children to be more constructive and
they are quite receptive when the ideas are presented in ways that make sense
to them. Name-calling gets us nowhere I believe. But, legit expressions of
frustration are in a different category and come closer to what you’ve
suggested about parody. We can learn from each other when engaging in
discussions about recent events such as this blunder. I AM frustrated that a
leader could be so inept as to not catch such a gross error – it is curious if
nothing else. I stick to my former observations regarding why he did not catch
himself. I think the discussion is good and the original post is not without
merit.”
My friend then added, “I
do agree with what you are saying Donna; there are so many memes I do not share
for this very reason. In saying that, there are some I share because of the
creativity of the creator, some because they are actually funny, some because
they trigger my pathos, and some because I’m simply in a mood. Like I
said, my fb is my playground, and much of what I post is not there for any
serious debate. Fb, for me, is a tool to keep up with people who are far away
or a toy to find unusual things and share with my like-minded peeps. It is open
for the public so anyone can comment and speak their mind. If I find something
truly offensive I delete it. And no I do not believe people who have completely
opposing beliefs can debate without becoming emotionally involved, which is why
I do not debate the things I post.”
I said, “I would never
suggest we not become emotionally involved…it’s how those emotions are shared.
It can be an enormous challenge to debate, to address the other with respect,
and to come away as friends, even when we continue to have opposing beliefs.”
My friend added, “I do
agree with that. For me it’s just about letting people be who they are.
Sometimes that frustrates me, or angers me, but in the end, I get over it as I
realize I probably trigger stuff in others. But for me at this age, I’ve
experienced enough to know my beliefs will not be swayed by debate. As I know
others are shaped by their experiences and I will not try to change their
minds. There will always be, and must be opposing forces in all things, the yin
yang of it all. So, as we swing on the pendulum from one side to another, I
choose to enjoy myself where ever it’s swinging at the moment.”
I should note that, as
my friend’s page is set to “public,” she didn’t mind my sharing, on this site,
the exchange that had been playing out there. And, odd as it may seem, I’m
grateful that I entered into the conversation with words that might have been
taken as offensive because I learned I shouldn’t do that in any future
go-rounds. And, you know? I must admit that the creator of the born-torn meme
was actually quite clever. A clear opening had been provided; it was easy to
take direct aim and it would have been hard to miss the target. Mistaking born
for torn? At the March for Life?! That was a beaut of a blunder; the President
left himself wide open.
In the end, my friend
and I came to a greater understanding and greater appreciation of each other,
and I actually gained a new Facebook friend: the woman who entered in at the
tail end, the one who acknowledged I had some good points, the one who shared
her own views respectfully and thoughtfully.
Coincidental to my
entering into this exchange on Facebook, was my viewing of a CBS Sunday
Morning segment that centered on the shutting down of free
speech on college campuses. I hope you’ll take the time to visit the link here: https://www.cbsnews.com/news/a-war-of-words-on-college-campuses/
In the program, an
altercation at Middlebury College in March, 2016 was recalled that was sparked
by the appearance of Charles Murray, a libertarian political scientist with the
American Enterprise Institute. He’d been invited to the Vermont college to
discuss his Coming
Apart, a book that explores the growing divide between rich and
poor white Americans. When he got up to speak, however, chanting and yelling
students shouted him down.
The individual who had
invited the author expected Murray would be controversial because of another
book he had written, The Bell Curve. In that volume,
Murray had suggested that race may play a part in determining intelligence,
asserting that blacks do less well than white on IQ tests. CBS reporter Rita
Braver interviewed one student who was looking forward to pressing him on these
ideas, and Allison Stanger, a respected political science professor who had
been selected to moderate the event because of her liberal credentials, was
also eager to debate. When she and Murray were drowned out and shut down by the
protests, Stanger lamented the missed educational opportunity.
Braver noted that
Murray’s presence at Middlebury eventually resulted in violence. “When
Professor Stanger was escorting Murray out, they were attacked by a mob that
included outside activists, and she was left with a concussion and whiplash.”
Stanger was clearly
saddened by all of this. She had reviewed The Bell Curve and had prepared
tough questions that she never got to ask in front of an audience that was
listening. She told Braver: “It was this real group-think mob mentality where
people weren’t reading and thinking for themselves, but rather relying on other
people to tell them what to think.”
Murray and Stanger were
essentially told–forced–to “go play by themselves,” and this brought me back to
the suggestion that Facebook pages can be seen by some as private playgrounds
where new arrivals can be bullied and kicked to the curb when they don’t fall
into lockstep line. Shutting down. Shutting down. But…it doesn’t have to be this
way. We can shake the dust, put our shoes back on, and start in again with
respect for one another and a renewed determination to listen and learn.