I've been in my head a lot lately. Thoughts have been swimming since the ever growing list of celebrity men committing sexual offenses of varying degrees. The spectrum is immense; things I never could have imagined were being done.
A movement took social media by storm, a hashtag movement (I've talked about the hashtag movement thing before). It was #MeToo. People were using it for solidarity with the women coming forward about being victimized by the celebrity men. The popularity of it was to reveal just how many women have fallen victim somewhere on the spectrum of offenses.
I didn't Facebook and Twitter post a #MeToo statement. As I thought about my life, I just wasn't sure that I experienced anything which made me feel like a victim in any kind of sexual way. So, I opted out of the hashtag activism this time.
As the #MeToo posts were flooding my social media, I did find myself questioning the validity of the person posting. In part, I guess I just couldn't imagine that that many people could possibly have experienced something #MeToo worthy. Also, I know some to be wolf criers who love social media. I'm sure some of you have those people in your lives. Those people who jump on a bandwagon and then cry wolf at the top of their lungs for the entire trip. Perhaps my cynicism is too strong, but crying wolf has been around for a long time and social media has taken it to a new level. I'm not anti the #MeToo movement, not at all. It just bothers me that some may hijack the hashtag which minimizes the value of those who really have a #MeToo story to tell.
If you're still with me and haven't decided to hate me for the previous paragraph, I do have some other stuff to say.
As the names of the accused started to roll out, our family was gut punched.
Shawn, Conner, and I have been huge Louis C.K. fans. Earlier this year, we had a family night out including dinner and than going to see Louis C.K. do his stand-up. It was a good time.
And then, months later, we are left with a giant WTF? and how could he possibly have done something so horrible? For me, I won't speak for them, I'm disgusted and done. I felt the apology was some kind of PR written bullshit.
Then, more names start to be revealed.
Early on in our relationship, just a few months, actually, a new radio network was launched. It was a progressive radio network, Air America. It was how Shawn and I first heard of Rachel Maddow and look where she is now! Another personality from the station was Al Franken. For me, his progressive politics were a bigger hit than his SNL career. Shawn and I connected through this. We bought Franken's books and even ended up seeing him at a book signing here in Denver. So many shows on the network were speaking to our progressive minds.
And.....now we're hearing the stories....of one...then two...then three and four....and five and six women coming out with stories of Franken's sexual offenses toward them. Again, I'm done. Again, the released statement sounds like such bullshit.
It's weird when you come to realize how much stock you put into the character of a celebrity of whom you are a fan only to have that stock's market crash.
Now, we jump to Matt Lauer. He's the latest to be added to the list of scumbags. However, I've always had a dislike for him. Something just didn't sit right with me. My douchebag radar must have gotten something right with this one.
The lesson I'm taking away from the revelation of his various sexual offenses is that sometimes you should read the comments' thread.
Now, typically, I've been trying to avoid reading comments on posts because it leads to anger and frustration that will not get resolved. Then, a bottle of Ativan later, I'm still trying to bring myself down. I would still say this is a good rule. It's especially helpful when reading articles and posts that have a huge following of strangers. But, thanks to Matt Lauer, I learned it can be helpful to read comments.
When the Lauer shit was hitting the fan, I found that I had many friends and "friends" (social media leads to a separation of sorts) in common when it came to a lack of surprise. Then, there was that one post.
I was scrolling through my news feed as one is wont to do on Facebook. I came upon a post from a "friend" regarding the Matt Lauer story and she said something about being surprised. So, since I wasn't surprised, I headed to the comments to say that I wasn't and I kind of pegged him (not in the way he probably is into) for that kind of pig. As I was heading down to comment, some previous comments caught my eye. Now, I knew the "friend" was conservative, but I still managed to be surprised by some of her friends (they seemed like the kind not in quotes). It was a mix of statements about how this needs to stop; it's getting out of control; stuff is probably made up; these men are being ruined; accused people shouldn't lose their jobs unless the accusations are confirmed; strong women can handle these things. SKREEEEEEECH! Hold on a second! Let me back up and see if that was really there. Yep. Strong women.
In my greatest moment of comment war self-control, a stopped myself from commenting. Now, you may think I should not have backed out and that I should have set that person straight. Believe me, I wanted to at first. But, I was reading a sea of comments that showed me that I had no chance of making an impact. Yes, I wanted to leave the proverbial two cents, but I could tell my two cents wouldn't be received very well. In comment conversations/wars, seldom does anyone give a penny, take a penny like at the counter at the gas station. Everyone just tosses their pennies out all willy-nilly.
In the end, I opted for un-friending that "friend" like I've un-fanned those celebrities.
How can you be upset that your friend's friends were saying things like "it's probably made up" when you admitted that you were skeptical of women that posted #MeToo. Isn't that the same thing? By doubting whether or not these women were telling the truth, you were actovely validating the men.
ReplyDeleteThe difference here is that Meg is questioning the motivations of people that she knows to be attention-seekers and bandwagon-jumpers, whereas the friend's friends are making a blanket statement about people they don't know.
DeleteAlso, Meg is voicing some suspicion about vague hashtags, not actually accusing women of having made up specific claims.
I think Meg's comments are more about the bandwagon affect of hashtag campaigns than anything.
The hashtag skepticism comes from knowing some people who regularly claim to have things that happen to be trending. People who, in all seriousness, are about one feigned disease away from being diagnosed with Munchausen Syndrome or Munchausen Syndrome by Proxy. They are people who one better everyone when hearing another’s life story; sicker than sick; poorer than poor; abused more than abused; bullied more than bullied. Everything you have, they have worse. I’m talking about people who use a hashtag with a vigorous wave of the hand to say, “LOOK AT ME!”
DeleteThe women coming out with their accusations aren’t eager for the attention. They are taking a very serious risk by coming forward. They have gone beyond the hashtag because they knew it was time to break their silence.
And there is the difference.