Please Stop Clicking That Link (Or, The Very Public Face of... You pt. 2)

Several years ago, I had a bad week. I had joined a charitable organization, found myself overwhelmed and unable to contribute, and tried to make a graceful exit. And things went sideways. After a lot of thought, I blogged about it.

I was angry. I received some bad treatment at the hands of some one I had trusted. So, I outed that person. I shared - in anger - the things that person said, and the things I had said. That person had made some racist comments, and I called that person out. In anger. Because poor treatment and racism make me angry.

Funny/sad thing is, it's one of my most popular posts. I keep hoping that it'll fall into obscurity, like my other posts. But the stupid thing is in my top-ten for any given month, and it's been my second-most-seen post of all time for years, beaten only by a knitting pattern.

So, when I was playing with my blog layout, I took that into consideration. Should I use a side-bar with my top-five? Should I just go delete that post? Is there anything in it I should be ashamed of?

I keep thinking about it, though. I T.H.I.N.K. Was the post True? Yes. Was it Helpful? Maybe, as a cautionary tale. Was it Illegal? Certainly not. Was it Necessary? So much of the internet isn't necessary. It was necessary for me to vent at the time that I wrote it. Was it Kind? No, but being a Dr. Who fan, I aim for "never cruel nor cowardly." I'm not sure I even want to aim for "always kind."

I could delete it... but nothing you put on the internet is ever truly gone. It would exist somewhere. Besides, it is a part of me. I really did that. It was me. Not my finest moment, but also not my worst (I don't put those on the internet).

I decided to put the top-five posts this month on the blog and hope that puppy stays down around 7 or 8. I won't hide from a years-old moment of questionable judgement. If I'm ever a presidential candidate, I'm sure some one will bring that up (unless they can dig up my really good dirt). Until then, please stop clicking that link.

Edit: Part 1 of The Very Public Face of... You was about marketing and privacy.

On Accidental Saints and Made For Goodness - Week 2

On Perfection

I have to say, Nadia's chapter where she talked about the expectations of others really spoke to me. She said, "Maybe it's not only the leaders who think they should be perfect; maybe it's also their followers who expect them to have it all together."

I am totally guilty of this. Like, all-the-time guilty. I have high expectations of myself, and high expectations of others. I tend to know my friends well enough to love them and their imperfections. I love their snarky-ness, their sarcasm, their occasional falling-apart. I identify with all those things, and I do them myself. I know we're not perfect.

But I expect my leaders - in family, in church, at work - to be always forgiving, never snarky, never falling-apart. At least, not when I'm around. I have some amends to make, and I'll make them in person.

Desmond Tutu again echoes her: "As human beings, we hear in the command to be perfect a demand for flawlessness. But flawlessness is not the goal of God's invitation. ... Godly perfection is not flawlessness. Godly perfection is wholeness." I love him for saying this. I guess I have some work to do.

Desmond Tutu talks about practicing being good. He talks about how God gave us choice, but the choice really is ours, and it does take practice. I have to admit, this really confused me. Last week, he was saying that being good is something we are, not something we do, and now he's saying that we have to practice being good.

Not the Blessing

The other thing Nadia said that really struck me, was when she talked about how we are not the blessing that is bestowed upon others. I'm guilty of this one, too. Thinking that I will magnanimously step down from my ivory tower and bless people with my presence or my works. She points out that we are all both needy and needs-meeters. It was a difficult concept to wrap my head around. I think she's also saying that experiencing the need and the meeting of that need is to experience Jesus. It's not in the being needy or in the generosity - it's in the communion.

The Discussion Questions

1. 1. What is your Nineveh? Has God ever moved you to confront that thing, person, or event that you would rather avoid? What happened, and how did it feel?
   
   Not so much, on this one. I would say that the closest it comes is at work. As a team-lead, I was a great coach, mentor, cheer-leader. But I wasn't good at giving negative feedback or conducting sessions where I had to counsel someone on poor performance. I had to do it, and it felt awful. I'm still much better at "A for effort!" than I am at "these are the expectations. Let's find a way for you to start meeting them."
   
   
2. Have you ever felt like you were someone's "project" - as if they were trying to "minister" to you, yet somehow were serving themselves? How did it feel? Why is it so difficult for us to give to others without becoming self-important?
   
   Again, not so much. I've definitely been on the other side of that - believing that I could lead a youth group (I don't even like kids!) because I was young and energetic (I was) and I understood teenagers (nope. Not even when I was one). It was a gift I didn't and don't possess, and I failed miserably. I think we do better at ministration when it's in a way that comes more naturally.
   
   
3. (Summarizing) When you were young, did you believe that Godliness meant following a list of prohibitions? ...Has that rules-based messaging affected how you live and feel as an adult? Is there such a thing as "Godly living"? Is the lifestyle and personality of the Christian the primary focus of faith?
   
   Oh, yes. Christians don't smoke, drink, smoke pot, swear, have pre-marital sex. I know now those things aren't true, but when I was a teenager, I vacillated between believing that we are saved by faith and that we are saved by works. When I thought we are saved by works, I was super-puritan. When I thought we are saved by faith, I took it as a free pass - I'm already saved, I can do whatever the hell I want. Now, I think it's both. I do still believe that we should aim for a lifestyle that treats ourselves and those around us well. I know that as sinners, we'll fall short. But I do believe we should be trying.

Stop Using That Hashtag

Victim Equaling

You probably already know what a "topper" is. Whatever you say, they've done it better, gotten a bigger one, done it more, or had it worse.

Victim-topping is this thing I see on the internet lately, and it's not so much topping, as it is "equaling." If you were at a party, it'd go like this: You say, "Thank God someone brought a veggie platter. I'm deathly allergic to peanuts, and they are in everything!" And they say, "Yeah, I'm a vegan. We should all demand more choices from our grocer."

The way it plays out in the internet, is there's some movement and a counter-movement. The thing is, we have movements for a reason: The status quo isn't getting it for some people. In order to change the status quo, a movement is born.

The #BlackLivesMatter movement is a good example of a movement with a counter-movement. This movement draws attention to "the ways in which Black people are intentionally left powerless at the hands of the state."

That Other Hashtag is a Straw Man Argument

The counter-movement, All Lives Matter, is a straw man argument that seeks to reinforce the status quo. In this day and age, we can pretty much agree that all lives matter. Hence the straw man part. No one is going to disagree with you on that one. No one was even making that argument.

By saying "all lives matter," you're seeking to diminish the power of the request for change by changing the focus of the argument. You're working to halt the change others depend on by reinforcing the status quo.

A Constructionist Reading

When you use that other hashtag, you're using the same well-recognized format as #blacklivesmatter, which draws a comparison between the two. "All lives matter" would have no meaning without the association to Black Lives Matter. By saying "all lives matter," you aren't drawing attention to a specific problem, you're just muddying the water. Because of this association, you're drawing a comparison which brushes aside the problem Black Lives Matter tries to address; you're making room at the party for a lesser problem.

Let me just clarify here. You're probably enraged, so let me clarify. When I say "lesser problem," I'm talking about the size of the problem in terms of number of victims and the rate of victims. When compared to white people, African Americans have it much worse in the justice system. They suffer more at the hands of the state and within the system in which we all live. I'm not interested in arguing statistics. That's not what this post is about.

Lastly, I'd like to remind you that Black Lives Matter is not a zero-sum game. A system that treats black people fairly won't suddenly turn on white people. More fair treatment does not necessitate the displacement of injustice from one group onto another group.

So, stop using that hash-tag. You're not helping anyone, and you're hurting some.

20151108 Update: edited to fix a typo.