🐱 Why We Crave Internet Justice

  • 🏰 The Fediverse is up. If you know, you know.
  • Want to keep track of this thread?
    Accounts can bookmark posts, watch threads for updates, and jump back to where you stopped reading.
    Create account
CatParty


When I joined Twitter 14 years ago, I was living in Michigan’s Upper Peninsula, attending graduate school. I lived in a town of around 4,000 people, with few Black people or other people of color, not many queer people and not many writers. Online is where I found a community beyond my graduate school peers. I followed and met other emerging writers, many of whom remain my truest friends. I got to share opinions, join in on memes, celebrate people’s personal joys, process the news with others and partake in the collective effervescence of watching awards shows with thousands of strangers.
Something fundamental has changed since then. I don’t enjoy most social media anymore. I’ve felt this way for a while, but I’m loath to admit it.
Increasingly, I’ve felt that online engagement is fueled by the hopelessness many people feel when we consider the state of the world and the challenges we deal with in our day-to-day lives. Online spaces offer the hopeful fiction of a tangible cause and effect — an injustice answered by an immediate consequence. On Twitter, we can wield a small measure of power, avenge wrongs, punish villains, exalt the pure of heart.
In our quest for this simulacrum of justice, however, we have lost all sense of proportion and scale. We hold in equal contempt a war criminal and a fiction writer who too transparently borrows details from someone else’s life. It’s hard to calibrate how we engage or argue.
In real life, we are fearful Davids staring down seemingly omnipotent Goliaths: a Supreme Court poised to undermine abortion and civil rights; a patch of sea on fire from a gas leak; an incoherent but surprisingly effective attack on teaching children America’s real history; the dismantling of the Voting Rights Act; a man whom dozens of women have accused of sexual assault walking free on a technicality. At least online, we can tell ourselves that the power imbalances between us flatten. Suddenly, we are all Goliaths in the Valley of Elah.
It makes me uncomfortable to admit that I have some influence and power online, because it feels so foreign or, maybe, unlikely. My online following came slowly, and then all at once. For years, I had a couple hundred followers. Those numbers slowly inched up to a couple thousand. Then I wrote a couple of books, and blinked, and suddenly hundreds of thousands of people were seeing my tweets. Most of them appreciate my work, though they may disagree with my opinions. Some just hate me, as is their right, and they follow me to scavenge for evidence to support or intensify their enmity. Then there are those who harass me for all kinds of reasons — some aspect of my identity or my work or my presence in the world troubles their emotional waters.
After a while, the lines blur, and it’s not at all clear what friend or foe look like, or how we as humans should interact in this place. After being on the receiving end of enough aggression, everything starts to feel like an attack. Your skin thins until you have no defenses left. It becomes harder and harder to distinguish good-faith criticism from pettiness or cruelty. It becomes harder to disinvest from pointless arguments that have nothing at all to do with you. An experience that was once charming and fun becomes stressful and largely unpleasant. I don’t think I’m alone in feeling this way. We have all become hammers in search of nails.
One person makes a statement. Others take issue with some aspect of that statement. Or they make note of every circumstance the original statement did not account for. Or they misrepresent the original statement and extrapolate it to a broader issue in which they are deeply invested. Or they take a singular instance of something and conflate it with a massive cultural trend. Or they bring up something ridiculous that someone said more than a decade ago as confirmation of … who knows?
Or someone popular gets too close to the sun and suddenly can do nothing right. “Likes” are analyzed obsessively, as if clicking a button on social media is representative of an entire ideology. If a mistake is made, it becomes immediate proof of being beyond redemption. Or, if the person is held mildly accountable for a mistake, a chorus rends her or his garments in distress, decrying the inhumanity of “cancel culture.”
Every harm is treated as trauma. Vulnerability and difference are weaponized. People assume the worst intentions. Bad-faith arguments abound, presented with righteous bluster.
And these are the more reasonable online arguments. There is another category entirely of racists, homophobes, transphobes, xenophobes and other bigots who target the subjects of their ire relentlessly and are largely unchecked by the platforms enabling them. And then, of course, there are the straight-up trolls, gleefully wreaking havoc.
As someone who has been online for a long time, I have seen all kinds of ridiculous arguments and conversations. I have participated in all kinds of ridiculous arguments and conversations. Lately, I’ve been thinking that what drives so much of the anger and antagonism online is our helplessness offline. Online we want to be good, to do good, but despite these lofty moral aspirations, there is little generosity or patience, let alone human kindness. There is a desperate yearning for emotional safety. There is a desperate hope that if we all become perfect enough and demand the same perfection from others, there will be no more harm or suffering.
It is infuriating. It is also entirely understandable. Some days, as I am reading the news, I feel as if I am drowning. I think most of us do. At least online, we can use our voices and know they can be heard by someone.
It’s no wonder that we seek control and justice online. It’s no wonder that the tenor of online engagement has devolved so precipitously. It’s no wonder that some of us have grown weary of it.
I don’t regret the time I’ve spent on social media. I’ve met interesting people. I’ve had real-life adventures instigated by virtual relationships. I’ve been emboldened to challenge myself and grow as a person and, yes, clap back if you clap first.
But I have more of a life than I once did. I have a wife, a busy career, aging parents and a large family. I have more physical mobility and, in turn, more interest in being active and out in the world. I now spend most of my time with people who are not Very Online. When I talk to them about some weird or frustrating internet conflagration, they tend to look at me as if I am speaking a foreign language from a distant land. And I suppose, I am.
 
Humans have always craved blood, you just can't get it in the modern world. People used to get their kicks via public executions, the best they can do now is ruin your life.
 
I lived in a town of around 4,000 people, with few Black people or other people of color, not many queer people and not many writers.
Truly you were unique just like everyone else.
Online is where I found a community beyond my graduate school peers. I followed and met other emerging writers, many of whom remain my truest friends. I got to share opinions, join in on memes, celebrate people’s personal joys, process the news with others and partake in the collective effervescence of watching awards shows with thousands of strangers.
Yes, it is pretty easy to find a hug box via Twitter if you have the right leanings. Actually 14 years ago it was easy regardless of your leanings.
Increasingly, I’ve felt that online engagement is fueled by the hopelessness many people feel when we consider the state of the world and the challenges we deal with in our day-to-day lives. Online spaces offer the hopeful fiction of a tangible cause and effect — an injustice answered by an immediate consequence. On Twitter, we can wield a small measure of power, avenge wrongs, punish villains, exalt the pure of heart.
I am guessing that increase coincides with an increase in your use of social media and reluctance to engage with any ideas that might not drop that dopamine.

On Twitter, we can wield a small measure of power, avenge wrongs, punish villains, exalt the pure of heart.
Definitely a queer writer. Sweaty there is no one pure of heart and what concerns me is that you actually think that, in general, there are good guys and bad guys. The dumbass down the street with the Trump 2024 flag is not a bad guy and the dumbass with the Biden 2020 flag still flying is not a bad guy. They are people with differing views. Given my guess that this person has fallen completely into the echo chamber they do not see that at all.
In real life, we are fearful Davids staring down seemingly omnipotent Goliaths: a Supreme Court poised to undermine abortion and civil rights; a patch of sea on fire from a gas leak; an incoherent but surprisingly effective attack on teaching children America’s real history; the dismantling of the Voting Rights Act; a man whom dozens of women have accused of sexual assault walking free on a technicality. At least online, we can tell ourselves that the power imbalances between us flatten. Suddenly, we are all Goliaths in the Valley of Elah.
Okay first, it really bothers me that people still do this David and Goliath shit. David had a fucking sling. Unless Goliath was wearing a metal helmet he was getting doinked.

Abortion and civil rights
Abortion is not a right and no they are not undermining civil rights.
an incoherent but surprisingly effective attack on teaching children America’s real history
No it is pretty coherent and what is being taught is not America's 'real' history. For fucks sake they are using the 1619 project which is a work of fucking fiction.
the dismantling of the Voting Rights Act
Also not happening and given the now documented though still being ignored by the MSM discrepancies uncovered in Arizona securing the vote is absolutely necessary. I have a feeling this author is in for a bumpy ride.
a man whom dozens of women have accused of sexual assault walking free on a technicality
It was not a technicality. An incoming DA violated an agreement to not prosecute which got Cosby to say that yes at one point he gave women drugs and then faced a Judge who ran a kangaroo court.
Accusation does not equal guilt by the way.
At least online, we can tell ourselves that the power imbalances between us flatten. Suddenly, we are all Goliaths in the Valley of Elah.
Holy shit dude you realize Goliath was the bad guy in that story right?
After being on the receiving end of enough aggression, everything starts to feel like an attack. Your skin thins until you have no defenses left. It becomes harder and harder to distinguish good-faith criticism from pettiness or cruelty. It becomes harder to disinvest from pointless arguments that have nothing at all to do with you. An experience that was once charming and fun becomes stressful and largely unpleasant. I don’t think I’m alone in feeling this way. We have all become hammers in search of nails.
W1zk4ZF.png

I don't think I'm alone in feeling this way. We have all become hammers in search of nails.
A funny thing about junkies is they believe everyone else is a junkie as well. Alcoholics believe everyone goes home after the bar and polishes off a liter of Vodka at least until they either die or hit bottom and bounce.

Our hero is still floating ever downward.
Every harm is treated as trauma. Vulnerability and difference are weaponized. People assume the worst intentions. Bad-faith arguments abound, presented with righteous bluster.
That does not just happen online, squishy. I am also picking up lethal levels of righteous bluster in this opinion piece.
As someone who has been online for a long time, I have seen all kinds of ridiculous arguments and conversations. I have participated in all kinds of ridiculous arguments and conversations. Lately, I’ve been thinking that what drives so much of the anger and antagonism online is our helplessness offline.
This is called projection. Your anger online is fueled by your impotence offline. That does not mean everyone else's anger is or that what you claim is the anger of others is even anger. You seem to have a very difficult time moderating your own emotions and are therefore quite likely to misinterpret the emotions of others.
There is another category entirely of racists, homophobes, transphobes, xenophobes and other bigots who target the subjects of their ire relentlessly and are largely unchecked by the platforms enabling them.
I am going to bet that most of those you claim are racists, homophobes, transphobes, xenophobes, and other bigots are not actually those things they just will not agree with every whim to which you demand they bend. They also probably do not target anyone. They are probably replying to some stupidity someone spouted on social media and which platform are you referring to where any of those deplorable people are not swept the second they step out of line?

Why am I unsurprised someone who has spent 14+/- years building themselves into a hug box wants total censorship of speech they do not like?
It is infuriating. It is also entirely understandable. Some days, as I am reading the news, I feel as if I am drowning. I think most of us do. At least online, we can use our voices and know they can be heard by someone.
Stop reading the very paper that published this ridiculous monologue because it is designed to make you feel like you are drowning.
I think most of us do. At least online, we can use our voices and know they can be heard by someone.
This guy projects a lot. They, like most people of their ilk, lack the ability to say, "This is how I feel and it is how I feel." They have to constantly couch their opinions and feelings in what they imagine is the consensus. They do this because they are weak.
When I talk to them about some weird or frustrating internet conflagration, they tend to look at me as if I am speaking a foreign language from a distant land. And I suppose, I am.
No, you are probably speaking English you are just showing them your ass and most people do not want to see your ass. They are also probably not quite as indoctrinated as you and question your sanity and if they really enjoy time spent with you.

I would like to point out since OP did not link to the NYT that this is a NYT opinion piece that has some strong undertones encouraging censorship.

This person who gently feigns victim has been given a platform in the pages of one of the most read publications online or off on the planet

You are not a victim. You are not oppressed if you ever were as a black graduate student.

Stop fucking whining.

Oh fuck I just looked at the author of course it is this fucking lunatic:
roxygay.png
Roxanne Gay who has done very well for herself telling everyone what a victim she and every other black person is oh and did she mention she is bisexual? Oh right she is calling it queer now.

Oh look she has no self-control and has to mutilate herself to put the fork down what a role model.
selfcontrolissues.png

6'3 of grift.
 
Yep, poor Roxanne Gay has been oppressed her whole life. I mean, how dare her parents stop paying her rent when she turned 30.

Gay was born in Omaha, Nebraska[1] to parents of Haitian descent.[8] Her parents were relatively wealthy, supporting her through college and paying her rent until she was 30. Her mother was a stay-at-home mother and her father had a career as a civil engineer which required the Gay family to move often for work. Gay was raised Roman Catholic and spent her summers in Haiti.[9][10] She attended high school at Phillips Exeter Academy in New Hampshire.[11] Gay began writing essays as a teenager;[12] her work has been greatly influenced by a sexual assault she experienced at the age of 12 at the hands of her boyfriend and his friends.[13]
 
Back
Top Bottom