Our leaders of late have tried selling us on the idea of “targeted” wars that kill scary bad guys but leave innocent children unscathed. That’s one reason we need periodic, horrific reminders that there is no such thing.
I remember one of the criticisms of Michael Moore’s Fahrenheit 9/11 was that he painted pre-invasion Iraq as a country of kite-flying children instead of a nation living under the iron fist of a nasty dictator. Of course the truth is that Iraq was BOTH things, we just made a collective decision to allow some of the former to die as a cost of ousting the latter.
My friend Randy tells so many horrific story’s of Vietnam. Having a nighttime fire fight and finding dead child soldiers in the morning. We have always been lied too.
Facebook isn’t an ISP, nor a monopoly. There are a million sites you can spout your opinions and post pics.
You can’t walk into a restaurant with no shoes. Some restaurants even require a dress code. Even grocery stores require shirts and shoes. None of these places are denying your ability to feed yourself, they just have some basic rules of conduct in order for you to acquire the food. Most places make you put on pants too.
These are different issues. If Facebook said, “You can’t post pics of Vietnamese kids.” That would be wrong. A “no nudity” rule is fine and completely different.
Using your gay cake as an example, one should be able to refuse a design of a cake because it is lewd or vulgar. They can’t refuse to make a cake because the person is gay, black, jewish, etc.
because the sheer scale of Facebook as a social network is close to monopolistic. So everything it starts dicking around with on the margins of social networking (especially media, news and advertising) has a whiff of trust about it.
My alternative is to not use it. I’m not trying to disparage you or anyone else that uses the site with that remark, but I really don’t understand that statement. (Yeah, OK, if it’s how you stay in contact with your family that’s moved across the country or whatnot, then I can at least understand that part, but … well, that’s actually similar to my situation, and I still won’t use the damned thing.)
Again, I’m not going to make a choice for someone else, but I don’t get expressing hatred for it, but using it anyway.
I use it because I’m a part of a very small minority. Facebook offers the most comprehensive state based groups for that. Also, if I didn’t exist on FB, my coworker would dig deeper looking for me. This way my “public” persona is nice, pg rated, and what they expect.
OK, so you apparently have a false front, just so nosy parkers will have something to find. I can kind of understand that, although mostly in a roundabout sort of way. I still don’t know why this would contribute to you using it – you could have a profile, but that doesn’t mean you have to … well, whatever it is people do when they’re “using” Facebook.
(One of my sweeties uses FB to keep up with their relatives who’ve moved out of our region, so that wasn’t exactly a random example. They still complain about so many things when using it, but can’t seem to wean themselves away from it. I don’t get that either.)
But at this point it’s like calling Donald Trump a liar.
who in their right mind would even bother checking?!
Facebook has power because everybody submits unto them. If you can’t refuse, then at least be aware of what you’re giving up and what what you’re feeding.
I can not understand why a naked women’s breast is so unacceptable, people
will march, write protest letters, etc. But if the breast is covered with
blood, NO Problem.
