Sometimes I’ll be surfing social media as I do and I think to myself that I’m spending too much time on that shit. The amount of times I look at a tweet or thread and get annoyed sometimes gets to me because I should be above it all. It has a weird way of roping me in and I don’t know why because I see the same shit topics (if I speak the names, I might get in trouble at some point) being regurgitated with absolutely no intention of finding a solution, just argument after argument. The worst part is that the arguments are usually produced by people who can articulate themselves well but don’t actually say anything of substance.
It makes me wonder if people like saying things just to sound smart because when I talk to people in real life, I don’t hear anywhere near the amount of nonsense that I see on social media. People in real life (or at least the ones I’ve met) are able to speak sense without forcing the large vocabulary, for the most part on social media, I see buzzwords which evolve into bullshit think pieces and at their final form manage to find their way into hour long discussions on podcasts or YouTube videos and there’s always one constant. All the people involved aren’t actually saying anything.
I asked myself if maybe the case was that I didn’t understand what was being said and that’s why I felt this way, until I saw the same posts being copied word for word and posted on multiple accounts. There are a lot of things that I see which pop up regularly so I have the chance to digest what is being said more than once and regardless of whether there’s good vocabulary or not, it’s all nonsense. I remember one person speaking on Bruno Mars and what stood out to me is when they said that people valorise and exceptionalise his music because they like his patriarchy and commodification of blackness… I paraphrased it and I’ll post the link to the tweet so you can decide if it makes sense or if it’s waffle. Thinking about it, I’m sure one of those words isn’t even in the dictionary. (Tweet here)
I know that the currency on social media is likes (and retweets on Twitter) so people say things that they know will attract attention. I don’t think everybody truly believes the stuff they write but they’re so driven by having their posts make a huge impression that they’ll do anything. I hope at some point people stop pretending to sound smart, it’s played out, it’s corny and it makes more sense to come with facts that might prove said statements. I have to give props to those people who go on social media and mind their own business because they’re doing things right.
Sometimes blogging is confusing, if there’s one thing I’ve seen. It’s the ever present piece of advice that one of the best ways to take care of your blog is to constantly and consistently post. I understand the consistent part but the constant part doesn’t really sit right with me. It’s nice to know there are people who will read the things I post but for that reason, it makes constantly posting a hard task. After all, I don’t think it’s good practice to post for the sake of posting, the readers of a blog must be respected so it means they shouldn’t have to read posts written out of desperation.
Personally, I want to post at least once a month because I don’t like the idea of looking down the side of my blog and seeing that I’ve missed out one month. There may come a point where I have to give my streak up but that’s only if I really feel that I have nothing worth putting out there. Sometimes I feel like I’m being halfway lazy and I delete a post as I’m writing it because the readers deserve better and so does this blog (it’s a part of whatever legacy I leave when I’m finished). I could never see myself blogging a quick question time post to ask how many sugars people like in their tea or their favourite colour because it’s not interesting and I don’t care.
I see how constant blogging can work, but it can’t work for a blog like mine where I just post my thoughts on random stuff. When I first started blogging, I believed in constant posts, I think there was a short period where I posted every two days but that stuff got tiring and none of those posts were memorable. If I gained a fan base, I don’t think I could be the guy who blogs regularly because I’d lose it very quickly and I’ve never really thought about blogging actual news for engagement (unless it’s my take on a current event). What I’m saying is whilst constantly blogging is great advice it doesn’t seem as universal as consistently blogging (it might even be more obnoxious) which is why I don’t fully understand why it’s given as advice when it comes to maintaining a blog.
One good thing about advice on blogs is that it’s just that, it doesn’t have to be taken on board or you can adapt it, I pretty much do. Advice is useful but at the end of the day it’s not always going to be relatable.
Over the past few years, I’ve seen more people around my age talking about mental health. Growing up, I never heard mental health being talked about too much but that’s probably because I didn’t pay much attention to anything that wasn’t entertainment. It’s good to see that mental health is a topic being taken seriously because with some conditions, I feel like they are sometimes brushed aside due to people who don’t really understand them dealing with people who are battling mental health conditions. I’m not a mental health expert, so I’m not in a position to talk about how it affects people even though I know that it’s serious and that brings me to my point (question).
Looking at mental health on social media, does it shine a positive or negative spotlight on the subject? In real life, I don’t really hear people talking about their mental health very much, it might be something that the people I know don’t feel comfortable sharing however on social media it’s different. It’s kind of commonplace but with that comes a lot of takes which become popular and it gets me asking questions. The thing about social media is when there’s a trend, everybody wants to bandwagon and find a way to get attention so it makes it hard to see who’s being genuine. So many people have come online to say that they suffer from depression for example but as insensitive as it sounds, how do we know that a good number of them just haven’t gone through a rough patch where they were feeling down, looked on Google for a definition of depression and saw that just a small part of how they feel matches the definition? Showing a trait of something doesn’t necessarily mean that you suffer from it, does it? There’s no doubt that people go through things which damage their mental state but I do question if all the people who claim to deal with mental illness actually do. I don’t think it would be surprising to hear that people are self diagnosed which really takes away from the seriousness, as I said before, I’m not a mental health expert but I think a lot goes in discovering if you’re dealing with mental health issues, even if they’re mild.
The bandwagon nature of social media doesn’t get me thinking near as much as people who do threads on mental health awareness, pointing out behaviours that might influence mental health disorders in others only to U turn a day (sometimes weeks or months) later and engage in the behaviours they were shaming. This is why I ask about social media and mental health, because as much as it seems that people are taking the time to educate and bring awareness, it also feels as if it’s being done by people who have no understanding of it. The fact that there’s a place in society for people to talk about mental health is good thing and it’s the kind of progressive that I like to see but given how social media is, it allows anybody to speak their piece and it doesn’t necessarily mean by speaking on it, they’re doing it justice.
I lean more to the negative side when it comes to my question and part of it is because I can’t help but feel that there a lot of people who are going through mental health issues that don’t think social media can help when looking at it. Social media will never give you the full scope of something, there’s also an attitude where people take a concept and run with it as soon as they see enough that supports what they want to think on it. At the end of the day, the people who know what they’re talking about when it comes to the subject are able to use social media as a platform so it’s possible that I don’t pay attention to them but it’s hard to find them amongst the people I’ve described.
Not too long ago a rapper called XXXTentacion died and pretty much as soon as the death was announced, social media split into two sides (as it likes to do with so many subjects), those who were happy to hear that he was dead and those who weren’t. It was interesting to see the response to his death because it made me realise how many sociopaths are hiding in plain sight on Twitter, my feeling towards it was that this subject is a grey area.
One of XXXTentacion’s most well known moments was when the news of him domestically abusing his then girlfriend came to light and it showed that he was a very fucked up person (or at least did some very fucked up things) and that is the basis a lot of people are using to justify being happy at his death. Domestic abuse is never acceptable but neither is being happy at someone being murdered. It’s a weird one in his case because the world doesn’t need domestic abusers but what does it say about the people who ignore the rest of his life and focus on that one thing? (which supposedly never happened). A lot of people in hip-hop have been known to engage in domestic abuse and are still loved so does this make it a situation where people were looking for a reason not to like XXXTentacion and that incident is was they were waiting for? When it comes to the reaction surrounding the death it’s interesting because of the talking points.
I said earlier that being happy at someone’s death is unacceptable but what if somebody is known to do something despicable? There are so many kinds of people in the world who aren’t needed and to know that when they die, a little bit of the evil dies with them can be seen as a cause for celebration. It doesn’t fix the problem but at least you know that said person won’t be making anybody else suffer. I know that I have my prejudices and if I saw a well known pedophile die, I wouldn’t feel anything for them, I’d be happy that they can’t commit that action anymore however, I don’t know if I would happy to hear that they’re dead. It almost seems pure to be happy at hearing that somebody who did something terrible has died but the act of being happy that somebody is dead isn’t actually any better even the reason can somewhat be justified.
There’s something about the act of expressing happiness at someone’s death that doesn’t sit right with me. You don’t have to like the person and you don’t have to be sad but it just makes more sense to move past it whilst letting the others who cared for said person mourn. I’d go as far to say that if people wanted to say something like ‘fuck that person’ even though they’re dead, I don’t think it would be necessarily bad because the evil that they’ve done has justified the anger that’s held towards the person but being happy that someone has lost their life is something different.
It’s always easy to say things on social media, that wouldn’t be said in real life but it’s probably because the relationship is impersonal which is why people can casually express sociopathic traits. If it was a relative, I wonder if people would be saying the same things? Personally, I hope that the next time I see social media reacting to someone’s death, it won’t be anything like how they reacted to XXXTentacion.
You’re at a gathering in the park, the sun is beaming on a 27 degree day (this is very hot for the UK) and everybody there is doing the drugs, dancing to music or talking to each other. The vibe is calm and you’re most likely wondering why there’s no BBQ, well guess what? There is. The social atmosphere surrounding the park has got you talking to everybody so you strike up a conversation with an interesting looking person and who could imagine that the passion that they have for their dreams matches yours, there’s a connection which signals the makings of a long lasting friendship. You ask them “what do you with yourself?” anxiously waiting for the answer so the conversation can continue for you to find out more about them and 5,4,3,2,1 “I’m a creative…”, you blatantly mouth out “what the fuck!?” and they see you do it as the situation begins to grow awkward because you have nowhere to go from that point.
It probably doesn’t go like that for most but when it comes to me, I have to ask what is a creative? I see so many people around my age group branding themselves as creatives and I don’t get it. I’ve always believed that creative is a quality, not a job title so when people do things, even if they’re hobbies, the term creative simply doesn’t work. It almost seems like someone who brands themselves as a creative does so because they don’t want to say what exactly it is they do but the thing is, nobody is obligated to share what they do with others and there are more effective ways of dancing past that subject in my opinion. What I’ve just wrote may not be the case but if somebody does something in the creative field, surely it makes more sense to just say what it is, if you write, then you’re a writer, if you draw then you’re an artist not this business of using an umbrella term that just about means something.
There are a lot of things that make me wonder about people my age. When I look on social media it looks like we’re all trying to be a part of something, we’re all trying to make ourselves seem grander than we are so we start giving ourselves titles. I can’t say how many people there are who sell shirts and call themselves CEO’s, the amount of people who make YouTube videos and start referring to themselves as social media influencers, the amount of people who start writing raps and calling themselves executive lyricists (I made the last one up). The title sounds cool but it doesn’t really add anything, I can’t think of an upside of referring to yourself that way.
There’s a side to this “I’m a creative” stuff that I’m not seeing and I would like to understand it. No matter how much I’ve thought about it from my point of view, I can’t help but feel that it’s a pompous way for someone to describe themselves. I’m not going to lie, I really don’t like the term and when someone describes themselves as a creative, I just want to switch off. If being a creative means something beyond the quality then I’d like to know so that I can make sense of it. Truth be told, even if I do ever understand what that term means, I know for a fact that I’ll never refer to anybody as one, but still that doesn’t stop from wanting to know what it means.
The other day, I saw a fight and I’m going to be honest, one of the people involved looked like he was getting rocked UFC style. It all seemed to happen in slow motion because he couldn’t find his balance but he was eating those fists. I’m surprised he didn’t get injured a lot more because it was definitely a four on one but that’s not the point. A lot of people stood watching the fight and one person walked past saying “It’s funny how no one wants to call the police.” She left and the person next to me asked why she couldn’t do that and he brought up a very valid point.
I can’t stand virtue signallers, always pretending to take the moral high ground in order to show that they have the wellbeing of others in mind yet when it comes down to the actual thing, they’re just as idle as those who aren’t signalling. I don’t understand what people gain from pretending to care, actions will always speak louder than words so if you don’t follow through, then are you really in the right for calling people out on not doing what you supposedly think is the right thing to do? People aren’t perfect and humans won’t always have the right response in a situation but we can definitely call bullshit on someone who also doesn’t have the right response but wants to seem like they do, so it’s easier just to not do it.
Virtue signallers are on the same level as people who snap in the club pretending to enjoy their time just so that people can validate them. It’s all a facade, a crappy one at that and it does no favours for anybody, you’d think by now people see that kind of stuff as a waste of time but it seems to me as if more people are doing it and I know that I’ll never truly understand why. There are some situations that are hard to be truthful in but I don’t think they’re the ones where people virtue signal, it looks as if people just want to feed their egos when they do the whole virtue signalling thing and that’s fucking annoying.
Life isn’t a competition so there’s no need for anybody to really try and prove something only for it to be obvious that it means nothing to everyone involved. If you want to be an example you’ve got to lead by it, we’re told this God knows how many times.
When it comes to newspapers, we know that they have audiences they appeal to and they also have political sides that they like to take. It helps to explain why you see so many of the same kinds of people reading them, I don’t have a problem with that because being completely objective is impossible in my opinion. I do have an issue with the way that journalists write for a paper and what they’re willing to do in order to fit in with the narrative. The media is powerful and people who are involved in the media definitely understand the kind of power that they wield in their hands, I think anyone who gets involved in that industry realises that there’s a degree of power that they’re given and it doesn’t seem to matter as to whether you’re fair with your use of it or not.
If you know about the Daily Mail, then you know that they like certain kinds of people and there are others that they’re extremely willing to demonise. One person that the Daily Mail likes to point its gun at is Stormzy, a well known grime MC who’s not afraid to speak his mind. It goes further than that though, it’s not only the fact that they paint him in a bad light when he’s the focus of their articles but when it comes to people that he’s worked with who get in trouble, they’re very quick to mention his name as if he’s involved and that only helps to make him look worse. I doubt that the Daily Mail are going to stop but it got me thinking about how journalists don’t seem to feel any kind of way about tarnishing somebody else’s name just because it puts money in their pockets.
I get that in a professional environment, you have to put your personal feelings aside but when it comes to journalism it almost seems as if there’s a vendetta when journalists write about people on behalf of their paper. I kind of get that their hands are tied but if I’m being honest, I can’t respect it at all; I don’t like the whole idea of talking badly about someone that you personally have no problem with and the refusal to hold back when doing it, there’s such a lack of integrity in it. It can also have a deep effect on the subject of the article and the thing is that said person is the one who has to deal with the fall out whilst the journalist goes on living their life.
Wishing for just journalism is a dream, I don’t think it’s in the nature of it but I still feel like the reasons to practically take the identity of your paper to speak in a certain way of someone who might not even bother you aren’t really justified.
I’m interested in the word aura, I want to know what it means to people. When I first saw the word, it part of the name for an attack in Pokémon (and the move was kind of cool to be fair). I haven’t really done research into what an aura is and I don’t know if a dictionary definition can help me. So far, I’m assuming that it’s something to do with the energy that you put out (maybe it could be spiritual) but I want to be clearer in understanding it because I have some ideas of my own.
The thing that made me think about the word was a Jay Z interview that I came across not too long ago, and just watching the way he talked kind of gave me an indication as to what kind of character he is. It’s weird because I shouldn’t really know anybody from an interview, especially when they’re not really talking about themselves but sometimes you can watch someone and feel as if you’ve learned something about them just from watching their mannerisms (I hope this isn’t just me). Jay Z is very quiet person, I don’t think I’ve seen him speak on enough things to judge how insightful he is but I know that he commands respect (as long as you’re not one of those 2000’s kids who’s trying to force the idea that Beyoncé made him relevant). When it comes to music and possibly even issues concerning race from a celebrity standpoint, you could say that he’s an influential figure but the thing is that nobody officially put him there. There are a lot of people who want to be in that position (don’t believe me? search Twitter) but they’ll never have that kind of clout.
When I think about aura, part of why I’m not so clear on it is because I don’t think I can fully buy that it’s the energy you put out as I wrote before. I think it’s more to do with your presence, you know when you meet someone but you don’t even think for a second about sizing them up? (to be honest people shouldn’t be sizing others up anyway) I feel aura is more closely related to that. I feel it makes sense if it’s related to everything that surrounds you and how you’re received. There are definitely people out there who have strong personalities but the respect factor is lacking, but even weirder, it kind of makes sense why even if it can’t be explained. I think I’m basically describing an extension of a person, it’s not something that you actively control but they way it works will make you understand why some people are perceived the way that they are (I’m not even sure if this is making sense, I hope you get my point). Have you ever met someone that in hindsight you feel they didn’t deserve to get to know you, yet you entertained them for a long time? Their aura allows them to have that kind of stay in my opinion.
An aura could probably be felt through the television screen or a radio broadcast. I may just be getting it confused with perception because me viewing someone in one way doesn’t mean that others will view them in that way. It’s a good thing that it’s subjective because then I can get some ideas on what it might mean and with that being said, I’d appreciate it if you let me know what you think an aura is.
Cleaners are MVPs if I’m being honest. It’s such an underappreciated role and some people out there think that they’re better than others because those others are cleaners but that’s complete nonsense. I don’t know if there’s such a thing as a cleaner’s union because I feel they could really gain some clout if they managed to organise a cleaner’s strike. When I’m working, I see people drop so much crap on the floor without giving a single fuck as to who’s going to get rid of it. I can bet my paycheque that the same people who dirty up my workplace will come up to me or any of my colleagues complaining about how dirty the place is.
There are so many things that a cleaner has to deal with; food (which is sometimes chewed up), drinks, piss, vomit, blood and that’s only a part of it. Nobody likes the idea of cleaning up after the mess of others but when it comes down to others who have to clean up after them, all of a sudden it’s not so bad. I’m not sure how much it matters to people if cleaners want to see the shit that they leave behind or not and what makes it worse is that cleaners aren’t exactly in a position to refuse to do anything about it because most people will answer that it’s their job. Part of my job is to help people find their way home but if someone was to tell me that they wanted to get from point A to point B, then tell me that halfway between point A and B, they wanted to find a specific road, to go to a shop and ask me to find out when the shop closes, then come back from the shop with enough time to get to point B within 30 minutes of leaving point A, I’d tell them that they’re taking the piss. I kind of feel that if you can translate that to a cleaner’s role, that’s kind of what they’re going through.
Sometimes, when I’m walking around and I stare at the floor I get a little disgusted but it’s more due to the fact that people disrespect the purpose of the bin only to dirty up the floor that other people have to step on. Floors tend to get dirty but it doesn’t mean that people have to go into areas and purposely dirty them up just because they know that somebody else has to do with it.
Many times I’ve looked at the floor and other places and when I’ve seen what’s been left there, I tell myself that I’m not touching any of that crap. I’ll even admit that sometimes I’m a little thankful that if I do clean something up, it’s by choice. In all of this, I don’t think it would bother me as much if cleaners got paid well but they don’t. From what I know cleaners get paid minimum wage, which is something else that helps to show the regard that cleaners are held in, nobody has ever said it to me but the attitude almost seems to be that they’re expendable. Let’s be honest, cleaners aren’t expendable (at least in my opinion they aren’t) because there are a lot of people out there who aren’t willing to do any of things that they do on any given day, yet alone everyday for a living. Whenever we walk through buildings or streets aren’t stained with rubbish, we’ve got to give the credit where it’s due.