Arguing on the Internet...like winning a box full of cat pee
There's a reason arguing on the Internet isn't an Olympic event
I DON'T CARE!" Harry yelled at them, snatching up a lunascope and throwing it into the fireplace. "I'VE HAD ENOUGH, I'VE SEEN ENOUGH, I WANT OUT, I WANT IT TO END, I DON'T CARE ANYMORE!"
"You do care," said Dumbledore. He had not flinched or made a single move to stop Harry demolishing his office. His expression was calm, almost detached. "You care so much you feel as though you will bleed to death with the pain of it.”
J.K. Rowling, Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix
Like many of us, I’ve earned a Ph.D. in Arguing on the Internet and learned enough to understand that your chances of success are roughly the same as having a long and happy marriage with a Russian mail-order bride.
Because of this, I’ve tried (not always successfully) to step away from online arguments in favor of slamming my forehead into a granite wall. Sure, I’ll have a headache and probably one helluva concussion, but at least that way, I can end things on my own terms.
So it was with no small amount of sadness that I witnessed a Facebook post of mine lead to a very heated argument and one person I’ve known as a friend for years in real life “unfriending” me.
I’m going to post the exchange to illustrate my point, but I’ll say to the people involved that this isn’t an attempt to embarrass or harass anyone. I’ve changed the identities (the male in the exchange is “H,” and the female is “B.”) to protect the innocent. I’m merely trying to illustrate the pointlessness of arguing online.
In this case, it was a Facebook post based on my Substack post, “Israel can't risk losing world support because of indiscriminate bombing and civilian casualties.” Yes, it’s a complicated subject, and many aren’t amenable to discussing the War in Gaza in a calm, rational tone.
Unfortunately, that proved to be true in this case.
So, here are the salient comments, with the names changed:
H: They can't afford to [Ed. Note: lose world support], but that doesn't mean they won't. It is always a mistake to underestimate the intransigent stupidity of people like Netanyahu (or, for that matter, Trump.)
Me: Too true.
B: You do know that there were civilian casualties when Hamas committed a terrorist attack on Israel on October 7, right?
H: You do know that Israel has now slaughtered 10 times as many innocent civilians, and then some, and are not one micrometer closer to ending Hamas, right?
No?
No, of course not. What am I saying ...
B: H, those numbers come from where?
B: H, I was just like you before October 7th. I'm glad I woke up.
H: Yes, nothing like being a vindictive, murderous racist to feel like you're fully justified before God and the Universe, is there?
After 9/11, we murdered more than 1,000,000 in Iraq. Damn, but didn't that work out for us "Good Guys"! Why, they all just love us over there! And the regimes we installed are perfect little puppets dancing to our every little whim, aren't they?
"Woke up" -- you redefine pathetic.
H: B -- The numbers are a matter of public record. For anyone who is not a drooling imbecile, all that is required is that they look. In your case, no amount of pointing will suffice.
And the numbers are more like 20 times: over 20,000 civilian casualties in Gaza to date. But you're not the sort of person who'd ever allow facts to interfere with your self-righteous wallowing, are you?
B: H, weird that they are such round numbers. You have a very odd definition of "facts."
B: I shouldn't be surprised that a man would think women lie about r*pe.
H: B -- Weird you are so bizarrely obtuse. I mean, seriously: how many flavors of st00pid are you, or is that an unfair question because it presupposes a finite number?
OF COURSE THE NUMBERS ARE ROUNDED. It isn't possible to get an exact count in the middle of a genocide.
The Nazis murdered 6,000,000 Jews in the Shoah. "Oh, those numbers are 'rounded'. How profoundly suspicious!" All the gods, how do you look at your reflection in the mirror and not vomit? (I already know the answer; it has to do with a complete absence of basic intelligence and decency.)
B: H, for someone with a PhD in philosophy, you certainly are vulgar.
It was shortly thereafter that I got a message from B on Facebook Messenger:
B: Are you going to let your friend H talk to me like that? I reported him to Facebook for harassment.
(I looked at the exchanges between the two and determined nothing would be gained by my taking sides or mediating this dispute. So, I posted a comment directed at both of them about “playing nice.” I didn’t want to get in the middle, but, in retrospect, I think I could’ve been more forceful in telling them to knock it off.)
Me: Do you think I'm getting in the middle of that? I think you're both out of line and need to retreat to your corners. Since when does arguing on Facebook solve anything?
B: Well, I'm not the one who got vulgar and disgusting and sexist. That was him.
(I knew when we lived in the same small town. My impression of her is that she’s always been somewhat reactive and far too quick to take offense. And she expects others to leap to her defense when she feels wronged.)
B: Neutrality always benefits the oppressor. Enjoy staying out of it.
B: I guess you and I are not really friends. Then. A friend would not let someone talk to their friend like that. Consider yourself unfriended.
I couldn’t take sides in this argument. I had no dog in this fight, and what would I have gained by leaping into the fray? What was at stake? What was there to be gained by either party? Should I have stepped in more forcefully?
Of course, I’ve been embroiled in plenty of silly online arguments like this. When you lose the face-to-face aspect of a conflict, it’s too easy to make things personal, hit RETURN, and send your opinion/retort/insult into the void. You feel righteous, and you can walk away feeling as if you’ve slayed a dragon…until you get a response that ratchets up your righteous anger even more.
And so the cycle continues….
There’s no way to win, of course. It’s like a tennis match where both players slam flaming forehands back and forth over the next endlessly. No one wins because there’s no way to declare victory. There’s no goal, no agreed-upon finish line, and no one ever wins match point…because there IS no match point.
I’m not too proud to admit that I’ve lost a couple of friends this way. It’s stupid and pointless. Sometimes, you have to be the bigger person and stop responding. It’s not an easy thing to do, but it’s the mature thing to do, and once you’re able to convince yourself that it’s OK to step back and not respond, it feels pretty shitty at first, like you’re being a coward. There’s so much you want to say…BECAUSE SOMEONE’S BEING WRONG ON THE INTERNET.
Once you do it a few times, though, you begin to realize that the bigger person is the one who walks away from a fight. When someone tries to draw me in by calling me names or attempting to start an argument, I either don’t respond or block them altogether. It’s not easy; there are times when I feel the need to put a fool in their place, but then I stop to consider what might happen. What will it get me? Will it make me feel better? Will it make me a better person? Will I “win?” And what will “victory” achieve?
It’s the reason I haven’t been in a fight since fifth grade. I lost two fights, gave my fighting talents an honest assessment (my punches landed like marshmallows), and decided that wasn’t how I wanted to settle my disputes. I read a lot about the philosophy of non-violence (yes, in fifth grade) from people like Mahatma Gandhi and Martin Luther King, Jr., and decided that’s how I wanted to live.
That’s still a work in progress….
Of course, I didn’t completely give up on violence. I played contact sports and found that hitting people could be quite therapeutic, but that was a different animal altogether. There was a purpose, not malicious intent, to that kind of violence that made it easy for me to rationalize.
But fighting with the intent to damage another person merely for the sake of doing damage? That, for me, is a hard no. I decided that the bigger person was the one who walked away from a fight- despite the catcalls and scorn tossed their way. I wanted to be that person.
For me, online arguments carry the same meaning and weight as in-person fighting. There’s no point and nothing to gain, so I’ll walk away. I only feel humiliated if I accept it as such, which I never do. I know why I do what I do, and that’s enough for me.
Besides, why would I care what someone I’ve never met, never will, and wouldn’t recognize if they walked by me on the street carrying an AR-15 thinks of me?
Did I lose a friend from this episode? Perhaps, but then again, someone who’d behave toward me in such a reactionary and immature manner isn’t much of a friend. I can understand being angry, but to assume that I’m automatically going to jump into an argument I have no dog in and defend her is as childish and entitled as it is absurd and unrealistic.
Could I have handled this episode better and/or more effectively? Could I have done better than offering a lame “play nice” admonition to the people involved? Perhaps. It wasn’t my argument, and I probably only would’ve made things worse, but I wonder if there might’ve been something I could’ve done to short-circuit the hostility and recriminations.
This whole episode was absurd, and I don’t mean that as a judgment against the people involved; Lord knows I’ve had my share of online arguments, and I’m hardly in a place to judge. I have my opinions, but I’ll maintain my own counsel on this one.
None of this needed to happen, nor should it have. I’m going to consider this a learning experience. I didn’t start the fight, nor did I finish it. But it did remind me of the lessons I’ve learned along the way and how important they’ve become to me.
Then again, if y’all want to argue and insult one another, I’m not here to stop you. Just don’t expect me to jump in and take sides. And please don’t do it on my turf.
Thus endeth today’s public service announcement….
(All of my posts are now public. Any reader financial support will be considered pledges- support that’s greatly appreciated but not required to get to all of my work. I’ll trust my readers to determine if my work is worthy of their financial support and at what level. To those who do offer their support, thank you. It means more than you know.)