X marks the Bluesky spot: Letter to the editor

@wwaycorrigan

I will concede, I believe Elon Musk's X is far from perfect. For one, dislike its verified-account approach. It's somewhat elitist.

Yet, the point of my letter, screenshot below and available via https://www.independent.ie/opinion/letters/letters-lets-honour-the-women-who-made-ireland-a-far-better-place/a203710178.html, still holds.

X marks the diversity spot.

It's war alright, but not as we know it

*Click here for an audio version of this blog entry.
In my previous blog entry, I wrote about the possibility of the current cold war between China and the US heating up and how it could bring biological warfare to a new, devastating level.

In light of the deep ideological differences between the two superpowers coupled with the almost daily jibes being exchanged, it's not that difficult to imagine a casus belli. 

A more optimistic take is that, as was the case for Cold War I, while they might reach the precipice, neither side will take the plunge to destruction. Not directly anyway.

The front line of today's war; nobody is safe. (Photo by Andri from pexels.com.)

Waging cyberwar

The USSR-US stand-off was characterised by many proxy wars — Latin America saw its fair share of bloodshed in this regard — so at the very least we can expect something similar in Cold War II. Again, though, the shape of them will most likely be quite different from the battles fought in the 20th century.

In fact, online electoral interference by Russian actors, state-sponsored as it is seen to be, gives us an idea of the clandestine proxy conflicts to come.

Rather than directly or indirectly fight each other, the belligerents will attempt to deepen divides in enemy territory to fuel ongoing internal strife and instability. War on the cheap for the instigator. It's also relatively low-risk with potentially high rewards.

In the US particularly, from the outside looking in, it appears not merely a case of the seeds for division having been planted, they've sprouted and are already in bloom in many respects, thanks in no small part to the media. 

For pretty much every issue, consensus is out, contestation is in. An insignificant spark is all that's needed to set off the warring factions.

The media, both traditional and new-age, amplify any divisions by a considerable amount, while in some instances they create them where none really exist. 

On the ground, the differences are often much less pronounced than they are made out to be. This gives some cause for hope. (Take a week's break from Facebook, Twitter and the media in general and there's a big chance you'll become more relaxed.)

Be that as it may, two-form media manipulation is as strong as it's ever been. There's manipulation of the media itself by outside forces as well as the media's own malignant influence on the people it speaks to.

On the first of those, in terms of superpower conflict, we're already in a hot war and have been for some time. 

From a Western perspective, this is relayed to us, as mentioned above, in terms of Russian interference. 

No doubt it's a two-way street, perhaps done more overtly than covertly by the West, as in public denunciations of the dirty tactics from conniving Eastern powers, while at the same time, we must assume, playing them at their own game.

'At this remove, the thinking must be that the West can be crushed by the very things it holds dear — its open society and liberalism.'

However, considering the more muzzled media in the likes of China and Russia compared to the West, interference by the latter on the former in this sphere is unlikely to be too effective.

Now, the fact that we hear dissenting voices and have verbal battles over the best course of action for a given situation is in itself not a bad thing. It's what liberal democracies with a free (in name anyway) press are all about. In normal times, this works fairly well.

Problems arise when our leaders look to unite the citizens behind a cause, especially an emotive one that is, literally, a question of life or death. This is what we're seeing right now with the coronavirus. The divide it has created brings to mind the old aphorism, 'One man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter.'

Comedown from a liberal high

In one sense, it's an inevitable product of an open, literate society replete with multiple sources of information available to the masses. If we lived under an authoritarian regime there would really only be one narrative. Thankfully, we're not subject to that — yet.

Moreover, deciphering what is #FakeNews from genuine information isn't easy in this particular conflict. 

There isn't even agreement amongst those best qualified to speak on the matter, so little wonder many lay folk, Google at hand, have serious doubts about debatable decisions being taken for 'our own health and well-being'.

As I wrote about previously, the approach to dealing with coronavirus isn't a simple black-and-white issue. It's not, as some like to make it out to be, a dollars-versus-lives decision. 

It's fair to say most agree that measures taken to stop coronavirus at all costs, to prevent premature deaths due to the virus in the here and now will have knock-on, adverse effects for some time to come.

Thus, while we can unite behind this common microscopic enemy to the extent that pretty much everybody wants it to go away — or, in the likelihood that it doesn't disappear any time soon, that it becomes less a burden on us than it currently is — we're far from united on how best to achieve this. (With such differences of opinion it's easy to understand why controlling the flow of information becomes such an attractive option for those in power.)

We can only assume that this makes for pleasant viewing for the monolithic systems in Beijing and, to a lesser extent, Moscow. At this remove, the thinking must be that the West can be crushed by the very things it holds dear — its open society and liberalism.

So have we given our worker ants access to too much information to the point that they're now harming the system itself?

Answering in the affirmative, it can be said we've already reached peak liberalism and operating at such heights has made us become lightheaded. 

It's far from clear as to the best route down to a safer level, if one exists that is.
_______________________________________________________
Listen to Wrong Way's Colombia Cast podcast here.

Facebook: Wrong Way Corrigan — The Blog & IQuiz "The Bogotá Pub Quiz". 

Wonder women

I recently received a somewhat fitting, reassuring reminder from Twitter (see image below). It was a notification informing me that my report of behaviour unbecoming from a particular user was deemed to be a rule violation under "hateful conduct".

A virtual slap on the wrist. That'll surely teach her! 

This nasty episode happened quite some time ago that I can't fully remember exactly what the woman in question — @NanaMGNS is the handle, very much a former friend/acquaintance now — wrote but she basically went on a virtual tirade, calling me a misogynist (and then some) following a tweet I posted. (Unfortunately, Twitter doesn't provide the tweets in question when giving its response to complaints.)

"They say what they like about the other 'side' and this must go uncontested. This is their version of 'equality'."

From what I recall, my tweet was in relation to an incident I'd had with a Colombiana, in a dating sense I think. 

It was probably along the lines of previous blog posts where I've detailed what I see as some common traits in women I've encountered in these parts. See A prostitute by any other name or Ignoring is bliss for an idea of where I'm coming from in this regard.

Radical logic

The offending, nay offensive, woman, a radical feminist by all accounts, took umbrage at the line I was taking. 

Contrary to what she seemed to believe, however, I wasn't having a go at all woman. I was merely commenting on experiences with, on this occasion, one particular individual whose conduct I'd also witnessed in some other Latinas.

Again, not all that is to say, but some, and enough to notice a connection among such types. My bad luck that I keep meeting them. Or kept meeting them really; I'm largely managing to avoid them these days. 

So this was my perspective on real events that happened to me. I wasn't making it up or just trying to have a cheap, unsolicited shot.

I say this notification from Twitter labelling @NanaMGNS's comments as "hateful conduct" is reassuring because in terms of verbal or written attacks against men by women these days the general attitude is to laugh it off. To lap it up even. "Sure you're a man! Suck it up lad, grow a pair."

Fair enough, I guess we are the stronger sex. 

Oh no, wait, isn't that the thing these radical feminists are raging against? We're only the stronger sex when it suits their narrative to say so. 

And how dare a man comment about women in the first place. How discriminatory and sexist. Only women can talk about women. What's more, they can say what they like about men and it must go uncontested.

This is equality for 21st-century radicals, of all shapes and sizes. 'Careful now, don't nonchalantly refer to their shape or size. You might get yourself into trouble.'

"I do more practical stuff to help feminism than most feminists."

The thing is, I'm more on the side of the feminists and the quest for gender equality than the campaigners might care to imagine. 

For example, I pretty much demand 50-50 when it comes to paying bills. Or, on the rare occasion where my earnings are more than the woman I'm sharing time with, I suggest we pay the appropriate percentage based on our income.

For the first couple of dates I don't bother bringing assets and the like into it, I'm happy to let that slide at the start. One wouldn't want to over-complicate things.

'Equality on our terms'

I also don't go out of my way to be extra special with women on a day-to-day basis, that is to say, treat them any differently to men when it comes to engagements in the office or in public life (if a woman, um, takes advantage of me in a private setting, things could play out differently, closer to the way Mother [and Father et al., for equality's sake] Nature intended).

Unlike a lot of other men, especially here in the Latino world, I don't condescend or patronise.

Yet, in the female-dominated advertising/marketing job I'm currently engaged in, I've been talked down to, indeed screamed at on one occasion for simply explaining, calmly, why the use of one English word worked better in a certain context over another, by a colleague who is of the not-so-fair sex, so to put it.

It's safe to assume that had it been the other way around, a man carrying on that way towards a woman, disciplinary procedures would have been instigated. But we're men, we're meant to take all of this on the chin whilst constantly being told how everything is fixed to our advantage.

For these radical feminists, it's a case of, 'be careful what you wish for'. Equality, "the state of being equal, especially in status, rights, or opportunities" to give it its dictionary definition, is just that.

What some women appear to be looking for is the complete subjugation of men. They might just find that the status quo in many liberal democracies is already tipped in their favour. If it goes any further, we could all tumble over the edge.
_____________
Facebook: Wrong Way Corrigan - The Blog & IQuiz "The Bogotá Pub Quiz".
Listen to The Colombia Cast podcast here.

We are what we tweet

In these social media times we live in, it seems that virtual reality has become reality. 

Or at least our smartphone updates have allowed those who read/view them to believe they know us and make judgements about us, even if they've only briefly met us or, indeed, have never met us at all.

'I tweet, therefore I am.'

Living in a social media world

Of course, social media profiling is not just a lonely layperson's pastime. Companies often check out the Facebook pages, tweets, Instagram photos and what have you of prospective employees to 'get a feel' for the person in question before saying yea or nay. 

In some cases, that may be pre-interview selection, thus a decision is taken on your personality or suitability before they've actually met you. At times that might be a good thing; on other occasions not so.

It does, nonetheless, beg the question: Does how we portray ourselves on social media accurately reflect how our real lives actually are?

We may post fairly honestly, but for the majority of us, these are just snapshots in time, brief moments detailing some particular aspect of our life that we feel is worthy of sharing. (Whether we should bother to share these things at all is a valid consideration; maybe those of us who do it will get over this phase as we come to terms with the continuously evolving social media landscape.)

The more mundane, everyday aspects of our lives usually aren't publicised — at least that's how it is for most people. It's a highlights package of sorts, and often a very skewed one.

Moreover, what is put out there is open to falsities and manipulation. Just as someone can lie to you about themselves in person, it can be done, but with greater ease, virtually.

In terms of on-line discussions — Facebook debates for example — there's the issue of tone and sentiment perhaps not coming across as intended by the writer. 

Linked to that, some people can write in a rather aggressive, argumentative manner when in reality they're big softies, so to put it. 'Virtual warriors, real-life sheep', one could say.

As has been posted on this blog before, all these social media outlets are just tools and, like any tool, they can be used in a productive way or improperly. 

A lot of the time user restraint is advised. Completely switching off from them may be almost impossible for some people in certain lines of work, but letting them dominate your life doesn't seem the best idea.

There is a real world out there, distinct from the social media one. It's not always the case that 'we are what we tweet', despite what some people may think.
______________________________________
Facebook: Wrong Way Corrigan - The Blog & IQuiz "The Bogotá Pub Quiz".

Respecting the hand(writing) of time

‘The pen is mightier than the sword.’ ‘Time is a great healer.’

They are two of the oldest sayings in the book and in many ways they complement and support each other. The result of using the sword is instant and, at its most effective, it generally doesn't allow the outcome to be modified.

Beware! Instant communication via smartphones. (Photo from Facebook.)

Healing hand/harmful hand

On the other hand, intelligent use of the pen, i.e. writing something with a clear head and thought, is physically less damaging than the barbaric sword and can be revised; or at least it’s not usually terminal.

In addition, it’s more time-consuming and can get you much better results in the long run. In this way, it's tied in with time and, depending on the circumstances, healing. Conversely, of course, it can be used to more devastating effect, depending on the author’s wishes.

The problem these days is that the pen has been replaced by the keyboard and keypad, linked to the World Wide Web, with the latter's multitude of ways of disseminating your message. Thus, the old time advantage, insofar as allowing for review and reflection, is wiped out.

For sure, in many aspects, instant communication can not only be advantageous but it can also be a lifesaver. It can be extremely efficient as well, especially in work environments. However, in other instances, it is damaging and dangerous.

We've seen numerous examples where the careers of influential people have been tarnished or ended by publishing things on social media that on 'mature reflection' they should never have uttered, or at least made public knowledge.

Nonetheless, our 21st-century communication tools are just that – tools. And like all such things, how they are used and/or abused depends largely on the human being operating them.

Just because you have the means to immediately respond to or comment on something, doesn’t mean you must – this is obviously more pertinent when the context is a negative or attacking one. Some people (and this writer has been guilty in this regard), though, just can’t resist. A virtual swipe of the sword, carried out with little forethought.

Nice birdie; but it can bite ... (Image from Facebook.)

Writing under the influence 

Such actions are normally much worse if done ‘under the influence’. Indeed, in the same way that you shouldn’t drive when drunk, it would be a good idea for many to avoid means of communication – real as well as virtual in some cases – when inebriated.

Now, in mitigation, you do have the old nursery rhyme, ‘Sticks and stones may break my bones but names will never hurt me.’ Should we really let a few ill-advised comments, in whatever form they come, offend us? Judge people by their actions rather than their words.

This, however, brings us back to the old pen trumping the sword. As mentioned above, the written (and spoken) word can and does cause harm, as much as it may seem, in a physical way in any case, silly to let it.

So just before you engage in your blitzkrieg-esque virtual written warfare, pause for a moment, take a long walk if needs be. And remember, some things are better left unsent.
________________________________________
For a related piece, see Unsocial media.

I'm yelling Tinder

As we all know, in this life there are the haves and the have nots, something that has been well documented in various ways on this blog.* 

In what could be seen as a microcosm of that on some levels, there are those who have a smartphone and those who do not.

Time to yell 'Tinder'? (Image from Facebook.)

At the moment I fall into that latter category. The reasons for this are chiefly split between personal choice and, to a lesser extent, economic circumstances.

The fact that much of my work currently revolves around technology (whose doesn't?) or at least staring at a screen, in my downtime, of which there has been a lot of late, I like to try and remove myself from such things. 

Hence, heretofore at least, I've been pretty content with my basic phone or flechita (literally, 'little dart') as they call it in Colombia. My thinking has been that with that, people can call and text me if they need to and I can do likewise if I want to. No more, no less. 

For all other technology and social media related issues, I can use my laptop at specified times of the day. Who needs to have Facebook or Twitter by their side 24/7?

The simple life: A 'flechita'. (Photo from Phone Outlet.)

Indeed, one of my bugbears when one goes out to socialise in person these days, something I've touched on before, is that you'll find a host of people with their heads stuck in their smartphones, preferring to virtually interact with people rather than engage physically with the person next to them. Perhaps that just happens to me, though?

Nonetheless, I'm slowly beginning to think that it may be time to take the plunge and invest in a smartphone. 

From a work point of view, considering plenty of hours are lost commuting across Bogotá going from one class to the next, having a compact device/phone that would allow me to do some additional research and writing while in transit would be handy and probably time-saving. 

Of course, there is always the dar papaya risk in flashing your smartphone in public,** giving would-be robbers an even greater incentive to have a go at the rich (if only they knew) Westerner.

That aside, a more compelling reason to join the smartphone revolution, if some people's experiences are to be believed, is the dating application (or 'app' as they say) Tinder. 

According to those in the know, it's basically a sure-fire way of at least securing a one-night stand. 

Not only that but in Bogotá, for Western men in any case, what's on offer is of pretty decent quality – superficially anyway. I imagine that's replicated throughout Colombia.

So for single and, apparently, not-so-single people, Tinder is proving to be a great place to get that much-coveted hookup. Word on the (virtual) street is that it takes a lot of the tedious small talk out of the equation. Both parties can just cut to the chase.

Beyoncé: She'd get a swipe. (Photo from Facebook.)

Now, if 'the chase' is something you actually enjoy, then Tinder might leave you feeling a little empty – fish in a barrel kind of thing you might say. 

Yet, if you're tired of the games that some potential partners play after you've had an initial rendezvous, Tinder could be just what you need to avoid becoming frustrated.

Thus, maybe it's time for Wrong Way to delve into the smartphone world and see how those swanky 'haves' live. If it saves time and effort across a range of activities it could prove to be a valuable asset.

And as it is with all of these things, there's always an off button. That, however, might not be as easy to find on whoever you happen to pick up on Tinder.
____________________________________
*See last week's Chasing a star(bucks) for starters on that.

**To get the 'dar papaya' reference and meaning, read 'Dar papaya' - letting the guard down.