Corona Conundrums

It takes a moment to process that it has been nearly a year since the <bleep> hit the fan, and we were all herded indoors. 

Beforehand, I would have thought that if I had an infinite amount of time at my disposal, I would become more productive. Photos would be organized. Bathrooms would be sparkling. Sleep would be paramount. Blogs would be updated regularly.

However, none of those things have happened. In an existence without structure, photos are ignored, bathrooms are oft neglected, sleep is meh, and blogs get overlooked. 

Or maybe, in this lockdown, I have little to report and comment on? Socializing has been outlawed (although I do admit I didn't do much of it in the first place). Newspapers merely shriek that the end is nigh (not much in the way of observations of the human condition).

Baruch Hashem, with the arrival of the vaccine, this upside-down time will, mit Gutt's helf, be ending, eventually. 

And perhaps, then I will be able to blog again, properly. 

TGIF

You Shall Not PASS!

In crime shows, it's fun to see the computer mastermind exposed. Usually the perpetrator is a lonely youngster, ignored by the popular girls, and he can pretend to be whatever he wants as he slouches over the keyboard. 

Trolls. I am happy to report that my comment feed has been violated only rarely by such sad, sad people. For that is how I see them: Sad, sad people. 

It is simply cowardice. While trolling, there is no accountability. If admired peers were present, trolls wouldn't type like that. It's a cheap attempt to boost oneself by bringing others down. 

But even as they mindlessly fling out insults to alleviate their own feelings of misery and powerlessness, those off-the-cuff remarks can do damage.

Stephanie Rosenbloom's "Dealing With Digital Cruelty" cites professional advice for how to navigate internet nastiness.

One way to become proactive is to ask yourself if those barbs you can’t seem to shrug off have an element of truth. (Glaringly malicious posts can be dismissed.) If the answer is yes, Professor Suler has some advice:

Let your critics be your gurus.

“You can treat them as an opportunity,” he said. Ask yourself why you’re ruminating on a comment. “Why does it bother you?” Professor Suler said. “What insecurities are being activated in you?”

I was not particularly taken with this counsel, since I would be spending way more time agonizing than the few seconds it took for a complete stranger to post an insult. Then I would dwell more on my perceived failings than actually progressing. 

Yet even when a person is alone, humor can be effective. Try reading nasty comments aloud in a goofy voice, Professor Pawelski advised, so that when your mind automatically plays back the comment it sounds absurd, or at the very least loses a bit of its bite.

Ah, Daffy Duck voice. Or Yoda voice! "Suck, you do."

In the quest to quell the cruel, we often fail to savor the good. And there is, despite the meanies, much good whirring around cyberspace. Some 70 percent of Internet users said they “had been treated kindly or generously by others online,” according to a Pew report early this year.

Rather than scrolling past a dozen positive comments and lingering on the sole exception, what if you did the opposite? And what if you shared a couple of the good ones with friends instead of sharing the one that hurt you? Research shows that it takes more time for positive experiences to become lodged in our long-term memory, so it’s not just pleasurable to dwell on a compliment — it’s shrewd.

In general, we focus more on the bad than the good. Being grateful doesn't just happen; one has to be aware. 

That reminded me of a story I heard from Rabbi Dr. Abraham Twersky; he was being evaluated, and received scores of positive feedback, except for one in the negative. That single bad review amongst all that glowing compliments really got to him.  

Don't let the gremlins get you.       

The Well-Fed Writer

"So, what do you do?" 

I expound on my education and my current employment, but rarely, if ever, say "writer." I have never been published; claiming that title seems a tad premature. My "novel" is more ignored than fussed over. I probably spend more time constructing perfect sentences in my head than actually saving them for posterity. 

Additionally, as an early bird, writing doesn't come easily to me past morning, and I work then. Sundays are spent crossing off various tasks that get ignored during the week. Ergo, beyond the blog, I don't do much writing. Since I don't publicize my authorship on this free platform, I will still not announce my identity as "writer."  It feels like I'm cheating.

 

Bill Hayes' essay "On Not Writing" begins describing his fading away from writing, and his return. He lists what he learned recently, how writing correlates to exercise regimens. The last point was about necessary rest, that over-writing (is there such a phrase?) can cause burnout. 

I must make a wee confession: I placed on myself a standard of, at least, five posts a week. I have kept at it. But recently, for the first time, I found myself resenting that criteria that I enacted. Enter "When Blogging Becomes a Slog" by Steven Kurutz.

Yet, I need to write (even though I make no money in it, unlike the bloggers featured in the above article), and giving myself such a schedule, composed of reasonable post-size pieces, has kept my brain going and growing (I like to think). I don't want to begrudge or quit the practice anytime soon. 

So I shall allow myself the leeway of not posting five posts a week; perhaps I shall begin with four, and already I feel calmer and less pressured. Maybe, one week, if circumstances decree, I shall go down to three. I want to enjoy blogging, not feel coerced into it.  

J'Accuse!

I was googling "The Frumanista" one day, just to see how my profile looks when I'm not logged in, then, well, went skimming through the rest of the results. 

One of the results was a comment left on another blog, regarding what is considered to be a "controversial" matter, that shall be heretofore referred to as Issue "A". The commenter, who I shall label "B", posted that the Frumanista, and another blogger ("C") believe such-and-such regarding "A". 

Here's the thing: I never made a public statement regarding my feelings for Issue "A". Not once. Quite frankly, I can't muster any sort of passion on the topic; let the individuals involved do what they like, as no halacha is being violated. 

Understandably, I am really, really, really annoyed to see my supposed personal beliefs flatly stated by others, especially a relative stranger. 

She erroneously inferred my thoughts on the subject, and if that wasn't bad enough, she publicly announced the falsified data. As for "C", she had written a post on "A," but what "B" claimed her position to be was not remotely what she wrote.

I could clarify my beliefs now, but I have no obligation to. I simply request from my readers not to manipulate, spin, intentionally misinterpret, etc., my words. I don't post lightly, taking exaggerated amount of care in what I choose to publicize as my principles. 

If any require explanation on my blogged opinions, please comment. If any wish to share my thoughts on a certain matter, kindly link the post itself. But I hope I shall not have to come across again the equivalent of, "The Frumanista thinks that unicorns are real."

It's a narwhal horn, totally.