Facebook has had much … well, face time I guess you’d call it … in the media this week, mostly to do with privacy (or, more to the point, lack thereof) settings. I am so down with that I’m practically combat crawling. I nearly closed down my Facebook page a few days ago, after a message from a reader that, among other things, criticised me for going to church on Easter (a fact which is mentioned in passing in The Winter of Our Disconnect).
“Would never have thought that an intelligent, deep thinking broad minded feminist would still be attending church,” she scolded. “Sorry if that is too personal an observation, it was just such a shock to me.”
Well, as a matter of fact, it is WAY too personal an observation, in addition to being atrociously narrow-minded, judgmental and, in its own unpleasant way, fundamentalist. Not to mention badly punctuated. LOL! To be fair, I have to say that this (extremely long) message was mostly positive in its tone. Yet even the strokes were, to my way of thinking, intrusive … and presumptuous really.
The ending, for example: “Please remind me, what is WILF? (In your commandments at the end of the book)”. The reference is to an acronym for What Was I Looking For? – a shorthand way of describing that free-associative wandering we are all given to doing online. But think about it: there my correspondent sat, my book presumably in hand. It was easier (for her) to ask me personally than simply to turn to the last page? As my kids would say, WTF?!
It was Sussy, age 15, who calmed me down and directed my attention to my privacy settings. “Here, Mum,” she cooed. “It’s okay. I’ll do it for you.” Now, only my “friends” can send me messages. Now if only I knew who half of my “friends” actually were, that would be such a comfort …