Three Ways Facebook Destroys Your Individuality

On the surface, Facebook might seem like a nice, progressive company. On the surface, John McCain might seem like a straight talker. Don't be fooled.

This doesn't have much to do with current political affairs, but it does have a lot to with how we see ourselves in society. As far as I'm concerned, it's fair game. So with that disclaim, three ways Facebook destroys your individuality:

1) Facebook divides your profile information into catagories like "basic", "contact", and "personal". The big problem with this system is the word "basic". It implies a fundamental, foundational fact upon which everything else in your life is constructed or somehow related--an "ontological" characteristic for you Heidegger fans. Why on earth does Facebook think it gets to pick what your defining characteristics are? I don't consider my sexual orientation an essential characteristic. I'd probably be pretty much the same guy if I were bi or gay. The same goes for my religious views and my nationality--where I was born is really foundational to who I am. All of this information is useful, and I'm glad Facebook provides a mechanism for sharing it. My problem is that we, as people, should get to choose for ourselves what defines us. Facebook's rhetoric essentially forces us to adopt its standards about what "basically" defines an individual instead of our own.

2) The sex box has only two options, only one of which can be chosen: male and female. I mean come on, is this the 1950's? There are probably dozens if not hundreds of people on Facebook who don't identify with either box exclusively, or identify with both equally. That these people can simply live the question blank is not a defense--why should they have to be silent about their sex?

3) The political views box actually has a list of stances you can take, ranging from "very liberal" to "very conservative" with "libertarian", "apathetic", and "other" thrown in for good measure. It's totally ridiculous to ask people to sum up their political beleifs in two words or less. I know people who are "very conservative" on abortion but "very liberal" about health care reform. What box are they supposed to check? Other? Simply having an "other" option actually does more harm than good, because it implies that these people have "other" views outside the mainstream. Facebook's rhetoric pidgeonholes people, and those who refuse to be pidgeonholed are forced to identify themselves as outsiders (others). Not only that, but it's also useless because NOBODY has a clear view of what these words mean. For example, does "very conservative" mean you want to spend millions on faith-based initiatives or that fiscal responsibility is your top issue?

Not-so-latent Sexism

Media coverage of Nancy Pelosi's rise to Speaker of the House was non-stop for a couple of weeks. Some attention was well warranted--not only did Pelosi lead the Democratic wave into the majority, she also became the most powerful woman in American political history (by some standards, at least). However, the focus of the media on Pelosi's gender instead of her politics is disturbing in an era when equality is purportedly valued.

Dennis Miller, the guy who ruined Saturday Night Live's "Weekend Update" and Monday Night Football, recently transformed into what Fox News calls a credible news analyst. He used his soapbox a couple weeks ago to attack Speaker Pelosi's intelligence.

There's nothing wrong with attacking a politician's brain power--I've happily highlighted many intellectual shortcomings in this column. But Miller's attack didn't actually center on Pelosi's intellect--it was about her gender. He started the piece by comparing Pelosi to "that nosy neighbor from Bewitched," a 1960's TV series which cast women, predictability, in a blatantly light. Then he called Pelosi is so dumb she"no doubt would have been drummed out of the Mary Kay corps after the initial 4-week evaluation period."

If you don't think this is sexist, try replacing "Nancy Pelosi" with "Barak Obama" and "Mary Kay corp" with "cotton picking crew." It reads, "Obama no doubt would have been drummed out of the cotton-picking crew after the intial four-week evaluation period." Who could possibly say (Trent Lott aside) that wasn't a deliberately racist remark?

The bottom line is that there was absolutely no reason for Miller to mention Bewitched or the Mary Kay corps except to call attention to Pelosi's gender. According to Willamette University's Student Policy Manual, that could be sexual harrassment. It's too bad Fox News doesn't hold itself to the same standards.

Unfortunately, examples of this kind of attitude toward Pelosi aboud. I recently saw this cartoon on Slate. It depicts Pelosi rejecting Rep. Charlie Rangle's proposal for a military draft because it scares her grandchildren. She's not given the benefit of an actual policy argument--instead, her entire line of reasoning for a specific stance on a specific issue is attributed to her maternal instincts.