FabSwingers.com > Forums > The Lounge > Being part of the moment
Being part of the moment
Jump to: Newest in thread
Do you think people are too concerned with this now, with the rise of social media?
For instance, a young lad who had just started university in Worcester went missing. A huge social media campaign was launched to try and find him which led to several false sightings, raising the hopes of his family. Of course these sightings could all have been in good faith and mistaken identities but I suspect a few were from people wanting to be part of the moment.
Sadly his body was recovered from the river last week. An absolutely tragic conclusion to the search that you wouldn't wish upon any family.
Since then there has been hundreds of posts from people who knew nothing of the lad before he went missing exclaiming their trauma over the event. His they have cried every day for him and his family. Contrary to what some of you might believe, I am a very empathetic person but I do find it hard to comprehend this level of empathy.
I know we all have a social media personna. For some that is very close to their real life personna, for others they are very different, but I can't help thinking that some people Wang to be part of a moment so much that they forget this was a real person, with real grieving parent and friends.
I am only using this story as it's the most recent in my area. Do you think the social media out pouring of faux emotion (some of it is genuine of course) is helpful at times like this?
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
 |
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
I’m torn with this one. To be honest I don’t usually comment on those things but I sometimes think the families do get something from it. For example the little lad from Liverpool where they turned the life support off, there was so much national support for that family. I see things and think aw that’s so sad etc but some do go a bit over the top. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"I’m torn with this one. To be honest I don’t usually comment on those things but I sometimes think the families do get something from it. For example the little lad from Liverpool where they turned the life support off, there was so much national support for that family. I see things and think aw that’s so sad etc but some do go a bit over the top. "
I think at times though it can also give false hope. In that case a lot of people assumed the decision would be changed because so many people were campaigning and backing the family. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Kind of like how people put filters on their Facebook after a terrorism attack?
Fuck knows what they're trying accomplish "
I always assumed it was just a way if showing solidarity. I've never done it myself, but then I don't have a need for others to validate my compassion.
Cal |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Kind of like how people put filters on their Facebook after a terrorism attack?
Fuck knows what they're trying accomplish
I always assumed it was just a way if showing solidarity. I've never done it myself, but then I don't have a need for others to validate my compassion.
Cal"
Maybe it's this that I'm feeling but couldn't find the right words!
It's the need for everyone to see what a compassionate person they are that makes a genuine emotion seem disingenuous (to me at least). |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
Kind of like when Diana died. My friends all wanted to go to the park where people were gathering to lay flowers and light candles but it just felt odd to me. I had no connection with her and although it was sad for the young princes I just felt out out of place publicly mourning someone I didnt know. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
I’ve always assumed it’s a bizarre form of egomania. Social media has given everyone a platform/voice and some use it to self promote their social status. It’s like they’re projecting ‘I am more (enter own word here) than you’.
More empathetic, more sincere, more liberal, more loving, more caring etc
A form of passive cyber narcissism.
Definitely a strange trait.
Ed |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Kind of like how people put filters on their Facebook after a terrorism attack?
Fuck knows what they're trying accomplish
I always assumed it was just a way if showing solidarity. I've never done it myself, but then I don't have a need for others to validate my compassion.
Cal
Maybe it's this that I'm feeling but couldn't find the right words!
It's the need for everyone to see what a compassionate person they are that makes a genuine emotion seem disingenuous (to me at least). "
It's kind like saying "look at me everyone, I'm being respectful" |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
I feel people's pain and have been brought to tears watching their stories, but I don't comment or want to be part of it.
I have my own life and family to deal with, which is my focus. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
But yeah I call this stuff disaster tourism. It's the same thing that makes people slow down and gawp as they're driving past a car crash. When I was a kid my parents took us on a special trip to Lockerbie to see the town where the plane crash had occurred. They didn't seem to think that was a bit sick. That kind of shit has been going on since way before the Internet. But it's now amplified by it. No doubt. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *emini ManMan
over a year ago
There and to the left a bit |
"Kind of like when Diana died. My friends all wanted to go to the park where people were gathering to lay flowers and light candles but it just felt odd to me. I had no connection with her and although it was sad for the young princes I just felt out out of place publicly mourning someone I didnt know. "
I think the mass outpouring of grief syndrome started with Diana's death to be honest - I was like you in that I found it odd the level of mourning that some went to over her death, tragic though it was. Especially when Mother Theresa died not long after and it barely warranted any attention at all.
Since then it does seem to have become the norm though and I guess it's partly down to the internet and social media bringing the world closer together, and able to comment on events like it's not been possible to before.
Now in some cases the mass shock and sympathy is more than warranted but there are some where I agree that it does seem over the top and almost a thing of "Facebook says I should be upset, therefore I will be" |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
I think you're right op.
I often see people saying "I'm in tears typing this" that's not empathy,that's wanting sympathy. Empathy is expressing understanding and offering support in my book.
People have always been like it. You tell them a tragedy has befallen you and they immediately don the sackcloth and ashes. Nowadays the wailing and gnashing of teeth can be so much more public and ( they think) show them in a good light to a wider audience. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"I feel people's pain and have been brought to tears watching their stories, but I don't comment or want to be part of it.
I have my own life and family to deal with, which is my focus."
Exactly this. As harsh as it sounds I worry about me and mine, there’s enough for me there!! Also the reason I hardly go on FBook now too. I used to see it as fun. Now it’s downright depressing! |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
I visited my older sister once when she was renting a place in London. When I awoke in the morning she was in floods of tears screaming something about someone through her tears. I consoled her and eventually found she'd received news that Princess Diana was dead 
My sister wasn't even a royalist
Some people really do just get carried away by mass hysteria |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
This is a great post op .
Way too many people live their lives in some kind of fantasy world , creating a persona that they hype with faux grief , empathy , etc.....
In reality they rarely leave the house , never leave their Facebook / Twitter or whatever platform they use to live their fantasy in , and are really only interested in themselves .
 |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"I think you're right op.
I often see people saying "I'm in tears typing this" that's not empathy,that's wanting sympathy. Empathy is expressing understanding and offering support in my book.
People have always been like it. You tell them a tragedy has befallen you and they immediately don the sackcloth and ashes. Nowadays the wailing and gnashing of teeth can be so much more public and ( they think) show them in a good light to a wider audience."
It's not compassion, it's narcissism. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Kind of like when Diana died. My friends all wanted to go to the park where people were gathering to lay flowers and light candles but it just felt odd to me. I had no connection with her and although it was sad for the young princes I just felt out out of place publicly mourning someone I didnt know.
I think the mass outpouring of grief syndrome started with Diana's death to be honest - I was like you in that I found it odd the level of mourning that some went to over her death, tragic though it was. Especially when Mother Theresa died not long after and it barely warranted any attention at all.
Since then it does seem to have become the norm though and I guess it's partly down to the internet and social media bringing the world closer together, and able to comment on events like it's not been possible to before.
Now in some cases the mass shock and sympathy is more than warranted but there are some where I agree that it does seem over the top and almost a thing of "Facebook says I should be upset, therefore I will be""
I'd say that in 1990, people watched the end of Wrestlemania 6 and saw a masterclass in how to take a moment intended for someone else, and steal it. Since social media addiction and narcassicism are both on the rise, it's the perfect storm. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Kind of like when Diana died. My friends all wanted to go to the park where people were gathering to lay flowers and light candles but it just felt odd to me. I had no connection with her and although it was sad for the young princes I just felt out out of place publicly mourning someone I didnt know.
I think the mass outpouring of grief syndrome started with Diana's death to be honest - I was like you in that I found it odd the level of mourning that some went to over her death, tragic though it was. Especially when Mother Theresa died not long after and it barely warranted any attention at all.
Since then it does seem to have become the norm though and I guess it's partly down to the internet and social media bringing the world closer together, and able to comment on events like it's not been possible to before.
Now in some cases the mass shock and sympathy is more than warranted but there are some where I agree that it does seem over the top and almost a thing of "Facebook says I should be upset, therefore I will be"
I'd say that in 1990, people watched the end of Wrestlemania 6 and saw a masterclass in how to take a moment intended for someone else, and steal it. Since social media addiction and narcassicism are both on the rise, it's the perfect storm. "
What happened at Wrestlemania? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Kind of like how people put filters on their Facebook after a terrorism attack?
Fuck knows what they're trying accomplish
I always assumed it was just a way if showing solidarity. I've never done it myself, but then I don't have a need for others to validate my compassion.
Cal
Maybe it's this that I'm feeling but couldn't find the right words!
It's the need for everyone to see what a compassionate person they are that makes a genuine emotion seem disingenuous (to me at least). "
I have some people on fb where every post is a cry for attention. Whether saying how sad they are or how happy their marriage is- usually means they're on the verge of divorce. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Kind of like when Diana died. My friends all wanted to go to the park where people were gathering to lay flowers and light candles but it just felt odd to me. I had no connection with her and although it was sad for the young princes I just felt out out of place publicly mourning someone I didnt know.
I think the mass outpouring of grief syndrome started with Diana's death to be honest - I was like you in that I found it odd the level of mourning that some went to over her death, tragic though it was. Especially when Mother Theresa died not long after and it barely warranted any attention at all.
Since then it does seem to have become the norm though and I guess it's partly down to the internet and social media bringing the world closer together, and able to comment on events like it's not been possible to before.
Now in some cases the mass shock and sympathy is more than warranted but there are some where I agree that it does seem over the top and almost a thing of "Facebook says I should be upset, therefore I will be"
I'd say that in 1990, people watched the end of Wrestlemania 6 and saw a masterclass in how to take a moment intended for someone else, and steal it. Since social media addiction and narcassicism are both on the rise, it's the perfect storm.
What happened at Wrestlemania?"
The Ultimate Warrior beat Hulk Hogan and was supposed to be the new face of wrestling. Ultimate who? - you ask. Well yes, Hogan wasn't going to let that happen. So he cleverly agreed to lose, but after the match he spent an absolute age to go and pick up the belt (camera on him), hand it to the Ultimate Warrior and give him a prolonged hug him. If you were watching that in pictures, you'd actually be forgiven for thinking Hulk won the match since he was holding the belt for the majority of the after match. There was essentially no pictures of just the Ultimate Warrior in the ring, alone with the Championship belt. Naturally the Ultimate Warrior flopped and Hulk was champion again at Wrestlemania 7. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Kind of like when Diana died. My friends all wanted to go to the park where people were gathering to lay flowers and light candles but it just felt odd to me. I had no connection with her and although it was sad for the young princes I just felt out out of place publicly mourning someone I didnt know.
I think the mass outpouring of grief syndrome started with Diana's death to be honest - I was like you in that I found it odd the level of mourning that some went to over her death, tragic though it was. Especially when Mother Theresa died not long after and it barely warranted any attention at all.
Since then it does seem to have become the norm though and I guess it's partly down to the internet and social media bringing the world closer together, and able to comment on events like it's not been possible to before.
Now in some cases the mass shock and sympathy is more than warranted but there are some where I agree that it does seem over the top and almost a thing of "Facebook says I should be upset, therefore I will be"
I'd say that in 1990, people watched the end of Wrestlemania 6 and saw a masterclass in how to take a moment intended for someone else, and steal it. Since social media addiction and narcassicism are both on the rise, it's the perfect storm.
What happened at Wrestlemania?
The Ultimate Warrior beat Hulk Hogan and was supposed to be the new face of wrestling. Ultimate who? - you ask. Well yes, Hogan wasn't going to let that happen. So he cleverly agreed to lose, but after the match he spent an absolute age to go and pick up the belt (camera on him), hand it to the Ultimate Warrior and give him a prolonged hug him. If you were watching that in pictures, you'd actually be forgiven for thinking Hulk won the match since he was holding the belt for the majority of the after match. There was essentially no pictures of just the Ultimate Warrior in the ring, alone with the Championship belt. Naturally the Ultimate Warrior flopped and Hulk was champion again at Wrestlemania 7. "
Clever Hulk.
Probably not the same thing at all but Samantha Markle is pissing me right off with her self promotion. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Kind of like how people put filters on their Facebook after a terrorism attack?
Fuck knows what they're trying accomplish
I always assumed it was just a way if showing solidarity. I've never done it myself, but then I don't have a need for others to validate my compassion.
Cal
Maybe it's this that I'm feeling but couldn't find the right words!
It's the need for everyone to see what a compassionate person they are that makes a genuine emotion seem disingenuous (to me at least).
I have some people on fb where every post is a cry for attention. Whether saying how sad they are or how happy their marriage is- usually means they're on the verge of divorce. "
I've had to hide several relatives and a vegan friend's posts for this reason.  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Kind of like when Diana died. My friends all wanted to go to the park where people were gathering to lay flowers and light candles but it just felt odd to me. I had no connection with her and although it was sad for the young princes I just felt out out of place publicly mourning someone I didnt know.
I think the mass outpouring of grief syndrome started with Diana's death to be honest - I was like you in that I found it odd the level of mourning that some went to over her death, tragic though it was. Especially when Mother Theresa died not long after and it barely warranted any attention at all.
Since then it does seem to have become the norm though and I guess it's partly down to the internet and social media bringing the world closer together, and able to comment on events like it's not been possible to before.
Now in some cases the mass shock and sympathy is more than warranted but there are some where I agree that it does seem over the top and almost a thing of "Facebook says I should be upset, therefore I will be"
I'd say that in 1990, people watched the end of Wrestlemania 6 and saw a masterclass in how to take a moment intended for someone else, and steal it. Since social media addiction and narcassicism are both on the rise, it's the perfect storm.
What happened at Wrestlemania?
The Ultimate Warrior beat Hulk Hogan and was supposed to be the new face of wrestling. Ultimate who? - you ask. Well yes, Hogan wasn't going to let that happen. So he cleverly agreed to lose, but after the match he spent an absolute age to go and pick up the belt (camera on him), hand it to the Ultimate Warrior and give him a prolonged hug him. If you were watching that in pictures, you'd actually be forgiven for thinking Hulk won the match since he was holding the belt for the majority of the after match. There was essentially no pictures of just the Ultimate Warrior in the ring, alone with the Championship belt. Naturally the Ultimate Warrior flopped and Hulk was champion again at Wrestlemania 7. "
This has to be the best comparison ever. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
Hmm mm... That's actually a good question. I think some people do like to jump on the bandwagon a bit and as you say 'be in the moment', but on the other hand I know there have been times when something has shocked, saddened and horrified me so much that I've felt the need to express it in some way. I remember last year as they unfolded, both the Manchester and London bombings featured quite heavily here on the forums and I was genuinely concerned not just for the friends I'd made on here from those areas, but for any losses they themselves may have suffered. I commented on threads and felt huge relief as each friend reported in to say that they and their loved ones were safe. It was all very much 'in the moment', and something happening hundreds of miles from me, but did that make my concern and empathy any less valid? I think the only people who can genuinely say whether public outpourings of shock and grief, and messages or symbols of support are appreciated or not are the victims of these tragedies and their families... Bandwagon or not, maybe knowing people cared in their own way is some small comfort to them after the darkest hours have passed and the events of the day simply become a footnote in history for everyone but them. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Kind of like when Diana died. My friends all wanted to go to the park where people were gathering to lay flowers and light candles but it just felt odd to me. I had no connection with her and although it was sad for the young princes I just felt out out of place publicly mourning someone I didnt know.
I think the mass outpouring of grief syndrome started with Diana's death to be honest - I was like you in that I found it odd the level of mourning that some went to over her death, tragic though it was. Especially when Mother Theresa died not long after and it barely warranted any attention at all.
Since then it does seem to have become the norm though and I guess it's partly down to the internet and social media bringing the world closer together, and able to comment on events like it's not been possible to before.
Now in some cases the mass shock and sympathy is more than warranted but there are some where I agree that it does seem over the top and almost a thing of "Facebook says I should be upset, therefore I will be"
I'd say that in 1990, people watched the end of Wrestlemania 6 and saw a masterclass in how to take a moment intended for someone else, and steal it. Since social media addiction and narcassicism are both on the rise, it's the perfect storm.
What happened at Wrestlemania?
The Ultimate Warrior beat Hulk Hogan and was supposed to be the new face of wrestling. Ultimate who? - you ask. Well yes, Hogan wasn't going to let that happen. So he cleverly agreed to lose, but after the match he spent an absolute age to go and pick up the belt (camera on him), hand it to the Ultimate Warrior and give him a prolonged hug him. If you were watching that in pictures, you'd actually be forgiven for thinking Hulk won the match since he was holding the belt for the majority of the after match. There was essentially no pictures of just the Ultimate Warrior in the ring, alone with the Championship belt. Naturally the Ultimate Warrior flopped and Hulk was champion again at Wrestlemania 7.
This has to be the best comparison ever."
Wrestling is full of many life lessons.  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Hmm mm... That's actually a good question. I think some people do like to jump on the bandwagon a bit and as you say 'be in the moment', but on the other hand I know there have been times when something has shocked, saddened and horrified me so much that I've felt the need to express it in some way. I remember last year as they unfolded, both the Manchester and London bombings featured quite heavily here on the forums and I was genuinely concerned not just for the friends I'd made on here from those areas, but for any losses they themselves may have suffered. I commented on threads and felt huge relief as each friend reported in to say that they and their loved ones were safe. It was all very much 'in the moment', and something happening hundreds of miles from me, but did that make my concern and empathy any less valid? I think the only people who can genuinely say whether public outpourings of shock and grief, and messages or symbols of support are appreciated or not are the victims of these tragedies and their families... Bandwagon or not, maybe knowing people cared in their own way is some small comfort to them after the darkest hours have passed and the events of the day simply become a footnote in history for everyone but them. "
Yeah I think that's a good example, the flip side that I hadn't thought about. Knowing that hundreds/ thousands of people cared enough to post about it may have helped.  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
» Add a new message to this topic
