Polarizing bickering

A few days ago, I opened my Facebook to find my newsfeed buzzing with people's responses to a debate between Bill Nye and a well-known creationist the night before.  I didn't even know this debate had taken place until I saw this chatter.  Disparaging chatter. So I did a quick Google search to see what I had missed. Again, I found more disparaging chatter.

Now, usually in these situations, there is pretty much equal disparaging of both sides in the aftermath of a debate.  Like during election season.  In fact, I [confession] refuse to read the status updates of my politically active friends [on both sides of the aisle] during election season -- because there is so much negativity, bashing, rude remarks, and zero to no discussion of how to actually come together to fix a problem.  People don't want compromise and moderation, they want to be rub-it-in-my-opponents-faces right.  Acting like the world is more black-and-white than it actually is.  Sorry...rant over.

Anyways, my simple Google search of the Bill Nye vs famous Creationist debate yielded pages covered in comments. As I said earlier, they were expectantly disparaging.  But what was surprising is that nowhere did I see a single comment actually defending the Creationist. (Poor guy. I felt bad that he hadn't received any social-media-active-young-adult-lovin'.) It seems that the majority of posts were in support of Bill Nye's allegedly superior arguments and presentation, all quick to point out the naïveté and ignorance of the Creationist.

[I'm going to make a huge disclaimer here: I obviously did not religiously scour every thread that my Google search yielded/every Facebook post I read for support of my observation.  This is all based on first glance analysis.]

Now, FYI this post is in no way intended to continue the debate of how this world came into being.  A discussion for another time.  What I am more curious about is why people feel the need to share such inflammatory remarks on social media, and I'm pretty sure, at least in this instance, it was not to show solidarity for everyone's-childhood-science-hero Bill.  

As I've been noodling on this idea, the wheels started turning more when I saw a post on my newsfeed two evenings ago (sheesh, Facebook seems to be the place to vent feelings these days) criticizing the opinions of a blogger regarding the recent movie Frozen. Intrigued, I read the article in question.  And, conversely, I found the article to be well-argued and presented.  Certainly an interesting take on the popular feminist commentary surrounding the movie.  Did I agree with everything? No. But I certainly thought she made her points well. I flipped back to the facebook post and opened the comments.  Rookie mistake.  Nearly all of them disparaged the author, using phrases like "rolling my eyes" and "read this if you want to be indignant" and tagging friends with similar beliefs so they could join in the fun. 

Now my first question is: why does a random blogger's interpretation of a movie cause indignation? It's a CARTOON. And even if it were a cinema masterpiece, all films [and art for that matter] are open to interpretation. Meaning, there isn't a right interpretation or commentary.  Just a scale of well-supported to not-well-supported ones.  It's not black-and-white. So then second question:  why do we feel the need to tear down someone's opinion that they wrote on a personal blog? Is it just because it's different from yours? And third:  what is the purpose of posting something you blatantly disagree with?

So this whole line of thinking brought me back to my earlier question of why we feel the need to post disparaging comments on social media -- the reasons for which I think can be aptly applied to why someone would post something they vehemently disagree with. Some possible shared answers to these questions include:

1. To validate one's own opinion.  We write disparaging comments/posts in order to incentivize our friends who agree with us to comment on/like the post.  When a post has 200 likes from all the Bill Nye fans you know, you feel validated that you have picked the "right" belief or position.  Solidarity in numbers.

2.  To convert some wandering soul to your cause/position.  As reading a newsfeed full of negativity tends to make me inclined to block the culprits from my newsfeed, I can't imagine that this mentality/methodology actually works.  So I'm going to have to nix this reason for implausibility.

3.  Because we can't stand the possibility that people might think differently than we do.  Now, this certainly is a narrow minded and controlling position.... And I would be very concerned if anyone actually held it.  So I'm nixing it -- out of hope for our society.

4. To educate others about your position.  Well, as I said earlier, I don't think negativity educates others well -- plus negativity isn't a good defense of a position.  Disparaging someone else's position is not the same thing as supporting your own. So wouldn't it be simpler (and more friendly) to post an article about what you do believe instead of posting one that you don't agree and listing your reasons why?

Plus, at least in the cases of evolution and Frozen&feminism that I've mentioned here, the evolutionist and feminist positions are pretty well understood and supported by popular culture and society.  So the possibility of actually educating someone is slim.  Bringing me to wonder (in relation to option 2 above), why do you feel the need to educate/convert them (the answer to which very well may be listed here).

5.  To prove one's own intellectual superiority/the superiority of one's positions. Regardless of issue or political affiliation, we all tend to think that our positions and beliefs are better than the other side's. And if we believe that our position is superior, then there's nothing left to do but rub it in the competition's faces.  Also known as gloating.

For example, comments like "those Creationists are so naive and ignorant for what they believe." Well, since evolution is the primary theory taught in schools, it would appear that evolution is winning the culture war -- I would place this category squarely in the "I-want-to-be-rub-it-in-my-opponents-faces right" camp (see earlier brief rant about political elections for reference).

As a quick side note: a particularly annoying side-effect of the fifth reason is individuals commenting on posts that were intended to remain neutral.  Many a time I have posted an article to Facebook that I found interesting, thought-provoking, or thought others might like, only to have someone comment with some sort of disagreement/criticism of the article.  While they are certainly entitled to their opinion, and I would love to discuss it further with them, my purpose in that moment was not to create debate.  Somethings, in my opinion, are best left not commented on.  On the flip side, not everything merits a comment -- either positive or negative.  Somethings are meant to just be absorbed, digested, and then added to our personal collections of knowledge.  We don't need to be so quick to declare our judgements; many find this to be instantly polarizing and hostile.

Okay, so maybe that wasn't so quick.  I'm sure there are more than five reasons -- but those are the first that have come to mind.... And this post is getting rather long anyway (this is what I get for not blogging in a long time LOL)

We live in a society that is desperately trying to make everything black-and-white, one that is becoming increasingly polarized.  Us vs. Them.  Me vs. You. Frozen interpretation #1 vs. Frozen interpretation #2. Notice that there is no room for middle ground opinions and/or compromise in such a strict dichotomy. What will it take for us to recognize that it's okay to have differing opinions and to not feel the need to squash them out of each other?  Part of being a beautifully diverse community is involving people who think a whole variety of different ways. And allowing and encouraging them to continue doing so.

Not everything in the world is so black-and-white. And sometimes (but not always), there isn't a "right" answer; but rather, there are equally acceptable options.