Tuesday, April 27, 2021

Looking forward to "getting back to normal" -- but maybe not all at once

I'm see that I'm almost a month late getting to my friend Bonnie McGrath's most recent column on Chicago Now, "Everyone's looking forward to 'getting back to normal' but me," which isn't surprising, I know: A day late and [only] a dollar short would be a victory for me....

I sympathize with much of Bonnie's kind-of-squeamish attitude about the world's halting, uneven return to normalcy.

I've had my shots---no, not at Loretto Hospital, thank you---and my side effects were minimal, even less on the second shot than on the first. (I was feeling pretty smug about that, too, until my kids informed me that really old people are less likely to have troublesome side effects with the vaccine than younger people. Thanks, kids.)

But, like Bonnie, there are some aspects of my former life I am not so anxious to resume.

I'll not be dining out anytime soon. Or going to a movie. Even though I think watching a movie is best done in a theater.

And I'm likewise in no hurry to start taking the train again. I was never a fan of being wedged in a CTA Blue Line car like a sardine. I really didn't like it during the evening rush on hot summer days. I'm tall enough that no one's backpack actually poked me in the eye. But I got punched in the gut with them many times.

I'm told it's much less crowded now.

Still, I'll wait. And when I do go back on the train, I'll be wearing a mask.

I'm in no hurry to ditch wearing a mask in crowds of strangers.

Like a lot of you, I'm sure, my wife and I cut back on our grocery visits during the past year. Lately, though, while we're still going half as often, both our local Jewel and Costco seem twice as crowded. My wife invariably notices people in the stores who aren't properly wearing their masks. He's old enough to know better, she'll hiss, gesturing surreptitiously at someone whose beak has protruded over his mask. I try not to look. I prefer to think we're all still compliant.

Bonnie mentioned that she serves on a number of boards, and she's happy to keep attending them virtually. One of the boards I serve on is having a meeting next month live and in person. And the host suggested we might decide, close to the meeting date, to dispense with the wearing of masks. A couple of board members balked. I suggested that anyone who wants to wear a mask absolutely should, and no one should say them nay. I think that should be the rule for all of us. In any setting. For as long as any of us wants.

But, unlike Bonnie, I'm looking forward to attending meetings in person.

Zoom meetings are better than audio-only telephone conferences, but there is no substitute for seeing a person in person. One can read a room much better, and more accurately, than a screen full of faces.

For the same reason, I'm anxious to get back to court. Zoom hearings are fine for routine matters, and I know some practitioners who are thrilled to be able to log out of a hearing in Bridgeview and into a hearing in Markham without leaving their kitchen, but, in my opinion, anything serious should really be done with all persons present. Even if we all wear masks.

Bonnie mentioned that she's resumed service as an arbitrator. I got called recently to serve as an arbitrator in Rolling Meadows. I was unreasonably happy to be setting foot in a courthouse again. I think the Deputy Sheriffs were a little concerned.

This past Sunday I was able to attend Mass in person (with masks, definitely) and thereafter able to go to the White Sox game (ditto). I liked being among people again -- but I also liked keeping my distance from those not in my "bubble." Some of this may be a natural function of age---even I have to admit that I am no longer likely to be offered the juvenile lead in any plays---but I think it also, at least in part, a function of my own squeamishness about fully jumping into a pre-pandemic "normalcy."

We'll all have to find a new balance point as Covid (hopefully) ends and we get our lives back. Bonnie's approach and mine may differ somewhat, but not in fundamentals.

There was one sentence, though, in her post that alarmed me---and I quote---"I love cable news running all day as my basic connection to life."

Oh, no! You don't have to subscribe to every position espoused by Glenn Greewald, Bari Weiss, or Matt Taibbi to see the dangers inherent in cable news -- any cable news.

We have been isolated in our houses for a year. Our society was becoming increasingly atomized before that; it is far more so now. How we atomized-individuals reconnect and recombine when we return to the real world will determine whether we will continue to have a civil society. And cable news divides us, forces us into 'silos', and fans our worst instincts.

I submit that the real real world is found on our walks around the neighborhood. Bonnie likes trying to guess the color of her neighbors' walls, the make and model of their fixtures, and what kind of food they have on their tables. My wife likes seeing what kind of flowers people have planted. There's a house in my neighborhood that has a giant RV that takes up almost all the fenced-in backyard. I've seen it parked in the street sometimes, but I've never seen how it gets from the street back into the yard. I wish they'd send out notices when they're going to move the darn thing.

The real world is found in those neighbors we see, even though we now avoid them on our walks, often with a good-natured shrug or wave, not the talking heads on TV. Our "basic connection to life"---in my opinion---are the people who are really in our lives, not just on our screens. One terrible thing about Covid is that so many of the truly important people in our lives were too long reduced to mere images on screens. But we're getting them back in our living rooms now, or at least in our yards. Even if we're not entirely ready for everyone else.

Wednesday, April 21, 2021

Bizarre Internet "Rape Day" rumor frightens kids

There was a movie back in 2013, called The Purge, set in a fictional, near-future America where crime has been largely stamped out -- except on a national holiday, also called the Purge, where all crime is legal for 12 hours.

The movie must have done well enough. It has so far spawned three sequels, with a fourth scheduled for release this Summer, according to IMDb.com. A television show, based on the same detestable concept, ran for a couple of seasons on cable.

Clearly, the idea of all crime being made "legal" for a limited period of time is so obviously ridiculous that no one would ever take it seriously, right?

Wrong.

I won't name the teacher or the school, but I heard from a junior high teacher yesterday whose homeroom was greatly agitated about "National Rape Day," supposedly set for this Friday, April 24. On that one day, according to the frightened students, rape would be "legal."

The teacher tried to explain that there is no such "holiday," that rape is never legal, and will not be made legal on Friday.

But the students were unconvinced. There were warnings all over TikTok, they said, so it must be true.

And the students were not entirely wrong -- there were warnings all over TikTok.

Internet watchdog Snopes.com put up a post about this subject on April 19. The post, by Dan Evon, links to a single Tik Tok video from @la.tania.ftn2 that was viewed 1.5 million times between its posting on April 17 and the April 19 publication of the Snopes.com post. An excerpt from that TikTok post, as quoted by Snopes.com:

I just saw a video on tiktok and i had to make a video myself … because I need to make sure that you guys are aware that there’s a video going around Tiktok of disgusting men … and they literally came up with a date to go around and rape women and children.

Except... Snopes.com can't find the video that supposedly prompted this reaction. According to Snopes.com's post, TikTok can't find such a post either. USA Today published a "fact check," by Devon Link, on April 19 (updated on April 20) that likewise came up empty in a search for the video that allegedly precipited the many warning videos:

Millions of social media users have viewed or shared reactions to the perceived threat on TikTok, Instagram, Facebook and Twitter. However, neither USA TODAY nor TikTok could find any evidence of the threat users were responding to.

And, yet, according to the USA Today fact check, there were more than 31.1 million views and more than a thousand videos using the #april24 hashtag. Quoting further from the USA Today post, "According to CrowdTangle, there have more than 1,000 Facebook posts and nearly 50 Instagram posts about 'National Rape Day' in the week before this fact check published."

USA Today tried to reach out to the TikTok 'creators' who spread these warnings. None responded. While some of the creators claim to have seen the video announcing the 'holiday,' none, according to USA Today, shared that link, or stitched it, or dueted it. I don't know what those last two terms mean -- but it does certainly seem reasonable to conclude that the threat was largely, if not entirely, made up.

Snopes.com unearthed archived pages on Urban Dictionary which suggested that someone had proposed a National Rape Day as early as 2018. But it didn't go viral until the condemnations of an apparently non-existent video began circulating.

So there is no "National Rape Day" Friday or any other day, ever. But April is Sexual Assault Awareness Month. Wikipedia says the month has been observed since at least 2001. President Obama proclaimed April as National Sexual Awareness Month in April 2010.

The Internet has many uses, and the ability to rapidly---almost instantly---share information can be one of the most beneficial.

But only if the information is accurate.

And figuring out what is, or is apparently, accurate information is increasingly difficult for all of us. Especially where information, and misinformation, is surging through channels of which we may not even be aware.