by There’s nothing quite so disturbing as posting an update on Facebook and then having a guy with a fake name try to take you on by defending — or “understanding,” as he put it — why a parent would strike a child because of stress. I said then, and I say now, “I do not, and will never, understand why any parent would raise a hand to any child.” I’m not being dramatic or presumptive. I’m being factual.
It all started when I posted a link I posted to my article — How Home Foreclosures Trickle Down into Child Abuse — and the guy with the fake name put a comment on that update. At first, I thought he was agreeing with me, but it turned out he was really defending the abuser, as you can see in the message stream:
In case you can’t read the conversation on Facebook, or if are having trouble viewing the screenshot of the comments thread, here is the last set of call and response:
ME: I will never understand why a parent would abuse a child. You didn’t answer if you understand Jerry Sandusky or not. If yes, why? If not, why not? What’s the difference in your mind — if there is one.
FAKE NAME GUY: You shifted your ground. The initial context was, as I recall, one-off physical attack, not ongoing maltreatment, which I cannot comprehend, unless the parent is mentally damaged.. I do not know what happened to Sandusky so I have ot say I do nto understand.
ME: I haven’t shifted anything. You’re trying to hide behind a single condition that you believe is non-condemnable and I am calling you out on your immoral duplicity. Either you “understand” the abuser of a child in all conditions and examples or you do not — you cannot claim one niche without encompassing everything else that comes with the cover. If you “understand” why a parent would abuse their child because they lost their house, then I certainly believe you would also “understand” the abuse of a child at the hands of a man like Jerry Sandusky. There’s no wiggle room. You either understand or you do not. You have made it clear you “understand” the abuser. I do not understand the abuser in any condition or circumstance.
I don’t know why I was surprised by this conversation. There are millions of people in the world, and if everyone behaved as they should, and actually believed in what they say they stand for, we wouldn’t have Batman killings, or pretend lynchings of Black schoolchildren, or people with fake names trying to troll you on Facebook.
I think perhaps this person meant “understand” to mean that the why of these abusers seemed clear to him, and he was condemning them for using this excuse. Maybe I’m misreading him. Silly fake namers.
I’m surprised Facebook allows fake name identities. I thought they were all about security and safety now?
Facebook has no way of knowing if people are real or not. I humbly submit the following as evidence :
http://imgur.com/2Bf5Q
What is more likely — that these people are named Sims or that they created the accounts in order to play the Sims? 🙂
I submit this in rebuttal, Gordon!
https://www.facebook.com/help/search/?q=name
The rules are fantastic! They don’t seem to enforce them at all
I think Facebook enforces the rule if a fake name become an issue. I discovered today when you block someone on Facebook, one of the reasons you can provide to the Facebook support team is — “Fake Name” — and then they’ll take care of it.
One of my game friends has “andjesuslovesyou” as his middle name.
REPORT IT! smile.
I am glad to see Facebook requires real names. I’m not sure how much that is enforced.
I don’t think it is much enforced, Anne, but I am glad the rule is there to be used as needed.