I Am Not "They"

I have only just noticed that Facebook, (where I am reading, sharing and liking but not posting for lent,) uses plural pronouns for me.
F'rinstance, "XXX changed their profile picture."
Is that because I needed to select from some long list of possibilities what "gender" I am currently "choosing"?
I am singular and female, but come April perhaps I'll do something silly - I've always liked the sometime-pretentious use of "one,"  or "ones" subbing for I/me/mymine... is that an option on FB?

I mean, now that feels trumps reals, and words have ceased to have meaning...

 

"And then Oedipus and Jocasta, assured by their supporters on social media that '#LoveWins', decided...."

In the great time suck that is Those Interwebs, ostensibly searching for some information about children and catechetics on the super highway, I found myself on a bypass about the irrationality and inconsistency of the current tv and movie rating system, and then went up a dead-end about the size of Cinderella's, (AKA Lilly James',) waist, pulled in to a private driveway and noticed something tantalizing about how to nip in the waist of an oversized button up shirt, had to back up to the intersection where I saw a criticism of children's literature that was not protective of the environment/blended families/the Other among us, and decided to go brew a cup, no, a mug, stadium cup of almond tea.

But while sipping, the thought came that there is a great misapprehension of the purpose of the fairy tale.

We get modern takes, and reboots and re-writes, and outright bannings of fables that fail to impart information in the manner of a user's manual.
We want Common Core nuts and bolts to help make us better worker bees instead of the grandeur and deeper truths of myth, shrunk to childsize for little hands, and pureed for mouths not yet containging any permanent teeth.
Cinderella isn't about women needing men to take care of them but about spousal and familial love being a greater goal and a rarer prize than almost any other in this life, finer than extravagant clothes and grand houses, (and certainly than inherited wealth, or servants to boss about.)

Have we done this with, (more than the occasional movie, such as the nit-wit Troy, and all stories from the Bible, on which there is open season) do we do this to creation tales, and to myth, as well?

Is there a volume of Greek and Roman Myths that functions as an apologia for Jocasta's incest and assures us that no, Time doesn't devour his children? where Narcissus has a learning experience, falls in and, rescued by followers who learn of his plight via Instagram, resolves to limit himself to only a few selfies a day? Does Atalanta not just scoop up the golden fruit but speed past Melanion just the same, magnanimously allow him to live and go off with her best gal pal to a life of lesbian bliss?

Voting and Self-Interest

My TwitFace, or Facer, or LockdIn or whatever they call it, friends and 'quaintances, with increasing frequency seem to be deriding other people for being "stupid" enough to consistently vote against their own self-interest.

Forgive my ignorance, but doesn't any decent person regularly do things against his own self-interest?

Isn't one, as a Christian, or an enlightened secularist, supposed to do the right thing, not the thing that is most salutary for ones bank account or social standing or comfort?

It's a sad argument to be making, and it says more about the critic than the person casting the vote.

"Europe, You Will Pay"

I have two very different circles of "friends" on Facebook, (some of both genuinely are friends as opposed to "friends,") one very right wing, one very left, both politically and socially.

I  grow weary, at times, of the posts of both. (Note - none of them support anyone but Carson and Sanders. No Rubio, no Clinton, no Bush, no O'Malley... moderation is in short supply.)

And I have knee jerk reactions to many posts but besides being weary, I am wary - so often a stance, even one with which I utterly agree, is supported by some obvious lie or absurdity. "Evidence" is provided in the form of graphs or listicles that are patently false.
But it isn't always obvious, and I try to stay in low-to-medium dudgeon until I investigate a bit.

Right now in the wake of the Paris Massacre, propagandists for both anti-Islamic Fundamentalism partisans, and anti-Islamophobia partisans are working at capacity.

There's a photo that runs with the "see I told you so" posts and blogs and tweets, without apparent irony, where in addition to the, "Behead the Infidel" signs, there's a swarthy and swathed protester carrying a placard that say, "Europe you will pay."
Seems plausible.
But his slogan continues,  "Fantastic 4 are on the way!!!"

 

Hence, my initial reaction - these people, over-eager to convince everyone of the dangers of a Muslim Europe, have used someone's, (the Onion's perhaps?) completely fake, staged photo unwittingly. (The saintly Eccles is not among the over-eager dupes, of course, as.... well, as he's Eccles. He is wittingly witty.)
An Icelandic site, not much help, as my Icelandic is only googlish, in fact, I thought it was Finnish, at first.)
But only a very little bit more effort, and I am comfortable thinking that this is indeed a photo of a real and hate-filled demonstration, with a minor photo-shopped joke, (from a number of years ago.)

Maybe I am a sap, but I have at least a little trust in the BBC, (not it's opinions, but it's facts.)

The technology that allows one to look into such matters is, of course, the same technology that makes the spread of misinformation possible.

Those Interwebs giveth, and those Interwebs taketh away.