Political Involvement Requires More Than Social Media Posts

Political Involvement Requires More Than Social Media Posts

To be an active member of the tumultuous political society requires a conscious, constant effort.

You log onto Twitter and amidst the memes that make you chuckle and the vine threads you could spend forever scrolling through, there lies a seemingly misplaced political tweet with only a few likes and many capital letters and exclamation points. We’ve all been there: sometimes it's Twitter, other times it's Facebook. People post their heated rants with the thought they will change opinions, and we continue scrolling.

It makes sense that these posts are in abundance. Older generations have scorned our generation for not being politically active, and we have platforms to share our views right at our fingertips. So uploading our ideas to the site of our choosing seems like a step up. But we are going about it all the wrong way.

To begin with, there is an overwhelming amount of counterproductive name-calling that further polarizes individuals from opposing parties, discouraging bipartisan thoughts—the thoughts that accomplish goals and bring much-needed compromise. The mudslinging comes from both sides. The right shames the left, the left shames the right, and so on. Internal conflicts also arise, turning those with common goals against each other.

Following the name calling, a slew of opinions without facts to back them up litter our feeds. With sparse information to backup harsh insults, friends with differing viewpoints are enraged while friends with similar thoughts remain unchanged. So you watched the news for twenty minutes and heard one company broadcast one headline. You are not an expert. A lot of your friends have stopped reading the feisty rant.

What progress has been made? Those who liked your post already thought exactly the same way. Little progress has been made in that regard. Acquaintances that fall into the grouping of people you bashed find themselves upset and dismissive of your views (and quite possibly your friendship). Others disregarded your post entirely, and the audience you can reach grows smaller.

Yet, you smile. Your duty as an attentive citizen has been taken care of.

As a fellow young adult in today's social media driven society, I urge you to reexamine your political involvement.

Have you looked at sources from multiple vantage points? Have you challenged your own opinions by turning to media that caters to an audience that is not your own? Have you tried having an adult conversation with someone you disagree with?

That means no name calling, listening to what the other has to say and using facts to back up what you believe.

If you are screaming from the mountain tops for change and wonder how it will come about, ask yourself the following: have you called your senators or congressmen? Have you written letters to government officials or lobbying agencies? I'm not saying you must. We all have busy lives with a vast array of priorities. I would be hypocritical saying you must. But if you sit there scratching your head, wondering what you have the power to do, there's a start. There are many more activities to participate in; only a little research on your part is necessary.

What I am asking you is to reconsider your political involvement, and to think before you post. Are you merely hitting “tweet” and checking off a duty on your to-do list? Is what you are adding to the never-ending landscape of the internet productive?

To be an active member of the tumultuous political society requires a conscious, continuous effort. It requires one to keep up with current events, perform a bit of research and hold engaged discussions on pressing topics. The world needs the younger voting population to take an interest in politics. The world needs those interested to educate themselves.

Don't be quiet. Be smart. Inform yourself, and when you speak up, your voice will pack a punch.

Cover Image Credit: Unsplash

Popular Right Now

No, I Don't Have To Tell You I'm Trans Before Dating You

Demanding trans people come out to potential partners is transphobic.

In 2014, Jennifer Laude, a 26-year-old Filipina woman, was brutally murdered after having sex with a U.S. marine. The marine in question, Joseph Scott Pemberton, strangled her until she was unconscious and then proceeded to drown her in a toilet bowl.

Understandably, this crime triggered a lot of outrage. But while some were outraged over the horrific nature of the crime, many others were outraged by a different detail in the story. That was because Jennifer Laude had done the unspeakable. She was a trans woman and had not disclosed that information before having sex with Pemberton. So in the minds of many cis people, her death was the price she paid for not disclosing her trans status. Here are some of the comments on CNN's Facebook page when the story broke.

As a trans person, I run into this attitude all the time. I constantly hear cis people raging about how a trans person is "lying" if they don't come out to a potential partner before dating them. Pemberton himself claimed that he felt like he was "raped" because Laude did not come out to him. Even cis people that fashion themselves as "allies" tend to feel similar.

Their argument is that they aren't not attracted to trans people, so they should have a right to know if a potential partner is trans before dating them. These people view transness as a mere physical quality that they just aren't attracted to.

The issue with this logic is that the person in question is obviously attracted to trans people, or else they wouldn't be worried about accidentally going out with one. So these people aren't attracted to trans people because of some physical quality, they aren't attracted to trans people because they are disgusted by the very idea of transness.

Disgust towards trans people is ingrained in all of us from a very early age. The gender binary forms the basis of European societies. It establishes that there are men and there are women, and each has a specific role. For the gender binary to have power, it has to be rigid and inflexible. Thus, from the day we are born, we are taught to believe in a very static and strict form of gender. We learn that if you have a penis, you are a man, and if you have a vagina, you are a woman. Trans people are walking refutations of this concept of gender. Our very existence threatens to undermine the gender binary itself. And for that, we are constantly demonized. For example, trans people, mainly women of color, continue to be slaughtered in droves for being trans.

The justification of transphobic oppression is often that transness is inherently disgusting. For example, the "trans panic" defense still exists to this day. This defense involves the defendant asking for a lesser sentence after killing a trans person because they contend that when they found out the victim was trans, they freaked out and couldn't control themselves. This defense is still legal in every state but California.

And our culture constantly reinforces the notion that transness is undesirable. For example, there is the common trope in fictional media in which a male protagonist is "tricked" into sleeping with a trans woman. The character's disgust after finding out is often used as a punchline.

Thus, not being attracted to trans people is deeply transphobic. The entire notion that someone isn't attracted to a group of very physically diverse group of people because they are trans is built on fear and disgust of trans people. None of this means it is transphobic to not be attracted to individual trans people. Nor is it transphobic to not be attracted to specific genitals. But it is transphobic to claim to not be attracted to all trans, people. For example, there is a difference between saying you won't go out with someone for having a penis and saying you won't go out with someone because they're trans.

So when a cis person argues that a trans person has an obligation to come out to someone before dating them, they are saying trans people have an obligation to accommodate their transphobia. Plus, claiming that trans people are obligated to come out reinforces the idea that not being attracted to trans people is reasonable. But as I've pointed out, not being attracted to trans people supports the idea that transness is disgusting which is the basis for transphobic oppression.

The one scenario in which I would say a trans person should disclose their trans status is if they are going to have sex with someone and are unsure if their partner is attracted to whatever genitals they may have. In that case, I think it's courteous for a trans person to come out to avoid any awkwardness during sex. But even then, a trans person isn't "lying" if they don't come out and their partner is certainly not being "raped."

It is easy to look at the story of Jennifer Laude and claim that her death was due to the actions of one bigot. But it's more complicated than that. Pemberton was the product of a society that told him that disgust towards trans people was reasonable and natural. So when he found out that he accidentally slept with a trans woman, he killed her.

Every single cis person that says that trans people have to come out because they aren't attracted to trans people feeds into the system that caused Jennifer Laude's death. And until those cis people acknowledge their complicity in that system, there will only be more like Jennifer Laude.

SEE ALSO: Yes, You Absolutely Need To Tell Someone You're Trans Before Dating

Cover Image Credit: Nats Getty / Instagram

Related Content

Connect with a generation
of new voices.

We are students, thinkers, influencers, and communities sharing our ideas with the world. Join our platform to create and discover content that actually matters to you.

Learn more Start Creating

Donald Trump's Sanctions Toward The Iranian Government Are Giving Us Painful Flashbacks To North Korea

Whether the sanction is effective is uncertain. But just like the North Korean nuclear problem, there will also be an answer soon.


The recent news is that Iran president Hassan Rouhani is willing to talk with Donald Trump and the American government about newly established sanction towards Iran. Three months ago, Donald Trump announced that the U.S. would exit the Iran Nuclear Agreement and threatened to impose sanctions on Iran nuclear in 180 days. Recently, Trump tweeted what could be seen as a threat to the Iranian government.

Donald Trump wanted to force the Iranian government to change their economic policy. There are a lot of domestic problems in Iran. The Iranian government is busy expanding their power in the Middle East. The government used to support the Syrian government. The Saudi Arabian government and the West, which supported the Syrian Rebels, attempted to stop Iran from interfering with Syria. The Iranian government worried that the Syrian governmental crisis would affect their political stability. The overuse of the financial budget has influenced economics, causing Iranian people to appeal the government to revolutionize.

Compare the North Korean Nuclear Crisis and the Iranian Nuclear Crisis and we can see Donald Trump's similar strategies. Firstly, Donald Trump has put in a lot of pressure of either country to force them to give up the nuclear plan and improve economics instead. In the North Korean Crisis, last year, Donald Trump called Kim Jong Un "rocket man" and Kim Jong Un condemned him "crazy."

After temporary language confrontation, Kim Jong Un gave and was willing to negotiate with Trump beginning in early 2018. As for Iran, Rouhani also laughed at Trump's policy and criticized Donald Trump's sanction to Iran which was not supported by the European Union. But the latest is that Iran officials are still willing to talk to the U.S. In the trade war with China, Donald Trump also exerted the pressure on China in order to negotiate.

Many people dislike Donald Trump. It is undoubted that Donald Trump's sanction has effectively forced the country to open their economy to a larger degree of freedom. In the Kim-Trump Summit, the U.S. government reportedly played a video that assumed the future of North Korea.

In Iran currently, the inflation is so high that the public wants the economics to be promoted and anti-America sentiment is expected to end. As Donald Trump mentioned, the aim of the sanction is not to overturn the Iranian government, but to let them rethink how to focus on economics rather than on political stability.

Whether the sanction is effective is uncertain. But just like the North Korean nuclear problem, there will also be an answer soon.

Related Content

Facebook Comments