Skip to main content

Why Trust Anonymous People?

A lot of people don't trust anonymous internet users.  I have come to realize that anonymous users might in fact be more honest.  At least for me, my anonymity ensures that you'll hear MORE of what I'm secretly thinking, not less.

Here's the thing.  One of my neighbors (whom I have a very friendly relationship with) made these claims on a recent Facebook post:

- She and her children's rights are being infringed on when they are not allowed to pray.
- The United States is based on the Christian god.
- The Christian god is what made the United States tolerant.

Now, realize that on Facebook, I'm not anonymous.  I'm her neighbor and we have a good relationship which I don't want to risk.  So, in my non-anonymous response to her, did I act more or less like my inner self than I would have if I'd been anonymous?  Well, I acted less like my inner self and more accommodating.  Is this good in some situations?  Absolutely.  It keeps the peace.

If I'd been anonymous and we didn't know each other, I'd go straight to the Treaty of Tripoli, talk about Christian persecutions, say how most of the founding fathers weren't Christian, state that there is no way that any place in the United States forbids people from praying, etc.  But I wasn't anonymous.

I did choose to respond, however.  (A lot of times, I might not even risk it, but I felt I had to say something this time.)  The way I did respond was very cautious.  It turned out that the problem was some cross on public land being removed.  I "admitted" that the boundary between what is freedom and what is crossing the line is blurry, but I offered some tidbits of information and opinion.  I also seemed a bit like I was on the Christian side when I said that because America is a fair country with equal rights, Christians might have to let people of other religions put their symbols up on public land, too, so it might be better to just have them on private property if they don't want to see Satanist monuments in government buildings, too.  I also said that religious monuments which are historically significant shouldn't be taken down (which is true, but maybe I wouldn't even admit that normally).  You know, I was sort of not giving my full thoughts and feelings on the subject...or focusing on my more tolerant thoughts.  This is important in day-to-day relations.

In the end, it worked, as there was no real argument.  Just a discussion.  And one interesting thing is that this woman's son "liked" my comment.  I guess you do catch more flies with honey than with vinegar.  Still, that isn't my usual style.  I feel that when you're anonymous, you can say what is truly in your heart (or "brain", as a scientist might say).  But when you're not anonymous, you have to get by in society and that forces you into the role of peace maker.

Real names create happier conversations.  But anonymous names let people show their truer feelings.  And, to be honest, I like anonymity because letting my true feelings out just feels better than making peace.  I'm sorry, but that's what I think.  I really like peaceful actions, but unadulterated rhetoric.  Of course, I still like my neighbor and I will act kindly, and I think we all should.  But the truth is the truth.  Maybe my anonymous words would convince even fewer people that I'm right.  Maybe they'd convince more.  I don't know.  But I like being free to say whatever I want.  And that is due to anonymity.

When I'm talking about anonymity, I'm not talking about someone claiming to be someone else.  (That's trickery and should not be trusted.)  I'm talking about someone who doesn't use their real name and readily admits that.  I think these people are the most honest of all, even if some use their honesty to say, "STUPID FAGGETS R SICK AS FCUK!!1" instead of "I believe that children do better with a mother and a father." or "I'LL FCUK ANY HOTT WOMAN WHO WANTSTO TAKE IT IN THE A$$!" instead of "Come on, honey.  You know you're the only one for me!" because then we at least know what kind of person you are.  There is either politeness or true honesty.  Some people are capable of both at once, but most aren't.

So yeah, I might not always like to be around them, but I do trust anonymous people more.  And I can tell you that as long as I'm anonymous, you will hear things from my mind that even my closest family members, neighbors, and friends have not heard from me.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Fighting Klanophobia I'm always hurt when I see bigots offend groups of people.  All too often, people paint a group, "the other" with a broad brush and stereotype them as being evil, even though the crimes that are associated with them are only committed by a tiny minority fringe element within the larger group. Such is the case with the Ku Klux Klan.  Most people don't like to associate with them.  There is a lot of prejudice directed towards that group, particularly among blacks and Jews, but this hate is widespread.  If you see a klansman wearing his cultural garb, how do you feel?  Do you become nervous?  Do you think that he'll do something violent?  If so, you're part of the problem. The KKK is an organization of peace.  Most of its members are peaceful and only want to go about their lives without being harmed...like most people in this world.  Sure, there are a few members who preach hate, but that's true in almost every grou...

The Islamic State has beheaded at least 21 Christians in Libya.

Whenever a Muslim brings up the Crusades, I have to laugh to myself.  Christians have done horrible things, including in later crusades against Constantinople and the Cathars in particular.  However, get this.  The Islamic State militants said, "Safety for you crusaders is something you can only wish for" right before butchering Egyptian Christians. It seems that many Muslims haven't taken a single history class.  If they had, they would have known that Christians existed in Egypt for 400 years before Islam.  (Heck, they were even around to murder Hypatia, perhaps the last major ancient female philosopher.)  It was the Muslims who were the "Crusaders"...yet almost nobody will admit to this.  Muslims instigated a merciless war against Christian Egyptians until they were overcome and under Islamic domination.  They did this to people across the world, from Spain to India...massacring any who resisted.  They tried to destroy the Byzaintine Em...
Sokal-style hoaxes work for religious postmodernists, but (post) modernism is the real hoax Modernism in art and architecture, and postmodernism in philosophy are, like religion, insults to human intelligence.  Unfortunately, many people fall for their hollow propaganda. The "Sokal Affair" was a hoax whereby a man called Alan Sokal submitted a postmodern-sounding article to a postmodern journal.  It turns out that the English you hear isn't just unintelligible to you, but it's unintelligible to the people at the journal as well.  But if it's unintelligible, it must be profound, right?  The journal quickly accepted it, not knowing that it was all fake B.S.  They then got embarrassed when they were told that it was pompous-sounding drivel. Religion has done the same thing.  When people can't understand something, they generally think it's much more profound than if they can understand it.  If a priest speaks Latin, wears some weird costume, and sp...