TW talking about repercussions of abuse

Vaguebooking and subtweeting are two techniques in the world of communictions that get a lot of shit. This is when someone talks about a situation or another person without sharing specifics. Many people see these as passive-aggressive techniques. However, it only seems as though they do that when they feel targeted by these writings.

A classic example of these techniques is when someone writes about a situation they experienced at work without naming names. If we’re supportive of those situations, why are so many people against these methods for other situations?

There are many reasons why someone might engage with the world via subtweets and vaguebooking. Some of us can’t bring up conflict directly due to abuse and other circumstances. It’s important to honor that, especially when we’re working through it. My therapists have discussed this method with me as a way for me to handle things that bring on negative emotions. WIthout engaging in these methods, I wind up holding a lot of anger in – which increases my stress and physical pain.

On top of that, I’m terrible at conflict. Growing up in abuse tends to do that to people.

Sometimes, I won’t bring up an issue directly because I’m concerned about harming someone’s feelings. This is especially the case if a situation brought up a systemic issue – which it does more often than not for me. Other times, we engage in this to maintain our privacy.

Why are people upset about these anyway?

Well, part of it has to do with a lack of empathy for others. This may sound like a joke, but it absolutely isn’t. Friends know that this is something that I need to do for me and both my mental and physical health. They know that I will mentally and physically have a difficult time if I don’t release my emotions. When I subtweet or vaguebook, I do it because I have to get my feels out – but also because I don’t want to directly harm someone’s feelings.

A lot of it has to do with tone as well. I don’t think people are great at reading tone in writing. I gave a quick heads up recently to another patient about using ableist language including a link on said language. Everyone knows that I can be incredibly mean, but this was very kind and worded nicely. Assuming that I was angry, I’ve been on the receiving end of a (now muted) series of tweets accusing me of being a horrible person.

… which I feel like just solidifies my decision to subtweet and vaguebook honestly. Why would I share something with someone directly if I wind up getting harmed over and over again?

For those who have the energy today, I highly suggest reading this thread from one of my favorite people, Coffee Spoonie.

It’s from October, but so timeless. She goes on to share how she adjusts what she does and says based on subtweets that involve her as a person of privilege.

Subtweets, vaguebooking, and callouts – oh my!

Each of these is an amazingly effective communication technique for people in marginalized communities. As a queer disability activist, I’ve been able to use these methods in addition to callouts to let companies, organizations, and individuals know when they’re harming entire communities that may otherwise not be heard. I’m certainly privileged in many ways, but callouts have worked for me around my marginalizations – and for me to help others understand why the ‘joke’ they just made was racist.

I’m not the only one.

Riley has a great piece where they discuss the issues around callouts – and how it’s not the culture that’s wrong, but people who tone police marginalized communities:

The idea of “calling out”, first and foremost, came from Black femmes on social media who were being violently harassed every single day… The idea of “calling out”, first and foremost, came from Black femmes on social media who were being violently harassed every single day. That was the original goal of a call-out. To make someone stop harassing you.

When you shit on calling-out, you shit on Black femmes doing whatever they can to prevent harassment, and that’s supremely fucked up. Talk about MISUSE, not about the concept itself.

Call-outs aren’t what’s toxic. Those who have appropriated it for their own shitty ends ARE.

Shaun Scott shares more information about anti-callout BS:

What many critics call “call-out culture” is actually a past-due moral balance being called in. With interest added. Had our pain been spoken more consistently over a longer period of time, perhaps our anger would be a manageable trickle, and not an avalanche. But we never asked for the condition that required us to remain silent in the first place. Oppressed groups once lived with the destruction of keeping quiet. We’ve decided that the collateral damage of speaking up—and calling out—is more than worth it…

In the end, there is no imagined community that “call-out culture” corrupts; no solid consensus that it dissipates. All the dreaded call-out does is expose fissures that already exist between those who need change and those who say they want it. If the rhetorical identification of privilege and racism is on its own enough to alienate people who claim to be progressives, there’s good reason to assume that they were never as progressive as they claimed to be in the first place.

The criticism of our peers should not be enough to drive us to the arms of our enemies. Unless of course we secretly wanted to end up there anyway.

Judgments hurt, not justice

Calling those of us who participate in these issues terrible shows that you misunderstand callouts, subtweeting, and vaguebooking. As Eve Peyser writes for Gizmodo, “You can do nice subtweets. You can do profound subtweets. You can do beautiful, artful subtweets. You can do benign subtweets. Multitudes.”

Peyser gives an example of a tweet where they talk about an interaction with their mother, supplementing it with the following: “I get why people mistake subtweeting for talking about someone behind their back, I do, but online, there is no metaphorical “back.” For example, here I subtweet my mom. I’m not talking about her behind her back. I’m also not saying it to her face. Like with any other tweet, I am shouting it into the void. Ultimately, the subtweet is never for the person who it’s about. It’s for your audience. ”

Or, for many of us, for ourselves – for self-care.

Bottom line

If these types of communication aren’t for you, that’s fine. You don’t have to participate – just like you don’t have to get ‘gay married’ or have an abortion. You can unfollow or unfriend people like me who use these for a multitude of reasons. That’s fine.

What you cannot do is tell me and Lebron that we’re not allowed to subtweet something simply because you don’t like it.