Social Networking and PSBs in MCs
an article by our site
- PSB or Facebook for Friends Status Checking
- Facebook Statistics and Studies
- Texting or IMing
- Social Network Tools
SOCIAL NETWORKING IS USEFUL FOR PARENTS to keep track of kids, express interest in their activities, learn what they’re up to, communicate with them via the social network, know that they’re safe, arrange rides, etc.
FROM THE PERSPECTIVE OF ALL MC ADULTS: "ALL MC KIDS ARE OURS TO CARE FOR." They're not the Smiths’ or the Millers’ or the family’s next door. So, whether childless or not, all adults pay plenty of attention to PSB statuses and caregiving schedules. How do social networks fit when someone’s in an MC? They seem to be mainly another means of communication. PSBs will do better for assisting with rides, for example, because someone who needs a ride can tell everyone in the MC at once. The social network may try to be a way to directly communicate about who is going to give the ride, but rides are time sensitive and most people check Facebook statuses daily or less, whereas PSBs are checked many times every day. All adults in the MC feel that all the kids in the MC are their kids to care for*, so with so many resources in the MC, parents don’t feel burdened to fill the needs of "their" kids. They know the designated caregivers on the MC Scheduler grid are taking great care of the kids, no matter who their parents are. (*Note: The phrase "their kids to care for" means they love all MC children and emotionally feel strongly that they want to ensure all these children's needs get filled. "Their" has no possessive connotations. They do not want to own kids or control kids. They want to empower and nurture their MC's kids because they care for them deeply.)
PSBs will do better for finding rides than Facebook because those needing rides can tell everyone in the MC at once; and PSBs get checked more often
TEXTING VIA FACEBOOK: Social networks like Facebook provide additional means of communication besides posts. Along with non-Facebook texting, cell phone, email, and chat communication, Facebook offers many such services as well. Statistics say that more texting is going on via social networks than previously (rather than texting through the phone system) since people are constantly logged into their Facebook pages, they can text right from there and receive texts there.
Statistics say that more texting is happening from social networks like Facebook
FIND MC PEOPLE: Social networks can also be used in the process of finding and learning about people you might want to be in an MC with prior to meeting IRL.
ON SOCIAL NETWORKS, THE LONELY GET LONELIER. Research like Is Facebook Making Us Lonely says that they do. People try to use social networks as a substitution when real IRL relationships are lacking or nonexistent. Many times, if there’s already a good relationship, social networks can enhance that relationship, the research says. However, if they don’t have any good relationships, social networks don’t create relationships or fill the void from lack of relationships. They often make lonely or friendless people feel more depressed and lonely about their lack of relationships after attempting to have virtual relationships on social networks. Social networks can enhance an existing relationship—social networks often mean that someone can meet up IRL with a friend when they know where the friend is going to show up due to communication via social networks. No plans are needed, just show up to connect. These uses may be mainly quite superficial, but may not always be.
Social networks don’t create relationships or fill the void from lack of relationships—they often make lonely or friendless people feel more depressed and lonely
Depression rate in the U.S. in 2011
SOCIAL NETWORKS ARE MOSTLY USED FOR INDIRECT SELF-ACCEPTANCE. This can be seen as their main downside. Those without self-esteem can be vulnerable to bullying and even predators. (Frequent Facebook users report good self-esteem, but they’re confusing self-esteem with indirect self-acceptance. When they get lots of Likes for superficial content and relate to lots of friends on Facebook, it tends to be an addicting way of getting acceptance from others. But since the acceptance is indirect, it vanishes once the person is not on Facebook just like the doper’s high vanishes once the dope is withdrawn. Real self-esteem is associated with DIRECT self-acceptance, and it is present in those that have it regardless of social networks use.) The problem is that the focus of looking for attention on social networks is a matter of context. If there is real self-esteem, there can be relating. If no real self-esteem, then attention on social networks is empty, and can only lead to depression and more loneliness. Social networks are not going to fill an unfilled need. If you’re secure by the time you’re a teenager, you’re not relating to others for the purpose of indirect self-acceptance, but you’re using the social relationships to try to figure out what your identity is, how you relate to people, how you want to relate to people, who you care about, and not care about.
Since the acceptance on Facebook is indirect, it vanishes once the person is not on Facebook anymore
BEST USE OF SOCIAL NETWORKS IS TO CLARIFY OR HELP FORM IDENTITY. How you develop and mature as an individual identity is critical, and clarifying this is the best potential effect of social networks, as opposed to looking for self-acceptance, an unfortunate use of social networks. Acceptance of the direct type, in an MC, would evolve before kids got to the social networks stage, so they would only need to use social networks for maturation and identity and camaraderie.
DEFICIENCY-COGNITION VS. BEING-COGNITION: There is a big difference between Maslow's deficiency-cognition and being-cognition. Being-cognition (seeing true reality) exists in a teenager that was brought up right and is learning to relate compassionately with others. Deficiency-cognition (seeing reality filtered through a haze of unfilled needs that distort perceptions of reality) involves laying needs on people and having a lot of emptiness feelings inside that one tries to fill up with indirect self-acceptance. There is a main psychological difference in these reality contexts.
Maslow's deficiency-cognition is seeing reality filtered through a haze of unfilled needs that distort perceptions of reality
This guy gets tons of acceptance on Facebook—funny how he dislikes himself anyway!
SOCIAL NETWORKS ARE JUST A TOOL. MC people will find social networks to be a good tool and have fun using them. But MC-ers will have a basic sort of secure, fulfilling "village" life in their MC that would preclude needing social networks for acceptance, compliments, and ego boosting. They would be with people in the MC for playing, planning, talking, working, or creating with friends, or to do caregiving, and any of these activities would be very satisfying, since people in being-cognition states would be fun to be around instead of simply expressing needfulness. (Those young enough to feel needy at times would be a pleasure to caregive since they are secure and know their needs have always been reliably filled and always will be.) MC people would use social networks, like non-MC people, for commenting on others’ posts and pictures (or updating their own) and giving likes and sending messages or chatting. But they wouldn’t spend much time on social networks, since their irl f2f social network is much more satisfying, real, honest, and nurturing.
Neighbors are nearby people we are stuck with, not friends we have chosen
MOST PEOPLE CANNOT RELATE TO NEIGHBORS VERY WELL AND SOCIAL NETWORKS CURE THIS. Currently, since few have neighbors that they can relate to, social networks can be another option. If someone is depressed and goes to social networks, they are likely to get exploited or bullied rather than the help they need, although at times there are people who will sympathize with what they are feeling, which is good. But social networks can also be looked at as a way to find people with similar interests, as your neighbors are not likely to have much in common with you. Coming to social networks lonely and depressed (in a condition of total deficiency-cognition), many people are trying to make social networks something that they aren’t: a way to fill their emptiness. They can produce the very addicting illusion of filling emptiness, however.
Social networks can produce the very addicting illusion of filling emptiness or filling needs—but they do neither
FACEBOOK IS NO CURE FOR LONELINESS. As mentioned, research says that those who are lonely only get lonelier on Facebook, although some may become friends IRL. An empty person doesn’t get full from hanging around online friends or texting. There’s no solution from any of that. The only solution is to deal with getting the nurturing that hasn’t happened earlier in your life. You can’t get that from friends distracting you online. Only an MC, or a good therapist, or someone in your neighborhood who is a nurturing mentor or caregiver (since you were apparently not nurtured well by parents or other relatives or you would not feel empty) can alter your loneliness status, even though enough distractions from texting, Facebook-ing, schoolwork, sports, and other activities can make you too busy to notice lonely feelings. This does not mean your depression or loneliness or sadness or emptiness are gone. It means you can keep busy enough and distracted enough to repress how you really feel—which is closer to losing yourself than finding yourself. There are many possibilities regarding finding a nurturing source, but not many likely ones. People are mostly alone and feeling empty and social networks are no solution. They do not fix anything. They can help you find people, but they won't give you a means to fix emptiness. Nurturing human contact is what people need.
Those who are lonely only get lonelier on Facebook
MOST PARENTS SUPPLY INADEQUATE NURTURING. The problem is that parents are too busy working to nurture well, and even those that take the time to try to nurture their kids well are mostly using bad parenting methods (authoritarian, permissive, unengaged/neglectful), and so are the alternate caregivers utilized when parents are at work: centers, homecare houses, babysitters, nannies, and relatives. Centers and people that practice good authoritative parenting do exist, but recall that nearly all those involved received inadequate parenting themselves, so caregivers are likely to revert to what they know, regardless of good intentions.
All of this results in insecure kids who are unsure of themselves, not skilled at relating to others, feeling empty, and extremely vulnerable to the lure of texting, chatting, Facebook-ing, and other social networks activities that will supply indirect self-acceptance, since they do not directly accept or like themselves. They feel empty and needy. They are other-directed (see The Lonely Crowd). They want to be autonomous (SELF directed) but neither their friends nor the role models in the media reflect true autonomy so they're not sure they'd know it if they saw it.
When actors in movies and dramatic or comedy series are offered drinks that they do not want, the actors 99.999% of the time accept them and drink them
For example, when actors in movies and dramatic or comedy series are offered drinks that they do not want, the actors 99.999% of the time accept them and drink them—which is the exact opposite of autonomy. These are not great role models! The alcohol industry LOVES this, of course, and probably(?) even pays them [writers] to write things this way. Autonomy is the result of good nurturing from any source, not necessarily parents. An autonomous person (or character) would never just change their mind about drinking just because another actor/character was pushing them.
PSBS ARE ACCESSIBLE FROM NOT JUST LAPTOPS/DESKTOPS BUT ALSO FROM MOBILE DEVICES BECAUSE PEOPLE CAN GET TO PSBS WITH SMART PHONES. Android tablet, iPad, Android Phones, Windows phones—there are plenty of devices besides iPhones that will surf the Internet. So now we have PSBs being mobile as well as computer based. The original PSBs were only on the wall in your house—they were stationary devices (1988, not much internet then!). Now PSBs are internet accessible from any computer or any mobile device that can get to the internet (phones, tablets, laptops, etc.). I.e., you can carry PSBs around with you now and check statuses anytime.
You can carry PSBs around with you now and check statuses anytime
SOCIAL NETWORKS USAGE WHILE LOCATED IN THE MC IS MOSTLY PSB. In the MC, there’s not a lot of reason to fool around with social networks other than with PSBs when at the MC. You’re mostly going to be concerned with your own status, your MC's friends’ statuses, your MC's children's statuses, and with your MC's caregiving schedule. Whether people are in the MC currently, or they leave the MC premises, they'll need smart phones or other devices to access PSBs and to check in and be checked on, check their schedules and make sure that they act responsibly toward what they’ve committed to regarding caregiving time.
Abraham Maslow says: when kids get secure, they 'adventure'
ADVENTURING: Regardless of whether the together/caregiving space is a special building or a room in a house, it’s still a place where people would want to hang out because that’s where the action is. People are happily around others that care about them and that they care about. They’re not running around with d-cognition, but with b-cognition, being creative. Abraham Maslow says: when kids get secure, they "adventure." Little ones can adventure outside the caregiving space if the block has been made safe with fences, there are no hazards, and there is no access to the street. Kids need to be able to adventure to see what happens when they ask to be with someone, but sometimes hear “not now—I'm too busy” (unscheduled person) but other times hear “okay.” They need to feel that they can be a social person seeking out companionship/relating. People say yes or no. And if "no" feels insecure to the kid at first, it's okay, kids learn that people have other things to do, things they have to do, and others they want to be with. Kids learn socialization lessons this way, and come back to their caregivers and tell them their feelings about their adventure—which is perfect! On the other hand, if they weren’t in an MC and they went to a tired mom who was their only option, that choiceless situation precludes the proper kind of nurturing then, and “not now—I'm too busy” would mean the kid’s feelings were repressed, swallowed, denied, and the kid is likely to get sad, angry, lonely, or feel he is bad or unloved.
In most situations today, 'not now—I'm too busy' would mean the kid’s feelings were repressed, swallowed, denied, and the kid is likely to get sad, angry, lonely, or feel he is bad or unloved
NURTURING REPLACED BY STUFF is a big insult to real needs.
NURTURING REPLACED BY STUFF is a big insult to real needs
MCS ARE A GREAT LIFE THAT INSPIRES OUTSIDERS. Having only a normal neighborhood to relate to/settle for is the antithesis of the MC. In an MC, you’ve already decided before you get around each other that those people are the ones you want to be around. These are your family now. You want an MC to be about how you can express caring for each other to the degree that everyone is secure enough so that they start reaching out to others, as in close encounters of the 2nd kind (outside of MC). (See Building Communities from the Inside Out: A Path Toward Finding and Mobilizing a Community's Assets and Why Do We Need Communities?.)
MCs would be an inspiration for other people to start an MC, or, occasionally, attract someone who they bring into their MC. The person (18+ years old, or 16 or 17 via the court document re: emancipated minor) would be going from d-cognition and insecure to quickly getting nurtured enough to be at b-cognition (after the initial shock of being around people who were totally different from what they were used to).
Cohousing playground next to Common House
COHOUSING? Initially the first people forming MCs would be just like everyone else except that they would be smart enough to know that they wanted to be in an MC, that the whole neighborhood is their family which will take getting used to, and that they'd only use good parenting methods. Some new construction in USA is supporting more extended families, which may work for MCs as well. Some MCs could evolve into something similar to current co-housing (share kitchens, washers, dryers, and sometimes eating rooms), but this is not likely considering the fierce independence of Americans—except when finances dictate cheaper options like co-housing, where living units are smaller and cheaper since there are these shared utilities.
When new construction or remodels are taking place, more and more of the customers are asking for multigenerational styles and over-the-garage apartments
OUTSIDE CAREGIVING SPACE: For teenagers, talking, video games, music, etc., wouldn’t necessarily be in the caregiving space, but perhaps in rec rooms or bedrooms in the MC. Little ones could be anywhere in the MC, but cared for/watched over. I.e., there would be more than one space where people would congregate and be together, but little ones would usually prefer the caregiving space. See Links to Drawings of Various Microcommunity (MC) Configurations.