Advocates and Causes and Social Networking

          What is an advocate? Growing up, I got the idea that an advocate was a person who spoke before legislators and lobbied them to get laws passed on behalf of those whom they were speaking for. When that word came to mind I would think of lawyers or other trained professionals with official ties to nonprofit or for-profit organizations. But in these days of the "information age" mass media and social networking, it has become clear that making a difference in this world has become much more accessible to us and that advocacy is not just for professionals or for those with the money and time to influence the powerful.
         Yes, in my younger days, years before social networking existed and before I discovered  this social networking, I would write letters to legislators on behalf of those vulnerable groups of people for whom I felt laws need to be changed for. I would occasionally circulate offline, paper petitions and participate in sporadic fundraising projects. But two years ago, I discovered social networking and especially, Facebook. And I saw something of what advocacy is. At that time, I was trying to bury my past and to "put it behind me" by trying to forget, since I could make no sense of it, there was no word for many of my experiences and no community that I could identify with concerning my experiences. In other words, no sense of belonging. So, as a way of what psychologists would call "sublimation" or using one's inner conflicts by channeling them into positive action, I got interested in following true crime cases and missing person cases as I viewed a few on television. This was a way of getting my mind off my apparently unsolvable, unexplainable problems. Plus, I knew that serious crime could very well happen to my family and me and that I wanted to be part of the solution instead of part of the problem by inactivity. Plus, I knew the Scriptural principle that "If a man does not hear the cries of others in need, he cannot expect others to hear his cries in his own time of need." At the time, I was disgusted with the media for devoting hours to celebrities while they gave only minutes to missing people. I was frustrated with them for their tendency to sensationalize the few cases they did cover. So, because of these reasons, I set up a Facebook account and began "friending" those whose profiles indicated that they were advocates for the missing, exploited and the abused, or whose profiles indicates that they had missing loved ones.
          All I can say is that entering the world of advocates through social networking has proved to be a lively education in itself. First, I learned, by trial and error, the right and wrong things to say that convey sensitivity and support for the families of missing loved ones or who had other needs, and what offended them or drove them away, making them see one as one of "the bad guys" even if I was just trying to help. I rarely had trouble with family members of the missing or murdered. The exception was a person who had a missing young person who was found deceased in a matter of months. Initially, I was on great terms with this person but this person became greatly angered with me one day with I posted on this person's page about a missing child who was also in this person's state. We exchanged messages that amounted to an online shouting match and the person's threat to have me reported and "stopped" because I was one of the "bad guys" and an "abuser" of families of the missing.
          Advocates have shown themselves to be quite a mixture in their ability to tolerate differences. Early on, I learned, the painfully hard way, that there are quite a few advocates who have chips on their shoulders and little tolerance for differences and were quick to "give you the boot" and remove me from their networks, if they disliked my beliefs, my posts or my posts on their pages about my causes. When I was still new to Facebook, I posted on the page of a person who was a respected missing person advocate, sharing the posters of two "cold case" missing children whom I hoped that this person would circulate among those in this person's own social networks. I checked this person's page a while later, hoping that I had an effect. I did, but not the effect I wanted! The posts were removed. Upset, I sent a messagge to the person, attaching the links to my message and appealing to the person to share them. The person responded but not in a friendly way, chewing me out for imposing my cases and my agenda on this person, and so forth. Again, our messages back and forth became an online shouting match that resulted in this person blocking me, apparently for good. Lesson learned? Do not engage those who disagree with you online, as people's monds are made up and online arguments are a waste of time and almost always backfire.
          I have found, in relating to advocates in my networks, that there are a number whom I count as warmly supportive and tolerant of differences and a number, like those, like the person above, who show little tolerance for differences or other beliefs or agendas. But the majority rarely, if ever, correspond with me, whether because they are "single cause" people, use social networks sporadically or for other reasons. I have found that my most awful experiences with advocates have happened when I applied for official volunteer positions with nonprofits that I learned about only online because of their online presence.
          Well over a year ago, I applied to a nonprofit that was hugely praised by many in my social networks. Craving a community to belong to and wanting to make a difference on a different level, I applied to the nonprofit, where I was asked, among other things, a disability-related question. I disclosed my epilepsy (noting that it was under control) and my Marfan's Syndrome and, in the phone interview, my undiagnosed autism spectrum condition. I was very elated and thrilled when I was told that I was accepted. I set up a new, official page for the nonprofit and its staff and volunteers "friended" me there. Almost right away, the account was hacked and those in my network received links to suspicious, "cheesy" material in my name. Soon, I grew crushed and depressed when I was abruptly told that I was "not the right fit" for the nonprofit and that I was dismissed as a volunteer. I was told that the nonprofit had issues with the dynamics of my family situation as they believed it would affect my ability to "be an asset to our organization." To make matters worse, I was told that everyone linked to this nonprofit was ordered to "unfriend" me on both my accounts. I was heartbroken to see that I was also blocked by a number of them. As this had happened during the Christmas eason, I entered into a depression that saddened my holiday. To me, this was a case of cyberbullying that was made worse by the fact that I could not prove a thing!
          A number of months ago, I applied to a second nonprofit, also one that I knew about solely from is online presence. I had corresponded with a few people who had official ties with this nonprofit and I admired their work on behalf of their chosen cause. So when they placed an online appeal for volunteers, I applied, striving for honesty and transparency in my application, though I saw the screening process as intrusive and excessive for someone who, in my case, was asking for the opportuntity to do online activites for the nonprofit. I also included a heartfelt piece that I hoped would explain my answers to the disability-related question on the application and any "red flags" that the nonprofit may find in my background. I hoped that I could receive empathy and understanding and a volunteer opportunity. After weeks of waiting, I got a curt phone call where I was told, unequivocally, that the nonprofit had no interest in my volunteer services. As this experience also happened around the holidays, I was left deeply distressed, disillusioned and turned off to the very idea of ever offering my volunteer services to another nonprofit. To this day, those in my network who have official ties to this nonprofit or who are its staunchest supporters, have stopped any form of communication with me. To this day, I remain leery of nonprofits that I learn about only online.
          It's because of my experiences with these two nonprofits that I remain a "self-directed" volunteer or advocate who works on my own, with no official ties to any nonprofit. I'm often mage aware that those who have official ties to nonprofits (and my network is full of them!) enjoy friendships, social connections, a sense of belonging and appreciation and recognition for their efforts, that you have a harder time finding without official ties to any nonprofit. But I'm not about to risk the prospect of identity theft to find these things.
          Why do advocates do what they do? From my observation, there are those advocates who get into their work because of their educational backgrounds, training and skills, who do their work professionally. Many in my social network present themselves as CEO's of nonprofits. While I admire these folks to their single-minded dedication to their chosen professions, I usually don't identify with them. Then there are the many, many advocates in my network who present themselves as "survivors" whose past traumatic experiences have compelled them into advocacy. This makes sense, as a big way of finding healing and redemption from one's past lies in using it to strive to make a difference in the lives of others. This illustrates the Scriptural principle that God allows suffering in our lives so we can comfort others who suffer. And finally, there are those in my networks who are "everyday people" who share little about themselves except that they simply want to help. They are often the best advocates who are agenda-free and are often the most likely to support me back.
          As I continued social networking and got in touch with my past, I began taking on multiple causes that I identified with, such as poverty, disabilities and injustice. I still supported the cause of missing people and crime victims but it no longer is it my exclusive focus. Many in my social network are "single cause" people who focus mainly on their own passion and whom I know I can't expect to show support for my multiple causes, unless any of these "meet with" their single passion. "One cause" advocacy is understandable in many cases, even though these are not people that I consider to be friends, as any positive experience with them is based on my support of their singular causes.
          Social networking with many "locals" in my area, including family and friends, has had a way of revealing the "true colors" of so many of them. For in the course of posting about my causes, from early on, I have seen that many of them would quietly and without dislosure, remove me from their social networks. Incredibly, these online deletions came from "church members," including a pastor's wife, youth workers and several family members and others whom I believed were my "friends"! This has taught me that Facebook and other social networks do not of themselves ruin relationships. Social networking only unmasks people who already know each other personally, or think they do.
          I have found out that there are many people who want no part of social involvement or causes, whether because they don't think they have the time, don't identify with any cause, don't think they can make a difference, or just don't care. And many "church members" tend to focus exclusively on their own relationships with god, family and their congregational life, forbgetting that Jesus tells us that we will be judged by our willingness to help the less fortunate and who combined His ministry with social involvement with all kinds of needy people.
          This has been a most interesting two years.
         
         

When Things Hit Home For Us

          I have noticed a very natural, univeral phenomenon and you may have noticed it, too. It is how we tend not to care about even the most pressing social issues until they hit home for us, or become real to us through being touched by it in our families, in our lives, or in or through our professions or jobs. Usually, people work with the most passion, tirelessness and vigor for those causes that have touched them in some way. In the area of cancer, cancer survivors, and those who have lost loved ones to cancer, most fervently labor to prevent/end cancer; specifically, they focus on the cancer that has affected them, whether that is breast cancer, ovarian cancer, lung cancer, liver cancer, prostrate cancer, pancreatic cancer, or any other cancer. Singer Sheryl Crow, a breast cancer survivor, advocates strongly for this cancer, and the Susan B. Koman Race For the Cure was born because of a woman whose life was claimed by breast cancer. Montel Williams, the TV talk show host, who has multiple sclerosis (MS), works hard to raise awareness about this condition through his show and in other ways. In the area of crimes against children, John Walsh, Erin Runnion, Donna Norris, Mark Lunsford, Dena Thompson, and others, are strong advocates for children, child safety, and tougher sentences for criminals against children; each one of these people and their families, have tragically lost children to senseless murders. In the area of abortion, it is those who have experienced the trauma and, yes, the guilt feeling of their abortions, as well as those who, abortion survivors like Gianna Jesson and Rebecca Kiessling, conceived of rape, who work tirelessly to end abortion, whether through awareness, education or practical help to families facing crisis pregnancies. Persons like these have seen and dealt with the evils of abortion and want to see its demise, whether from the viewpoint of those who have been traumatized by their own abortions, or who  have been conceived in circumstances where our society calls for abortion as a "solution" and they see it most strongly from the unborn's perspective. In the area of disabilities, it is families with loved ones with disabilities, and those with disabilities themselves, who most passionately work hardest for acceptance, opportunties and awareness of the needs of the disabled. Get the point? I'm sure you do. We typically do not get fired up about an issue, even an important one, until it gets real to us and touches our own lives.
          As a person who often uses social networking to promote my causes as well as support other people's causes, I have noticed this trend over and over. For I have in my network a wide variety of people who use social networks (SN's) for a variety of different causes. First of all, those on my page who are officially tied to organizations, especially Executive Directors, use SN's solely to promote their particular  organizations and pretty much ignore any other causes, important as these may be. It is these kind of people who I, generally speaking, have found to be the least supportive of my own causes. These causes/charities range from missing/unidentified charities or causes, domestic violence or child abuse causes, sexual crimes causes or charities, parental alienation causes (patental aleniation is when children are wrongfully taken from their families, usually as a result of a court order, allegedly). Many in my network advocate on behalf of cures, therapies, acceptance, and support for those touched by specific illnesses, disease, medical conditions or disabilities. There seems to be no end to the number of causes and charities.
          Whatever we are passionate about and as important as it is, we need to remember that it is, unfortunately, only one of many issues in need of advocacy, awareness, and resources. I see way too many people, caught up seemingly exclusively in the agendas of their causes or their charities, who seem to forget this. We have the right to ask other people to show support for our causes and to encourage us in them, but I don't think we have the right to expect them to be as passionate as we are about things that have touched our lives but which may not have touched theirs. For example, I know that I'm fired up about missing people because of the cases I have followed in the news and the books I have read and the simple fact that I know that having a missing loved one can happen to anyone. But I know that many people are unaware of missing people, have never been touched by this issue and don't think it can happen to them. So they, frankly, don't care. A person in my life has been heard to say, bluntly, "I don't like to see images of missing people. I don't want to know about it." Sadly, I feel that this person is just saying what many people are thinking. Indeed, when I discovered social networking, I did it mainly, at the time, to get the word out about missing people through networking with others; my intense interest in the case of Lindsey Baum, who had been missing for one year at the time (and who is still missing!), is what ushered me into the world of missing people. I started to add as Facebook friends, more and more people of my acquaintance. I would find, to my dismay, that many of these "local friends" would, one by one, remove me as friends and give me no warning. I suspect, and have had others tell me, that these people had removed me because of my missing persons posts that showed up on their home pages. As upsetting as it has been to see so many people come and go as "Facebook friends," I know that much of it is because many of these people, because of life experiences and because they have not been touched by these issues (or were in denial if they were), chose to remove me from their friends list.
           On the other hand, I have often wondered, does it require tragedy to make us care and get us fired up? Sadly, it seems to be this way. In my personal life, I know of individuals who have lost children to horrific murders and it was this that got them all fired up about justice, the law, and the safety of children. Before this, I doubt it if these people were as deeply concerned about these issues. The people I know who are most fired up about education and its issues are teachers and those with special needs or with loved ones whom the system has failed; this is because they are directly affected by the system; but we should all be concerned about how children, "our future," are taught and about education. Most uncomfortably, how many of us are fired up about global issues like world poverty or hunger or about the severe global religious persecution of people of faith, or the AIDs pandemic especially on the continent of Africa? These people, real as they are are and suffering (and in many cases, dying!) as they are, seem distant and unreal to us because we are closed off to them and we cannot relate to their experiences. And most of us cannot afford to travel abroad to see, firsthand, the conditions for ourselves, or go on "short-term missions," which many churches, including my own, promote. And, getting closer to home, how many people are fired up about texting and driving, or drinking and driving, until we lose a loved one to one of these? How many of us want to listen to the self-disclosures of people who share about their struggles and the shame and stigmas of things like sexual abuse, mental illnesses, hidden disabilities like autism, epilepsy and others, unless we have been touched by such things or have loved ones who have been touched by them? Do we really need to go through adversity to understand others who go though it? According to the Bible and experience, I think this is usually the case.
          In my own life, I have found that yes, it is my experiences that determine what causes I'm most passionate about and which I post about the most on social networks, including this blogspot. I'm fired up about neurological conditions like autism and epilepsy because they have affcted my life. I have grown up with offially diagnosed epilepsy (conpletely controlled for the past 16 years) and undiagnosed autism (high-functioning). And I have a daughter, high-functioning, who is officially diagnosed with autism. Growing up, I have often done to school with or been in other settings with those with a variety of emotional, learning, behavioral and other disabilities, and mental illnesses. Because of all this, disabilities causes are closest to my heart. Growing up, I was officially diagnosed with Marfan's Syndrome, a condition that affects the eyes, the connective joints and the heart's aorta (the heart's largest artery); this and my family history of heart disease, gets me fired up about heart disease and especially about women's heart disease. Also, our family has felt, to some degree, the effects of an economy gone sour, unemployment, and having to use government programs to survive; therefore I'm passionate about poverty, social and economic justice as well as the corporate greed and political corruption as represented by the Occupy movement. Having experienced so much bullying, and often vicious bullying, I'm fired up about bullying and about its causes. And I know that every person has his or her own story which has caused each of you to gravitate toward your causes.
          And we cannot assume that just because people are dedicated to a certain cause and are experts at that, that it follows that he or she can automatically relate to and empathize with our situations. For example, I have applied to volunteer at a nonprofit for those facing crisis pregnancies, and I have applied at a nonprofit for abused children and at another for unidentified victims. In each of these cases, I have self-disclosed about my disabilities and hoped that, because these nonprofits  presented themselves as caring for people and declared their belief in the priceless value of every human life; I hoped that this would translate to an empathy to the things I disclosed to them. Judging from their reactions to me afterwards, this was not the case! A passion for helping those in crisis pregnancies, abused children, and identifying John or Jane Does does not automatically translate to an understanding of people who differences or empathy for them. It's just like these nonprofits cannot expect people like me to automatically understand them; I have come to do so only through taking the time to educate mysef about them, coupled with knowing that any time ones of thse things could happen within my family or anyone else's.
          On a national level, how many of us, in the US or in other parts of the free world, were concerned about terrorism until that fatal, awful day on September 11, 2000? How many of us, on a national level, become stirred up about child sexual abuse until we started to hear one tragic case ofter another, about girls being found not only molested, but dead? It took high-profile cases of children who killed themselves because of their bullying, that got us to care about bullying and to take it seriously. It has taken one child after another, who has lost their lives to child abuse at the hands of parents or other caregivers, that has spawned national concern about this epidemic and has gotten us to talk about it. And so on and on.
          Yes, sadly, it seems to often take tragedy, sorrow and trauma to get us to take important issues seriously and to give them the attention that they deserve. If this is the case, then this is a sound argument behind the "Why?" concerning suffering. Think about it.