Social Media

I don't seek validation in 140 characters or less... nor should you


Watching TV and following major events while tweeting is a favorite pastime of mine. It's both enjoyable and irksome at the same time. I don't have as much time to indulge as I used to so when I'm on, I tend to get dive in and (for the most part) enjoy. In the past ten days, a few things that I watched while tweeting were the Grammys, a CNBC documentary on online dating, a PBS documentary Slavery by Another Name, and Whitney Houston's memorial service.

It must be said - one of the most infuriating things about social media is that people feel the need to critique your thoughts and emotions. No it's more than critique, there are people who exist to either dissect and oppose the things you express or vehemently try to get you to agree with them.

First of all, far too many of you are far too invested in these celebrity's lives. Does someone think Nicki Minaj is personally offended that I felt generationally challenged and musically confused by her Grammy performance?  Was it necessary for people to insist that there was no difference between Rihanna's tousled blond look (which I wasn't feeling) and Tina Turner's back in the day (which I loved)? Am I wrong for saying I gave not two shakes of a damn what went down with Bobby Brown at Whitney's memorial? It was Whitney's day, I can worry and wonder (or not) about Bobby after the woman has been laid to rest. Out of respect for the solemnity of the moment, I did not shade Tyler Perry or R-uh Kelly for their appearances at Whitney's memorial. Doncha know folks took time to call me a hypocrite. "But you HATE Tyler Perry." No. I don't. But whatever I feel for him and his body of work had no place at a ceremony where he was honoring a friend of his and an icon of mine.

Second of all, way too many people speak authoritatively and completely incorrectly at the same damn time. If I'm watching a documentary that says over 36 million people are on online dating services, how are you going to come at me with - "there a lot of desperate people out there." Stop. Yes there is some thirst but are you really making the leap that 36 million single people are desperate? I mean, c'mon, really? Then (and you'll love this one) while I was watching with horror and heavy heart at the treatment of African Americans in the early 1900's, I commented that unfortunately many of these closed-minded and narrow assumptions about people of color are still alive and well today. To which I was told to "get over it, stop playing the race card." Oh.

Third of all, stop telling people how to grieve. Seriously. This must stop immediately. Whatever way people have of dealing with grief - as long as it's not turning your world inside out - leave them be. Did it matter that some people who hadn't listened to a Whitney song since '92 were in mourning? Was their grief lessened because they had not steadfastly supported her over the last two decades? GTFOH with that. Every time a tragedy takes place, people go on the attack. As if you have to justify what you feel and why.

Lastly, stop assuming you know everything there is to know about somebody from following them on twitter, reading their blogs, whatever. My favorite (<~~sarcasm) tweet from Saturday was the following, "Chele, I didn't realize you were this religious. You never tweet or post about Jesus." Should I emblazon a flaming cross into the header of BnB? Should I hashtag all my tweets with #inJesusName? Can't I be a person of faith without tattooing the commandments on one ass cheek and the beattitudes on the other? Okay, that was a little snarky but Jesus knows how I meant that... :-/ 

Since when are our opinions not our own? Since when do our emotions need the validation of a mob to be legitimate? You feel what you feel. Others can disagree, so be it. Repeat after me: It is what it is. And sometimes that has absolutely nothing to do with me. 

Let folks live, won't you? Our time here is short. How about people get in touch with and own up to their own emotions and behavior before calling out other folks? Hmm? What would that world look like? Le Sigh.

BougieLand... thoughts, comments, insights?

So much outrage, so little action


A minor rant. Short and sweet today:

The really wearying thing about 24/7 news cycles, social media and smartphones is that everybody has access to just about everything constantly. So no matter where you turn, there is someone on a soapbox lamenting (in FULL CAPS!!!) wrongdoing somewhere. I'm not saying these aren't real issues, I'm just saying that in a lot of cases, these continuous rants are full of sound and fury yet signifying nothing.

It exhausting and disheartening. Sometimes I have to unplug from all of it and rediscover some Zen. I get confused. It seems as though activism is fleeting and unsure of its purpose these days. I see a lot of outrage and irritation and not a lot being done to back it up. Twitter/Facebook activism is only effective is there is activity to prop up the rhetoric.

Case in point -  Did you see Susan G. Komen get their epic back pedal on? Classic campaign started in social media - spread the word, get a bunch of people riled up, exert some pressure, take it to mainstream media, threaten to withhold funds, organize ways to unleash unholy hell on the organization, repeat and escalate until someone makes a change. 

I signed about 6 petitions to get Jan Brewer's wig snatched when she tried to scold the President like he was a house boy beyond his station. I also sent the Obeezy campaign some dollars. Granted, they shan't be naming me contributor of the year but every time I get offended, ticked off, outraged and scared shitless of a Romney-led America, I drop a lil sumthin' sumthin' in the O-Please-Let-Barack-Get-Reelected Fund.

I'm not going to lie to you, I'm going to start calling people out the closer we get to this election. I want to see the same people who campaigned ferociously for 2+ years to bring friggity-frackin' The Game back to television working just as hard if not harder to keep America out of the clutches of crazy entitled folks who may or may not be in discussions to send all the poor and "unreal" Americans back from whence they came. (Okay that's extreme but I wouldn't put it past them. I'm just saying. If Obama loses and someone tells you that you won a free cruise, don't get on the boat.) 

It's one thing to talk smack, finger point and head wag. But in the words of Sean Connery's characters from The Untouchables: What are you prepared to do?

Gisele, Roland and foot-in-mouth disease

I think stupid ratchet less-than-intelligent things all the time. I have the presence of mind not to say them publicly. Many a moment my hand has hovered over a tweet before slowly hitting the back button while I shake my head. "Naw, Chele - that is not for public consumption." I distinctly recall being interviewed on a Los Angeles radio station and having to bite my tongue for fear of letting my true thoughts fly free (only to have them bite me in the ass later). Apparently not everyone does this?

God bless Gisele Bunchen-Brady. Bless her. She's rich, attractive, married to a future Hall-of-Famer and has a lifetime supply of Vicki's Secrets to chose from. Good for her.

After watching her hubs lose a close game (to the same team he lost to a few years back) on Sunday, she loudly proclaimed that her man can't do every damn thing. He can't win by himself. In fact she stated:
"My husband can not f***ing throw the ball and catch the ball at the same time. I can't believe they dropped the ball so many times."
Oh. Keeping it classy.

Now on the one hand, I get it. I do. Having dated a player (or two) in my time, losses hurt and you're always looking for someone (not your boo) to blame. Secondly, that's her man. She's going to defend him and I can't be mad at that. Thirdly, even Wes Welker admitted that it wasn't his best game.

All that aside - really, girlfriend? When you kinda have ev-ery-thang and your man already has 3 rings, finger pointing at his teammates after a loss makes you look a little, er - sour grape-ish. Plus, it may not be a great idea to vent out in public. Where reporters and cameras may roam. Just saying.

However, I do not think she should be told to "continue to be cute and shut up." [Harsh side-eye to Brandon Jacobs] That's taking it too far. A wife is allowed to back her man even if her timing and delivery were a bit off.

Po' po' #AscotStruggle (Yes, this is how I refer to Roland Martin). During the SuperBowl after the Beckham undies ad {which was ni-ice!} aired to much fanfare, he tweeted:
If a dude at your Super Bowl party is hyped about David Beckham’s H&M underwear ad, smack the ish out of him! #superbowl
Oh. Might one assume he wasn't wearing his ascot whilst tweeting this?

These words were taken as homophobic and all hell reigned down on him. GLAAD asked for him to be fired, people started taking sides. He defended his statement (poorly, very poorly) and now he has been suspended from CNN indefinitely. 

I didn't think his tweet was suspension worthy. In a perfect world, he would have been given an opportunity to apologize and then host a town hall airing before the next installment of Gay in America. That still could happen but for now he's not allowed in One CNN Center over a mindless tweet.

I didn't take his comments as homophobic or advocating the beatdown of homosexuals, I just thought he was trying to be funny and it didn't work out. Again... know your audience and understand how things will be perceived. #AscotStruggle should know that he's not going to get the Don Imus, Dr. Laura, Rush Limbaugh "sorry I was douchey" pass. Only white folks who generate millions are allowed to say whatever the heck they want and keep rolling. Black folks have to rain mea culpas down, go to rehab, tap dance, do the electric bugaloo and pretend to be off meds to get second chances. <~~ A teachable moment in Black History Month.  

Here's the thing. Both Gizzy & Rolo should have known better than to speak/tweet publicly thoughts that were ill-thought out and better kept private. But let's be clear - Gisele will be back in angel wings and stilettos by summer while Roland battles to stay relevant. This is the way of the world. Foot in mouth disease in these here 2010's can get you scorned and sent home in no time flat. Let this be a lesson to all who think Twitter is just a fun social media tool. When the world is watching, know what to say...

BougieLand, any thoughts on the Gisele/Roland of it all? Have you suffered from foot-in-mouth disease before? Is there a cure?! Do share your thoughts...

Bougie Bachelor Chronicles - Twitter troubles


Le Dude has a crew of guys here in Dallas that he knows from his Georgia days. Some were his line brothers, others they adopted to the crew along the way. We've come to call the main group of six the Georgia Boys. David found BougieLand first and then joined Twitter. Trey followed and eventually Jay, Shawn, Wes and Bryan followed suit.

When all of the Georgia Boys joined Twitter, they thought it would be a fun way to keep up with each other and folks they'd met on the Innanets. There were some growing pains - they had to learn the difference between what you text and what you tweet. There was a learning curve about how to check and reply to DMs. (Some of them are still challenged.) There were rules of engagement about how much to share and what to keep to yo' damn self. Others realized that alcohol and Twitter are a dangerous combination. And some were slower to understand that what happens on Twitter is pretty much broadcast out into the world forever. Forever ever? Forever ever.

So right after the New Year's Eve debacle where we all very publicly tweeted our displeasure with each other, we had a CTJ (Come to Jesus) meeting about how Twitter will forevermore be used amongst us. (respectfully with discretion and humor) At some point during that discussion - it was discovered that three of the Georgia Boys were semi-sort of hollering at the same chick in DMs. Two of them were in trouble for tweeting foolishness that their wives read. Another realized that his boss was following him and reading every word. Another found out that a girl he had broken up with (and considered taking out a restraining order against) was following him under an alias. Whelp!

Now these are smart guys but somehow sitting behind a keyboard in an open forum things got complicated. It was decided that perhaps a period of reflection would be in order? A review of what works and what does not? They decided to self-suspend for 30 days. The suspension lifts tomorrow. Welcome the wiser Georgia Boys back to Twitlandia.

BougieLand - are folks less careful on forums like Twitter than they are in real life? Do you pay attention to the people that follow you? Have you ever been involved in some Twitter drama. And any words of advice for the fellas? Do share...

Sexting - It's not for everyone... please!


I know I said there were only three topics to kill and bury. But here's another: Sexting.

To me, subtle is sexy. I'm of an age where sensuality and attraction is so much of a mind game, I almost (notice I said almost) don't care what you look like. I'm into the context and the conversation and painting with all the colors of the rainbow (not just the cocoa).  I get that everybody's not there yet. With Skype, GTalk and YouTube and videophones and the like, the instant access to see and be seen has clearly gone straight to some folks' heads.

But now it seems, it's not enough to just send a few candid pictures. Now people are flashing the full monty to ev'body. Let the record reflect that if someone ever (ever, ever) says they have naked Michele Grant pictures... they are lying and/or skilled at Photoshop. I don't play with it. One of the ex-fi's had a picture of me completely covered in bath bubbles from the neck down with nothing showing but a foot and an arm and don't you know I zapped it off his hard drive last time I was there? Sure he might have a copy, but he'll have a hell of time identifying that ankle as mine. 

Early in my tweeting days, there was a guy who started chatting with me. The conversation moved to DM (direct message, supposedly private) and then to exchanged cell phone numbers and calls. Before I knew it, there at 9:00am one morning came the triple-chime announcing picture mail. I clicked to open and there was naked genitalia winking at me. In unsolicited and ungroomed high definition. Hold up, playa. I don't know your middle name, your street address or your city of birth yet but I now know more about you than some men I've dated! No. Sir. 

You can't just foist naked pics of your junk on unsuspecting folks. The sun hadn't even set yet. At least let me get an adult beverage and half an impure thought going. I was in business mode. It takes me a minute to switch gears like that. Where is the build up and segue? Where is the romance? Save some of the mystery, please!

In light of WeinerGate and FavreGate and every other gate involving some random dude deciding to overshare; I need to set a few BougeRules if you must indulge in sexting:
1. There's no such thing as internet security - know this before you click send. Once that picture leaves your phone and heads out in the ubersphere, you have no control over it. Sure, the person you sent it to swears they'll delete it but um... we've seen how that works out time and again. Send at your own risk, I'm just sayin'. 
2. By personal request only - I mean the person has literally said "I want to see naked parts of you now, please send candid photos." They didn't hint or giggle or suggest, they actually asked to see your naked body. Don't just spring that on folks. TMI. TMI! 
3. Mutually agreed upon disposal method - what happens to that picture after the other person receives it? Have you talked about a "NOT sharing is TRULY caring" policy? This bears discussion. I'd hate for you to be flipping though someone's blog and see a picture of yourself doing a nekkid spread eagle split, waving around a Grey Goose bottle, blowing kisses at the camera. Get the ground rules straight up front. 
4. Know what you look like - I'm sorry to say this but not everyone looks good naked. Think about it. Ladies, there's a reason some of us wear support garments. And fellas, don't ever hold a ruler there unless you have something to really be proud of. O__o
5. Tighten your game up - Even if you do look good naked, have you uh... groomed thangs? No one likes to see ashy, rusty, wild kingdom in 300 pixels or better. Nuff said. 
6. And last but not least - if you are a public figure (elected official, celebrity, member of the CLERGY!!!) or if you are in a committed relationship to someone other than whom you plan on sexting - Just. Don't. Do. It. I don't need another tear-stained "I know I've let you down" press conference in my world. 
On a serious note - I got an Ask A Bougie Chick letter the other day from a thirteen year old girl. First, I told her she really doesn't need to be reading BougieLand until she skates up past age sixteen but second, her letter frightened me to death. She said that the boys at her school told the girls that they will only go out with the girls that send naked pictures to them for "pre-evaluation." The hell you say?

I hipped her to some reality and told her to (first tell an adult about this nonsense) and then introduce the boys to terms like "child pornography" "underage sex offender" "unsealed youth record" "predatory sex acts" and things to that effect. And then I let her know that she had some prepubescent punks trying to run game. If she gathered the girls up and they united in a "heckie naw and I'm telling" campaign, the entire script would be flipped. What's wrong with these children?! 

That is all. That's the sum and total of what I have to share on sexting. Whatcha got, BougieLand? Do you sext? To whom and why? Got any "when good sexting goes wrong" stories? Thougts, opinions, commentary...