To Be Announced

30 April 2019

The Devastation of Overfishing and the Major Problems with Aquaculture and Seafood

Starving marine life, and everything you need to know about sustainable seafood — if there is such a thing anymore…

There are devastating impacts from overfishing and farmed fish upon wildlife and our marine ecosystems. As we look at these issues, keep in mind that overfishing and factory fish farms (aquaculture) make all the other problems even more stressful and devastating. Sadly, the beautiful ocean of this Earth has become an extremely stressful home for marine life.

While humans may not live in the ocean, our lives depend upon the ocean as well. If the ocean life cannot survive, we won’t be able to either. Seeing all life on the planet as connected and interdependent, as family, is the most accurate viewpoint, when it comes to seeking a healthy future for everyone.

Graphic fact sheet from Change Market’s “Until the seas dry up” April 2019 report: “Fish Laundering: Industrial Aquaculture’s Hidden Paradox”

The April 2019 report from Changing Markets on Aquaculture addresses many of the critical issues we now face. Their graphic above contains the following information:

the ocean is sick and severely depleted
overfishing, along with climate change, demand, and pollution (sound, plastic, chemicals, fabrics, waste) are destroying the ocean’s ecosystems
billions of wild fish and crustaceans are used to feed farmed seafood
aquaculture is the fastest growing food production sector
overfishing takes food and livelihood away from the poor who are in countries without food security
the wild fish taken to create fish meal and fish oil (“forage fish”) are key to the food chain, including: plankton, fish, marine animals, and seabirds
the main forage fish within the food chain are: anchovy, sardine, herring, mackerel, and krill

Some carnivore species rely on just one species of food in order to survive, like the orca pod that is starving, in the NW Pacific, who depend on endangered Chinook salmon. It may seem strange, but it is really no different than the monarch caterpillar whose sole food source is milkweed (which is scarce due to heavy use of pesticides in the Midwest). Another example, breeding penguins rely on anchovies off the coast of South Africa. When the anchovies are not there, then babies cannot be born or are weak and may not survive. In South Africa, a ban was placed on catching “forage fish” like sardines and anchovies to help the endangered penguins. Evidence shows that bans like this help the penguins. Forage fish numbers can mean life or death for marine life.

The good news is: we can take steps to speak out against policies and practices that contribute to this kind of overwhelming devastation, and resulting starvation for marine life. It isn’t too late to take a stand with voice, choice, and actions. It is best to start at home, with our own lifestyle — and that goes hand in hand with political action. We can change our demand for food, while we support political and business leadership that upholds what is most ethical and sustainable.

Heartbreaking Impacts: Starving Marine Life

In just the past year or so, if you search the internet for news about overfishing and the impacts of aquaculture, you will find report after report about all kinds of wildlife that are starving to death, with little to no help on the way — like seabirds of all kinds, whales, orcas, dolphins, and sea lions.

These reports are not easy to read, yet it is important that we read them. If we turn away from the difficult news, just because we feel small and helpless about it, or too tender, we will not have the awareness that is necessary in order to make informed decisions. When we are aware of the problems we face, then we are able to respond to them more appropriately and effectively. And, certainly, people are becoming aware, and things are being done — but there is not enough momentum yet, and too much suffering is continuing.

Just this week, I wrote about the ethical issues involved with the Native American Lummi tribe’s call to feed the starving orcas in the bay of Seattle and Bellingham Washington. I do support their call to feed the orcas now. The fact is, aquaculture (factory fish farms) monopolize much of the food that would be in the ocean for our fellow living beings, like the orcas. We need to re-direct what is happening. There is a need to respond to starvation (whether they are human or birds, mammals or other sorts of living beings) by providing food.

Still, we are dealing with difficult problems. Feeding those who are starving leads to heart-breaking questions about a means for survival after the starvation is alleviated — because of other ongoing problems like pollution and ocean warming.

The stark truth is that the starvation tragedies occurring worldwide are due to: loss of habitat, pollution (like plastics and chemicals), loss of food sources due to overfishing and farmed fisheries, ocean warming, and climate change. It would be foolish to think that none of this will affect us humans. What happens to wildlife and nature is surely happening to us as well. However, we can still act to change some parts of this. But first, let’s learn more about the issues of aquaculture and sustainable seafood.

The Problems Of Aquaculture

Farming fish is meant to take the stress off of the oceans, provide a way to supply more sustainable seafood, and give us healthier alternatives to other meats. Instead, farmed fish and aquaculture has not decreased the demand for wild seafood, nor has it decreased the stress on ocean wildlife and fishes.

Why is this? Fish farms need to feed their fish, and that requires huge amounts of wild fish to be taken from the ocean, slaughtered, and turned into feed. In addition, almost all fish farms are filled with wild fish at the start. On top of that, the way in which fish farms are managed is for profit and expansion, not conservation and healthy sustainability.

Beyond these problems with fish farming, aquaculture also contains the same dark side that all factory farms have, they are: huge, crowded, have dirty containment with runoff; tons of antibiotics and chemicals, genetic modification, and inhumane cruelty.

As is too often the case in the United States, Native American beliefs and practices are not respected or protected enough in these matters either. Salmon are sacred to Native Americans. Therefore, Native Americans wish to protect the wild salmon that are now endangered.

Another problem: fish that escape from the industrial fish farms cause chaos and damage the local ecosystem by way of pollution, non-native diseases, and competition. The factory farmed fish that are crowded in nets in the ocean, also cause great peril for marine life. The huge and unethical crowding of the “frankenfish” draws attention from hungry ocean life, who then get entangled in the nets.

In addition, overfishing also takes away the livelihood and food from poorer populations around the world, who are dealing with the effects of climate change, and loss of food sources and clean water.

All of this translates into a massive humanitarian and environmental crisis and disaster. Suffering among the most vulnerable will continue and increase, until major efforts are made to end the corruption, exploitation, and abuses that are going on in our country and world.

A solution that is proposed for the impacts of aquaculture overfishing to feed the fish in their farms, is to depend more on freshwater and plant-based food for the farmed fish.

Unfortunately, plant-based food for farmed fish and other farmed seafood is another empty solution. Fish farms that apply this method, most often depend on massive crops, which demand huge amounts of resources. According to Anthropocene magazine, “demand for freshwater went up by 63%, both land-use, and phosphorus use (for fertilizer) surged by over 80%.”

This translates into increased pollution and stress on freshwater and land resources and ecosystems, due to corporate farming practices. All in all, aquaculture, as it stands now, is not sustainable. Just as factory and corporate farming are not healthy, sustainable, or humane.

Whenever profit and quantity are prioritized over life and collective and environmental health, we will find disastrous results for life and future.

~ C.S. Sherin, author of “Recipe For A Green Life”

Many of the major producers of fish meal and fish feed for factory fish farms commit to transparency and sustainability in word only. There are no real disclosures or transparency about the amount of wild-caught fish that are taken, sourcing, or sustainability measures — if any.

Despite all of these serious problems, aquaculture (including fish, shrimp and mollusks) are booming. Yet, most of these harbor all of these dark and dangerous issues, which are threatening the survival of life on our planet.

Sustainable Seafood Problems

If we are going to eat seafood, we need to make sure that we are choosing seafood that is healthy and sustainable. With all the marine life dying and starving around the world, we have to really sit with the question: is seafood really ever sustainable anymore?

Let’s start with the big official certification for sustainability. Does the seafood have a certification in sustainability from the Marine Stewardship Council (MSC)? Then it must be sustainable and good, right? Certainly, it is an important marker. Yet, much like loopholes and other transparency issues that exist with organic certification, this seafood sustainability certification also has problems and challenges regarding transparency and accuracy of claims. The Pew Environment Group thinks it is misleading for the MSC certification to use the word “sustainable”.

Some critically endangered species, according to the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) include: southern bluefin tuna, hawksbill and leatherback sea turtles. Some endangered species include: loggerhead, green, and olive ridley sea turtles, sawfishes, and blue whales. Whale sharks, humpback whales, grey nurse sharks and great white sharks are likely to go extinct if nothing changes. Close to being endangered: stellar sea lion, gaudalupe fur seals and California sea otters. Depleted species include: bottlenose dolphins, spinner dolphins, fur seals, spotted dolphins, and beluga whales. The Marine Bio site explains that the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) cannot give a complete picture of all species in peril. For example, barely any invertebrates are listed, because information on invertebrates is difficult to track. Source: Marinebio.org.

Is Our Seafood Sustainable Or Not? When thinking about seafood and where to get it, consider the following first:

How is the fish or other sea life caught or farmed?
Is the species being overfished? Is the fish farm dirty, irresponsible, and/or contaminated?
Is the fish or other seafood’s food source (forage fish) being overfished?
Is there an issue of bycatch? Young fish, hundreds of thousands of sea turtles, sea birds, and mammals like whales, dolphins, threatened sharks, and porpoises are victims of bycatch. There are 250,000 endangered sea turtles victim to bycatch yearly.
Shrimp and tuna cause some of the biggest negative impacts of bycatch, and are in high demand in the US.
Long-line vs. pole and line fishing (low bycatch methods)
How much are fossil fuel driven practices a part of the supply of the seafood via ships, farm, and transport?
Consider the source carefully. For instance, some aquaculture is a type of monoculture (like shrimp farms in Thailand) that cause serious pollution and mangrove decimation.
While there is not a lot of research about the long-term impacts of pollution like radiation, crude oil, microfiber and micro-plastic pollution (and the persistent chemicals that are attached) — these are all issues worth keeping in mind.

More Sustainable Seafood Choices

And finally, here is a short list of guides to help you navigate finding sustainable seafood on a day-to-day basis.

These are important issues to talk about, explore, and act on. I hope this has been a helpful and motivating guide for you. If you know of more helpful resources related to this, or good news related to any of it, please do share in the comments.

Aquaculture Sources:

“Factory Fish Farming” Food & Water Watch
“Industrial Ocean Fish Farming — Bad for the Ocean, Fish, and People” Friends of the Earth
“Aquaculture: Pollution & Disease” Seafood Watch
“Billions of tonnes of wild fish used in aquaculture” iNews UK
“Fishing the Feed: Until the seas run dry” Changing Markets Foundation
“Overfishing” Young People’s Trust For the Environment

Originally published at my old Recipe For A Green Life blog on April 30, 2019.

21 March 2019

Sustainable Fashion: What You Need To Know Current Movements, Realities, And Options Related To Sustainable, Ethical Fashion

Exactly a week ago the United Nations Environment Assembly launched the “UN Alliance for Sustainable Fashion” in Nairobi, Kenya. Its goals are to end the environmental and socially destructive aspects of the fashion industry at large. This new alliance welcomes other organizations to collaborate for the cause. For example, UN Environment is pushing for governments to adopt and maintain sustainable manufacturing practices. The International Trade Centre plans to promote fashion artisans from the developing world. The Food and Agricultural Organization plans to facilitate the use of sustainable oceanic materials for fashion, which they call “Blue Fashion.” Many big fashion companies have signed on, pledging to make changes in the coming decades.

A Destructive Industry

The fashion industry is responsible for ongoing negative impacts upon the environment and quality of life for people. The fashion industry:

Uses about 20% of the world’s water, and releases about 500,000 tons of synthetic microfiber pollution into the ocean every year. In addition, those who buy and wash synthetic fabrics (everyone), release significant amounts of synthetic microfiber pollution into waterways around the world.
The general quality of mainstream clothing is poor and synthetic. People now buy 60% more clothing than in 2004, and all of that lasts half as long.
8–10% of all global carbon emissions are from the clothing industry.
The clothing industry’s crops account for 24% of all insecticides used, and 11% of all pesticides used.
Hundreds of billions of dollars in clothing are wasted each year by the fashion industry due to an absence of recycling, and never-used-waste that goes to the landfill.

(Source: UN Environment Press Release, March 14, 2019)

The Fashion Industry’s Dark Side

In addition to the statistical information, the fashion industry has yet to invest seriously in hemp, organic cotton, and linen in a way that is inclusive and affordable for the average person. It is the choice of the industry so far to lean heavily on synthetic fibers in order to cheaply produce clothing and fabrics for the mainstream. This leads to huge amounts of destructive waste and pollution.

The dark side of fashion has always included animal cruelty, outsourced slave labor and child labor, trends that are wasteful and encourage reckless waste, objectification of the female body, and elitist glamour that saturates ads that prey on youth — who are especially vulnerable to eating disorders and body dysmorphia.

The fashion industry is not just high fashion, trends, niches, and the runway — it is also chain stores that overstock cheap garments of little quality and short life, lingerie, and athletic wear. And it is forever linked with the beauty industry (which is saturated with these issues as well). The fashion/clothing industry is much like the major corporations that continue to manufacture single-use plastics daily — they are responsible for ongoing reckless waste that is polluting and suffocating so much of the planet.

A Movement For Positive Change

Initiatives like the UN Alliance for Sustainable Fashion can hold the fashion industry accountable in ways that inspire many to turn things around for the better. The fashion industry, like the rest of the world’s wasteful, toxic systems, must make never-before-seen levels of radical change, which turn exploitation, destruction, and abuses into healthy, ethical, empowering, and sustainable practices and promotions.

While the UN Alliance for Sustainable Fashion is tackling the issue of plastics related to fashion, it is unclear if the change will be made quickly enough to save our ocean and resources from the damage that has built up, and that continues daily.

New Options In The Search For Sustainable Fashion

Emma Watson, a champion for gender equality and LGBTQ rights, is also using her positive influence to recommend a sustainability-driven fashion operative called, “Good On You.”

“I support Good On You because I need to know my clothes do not harm our precious planet or its people.”

~ Emma Watson

Good On You provides many helpful explanations on materials, concerns, resources, and reviews on their website, as well as an app and presence on social media. Good On You rates clothing lines according to the sustainability categories that they most value, which include: impact on workers, resource use, energy use, carbon use, impacts on water, chemical use and disposal; animal welfare, leadership on issues, and standards like Fair Trade. They avoid brands that greenwash and lack transparency. They give a rating of “Not good enough” for brands that don’t provide enough transparency. The “It’s a start” rating denotes that the brand is making progress. And the other ratings are “Good” and “Great.”

Fashion Revolution is a UK based inclusive global movement for ethical action and change in the fashion industry. They call themselves “pro-fashion protestors” because they see fashion as positive, and yet want it to become truly sustainable and ethical.

We love fashion. But we don’t want our clothes to exploit people or destroy our planet. We demand radical, revolutionary change.

~ part of Fashion Revolution’s Manifesto

This organization appeals to all people in general, brands, retailers, producers, students, and educators to get involved. They have global representation, networking, regional articles, and an action center.

The Good Trade is an online guide to ethical and sustainable choices, some of which take budget into account for: fashion, beauty, wellness, home, travel, food, and lifestyle. The website style is very much like a magazine, with ongoing feature articles in the different genres of topics. The shopping guide for fashion does identify many brands that are organic, sustainable, and “affordable.” Affordable is in quotes due to the relativity of that particular word, especially in articles featuring fast and new fashion.

Between Affordability And Sustainability

Platforms like The Good Trade are helpful in some ways, but none like it seem to really address the plight of most people, which is that wages are not matching the demands of inflation and cost of living — leaving a lot of the organic, sustainable, ethical options out of reach, no matter how “affordable” fashion folks deem certain brands.

For example, a similar platform, EcoCult, published an article, “The 18 Most Affordable Places to Buy Sustainable, Eco-Friendly, and Ethical Fashion.” I would recommend reading all the comments made in response to this article, as they highlight the realities, and the varying ideas on where the ethical line is drawn between supporting large businesses making an effort (with some greenwashing going on) and real, accessible, ethical choices.

What is ultimately highlighted or felt in well-meaning, even helpful articles like this is the dissonance present in our culture due to systemic dysfunction, corruption, privilege, and disparate levels of financial means.

The comments reveals two key things. One, the “affordable” options are not affordable for many. Two, recommending companies that greenwash can and does erode the trust of readers — especially when they are already accepting sponsored products on the author’s transparent ethical stance. Of course, the advice given for those who cannot afford the “affordable” is the only advice that can be given: shop secondhand — thrift your way to lasting, ethical fashion.

Secondhand clothing is, indeed, one of the big answers, yes. And so is: buying less and divesting from new fashion entirely. Or choosing to invest in new clothing only when you can source it ethically and sustainably, which may be through local/regional people, rather than from companies.

From Corporate Alliances To Grassroots Action

The big industries need to be held accountable with restrictions and taxes made into law that enforce the changes needed. All of the different organizations and movements in the world pushing for ethical, sustainable fashion address the needed change on different levels, with many different ways of putting it into action.

In regards to fashion, for those of us who are directors and designers of our own sustainable and ethical lifestyle changes, the ongoing values that inform actions revolve around: reducing and eliminating waste, buying less, buying thrift/secondhand, no more buying, trading and fixing, mending or transforming what is wearing out. And, avoiding synthetic fabrics whenever possible.

We can’t afford fast fashion. We can’t afford ethical fashion, for that matter, until wages are updated with inflation. In regards to our future on this planet, life can’t afford for us to keep buying and wasting.

~ C.S. Sherin, author of Recipe For A Green Life

Secondhand Clothing options run the gamut from little shops to big operations — local, regional, and online — that provide truly affordable clothing. My Wardrobe HQ is an example of an online buying, selling, and renting operation for clothing. Money earned is used to buy or rent fashion on the site. The site requires participants to do their own shipping, packaging, and printing of labels. This includes use of single-use plastics and paper.

Brick and mortar outfits may provide a more sustainable option in light of packaging and shipping related to online operations. Yet, many secondhand operations may or may not be making strides in how they run the business. Secondhand operations may or many not choose to depend on the use of: stickers, single-use plastic tags, hangers, bags, chemical air fresheners, and other single-use items related to clothing protection, purchase, and storage.

In many areas where a large city is nearby, there are often various shops that provide secondhand clothing in the niches of vintage, brand name and high fashion, in addition to the regular and mainstream options. In some areas, there are also shops with some options for locally or regionally handmade clothing. And why not combine the two?

A creative and talented thrift shopper may find secondhand clothing that doesn’t quite fit, but has an idea for it, and knows how to sew and create new clothing from what is salvaged at rummage sales and the like. Or, a creative and resourceful thrifter can obtain the salvage items of clothing and enlist a local tailor or seamstress to fix and recreate items for them. This is another level of thrift that incorporates re-purposing and upcycling.

Stop Buying Clothes

Clothing exchange groups are a part of the natural solution to the excess and need present. Free exchanges of clothing provides the opportunity to reuse, re-purpose, and help one another — without a price tag always being attached.

Pop-up shops and secondhand clothing shops can provide events where people can trade clothing items using the one-for-one policy. This seems a most exciting new movement for the general population. Fairness in what is traded, and proposed value for an object is erased in favor of need and demand. Value of one-for-one is straightforward and no-nonsense. Perhaps more detailed or other approaches are successful as well, like: a dress for a dress, a shirt for a shirt. That policy would be the like-for-like policy. There are many options for sharing, trading, and renting, and they are not limited to casual or practical fashion.

Rent and Swap sites are another way to satisfy fashion hunger without buying. Online sites like Rent The Runway and Style Lend facilitate the renting of high-end, exclusive clothing. Rent The Runway works on a two tiered monthly membership fee of $69 or $80 per month trial offer ($89 or $159 per month after trial), that can be cancelled at any time. This is not affordable for everybody, but it does fit a need and reduces waste and buying. Style Lend is similar in approach to My Wardrobe HQ. To be clear, since they are not — “lending,” in this context, means renting. There is no lending going on in — in the sense of a friend lending a friend an article of clothing — free. That would instead be in the category of the previous paragraph, clothing exchange groups. So yeah, none of the Rent and Swap sites are actually swapping or lending for free.

The Rent and Swap is a solution for those who have the budget, and only wear items a few times for events and special occasions or due to lifestyle and/or profession-based demands. These platforms eliminate buying, while allowing the joy of fashion to be spread, as well as a secondhand profit from it that keeps investing in rented items. With this option, the concern of shipping materials and emissions remain an issue to weigh and consider carefully. Local or regional brick and mortar rent and swap sites would be a better choice, when available.

Overall, we need all the solutions in order to address the many layers of challenges and problems within the realm of fashion, for the industry at large, and for all people — in all the situations we find ourselves in. What we don’t need anymore is ongoing inaction, greenwashing, destructive waste and pollution, and a terrible lack of enforced accountability.

*Originally published at my old blog for Recipe For A Green Life, on March 21, 2019.

06 November 2018

They Say The Best Things In Life Are Free, But Facebook Isn’t One Of Them... You Pay With Your Most Valuable Currency!

Updated: January 2024, C. S. Sherin

Image by Geralt on Pixabay

I left Facebook (FB) back in June of 2018 — not long ago. In fact, I would like you to appreciate the fact that I left about a month before my birthday. I did that purposefully, and I am glad I did. For those familiar with that particular hook that keeps many in FB, it is the ego gratification of 50–100s of birthday greetings from “friends.” What I discovered is that the people I am truly close to found a way to wish me a happy birthday without FB — go figure.

Leaving, for me, wasn’t just about privacy issues and scandals, the experience of negative effects from FB, or the negative repercussions it and other social media has on young people. All of that definitely made my decision to leave FB more firm and resolute, yet my personal reasons for leaving revolved around how FB tended to suck the creativity and inspiration out of me, while also leaving me at a loss in another way.

The layers of FB became over-stimulating, yet empty, and I saw how relationships I was excited to have on FB eventually faded into laziness and apathetic connections. I was receiving way too much input, much of it useless, with very little return, and it became a compulsive loop of behavior to check in anyway, and scroll into oblivion.

As we know, there are real benefits to social media like FB, and I really miss a few truly good groups and quality sharers. But, not enough to compromise what I have re-gained in leaving. I am more inspired, more motivated, and more productive since leaving FB. I will add the caveat that my husband is a musician who benefits from the local events aspect of FB, so he remains there in a minimal way. He does show me pics of close family and friends when he is on. Some people only share on FB, and don’t visit or call their friends much. They certainly don’t visit with weekly photos of everything they are doing— and aren’t we glad people don’t — in real life? So, I have contact with FB, but it is quite minimal.

I had been on the platform since around 2008. In that span of time a lot changed, on Facebook and on the Internet in general. The very first version I experienced of FB was the best one, in my opinion. It wasn’t layered or mired with problems, and was kind of old school in a good way.

As FB aged and morphed into what it is today I became more and more annoyed at how it is so unnecessarily complex, and breaches basic healthy boundaries of relationship. For example, people could force me to join a group message or a group without asking me first, and my relative’s friends may friend me, or unfriend me.

Photo by Chase Wilson (jiggliemon) on Unsplash

Can you imagine if that happened in actuality with the forced group join? Someone comes over to my house, forces me into their car, and takes me to their favorite Meetup group about something that I am not interested in at all. They don’t say hello. They don’t explain. In fact, they don’t even normally talk to me, nor do they, when they come to get me for their group.

That is seriously messed up.

And when we want to leave a group message that we didn’t create, and don’t want to be a part of in the first place, FB announces to the group that “so-and-so” left.

Awkward.

Poor structure and design like that creates interpersonal conflict and tension that would not have been present otherwise.

FB structures place tension upon relationships, and create problems, where none would normally have existed.

Facebook creates unnatural and forced connections in other ways as well. There isn’t a natural and healthy boundary of acquaintance, co-worker, past friend, current friend, family, etc.

FB puts everyone at the same par, tone deaf to the real life varying levels of intimacy to estrangement. There is no nuance or spectrum, despite their claim that we can tailor who and what we see.

That is true in word, but unspoken norms force us (against our natural and healthy instincts) to accept friend requests and to “like” comments in certain circumstances. Not to mention the tiresome and layered controls to filter out who you don’t want to deal with. For non-tech savvy people, it is too complex, too many layers!

This seems a gross mismanagement of relationship to me. If someone saw me a few times in real life, or just once, or they know my spouse, mother, or a friend of a friend, or some other awkward connection, there comes an eventual request (demand) to become a FB “friend.”

In addition to this, FB makes actual friendships and true connections lazier and taken for granted, because of the sharing and over-sharing going on. There becomes no need to connect, when you already feel that you know and see everything. The connection won’t deepen in most cases.

Some of the curses of FB — like misunderstandings, unfriending, abuse of invitations, blocking, monologues, showboating, and a junked feed — even when preferences are dialed in — can have long term consequences in real life. Dynamics, relationships, and patterns of relating outside of FB are altered because of FB.

There are, of course, good things to it too, or people wouldn’t stay. The good things go like this: instant gratification of connection to friends and family in real time — despite geographical distance — with photos and thoughts; conversation with wonderful people (in groups or individually) you wouldn’t have otherwise met or known about; free easy access to community, local events, local businesses, some grassroots activism via events, and “do-gooding” that is shared. That’s it. The rest is junk and a headache (I am not going to even talk about privacy issues or Messenger, ugh).

All of this, so far mentioned, are just the trivialities — a distraction from the actual reality of Facebook. The reality of the virtual face book of friends, FB, is that it is not free — not really — not at all.

The proverb goes, “The best things in life are free.” That is true, in a deep, spiritual, and practical way. Quality time with loved ones, true friendship, health, libraries, silence, peace, joy, a compassionate presence when one is suffering; thinking, breathing, feeling, loving; being active, time in nature, and that sort of thing are free and they are, arguably, the best!

Some things in life that aren’t free can also be the best, like: dessert, traveling, and health care. And some things in life are meant to be free, but aren’t always, like: clean water and air, civil rights, and education.

“Friends” by Dario Valenzuela (@darvalife) on Unsplash

Yes, FB, in stark reality of money/dollars and fees is quite free, unless we pay for advertising for our business or organization. Yet, we are paying dearly for all that free space and time on Facebook. Yes, the important thing to ask ourselves is: Are we aware of it?

Facebook not only mines our data, it also mines our personal resources — our time, energy, emotions, thoughts, beliefs, and self-worth.

Our personal resources are our fundamental, and most valuable currency in life.

Our personal resources are as precious as our shared resources are: water, air, soil, land, ecosystems, communities, social security, insurance, health care, and education.

Your unique presence, energy, feelings, thoughts, being, and time are immeasurable in monetary value.

Let’s take a closer look at what we are using to pay FB, and what FB gives us in return.

We pay FB with our time. FB gives us endless scrolling, hooks, bells, and emojis. Endless scrolling enables prolonged visits. And despite tailoring one’s preferences and only following what is of most interest, there still seems to be a downhill slope of long and endless scrolls to find substance, or whatever. FB is designed to be as addictive as possible in order to keep you there for as long as possible. FB is funded by advertisers, researchers, and business. They want to hook us and keep us there for many reasons. Giving away our time to FB can be like giving away our prized possessions or money to someone who doesn’t really care about, and wants to take advantage of us. I don’t know about you, but when I find a person who consistently seems to want to take advantage of me, I steer clear of them. It’s a big turn-off, you could say. FB is an ongoing loop of Pavlovian type conditioning (emojis, likes, and echo chamber affirmation) to keep us hooked. In real life, with jobs and work, we are paid by our time — hourly or via salary. Paying FB with our time can result in us being trapped in a subtle addiction that we are tempted to never take seriously, minimizing our own value and the value of our time and life.
We pay FB with our presence. FB gives us virtual space, networking ability, and simulates community for us. This is, by far, is our most valuable and powerful personal resource — our presence, each person’s presence — also known as health, energy, and being. What is the most real and important gift you can give to another person? Your presence. It costs nothing, yet it is precious. When a loved one dies, what aches more than anything else? The physical absence of our loved one. And when we are ill or scared or hurt, what is the greatest salve? The loving presence of someone who is really there. The energy and being that is you, each of us, is unique and irreplaceable. There is no real monetary equivalent for what our presence is worth. Sharing it with others needs to be considered seriously and consciously. FB simulates an experience for us, which is virtual. FB simulates the experience of community, company, friendship, and presence. This simulation can act as a replacement for real physical contact with people — it can sometimes end up replacing the impulse to engage in real intimacy, dialogue, and friendship. Seeing someone else’s photos, comments, and shares can take away the natural desire to connect and go deeper. So, as we pay with our presence, spending time, energy, and attention on FB, we are given, in exchange, FB’s dysfunctional simulation of connection, friendship, and community. In addition, what we choose to share on FB can make us seem like our life is something other than it really is. We shut our selves off from real sharing, and sometimes we become depressed thinking our lives aren’t as good as what others are sharing theirs to be on FB. Our mental health can suffer due to social media. It is fair at this point to acknowledge that for some folks who are unable to socialize or connect due to real challenges, disabilities, or limitations, this sort of community can be a huge blessing. I don't wish to detract from that. Yet, I still assert that things are not incredibly ethical or healthy there.
We pay FB with our beliefs. FB helps us to segregate ourselves! We customize our experience according to our beliefs and values. We provide FB with an ongoing anthology of our beliefs. What we believe can be: scientific, logical, religious, political, philosophical, moderate, extreme, esoteric, sci-fi, moderate, extreme or hate-based. It doesn’t matter. All sides, spectrums, views, statements... can be manipulated, researched, and used — all of it is data that can be capitalized upon — by corporate, private, and political interests. This collective data of our beliefs, choices, habits, REACTIONS, and preferences allow unprecedented amounts and kinds of information about the psychology of us, and more. Propaganda and advertisers have long hinged their approaches upon the hidden psychological tendencies, habits, and weaknesses of humans in order to profit and manipulate, in order to gain power, dominance, and profit. FB is no different. FB states an altruistic motive and mission as its operative and public goals. Yet, only when it has been exposed has FB decided to purge accounts that were created to sabotage our political system. Accounts still remain that are openly violent, hateful, and abusive. FB does not close them all, despite the claims of being altruistic. In reality, the currency of our beliefs can be used, manipulated; and may be seen as a greater value of currency than money, for those who wish to dominate in power, corruption, and greed. Paying FB with our beliefs can be tricky, because for those with low income and startups with no capital, FB may be one of the few platforms where they can network and make a way for themselves. Another disturbing trend on FB related to the currency that is our beliefs, is this: there is a general consensus, among even professionals, that there is no need to fact check or for accuracy of statements made on FB — as if we set aside our ethics and standards at the FB login. The seemingly small degradation of due research and verifying information is, in actuality, no small erosion. It creates a wide gate for more unhealthy relating, distortion, and abuse on the Internet at large.
We pay FB with our emotions. FB gives us ways to express our emotions, all the time. Our emotions are neither good or bad. They simply are. There is no real need to judge them. When we simply acknowledge the feelings we are having, and handle them in healthy and constructive ways, it is all good. Emotions are natural responses to life and living — they are instinctual. Emotions only become bad when we react in harmful ways, hold on to them, and allow them to fester; or push them down and deny them until they explode or implode — harming ourselves or others. Emotions can be directly tied in to our beliefs. If we identify with our beliefs — if we think we are what we feel and believe — then it becomes very easy to be emotionally manipulated, and to become emotionally reactive when our beliefs/values are being threatened or attacked, or we think they are. Few adults, let alone children, are taught how to handle and healthfully channel emotions. We need to, but it doesn’t happen formally, or commonly enough. And that is what advertisers and politicians count on. Emotions and political fights and tirades run high on FB. It's great for profits, but is it healthy or productive? If it was a platform that encouraged and facilitated healthy boundaries and relationships, and healthy techniques, paying with our emotions wouldn’t be a problem, really. Paying with our emotions is a drain to our energy, as it is. It is energy and time that can be otherwise spent being and doing what fulfills us; and toward what makes a difference in our lives and the lives of others. Sometimes we can do that and share it on FB. Some are doing amazing good, and sharing it there in healthy ways. And that is the good of it. But, those are the exceptions, not the overriding experience on FB. They are the healthy fish in a sea of plastic waste. Emotions, when healthy and flowing naturally, with a responsible awareness, do not attack, or over-react to what is or isn’t happening. That doesn’t mean that we can’t express anger. It is healthy to express anger. Just not in ways that harm others or build up a force of hate and sabotage. Sharing our emotions with one another in an honest, supportive, and responsible way can lead to transformation and growth. If we understand how our emotions work and are responsible for them, then we can consciously choose to withdraw our unhealthy emotional payments to FB.
We pay FB with our self-esteem. FB gives us ego-gratification hits via likes and followers. There are many ways that we pay FB with our emotions, yes. Our emotions and thoughts are directly linked to our self-esteem. Healthy self-esteem allows us to have healthy relationships and self-worth that is neither too narcissistic nor too selfless. Positive self-esteem and a healthy valuing of our life and self leads to greater fulfillment and better quality relationships. Self-esteem is a root that our values, beliefs, and possessions take shape around. Healthy self-esteem in such a corrupt and superficial culture is hard won. Many of us who have it, may still struggle with keeping it. It has been found that those with self-esteem issues and low self-worth may be vulnerable to FB addiction. FB capitalizes on our weaknesses in relationships and in our self-esteem. We pay by disclosing our likes, emotions, thoughts, and giving up much of our time and energy to it. Facebook found a way to appeal to all sorts of people with the “like” button. The like button then got enhanced with options for emoji reactions within the like button. This button and it’s emojis are the veritable morphine-like shot of ego buffing that hooks so many. For those with low self-esteem, for those with big egos, for those with narcissistic tendencies, for those hungry for affirmation — the like button and accompanying emojis are both the Pavlovian bell to condition us, and the drug of choice to keep us hooked. Better yet, for FB, the data we provide through our habits with likes, emojis, browsing, and our emotional reactions are, collectively, providing studies of human vulnerabilities and thought like never before, while conditioning people to stay stuck within FB’s exacting patterns and loops.

Facebook is intentionally complex and layered in order to make the many hooks and complications a part of the difficulty, should you want to leave for good.

Yet, is FB so different from Twitter, Reddit, Linkedin, and Instagram (owned by FB)? And what about Google? And other addicting apps? And mobile phones in general?

We pay them all with our presence, time, energy, and other personal resources.

Is Facebook worse? Or is it all a part of a new age, where we engage in it all without realizing how we are being conditioned and preoccupied by it? Without seeing how many are being radicalized and miseducated by it.... Not to mention what the unknown repercussions may be for our evolution and health…

I am not sure, but I know that FB is one of the most influential and massive —there are over 2 billion active monthly users, and 76% of those are women; and over 80 million fake accounts. With this kind of massive reach and power, comes even greater responsibility, and need for accountability and ethics.

Not everything about Facebook or social media and apps is negative, as I have said. A lot of it can be utilized in positive, inspiring, and life-giving ways. But it isn't really. There are bright spots, but it also gets murkier and uglier as well.

We need to call for more ethical standards, accountability, and teach conscious choice and engagement. Facebook wants to be “a force for Good.” I think that is wonderful. And, if that is true, many things need to change!

“Selective Focus” by Rawpixel on Unsplash

Our part in this, is that we need to be more conscious of what we agree to, and what free actually means.

If you are looking for ways to take back and regenerate your precious personal resources, also known as your personal wealth — start by unplugging from the machine from time to time.

Leave platforms that drain you.

Use only what facilitates a more real and better expression of you and your life and relationships. Take walks without technology, when it is safe to. Eat meals with friends and family without technology butting in.

Be present to the people around you. Make a homemade meal with a loved one with the computer and phone off, or at least away and silenced.

Also, consider why animals and animal companions are so loved and enjoyed by so many of us. What is it about them? They are present. They are timeless and here. They don’t make our relationships and time more and more complex, strained, dangerous, or fake. They are real, honest, bundles of love, energy — exactly who they are. They don’t want to mine our data. They are truly here with us.

We need to make the most of the technology we have, and utilize it in productive and life-giving ways. We need to create structures and standards that serve us and all life on Earth in the best of ways. Until then, we have to nurture a mindfulness about what we are choosing and how we are choosing it, and what it really costs. If it's worth it, maybe you are doing something important and good. Please continue. If not, consider what needs to change, for the better.

*exported from my old Medium account

Update: I did return to FB a few years later after a death and some serious illness in the family. I remain on it, but in a very different and more limited way. And that is okay. I appreciate those doing good there. And I see how all of the Internet, with all its brilliant potential, has become even more difficult, stressful, dangerous, and deceptive. I hope for the best, as always, and remain realistic about it too. Most of all, the youth carry these effects and ramifications in ways we don't comprehend (we meaning, those of us who know life without social media and the Internet as it is now).