It's complicated.

Part of the allure of Facebook, besides keeping tabs on what all 934 of your friends are up to, is the ability to completely control how you are portrayed to others. Sure, you can carefully choose the clothes you wear and how you act, but you're bound to leave an unflattering impression on at least one person after many an awkward moment. Maybe that's just me. But on Facebook, I can untag any photos in which I don't look red-carpet ready (and sometimes persuade the poster to delete especially heinous shots all together), remind everyone I know that I listen to interesting music by posting some Avett Brothers' lyrics as my status, and let even strangers know that I'm witty by posting something hilarious and clever on my friends' walls. My Facebook profile is really a carefully maintained image of myself, but not statement I can make about myself on Facebook is as crucial as the "Relationship Status."

Now we know how the Facebook powers that be
 in Palo Alto voted on Prop 8!

The powers that be at Facebook recently added "In a civil union," and "In a domestic partnership," to it's now eleven different options to set as one's relationship status. This addition alone is a triumphant gesture made by Facebook, but the fact that so many options are available in a fabricated world of social networking emphasizes the importance one's "Relationship Status" holds in today's culture. With Facebook being a relatively new facet of social life, there is no official etiquette for posting these statuses (stati?), but below I have listed what I have perceived to be the general consensus about a few common statuses:

• Single - A pretty standard status. Some people choose just to not have this status appear on their profile at all, either to simplify their page or to hide the fact that they're sad and alone. (Just kidding. All mah single ladies!)
• In a relationship - In my age bracket, this status is reserved for the most serious of couples. The kind whose names are said together as if they're one, such as, "Mike-and-Emily." These duos have usually been dating for several weeks, at least, and have already met the parents, etc. In other words, going "Facebook official," with your relationship with someone is the younger equivalent to moving in together or whatever old people do. 
• Engaged & Married - I've combined these two because they're pretty self-explanatory. The only actual married couples I see with this status on Facebook are my friends' parents. One of my friend's status reads "Married to Da Streets." I think that's a different kind of relationship, though...
• It's complicated - I'm going to spare everyone my rant about this status, but if you're taking time out of dealing with whatever issues you're having with your significant other to change your relationship status on Facebook to something nobody cares about, things are more complicated than you think. 
• In an open relationship - This kind of goes with the one above. If you want to have a relationship status that says you're still open to hooking up with other people, you might as well just leave it at "Single."

P.S.: It's worth noting here that good friends who think they're funny will enter any two-person Facebook relationship with each other so everyone can know they're best friends. That girl is probably not engaged to her roommate. There are other people that defy the unspoken laws of relationship statuses as well, like my friend who refuses to change her status from "Single," even though she recently celebrated her 19 months anniversary with her boyfriend. Okay. If you want some other tips on how not to be hated on Facebook, go here.

"I'm not your sweetheart. Just let me walk!"

Photo credit goes here!

Okay, okay. So I know last week I praised the Fresh Prince for his pick-up lines. It’s just that I love Will Smith so much, I think everything he touches turns to gold. I have to admit, though, that my bias towards him overshadowed my opinion about pick-up lines outside Bel-Air. There’s a fine and tough-to-walk line between being confident and being offensive. Just in time for Valentine’s Day, Holly Kearl wrote a great piece for the Guardian providing lonely lovebirds with tips on how to approach someone new without borderlining on sexual harassment. She encourages suitors to approach the first conversation between strangers as a specific rhetorical situation. In fact, her rules for a happy Valentine’s Day echo our course textbook’s third chapter, “Preparing to Speak with Commitment and Confidence,” particularly the bullets under, “A Checklist for Preparing a Design Plan for a Talk,” on page 73. Although the entire article—and her own blog Stop Street Harassment—is worth a read, I’m just picking those tips that lend themselves to a great example of a rhetorical situation:

Physical context – The textbook asks you to consider the physical environment in which you will be speaking. Similarly, Kearl suggests that whoever you may want to talk to may feel unsafe or unsure if it is:

-       late at night, or in a dark place in general

-       deserted

-       an exit is not easily visible or accessible

Social context – I would interpret part of this as determining what circumstances have brought your audience into this specific space. I think that Kearl would place the following pointers under this textbook-designated category:

“They want to get from point A to B or enjoy fresh air. They may be in a hurry or be preoccupied. Therefore, chances are that a person you approach is not going to want to talk to you or interact with you. That has nothing to do with you personally.”

Audience – What can you determine about your audience before and as you speak? Kearl indicates that certain features, such as your size, apparent strength, and age in relation to those of the target of your flirtation will call for different approaches. This makes sense: a six-foot college student might not make me feel uneasy at first, but a six-foot-eight retired NFL offensive lineman probably would. She asks you to pick up on your audience’s reaction to your small-talk, as well:

“Make sure there is consent in your interaction. Does their body language, including eye contact (not lack thereof), and tone of voice indicate they want to interact with you, too? If you are unsure, you can always ask, is it OK if I talk to you?”

Several initiatives have been taken to start a dialogue towards ending street harassment, including programs in Washington, DC, Wales, and India. DC’s The Consensual Project has an especially well-written take on “sexual communication” and where it’s headed. Kearl and her peers around the world are shedding light on first-time flirtation as a specific rhetorical situation that, when not regarded as such, can result in harassment. 

This I Believe Podcast

http://www.zshare.net/audio/8607917661f0f983/