So I have been duly corrected by the younger generation on several occasions about the correct usage of the phrase, “Mad or nah.” While some of them think that I should drop the you, almost all of them tell me to drop the are. And after much consideration, I think I finally get it. You see, I've wanted to ask a question when questioning is not the point. When someone says to another person you mad or nah, they're not really asking a question. What they are doing is taunting …letting the person know on the receiving end that s/he is upset even if s/he doesn't want to admit it. So, in short, it's not really a question. It is an observation. And because of my age and probably because I am no longer in the day to day classroom with urban students, I cannot seem to protect the integrity of the phrase. So for those who have been trying to help me to get it right, please don't give up. One day I will.
For now in this post, where I explore online aggression, I've got to do more than just taunt. You see, I don't want to just make an observation. I want to question. As a result, I hope that some of my younger friends will extend my urban license and allow me to take some liberties by asking some very angry people, "You mad or nah?"
You Mad? Behaviors Tell a Story
Angeris an emotion. Madnessis a mental condition. Anger indicates that “needs are not being met, rights are being violated, (and) something is not right.” And generally, our feelings of anger are healthy and sometimes quite necessary. Through anger, we are able to establish boundaries, avoid trauma, and resist abuse.
However, there are times when anger is not healthy. While engaging in informal research for this post, I ran across an article that identified three types of anger: 1) low level anger; 2) chronic anger; and 3) rage. Although there can be some dangers associated with low-level anger (or what is perceived as low-level), I want to frame madness in the context of rage. Albeit rage can be considered to be an emotional state more so than a mental one, the cognitive conditions associated with pervasive or perverted anger puts it in the madness category.
As a behaviorist, I am intrigued by behaviors. According to PBS’s The Emotional Life, behavior is one of three components of anger. Fischer and Evers (2011) talked about behaviors typically associated with men when they are angry (classifying them as direct, attacking and antagonistic) and those typically associated with women (classifying them as indirect, stonewalling and gossiping). While it would be reasonable to challenge these gender-based classifications, I am more interested in the behavioral conditions (in general) associated with extreme anger. Knowing that all behaviors tell a story, I am compelled to understand (or attempt to understand) the story behind someone’s rage.
The Internet, Anonymity and Madness
Most of what was discussed in my informal research was on how behaviors of anger are displayed in face-to-face contexts. A reasonable question would be what then happens in faceless, online context? In that Fischer and Evers also discussed verbal (and physical) aggression as an indicator of extreme anger, online threads dripping with attacks, antagonism and a steady stream of ranting (read the comments of this blog for an example) can be seen as chronic anger/rage.
Exactly why do people get mad in online communities? Some say that people use aggression to establish dominance. Others have classified anger as a secondaryresponse as it is a response to fear and sadness which surfaces when needs are not being met, when rights are being violated, and when someone feels as though something is just not right. So, this aggression may not just be about dominance. It may also be about fear, pain and sadness. Maybe at the end of the day, people use aggression in online communities because in there real-life, on the ground communities, they are feeling an overwhelming loss of power, a loss of opportunity, or a loss of resources.
In a websitedevoted to studying anger and violence, research was conducted to understand rage in social media forums. One thing noted, as relevant to this discussion, is the degree of anonymity that is used. Such anonymity indicates a consciousness of social appropriateness (or not) to one’s true feelings. When people engage in anonymous rage, it is reasonable to question who these people are in their disclosed selves as opposed to the ones that that mask in online conversations.
Conclusion and Considerations
So really, you mad or nah? Fischer and Evers (2011) said that people are not effective in identifying and measuring their level of anger. It is for this reason why Brookfield (1995) and many others argue for a self-reflecting process to help uncover that which we suppress, keep hidden or deny. It is not that our denial is about deception. For many, it is about survival.
Facing one’s darker side or political incongruences may just be too much to bear. So it may be easier to pretend that they do not exist… that is, until one can get in an online community, create an anonymous identity and then rant and rave about all that one won’t give her/himself permission to do when fully disclosed in her or his public self.
Here are some questions to consider:
1. How do you respond to others when they get angry?
2. How do you respond to anger in online conversations?