Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Only the apps you allow.

Meet the Other Phone.
Only the apps you allow.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

to not weep at international & other tragedies?

187 replies

CogitoErgoSometimes · 19/11/2013 08:56

I get that what's happened in the Philippines is a terrible thing or that it's shocking when children are starved to death by parents etc. But I don't understand why others get so emotionally involved to the point of 'weeping'. How do they get through the day if they find all these things to which they are not directly connected so physically distressing? How do they get to the end of a newspaper? There's always something tragic happening somewhere after all. Anyone else save their emotions for problems closer to home or am I just a hard-hearted Hannah? AIBU for not sobbing?

OP posts:
Original poster
CogitoErgoSometimes · 19/11/2013 20:02

I started the thread after reading another 'I am crying and shaking at the thought of (insert random tragedy here)' post. For all I know this person is genuinely & literally crying and shaking although I strongly suspect it's hyperbole. I wouldn't actually write back accusing them of lying..... just wonder if they realise how unstable they sound?

OP posts:
PublicEnemyNumeroUno · 19/11/2013 20:29

I don't cry at major news stories. I don't cry when famous people die.

Only 2 times I've cried at something on the news was James Bulgers murder and Baby PS murder. Innocent, defenceless children being harmed upsets me greatly, but those 2 horrific stories brought actual tears to my eyes.

I'm definitely not a crier 99.9% of the time. And I certainly wouldn't post on FB about it, attention seeking much?

sarine1 · 19/11/2013 20:47

I have a great concern about how children are interpreting our 'obsession' with grieving for those we have no connection with. The massive media coverage of disasters, murders, abuse etc, worries me in that many children are not protected from all this information. I believe that children need to be protected from dreadful things that they can't influence. I don't mean in a 'precious' way, they need to know the world can be a tough place, but the media overkill worries me in terms of the potential impact on their mental health.

RevelsRoulette · 19/11/2013 20:51

Well, we'll have to agree to disagree. People are not as complex as all that. Generally speaking, if it looks like a duck and quacks like a duck...

I can only tell you how it often comes across to many people. You don't have to agree with that or even accept it. That's fine. We'll just have to leave it at this. I can't agree that we should or even could avoid forming an opinion on the "X has happened to someone I don't know and I am in bits on the floor rocking backward and foward cos it's the worst thing that's ever happened to me" brigade.

Pearlsaplenty · 19/11/2013 20:59

Yanbu

People exaggerate over these things. They are not weeping Hmm they may be sad and empathetic but are not weeping.

Opalite · 20/11/2013 13:00

But aren't we all connected in a way because we are all human beings
I think it's perfectly reasonable to be extremely upset about these things

HoratiaDrelincourt · 20/11/2013 13:20

I don't think it's reasonable to be "extremely upset". I think it's reasonable to be briefly distressed.

Because this shit happens all the time and if we genuinely gave every event the same significance we wouldn't have head space for anything else.

A child dies every minute from drinking dirty water. Do you cry every minute?

A child dies in the UK every week from maltreatment or neglect. Do you cry about that every week?

And every crippling death from cancer, and every dog left to stray, etc etc. Nobody has enough sympathy to count all the sadnesses, let alone be "extremely upset" by them. It's absurd.

All any of us can do is process what comes under our noses when it presents itself, and decide whether/how to react. Getting "extremely upset" makes not a scrap of difference to anybody but you.

Opalite · 20/11/2013 13:29

If it doesn't make a scrap of difference to anybody then I wonder why you think it's 'unreasonable'
It makes no sense to me whatsoever

YouTheCat · 20/11/2013 13:32

Be as upset as you like. Just don't post crap on social media telling everyone how you're 'shakin' wiv teers'.

Why does everyone else need to know?

Opalite · 20/11/2013 13:32

The thing is that people don't actually see every child die on the news... things like the Philippines situation are being watched by people on the news and being read about in great detail.

Opalite · 20/11/2013 13:33

But why should you be the one to decide what these people do?! or to judge them and make assumptions about them

Opalite · 20/11/2013 13:34

I personally wouldn't like to think that people were just bottling up their emotions for fear of being judged as an 'attention seeker'

LadyBeagleEyes · 20/11/2013 13:34

The only event I remember really weeping about was Dunblane.

boschy · 20/11/2013 13:34

fascinating thread. I am of the 'dont cry much' brigade, I watched 9/11 with absolute horror but it didnt make me cry. same for the London bombings, hideous child-related stories etc.

but I cannot watch the end of the Railway Children, where Jenny Agutter runs towards her returning father screaming "My Daddy! My Daddy" without sobbing. My father died 8 weeks before DD1 was born, so it has immediate emotional resonance. equally music, performance, or things like Remembrance parades mentioned upthread make me blub, I think because it is to do with shared human experience in one place at one time.

the Philippines, the Boxing Day tsunami etc - I cant cry about them, but I can do something practical (ie give money to the relevant organisations). surely more worthwhile than weeping and wailing publicly on Facebook so everyon knows waht a caring person I am??

Opalite · 20/11/2013 13:38

Of course it's more productive to do something practical boschy... but when people are upset they don't always think logically. Also, people can do both- be upset and try to help. Not everybody can help though! Helping is fantastic but there are some things that can't be put right again, people have lost their loved ones, had their lives ripped apart etc.
Also the 'so everyone knows what a caring person I am' again, that's an assumption and a judgement on these peoples intentions which only they know.

YouTheCat · 20/11/2013 13:39

Opalite, please read this carefully.

I am not saying people should bottle it up and not emote if they feel the need. If you need to cry get on and cry.

I am saying there is no need for them to type it out on social media to tell the world that they are crying over something. That is where the attention seeking comes into it.

I'm also not deciding what other people should do but expressing that I don't like the, as I see it, attention seeking behaviour on sites like facebook.

Can you grasp how those ways of emoting are very different?

YouTheCat · 20/11/2013 13:40

Boschy, me too with regard to the Railway Children. Grin

Opalite · 20/11/2013 13:41

It's more worthwhile not to cry at the things you mentioned boschy... but you did, it was natural for you and you just publicly shared it. Did you share it 'so everyone knows what a caring person you are'?

Opalite · 20/11/2013 13:43

YouTheCat, it does help people to share how they are feeling, that's what I am saying! I'd rather that than they say along and cried?
I just don't understand... what is wrong with sharing your emotions? I've seen this kind of stuff a lot on Mumsnet

YouTheCat · 20/11/2013 13:46

Opalite, you are being obtuse.

It is just not the same at all because the desired outcome of someone who posts statuses about how much they are crying over something is to get loads of hugs and 'huns'.

All Boschy did was state a fact - she doesn't appear to be seeking out sympathy because of it.

You really just don't get it at all do you? Hmm

Opalite · 20/11/2013 13:47

No YouTheCat, you do not KNOW what someones desired outcome is? Don't you understand that?! Do you honestly believe that you know what these peoples intentions are?! It's VERY judgemental ffs

Opalite · 20/11/2013 13:49

Also, if some of them are that insecure that they post these types of statuses for validation and attention then I really don't think they deserve to be judged so harshly. If someone is that insecure, with issues which affect their life and how they interact then I have sympathy for them

Freddiefrog · 20/11/2013 13:56

I don't cry generally either, but every now and then something gets to me.

Remembrance parades make me cry, it's the 2 minutes silence followed by the last post that sets me off - it's like the weight of the sheer waste of human life hits me, some of the films on Comic Relief make me cry. There was a Make Poverty History ad a few years ago - just white background, and famous people clicking their fingers, it was supposed to signify that every 3 seconds a child died needlessly. All those clicks during one 60 second ad made me cry

I don't think it's unreasonable that these things upset me, things upset me know I have kids, that didn't before I had them. I tend to hide and pretend I'm having a coughing fit though, I don't write that I'm in tears on Facebook

HoratiaDrelincourt · 20/11/2013 13:57

I think most of us know which of our FB friends are demonstrably heartbroken by every broken nail tragedy that they come across, and which friends only mention current affairs when they're truly remarkable or to link to appeals/petitions/enquiry findings.

"Hide posts from WeepyAttentionSeeker" has reduced my exposure to the former considerably.

Ultimately it's none of my business how another person feels about an event, but I can certainly have an opinion about how they deal with those feelings and what they want me to do about it.

Opalite · 20/11/2013 13:59

Let's all remember that when somebody posts a status, it isn't specifically addressed at YOU!