Come fly without me

According to the U.K.’s Daily Mail, a British immigration control officer put his own wife on the “no fly” list so she couldn’t return to him after traveling to visit family in Pakistan. The recent discovery of and fallout from this divorce substitute has formed the basis of soapbox rants for a number of security commentators. There are definitely points to be made about the lack of oversight in the no-fly system, the slow creep of fascism into Western democracy and the effect terrorism has on a national psyche. However, I believe there is another point that is being completely overlooked here: How cold is it to break up with someone that way?

In terms of daggers through the heart, being listed as a terrorist has to rank right up there with seeing “[insert name] is now single” in your newsfeed as one of the worst ways to get dumped. (Also receiving votes in this category: the classic two-text dump, buying a full-page ad in the Chronicle at its very reasonable color rates and Jumbotron breakups.) There are two things that each of these methods has in common: They all sound hilarious until they happen to you, and each of them is a coward’s way to get out.

That’s a bold statement. After all, there are many risks to breaking up with someone in person. They might cry. They might curse your future children. They might go and invent Facebook. They might ask you for a ride back, even though they live 45 minutes in the opposite direction. With the wonders of modern technology, you can easily choose to distance yourself from these kinds of unpleasant outcomes. You don’t have to see the impact of your decision until and unless you want to. You are in control the whole time because you can always block the reaction.

This is the essence of modern social media: You have the power to choose, and you don’t have to see anything you don’t want to. Ironically enough, while Facebook reunites us with old youth soccer teammates and surprisingly hot ex-girlfriends, it can also serve to distance us from the very people we are near and dear to. Modern technology allows us to “ignore” just about anything: phone calls made from specific numbers, angry wall posts, status updates written in all caps, Skype requests and holograms hidden in R2 units. We can go about our business with nary a care for the feelings of those we left behind.

There’s been a lot of hand-wringing in the national and local media about the hook-up culture at Duke and other elite schools, and about how there’s a lack of desire for lasting, meaningful relationships. The discourse about it and the blame for it is typically shaped by whatever angst-filled pet cause the writer champions (“Why won’t they do something to empower women?” “Those privileged white people are doing it wrong and oppressing minorities!” “How low can these frats sink before we disband all of them?” “It’s because Duke gets all the calls!”). And the issue is widespread. I can almost guarantee that if you don’t know someone who’s gotten a rude surprise via text message or full-page Chronicle ad, you know someone who’s been doing the surprising.

But permit me to go all “Caitlin Flanagan” on you and offer a hypothesis without any research backing it up: What if sleazy one-night stands and emotionally abusive relationships aren’t just assisted by technology, but enabled by them? It has never been easier to avoid the fallout of caddish behavior, so why should we be surprised that people are acting like cads? Or, to examine it from the opposite direction, what if everyone had to look directly into the eyes of the people they cast aside each day?

We already know that the heightened consequences would cause a rippling change in social norms. For example, “dormcest” carries a negative connotation because of the awkwardness that ensues after you hook up with someone who lives next door to you, someone from whom you can’t distance yourself via technology What if, we taught people from a very young age that any serious matter needed to be discussed in person, face-to-face? I don’t think that would completely solve the issue, but it might operate as a deterrent to those on the borderline between “normal person” and “passive-aggressive jerk.” At the very least, it would keep us from abusing technology and allow us to use it for what’s really important­—fighting terrorists.

Harrison Lee is a Trinity senior. His column runs every other Monday.