unsaid but hopefully well written

1. Facebook status is public by default

By that I mean that we don't choose what to see or what not to show (except you are okay to trouble yourself to change your privacy setting or mute some annoying people as the feature is currently available). But I think I am also 'kepo' by default so I don't really use the feature and enjoying people's life story via facebook. That makes me aware that I don't really want people to know about my life in detail and this is the very basic reason of why I don't update my facebook status at all. 

2. Facebook status is real time and in my opinion, it's supposed to be short 

Eventhough facebook status is supposed to be an answer to the question 'what's on your mind?', and in that manner I can be as elaborate as possible, most people only tell how he was at that time (like, how annoying a person who snore beside me on my flight to HK! and not what kind of person the snoring person is, why do I have to go to HK, or with whom I went to HK) and it bring us to the third reason that 

3. I can't elaborate things to everyone via facebook status 

And the facebook status can not reveal my thinking process and my knowledge as a whole and some people, while just being naturally curious or honestly caring, needs explanation.
4. Because people, and that include myself, tends to make conclusion
For me, the point is, how do I arrive to that conclusion. Do I read and concluding real time and keep it for myself? Do I read and think and observe then concluding? Or do I read, concluding real time, listening to someone having the same conclusion, and end up labeling the person whose status I read? 

5. And from the fourth point, I came to a conclusion (see I've been through four parts here, just saying) that facebook status is a place where misunderstanding is inevitable. 

I know one case when a renown ustadz make a series of tweet about how useless is having girl/boyfriend and my friend, who happens to follow the account and currently having boyfriend said that the ustadz is exaggerating and she doesn't do things to that extent with her boyfriend. In my point of view, the whole thing about having girl/boyfriend is not as simple as whether it's allowed or not, it is a matter of what do you believe and what do you understand from your belief. The ustadz may have elaborate it on the former tweet on why it's not supposed to be done based on his belief but my friend might be too lazy to stalk the timeline. Maybe the ustadz was using some confusing words that it is a bother even just to read or maybe my friend was involved in some conversation where people said that they don't agree to the tweets. Anything can happen when we can't explain ourselves, and mostly it's misunderstanding. 

6. It's true that I don't have to explain myself, but when I need to be heard, when I am about to transfer my knowledge, then people need to know it as a whole, not as parts. 

And it's only fair that way. To myself, and to people who read. 

7. At the end, I think the question has change from whether to update or not to update my facebook status with such a sensitive statement, to whether it is the right platform to do such things. 

After reviewing the six number above, I answer myself that it might not be the rightest platform for me (note that all of my reason is completely subjective, not generally applicable, but definitely one of a million way of answering the question on update or not updating your facebook status) because I have a need to make people understand about me and my mind. That way, it is easier to be heard.

Waktu itu pernah nonton Stand Up Comedy di TV, salah satu comic nya ngomentarin acara TV yang programnya itu ngebawa anak-anak orang kaya buat tinggal di desa dengan kehidupan yang beda 180 derajat dan biasanya diakhiri dengan nangis nangis di kamera.

Kata comic nya, padahal sebenernya si orang yang tinggal di desa itu biasa biasa aja loh, cuman orang yang datengnya pasti nangis kejer. Saya nggak suka, dan sangat menghindari acara-acara yang kayak gitu. More or less, setuju sama si comic itu. For me, it's as if there is no other way to live other than in a city. Orang yang di desa itu might be living just fine, lalu dateng orang entah dari mana yang menganggap they living a super hard life just because they both come from a different standard.

Buat sebagian orang, bahagia itu mungkin dengan backpacking ke tempat baru dan belajar hal-hal baru. Mungkin sesederhana pasang radio dan tiba-tiba lagu favorit kita diputar. Ada banyak hal untuk mendefinisikan bahagia, tapi mungkin nggak semua orang mau melihat standar bahagianya orang lain. Itu dia menurut saya yang bikin anak-anak kotanya nangis kejer dan ngerasa kasihan berlebihan sama orang yang tinggal di desa dan akhirnya orang yang nonton acara itu ikutan merasa kalau hidupnya si orang desa itu memang jauh di bawah standar.

But whose standard are we talking about right now?

What if their happiness is by sharing some food with other, by knowing that even though they have to work so hard only for dinner and breakfast, they can keep their family close. What if their happiness was not define by pretty shoes and smooth skin, what if they are content with their life at that time?

I've met some people that lead a harsher life than mine and that encounter got me thinking. How people could have sooo much problems in their life and still looks happy most of the time. Maybe that's because their happiness doesn't defined by their level of problems.

Dan mungkin mereka lebih banyak bersyukur daripada mencari-cari apa yang nggak ada. After all, the bad things in life are so few (if only I would want to see beyond things).