From: Elizabeth Childs (echilds@linex.com)
Date: Mon Sep 06 1999 - 01:33:37 MDT
> My notion is that online romances have the *potential* to be so much
> more honest and true, because those internal censors are turned off when
> online. There is no *reason* to lie, because one has no way to know if
> one is doing any good by doing so.
I think certain types of honesty are overrated. ("What an ugly tie!" or
worse yet "What a stupid opinion!") And it's those types that seem to be
promoted most by electronic communication.
Some people who have a lot of barriers to intimacy in the physical world may
find that this isn't true in the virtual world, and thus can reveal
themselves in a way they couldn't otherwise. I know for myself, I'm
reluctant to pour my heart out to someone and form a real emotional
connection when I can't even tell how they're reacting.
I'm also reluctant to trust people I meet electronically, as I have very
good intuition and can usually tell if someone is going to be trustworthy by
a lot of subtle cues that I can't get in e-mail.
On the other hand, I have a few far-flung e-friends who I feel comfortable
telling whatever I want, because I know there will be no social
consequences. They won't tell my friends or start working at my company or
run into my dad at the mall.
In terms of romance, I've had several friends who've tried dating people
they met online, and it almost never seems to work out. I theorize that
when you have an electronic relationship with someone, it's easier to
idealize them, and then the reality is disappointing.
One good thing about electronic communication is that it makes it easier for
a polite person to ask for help, because it's easier for people not to get
involved, so you're less likely to be bothering them. A friend of mine was
on a technology forum, and someone posted asking where some of the old
posters had gone. One of them posted again to say that he was sorry he'd
been absent, but then detailed a terrible personal tragedy he'd gone
through. So lots of people were able to jump in and give him some support,
whereas if he'd belonged to a face-to-face user group, he probably would
never have mentioned it.
> Furthermore, I would suggest that
> those internal censors, which have been exercised every day since
> kindergarten *cannot* be turned off in person. We dont know how
> to turn them off! We cant! But online we can. Why please? spike
Until the invention of writing, a heartbeat ago in human evolution, every
single human interaction was face to face. We have no programming at all
for dealing with people electronically.
People are extremely attuned to faces and facial expressions. Voices, as
well, have a great deal of emotional signalling that accompanies the words
spoken. All of that is lost here. Since we can't see the people, or hear
the people, we might as well be alone in the woods. Our millenia of primate
programming for dealing with people is not as activated. (Well, people seem
to continue to compete for status, but that's a drive that's easily
sublimated into abstractions, like expensive cars.)
So, after you've met people in real life, does that turn the censors back on
in e-mail?
> I myself have made gags [such as giving up masturbation, etc] that I could
> *never* state in the presence of my oldest and closest friends, yet I have
> zero control over how this post will be used. I can forget ever running
for
> president. {8-[ {8^D
Interesting. I am always aware of the permanence of my remarks, and have
often killed a post because I didn't want it coming back to haunt me.
I try never to say anything that Jesse Ventura wouldn't say. :)
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Nov 01 2002 - 15:05:02 MST