Friday, April 18, 2008
Rape or Internet Terrorism?
Second Life Success Story
Sunday, April 6, 2008
Virtual Cross-Dressing??
Sherry Turkle has become just another author in a long list of authors that has failed to convince me that the Internet is not the home of the social outcast of the world. In her book Life on the Screen: Identity in the Age of the Internet, the chapter titled “Tinysex and Gender Trouble” only proves to me that the Internet is where all of these misfits go to try to find an “identity,” a word that has been tossed around quite often in our class. In the past, I have been hard on the people who use the Internet as an escape. After reading this chapter, I have realized that I have not been hard enough on these virtual nerds, who in “real-life” are also nerds. Which begs the question, what are they actually escaping?
Turkle documents her efforts as she tries to construct her own online persona and along the way notices some very disturbing facts including virtual cross-dressing. The weirdest part, is that Turkle tries to defend these cross-dressers by saying things like “Boys, after all, were not called prudes if they were too cool to play kissing games” or “In Shakespeare time, there was yet another turn because all women’s parts were played by boys.” After all, boys are never too cool to play kissing games and if they were, they would be called gay, not prudes. Also, in Shakespeare’s time, men played the woman’s characters because women weren’t allowed to play any part, which hardly makes those men cross dressers. I digress though and want to focus more on what I find to be the most confusing aspect about this new epidemic. The part I am most confused about is how people think that for a second that skills used online will be able to correlate into the real life situations. Maybe one is not sure about their gender, so they explore it online to they point where they think they are ready for the change. They then get this expensive sex change that takes years to fully complete and when they get into the real world they realize that people still look at them oddly, driving them back to their lairs where they continue to play online games trying to escape their own reality.
I am sorry if this offends anyone, but sometimes the truth hurts. A 35-year-old hiding behind a computer screen in his mom’s basement is pathetic. Lets face it people, the behavior that is seen on MUDs challenges everything that society views as weird. I hear people say, “Well, maybe society isn’t right, who are they to judge?” Society is the purest form of democracy, where opinions are not just stated but have to go through hundreds of millions of people before they are accepted as a societal norm. So I leave all the Internet losers with this message: You have two legs and a heart so you can go outside and do activity in the REAL WORLD. You have a penis because you are supposed to have sex with REAL PEOPLE. You were blessed with natural forms of communication so you can interact with REAL PEOPLE. It is pathetic that people live their lives in fear of themselves, especially when they have all the tools they need to succeed in the REAL WORLD. So stop cross-dressing online because you guys are not the only ones who cannot handle the stresses of the real world, your just the only ones pathetic enough to resort to changing who you are. We all have problems, get over it, that’s called life in the real world!
Monday, March 24, 2008
MUDding vs. Smoking the Ganja Green
Legality aside, what are the key differences between playing a MUD game and smoking that reefer? I poked around the internet and stumbled across a marijuana fact sheet published by the ADA (Division of American Drug Abuse http://www.well.com/user/woa/fspot.htm) that is actually posted on the WELL network, apparently it’s not a small world anymore, sorry Disney. Here is one of the questions asked to this doctor:
Wednesday, March 19, 2008
THANK YOU, Mr. Rheingold...
A common abbreviation found on the WELL is IRL, which stands for In Real Life. Now, this argument of using the internet to escape ones reality has been shot down several times in class, but here it is in plain writing. Rheingold’s admitting it, anyone who has ever used the abbreviation is admitting it and our professor has admitted it without even knowing it. Creating an alternative identity on the internet is a pathetic way to escape ones reality. Not only does this kind of interaction take up a lot of your time, but it limits you to be sitting in front of your computer. While sitting on your computer, you’re missing out on everything that your natural reality offers you. Exercise, intercourse and nature are a few that come to mind as I think about the things I could be doing with my “real-life” instead of creating a fake life I’m more comfortable in. I’m not saying that an open exchange of information is a bad thing; I actually think that it is a great medium to exchange information. I find it weird that there are people who have to make friends on the internet because they can’t do it in real-life. This is a very harsh criticism and I’m sure that it will face a lot of opposition, but living a duel-life doesn’t seem to make a lot of sense to me. If you are not comfortable with your own reality, why take the time to create another one? Why don’t you work on the reality you currently live in so you don’t feel like you have to start over online.
We Are All Stupider!
For starters, Keen makes several good points that I have found to be evident in our class. Keen claims that bloggers and other amateur journalists “are the digital equivalent of online gated communities where all the people have identical views and the whole conversation is mirrored in a way that is reassuringly familiar.” So our professor goes online to talk to other popular culture professors about what she should put on her syllabus. She has found a community that she is comfortable in because they share many of the same points of view, or POV in internet slang. Well here’s the problem with that, that’s one side of the popular culture argument. Keens article is the first example that we have looked over that is challenging the ideas of popular culture. This class has become an environment where the internet can do no wrong, has no downside. Going online to a community that shares liberal ideals concerning internet use by society makes it seem like we are learning biased information, which we are. Keen is giving the other side to the internet that we have yet to and probably won’t even touch in this class. Amateur journalism is an unreliable source of information as often times the knowledge is skewed and based off of public opinion then passed off as truth. Though there are biases in mainstream media, the resources and connections they have trump that of amateur journalist.
Mainstream media has also fallen victim to amateur journalism. Whether it is Wikipedia forcing Britannica to lay-off workers or media having to clarify rumors spread by bloggers, the role of mainstream is taking a hit. After the Tsunami that destroyed the surrounding areas of the Indian Ocean, amateurs started claiming to have taken pictures of the destruction which major newspapers began to publish. In this article published online, http://www.mg.co.za/articlePage.aspx?articleid=195680&area=/insight/insight__columnists/, it shows the newspapers that had to apologize because it used these pictures taken by amateurs that ended up being fake. Thus, showing a major pitfall of amateur journalism, who are you supposed to believe? We as a society are more stupid because we are ignorant to the fact that information posted on blogs and Wikipedia is generally an opinion opposed to factual information.