Slashdot Mirror
Don't Dismiss Online Relationships As Fantasy
Columnist Regina Lynn has a look at how online relationships seem to be blurring the lines between fantasy and reality. "The common thread among these stories is that people get deeply involved in online relationships and make decisions about their real lives. Calling any of these online relationships 'fantasy' dismisses the impact they have on the people involved and on those closest to them... I have yet to encounter anything that challenges my core belief: Relationships are real wherever they form."
I'm a nerd, remember?
i found out my beautiful elf princess was really a 56 year old man
FOXTROT UNIFORM CHARLIE KILO
Relationships are only as real as the people in them. If the person is pretending to be something their not, even by a little bit, that can be greatly magnified online. As long as the relationship STAYS online, it's fine... But meeting the person in real life can be a disaster.
So sure, don't just dismiss them as fantasy, but don't just accept them as reality, either. Same as pretty much everything else in the world.
"If you make people think they're thinking, they'll love you; But if you really make them think, they'll hate you." - DM
This reminds me of a hilarious story a friend of mine told me about his Everquest days...
Apparently a group of players decided they're gonna have two of their friends get married in the game, complete with ceremony. I mean they were really serious about this! They apparently sent out invitations and got all worked up over it like it was real.
Unfortunately, upon hearing this, my friend built up an army of warriors to pay a visit to this little event. As the bride and groom exchanged vows, they charged in like Lancelot and began their slaughter. A paralyze spell was used on the bride who was then carried off onto a boat. The groom was hacked to bits and the rest of the wedding party was killed off as the bride and her captor sailed off into the sunset.
Now I have to ask myself this: Do those people have a right to be upset that their "wedding" was so rudely interrupted? Or did this serve as a healthy eye-opener to the ludicracy of the situation and a much needed return to reality for all persons involved?
I guess the point I'm trying to make is that while I believe these online relationships may indeed be very strong, there comes a point where you're just going taking this "fantasy" too far. There comes a point where you have to face reality, not escape it. Otherwise we will lose our ability to deal with problems in the real world.
Caller: "When his pet hamster died he yelled, 'Mommy, mommy, where's the reset button?' Lazlo, life does not have a reset button." Lazlo: "But this radio show does! -click- I love that button..."
Capitalism: When it uses the carrot, it's called democracy. When it uses the stick, it's called fascism.
recently i had a discussion with a friend concerning the nature of community in general and in particular the relationships that make up the online gaming experience. the emotions felt are real. the connections made between individuals are real. therefore imo online relationships are real just as the ones i experience in the office or at home or at the coffee shop are. however, while they may be real, because they comprise real human experience, they are qualitatively different. and i think that this is where it becomes difficult. we haven't related to each other in the ways presented through this new medium, ever. this means that in the social background the rules have yet to be established, the presupposed boundaries and entry points are not agreed upon, leaving us in a liminal stage. it appears to me that once these things are more hashed out the debates about the 'reality' of the nature of online relationships will fade.
They are real alright.
Depends. As I have noticed, online relationships' realness depends on how well they pass the test of time, and how well the relationship survives the shit it goes through.
Now that I come to think about it, it's the exact same thing in real-life relationships. Real-life one night stands or relationships that live no longer than a couple of weeks have little credibility.
You just got troll'd!
I have had many meaningful conversations with my best online buddy Elisa. She wont agree to meet in the real world though.
We met back in 2001 on what now is FreeNode's #php channel. This past summer, we finally tied the knot. I ended up moving up to be with here (I was living in Pennsylvania at the time. She was living in Montreal). We are happily married, and have been a happy couple ever since we first started being a couple. Both of us are absolutely thrilled at the way we met. I've also developed a rather one-sided opinion that programming chat rooms are great places to pick up chicks. =)
Jason Lotito
isn't it about swordplay and magic and killing things? it's called escapism: a place for people to go and do things they can't do in real life. therefore, you can't hold the standards of behavior of reality against it
so the guy made a bloody raiding party on a wedding. in reality, that's front page horrible news. in everquest, it seems to me to be par for the course
why do you expect any different, why do you think you ever could expect any different? everquest: people have swords and spells. they hurt things. that's the whole damn point of it to begin with: pointless violent escapism. and that's not bad: it's a harmless outlet
i don't think you are deluded. i don't think you are taking something too seriously. i just don't think you understand the rules here
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
``Relationships are real wherever they form.''
That sounds like it wasn't what you expected. Apparently,
people have some idea that relationships should only
developed through normal means, for some definition of normal.
And there, I said the magic word: definition. What is the
definition of relationship? When is a relationship real? What
means are normal?
My feeling is that this is going to be similar to the question
whether machines can think. Some people define thinking in a way
that machines can't possibly satisfy (usually, the argument is
exactly "if a machine does it, it's not thinking"). Other people
use definitions where thinking machines are always just around
the corner, but never actually there. And some people use
definitions by which we've had thinking machines for a long
time now.
As for relationships, I think that, no matter what your definition
of a relationship is, the (real) feelings you get from interacting
in a virtual world are about the same as those you would get if
the interaction had happened in the Real World. For me, that makes
the relationship real.
Of course, some aspects of relationships that develop in the Real World
will be missing from relationships that develop in some virtual
reality. On the other hand, there may be things in virtual reality
relationships that aren't in Real World relationships. There are
some very interesting effects here. For example, there are great
opportunities for misrepresenting and hiding things...in both virtual
and Real relationships.
Virtual reality being virtual, it also provides great opportunities for
experimentation. Some people never get past the "let's offend people
and see what happens" stage, but other people go much, much further.
Some people get married and/or have children in virtual reality, and
I think that this gives them some insight in what it
would feel like if they did the same thing in Real Life. To me, this
seems a valuable experience. And I'd much rather this experiment be
run in virtual reality with virtual children than in Real Life with
Real children.
All this is my 2 cents, of course, but those cents have been given to
me as the result of having both Real World and virtual reality
relationships, and even some that were both.
Please correct me if I got my facts wrong.
I had been getting computer advise from someone who I thought was a fat, balding, middle-aged dude working from his moms basement, wearing a Yoda t-shirt and eating hot pockets. It turns out this person was really a ho, horny supermodel who was cruising the internet to find victims to satisfy her lusts and to spend her millions of dollars. You never get over that kind of betrayal
Worst. Sig. Ever.
Right, because no one puts on perfume or aftershave to hide their true scent in person.
And no one works on changing their voice so they can appear to be more (or less depending) authoritative than their normal voice makes them seem.
And no one dresses up (or down) to try and mask their socio-economic status from whatever social circle they're trying to get into.
And no one flat out lies about themselves in the real world too. All perfectly honest.
Just because you're close enough to a person that you could slap them, doesn't mean the person is any less of a mirage than they are online. Hell, in the world of blogs, you can often find out more about someone than you can from meeting them.
I thought I would share my little story of "online relationships". I have a profile up at a site that caters to a gay demographic, and on there I've got about like 12-13 pictures and a little blurb.
Anyway, so one day I get a message on there which read something like: "Why are you using a dead guy's pictures?". This puzzled me so I replied that in fact I'm using my own pictures. His reply to that "No, the pictures you are using are of a guy named such-and-such and he lives in [a town like 26 states over] and he recently passed away and you suck for using his pictures".
Anyway, I won't go into details here, but I offered to prove to him that I was the person in the pictures, not because I felt like any particular need to prove it, but because I felt like he needed some closure. And so we did (webcam does the trick nicely).
Anyway, then the story came out - he'd been talking to someone on craigslist of all places who posted an ad with my pictures. They got into it quite heavily (though obviously they never met), talking every day and such. Finally, when this other guy got bored of the game he invented a cyber-death and had his "sister" email the original guy to tell him that her brother is dead.
Long story short, it was interesting to examine this situation. The poor man, he seemed totally crushed. He even told me at the end that he could never really get to know me as a person, since he's tied my pictures to whatever personality the liar invented. For my part, I also felt very bad - I'd almost say guilty - even though I did nothing wrong. And I really pitied the guy - his emotions were wracked in a very real way, even though the entire thing occurred online, and even though, let's face it, he should have known better.
That's +1 Informative
paintball
They existed solely in your head. Most people can also find someone who has a relationship with them in their head.
There is no two way communication. There is your feeling towards someone else, it does not mean they have the same relationship with you.
Fortunately, when the fantasy is smashed, most people can get up and go on..but some keep living their fantasy until they believe it is true.
The problem with online relationships, is that people bond(i.e. have mutualy ralationship fantasy) without key data. Looks, mannerisms, daily behaviour off line.
All of which is important, for very real reasons.
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
I'm a huge internet troll, mainly because i know i couldn't get away that kind of behavior in the real world. my personality online and off are night and day. here i am loud angry and rude. in real life i am quite pleasant. for me, the internet represents catharsis: a mental taking out the trash that leaves me capable of not blowing my stack in the real world
in other words, my personality here is not only completely unlike my personality in real life, my personality here allows me to be someone else in real life. and i completely understand the boundaries
This attitude is precisely the reason I despise internet trolls. Not because of the whole signal-to-noise ratio thing; newbies posting stupid questions and other minor breaches of nettiquette accomplish roughly the same thing and I don't mind them at all. No, the reason I hate trolls is because they treat the internet like some kind of damned videogame and other people on it like NPCs at worst, other players to be "beaten" in the "game" at best. But despite the fact that you're accessing the internet through a keyboard and screen, it's not a damn game. And I don't mean that the internet should be a serious, demure place of pure business and scholarship either; I'm here to have fun more often than I'm here to do work. I just mean that the internet is less like baseball and more like a game of catch, less like the debate team and more like chatting in the living room with your friends. It's not a competition, you can't win at it, and so playing manipulative social games trying to get certain reactions out of certain people for fun (or "catharsis" as you say) is just as despicable as if you were to treat IRL conversations with your friends that way. (Granted, some people do the same thing in real life, and I'd consider them assholes too).
Do you assume a different persona and play social games when you converse over the phone? How about through postal mail, on the off chance that you actually write letters to people? Why is the internet any different? It's just another means of communication - one which, due to its breadth and efficiency, is if anything MORE like real life than the phone or mail.
The same thing applies to people who are dicks in the non-game aspects of online games, e.g. game chat. Yes, if you're playing a competitive game the objective is to blow up the other guy or what have you, and you shouldn't complain that people are being "mean" when they do so efficiently. At the same time, there's this little thing called good sportsmanship which has been pretty well established in real world competitive activities, and I see no reason why it applies any less online. So, just because someone is competing against you in something that actually IS a game on the internet, doesn't mean that when you communicate with them within the context of the game (but "out of character", if such a concept is relevant) you're free to be a dick, anymore than it's OK to shout demeaning insults at the other team in a real-world sport, or to gloat over your victory or throw a tantrum over your loss.
On the other hand, there is something to be said for people behaving differently in person and online. Someone may be more or less comfortable in one venue than in the other, and so censor certain parts of themselves where they're not comfortable expressing such traits. But then, that just gets back to what the person you're responding to was saying; some people reveal their "true personality" more online than they do in real life. If you might be inclined to be an asshole in person but don't feel that that's OK, so instead you're an asshole on the internet (which honestly I've never seen you be, here on Slashdot at least), then that means that somewhere in your "true personality", you're an asshole, and you just censor that in real life and let it out on the internet so it doesn't stay bottled up. Even if the actual personas you're adopting online are all fake and consciously so, just put on for the response that other people give
-Forrest Cameranesi, Geek of all Trades
"I am Sam. Sam I am. I do not like trolls, flames, or spam."