Last week, I began this and several other posts that I was unable to complete due to the circumstances that I discuss below. Somehow I think that it makes posting this now, late and only partially complete, particularly important.

[Beginning of saved post from 4/13/08]

Ever feel lonely out there surfing the web? On second thought, does anyone use the phrase "surfing the web" anymore? Anyway, until I heard about Me.dium, I’d never really considered this question before. I mean, lonely? Reading blog posts, checking up on Facebook pals, commenting on some fan boards . . . how could anyone be lonely? But then again, these are all traces of people– left behind words and ideas, hardly real time. The closest thing to feeling the presence of someone else on the web may be a text or video chat. However, these still tend to take place in areas of the web built for that specific purpose. When I’m surfing, cruising, or clicking, the time on the web is ultimately pretty lonely.

Note: I have included very few links in this piece because I find the message boards and websites linked to Anonymous to be so objectionable. I have no desire to add to their web traffic or in any way associate this site with theirs.

The Rape Culture of “Meatspace”

Feminist theorists have consistently argued, in what seems to me clearly logical and transparent ways, that we live in a rape culture. Our lives are controlled by the constant threat of rape. To be clear, I am distinguishing between “fear” and “threat.” Although it may be accurate to say that all women fear rape, fear is something specific to the individual. I'm talking about systemic control. While the fear of rape may influence the way that an individual woman engages the world around her, it is the threat of rape that controls the way that we all, men and women, are culturally conditioned. In Against our Will: Men, Women and Rape Susan Brownmiller made the first comprehensive attempt to conceptualize rape on a macro level. The basic principle is that because we are immersed in a culture that frequently sexualizes and decriminalizes acts of rape and because as women we are taught to be ever-vigilant in protecting ourselves against rape, the threat of rape functions as a mechanism for control and domination.

In a recent article from The New Atlantis, Christine Rosen writes extensively about social-networking sites and paints a fairly stark picture. With section titles such as "The New Taxonomy of Friendship" and "Status-Seekers," Rosen paints a picture of social interaction morphing into a giant Pokemon mentality of gotta-catch-em-all status battles where "friends" are publically paraded around (pitted against each other), then tucked away and occasionally petted (or superpoked) while we collect some more (Pokemon metaphor mine, but I think an effective one). Here are my two "favorite" quotes:

"In investing so much energy into improving how we present ourselves online, are we missing chances to genuinely improve ourselves?"

"[The popularity of social networking sites] shows a desire to avoid the vulnerability and uncertainty that true friendship entails. Real intimacy requires risk—the risk of disapproval, of heartache, of being thought a fool. Social networking websites may make relationships more reliable, but whether those relationships can be humanly satisfying remains to be seen."

First, I’m fascinated by the odd choice implied in the first quote. So we either "present" ourselves online or we "improve" ourselves (supposedly in the "real" world)? I fail to see how those are connected; I fail to see why it has to be an either/or choice. Even if we agree with the premises (which I don’t) why can’t someone work on accomplishing both? There’s also an implication that presenting ourselves online can not be a method of improving ourselves (note the further implication that social-networking should intrinsically involve self-improvement in the first place). But I do think the presentation of our online selves can be done in the name of self-improvement– it just might not be the self that Rosen seems to think "genuinely" matters. What seems at stake here is the continuing debate about identity itself– between people who see identity as fluid playful fracturedness and those who seek a cohesive structured enlightenment-style form. I’m obviously in the "playful" camp; and subsequently, see our online selves as valid and genuine expressions of who we are, who we think we are, or who we’d like to be. Be it our representations on Facebook or Myspace, our avatar in Second Life, or our words on a blog, I find it silly to think that such identity representation/presentation is not "genuine" or constructive to our meat space selves (equally fractured, btw). Why this hair-triggered reaction to think that constructing online (digital) versions of ourselves has to be counterproductive to our fleshy selves instead of viewed as an expansion, rearticulation, or playful (productive) fantasy?

For all intents and purposes, StudentAvatar made its public debut yesterday. We hosted a workshop at the Purdue Teaching and Learning with Technology conference along side Professor David Blakesly. The goal of the (far too short) hour was to get the thirty attendees registered with Second Life, into the world, and exploring some of the basic movement and camera controls. Some may say we set our sights too low (while one person in attendance seemed to suggest we set them too high). Regardless, the hour was an absolute blast.

A recent post on Slashdot discusses the the hacker attack on Second Life. Apparently, a security weakness in Quicktime has enabled hackers to "direct the Second Life software to a malicious Web site that then allows them to 'take over the user's avatar and force it to hand over its Linden cash." The Mercury News reports in more detail. [subscription required to access content] For our purposes this is interesting in exploring virtual identity and the way that it is perceived. While the article describes the hacking as "tak[ing] over the user's avatar," the only actual control seems to be over the avatar's virtual bank account. This raises interesting questions over what it means to be in control of one's virtual identity. The theft of Linden dollars is most analogous to having one's pocket picked in your first life. Few would consider the perpetrator to be in control of their identity in such a situation. Why, then, is this describes as "control"? Is it simply poor word choice or does the act of stealing money change when nobody is doing it? Of course, it could be that in my enthusiasm for semantics, I'm overanalyzing this.

"Why don’t you just shut up and enjoy them! You know, what comics use to be for before the internet."

This quote comes from a comic book blog’s comments page; and upon reading it, something about it’s passion seemed to really sum things up for me– but first some background. The overall discussion dealt with Marvel comic’s, upcoming "Secret Invasion" storyline that will run through a variety of titles before culminating in an eight issue mini next summer. The basic plot is such: the Skrulls (a big bad alien menace in the Marvel Universe) have used their shape-shifting abilities to apparently replace a number of Marvel heroes with Skrull operatives. Elektra and Black Bolt have already been revealed as skrull imposters, and Marvel has hinted we will discover many more.

1997: Titanic was in theaters, Hale-bop comet was kissing our atmosphere and driving people mad, Princess Diana and Allen Ginsbergdied, Ellen DeGeneres came out, and postage cost 32 cents. Even having lived through 1997 as a mostly conscious being it's difficult to imagine what it was. We are human, we move on, and up and out. However, reflection and memory are useful, especially when it comes to the internet (on which we move on/up/out/down/around and back again fast as the connection allows). So, for those of you who would like a trip down memory lane, or don't recall too much about 1997 because you were ten, listen to This American Life #66. Ira Glass does a weekly show that examines a wide variety of topics in America(very rich for classroom use, and great examples of fantastic composition), and this episode was recently replayed. This was a nice reality check for me that the net as we know it was not always the net as we know it.

Many gamers who've found themselves stuck at a frustrating part of a level are probably accustomed to the world of online video game walkthroughs.  Here is a parody of the form that instructs the player on how to survive the first five levels of the IKEA shopping experience.  Not only clever, but more than a little convincing about how much our supposedly seperate lifeworlds and playworlds can bleed together.

IKEA walkthrough

via The Morning News