by John Hibionada
As much as I hate Ke$ha, the title of one of her latest hits explains us as human beings very well: We r who we r. In Premodern times, identity was limited to a handful of factors, such as gender, age, or creed. If you were a young girl, you were to play with dolls, and when you were to grow up, you’d marry a man and have a family. Almost everyone had a certain religion (mainly Christianity in North America), and if it were any different, you would get ridiculed. It is like people were socialized into “traditional” stereotypes, and there really was no other way. These traditional socializations of the past still exist today, though they are much less pronounced.
In present times, these limits have decayed; and the Postmodern age of identity has risen. Today it is not uncommon to see Lesbian/Gay couples being affectionate in public. Today, marriage rates are decreasing, and divorce rates are increasing. Today it is not so far-fetched to be without religious beliefs. There are no limits. People no longer have a certain path that is set out for them to follow; rather people now have the ability to create their own. And what i’s one of the most common vehicles? Technology!
Postmodern identity can be characterized through three main ideas: multiplicity[1], fluidity[2], and flexibility[3]. Today in the 21st century it is easier (and acceptable) to shape and create your identity than ever before. With increasing access to the internet individuals can let down their guard and find themselves a niche where they will feel comfortable to exercise or express their inner desires, and be accepted for “who they are”. It acts as a ‘virtual word’ where you can act however you want, whenever you want. You can use it to help cope with complex problems (ie. social phobias), or as simple as looking for fellow geeks to congregate with in order to satisfy your closet geekdom. Technology is a route to facilitate social acceptance and with this there are many ways you can go about it. But how does the digitalization of one’s identity affect an individual? In John R. Suler’s article entitled, Identity Management in Cyberspace, Suler is perplexed by the dimensions of the reality self and the digital self. “What is one’s TRUE identity?” Some may believe that a person’s true identity lies within the reality person but can the identities that people create online also be considered true or “real”? Suler concludes the article by leaving the answer up for debate, but I believe that it all comes down to how you handle and balance the two.
Having an online identity more or less can be extension of one’s self, but it also may act exclusive and separate from your reality self. Even though individuals can convey emotion, intellect, and psyche online, it does not necessarily mean that their identities online are who they actually are; some may go online for the sole purpose of wanting to express traits that they actually don’t have, or fantasies that they wish to explore. In online dating it is common for people to create their profiles with a more desirable version of themselves in order to get more attention. People may also enter chat rooms posing as another race or different age, in order to elicit a desired response. For the sole reason that they are creating a skewed version of themselves we cannot say that these people are who they say they are; rather fantasized versions of themselves that may exist only in the digital world. Fantasies are fantasies for a reason, but some take it to another level and try to make it their reality; though there are people who take a different angle on the digital world and have identities that correspond to their reality selves…
For example, many people with social phobias in the real world may find complacency over the internet or through video games. On these mediums people do not have to fear disapproval or angst toward social situations. They can interact with others within their own comfort zone - where they want to, when they want to, and with whom they want to. This may seem like a great tool for people to deal with such issues, but how beneficial is it really? Is this a legitimate solution to their problems? Not really.
Though digital communication may seem like a good way for people with social ills to interact, it does not solve the underlying issues that manifest within. Think of it as a coping mechanism…
For example, some people may bite their nails when they are nervous, or furiously scratch their skin when it gets itchy. These are not solutions to problems, they are coping mechanisms. They temporarily relieve the problem, and are not always the best solution, because the next time they are faced with a similar situation, those feelings, that anxiety, will all still be there. Digital communication as a coping mechanism allows people with social discomfort the ability to have “normal” interaction, but it does not tackle the actual problem. Although knowing this, some are comfortable with this idea, and try to live their lives in a fragmented state. This is not ideal. Why? If you have a social anxiety, no matter what you do, you eventually you will have to face new and uncomfortable social interactions in the real world; especially as you grow. How many be introverted careers are there out there today? The answer would probably be not that many. Most jobs will require you to interact with others, whether they are co workers, customers, or interests, at some point in your career and you will not able to hide behind a computer screen or microphone in the process.
Now I’m not saying that people with social problems shouldn’t use digital medium to communicate, or to just “suck it up” and deal with it; there is just a certain way that it should be applied…
I believe that the digital medium is a good arena to work on these types of problems. The solution lies within how you utilize the medium. Digital communication will always have its pros and cons, much like anything in the world. If you use it to create identities, you fragment your actual self into virtual realities [not real]. Using the medium to emulate desired feelings, emotions, states, because you can’t achieve them in reality will make you feel good temporarily, but this is only a way to cope with other underlying issues. You’re only tricking yourself.
On the other side of the coin, digital communication can also be a great opportunity. Online identities are a good thing when they are used as extensions of the self, rather than fragmentations. For people with social problems, it can be an asset when the skills or experiences learned online are transferred over to reality, acting as a gateway to overcome such phobias rather than cope with them.
The paradox between reality and the digital self will only become more obscure as the digital age continues to advance. As time passes It is increasingly difficult to live without technology, so it is important to find the right balance and to not let the ease of the digital world get the best of you. As Suler speaks in his article, “bringing together the various components of online and offline identity into one balanced, harmonious whole may be the hallmark of mental health”. The digital world is much like a drug. The affects are pleasurable, but only temporary. If you get too comfortable with it you could end up becoming far separated from reality.
-----
[1]Multiplicity – having numerous “versions” of yourself
[2]Fluidity – the ease at which you are able to switch between these identities
[3]Flexibility – the ability to modify each identity
-----
Martin, Jennifer. Class Lecture. Online Identity. University of Western Ontario, London, ON. 15 Mar 2011.
Suler, John R. “Identity Management in Cyberspace.” Journal of Applied Psychoanalytic Studies, Vol. 4, No. 4 (2002): 455-459. Print.
No comments:
Post a Comment