response to Jerry Kang article

Sorry guys I don't know how to add a hyperlink in a comment so am adding it in a post on the main page instead. Susie Scott's article titled 'Researching shyness: a contradiction in terms?' (2004) can be found here (apologies it's only the abstract) xx Also sorry to anyone who reads this and hasn't read my comments on the Kang article before hand, it will make no sense! Happy blogging xx

Workshop Response to Menu-Driven Identities

Well, my internet connection is having a bit of a moment so I was only able to access the Lavalifeinternet as the medium to seek out potential partners. I searched for a while under these default settings and noticed that all the men were a variation on the same theme - trying to be friendly, fun, light-hearted, non-threatening. As the men got older in my searches, I found they were less likely to try and appear 'wacky'. What interested me most is how large a proportion of the applicants were white - with some listing their ethnicity as 'other'. Other than white? I did try to get onto the page where you establish a profile for yourself but it wanted me to enter lots of details before that stage so I chickened out. Also interesting to note, every single male I looked at either didn't smoke or was 'trying to quit' and only drank 'socially' - are people afraid to reveal their vices at this early stage? Probability tells us that some of these applicants must love their cigarettes, or sometimes drink a little more than is 'socially acceptable.' I would have thought that the drop-down menu answers available to applicants are possibly a little limiting, and people would be able to convey far more of their personalities if given the chance to reply for themselves. Sure, they'd probably get less interest, but at least they could stand out from the competition!
site. The default search engine settings on the homepage where not surprising to me: aimed at women in the demographic most likely to be active on the dating scene and technologically proficient enough to employ the

Workshop 4 – Menu Driven Identities

Focusing on the Lavalife dating site:

Interestingly the homepage shows “female seeking male/ age 25-34 /for casual dating”.

Arguably this reinforces the traditional heterosexual relationship, as the site does not immediately advertise homosexual relationships, thus immediately projevting a normalised image of heterosexual relationships. Additionally the option of “For:” is listed as “casual dating” thus is this website encouraging non-committed encounters between individuals. There is not an option of marriage; would such an option be considered too serious? Is there a need to be casual and relaxed, just looking for fun in order to be successful on such websites? There exists a stereotype that men seek non-committed causal fun whereas women are in favour of committed serious relationships thus are such sites geared towards the need s of men? In terms of the age bracket shown on the homepage (25-34) it could be argued that the site is implying that by this age one should be seeking a partner, again possibly reaffirming the norms of a man and woman creating a stable family unit once into the age of maturity (i.e. 30ish).

I typed in female searching for male 18-24 years and then continued to search each 3 categories of “casual dating, a relationship and an intimate encounter”. The same page of results emerged for each category. This raised many questions for me. Is the site using the information of members wrongly and entering their details into each category or are those members simply seeking any type of relationship? Alternatively when one signs up is the “looking for” option still available or is one immediately available in all categories?

The initial information box shows “age, location, status and interested in” (in terms of sexual preferences). Thus are such details the most important to the general public? All details seem optional as some refuse to detail religion and other information which highlights how one is permitted to be whoever they choose. There is no compulsion to detail every aspect of one’s life. I found it interesting that one of the first pieces of information is sexual preferences titled “interested in”. Thus is one of the most important things when looking for a new partner their sexual preferences? If one does not list much in terms of preferred activities, is this viewed negatively? If one lists a lot (i.e. “threesomes, fetishes, swinging/swapping”) will they receive more attention as they are appear more experimental? Is there a need to exaggerate one’s choices and appear open-minded in terms of sexual preferences in order to attract a wide selection of people? As with most types of menu identities one can opt to be whoever they choose, detailing and omitting whatever interests they like.

Workshop Response to Menu-Driven Identities

All the sites I visited really didn't surprise me at all when I looked at the various different sign up pages. The Hotmail and Yahoo signup pages were pretty similar and basic, and were also comparable to the Second Life questions (I found the avatars more interesting in displaying certain stereotypes of gendered identities..)

Clearly from these sign up pages, age and gender is extremely important in determining your personality and identity - even though cyberspace is virtually anonymous! Lavalife also proved to be similar, where searches are based on gender and age alone.

However, the searches on Lavalife proved to be quite interesting...although you start off with a basic search and the information given about each individual seems to be quite in depth(when you click on a profile), the thing that struck me most was the 'ethnicity' in regards to identity. "White" seems to be an all encompassing construct in which 90% of the individuals on the site seem to be...so in this sense ethnicity also seems very vague and generic when looking at how people judge others online. The information on individuals on Lavalife also reminded me of the info found on Myspace pages - questions such as smoke?,drink?,education?,children?,Body type etc. This reinforces our construction of identites through these various different categories people are placed in - signifying what is held as important when building an identity.

Workshop response to Menu Driven Identities

Lavalife's website contains many diverse identities constructed by users who want to put themselves (or another version of themselves) on the internet to be reviewed by other lavalife users who are seeking to meet, chat with, or flirt with online. The profiles you choose to look at are focused down according to what you are looking for ie. gender, sexual preference, and what type of relationship you would like with these users. Initially, the site asks you to describe yourself according to gender, age and occupation. It is obvious that the makers of the site believe that people observing the profiles are nieve, that is to believe that this identity is a pure one and the person who created it is genuinely interested in whoever is observing it. This preying on people's lonliness is a horrible way to go about making money. Problems with the identities on the site include, but aren't limited to: non 3 dimensional images for the observer to witness, not enough profile information, or webcam chat capabilities. This would further enrich the expirience of using this site by making it more "real". this would be achieved because if the people could chat via webcam perhaps it would make the expirience more "human".

sorry

Just the full reference for the Nakamura's article seeing as I used quotes from it!
Nakamura, Lisa. "Menu Driven Identities: Making Race Happen Online." Cybertypes: Race , Ethnicity, and Identity on the Internet. London and New York: Routledge, 2002, 102 - 135

Tutorial Presentation - "Menu - Driven Identities: Making Race Happen Online." written by Lisa Nakamura - presentation by Katherine Joensson

Lisa Nakamura's article Menu - Driven Identities: Making Race Happen Online opens with the question "what happens to race on the World Wide Web?" Like gender, age and other markers of identity, is race and racism experienced by users of the internet or is the internet, like we have discussed in this course, a medium for people to be free form what can be viewed as the constraints of their everyday lives? Nakamura is critical of those who suggest that "user's identities can be freed from race when on the web." She argues that unlike popular belief, the web is a structured medium where by users experience some degree of prompting and direction which ultimatley pigeon-holes the user to fit into what she describes as a "clickable box." The article discusses and problematises the need for internet users to have to choose from predetermined options when it comes to their ethnicity.

Nakamura's article contains various examples of just how race is infact experienced online. The first is the use of portals and their ability to "impose order upon the web's enormous collection of data by presenting the user with a series of choices." Often these choices relate to identity and include questions in relation to age, sex, marital status and racial identity. Nakamara states that she was directed to a series of choices when searching the term race. These were:
1. African diaspora
2. Asian-American
3. Gay and Lesbian
4. Community Services
5. Latino Culture
6. Men's Issues
7. Nativ American Culture
8. Religion
9. Virtual Worlds
10. Women's Issues
Keeping in mind these categories are specific to America, they are still incredibly restricting and for an environment that many claim to be free from everyday experiences of identity, these groups do not offer the space for hybrid or alternative choices. I found myself thinking as a half German - half Australian woman, where would I fit into these categories? Nakamura is very critical of forced categorisation that menu's like this encourage and the inability to choose more than one option. She also points out the invisibility of 'whiteness' in such menus. That choosing 'white' is not an option and therefore all alternatives are considered 'other,' and that when other ethnicities are mentioned, they are based on traditional stereotypes. Nakamura attributes a lot of this categorisation to money making opportunities, "these sites want to know what you are so they can best figure out what they can sell you."

The article goes on to discuss how the inernet and access to it is implicitly determined by race. She describes the internet as being a "domain of the white upper middle class user." She includes in her argument that white Americans are more likely than black Americans to have access to the internet at home. So race is experienced by its users both online and by their ability to access an online environment.

Nakamura closes her article by including an example of her own experience as a Japanese - American woman and er exposure to a circulating email entitled "101 ways to tell you're a Japanese American." This list inlcudes various stereotypical examples of behaviours of half Japanese - half American people. Interestingly, this shows that not only is race categorised by websites and web portals but unconciously perhaps by its users.

Some questions to think about?

1. What have been your own experiences of race online? Where would you fit into such a restricting category list? Or is your internet use infact influenced by your race - think about the websites you visit etc.

2. Do you think sigifiers of identity are lost online? Think about race, gender, sexuality, age etc.

3. Is race something that is commodified online? Does our ethnicity make us more of a target for particular sites?

Webliography
The issues concerning bioethical standards and the use of technology to enhance human bodies has been discussed for many years. From Frankenstein to The Visible Human Project and beyond, people have been arguing over the ethical issues around the use of technology to enhance human bodies. I will analyze 5 scholarly works that I have found on the internet. These articles explore many facets that have led to the complex bioethical debates we are now confronted with. Politics and religion are closely interwoven aspects of our cultural fiber. Bioethical debate has become one of the battlegrounds of our human political experience and no matter if one doesn’t hold an opinion, these issues will affect them in some fashion. The question of what it is to be human and to what extent technology should play in aiding our human experience will be explored and pondered for years to come.
The technological extensions that have aided humanity from the first stone tools to nanotechnologies have assisted us in our endeavors to survive. Whether it is to acquire food, stay warm or know how to make fire. These early technological advancements have been beneficial to us. In Technology as Extension of Human Functional Architecture, Alexander Chislenko argues that human production of technology is a naturally occurring phenomenon that has been going on since the dawn of humanity. His argument is based on an evolutional theory that supports the ideals of technological means for adaptation. Chislenko states, “I would define technology as anything intentionally designed, even if no external physical objects have been used. As for the human identity, we can draw borders in different physical and functional places. I personally identify more with my writings than with bacteria in my stomach. The extensions can also be inside and outside the body or programmed within natural bodily functions such as language or other artificial skills” (Chislenko p.3). The problem with Chislenko’s argument is that he defines technology as something natural, when so many have defined it as artificial. His thesis is bold by arguing that all technological advancements throughout history can be attributed to the ‘natural’ evolution of the human species.
Many debates concerning the novel Frankenstein have been swirling since the novel was written. People could hardly fathom that victor Frankenstein could create an entity derived of mechanical and human parts. The use of technology to create Frankenstein was challenged by the people in the village who were threatened by the unnaturalness of his being. Furthermore, the monster doesn’t realize he is unnatural after an incident that exposes his unnaturalness. Robert Anderson argues in Body Parts that Matter: Frankenstein or the Modern Cyborg? “The creature Frankenstein was born in a laboratory, not a garden, and while it may be considered to be innocent by the reader, it is never considered to be so by Victor—its existence itself is monstrous, not innocent. The creature also shows moments where it takes irony for granted, but only after it comes to a certain self awareness of its own monstrosity—after the incident with William and the family in the hut” (Anderson p.3)”. Anderson’s arguments are solid in this article, but it lacks original thought and direction. That is, he compares quotes others so much that it is hard to decipher his thesis.
The Visible Human Project has given many web users the opportunity for anatomical exploration in a virtual world. This privilege has come under some scrutiny regarding the ethical boundaries that have been crossed when this project was undertaken. In Lacerations: The Visible Human Project, Impossible Anatomies, and the Loss of Corporeal Comprehension, Eugene Thacker argues that there can be consequences for using the software in a medical context. His two pronged attack against the use of the Visible Human Project in medicine criticizes the authenticity of the virtual world as a medium for anatomical research. Thacker argues, “This is not discovery science, where anatomists will claim to have uncovered new structures in the human body; rather, this is an analytical science, in which first the cadaver and then the data-body are urged to become the most technically- sophisticated bodies possible…The Visible Human Project, in taking its impossible anatomies as new models for the body-in itself, is producing a set of norms that is in excess” (Thacker p.6). Thacker’s analysis and criticisms of the use of this software questions whether or not it is safe to use when examining real patients. By using computer simulation to work on an actual cadaver, something is lost in the translation between the virtual and real world. This could have serious consequences and raises more questions concerning bioethical standards.
Bioethical standards have been largely ignored when it comes to making money, succeeding at sport or creating healthier, happier children. These alterations of humanity could result in serious consequences. In The enhancement of human capacities by medical and biological technologies Dr. Ruud Ter Muelen argues that these consequences would be the result of gene manipulation and the bi products of human greed. Ruud Ter Muelen claims, “An important issue might be that of social coercion and control. The risk that technologies for example like behavioral genetics may be used to eliminate behavior that is considered less desirable or acceptable on a large scale is not a totally realistic scenario. As a result, the behavior of individuals may become conformist or shallow, with a homogenization of society as a possible consequence” (Ter Muelen p.4). This consequence could tighten government control over our bodies and minds. Our personal spheres could be further penetrated by government regulations.
Political debate regarding bioethics in the US is backed by special interest groups who harbour bipartisan beliefs. Transhumanist supporters align themselves with ideas of technological advancements to aid in our human experience, whilst, bioconservatives push for more government regulation in issues such as cloning and nanotechnology. In Human Enhancement on the Agenda Dr. John Hughes argues that this bipartisanship has shifted to the right due to increased spending by conservative Christian groups opposed to technological body modification. Hughes states, “ Stacked with conservative intellectuals, and even replacing two of the few liberals with conservatives in 2003, the PBC recommended a moratorium on embryonic cell research and a permanent ban on human reproductive cloning” (Hughes, p. 1). If we are to regain control over our bodies and promote research on life saving stem cell research, it is imperative that political control is regained.
Bioethics is at the forefront of debate in many countries and what it means to be human is constantly being argued. These five articles offer insight to this debate and critically analyze both sides of the argument.








Work cited
1. Anderson, Robert. ‘Body Parts That Matter: Frankenstein, or The Modern Cyborg?’
Original Articles (1999) http://www.womenswriters.net/editorials/anderson1.htm
[accessed 25 August 2008].
2. Chilenko, Alexander. ‘Technology as Extension of Human Functional Architecture’
Extropy Online (1997) http://project.cyberpunk.ru/idb/technology_as_extension.html [accessed 25 August2008].
3. Hughes, James. ‘Human Enhancement on the Agenda’ Institute for Ethics and
Emerging Technologies http://ieet.org/index.php/IEET [accessed 25 August 2008].
4. Muelen, Ruud. ‘The Enhancement of Human Capacities by medical and biological
Technologies’ Centre for Ethics in Medicine University of Bristol
http://www.bris.ac.uk/ethicsinmedicine/currentevents/inaugural.html [accessed
26 August 2008].
5. Thacker, Eugene. ‘Lacerations: The Visible Human Project, Impossible Anatomies,
and the Loss of Corporeal Comprehension’ Culture Machine, Vol.3 (2001)
http://www.culturemachine.net/index.php/cm/article/viewArticle/293/278
[accessed 26 August 2008].

Jessica's Tutorial Discussion - Week 7

Ruminations on Cyber-Race by Jerry Kang

Jerry Kang a Korean-American law professor enquires into the functionings of the virtual world and how 'race' works in online communities. Ruminations on Cyber-Race asks if cyberspace has the potential to change racial mechanics and consequently alter the ground rules of social interaction.

Describing cyberspace as operating similarily to a sidewalk cafe, the article proposes that the Web helps people to form and maintain social relationships, the main difference being that in the virtual world most interaction occurs through text,lacking the face-to-face communication that occurs in the real world thus allowing for a sense of anonymity, (there are of course exceptions including the likes of Webcams-whereby no one is any more racially anonymous than they would be in any face-to-face encounter).Kang points out that just because race is to an elaborated sense 'anonymous' in cyberspace, this does not mean it ceases to matter. He goes on to retell a situation he personally experienced when participating in a graphical world as a "young, muscular, bald black man". This graphic representation of self caused conflict with another character appearing as a "white female" who sprayed Kang with racist bile because he was African-American. This episode influenced Kang's thoughts on how communicating at a distance through blogs, email ,instant messaging and so on could possibly rearrange race relations. He considers how cyberspace offers a way to increase interracial social interaction without the conflicts inherent in the real world and the example above. Kang expands on this idea by proposing the abolition of race in cyberspace (being race blind), intergration of race (promoting social interactivity) and transmutation online (broadcasting a different racial identity). Kang notes that although there are many inplications with these approaches (cyberspace cannot and SHOULD NOT be colourblind etc),cyberspace is a powerful social force, and if we look at cyberspace as an opportunity to explore social issues perhaps we will be able to positively progress in regards to race in the real world.

In my opinion I think race will continue to influence the content of a person's cyber interactions even if the audience is not aware of the colour of the participant's skin. Race has alot to do which cultural and social upbringing and thus implictly a person may give away clues about their racial identity,for instance poor English. Hopefully we can embrace race online and not see it as a barrier to entering and participating in virtual space.If built right cyberspace could provide the conditions to fight prejudice. Realistically,this may prove more difficult.The text is short and brief and therefore I will keep my blog entry the same.Nonetheless the artcile presents rather interesting notions and is a good starting point for considering the following:

Think about how much our lives have changed since the invention of the Web eg.paying bills online,purchasing plane tickets,booking accomodation,finding lost relations,learning new languages etc.Do you think that cyberspace has
the potential to change race relations in real life?

Is race less fixed in cyberspace? Is it voluntary or experimental?(as demonstrated by transmutation)

Kang states that virtual communities are centred around common interests and experiences and that race does not influence these commonalities,and so virtual communities are not exclusive or race-specific.
Do you agree with his perspective?

Week 7: Tutorial Presentation

Hi, I am here presenting Tak-yee Amy Lai’s "Hong Kong Cyberculture: A Case Study". As the awareness of the internet use is increasing, the side-effects of the activities in cyberculture are also concerned. Lai’s study in Hong Kong cyberculture is in order to inform the degree of freedom of speech, and discuss how netizens’ identities and representation of their selfhood in cyberspace affect their social life.

Tak-yee had argued that whether the degree of freedom in cyber context is truly existed in ICERED, on the Internet and the entire Hong Kong society. ICERED was an English-based online forum in Hong Kong, which established in 2000, particularly targeted on the bourgeois who works in professional positions. The posts of ICERED were mainly formed by unreasoned musing, gossips on celebrities, insults to other posters, which ultimately accused by a company in the Hong Kong stock market, for the charge of libel and a demand for issuing list of the forum’s membership, resulted in a closure of the forum in 2003. On the other hand, ICERED’s closure had started a series of questions about “cyberdemocracy”, whether democratic in virtual space is achievable. She examined in the categories of racism, sexism and homophobia and also discussed the benefit of being online and how it affects the offline society, in four most popular threads in ICERED.

"Your English sucks!"

She explained that the widely use of Internet had somewhat stratified the users in terms of income level and education level. ICERED’s positioning was originally problematic, which was "an interactive platform of exchange of high-income professionals and university alumni of top universities around the world", had set a boundary between "well-known, excellent, and expensive colleges" and "less well-known colleges". In this thread, participants were examined in terms of their education and social background by many anonymous posters and how they responded to them, to determine their English proficiency. Speaking English fluently is symbolized as a privilege in Hong Kong thus ICERED was the site for promoting and mirroring on the real social stratification of “local/expat/study overseas” in both online and offline society.

The Unbearable "White-ness" of ICERED

Although racist is unlikely exists in Hong Kong, many people have the sense of Internet as a "racialized" space, that is, people were assumed as a Caucasian. The racists’ ideas on Internet are often associated with Eugenics. In anthropological context, the thread holder and the racist, both made misjudging responses, i.e. Ethnocentrism, "means evaluating other people from one’s own vantage-point and describing them in one’s own terms…within this frame of thought, other peoples would necessarily appear as interior imitations of oneself." (Eriksen, 2001, pp.6-7) In her observation, an online racist would express his/her perspective on racial issues, rather than judging on receivers’ physical bodies since the latter’s appearances are invisible, or vice versa. The absence of ethnicity as a social category is problematic, since “whiteness” seems a universal assumption unless you have labelled your names differently. However, if the ethnic categories do exist in WebPages, yet is still problematic as there’s no clear definition between certain ethnic groups, and thus violated the ideas of “the Internet should be no restraint” (Barlow 1996, in text p.1), although Tak-yee takes opposition to that.

"Men are after sex, women, after money"

In ICERED, the threads held by female are likely to be abused and attacked by male posters. It reminded us about the study conducted by Alison Adam of cyberstalking and online sexual harassment in pervious week’s reading, which is concerned about computer ethics versus feminist ethics. There are several examples which IceReders labelled Hong Kong women are as "devalued, ignorant, and materialistic". She also suggested that the accusations made by Asian often greater than the West. A female user was threatened by the handle to expose her ID address and hijack on her computer, in order to restrict girls’ responses. It indicated that the degree of "cyberdemocracy" is in decline as well. Furthermore, she suggested that ICERED promoted a certain level of materialism, which happened as the same time as in Hong Kong as well. In this case, to blame on HK women’s "money worship" was blamed on society and the accusers themselves. Therefore, male IceReders were infected, one by one in the real life, and reproduced their idea of materialism to their discussions.

Tak-yee also examined two of female IceReders, "HKGirlie" and "Bettina". "A dis-embodied environment, apparently without constraints descriptions and even greater homogeneity rather than new forms of identity (p.11)" Both two were represented a model of "peculiar female identity", who transgressed on the notion of traditional feminist ethics.

On the other hand, men were stereotyped as "sex-hunters" and "desire for women" in one of the threads in ICERED, and certainly it provoked male members who participated in the discussions. However, it seldom existed as we assume the power of both actual and virtual space is masculine.

Homophobia and Queerness

Gay and lesbian online population is growing, accompanied with the popularization of the Internet. However, the fear of homosexuality is also pervaded. In a thread of, homosexual was misunderstood as unnatural and immoral practice, or the aid of transmission of HIV/AIDS. Also the origin of homosexuality was misinformed "from the West". Therefore, the general presumption that the Internet "is" a white, male, heterosexual, and elitist discourse, is confirmed and across different community sites.

"Who wanna be superstars?"

There was a case that a citizen in Central becoming a “notorious” celebrity. ICERED (and thousands of online communities) enable to use their impact on the real world, even enable to change the real world. Contest participants were able to achieve a form of celebrity status, with their online-formed charisma. ICERED is an online community that able to organize real-life events, that is, a simulation that the representation or imitation of a physical or social system or its activity by computers for the purpose of predicting the behaviour of that system (the reality) under certain conditions.

Finally, Tak-yee’s assumption that "cyberdemocracy" is indeed vanished as those marginalized responses such as racist, sexist and homophobia in ICERED has disrupted the process of the ideal democratic public sphere that people discuss about an issue before across their subjectivity. The democratic trajectory is deviating indeed. Anonymity is one way of protecting privacy but one doesn’t response to his/her consequence made on Internet, yet we still accepted somewhat border crossing. They could be observed as "the bad boys (and girls) of cyberspace" (p.17), who stirred bad atmosphere into discussions and produced a chaotic result. On the other hand, her fascinating suggestion of the simulation between real life and the virtual life in ICERED was a kind of addict for the participants, that is, the virtual reality, to intervene the situations that online communication replicates value and fears offline.

My responses

Hong Kong people are always considered as "over-response" or radical on several social and economical issues. There is the case in the online community as well such as in ICERED: the fear of homosexual content spread in the media, devaluing women, speculating whether you are wealthy etc. On the other hand, the "whiteness" responses made by Hong Kong IceReders reminded me the Chinese responses on the relay of Olympic torch, to rebelling on Western media. However, sometimes HK people have fewer responses, or being silent on political or democratic topics. They are apolitical; they simply rely on the Internet heavily, as Lupton suggested. I don’t think the dominance on the English language online is a form of cultural imperialism (but certainly does at the beginning of the Internet development), but now there’s emergence of other languages and their cultures as well, e.g. Japanese with the popularity of its Manga. Multiple languages are needed in online discussions. Tak-yee’s emphasis on Hong Kong cyberculture enables us to clarify the relationship between the freedom of speech and itself, in terms of racism, sexism, homophobic hostility and online celebrity.

It's Time for questions!

• Is it necessary to identify ourselves in terms of ethnic identity in online communication?
• Do you think the English language has the dominance in online communication still?
• Does the politics determine our tone, or our manner in online discussions?
• How do you define the relation between Internet use and sociability? Do they interweave with each other?