"E-Mail Me Way Hard, Baby." (from salon.com)

shereads

Sloganless
Joined
Jun 6, 2003
Posts
19,242
It has come to my attention that some people here at Literotica, not content to write and read dirty stories or even to participate in interactively dirty stories over at SRP, have been indulging in "cyber-sex." Or so I would presume, since I read this article at salon.com. Thought some of you might be interested. From a purely clinical perspective...

:D

Is it worth reading? Here's an excerpt:

"In the good old days, the perfect partner was a blond, blue-eyed person. Nowadays, a perfect online relationship is someone who can type fast with one hand. "

E-mail me way hard, baby

An Israeli philosophy professor says that online love can be more powerful than off-line because, after all, sex is about the brain, isn't it?

- - - - - - - - - - - -
By David Bowman

Dec. 18, 2003 _|_ Israeli philosophy professor Aaron Ben-Ze'ev has written a book to be published this Valentine's Day called "Love Online: Emotions on the Internet."

"Emotions" -- ha! The best parts of his book detail the proliferation and complications of cybersex. We spoke to the professor by phone from Haifa. But before you begin reading, let's you and I have a little erotic experience. Slip off your pants or skirt. Go on, do it. If you're sitting in an office, do it subtly so no one sees. Now pull down your underwear, but don't take it off. No. Leave it stretched between your knees. Feel your bare ass on your seat. The byline on this article says David Bowman. Maybe that's my real name. Maybe it isn't. Maybe my name is Donna. If you are straight or gay, male or female, my name now fits into your cosmology. Before you begin reading, say one of these names out loud: "David Bowman." "Donna Bowman."

As you read my interview with your underwear stretched between your legs, this is what is going to happen. If you are a woman, straight or gay, your nipples are going to get hard. Real hard. Real big. Like the tops of salt shakers. They're going to poke through your blouse. Even if you are not sitting bare-assed on your seat, your nipples are visible to anyone who walks by your desk. Don't be embarrassed. They are your nipples and they are beautiful. And you fellas, don't think I've forgotten about you. Both David and Donna are thinking of lighthouses. Smokestacks. Licking their lips. Oh good Christ, ladies and gentlemen -- let's have cyber sex together!

Aaron Ben Ze'ev feels cyber sex and cyber love are almost more powerful that what he terms "off-line" relationships.

Say the term, "Off-line."

"Off-putting," isn't it?

When was the last time you had really, really good off-line sex? When was the last time you slapped the walls and screamed, "God oh God oh God!" Yeah, right. I thought so. I'm about to give you a fabulous experience. In Ben-Ze'ev's book, he lets slip that cybersex is so prolific that women now have to fake orgasms online. Well, baby, you ain't gonna fake nothing with me -- I'm your champ. And you, buddy! Saddle up the stallion because we're gonna herd cattle. Sex ain't about friction, soldier. Sex is about words. That's right. And Aaron Ben-Ze'ev and I have the language to make you cream your chair and yodel your lungs out. We're on an online roll now, baby doll. We're Circuit City. Can you stand it? How erect and besotted with blood are the appendages on your body? What will your teeth bite down on? No, no, no, not your keyboard! Sit still. Sit very still and just read this interview, and let your hands do what they were born to do.

Your book is dedicated to "Ruth"? Who is Ruth?

[Thick Israeli accent.] She's my wife.

Did you meet online?

No. We've been married for ... 18 years. Before the Internet. I've read the last interview you did with the woman who said that intelligent women are more successful in getting powerful men. I gave a lecture about emotional intelligence online -- what I argue is the combination between emotion and intelligence is much greater online than off-line because that relationship is based on conversation, which is an intellectual activity. Those who are more intelligent can seduce better. One woman told me that, off-line, stupid men can be sexy, but online stupidity cannot work. You have to have a certain amount of intelligence to excite a woman online.

Have you yourself had an online romance with a woman?

I don't have the time. I think it is a very nice way of creating a relationship. In off-line circumstances, we fall in love in light of external appearances, and then we get to know each other. In online relationships we first get to know each other. And only then fall in love. In this sense, we return to more conservative relationships. In the past, we first got to know each other and only then jumped into the bed.

Do you have any kids?

Two sons. One 13, one 17. They're all the time online.

Do they date online?

I don't know whether to call it a "date." They conduct conversations -- most of them are kids that they know. Israel is a small country and when you begin an online relationship you immediately want to meet. It is easy to meet because you don't live far away from each other.

Did you date your wife?

Yes.

For how long?

Half a year.

Did you live in the same town?

She lived not far away from where I lived. Yes, we dated before the marriage, but it went quite quickly. We met on a blind date that a friend of ours thought we were intended for each other. We fell in love quite quickly.

So this is the antithesis of online love?

Yes, it is. Look, I don't say online love is the only solution for future romantic relationships. What I do say is that it is a very good means for falling in love and having intense love and wild sex. People say that they experience the most intense love of their life with online relationships. And they say that they experience the wildest sex through the Internet. You feel very safe. And if you are safe you can speak more about yourself. And build intimacy.

I don't say that this is the only way of falling in love. I don't say that online love will completely replace off-line relationships. Even successful online relationships want to transform to off-line. They think, "If it was good so far, the physical aspect will increase our love." In many cases, it does not. On the contrary, it ruins it. This emphasizes a common human failing. We are not satisfied with being happy. We always want to be happier, but this search for being happier may ruin our happiness.

Well, love has always been a head trip, but cyber love seems like taking things too far ...

You are right, it is a head trip. It is a brain-to-brain relationship, but what I am saying is that people are not satisfied with mere head trips. They want something more. I'll give you another example, let's speak about the sexual aspect of online relationships. A husband says to his wife, "I don't care if you have an online affair as long as it is kept in computer boundaries. If you get your sexual arousal on the computer, as long as you do the sex at home, I don't care if you're aroused outside the home." The problem is that once you have this online cybersex, then you become attached to the other person. And when you become attached, you may want to meet the other person. Again, it is very hard for us to set the boundaries and then keep to the boundaries because it is so exciting.


A statistic: I bet beautiful women do not have cyber lovers.

If you want statistics -- first, couples who met online and then survived the first face-to-face meeting, two years later over 70 percent are still in love and together. There are very good-looking women and men who have online affairs in order that people will fall in love with them in light of their personality and not their external appearance. Sometimes attractive women want to know that men fall in love with them not because of their beauty, but because of their personality. By the way, a colleague of mine told me his wife, his ex-wife I mean, went to the Internet to find a partner. Why on the Internet? Because she is rich and doesn't want people to fall in love with her because of her money. He told me after their divorce she won $40 million in the lottery.

I said, "Do you not regret the divorce?"

He said, "No, no. It was the right thing to do."

I said, "Maybe it was the right thing to do, but maybe it was a bit too premature."

Romantic love is only a couple of centuries old, isn't it?

This is a disputable issue. Look, I think basic romantic love has existed all the time. We read Shakespeare. We read the ancient Greeks.

What's the difference between old-fashioned love letters in the mail and online love?

Letters take time. They cannot express the immediacy of emotions where you want a response now. You want to actually speak with the other person. Also in an online relationship you have an anonymity that you don't have with letters.

You use "love online" and "love off-line" as if the two terms were somehow equal.

Some people told me my use of the term "off-line" love has a negative aspect. But I use it in a neutral sense. Some people write "actual relationship" as opposed to "online" relationships, but many online relationship are "actual" ones. In online relationships the language is not passive like in literature. It is active. It is interactive imagination because the other person is an actual person. [Pause.] One married woman said that she found herself faking cyber orgasms. The whole relationship is imaginary, but she must fake something in order that the relationship will be experienced as the real one.

Some of your fellow teachers are women, aren't they?

Yes.

And some of them are beautiful?

Yes.

I've worked with women online and on the phone for several years, and then I finally met them in the flesh. And they were beautiful. I found myself stunned. I almost wanted to shout: "Your breasts! Your hips! How great!" I realized when you work in an office, you size up women all the time but do it subtly. You're cool. When that human quality is gone, then it's shocking to suddenly be face-to-face.

You've already developed a relationship. You already have a positive attitude of that personality. Someone wrote online, "I never saw your face, but I cannot imagine someone with such a beautiful soul as you have not to be beautiful." Handsome people get all the advantages in off-line life. Online it is the other way around. People with a sense of humor get this advantage and then their physical appearance is seen in better terms.

In your book, you mention a woman who falls in love with someone online, but when he walks off the airplane it looks like he's never taken a bath in his life.

In love there is an element of attraction. We don't always know how this attraction comes about. For example, a certain type of accent may attract, of clothes, of uniform, of hair, of glasses may generate attraction.

How old are you?

54.

Are you losing your hair?

Not yet. You can see my picture on my home page.

Are you handsome?

My wife thinks so.

Do other woman respond to you?

Yes. With all modesty.

Before you met your wife, was it easy to meet women because you are handsome?

I wouldn't say I'm like Tom Cruise. My wife admired Tom Cruise. But she didn't fall in love with me because I look like Tom Cruise.

We have an advantage, being men. Beautiful women can dig us even if we have a mug. Humphrey Bogart had a mug. I have a mug. Once women get over our mugs, then they see how charming and intelligent we are.

Are you handsome?

No. I just told you. I have a mug.

Mug? What is mug?

I'm not homely, but I'm ... really, really far from Tom Cruise. And worse, I'm losing my hair.

Men give more weight to physical appearance than women do. But not-so handsome men or not-so handsome women have great success online, because they are intelligent and witty, and they don't make spelling mistakes. One woman wrote that she cannot stand spelling mistakes. If a man writes to her with spelling and grammar mistakes she cannot have cyber sex with him.

[Laughs] I am a terrible speller, but I have always taken comfort in the fact that F. Scott Fitzgerald was one too.

Look, if you have some disadvantages at the beginning of your online affair because of your spelling mistakes, but then if she continues to write you and sees that you are witty and smart, she may not be bothered by spelling mistakes. But you see, writing skills are very important. One stereotype of off-line relationships may be, what do you call it, your "mug"? And a stereotype of online relationships is spelling mistakes. In the good old days, the perfect partner was a blond, blue-eyed person. Nowadays, a perfect online relationship is someone who can type fast with one hand.

So let's talk about adultery.

Please do.

Your wife wouldn't stand for you having an online relationship with some woman, would she?

No way. She is, I believe, a jealous type.

What about marriages when it's OK to have affairs as long as you never meet in the flesh?

Look, a certain percent of people who have such affairs do not think it is cheating. But 80 percent of their off-line partners think it is cheating. It pertains to their perspective. You don't meet face-to-face. There is no penetration. There is no risk of pregnancy or AIDS and so forth. Some people who may compromise in their sexual exclusivity may say, "OK. Online affairs are a good solution." They set boundaries. One husband says, "OK. You can have cybersex with somebody, but not more than twice with the same person." In order not to get emotional attachment. This is a real problem. We cannot stick to our own boundaries. Because after and before cybersex people usually talk. It's not like off-line sex, you do bam bam and then fall asleep. In cybersex, you talk. And then you may develop emotional bonds. And then the relationship becomes quite close and generates primary jealousy from an off-line partner.

Just to comment on "bam bam then you fall asleep." What if while you are having sex with your wife Ruth, she pretends that you are Harrison Ford? You wouldn't want to know this, right?

I wouldn't want to know it because it would be insulting. [Pause.] Jimmy Carter spoke about having adultery in his heart.

What if you have a cyber relationship with a woman who is actually a man?

If it is kept in the border of cyberspace it may not make such a big difference. I mention in the book about two people who correspond with each other, and then after 10 days one of them says, "I have something to tell you. I am not a man. I am a woman." The other woman was quite upset, "How can you deceive me in this manner?" Then a few days later, she wrote, "I have something to confess. I am not a woman. I am a man." Well, they were upset with each other, but after two weeks they begin to correspond and promise to never lie again. And finally they got married. [Pause.] Incidentally, in an online survey on personal profiles, most women write that their bra size is D plus. This is the type of lie and deception that people always write down. But the more profound traits they cannot hide because those traits are revealed through conversation.

The last topic I want to talk about is masturbation. During the Clinton scandal -- phone sex. Now cybersex. They're both masturbation. Britney Spears even has a new song about "hand love." (A hand-maiden!) Is masturbation some social rebellion against the tyranny of Alex Comfort's "Joy of Sex"?

Look, of course cybersex is mainly a form of masturbation. What is interesting, it is mind-to-mind communication. It is the intellectual aspect which we spoke of before. People who are smarter, wittier, have a better sense of humor, are more successful online.

I have a friend who used to convince girls to masturbate in front of him. When you are having cybersex, are you imagining that your partner is making love with you? Or masturbating -- and this is what is arousing?

Don't ask me. I have never had cybersex. Yes, there is an account that I have read that there is both types of images -- imagining them masturbating, and imagining them flesh and blood with you. I cite in the book a woman who said her husband likes to see her masturbating with someone online. He likes to watch or do to her what the other person writes that he is doing to her. She said that her husband and herself are getting quite excited by this cybersex.

No one thought this through in the 1990s. Imagine Monica Lewinsky knowing that the president of the United States was jerking off to her instructions. There is degradation in that, but also power. Imagine that you're influencing the most powerful man in the world to diddle himself.

Yes. Words are quite seductive. We are intelligent creatures and words can seduce us. Words are quite powerful to us. This is the power of online relationships. I believe these people who say online they have experienced the most intense relationships of their life. The most intense sex. I believe them because it is generated by words, and words and the imagination have no limit.
 
I myself do not cyber for many different reasons. However I can believe 95% of what is said. For the most part that makes sense.
 
In off-line circumstances, we fall in love in light of external appearances, and then we get to know each other. In online relationships we first get to know each other. And only then fall in love. In this sense, we return to more conservative relationships. In the past, we first got to know each other and only then jumped into the bed.
I can't believe this guy is a university professor. I hope his book had a good editor. It's an interesting topic in general but this interveiw taught me nothing new.

Perdita
 
The article’s right on the money, from my experience. I’m always falling in love online, but then, I’m a total sucker for words. What makes it work is that with the anonymity of the internet, you can get that kind of immediate intimacy that we always read about in Literotica fantasies: “Hello. Let’s fuck.” It’s natural to imbue the other person with all the traits you’d want your ideal lover to have.

---dr.M.
 
The Bambino

Originally posted by shereads Your book is dedicated to "Ruth"? Who is Ruth?
Dear She,
Good grief! Quite a dissertaton. I can only state one thing with certainty: The "Ruth" is Babe Ruth. There are some big baseball fans over there in Israelia.
Helpfully,
MG
Ps. Is it almost time for spring training?
 
I have been involved in the social and community aspects of the internet for almost 12 years. I've seen all manner of relationships online, and I've seen everything that happens offline, happen online. Lying, cheating, two-timing. Professions of undying love, professions of eternal hatred. People falling into love, out of love. Friendships made that have lasted those entire 12 years and other friendships made that haven't lasted but a few months before the people concerned drifted apart.

12 years ago, it was a different internet. 12 years ago, we didn't have voice-over-ip, or the ability to use webcams. Real Networks, who were the first to really develop mass-market streaming video only released their first version of RealPlayer at the end of 1996. Prior to that, we were limited to very basic textual communication. IRC, talkers, MUDs, BBSes. 12 years ago, CGI was in it's infancy, and messageboards like lit were a very very rare thing indeed. The lit messageboard is written in a language called PHP, which was developed from an earlier language known as PHP2.0/FI sometime around 1996/97. Prior to that, the lit board could not even have existed in it's current form. In fact, 12 years ago, Netscape (the web browser) didn't even exist.

But, even given the extremely restrictive communication media available, online relationships flourished. The number of them grew and grew as I watched.

Why?

At the start of the internet, back when it was populated solely by geeks, the reasons for this are/were very similar to the stereotypes that you hear about. Traditionally, (especially those of the '80s generation') computer geeks tend to the insular and the introspective. They're socially handicapped, because they spent their formative teen years programming computers instead of going out and getting drunk/laid/arrested like the rest of us.

But, they grew through their teens and went to university/college. Finding themselves socially inept and starved for human contact, they discovered many like minded individuals online. Back then, the stereotype was very true. Your average internet user was a socially-recluse computer 'nerd' who had an easier time relating to computers than to people. They were very socially frowned upon and ridiculed.

Over the internet, of course, their lack of fashion sense and typically poor physical development didn't matter. Their personality shone through, and these were smart, intelligent and caring individuals. But, they were desperately lonely. I saw many, many people go into online relationships, not because the other person was the right person for them, but because they were lonely, and looking for someone, anyone, that would show them affection.

Obviously, those relationships are destined to fail, regardless of whether it's online or offline, and the potential for the success or failure of internet relationships in general should not be based on these.

That was 12 years ago. Now, we have photo-email, (12 years ago, pictures that we sent across email had to be de-attached and decompressed by hand before we could view them), live webcam and voice, albeit with a very short delay. We have messageboards like this, where whole communities form, with exactly the same characteristics as real-life communities.

And more importantly, the internet has grown in usage. Now, normal people are using the internet. The guy you see behind the checkout at the grocery store. The cop who pulled you over for speeding last night. The woman who drives your kids to school in the schoolbus. The internet demographic has changed, and so has the success/failure rate of internet relationships.

In the last 12 years, I've met somwhere between 150 and 200 people that I met first online. I've had physical relationships with some of them. I've had emotional relationships with others. And maybe I've just been lucky, but I can tell you that if you asked me to count the number of people who's real life personality didn't match up to their online one, I'd run out of examples before I ran out of fingers.

A much wiser man than I once told me, "When you're thinking about spending the rest of your life with someone, consider how well you communicate, because when you're both 60 years old, being able to talk to one another will be the most important thing in your relationship."

And really, what's the internet all about?

Communication.

When all you have is words, then you're forced to communicate.

When my marriage was breaking up, the ex-wife and I would replace communication with films. We'd get home from work, have nothing to say to each other and supplant the uncomfortable silences by going to the movies.

When you go out in the evenings, you can cover up gaps in the conversation by listening to the music in the bar or club where you're at. Or dancing. Or going to the bar to get another drink.

If you're hanging out at your apartment, you can watch TV, or make a coffee, or find something else to do if you run out of things to say. A lot of people I know just fuck.

You can't do that online. You have no fallback activity when you run out of words, because words are all you have - And so it's very easy to find out very quickly if you have anything lasting to talk about with the other person.

The other reason why it's very easy to find out quickly, is because of the sheer intensity of online communication. Back when I first started chatting online, I would think nothing of sitting down for a 4-hour session, or 6-hour session in the college computer labs to talk to all of my online friends. (I believe the longest time I was ever continuously online and talking for was around 68 hours straight through)

So many people, when they get involved in chat rooms for the first time (Be it webchat, IRC, talkers, IMs, or whatever) say to me "Wow, where did the time go?"

I think it's very rare for people two people to get together and do nothing but talk for 6 hours straight. You go out for coffee with a friend. Maybe you spend an hour in the coffee shop, and then you say goodbye and carry on shopping.

You can learn a lot about a person, if all you're doing is talking for 6 hours, and none of it is based on their physical appearance.

Online relationships generally only get a bad press from people who haven't spent very much time online.

edited, cuz i speel guud
 
Last edited:
I think the internet is a petrie dish that's breeding new neuroses that will only be diagnosed years from now when the term "going postal" will be replaced with something like "going offline."

It's far too easy to pretend.
 
Raphy

Interesting summary of the development and in the way you relate that to the person to person interface.

When I was young, I would think nothing of spending six hours talking with a girl.

The silences you speak of can mean different things to different people. We married 29 years ago after a 6 week courtship. We never stop speaking, even when we are silent.

We remembered driving, when we were young, following an older couple who were not speaking wondering about their lives, how could they have grown so 'apart'. Now we do the same, the other drivers cannot see hands on thighs, reassuring squeezes and gestures or hear the thoughts that pass unsaid between us. Life is great.

Will's
 
Wills said:
Raphy

Interesting summary of the development and in the way you relate that to the person to person interface.

When I was young, I would think nothing of spending six hours talking with a girl.

The silences you speak of can mean different things to different people. We married 29 years ago after a 6 week courtship. We never stop speaking, even when we are silent.

We remembered driving, when we were young, following an older couple who were not speaking wondering about their lives, how could they have grown so 'apart'. Now we do the same, the other drivers cannot see hands on thighs, reassuring squeezes and gestures or hear the thoughts that pass unsaid between us. Life is great.

Will's

Aah, but my friend, there's a difference between a comfortable silence and an uncomforable silence - As you say, you two don't stop communicating even when you are silent.

I have maybe 2 or 3 people in the entire world that I can speak to face-to-face in a way that makes time fly, but it's harder to notice in the real world, because you have the opportunity of filling in the gaps with other stuff.

The point that I was trying to make is that when you run out of words using the internet to communicate, there is nothing else to fill in the gaps with. And those kind of silences are very telling.
 
Last edited:
raphy said:
The point that I was trying to make is that when you run out of words using the internet to communicate, there is nothing else to fill in the gaps with. And those kind of silences are very telling.

The potential for miscommunication can be astonishing, though. I don't know if this has happened to any of you, but I've found that it's possible in the environment to completely misunderstand someone - and be misunderstood, as well. To the point that people I barely know think I'm angry with them, because I failed to acknowledge them by name when posting to a group.

Even worse, I've had people I know and respect think I insulted them when I meant to simply tease. (That's when I learned the value of the smileys, which I used to despise. I'd rather err on the side of overusing smileys than have people think that "Bite me!" is intended to be dismissive, when in fact it's an invitation.

As in:

Bite me! :devil: :kiss:

Edited to add my original point (I think):

Unlike writing a letter, where you'd generally take a long time to decide what you want to say and how best to say it, this medium is so easy to use that it can be as dangerous as it is pleasurable. When you're sending a series of PMs back and forth, or in a live chat or IM, there's the illusion that the communication is similar to a phone call or face-to-face conversation - But with both of those, your words are supplemented with voice inflections, sighs, laughter, and all of the other clues that clarify the meaning of casually-used words.

I received a serious education in the value of body language and vocal inflection when I had an online friendship almost end over a misunderstanding that would never have happened in "r/l."

On the other hand, one can build friendships online that might never have happened if there had been an initial face-to-face meeting - In the early days of AOL, I used to hang out at a chat room called "Authors Cafe" and met a delightful, funny, very talented woman who - by bizarre coincidence - used to live in the neighborhood where I had just bought my house. She remembered the address, and told me about the parties they used to have here in the '70's, with bonfires in what is now my back yard.

I introduced this lady to an r/l friend who was heading to her part of the country for a writer's conference. When r/l friend returned, she gave me a picture of my online friend, "Jan," and said, "She wanted me to give this to you in person. It's time." That's the first time I learned that Jan is a quadriplegic whose entire communication with the world outside of her bedroom takes place online.

I know that if I had met her in person, I would have pitied her before I learned to respect her.
 
Last edited:
Absolutely, and it's always very hard to infer inflection from typed words on a page, which is why messageboards are always more dangerous. In IM or real-time chat, of course, it's a lot easier to avoid miscommunications, but with a messageboard it happens all the time, because the interaction is a lot slower.
 
A very interesting topic, and one that I think of quite often - not so much in a romance / cybersex way but more in a general interaction of the web-based population (webulation?)

To recap, I was a computer nerd during the 90s. I really really wish I had an internet connection then - in the UK we had to pay for our internet connection over our telephone lines - I was always led to believe most US cable companies gave free local calls. I guess that hampered our home communications a little; my parents would never agree to pay for something like that.

But part of being somewhat isolated from society gave me the rare position of being able to observe from outside - watching human interaction, how people work, without actually becoming embroiled to the extent that my opinion becomes biased by personal interaction.

The internet is a fantastic viewpoint for many others to do this, although I get the feeling few people take the opportunity.

For a while, I was an administrator of a message board like this, and saw a large number of friendships blossom and innumerable wars rage across the binary ether.

Many people come to chatrooms and forums, I believe, because they are unhappy with what they are in real life. Many people are socially inadequate, whether they know it or not (I used to be in this category for the larger part of my life), whether through a medical or mental condition (sufferers of depression or moodswings, for example), or through inexperience (our computer nerd example applies here). But these people, like so many others who show inexperience, say "It is easy to lie on the internet".

This is simply not so. Example:
A young man wants to fit in with his peers, who are into performance tuning their cars - a popular thing among lads these days. He doesn't have a tuned car, but he knows a little through reading magazines and textbooks. He sees how the owners of very powerful or unique cars get a tremendous respect on the modified car forums, and he yearns for that kind of respect - his social inadequacy means he has never been truly happy with himself, so he thinks that respect amongst his peers will make him happier.

So he logs onto a modified car forum under a pseudonym and posts a welcome - Hi there, I'm BadBoy Jonny, I've got a [insert heavily modified car here] and it's producing 1000BHP.

Hence a few welcomes, and from the more experienced forum members, there are requests for proof, technical specifications, and general professional interest. When this fails to materialise, the regulars begin to see BadBoy Jonny for the fake that he is, and promptly dismiss him.

Now our socially inadequate Jonny can't cope with this, and instead does everything he can to prove he has what he says he has, even down to copying specifications etc. from magazines. Even this fails to convince the respected forum members who he so badly wanted to become. In the end poor Jonny is forced away with his proverbial tail between his legs.

This is a very extreme example, but it happens with alarming regularity on forums all over the UK. Sometimes these threads can be very amusing to watch - a lot of the symptoms of social inadequacy such as tantrums, name-calling and blatant denial are shown, and this engenders nothing but annoyance in the social group that these people want to join.

I a few people personaly who go online under false personas, and they always get found out; they invariably get peoples backs up and end up being kicked out in sometimes rather violent flame-wars. My best friend has been a victim of this sort of thing on a number of occasions because he never acts 'himself' online; this has gone as far as him being accused of acts of vandalism by a large group of people on the forum which eventually led to my affective resignation as administrator.

My point in all of this nonsense, is that people will spot a fake. Yes, you can go on the internet to lie, but no, you won't get away with it for very long if you are interacting on a social level in a chatroom or forum.

Perhaps that's different if you have more time to build a false persona before proper interaction takes place (e.g. posting stories to lit under a false gender - which by all accounts is quite popular) but then this takes the discussion in a different place entirely.

ax

PS... Ax is back
 
Back
Top