1 / 13

Identity

Identity. By: Alison Knecht. Queering Internet Studies: Intersections of Gender and Sexuality By: Janne Bromseth and Jenny Suden. Purpose: Discussion on play and power of imagination in shifting Internet cultures.

riley-rhodes
Télécharger la présentation

Identity

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Identity By: Alison Knecht

  2. Queering Internet Studies: Intersections of Gender and Sexuality By: JanneBromseth and Jenny Suden • Purpose: Discussion on play and power of imagination in shifting Internet cultures. • Moves to contextualize notion of play, questioning credibility, accountability, and genre. • Finding inter-links between gender and sexuality and subcultures online • Ending with questions of body, spatiality, queer feminist politics • Cyberspace • Unbound by physical bodies • Create/recreate yourself, allowing for flexible gender identity • Experimental and liberating • Cyberfeminist • “Boys and toys” • 80's/90's women were positioned as computer illiterates • 5 different scenarios • Sexual/sexuality based • Change in personal reaction/others reaction

  3. Continued • Access to online communities both on and off screen more widespread • Competing understandings • Identity, gender, and body • Also accountability • Conclusion • Overview of research on gender, sexuality, and Internet technologies. • Addressed changes in mediation and ownership Web 1.0 to Web 2.0 • More needs to be studied on the Internet and discourses on gender and sexuality • Queer critique of the study of gender, sexuality, and the Internet • “Establishing online selves is also always a situated process and dependent on genre as well as the social frame created within a group” (pg. 277)

  4. Discussion • Do we actually have gender freedom online? • Is the Internet a new breading ground for the next gender debate? • Are gender differences as important online as they are offline? • Can we ever escape this need for known gender roles?

  5. Self-disclosure, privacy and the Internet By: Adam N. Joinson & Carina B. Paine • Purpose: focus on disclosure in CMC and web-based forms, finding links between privacy and self-disclosure, and proposing three critical issues that unite the ways in which we understand the links between privacy, self-disclosure, and new technology. • Determine self-disclosure: bonds of trust, solidarity, and strengthen identity • Measure self-disclosure: different from F2F and CMC • Self-disclosure and the Internet: New technology contains high levels of self-disclosure. • Findings suggest more is being disclosed through internet relationships compared to real-life relationships. • Online and automated interviews and surveys, report more sensitive information • “Very few individuals actually take any action to protect their personal information, even when doing so involves limited costs.”(pg. 239) • Models of self-disclosure online: Paradox of being able to express yourself and also allowing more access to self. • What is privacy?: various functions and dimensions to privacy

  6. Continued • Privacy and the Internet: clash between privacy and new technology. Concerns about the Internet eroding privacy. Personal information being a commodity. “Double edged sword” • Linking models of privacy and CMC: privacy is prerequisite for disclosure. • Trust and disclosure: Establishing trust and not always having to reduce privacy • Control: self-disclosure online is control. Volunteering info, privacy may be compromised, uncontrolled use. • Conclusions: Focus on micro-level media is ignored which limits how we conceptualize online behavior. Examples: • Facebooks use of personal info to conduct research • Privacy setting on Facebook • Commercial use of our browsing history • Online dating

  7. Discussion • What is your definition of privacy? • What are some of your ways to protect your privacy online? Do they work sufficiently? • What are the moral and ethical implications to using our personal online information even if it is supplied voluntarily? • How has the increased use of new technology changed our self-disclosure patterns?

  8. The real problem: avatars, metaphysics and online social interaction By: David Gunkel • Purpose: addressing social issues regarding CMC proxies or avatars, distinguishing what is reality vs virtual reality. • Online we are free to be who we wish to be • Manipulate avatar characteristics • Neglects to recognize limitations of real physical bodies • Cartesian Thinking • Online behavior/Avatar behavior vs Real behavior • Shedding race and gender without “real life” consequences • Violent actions not tied to real behavior • Will the Real Please Stand Up • Case of Julie • Earliest recorded accounts of avatar identity crisis • To Tell the Truth Show • One would need access to appearance and real thing

  9. Continued • Plato • Differentiates between object as it appears to us, through our senses and the thing itself • Kant • Adds further qualification that access to the real thing is forever restricted and beyond us • Zizek • Real= already a virtual construct • Truth= no longer resides in what is assumed to be the “real state of things” http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CMA4x7aXJT0

  10. Discussion • How is identity determined in the age of the Internet? • Do social media groups such as Facebook, allow us to access the “real” thing? • What are some ways that we might be able to protect ourselves from “fake” identities online?

  11. Is Facebook Changing Our Identity? | Idea Channel | PBS Digital Studios • Facebook has 955 million users • Helps to create memories • Our identity • Hair, clothes, music we listen to, car we drive etc. • We create our identity off what we know and remember from our past experiences • Facebook is doing to our memory what Google does for simple facts • Dunbar’s Numbers • Describes cognitive friend limit • Facebook increases this number from 150 to 5,000 • Browse self to help construct more about identity EX: The usage of Facebook as it relates to narcissism, self-esteem and loneliness By: Madeline Schwartz http://digitalcommons.pace.edu/dissertations/AAI3415681/

  12. Discussion • Has Facebook become our memory surrogate? • Has our society become lazy with our interactions due to increased Facebook use? (i.e. remembering birthdays) • In what others way has Facebook influence dour behavior?

  13. References Gunkel, David J. "The real problem: avatars, metaphysics and online social interaction." new media & society (2010). Ioinson, Adam N., and Carina B. Paine. "Self-disclosure, privacy and the Internet." The Oxford handbook of Internet psychology (2007): 2374252. Is Facebook Changing Our Identity? | Idea Channel | PBS Digital Studios. Perf. Mike Rugnetta. Youtube.com. PBS Digital Studios, 12 Sept. 2012. Web. 10 Sept. 2014. Schwartz, Madeline. "The usage of Facebook as it relates to narcissism, self- esteem and loneliness." (2010).

More Related