Posted: Sat Jun 19, 2004 1:10 am
I think they're more sensitive because they feel like they're putting themselves on the line when they write messages on the internet. I think there is a qualitative difference between what comes out of our mouths and what we write. When we are inside our own heads (outside of our usual social context, if you prefer), our ideas and beliefs are the measure of our worth and the source of our pride, and we are more vulnerable to disapproval or disagreement. In RL, we have lots of buffers and defenses, and we simply don't pay as much attention to what other people say because we're concerned about other things besides pure ideas (such as how people look when they're talking). In RL, other people's words are spoken into the air; but when we are on the internet and the space we're occupying is in our own mind, other people's remarks seem to be coming straight at us, right into our personal space. (I'm having trouble putting that into words, and I hope this isn't a circular argument.)
You aren't having problems expressing this thought at all. What you're referring to is the distinction between social space and internal space. In nearly all cultures, there is a distinction between the two. (Totalitarian regimes have tried to turn it all into social space, and to the extent that they have complete control over the media, including education, they've succeeded. I'm reminded of an incident reported in a Russian sociologist's book a few years back, where he referred to his uncle who had been hauled off for some unknown reason by Stalin's secret police to his death. The man's son, 9 at the time, said to his visiting relatives, "Some reactionaries think they can hide behind the false title of father!" -Internal space completely converted to social.) In cultures that put a premium upon public manners, such as Japan, the distinction can be extreme.
And I think you're right about the way that which we read on the Web, often has a greater impact than that which we hear when spoken to us. The literary word has a permanance lacking in other media. It can be viewed again and again.
Then, too, when sentences are spoken, we focus on the main words, and quickly derive meanings in context. When we read, many of us in normal situations give equal weight to all words in all sentences, lacking any visual or auditory stimuli to provide weighting clues. It's all too easy to be angered by a particular phrase that would normally be overlooked in conversation, and the ability to reread it, again and again, only magnifies the emotion.
You aren't having problems expressing this thought at all. What you're referring to is the distinction between social space and internal space. In nearly all cultures, there is a distinction between the two. (Totalitarian regimes have tried to turn it all into social space, and to the extent that they have complete control over the media, including education, they've succeeded. I'm reminded of an incident reported in a Russian sociologist's book a few years back, where he referred to his uncle who had been hauled off for some unknown reason by Stalin's secret police to his death. The man's son, 9 at the time, said to his visiting relatives, "Some reactionaries think they can hide behind the false title of father!" -Internal space completely converted to social.) In cultures that put a premium upon public manners, such as Japan, the distinction can be extreme.
And I think you're right about the way that which we read on the Web, often has a greater impact than that which we hear when spoken to us. The literary word has a permanance lacking in other media. It can be viewed again and again.
Then, too, when sentences are spoken, we focus on the main words, and quickly derive meanings in context. When we read, many of us in normal situations give equal weight to all words in all sentences, lacking any visual or auditory stimuli to provide weighting clues. It's all too easy to be angered by a particular phrase that would normally be overlooked in conversation, and the ability to reread it, again and again, only magnifies the emotion.