I can appreciate how Sherry Turkle's text discusses how MUDs may help some individuals work out their identity issues. Peter was able to portray his ideal self in virtual reality, a task which may have boosted his confidence and self esteem. Since he participated in virtual life, he was forced to deal with the ideas of identity. This act of self examination is not something that people tend to do as routine or habit. Some avoid these issues or are forced into therapy with some shrink in order to resolve forces associated with identity. I actually respect the concept of self examination presented in a game like format. In a way, it tricks the individual into addressing potentially deep-seated problems.
I have a very difficult time with the concepts presented in A Rape in Cyberspace. I can't even begin to imagine the act of physical rape compared to a rape in virtual reality. I agree that there are many instances when the aspects of virtual life and real life are equally rewarding, and therefore each can have aspects of pain and fear, but a picture of fire does not have the impact of the actual element. A dragon killed in virtual reality means nothing beyond entertainment. A gamer typing in sentiments such as " character A now raping character B" borders on the edge of ridiculous. A light breeze could even send it over.
I have serious doubts about survivors of virtual rape. I would love to see them in a group support session for survivors of physical rape. I'd even encourage them to tell their story to the group. Go on. It's alright to cry. Tell us a story of the rapist gamer, but don't expect sympathy. Expect anger and resentment because you have just wasted valuable time. There are other women here who have suffered such brutalization that they have nearly died. Their stories have impact. Your story has none. Your story has told us that you have such low self-esteem that you create drama and rape scenes so that you can say that you "survived" some horrible event.
I especially like Turkle's analogy of the ink blot test. This has been used in traditional therapy for years. In virtual reality, the ink moves and shifts around. You could even say that one projects a different personality at each log in. There is also the added advantage of not knowing what the correct answers are. It's therapy for the digital age, only it requires complete submersion. When participating in an ink blot test, the subject may say what he/she thinks the therapist wants to hear. They may even know the basics in the sense that ink blots never look like blood, corpses, or their mother. The ones that know how to play this game know that these are dangerous answers. This image of virtual reality is fascinating. Since the ink is never in the same pattern, this may even cause an evolution in unlikely traits such as emotions and personality. Concepts that were previously thought of as "hardwired" will have the ability to drift apart and even float back together in new ways.
Thursday, February 15, 2007
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
Your idea of "tricking" someone into self examination is intriguing.
So it's very easy, then, to separate "entertainment" from "reality"? I'm glad you're convinced. I wonder how easy this distinction will remain as our "entertainments" get more "real"?
More secondary research might help you tease these issues out some more. Some excellent thoughts, though.
Post a Comment