MENU DRIVEN IDENTITY RESPONSE

1. Which categories are available for users to choose from when signing up for Hotmail, Yahoo! Mail or in order to use the Second Life gameworld? What presumptions do these categories make about users, and what does the absence of certain categories of identity say?
2. What sort of 'identities' are visible in the profiles on Lavalife? How are they displayed? What presumptions does this display make about both the people reading these profiles and those users who made them?
3. How much of the "identity" that we can see online for the users on Lavalife is restricted by the overall design of the website? What changes would you suggest in order to "improve" the sorts of identity Lavalife users can construct?
4. Are any of the websites you've visited inherently racist? Why or why not?
1) Hotmail: Other than standard categories such as name, gender etc, Hotmail does not seem to give its users an option to create an identity based on race information. However, you could interpret that some form of race identity could be created through the choice of Country and Language. If we look at this the default language is (surprise) English and the default country is US, even though I am accessing the site from Australia. From this point of view we can interpret there is some bias in favour of a dominant English speaking US group. However, in the US there are a number of ethnic and racial groups, and the selection of the US as a country, as well as the spoken language of English (which Tama admitted himself is the most common language if we include second learned) does not act as a completely discriminatory act in terms of race etc. The fact that race is not explicitly a question in the form can mean one of two things : when filling out this form it is irrelevant what race you are, everyone gets the same treatment, or, the dominant thought is that everyone is white so why bother with the question. In Hotmail’s privacy statement and user agreement forms etc, they do include ideas of race, and also the notion of internet stalking and signing up under a false name or identity. Hotmail remarks that it is not right to sign up without using your correct name or that any racial abuse etc should be carried out within their sites otherwise it is breaking the terms of the agreement. YAHOO: does not seem to take race into consideration, similar to Hotmail, however the default country is set to Australia. However, it is interesting to note that an example name is ‘dairyman’ is this a play on words considering our question or what? The example seems to point to a ‘white male’….SECOND LIFE: no question for race in this sign up, however I would think options would be available later on when creating your character. It is interesting to see though that examples of names appear to be typically western.
The absence of questions relating to race seems to suggest that in these contexts it is not a factor in the signup process, and that the standard appears to be for a white person, speaking English. However I think it is important to note that there are a number of factors for why these signups would not question race and assume that English would be the dominant language. Also when listing countries, languages etc there are a large number of choices. I don’t think it would be fair to say that from this specific viewpoint of looking at these sites that they are racist. If there was a site that explicitly asked me to list my race, what would that imply? Why would they want to know? And how would it affect the service I received?
2) Ok, Lavalife does seem to have some issues on gender and race….for a start the default setting is a male seeking a woman. Interestingly enough if you accept that it comes up with a predominant listing of Asian women. Maybe if you were to access the site from inside the signup option you would be given a more detailed search where you might be able to discriminate between asian, other, white etc in who you want to search for a match with. Peoples descriptions do tend to include their race, and most seem to be white, most gave their alternatives such as asian etc, while a few gave OTHER as a type. I would think in a dating service the notion of race would have to be brought up based on cultural compatibility. Naturally some asian women would only want an asian boyfriend/lover etc, due to simply a fact that they would have the same cultural background and it would make it easier to date. I don’t necessarily think the listing of race on lavalife is negative. I think lavalife illustrates the distinction between online and offline self perfectly. Here we can really see that race is an issue to people. For Hotmail and Yahoo in their signups race did not appear to be a factor, this is not necessarily saying they thought we are all white, but that they just don’t need the information for the creation of this online identity. In lavalife there is the assumption that at some point the people who are reading your description are going to meet you face to face, and so obviously both the readers and writers believe race to be an important factor, why, we can only speculate depending on the individual. It would be an interesting space in which to attempt the delay race issue brought up from the reading.
3) For a start, those people that don’t want to place photos could put up avatars, that would be cool. That would be a great way to indicate race and a number of other things. The site isn’t really catering for gay/lesbian from what I gather but there are other sites specifically for those. In terms of search criteria they could do to include race and language searches. There category pictures of ‘dating’, ‘relationship’ or ‘something else’ could do with some other racial groups in them other than just white people. However they do have a ‘black’ couple in other photos around the site.
4) I don’t think it is possible to say any of these sites are inherently racist. They seem to assume at times a certain internet user, but, if research has shown that this is the dominant user, than they are just using good business sense in assuming that user. The sites do seem to allow for the identification of race on the net. Remember, in Hotmail and Yahoo these are just the signup pages, once inside people can identify their race in a number of ways through the use of avatars etc. What is evident though, is that race in many situations does not seem to be an option to select from, like male/female. If I had to say that any of these sites where racist I would say Hotmail and Yahoo, and only because on their profile options in their member directories you cannot list what race you are, unless by means of a photo. This may suggest that they view that there is no place or necessity for race on the net. Whether this is a discriminatory attitude or a way of preventing racial discrimination by other members of the site I do not know.

Changes to this tutorial blog

Hi Everyone,

New Link
A couple of changes to your tutorial blog. Firstly, you will notice I've added a link to the main Self.Net blog; this contains occassional posts from myself or Karen focusing on items which may be of interest for all students. Also, a number of curious people have found my own personal blog. Since some of you have found it, I may as put a link here, so if anyone else wants a read, you're most welcome (but do keep in mind, this is my personal blog, so isn't always 100% academically orientated!).

Blog Navigation Bar
I'm sure you've all noticed this new Navigation Bar at the top of the blog:

This adds some functions which might make using the tutorial blog easier:

• The orange Blogger button will take you directly to Blogger.com.

• Entering a search into the empty form box (the white box) and hitting search will search this blog (or whatever blog you are viewing). This should make finding earlier material much easier (only 15 posts remain on the front page, the rest go into the archive, accessible via the links on the side).

• Finally, the BlogThis! button will automatically open a window to let you write a blog post.

FollowUp Comments for those Introducing Readings
Just a quick note: most of you who have already introduced readings this week in tutorials have gone back and published your reflection upon the tutorial after it finished. Those who haven't (and those presenting in the coming weeks) please remember that part of your tutorial presentation is to go back to the post you made before the tute and reflect on how well your presentation went (how well the ideas were received; what sort of conversation happened; any ways your ideas about the reading might have changed/expaned). Ideally, this should be done as soon as possible after your tutorial presentation (but really should be before the next meeting of your tutorial). Others are reminded, that they are always welcome to comment on any posts in their tutorial blog and are also welcome to post relevant links/ideas whenever you find things! (oh, and for those of you who've never read other people's comments, give it a go; there are some really interesting dialogues taking place in the comments!).

A reminder:
Before clicking the 'Publish Post' button, if you place the cursor inside the window where you have written your post press either Ctrl+A to select all and then Ctrl+C (on a PC) or Apple+A to select all and then Apple+C (on a Mac), this will place the text you have written in the memory of the computer (this is referred to as placing text on the clipboard). If something goes wrong during the attempt to publish, all you need to do to make the post a second time is place the cursor in the post window and press either Ctrl+V (PC) or Apple+V (Mac) to paste the text from the clipboard into that text box. (Occassionally blogger does 'hang' [which means not finishing the posting function], so it is useful to make this quick backup in order to avoid typing out the entry a second time!)

Gattaca Response

“Does the prospect of scientific manipulations of genetics have to be a negative thing in terms of gender? Is there something to be said for ‘Liberating’ women from reproduction?”

In terms of considering scientific manipulation, in the form of eugenics, I would think that it would immediately create a response that questions whether there would be negative implications for gender. But I don’t think this has to be the case. Obviously it has been evident through history that male children in many cultures have been considered a greater ‘blessing’ than that of a female child. But this is limited to cultures and their value of male and female as part of society. Women are linked not only biologically with reproduction but in many other ways as a ‘mother’ figure or the gentler version of the sexes. But if women are no longer the only means of producing a child I don’t see that this would HAVE to be a negative thing in terms of gender. I think females have other qualities that have been recognised in society today, they represent compassion, provide a substantial portion of the workforce, and excel at jobs etc that men may not necessarily be so skilled at. I think it is key to look at male and female as the two opposite sides of a coin, they each possess what the other lacks. Women don’t just contain the capacity to reproduce while the men have every other quality. Eugenics may offer the benefits of creating the ‘perfect human offspring’ but is there one single definition of what the perfect offspring would be?
I think that there is definitely something to be said for liberating women from reproduction. Today it is commonly known that women do not want to have children until they are in their 30’s! Why, because already women have broken out of the confines of simply being considered the ‘mother’. They are pursing their rights and positions in the public sphere, previously only dominated by men. If women themselves are no longer focusing on their ‘supposed’ only real reason for existence, that of giving birth, then why would the ability to not be the only reproductive force pose a threat. I would think they would welcome it. Think of all the women out there who suffer the fate of believing themselves inadequate and enduring the pain (and shame) of not being able to give their husband a child. They are not able to reproduce, but that doesn’t mean that creating a child from their genes would be inferior. There genes are still worthy of being reproduced.
If a fear of the negative effect of scientific manipulation is present, I think it should be interpreted more from an angle of the fear of our creation no longer being natural or ‘god given’ but being reduced to that of simple gene manipulation and like that of creating robots or computers. For anyone to think that they were born in a test tube (no matter whether it was still from elements of a ‘mother’ and ‘father’) is surely a terrifying thought and would have devastatingly negative effects for the human mentality I should imagine.
And think how much a child would cost then!! Even their creation would be more expensive then what it would be from natural reproduction!! And I should think the bond between husband and wife would also be lessened.
IF there were to be negative effects for gender I’m sure they would be felt not only by the women but also THE MALE. The male as well as the mother would also be detached from his original role in the nature of reproduction. Would the father still think of himself as a father of a test tube baby? What happens if his wife was to use the genes of another man to create a child? Would the husband consider that infidelity?
Unfortunately I was unable to attend the workshop as I have been ill and didn’t get to see Gattaca, so I’m having to answer the question from a wider angle. I apologise for my absence and if you would like to see my antibiotic prescription to justify my missing the workshop feel free to ask!

Hello fellow Bloggers

Hey everyone im testing
Wow a serious blog to participate in, not like that *cough cough* livejournal :)
My favourite website at the moment (ie the one I can remember) is yetisports
This is just some small fun games involving penguins and a yeti. Number four is good, but the orca the whale is hard. Beware addictive!!!
-Cheers

Welcome!

This (we)blog is intended for the Monday, 2pm tutorial group (Tama Leaver's group) in the unit Self.Net: Communicating Identity in the Digital Age.