The dehumanization of people on the internet.

[sky14kemea]

Hahahahaha. Hahahahahahaha.

Spoiler

I agree it's a real problem, and I've probably brought the subject up a couple of times when dealing with people to try and get a little damn understanding sometimes.

I can admit it's hard to always remember that everyone here is a different, living person with their own lives and problems. The problem is some people might know that and just not care anyway.

 

[the_dramatica]

I think this is a big issue with the cyber bullying and all, ok write something about Michael Bay- your opinion, now imagine saying the same thing to him in front of his face looking him in the eye.

No problem there. He got payed hundreds of millions of dollars making his garbage. It's unlikely he cares about the quality of his films with his habits, let alone their criticism.

 

[Sarge034]

I follow one simple rule, don't say anything online you wouldn't say to someone's face. I'd say a lot to someone's face...

 

[Sarge034]

I can admit it's hard to always remember that everyone here is a different, living person with their own lives and problems. The problem is some people might know that and just not care anyway.

You nailed it with that second bit, but not in the may you meant to. We are all different, but that means things some people think are problems I may not and vise versa. I fall firmly in that second category and I don't plan to change just to make other people feel better.

 

[DrunkOnEstus]

I'm not a celebrity by any definition of the word, but reading the OP reminded me of a situation that happened on this very forum.

I was announcing that my daughter was about to be born, and some people didn't like what her name was, thought it was a bad idea to do. Someone in particular (not naming names) got rather heavy about it, and started to suppose what kind of person I must be and kind of "went for my throat" about it, steering away from the topic of the name itself.

When I replied to them explaining who I was and what my motives were and how I felt about the situation, I actually got an apology with the person saying that (and I paraphrase here) "I was attacking the concept, I was saying those things to you as a username, a faceless concept online without thinking about the human being on the other end who would and should be hurt by what I said".

I didn't really expect that. We ended up having a rather pleasant back and forth, and now we're friends on the Escapist here. Since then, if I'm replying to someone directly, I make an effort to think of them at least as a single person (like someone else said, it's really easy to dehumanize a situation, like not flying into a catastrophic depression when a train derails and kills everyone onboard). I wonder what I would feel on the receiving end, and think about being constructive if I'm debating someone's argument. It doesn't always work, but that's being human sometimes, and the Internet is a very weird dynamic.

"The Internet is the first thing that humanity has built that humanity doesn't understand, the largest experiment in anarchy we have ever had." -Eric Schmidt

 

[happyninja42]

I believe many people are dicks online and may use it as a means to bully others, but the majority are decent human beings and say things that are either nice or at least not dickish (and so these individuals don't stand out in our minds as much as the dicks do).

I worked in retail for six years, it feels kind of like that. I interacted with more customers a day than I cared to count, and for the most part, things were uneventful, but then I get that one customer and suddenly it felt like all the customers were bad.

Combine that with a lack of overly happy people[footnote]I'm not saying they were sad, but just content, said thank you and went on their way[/footnote] to balance things out and the bad weighs heavier on the job (internet) satisfaction.

Also, because body language and tone can't be properly conveyed through text, some people might not even be trying to be dicks, but still come across that way.

Yeah, I've had that last issue multiple times online. I used to play world of darkness roleplaying games on websites dedicated to the roleplaying, and the group of players that I grouped with for my werewolf pack, or mage cabal, knew me better than anyone else on that forum, and they still thought I was a bitter person. This was because I would make quick jokes, Mystery Science Theater 3000 style, which would be construed as bitter lashing out. But here's the funny thing, after months of talking to each other via type chat, we had a voice call through skype to discuss some things, and the first thing they said to me was "wow, you're in a really good mood tonight! you're being very jokey and funny!" and i responded with "this is how I am most nights, you're just not hearing my tone of voice, to know that I'm being silly and making funny quips." So I do think there is some merit to this statement, but there are also plenty of people who are clearly trying to be abrasive and hostile.

As to the comparison to the retail business, I would agree. Most of my jobs for my entire life have been some kind of customer service, so I can agree that for the most part, the interactions you have are uneventful, and not worth noting. Then you get that one customer (ie: asshole), and it sours you for a little while.

I also think that some of it is due to our habit as a species to internalize the things we care about. We identify with the things that we love/feel strongly about, and so when we hear someone criticizing them, or speaking about them in a way we disagree with, it feels like a personal attack. For example, that Paltrow comment comparing online harrassment to being in a war, reeeaaaaally hit a nerve with veterans, and families of veterans. They instantly assumed she was comparing her problems to being in combat, which isn't really what she was saying, she was making a comparison to a similar reaction, but people took it out of context and lost their minds. Because they take offense at this hollywood celebrity daring to compare herself to our proud and brave soldiers who risk their lives to give her the freedom to do her stupid movies!! 'MURICA!! And so yeah, they lose their shit over it. I personally don't really care, I deal with veterans every day, and most of them simply joined the service because it was a good job prospect, not out of any jingo-istic patriotic motivation. So it doesn't really ruffle me at all. But my clients? OOhh yeah, they got hot about it.

I do think there is a trend online to dehumanize those who are opposing our views when we express them. I wouldn't say it's an internet specific issue, so much as a human tactic when arguing with someone. Try to devalue them in the eyes of the audience, and you will win by default, even if your argument isn't valid.

 

[freaper]

Internet forums are slums. They can be fun, vibrant, challenging and exciting slums, but they are still slums.

"Slums" is a good description.

Personally, I go with "Bathroom graffiti", because that's how seriously I take everyone's posts until they prove to me they're worth more (or if I'm bored enough to blather on at great length).

Incidentally, I apply that standard to social media; I'd never put pictures of my self up in a public restroom and/or vocalize my every stupid thought to gobs of random strangers either.

Ironically, I've seen memes scrawled across bathroom walls.

OT: I've called the "internet experience" the perfect sociopath simulator before. Like you said OP, communication is [em]so much[/em] more than pure text/words: the non-verbal aspect of an encounter is much larger than most people take into account (nevermind the "Top 5 body language signs that show she wants to S your D). But we don't get that huge slice on a forum, even if people shitpost with their personal information in view, they don't care, because there is no immediate visual feedback from their conversational partner.

 

[sonicneedslovetoo]

My experience with the internet is this:
There are a lot of people who don't have much to say until they've been poked, somebody who cares a lot about one issue won't even bother to acknowledge or speak up about another. So you'll have two thousand people pass by the same thing and ignore it, but if it offends even a small fraction of the people who see it, well that's still a couple dozen people and that's more than enough to start raising a stink or bringing attention to it. More than likely they aren't going to bring it up to non like-minded people so what may have only pissed off a small part of one group starts having people added to the pile whose views are already poisoned by the people who brought them here. And a vocal 25 people or so can seem like a lot even though most of those that viewed it didn't care enough to comment one way or another.

In addition to that I don't think there are very many full time trolls, some people who may be pissed off at you may be just normal people with a reason to be pissed off at you. Sort of like how in some places of the world you don't want to offer your left hand to be shook the internet is a global thing and you will never be able to filter out all the stuff that will seriously piss people off. People, chances are, will find ways to be pissed at you for reasons you've never dreamed of.

 

[CaitSeith]

I think this is a big issue with the cyber bullying and all, ok write something about Michael Bay- your opinion, now imagine saying the same thing to him in front of his face looking him in the eye.

No problem there. He got payed hundreds of millions of dollars making his garbage. It's unlikely he cares about the quality of his films with his habits, let alone their criticism.

Saying that someone doesn't care about what people say about him because he makes lots of money from making something they dislike is an example of dehumanization (if he does care or not depends on the person, not the money or his work). Note that insulting or criticizing his work is not.

 

[Redd the Sock]

The part of me that's middle aged wants to think it's a byproduct of the "entitlement generation" having grown up with little knowledge of living not getting everything you want or how to go about getting it politely, but the more rational mindset of me knows there's more to it. Yes, there are people that will attack Michal Bay for not making THEIR Transformers movie, and then attack anyone that likes Bay's version, but let's move beyond people that are purely spoiled.

I was listening to Liana K's new video about anger transference this morning. Short version: anger is rarely an emotion felt for itself, but is a reaction to other hurtful emotions that have built up over time. You can argue if the are serious or trivial, real or imagined, external or internal, etc, but extended periods of rejection, disappointment, isolation, indifference, etc, eventually build to a point where you blow up at the little thing that pushed you over the edge, and the internet gives you the ability to go after that little thing directly.

The problem then becomes that anger causes the message to be lost in 2 ways: first, anger adds hostility to complaints and requests that may not be fully intended, and second, that hostility falls into the laps of people that may be at their own boiling point. Now they're angry and start firing back. Moreover if the complaint was lodged with stereotyping, and generalization in any kind of publicly viewed area, that second group gets impossibly large as everyone it may apply to feels the need to fire back, creating an army. Of course, that's full of hurtful attacks and generalizations as well, so the first side gets its army built and it's on as everyone just attacks trying to tear down the other side they feel are stopping them from being happy.

Dehumanization becomes a self defense mechanism at this point because no one wants to think they're being jerks to other people, and that the insults, blame, shame, indifference, etc they toss out are things the other side probably has every god given right to be angry at (and are even the things they themselves are angry about receiving). No they need to find some way to say group X deserves that treatment, or they have to face treating others in ways they don't like being treated themselves (being an asshole), and expecting positive responses and change as a result of doing so (being an idiot).

It's just an endless circle of not being able to deal with our negative emotions.

 

[Guffe]

Well someone didn't start of their EscapistLife lightheartedly :/

Welcome to the Escapist, hope you enjoy your stay
I know you've been around for 2 months, but it's just your sixth post

On Topic:
The thing is when doing stuff over the internet is you can stay anonomus. Which means chances someone can "pay bac" are minimal. Which gives one more "courage" to say stuff you maybe wouldn't face to face.
Yeah it's a problem. I try to think that I wouldn't say anything to anyone over the internet that I wouldn't dare say to them in real life.
Treat others the way you want to be treated. A good phrase to live by if you ask me.

 

[Strazdas]

Heres the thing: there are no people on the internet. Every single one of you are just bits of data showing on my screen. There are no sexes, skin colour or sexual preferences on the internet. Only opinions and data. A better question would be why some sites, like facebook, tries to humanize the date?

As far as people being dicks online versus people being dicks to your face. its very simple really. Some people are dicks. Many of them are smart enough to know that if you are being a dick in front of somone he might punch you. so they restrain themselves for fear of reprecution. Online, there is no reprecution. what are they going to do, ban him? he will create a new account in a minute. So they say what they mean and mean what they say.

There is also another side of this however. people are not afraid to express their opinions that may not be popular in real life. Which is the basic concept of freedom of speech. yes, there are some that abuse it, but far more - dont. and this is why internet is worth fighting for - it frees people from fear and oppression. People can be openly atheistic on the internet when they would get ostracized had they mention this in real life, for example. People can be gay on the internet where not so long ago that was an actual crime in real life.

People on the internet are who they are, without the mask of "Face-to-face", and thats a good thing.

But I think if everyone could see the result of the things they have said people would be much more careful about what to say.

There is a word for it. Its called Self-Censorship. It is worse than regular censorship.

 

[briankoontz]

How would you treat alien data sent from space? How would you treat an alien message which informs you that the alien lacks any technology necessary to visit in person?

The internet doesn't dehumanize people - but both it's strengths and it's weaknesses are incorporated into it's culture. It was called the "Digital Wild West" as a COMPLIMENT - to contrast it against the generally conservative social face-to-face culture in the United States and most other places. Many of the early internet pioneers *wanted* people to be able to say whatever they wanted to each other, including things they would be too polite or cautious to do in person. Flame Wars were a *celebration* of a culture that simply could not exist in "Meat Space". Unlike in Meat Space, if you burn down someone's house on the internet it's POOF, a simple reload and everything is reset to the default setting.

Treating the internet as if it's identical to face-to-face culture is rather pointless, unless you lack access to face-to-face culture and thus require the internet to supply you with that.

It's like going to a private club with it's own rules, being treated differently from how you are in mainstream society, and then complaining that you're being "dehumanized". It misses the point of the meaning of the social space you engaged in, begging the question of why you're there in the first place. Dick and Jane would complain about being "dehumanized" at an S&M club, but that's not actually the reality of what's going on.

What's happened is two-fold - lots of people with no history and understanding of the internet have joined the internet and expect things to be exactly how they are in mainstream society. Also, the internet has become so powerful that it's the primary form of socialization for many people, so it's literally TAKEN THE PLACE OF face-to-face culture, and therefore *needs* to take on some of the features of mainstream culture to supply humans with the kind of socialization they need.

If we seriously propose that the internet lose it's identity and become synonymous with mainstream culture we'll lose a precious aspect of our freedom, and betray the vision of many of the early internet pioneers. If we decide "well, that's a small price to pay" then go for it, but don't expect everyone to be on-board. Much like a "cleanser" at an S&M club, the problem isn't so much with the club as with the idea of cleaning it.

 

[TwistednMean]

A lot of people on the internet are not civil because they have no incentive to be civil. Internet offers protection from physical or social retribution through anonymity and complete lack of any physical interaction available

The person who invents a device, which would enable you to punch people in the face over the Internet is not only going to be filthy rich, but would make it a much more civil place than it is now.

On the other hand, I do not believe dehumanization on the Internet is a problem. As much as I am not a person to many other users of the internet, they aren't people to me either. If they trash talk, I trash talk back and feel no regret or remorse. If they threaten me, through insults or spew bile, I couldn't care less. They are just as impotent to cause me any harm.

Of course, when anonymity is broken that's until actual harrasment can begin.

 

[Sir derp sariff]

snip

I understand your point of view, but my criticism is that same concept being taken too far, when we say somethings on the internet to a person we wouldn't otherwise face to face because of social norms, etc we are aware of talking to(/about) a human but as someone mentioned with entitlement we forget that we are talking to a human being and rather criticize an idea and a concept devoid of human emotions(you wouldn't treat a person and a robot the same way), this is not the same as talking your mind freely about a person since it's not acknowledging who you are talking to(/about) as person at all(like I said criticizing an idea), though I am sure there are cases when what you have said is true- like asking opinions on a certain topic where there is less conversation between people, and I am also sure there are cases when dehumanizing is a problem- discussing about individual opinions/views and not with a third person entity as main subject(like-what's life like in your country etc), then we are at 'he say-he say'.

Overall I agree with you, I just think there are times when we must acknowledge the other party(be it a fellow escapist or a celebrity) as human being same as yourself, the action w/o consequences shouldn't be the only available option.