I don’t think there is a single person behaves that way online that thinks it doesn’t change the person they are IRL. It’s just online they have the balls to be the person they really want to be.
I know a couple of people (brothers) who definitely thought that online wasn’t real and they could act without any consequences in their real life. This was back in the 00’s when social media was just catching on. They were absolutely awful to real life friends online and then acted like nothing happened in person. They lost pretty much every friend they had as a result of it. I still don’t talk to either of them. We tried to explain to them multiple times that it was absolutely unacceptable behavior, and they thought it was funny.
Oh you sweet summer child. Everyone is the hero of their own adventure.
I never said that they weren’t. I’m just saying I don’t believe anybody looks at their online behavior and thinks ‘thats not the real me that doesn’t count.’
Several comments here provide evidence to the contrary.
And maybe that’s the problem. The people who are assholes online don’t think about there being real, earnest people behind the other keyboards.
Anonymity and the abstraction of interacting online can and does weaken the sense of social contract for many people, unfortunately.
And it does count. Because what one says online can and does affect others in a real way.
I duno i have definitely seen people argue the internet isn’t real and none of it counts. I think people definitely try to justify it to themself like that. Like if a trans person complains about online harassment, that argument gets used a lot to dismiss it as lesser or not really important.
EdibleFriend isn’t saying that people don’t make that claim, they are saying that those people are being dishonest when making that claim. That they don’t really believe what they are saying.
I dunno. I agree and I don’t. I am part of a gaming community where RPing and ERPing is a decent chunk of subscribers. It does not appeal to me, but does that make them a catboi that will lick the back of their paws for a million gil? I kinda doubt that.
There is a big difference between me being “Sir Markham of Viewhampton” online, and playing that role as a total dick, and me being me online and me being a total dick.
If I play Sir Markham as a dick who goes out, woes women, wines them and dines them then dumps them for the next bit of tail that comes along, that is clearly a part I am role playing because I am roleplaying him as that.
But if I come on here as me – as Gabe and am rude, obnoxious, racist and a total twat then it is far more likely that is what I am like in real life.
If I roleplay a wizard in an online game do you think that means I can do magic in real life?
Not sure all! However both our scenarios are fairly apparent where fantasy starts and reality ends. But where is that line in other mediums?
I’m not justifying bigotry or anything else you brought up. I completely agree that they are assholes.
But is shittymorph just a shitty wrestling guy?
Unexpected XIV.
Honestly, if you’re online enough you do start to feel like a lot of people aren’t authentic, and it’s true enough, but I also think that validates the OP in a way. People are living our their fantasies, and they wouldn’t be fantasies if they weren’t appealing.
Yes! But I’m not a WOL with a mansion. I dunno. I hear the sentiment about being a dick and bigotry. We both know that XIV is not about that life and I am happy it’s that way. However I was going down the wormhole of possible exceptions.
XIV has a lot of content to delve into besides just being either a roleplayer or a raider. There’s definitely some unpleasant individuals in certain circles, but yeah we do usually call them out.
I am a raider through and through. That’s for sure. But I do partake in another nuances.
but does that make them a catboi that will lick the back of their paws for a million gil?
Absolutely it does, you just can’t do that in real life, because catbois, contrary to popular belief, don’t exist, and gillionaire whales willing to fund these ventures also don’t exist.
I think the difference here is that people are more multifaceted than they care to admit, and there is no real “you”. You can just as easily get lost in the sauce of catboi erotic roleplay as many can get lost in the sauce of ironically being a callous asshole. If I have learned anything, it is that irony doesn’t exist, and there is no core “reality”. I mean, there’s like a core physical reality, probably, but that’s not really what I mean.
Actually I just need to address this a little further because this is a beautiful example of what I’m discussing. All I did was post my opinion and you came along being a condescending ass about it. Do you believe that doesn’t count towards who you really are?
Wow so touchy. Not only was that not condescending, it was lighthearted. Yet you’re just too fucking miserable to not make it personal huh?
calls op a child
Condescending: 1. having or showing an attitude of patronizing superiority.
Denies being condescendingI honestly couldn’t have asked for a better example to prove the point I’m making about people being assholes on the internet versus their real life behavior. There was absolutely no need for him to talk the way he did yet here we are.
To be fair, at first I’m sure he didn’t mean to be condescending. I have certain friends that use the “poor child” type phrases like that as well, but it’s usually used for a comedic spin, because the language is from a few generations ago. His following reply was shit though 😆 talk about touchy.
Isn’t “sweet summer child” just a game of thrones reverence calling the other to be a bit naive? Or am i just missing context here?
It’s a platitude my dude. You can guys can self victimize yourselves all you want - I certainly am not gonna spend time arguing with professional victims.
Lol. No one is feeling victimized by you. You’re just providing the example for the conversation.
And there’s some very hostile toxicity and insults.
Again…is this not the real you? Do you believe that?
Allow me to come in and analyze both of your conversations.
Firstly, I think you probably misinterpreted the “sweet summer child” thing. I think it is pretty lighthearted, but I do understand how it could come off condescending. You were the first to use an insult, though, for calling the person an ass.
On the other hand, the person also engaged in insult throwing, by calling you too fucking miserable to take something lightly.
Finally, do I think either of you would’ve thrown such tantrums in the real world over such a stupid issue? Absolutely not. Do I think both of you are complete assholes for being assholes to each other online, based on misinterpretation of tone? Also no. Would I talk like this in real life, butting into a conversation I’m not a part of, offering my opinion that nobody asked for, and generally being annoying? Also no.
Does it mean I’m annoying in real life? Probably still yes. But I also think that you are probably not both assholes IRL.
Would I talk like this in real life, butting into a conversation I’m not a part of, offering my opinion that nobody asked for
That’s not super fair to yourself - makes me realize we all have special privileges here… we’re all not part of 99% of conversations yet we’re all welcome to become a part of about 100% of conversations anyway.
BTW I think of our behaviors as drivers as somewhat analogous.
When was the last time somebody cut you off in traffic?
When was the last time somebody cut in front of you in a grocery store?
Spend an hour in traffic, spend an hour in a grocery store… experience entirely different parts of people. A cage (car) and removal from direct interaction (internet) both change our psychology ever so bigly.
I think you’re right on the money in terms of relating the Internet to the car. It’s so similar. Like, why am I calling the person in front of me an asshole for cutting me off? I’ve done that a million times to others. I’m just as bad as them. But because I can’t see them and they can see me, I feel freer with my emotions and words. I think it’s similar with communication on the Internet.
I’ll be honest maybe it was a little lighthearted but… At the same time still condescending and there was no need for it in relation to my perfectly innocent opinion on this post. Especially when it comes down to it he clearly didn’t understand my opinion because ’ everyone is the hero of their own story’ honestly completely fits with my point of ’ people don’t look at their online behavior has not actually being the real them.’
When people are complete assholes on the internet they feel justified. When people said death threats on Instagram they believe they were doing the right thing.
And I’ll be honest… Yep. I behave like this in person too. If somebody’s condescending to me I call them on it so… Yep. I would have behaved just like this in person.
Thank you for actually talking rationally about this though :)
I agree with you that people believe their death threats are justified, and probably aren’t like “oh that’s not me in real life.”
But also, for me personally, I find it way easier to be an asshole online than in real life. I’ve definitely said things online (thrown insults, name-calling, etc) that I would never say in real life, and I would probably say, “that’s not really who I am.” But it is, because I said it. But it also isn’t, because I was younger and dumber and more emotionally unregulated. Yes, it was still me who said it. But when you see someone’s face, you see their expressions, their body language, you see them as a human rather than a username. And I understand for me, personally, that I’m more likely to be a dick behind a screen than to someone’s face absolutely unconsciously, so I’ll give someone else the benefit of the doubt there, as well.
In the end I would probably push back against the notion that we are always one person. We all should be capable of kindness and sternness, gentleness and seriousness, somberness and goofiness.
So in regards to your point, I absolutely would use that language in real life and no one I know would be offended by the words ‘sweet summer child’ unless maybe English was their second language. If EdibleFriend responded by getting in my face and calling me an ass and we weren’t in public he would be on the floor very quick. And likely would if he said that to anybody. Analyze that how you will. The internet doesn’t teach social skills.
I mean, I would also use sweet summer child in real life. I have. But people don’t always know it’s a joke, and I understand that. I certainly wouldn’t deck them if they called me an ass, that seems a bit extreme. Probably would go on the verbal defensive, try to explain it was a joke, and feel bad that they took it the wrong way.
But if that’s how you carry yourself through life, I can only say I feel bad for you that someone else’s words would affect you so much as to prompt you to physically assault them. Just seems a bit silly, doesn’t it.
I’m a background character in the story.
Me too!
I feel more like I’m one of those framing device characters, you know, like I’m the kid or the grandpa in the princess bride. I’m not the main character, or a main character, but I’m kinda like the guy in the twilight zone that sort of introduces things and then summarizes afterwards. DAE feel that?
Zizek says that our online persona is our real persona, because it doesn’t have the weights and limitations of our physical bodies and can be free to express as itself.
I don’t know, this sounds very mind body duality to me but I don’t think it’s reasonable to assume such a duality exists?
I think being removed from legal or social ramifications enables a lot of misbehavior. If there were social or legal ramifications for online behavior, then maybe people would behave consistently online and offline. In fact, you see that with places like LinkedIn.
Before social media, “trolling” was a game of inciting reactions without malicious intent. IIRC the norm was to induce anger or reaction or exhaustion without using violent language, like death threats etc. But of course people always behave stupidly for any number of reasons! The death threat people, from my old school pov, are not OG trolls. The death threat people are politically motivated actors or sociopaths.
So I think it’s less about being real online vs fake, and more about what you’re doing vs everyone else. If you’re looking for a cozy time online, then someone coming in to incite reaction by being contrarian (because that’s interesting to them) would seem aggravating to you, and that’s just unkind of the contrarian person (or troll).
If you’re shitposting and assume everyone is just a troll trolling trolls (and that’s true), then all interactions are performative and a game. However this cannot apply anymore because the rules of engagement on the web have changed, and there a lot more people online now with different needs and different expectations. I don’t think there’s anything wrong with being inclusive. The chans etc. are filled with glowies or nation state actors, so it’s not worth engaging in old school trolling in any form because you just provide convenient camouflage for people with malicious intent or political agendas.
So in short no, I don’t think body vs non body is the reason for differences in irl or online behavior.
I genuinely miss the good-spirited trolling that existed before the political-minded decided to abuse it, ruining it for everyone :'/
If you’re shitposting and assume everyone is just a troll trolling trolls (and that’s true), then all interactions are performative and a game. However this cannot apply anymore because the rules of engagement on the web have changed, and there a lot more people online now with different needs and different expectations. I don’t think there’s anything wrong with being inclusive.
Maybe I just have an old school mentality about this, but wouldn’t this be kinda, a better stance to take, even if you were looking for a cozy time online? Would it not be the more accommodating position? A troll is easier to dismiss out of hand for being bad faith, rather than assuming someone who’s good faith, but inflammatory, has entered into your space and decided to talk shit and incite reaction. One of those cuts it off before you spend more thought process on it. Thought terminating cliches are useful sometimes, for controlling your own behavior and not engaging with that which you do not wish to seriously engage. Which, I think, is something we need more much of, online. The fallacies are fine, it’s just that they are meant to be helpful to you, personally, rather than being a kind of, moral creed to which we all must conform, a creed that must be enforced, if not by strict rule, than by a kind of unspoken social norm, by chastisement.
I think probably it’s also weird that people comment like “this person is a troll” or “this person is a bot” as like, a kind of weird flag that’s supposed to be helpful, but then they expect not to get engaged with after they post that, by the poster. I’m not super convinced the people doing that “flagging” are always doing it in good faith, though, anyways.
Makes sense. It does make me wonder how many people I meet IRL secretly want to beat me up though.
I think this as well. People in on-line video games are so quick to flame, troll, and ruin a game. But Ask them if they think it reflects poorly on them and they’ll either get defensive, victim-blame, or say they were just joking. They complain about having bad community scores in these games, and blame literally everyone else before they can admit any semblance of culpability. Saw it in DOTA 2, saw it in Smite, and every other online forum.
However, we all lose our cool sometimes. I am usually the chillest dude on the server, but if I’ve had 3 games in a row of being flamed, trolled, having teammates quit, and on that fourth game some teammate “woohoo’s” my death? I’m already so steamed from the previous games that I’ll unleash a nasty comment right back, even if the dude accidentally hit the wrong emoticon thing. And if they are legit trolling, and I’m fed up? yeah, that’s definitely a nasty message right back at’em.
I guess I’m trying to say, we all lose our cool on-line once in a while, just like we all lose our cool in real life once in a while. Those once-in-a-while situations don’t define us, as long as most-of-the-time we’re chill. But if you’re edging towards losing your cool most-of-the-time, with your chill moments only once-in-a-while? then yeah, man. you’re the a-hole.
deleted by creator
The only difference is that if you do it online and not in real life, you’re a coward, two-faced, or both.
The true test of a person’s character is what he they do when no one is watching.
with no apologies to john wooden
Sleep, and sometimes masturbate?
You think no one is watching? :)
Try to do a D.Urge bg3 chaotic evil run but then quit because I feel bad?
deleted by creator
There is no division between who you pretend to be and who you are.
This is quite the nice message in view of imposter syndrome too. If you’re being a kind person online then you are simply a kind person.
If you’re being a kind person online chances are you’re a paedo incel.
Well fuck you and I hope any semblance of kindness towards you is merely a facade to take advantage of your ignorance :)
I truly don’t understand what motivates trolls like you to post rage-bait. What part of it do you enjoy, and what makes this worth your time?
That’s not trolling, that’s a reality.
humans regularly put on acts. Work, love life, friends, family etc. What makes online an exception?
It isn’t. People who are willing to act like assholes, in any context, are assholes. What is the criteria for being an asshole if it isn’t acting like one?
I suppose notable exception for literal actors playing a role in a performance.
See the Nazi Bar Problem.
It’s objectively an asshole move to refuse to serve a paying customer who is causing no issues and to imply violence if they don’t leave, but is the bartender in question really an asshole at the end of the day?
Wait, the bartender in the anecdote isn’t an asshole in the context of his story.
No, because the Nazi would absolutely use violence and other coercive means if he had the backup to feel safe doing so, like by having his Nazi friends join him at the quickly emptying seats at the new Nazi bar.
If the bartender doesn’t want future problems he needs to act now.
Stanford prison experiment is generally accepted as bunk science nowadays and it’s conclusions should not be used to inform opinions of someone’s actions.
absolute lie!
I am funny when I’m online.
My toxic trait is that online I code switch to calling out bullshit instead of sitting quietly listening to nonsense
Yeah, now that you mention it, the Lemmy version of me is just like the real version of me except I talk to strangers.
deleted by creator
That makes sense, but it seems to support the underlying idea that your internet persona matches your actual persona. Like, those nuances and days that are exceptions to the rule happen in the real world just like online.
There’s a huge difference between your true self and your societal masks. Just because you don’t act on your base impulses, because of the repercussions, doesn’t mean you don’t have and experience them.
So everyone is an asshole then? This form of thought makes it impossible not to be.
Nah, I’m saying if you naturally have mean thoughts, that you constantly need to suppress, then you’re probably an asshole. I would assume most people are generally good.
Alright. I may have misread your comment.
Eh… there are abundant examples of assholes who have learned to pretend to be decent people though.
I think that’s the point, if you’re an asshole online, but tell yourself you’re fine irl. You’re lying to yourself and it shows.
deleted by creator
The ironing is hilarious.
Yes, there is plenty of “ironing” here. I had initially read “you” as being directed at me rather than being directed at a hypothetical person, but once I recognized my mistake I deleted the comment and corrected my reply, because I do attempt to be fair to others.
Well then that’s a clear example of someone pretending to be something they aren’t, which contradicts the entire premise. Someone can absolutely pretend to be a saint on social media while being full of vitriol inside. Similarly, expressing anger and frustration on social media does not in any way mean that you’re ruled by those things.
It doesn’t contradict the premise at all. In fact, I think the person I described is the exact person the post is talking about, i.e. someone who is convinced that their actions online don’t translate to who they are irl.
It’s true that one instance of anger doesn’t mean the person is an asshole. The point of the post is that your post history on social media is often a more accurate portrait of your personality irl than some people want to admit.
I’ve asked myself in the past, if someone found my account, would they be shocked to read what I posted? I want the answer to be no. I wouldn’t want someone IRL to see my account activity and be shocked by what an asshole/troll I am on the internet. I hope that the person I am on the internet is at least as kind as I perceive myself IRL, if not kinder.
Honestly my username is based off my real name and I use it for a number of other things my family members all know about. At best, they might be surprised and some of my comments discussing events they were involved with, and perhaps my descriptions of how the religion some of them are still in harmed me, because I don’t bother discussing that with those still religious du3 to not wanting to fight.
Of course, I’m mentioning specifically my comments to reddit and both lemmy accounts. Why do I have two? I started on World then World defederated a few communities I was interested in keeping up with, not because I really participated, but because I like having a balanced input and some were interesting for work (mostly piracy and privacy, as I work in IT). I don’t use reddit anymore except maybe old solutions for work stuff, but I still have much more comments there than on lemmy so far.
(This is my other account).
…
(OK I have a NSFW one too, but I never comment or post on that one. Not sexy enough.)
I might be calling myself out a little, but VRchat and its avatars do an astronomical amount of heavy lifting in that department.
The term code-switching comes to mind, but it’s not a perfect fit. The linguistic term talks about it more as something that people will do when they aren’t able to express an idea in a specific language or dialect. The other time I here it is when talking about racial inequality, and code-switching in that context includes how one dresses, talks, behaves, etc.
In the same fashion that folks can be normal in social settings but shitty online, I’ve often heard that abuse happens in private because abusers only allow themselves to be abusive in private. This sounds very similar to the concept of code switching, though is almost the opposite of what it usually means. I do not know of a term for it.
Long story short, you are the ultimate decider of how you act, and you are yourself in all contexts. Take responsibility for your behavior in all contexts, because it matters in all contexts.
At the same time, though, I am a determinist who views humans as animals running off the same reward systems as any other animal, and thus equally likely to be ‘unconscious’ of their problematic behaviors. The seed of self control, the very idea of autonomy and personal responsibility, needs to be planted in many people. That role initially falls upon the parents, then the teachers as well, and then the individual’s community. If none of that occurs, then it is no longer any small collection’s duty, but the duty of society at large. So punch Nazis - you’re doing them a favor.
Ah, that’s like multilingual speakers. They tend to have different personalities per language spoken.
