The Need to Connect

This weekend is my 25th High School Reunion. For many reasons, I decided not to go -- mostly time, cost, and distance. But there is another reason: To some extent, thanks to social networking, I already feel that I am caught up enough with my classmates, those with whom I was not close, but in whose well-being I am still interested. I see their lives flash before my eyes in the form of baby pictures, complaints about work, news posting that reflect their ideals.

My class even set up a "private" group in which we share more specific memories and photos (I put "private" in quotes, because I really feel like I can't trust the privacy of anything online, but boy I sure hope most of those pics stay behind closed doors!). In many ways, this group made me even more excited to attend the reunion, while at the same time sated my desire to. All in all, I am sure I will miss some laughs, but I am OK with not attending.

I wonder how reunions are going to be perceived among the younger generations. Will they even be seen as necessary? Will they be conducted remotely? Or will they be even more important because no one will have lost touch in the first place?

The idea of connecting via social networking, especially when Facebook and other sites first launched, was an abrupt, novel experience. Within minutes of setting up a profile, I had several friend requests and I was suddenly being (re)introduced to people from my past who were reaching out. And I had a great time thinking of people I wanted to reach out to and thrilled in perusing their pages when they accepted the connection.  This sudden onslaught of faces and memories is not really a part of younger people's experiences. The people they know will be connected to them online from the very beginning. There will be no online "reunion" with the initial establishing of a social networking presence. The whole concept of "hello" and "goodbye" has changed.

This can be seen in the decline of the yearbook. What was once an essential piece of nostalgia may become nostalgia itself. Why reference an old book when you can see pictures old and new on a screen?

Writing this post makes me sad that I am going to miss sharing stories and creating new ones at our old-town watering hole. But I know that I'll at least be able to see what's going within minutes of it all happening. Question is, will that be enough, or will it make me feel even more isolated from the group? And, to draw the parallel to youth today: When they see pictures of an event from which they couldn't attend or were excluded, where does that leave them?

Comments of Passion

I love that term -- it pretty much captures the reasons for flaming, sexting, and other regretful internet sharing moments. I read this phrase in a post by Margarita Tartakovsky, where she pretty much shares the work of Dr. Tristan Gorrindo.

The overall message: Think before you post something that might not be so smart to have forever captured in cyberspace. What should a person think about is summed up in the acronym "WAIT" -- for Wide audience (who and how many might read this?), Affect (what emotions am I feeling right now and am I able to make a rational decision?), Intent (will I be understood properly?), and Today (Can this wait a day?).

While I see the benefits to this brief series of considerations, some don't seem to fit. The main one being "today." The answer to the question "Can this wait a day?", for the most part, will always be "no." The internet and social networking are so immediate, that waiting a day to post a comment is akin to saying something in an empty room -- no one, including the immediate recipient of the comment -- will ever see it. While I am all for thinking about the consequences of posting something before actually doing it, perhaps the "T" should really be for "Tomorrow" as in "How will I feel tomorrow after everyone reads my post?"

And I totally agree with Tartakovsky's statement that adults can benefit from following these steps just as much as youth. In my own Facebook account, I have read posts about drunken vomiting, pubic hair, and baby poop. Wonder how many of those posts I would have read if someone WAITed before they broadcast those news items?

Facebook beefs up security: Some good, some stuff needs work

Facebook is undergoing some pretty interesting and I think beneficial changes to its Facebook security and privacy settings. My friend and colleague Anne Collier summarizes them quite well in her Net Family News blog (if you do not get her weekly newsletter, you REALLY should!). Here are some highlights:

• Users will have the ability to approve a post or photo right before it's visible to others.
• Users will be able to choose a setting in which they can approve or not approve a tag someone else makes before it goes live.

Why are these changes so great? Because it provides a moment of pause before something goes public. A user can think for that one more second as to whether what they are about to broadcast is a good idea or not. In other words, it's a concrete and immediate reminder as to what is about to happen.

The bonus will be if we can somehow communicate that point directly to the youth and young adults who might benefit from it most.

And speaking of youth, Facebook has also just published Own Your Space: A Guide to Facebook Security. Supposedly, its audience is "Young Adults, Parents, and Educators," but I would be shocked if they consulted any youth before putting that document online: 14 pages of text and graphically sparse, it falls far short of being youth friendly. If Facebook truly wants to reach out to those younger users, it's going to have to revise that manual into something that will actually be read.

Fandom + internet = new lows

Here's another example that supports my belief that the internet does not really offer up anything new when it comes to youth expressing their sexuality, instead simply repackages old phenomena -- albeit sometimes in an amplified format:

Teens in Mexico are allegedly auctioning off their virginity in order to score Justin Bieber tickets. This horrifies me in many ways. The obvious one: Justin Bieber. Really? The second one: the concept that sex is seen primarily as a commodity. Auctioning off one's virginity is not a new idea, but what I don't like is that there are so many messages nowadays that stress sex as a product more than an experience people share with each other. This concept can be seen in both the abstinence-until-marriage movement as well as the "pornification" of youth today. The third one: That the news would choose to cover this idea, which in and of itself glamorizes the situation. I guess I'm to blame now, too, since I am calling attention to it by writing about it. My bad.

Do we really know how social networking impacts youth?

A plenary presentation at this year's American Psychological Association's convention is getting a lot of press (in part due to the APA's own press release). The talk, entitled “Poke Me: How Social Networks Can Both Help and Harm Our Kids,” highlights of the talk, at least according to the press release, include findings such as:

1. Teens who use Facebook more often show more narcissistic tendencies while young adults who have a strong Facebook presence show more signs of other psychological disorders, including antisocial behaviors, mania and aggressive tendencies.  
2. Daily overuse of media and technology has a negative effect on the health of all children, preteens and teenagers by making them more prone to anxiety, depression, and other psychological disorders.

 The research nerd in me sees the first statement as more "mild" than the second for one main reason: The first statement simply shows associations.  An association, in teens, between being full of oneself and being on Facebook more often. In young adults, hanging out on Facebook more is associated with being anti-social and having mania. Those statements make sense to me -- you can see how those characteristics go together, but there is no indication that being on Facebook causes narcissism, mania (which can result in not being able to sleep and thus being online more), and/or anti-social behavior.

Then, there is that second bullet -- the one that makes me nervous and even angry. First of all, what is "overuse"? How many hours constitute that concept? Second, the phrase “has a negative effect” implies that the researcher studied young people over time – and if that happened, how long a time? I would love to see that actual study so I can answer those questions for myself.

Finally, the word “all” – really? Every single child, tween, and teen is going to be prone to anxiety, depression, and other mental health concerns by “overusing” Facebook? Wow. Never in my life have I heard a researcher claim that a phenomenon impacts every single person. Think of all those chain smokers that manage to not get lung cancer, for example.

Most of you will probably think that I am being a little too picky here, but I think it’s important to point out how these phrases can mislead reporters. I understand that most reporters are not trained in research – that’s OK. But, to feed them such broad generalizations is nothing short of dangerous and irresponsible. Which, in turn, misleads the public. I will take back everything I say here if somehow “overusing” Facebook causes every single young person mental harm, but until then, shame on you APA.

Readin', Writin', and...Sex?

Nice article in Salon challenging the "alarmist" findings that over half of young adult novels have sexually explicit content in them -- which ranges from Rated G kissing to sexual intercourse. And, according to Salon columnist Tracy Clark-Flory, the study authors seem to find this problematic (note: I was not able to locate the study or even the abstract, so I am commenting on something through hearsay in this post).

I can only scratch my head in wonder over their concerns. Let's see, what was I reading when I was a young adult? Oh yeah. There was the 1975 classic Forever, by Judy Blume, which told the story of a teen losing her virginity. Tame stuff. Then there were the VC Andrews books that made the rounds in my school -- these lovely tales featured sexual exploration among siblings locked in an attic. Finally, there were Anne Rice's Vampire Chronicles, telling sexual tales of all sorts, including a relationship between two vampires -- one of whom was embodied in a 8-year-old girl. While I admittedly have not read many of the young adult novels that are reviewed for this recent study, I cannot imagine the current sexual exploits are more fringe than the ones I read growing up. But correct me if I'm wrong.

And let's not forget what teens are writing themselves. I wrote this post  sometime back about youth-authored fanfiction. If we shield teens from sexual content, then they are going to just make their own. Or find it somewhere else. So, let's not be too concerned when a young person buries their nose in a book. At least their vocabulary might increase.

I wanna live forever...

Fame! The biggest priority among youth these days? Take the New York Times article on how some young teens are becoming cultural phenomenon within a matter of days. Or 23-year-old "internet sensation" Dia Frampton, who originally got her fan base through You Tube, but then gained even more popularity by being the runner-up on NBC's The Voice. I'm sure there are many other examples, but I, alas, am not all that great when it comes to pop-culture savvy.

And then there's the research. Recent work out of the Children's Digital Media Center at UCLA finds that "fame" is the number one value conveyed in television shows targeting 9-11 year olds in 2007. This is in sharp contrast to the top value of "community feeling," which topped the list from 1967 all the way through 2006. And a survey of adults by Dr. Jean Twenge revealed that 10% of young adults (in their 20s) had experienced symptoms of Narcissistic Personality Disorder, as compared to only 3% of Seniors.

So, why all the focus on the self? It's possible that the simple answer is "because we can." The internet (especially social networking) can cause an individual to reach a vast number of people exponentially, something that probably couldn't be done a decade ago, and most certainly was unobtainable a generation ago. Pair that with the normative developmental stage of egocentrism often found in teens and young adults, and their tech-savvy, and the recipe is perfect for this storm.

The question I have is, "is this focus on fame inherently a problem?" Part of me says no, simply because to some extent, as I stated above, such focus on the self is pretty typical of youth. Plus, this focus could help increase self-esteem, sense of well-being, and maybe even a sense of purpose and obligation. For example, 14-year-old Benni Cinkle has used her new-found fame to help non-profit organizations. Where's the harm in that?

On the other hand, not having such notoriety -- despite, perhaps, trying hard to achieve it through a clever blog or video -- could backfire on a young person and threaten their sense of self. "After all, if all these peers I hear about on the news can gain such followings, why can't I?" goes the thought process.

It all comes back to a basic reality: There is always someone out there who is "cooler" than you. They have more friends, a better voice, nicer hair, a more impressive jump shot, a more noble cause. If we can convey that basic fact to youth (and heck, to people of all ages), perhaps there would be less focus on fame. And, it would probably help if the media catering to the tweens didn't think it was so great, either.

A Youth's Voice Rings True

Thanks to my Google News Alert, I was notified of this wonderful post by Layla Smith, a HS youth in Maryland. Her article, "Parents Just Don't Understand," is about how technology has changed the way teens live. And, if my interpretation is correct, she seems to believe that her generation is faster, more immediate, and as a result, she feels less in control of her life.

Her opening paragraph sums it up quite well:
"Today, we live in a generation where everything is not what it used to be. Today’s teens want things bigger, better, and faster, with a constant need to be entertained and fascinated. If these criteria aren’t met, it just seems wrong.  With this fast-paced generation out there one question comes to mind:  Do parents really understand what it’s like to be a teenager during these rapid changing times?"

The rest of her article goes on to somewhat blame adults for a youth's need to have everything right here and right now. To some extent, I can perceive this as "typical" adolescence, where a somewhat developmentally egocentric mind feels that her problems are larger than life, and not her fault. But, then again, Ms. Smith has a point -- as she writes, teens did not make all this new technology: adults did. And, most of the marketing and hype that has been generated around all these new gadgets is the product of adult minds whose primary goal is to sell things to teenagers by convincing them that it's essential to participate and purchase in this new technological world.  And, given that teens are socialized to believe that fitting in and looking good matter ...is it their fault that they buy into the madness? Smith states, "As teens, we can’t control everything around us, and sometimes we have no other choice but to follow what is happening around us...This generation, Generation Z, seems to be completely unsheltered; everything is pushed in our faces and the only choice is to accept it." 

While I am still pondering whether or not teens have a real "choice" as to whether to accept or reject all this technology and its related promotions, I do know that if the thoughts of this teen ring true with many of her peers, then we as adults need to find out how we can best serve these youth by telling them it's OK to step back, slow down, and ask themselves how this technology can best meet their needs and support their lives.

The internet just "is"

Nice summary of research by academics Patti M. Valkenburg and Jochen Pete, who have written numerous articles about youth online. In their current research, these two scholars conducted a review of all research done to date on teens online and concluded that the Internet isn't necessarily a positive or negative influence. It is just a tool to use -- for good or evil. They write ""Instant messaging can help them exchange intimate information with their close friends, thereby stimulating the quality of these friendships. However, it is also widely used for cyberbullying and online harassment. Likewise, online social support groups can help adolescents with social or health problems, but at the same time they can also result in dangerous interactions with strangers."

"Nuff said. As I and many others have been positing for years, we cannot portray the internet as this scary world from which we need to protect our youth. Instead, we need to work with our youth to provide them with positive environments and good role models so that they are more prone to use technology (and their lives) to promote themselves and others, not bring each other down.

Give Them Credit, Give Them Support

A recent article in the New York Times appears to uncover how the internet is impacting middle school romances. Through interviews with some young New Yorkers (note the limited representation), it attempts to reveal how sexting and easy access to porn are shaping how these youth relate to each other, their bodies, and their friends.

I always find these articles fascinating, and usually respect their content -- the Times often tackles an issue related to youth development more in-depth and responsibly than most other news outlets. And for that I am grateful.

However, this time the article goes a little too far in the alarmist direction for my taste. First, let's take the illustrations. Though clearly meant to show what girls are doing these days, they do little more than glamorize the very pictures is admonishes. Second, the article quotes the "statistic" that the average age of first exposure to online porn is 11 -- and doesn't cite the source. Probably because that statistic has long ago been criticized as being total bunk by highly reputable sources.

But mostly, this article bothers me because it simply presents problems (scandals, even) without offering any solutions. Yes, it may be true (we don't have evidence, but it does make sense to believe) that higher access to pornography might create an inaccurate sense of what actual sex is supposed to be like -- but what should we do about it? Can we have intelligent conversations with girls AND boys about how pornography depicts unrealistic expectations of sex in a classroom? At an after school program? Among family members? And yes -- oftentimes the content of cyberbullying focuses on sexual rumor (just like gossip and bathroom wall graffiti in earlier times) -- so why can't we incorporate lessons on cyberbullying in a sex education classroom? And where is the dialog about healthy relationships? It's missing from most of our lives.

To the author's credit, the article does portray girls as having common sense to assess what is right and wrong to do both online and with a boyfriend, and as having a great deal of strength to fight the pressure they feel to sexualize themselves in ways they do not feel comfortable. So, let's give these savvy youth a chance to educate themselves further and critically analyze today's influences on their sex lives so that they embody healthy messages about their own sexual expression and relationships, and pass them on to their peers and partners.

CORRECTION: I misattributed this article to the NYT -- It's actually from New York Magazine. Big difference, and I apologize for the error. It does help explain the tone of the article, though!

Teens view sex information with a critical eye

A new report from Guttmacher staff (summarized here) finds that teens do not consider the internet to be a main source of sexual health information. However, I do want to point out that the sample only consisted of 58 youth, some of whom came from New York, where arguably the access to information from other venues (health clinics, sex ed classrooms, community centers) may be higher than in more remote areas.

Nevertheless, the fact seems to remain that teens prefer more personal sources for information about sex. These include family members (voted number one again as has been found in previous research), school, medical professionals, and friends. While I commend youth for reaching out to more human resources, this fact does concern me because both in the literature and in the community, I have found time and again that the adults mentioned in this previous list are extremely hesitant to talk about sex -- which leaves youth to rely on each other for information. Many parents, doctors, teachers, and other trusted adults express discomfort at the very idea of having "the talk" with youth in their care (note: the idea of "the talk" is not really accurate, as a sex conversation is hardly a one-time thing, but more of a process over many years!).

How can we best reach adults and support them so that they are more comfortable to talk about sex? What resources do they need? I don't fault adults for not starting conversations -- many of them were raised in ignorance and didn't have role models of adults whom spoke openly with them. Adults can't simply start talking about something without guidance -- especially something so value-ridden and complicated as sexual relationships and health.

So the question becomes -- who teaches the teachers? Maybe there are some good online resources...

Actually, there are a few places that have some good basic tips:
Mayo Clinic
Families Are Talking
Children Now

Huge increases in media use reported

A recent article in the New York Times highlights that teens are spending more time with media than ever before -- an average of 7.5 hours a day. And, given that they can use several different types of media at once (listen to music while playing a video game or posting on Facebook), teens actually manage to bend time and get in nearly 11 hours of media content into that seven and a half hours.

Heavy media use (defined as more than 16 hours a day!) was found to be associated with several negatives, including behavior problems and lower grades. So, the increase in media, at least in its extreme, may be cause for concern.

The study was conducted by the Kaiser Family Foundation, who has a strong history of researching media use and content. KFF is also known for its thorough analysis of the sexual content on television (the Sex on TV series). Major findings there include that the amount of sexual content on TV continues to increase, and that references to safer sex or sexual risks and responsibilities are rare (about 14% of sexual content alludes to them). The last Sex on TV report I could find was from 2005.

But maybe KFF realizes that those studies are outdated, and it's time to look more closely at the sexual content of the digital media teens consume instead. I look forward to it!

New web site in Colorado

A new site, "Teen Clinic," was set up to provide a safe space for teens to ask questions about sex and sexuality. They have a Twitter account, a means for youth to text in questions, a web platform for question asking and, of course, MySpace and Facebook pages. Question: How is this site going to be any different than all the others out there (of which Teen Wire and Sex Etc seem to be the most popular)? Is anyone going to start keeping track of how many youth use these sites to get their specific questions answered? And, if they already do that, will they let the rest of us know how useful these sites are?

Causing Panic Down Under

An uninspiring "study" out of Australia states that more than half of teens lie about their age online. As if teens trying to pass as older than they really are is some new phenomenon (C'mon, readers, when did you get your first fake ID?).

What I find especially disconcerting about this newspaper article is the lead: "TEENS are using the internet to lead double lives..." it states. I mean really -- you read the rest of the article and it simply states that teens lie about their age and use pictures to make them selves look better and more "cool." Is this really something to get in a panic about? I think not.


Interesting note: The study was conducted by a "skin products manufacturer." And we wonder why teens struggle to look better all the time...

Unreal and Sad

I've been mulling over how to write this post for several weeks now, and am still at a loss for words. A study issued by internet security company McAfee found that about two-thirds of mothers of teens in the United States are just as, or more, concerned about their teenagers’ online safety as they are about drunk driving and experimenting with drugs.

This is so wrong that I don't know where to start. Luckily, Larry Magdid did all the work for me, breaking down the actual statistics related to the risks of online predators, drug use, and drunk driving among youth. Of course you know the bottom line: Teens are MUCH more likely to experience harm as a result of drunk driving or drug use than they are by surfing the web, or even visiting MySpace. Yet, somehow, parents are nervous as hell about something that really is quite safe. Being online, while it can have negative consequences, is not nearly as detrimental to a young person's health as substance use. We can't say it enough.

This is one of those cases where it is tempting to blame the media -- newscasts, To Catch a Predator, talk shows -- they all do a great job of scaring the crap out of adults by sensationalizing how "easy" it is for adults to target teens for sexual exploit. But research shows that the teens are smarter than their potential aggressors: as this article states, online sexual predation is extremely rare and teens aren't really even distressed by the infrequent sexual solicitations that they receive online.

But the issue is more complex than that -- in order for parents to buy into this media bias, they have to lack the basic understanding of how the media work and the realities of its impact. Just as I stress the need for schools to integrate internet safety/etiquette/etc. into its curricula, I also feel it is important to reach out to parents who aren't sure about the true ins and outs of interactive media. While there is no question that parents can be harder to reach than their children, this study demonstrates that their education is just as important if not moreso.

In the meantime, I hope that parents don't forgo conversations about drunk driving and drug use, replacing them with rehashed versions of the "don't talk to strangers" speech. Sure, that has it's place to, but let's not misplace our concerns of where the dangers really lie.

Sex Vlog: Inappropriate for Minors?

Came across this vlog (video blog) and am still trying to form an opinion around it. For the most part, I'm inclined to like it. Made by 22-year-old Kicesie, it's of course about sex. Otherwise, why would I even mention it :-)? Some of her videos do seem to be educational, such as this one on STDs. It's pretty accurate information-wise, but she uses a lot of judgmental language -- "gross," "disgusting," -- which might alienate anyone who already has an STD, or had one in the past. But overall, she's cute, and delivers the facts in a very calm, approachable manner. And given the fact that most of her videos are getting several 100,000 views, at least people are listening.

But other examples within her 61-video collection make me think differently about her and her motives. Several of her videos simply ask her viewers questions. Like this one on oral sex. First of all, it starts off with a montage of her in cute and sexy poses, then cuts to her in a low-cut top, camera angled for maximum cleavage display. Is she really trying to be an educator or does she just want to show off her bod? Hard to say sometimes.

After some non-linear babble, looking all coy for the camera, she asks her male viewers what makes oral sex great for them, and encourages feedback. And 529 responded. What surprised me, honestly, was that for the most part the comments seemed sincere. I frankly was prepared for a bunch of immature, irrelevant, inappropriate comments (to Kicesie's credit, she may have deleted those or maybe YouTube did) -- but instead I got graphic, but thoughtful advice on how to give good head from a bunch of random dudes. Interesting.

Then there are times when she simply goes on an editorial rant. Here's where things start to break down for me. Wearing no makeup and filming in black-and-white (a huge contrast to her dolled-up look she tends to adopt for her question asking videos), she complains about the lack of parental monitoring of children when they go online. "Where are the Parents?" she laments. An old and tired question. What troubles me most about this particular post, however, is her blanketed inaccurate statements. She is clearly troubled by the fact that youth under 18 are watching her videos -- disclaimers abound about age appropriateness in her vlogs -- and she explicitly states that her content is not appropriate for minors in her monologues. However, in this particular post she states that if children are watching her videos they are "probably in chat rooms with people who are much older than them," and "they are probably open to predators. They have probably been exposed to explicit pornography." Hmmmm. I think she is better off sticking to topics she can research more effectively.

And then here come the judgment statements again: "How can you parents let that happen? There is no excuse, no excuse at all." The statement is strong, yet naive. Her accusations are harsh. She says YouTube should be more responsible for ensuring minors don't get to see her videos. She seems to want to blame someone for the fact that younger people are listening to her.

But is it so bad that younger people are tuning in to what she has to say (I'd say middle school is pushing it on the age level, but mature high schoolers should be fine...)? She talks about STD transmission, she emphasizes the importance of partner communication. Are these such bad messages to get across to her viewers, no matter their age? I think if Kicesie wants to be a celebrity (at least a minor internet one) she is going to have to deal with all aspects of it. And that means understanding that people she doesn't want seeing her videos tuning in. And possibly learning something.

A Game of Dress-up

Whether it be as a Disney princess in grade school, or as a naughty nurse in college, girls have always enjoyed playing "dress-up." However, what happens when a 13-year-old "dresses-up" as an 1p-year-old and initiates a sexual encounter with a man 15 years her senior? Trouble.

In early July, Scott Knight, an Aurora, Oregon man was arrested on charges of statutory rape after a 13-year-old girl talked to authorities. After the two allegedly met on Flirt and supposedly talked through MySpace, they then met in person. Knight claims he asked for ID from the girl and then the rest of the details become muddy.

I came across a MyCrimeSpace blog summary of the incident that stuck to the released information, but the comments on the blog prompted me to start thinking, what makes teenage girls seeks out men like this? According to Justine Cassell & Meg Cramer from Northwestern University’s Center for Technology and Social Behavior (who I quoted in a previous entry) most likely this girl has "a greater tendency for conflict or lack of communication with their parents; high levels of delinquency, including committing assault, vandalism or theft; have a troubled personality due to depression, peer victimization, or [has experienced] a distressing life event." The very first comment asked "what would she gain from setting him up?" A few answers – public attention, "fame" on the news, a book deal, a Lifetime movie even!

I remember being 13 and wanting to be 23, wanting to have an older boyfriend, wanting to be a grown-up; I don’t remember ever thinking that the Internet could be used like this, though. A little part of me is surprised at the lengths this girl would go to in order to make a connection with Knight (finding an internet dating site, getting a fake ID to lie about her age, working to draw in a man who would "fall" for her act) and then a bigger part of me isn’t so taken aback. This girl, rather than turning to her parents (who aren’t mentioned in any story that I can find), she turned to the internet and found adults there.

Is social networking to blame for incidents like this? Probably not. Frivolous Electrical Conversation explains that people blamed promiscuity on the telegraph, the telephone, and even the automobile.

"The telegraph provided users with faster responses to their communication with others, more frequent interactions, and more access to others around the world. It improved access to goods and services, and to knowledge of all sorts. And yet, even while the telegraph (and the internet) led to a revolution in business practices, it also gave rise to new ways to commit crimes, and it was quickly adopted beyond business to the communication needs of everyday people. In the techie magazines of the times (such as Electrical World, the historical parallel to PC Magazine) many authors alluded to a possible loss of a world they idealized, a world threatened by new modes of electrical communication. Media critics of the times described the telegraph as used by 'talkative women' who had 'frivolous electrical conversations' about 'inconsequential personal subjects.' Novels, like the 1879 Wired Love, and other popular culture texts expanded on this theme. The women portrayed in these narratives were näıve and incapable in the face of technical advances, and when they made forays into the world of the telegraph they ended up needing to be rescued, to be protected from technology, in sum. ... technical ignorance was a virtue of 'good' women. The moral was that women's use of men's technology would come to no good end." Justine Cassel & Meg Cramer in High Tech or High Risk: Moral Panics about Girls Online

Sound familiar?

Then we must ask "Who is responsible?" Another commenter later in the list of postings had a very good point; "they are both responsible for their behavior." When does a person become "of age" for their own personal responsibility? Minors are held responsible for murders, being tried as adults in courts when faced with such serious charges, but incidents such as these are brushed off as solely the adult’s fault. Whether the adult blamed is the minor’s parent or the adult in the sexual relationship, it’s rarely the minor’s fault. Should parents be punished for the behavior of their teenagers? "At what point do the girls have to take some responsibility about what happened?" So, I ask you, "Where do we draw the line when playing dress-up?"

Experiments in virtual reality

Over the weekend I tried to participate in two different virtual reality type websites. Unfortunately neither were quite the positive experiences I was hoping for.


First I tried out Google's new avatar-driven chat rooms Lively. I spent two hours preparing my avatar (can't go in naked, you know) and then trying to figure out how to get INTO a room. Once I got into a room, my computer slowed down so much that I was going crazy trying to mentally adjust. Instead of trying to chat with people, I started searching rooms. I visited the "Love Sweet Love" room, the "Dating Cafe" and then even took a virtual tour of the Google facilities in the "Lively: Google Room," but I wasn't impressed. Maybe it's because it's too new, but it felt clunky and not quite user-friendly. Maybe teens can deal with that, but tech-savvy adults might be annoyed by the quirks that it still has. I was disappointed that I didn't feel "at home" after setting everything up and removed the program from my computer soon after giving up on it.


Second, I put my big girl panties on and looked into Second Life. I think my experience would have been more positive if my internet provider gave me more bandwidth and my computer went faster, but I made due with what I had. I carefully read the "Big Six" (community standards) and was almost scared that I'd make an accidental mistake and get myself kicked out before I even began - especially when my character first appeared naked! I was pleased to see these rules set out so clearly before being able to join, and wish that I had speed/bandwidth to see if they work!

Second Life's "Big Six" are six behaviors that would result suspension from the site:

1. Intolerance - "The use of derogatory or demeaning language or images in reference to another Resident's race, ethnicity, gender, religion, or sexual orientation is never allowed in Second Life."

2. Harassment - "Communicating or behaving in a manner which is offensively coarse, intimidating or threatening, constitutes unwelcome sexual advances or requests for sexual favors, or is otherwise likely to cause annoyance or alarm is Harassment."

3. Assault - Most places you can be in Second Life are "Safe," where you cannot shoot, push or shove another resident. I guess this also means there are areas that are "unsafe" where these actions are to be expected?

4. Disclosure - "Sharing personal information about a fellow Resident --including gender, religion, age, marital status, race, sexual preference, and real-world location beyond what is provided by the Resident in the First Life page of their Resident profile is a violation of that Resident's privacy."

5. Indecency - "Content, communication, or behavior which involves intense language or expletives, nudity or sexual content, the depiction of sex or violence, or anything else broadly offensive must be contained within private land in areas rated Mature (M)." When my character showed up nude, I was worried that I'd be kicked off immediately as I couldn't find an "M" anywhere on the page. Good thing it was the introduction page where other new characters continually showed up nude.

6. Disturbing the peace - "Every Resident has the right to live their Second Life."


I was intrigued to see whether these rules were followed within the community. Maybe those readers who are frequent Second Life users can explain it a bit more to me; I'd really like to know more! Also, if there are other online virtual reality "games," that are geared towards teenagers, I'd love to hear about those to see if I can't experiment some more!

Cornfed Citizen Safety

Image by glsims99 via FlickrDr. Kris pointed me in the direction of Net Safe Kansas, a new website based in Kansas looking to protect their state’s Internet users. Maybe it’s a Kansas thing, but apparently Internet users there are ridiculously uneducated and can’t do research for themselves. On top of that, the website creators believe that their oh-so-exiting website will draw children in to read all of their rules. I was bored … what 12-year-old is going to stick around to read these things? (My comments on these "rules" are in italics.)

• Don't believe everything you read online, especially from someone in a chat room. It's extremely easy to lie online and predators will tell you anything to gain your trust. For example the "14-year-old girl" you just met online might actually be a 40-year-old man trying to gain your trust. Or the “14-year-old girl” you just met online might actually be a 160-year-old boy from your neighboring high school fulfilling a dare from his friends.

• Choose a random user name or screen name. Make sure it doesn't reveal your name, age, school, location or interests. For example, the user name "CutieCougar94" might reveal to a predator that this person is likely female, a student at a school with a Cougar mascot and born in 1994." Or people of my generation will think that you’re a cute older woman looking for a younger man and that you quite possibly graduated in 1994.

• Don't respond to messages that are mean or in any way make you feel uncomfortable. It is not your fault if you receive a message like this. Tell your parents right away so they can contact the online service provider. Messages that come to me that make me uncomfortable aren’t always illegal … if it’s not illegal, the online service provider can’t do anything anyway.

• Stick with friends. It's always safer to chat with friends you know in real life. Strangers online are bad news. I was 22, online talking to strangers and met my best friend. Strangers online aren’t always bad news. You can safely meet some incredible people online.

Then they have a “NetSafe Kids Pledge” that made me laugh … and then I felt kinda bad for laughing at the ridiculousness of it … for about 37 seconds.

NetSafe Kids Pledge

1. I will turn off my computer monitor right away and tell a trusted adult if anything makes me feel scared, uncomfortable, or confused. There are TONS of things on the internet that confuse me. If I turned off the monitor every time that happened, I’d never learn anything. (I do understand what they’re getting at, though.)

2. I will tell my parents or guardian if anyone online asks me my name, my address, my telephone number, or the name and location of my school. Or I could just tell them no or ignore them or block them.

3. I will never share personal information such as my address, my telephone number, my parents' or guardian's work address/telephone number, or the name and location of my school without my parents' or guardian's permission. Why would a teenager share their parent’s work number with a stranger online?

4. I will tell my parents or guardian if anyone online asks to meet me in person.

5. I will never meet in person with anyone I have first "met" online without checking with my parents or guardian. If my parents or guardian agrees to the meeting, it will be in a public place and my parents or guardian must come along.

6. I will talk with my parents or guardian so that we can set up rules for going online. The rules will include the time of day I may be online, the length of time I may be online, whom I may communicate with while online, and appropriate areas for me to visit while online. I will not break these rules or access other areas without their permission. Seriously? I was a good kid growing up. Straight-A student, top of the class, blah blah blah, and I wouldn’t have set up rules like this with my parents. Do you know any teenager that has?

7. I will tell a trusted adult if I come across anything that makes me feel scared, uncomfortable, or confused. I will not download anything from anyone without permission from my parents or guardian. Stay away from Wikipedia.

8. I will not use rude or mean language on the Internet. *bites her tongue so she doesn’t say something inappropriate*

9. I will never respond to any messages that are mean or in any way make me feel uncomfortable. If I do get a message like that, I will tell a trusted adult right away so that he or she can contact the online service.

10. I will always remember that people online may not be who they seem. Because I can't see or even hear the person it would be easy for someone to misrepresent himself or herself. For example, someone indicating that "she" is a "12-year-old-girl" could in reality be an older man. Hello stereotypes.


So, it seems that NetSafe Kansas has a good idea … but it almost feels patronizing to go through their website. I am pretty sure that there are Kansan citizens who KNOW better than the website assumes. Also, the fact that their kids & teens pages are still geared towards adults doesn’t make it any more marketable. The bare bones of it might one day be improved, but spreading more “stereotypical” internet information doesn’t help anyone.

Gender Role Reversal

I can't find much on this story from the Shreveport Times (Louisiana), but a 39-year-old female teacher has been arrested on cyberstalking charges for posing as a 14-year-old girl and harassing a 14-year-old boy through MySpace. According to the brief article, there is no evidence that the teacher and boy ever met face-to-face.

I think this is worth noting because we spend so much time worrying about girls as victims that we need reminders that boys can also be subject to such things. Outside of the extremely bizarre case of Mary Kay Letourneau and her former student and now husband, Vili Fualaau, this issue has been a completely non-issue but remains a lingering question: "Is a sexual relationship with a young male and significantly older female harmful?" There is all sorts of research on the negative effects of younger females partnering with older males (higher rates of pregnancy, sexual coercion, drug use...) but there is NOTHING on the opposite. I've looked. And wondered as a result. Which means that I am challenged by my own stereotypes and assumptions. I think that this large an age gap at this developmental time cannot be healthy. But is there evidence? That remains to be seen.