A bunch of things have me thinking about the link between our avatars and our actual identities, not the least of which being that at Metanomics the protocol or whatever is to ask guests whether we can use their actual names – in most cases, the guests say yes, they have real businesses, and reputations associated with those businesses, and they’d probably feel weird if folks were calling their offices and asking for their avatar names.
It’s an optional thing, but I can’t help feeling that the whole thing is fraught with peril – as if by asking, you’re also implying something along the lines of “if you don’t tell us, you’re not one of the cool kids, you’re just an AVATAR”, and while I don’t believe this is the actual belief, or intent, the idea that this would ever be implied gives me pause.
I remember being invited to be a guest on Metanomics, and there was this form, and lots of information to give, and I remember thinking “Wow, I’ve come face-to-face with reality here”, I felt like I was signing up to become one of those dreaded augmentationists, or to join a cult or whatever – although it was all very patiently explained to me that most of it was optional, and was kept private and secure and would never be shared – who knows, it still felt like an overwhelming moment:
“Please provide your name and a ‘real life’ photo” and suddenly I was into something bigger than talking about UI designs and I couldn’t quite decide what the implications were. It certainly felt like my days walking around in grunge clothes and tool belts were coming to a close.
My point isn’t to talk about Metanomics policies here, it’s evolving and changing, and I came into this not wanting to mess with what has worked. But more than anything it has me thinking, and wondering – why is avatar identity so important?
I AM a Builder
Prokofy is talking about roads this morning. And I found it a really touching post: because SL to me IS a place, at the best of times – the kind of place you wander around in, that has a geography, and that because of this provides moments of serendipity.
I really mourn the fact that I wasn’t around in the days of telehubs, the days when you couldn’t teleport around – I find it hard sometimes not to just beam in and beam out: you know what I mean, hop through search or landmarks, arrive, let stuff rez a bit, and if you don’t like what you see off you go to some other random place.
The best experiences in SL have always been those times when I actually walk around.
I had a friend who I’d go shopping with, and he’d always stand at the front of the store not moving, while I was wandering around inside. And I’d ask him “Are you just going to stand there?” and his reply was “Why move? I can cam around” and that struck me as a cop-out somehow, it made the experience sterile or something, I like the feeling of walking through a space, of taking time, of feeling what a display looks like because you discover it when you turn the corner rather than camming across the sim.
And I take a kind of odd pride when someone IMs me about one of my houses and says that they love the space, or they invite me over to look at how they decorated their living room, or send me photos or whatever. I think it was Prok who commented on my post about the Lab’s purchase of XLStreet that “You obviously haven’t tried to run an in-world business”….but I take a lot of pride in the fact that I have, and that the houses sell OK or cover tier at least, and that I have hundreds of happy customers to boot.
The Temple I built
A mall-type thing with offices
OK – so why is this important? I’m not entirely sure: except to say that online, your reputation accrues first in the communities you join, and extends from there. This seems contrary to the notion that we bring established identities with us – increasingly, we rebuild as we go, and what’s useful in one place isn’t in another.
And this implies a tribal morality – something that has both benefits and problems, but which basically says that “you are important insofar as your contributions to whatever particular ‘culture’ you are in, whatever social platform you belong to, and although these things overlap and bleed, the reference points for reputation are not easily transported.”
Which means that while we’d perhaps love it if our “identity” was all kept in one place, I don’t think it can be, or ever will be – and I also believe that this isn’t just true of online communities, this has been true forever, even in those small towns where everyone knows your business.
Sex, Ruined Marriages, and the Media
Like at the dawn of the Web, or the dawn of online dating, or when people realized that kids were hooking up on MySpace, virtual worlds are always good for a story about people living fantasy lives that end up ruining their real lives, and the implication of course is always something like “what losers, investing in a FANTASY”.
But I love it when this comes up. I love it when people I work with say “Did you see the Fifth Estate last night” and then arch their eyebrows as if to say “OK, so, this Second Life thing you keep preaching about…I guess we all now KNOW that it’s a crock and filled with geeky misfits.”
And I love it because I get a chance to challenge people’s assumptions about identity. Because I can get all Socratic on them and ask questions back. Like, “So what does that tell you about virtual worlds that people can see it change their lives like that” which leads into the loser discussion, and lets me ask whether they think EVERYONE in a virtual world is a loser (to which they have to admit no, when pressed on it) and then lets me ask: “OK, so if not everyone is a loser, do you think the non-losers also find their lives affected by their avatars in different ways? And what does that tell you? What does it mean that people attach and get value, whether good or bad, from having an avatar?”….at which point, the REALLY interesting discussions can begin.
Because at some point the discussion cycles back to the actual world. And sort of ends with the main question, the real question: “Why is it that we, as humans, use so many different techniques to express ourselves, to escape, to wear different masks, to want to join different clubs, to want to belong to different social circles where we assume a different persona…is there REALLY such a thing as being REAL?”
The Traps of Trust
So, look – virtual worlds let us explore, try on different persona, live different lives, understand what it means to be meaner, or nicer, or gentle, or to be beautiful and famous. But it’s as if there’s a line drawn around all of this, a line that says “well, that’s all fine, but when it comes to doing REAL business in virtual worlds, we need to know people’s identities…otherwise how do you establish trust?”
Which consistently strikes me as a cop out. Because issues of identity aren’t primarily linked to trust, they’re linked to having an option for RECOURSE. It’s as if to say: I need to know who you are so I know who to hold accountable, who to sue, who to pursue if things go wrong. And sure, there’s some truth to all that: and if you’re spending big bucks or putting your business on the line or making some huge strategic bet, sure…it’s due diligence I guess, but just remember that you’re not really asking for identity to establish TRUST, you’re mainly doing it in case things go WRONG.
And I’d further argue that virtual worlds actually give us a far cleaner, far more intelligent way to establish trust than the bonds of contracts and identities and signatures: you establish trust because you work with someone, they perform, you work with them again, and if everyone is treated fairly then the relationship is solid, and can be the source of far more value than signing up some sub-contractor you barely know and hoping that because you know their real name this will somehow make them more trustworthy.
I hire people without meeting them. They have a good reputation. I don’t care about their names, or which jurisdiction they’re in (although sure, I end up covering that stuff off….but the decision ahead of that is about TRUST, the rest is about lawyers).
These issues of identity are, I believe, profound. The things that are happening in Second Life aren’t just about protecting our right to role play. The Lab has actually set up a massive test bed on which issues of avatar identity, trust, collaboration, work and play can be experienced first hand, that give us a sense of what tools we’ll need in the future – a future in which we’ll just as easily be working with avatars run by machines as avatars run by people, in which we may not know the difference, in which an avatar name will be sufficient, and which may end up being more of a bond than the one which appears on our birth certificates.
And so I sign off, Dusan Writer.
Wonderful post, Dusan.
Or, my personal favorite, “…where that idea came from so I know whether to attribute any merit to it or not based on who you are.” As I have said before, in a business context or any forum ideas and art should stand on their own merit.
I thought about this a bit also when I was prompted for my real name before participation in a business think community.
Wow – nice post Mo – will read in full later, but I get the quick sense of it.
Separate topic, but I really believe that it’s important not to confuse anonymity with avatar identity. Associating with an avatar identity does not necessarily correlate directly to anonymity. It CAN but it doesn’t necessarily. You can have an avatar identity that you ‘partition’ from actual identity, but it doesn’t mean you don’t provide the link as a “if needed” thing.
What’s interesting is the question of why people want to use a “real name”. Anyways – complex stuff, but thanks for pointing to your post. Your blog is a must read!
Perhaps it’s because I am a bear of simple mind (like Pooh), but I find it impossible to disassociate my identities no matter where they serve (virtual or real or in the many computer systems my identity necessarily resides as part of the modern world). Yes, my avatar has a different name in Second Life but a rose by any other name still smells, well, like a rose.
As a poet I view the landscapes and avatars of Second Life as poetry and as the living marks made by creative souls. I wander around and understand that whatever I see is just the beginning of something new and yet something that is in line with the historical progression of a long line of visionary endeavors that began with the artists who left us the ancient cave paintings.
About liability and litigation and etc, it’s sad that a business can no longer be run on a handshake and a gentlemen’s agreement. But this is the way of the world.
Thanks for the post, as it continues a discussion that I feel will run for a while yet. for my part I feel the whole concept of virtual worlds is moving away from where it was say two maybe three years ago to more a platform which adds to, rather than is separate from our everyday lives.
Had I known what I know today, and if I could have afforded it I would in fact have taken my real name as my avatar name, as I have done in Twinity, as my feelings are like most aspects of some parts of our organic business lives, which remember are a part of our social lives, the final document is usually signed after the business lunch, where we all get to meet to get those final visual clues from each other, we then go on to have those company picnics with our families etc “grin”
On trust issues although we have had a few scares with so called banking frauds, and some of the dodgy deals done within secondlife, as the stakes get higher, I do fear we are yet to see “the big one” its just a mater of time and then maybe we will revisit this topic in a different light.
I share my real name/identity via my LinkedIn profile, with those I want to do business with. This type of disclosure is likely more important to people/businesses that are new to virtual worlds, as it allows them to quickly establish their “brands” value.
Doing business without the benefit of legal identities, has the potential to leave you vulnerable to a whole host of problems such as:
> Contract Enforcement
> Insufficient Tax Documentation
> Copyright/IP Prosecution/Defense
> Non-disclosure Exposure
With respect to contracts; Benjamin Franklin said “an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure.” In business, a single business dispute can ruin you. Written contracts are the “ounce of prevention” that can eliminate costly disputes. Although it may happen in the future, I know of no precedent for avatars to legally execute or defend enforceable contracts.
The tax issue is the growing 300lb (soon to be 800lb) gorilla in the room. It won’t be long before taxing authorities compel the reporting of Virtual World income. I consider it to already be an ethical requirement. If you want to deduct Virtual World expenses, you had better be prepared to identify the recipient, be it a business or individual, of your payments.
Copyright and IP issues are another area of growing concern. What if someone doing work for you “unintentionally” “borrows” IP from another company, goes MIA and the IP owner sues you? How do you subpoena someone you don’t know for your defense?
Protecting your ideas via non-disclosure agreements (NDAs)is another area where real identities are required. If you don’t require NDAs of people who do work for you, you are asking to have your ideas & Trade Secrets stolen.
I realize many of these arguments are philosophically distasteful. I regret that “business can no longer be run on a handshake and a gentleman’s agreement.” Whether we like it or not the reality is that knowing people’s real identities is important in today’s business world, even when that world is “Virtual.”
There are certainly more questions than answers for this topic. SL certainly is a prime place to explore these questions. However, as you say, they are not new – we have many other mechanisms to create different identities or nuanced persona without SL.
Thinking back to my first SL experiences, I quickly got the message that in SL, people tended to avoid introducing themselves with things from their RL, such as name, age, sex, location, education, occupation, and maybe what car we drive as we typically do in informal social settings.
When I learned it was uncool in SL to tell those types of demographic parameters about myself, I had two realizations/reactions:
1. I realized how I had gotten used to my identity based on these things, and I almost felt handicapped to not have them if not for identity, then for small talk. This is one thing that led me to being a kid, because I was faced with the truth that I had confused my Self with my RL roles, something that, as a kid, I promised myself I would not do.
2. I then found the challenge of asking myself *who I really am* at my core with all the other trappings if identity stripped away. (paging mr. zen on line one… to take this call and receive the truth, you must release your hold on what you think it is…) And then, back in SL: given a basic cartoonish avatar shape and text chat, how would I project my true personality into that world for the other persons to grok and interact with?
[...] thing seems to be resonating for others, too. Dusan came at it from a number of directions in a post today, which evoked a number of comments, including this one from [...]
Another excellent post, Dusan. Thank you for challenging assumptions and thinking out loud about identity. These are some of the very same questions I have been struggling with as virtuality and reality become more and more enmeshed. My SL identity (and thoughts, experiences, creations, etc.) are as equally valid and important to me as my “real life” identity. It actually hurts when people brush off my SL persona as just being some sort of fantasy…
Funny how I said this would be a topic that would not go away, and behold was plurked this todayhttp://www.districtadministration.com/viewarticle.aspx?articleid=1852
Not quite the “big one” and not sure if it will be appealed, but this will be a landmark case in days to come.
For those who are interested, you can find an excellent paper on the subject of Avatars, Publicity and Identity here: http://tinyurl.com/avatarid
This post reinforces everything I like about you.
Humm looks like the convergence of Avatar and Organics is to be laid out if the EU and other Governmental bodies have anything to do with it, and considering we in the EU had VAT added to our costs have no reason to believe otherwise
http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/gamesblog/2009/feb/06/virtual-worlds-policy-berr-government-eu-security-it-policy
@Kwame
The degree of separation between virtual and actual worlds, sometimes known as the magic circle, was always wildly exaggerated. Despite all the exciting stuff in the TOS that claims to place LL beyond the reach of any court or consumer law, when those terms have gone to court they’ve been caught short. LL probably has the most fire-breathing TOS, the courts have pretty much disregarded the wilder clauses of the TOS. The breadth of LL’s claims is one reason the courts have consistently ruled against them when their TOS has been considered.
There is a libertarian mythology in virtual worlds that is usually built on a total misunderstanding of the history of the US frontier. (See Mitch Kapor’s good-bye and thanks for all the fish speech for a classic example) The frontier was a government enterprise from beginning to end and one where the natural rights to the land involved quite a lot of gunplay to persuade the existing inhabitants that the frontier no longer belonged to them.
The frontier was not a blank sheet where the rugged individualist wrote his own story. The frontier was pretty much a place where the rugged individualist lobbied Washington furiously for the protection of the US cavalry, subsidies from the US treasury, and a privileged position on the railway network so he could seek rents from his competitors.
Magic circle claims pretty much come down to the same thing. Which is a long way from who am I but then who am I is a big question.
No, no, no and NO.
this is NOT true: “online, your reputation accrues first in the communities you join, and extends from there.”
This is NOT your best post and this is what I do NOT like about you.
Implying that the avatar is something constructed by “thecommunity” (whatever the hell that is) or something constructed “online” (whatever that really means) implies that the individual has now lost his ground. He goes online, and loses his rights. He only gains them if he gives his “true identity”.
In fact, there is a subtle but real pressure to provide your real name. Metanomics shouldn’t even have to require this of people, but it *is* considered the “right thing to do” if you hope to be “noticed” and “taken seriously”. That’s a shame, because there was once a higher vision for our world, but of course, it’s been trampled, and Metanomics has been very much part of that trampling, hauling in game gods with real name and RL reputatoins as game gods as the early guests, and setting the bar there for “realness”.
I’m sorry, but my reputation does not depend on what a bunch of anonymous creeps think about me in a stupid game. It doesn’t depend on what even right-thinking thoughtful adults in an augmented reality think about me. That is, there might be some “reputational” field that has this or that validity or no validity, depending on your values.
But so often reputation is in fact then power — power of the community to control that constructed self. And that I simply refuse to have any part of — and in fact, a lot of people implicity reject it by taking on an anonymous avatar in the first place. They simply don’t wish to cede the shaping or reputationalizing of their “real selves” to that horde online that can be so insolent and cruel. And they are right to do so.
Alberik Rotaru is writing tripe. One doesn’t need to idealize cowboys and their venturing to respect the individual and his ruggedness and private property. To imply that land rights only came from the barrel of the gun is to swing to the other extreme of revisionist history. This silly socialist notion that settlers are merely subsidized rent-seekers simply belies the historical record. There are plenty of ordinary families moving into ordinary places and setting them where they don’t have to shoot the natives or even find any natives. No need for exaggeration.
Everything depends on how you first perceive the world — even as a world at all, or whether it is a mere “3-d visualization platform” as the guy says about his toy in your other post.
If it is a world — a brand new world, a better world — then people might wish to construct better, separate, more free identities for that world through their avatar, where they need not be bound by the associations and prejudices that accrue to geography and gender.
But the world is really quite eroded as a concept, and Metanomics, with its meta-meddling has contributed to this process, of course, and you can only look properly cool and business like if you can prove you don’t immerse but only meta-ize and augment or only consult ABOUT or write ABOUT immersion, but never immerse.
Then, that sort of tattered world becomes more and more shrill about demanding credentials.
As for you “really trying to run an inworld business”. I seem to have forgotten that you do have a prefab business. I remember sort of stumbling on it. It seems to me, however, that this is merely a kind of testing device, a hobby, not really a way to earn a living, just a sort of “getting your hands wet” sort of thing, as you have your other real business, of which VWs are only a part.
It’s true that in SL, when it comes to work, say on a build, or sharing a sim project, the only thing that counts is their inworld reputation for performing, delivering, being can-do, etc. etc. And that’s indeed how people are judged.
Alberik Rotaru would indeed be writing tripe if he’d written what you claim, Prokofy. What I did write about was the trope of the frontier as a blank space devoid of both government and previous inhabitants and the way that historical nonsense is so often linked to cyberspace libertarianism.
You would do better, Prokofy, to avoid filling your mouth when tripe when you have already filled it with your foot.
No, Alberik, at least have the courage of your anti-Western convictions.
Here’s what you wrote, again, in case you forgot — I don’t have my foot in my mouth but you may have your head somewhere else:
“The frontier was not a blank sheet where the rugged individualist wrote his own story. The frontier was pretty much a place where the rugged individualist lobbied Washington furiously for the protection of the US cavalry, subsidies from the US treasury, and a privileged position on the railway network so he could seek rents from his competitors.”
In fact, for that rugged individualist, it *was* a blank slate in his perception, if nothing else. And it was an *actual blank slate* in many places and instances because it was not all cowboys vs. Indians and the brave calvary riding to the rescue as you imagine — you merely go in the opposite direction with the caricature.
You’ve also introduced this sort of funny anti-American meme of the pioneer as lobbying furiously for subsidies, army protection and a cushy spot by the railroad — it’s a caricature. You can’t explain complex social and political phenomena in this sort of jargonistic glib leftist revisionist fashion — it’s just too simplistic and silly.
In fact, the cyberspace libertarianism very much draws on those motifs of rugged individualism and pioneering that in fact are legitimate and actual and not the imperialist blah-blah that you try to posit. Cyberspace pioneers may have gotten their start in government institutions and government-funded universities, but they certainly didn’t remain there for long. In the long span of 100 years, even I am an early pioneer of the Internet and I didn’t have any government funding nor did I look for a cushy spot by the railroad — or even the telehub.
Your notion that American history is “nonsense” is a marker for a) your anti-Americanism or b) your own extremist political position within the American scene.
Prok, Prok, Prok, sending you up is not the defining parameter of leftism. I am as atounded to find myself drafted into the left as most of my leftwing friends would be to see it done.
Thanks for confirming that cyberspace libertarianism draws on the trope of the frontier as I originally argued. the cyberspace libertarianism very much draws on those motifs of rugged individualism and pioneering It is unclear to me how you managed to discover the rest of your more than faintly overstated allegations in my brief comment.
If you are going to insist on sticking out your tongue while grinding your teeth together I am not sure why the rest of us have to watch. It is anatomically interesting but it cannot be comfortable for you.
Oscar Wilde said, “Give a man a mask and he’ll tell you the truth”. I think that sums it all. We are what we do, what we think, what we say, and what we don’t do, think, and say. The setting is just a variable that changes. I hope most of us don’t ever find out who our true selves really are, as typically it isn’t as flattering as one would wish. A good way to shy away from that knowledge is to control the variable of setting.
well quoted infocyde, though I cannot agree on not finding self, as most pain in ones life is that constant fleeing from self, which perhaps explains the need for some to hide within the mask that is their avatars.
It pains me to see as usual we get an interesting topic on the go, and again the same old coven of nay sayers chip in with personal comments, but hey such is the nature of freedom of speech.
Alberik you are right about the nature of TOS, I was recently asked to write note card to hand to new residents, and was told “we need more fire and brimstone to deter the griefers” to which I answered this means sod all in so far as the note card is concerned, but maybe we try appealing to the majority in a human manner.
My view has and always will be that somewhere along this magical mystery tour we are on, in so far as Virtual technology is concerned some have taken it upon themselves to not see beyond the pioneering nature, and have in my view taken up the “rabbit in headlight’s stance” because of fear of change.
I welcome the input of the real life governing bodies in this trip we take, as the next hurdle we face is the trust and credibility issue “is the avatars word his bond?”
Again I thank all for their part in this debate
your humble servant “grin”
It’s usually a fairly bad idea to use the etymology of a word to try and establish its meaning. Nevertheless, this could be an exception. ‘avatar’ is from Sanskrit and describes the relationship between a Hindu god and a descent a avatarati of the god into human form. A Hindu avatar is generally thought of as all god, but not all of the god. The usual language we use in SL implies a much greater degree of separation than the Sanskrit word would bear. My SL avatar is obviously all me, but I very much doubt that he is all of me.
Social Construction
Anyone who has studied Social Psychology will be familiar with the extensive work of Kenneth Gergen about the constructed identity and its variants in different social groups and situations. Also group work done by Zimbardo and others underpins these significant findings.
We are arguing here about a phenomena that has been well researched and well proven for many years now. Its findings and conclusions are well established, even in situations that are fabricated and not considered ‘normal’ interaction.
Constructed Identity
Our identity consists of parts. All are part of the whole, yet the sum of the parts is greater than the parts themselves.
Identity varies in differing situations and each person who knows us sees us with a different identity according to their own filter of experience and understanding. Just as we all have our ‘telephone voice’, we have a personality for every individual we come into contact with, depending on our previous stereotyping of people we judge as being ‘like them’ – in real life this judgement is often made by the colour of someone’s skin, their gender, hair colour, age and dress. These categorisations are strikingly arrived at within 7 seconds, before a person even has a chance to open his or her mouth.
Pinker (2002, p. 202) writes that “some categories really are social constructions: they exist only because people tacitly agree to act as if they exist”.
Avatar Identity
Avatars are a convenient way to decide on what stereotype you wish to be given, outside of those organically embedded into you. You already have an idea of what makes up that category. In Second Life, we are also defining new categories, such as Steam Punk and Furries. What we have is created a socially agreed norm for what constitutes that category.
Avatar names are also constructed like real names. Akin to nicknames, they are ones we chose for ourselves rather than having names like ‘four eyes’ thrust upon us. We construct our own chosen identities within the pressures of our real environment, it is much the same within virtual worlds.
Identities Linked
I personally agree that real names and photographs should identify us and link us to the real world, however there too, we are in a continual process of constructing and deconstructing our identities, dependent on our own and others’ expectations. No one has a consistent identity that they carry around with them intact, we vary al the time. When you row with your significant other or scream at your kids, are you the same person who greets the boss? I hope not because you’ll soon be out of a job.
The same applies to virtual worlds, we fit in with societal expectations of us. Linden Labs has the intelligence to treat each cultural entity as distinct. They don’t expect conformity as Twinity does (which is not surprising given its Germanic home – were we to stereotype this would be neat, tidy, organised and controlled). We re bound by cultural expectations.
What is Transparency?
When Dustan talks about trust, again the word transparency rises its ugly head. Authenticity, integrity, validity and other such words enter the arena too. He mentions ‘RECOURSE’, this is simply a culturally bound principle in the US and other western nations. Nations who do not have a blame/sue culture are not even aware of this. I have a lot of contact with Portuguese people, in both realms and people from this culture are eager to exchange personal information in Second Life. There is no ‘blame culture’ in that country. Perhaps the Western ‘sue’ culture is the reason for fear, not transparency itself.
I myself was at the sharp end of that phenomenon in hiring a builder who we shall call ‘Dolly’ here. Dolly was from the US, California to be precise. Dolly wasn’t interested in the pittance I paid her to build in Second Life, she had a sick relative who needed money for medical care. Dolly had limited building skills and I took pity on her believing I could train her. Needless to say Dolly’s work was never any good and was never completed. However, after she disappeared I was contacted by her lawyer who informed me that I had to pay $12,000 US because she had incurred stress during her work in Second Life. All this was set up well before I took Dolly on and needless to say, she had already tried the same stunt several times before this. If this is your culture, then indeed it is wise to hide your true identity.
Where there is money, the lawyers, accountants and tax men will always be there to take their cut.
However this is nothing to do with ‘who you are’ and everything to do with preventing exploitation. As Dustan says, relationships are another construction, built over time and dependent on past performance. This is why social networks have become paramount during these information rich times.
Body of Evidence
I have to disagree with Prokofy Neva, not because I personally disagree, but because there is a huge body of empirical research that reinforces these facts about the human psyche. I see the power of Prokofy’s argument and know that might can sometimes be right, but not in this case – where masses of leading research over the past 100 years points in the opposite direction. Alberik did not write tripe, he wrote something that has been well substantiated. I am sure that those interested in this subject would find much of the work done by ‘Social Constructionists’ useful.
The Value of Anonymity
As Infocyde points out, Oscar Wilde was a wise man. Seldom are we given the opportunity for anonymity in life. However, the opposite is also possible, as people are shown to construct lies more liberally when given anonymity in courts. As even language is a fundamental construct, we can make ourselves and others believe anything we want to through language and image.
Why hide behind an Avatar?
So why separate part of our personalities and split them off – as you would do if you kept your true identity hidden behind an avatar?
- To separate an aspect of your personality and contain it in an environment that is not threatening. People threatened in this way would find help in the study of PTSD, fragmented personalities and warfare to understand this more deeply.
As Kwame AKA (Julius Sowu) says, fleeing from ourselves has caused more grief that integrating and understanding our various identities, or ‘faces’. Personally I would encourage anyone resisting this move forward to look at themselves and identify what they are frightened of instead of resisting change.
Times are Changing
Change is inevitable, even change of the ‘self’. We grow older, we change jobs, we cannot resist it. Change can be positive, once we are across the barrier that is fear. We are more than one identity, we are many – changing, evolving and growing. I thank everyone who has given me the material and inspiration to join this discussion to help me change and grow.
To show the world all that you are and share it with others is the most powerful expression of ‘self’ possible. To deny this to yourself and others is tragic.
A quick re-visit to this topic as we come towards the end of 2009, many a moot point now in the debate as more of us come out from behind the avatar and interact in real life.
Virtual worlds marches on and more of us realize due to the need for transparency,the future is who you are, not what you create for consumption.
Happy new year Julius Sowu Virtually-linked London