The way we identify ourselves
defines who we are. You already know a lot about me if I tell you that I’m a
red head, who likes mozzarella sticks, and enjoys sleeping in. But who we identify with also plays a role
in the makeup of our character. I’m a sister of Sigma Delta Tau, I’m Irish, and
I’m a student at the University of Rochester. My membership in these groups defines
me as both an individual, and a member of the collective whole. These
associations, organizations, and cultural groups provide a context for
understanding who I am. Psychologist Dr. Haim Weinberg argues that “a personal
identity cannot be formed without a collective identity to serve as a reference
point” (54). Today, more than ever before, people connect with others who share
similar interests and backgrounds through the internet. Groups form over chat
rooms, blogs, and hashtags, creating a virtual sphere of people who share a
common concept of their identity. If our personal and collective selves are so
deeply intertwined, how does the internet help navigate that dynamic?
Before we even begin to think about
how the internet acts a tool to connect our group identities to our personal
identities, we have define what a group is, and consider how they operate on
the World Wide Web. Virtual dynamics researchers Katelyn McKenna and Amie Green
characterize a group as two or more people who are “interacting in such a
manner that each person is influenced by and exerts influence on the other
individuals” (117). This makes sense in the context of personal and collective
identities; when you interact with others, you exchange bits of your personalities
and thoughts. Picture this for a moment—you love fishing. Can’t get enough of
it. So you join a Facebook group of other fishermen (and women—the internet
doesn’t discriminate) to talk about the joys of casting a line. You make a
connection with someone, and share tips on how to catch catfish—not like Nevand Max, that’s a topic for a different blog post. Each fisherman walks away
from this situation with new information, and maintains their personal identity
while adding to their collective self. McKenna and Green also argue that groups serve
two specific functions—achieving a shared goal, and fulfilling an individual’s
social needs (120). While some social phycologists claim that internet groups cannot
satisfy our social needs, McKenna and Green cite evidence from a 2002 study
that argues the contrary. The study found 84% of the participants found their
online relationships to be as close, important, and real as their offline
relationships. The study also found that these online relationships stayed consistent
and stable over time (McKenna 120). Obviously, fishermen and women everywhere
benefit from the relationships they form online. McKenna and Green also point
out an important component of virtual groups that sets them apart from their
physical counterparts: internet groups are always in session. Users can
participate at any time, day or night. So even if the fish don’t bite at 3 am,
chances are someone in the fisherman Facebook group is up and willing to chat.
Image source: https://media1.giphy.com/media/BKgOib9ktwfUA/200_s.gif
I propose that the internet acts as
an enabler that allows users to traverse their personal and collective
identity. Considered alienated sexual minorities. There is nothing more
terrifying, in my opinion, than feeling that you are completely alone with
little to no support. Researcher Bharat Mehra designed a study that explored
the role of internet based communication among sexual minorities, focusing on “how
members of the LGBT community are using the internet to express their
marginalized ‘queer’ identities and achieve social change in their local living
environment” (787). The study found that LGBT users find positive development
in their ‘queer’ identities through internet communication with other members
of the LGBT community. Mehra establishes that the internet based group helped
share information about LGBT events, promoted LGBT users to make political
statements to heterosexual communities, generated a fostering support network,
and provided a space for LGBT users to interact and socialize (789). The study’s
results easily point us to the idea that the internet is a tool for people who identify
with historically marginalized groups to define a collective identity, and incorporate
it into their everyday lives. McKenna and Green argue similar findings; they
claim that the more internet users participate in identifying groups, the more
they integrated a previously taboo aspect of identity into their self-concept
(121). They found that more than 40% of participants eventually share previously
secret aspect of their identity to family and friends for the first time, as a
direct result of their Internet group activities (121). This is extremely
important for members of the LBGT community and other marginalized groups
everywhere. In coming- out, or sharing another formerly closeted area of their
lives, internet users make what could be left private public information,
demonstrating how uniquely important the online group is to their identity on a
personal and collective level.
The internet is vast. It stretches
to the corners of the globe and connects millions of people who might never get
the chance to communicate if not for the wonders of the web. It undeniably provides
a space for users to mark their identities by joining groups, sharing stories,
and receiving the support they may not be able to find in their offline lives. The
internet helps us navigate who we are IRL and offline; who are when we’re alone
and when we’re in the company of our virtual peers. Our identities tell us who
we are; I’m an Irish, redhead student at the University of Rochester, who loves
mozzarella sticks and sleeping in, and who also happens to belong to a Facebook
group called “Dogs in Sweaters” (true story). But hey—that’s just me. The real
question is who are you?
Sources
McKenna, Katelyn, and Amie Green.
"Virtual Group Dynamics." Group Dynamics: Theory, Research and
Practice 6.1 (2002): 116-27. 2002. Web. Oct. 2015. https://www.ece.ubc.ca/~leei/519/2002-VirtualGroupDynamics.pdf
Mehra, Bharat, Cecelia Merkel, and
Ann Peterson Bishop. "The Internet for Empowerment of Minority and
Marginalized Users." New Media and Society 6 (2004): 781-802. Sage
Journals. Sage Publications. Web. Oct. 2015. http://nms.sagepub.com/content/6/6/781.full.pdf+html
Wienberg, Haim. "Group
Analysis, Large Groups, and the Internet Unconscious." (n.d.): n. pag. Group-psychotherapy.
Manchester Metropolitan University, Mar. 2006. Web. Oct. 2015. http://www.group-psychotherapy.com/articles/HaimPhD.pdf
No comments:
Post a Comment