It’s the “real life” identity that is a mishmash of things that will throw people off the scent of how they should relate to me. Online, with a name that people don’t associate with anything much, they have to relate to your ideas, and judge you for what you bring to the discussion rather than what you look like, your race or religion or age or sex.

nice blog

Regards
Gwen

http://work-doctor-australia.com

It’s the “real life” identity that is a mishmash of things that will throw people off the scent of how they should relate to me. Online, with a name that people don’t associate with anything much, they have to relate to your ideas, and judge you for what you bring to the discussion rather than what you look like, your race or religion or age or sex.

There is of course the concern that the people are more likely to misbehave if they can do so anonymously , and it’s quite likely that you will experience prejudice if you take a stand on this.

What is important is reputation, and certification of authorship. The single “real name” that creates the persona is irrelevant. (Especially considering the fact that some online personas are gestalts, or psuedogestalts).

I think rather than trying to impose our “real world” systems of identity on the internet, we’d do well to learn from the internet in our social structures in “real world”, and make it easier to allow people to call themselves different things in different situations. It would require a rethink of social structures, but it can be done, and it would provide people with an extra layer of freedom.