4. Hanging Out in the Virtual Locker Room
BlueSky as a Masculine Space
I've found that in most cases gender becomes one of the least important things about a person. [I choose] male or female as the mood strikes [me]; on many muds I'm almost exclusively female. I think that when you get down to it, if people really think about it, gender matters for little ultimately. Like take you for example—your @sex is set to “female”—but does that mean anything other than the 6 bytes it takes up to store the text? Not really. I treat you the same whether it says female, male, neuter, or whatever—assuming that we're not roleplaying something or the like.
Carets
I'd like to think … I don't really know, because I'm not a guy … but I would like to think that when you're online as a woman that the fact that you're a woman is backseat to the personality.
Peg
A female newbie will be given more breaks & more attention, even (especially?) by women.
Beryl
Women get treated differently from men. It's not that they get more slack or anything, but they get chased out differently. Part of it is that most women tend not to talk immediately, just by normal socialization. Guys are much more likely to mouth off early. But women often get turned off by less nasty hazing than men.
Spontaneity
Online participants, like the researchers who study them, present a range of views about the significance of gender online. Carets believes gender doesn't matter at all, while Peg more ambivalently hopes it doesn't. Beryl, on the other hand, has noticed different patterns of treatment based on characters' declared online gender identity. Spontaneity further notes that
Unless they attempt to use nonstandard or invented pronouns, textbased forums require some acknowledgment of gender. People must choose pronouns to refer to themselves and others, and mud servers use character gender designations to pick appropriate pronouns when generating text about characters.[1] Gender's connection to sexuality also brings it to the fore in online interactions. Many mudders engage in personal, social, and sexual exploration on muds (Deuel 1995; McRae 1997; Turkle 1995). Mudders thus acknowledge and discuss gender more readily than they do either race or class. Mudders almost never ask about others' real life race or class identities (although they do sometimes ask about age). But the interconnection between specific gender identities and sexual identity, the expectation that both gender and sexual identities form a core part of the self, and the prevalence of homophobia in U.S. culture lead participants online to ask each other's “real life” gender designations routinely.
Such questions almost never occur on BlueSky, where people know each other's offline identity and also distance themselves from the “pickup” atmosphere of some mud public areas. Many of BlueSky's female participants appreciate that people are not likely to hit on them on BlueSky. (Participants do sometimes flirt.) Yet some people on BlueSky also recognize its gendered nature. As RaveMage commented online when I suggested BlueSky could be characterized as a “male” space, “i'd say totally male, ya; I mean, look at all the sexist banter.” Patterns of speech, persistent topics, and a particular style of references to women and sex create a gendered environment on BlueSky that favors males.
MASCULINITIES AND COMPUTER TECHNOLOGY
The masculinity of BlueSky's environment relates in particular to computer use. As Connell (1995) has pointed out, masculinity does not constitute a single uniform standard of behavior but rather comprises a range of gender identities clustered around expectations concerning masculinity, which he terms “hegemonic masculinity.” Connell defines hegemonic masculinity as “the configuration of gender practice which embodies the currently accepted answer to the problem of the legitimacy of patriarchy, which guarantees (or is taken to guarantee) the dominant position of men and the subordination of women” (77). While few men actually embody the hegemonic masculine ideal, they nevertheless benefit from the “patriarchal
This negotiation, along with the performance of specific masculinities, occurs through interaction with others. As Messerschmidt points out, “Masculinity is never a static or a finished product. Rather, men construct masculinities in specific social situations” (1993: 31). Segal describes masculinity as not only emerging through relations with others but as relational by definition: “As it is represented in our culture, ‘masculinity’ is a quality of being which is always incomplete, and which is equally based on a social as on a psychic reality. It exists in the various forms of power men ideally possess: the power to assert control over women, over other men, over their own bodies, over machines and technology” (1990: 123).
Perhaps the most salient of these forms of masculine power for the men on BlueSky is power over technology. Not all BlueSky participants currently work with computers, but most have done so at some time. In addition to their socializing on BlueSky, many participants employ computers for other leisure uses, including playing computer games at home and participating in networked games on the Internet. BlueSky participants thus enact a form of masculinity congruent with computer culture, itself a largely masculine domain (Spertus 1991; Turkle 1984, 1988; Ullman 1995; Wright 1996). Wright discusses the particular style of masculinity in both engineering and computer culture as “requiring aggressive displays of technical self-confidence and hands-on ability for success, defining professional competence in hegemonically masculine terms and devaluing the gender characteristics of women” (1996: 86).
MASCULINITIES AND WORK TALK ONLINE
Many conversations on BlueSky revolve around computers, including discussions of new software, planned purchases, and technical advice. Participants stress the value of the work-related computer information they have obtained on BlueSky. When people log on with a particular question or problem from work, they give other participants the opportunity to demonstrate technical knowledge and reinforce a group identity connected to computer technology. Following are several log segments from a long conversation in which one participant asks for help with rewriting a segment of software code. During this conversation, participants negotiate group norms and their relationships with each other. They also demonstrate their computer knowledge and membership in the computer subculture in ways
henri says “what's the /bin/sh equivalent of goto”
henri d'ohh there doesn't seem to BE a goto in /bin/sh
Perry says “of COURSE there isn't a goto in sh. why do you need one?”
henri says “I CAN't BELIEVE THERE's NO GOTO IN ‘SH’”
Perry says “sh is the lily-white pure programming language”
elflord says “Perl is the One True Language”
Corwin says “is not”
elflord says “Well, it's a damn fine language anyway:)”
Faust says “Perl is the One True language for Many Uses”
As the conversation continues, participants implicitly compare their preference for particular languages to adherence to different religious doctrines. The discussion allows them to demonstrate the extent of their programming knowledge as well as to indulge in a joking argument about the virtues of the various languages. In the next segment, Perry initiates a roll call polling of the Perl “faithful.” Perry and Faust list their names as agreeing with the roll call statement, while Corwin indicates disagreement. The other participants tease Corwin about his dislike of Perl, suggesting it relates to his religious beliefs as a born-again Christian.
Perry THINKS PERL IS A DAMN FINE LANGUAGE ROLL CALL
Perry
Faust
Corwin pfeh
Faust says “Corwin doesn't like Perl because of the comment in the docs about ‘You're going to hell anyway, might as well program in Perl.’”
henri LAUGHS
Perry heh
Corwin eyes Faust
After this digression, henri attempts to draw the conversation back to his programming problems, introducing a new snag he has hit. This time participants respond more directly to his question.
henri says “goddamit how do I put a embedded newline in a string in sh”
Corwin says “\n”
Corwin says “maybe”
henri tried that and got a literal n
― 75 ―elflord says “What's the context? Just an ‘echo’ or something?”
henri says “setting a variable to a string that includes newlines; to be used in an echo later”
elflord says “Ah. Try just slapping a literal newline in there.”
Faust thought you used that ENDLINE thingy
henri says “that didn't work either”
While BlueSky participants often get quick and accurate responses to workrelated questions, in this case, no one has the right answer for henri. He gets annoyed and frustrated that people respond to his questions without really knowing the answer.
henri can guess as well as anybody
Corwin laughs
Corwin says “use \012”
henri BONKS Corwin
Corwin says “ow, what”
henri says “stop guessing”
Corwin says “it's a GOOD guess, try it”
henri tried it before he bonked you
Although several things can confer status on BlueSky, including a quick wit, participants respect extensive programming knowledge. henri, with a Ph.D. in computer engineering and a job in which he works on complex and specialized programs, has high status on BlueSky.[2] henri's reputation as a superlative programmer makes this conversation somewhat different from more routine occurrences in which less experienced programmers ask for help. Without his intending it to, henri's question becomes a challenge to the other participants. In the next section, elflord, apparently after consulting online documentation, responds to henri's original question.
elflord says “okay, in sh, \ only escapes \, ',”, $, and newline; no nifty c-like \n or \r or anything
henri says “it doesn't seem to work when I'm setting the value of a macro to be echoed later”
henri gave up on the sh problem
Perry says “right, it has to be inside an echo”
Faust says “write it in perl:-)”
elflord's literal newline gets turned into a space in a variable value
henri says “it's a 2000 line sh script I'm trying to improve”
henri ain't rewriting it
― 76 ―henri says “my mistake 2892 lines”
elflord says “Well, bummer, henri.”
elflord says “If you remove \n from $IFS you might be able to include it literally in a variable value”
henri stares at elflord
elflord stares back
henri says “(i) you're still guessing (ii) I gave up on that problem”
elflord says “Okay, fine, forget it, just trying to help”
henri says “JUST SAY I DON't KNOW”
henri's last remark plays off Nancy Reagan's anti-drug-use slogan “Just say no.” In BlueSky's cultural context, this also implies that elflord suffers from MAS, or male answer syndrome, as defined in this earlier conver-sation:[3]
Jet says “What is MAS?”
henri says “Male Answer Syndrome”
Jet oseO
btuse ew
Rostopovich says “that's when you answer everything with a question?”
Jet says “You attempt to answer any questions asked of you no matter your actual knowledge of the subject at hand”
Barbie says “a thoroughly knowledgeable SOUNDING answer to everything”
henri's reference to MAS in the discussion about programming calls attention to the ways in which discussions of computer work reinforce particular middle-class masculine identities.
Like most statements on BlueSky that call attention to norms of masculinity, accusations of male answer syndrome tend to be offered and taken in good humor. As an example, henri described for me an object called the Male Answer Syndrome Clinic, which he'd built on a previous mud. The clinic functioned as a type of puzzle common to the text-based adventure games that were the precursors of muds. A participant who entered the clinic had to solve a variety of puzzles. The final puzzle, which had to be completed in order to exit the clinic, required typing the words “I don't know,” at which point the participant was declared cured of MAS. elflord's familiarity with MAS and with henri's earlier puzzle allows him to interpret henri's accusation of MAS without henri actually using the acronym in this case.
BlueSky participants' discussions of MAS suggest a critique of hegemonic masculinity. However, BlueSky's culture in general includes a high
In the following, final segment of the programming conversation, henri's MAS accusation angers elflord, who “shouts” at henri. Corwin also suggests that henri's response to others' attempts to help is unreasonable. (The phrase “man page” in the following refers to online manuals of commands that are available on computers using Unix operating systems.)
elflord says “I DON't KNOW BUT I'M TRYING TO HELP BY VIRTUE OF READING THE DAMNED MAN PAGE”
elflord says “BUT NOT ANYMORE”
henri points at the man page sitting on his xterm window
Corwin says “henri asks just so he can abuse helpful attempts”
henri asks in case someone who has some specialized knowledge is present, not so N people can duplicate what he's already tried
elflord says “Well how the heck are we supposed to know what you've already tried?”
henri says “just believe that I would try the obvious strategies like reading the man page, trying n”
Here, the participants negotiate potentially discrediting facets of their relationships and computer knowledge. Computer culture depictions of end users suggest that they are not capable of looking up basic questions in available documentation. For instance, the Hacker's Dictionary offers as one definition of user, “A programmer … who asks silly questions” (Raymond 1991: 364). This dictionary also offers a definition and etymology for the more derogatory term “luser” (pronounced “loser”), also used to refer to end users of programs (see 229–30). Computer engineering culture, and especially hacker culture, values self-instruction and the ability to figure things out. The belief that “lusers” lack this ability is expressed in the well-known acronym RTFM, for “read the fucking manual.” The Hacker's Dictionary offers the following definition for RTFM: “1. Used by gurus to brush off questions they consider trivial or annoying. … Used
While the preceding conversation illustrates henri's attempts to gain information necessary for his work activities, it serves several other purposes as well. The discussion of the relative merits of different programs confirms the status of various participants as sharing programming skills and knowledge. It also augments and perpetuates BlueSky's connection to computer culture. Further, the argument over the proper response to a call for help constitutes negotiation of BlueSky's social norms.
Through such discussions, not only do BlueSky participants gain work information; they also enact and reinforce a particular type of masculine culture. They receive affirmation of their computer knowledge and work abilities and of the value of such skills. In addition, by obtaining answers to their questions from online sources rather than from coworkers, BlueSky participants can appear more self-sufficient and knowledgeable and bolster their status at work.
“DEAD BUG WALKIN'”: PROGRAMMING AS SPECTATOR SPORT
Work-related talk on BlueSky does not always involve information exchange. Some people also use BlueSky to engage in running commentary about their work, which further illuminates BlueSky's role in supporting a particular work-related, masculine, middle-class identity. For instance, some computer tasks are so tedious and routine that a person can perform them while participating in a mud conversation. The most common of these is “bug fixing”—hunting down errors in computer code. In the following, Locutus comments on his progress in attempting to fix a particularly problematic bug. He begins his commentary with a mocksexual suggestion common to masculine discourse in various forums. (This conversation occurred on a relatively quiet night. I've inserted spaces into the log excerpt to indicate pauses in the conversation.)
Locutus says “man this bug can blow me”
Locutus hate hate hate
Copperhead snerts
Locutus prays to the gods of mail merge
― 79 ―Locutus thinks it's grandma's cookies time
Locutus says “bringing out the big guns”
In suggesting that a computer software error can “blow” him, Locutus almost certainly has no explicit image of sexual activity in mind. His expression derives from widespread slang usage particularly common among males. Although the sexual imagery therefore serves as an expression of general displeasure, it nevertheless suggests that the “bug” holds a subservient (feminine) position to Locutus's masculine prowess as a programmer. Such routine usages demonstrate the degree to which the concept of competence, both at work and in life, is intertwined with expectations and assumptions about masculinity.
Locutus says “mother FUCKER i just figured out this bug”
Locutus debug debug “hey that looks bogus” look at code “how did this ever work?”
Locutus says “answer: it didn't”
Copperhead says “go Locutus go”
Thistle watches Locutus demonstrate the Heisenbug Uncertainty Principle.
Locutus says “nah; you could repro it, but it was just tricky”
Locutus bets no user has ever run into it, even
Locutus debugs
Locutus is a CODER AFIRE
Locutus says “AAHAHAHAH bugs who know me know FEAR”
Thistle says “DEAD BUG WALKIN'!”
Thistle, a newbie who ultimately logged only ten hours on BlueSky, attempts to assert his or her own programmer status by bringing up the rather arcane discussion of the Heisenbug Uncertainty Principle. Raymond defines a heisenbug as “a bug that disappears or alters its behavior when one attempts to probe or isolate it” and identifies the reference as wordplay on “Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle in quantum physics” (1991: 198). In the line following Thistle's comment, Locutus indicates that Thistle is wrong, because this does not describe the bug Locutus is working on. Locutus's relatively gentle correction acknowledges the potential relevance of the phenomenon Thistle identifies by pointing out the specific difference between Locutus's own problem and a “heisenbug,” that is, reproducibility. This kind of discussion again demonstrates knowledge of programming and computer culture minutiae and establishes the work identities of the
Debugging can be an extremely tedious and frustrating part of programming. By commenting on progress in this way, programmers on BlueSky can express their frustration regarding difficult problems and receive encouragement and congratulations when they manage to fix them. In a way this turns programming into a spectator sport; something with a higher degree of masculine status—that is, greater congruence with hegemonic masculinity—than sitting in front of a computer.
“HOW DID I GET SO NERDY?”
While their computer skills help BlueSky participants gain and maintain employment, and their connections with computers have cultural cachet as well, U.S. culture is ambivalent toward computer expertise and those who hold it. This ambivalence extends particularly to the perceived gender identity of people skilled in computer use and centers on the figure of the “nerd.” For instance, Turkle discusses the perception that MIT students (when compared with, for instance, Harvard students) are nerds because of their connection to technology and that MIT computer science students are “the ostracized of the ostracized” and “archetypal nerds” (1984: 197–98).
In addition to its (relatively recent) connection to computer use, “nerd” connotes a lack of masculinity. For instance, researchers have documented its pejorative use in regard to nonhegemonic white males (Connell 1995; Addelston and Stirratt 1996). Euro-American men sometimes also denote Asian American males (often stereotyped as feminine in U.S. culture) as nerds (Cheng 1996). “Nerd” thus is not necessarily limited to designating a technologically savvy male, but in recent years the term has been increasingly connected to computer use.
However, as Wajcman discusses in reference to descriptions of computer hackers as disheveled loners and losers, the connection to technological knowledge conveys masculine status, even while it complicates that status.
The question that this poses is whether for these men technical expertise is about the realization of power or their lack of it. That in different ways both things are true points to the complex relationship between knowledge, power and technology. An obsession with technology may well be an attempt by men who are social failures to compensate
The growing pervasiveness of computers in work and leisure activities has changed many people's relationship to this technology and thus has also changed the meaning of the term “nerd.” Since the 1980s, the previously liminal masculine identity of the nerd has been rehabilitated and partly incorporated into hegemonic masculinity. The connotations of this term thus vary depending on the social context. As an in-group term, it can convey affection or acceptance. Even when used pejoratively to support structures of hegemonic masculinity, it can confer grudging respect for technical expertise.
Men on BlueSky are well aware that the extent of their computer use places them within the definition of the nerd stereotype. Many also have some of the other personal or social characteristics that brand them as nerds. As represented in the “Nerdity Test,” available online, such characteristics include fascination with technology, interest in science fiction and related media such as comic books, and perceived or actual social ineptitude and sartorial disorganization.[4]
In the following statements, culled from several different conversations on BlueSky, participants illustrate their recognition of the nerd as both a desirable and a marginal masculine identity in their discussions about nerd identity.
Ulysses looks in henri's glasses and sees his reflection, and exclaims “Oh NO! I'm a NERD!”
Mender says “when you publish please feel free to refer to me as ‘nerdy but nice’”
Jet says, “HOW DID I GET SO NERDY”
Randy <—fits one of the standard nerd slots
BlueSky participants humorously identify themselves as nerds and connect with each other through play with that identity. But they also indicate their understanding that this status disqualifies them from a more hegemonic masculine identity. Ulysses' mock dismay at his nerdy looks and Mender's phrase “nerdy but nice” indicate that they see the nerd identity as not completely desirable.
The nerd stereotype includes elements of both congruence with and rejection of hegemonic masculinity. Its connection to a reconfiguration of middle-class male masculinity partly redeems its masculine status. The nerd identity thus constitutes one type of masculinity that Connell identifies as complicit “with the hegemonic project” (1995: 79–80).
Not surprisingly, given the nerd's contradictory masculinity, BlueSky participants both support and call into question societal norms regarding masculinity. Their conversations about women, men, and sex are often wry and self-deprecatory.
henri says “[Mender], if we meet a couple of supermodels in NYC, the rule is: you take the brunette, I take the blonde”
Mender says “what if they are both blonde?”
henri says “you take the shorter one”
Mender says “hsm”[5]
henri says “you are shorter than me after all”
Mender says “OK”
fnord says “what if you meet a short blonde and a tall brunette?”
Mender says “trouble”
henri says “hair color overrides height”
henri says “domehead and I used to use the blonde/brunette system when scoping babes (from afar) at basketball games”
In such joking conversations, the irony derives from the men's knowledge that they do not meet the standards of hegemonic masculinity and also indicates some degree of rejection of those standards. However, this selfreferential irony encompasses only the relationship between these men and other (presumably more hegemonic) men. It does not include women, who become adjunctive definers of status. Mender and henri poke fun at expectations that masculinity includes the easy possession of women but do not question the desirability of “supermodels.” Although they distance themselves from normative standards for masculinity, BlueSky participants do not necessarily embrace a more egalitarian standard between the sexes.
For example, the term “babe” is ubiquitous on BlueSky. Usually it denotes a woman outside the mud group. The woman's connection with a mud participant is usually romantic or potentially romantic, although that connection may exist only in fantasy. In the following brief excerpt (taken from a much longer conversation), Mender and henri (who live in different areas of the country) discuss possible plans for the evening; people offer
Mender says “What should I do tonight henri”
henri says “Mender, rent The Quiet Earth”
Roger Pollack says “find a babe and rent the fisher king”
Roger Pollack says “okay, okay, forget the first part”
Mender stares at Roger
Mender says “I HATE YOU”
Tempest waits for his party to respond
Roger Pollack says “is this the babe, tempest”
Tempest says “babe?”
Tempest says “not, just some woman”
Tempest says “i mean, she's a babe, but not any specific babe:)”
Roger Pollack says “weren't you eyeing some babe? or was that madmonk”
Tempest “that was madmonk:)”
Roger Pollack ose
Mender says “what should I do tonight”
Mender says “the bar with all the babes isn't serving alcohol tonight”
Mender says “no point going if there's not even a chance of me getting tipsy enough to talk to them”
Perry says “so get drunk beforehand”
Mender ! @ pairy [= Mender looks very surprised at Perry]
Mender says “YOU'RE A GENIUS”
Mender's request for suggestions concerning what to do that night sets a joshing tone, and both his statements and others' suggestions include ironic insinuations regarding their inadequate social lives. (I've reproduced only some of these insinuations in the excerpt above.) Mender in particular implies with his continual requests for suggestions about what to do that he needs to be talked into undertaking social activity. He also indicates that he needs alcohol to talk to women. This conversation demonstrates BlueSky's use as a place in which guys can share anxieties about socializing with women and strategies for decreasing those anxieties. In this context, Mender particularly uses “babe” to denote anonymous women of potential sexual interest.
Roger Pollack and Tempest demonstrate uses of the term “babe” connoting attractiveness and also a specific relationship. (I've excerpted a portion of their conversation again here for ease of reference.)
Roger Pollack says “is this the babe, tempest”
Tempest says “babe?”
― 84 ―Tempest says “not, just some woman”
Tempest says “i mean, she's a babe, but not any specific babe:)”
Roger Pollack says “weren't you eyeing some babe? or was that madmonk”
Tempest's correction of Roger Pollack's use of the term “babe” demonstrates the relational quality of the term and also exposes the element of sexual attractiveness in its definition. Tempest refers to the woman he phones as a “babe,” in the sense of “attractive woman,” but stresses that she is not a babe in the sense of being a potential sexual object, such as the one madmonk was eyeing.
These uses of the slangy, offhand term “babe” fit the casual, clubby atmosphere while also keeping concerns about sexuality and relationships at a distance. BlueSky participants refer to “the receptionist babe,” “the Yale babe,” “the swim babe,” and so forth. This allows them to designate sexually attractive women by monikers describing their connection to the participant or to some outstanding but still relatively generic feature. But even with these particularizing classifications, all of these women remain just “babes.” This allows the guys to discuss potential (or unlikely) exploits and to bemoan their inability to connect with babes without it reflecting too negatively on their masculinity. Further, they can deflect the loss of masculinity connoted by the inability to get dates through their comradery in bemoaning the situation. “Babes” become an abstract, an unattainable; talked about and theoretically longed for, they are always a distant object.
“DIDJA SPIKE 'ER?”: HETEROSEXUAL MASCULINITY ONLINE
As Segal points out, “ ‘gender’ and ‘sexuality’ are at present conceptually interdependent” and “provide two of the most basic narratives through which our identities are forged and developed” (1994: 268–69). Understandings of one's own and others' gender identity include assumptions about sexuality. While not all BlueSky participants are heterosexual, heterosexuality is an important component of the particular style of masculinity enacted on BlueSky. However, in this forum, in which relationships are based so heavily on “talk,” talk about sex and about men and women not surprisingly becomes more important to acceptable masculine performance than avowed conformity to particular sexual desires, practices, or relationships.
For instance, two very active and well-respected BlueSky male regulars define themselves as bisexual. One of these has never had a sexual relationship with a man. The other had a relationship with another male mudder (who only rarely appears on BlueSky), which most other BlueSky
In keeping with acceptable performance of hegemonic masculinity, both men and women on BlueSky distance themselves from femininity and, to some extent, from women in general. Conversations that refer to women outside the mud, particularly women in whom a male participant might have a romantic interest, bluntly depict such women as sexual objects. However, participants' allusions to sexual activity are so far removed from the circumstances described that these references again incorporate a high degree of irony. Participants further enhance this irony through the use of formulaic joking patterns, as in the following variations on the question “Didja spike her?”
Mender says “did I mention the secretary babe smiled at me today”
Roger Pollack WOO WOO
Jet says “cool Mender”
Jet says “did you spike 'er”
Mender says “No, sir, I did not spike 'er.”
McKenzie wonders if he should continue this email correspondence or just wait till he can meet her tomorrow
McKenzie siigh
Locutus says “meet whom”
Locutus shouts into a microphone, “SPIKE HER”
Locutus had a short conversation with a 50–55 year old wrinkly well dressed woman in the wine section of the grocery
Mender says “didja spike 'er, Locutus?”
Rimmer says “DIDJA SPIKE HER LOCUTUS”
Locutus says “hell no”
In each of these conversations, mere mention of a woman provokes the formulaic question “Didja spike her?” Such joking formulas constitute techniques of group identity construction. Through jokes regarding women's status as sexual objects, the men on BlueSky demonstrate support for hegemonic masculinity. As Lyman explains, “The emotional structure of the male bond is built upon a joking relationship that ‘negotiates’ the tension men feel about their relationships with each other, and with
For instance, in a later discussion, Locutus and Rimmer indicated that they used the term “spike” to refer to any heterosexual activity (whether initiated or controlled by the man or by the woman). But the phrase “Did she spike him?” would provoke considerable confusion for most people. Further, its suggestion of nonhegemonic heterosexual practices gives it a very different meaning from “Did he spike her?” The metaphor “spike” contains an obvious male bias. It also contains a discomforting conjuncture between sex and violence, which corresponds to standard expectations about hegemonic masculinity.
Further, the joking quality of the “Didja spike her?” conversations points to an uneasiness with hegemonic masculinity as well. During a period when several participants had read a piece I'd written analyzing references to gender on BlueSky (which did not include a discussion of the term “spike”), Rimmer asked me about “spike her” references:
Rimmer says “So if I now said to Locutus ‘So did you SPIKE her?’ would that be offensive?”
Copperhead does find the “did you SPIKE her” stuff a bit offensive, actually
Rimmer says “Wow; the SPIKE stuff wouldn't be funny if there was any chance in hell that anyone ever would”
henri nods at rimmer
Locutus says “the ‘didja spike her’ joke brings up the whole ‘women as conquest’ idea”
Rimmer says “Boy I don't think it's a woman as conquest thing at all”
henri says “what you find offensive (and I agree) is people thinking any time a guy interacts with a woman they should ask if their pants fell off and they locked hips”
Rimmer says “I think it's more of a ‘Mudders never have sex’ thing”
McKenzie agrees with Rimmer, “asking ‘didja SPIKE her’ is more parody than anything else”
Rimmer doesn't think he's ever asked “DIDJA SPIKE HER” and expected someone to actually say YES
Rimmer says “It would be tacky as all hell in that case”
McKenzie says “actually everyone would say ‘I HATE you’”
Rimmer points out the joking nature of the question “Didja spike her?” His assertion that “the SPIKE stuff wouldn't be funny if there was any
However, as Locutus and henri recognize, the joke also relies on the continuing portrayal of women as sexual objects. Women's unattainability as sexual objects to some men provides the sting in the self-deprecatory joke, leaving in place a normative expectation that masculinity involves the sexual possession of women and that this is a desirable norm to attain. Rimmer and McKenzie indicate this in their statements that “Didja spike her?” is a rhetorical question, because it is expected that mudders never have sex with women and wouldn't talk about it if they did, because the other “less fortunate” participants would, as McKenzie indicates, say, “I hate you.” The joke is intended to be on the participants themselves, regarding their nonhegemonic masculinity, but women are the ultimate butts of the joke. As Butler points out, heterosexuality (and, as one of its terms, I would add hegemonic masculinity as well) “can augment its hegemony through its denaturalization, as when we see denaturalizing parodies that reidealize heterosexual norms without calling them into question” (1993: 231, emphasis in original).
The sexual practices of BlueSky participants also may diverge from the aggressive hegemonic model implied by the word “spike.” The potential discrepancy between sexual practice and group identity practice demonstrates some of the dilemmas involved in negotiating masculinities. Like adolescent boys who feel compelled to invent sexual exploits about which they can brag, men in groups create sexual and gender narratives that may not resemble their lived experience but nevertheless form important elements of their masculine identities and their connections with other men. Such connections to other men can come at the expense of connections to and empathy with women.
“BLUBBERY PALE NERDETTES”: NERDS, GENDER, AND SEXUALITY
BlueSky discussions also demonstrate the dilemma that nerd identity introduces into connections between gender identity and sexuality. Nerdism in both men and women is held to decrease sexual attractiveness, but in men this is compensated by the relatively masculine values attached to
Mike Adams says “that's half the reason I go to cons. Sit and have these discussions with people”
Bob. o O (No it isn't)
Mike Adams says “well, okay it's to ogle babes in barbarian outfits”
BJ says “*BABES*?”
BJ says “you need new glasses”
BJ says “pasty skinned blubbery pale nerdettes”
Locutus laaaaaughs
Locutus says “ARRRRR 'tis the WHITE WHAAALE”
BJ wouldn't pork any women he's ever seen at gaming/other cons, not even with Bob's cock.
Perry says “that's because pork is not kosher, drog”
Locutus says “women-met-at-cons: the Other White Meat”
Perry LAUGHS
BJ HOWLS at locutus
While apparently quite misogynistic, the impetus for this conversation relates at least as much to the BlueSky love of wordplay (another “nerdy” pastime) as to negative attitudes toward women. The word choices and the source of the humor in the above banter also reveal some key assumptions about, and perceptions of, nerd identity. Besides the implication in BJ's description that female nerds, like their male counterparts, do not spend much time outdoors or engage in exercise, his and Locutus's statements represent nerds as white. While the term “nerd” may be applied to nonwhite males who meet other nerd identity criteria (see, for instance, Cheng 1996), the stereotypical nerd is white. Similarly, nerds are presumed male, as evidenced by the term “nerdette.” This term, like the term “lady doctor,” defines the normative case of nerd as not female.
This connection between nerdism and masculinity may be what makes a nerd identity so damaging when applied to women's potential and perceived sexual desirability. The participants express the assumption that “nerdettes” who would attend science fiction conventions by definition lack sexual desirability, and they quickly join in the joke set by BJ's critique of Mike Adams's potentially transgressive desire. Mike Adams, on
Although some versions of these types of “guy talk” likely occur in most male groups, this group enacts a particular style of masculinity relating to their use of computers and the accompanying social stereotypes. Their rejection of some aspects of hegemonic masculinity led them to reject my attempt to construe their interaction in male-specific sports-related terms, as in the following.
Copperhead makes some quick notes about “lockerroom atmosphere” and “male bonding”.
henri says “what did we say that was locker room like”
Mender exposes himself to Copperhead
Mike Adams I henri thinks about the cool guys girlfriend “MAN she is a babe”
henri says “that's not locker room, that's angst”
henri says “locker room is ‘well my date with so and so last night was hot, she was all over me’ etc.”
Mender snaps henri with a towel
henri YEEOOWWW
Copperhead was referring more to the general repetitiveness of topic than to the flavor of any particular comment.
henri says “the only things people talk about on muds are (i) technical issues, (ii) sex, (iii) idiots”
Mike Adams says “lessee, common repetitive topics here: computers, dating, lack of dating, computers, sex, sexual deviance, computers, jobs making money, lack of jobs making money, computers …”
henri says “see I'm right”
The other participants (in this case, all male except for myself) object to my characterization of the space as a locker room. They also demonstrate their understanding that I may be accusing them of sexism (as in Mender's joking comment that he is exposing himself to Copperhead) and their knowledge of the cultural code I have evoked through their pantomime of locker-room behavior (Mender's snapping of henri with a towel, and henri's yelled response). While more or less agreeing with my identification of repetitive topics, they disagree with my characterization of the space as therefore potentially excluding women. They represent their discourse as just normal topics of conversation, to which anybody can contribute. But henri's and Mike Adams's descriptions of these “normal” topics
HETEROSEXUAL “DROPOUTS”
Several BlueSky males are bisexual or gay, including some of the participants in the conversations above. Of the 138 regulars, I know the selfreported sexual identities of 75.[6] Of those 75, 7 (both men and women) are either bisexual or gay, and a couple of infrequent participants are as well. Although participants' sexual orientations occasionally become a topic of conversation, for the most part they are ignored. Homophobic jokes generally are not tolerated, although participants known in general for crassness sometimes get away with homophobic remarks. Significantly, in a forum where outspoken opinions are a normal feature of discourse, several of the more politically (and/or religious) conservative participants, understanding that their views on homosexuality are in the minority, express such views quietly and only when asked, if at all. Through their tolerance of different sexual orientations, men on BlueSky thus diverge again from hegemonic, heterosexual masculinity, which “is also defined according to what it is not—that is, not feminine and not homosexual.” (Herek 1987: 73.)
Further, some of the ways in which BlueSky participants enact and express heterosexual identities suggest that in examining connections between sexualities and masculinities, we need to problematize notions of heterosexuality as a single, uniform sexual identity. A standard, Kinseystyle spectrum of straight to gay identities based on sexual behaviors or feelings does not adequately describe sexual identity on BlueSky, because it leaves out important information concerning affectional connections and orientation toward sexuality in general. As Segal states, “It is men's fear of, or distaste for, sex with women, as well known as it is well concealed, that the heterosexual imperative works so hard to hide” (1994: 257). Discussions of sexuality on BlueSky sometimes reveal this distaste as well as the unorthodox solutions some men find for the dilemma imposed on them by the tension between distaste and hegemonic masculine identity, including its heterosexual component.
For instance, several of the straight men on BlueSky report that they have “given up” on women or romantic relationships and have been celibate more or less by choice for several years. In occasional discussions on BlueSky focusing on this issue, these men complain of rejection that derives from their nonhegemonic status.
Stomp has problems with dating and women and stuff, but also has serious reservations about the accepted male-female dynamic in the USA, to the point where he's never felt much point in getting over the first set of problems.
BJ says “Sides, women LIKE scumbags; it's been proven”
Ulysses nods at BJ
BJ should have been gay, he can relate to other guys
Stomp says “as far as I've been able to observe, abusing women (subtly) is one of the fastest and most efficient ways of getting laid.”
BJ will agree with that
Stomp says “Once I realized this, I just sort of went: Well, forget it, then.”
BJ says “guys get to be assholish and abusive cause that kinda attitude is richly rewarded”
Ulysses says “Nice guys end up being the friends to whom those women say ‘You're such a good listener, let me tell you about the latest horrible thing my inconsiderate sweetie did to me’”
Stomp says “Expressing interest in a way that isn't assholish invites getting cut down brutally.”
Ulysses says “We tried opening our mouths a few times, and got laughed at”
Ulysses says “End of experiment”
Stomp says “You get seen as weak.”
Ulysses says “self-assurance and confidence are not options for me. I'd have to go back to infancy and start over”
BJ says “this mud is full of ‘nice guys.’ it's also full of guys who haven't been laid in epochs if ever”
The male participants in the above conversation express considerable ambivalence toward predominant standards of masculinity, portraying themselves as “nice guys” left out of the standard (in their understanding) heterosexual dynamic of violent conquest. Although they designate more sexually successful men as (by definition) jerks, a degree of envy tinges this discussion. Rather than merely rejecting a heterosexuality they view as abusive, they represent themselves as reacting to having been “cut down brutally,” “laughed at,” and “seen as weak” as well as used as a sympathetic ear without regard for their own potential desires.
The rather stereotypical depiction of women in the above, as not only tolerating but desiring abuse, leads to some potential interpretations of the male angst expressed. Hegemonic masculinity's requirement of heterosexuality contains an inherent contradiction. As Lyman points out, “The separation of intimacy from sexuality transforms women into ‘sexual objects,’
While not all of the men on BlueSky share this orientation toward sexuality or the discomfort with women that it entails, conversations such as the above elicit no surprise and little censure. A closer look at reactions of BlueSky participants to the situation of one of these men, Ulysses, helps further illuminate the connections among nerd identity, hegemonic masculinity, and sexuality.
Ulysses' sole sexual relationship has legendary status on BlueSky, partly because it involved Elektra, another BlueSky participant who was formerly a regular but currently participates very infrequently. Ulysses and Elektra initially met online and, after meeting offline, lived together for several months. BlueSky participants frequently retell or allude to the story of Ulysses and Elektra's relationship as one in which Ulysses, a shy and retiring intellectual male, became involved with Elektra, a promiscuous and exploitative woman, who subsequently abused Ulysses and ruined him for all future heterosexual contacts.
Ulysses has only kissed one person, and does not remember it fondly
Anguish wows.
Copperhead says “only one person?”
Ulysses says “One”
BJ imagines sucking face with eleqtra and GIBBERS in abject horror
Anguish says “gee … are you asexual, Ulysses? Or is that an entirely inappropriate question to ask?”
Ulysses says “No, I'm straight, just completely unappealing”
BJ says “anguish. you haven't seen or talked to his last slamp;[7] it's a wonder he talks to women”
BJ would have been either a monk or gay by now
Anguish has had some horrible “partners”
Ulysses is a hermit, basically, especially since Elektra
Anguish says “oh oh, I think I've heard of Elektra stories.”
― 93 ―BJ is even less appealing than ulysses, but still manages to get laid or at the very least kissed at semi regular basis
Stomp says “Ulysses is dapper and appealing, but cannot admit it to himself, because he's scarred so much.”
In the above, Anguish and Copperhead (both female) express amazement at Ulysses' lack of sexual experience, while BJ and Stomp (both male) demonstrate their familiarity and sympathy with his story. In other online conversations, references to Elektra usually allude either to her lack of willingness to pay back the large amounts of money she reportedly owes Ulysses and others or to her many sexual contacts (including several other BlueSky participants). My aim here is neither to dispute nor to confirm claims regarding Elektra's actual behavior or those regarding Ulysses' status as her scarred-for-life ex-lover. The notable aspects of this story and its frequent retelling are (1) the representation of Elektra as the archetypal manipulative (and promiscuous) female, and (2) the acceptance of Ulysses' claim that because of Elektra, he will never have another heterosexual relationship. These themes have taken on a mythic quality in BlueSky's culture and, as such, represent important expressions of ideas about sexuality and women, even if they do not represent the feelings or experiences of the majority of men on BlueSky. The concerns expressed in this story demonstrate some of the strains and contradictions involved in enacting heterosexual masculinity.
Ulysses represents himself in the above conversations as unappealing and lacking in self-assurance and confidence. While this assessment may or may not represent his actual estimation of himself, it does not match the opinions others hold of him. Ulysses has relatively high status on BlueSky, and others consider him witty and intelligent. Furthermore, Stomp's description of him as dapper and appealing fits my own impressions from spending several days as Ulysses' guest while doing interviews. Far from the awkward portrait that the above discussions likely convey, Ulysses' actual comportment is suave, gracious, and considerate. His wry sense of humor and quirky wit enliven the mudder gatherings he attends. The discrepancy between, on the one hand, Ulysses' demeanor and the high esteem in which others hold him and, on the other hand, their account of his relationship status highlights the danger that BlueSky participants perceive from heterosexual relationships.
BJ, Stomp, and Ulysses still represent themselves as heterosexual (and not, for instance, asexual, as Ulysses indicates to Anguish), despite their lack of sexual involvement. Their support of each other's stories and the
These “victims of masculinity” are all in their late twenties and may in time change their views of heterosexual relationships. However, their current divergence from normative heterosexuality relates directly to the performance of masculinities. Categorization of men according to sexual identities based solely on sexual object preference fails to consider significant differences among the relationships of men to other men and women and the meanings that their own sexual preference or behaviors hold for them.
ONE OF THE BOYS:
WOMEN PERFORMING MASCULINITIES ON BLUESKY
The sexist attitudes toward women sometimes expressed on BlueSky and the mud's status as a male-dominated space do not preclude the active participation of several women. The sexual objectification of women usually refers to women “out there.” Any woman on BlueSky itself is one of the gang. This means that sexual harassment and the experience of “being hit on” is almost unheard of on BlueSky.
Lisa has been a member of the Surly Gang for many years. Like both her parents, she has a degree in engineering, providing clear proof of her ability to get along in male-dominated settings. She pointed out in her interview that one of the advantages of being accepted as “one of the guys” in a male-dominated setting like BlueSky is the lack of attention to sex uality.
LISA:I think the atmosphere of the Surly Gang muds is kind of different from the other muds [in terms of] just being hit on. That's one of the reasons that that's where I hang out primarily—you're not hassled.
LORI:
Have you found that a problem on other muds?
Occasionally, yeah. Someone will just start paging you stuff. You have no idea. Someone who doesn't know you will presume familiarity at you. And that happens a lot less on Surly Gang muds. Part of it may be that it is kind of a smaller community. There are fewer strangers.
The general obnoxiousness on BlueSky tends to keep out potential new female participants. But the harassment of outsiders also benefits the women who are already there. Most participants are known, and harassment from strangers, sexual or otherwise, is not tolerated.
Slightly more than one-quarter of BlueSky's regulars are women. Most of these women have histories of participation in male-dominated groups, as Beryl, a female regular, indicated to me in our interview:
BERYL:I've always been around men, groups of men, because I've been interested in role-playing games and science fiction and computers.
LORI:
Those are all pretty male dominated.
BERYL:
Yeah. So I feel totally comfortable. Even though it's weird to notice that sometimes I look around and there's ten guys in the room and—me. But then sometimes there'll be four or five women in the room and just a couple of guys. It swings the other way. Not as far.
Beryl's previous experience with male-dominated groups has given her social skills and understanding that help her to deal with BlueSky's rough social ambience. BlueSky's other active women participants also have experience in male-dominated groups, which helps them fit in well.
Peg notes some differences in men's and women's experiences on BlueSky. But in the following excerpt from my interview with her, she suggests that gender doesn't strongly affect how people are treated on BlueSky.
LORI:You've talked a little bit about women getting different treatment on BlueSky. What have your experiences been?
PEG:
Really, I don't pay attention to that. When I just started mudding, people flirted, but that's when I wasn't thinking about how people were treated. Half the time you couldn't tell what sex somebody was anyway. I think on BlueSky it's the classic geek thing. I still get the feeling sometimes that the guys think of themselves as … they're all sitting around in this guy geekhold and any woman who comes in it's like the things will be—
Different?
PEG:
Yeah.
Here and in her comment at the beginning of this chapter, Peg connects gender to sexuality. In the earlier quotation, she assumes that she can't know whether being a woman online really matters, since she isn't a guy and therefore can't know what they might think. She assumes then that her status as a woman online means something different to guys from what it means to other women. Here, she replies to my question about differential treatment with reference to flirting. In both comments, Peg reveals a degree of uncertainty and ambiguity in her characterization of the mud social space. Although she claims not to pay attention to differential treatment, she nevertheless characterizes BlueSky as a “guy geekhold” that changes when women enter it.
Beryl, Peg, and I all share histories either of personal interest in science fiction and computers or of primary friendships with men or boys with those interests. Our previous experiences in male-dominated subcultures prepared us for the tone and character of BlueSky's social atmosphere. While we all have female-designated characters and make no efforts to hide our female status, our familiarity with the dominant topics of conversation and our ability and willingness to conform to the social norms of the male-dominated space enable us to perform (at least in part) masculine identities and enjoy the enhanced social status attendant on being “one of the guys.”
However, the few participants who do not work with, and are not interested in, computers can sometimes feel left out of the culture of the group and hence outside the group's norm of masculinity. Because Western culture in general associates computer competence and interest with masculinity, femininity can come to be associated with lack of competence and an inability to fit into the dominant social norms. Shelly, a woman who muds on BlueSky only infrequently, told me that she wasn't interested in all the “tech talk” that occurs on BlueSky and that therefore “they all consider me a bimbo here.” BlueSky participants do tend to evaluate Shelly's intelligence negatively and may do so because of her lack of interest in computers. Significantly, in Shelly's mind if in no one else's, that negative evaluation takes a gendered form in the term “bimbo.”
Another frequent regular, Sparkle, said:
In the bar [on BlueSky], I most likely seem more flakey than I am, but that's mostly because they don't talk about things I know anything about. All I can do is crack jokes and laugh when I read something
Both Shelly and Sparkle refer to themselves using terms that both denigrate their intelligence and connect that denigration specifically to femininity. They thus connect their lack of technical knowledge to negative female stereotypes. On BlueSky, as long as a woman participant shares the group's interest in computers, she can fit into the taken-for-granted conversational pattern by becoming one of the guys. Women such as Shelly and Sparkle, however, remain gender outsiders.
These social norms tend therefore to reify connections between technical competence and masculinity. Because the male-dominated nature of the social space combines with an emphasis on technical talk, people who join the technical talk more successfully perform the type of masculine identity dominant in the subculture. As Cockburn explains, “Technology enters into our sexual identity: femininity is incompatible with technological competence; to feel technically competent is to feel manly” (1985: 12). To the extent that conforming participants, whether male or female, are defined as “one of the guys,” participants perceived as not technically competent are also perceived as not one of the guys. They become, in both cultural and gendered terms, Other.
Several people, both male and female, nevertheless participate successfully in the group without any particular computer interest or expertise. For these participants, joining into the general style of conversation becomes more important than the ability to participate in any particular topic of conversation. Both men and women agree that conversations on BlueSky frequently become insulting and obnoxious. Most women do not consider obnoxiousness normal in friendship groups or a usual requirement for group membership. Many men, however, are used to this as a feature of male group sociability. Women on BlueSky, including myself, must negotiate a stance within this unfamiliar social terrain.
After several months of mostly quietly observing the conversations (or “lurking,” as this activity is generally referred to on the net), I decided to attempt to become a more active participant on BlueSky. In the following excerpt of a conversation on BlueSky, I deviate from my previous, relatively quiet comportment and attempt to respond in kind to the obnoxious banter. allia is the only other woman present.
Florin has arrived.
Shub says “Baron Florin of Shamptabarung!”
― 98 ―Copperhead says “hi Florin”
Florin says “shub, copperhead. who the hell is copperhead?”
Shub says “copperhead is your future wife, Florin.”
Copperhead WHULPs at the thought of being Florin's wife
Florin says “bah. every woman on this earth bleeds from the crotch at the thought of being my wife.”
Florin isn't sure whether it's GOOD or BAD, but that's what they DO.
allia thinks every woman on this earth gets a yeast infection at the thought of being florin's wife.
Florin SILENCE, UNSHORN HUSSY
Shub wondered why they all bleed from the crotch …
Florin says “because their WOMBS are FERTILE”
Florin must PROCREATE
Copperhead says “uh-oh”
Copperhead hands Florin a Petri dish
Florin says “well, if you're nasty looking, CH, i'll just hand ya sperm in a petri dish. i understand.”
Florin won't deny any woman the chance to bear his offspring; he only denies them the chance to touch his Captain Happy, when they're unacceptable.
Like many forms of bantering among groups of young males, this conversation revolves around sexual references and insults. As a woman entering the group, I have limited options for dealing with this masculine pattern of interaction. As Fine suggests:
Women who wish to be part of a male-dominated group typically must accept patterns of male bonding and must be able to decode male behavior patterns. They must be willing to engage in coarse joking, teasing, and accept male-based informal structure of the occupation—in other words, become “one of the boys.” While some women find this behavioral pattern congenial, others do not, and they become outcasts or marginal members of the group. (1987a: 131)
Hacker also describes women students in engineering (a culture closely related to BlueSky's computer culture) as becoming “one of the guys” (1989: 49).
In this regard, my performance in the above exchange can be read as an attempt to become one of the boys, that is, to perform a masculine identity. My efforts partly fail because of people's previous knowledge of my female identity, as evidenced by their references to my female status (as potential wife) and body. On the other hand, my performance succeeds to the extent that the other participants accept my behavior as normal. My
The above conversation probably had little effect on my status on BlueSky. However achieving “regular” status on BlueSky depended on my ability to participate actively during similarly obnoxious conversations. In my conversation with Beryl about participating in male-dominated groups and feeling comfortable on BlueSky, she for a time switched roles, interviewing me about my own participation on BlueSky. I tried to explain to her my occasional discomfort with the style of interaction on BlueSky.
BERYL:I feel totally comfortable. Do you?
LORI:
Yeah, most of the time I do. Sometimes I don't.
BERYL:
How come?
LORI:
Um. When, I guess sometimes when the guys are talking about babes or are being very graphic in some ways … not really mean or gross or anything, just guys goin', “Oh man, the so-and-so babe just walked in. Oh boy, but she's got a boyfriend, and I don't have a chance.” It's kind of like AAUGGH!
BERYL:
I think it's hilarious.
LORI:
I guess. Sometimes it will strike me that way, and sometimes it doesn't. I would say that as time has gone by, I've been more and more comfortable. So there's fewer times now when I'll just go, “I just can't handle this anymore.” But there used to be times when I'd log off for a week or two weeks at a time. I just would not go back in. It's like, I can't take this anymore. I just … I don't like it.
Beryl makes clear to me that she isn't bothered by the aspects of BlueSky that cause me to stay away for periods of time. Her support of the interactional status quo provides an example of the ways in which women sometimes not only perform masculinities but also support and perpetuate social structures requiring that they do so to fit in.
Although I have brought up issues of sexism on BlueSky (as demonstrated by examples in this chapter), these critiques have had little impact on BlueSky's culture. On the contrary, BlueSky has probably changed me more than I have changed it. In an earlier article (Kendall 1996), I commented that I was almost the only woman on BlueSky who participated in one of the standard (and arguably sexist) joking patterns. In my
Other participants recognize that the style of interaction on BlueSky favors participation by men and excludes most women. Spontaneity, a male regular, explained some of the differences he sees between men's and women's participation on BlueSky in the quote at the beginning of this chapter: He also mentioned that he knew several women who had given up on BlueSky as entirely too “vulgar and mean.” Similarly, in an informal face-to-face conversation with Jet, a male BlueSky regular, I mentioned that the generally obnoxious tone on BlueSky tends to keep women out. Jet agreed and said that none of the people on BlueSky “know how to deal with women. We just treat them like we treat men, which is fine for equal rights but doesn't seem to work too well socially.”
While Jet and Spontaneity differ somewhat in their opinions about whether women get treated differently from men, they both recognize that treating people “the same” doesn't necessarily result in equal treatment. Spontaneity points out that “women get turned off by less nasty hazing than men,” and Jet recognizes that a supposedly egalitarian stance still somehow excludes women. They understand that, even when male and female characters are treated identically, as occurs for the most part in my encounter with Shub and Florin, different participants in the interaction will nevertheless have different experiences of it because of their different histories and the gendered nature of that treatment. As Hacker says about engineering, “Women's entry into the traditionally masculine is important, but it is only one aspect of degendering technology and eroticism. It strengthens the masculinization of both and includes but few women” (1989: 49). Similarly, the gendered social context on BlueSky casts women as outsiders unless and until they prove themselves able to perform masculinities according to the social norms of the group. Women who are able to do so find acceptance within the group, but their acceptance reinscribes masculine norms, which continue to define women as assumed outsiders and outsiders, by definition, as not men.
GENDER MASQUERADE ON BLUESKY
Although muds have been male dominated, they can sometimes provide a relatively anonymous forum in which to experiment with gender identity. Mudders' own awareness of these facets of mud experience sometimes
For the rare gender switchers on BlueSky, portraying an online gender identity different from their offline identity need not disrupt their existing understandings of identity norms. As in other forms of gender masquerade, whether on the stage, in carnivals, or on city streets, motivations for such masquerade vary. So too do the potentials for masquerade to disrupt existing gender norms. Following are excerpts from discussions with two BlueSky participants, Fred and Toni, who, for significant lengths of time, enacted gender identities on BlueSky different from their offline gender identities. Their experiences provide evidence that the online enactment of gender identities differing from participants' offline gender identities need not call into question existing beliefs and assumptions about gender. Fred's and Toni's gender strategies thus highlight both the potential for and the limitations of fluidity in online gender enactments.
Fred/Amnesia: “Her Femininity Shows
through Easier via Text”
Fred is a long-term male participant on BlueSky who for a year portrayed himself as female, with the character name “Amnesia.” Although Fred revealed his offline male identity to other BlueSky participants several years ago, ending his masquerade, he retains the online name “Amnesia” and continues to self-refer using female pronouns.[8] I asked Amnesia about this in a whispered conversation on BlueSky.
Copperhead whispers “so I'm curious—if everyone knows you're not female, why still the female pronouns? Continuity?”
Amnesia whispers “‘Amnesia’ is a woman, and always has been. Amnesia was (is) my ‘ideal woman’, and so is more caricaturial than any real woman can be. I think that means her femininity shows through easier via text.”
Copperhead whispers “your ‘ideal woman’ is caricaturially female?”
Amnesia whispers “no, I mean that I have no real experience in being a woman,
― 102 ―so can only draw a crude image with a broad brush when I'm acting. Also, my ‘ideal woman’ has qualities not available in humanity, so there's another thing that doesn't translate into reality well.”
Fred considers himself to be acting and does not expect characteristics of his “ideal woman” to translate into reality: he relies on stereotypical notions of femininity to accomplish his masquerade. Fred also specifically separates the “crude image” he portrays online from his offline identity, suppressing any gender-blurring effect his online masquerade might have on his sense of identity.
This type of gender enactment, while clearly performative, does not necessarily lead to an understanding of gender as performative in all instances. In addition, Fred's understanding of gender switching emphasizes rather than diminishes differences between males and females, as seen is this exchange:
Copperhead whispers “okay, but why do you need experience as a woman to play a woman on-line. I mean, look at me. What experience would you need to come across like I do?”
Amnesia whispers “in the short run, not a lot. For a year, quite a lot.”
Copperhead whispers “I've been here six months. I haven't needed any special experience yet!;)”
Amnesia whispers “now try pretending to be a 50 year old man for 6 months.”
Copperhead whispers “ah, but what if I just talked like I've been talking and *told* people I was a 50-yr-old man?”
Amnesia whispers “if one isn't exceedingly careful, one slips just slightly and the entire game is up.”
While the slips to which Fred/Amnesia refers could result from any inconsistency in online self-presentation, he specifically emphasizes gender. Pronouns in particular are easy to forget. Amnesia is considered by other BlueSky participants to be obsessive about using female pronouns, perhaps because everyone does relate to Amnesia as male (since they have met or know about Fred), and the constant use of female pronouns strikes them as somewhat incongruous. In treating Amnesia as male, BlueSky participants give greater weight to offline identity than online identity and continue to treat gender as immutable and rooted in the physical body. Despite having previously believed that Amnesia was actually female, they treat that earlier understanding as a mistake, now corrected by their greater knowledge of Fred's offline identity.
As Amnesia and I continued to discuss gender portrayals online, it became
Amnesia whispers “ ‘Oblivious’ was my male persona briefly, but it was less fun”
Copperhead whispers “less fun? how so?”
Amnesia whispers “hard to say. Perhaps less attention is paid male characters.”
Copperhead whispers “hmmm. I've heard that from other people as well.”
Amnesia whispers “when I was full-out a woman, the differential was unbelievable and measurable.”
Copperhead whispers “but you know, I haven't really noticed it. ‘Course, I haven't been on here as a male, but comparing myself to other people, it doesn't really seem to me that I get more attention. Heh. Maybe if I was male, I'd get *no* attention.”
Amnesia whispers “you don't ‘act female’ in the traditional sense, as far as I've seen.”
Copperhead whispers “ah. I suppose that's true. So maybe it's not females that get more attention, per se. Am I less a woman than Amnesia?;)”
Fred interprets my presentation of myself online, in which I make no particular effort to emphasize a gendered identity, as not “acting female.” With the limitations inherent in text-based online interactions and the absence of cues we usually use to assign gender identity to others, Amnesia's caricature of femininity becomes potentially more real—more female—than my less stereotypical enactment as Copperhead. However, other participants' understandings of both Amnesia's and Copperhead's online gender presentations remain subject to correction and reinterpretation upon acquisition of further information about our offline identities. Several BlueSky participants acknowledged that Fred had “passed” as female for a year. But rather than interpret Fred's ability to fool them as evidence of gender malleability (and rather than credit Fred with skill at deception), they generally attribute their mistakes to their earlier naïveté and unfamiliarity with the medium. As discussed in chapter 5, BlueSky participants make ironic references to their earlier naïveté, using the phrase “I feel so betrayed” to refer to potential gender switching.
Toni/Phillipe: “Me with Different Pronouns”
Toni has been mudding for several years but joined the group on BlueSky fairly recently. She portrays herself on BlueSky using the male character
When I was sitting there thinking, “What am I going to name this character?” I had heard so much about what a weird place GammaMOO was that I just didn't want to go there as myself. It wasn't like I decided, “Oh, I'll make a male character because it's safer to be male online, or something like that.” I didn't really ever feel that. I just liked the notion of not being myself. I wasn't really sure of the environment or anything. … And so I just … I had a cat named Phillipe, and so I just borrowed his name. So then I got in the habit of naming characters Phillipe or Phil, some variation of that whenever I went somewhere that I wasn't sure I was going to be comfortable.
At the time of this interview, very few BlueSky participants knew that Phillipe was female offline. Since then, Toni has “come out” as female. However, just as Fred continues to go by the name “Amnesia” and to use female pronouns, Toni retains the name “Phillipe” online and continues to self-refer using male pronouns. This leads to occasional confusion among other participants:
evariste says “mckenzie won't even dance”
Phillipe won't dance either; why is this bad?
evariste says “women like dancing dudes”
Phillipe says “i don't”
evariste says “are you a woman?”
Peg says “yes, she is”
evariste says “phillipe is a woman?”
evariste says “niiice name choice”
Phillipe says “evariste, we've had this discussion before; every few months you find out i'm female and boggle like that”
evariste forgot it
evariste has a profound aversion to cross-sexing, that's why
evariste says “i'm sure i block it out”
henri says “your illusion is JUST THAT GOOD”
evariste says “or i care JUST THAT LITTLE”
evariste indicates that he expects online names to reflect offline gender identities (perhaps particularly since those names can be chosen rather than
Fred emphasized the difficulty of portraying a character with a gender different from one's offline identity. But Toni claims to have little problem maintaining Phillipe's male persona consistently. She indicates that she makes little distinction between her own personality and that of Phillipe. Toni describes others' mistakes in portraying gendered identities and outlines her own enactment strategy:
You know a lot of people, if they make an alternate gendered character, they'll make it really exaggerated. I think Phil's kind of this wimpy guy, kind of a pretty boy. I think Phillipe is just more me with different pronouns. I suppose it's a lazy kind of a disguise. He has a guy's name and he has male pronouns. I guess the wimpy part is, it's a stupid name. I have this notion that probably lots of people think that Phillipe is gay.
Toni's masquerade both reinforces and calls into question stereotypical assumptions about masculinity and femininity. Like others I spoke with, she suggests that the attempt to be different when switching genders leads many to perform exaggerated and easily unmasked caricatures. She, on the other hand, successfully passes as male, theoretically without making any effort to behave in a “masculine” fashion. (Participants less frequently question male character enactments, because the assumption is that more online participants are male than female, and our cultural tendency is to view “neutral” enactments as male.) Unlike Fred's contention that lack of experience as a female hampers his ability to portray a female character, Toni's low-key masquerade suggests greater similarities between male and female gender enactments.
Toni's portrayal of Phillipe may indeed be based on her own offline enactment of herself as female. However, few other BlueSky participants would agree with her characterization of Phillipe as wimpy. Given the social norms on BlueSky, gender enactments of all participants, regardless of online or offline gender designations, tend to conform to standard cultural expectations of masculine behavior. For instance, in the following discussion, Phillipe and two other participants (who both present themselves
Mender mewmewmewmewmewmew
Phillipe doesn't really think that's how you attract pussy, Mender
Phillipe says “AHAHAHAHA”
Locutus laughs
Mender says “So how DO you do it”
Phillipe says “i think it's abundantly clear at least to some of us in this room that I don't”
Locutus says “you say ‘come to madison’ over and over until someone gives in”
Mender says “Locutus, come to madison”
Locutus says “no”
Mender says “Locutus, come to madison”
Locutus says “STILL no”
Locutus says “mender, hint, I'm not female”
Mender says “oh yeah”
Phillipe says “what locutus said, only first we need to have a little talk about genders; and clearly i'm the best person to talk about genders”
Phillipe HOWLS at himself
Mender says “we've had that talk”
Phillipe pages Locutus with ‘mender knows i'm a girl, btw. he started telling me a lot of personal stuff and i outted myself cuz it seemed unfair’.
Locutus pages Phillipe: aw you're so sweet
In the above, male and female alike flirt with each other and joke about gender identities. Significantly, Toni/Phillipe indicates that she felt bound to reveal her “true” gender identity when Mender began revealing “personal stuff,” that is, information about his offline life. She thus reciprocates his revelation of offline information with her own confession of her offline identity.
As with Copperhead, Toni's online and offline presentations of self fit neither feminine nor masculine stereotypes. Yet because she is female offline, Toni characterizes her less “exaggerated” male character as “wimpy” and believes others may perceive him as gay. Toni's evaluation of Phillipe's wimpiness relies on cultural standards of masculine behavior. Her view of Phillipe as not very masculine and possibly gay also depends on expectations
In Gender Trouble, Butler asks, “What kind of gender performance will enact and reveal the performativity of gender itself in a way that destabilizes the naturalized categories of identity and desire?” (1990: 139). In that work and in the later Bodies That Matter (1993), she suggests that drag, as a form of gender parody, does not necessarily call normative, naturalized gender into question, but rather that the disruptive possibility of such actions “depends on a context and reception in which subversive confusions can be fostered” (Butler 1990: 139). Online performances of gender, whether construed as “masquerade” or as serious and “realistic” performance, may or may not be parodic. But in either case, they are probably even less likely than offline parodies to “drastically call into question the gender system of the dominant culture as a fixed binary” (Poster 1995: 31). The electronic medium that makes gender masquerade possible and conceivable for a wider range of people also enables both the masqueraders and their audiences to interpret these performances in ways that distance them from a critique of “real” gender. The understanding that the limitations of the medium require performance allows online participants to interpret online gender masquerade selectively as only performance.
Gendered meanings permeate and inform all aspects of BlueSky interaction. The cultural connections on BlueSky among work, masculinities, computer use, and sociability ensure a male-dominated atmosphere regardless of the number of women present. For the most part, BlueSky participants, including myself, conform to dominant masculinity standards. They relate to each other in ways that support heterosexual masculinity (although not all identify as heterosexual) and in the process continue to objectify women. This demonstrates that even as members of nondominant groups increase, their effect on existing social norms may be minimal. Without the constant visual reminders provided by physical