|
I don't use the Internet for dating and there are several good reasons why:
a) it's too much like work; b) I spend enough time on the computer already;
c) I can't be bothered to make up attractive lies; and d) I don't want to
trade dick pictures with total strangers.
Personally, I find dick pictures and other disconnected bits of anatomy
rather dorky, if not outright spooky. (Where are the legs that go with that
butt, the chest that goes with that crotch?) But in this I seem to be in a
minority. Close-ups of dangling genitalia are the lingua franca of the
Internet and it's quite amazing how many people are willing to share them.
Many, if not most people, it seems, are more comfortable showing their loins
than their face, though, really, that's the least of it.
When it comes to the shredding of what used to be quaintly known as privacy,
it's astonishing how far people will go today.
Pop stars flash their panty-less crotches. People read their diaries at
public readings. And everyone under 40 uploads huge amounts of personal
information to blogs, social networks and photo-sharing sites.
It's like our emotional world has been flipped inside out. We wear our
underwear as outerwear and we disgorge our inner life - or what passes for
it, usually long lists of likes and dislikes - to people we've never
actually met.
I don't think it's immoral, shameful or dangerous to exhibit yourself like
this. I just wonder if it works.
Traditionally, privacy was what we shed on the way to intimacy. You bartered
a bit of privacy for a bit of connection, and you did it gradually, with an
eye to the other person's reaction and their ability to handle new, and
sometimes surprising, revelations.
Now, though, the goal has shifted. Publicity has replaced privacy and we
just push ourselves out there, often without regard to who is listening,
watching or reading. The result may well answer a need for attention,
adulation or even simulated celebrity, but does it really help people
connect?
Judging from the alienated faces on the subway, the answer is a resounding
no. One look at some of the more personal blogs and you realize that a lot
of people don't have anyone to talk to.
To me, the so-called social networks - Facebook, MySpace, et al. - are a
massive contradiction in terms. I mean, really, if you actually had a social
life - and a solid network of friends, family and acquaintances - would you
waste your time on a thin simulacrum of same called the Internet?
Whenever I ask people about their online dating experiences, the usual
reaction is that it's good for quick hookups but not much else. And spare me
the crap about its being interactive. "Hi, what are you wearing?" does not a
conversation make.
This year in New York magazine, a writer named Emily Nussbaum suggested,
probably correctly, that reactions like mine position me on the far side of
a massive generation gap. Older adults are generally indifferent to the new
online sharing. Kids just take it for granted. For them, wrote Nussbaum,
"It's theatre, but it's also community."
Yeah, well, if that's community, then I'm a recluse. Call me old-fashioned,
but I prefer my version of community to be a little more rooted in the
here-and-now, someplace tangible like a bar or a coffee shop, where I can
keep my sordid details to myself and still let people get to know me, just
from the crotchety look on my face. A reticent look that says, "I'm not
telling you nuthin'."
Source: http://www.thestar.com/living/article/282491
| 
