An article from the New York Times has been circling all over my social networks today, about "RBF" or "resting bitch face." If you haven't seen it, it is actually an interesting (and pretty true) read, with a link to a pretty funny buzzfeed, but an honest commentary on some societal sexism and "outrage" that has been created by famous (but also basically all) women not smiling all of the time, and getting called out for looking mean (I'll just leave it at that for Web 2.0 class, but there is much more to say about all that). Check it out here: http://www.nytimes.com/2015/08/02/fashion/im-not-mad-thats-just-my-resting-b-face.html?_r=0.
It got me thinking about how we represent ourselves in Web 2.0. While on a class discussion board we were talking about some privilege pieces tied to not posting on Wikipedia (not feeling like an expert, feeling like an impostor, concerned we didn't have all the information correct, etc), I'm wondering if Web 2.0 also provides a venue to actually post more.
Obviously, the ability to be anonymous, or to create a different online identity has it's perks, one of which could be participating in conversations and communities that may have been limiting in personal conversations. The online pseudonym is like the new age version of some pen names seen in old literature (the Bronte sisters would be so proud).
Whether using a pseudonym or not, most Web 2.0 allows for barriers to exist in communication circles, even within those communities where people are active. If a concern is resting face, or formulating thoughts, or getting interrupted, or not being listened to due to a variety of (messed up) social constructions, Web 2.0 could create some leveling of the playing field...
Does Web 2.0 take away some initial judgment and assumptions that are created during face-to-face communication? Do people feel more comfortable communicating via technological methods then face-to-face in some settings?
I'll admit that I never considered the sexism behind "resting bitch face", but that does make a lot of sense. Social media can go either way when it comes to facial judgment. Facebook is extremely reliant on pictures; even if you don't want to use images, there's almost a pressure to use them. Twitter averts this but has its own disadvantages like the character limit.
ReplyDelete