Download groupJ - Homepages | The University of Aberdeen

Can online relationships hinder or develop our ability to form
social relationships/ interactions with others?
Group Essay
Electronic Society
Alan Smith
Vicky MacLachlan
Uzoukwu Obinna Kaine
Can online relationships hinder or develop our ability to form
social relationships/ interactions with others?
This essay will look at three arguments on whether on-line dating sites are useful tools in
developing and maintaining the relationships that separate Man from the rest of the
animal kingdom. The essay will have three main arguments, which focus on the
individual as well as society. The three viewpoints are
 The way online relationships have developed our ability to form social
relationships and interactions with others has been seen through the use of virtual
communities, general interest websites and dating to even marital websites. These
factors will all be discussed below.
 The way it has hindered our ability to form social relationships and interactions
with others
 The way in which morality and crime are affected by on-line dating.
The Argument For
Online relationships have many forms on the Internet, through work, leisure,
business, travel and education relations. These can be seen through virtual communities,
these communities consist of groups of people interacting or communicating through the
internet electronically rather than face to face. Social values, cohesion, trust are all
important factors in communities and by having them present in virtual communities
now, it allows us to communicate easier and more efficiently with others. Society has
seen that through online/virtual communities gaming industries, businesses, employment,
E-health, general interest and campaigning sites, leisure, education, travel and many more
have all contributed to the selective choice of a social relationship. Individual
relationships have also developed through the internet through online dating sites,
matrimonial sites and the positive filtering that makes these sites easier to work around.
These sites empower shy people on the internet and hugely increase the range and
amount of people you can meet.
Virtual communities help and better our communications with others and hence
make our social interactions and relationships better. This can be seen through the work
place, employment, E-Health and many more. The work place has seen changes with the
advancement of the internet, helping to advertise and use marketing strategy helps
improve businesses. Business communities has also helped foster a sense of community
among geographically or organisationally isolated professionals1.Other businesses like
eBay has allowed us to buy and sell and through feedback forums, bulletin boards, chat
rooms, Wiki’s, Blogs and Skype it has allowed us to interact with others to help with
buying and selling strategies. People also uses the internet to contact prospective
employers through electronic mail or whatever means, showing us online relationships
has developed employment and the possibility of a business relationship.
There are many different types of relationships on the internet, however the
reason that social relationships are being used, developed and becoming more popular is
through bulletin boards, blog, feedback forums and even skype on the sites. These
additional services are bringing people together; this may even result in that of a meeting.
On campaigning site for example green peace and feminism sites have even got event and
volunteer links to help similar people come together and enjoy what they do.
Internet sites not only get people together who enjoy pursuing similar hobbies,
scavenging for investment tips, political organizing, and so on, it also allows people to
find friends and lovers2.
Online dating can develop our ability to form social relationships and interactions
with others enormously this can be seen clearly through an online and phone survey in an
online dating report in Canada. Showing us that 67% of people using dating sites had face
to face meetings and 31% of people had 11+ contacts after meeting them face to face.
This illustrates to us that online dating can contribute hugely to our social relationships
and interactions. Due to large numbers of people actually meeting this develops
interactions, communication and then social relationships in reality.
The Argument Against
Traditionally dating involves interaction using all the senses hence less control over self
presentation this makes relationship grow in controlled and proportional pace, online
interaction is limited to written words, there are no visual cues or non-verbal
communication giving users great control over self presentation, allowing for fantastic
expression of one self. Though this enhances the speed of the relationship and dating, but
the speed causes a disproportionate level of perceived intimacy, a kind of cognitive
attraction far from reality. The control of self presentation in online makes it difficult if
not impossible to actually judge or interpret the personalities of the partners since many a
times users present an ideal self rather than a true self.
Following her experience an online dater said: “getting to know the mind before the man
could be enticing and later disappointing when realities are discovered”
In online dating there is a tendency to be carried away by its fantasies and the ability to
draw the line between reality and fantasy is sometimes difficult.
The chemistry of attraction is probably the greatest limitation of online dating. The
inability of the computer to simulate the sensation of touch or reveal the chemistry
between two people makes it less likely to replace the tradition method of dating. There is
a lot more to dating than instant messaging or online chatting. Pheromones, mannerism,
skill etc are necessary tools in online dating unfortunately the computer is not yet
equipped to reveal or simulate this.
“You cannot assess information about another person without physical, nonverbal cues,”
says Dr. Reece Burka, a New Orleans psychologist. “A false sense of intimacy is created
when interaction remains purely cognitive”. Only when there be an in-contact meeting
can there be an assurance that two people ‘click’ in person3.
There is also the issue of safety with dangers of being exposed to obscene or offensive
materials when using on-line dating sites e.g. pornographic pictures are one of the
attractions of some dating sites, there is also the risk of giving information to a stranger
who may use it to harass or harm.
Online dating requires members to create a profile this is used as a basis of matching user
to one another. The advantage of profiling is that it provides an instant result of a search
criteria, offline it is difficult to assess all the numerous people passing by and selecting
instantly the person of choice, online profiling seems to solve this problem by a click,
however it fails to address the issue of ones soul mate which cannot be sorted by
searching a database. There is an abundance of stories on romance involving two persons
who apparently are incompatible on the basis of physical appearance but found an
unfailing love in each other. Online profiling tend to use logical line items to control
things which are not logical; attraction and compatibility and this is indeed is a great flaw
for those seeking true and lasting love4.
A profile is effectively an advert of one’s self, dishonesty has become a phenomenon
there are lots of stories on e-lying. In one story a man online interest described herself as
looking like famous actress Renee Zellweger Before getting together, she revealed that
she was actually “an older, less pretty version of Renee Zellweger.” In one last e-mail
before getting together, she said she’d “once been described as looking like John
Denver”5
User are not the only e-liar on line dating site have been caught in this fib time to time.
On November 28, 2002, an article in The Spokesman Review detailed a lawsuit (on behalf
of a user whose identity was kept a secret) accusing the site INeedANewGirlfriend.com
of lying in order to get newly registered users to buy subscriptions. The lawsuit says that
bogus e-mails with photos of beautiful women were sent to men asking them for a reply
or for a date. Once the men paid their membership fees and e-mailed the women, they
never heard back6.
All these factors; the propensity for dishonesty, the inability to simulate the sensation of
touch, safety issues and the limitation of online profiling to provide a soul mate does not
make online dating a good choice for finding an ideal relationship.
The Moral Argument
5
When looking at morality and law there is a great deal of debate over whether something
is immoral or not, this is because of the philosophical nature of morality; this will be
discussed later; whereas legal issues although not definite due to the definition and
common law systems which exist. Actions which are illegal and immoral do have
tendencies to be similar however they can be viewed as mutually exclusive depending on
viewpoint.
It would be clear that to commit a crime against an individual or his property that there is
a breach of morality regardless of viewpoint, this is on the basis of Rawlsian Justice
which prevails as a moral philosophy regarding the basic laws in our society. This theory
states while a society will attempt to create laws to one’s own advantage the majority will
prevail and basic human rights are accepted as law7. JS Mills states an individual is only
answerable to society for conduct which concerns others8
A crime against the individual in Scotland is defined as an act which causes physical
harm or real threat of physical harm9,clearly protecting one’s basic human rights. The
two requirements in Scot’s law are actus reas (too have committed the act) and mens rea
(the intention to commit such act). The mens rea is not a specific requirement to
constitute a crime as there are crimes which have strict liability (the act in itself is a
crime) and where the accused has shown wicked recklessness.
Examples of such crimes specific to on-line dating are those such as that of Gary
Dellapenta who imitated his victim on-line and stated she had a fantasy to be raped, after
many approaches to the victim Dellapenta was convicted of cyber-stalking10.
The most common crime committed through on-line dating sites is that of fraud, whereby
the victim is befriended and then defrauded, on-line dating provides the ideal scenario
where a false trust can be gained.
It can be seen that on-line dating does provide a vessel upon which crimes can be
committed but it could be argued that these crimes would be done in another manner had
on-line dating never existed. Increase in crime can be attributed to moral thinking rather
than the opportunities available.
The view of what is moral also has some legislation surrounding it; there are crimes
against morality such as that of displaying lewd images; which can often be found on Online dating sites such as adultfriendfinder.com. These is covered by the communications
decency act 1996; which states that as long as the provider makes the viewer aware of the
possible images and block children from viewing these images then there is no breach of
decency laws11. Such sex sites could also be accused of assisting in the solicitation of sex,
this is difficult to prove but statements “hot Brazilian woman looking for generous man
to please” only conjure up images of professional prostitution.
Morality varies greatly from person to person as it is shaped by our social environment
including religious upbringing and laws we have grown up under. In Iran in 2004 there
were 68 arrests for the use of on-line dating12, which shows a parallel to the western
world where it is clearly legal to do so. Morality has several main schools of thought:
1. relativism, what is moral depends on each individual and varies greatly
2. Utilitarianism, an act is moral if it increases the greater good, regardless of
motive, based on the economic theory of Utility
3. Deontological theories / Duty ethics, where an act is moral if the intentions are
good
4. Virtue ethics, which originate with Aristotle in ancient Greece where one, has
different stages to become a virtuous being13.
The different thinking shows that morality varies greatly. On-line dating throws up many
moral arguments:
Homo-sexuality: This is illegal in some countries and viewed as unnatural and immoral
by others yet legislation makes it perfectly acceptable in the UK, with introduction of
laws regarding civil partnerships giving gays equal rights. On-line dating can increase
homo-sexual activity by allowing discreet relationships – Is this moral?
Monogamy, Western society has the notion of monogamy which originates from
religious roots of the Old Testament but this appears to be a thing of change. In 1970
Dateline removed a question on its application that participants were willing to have sex
before marriage after Government pressure14. On-line dating site true.com now vets
members to see if they are married; this has not been passed as a legal requirement to
others as is a moral judgment and not a legal one15.
The remoteness of relationships, James Rachels (1975) argued that people control the
information given to control relationships16, for example my Parents have different
information about me that close friends or an employer. This leads to the argument that
people can hide information easier and lie whilst on-line; also the information received
by body language is removed altogether is this moral?
One moral argument that is clearly against on-line dating is that of Tiker (1970) where
the consequences of one’s actions are depersonalized when there is remoteness17, If
someone is on-line how remote is the person on the other side of your communication
and how is your moral position towards them?
I would argue that On-line dating can be seen to change the moral and legal situations in
our social environment, however as it stands these changes are no more significant that
the films or TV we watch (many sitcoms such as friends and films such as Bridget Jones
in the 1990’s portrayed single twenty-something’s as socially acceptable). The danger of
On-line dating does however exist; if we become over-dependant on virtual relationships
instead of real ones then moral standards will shift and the percieved consequences of our
actions will be affected by the remoteness of others around us. This is why it is important
for society and individual users of these sites to be aware of the potential dangers and the
non-disclosure of 80% of information from body language that is received by face to face
relationships.
Conclusion
In conclusion to the three arguments it is clear that there are many stances and too many
variables to define on-line dating as the major change agent. Whilst on-line dating offers
the possibility of global relationships, the simple human factors are removed. The
different moral positions and the subjective nature of morality make it difficult to
evaluate whether on-line dating is affecting the moral structure of society. We can
conclude that while on-line dating can be no substitute to real relationships it can still be
used to build and maintain social networks and relationships.
Referencing
1. Kling, R. (1996) Social Relationships in Electronic forums
<http://www.december.com/cmc/mag/1996/jul/kling.html>
2. Brym et al. (2001) Love Online: A Report on Digital Dating in Canada, Social
Relationships in Electronic Forums
3 “Survey of 14,833 reveals that offline dating trends are spilling into the online world.”
Editorial. Business Wire August-6-2002: Lexus-Nexis database (University of
Washington Library). December-3-2002 (Date of Access).
4 Ciao! co.uk: “Love is blind when a computer is involved: Trampus’s verdict on
‘Member Advice on Online Dating.’” April-21-2002.
<http://www.ciao.co.uk/Member_Advice_on_Online_Dating__Review_5270696> May8-2003 (Date of Access).
5 Ciao! co.uk: “Net Nookie: mrsandrewsjk’s verdict on ‘Member Advice on Online
Dating.’” April-15-2002.
<http://www.ciao.co.uk/Member_Advice_on_Online_Dating__Review_5270155> May8-2003 (Date of Access).
6. Morin, Monte. “Suit says date site lured men with fakes.” Spokesman Review
November-28-2002: In Life section, p4.
7,10,16. Johnson, Deborah (2001), computer ethics, 3rd ed, new jersey, Prentice-Hall.
8,9. Jones, TH and Christie MGA (1992) Criminal Law, Edinburgh, Sweet & Maxwell
11, 14Akdeniz et al (2000), The internet Law and Society, Harlow, Pearson
12. BBC News (2005), Iranians arrested for net dating, available from
<htttp://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/-/2/hi/middle_east/2813953.htm> accessed 02 Dec 2006
13. Alai, Valerie (2004), Media ethics and Social Change, Edinbugh, edinburgh
University Press
15. Internet Alliance (2004) Online dating available from
<http://www.internetalliance.org/articles/online_dating.shtml> accessed 04 Dec 2006
17. Bandura, A (1991), 1991). Social cognitive theory of moral thought and action. In
W. M. Kurtines & J. L. Gewirtz (Eds.), Handbook of moral behavior and development
(Vol. 1, pp. 45-103).
Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.