Some false concepts about online interaction:

Another "I came across someone talking about this, and want to disagree with their conclusions" rant. This one is brought to you by someone writing about online relationships. I've distilled their points into a summary of points I've seen from multiple places, because I want to reply to them.

"It's only words on a computer screen. You can't really get to know someone online."

For some people, it may just be words on a screen. For me, however, I'm always aware there's a person behind the other end of the connection - someone with feelings, other commitments, and all the other stuff that life entails. One of the things I always check before any flirting goes too far, or anything else that might have an impact on real life is to find out if they have a partner and if so if that partner's ok with what's going on, and if they're neglecting other stuff they should be doing. (Because in either case, if there's a problem, I'll back off.)

The other - and honestly, the more problematic - issue here is whether you can get to know someone online. I often know a fair bit more about acquaintances online than I do offline. I hang out in places where discussions about favorite foods, movies, trips, and all sorts of other things are fairly commonplace, as well as conversations about their childhood and life so far. Over the course of a few months conversation, I often know quite a bit about them.

But that, of course, involves talking with people about things beyond nice fluffy-lovey-dovey words.

Now, I'm not saying I know *everything* about someone I meet online. Just that I have a good start. There are things that don't carry over online - someone's voice, body language, all sorts of very subtle things like smell and limbic system reactions. But you can still know someone quite well online to start with. Assuming, of course, that someone isn't lying. But people lie in person, too, so it's not like meeting someone offline solves that problem.

The other benefit, of course, of having extended conversations with people is that it gets much easier to pick out the people who might be hiding something important. In one case, the fact that no one had ever met a particular person on an online game I was on, that that person refused to give out any identifying information at all (even to supposed friends who wanted to help with a problem), and that their story was not entirely consistent led people to suspect there was something weird.

(There was: the person in question was male, but presenting himself as female, and insisted on doing so to the point of calling people who had started trying to find out the truth liars. I'm not talking about someone who was legitimately transgender, either - this was someone who'd started portraying himself as female online just to see what it was like, and then didn't handle things well at all when their real life information was questioned.)

However, few people can keep up lying consistently to multiple people over a period of multiple months convincingly - so it's good to keep an eye open for inconsistencies. How someone *responds* to questions about those inconsistiencies is a very telling thing.

"People rationalise that it's ok to flirt, since they don't see anyone being hurt. Thus, all online romances are wrong."

(And yes, I've heard this particular two sentence concept before. That because some people flirt when they shouldn't be, that all online romances are wrong. Does anyone else see the major logic flaw here?)

Now, I can certainly agree that the first statement is sometimes the case. However, this does not mean that everyone who flirts is wrong to do so. Some people are not in relationships otherwise (and therefore, have no partner to harm). Some people are in relationships with agreements that allow flirting or other online activity of that kind under certain circumstances.

My husband and I, for example, have an agreement that online stuff is perfectly fine with both of us, as long as the other person involved is informed of the existing relationship, the fact we *do* have a relationship where either of us might have other partners, but that we have some requirements once something proceeds past a certain point. (Fooling around online is fine as long as everyone's aware of the existence of ongoing partners. If that's going to come offline, then we have agreements about how to handle that.)

No one's getting hurt here, and we're honest and upfront about our situation. Anyone who wants to pursue it has been told clearly what the options are, and what the absolute limits are (including things like the fact that encouraging us to break our promises is a major turn-off.) It might not be what many people do - but we're not hurting one another, breaking any agreements to each other, or anything else. It's a case where it's the specifics that count, not the idea that just because it's online, it's wrong.

"People who fall for people online are often lonely and dysfunctional, and looking for a way to be meeting guys."

Gee. That's so flattering.

Some people find it much easier to find partners online. I know I do. Why?

Well, first off, I'm an introvert by the purest definition. Spending time in groups of people - particularly people I don't know well - wears me out quite quickly. While some people can walk straight into a new group, and have a blast, that's really uncomfortable for me. I do fine with smaller groups - particularly groups focused on a specific task or concept - but the smaller the group, the less likely there are to be people I'll consider as potential partners.

Even if I go by the lowest of my criteria - male, heterosexual, able to enter into a relationship - in a group of 20 mixed-gender people, that might be only 2 or maybe 3 people. If I actually get pickier about it - to the stuff I know I need to make a relationship something I want to work with - I can often quickly rule out those 2-3 people for other reasons (lack of desire for a polyamorous relationship, lack of other stuff in common, we just don't 'click').

If I want a wide potential choice range, I either need to be spending a *lot* of my time in lots of different small groups (something I don't want to do, because it causes imbalance in other areas of my life), or more time in big groups (which wears me out really fast, and I don't meet people well in that situation.) Or I'd need to be very patient and hope someone wanders into my life (which might leave me without companionship for a long time.) None of these, frankly, is terribly appealing to me, when compared to the possibility of meeting people online I have stuff in common with, building a friendship, and then discussing from there.

There's also the other factor - it seems to take me a long time to become attracted to someone romantically. Every one of my romantic partners (all five, in my life) have been people I've known for at least a year (and in a couple of cases, a good bit more than that) before we got involved. It seems to take me about a year to be able to know someone well enough to become attracted, and want to see about further options. Now, you can certainly do this in person, too, but online works well as a way to get to know someone gradually, and yet interact regularly with them. It also gives you an excellent way to see how they interact with others - which is more than a lot of dating situations do.

Another factor is the sheer time issue. I'm one of those very busy people - but part of that busyness is working on personal projects that matter to me at home. If I'm out doing various things a couple of evenings a week , out with friends once or twice a week, that means that to get those things done, I need to be home a few evenings a week. When I'm home, I'm often working on one or more projects, petting the cat, doing laundry, and so on. It's a lot more convenient for me to be doing a lot of my social chat stuff *then* and online, where I can be doing other things as well.

It also means I can talk about a variety of different things of interest to me, rather than having to spend one evening at a social group for one subject, and the next evening talking to people about a different subject. Online, I can do both of those at the same time pretty easily, if I can multitask. If I can't, I can still talk about one for an hour, then go talk about the other for an hour, without any travel time or other distraction.

For some people, online just works better, unless they happen to chance into someone in the course of what they want to do that they're also interested in. If you want to spend all your time in places with people who are potential partners *anyway*, doing it offline might well work. But if you're more interested in doing things you want to do, even though you're not very likely to find a potential partner there (for whatever reason), then being open to other options in meeting people is an excellent idea.

"We get sucked in by the ability to be something we're not."

Well, maybe *you* did - but some people handle this better than others. Like any other potential addiction, the fact that some people can't cope with it for whatever reason is not a reason to condemn the activity. Some people abuse alcohol, tv-watching, food, religion, or many other things - that doesn't make those activities universally bad. It just means some people can't deal with specific activities as well.

It's always appropriate to know your own limits. If you know you have a tendency to get lost in what you tell people online then, yes, perhaps being online in places where you can lie is not a good thing for you to be doing. However, if you enjoy chatting online, but only make up stories in places where that's expected (the vast online gaming community, for example) then that may be a healthy and educational way to learn new things for you - the same way writing a novel, acting in a play, or joining an improvisational acting troupe might be for someone else.

"People who get sucked into online romances neglect their friends, family, and other obligations, and ignore their real life."

Well, yes. Sometimes. But not always. And sometimes, what other people perceive as "neglect" has other reasons.

When I was in college, I was accused of spending all my time online. No - not all of it. I was still active in my college Newman club, participating in orchestra rehearsals, and getting together with other people to do things a couple of other times a week. But I wasn't spending all my time hanging out mindlessly watching TV - and, in fact, wasn't hanging out with people as much as I had been.

Why? I lived across campus from many of them (due to needing to be in a non-smoking and non-carpeted dorm, due to asthma. It wasn't exactly my choice). I'd been repeatedly told that what I was interested in talking about wasn't interesting to them. I'd made multiple requests for "I'd like to do stuff with you guys, but I can't make it over for lunch all the time, so if you decide to do something, send me an email or leave me a voice mail, and I'll appear" got ignored.

(I'd occaisionally get a "Hey, we're about to go do this in five minutes, wanna come?" offer, but always on nights I already had other plans to go do something *else* real life - and my "Oh, gee, I'd love to, but I'm on my way to a rehearsal for X - let me know when you plan something next, please, as I'd love to join you" request didn't get me anywhere.)

So, for a while, I spent more time online - hanging out with people who *did* get back to me if we had to reschedule something, and with the few friends who seemed to really want to have my company enough to let me know when they were free, or when they were getting together to do things. I pulled back from the places I felt I wasn't wanted- and *said* what I was doing, when asked, and I still got accused of "spending all my time online".

Bah. People like that, I don't need in my life, I think.

Now, that isn't to say that it might not be reasonable for people to have concerns about the amount of online time. Someone who's staying up well into the wee hours of the night every night, when they have to get up for work, obviously has behavior that should cause some concern. Someone who ignores their kids or spouse consistently, there's obviously a problem there.

But I think it's a lot more productive to address that as a different issue - that of ignoring needed commitments in a way that is self-destructive than to blame the poor behavior on something that, is, really, just a tool. You might feel annoyed at the TV if your partner started spending all their time watching TV and not interacting with you, or you might be frustrated if your partner spent all their time on another activity outside the home (sports, work, whatever), but would you, in those cases, say that everything having to do with the purported 'reason' was wrong and should be done away with, or would you try and address the problem behavior?

"If we were really healthy, we would have friends online, but we'd also go and do things offline. We'd have contact with our families, do new and interesting things, and we wouldn't need to be online as much. Online is something you only do if you don't have offline options."

(And again, no, I am not artificially conflating these statements. I've seen this particular chain of thought several times.)

I agree with the first statement. I agree with the first half of the second statement. I disagree with the second half, and with the third statement.

Let me go back to the original premise of what I'm saying here: that the people on the other end of the computer screen are Real People. You don't ditch Real People just because something more convenient and attractive comes along. That's nasty. That's being a lousy friend. That's being a lousy *human*

The above statements also imply that what you do online matters *less* than what you do offline. That it's ok to cheat and lie and mess with people's heads and emotions because 'It's Not Real'.

I think that's the furthest thing from the truth. It is *very* real. The fact that you're communicating through text does not remove the realness of people online, nor the fact that they are not toys to be picked up when you're bored and don't have anything better to do, and tossed aside when something 'real' or 'better' comes along.

It does not make it ok to cheat on your partner, to lie, to play head games, or anything else that you'd consider unethical or immoral if you were to do it in person. If you'd think it would be wrong or something you wouldn't want to do offline, don't do it online.

If all you want is something to amuse you when you don't have anything better to do, then fine. Hang out in places where that's acceptable, or drop in somewhere occaisionally. Be certain you don't commit yourself to being someone's friend, to being around for them when *they* need it, not just when you feel like it. I don't think there's anything wrong with that, but *please* consider what you're committing to, and either keep your commitments, or clearly refrain from commitment in the first place. Treat people with respect, not just like throw-away amusements.

The other side of this, of course, comes from the point of view of the person logging on. *You* have responsibilities - basically, don't lie in ways that will hurt people.

If you really want to find out what it's like to be female and you're male, try it out somewhere where long-term conversations won't start. Or, better, try it out on one of the online communities where role-playing is encouraged, and avoid questions about your personal life for a few weeks or a month. It's not that hard to do - and as long as you don't go out of your way to actively mislead people (i.e. don't use the female pronoun about yourself if you're actually male, and identify as male. Or the other way around)

If you're in a monogamous committed relationship, and it's not ok to flirt, then *don't flirt*. If you can't resist the temptation, then go elsewhere online. Do other things. If you're in a relationship where it's ok to flirt, then at least make it clear that you're in a relationship early on - and that you either are willing to consider leaving your partner (if you already were for other reasons) or that you're not. And then keep to that. Y'know, basic mature adult stuff.

"If you really want to meet someone nice, you need to go offline and do it."

Funny. I've got two lovely partners I met online. Lovely men, both of them. They cook. They clean. They give backrubs. They support me when I'm tired and grumpy and stressed. Very nice.

Again, what works for one person might not work for others. Please don't presume to tell other people what might or might not work for them, or make statements that imply that online relationships can't work.

Oddly enough, I've seen some statistics about relationships that begin online, and which result in immigration - there is no difference in the Immigration and Naturalization statistics between relationships which began online (and which only became local after one person immigrated to the US) and those which began locally (say, because one person was working in a foreign country or in school there) as far as the relationship lasting.

I don't have these stats for relationships which are in the same country (and in fact, I don't think they're collected anywhere... the INS already has a lot of the information in place, so it's relatively easy for them to look at numbers) but that certainly seems to suggest that it's not how you meet that makes the difference - but what you make of the relationship once you meet someone, and how upfront you are about yourself and your desires. (People can lie face to face, too, or play all sorts of head games.)

So what's my point?

Online involves real people. And those real people have real feelings. And those real people may have different agreements in their relationships than you have, or not be in a relationship at all, currently. They may prefer to run their life differently from yours.

All of that's ok. If you can't treat people online as real people (doesn't mean you have to *like* them, mind - just treat them the way you'd treat someone who you ran into in real life who you didn't particularly like, if you don't like them.) then maybe you shouldn't be online interacting with strangers. If you know you have problems with flirting when you shouldn't be, or lying about yourself, then deal with those problems or avoid the situations likely to trigger them.

Hanging out online is not an automatic right - it's a gift, given by the people you hang out with, if you're going to have a fun time at it. Abusing that gift is a nasty and selfish thing to do, and if you do it, the online culture may change until those opportunities are no longer available to you, or to anyone else.