Thursday, March 01, 2007
A Rape in cyberspace.
this reading all seemed a bit rediculous at least from the perspective that a physical rape never took place, but what did? I would agree that yes this is a form of harassment but there is no way to prosicute anyone for it. I guess what was most surprising is how seriously the other people on the moo in the story took the whole thing. Keep in mind though that this virtual space was still a place that was at least a little important to those who participated there. What Mr. Bungle did was pretty lame and relitively obscene but in no way physicall damaging. There was the woman mentioned in the article that was a victim and survivor of both physical rape and cyber rape. I can understand why she might have felt "victimized" to some extent from this interaction with Mr. Bungle, but she could have left the moo at any time. No one had sex in real life and to argue that "yes to some extent they did" is like saying that "to some extent i am 30 feet tall". I just think cyber rape could be compaired to being made fun of verbially assulted. Over all I just think that this is an account of just another creep with a computer with a thing for masogany and voodo dolls. Just what we needed another asshole in the world.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
11 comments:
The only problem I see with the cyber rape is that he was using a program to make someone say something. It's one thing to verbally harass someone, but to use their name do say obscene things is different. That's defamation of character (even if it is virtual) and the user should be punished to some extent.
I see it this way, I can go on blogs or other sites and rip on Paul Shovlin all I want (this is just an example) and I'd consider that the freedom of speech, but logging onto blogs with the name Paul Shovlin, or acting as if I am him and saying obscene things is much worse. I'm giving him a bad name. It's like misquoting.
If Mr. Bungle had just come in and started spouting off at the mouth with obscene statements, there would be no article and no big fuss. But he didn't, he used someone else's name to say what he wanted, and that's wrong.
I think scurvy is mischaracterizing this article....Dibbell is not claiming this was a real "rape" and the woman involved did not claim that it was the same thing as a physical assault...for g's sake she said wanted him banned from the site...not arrested.
On the other hand, Dibbell is exploring the lines that we so neatly draw between virtual and real...we'll talk more about that question about whether the mind becomes the body in virtual worlds...Is it so stupid or wrong that we start to ask if words have greater effects than we conceive of most of the time? If not then why be upset at someone like Michael Richards or Mel Gibson?
I was pretty shocked when I was reading this artcle. The things that Mr. Bungle said were obscene and inappropriate and I defintely agree that he should be banned from the site. I found it kind of ridiculous that they were comparing banning him from the site to the death penatly which I don't agree with at all. If people cannot be responisble when they are on sites like this one, then they should not be allowed the privelage of using them.
I agree with everyone who posted on this subject, which might sound a little two-faced of me but it's true. I do think it was a little ridiculous the thing about her crying over this. She must have known logging into what is basically a chatroom that there would be immature college boys. If you go into a chatroom for like 5 seconds you'll see something obscene or wrong, but you can't take it to heart. I agree with hambone because you have to realize that words do mean a lot. And the saying actions speak louder than words might come into play a little here; even though all they read was words, it was the actions virtually performed that made everything so messed up. I think the only way you could punish someone for doing something like this is making them stand in front of their peers and the "victim" and apologize and let her throw a water balloon at him or something. That's all I'd ask if I was the girl, just a little embarrassment and for every one of his friends to know how much of a tool he is. I also agree with lilszabz in that I too was completely blown away by how graphic this article was. Not that I haven't seen all of these words before, but man that dude has some issues.
I think that this incident is good for MOO because before this incident happened “…there were no explicit MOO rules against rape, or against just about anything else…” So, the creators of MOO can learn from this and hopefully will realize that they need to have stricter rules for their users.
I think it was one of the Ashley’s in class (on MOO) that made a good suggestion for people that want to sign up for the MOO. Since anyone with an email address can sign up, people that get kicked off can easily sign back up. Ashley said that people should have to give more information than just their email so it would not be as easy to re-sign up. Good idea.
The issue of the first amendment plays a vital role in this case. Freedom of speech, expression, and all that other stuff is probably one of the most significant rights in our country. The internet, specifically the MOO in this situation, is the ultimate means of expressing one’s opinions, thoughts, beliefs, etc. However, it obviously can be offensive and I think that this case is taken to the extreme. It involves virtual harassment and “rape” and to my knowledge we have yet to deal with an incident like this. It will be interesting to see what happens with circumstances like this one in the future.
Unfortunately when you join a virtual community where you meet and befriend new people, you begin to feel comfortable in this new community. You believe it to be your own. I like how Shovlin used the example of "our place" at OU, like a bar you and your friends often go to. When you feel like you have a place within this environment, its upsetting when someone who is offensive joins. In this article, women are felt sexually assaulted online by Mr. Bungle, a man who was manipulating objects in the MOO to make women "feel" as if they were in fact engaging in activity they were not comfortable with.
What should be the consquences for someone who is responsible for this type of "virtual rape"? Obviously if you have the time and wish to figure out new ways to take advantages of people online, you are most likely an internet "pro". Can we take away their online privelegdes? Although Mr. Bungle did not physically rape another person, he absolutely took advantage of them virtually and should be punished accordingly.
Wow people can be sick. I feel that of course this person should be punished in some way, whether it be that he is simply banned from using this site, or if he has to face further consequences then alright, although I think that would be a tough case.
This woman was obviously exploited, and it would probably make me feel violated to some extent, if not just simply angry as all hell. If you feel that online representations portray ourselves, then I think you should feel pretty strongly about something like this that violates who you are, right? I am not too involved on sites such as these, but I think I would want this man punished for making me feel at least somewhat unsafe in what should be considered a "safe place".
I do not believe it is ridiculous at all to feel fully taken advantage of and find yourself out in the cold in yet another misrepresentation of ourselves when this Mr. Bungle uses other people's names and says vulgar things. I would agree it would be difficult to being to court or something, but there has to be an example set that people cannot treat others this way, whether it is online or not.
At first I was in agreement with most of the class and didn't really understand why the people in the Moo were so upset about what happened. It's not like Mr. Bungle actually raped anyone, and words can't really hurt anyone... or can they? As I said in class I think that because you can not physically harm someone while online, mental and emotional harm is so much more important. The women on the Moo were most definitely scarred from their interactions with Mr. Bungle so I guess I can see why they made such a big deal about it. I don't think there is a good solution for the problem though.. that is the trouble with online communities.
Was I the only one who thought this was funny? The author of this article definately did a good job of making the "rape" seem evil and heinous, but if it was me in the moo while it was happening I would have been cracking up. It may be dirty and in poor taste, but he didn't harm anyone. If your name was emoting that you were shoving something up your ass and you didn't think it was funny, you could close the program or get up from your computer. This author is taking this way too seriously, although they did an excellent job of composing this as a horror story. After reading the begginning I thought that the "rape" was occuring visually on screen like it would on Second Life, but when I realized it was just a Moo, the story totally lost its force. Scurvy said that it's prettymuch like verbally abusing someone and that's exactly it. I've probably heard worse trash-talk on X-box live.
There were many conflicting thoughts that I had after reading this article. The first thing is that I was disturbed because it was really detailed and descriptive. Then I was surprised because all I could think to myself was why this woman would stay online talking to someone that potentially "hurt her" in either a physical or mental way. Then I realized that these people go into these chatrooms because they feel comfortable in doing so, just as we would going shopping or to a certain place of our own.
I don't necessarily think that this was a ridiculous article because there is something wrong with the situation. I do think that something needs to be done to protect people from other harmful people whether it be a banning or whatever they call it.
I also do not think that this is the same as a physical rape because I think more harm is done that way, and I think other people would agree. I do believe this left the woman in distress and she should not have gone through that. Interesting article. It raises a lot of potential questions.
I thought this article was really creepy. To think someone would actually want to try to rape someone in cyberspace is pretty pathetic. I do feel it was harassment however anyone who was raped in the virtual world has the power to fight back or even ignore the rapist. They are lucky enough to be able to walk away and not let it effect them. I almost feel it is a little disrespectful to people who have experienced being raped in the real world even comparing the two. For someone who can just sign offline when a person is harrarsing them and wanting something to be done about it compeletly disrepectful to those who have actually been raped and threatend with a gun or a knife. They are completely two different things and have nothing to do with eachother in my opinion.
Post a Comment