In exploring the work of Second Life and creating an avatar to live in-world, a few questions arise about gender and even gender benders.

In Ross Horsley’s “Masculinities on the Web”, author Sherry Turkle discusses that allowing people to create an avatar of the opposite sex allows a person to reflect on what ideas regarding gender shape our expectations.  When roaming in Second Life, it became apparent that females (which is the avatar I created) are definitely more at risk to be seen as not only inferior but also frequently approached with inappropriate or bizarre questions.

Although I have never created a male avatar for SL, I believe those people that blur gender lines do have to bring forth some type of reflection in order to participate in the game.  Those who choose to be the opposite sex in world must recall what their ideas and expectations of that gender so they can portray them while playing.  Never having been male, in order for me to play as a male, I would have to call on how I think males should act.

In some cases, the role that we take on may be transparent.  I am not sure how well I could sell the fact that I am a male in world; I think some of my actions would give away the fact that I am a female.  In some cases, I think even men who create male avatars heighten their masculinity in world.  Often you see men with swords, or wearing hyper-masculine clothing.

This again makes one reflect on the ideas that make up our views of each gender.  In the same respect, I have never come across a woman in SL that was unattractive.  I think that also feeds into the way women think as well. Women have an ideal to be very feminine and attractive.  So switching gender does allow for each of us to see how the other half, or rather how we think the other half lives.

Mark Stephen Meadows embraces the virtual world and dissects it through a case-study-esque narration the intricacies of avatars and the idiosyncrasies of their creators in I, Avatar. Here’s my take on Meadow’s avatar controlled world.

“What it is: Part One”

I will not pretend to be a veteran in virtual worlds. I played The Sims for the first time a few days ago.  I will say in creating my avatar in Sims it became apparent that your avatar does control your interactions as Meadows stated.

 An avatar can be a representation of yourself or the complete opposite (which I think is more often than not the case). In the case of the Sims, if you create an avatar that tends to be shy, their interactions are based on personality, just like a “real” person.  If you want your avatar to be social and make connections, you wouldn’t create someone who is shy.  I think the very basis of how you want to play or the game or simulation so to speak begins when you create and personalize your avatar.  I think that Meadows statistics on avatar users also displays it takes a certain skill set and desire to create avatars.  As the avatar becomes more difficult to develop, the number of users creating them decreases; I would fall in the simplest avatar group.

“What it is: Part Two”

I think in games like Second Life you can create scenarios and collaborate with others to stir the pot, cause a ruckus, or keep the peace.  If avatars are, as Meadows says, living in a fictional space but are still “keeping it real,” then the avatar becomes a direct reflection of not only the user, but of our culture.  Right now there are too many realities shows on television to count, we want to see and create real worlds that are just real enough.  If they were actually real, then they wouldn’t be entertaining.  After all isn’t that why we do most things, even create an avatar, for the entertainment?

“What it is: Part Three”

In creating an avatar, I think the perspective of the avatar makes all the difference.  In creating an avatar for Sims, I was careful to make sure I like the appearance of the family I was creating.  I was looking on the avatar from afar (I don’t believe even from a second person standpoint).  I have the ability to zoom far away from the scene that my avatar isn’t even present on the screen.  So, if I have to look at the avatars I create, I want them to look a certain way.  In games where there is a first-person point of view as Meadows describes, I am not necessarily trying to judge how I see my avatar but how others will see me.  I never actually look at myself in this view, so in my creation, others impression of me will have a bigger impact.

When discussing viewpoint, I think of two things. First, books and literature; in first person, who are wholly involved in a work, while other points of view give you a more objective and removed feeling.  The same goes for virtual worlds. If you are the person, you are more involved.

I also think of those racing games in arcades where you get a birds-eye view of your car or are put in the driver’s seat. I always chose birds-eye, I think it gives you more perspective on a lot of things.

“What it is: Part Four”

Meadows presents the idea that much of the internet is an avatar.  I think many of the way users function online is through an avatar base.  Whether it’s this blog with a picture of a ship’s wheel as my avatar, or my screen name on AIM, I function under the auspices of an avatar.  To that degree, email addresses we create and sign-in names to our favorite recipe website can all be avatars. Many people like the protection of the avatar in chat rooms or in virtual worlds; you don’t have to really be yourself.  So for some what a relief, for others what a nightmare; this world of avatars has the potential to consume us until the line between fiction and fact, virtual and actual, is even more blurred than Meadows describes.

In exploring the structure of a traditional classroom setting, there is room to incorporate advancing technology and push barriers.  But what if a class could actually revolutionize learning as we know it?

I recently began reading a book called The Majic Bus: An American Odyssey, by Douglas Brinkley. Published in 1993 the book describes the 6 week course Professor Brinkley created that allowed students to visit 30 states and 10 national parks while on board a sleeper bus.  The class would also read 12 novels by great American authors and experience many of the wonders and famous locations that exist in the United States.  Who wouldn’t want to be part of that class? It’s always better to see and experience than simply discuss.

I think Brinkley’s creative idea for a non-traditional class sparked many other professors and teachers to take a look at their own classes and maybe even “spice” them up a little bit.  I think Brinkley’s rolling classroom could be taken a step further to meet the growing arena of social media. Social media does not have to stop at the classroom door; just as Brinkley showed there are many ways to learn.

If a class like that described and logged in The Majic Bus were to take place now, specifically at McDaniel, the college could utilize its connection to our sister campus in Budapest.  Students here could tour the U.S., while students there could tour Hungary and the surrounding countries.  The book list could be split between the two, 6 famous American works and 6 famous from Hungary and surrounding European countries.

Then the fun part.  Students from each class could meet in a virtual world where they could interact and discuss their experiences with their neighbors across the globe having similar experiences in their own country. The students’ avatars could meet over coffee in a virtual cafe and discuss how the books they have read really display their country’s characteristics.  Students could discuss their differing cultures in a park or chat about seeing a historic landmark for the first time in a laundromat.  It doesn’t matter that the students are an ocean apart, the virtual world allows them to make connections to other students while still discovering their own heritage.

Students would also blog about their personal experiences in each class.  The blog almost serves as the type of travel log Brinkley created.  The point is we don’t realize how similar people are and how we share many of the same experiences no matter what our culture is. A virtual world creates an even playing field.  Sometimes we need to get out of the classroom to understand why we are learning the material in the classroom in the first place.

A little more info on the book, check it out.

Wikipedia-a free encyclopedia you can edit.

On first glance, Internet sites such as Wikipedia and TWiki seem like the easiest and fastest way to find answers to most any question.  However, because of the very nature of wiki sites, the content of some subjects is questionable at best.

As Wikipedia states on its own site, it is a collaborative site from volunteers around the world; anyone can edit its content.  It is also one of the most used references on the web today. But how much of the information can we actually trust?

Recently, I went online to look up the definition of the word “ombudsman.” I immediately chose Wikipedia from the search list because it gave the simplest answer possible.  A few of my friends and I thought it would be funny to see if we could actually edit something on the page. So, I edited a portion adding, “The first ombudsman in Australia was a kangaroo.” Not very funny, I know.  But it was a laugh to refresh the page and see the sentence still there.

After almost two weeks, the sentence finally disappeared.  So in lies the problem; students always ask why Wikipedia cannot be used as a source in a research paper. The answer, as I displayed, is the content is a jump start but not always the most reliable source. If I can change it anyone can.

TWiki-another online information source

A wiki project like TWiki, although a unique way to share knowledge on common interests and communicate on the web, also has some drawbacks.  Perhaps not as user friendly for searching like Wikipedia and providing less information and a narrower range of topics, TWiki is not necessarily the best place to find a quick answer.  I struggled to understand how the site even worked and where to begin my search.

However, in order to edit you had to become a member with a username and password, which is not required by Wikipedia. So maybe the content is slightly more reliable because those of us that want to “play around” won’t take the time to go through the registration process. However, Wikipedia does try to ensure its content is accurate by asking for a list of resources to verify the information provided for each entry. Some entries cannot be edited at all.

Overall, instant gratification for nagging questions or quick research is most easily and efficiently met by Wikipedia.  I wouldn’t necessarily put money on the information, but it usually leads me in the right direction.

Welcome to WordPress.com. This is your first post. Edit or delete it and start blogging!