II think most people like the idea that a person's contribution (in whatever context) should be based on its merit and not on what a person's race, gender, age, nationality, religion, hair color, height, weight, etc. is. Yet most of us would probably accept the notion that each of us has biases (conscious or sub-conscious) that influence how we perceive or judge another's contributions.
I think that one of the interesting phenomena associated with the relative anonymity that occurs in this type of communication forum is that we aren't as influenced by potential biases because we can't see or hear the people we are talking with. This allows for a different kind of communication freedom yet also can be restrictive in that you can't see or hear me -- you can't see/hear the non-verbal communications that occur through body language, facial expressions, tone, and voice inflection. My communications are also impacted by my ability (or inability) to express in writing what I otherwise might be able to do more effectively verbally and in person.
There is something I like and something I don't like about not knowing a lot about the person I'm communicating with. Personalizing the experience is a choice that people have -- some here are very open about aspects of their life, and some never provide any personal information. I hope that regardless of what is personally revealed by people that this information would have absolutely no impact on how I would perceive what is written by them. However, if truthful to myself, I know that the more I know (or the more I think I know) about a person the more I filter that knowledge into how I perceive what they are communicating to me. This isn't what I want it to be, but nonetheless it is what happens. As an example, when I know that I am reading a post by a woman or a teenager, there is a filter somewhere in my brain that assesses the post based on perceptions I have about female sports fans or young sports fans. The quality of the post is then (mostly sub-conscously) assessed for how well it fits into my stereotypic views -- I am open to information that belies a stereoptype but unfortunately I am also open to information that reinforces a stereotype. It is a sad but embedded reality of how people (or at least I) organize thoughts. I do believe that as long as I am open to exploring and learning about my own biases and am conscious enough of them to resist having them impact my behavior (especially if it leads to anything discriminatory), that it is generally OK -- though not ideal, as I wish I could be completely unbiased.
I don't think that I will ever be able to judge people solely on the content of their character or the merit of their argument -- because I am influenced to some extent by my perceptions of who the person is, often based on inaccurate data and invalid conclusions. The more we know about the people we communicate with here, the more likely we are to use that information to filter their comments through the own biases and stereotypes.
There is something uniquely pure about knowing very little about those I am communicating with in this blog. Yet at the same time, finding common ground with others in ways that create comfort remains a hallmark principle of community.
Topic: Thread for CBers to debate merits of female CBers wanting to talk to each other (Read 13211 times)