Dines68.qxd 7/26/02 12:46 PM Page 696

68

DATING ON THE NET Teens and the Rise of “Pure” Relationships

◆ Lynn Schofield Clark

◆ Studying Teens and the Internet

. . . This study on dating and the Internet emerged out of a broader qualitative study on the role of media technologies in the domestic context of the household.1 Over the course of a year, I conducted a series of inter- views and observations with 15 families and two focus groups, devoting between 4 and much more than 30 hours of conversation, observation, or both to each family. A total of 47 teens and 26 of their family members were included in the interviews, groups, and observations. An additional six families (14 teens) were interviewed by an associate researcher on the project, who has corroborated my findings. From the families interviewed, three teenagers were selected for the further study of Internet use: Elizabeth, a 15-year-old white female from a lower-income single-parent household; Jake, a 17-year-old white male

NOTE: From CyberSociety 2.0: Revisiting Computer-Mediated Communication and Community, edited by Steven G. Jones, 1998, Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Copyright © 1998 by Sage Publications, Inc. Reprinted by permission of Sage Publications, Inc.

696 ◆ Dines68.qxd 7/26/02 12:46 PM Page 697

Dating on the Net ◆ 697

from a middle-income blended (two-parent, the teen’s chat room participation altogether. second marriage) household; and Michael, Despite the frequent warnings concerning a 15-year-old African American male from the dangers facing teens on the Internet, a lower-income single-parent household. parents were largely unaware of the content These individuals were chosen because they of the chat rooms; the limits were set based represented “information-rich cases,” in on what in some cases were alarmingly high that I expected that they would yield find- bills from their service providers.2 ings that would contrast from expectations Much like the adults on the Net dis- and from each other due to their differing cussed by Rheingold (1991) and others, social, economic, and political positions teens seemed to be drawn to Internet chat within the wider culture (Yin, 1994, rooms by the promise of fantasy and fun. pp. 45-46). . . . I also selected them for their As Kramarae (1995) noted in her critique of ability to be thoughtful, articulate, and the overwhelmingly male population in responsible, as I wanted to train them to cyberspace, the males far outnumbered the serve as leaders of what I have called peer- females in teen chat rooms as well. Yet led discussion groups, focus groups that there were also differences between the were led and participated in solely by teens. communications between teens and those I This format was adopted as a means to witnessed on the adult chat lines. Perhaps more closely observe how teenagers most obvious was the “age and sex check,” “really” talk about these issues when an the frequent request that resulted in the adult is not present. . . . sharing of ages and genders among partici- Whereas my research primarily is based pants, often serving as a precursor for those on these interviews and observations in of similar ages to break off into a separate “real life,” I supplemented the knowledge chat room of only two persons, which the gained through these methods by “lurking” girls, at least, agreed constituted an in teen chat rooms. Elizabeth also allowed “Internet ‘date.’” . . . Sometimes these ini- me to read many of the e-mail exchanges tial conversations between two teens would she had had with her online male friends. last for several hours. The topics of conver- Although many of the teens discussed sation mirrored those one might hear at a using the Net for school-related research, teen party. Internet dating, much like the the teens in my study primarily used the Net practice’s counterpart in “real life,” exists to communicate with other young people in within a specific environment that in many the teen chat rooms of Microsoft Network, ways, not surprisingly, shares similarities America Online, and the teen lobby of with the other social contexts in which Yahoo! These “socially produced spaces” teens find themselves. Thus, we turn to a constitute a form of “synchronistic commu- discussion of the environment of teen chat nication,” in that the posts are ephemeral rooms within which (or out of which) and immediate (Baym, 1995; Jones, 1995). Internet dating occurs, beginning with a They are seen by all those in the chat room review of the practice in its historical context. at the same time, and answers to various queries posted to the chat room often over- lap, creating a cacophony of conversation. ◆ Most of the teens with whom I spoke had Teenagers and Dating: experienced similar periods of intense A Brief History experimentation in the chat rooms, some- times devoting more than 4 hours a day to online chats for a period of several weeks or Teenage “dating”—the casual romantic even months. In most cases, however, this interactions between males and females (or, period was followed by parent sanctioning, even more recently, between persons of which either severely limited or discontinued the same gender)—is a relatively recent Dines68.qxd 7/26/02 12:46 PM Page 698

698 ◆ The Internet

phenomenon. Historians argue that it from the establishment of the practice. He emerged among middle-class teens in the wrote, “Before dating, parents had tended 1920s during a time of gender role to construe strictly girls’ obligation to enter upheaval (Bailey, 1988). With the rise of marriage untainted by even a hint of scan- both compulsory education and restrictive dal, and they supervised courting accord- child labor laws during this era, teens of ingly, limiting both its occasion and the set immigrant and farm families who once had of eligibles.” As parents were more con- been expected to work, as well as teens cerned with their daughters’ reputations from more privileged classes, were now sent than their sons’, “girls were far more con- to school. Education was cemented into the strained by parental oversight” (Modell, American teen experience, affording 1989, p. 95). Whereas dating in the early increased public opportunities for young part of the [last] century still required the people to interact with one another under male to take initiative, it shifted control minimal supervision by their parents. over the girls’ interactions—and by exten- The rise of the “dance craze” in the sion, her sexuality—from her parents to her 1920s also has been linked to the emer- peers. It thus served as a potent aspect of gence of the practice of “dating” (Modell, youth rebellion against parents and their 1989). Whereas some teens in the decade traditional ways. Whereas girls of this gen- before had attended community dances that eration would not be considered sexually were sponsored by neighborhoods or other liberated by today’s standards, dating social clubs (and hence had fairly strict enabled girls to play a more active role in social restraints that limited the “tendency constructing and maintaining heterosexual to overstep moral rules”), it was the open- interaction through informal rules of con- ing of a dance “palace” in New York City duct. Dating required teen boys to negotiate in 1911 that ushered in new practices sur- with teen girls and their peers directly, rounding dancing and dating (Modell, rather than through their families. To a sig- 1989, p. 71). The large dance halls that sub- nificant extent, dating shifted the approval sequently sprang up in urban areas made and sanctioning of romantic relationships dancing with relative strangers an accessible from parents to peers. and intriguing new option for teens. The Dating then, as now, consisted of going dance style of the period, as it moved away to movies, dances, or restaurants. As such, from formal steps and toward increased dating, and by extension romance, quickly free expression and physical contact, came to be linked with leisure and con- encouraged the establishment of casual het- sumption, as Illouz (1997) argued. erosexual relationships in a way not previ- Moreover, as the rising consumerism of this ously seen. era encouraged immediate gratification, During the same era, film houses multi- young people began to think of self-denial plied throughout urban as well as rural for its own sake as old-fashioned, seeking in areas, and weekly attendance at motion pic- dancing and dating some fulfillment of the tures increased dramatically. The darkened sexual tensions of adolescence (Fass, 1977). theater and the heightened emotions film Whereas chaperoning and “calling” were evoked offered further opportunities for steadily replaced among middle-class teens physical closeness. Whereas films often by the practice of dating, however, those were attended by groups of teens, they teens of all races with less means were less quickly became vehicles for the exploration likely to date. Part of this is due to the fact of exclusive intergender relations as well that these teens were usually encouraged to (Blumer, 1933). lighten the family’s financial obligations Modell (1989) credited middle-class girls either by seeking employment or marrying. of this era with actually initiating the prac- By the middle of the century, however, tice of dating, as they had the most to gain in part due to the popular romanticized Dines68.qxd 7/26/02 12:46 PM Page 699

Dating on the Net ◆ 699

narratives of the practice in film, television, tionships with boys and was even “dating and magazines, “dating” became an inte- four guys at once.” “Usually I act a lot gral part of the teen experience in the more aggressive when I’m on the Internet,” United States. she stated. “I just express my feelings a lot Since the cultural shifts and sexual revo- more in the chat rooms and stuff, so if lutions of the 1960s, however, dating as a somebody talks about something that I teenage institution has been in decline. don’t like, then I’ll say it. And I would Ironically, as Modell (1989) pointed out, probably never do that in class, in school dating, which originally caught on as a and everything.” As Reid has written of the form of rebellion from establishment and Net experience in general, “Users are able traditional values, “had moved from a to express and experiment with aspects of ‘thrill’-based innovation half a century their personality that social inhibition before to a somewhat fading bastion of would generally encourage them to sup- essentially ‘traditional’ marriage values” by press” (Reid, 1991, cited in Baym, 1995, the 1960s (p. 303). Today, teens use the p. 143). This suggests that girls may use the term “dating” in a somewhat bemused verbal skills they might otherwise suppress way, often with self-conscious ironic refer- to parlay themselves into a stronger posi- ence to the 1950s version of the practice. tion in relationship to their male counter- Whereas they still go out on dates, these parts, thereby assuming more authority in occasions are less fraught with specific the construction of the heterosexual rela- expectations. They are less frequently tionship. This was illustrated in one of the planned in advance, for example, and there peer-led discussion group’s conversations is also less compulsion to report on the about sexual behaviors on the Net: experience to one’s peers. “Dating” has become much more idiosyncratic, with less Elizabeth: The only thing I didn’t like about reference to the external peer group and those guys [two “brothers” she more relation to the self-gratifications and was dating simultaneously] pleasures of the individuals involved. This was that they liked sex just a is part of a larger turn toward issues of self- little bit too much. reflexivity and identity as central aspects of Vickie: Cybersex? relationships, as I will show. Lisa: Kinky? Elizabeth: They liked sex, it was scary. ◆ Cyberdating Relationship They e-mailed me a message as Emancipatory that like, had a lot to do with sex, and you know, we did- n’t—I didn’t have my own Cyberdating’s potential to limit emotional screen name or e-mail address, pain in relationships seems particularly so it was like, oh my God! appealing for teen girls. Indeed, the girls in [Either her mother or brother, my study were, on the whole, much more who share her account, could enthusiastic about the possibilities afforded have read it] So I like deleted it to Net dating than the boys of the same age. before I even read it. And when “I’m not too popular with the guys,” 15- I was talking with them later, year-old Elizabeth explained to me, noting they’re all, “did you get my that Net relationships held less potential for message?” And I’m all, “uh, the pain of rejection. On the Internet, no. Yes, I did, but I didn’t have employing her excellent skills in verbal a chance to read it. My brother articulation and humor, she seemed to have tried to read it, so I deleted it no difficulty meeting and developing rela- before I could read it, I’m Dines68.qxd 7/26/02 12:46 PM Page 700

700 ◆ The Internet

sorry.” Yeah—right! [the girls empowered through the power of all laugh]. But you know I self-presentation. never even told those guys I Interestingly, both Michael and Jake was getting off the Internet state that they dislike it when girls lie about when I did. So I just kinda like, their looks in the chat rooms. As Jake said, disappeared. Jake: You can kinda like tell [if Betsi: How long do you think they they’re lying, because of] were talking, thinking you how they’re putting it and were there? all. Sometimes they get too Vickie: They’re like, sitting there writ- extreme with their lying. ing all these messages to you, You’re like, “whatever.” and you’re gone. Interviewer: So that’s kind of a turnoff, Elizabeth: Well, I got off the Internet, my then, when you can tell that mom canceled the thing [the they’re lying? AOL account], and I never told Jake: Yeah. “Bye.” And then go them that I was gonna cancel. back into the chat room. In this situation, unwanted sexual advances Michael noted that looks are less important were not only rebuffed but resulted in on the Net than they are in real life. Elizabeth’s creation of a potentially embar- rassing situation for the boys as they may Interviewer: So what is the difference, do have found themselves talking (or mastur- you think, between meeting bating?) without an audience. Further, the someone in the chat room boys were objectified as the story became a and dating somebody in shared experience of female triumph among person? the girlfriends. To further strengthen their position in Michael: Well, when you’re dating the dating interaction, several teen girls somebody and it seems like, reported that they adopt new physical per- you’re more looking at them, sonae, describing their looks in such a way but when you’re like, chat- as to appear more attractive to the males. ting to them, you can’t see This not only fulfills the function of avoid- them, but you can get that ing potential pain and rejection but also trust going with the person, neutralizes some of the power aspects of the and you can really get to heterosexist system in which beautiful girls know them before you see are given more attention and more social them. And if you know ’em opportunities (Brown & Gilligan, 1992). If before you see them, you’ll everyone constructs their appearance in like, even if they don’t look accord with the imagined “ideal,” after all, physically attractive to you, no one can be judged more or less desirable you’ll still like them because based solely on appearances. Thus in effect, you know them and you boys lose some of their power as one of the have a lot in common. primary tools of the evaluation of desirabil- ity is removed from the equation. It would When he learned that one of the girls with appear that in these relationships, it is no whom he was chatting had lied about her longer wholly a matter of the men as con- looks, Michael noted that he did not aban- sumers and women as consumed, as has don the relationship because he had not been argued in less interactive contexts entered it with romantic intent based on (see, e.g., Kramarae, 1995). Girls feel looks: Dines68.qxd 7/26/02 12:46 PM Page 701

Dating on the Net ◆ 701

Michael: Okay, I ask them [girls he’s experience in “real life.” For example, let us met in chat rooms] to return to the consideration of the fact that describe themselves, and girls change their appearances to achieve some of them, they lie. Like more social power. In this action, teen girls one girl, she said she was are not redefining standards of acceptability 5’5”, 130 some pounds, I for- based on beauty but are using the Net to got, and I went on her Web actively construct what they believe is a page, and she was pretty big. more socially acceptable version of them- [laughs.] So I asked her why selves. Each of the teen discussion groups she lied, she was like, “I was expressed agreement in the fact that “on the scared you wouldn’t like Internet, they [persons of the opposite sex] me.” But I talk to her still, cannot see you.” Whereas the lack of phys- though . . . ical presence undoubtedly lowers inhibi- tions as Kiesler and colleagues argued, the Interviewer: Have you ever, when people fact that each group mentioned this when have said what they looked contrasting dating on the Internet to dating like, decided that you didn’t in “real life” demonstrates the importance like them? of visual appearance in the currency of pop- Michael: No. Mostly, when I go on the ularity and hence one’s desirability as a Web, I’m looking for friends, “date” (Kiesler, Siegel, & McGuire, 1984). so it really doesn’t matter Not surprisingly, given the opportunities what they look like. afforded on the Net, girls are very con- scious of the online presentations of them- Thus, even though boys may dislike the selves. Elizabeth notes, for example, changing of looks, they are still able to find “Usually I describe myself skinnier or taller. online relationships with girls satisfying. Skinnier and taller, with longer hair, and a Instead of being under pressure by their lighter color blond, usually.” In this way, peers to pair with the “right” girls whose Elizabeth’s employment of the technology looks approximate the ideal, the Internet is in keeping with social conventions con- allows for more egalitarian exchange freed cerning gender roles. She was not interested from most of the restraint of peer approval. in meeting the boys with whom she con- Indeed, several of the teens noted that what versed, as this might undermine her attrac- begins as somewhat romantic or titillating tive and aggressive online persona. In fact, Internet exchanges often grows into posi- when one of the male friends suggested that tive, ongoing relationships with members of they talk on the phone, she deliberately the opposite sex. This suggests some hope kept her phone line busy during the for the Net’s ability to contribute to posi- appointed time so that he would not be able tive teen communities both in cyberspace to get through. She said that they did not and beyond. Also, because physical contact “talk” again online after that, something is (usually) impossible in a Net relationship, she seemed to have no regrets about, even young people may find that they are able to though she reported that the relationship communicate with one another free from had been fairly intimate before that time. the social and peer pressures toward She also noted that although she had never expressed sexuality. “met” anyone online from her own school, Yet, whereas this might suggest a depth she had decided to terminate one relation- of relationship is possible, my research ship owing to the fact that the boy attended actually affirmed that the opposite is much a neighboring school: more common. This is not surprising, as the environment of teen chat rooms in many We started comparing notes about who ways mirrors the social restraints teens we knew in each other’s schools. But I Dines68.qxd 7/26/02 12:46 PM Page 702

702 ◆ The Internet

didn’t want to meet him, or someone for cybersex were sanctioned through from my own school, because then what prolonged “silences” (in which the on- if I knew who he was in person and he screen dialogue was halted) followed by said something mean about me, I’d be statements such as, “Whoa” or even like, hurt. “watch the language.” There were also comments of mockery directed at the “Dates” with faceless and voiceless boys overzealous pursuer, such as the comment from faraway places held no such possible following an age and sex check: “ha ha consequences. The fact that Elizabeth RYAN, all 2 young 4 you!” On the whole, avoided rejection in “real” relationships the teens seemed much less comfortable and still sensed a need to censure her ideas expressing their sexual desires and fantasies when not online further demonstrates in the larger group of a teen chat room than that the power afforded through self- the adults did in their counterpart rooms, construction on the Net does not translate although there were suggestive screen into changed gender roles and expectations names adopted by the teens, such as in the social world beyond cyberspace. “Tigerlover,” or the more explicit Consistent with the findings of Rakow and “Rydher69her.” Navarro in their study of the introduction Just as in “real life,” teens in chat rooms of cellular phones, therefore, we must con- seem to be more vocal than their adult coun- clude that the possibility that new commu- terparts in policing the boundaries of race nication technologies might subvert social and sex. . . .Teens are more overtly critical systems is limited (Rakow & Navarro, of homosexuality and use derogatory terms 1993; see also Rakow, 1988). Indeed, there to police the boundaries of heterosexuality is evidence of much more that is socially and to place themselves safely within its reproduced into the chat rooms from the realm. In his analysis of the heterosexist cul- environment of “real life.” ture of adolescent schooling, Friend (1993) has observed, “a systematic set of institu- tional and cultural arrangements exist that ◆ Border Patrol: The reward and privilege people for being or appearing to be heterosexual, and establish Policing of Gender potential punishments or lack of privilege and Taboo Relationships for being or appearing to be homosexual” (p. 210). Friend pointed to textbooks that assume a heterosexual norm and teachers The content of teen chat rooms on the reluctant to discuss homosexuality alto- whole appears to be much tamer than many gether as ways in which heterosexism is of the adult chat rooms.3 Whereas adults reinforced through silencing. Heterosexist are explicit about their desires, as Seabrook ideas extend beyond the classroom to the (1997) has illustrated, teens are much more adolescents’ homes and are reinforced in the reserved and, not surprisingly, less creative media through texts that assume the norm verbally. Much like the furtive illicit activi- of heterosexuality. Being labeled a homo- ties of the proverbial backseat, teens were sexual or lesbian by one’s peers, regardless reluctant to speak of their sexual experi- of the reason, then, has real material conse- mentation, and what happened in the “pri- quences: Loss of friendships, marginaliza- vate” two-person chat sessions was not up tion, and physical violence may result. Thus for discussion in the more public chat rooms. teens, both heterosexual and homosexual, Sex was an exciting but also heavily have a great investment in maintaining a policed topic in the teen chat rooms. On “straight” identity in the context of public several occasions in teen chat rooms, in schools and constantly seek to assert their het- fact, persons who issued explicit invitations erosexuality. Teen chat rooms, along with Dines68.qxd 7/26/02 12:46 PM Page 703

Dating on the Net ◆ 703

other locations in which teen discussions relations, with results potentially as occur, serve as platforms on which young far-reaching as those initiated during that people may assert their alignment with the time period. I would like to suggest that the dominant ideology of heterosexuality as a relationships online are characteristically means of affirming that they are accepted different along both physical and emotional and acceptable among their peers. One can lines. The physical hazards of relationships, therefore imagine the therapeutic and liber- at least in terms of consensual premarital ating potential of gay and lesbian teen chat sex, were limited more than 30 years ago rooms for young persons. I have not ana- with the introduction of “the pill” and the lyzed these chat rooms here because among consequent rise in acceptability of other the teens in my study, experiences in these forms of birth control to avoid pregnancy locations were not discussed except in and sexually transmitted diseases. It is instances in which the speaker was asserting almost too obvious to state that the Net his or her own heterosexuality. For instance, introduces disembodied relations, thereby mention of gay and lesbian chat rooms sur- limiting physical contact between most faced in the discussion groups when the peer teens. After all, even if they had wanted to leaders asked them, “which is the worst chat meet their Net romance in person, the chal- room to meet boys or girls?” In each group lenges of distance and a lack of transporta- someone answered, “The gay [or lesbian] tion or resources limit this to a significant lounge,” followed by raucous laughter. . . degree among teens. Net relationships, The norm of interaction in teen chat therefore, operate in tandem with or as ver- rooms, therefore, to extend the earlier argu- bal “practice” for the actual events in “real ment, is of heterosexual dyads between two life” rather than eliminating or restructur- persons of the opposite sex and approxi- ing the sexual mores that preceded them. mately the same age who did not know one Yet in the contemporary situation, “Internet another in other contexts. This of course dating” emerges as an alluring option for echoes the norms of romantic interaction intimate hetero- and homosexual experi- occurring in the high school. Yet chat room mentation that holds the possibility of and follow-up e-mail experiences have decreasing the potential emotional hazards afforded teen participants an opportunity of intimate relations. to experiment with heterosexual relation- Someone from an older generation might ships in ways that are rather different from, wonder why teens would feel that dating is and in certain ways less risky than, those an emotional minefield to be navigated occurring in their junior high and high carefully. After all, those older than teens schools. Even with their limits in terms of might look back on the youthful dating overturning gendered hierarchies, therefore, scene as carefree. Yet dating, like other cul- these relationships suggest changes that are tural institutions, must be considered in occurring in the adolescent interactions and context. Borrowing the term from Ulrich expectations between males and females. Beck, Giddens referred to the current situa- tion as a “risk society” (Beck, 1986, cited in Giddens, 1991). Giddens noted that this ◆ Dating and the implies more than the increased exposure to “Pure Relationship” new forms of danger: in a “Risk” Society To accept risk as risk, an orientation which is more or less forced on us by the abstract systems of modernity, is to Much like the dance halls 70 years earlier, acknowledge that no aspects of our activ- today’s cyberculture affords teenagers new ities follow a predestined course, and all opportunities to experiment with gender are open to contingent happenings. . . . Dines68.qxd 7/26/02 12:46 PM Page 704

704 ◆ The Internet

Living in the “risk society” means living [Pure relationships] offer the opportunity with a calculative attitude to the open for the development of trust based on possibilities of action, positive and nega- voluntary commitments and an intensi- tive, with which, as individuals and glob- fied intimacy. Where achieved and rela- ally, we are confronted in a continuous tively secure, such trust is psychologically way in our contemporary social exis- stabilizing, because of the strong connec- tence. (p. 28) tions between basic trust and the relia- bility of the caretaking figures. (p. 186) As a part of their developmental process, therefore, teens must garner the skills . . . The “pure” relationship, Giddens necessary to envision various possible out- argued, is justified not in reference to one’s comes to their actions. Even as this has kinship or other social ties but in reference occurred, the decline of the authority of to romantic love. Indeed, it is considered adult institutions throughout culture in “pure” because it is no longer constituted general has left young people with more within the social context of kin and com- autonomy and hence more authority over munity. Persons are no longer constrained their own behavior. Moreover, with the rise in their selection of romantic partners by of part-time employment hours, young the social mores of their families or com- people themselves now have greater control munities. Instead, relationships are sought over resources (financial and educational) out and maintained solely for the gratifica- that allow them to choose the timing of the tions they provide to the persons involved. events in their own life course to a greater Therefore, these relationships of modernity, extent than in previous generations. This Giddens argued, are always organized in combination of factors results in a strik- relation to the reflexive self who asks, “how ingly different approach to the future than is this relationship fulfilling to me?” With the concept of one’s “fate,” which teens of the lowering of sexual inhibitions through earlier generations had been taught to the social transformations of the last four accept, even if implicitly. Perhaps in the decades, sex has come to be more closely past teens felt that society held a specific aligned with contemporary concepts of inti- place for them and their task was simply to macy and even identity and thus is a key find out what that was by undergoing an aspect of the “pure” relationship. . . . “identity crisis” of some kind, as Erickson The participants in the relations experi- (1968) postulated. Instead, with the rise of ence a satisfaction in relationships that have a plethora of potential courses of action, no reference to their peer group or social teens learn that they will, throughout their status and may be considered more individ- lives, continually be called on to choose ualistic as a result. Moreover, it is not a between “possible worlds.” They have wit- complete lack of commitment but a tenuous nessed their parents and other adults in and ephemeral commitment that links the their lives changing their minds about participants in the Internet date and pro- mates, careers, and home locations, after vides satisfaction for its participants. In this all. Teens therefore have come to expect context, it is perhaps not surprising that it that while intimate relationships may offer does not matter whether or not the partici- fulfillment, such satisfaction may be pant in the relationship is accessible in “real ephemeral. Relationships are pursued as a life,” and why in some cases such connec- part of a self-reflexive process in this con- tion is studiously avoided, as was illustrated text and may be understood in terms of in Elizabeth’s avoidance of the male Net what Giddens (1991) characterized as a friend who wanted to speak with her on the “pure relationship”: telephone. The lack of accessibility fulfills a Dines68.qxd 7/26/02 12:46 PM Page 705

Dating on the Net ◆ 705

function in keeping such individualized individual gratification, teens experience no expressions of intimacy and self-gratification sense of obligations to the person with from impinging on one’s local, lived whom they are ephemerally committed; as experience. In essence, the relationship has Elizabeth noted, if a person fails to show up many of the benefits of the “pure” relation- at the preappointed time, there are no con- ship but without the restraints of a commit- sequences. Of course, this assumes that ment of time or emotional resources. In this both parties agree to the lack of seriousness sense it might be said to be a postmodern with which such relations are entered into. “pure” relationship: one comprised of self- Denial of a more intimate connection is not reflexivity in which experimentation and out of maliciousness; those who believe that self-construction are central. Unlike adult they are experiencing more than simply a participants in chat rooms, teens are limited “fun,” ephemeral connection are assumed in their ability to parlay an emotional tie to be not “playing by the rules,” as it were. forged on the Net into something that Teens participating in Internet dating would have material consequences in the also seem to feel no need to justify their local context. Thus, the relationships that actions among their “real-life” peers, as emerge transcend time and space to deliver they might for other, more widely observ- satisfaction through the medium of a dis- able actions. In the Net environment, teens embodied, “surface” communication, are unmoored from local peer groups in allowing the teen to feel connected to which so much of identity is constituted others while allowing them to experience among this age group. Peers are only affirmation in an environment that does not involved when the participant chooses to risk their current social position. involve them, either by conversing about one’s individual experiences online or, on frequent occasions, watching over one’s ◆ Conclusion shoulder as a friend converses with others online. Most frequently, however, teens online experience themselves as individuals What, then, might be the implications for a removed, to some extent, from their local teen community on the Internet in this envi- social context. As autonomous persons in ronment? I have argued that whereas teen interaction, teens are like the adult counter- dating relationships in chat rooms mirror parts to Giddens’s (1991) “pure” relation- the relationships of “real life” in their ship in their search for connection yet are adherence to norms of heterosexism and very different in that trust is not a factor in sexism, we also see a difference in the role the relationships achieved, nor must they of trust and intimacy in these relations risk “authentic” self-revelation to achieve when compared with those of the past and gratification. in “real life.” Internet dating, despite its It is also worth noting that much like the possibilities for verbal intimacy and egali- teen dating experiences of the midcentury, tarian relationships, is in actuality more fre- there is a noticeable absence of other classes quently employed for fleeting, “fun” and races beyond the Caucasian, middle- relationships that hold little consequence in class norm of the Net. Participation in teen the “real” lives of the teens who engage in chat rooms is increasingly forbidden in them beyond self-gratification. Further, the school and community center contexts, and emphasis on “fun” and inconsequentiality thus young people with limited means are suggests that the norms of conduct for teens less likely than their middle-class counter- online may be localized to such an extent parts to have access to the technology. that teens feel no need to consider how their This research, therefore, leaves us with own participation might influence others. several more questions regarding the future Because the focus in the Internet date is on of the Internet as a possible site for Dines68.qxd 7/26/02 12:46 PM Page 706

706 ◆ The Internet

community building, particularly among dissertation fellowship from the Louisville teens. If these postmodern “pure” relation- Institute. ships might be considered a youthful 2. For an illustration of warnings in the precursor to the more serious, “pure” rela- popular press, see, for example, Rozen, L. tionships its participants will presumably (1997, November). Undercover on the Internet. enter on adulthood, one wonders: will Good Housekeeping, pp. 76-78, 82. authenticity in the lived environment 3. It should be noted, however, that while appear less—or perhaps more—important the teens in my study by and large noted prefer- as a characteristic of these meaningful rela- ences for the teen chat rooms, many of them had tionships as a result? I think the fact that experimented with the more racy adult chat the “other” in the relationship is hardly rooms, as well. considered, or is assumed to share one’s level of commitment and self-gratification, is telling. Teens in chat rooms, after all, References ◆ experience themselves as a gathering of unconnected individuals, seeking others (or usually one other) with whom to converse Bailey, B. (1988). From front porch to back seat. and thereby achieve gratification. Perhaps Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press. these individualistic relationships under- Baym, N. K. (1995). The emergence of commu- score the increased localization of caring, nity in computer-mediated communication. thus implying the increased lack of any In S. G. Jones (Ed.), Cybersociety: communal sense of identity. Teen chat Computer-mediated communication and rooms become a space outside the stream of community (pp. 138-163). Thousand Oaks, everyday life, a space for the development CA: Sage. of the ideal “pure” relationship of the con- Blumer, H. (1933). The movies and conduct. temporary age: one with imagined intimacy New York: Macmillan. but no need for trust or commitment; thus Brown, L., & Gilligan, C. (1992). Meeting at the one that is fulfilling and liberating, ulti- crossroads: Women’s psychology and girls’ mately and primarily, to the self. In this development. Cambridge, MA: Harvard sense, then, the self-gratification of dating University Press. on the Net can be seen as a natural out- Erickson, E. (1968). Identity: Youth and crisis. growth of current cultural conditions. The New York: Norton. technology does not enable a wide-scale Fass, P. (1977). The damned and the beautiful: social change toward greater self-reflexivity American youth in the 1920s. New York: but allows this already occurring practice to Oxford University Press. find a new avenue for its expression and Friend, R. (1993). Choices, not closets: development. Heterosexism and homophobia in schools. In L. Weis & M. Fine (Eds.), Beyond silenced voices: Class, race, and gender in United ◆ Notes States schools (pp. 209-235). Albany: State University of New York Press. Giddens, A. (1991). Modernity and self-identity: 1. I serve as Associate Researcher on the Self and society in the late modern age. Lilly Endowment funded project, “Media, Palo Alto, CA: Stanford University Press. Meaning, and the Lifecourse,” which is under Illouz, E. (1997). Consuming the romantic the direction of Stewart M. Hoover at the Center Utopia: Love and cultural contradictions of for Mass Media Research, University of capitalism. Berkeley: University of California Colorado. I gratefully acknowledge the funding Press. for the research in this chapter, which has Jones, S. (1995). Understanding community in been provided by the Lilly Endowment and by a the information age. In S. G. Jones (Ed.), Dines68.qxd 7/26/02 12:46 PM Page 707

Dating on the Net ◆ 707

Cybersociety: Computer-mediated communi- Rakow, L., & Navarro, V. (1993, June). Remote cation and community (pp. 10-35). mothering and the parallel shift: Women Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. meet the cellular telephone. Critical Studies Kiesler, S., Siegel, J., & McGuire, T. (1984). in Mass Communication, 10(2), 144-157. Social psychological aspect of computer- Rheingold, H. (1991). The virtual community: mediated communication. American Homesteading on the electronic frontier. Psychologist, 39(10), 1123-1134. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley. Kramarae, C. (1995). A backstage critique of Rozen, L. (1997, November). Undercover on the virtual reality. In S. G. Jones (Ed.), Internet. Good Housekeeping, 225(10), Cybersociety: Computer-mediated commu- 76-78, 82. nication and community (pp. 36-56). Seabrook, J. (1997). Deeper: My two-year Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. odyssey in cyberspace. New York: Simon & Modell, J. (1989). Into one’s own: From youth Schuster. to adulthood in the United States Yin, R. (1994). Case study research: Design and 1920-1975. Berkeley: University of methods (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: California Press. Sage. Rakow, L. (1988). Gendered technology, gen- dered practice. Critical Studies in Mass Communication, 5(1), 57-70.