Hey everyone! This is Renile and Ava. We are going to have a presentation on the topic virtual ethics. In our presentation, we will mainly focus on the first reading. Here comes to the summary of it.
The author, Alkison Adam, has tried to illustrate how feminist theory can be used to make a more extended analysis in discussion of computer ethics through examples of cyberstalking.
But first of all, what is cyberstalking? Cyberstalking is actually an extreme form of internet- based harassment. It is also believed that the word cyberstalking was created to describe stalking behaviour perpetrate through some online information and communication technology. Cyberstalking also derives a milder form of behavior - online sexual harassment. As mentioned by Herring, he stated that online sexual harassment tends to mirror the levels harassment that women often find in the real life.
Actually, internet reinforces and magnifies stereotypical gendered behaviours, as cyberstalking is already a representation of a strongly gendered behaviour. Thus, Herring believed that computer-mediated communication does not neutralize gender.
The writer is applying feminist theory in computer ethics. She stated that women feel empowered by the use of information technology. However, in reality, only a small number of women can be successfully achieved. As Winner mentioned, it is originally assumed that everyone has equal abilities on the internet. If both men and women are equal in the cyber world, then why the proportion of women who are being stalked is still high?
The writer also looks into the issue of cyberstalking form the utilitarianism perspective. From the view of Kantian, if an issue can generate the greatest happiness of the greatest people, then it is up to the moral standard and should be worth to do so. By the same token, if cyberstalking just make a few women very unhappy but many men happy, then should we continue to do so? Nevertheless, the writer stated that few people would be comfortable with such argument. Therefore, some scholars who studied Utilitarianism believed that cyberstalking is only treating women as a means to an end but not as individual moral agents with rights.
Then what have been done in order to protect the victims? According to DeCew, the official are unwilling to see cyberstalking as a problem, thus there is no guarantee that the legislation can protect the victims.
Hence, victims felt unhappy because the level of protection is far too little. Besides, all measures seem not effective enough and do not get to the heart of the problem. Therefore, it is believed that only when we have a better understanding of why the behaviour occurs can we then begin to think about policy measures which way is the most effective.
The conclusion is excellent! It brings out the gist of the issue. Eg: It is good to consult doctor when you are sick. However, it will be perfect when you take care yourself before you get sick. It is about the origin or the root of the problem. Back to the topic, why women are the cyberstalking target? Why do they get harassed? It is not because how a woman act or dress like. It is about the general values and norms which are mostly constructed under the patriarchy. In their pov, it is so natural to perceive female as an object. An object that can provide pleasure. No matter how do they behave or dress, they will be assuming to provide "fun", "sex" or other service. It is so pity and ridiculous that this kind of norms still exist. ><
ReplyDeleteThanks Ava and Renile for giving an outstanding presentation about this topic.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Adam that we should understand the reasons/purposes of why the netizens act in such ways online, but not in the reality. Interestingly, does an asynchronous (and not face to face) online communication create an illusion that you don't have to bear any responsibility/consequence inside the virtual reality since you just interact with the cyborgs (other netizens'profiles)?
It then cause a further question - should an online cyborg be regulated by the human's ethics? If yes, who will be powerful and creditable to establish the virtual ethics? does the boundary between human and cyborg become blurred in the future?
You are right, Sam~!
ReplyDeleteFemales as "objects" always are gazed by male not only in reality, but also in cyberspace!!!
Cyberstalking just another obvious phenomenon shows that female is subordinate in any patriarchal society.
However, just like what you said, it is the core problem regarding norms. Before feminist voice out the problem, most of us just took it for granted!!!
Then, can it be possible to make use of "ethnic" to regulate norms, and protect women's right? Well~ i guess it just depends on how you define "ethnic"!! (p.s. it is the unsolvable problem raised by Alkison Adam also.....)
Yoyo, your discussion on cyborgs and human ethnic is really interesting~~!
ReplyDeleteShould "human ethinic" be applied to cybrog, a hybrid of machine and organism?
Maybe yes, it is because we really want to humanize cybrog!!
When we humanize netizen, "human ethnic" become a powerful tool to regulate them. And "virtual ethincs" will no longer be a matter/excuse for cyborg to escape any responsibilities in the reality.
But back to the problem--> what is "ethnic" ?