Internet Romance Thought Paper

In the age of technology people treats internet as an enjoyable way of spending free time. Chatting online using applications such as MSN and Facebook is becoming an increasingly popular method for finding romantic partners. Online encounters allow you the opportunity to get to know people from all over the world, time and distance are no longer limiting factors for the participants to communicate, all they have to do is to send messages or emails and patiently wait for replies from their ideal targets. Although I myself so far still cannot afford the time for constant internet chatting, I believe there are advantages as well as disadvantages in online encounters.

In virtual communications there are more opportunities to share a great deal of information. Individuals may disclose themselves more fully by revealing a lot of personal information that they would not disclose in real life situation. A person can show his or her inner thoughts, feelings and beliefs which most likely would be met with less disapproval than in the case of face to face encounters. This gives a sense of trust and equality which people search for in a relationship. It also builds up a reciprocity effect as the opposite parties also shows readiness to disclose themselves. This contributes to the building up of an interpersonal relationship even though physical attraction is irrelevant.

However, while one enjoys and believes what she or he reads on the screen, one must also be aware that he or she may not be telling the truth. When corresponding on the internet, fantasy and computer communication go hand-in-hand. According to the article, Daum admits that she imagined Pete’s personality to be possessing the aspects she would like her romantic partner to have, this fantasy was initiated by the messages that Pete sent her. Many people who are looking for internet romance tend to assume a complete picture of their “partner”. When reading a typed message there is strong tendency to unconsciously project your own expectations of what the person has written. In online encounters people may try to disclose socially desirable traits to their targets and hide up their undesirable personal defects, tricking their targets to increase likeliness and intimacy. This can present a great disappointment when the couple finally meets each other.

Based on these advantages and disadvantages, it is questionable whether internet relationships are superficial or as intimate as face-to-face relationships. In my opinion I think it is superficial.

Online chatting via computers can be regarded as a more impersonal communication medium than face to face communication.. The written dialogues may involve more literary devices than in-person talk. Some people are more expressive and organized in conversation while some feel that they can express better in written words, so it may be easier for a shy person to interact over the internet.

Nevertheless, physical appearance and verbal uses play a big role in attraction in face-to-face relation. They determine whether two individuals can be attracted to each other. There are no facial expressions or body languages in the email-message, so even a shy person can write long paragraphs of his thoughts, in real life he may not be to talk and express himself freely. In Daum and Pete case, Daum did not realize Pete being a hyper until they meet face to face although they had been internet chatting for months. The human face and body language are rich in meaning and emotion. All these visual cues are missing thus making the relationship superficial.

Humans need physical contact with each other. Internet relationships fall short of physical contact. Email and typed words can be considered as fascinating styles of developing a relationship. I believe internet can be a tool to create initial contact but we cannot depend on sending written messages to each other to develop a true sense of intimacy. On meeting face to face one may enrich the online relationship or not to sustain the relationship when there is little or no common ground between the two participants. Perhaps that is why I prefer “in person relationship” as it captures the feeling of physical presence and the sharing of ideas at the same time.