Come on -Who are You?

Anonymity, the use of Nom de plumes, Nom de guerre, Pen Names and Pseudonyms is a perfectly acceptable practice used by writers and entertainers throughout the ages. It has not been considered in any way disreputable or discreditable. There has been an explosion of writing and the consequent ability for people to express their opinions and ideas, unconfined by the established gatekeepers. This has provoked a lot of po-faced protectionism among elitists in the press and the Internet. Most writers have one or two pseudonyms; one Internet Web-site lists more than 55 writers who use more than 10 pseudonyms each, and one Edward Alexander Crowley having 150!

Newspapers and Magazines and Journals take a two faced view on the use of pseudonyms.

While it is acceptable that editors, leader writers, diarists and junior reporters do not have usually have their identity know to the readers, letter and article contributors can only in certain circumstances, and at the discretion of the editors be allowed to write anonymously providing their full identity is given to the editor and therefore available to other staff, not all of whom can be trusted to keep the information confidential. All writers have all the same reasons for wanting to use anonymity - because their subject matter is sensitive or controversial; because they need personal or professional protection; have prolific output or conflicting aims; need to distance themselves from personality laden responses, or avoid gender or other discrimination. New writers often find it difficult to get published because editors prefer to use the same few well known names or academics, in preference 'unknowns' with new ideas.

Several years ago Doris Lessing revealed that she had written two novels under the pseudonym Jane Somers to dramatise the difficulties faced by unknown writers.

The rationale for this restrictive attitude by editors is that they need to know who their contributors are. Why? providing they do not publish anything that would be libellous what possible constraint can there be on them not to publish letters or articles written under pseudonyms? I think the opposition to anonymity and use of pseudonyms, and the free expression it allows, is an extension of the elitism of the traditional print medium and electronic media and is an attempt to resist any challenge to their ability to control the flow of information and ideas.

This phenomena has increased in proportion to the growth of writers on the Internet which has given non-professional writers the confidence to challenge the elitism that has been built up by the established publishers and editors, who have a formidable stranglehold over traditional print outlets.

The Internet allows complete anonymity much to the annoyance of some.

Some of this opposition to anonymity on the Internet often comes from people who feel secure because they never say anything controversial anyway, and I suspect that many more of these po-faced critics who supposedly want openness of discussion, are people who cannot judge an argument without the aid of their prejudices and it annoys them when this is withheld. There are also posters who are unable to reply unless they have something personal to latch on to in order to divert attention from debate that they may be unsure of or losing!

Anonymity does not in any way restrict full frontal attack by anyone who disagrees with the material, but it does force people to consider only the contents of a post. It does not denote 'lack of openness' but forces reply to the content without attacking the person, and further, it also avoids any accusation of self promotion by the writer.

There are very good reasons for those of us who have controversial ideas on politics and religion to want to post anonymously. Suppression of controversial political ideas is often the reason, and atheist ideas have been more comprehensively suppressed throughout history than most topics, and there are still considerable dangers in posting material critical of religions and the church.

Fiction writers lead the field

Fiction writers often write under names other than their own, usually for promotional reasons, but also for all the same reasons as for any other writers. They may want to write in a genre other than the one that their reading public is used to, have more than one book or article, coming out in a short space of time. They may want to express views that would not go down well with their existing public persona or reputation, and affect their sales or likelihood of getting published. And for new writers they may have a name that is for some reason unacceptable for their image, it may already be the name of another well known person, or may be unattractive! ''I wanted a fresh reading; I wanted to escape from my own identity." said Joyce Carol Oates a prolific writer.

"While it is not unprecedented for novels by the same author to be published in one year, publishers tend to think that one book a year - particularly in fiction - by an author is about as much as customers, reviewers and literary critics will bear". (JCO)

Writers may be known for a particular lifestyle, pattern of behaviour or scandal that would colour the way in which their ideas are received, but which have no bearing on the content of the book or article.

Sex, Gender, Race, Politics and Religion and personal security

These are areas of writing in which individuals have personal reasons for wanting to use created identity. In their every day lives there may be very valid reasons for wanting to keep their ideas and opinions from friends and relatives who could be adversely affected by the expressions of opinion alien to them. Opinions or ideas that run counter to the prevailing consensus on these issues are the most obvious ones to need the anonymity afforded by the pseudonym.

There are also issues of personal security in areas of writing particularly on the above issues that are especially likely to endanger the well-being of writers. On any topic on which there are fanatical extremes of belief there is the ever present danger of attracting the attention of 'nutters' on the prowl looking for targets.

Then there are the situations in which for personal and professional reasons individuals need anonymity in order to be able to express their views. Whistle blowing or people wanting to bring issues out into the open that superiors or those in authority do not want bringing out.

Women are at a particular disadvantage in writing and participating in discussions on the Internet. Many women will attest to this and may explain the apparent reluctance of women to post onto news groups and forums and message boards, on which there is vigorous discussion of serious issues. This subjective experience is also born out by researchers who have found that women are often placed at a disadvantage in interpersonal communication contexts by social conditioning and expectations. Neither is this discrepancy confined to the Internet. One has only to survey the contents, and especially the letters printed in national press and journals, to wonder why the ratio of men to women writers is so unequal!

"Consistent with our expectations, people apparently felt more comfortable participating to a greater extent in CMC (Computer-mediated communication) when they were able to mask their identities. Whereas women felt the need to project a cross-gender identity, men did not. Our observation that women have an increased tendency to mask their gender concurs with a similar finding of Selfe & Meyer (1991) and underscores the implicit social pressure that women feel when interacting in mixed-gender situations. The tendency for women to mask their gender identity might reflect an effort to maintain a parity of status in the shared activity of conversation, an imperative which men would be less likely to feel in a mixed-gender setting.

In such a virtual social reality, people may try to mitigate gender-related expectations by exhibiting cues that identify them as the members of the opposite sex, i.e., cross-gender, or which are gender-neutral. CMC also opens up the possibility for humans to interact in ever-increasing numbers of virtual communities. The combination of a CMC-based shared virtual reality, which affords its members the ability to design their exhibited identities, may present us with a view of what is possible in a "real world" with different

CMC users might feel less constrained by the gender-based stereotypes and social expectations which dictate communication behaviour. This, in turn, might reduce theoretical asymmetries between the sexes regarding both power-related, relational, and socio-emotional discourse (Tannen, 1990).

In seeking to express themselves more independently, women will show a greater tendency, than men, to conceal or disguise their gender in mixed-gender communication contexts which facilitate gender anonymity or pseudo- anonymity."

Women have been socialised to display qualities of social interdependence. This socialisation results in communication patterns exhibiting socio-emotional discourse, conflict avoidance, restrained assertiveness, expressions of support for others, and disclosure of personal information (Tannen, 1990). Conversely, men have been socialised to display qualities of hierarchical, power-based assertion and independence. Men therefore tend to assert opinions, avoid expressing support toward others, and avoid personal self-disclosure in conversation."

see:-http://research.haifa.ac.il/~jmjaffe/genderpseudocmc/abstract.html

BACK

BACK TO 'The Roots of Sexism in Religion'

BACK TO Secularsites