VIRTUAL COMMUNITIES IN A
THERAPEUTIC AGE
Felicia Wu Song
/~k m i d s t all the e x c i t e m e n t a n d s p e c u l a t i o n over
/ ]kthe Internet, hopes have been staked on
t e c h n o l o g y ' s c a p a c i t y to revitalize civic a n d com-
m u n i t y life i n A m e r i c a . T h e p r o l i f e r a t i o n of on-line
( o r " v i r t u a l " ) c o m m u n i t i e s , in p a r t i c u l a r , has b e e n
r e g a r d e d as a p o s s i b l e c o u n t e r b a l a n c e to t h e
t r e n d s of d e c l i n i n g s o c i a l c a p i t a l o b s e r v e d b y
R o b e r t P u t n a m in his book,BowlingAlone.While
P u t n a m may have aptly n o t e d a s i g n i f i c a n t cul-
tural c h a n g e in the d e c r e a s i n g m e m b e r s h i p of
local a s s o c i a t i o n s , m a n y s c h o l a r s s u g g e s t that t h e
m a i n l e s s o n to l e a r n from P u t n a m ' s w o r k is sim-
p l y that it is time to l o c a t e civic d u t y a n d social
c o n n e c t i v i t y in n e w i n s t i t u t i o n s . As F r a n c i s
F u k u y a m a c o m m e n t e d : " F o r e v e r y b r i d g e c l u b or
Masonic t e m p l e that has folded, t h e r e are c o u n t -
less AIDS a d v o c a c y g r o u p s or U s e n e t d i s c u s s i o n
g r o u p s to take t h e i r p l a c e .... The I n t e r n e t by it-
self clearly c o n s t i t u t e s a m a j o r r e v o l u t i o n in many-
to-many communications, one that by itself could
easily o v e r w h e l m all t h e o t h e r d o w n w a r d t r e n d s
c i t e d in Bowling Alone."
F u k u y a m a has n o t b e e n alone in his o p t i m i s m .
While many scholars and technologists recognize
the i m p o r t a n t d i f f e r e n c e s b e t w e e n face-to-face
and on-line c o m m u n i t i e s , t h e y n e v e r t h e l e s s main-
tain that on-line g r o u p s are g e n u i n e c o m m u n i t i e s ,
and thus valid s u b s t i t u t e s for t h e local c o m m u n i -
ties n o w in decline. Several key c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s are
c o m m o n l y n o t e d as e v i d e n c e that v i r t u a l c o m m u -
n i t i e s are i n d e e d "communities." For e x a m p l e , in
his b o o k The Virtual Community, H o w a r d
R h e i n g o l d gives a c o m p e l l i n g a c c o u n t of h o w
c o m p u t e r - m e d i a t e d c o m m u n i c a t i o n o f t e n sup-
p o r t s e a r n e s t , i n t i m a t e and affective ties b e t w e e n
p e o p l e . O t h e r s claim that on-line c o m m u n i t i e s can
be as effective as t h e i r off-line c o u n t e r p a r t s in
m a t t e r s of s o c i a l a n d p o l i t i c a l a c t i o n . O n - l i n e
g r o u p s also usually p o s s e s s s o m e s h a r e d s t a n d a r d s
of c o n d u c t , a c o m m o n a t t r i b u t e of face-to-face
VIRTUAL COMMUNITIES IN A THERAPEUTIC AGE
c o m m u n i t i e s . As such, m a n y p e r c e i v e t h e v i r t u a l
c o m m u n i t y as a n e w form of s o c i a b i l i t y t h a t es-
s e n t i a l l y o p e r a t e s as any p r e v i o u s c o m m u n i t y has
in t h e past. In light of t h e fact t h a t m a n y Ameri-
c a n s a l r e a d y m a i n t a i n t h e i r p r i m a r y s o c i a l ties
t h r o u g h n o n - l o c a l social n e t w o r k s , v i r t u a l c o m -
m u n i t i e s m a y a c t u a l l y i m p r o v e p e o p l e ' s a b i l i t y to
c o m m u n i c a t e a n d p a r t i c i p a t e in each o t h e r ' s lives,
g i v i n g i n d i v i d u a l s t h e m e a n s to c o m b a t t h e atom-
izing t e n d e n c i e s of c o n t e m p o r a r y A m e r i c a ' s eco-
n o m i c , c u l t u r a l a n d social realities.
T h e r e are, h o w e v e r , g o o d r e a s o n s to q u e s t i o n
w h e t h e r v i r t u a l c o m m u n i t i e s can f u n c t i o n as a
viable a l t e r n a t i v e to c o m m u n i t i e s of p l a c e a n d
civic a s s o c i a t i o n s . W h i l e t h e I n t e r n e t is still in a
stage of r e l a t i v e infancy, several f e a t u r e s of vir-
tual c o m m u n i t i e s s t r o n g l y suggest t h a t it is un-
likely for t h e s e c o m m u n i t i e s to cultivate t h e t y p e s
of social b o n d s a n d a s s o c i a t e d n o r m s of r e c i p r o c -
ity o f t e n u n d e r s t o o d to b e t h e b u i l d i n g b l o c k s o f
a s t a b l e a n d v i b r a n t d e m o c r a c y . B e c a u s e of the
p a r t i c u l a r w a y s that c o m p u t e r t e c h n o l o g y medi-
ates t h e r e l a t i o n s h i p b e t w e e n an i n d i v i d u a l a n d a
c o m m u n i t y , t h e I n t e r n e t may lead to an i n c r e a s e
in t h e quantity of social c o n n e c t e d n e s s , b u t t h e
quality of that c o n n e c t e d n e s s will be v e r y differ-
ent from that which Putnam and Alexis de
T o c q u e v i l l e r e s t e d t h e i r d e m o c r a t i c h o p e s . Put
a n o t h e r way, w h i l e virtual c o m m u n i t i e s may b o o s t
the n u m b e r o f s o c i a l n e t w o r k s , t h e y are n o t con-
d u c i v e to f o s t e r i n g t h e n o r m s of m u t u a l obliga-
t i o n n e e d e d for a c h i e v i n g c o m m u n a l ends.
I n s t e a d , t h e t y p e of s o c i a l c o n n e c t e d n e s s t h a t
virtual c o m m u n i t i e s m a y t e n d to c u l t i v a t e b e a r s
a g r e a t e r s i m i l a r i t y to Philip Rieff's v i s i o n of t h e
t h e r a p e u t i c c u l t u r e - - t h a t is, t h e y t e n d to e n h a n c e
t h e w e l l - b e i n g o f t h e i n d i v i d u a l at t h e e x p e n s e of
the community. Historically, liberals and
c o m m u n i t a r i a n s have c o n c e p t u a l i z e d the p r o b l e m
of c o m m u n i t y in t e r m s of a d e l i c a t e b a l a n c e be-
39
t w e e n the individual and the c o m m u n a l good.
However, this crucial dynamic is apt to b e c o m e
u n d o n e in a virtual community, resulting in a com-
m u n i t y w h o s e therapeutic f u n c t i o n has b e c o m e
its sole p u r p o s e for being. That is to say, b e y o n d
asserting individual rights as being prior to the
c o m m u n a l good, a virtual c o m m u n i t y has the po-
tential to b e c o m e a c o m m u n i t y in w h i c h indi-
vidual rights are the c o m m u n a l good.As its struc-
tural and technical features e n h a n c e the p o w e r
of private control, a virtual c o m m u n i t y runs the
risk of being r e d u c e d to w h a t Michel Foucault
referred to as"a t e c h n o l o g y of the self," that w h i c h
permits individuals to "transform themselves in
o r d e r to attain a certain state of happiness, pu-
rity, wisdom, [and] perfection" (Technologies o f
the Self, University of Massachusetts Press, 1988,
p. 18). In this way, the dynamic b e t w e e n an indi-
vidual and the collective in virtual c o m m u n i t i e s
begins to share a strong resemblance w i t h Rieff's
vision of the t h e r a p e u t i c culture.
The Therapeutic Nature of Virtual C o m m u n i t i e s
Are virtual communities reliable sources of n e w
social capital? Rieff's n o t i o n of the t h e r a p e u t i c is
helpful in settling this question because it directs
the focus of analysis to the c h a n g i n g character of
the individual, rather than that of the community.
For regardless of h o w one might characterize the
changes t h a t A m e r i c a n c o m m u n i t i e s have experi-
e n c e d historically, Rieff's a c c o u n t of the funda-
mental shift in the way that p e o p l e participate in
social institutions still radically alters the terrain
on w h i c h any discussions a b o u t c o n t e m p o r a r y
public life take place.
The shift that Rieff calls "the t r i u m p h of the
therapeutic" describes an inversion of the rela-
tionship b e t w e e n an individual and a collective,
or social institution. W h e r e the relationship be-
t w e e n individuals and institutions was formerly
characterized by the priority of external c o m m u -
nal goods over individual ends, in c o n t e m p o r a r y
t h e r a p e u t i c culture, personal well-being super-
sedes c o m m u n a l goods. The external c o m m u n a l
purposes, w h i c h had formerly b e e n sources o f
personal identity and meaning, are n o w v i e w e d
as causes of neuroses. Formerly c o n s i d e r e d first
principles, t h e y are n o w n o t h i n g but binding de-
mands that o u g h t to be a b a n d o n e d . T h e pursuit
of personal well-being is the end and justification
of all our actions.Yet, Rieff's therapeutic individual
is not s o m e o n e w h o recklessly spurns social in-
stitutions altogether. Rather the t h e r a p e u t i c indi-
40 SOCIETY 9 JANUARY FEBRUARY2002
vidual is s o m e o n e w h o does participate in social
institutions, but participates in a n e w l y d e t a c h e d
and strategic m a n n e r that may n o t be easily dis-
c e r n e d at first glance. Consequently, t h o u g h so-
cial institutions may a p p e a r to have retained their
original form in society, t h e y are n o w regarded as
t e c h n o l o g i e s of the self.Therapeutic individuals
a p p r o a c h t h e m as savvy c o n s u m e r s seeking to
invest only in that w h i c h serves "the e n r i c h m e n t
of their o w n experience."As Rieff e l o q u e n t l y de-
scribed in his essay, "Reflections on Psychologi-
cal Man inAmerica" :" [P] sychological man c a n n o t
c o m p l e t e l y shake off his past. He has in fact the
n e r v o u s habits of his father, e c o n o m i c man: he is
anti-heroic, shrewd, studying unprofitable commit-
m e n t s as the sins most to be avoided, carefully
k e e p i n g a balance of his satisfactions and dissat-
isfactions, but w i t h o u t the genial c o n f i d e n c e of
his immediate a n c e s t o r that the sum will m o u n t
to something meaningful and justify his entire life.
He lives by the ideal of i n s i g h t - - p r a c t i c a l , experi-
mental, and leading to the m a s t e r y of his o w n
personality" (The Feeling Intellect, University of
Chicago Press, 1990, p. 4). Since the i m p a c t of the
"triumph of the therapeutic" is mainly located in
the individual, any form of c o m m u n i t y - - w h e t h e r
local or non-local, face-to-face or v i r t u a l - - b e c o m e s
equally subject to a p p r o p r i a t i o n as a t e c h n o l o g y
of the self by a t h e r a p e u t i c individual. H o w t h e n
can virtual c o m m u n i t i e s be v i e w e d as being par-
ticularly therapeutic?
Because of their u n i q u e features, virtual com-
munities are particularly well-suited to enacting
and reinforcing the d o c t r i n e s that c o n s t i t u t e the
t h e r a p e u t i c culture, making the t h e r a p e u t i c ideal
tangible, plausible and compelling. For the me-
dium of the c o m p u t e r and the organization of the
Internet's many-to-many c o m m u n i c a t i o n have the
capacity to make ordinary socially-binding expec-
tations and d e m a n d s powerless, and thus, predis-
pose individuals towards prioritizing the pursuit
of personal satisfaction at the e x p e n s e of com-
munal ends. Consequently, it may be w i t h great
irony that enthusiasts place their h o p e s in virtual
c o m m u n i t i e s for r e n e w e d social trust and mutual
obligation. For if Rieff is right in his assessment
of t h e r a p e u t i c culture, at best, virtual c o m m u n i -
ties will fail to revitalizeAmerican c o m m u n i t y life;
at worst, t h e y will institutionalize the therapeu-
tic sensibility in its e x t r e m e form.
Let us n o w c o n s i d e r h o w the particular con-
stitution of virtual c o m m u n i t i e s serves to struc-
turally reinforce the t h e r a p e u t i c sensibility. By
l o o k i n g at t h e w a y s t h a t c o m p u t e r m e d i a t i o n im-
pacts four major aspects of communal experience:
(1) a collective sense of belonging, (2) the author-
i t y o f s o c i a l l y - b i n d i n g d e m a n d s , (3) t h e c h a r a c t e r
of social interaction, and (4) the nature of trust,
we will see how virtual communities are not
m e r e l y e x t e n d e d v e r s i o n s o f c o m m u n i t i e s as t h e y
have been historically conceptualized and under-
stood, but actually inversions of them.
Belonging Redefined
A brief survey of on-line communities reveals
that there are many different types of groups.
Some groups "meet" both face-to-face and virtu-
ally; o t h e r s g r o u p s e x i s t e x c l u s i v e l y o n - l i n e . T h e
p u r p o s e s a n d m i s s i o n s o f t h e g r o u p s v a r y greatly.
S o m e m e r e l y a c t as a c l e a r i n g h o u s e f o r i n f o r m a -
t i o n o n a p a r t i c u l a r t o p i c , o t h e r s a r e g e a r e d to-
wards providing emotional support and cultivat-
ing a sense of belonging. Imaginary text-based
environments known as multi-user domains
(MUDs) are primarily used for recreational social
interaction, while the most common on-line
g r o u p s a r e s p e c i f i c a l l y i n t e n d e d as f o r u m s for dis-
cussions.These groups span a wide range of top-
ics f r o m t h e m o s t m u n d a n e ( d i s c u s s i o n g r o u p s
for crock-pot cooking) to the serious (support
g r o u p s for m e n w i t h p r o s t a t e c a n c e r ) , a n d f r o m
t h e p r o m i s i n g "Anti-Racism" g r o u p w h e r e " r a c i s t s
a n d n o n r a c i s t s c o m e ... to d e b a t e " to t h e e y e -
b r o w - r a i s i n g " P e o p l e H a v i n g a n Affair" g r o u p .
T h e v i r t u a l c o m m u n i t i e s a s s e s s e d in t h i s a r t i c l e
are mainly newsgroups and electronic bulletin
b o a r d s t h a t e x i s t s o l e l y o n - l i n e . T h e s e t y p e s o f on-
l i n e c o m m u n i t i e s r a n g e in size f r o m a h a n d f u l o f
i n d i v i d u a l s t o g r o u p s s u c h as t h e Y a h o o ! " I s l a m i c
Community" Club which claims a membership of
o v e r 1 0 , 0 0 0 p e o p l e . T h e s e g r o u p s a r e o f t e n ac-
cessed through World Wide Web search engines,
l n t e r n e t s e r v i c e p r o v i d e r s ( s u c h as A m e r i c a
Online) or individual websites.Virtual communi-
t i e s c a n also b e f o u n d o n U s e n e t , o n e o f t h e larg-
est discussion group systems.According to stud-
ies c o n d u c t e d b y s o c i o l o g i s t s M a r c S m i t h a n d
Peter Kollock, Usenet averaged 20,000 people per
day, p o s t i n g 3 0 0 , 0 0 0 m e s s a g e s o n o v e r 1 4 , 0 0 0
n e w s g r o u p s in 1 9 9 7 . A s o f 1998, t h e r e w e r e al-
ready over 80,000 topic-oriented discussion
groups on the entire Internet, a number that surely
h a s r i s e n in t h e last t h r e e y e a r s .
W h i l e o n - l i n e g r o u p s m a y v a r y b y size a n d p u r -
p o s e , t e c h n i c a l l y s p e a k i n g , all v i r t u a l c o m m u n i -
ties are essentially electronic and digital commu-
VIRTUAL COMMUNITIES IN A THERAPEUTIC AGE
n i c a t i o n s y s t e m s . A s s u c h , o n e o f t h e i r m o s t cel-
e b r a t e d f e a t u r e s is t h e i r c a p a c i t y t o o v e r c o m e
s p a t i a l l i m i t a t i o n s . In t h i s way, t h e v i r t u a l c o m -
m u n i t y is t h e l a t e s t d e v e l o p m e n t in a l o n g t r e n d
of technology and media that have altered the
basis for conceptualizing community by diminish-
i n g t h e r e l e v a n c e o f g e o g r a p h y a n d p l a c e , a n d in-
creasing the salience of communication.What we
f i n d in v i r t u a l c o m m u n i t i e s is an u n d e r s t a n d i n g
o f c o m m u n i t y as c o m m u n i c a t i o n t a k e n t o n e w
e x t r e m e s . F o r w h e n an o n - l i n e c o m m u n i t y is ma-
t e r i a l l y w i r e d a n d c u l t u r a l l y i m a g i n e d as a c o m -
m u n i c a t i o n n e t w o r k , it is n a t u r a l t o p r e s u m e t h a t
b e l o n g i n g to o n e m e a n s p o s t i n g a n d r e a d i n g m e s -
sages either on the group's home page or through
o n e ' s e m a i l a c c o u n t . F o r all t h e v a r i o u s s o c i a l in-
teractions that take place within a virtual com-
m u n i t y a r e r e c o r d e d in t h e s e t h r e a d s o f m e s s a g e s ,
except for the contents of real-time chat sessions
o r p r i v a t e e m a i l e x c h a n g e s . A s a r e s u l t , t h e s e ar-
chives are not merely a chronicle of what mem-
b e r s h a v e said, b u t a c t u a l l y represent the sub-
s t a n c e o f the c o m m u n i t y itself.
B e c a u s e t h e r e is a p e c u l i a r s e n s e in w h i c h t h e
c o m m u n i t y w o u l d n o t e x i s t if t h e m e s s a g e s d i d
n o t e x i s t , an i n d i v i d u a l ' s u n d e r s t a n d i n g o f h i s / h e r
r e l a t i o n t o t h e c o m m u n i t y is a p t to b e c o m e sub-
tly i n v e r t e d . In his e d i t e d v o l u m e , Virtual Culture,
c o m m u n i c a t i o n s s c h o l a r S t e v e n J o n e s p o i n t s to
e v i d e n c e o f U s e n e t n e w s g r o u p m e m b e r s w h o feel
t h a t t h e g r o u p a n d its m e s s a g e s " b e l o n g " t o t h e m .
J o n e s w r i t e s , " N o l o n g e r d o we, as m e m b e r s o f
the group, belong to the community, rather the
c o m m u n i t y b e l o n g s to us" (p. 1 6 ) . T h i s p h e n o m -
enological difference between on-line communi-
ties as a n i m m a t e r i a l l o g o f m e s s a g e s a n d "off-line"
c o m m u n i t i e s as p e o p l e i n h a b i t i n g a p a r t i c u l a r
p l a c e , t u r n s t h e v e r y n o t i o n o f b e l o n g i n g o n its
h e a d , so t h a t t h e i n d i v i d u a l is n o w t h e a g e n t t o
whom a community belongs. This inversion of
belonging, though abstract and subtle, provides
an opening for individuals to view virtual com-
m u n i t i e s as i n s t i t u t i o n s t h a t t h e y " p o s s e s s " a n d
a p p r o p r i a t e a c c o r d i n g to t h e i r p r i v a t e s e n s e o f
well-being.
The Evasion of Social Authority
F u r t h e r i n g this t e n d e n c y t o w a r d s v i e w i n g c o m -
m u n i t i e s as m e r e t e c h n o l o g i e s o f t h e s e l f is t h e
c a p a c i t y for c o m p u t e r t e c h n o l o g y t o f a c i l i t a t e t h e
a c t o f c h o o s i n g o n e ' s c o m m u n i t y . F o r i m p l i c i t in
t h i s c h o i c e is t h e a s s u m p t i o n t h a t i n d i v i d u a l s w i l l
c h o o s e t o a s s o c i a t e w i t h p e o p l e w h o s h a r e corn-
41
 m o n c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s , status o r p r e f e r e n c e s . I n d e e d ,
the very organization of on-line communities on
t h e I n t e r n e t is d i v i d e d u p a c c o r d i n g to c a t e g o -
r i e s t h a t m i r r o r t h e t a r g e t g r o u p s o f n i c h e mar-
k e t i n g . F r o m h o b b i e s to h a i r c o l o r , e c c e n t r i c i t i e s
t o a d d i c t i o n s , i n d i v i d u a l s a r e e x p e c t e d to c h o o s e
to associate with others like themselves. Under
t h e Yahoo! C l u b c a t e g o r y " C u l t u r e s a n d C o m m u -
n i t i e s , " B a b y B o o m e r s a l o n e h a v e 18 g r o u p s ,
w o m e n h a v e 443, a n d t e e n a g e r s h a v e t h e m o s t
o p t i o n s w i t h o v e r 17,000 p o s s i b l e g r o u p s to join.
On iVillage.com, a commercial website voted by
Y a h o o ! I n t e r n e t Life as t h e b e s t c o m m u n i t y
w e b s i t e for w o m e n , t h e h o m e p a g e e n c o u r a g e s
n e w m e m b e r s to s c r o l l d o w n a m e n u l a b e l e d ,
" W o m e n Like Me," p r o v i d i n g a w i d e a r r a y o f o p -
t i o n s v a r y i n g f r o m age, r e l i g i o n , e t h n i c i t y to m a r i -
tal a n d familial s t a t u s . In his a r t i c l e , "Virtual C o m -
m u n i t i e s as C o m m u n i t i e s , " s o c i o l o g i s t B a r r y
W e l l m a n s h a r p l y o b s e r v e d t h a t "in v i r t u a l c o m -
munities, the market metaphor of shopping
a r o u n d for s u p p o r t in s p e c i a l i z e d ties is e v e n m o r e
e x a g g e r a t e d t h a n in r e a l life" (p. 186).
However, many enthusiasts of virtual commu-
n i t i e s b e l i e v e t h a t c o m m u n i t i e s a r e s i m p l y better
w h e n p e o p l e c h o o s e t h e m . O v e r t h i r t y y e a r s ago,
J.C.R. L i c k l i d e r a n d R.W. T a y l o r p u b l i s h e d an ar-
t i c l e t i t l e d " T h e C o m p u t e r as a C o m m u n i c a t i o n
D e v i c e " in Science & Technology e n v i s i o n i n g t h e
on-line community of the future. They imagined
t h a t "life w i l l b e h a p p i e r for t h e o n - l i n e i n d i v i d u a l
because the people with whom one interacts
most strongly will be selected more by common-
ality o f i n t e r e s t s a n d g o a l s t h a n b y a c c i d e n t s o f
p r o x i m i t y ... c o m m u n i c a t i o n w i l l b e m o r e effec-
tive a n d p r o d u c t i v e , a n d t h e r e f o r e m o r e e n j o y a b l e "
( 1 9 6 8 , p. 31). Set f r e e f r o m t h e " a c c i d e n t s o f p r o x -
imity," c o m m u n i t i e s w o u l d b e l e s s b u r d e n e d b y
f r e e - r i d e r s a n d less t r o u b l e d b y i n s t a n c e s in w h i c h
a coercive power must force community members
into their share of mutual obligations.
M a n y s c h o l a r s s u c h as s o c i o l o g i s t R o b e r t Bellah
have criticized such communities, viewing them
as "lifestyle e n c l a v e s " a n d q u e s t i o n i n g t h e i r c a p a c -
ity t o g e n e r a t e t h e k i n d o f m u t u a l o b l i g a t i o n n e c -
e s s a r y for t h e p u r s u i t o f c o m m u n a l e n d s . I n Hab-
its o f the Heart, Bellah h a s a r g u e d t h a t c o l l e c t i v e s
formed out of common interests alone are rarely
r o b u s t e n o u g h to b e c a l l e d " c o m m u n i t i e s " b e c a u s e
s u c h g r o u p s e x i s t s o l e l y to fulfill i n d i v i d u a l n e e d s .
T h e s e c r i t i q u e s p o i n t to t h e t h e r a p e u t i c t e n d e n -
c i e s o f m o s t v i r t u a l c o m m u n i t i e s . Yet, w h i l e on-
l i n e c o m m u n i t i e s m a y b e t o o n a r r o w in s c o p e for
42 SOCIETY 9 JANUARY / FEBRUARY 2002
cultivating thick community bases, there are signs
of how virtual communities do seem to serve an
important, perhaps even necessary, social func-
tion.
Consider the Usenet newsgroup--
soc.support.youth.gay-lesbian-bi. It is s e l f - d e -
s c r i b e d as e x i s t i n g t o " o f f e r s u p p o r t , u n d e r s t a n d -
ing, and friendship to young people who are
c o m i n g to t e r m s w i t h t h e i r s e x u a l i t y , w h i c h m a y
differ from the heterosexual norm."Their mission
statement explains how the group exists explic-
itly f o r t h e p u r p o s e o f m e e t i n g a n e e d in c o n t e m -
p o r a r y A m e r i c a n s o c i e t y : " T h e s e p e o p l e o f t e n suf-
fer from unimaginable shame and guilt because
they feel attracted to members of the same sex,
or to both sexes; should these feelings become
publicly known, these young people may become
o u t c a s t s in t h e i r c o m m u n i t i e s .... T h e i n t e n t o f t h i s
n e w s g r o u p is t o l e t t h e s e p e o p l e k n o w t h a t t h e y
are not alone, and that there are people they can
t u r n to for f r i e n d s h i p a n d c o m f o r t . "
F o r m i n o r s w h o live u n d e r p a r e n t a l s u p e r v i -
s i o n a n d s t r u g g l e w i t h a s t i g m a t i z e d s t a t u s , a vir-
t u a l c o m m u n i t y s u c h as t h i s o n e is n o t o n l y a
s o u r c e o f a d v i c e , b u t a l s o a life-line t h a t a f f i r m s
their personal struggles and fledgling sexual iden-
tities.The extent to which contemporary Ameri-
c a n s d e s i r e to b e in a c o m m u n i t y w h e r e " t h e r e
are people like me" or where an individual can
b e r e a s s u r e d t h a t "I a m n o t a l o n e " is a p p a r e n t b y
t h e u n u s u a l l y l a r g e n u m b e r o f o n - l i n e g r o u p s ori-
ented around particular identities or needs that
usually receive little institutional support.
T h e u b i q u i t y o f t h e s e g r o u p s r e m i n d s us o f t h e
f a c t t h a t all g e n u i n e c o m m u n i t i e s d o h a v e s o m e
t h e r a p e u t i c f u n c t i o n , f o r t h e r e u n d o u b t e d l y is
v a l u e to h a v i n g o n e ' s i d e n t i t y a n d f r a m e w o r k o f
meaning reinforced. However, where communi-
t i e s h a d o n c e f u n c t i o n e d as t h e s o u r c e o f t h e s e
i d e n t i t i e s a n d m o r a l f r a m e w o r k s , t h e r e is n o w a
tendency to overemphasize how individuals can
choose and construct communities that share and
affirm their pre-established, self-derived identities.
As a r e s u l t , t h e r e is l i t t l e t o k e e p v i r t u a l c o m m u -
nities from being reduced to communities of
t h e r a p e u t i c f u n c t i o n a l o n e , a g a i n at t h e e x p e n s e
of external communal ends.
One striking example of where this intensifi-
c a t i o n o f t h e t h e r a p e u t i c c u l t u r e c a n l e a d is t h e
Yahoo! c l u b c a l l e d " P e o p l e H a v i n g anAffair" w h i c h
o f f e r s its v i s i t o r s a n d p o t e n t i a l m e m b e r s : "a ref-
u g e f o r t h o s e o f us w h o a r e h a v i n g affairs, o r a r e
c o n t e m p l a t i n g h a v i n g o n e . W e all h a v e t w o b a s i c
t h i n g s in c o m m o n ... t h e n e e d to be h a p p y , a n d
to fulfill o u r desires. C o m e share y o u r t h o u g h t s ,
y o u r joys, y o u r w o r r i e s , a n d y o u r s o r r o w s . We're
h e r e to listen, a n d h e l p e a c h other. E x p e r i e n c e
t h e energy, e x c i t e m e n t a n d c o m p a s s i o n t h a t has
m a d e o u r club u n i q u e . " W h i l e this virtual c o m m u -
nity may be d e e p l y r e w a r d i n g for an i n d i v i d u a l ' s
p e r s o n a l sense of w e l l - b e i n g , t h e u n c o m f o r t a b l e
fact r e m a i n s : t h r o u g h c o m p u t e r t e c h n o l o g y , it
b e c o m e s quite easy to offer s u p p o r t to t h o s e con-
d u c t i n g s e x u a l r e l a t i o n s that the c u r r e n t m o r a l
o r d e r d e e m s illicit or i n a p p r o p r i a t e . Because t h e s e
t y p e s of social i n t e r a c t i o n s have b e e n c o n d u c t e d
on-line, t h e s o c i a l l y - b i n d i n g c o n s e q u e n c e s , w h i c h
n o r m a l l y u p h o l d t h e e x i s t i n g m o r a l order, have
b e e n e v a d e d and r e n d e r e d p o w e r l e s s . U n d e r m i n -
ing t h e social a n d m o r a l d e m a n d s of t h e institu-
tions of m a r r i a g e and family in o r d e r to e n h a n c e
i n d i v i d u a l w e l l - b e i n g , this v i r t u a l c o m m u n i t y is a
c r y s t a l l i z e d form of h o w t h e r a p e u t i c i n s t i t u t i o n s
are a n t i - c o m m u n a l in t h e i r t e n d e n c y to r e l e a s e
its m e m b e r s f r o m s o c i a l l y - b i n d i n g e x p e c t a t i o n s
and consequences.
Freedom from Embodied Interactions
As c o m p u t e r m e d i a t i o n f u n c t i o n s to r e l e a s e or
d i s t a n c e i n d i v i d u a l s f r o m the p r e s s u r e of n o r m a -
tive d e m a n d s , it n o t only g u i d e s t h e t y p e s of on-
line g r o u p s that can exist, b u t also s h a p e s t h e
n a t u r e of social i n t e r a c t i o n s w i t h i n virtual com-
munities. It is c o m m o n for s k e p t i c s of virtual com-
m u n i t i e s to p o i n t to t h e i n f e r i o r i t y of c o m p u t e r -
m e d i a t e d c o m m u n i c a t i o n w h e n c o m p a r e d to
face-to-face c o m m u n i c a t i o n . C o m p u t e r - m e d i a t e d
c o m m u n i c a t i o n is o f t e n n o t e d for its r e l a t i v e in-
a d e q u a c y in c o m m u n i c a t i n g e m o t i o n s t h a t nor-
mally are e x p r e s s e d t h r o u g h facial e x p r e s s i o n s ,
v o i c e i n f l e c t i o n or o t h e r n o n - v e r b a l c u e s in face-
to-face e n c o u n t e r s . A s a result, c o m p u t e r - m e d i a t e d
c o m m u n i c a t i o n d o e s n o t l e n d itself to e x p r e s s -
ing h u m o r or irony, w i t h a t t e m p t s o f t e n r e s u l t i n g
in m i s u n d e r s t a n d i n g s .
This lack of p h y s i c a l e m b o d i m e n t in c o m p u t e r -
m e d i a t e d c o m m u n i c a t i o n also r e l e a s e s p e o p l e
f r o m p a r t i c u l a r social d e m a n d s that h a v e tradi-
tionally g u i d e d h o w p e o p l e t r e a t e a c h other. O n e
r e s u l t is t h a t t h e social i n h i b i t i o n s t h a t k e e p inci-
vility a n d h o s t i l i t y in c h e c k d u r i n g face-to-face
i n t e r a c t i o n s are no l o n g e r felt. Long e x t e n d e d ti-
r a d e s in r e s p o n s e to o t h e r p e o p l e ' s m e s s a g e s ,
k n o w n as "rants" or "flames," can e n d u p c r e a t i n g
m o r e difficult and c o n t e n t i o u s e n v i r o n m e n t s than
that of t h e usual face-to-face i n t e r a c t i o n s .
VIRTUAL COMMUNITIES IN A THERAPEUTIC AGE
Yet, b e c a u s e c o m p u t e r - m e d i a t e d c o m m u n i c a -
t i o n c o n v e y s far less i n f o r m a t i o n than face-to-face
i n t e r a c t i o n s , it has b e e n k n o w n to e m p o w e r cer-
tain p e o p l e g r o u p s w h o finally c a n i n t e r a c t w i t h
o t h e r s w i t h o u t the usual h i n d r a n c e s of t h e i r stig-
m a t i z e d p h y s i c a l a p p e a r a n c e or s o c i a l s t a t u s .
W h i l e m a n y s c h o l a r s r e g a r d this p h e n o m e n a as
e v i d e n c e of i n c r e a s e d e g a l i t a r i a n i s m on-line, it
seems n e c e s s a r y to c o n f r o n t the fact that the egali-
tarian e n v i r o n m e n t is n o t a p r o d u c t of d i m i n i s h e d
p r e j u d i c e or t r u e u n d e r s t a n d i n g , b u t a r e s u l t of
c o m p u t e r m e d i a t i o n ' s c a p a c i t y to free individu-
als f r o m e x i s t i n g social n o r m s b y o f f e r i n g a l m o s t
c o m p l e t e c o n t r o l o v e r t h e m a n a g e m e n t of t h e i r
i d e n t i t i e s . I n d i v i d u a l s are a c c e p t e d as e q u a l s o n l y
b e c a u s e t h e y c a n h i d e t h e i r t r u e c o n d i t i o n s un-
d e r c a r e f u l l y c o n s t r u c t e d p e r s o n a s . As S h e r r y
Turkle has s h o w n in h e r b o o k Life on the Screen,
on-line c o m m u n i t i e s can b e c o m e u s e f u l s p a c e s
for i n d i v i d u a l s to e x p e r i m e n t w i t h m u l t i p l e per-
s o n a s w h e t h e r it is t h r o u g h g e n d e r s w a p p i n g , or
e x p l o r i n g n e w d e g r e e s of v u l n e r a b i l i t y or p r o m i s -
cuity.Thus, for b e t t e r or for w o r s e , c o m p u t e r me-
d i a t i o n offers i n d i v i d u a l s u n p r e c e d e n t e d c o n t r o l
o v e r t h e m a n a g e m e n t of t h e i r i d e n t i t i e s a n d be-
haviors. They can hide their actual c o n d i t i o n s
u n d e r c o n s t r u c t e d p e r s o n a s or act o u t w i t h o u t
any s o c i a l l y - b i n d i n g c o n s e q u e n c e s .
On-line communities can b e c o m e
useful spaces for individuals to
experiment with multiple personas
w h e t h e r it is through gender
swapping, or promiscuity.
Because computer-mediated communication
c a n e q u a l l y l e a d to a m o r e h o s t i l e or c o n g e n i a l
social environment, many virtual communities
a t t e m p t to m a n a g e this n e w a n d u n c e r t a i n social
t e r r a i n w i t h r u l e s o r c h a r t e r s . On t h e iVillage
website, a " C o m m u n i t y Covenant" establishes the
b o u n d a r i e s of c o m m u n i c a t i o n , a n d in d o i n g so,
i m p l i c i t l y s h a p e s t h e p u r p o s e s of t h e c o m m u n i t y
itself, iVillage e x p l a i n s to its m e m b e r s : " i V i l l a g e is
a p l a c e w h e r e it's o k a y to be y o u r s e l f - - b e t h a t
h a r r i e d , jovial, silly or s a d - - a s l o n g as y o u always
act w i t h r e s p e c t for y o u r f e l l o w iVillagers .... The
real o b j e c t i v e of c o m m u n i t y is to u n d e r s t a n d e a c h
other, n o t to a t t a c k o t h e r s a n d c o n v i n c e t h e m that
y o u ' r e r i g h t .... A g r e e to d i s a g r e e respectfully."
43
Representative of many other on-line communi-
ties, iVillage f r a m e s i t s e l f as a c o m m u n i t y t h a t is
c e n t r a l l y c o n c e r n e d w i t h l e t t i n g its m e m b e r s " b e
themselves" within a judgment-free environment.
While these goals are well-intended, such objec-
t i v e s t e n d to r e v e a l a r a t h e r t h i n n o t i o n o f c o m -
m u n a l e n d s . W h e n t h e i m p e t u s o f a n y f o r m o f reci-
p r o c i t y o r o b l i g a t i o n is s o l e l y t h e p r o t e c t i o n o f
e a c h i n d i v i d u a l ' s s e n s e o f self, it b e c o m e s a p p a r -
ent that these virtual communities are actually
inversions of accepted notions of communities,
for t h e p r e s e r v a t i o n a n d e n h a n c e m e n t o f p e r s o n a l
well-being have essentially become the commu-
nal purpose.
I n s t a n t I n t i m a c y Among Strangers
Lastly, w h a t k i n d o f t r u s t is f o s t e r e d in a c o m -
munity that has released individuals from exter-
nal social demands and pressures, enabled them
to c o n t r o l t h e i r p r o j e c t e d i d e n t i t i e s , a n d p e r h a p s
most importantly, given them anonymity amidst
social interaction? We have already touched on
some of the social consequences that result from
a l l o w i n g p e o p l e to h i d e t h e i r off-line i d e n t i t i e s .
Through cryptic usernames or aliases, people are
granted a degree of psychological disinhibition,
w h i c h , in o n e i n s t a n c e , f r e e s t h e m t o a t t a c k e a c h
o t h e r , a n d in a n o t h e r , c u r i o u s l y s t i m u l a t e s a n "in-
stant intimacy" among them. In these circum-
s t a n c e s , it is w o r t h n o t i n g t h a t , i n s t e a d o f b e i n g
suspicious of strangers, people find themselves
d i s c u s s i n g t h e i r lives a n d o p i n i o n s m o r e o p e n l y
with those who they probably have not met and
w i l l n e v e r m e e t in p e r s o n .
To a s i g n i f i c a n t d e g r e e , t h e c l u b f o r " P e o p l e
H a v i n g an Affair" r e s t s o n t h i s v e r y p r e m i s e as
m e m b e r s m u t u a l l y c o n f e s s t h e i r r e s p e c t i v e affairs
a n d e x c h a n g e e m o t i o n a l s u p p o r t in t h e i r activi-
ties, w i t h o u t t h e c o m p l i c a t i o n s o f p u b l i c d i s c l o -
sure. O n e m e m b e r ' s m e s s a g e c a p t u r e d a c o m m o n
s e n t i m e n t w h e n s h e w r o t e : " T h a n k s all f o r b e i n g
h e r e ! ! W e c e r t a i n l y d o n e e d a p l a c e to l e t t h e
W H O L E t r u t h c o m e o u t .... I s p e n d s o m u c h t i m e
' e d i t i n g ' t h e t r u t h to p r e s e n t it to v a r i o u s f r i e n d s
... t h a t it's c r a z y m a k i n g at times."
T h i s t y p e o f t r u s t in s t r a n g e r s f o u n d f r e q u e n t l y
in v i r t u a l c o m m u n i t i e s s e e m s to b e q u a l i t a t i v e l y
different from the sort of trust that Putnam and
other social scientists have sought to measure.
T h i s is t h e k i n d o f t r u s t t h a t G e o r g S i m m e l dis-
c u s s e d in his f a m o u s e s s a y " T h e Stranger." I n it, h e
d e s c r i b e s a u n i q u e t y p e o f t r u s t in t h e a r c h e t y p a l
s t r a n g e r w h o is n o t " . . , t h e w a n d e r e r w h o c o m e s
44 SOCIETY 9 JANUARY / FEBRUARY 2002
t o d a y a n d g o e s t o m o r r o w , b u t r a t h e r ... t h e m a n
who comes today and stays tomorrow--the po-
tential wanderer, so to speak, who, although he
has gone no further, has not quite got over the
f r e e d o m o f c o m i n g a n d g o i n g " (p. 143). F o r S i m m e l
o b s e r v e d t h a t w h e n " t h e o n e w h o is r e m o t e is
near," p e o p l e e a s i l y d i v u l g e t h e i r k e p t s e c r e t s ,
p r o b l e m s a n d c o n f e s s i o n s . I n t h e s a m e way, a n y
time a member of a virtual community logs on,
t h e y c a n p o u r o u t t h e i r h e a r t s in t h e p r i v a c y o f
their bedroom or office to the multitude of on-
l i n e r e a d e r s w h o a r e " o u t there," b u t , like a n y g o o d
f r i e n d , a r e " a l w a y s t h e r e f o r you."
Simmel suggested that the appeal of the
stranger as confidante is a f u n c t i o n o f t h e
stranger's possession of (1) an apparent objectiv-
i t y a n d ( 2 ) a p o t e n t i a l for m o b i l i t y . First, as s o m e -
o n e w h o is n o t d i r e c t l y i n v o l v e d in t h e c o n f e s s o r ' s
life, t h e s t r a n g e r l a c k s p e r s o n a l ties t h a t c a n p r e j u -
dice perception. On-line, individuals frequently
m a k e a p l e a f o r i n p u t f r o m t h o s e w h o h a v e "an
o p e n m i n d " ( t h a t is, i m p l i c i t l y , in c o n t r a s t to t h e
closed or narrow minds of their family members
a n d f r i e n d s ) . As o n e m e m b e r o f " P e o p l e H a v i n g
a n A f f a i r " e x p l a i n e d in h e r m e s s a g e : " I K N O W t h a t
w h a t I a m D O I N G is n o t r i g h t , b u t , I n e e d to f a c e
w h a t I a m FEELING. K n o w i n g it is w r o n g d o e s
n o t m a k e t h e f e e l i n g s g o away. I n e e d to talk a b o u t
it w i t h s o m e o n e w h o h a s a n o p e n m i n d a n d is
n o t g o i n g t o j u s t tell m e h o w w r o n g it is! I al-
r e a d y k n o w t h a t p a r t ! ! ! " I n t e r e s t i n g l y , in t h i s in-
stance, the possession of an open mind does not
even seem to mean having objectivity about the
issue of extramarital relations. Rather, open-
m i n d e d n e s s h e r e r e f e r s to h a v i n g a t h e r a p e u t i c
appreciation for the individual's personal desires
and pursuit of self-fulfillment over and against the
existing social and moral order.
S e c o n d , t h e p o t e n t i a l f o r m o b i l i t y is, in o n e
s e n s e , p r e s e n t in all m e m b e r s o f a v i r t u a l c o m m u -
nity. S i n c e t h e g e o g r a p h i c c o m p o n e n t o f a c o m -
munity has already been made irrelevant, mem-
bers can leave or "disappear" at any moment.
Virtual communities have such low entry and exit
costs that becoming a member often only requires
registering with a user name and email address.
S i n c e m a i n t a i n i n g m e m b e r s h i p is o n l y c o n t i n g e n t
u p o n p o s t i n g m e s s a g e s , it is p r a c t i c a l l y i m p o s s i b l e
f o r a c o m m u n i t y to k n o w t h e c a u s e o f a p e r s o n ' s
absence or failure to post more messages (unless
t h e i n f o r m a t i o n is v o l u n t e e r e d ) . B e c a u s e v i r t u a l
communities have unusually low entry and exit
c o s t s , t h e r e is a s e n s e in w h i c h e v e n t h e m o s t
intimate of personal self-revelations are framed
within a structure of loose ties, low e x p e c t a t i o n s
and weak means of accountability.The less bind-
ing the ties, the more p e o p l e trust each other with
a peculiar c o m b i n a t i o n of quick c o m p a s s i o n and
selective indifference.As such, the c o m m u n i t y of
intimate strangers b e c o m e s a normative ideal for
virtual communities, an ideal that has t u r n e d tra-
ditional notions of c o m m u n i t y inside out on many
different levels.
The Reality o f Unintended Consequences
In all, the structural and technical features of
virtual c o m m u n i t i e s have the effect of releasing
individuals from the usual socially-binding de-
mands that guide our everyday lives.With an in-
crease in individual p o w e r to c o n t r o l o n e ' s iden-
tity, social interactions, and degree of c o m m u n a l
p a r t i c i p a t i o n , the virtual c o m m u n i t i e s usually
f u n c t i o n as t h e r a p e u t i c c o m m u n i t i e s , existing
primarily to serve the personal ends of its mem-
bers.
It is unfortunate that many of the
benefits virtual communities bring
to the individual may undermine
the cultivation of particular
sensibilities necessary for citizens
of a vibrant democracy.
As scholars c o n t i n u e to puzzle over the feasi-
bility (and desirability) of r e n e w i n g local c o m m u -
nities and civic associations amidst today's eco-
n o m i c a n d c u l t u r a l c o n d i t i o n s , t h e r e is n o
question that virtual communities have an incred-
ible potential to be the safe and c o n v e n i e n t ha-
vens of s u p p o r t and advice that p e o p l e are seek-
ing. But to claim that they can simply replace local
c o m m u n i t i e s and their associations as the build-
ing blocks of d e m o c r a c y is to fail to appreciate
h o w the medium and configuration of virtual com-
munities are p r e d i s p o s e d to e n c o u r a g e and insti-
tutionalize a therapeutic u n d e r s t a n d i n g of w h a t
a c o m m u n i t y is for. To p r e s u m e that social b o n d s
in an e m b o d i e d local c o m m u n i t y w o u l d retain its
character and quality in a virtual and "place"-less
one, is to neglect the dynamic ways in w h i c h our
environments of social interaction provide limita-
tions and supply possibilities for particular behav-
iors, perceptions, and thoughts, impacting w h a t
w e think is possible and g o o d in a community.
VIRTUAL COMMUNITIES IN A THERAPEUTIC AGE
It is u n f o r t u n a t e that m a n y o f the benefits vir-
tual c o m m u n i t i e s bring to the individual are the
very factors that may u n d e r m i n e the cultivation
of particular sensibilities n e c e s s a r y for citizens
of a vibrant democracy. For the strength of vir-
tual c o m m u n i t i e s is ultimately their capacity to
subvert e m b o d i e d social authority.This, however,
effectively w e a k e n s the c o m m u n i t y ' s ability to
prioritize external c o m m u n a l ends over personal
w e l l - b e i n g . W h e n there is an a b s e n c e of anything
socially binding, individuality and f r e e d o m c a n
flourish as w e desire. But, the cost is a loss o f ef-
fective sanctions that can e n c o u r a g e the pursuit
of larger c o m m u n a l p u r p o s e s . This is not to dis-
miss the reality of specific individuals and par-
ticular on-line c o m m u n i t i e s w h o do i n d e e d pur-
sue and achieve larger c o m m u n a l goals that r e a c h
b e y o n d their p e r s o n a l sense of self-fulfillment.
Rather, it is to say that the s t r u c t u r e s of these
c o m m u n i t i e s simply lack the r e s o u r c e s to consis-
tently resist being a p p r o p r i a t e d by a culture that
most prizes an individual's sense of well-being.
As a result, virtual c o m m u n i t i e s will p r o b a b l y fail
to meaningfully revitalizeAmerican c o m m u n a l life
and may even bear the u n i n t e n d e d c o n s e q u e n c e
of f u r t h e r i n g its decline.
SUGGESTED FURTHER READINGS
Bimber, Bruce."The Internet and Political Transforma-
tion: Populism, Community, and Accelerated Plu-
ralism." Polity,Vol. XXXI, Number 1 (Fall 1998):
133-160.
Jones, Steven G."The Internet and its Social Landscape"
in Steven G.Jones, ed., Virtual Culture. London:
Sage, 1997.
Rieff, Philip. The Triumph of the Therapeutic. Chicago:
University of Chicago Press, 1966.
Rheingold, Howard. The Virtual Community. Reading,
MA:Addison-Wesley, 1993.
Simmel, Georg."The Stranger" in Donald N. Levine, ed.,
George S i m m e l on Individuality a n d Social
Forms. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1971.
Sunstein, Cass. Republic.com. Princeton: Princeton
University Press, 2001.
Wellman, Barry."Virtual Communities as Communities:
Net Surfers Don't Ride Alone," in Marc A. Smith
and P e t e r Kollock, eds., C o m m u n i t i e s in
Cyberspace. London: Routledge, 1999.
Felicia Wu Song is a f e l l o w at the Institute f o r Ad-
v a n c e d Studies in Culture at the University o f Vir-
ginia.
45