This page is referenced by:

• 1 2017-03-22T14:10:29-07:00 Pretenses of Online Anonymity: The Language of People Who Pose as Different Genders 4 plain 2017-03-24T03:13:29-07:00

  Aaron C. Acuna

  Part I: Introduction

  This project compares the language of people who pose as different genders in online settings and people who are confident in their genders and never pose as other genders. Only two separate online discussions were observed for this project. The goal was to see how the gendered language differs between Group A and Group B. It has been determined that, in an online setting at least, stereotypical gendered behavior is actually more pronounced in individuals who have posed as genders that are not their own, while stereotypical gendered behavior is in some ways reversed and even averted in individuals who are confident in their gender identities.
  
  I believe that gender roles and gendered behavior in communication have become less distinctly pronounced in men and women. That is, men are less likely to act stereotypically masculine while women are less likely to act stereotypically feminine. In the process of collecting data, it was observed that the gendered behavior of the participating genders was not very consistent. In other words, if one did not know the gender of each participant, there would be almost no way to determine what their true gender is.
  
   

  Part II: Literature Background

  This study bases its observations on the findings of Susan C. Herring in her article “Gender and Power in On-line Communication”; Mary Talbot in her article “Gender Stereotypes: Reproduction and Challenge”; and Deborah Cameron in her article “Gender and Language Ideologies.” Herring’s findings are especially important to this study of asynchronous online communication due to Herring’s focus on asynchronous computer-mediated communication (or asynchronous CMC). Online communication and computer-mediated communication is the same thing; the difference between the two terms is nothing other than the fact that Herring’s term, CMC, is an older one that no longer sees widespread use. Regardless, much of Herring’s theory on online communication is still worth studying due to its importance in evaluating contemporary asynchronous CMC and how asynchronous CMC has changed since Herring did her studies in the 1990s. For example, Herring finds that:
  
   
  . . . text-only [asynchronous] CMC is less revealing of personal information than face-to-face communication, and some user names are neutral as to gender. Female users can choose to present themselves so as to minimize discrimination and harassment by adopting a gender-neutral name . . . in cyberspace others only know what you choose to present about yourself (206).
  
   
  This finding is still very much true of contemporary asynchronous CMC. In addition, Herring’s observations of asynchronous CMC have led her to realize that “politeness is one common means through which gender is cued in asynchronous CMC” (207). In other words, an online user’s level of politeness is a strong indicator of what that user’s gender is (and “politeness” as a concept is different across cultures, so it should be noted that Herring writes on American culture). Women “are more likely to thank, appreciate, and apologize, and to be upset by violations of politeness” (Herring 207), whereas men are:
  
   
  . . . less concerned with politeness; they issue bald face-threatening acts such as unmitigated criticisms and insults, violate on-line rules of conduct, tolerate or even enjoy “flaming,” and tend to be more concerned about threats to freedom of expression than with attending to others’ social “face” (Herring
  207-208).
   
  
  Just as well, men tend to:
   
  
  . . . post longer messages, begin and close discussions in mixed-sex groups, assert opinions strongly as “facts,” use crude language (including insults and profanity), and in general, manifest an adversarial orientation toward their interlocutors (Herring 207),
   
  
  whereas women:
  
  
  . . . tend to post . . . short messages, and are more likely to qualify and justify their assertions, apologize, express support of others, and, in general, manifest an “aligned” orientation toward their interlocutors (Herring 207).
   
  
  Finally, Herring notes that the gender minority tends to imitate the communication styles of the gender majority. For example, “women tend to be more aggressive in male-dominated groups than among other women” (Herring 207). The opposite is true of men, who are less aggressive in female-dominated groups (Herring 207). These findings make sense in theory, but some of them are less true in the year 2016 than they were when Herring did her research in the 1990s.
  
  Talbot’s “Gender Stereotypes: Reproduction and Challenge” is another important article to consider when observing online communication. Talbot does not write on online communication, but her findings are important in observing online communication because gendered online communication is rooted in gendered offline communication. One of the most important things to remember is that, in observing asynchronous online communication, gender stereotypes must be considered at all times. Talbot writes:
   
  
  We type people according to the complexes of classificatory schemes in our culture, in terms of the social positions they inhabit, their group membership, personality traits, and so on. . . . [S]tereotyping . . . reduces and simplifies, often inaccurately. Both social typing and stereotyping are practices in the maintenance of the social and symbolic order; both involve a strategy of “splitting,” whereby the normal and acceptable are separated from the abnormal and unacceptable, resulting in the exclusion of the latter (470-471).
   
  
  Stereotypes are reinforced in online communication because it is an easy way for people to categorize anonymous users whose genders are unknown. For example, Herring’s observations of women being passive and men being aggressive in asynchronous CMC is, while true to some extent, a stereotype used subconsciously by regular internet users to differentiate between anonymous users. That is, people base online hierarchies on how masculine and feminine online users are, even if these users are anonymous. The reason online users feel the need to create a hierarchy is because, as Talbot writes:
   
  
  Power is clearly a key in stereotyping because stereotypes tend to be directed at subordinate or minority groups, e.g. ethnic minorities and women. Stereotypes play an important part in hegemonic struggle (471).
   
  
  Furthermore, Talbot writes that “Hegemony involves control by consent rather than force” (471), which connects to stereotypes in such that:
   
  
  Gender stereotypes are closely linked with and support gender ideologies. If we view them as ideological prescriptions for behavior, then actual individuals have to respond to the stereotypical roles expected of them. Gender stereotypes linked to gender ideology reproduce naturalized gender differences. In doing so, they function to sustain hegemonic male dominance and female subordination (472).
   
  
  The same stereotypes and hegemonic male dominance appears in online discussion forums (as outlined by Herring). Therefore, Talbot’s findings on gender stereotypes are invaluable to the observation of asynchronous online communication because online communication is riddled with—and even emphasizes—gendered language.
  
              Cameron’s findings are, in the context of my study, the least important of the three sets of findings, though it remains that Cameron is still important to this study because her findings exist to this study as both a crucial reinforcement and a counterargument to both Herring’s and Talbot’s findings. That is, she makes some of the same observations as Herring and Talbot while potentially “disproving” others. For example, Cameron writes:
   
  
  Joel Sherzer (1987) has suggested one useful overarching generalization: that in any community the normal linguistic behavior of women and men will be represented in ways congruent with the community's more general representation of the essential natures of the two groups. If women are said to be "naturally" modest, for example, their speech will be represented as expressing that modesty - community members may explain that "women don't like to speak in public," for instance. In observed reality, there may be little evidence for this generalization, or the evidence may be contradictory.
   
  
  With this statement, Cameron believes that some observations made in older studies, such as Herring’s, are potentially outdated and will become even more so as the years pass. This is not to say Herring’s observations are always wrong—again, some Herring’s statements are true even in 2016—but that they are not universal to gendered experience.
  
  However, Cameron does not always reject the observations of older findings. For example, when Cameron writes,
   
  
  The idea that women are better than men at sharing their feelings or listening sympathetically to others is hardly novel: on the contrary, it is a hoary old stereotype (458),
   
  
  she is reinforcing Talbot’s assertions on gender stereotypes. Talbot even elaborates on gender stereotypes when she claims:
   
  
  Ideological statements such as "women's language lacks forcefulness" can become self-fulfilling prophecies; that is why it is important to challenge them so vigorously. In which case, it might well be asked why so many common stereotypes find little support in empirical studies of naturally occurring language use (463).
   
  
  Thus, Cameron provides an alternate viewpoint on much of the same fundamental theories on gendered communication and gender stereotypes that Herring and Talbot provide.
                         

  Part III: Methods

  Because my project just focuses on asynchronous online communication between strangers, no complicated ethnographic methods were necessary to obtain my data. Rather, an online discussion forum was observed—specifically, Reddit.com’s “askreddit” discussion forum, which is a discussion forum for people to anonymously ask one another questions on literally any subject. For example, the top five most popular question threads in December, 2016, are:
   
  1. “What is the scariest film that doesn’t resort to cheap jump scares?”
  2. “What tasty food would be [disgusting] if eaten over rice?”
  3. “Girls, when the guys aren’t around, what are your true thoughts on Pascal’s principles of hydrostatics?”
  4. “If we lost all memory of Photoshop, but the pictures remained, which [doctored] photo would be the hardest to explain?”
  5. “People revving your engines at 8am on a Saturday…watcha doin’?”
   
  These question threads serve as a means for casual discussion. Additionally, because Reddit is a popular social media platform, these question threads often receive thousands of comments. I collected data by choosing two question threads that were relevant to my topic, and I scanned each of the two threads for the most relevant (i.e. the most explicitly gendered) comments. Each comment is documented on a table that lists the username, comment, gender, and gendered language of each Reddit user; the noted indexes, or language variables, come from Susan C. Herring’s study on computer-mediated communication. Additionally, there is a separate table for each of the two question threads. These tables can be found in the next section, “Part IV: Results.”
   

  Part IV: Results

  Table 1: “Guys who pretend to be female online, why do you do it?”
   
  
   Note: An asterisk (*) denotes a person whose gender is not stated in the comment itself but is either implied through the gendered language in the comment or is made explicit in their comment history (in which “comment history” refers to an archive of other comments the user has made in other Reddit discussion threads. Their comment history is accessible in their user profile).
   
  Table 2: “What have you always wondered about the other gender?”
  
   
  Note: An asterisk (*) denotes a person whose gender is not stated in the comment itself but is either implied through the gendered language in the comment or is made explicit in their comment history (in which “comment history” refers to an archive of other comments the user has made in other Reddit discussion threads. Their comment history is accessible in their user profile).

   

  Part V: Discussion

  Each table in the previous section corresponds to one of two Reddit question threads observed for this project: (1) “Guys who pretend to be female online, why do you do it?” and (2) “What have you always wondered about the other gender?” Each thread was scanned for fifteen comments that display strong characteristics of gendered language as outlined by Herring.
  
  Thread #1, “Guys who pretend to be female online, why do you do it?” is primarily aimed toward male users (and most of the thread’s comments are written by men), but some women are seen participating as well. Some of these women even write on their experiences posing as men.
  
  The first observed comment in Thread #1 is by user CQZ. CQZ’s comment is short, contains improper grammar and cuss words, and he answers the topic question by saying “[to] Get free shit on runescape.” Runescape is an online fantasy game with much social interaction (akin to the popular game World of Warcraft, which is also mentioned in this same question thread). Though CQZ does not literally say he is male, the way he answers the topic question strongly implies he is in fact male. In any case, for CQZ to say he poses as a woman to get free items implies that women, in this online setting, are given a positive kind of attention that men are not given—thus, women receive free items, presumably for simply being a woman in a male-dominated area meant for social interaction rather than workplace prestige. Interestingly, CQZ’s answer is not a unique one. Several users further down Thread #1 confirm the same type of behavior, whether it is for free items or for attention in general.
  
  The second user, Canazza, responds directly to CQZ. Redtit64’s comment. Cannaza’s comment is long and contains improper grammar. Canazza says he has accidentally done the same thing as CQZ, but in the game World of Warcraft rather than in Runescape. In Canazza’s long comment, he explains his situation: Another World of Warcraft player had mistaken redtit64 for a girl due to his using a female character model. Like CQZ, Canazza does not explicitly state he is male, but his language and the way he answers the topic question strongly implies he is male.
  
  The third user, redtit64, writes a short comment with improper grammar. Redtit64’s comment does not explicitly state his gender, but considering the way he answers the topic question (as well as his username, which contains a juvenile pun on the name “Reddit” that combines the words “red” and “tit,” a vulgar term for “breast”), it may be safe to assume that redtit64 is male—and a young one, at that.
  
  The fourth user, Beautifulcreature86, writes a long comment, makes note of at least one other person’s physical attractiveness, cusses, and writes their comment as a statement rather than as an opinion. By all accounts, Beautifulcreature86 should be male. However, because their comment never explicitly states their gender, I had to dig into their comment history to see if they ever mentioned their gender. And surprisingly, they do mention their gender; it turns out Beautifulcreature86 is female (because she at some point anecdotally mentions when she first began getting her period). Her username may hint to her gender; stereotypically, not many straight cisgender men refer to themselves as “beautiful creatures.”
  
  The fifth user, julia0143, writes an unapologetically long comment with proper grammar. Julia0143’s gender is not explicitly stated, but going through her comment history reveals her gender is female. Additionally, judging from her username, her real name is possibly “Julia.” Julia0143’s long comment tells a story of her younger brother doing something foolish with his life. There is no statement to be made; julia0143 is just telling a story.
  
  The sixth user, Svenhoek86, writes a long, assertive comment with slang and improper grammar. He is explicitly male; he writes on the frustrations of dating women and blames his romantic misfortune on his depression, which may or may not be legitimate. He uses slightly abnormal, slightly dramatic words to describe simple actions (e.g. “erode” for “fall” or “lessen”; he writes “your standards erode more and more” as opposed to “your standards lessen over time”). Additionally, he writes as if his opinions are facts.
  
  The seventh user, buckeyelegend44, writes a long comment with mostly casual but some vulgar language. His gender is not explicit, but the way he answers the topic question strongly implies he is male, as he recounts in his comment a past event in which he had to pose as a young girl in a chat room for the purpose of catching potential pedophiles; of course, this was for a “Computer Crimes” class rather than it being a genuine police sting. Just as well, buckeyelegend44’s vulgar language and general nonchalance toward his otherwise unnerving discussion subject imply he is male.
  
  The eighth user, JdotAllan, writes a long comment with proper grammar. He is not explicitly male, but the way he answers the topic question implies he is male, as he writes on his experience of playing the videogame Second Life initially with a male character while eventually switching to a female character for the purpose of a university assignment related to online communities. JdotAllan’s assignment had him play Second Life to speak with other Second Life players about their experiences communicating with other Second Life players. The assignment was at first unsuccessful because no one wanted to speak with JdotAllan while he played as a male character. Because of his initial failures, JdotAllan changed his character from male to female. As a female character, JdotAllan found that many more Second Life players wanted to speak with him; in fact, some players approached him unprovoked. JdotAllan concludes that women receive more attention in online communities. JdotAllan’s experience playing Second Life harkens back to CQZ’s and Canazza’s experiences playing Runescape and World of Warcraft.
  
  The ninth user, Stakz12, writes a short comment with cuss words and various other vulgar language. His gender is not explicit, though from the way he answers the topic question (i.e. he pretends to be a woman to mess with other men), he is strongly implied to be male.
  
  The tenth user, thecutestnerd, writes a short, supportive comment with casual language, a light cuss word (“ass”), and an “emoticon” (or “Emoting Icon”) in the form of a happy face. Thecutestnerd is not explicitly female; the fact that she mentions having a boyfriend is not proof of her gender, as she could have been a homosexual male. However, from the way she answers the topic question, she is implied to be female. Additionally, by viewing her comment history, one can see that she refers to herself as a female multiple times; therefore, theecutestnerd is female.  Also, her username, as with Beautifulcreature86 before her, may hint to her true gender; not many straight cisgender men refer to themselves as “the cutest.”
  
  The eleventh user, kev_the_noble, writes a short comment with vulgar language. He is no explicitly male; however, the way he answers the topic question strongly implies he is male. He writes on his experience making a fake account on a dating website to see what girls go through on dating platforms. He refers to “girls” in such a way that he implies he is not also a girl. Of course, his “othering” of women does not fully imply he is male; he could be nonbinary. And unlike thecutestnerd, kev_the_noble’s username does not fully imply he is male; there are plenty of nonbinary or genderqueer individuals who go by traditionally masculine and feminine names because they either cannot afford to legally change their names, or they just do not wish to change their names when they transition to become nonbinary. However, his comment history strongly implies he is male rather than genderqueer.
  
  The twelfth user, PaperCutPupils, writes a short, apologetic comment with proper grammar. He is not explicitly male, but as with kev_the_noble, the way PaperCutPupils answers the topic question strongly implies he is male. Like kev_the_noble, PaperCutPupils once pretended to be female in an online community to see how women deal with harassment. He recounts that “I only did it for 10 minutes before I had to get out. I had no idea [that women had it so bad].”
  
  The thirteenth user, Aeolian_Epona, writes a short, assertive comment with proper grammar. She is explicitly female. She recounts previous experiences playing videogames online and how she has had to hide her gender for fear of being harassed by male gamers. Additionally, the “Epona” in her username alludes to “Epona the Horse” from The Legend of Zelda videogame franchise. Epona is a female horse.
  
  The fourteenth user, DiggaryDonaldson2, writes a long, supportive comment with proper grammar, casual language, vulgar language and cuss words. His comment is also somewhat apologetic, yet he also writes his comment as if it is a true statement rather than an opinion. DiggerDonaldson2 is not explicitly male, but his answer, as well as his comment history, strongly implies he is male. He writes a comment in support of women after recounting an experience he once had reading through the disturbing comments his girlfriend’s friend received on a dating platform.
  
  The fifteenth and final user of Thread #1, propuntmma, writes a long, apologetic comment in support of women. He is not explicitly male, though he strongly implies he is male from the way he writes his comment: He recounts his experience posing as a female to play online poker. The reason he posed as a female to play online poker is because women are apparently not taken very seriously in online poker, and so his opponents let their guard down with him when he is “female.” He also recounts all the flirtatious behavior sent his way whenever he posed as a woman during his online poker games. He describes the online female experience as “aggravating.” Propuntmma’s experience adequately sums up Thread #1 as a whole: Aggravating. That is to say, men pose as women for the attention, and women pose as men to avoid the attention. The contrast is astoundingly black and white, yet it is not at all unexpected.
  
  Thread #2, “What have you always wondered about the other gender?” is, unlike Thread #1, aimed at any gender. Yet still, there are more comments in Thread #2 explicitly written by men than there are written by women.
  
  The first observed comment in Thread #1 is by user commencedownvotes. He writes a long, apologetic comment with mostly proper grammar in support of women—specifically, pregnant women. He is explicitly male. In responding to the topic question, he asks, “Isn’t being pregnant extremely scary?” He then writes on his assumptions, but none of his language or assumptions are rude, aggressive, or insulting. Because many other women respond to him, the way he replies back to them is in such a way that is nice and supportive.
  
  The second user, BuckeyeMommy, writes, in response to the first comment, a long, humorous comment with proper grammar and casual language. Though her gender is not explicit, the fact that she answers by saying she is a pregnant woman strongly implies she is female, although—and this is an issue with every user and not just BuckeyeMommy—there is no way to tell if she is a pregnant transgender male who has not transitioned or at least lost her ability to give birth. Therefore, it is assumed she and all other people in Thread #1 and Thread #2 are, unless stated otherwise, cisgender men and women.
  
  The third user, Tsim12345, writes a long comment with proper grammar and neutral language. She is explicitly female. She writes on her inability to have children due to a medical issue, but she also feels relieved in that she feels pregnancy is a burden. She expresses her opinion without strong, insulting, or aggressive language. In fact, she is slightly apologetic in that she says “Just my perspective” at the end of her comment, as if she does not wish to offend anyone.
  
  The fourth user, IReportDumbCunts, writes a long comment with proper grammar. Though he is not explicitly male, the way he answers the topic question—i.e. he refers to “women” in such a way that “others” women—implies he is male. His username may or may not hint to his true gender; after all, though the vulgar word “cunt” is almost exclusively female-oriented in the U.S., the term has a less offensive and a more “friendly” meaning in the U.K. and Australia, and it is also gender neutral. In any case, IReportDumbCunts asks how women are able to smell so good, as in “It seems almost any woman of average attractiveness or higher [attractiveness] smells incredible.” He describes the phenomenon as “Shits magical”—i.e. “The female ability to smell so nice is magical.” He is aware of the potentially creepiness/invasiveness of the question and is apologetic for it. It seems he does not wish to offend anyone.
  
  The fifth user, haoareyoudoing, writes a short comment. Though not explicitly male, haoareyoudoing makes a statement that is geared toward women, and he writes his comment in such a way that he “others” women from himself. The comment itself is posed not as a question but as a statement; he says he finds it strange “[h]ow women can have a long, deep conversation with you in person, but won’t text back in the same day.” There is nothing overtly aggressive or insulting in this comment though he writes as if he means to frame his opinion as a fact.
  
  The sixth user, ParadoxicalFire, writes a short comment with casual, vulgar language and proper grammar. Though not explicitly female, her question is geared toward men, and she writes her comment in such a way that she “others” men from herself. The comment itself is posed as a question; she asks about male genitalia and whether or not it gets squished by their thighs whenever men walk. It is a very innocent question and is, like the previous comment, not overtly aggressive or insulting in any way. However, there is something interesting about the fact that ParadoxicalFire poses her comment as a question while the previous user, haoareyoudoing, poses his comment as a statement.
  
  The seventh user, wanawanka, responds directly to the previous user, ParadoxicalFire. He writes a short comment with improper grammar, and because he replies directly to ParadoxicalFire’s question, his comment is a statement rather than a question. And though he is not explicitly male, he says “our balls dont hang directly between our legs . . . theyre in front,” in which the “our” signifies that he refers to himself as a male and that his experience is representative of all males (or, of everyone who has masculine genitalia, at least). There is nothing aggressive or insulting about wanawanka’s answer to ParadoxicalFire’s question.
  
  The eighth user, RXL, writes a short comment with proper grammar and casual language. Though not explicitly male, RXL writes his comment in such a way that he “others” women from himself, thus implying he is male (or, that he is at least not female). He is also aggressive and possibly frustrated in his comment, as he writes, “When women go out as a group can they still not decide where the fuck to go for dinner?” which implies he means to make the statement that all women cannot “decide where the fuck to go for dinner.” Though RXL’s comment is probably not a truly malicious one, it still, from its limited wording, looks to be a typical male comment as outlined by Herring in that he is aggressive, cusses, and makes a statement out of a question.
  
  The ninth user, Pillowish, writes a short, humorous comment with vulgar language and proper though casual language. Pillowish is not explicitly male, though from the way he “others” women in his comment, he is implied to be male. He asks about women with large breasts and how their breasts manage to stay in their bra while they run: “How do you girls still managed to run when your cough boobs cough are quite big? Wouldn’t it bounce despite wearing a bra?” The way he frames the topic of his sentence, “boobs,” is an attempt at making his comment a humorous and therefore less serious one, which is perhaps an attempt to not offend the women who read his comment. There is thus nothing aggressive or insulting about his comment.
  
  The tenth user, Beboprockss, writes a short comment with potentially vulgar language and proper if casual grammar. Though Beboprockss is not explicitly female, the way she “others” men implies she is female. She asks, “Where do you put your penis if you get an erection but you are only wearing something with an elastic waistband?” Her use of the words “penis” and “erection” may or may not be vulgar, but because of the way she uses the terms—i.e. she uses “penis” and “erection” in a non-juvenile way—it may not be vulgar. She poses her comments as a sincere, straightforward question with no overtly positive or negative tones. Therefore, her comment is neither aggressive nor insulting; it just exists.
  
  The eleventh user, mrchicano209, responds directly to the previous user, Beboprockss. Mrchicano209 writes a short comment with slightly improper grammar, and because he replies directly to Beboprockss’s question, his comment is a statement rather than a question. And though he is not explicitly male, the way he answers Beboprockss’s question—i.e. he refers to his own experience as if to answer for all men—strongly implies he is male, or at least someone with masculine genitalia. There is also his username, which contains the honorific “Mr.” This use of “Mr.” implies he is male. In any case, there is nothing inherently aggressive or insulting about mrchicano209’s response to Beboprockss; he simply answers the question.
  
  The twelfth user, Liz_doll, writes a long, supportive comment with proper grammar and casual language. Though not explicitly female, the way she “others” men in her comment, which she directs toward men specifically, strongly implies she is female.  There is also her username, in which she refers to herself as both “Liz” and as a doll; most stereotypically straight cisgender men would not usually refer to themselves either term. In any case, Liz_doll’s long comment is made up of two parts: A series of questions and a series of conclusions to those questions in response to the answers she received for her questions. She asks men what they think of “Brazilian waxes,” which is a term that refers to a woman completely shaving and waxing her pubic hair. She also asks about what men think of red lipstick and whether red lipstick is a turnoff. Finally, she asks about what men of when a girl “tops” during sex—that is, when the girl is on top of the man rather than below the man during sex. Though all very personal questions, she asks them in such a way that she means not to offend anyone, and she nonetheless gets answers for them, which she is very thankful for. There is nothing inherently aggressive or insulting in the way Liz-doll conducts her comment.
  
  The thirteenth user, xphyria, writes a long comment with mostly proper grammar and casual language. Though not explicitly male, the way he “others” women in his comment implies he is male. Xphyria asks about female menstruation and how the blood flow of that process works. He expresses a certain discomfort he has in writing about such a topic, though there is nothing inherently aggressive or insulting in his language.
  
  The fourteenth user, drmeteor, writes a short comment with proper grammar. Though not explicitly male, the way he “others” women in his comment implies he is male. His comment is a very short, very concise one: “Is it possible to aim when women pee?” Though a very personal question, he poses his comment in such a way that is neither aggressive nor insulting; he simply asks what he wishes to ask. It should be noted that he is also, however, not apologetic for asking such an invasive question, which is unusual in that almost every other user who asks a question like his has been apologetic in an attempt to save face. For example, in comparison to the ninth user, Pillowish, who saves face by adding humor to his otherwise invasive comment, drmeteor does not do anything to be apologetic.
  
  The fifteenth and final user of Thread #2, Team_Sprocket, writes a long and assertive (but also positive) comment with mostly proper grammar and casual language. Though not explicitly female, the way she “others” men in her comment—particularly in her use of the word “you,” as in “you men”—implies she is female. Like the twelfth user, Liz_doll, there are two sections to Team_Sprocket’s comment: A series of questions, and a response to the answers she received for her questions. She asks, “What does having a penis and all the stuff that comes with it feel like? Is it heavy? Does it wiggle when you walk? What's it feel like, physically, when it gets hard? Can you feel the blood moving into it? What about when it 'deflates'?” Team_Sprocket then goes on to say, “awesome responses, folks! Although i'll never know what it's like, I feel a little enlightened!” She is assertive but not aggressive in her questions, and she is supportive and positive in her response to the answers she receives. Additionally, there is nothing insulting about her comment; she simply asks what she wishes to ask. Though like the fourteenth user, drmeteor, she (though to a lesser extent) does not attempt to save face in the question portion of her comment despite asking such invasive questions. However, like drmeteor, she never asks her questions in a demeaning or insulting way; again, she simply asks what she wishes to ask.
  
  Team_Sprocket’s experience adequately sums up the experiences of nearly every other user in Thread #2: Assertive yet positive. Almost every user in Thread #2 asks a normally invasive question in such a way that is neither insulting nor in poor taste within the context of the discussion topic; actually, the only user that falls out of line is the eighth user, RXL, who makes an aggressive statement and uses the cuss word “fuck,” which is arguably the strongest and most offensive of all cuss words in American English. However, in comparison to his fellow users’ comments, the use of the word “fuck” is not unexpected or surprising in the least—rather, what is unexpected is his aggression and frustration, which almost no one else seems to display. In general, the users of Thread #2 are, like their Thread #1 counterparts, very pleasant people.
  
  Altogether, there are eleven men and four women in Thread #1, “Guys who pretend to be female online, why do you do it?” Of the men, only three of them explicitly state their gender in their comments, and five of them write short comments while the other six write long comments. Only four of the eleven men use improper grammar while seven of them use proper grammar. Additionally, only three of the eleven men cuss and only four of them use any form of vulgar language. None of them write their comments to insult other users, nor do they impose their opinions on the other users, even the women. Even outside this sample of eleven men, nearly every male user in Thread #1—those that can be identified as male, at least—generally follow these guidelines: They are not rude; they cuss but they do not cuss at each other; they take the topic seriously; they are respectful toward both women and other men; they generally do not use vulgar language, but when they do, it is not overtly disrespectful or offensive; and much of their comments are long rather than short.
  
  Of the four women in Thread #1, only one of them explicitly states their gender in their comment, and two of them write short comments while the other two write long comments. Each of the four women uses proper grammar. Additionally, two of the women cuss and none them use any form of vulgar language. None of them write their comments to insult other users, nor do they impose their opinions on the other users, even the men. Even outside this sample of four women, nearly every female user in Thread #1—those that can be identified as female, at least—generally follow these guidelines: They are assertive yet supportive; they cuss but they do not cuss at each other; they take the topic seriously; they are respectful toward both men and other women; they generally do not use vulgar language at all; and much of their comments are short rather than long. The two observed female users that do write long comments are outliers in Thread #1.
  
  In Thread #2, “What have you always wondered about the other gender,” there are nine men and six women. Of the men, only one of them explicitly states their gender in their comment, and six of them write short comments while the other three write long comments. None of the men in Thread #2 use improper grammar; casual language, yes, but never improper grammar. Additionally, only one of the nine men cusses and only four of them use any form of vulgar language. None of the male users—other than one, “RXL,” as noted in the previous section—write their comments to insult other users, nor do they impose their opinions on the other users, even the women. Even outside this sample of nine men, nearly every male user in Thread #2—those that can be identified as male, at least—generally follow these guidelines: They are not rude; they cuss but they do not cuss at each other; they take the topic seriously; they are respectful toward both women and other men; they generally do not use vulgar language, but when they do, it is not overtly disrespectful or offensive; they generally do not cuss, but when they do, it is very aggressive toward women; they are generally supportive but curious about women; and much of the men’s comments are short rather than long. Indeed, though Cameron’s findings are technically the least important to my project, I find myself agreeing with her the most, if only because she says Herring’s findings are not universal—which, of course, they are not, if the findings of my project are anything to go by.
  
  Of the six women in Thread #2, only one of them explicitly states their gender in their comment, and two of them write short comments while the other four write long comments. Each of the six women uses proper grammar. Additionally, none of the women cuss, but two of them use vulgar language. None of them write their comments to insult other users, nor do they impose their opinions on the other users, even the men. Even outside this sample of six women, nearly every female user in Thread #2—those that can be identified as female, at least—generally follow these guidelines: They are assertive yet supportive; they cuss but they do not cuss at each other; they take the topic seriously; they are respectful toward both men and other women; they generally do not use vulgar language but are not afraid of using it; and much of their comments are long rather than short. The two observed female users in Thread #2 that write short comments are outliers in Thread #2; a majority of women in Thread #2 actually write long comments.

   

  Part VI: Conclusion

  The good thing about observing anonymous online discussion forums is that many of the comments in these forums are unfiltered in their language—that is, none of the participants hold back on the language they use or the topics they discuss, which means there is always a degree of unabashed truth to what is being said. The setback of observing anonymous discussion forums, however, is that:
   
  
  . . . text-only [asynchronous] CMC is less revealing of personal information than face-to-face communication, and some user names are neutral as to gender. Female users can choose to present themselves so as to minimize discrimination and harassment by adopting a gender-neutral name . . . in cyberspace others only know what you choose to present about yourself (Herring 206).
   
  
  Herring’s statement about “less revealing of personal information” is very much true in my study of these two Reddit discussion threads. The unfiltered language is great, but in turn, there is less to work with in terms of each user’s identity. Their genders are not always known for sure and the tone of how they mean to say their comments is not known for sure either. Furthermore, even with the users who explicitly state their genders in their comments or comment histories, it is unknown whether they are transgender men or women, which may or may not affect their gendered communication styles.
  
              In any case, juxtaposing the language of the men and women in Thread #1 against the language of the men and women in Thread 2 denotes some interesting parallels and contrasts. For example, it seems the men in Thread #1—the thread in which every observed male user has posed as a female online—seems to write longer comments than their Thread #2 counterparts, whom are all otherwise confident in their gender and have never posed as women online (as far as the scope of this thread is aware). Additionally, the women of Thread #1 write shorter comments than the women of Thread #2. Not all of the observed female users in Thread #1 posed as men, but most of them did, and so it is interesting to see that the women in Thread #2—i.e. the woman who have otherwise never posed as men online—write longer comments than their Thread #1 counterparts. Not only that, but in both threads, men and women seem to use cuss words and vulgar language equally; just going by the language each user employs, there is no concrete way to ascertain their genders, which is why I was required to dig into their comment histories to find that information in the first place.
  
  The most curious thing about these parallels and contrasts between Thread #1 and Thread #2 is that they each deliberately go against many of Herring’s gendered language markers—that is, that “men always write longer comments,” “men are more likely to be less polite,” “women do not write long comments,” “women are not assertive,” etc.—yet some of Herring’s language markers are also confirmed, such as “women being more supportive.” However, it must be noted that the behavior of the men and women in both threads is perhaps due to Talbot’s theory of hegemony—that is, because there is an abundance of men in Thread #1, the women of Thread #1 are less like Herring’s theoretical women and more like the men of Thread #1 in that the women of Thread #1 are more likely to write assertive comments with vulgar language in the presence of men. Likewise, because of the strong female presence in Thread #2, the men of Thread #2 are less like Herring’s theoretical men and more like the women of Thread #2. In other words, the men of Thread #2 are more supportive and more positive, and they also use less cuss words due to the strong presence of women. Whether the peculiar behavior of the men and women in both Thread #1 and Thread #2 is due to Talbot’s theory of hegemony or due to the simple fact that contemporary men and women are no longer like Herring’s observed men and women from the 1990s is not known for sure. However, I would like to think that it is a mix of both, especially in the case of my observations. Curiously, it has been determined that stereotypical gendered behavior is actually more pronounced in individuals who have posed as genders that are not their own, while stereotypical gendered behavior is in some ways reversed and even averted in individuals who are confident in their gender identities.
  
  The reason this observation of asynchronous online communication matters, I think, is because it must be known that men and women are evolving in terms of social communication. No longer are contemporary men so typically aggressive, close-minded, and vulgar—at least, not vulgar in the same ways. Likewise, no longer are contemporary women purely submissive and “proper”—that is, “ladylike”—which, of course, is not innately a bad thing, but is also not universal of all contemporary female experiences.  I have determined, for the time being—and with the studies of Herring, Talbot, and Cameron in mind—that gender roles do not play as big a part in language as they previously have, especially in otherwise anonymous online communities such as Reddit. Either Herring’s and Talbot’s findings were subverted or they did not occur at all.  However, when their findings did occur, they were spot-on in regards to what Talbot and especially Herring outlined in their findings. From this study alone, I assume that gender roles are becoming less and less important—or, at least, there is less pressure for each gender to be so typically masculine and feminine, and more freedom for them to just be.
  
   
  Works Cited
  
  "Guys Who Pretend to Be Female Online, Why Do You Do
  It?" Reddit. N.p., n.d. Web.
  <https://www.reddit.com/r/AskReddit/comments/57x019/serious_guys_who_pretend_to_be_female_online_why/>
   
  “What have you always wondered about the other gender?” Reddit.
  N.p., n.d. Web.
  <https://www.reddit.com/r/AskReddit/comments/3yu64l/people_who_pretend_to_be_someone_else_on_the/>
   
   

  ---

  Aaron C. Acuna is pursuing a Baccalaureate of Arts in English with a minor in Music Performance: Percussion. Selected by Professor Clare Dannenberg.