The Vacuous World Re: Pat Shah and pseudonyms

Pat Shah, I agree with your basic premise that pseudonyms allow one to express oneself more completely, and for some people, also more honestly, without fear of consequences. They are also a powerful tool for investigative reporting when doing it openly may be too dangerous.

However, I do not think they are the best way to foster honesty in a number of situations. In fact, they may have the opposite effect. For example, if I were against a particular scientist because he/she didn`t give me a grant I applied for, I could start spreading false rumors about him/her to get back. On Chowk, if I say something someone doesn`t like, they can say false things about me, because it serves their purpose, and they have nothing to lose, since I can never know who it is, and what their motives are.

Before Umair put in the password registration system, people were even accusing others of being dope addicts, writing under different pseudonyms to create multiple personalities for themselves, and worse of all, posing as other interactors (for example someone could pretend to be me). One had no idea who was saying what. The chaos was unbelievable. The sad thing is - that`s why many people use pseudonyms. If that weren`t true, we wouldn`t even need this process of signing up, using password, have a language code etc. You`d see a lot more people interacting (we used to see a lot more people interacting)- but about half of them would be name-calling and falsely accusing each other of some or the other crime.

Another, admittedly a more benign variety of pseudonymer is the `feel-good` type. They appear to have some basic sense of insecurity that is fulfilled by making `feel-good` statements about popular causes in cyberspace where there is no way to separate virtuality from reality.

Also, a somewhat unrelated question - if everyone (all writers as well as interactors) decided that writing under one`s real name was just too painful, and adopted pseudonyms en masse would Chowk be as much fun?

Finally you ask how I seem to know that BG is ``intentionally advancing an ultraliberal activist agenda``. Actually I don`t. I don`t know anything about BG. I said that she APPEARED to be, that this is how she came across to me, but that I could be completely wrong, and may be this wasn`t at all her intention or agenda.

Re: Rishi

You ask why I am not asking BG whether a connection exists between Random and her?

I haven`t because I thought it unfair, since it is not HER pseudonym that is hurling these accusations of tag-team gang attacks on people at me. But I do think it curious that she hasn`t denied a relationship, if none exists.

Also, Rishi, while defending myself against Random`s accusations, I have been careful not to accuse, rather only question him/her about possible motivations.

To be accused of a crime that I`m not commiting, while the accuser MAY be playing the same game himself/herself from behind pseudonyms (see replies to Just Another Woman)- you tell me, where`s the justice in that?

Anita

Limiting Images Re: slink #43

Shandana, dropping out of college to do what you are really good at should be worn as a badge of honor. You simply followed your heart. Takes a lot of courage to not follow the herd and carve out your own unique path.

God knows how much true talent, such as yours, is being sacrificed at the altar of a college and professional degree?

And remember, if the urge strikes you - you can always go to college when you are hitting tottering old age. Who said college is only for the young?

Anita

The Vacuous World Re: Random

Random yaar. I must say I have been rather patient with you. Would like just a plain yes/no. Do you have a connection with BG outside of Chowk? Since this can undermine the credibility of all your tag-team dhandora, why not simply deny it if it isn`t true?

Anita

The Vacuous World Re: BG

Thanks for your response. Look forward to hearing from you.

Anita
(anita@chowk.com)

The Vacuous World Re: Random

I wonder why you are having so much trouble answering this.

If you unfairly accuse others of tag-team personal attacks, shouldn`t you also disclose your own secret alliances, if any? A simple yes or no answer to the following will do:

Do you have any connection with BG outside of Chowk?

(No accusation, just a query.)

Anita

The Vacuous World Re: BG

``does what i say make sense or not? do my ideas appeal to you?..``

I don`t know what it is BG, perhaps it is my scientific training, but in order for ideas to make sense to me, `external consistency` is key. There has to be empiric evidence to show that the ideas work in practice.

Also, to address your point about having nothing to gain from your Chowk writings, may I beg to differ? While some people on Chowk who write under pseudonyms or just their first names (eg. temporal, Futema) seem to do it just for the fun of interaction without having to be constrained by their real world identities, others use them almost entirely to take pot-shots at people (eg. Random). But you do not appear to belong to either group. You appear to intentionally advance an ultraliberal activist agenda, that you really believe in as a cause worth fighting for. But then may be, I`ve just `read` you wrong, and you have no desire to use (may I say a rather excellent opportunity) to meet and work with similarily inclined Pakistanis, that is presented by Chowk. In that case, feel free to correct me.

Regarding the talk on why sanctions should be lifted on Iraqi people, I am actually serious. We`ve been looking for a speaker who has tried to garner popular support in the US for getting the sanctions lifted. It can be arranged on pretty much any Wednesday in the next few months at the Global Chat Forum (January is already taken). There is a fairly large audience to sell your case to, with opportunities for further networking. Airfare can usually be provided.


Re: Random

Random, this was an argument about wrongly accusing couples of tag-team play, while hiding your own relationships, if any, behind pseudonyms, and playing secret tag-team. If I didn`t make that clear, I apologize.

Regarding your relationship with BG, if any - its obvious you don`t want to address the question directly - and I am happy to leave it at that.

Re: Zehra

I sense a budding romance, may be the first for Chowk. Good luck!

Anita

The Vacuous World Re: Umair

Thank you for clarifying for everyone that just because one article appears before or after another, it does not mean that was the order in which they were written.

I`d also like to point out that authors also have no control over when their piece gets published. It may be one day or several months, depending on many factors. For some this means that they may not have time to interact when their article gets published b/c they happen to be busy with other things at the time. Interactors should not construe the author`s absence to mean they are deliberately being snubbed.

Finally, although all the criticism that writers get is at times tough to take, one shouldn`t just stop writing controversial things to please the gallery. I hope that never happens to writers like Shandana. Also, there is indeed a fine line between criticism and abuse by interactors - and you do a great job of watching that line closely, as much as possible without going overboard. One further suggestion would be to intervene with a moderating statement when things that are uncalled for are being said, while not deleting the interactors remarks.

Re: BG (reply #65)

Yes, we`ve had this argument before, and I think we agreed to disagree - to me `who` is saying something is AS important as `what` is being said. So, for instance, Benazir Bhutto may talk of her ideas of gender equality in Pakistan, but we know it doesn`t mean anything coming from her - it`s just for her to get some cachet in the Western world. In other words, her actions belie her words. But it means much more coming from Asma Jehangir. Similarily, Madeline Albright may talk of her visions of justice and peace for all. We can evaluate her actions and know she`s no lover of justice and peace - only of imperialism and American hegemony in the rest of the world.

Someone in this discussion said (it was Rehan, I think, and I am paraphrasing), that as long as what people say in their virtual persona was consistent and made sense, it should be acceptable and believable. I agree that such `internal` consistency is important. However, I would argue that `external` consistency is just as important. In your case, you consistently preach an ultraliberal, anti-elitist, and anti-private property ownership morality. So, it is natural for some to question whether your personal life reflects a similar morality. Are you really never going to own a house, or send your kids to elite schools, for example?

You ask why should the attack against pseudonyms be directed against you, when many others are also using pseudonyms?

That is a very valid question and has a simple answer - you and I feel passionately about many of the same things (especially gender equality, human rights, American imperialism). I see your anonymity as a big hindrance to networking in the real world about issues that we both care about.

Somewhere you implied that you worked for an organization that has been trying to get the punitive sanctions lifted against innocent Iraqis. I would love to be able to invite you to talk to us about your experiences in this regard at our Global Chat Forum at Harvard School of Public Health. Similarily, it would be great to have you join our bulletin board and mailing list on Women, Health, and Rights in South Asia.

So, to be perfectly honest with you, I see your anonymity as wasted opportunity for networking, for working together - for a real life connection among women who seem to have similar goals and aspirations for their country women.

Regards

Anita

Heat Wave ``Markets just opened to technological fast food
While the barbecues are still going in the bazaar
In a country that has seen time travel
And is no stranger to the touch of the Loo * *.``

Ras,

These 4 lines - wonderfully expressive!

Anita

Limiting Images Re: Futema and Bina,

Very useful suggestions from you two. Thank you. I especially like the demonstration of the Eid greeting idea. Just one question - do I have to leave the clothes out - isn`t that one of the major things about how we celebrate Eid - the Eid ka jora, especially in this case when the jora comes all the way from Pakistan? On this note, can anyone refer me to any children`s stories in Urdu that incorporate Eid in them, with lots of pictures? My daughter keeps saying that I should read a story about Eid too - just like so and so`s mother read a story about Hanukah, Kwanzaa, Christmas etc.

Bina, I`ve had similar experiences to yours. People are completely intimidated, and many are turned off by any mention of the `H` word in your educational pedigree. It`s best to avoid it, unless you are in the mood for a lonely evening, and then it works really well.

Anita

The Vacuous World Re: Rishi

Rishi, you argue both sides of the debate really well. I wish I could post your response in the Replies section to my Sobriquets essay....and I miss Sohail from Chowk too. Will have to convince him to take time out from his baby and return to further edify us (btw that`s another advantage of not using a pseudonym - you get to connect and interact in the real world too, if you so desire).

Re: Rehan and Ferozk

Points well taken. But I did have a point to make (see Reply 72) that was important to me, at the expense of my ``reputation`` (would be much easier to do with a pseudonym, on the other hand). Needless to say, I would have preferred to do it offline - but the interactor in question wasn`t interested.

Btw Rehan, you shouldn`t let the ``highly educated and brilliant people`` facade fool you. They argue about NOTHING all the time. You should come to one of my faculty meetings at the unmentionable University in Boston to be truly entertained!

Anita

The Vacuous World Re: Random

To my
``...you have so far avoided answering the question of a connection...``

Random says:

``You cannot finesse this issue so forget about it. I also don`t feel compelled to give out any info just to make the grade according to your rules.``

I think I rest my case.

PS. To all those who have forgotten what the case was (well, there may be SOME people out there who haven`t followed this very closely :)- it is my contention that it is unfair of people who are using pseudonyms and not revealing their relationships to comment on others who are.

Anita

The Vacuous World Random,

I appreciate the change in tone. In fact, I agree with much of what you have to say on psuedonyms being powerful tools when used properly (have said much the same thing in an essay I did for Chowk ``Pseudonyms, Sobriquets, and the Like`` more than a year ago).

However, when you are using your pseudonym to mount personal attacks on people and ascribing ulterior motives to them, you are abusing your pseudonym. I refer you to your interactions in Anne Shamim`s `Just Another Woman`, to the interactions in Umair`s `Killing Iraqis before Ramadan starts` (especially reply #78), and of course to your earlier replies to me in here. Smilies or no smilies, the hostility comes across clearly.

I started this argument because I thought it was unfair of you to accuse others who have been open enough to declare their relationships, of `tag-team play`, when you are not declaring yours. Saad and I could have kept interacting, without revealing our relationship - but we felt readers had a right to know and make their own judgments, if we happen to (and this is rare) articulate the same viewpoint.

Regarding your relationship, if any, with BG:

Please note that unlike you (categorically stating that Saad is writing from my account - which is completely unsubstantiated and false), I have made no declarative statements in this regard. I have questioned a connection because you seem to conveniently and passionately tag-team with her - but it has always been phrased as a question: are you BG, related to BG, or friends with BG? And while you have twice implied (and BG once) that you are not the same person, you have so far avoided answering the question of a connection. Any connection in my mind would go towards proving the point I am making about the hypocrisy evident behind some pseudonyms.

Also, should I not think it odd that you keep declining the offer of personal e-mail contact with me, after requesting it in one of your earlier replies? In other words, have I called your bluff?

Anita

Limiting Images Bina,

This American multiculturalism bit starts pretty soon. Last month I had to give a 20 minute talk on Pakistan to my 6 year old daughter`s class. The teachers wanted me to emphasize Pakistani culture. Imagine holding 20 six year olds attention for that long. I showed pictures of the Northern Areas, including one of a snow leopard (this was the most favorite), a beach scene from Karachi, and several shaadi scenes (the kids all oohed and aahed at the costumes), as well as some traditional dance scenes. I also made a poster with all the kids names written in Urdu which went down very well. But I kept feeling that I was doing an inadequate job of representing my country`s culture - and now you put this piece out. What would you have done in my place? Would you have done it differently?

The problem is not over because in 3 weeks I have to go again to talk about Eid, and how we celebrate it.

Anita

Honoring the Greats Anjum,

Great idea. I second the idea for an award recognizing eminent Pakistani physicians and scientists.

Some other possibilities for the list:

Jameeluddin Aali (poet, columnist)

Hakeem Saeed (did somebody mention him already?)

Fatima Surriya (writer, playwright)

Anwar Maqsood (writer, comedian)


Re: Syed Ahmed

You had the best idea by far. This award should be called Dishonoring the Toads.

Anita

The Vacuous World Random yaar,

Nice try about Saad secretly writing under my name, but won`t work (and boy, you are really grasping at straws here).

For one, what would be the sense - instead of the ``protective`` husband you think he is, he`ll just increase the invective directed against me.

Second, at the time that I wrote my `EST` reply, Saad was at Mclean Hospital taking care of the mentally ill, and without access to internet. If you feel moved enough to check, call 617-855-2000 and ask for the secretary to the Medical Clinic (working hours 9 am on 1/3/99 to 9 am 1/4/99).

Random, do you not see the inherent holes in your arguments regarding pseudonyms? At one point you imply that you use your pseudonym b/c `it`s a dangerous world out there`, while at another you claim that my calling this tactic `a bit of a cop-out, if one truly wants to be an activist in the real world`, is a specious argument. How is it then specious, if you are saying the same thing? And is it possible to be an anonymous activist, and bring about any real change, or is all this talk then just hot air?

If one uses a pseudonym, there is no real-world accountability for what one says in cyperspace. You can for example label Pakistanis as ``nosy Pakis`` with impunity. You can mount personal attacks on others from the safety of anonymity. You can keep your alliances and advocacies secret. Nothing that you have said since you began interacting fits in the ``too politically dangerous to openly espouse`` category. Rather, you seem to have used your pseudonym exclusively to ridicule, one-man-up, and needle writers/interactors - this is the kind of behavior that leads writers such as Shandana, writing under their real name, to question why they should even open themselves to such abuse (just because her husband wrote to clarify her motivations gave you the excuse to accuse them of your favorite crime, the infamous tag-team play). But thankfully, the will to ``make a difference`` keeps them going.

Incidentally, you asked somewhere if I considered myself a rebel. The answer would have to be: not right now. Motherhood has had a neutralizing effect. However, I do see myself as an activist and reformer in the areas of health care and women`s rights in Pakistan. Can`t wait to get back.

In the end, Random, if you are not BG, and are not related to, or friends with BG, why spend an inordinate amount of your time fighting someone else`s battles. You obviously have considerable wit, and an elegant turn of phrase. How about contributing more productively to Chowk in the form of an essay or two, instead of these hostile interacts that emanate from you? Say something nice, occasionally.

The offer for direct e-mail interaction still stands. I promise to cause you, or your loved ones no bodily harm :)

Anita

The Vacuous World Re: Random

Very flawed arguments, sir/madam.

For one, how do you know that my irritation at pseudonym use by people who want to come across as real world left wing rebels is because ``like all desis, I want to peg them``? Please...such judgmental stereotyping!

Second, not all pseudonyms bother me, its just the ones that come with holier-than-thou moralizing rhetoric attached.

Third, why is it that only you, and no one else is bothered by couples interacting together?

Fourth, how can you possibly know what the personal consequences to me of writing under my real name are? Also, if as you say, these can only be negligible, what is it that you write that makes it risky for you, but not for me?


Fifth, you nicely avoided the main substance of my last interact - the much bandied about tag-team play that you harp on constantly, but seem guilty of yourself (see below). Who knows, may be this is why you need your pseudonym?

So let me revisit:

You seem to imply that you and Bad Girl are not the same person. I suppose we’ll have to accept your word for it, although I am not entirely convinced (sigh).

Exploring this Random and Bad Girl alter ego question a bit further to explain where I am coming from:

1) how do you explain your constant support and defense of Bad Girl. This tag-team play (if I may borrow your term) is exhibited in several recent interacts. Anne Shamim’s ‘Just Another Woman’, and Umair’s ‘Killing Iraqis before Ramadan starts’ come to mind (there may be more, I don’t get to follow every discussion closely).

2) how do you have knowledge of Bad Girl’s motives - as evidenced in the following interaction in Umair’s article. Defending BG’s command to Waheed to ``keep a lid on it``, you said:
``The ones who do respond are not intending to silence the writer, as you contend, but to show how untenable the argument is.``

3) how have you acquired such detailed knowledge of interacts from over a year ago, that occurred in other people’s writings (not Saad’s or mine), when your Chowk persona supposedly is a recent one? And how come you suddenly appeared with so much baggage?

4) how did you develop insight into the significance of EST and PST in the Replies? Could it possibly be because your replies under one pseudonym are subject to moderation, and under another are not?

Lastly, I’d be glad to take our `vacuous` discussions to-one-on-one e-mail. Just write to me at anita@chowk.com on your non-hotmail account:)


Re: all others

My sincere and deep apologies to you all for pakrofying this particular taang for so long. I`d like to understand the motivations of this particular interactor.

Anita