“Being alone feels like a problem that needs to be solved. Thus, people try to solve it by connecting. But the connection is more like a symptom than a cure.” (Turkle, 2017)

Let’s start with an experiment. A group of people were first given an electric shock to experience the pain. They reflected that they would not be willing to suffer that again, and prefer to pay a high price for it. They were then asked to spend 15 minutes alone in an empty room. In the meantime, they had two choices: either “do nothing, just be with their thoughts and feelings” or “choose to shock themselves and pass the time actively.”

They found that even among those who said they would rather pay than be shocked, a quarter of the women and two-thirds of the men shocked themselves at least once during their alone time. There was even a person who shocked himself 190 times altogether in just 15 minutes (Wilson et al., 2014).

The research outcomes are remarkable: people hate “doing nothing but being with their thoughts and feelings”. They would alternatively do anything to avoid being with themselves, even if that’s painful.

So why do we need to learn to solitude?

People who can be alone are mentally and emotionally “self-sufficient” and are enthusiastic about remaining connected and loved. Therefore, they will not actively seek solitude, but also actively maintain interpersonal relationships (Rubin, as cited in, Crane, 2017). In other words, solitude enables us to maintain a certain interpersonal distance from others, to be connected, fulfilled and independent.

Additionally, we can hold more authentic relationships without entirely rely on each other to soothe our insecurities or satisfy our needs. Since it assists in stabilising a good sense of ‘self’ by looking inward for approval, learn to solitude can prevent us from possessing, consuming, or control each other. We believe worthy of being loved (Brenner, 2014).

All of this encourages people to gain a positive sense of self — who I am and how I feel about it. “I’m independent and self-sufficient, and I am happy with that.” The capacity to get along with ourselves is significant. It reshapes the quality of life undeviatingly and relieves us from absolute dependence on others.

References：

Brenner,A. (2014). The importance of being alone. Psychology Today.

Collinson, D. (2016). What it means to love yourself? The Positive Psychology People. [Digital image]. Retrieved from https://images.app.goo.gl/KXh6uFA8v1X66p257

Crane,B. (2017). The virtues of isolation. The Atlantic.

getselfhelp.co.uk(n.d.). Imagery for self-help.

Hutson,M. (2014). People prefer electric shocks to being alone with their thoughts.The Atlantic.

Psych2Go. (2017, June 5). Solitude. [Video file]. Retrieved from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rA42u5K9_bA

Turkle, S. (2017). Alone together: Why we expect more from technology and less from each other (3rd ed.). New York: Basic Books.

Wilson,T.D., Reinhard,D.A., Westagte, E.C., Gilbert, D.T., Ellerbeck, N., Hahn, C., Brown, C.L., Shaked, A. (2014). Just think: The challenges of the disengaged mind.Science, 345(6192), 75–77.

People no longer express or seldom post anything on social media. Preferably, they migrate to a ‘safer’ place that others cannot see — to post the most authentic and emotional contents without by knowing any of friends or acquittances. The primary purpose of social networking is no longer related to ‘social’.

“Whenever I want to make a post, I need to think about whether or not I should send it or if I might need to block any person.”

“Sharing occurs to become an unpredictable bomb. The space and the circle of friends are converting less and less interactive and more of a channel for gathering people.” So what makes us lose monologue? Is it the desire for expression that we lose, or the place for expression?

Self-expression frequently occurs in safe situations that we feel secure. The Internet was precisely a secret and closed space where we could escape from reality and express ourselves safely. Nevertheless, when the web goes from private to public, everything turns to be transparent. We, therefore, commence to censor ourselves.

Contemporary’s social network is compared to “The Panopticon” designed by the British philosopher Jeremy Bentham in 1791. Prisoners remain in a constant state of “surveillance”. The real-name system replaces anonymity, with identity information crisscrossing among apps, making each of us resemble to live in a circular prison. We are tempted to self-censor like inmates in “The Panopticon”, compelled to choose a safer way of expression and communication.

“What’s wrong with the conversation?”
“It takes places in real-time, and you cannot control what you are going to say.”

Turkle (2017) claims that there is a bottom-line — texting, emailing, posting, allow us to present the self as we want to be. “We get to edit, and that means we get to delete; we get to retouch, the face, the voice, the flesh, the body — not too little, not too much, just right.” (Turkle, 2017)

Modern tools provide us with reliable hiding places and help us avoid “exposing our weaknesses”. Meitu is now standard enough that you can easily illustrate a filtered “virtual self”. There are plenty of tools to assist us in showing what others prefer to see in our friends’ circle. The Internet had deprived people of the ability to “be themselves in a negative way.” “Being negative” implies not hiding, not wrapping, but facing others in a real, unedited way.

Everyone is actively engaged in the operation of “virtual self”, without in-depth communication. A post might receive 100 likes, but the stranger is still a stranger. As far as I concerned, I would rather be a real person who is defective than a seemingly perfect doll produced by flow-line production. A real person can be memorized by others for his/her unique characteristics, but a ‘perfect’ person will merely leave the impression of being ‘perfect’.

References:

London meets Paris. (2019). The curse of social media — how social media causes depression & anxiety. [Digital Image]. Retrieved from https://images.app.goo.gl/2LZg2JCkoVY1xase6

Reddiy. (2013). How fast things can change: Animemes. [Digital Image]. Retrieved from https://images.app.goo.gl/G8c1ux6nXsPkBUJV7

Turkle, S. (2017). Alone together: Why we expect more from technology and less from each other. Hachette UK.

Tumblr. (2019). PEOPLE DON’T CHANGESOMETIMESTHEY JUST FORGET WHO THEY REALLY ARE MEME. [Digital Image]. Retrieved from https://images.app.goo.gl/KyFFZ9SzPcnovtRu5

“We’re lonely but we’re afraid of intimacy.”

(Turkle, 2017).

When I first read this sentence, it reminds me of a prevalent social phenomenon that young generations have been found more and more challenging to go on a date. It was applied to describe the illusion of companionship without the demands of friendship (Turkle, 2017). In other words, it can be transformed into another interpretation that people mistakenly believe that technology can help them connect immediately. Without taking too many responsibilities, some of them choose to hookup rather than establishing a formal relationship.

Nowadays, sex outside of traditional romantic relationships appears to be a new trend. “Hookup” also identified as “casual sex” or “uncommitted sexual encounter”, with the deficiency of commitment, emotional attachment or intimacy between both parties in the relationship (Garcia et al., 2012). The New Yorker (2016) announced that “hookup” is no longer a negative word, but a social culture and a way of life for “emerging adults”.

According to the Guardian (2014), the study exposed that 55% of men and 43% of women had endeavoured a “one night stand”, with one in five saying they had slept with someone they did not know their name (Mann, 2014). The data seems to show that people are seeking companionship with the desire of a stable relationship, but afraid of maintaining an intimate connection at the same time. There is a paradox between the fascination of looking for ‘the one’ or a permanent steady relationship and having casual sex to escape the sense of loneliness.

Turkle (2017) raised a concept of “Goldilocks effect”, refers to a relationship which is “not too close, not too far, but just right.” She said, “people are hiding from each other, they cannot get enough go each other, if and only they can have each other at a distance, in amounts they can control.”

Hence, will hookup reshape our perceptions of a romantic relationship?
It depends on your views of sex and its association with love. Do you treat sex as a separate biological need like eating or sleeping, or further approval to love? Can love and sex be separated or not? Will people be pleasant and enjoyable from casual sex?

However, different motives may lead to various consequences. Those whose motives are autonomous and positive, are mainly for self-exploration and to please themselves; while the ones’ motives are involuntary and negative, they will show significantly higher levels of depression and anxiety, lower levels of self-esteem, and even more physical symptoms (Vrangalova, 2015b).

Although we utilise the specific names like “one-night stand”, “friends with benefit” to classify and label the relations, however, each relationship sticks in somewhere on the spectrum, including hookup and exclusive relationship. Thus the relation of “friends with benefit” which consist of sex and friendship could lie in the middle of the spectrum (Lachmann, 2015). I would rather believe that every relationship is unique and cannot be fully categorised. It is more crucial for you not to label a relationship, but get to know indeed how you and your partner feel about it.

People yearn for compansion because they feel lonely; they are afraid of intimacy but still looking forward to meeting ‘the one’. Surprisingly, I assume that we are expecting more from each other, directly through technology. The Internet will never substitute offline communication.

References:

A24. (2016). Miles Teller Kiss GIF. [GIF]. Retrieved from https://giphy.com/gifs/a24-the-spectacular-now-3o6ZsXco9ACON6dSjS

Garcia, J. R., Reiber, C., Massey, S. G.,& Merriwether, A. M. (2012). Sexual hookup culture: A review. Reviewof General Psychology, 16(2), 161.

Helen, Y. (Illustrator). Balancing tenderness with intimacy. [Illustration]. Retrieved from https://www.columbiaspectator.com/opinion/2019/01/23/balancing-tenderness-with-intimacy/

Lachmann, S. (2015). What It Really Meansto Be ‘Friends With Benefits’. Psychology Today.

Konnikova, M. (2016). CASUAL SEX: EVERYONEIS DOING IT. The New Yorker.

Mann, J. (2014). British sex survey 2014:’the nation has lost some of its sexual swagger’. The Guardian.

TED. (2012, April 3). Sherry Turkle: Connected, but alone? [Video file]. Retrieved from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t7Xr3AsBEK4

Turkle, S. (2017). Alone together: Why we expect more from technology and less from each other (3rd ed.). New York: Basic Books.

Vrangalova, Z. (2015b). Does casual sexharm college students’ well-being? A longitudinal investigation of the role ofmotivation. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 44(4), 945–959.

Sherry Turkle (2017) says social media creates three illusions:
1. We get attention in any situation.
2. We are always heard.
3. We never have to be alone.

She argues that the Internet is “taking us where we do not want to go.” Although the digital age provides more ways for people to socialize, the relationship between people appears to be more and more distant.

In 1950, fewer than 10 per cent of Americans lived alone; by 2010, it rose to 27 per cent, according to the Atlantic. In 1985, the average number of a person’s “close friends” was 2.94; by 2004, it diminished to 2.08; with 25 per cent saying they had no trusted friends to talk to. The most significant change in those 20 years was the advent of the Internet.

As we all know, good relationships will produce many benefits, like health and happiness. However, when social relations are harmful, and we feel socially excluded, our brain responds similarly to trap in the sense of physically painful. It indicates that social pain is at the equivalent level as physical pain in actual emotions. Furthermore, social problems also influence our self-esteem and sense of self-worth (Seppala, 2012). Lieberman et al., (2002) stated that we are always ready to socialise — whenever our brains begin to rest, they default to thinking about sociability.

Nevertheless, virtual networking will not expand your friend circle. Alternatively, the more you use it, the more lonely you are likely to be since the Internet has an alienating nature (Knnikova, 2013). Kraut et al. (1998) found that happiness and social connectedness consistently declined in the first or two years after people started using the Internet, and it had a profound impact on people’s family relations — contact and communication with families are significantly reduced, accompanied by a shrinking social circle and an increase in depression and loneliness (Kraut et al., 1998).

Why do social networks make us feel lonely?

Firstly, when people communicate on social networks, they can only receive private (frequently one-to-one) communication content, which is conducive to the reduction of loneliness and the improvement of happiness (Burke, 2016). Additionally, the “passive consumption” (refers to non-purposeful, but inadvertently received information) of social networks reduces a person’s sense of connection and happiness. This is mainly because people excessively focus on online self-presentation.

People are given chances to create a “virtual role model” to avoid going through the awkwardness of expressing ourselves in real-life (Lanier, 2018). We can meticulously retouch everything to show a perfect self. However, it is this need to shape perfect oneself that causes people to be “imprisoned” in the prison of self-expression (Marche, 2012).

Finally, we all have to go back to off-line life. What we need to do indeed is to improve the quality of social interaction, not the quantity of your relationships (Klinenberg, 2013). Having more meaningful conversations, making more intimate friends, avoiding become “passive consumers”. The higher the proportion of face-to-face interaction, the less likely a person was to feel lonely (Cacioppo & Patrick, 2008). “What matters is not what tools you use to make friends, but whether it expands your off-line presence.”

References:

Burke, M., & Kraut, R. E.(2016). The Relationship between FacebookUse and Well‐Being depends onCommunication Type and Tie Strength. Journal of Computer‐MediatedCommunication, 21(4), 265–281.

CasMcKenzie5. (2018). I Dont Have The Luxury Of Friends Batman. [GIF]. Retrieved from https://tenor.com/view/idont-have-the-luxury-of-friends-batman-social-popular-loner-gif-11783844

Cacioppo, J. T., & Patrick, W.(2008). Loneliness: Human nature and the need for social connection. WWNorton & Company.

Emma M. Seppala. (2012). Connect To Thrive.Psychology Today.

How One App Might Be A Step Toward Internet Everywhere. iStockphoto. (unknown). Retrieved from https://images.app.goo.gl/uBPK2mFbBY7hFdr77

Lieberman, M. D., Gaunt, R., Gilbert, D.T., & Trope, Y. (2002). Reflection and reflexion: A social cognitiveneuroscience approach to attributional inference.Advances in experimental socialpsychology, 34, 199–249.

Kraut, R., Patterson, M., Lundmark, V.,Kiesler, S., Mukophadhyay, T., & Scherlis, W. (1998). Internet paradox: Asocial technology that reduces social involvement and psychologicalwell-being?.American psychologist, 53(9), 1017.

Stephen Marche. (2012).Is Facebook Making Us Lonely? The Atlantic.

Maria Knnikova. (2013). HowFacebook Makes Us Unhappy. The New Yorker.

Thing Being GIF. (unknown). Retrieved from https://giphy.com/gifs/being-gurlcom-PhTf93XZ5noqs

Turkle, S. (2017). Alone together: Why we expect more from technology and less from each other (3rd ed.). New York: Basic Books.