I have often found the expression, IRL (In Real Life) to be a... curious one. Its use so far as I can tell is to differentiate someone's online/cyber life with their day-to-day life or physical environment and contacts. But... why do we consider one more "real" than the other? Is not everything technically real if it has effect in reality? Like fiction, for example. If reading a work of fiction (which is talking about something "not real") changes someone's life or perception, doesn't it become "real" because it has a measurable effect in reality? Because suddenly that work of fiction has meant more to that person than any number of so-called real things that happen to them every day. After all, something unreal cannot make a difference in reality, not really. Back to the original topic, though... What makes "cyber-life" presumably less real than "real-life?" What is the respective importance of either one? Obviously abuse of either can be detrimental, but what are the negative or positive aspects of one as opposed to the other? Thoughts much appreciated.
I use IRL to seperate the person I am "in person" from my online persona. It has its uses. . It's very easy to project different parts of yourself to different people (at least for me), and I suppose I use IRL to refer to the person I am when in public or when societal eyes are on me. I think both cyber-life and real life have their uses. The Internet has done wonders for me socially; I'm usually too nervous to talk to anyone around where I live, and there's no way I'd be as open about my gender or sexuality as I am when I'm among groups of peers online. I suppose this also applies to "real life" as well though. cyber-life has always been a positive space for me, sometimes bordering on escapism; real life has always been a reminder that it's time to play pretend. I think it's very easy to give yourself entirely to the idea of re-inventing yourself online, but there's something refreshing about being genuine and finding acceptance in it. And I'm rambling. Hope that made sense.
I never really cared for that expression, but I guess when people refer to occurrings in their offline reality as "real-life" it's based on senses like sight, touch, hear, etc. Nowadays you can see and hear people from behind a screen, but you can't touch or smell them.
Ever since social media erupted, "in real life" for many people has become an offshoot of their virtual presence. I go out to eat with my dad and he spends a good quarter of the time on Facebook or Instagram and his meal. It seems "in real life" for many is the raw materials from which they "curate" their social media presence.
Online interactions are only less real because there's some pretense in between the people. If you meet in a game, you are still talking to a real person, but through the context of being in a non-real world. To say it in contrast to facebook chat or something is sort of silly because it is just an extension of real life, not really anything imaginary.
I use the phrase "in real life" to mean in real life as opposed to in fiction. Like, "That happens a lot in movies, but is extremely rare in real life" I use the phrase "in person" to mean you're actually with people physically and not on the internet or texting or whatever. Like, "People say that to me on the internet, but not in person"
I've kinda thought it was a bit wierd, considering how alot of us these days are so connected with the virtual world, that we practicially live on there. I use the term "in real life" to mean the physical part of me people in real life don't know. Like my family, my friends, and stuff that happens to me offline. I think that's how most use it too. I think the phrase might possibly a remnant of 90's internet culture, when peoples lives were *actually* seperate from the ones of cyberspace, and also from a time when it was MUCH MUCH EASIER to lie about yourself online before you got caught.
If anything, the phrase shows the extent to which many people still feel a disconnect between things on and off the internet. People spoken to on the internet are still "less real" than people spoken to in person, despite the fact that the stigma against, for example, online dating seems to be going down. Perhaps it's better to recognize that the people you talk to online are real, you can have real interactions, and the things you say online can have real repercussions.
You choose what people see and their opinions and perception of you are based on the persona you build for yourself on the Internet. There's always something they won't see because you don't put it out there. I think there is a huge difference between who we paint ourselves to be online and our physical selves, who we really are beyond our internet selves. If you compare online conversations to real life comverations, when having a conversation with someone in person, you can tell a lot more about them then if you were taking to them online. Online, you would only really have their words to go by to help you form an opinion of them or make assumptions about them. In real life, face-to-face conversations, you not only have their words but their body language (posture, facial expressions, gestures, the way they look and dress, etc.) that can give you more hints about the type of person they are.
I can freely be myself online, thus I am more real on the internet. But when I say in real life, I usually mean the life that takes place in the world outside the internet. The world I have to live in no matter if it is truly me or not.
I've thought about that before, exactly because it doesn't quite make sense to me. When it comes to fiction opposed to reality, fine, but as in online life opposed to everyday life, no. Of course there's differences between on & off the internet, but saying "in real life" just sounds too extreme. I sometimes use that term for lack of a better one, but yeah I don't like it. I think "in person" is more fitting.
