"If rural LGBT-identifying youth are at times hard to see, it is as much because researchers rarely look for them as they have so few places to be seen.  They must also be strategic about how they use their communities for queer recognition if they are not to wear out their welcome as locals" (Gray 1867-1883).  And this is what chapter 4 of Mary L Gray's Out in the Country deals with: the spaces that rural LGBT folks occupy to become both visible and to work on identity. 

Gray makes a good argument for the visibility of LGBT youth in rural communities.  But we don't drive down main street, rural town, USA, or the town square and say to our friends, "oh look, there's Billy Bob or Sally Sue at the gay bookstore.  I never knew they identified that way!!"  And why is that?  Well, unlike in the cities, it'd be kinda hard for Billy Bob and Sally Sue to support a gay bookstore in rural town, USA!!  And yes, there are probably more than two queer identifying folks in rural town, USA, but it's likely that Billy Bob and Sally Sue are the only two of the dozen or so that do exists that have the couple of extra bucks that they could spend on such luxuries. 

So what visibility can rural LGBT possibly have in rural town, USA?  Gray describes what she calls boundary publics.  Places that are not typically seen as queer spaces can become that when LGBT identifying individuals choose to meet there.  Gray argues that "boundary publics therefore should not be seen so much as places but as moments in which we glimpse a complex web of relations that is always playing out the politics and negotiations of identity" (1900-1916).  Gray goes on to note that "rural young people make space for themselves through acts of occupation" (1980-1996).  Examples she list include doing drag at the local Wal-Mart Superstore, attending a church skate park punk rock concert, and through new media such as websites and blogs. 

The point is this: rural LGBT youth, and adults too for that matter, make the space for themselves to be visible.  It's not like the locals don't know who is LGBT!  Seems that people in my home town knew I was a Lesbian long before I even knew what the word meant.  And the fact of the matter is that those who are gay, lesbian, bi, or trans in rural communities are not hiding any big secret.  Sure, they don't go around flaunting it because that could do more harm than good, but as one rural youth told Gray "I think everyone knows about me [being gay].  I don't really have to say it" (2090-2106).  So if a group of queer identifying people are seen in one place, that place becomes, for the moment, a place for them to be visible as LGBT.

The concept of boundary publics and spaces such as the local coffee shop becoming a place of identity work are new to me.  Gray discusses several theorists who deal with the traditional notion of the public sphere and how her boundary publics fit into these theories.  Since I am unfamiliar with these theories and theorists, it is hard for me to wrap my mind around all of this on one read, but I believe I have the basics of the concepts: public spaces are plastic enough to stretch and become something they are typically not.

Finally, an article that I think many interested in Second Life for education will find useful.  Will it tell you how you should setup your class?  No.  Will it help you make the argument to administration as to why this is useful?  Maybe.  So you are wondering what exactly it does do, right?  Well, it discusses what the digital humanities research lab and studio HUMlab at Umea University did when they began thinking about using Second Life, and it describes some of the mistakes they made and how they corrected them.  Generally speaking "Spacing Creation: The HUMlab Second Life Project" by James Barrett and Stefan Gelfgren is a good foundation piece to have in your arsenal for future use.

I find that I have written lots of "yeps" and "yeses" and put stars in the margins of the text.  Pedagogically speaking, the project decided to use the space as a "constructivist user driven exercise" , and they state that the decision to do so shifted "the emphasis on results . . . from the facilitators to the users in the project" (170).  I have read a lot in this text and in others about the constructivist approach to SL, and i am a believer.

While all of this information is good, there is one quote that really caught my attention concerning "space" in SL.  The authors state that "space, and subsequetly place, have a deep and defining connection to personal identity.  Even virtual space exerts a powerful influence over identity through self expression and as a gestalt to feelings of control" (171).  I couldn't agree more.  I have been to a LOT of places in SL and I've called several my virtual home.  Any property that I have ever owned has had to be on an island and be secluded from others.  My favorite "house" in SL is a treehouse, which is basically a tree with a platform.  i don't like walls, and I don't like being closed in.  The place I call "home" now is on the main island and is surrounded by other builds with very little "nature" to it.  I hate it.  So I never log in there and I rarely go there.  So why do I call it home?  Because everyone needs a "safe" place that they can quickly teleport to, and anything is better than nothing.

I must admit that the feelings I have in real life when I am at that patch of land on the main island surprise me.  I get antsy and nervous if I stay there too long.  Zoe is not meant to be a city girl in SL anymore than Dianna is meant to be one in RL.  And maybe it's because I am living in the city in RL that I can't tolerate it in SL.  Luckily, in SL I can easily find solitude in a wide open space and chill anytime I have the need.  Now ya know why I stay logged into SL all the time. :-)