When I first addressed the issue of technoculture in a tertiary context, I left out specific discussion of cybersex since I thought we were unlikely to add much to the somewhat salacious debate regularly canvassed in a variety of popular media. Nonetheless, cybersex was a matter of considerable interest to my class-particularly the issues of 'Where does consensual cybersex fit into cyberspace?' and 'How is cybersex related to RL? 'The reason for this student interest is likely to be related to age and stage rather than any technologically driven factors. As Rheingold comments: 'The single largest category of MUD'ers are college students, age seventeen to twenty-three, and the particular uses they find for this technology-identity play and sexual innuendo-reflect the preoccupations of that population' (1993, online publication). Palandri and Green note, observing a group of younger chatters, that: introductions are closely followed by requests for 'stats' (statistics: age, gender, height, weight, color of hair and eyes and physical proportions). Without much 'foreplay' the younger MUD chatters will ask/be asked for cybersex ... it is clear that males and females. . . sense a freedom to express a side of themselves on the Net which is generally taboo in relation to their peers, their family and society in general. Even though it would be naive, and inaccurate, to argue that there is no impression management on the Net, many chatters feel liberated from the RL systems that control unacceptable language.

   Possibly, the request to theorise what goes on in cybersex, and the reduction of the inhibitions of RL, addresses the sexualisation of technoculture and a desire on the part of these young adults to explain their own interests and behaviour to themselves.

   As a class, we looked at cybersex in relation to phone sex, porn magazines and movies on the one hand, and in relation to RL sex on the other. Phone sex shared common features with RL and cybersex in that all had interactive elements. Phone communication predominantly involved the senses of speech and hearing. Unlike two-way RL and cybersex, however, phone sex was essentially one-way in that only one party (the client) was expecting to enjoy the experience. The designation 'client' was seen to be indicative here, since the experience is an expensive one-the fiscal investment enabled the experience to progress with minimal emotional investment. In this way, the client and sex worker are able to hold back on intimacy, since the relationship is driven by dynamics of commodity and exchange. Use of the phone for phone sex may indicate a lack of alternative options, but it may also indicate a fear of intimacy.

   Sexy films-and at the extreme, blue movies-offer no interactivity with other people apart from intellectually, through empathy and identification. Nonetheless, they tend to be rich visually, and stimulating in terms of dialogue, sound effects and music. They can help create a seductive atmosphere, but the lack of interactivity (and any recognition of the individual members of the audience) lessens the viewer's identification with the movie-sex experience (unless a RL partner is involved). Porn magazines allow even less intimacy and even greater distance from interactivity, and involve only the sense of sight.