Playing with Fire

This blog post is for INF2196, New Media Practices for Youth

Hijazi-Omari, Hiyam & Rivka Ribak. "Playing with Fire: On the Domestication of the mobile phone among Palestinian teenage girls in Israel." Information, Communication & Society, 11(2). March 2008, 149-166.

This article discusses the use cell phones by teenage Palestinian girls living in northern Israel. The girls, who were interviewed extensively over a two year period, are part of a fairly conservative, patriarchal community, and all of them use cell phones only in secret, as a way of communicating with their boyfriends. The majority of the girls are given the phone by a soon-to-be, or already (secretly) established boyfriend, and hide their conversations, as well as the phone and its charger, from parents and siblings.

Authors Hijazi-Omari & Ribak trace the ‘domestication’ of the cellphone for these girls as taking place in four stages: appropriating, objectification, incorporation, and conversion. In the first stage, appropriation, the girls receive the phone (“appropriation never consists of a teenage girl purchasing a mobile phone, having her parents purchase one for her, or literally owning it” [Hijazi-Omari & Ribak 156]). The transfer of the phone from boy to girl often happens via an intermediary, usually a cousin, friend, or neighbour. Some girls were simply told where to pick up the illicit new object: in one case at a cemetery, and once beside a garbage dump. Another complication for cell phone owners is the cost of the often-lengthy phone calls. While purchasing calling cards was one way the girls could contribute to the relationship, others saw the phone bill as wholly the boy’s responsibility. Bills were typically between $75 and $250 a month, a substantial cost for teenagers.

In the second phase, “objectification,” the girls hide their phones from their family. Those with their own bedroom were considered incredibly lucky, and their room often became a storage spot for other girls who had to share their room with a snitcher sibling. Many of the girls reported having their phone found by a furious parent, but this did little to stop the object from entering the house: a new phone was quickly acquired, and a better hiding spot sought.

In the third phase, “incorporation,” the girl learns how to negotiate the actual use of the phone. During this phase, rules dictated by both the boyfriend, and the family and community at large, determined how and when the phone could be used. While the object had to be stored safely when not in use, it was the girl and the sound of her conversation that needed to be kept hidden when she used it. Many reported hiding under their bed, or piling a mountain of blankets and pillows on top of themselves. I found this fascinating: we so readily characterize cell phones as connoting freedom of movement, but for these girls exactly the opposite holds true. I think this is the clearest evidence of the authors’ thesis, that the technology is not, in itself, either emancipating or oppressive. Instead, it is through the highly gendered use of the item that demonstrates its medium.

In the final phase, “conversion,” many of the girls developed their own uses for their phones, separate from their boyfriends. Friends would chip in to buy a phone for a girl whose boyfriend could not afford one, or else purchase a phone to be shared among the group on a schedule. Some girls, once gifted a phone by their lover, purchased a second SIM card so that they could use the device to talk to friends, or even other boys, without their boyfriend’s consent. By the end of the study, many of the girls, approaching university age, (and living two years later in the history of technology—there was a huge leap in cell phone use generally between 2003 and 2005), were given mobile phones by parents.

What I found most interesting about this article was the characterization of the immensely complicated relationship between phone as physical object and phone as symbol. For most teenagers, ownership of a cell phone is a point of pride, and arguably more so if it is a gift from a boyfriend. But for these teens cell phones were less of a status symbol and more of a liability: girls wanted a cell phone from their boyfriends, but there was a huge risk involved in the acquisition, keeping, and use of the device. Furthermore, as the authors note, the sense of emancipation the girls got from being cell phone users was more romantic than factual; boyfriends often demanded that they not give out their phone number, talk to friends, or even turn their phone on except to talk to them. As soon as the relationship ended, the phone was retrieved, and the girls lost both the symbol of their romance, and the use of a very handy gadget.