Second Life = Deviant Life? Have YOUR say

I agree and I think RL would be better if more people had this attitude. Oddly (or not), this is very similar to the way things work in RL BDSM communities and clubs (so I am told ).

No, Lindal always gets the last word.

I know the joke.

If you had asked the question without the first sentence, I would say yes, but since you ask it this way I have to say no. And I'm being perfectly serious.



The parts of SL that I frequent are generally similar to real life.



It's an idealized image of the way I actually look.



I would say that norms and rules have had very little influence, since they are mainly the same or similar or analogous to real life.


SO...

Now that I've answered, what (if anything) do you get from that?

Gee, I always thought an academic was an insulated,pompous windbag, who spends his life inside the ivy covered walls pontificating to gullible and impressionable minds, while an intelluctual was an academic who grew so pompous and insufferable that the other academics threw him out into the world and is now pontificating on his own. Thanks for clearing it up.

I agree that it is our right to demand quality. But that's not what happened for pages and pages. It did eventually happen with snide remarks thrown in. I answered his survey in a general way. But I definitely agree that the questions were rather vague.

Since all the cool kids are doing it, I'll answer too.

1. Some people suggest that Second Life encourages deviant activities. Do you feel your behaviour is less inhibited in Second Life than the physical world?
Yes. There are very few consequences in SL. You can do things that are hindered by RL physical, social, and economic constarints. SL encourages fantasy. Whether those fantasies are deviant is subjective.

2. Some people suggest that Second Life mirrors the physical world. Is your experience of Second Life remote from, or close to, the physical world in which you reside? You can't fly without assistance, TP at will, and create from nothing in RL. Once again, if I fall 1000 feet while skydiving without a parachute in RL, I'm not walking away. So my answer is no.

3. There is 3D avatar creation technology in Second Life, do you want an avatar that closely resembles you, or realises some new desired image? I don't want an exact copy of me out there for a variety of reasons. It's enough of me that I'm comfortable with it.

4. In the communities of Second Life, there are various norms and rules, how do they shape your views about deviant activities? Without getting pedantic about the definition of deviant, I prefer SL to be as free from norms and rules as possible. RL is becoming more and more rigid and categorized each day, everything has to be labelled. Beyond the gneral concept of treating everyone in SL with respect and decency, I prefer Live and Let Live. Except for willfully hurting someone, stealing, or anything that may violate the RL laws of the land, what you do in SL and who you do it with is none of my business.

At the risk of TMI, I have to say that getting one in SL is indeed less painful, but far more complicated and time consuming. There are always trade offs.

Very little effective difference between the explanations in most cases.

Pep (More expert at being an irresponsible student)

You asked a question, this is my answer, and I am not angry at you Marin as you ask a legitimate question. I am weary of the way this type of survey is presented:

Here's my problem with Mr/Ms survey: This purportedly is from an institution of higher learning, yet anyone with any knowledge of a survey process, research/stats, would instantly recognize this "survey" to be a sham. Maybe he doesn't need to be ridiculed, but on the other hand, survey after survey that comes this way is garbage [I don't include surveys such as name that fish.]. And obviously this surveyor is unfamiliar with the concepts of: objectivity, thesis/anti-thesis, definition of terms, and confounding variables - to say the least.

Maybe we need a sticky at the top of the forum that outlines a good survey when it is offered as scientific research: Statement of thesis, definition of terms, don't include personal biases, disclosure of the researcher's background and qualifications.

If this type of mish mash is to be passed off as research, should intelligent people be expected to ignore the obvious errors inherent in it and try to make sense of it just to prove that SL isn't what the general population perceives it to be? This survey is not going to help change "some peoples" perception of SL, rather it will just reinforce a preconceived stereotype.

This is the type of crap that should be collected and published to show that researchers into SL have not a clue as to what is entailed in research. No wonder there are misconceptions about SL for I can just imagine the published results from such surveys.

Someone needs to do a survey of SL surveys that uncovers the idiocy of such research and the results obtained from such nonsense.

If you need my qualifications, just ask.

You could hit a pine tree, or a snowbank, or a pine tree in the snow, or a lake, if you break the surface tension with your sledgehammer! OK, you probably don't have a sledgehammer. How about an anvil? The one the stupid cartoonist put in your backpack instead of the parachute?

Alright, serious hat on now.

First, sexual deviance (I presume this is your inference), is defined by the DSM-IV, and that should likely form the litmus for your piece. However, one's personal interpretation of deviance will vary from individual to individual. How do you honestly collate your data and arrive at a consistent conclusion based on the latter? You cannot.

You are making an assumption that SL was created to be different from RL and yet in so many ways it mimics RL spectacularly (primarily when dealing with the behaviours of people). Yes, the anonymity SL offers encourages most people to censor themselves less.

Does that anonymity increase deviant beahviour? No, it only gives it forum to take place. People who indulge in "deviant behaviour" in SL are not discovering their inner deviance so much as being provided a means to indulge something that was already present within them. SL merely offers an environment to do so. But so can many RL establishments.

So why is SL and RL "deviant exploration" different? Well, in SL you don't get hot in a fursuit while being physically active But does it affect the mind? Does it free one to explore deviancy mentally? I say not.

We are what we are. We explore ourselves via whatever medium is presented to us that we feel comfortable in doing so (whether it's a fetish club, Dominatrix house, SL club, or one of those BDSM Czech weekend getaways). SL is just less expensive.

And returning to your statement, I'm confused as to how everyone's personal definition of deviance assists you in your research. Good luck.

Scurries to find copy of DSM IV-TR

If the DSM doesn't include adcutting and forum trolling it's worthless.

FWIW, the link http://www.cs.swan.ac.uk/SecondLifeResearch/ appears to be dead now.

1. Some people suggest that Second Life encourages deviant activities. Do you feel your behaviour is less inhibited in Second Life than the physical world?

- I disagree with "some people" (see my previous comment). My behaviour is the same in RL and SL. I am a gentleman "deviant". In fact, I've explored less "deviancy" in SL than in RL. RL has spoiled me.


2. Some people suggest that Second Life mirrors the physical world. Is your experience of Second Life remote from, or close to, the physical world in which you reside?

- In many ways it is the same with respect to personalities, behaviours of others (and self) etc. The only difference is the incredible creations that are so much easier to construct in SL than RL. People's imaginations are given a chance to blossom and grow.


3. There is 3D avatar creation technology in Second Life, do you want an avatar that closely resembles you, or realises some new desired image?

- I have two avatars. Human and fox (see my profile in world, and my blog in my sig). I am fox 80% of the time. I originally came in SL to "recreate" myself as I thought it was simpler, but then as I grew more knowledgeable of what was available (fox avatar!), I could indulge that aspect of myself.


4. In the communities of Second Life, there are various norms and rules, how do they shape your views about deviant activities?

- I have no idea what the norms are except that public displays of nude sexual congress are generally frowned upon. I believe, personally, that there is a place for everything, and people should be just as considerate of others and their surroundings in SL as they are in RL. I am disappointed with the displays and activities of "deviant behaviour in SL (as compared to RL), but this is what made me realize that SL is the perfect place for those who do not have:
(a) the courage (yet) to discover a local club, group or person to "play with",
(b) the regional location that offers such activities (ie remote living), and
(c) the idea of what their "kink" is yet (is it bondage, waxing, role play etc.).

The unfortunate aspect of SL, is that it's far too easy for a "Master" to set up shop without credentials and behave in what would be unacceptable for a Master in RL. This could give incorrect impressions to new submissives about what the world of kink is all about.

On the other hand, one can simply jump into a purely fantasy deviant world in SL that cannot be accomplished in RL. I have no such interests at this time, so keep my deviancy to RL.

If you wish further discussion with myself, please use my email address (elric . anatine @ g mail) as I do not have time to read the forums always.

Good luck.

Bugger, and I just spent fifteen minutes writing a serious reply.

/me sighs.

LOL. Indeed. We should alert them then.

I go to the toilet more in RL
I hope that helps

From http://www.psychiatrictimes.com/display/article/10168/55266

*** Paraphilias are defined by DSM-IV-TR as sexual disorders characterized by "recurrent, intense sexually arousing fantasies, sexual urges or behaviors generally involving (1) nonhuman objects, (2) the suffering or humiliation of oneself or one's partner, or (3) children or other nonconsenting persons that occur over a period of 6 months" (Criterion A), which "cause clinically significant distress or impairment in social, occupational, or other important areas of functioning" (Criterion B). DSM-IV-TR describes 8 specific disorders of this type (exhibitionism, fetishism, frotteurism, pedophilia, sexual masochism, sexual sadism, voyeurism, and transvestic fetishism) along with a ninth residual category, paraphilia not otherwise specified (NOS). ***

The point is that any normal, healthy adult can exhibit some of these behaviours without being diagnosed as "deviant", providing that the behaviour doesn't harm anyone else, or prevent them having a normal life.

Thank you, Kelli, as obviously my copy has entered the black hole of disorganization.

thank you...i am glad to see ia not the only one feels this way

again i was going to have fun with this.. but it is just not worth it.. people giving serious answers now... just what he needed from his pet lab rats..........

There's a new one up now (survey from University of Kentucky, I think) that you can have fun with.

AND (just agreeing and underlining) the part about such behaviors causing "clinically significant distress or impairment in social, occupational, or other important areas of functioning" pretty much rules out deviant behavior in SL entirely.