I would say that in nearly two years now on SL I have got to know maybe 50 people really well (as well as SL we email, Skype etc), and many more on an acquaintance or passing level.
What has struck me is the number of people I know who were involved in the start of rl divorce proceedings while I have known them in SL.
I did not discover if the separations were the result of SL activity, or whether SL was being sought because of unhappiness in RL already, with ALL my friends who are in the midst of this, but a few did reveal that a general void in RL led them to bite the bullet and change their lives because of the people they met in SL. I wonder how common this is?
I suspect a lot of people who do divorce in rl, while in SL, do so because there was already things not right at home, and SL brought some sort of relief, but I also wonder if there are any cases at all of an otherwise happy marriage that was compromised, or led to divorce, DUE to SL activity.
On a lighter note, I wonder if the SL divorce rate is higher, lower, or about the same as the divorce rate in RL. I attended a wedding in SL once, and received a WE ARE DIVORCED notecard the very next day. Is that a record?
Rock
Welcome to the Second Life Forums Archive
These forums are CLOSED. Please visit the new forums HERE
The Effect of SL on RL |
|
|
Rock Ryder
Registered User
Join date: 6 Oct 2006
Posts: 384
|
10-11-2007 06:15
|
|
Alicia Sautereau
if (!social) hide;
Join date: 20 Feb 2007
Posts: 3,125
|
PIER group IM (yea public)
 10-11-2007 06:27
and on this note i can`t resist anymore, sorry kenny lolololol
[22:58] Giuliani Rossini: Next on FOX, we'll be having a very *special* episode of Hula Hour, so do tune in! [22:58] Methilde Hapmouche: dare i ask?? [22:58] Giuliani Rossini: no. you dast not. [22:58] Methilde Hapmouche: i darent? [22:58] Giuliani Rossini: that too. :) [22:59] SkullDusted Schnyder: hi [22:59] Methilde Hapmouche: as kong as that's clear [22:59] Methilde Hapmouche: *long [22:59] Skaja Carter: I wonder what it'll be like to be there as a non-staff member...? [23:00] Right Paean: ok who mentioning kongs length? [23:00] Giuliani Rossini: it freakin rules, Skaja :) [23:00] Streak Lundquist: just as cute as a staff member [23:01] Skaja Carter: ooh...Streak...are you flirting?? [23:01] Methilde Hapmouche: can't get enough kong [23:02] Methilde Hapmouche: guess Streak only flirts with non-staff [23:02] Streak Lundquist: me flirting? no way [23:02] Skaja Carter: Methy...you have someone... [23:02] Right Paean: flirt with me streak..bats eyelids [23:02] Methilde Hapmouche: lol [23:03] Skaja Carter: Oh, like Streak would give me the time of day... *sighs* [23:03] Streak Lundquist: yes i would Right.... [23:03] Streak Lundquist: but then you are taken [23:03] Right Paean: he wuvs me:))) [23:03] Streak Lundquist: geez am i taht bad [23:04] Skaja Carter: everyone loves you, Pan... [23:04] Giuliani Rossini: PAN! Glad to see you got out of the northeast corner ;) [23:04] Right Paean: saw sante there hes got funny attachemenets [23:04] Samm Ivory: yes [23:05] Right Paean: santa* [23:05] Skaja Carter: awww....poor Streak. [23:06] Methilde Hapmouche: wuvs, even [23:07] kenneth Watkins: i dont know why you all think this game is so good [23:07] Skaja Carter: shut up ken [23:07] Methilde Hapmouche: which game? [23:08] Right Paean: jeez get a third life [23:08] kenneth Watkins: this life game [23:08] Streak Lundquist: Ken its because peeps like you are there taht make it fun [23:08] Skaja Carter: if you don't like it, why are you playing? [23:08] Methilde Hapmouche: oh [23:08] Methilde Hapmouche: yeah! [23:08] Streak Lundquist: he loves it [23:09] Skaja Carter: he loves the drama [23:09] Right Paean pulls out violins [23:09] Skaja Carter is having a giggle with Pan on voice.... [23:09] kenneth Watkins: yes but you are all nuts and need to get a life [23:10] Methilde Hapmouche: skaja...get him to say my name on voice...it's dead sexy [23:10] Streak Lundquist: says prof Dr Nutty [23:10] Skaja Carter: you should be here to hear him... [23:10] Methilde Hapmouche: at your place? [23:10] Skaja Carter: this is supposed to be fun, ken. [23:10] kenneth Watkins: well tell me [23:10] Right Paean: jeeez dude wwe do and we see it for what it is nutz thats why wee come in here for fun can you spell fun [23:10] Skaja Carter: nah methy...i'm at his place. [23:11] kenneth Watkins: i dont care [23:11] Methilde Hapmouche: cool [23:11] Methilde Hapmouche: can i come over too? [23:11] Skaja Carter: then stop contributing to the conversation, ken. [23:11] Right Paean: exactamundo kenny boy [23:11] kenneth Watkins: come over were [23:12] Skaja Carter: wouldn't you like to know? [23:12] kenneth Watkins: yes i do [23:12] Skaja Carter: too bad [23:12] kenneth Watkins: you are fucked up [23:13] Right Paean: lol hahaha [23:13] Skaja Carter: so who isn't? [23:13] Methilde Hapmouche: shut up ken [23:14] kenneth Watkins: no im not ken im his wife that he said he was not marred [23:14] Skaja Carter: what!?? [23:14] Right Paean: COOL HYAS KENS WIFE:))) [23:14] kenneth Watkins: yes [23:14] Skaja Carter: hey ken's wife [23:14] Right Paean: everyone say hi to kens wife [23:14] Giuliani Rossini: so, either an asshole, or an asshole *smirk* [23:15] kenneth Watkins: know whut would you like to tell me [23:15] Right Paean: lol G:) [23:15] Skaja Carter: what wouldn't we like to tell you? [23:15] Right Paean: gawd so much lol hes a naughty boy [23:15] Giuliani Rossini: I would like to tell you, "go home dad, yer drunk" [23:15] Right Paean: l0ol [23:15] Skaja Carter: lmao [23:16] kenneth Watkins: well tell me [23:16] Right Paean: not in group im its personal [23:16] Giuliani Rossini: consider it told ;) [23:16] Skaja Carter: exactly [23:16] Skaja Carter can't be bothered to relive the tragic story. [23:17] Skaja Carter sighs [23:17] Skaja Carter: you know the old adage..."What happens in SL, stays in SL..." [23:18] XsaraJane Cortes: Skaja u r on Pier chat!?? [23:18] Skaja Carter: yes, i am, X. [23:18] XsaraJane Cortes: oh ok then! LOL carry on [23:18] kenneth Watkins: no i tink you ARE A HOE [23:18] XsaraJane Cortes: lol Kenneth [23:18] Skaja Carter: isn't that a garden instrument? [23:19] XsaraJane Cortes: I came in half way through - thought I was getting some gossip I shouldnt be! [23:19] XsaraJane Cortes: :-)) [23:19] XsaraJane Cortes: u guys crack me up [23:19] Vie Kronos: was someone looking for a Hoe? [23:19] Skaja Carter: ken's wife is online as ken. [23:19] kenneth Watkins: NO I MEN IT THE OTHER WAT U WHORE [23:19] Giuliani Rossini: it's comedy gold :) [23:19] Vie Kronos: pick me pick me [23:19] XsaraJane Cortes: LMAO [23:19] Skaja Carter: i'm trying so hard not to laugh and wake up the other people in my house. [23:20] Vie Kronos: I'se got skills [23:20] Skaja Carter: Vie...you're hired!! [23:20] Right Paean: does it involve tongues vie? [23:20] kenneth Watkins: YOU CALL THIS SKILL [23:20] XsaraJane Cortes: I sometimes have to resort to incontinence pads once you guys have got me going [23:20] Vie Kronos: sure Pan I can speak in tongues [23:20] Skaja Carter: omg...can't breathe... [23:20] XsaraJane Cortes: me too [23:21] Right Paean: come on X you like that warm feekling yopu get [23:21] Vie Kronos: Why have you waken me from my evil slumber!!!!???? [23:21] Skaja Carter: ken's wife....what brought you here anyway? [23:21] XsaraJane Cortes: what warm feeling?? [23:22] kenneth Watkins: MY HUSBAND WAS CHEATING ON ME YOU WHORE [23:22] XsaraJane Cortes: OMG [23:22] Skaja Carter: not with me, he wasn't. [23:23] Vie Kronos: woh! [23:23] Right Paean: hey he didnt sleep with er [23:23] XsaraJane Cortes: PIER CHAT PIER CHAT [23:23] Right Paean: FIGHT FIGHT FIGHT [23:23] Right Paean: that wet warnm feeling you get that only sl gives you [23:23] Skaja Carter: i have taste, thank you very much. [23:23] Taura Eilde: o_O [23:23] XsaraJane Cortes: call the police [23:23] Vie Kronos: Mmmmmmm [23:23] Vie Kronos: o.k. but who wanted a hoe? I'm confused now [23:23] XsaraJane Cortes: plank her Kenneths's wife online as Kenneth [23:24] Right Paean: kens ifey thingy [23:24] Right Paean: wifey [23:24] Skaja Carter: Vie...ken's wife did. [23:24] Right Paean: think shes gonna bury ken in the garden [23:24] XsaraJane Cortes: it must have been those nipple things that gave it away [23:24] Right Paean: LMAO [23:24] XsaraJane Cortes: i wonder if it was the blue pair or the red [23:24] Vie Kronos: Ohhhhh! Kens wife [23:25] Vie Kronos: well hello Ken's wife... *wink* [23:25] Right Paean: yup vie she hijacked his avi [23:25] Carys Dahlstrom: yeah, Barbie [23:25] Skaja Carter: ken's wife, have you spoken to his fiancee yet? [23:25] Vie Kronos: seriously? [23:25] Skaja Carter: hey carys!! [23:25] Right Paean: SERIOUSLY [23:25] Vie Kronos: Carys!!! [23:25] Methilde Hapmouche: ROFL barbie [23:25] Vie Kronos: you hauer [23:25] Carys Dahlstrom: Hey! [23:25] Enna Roux: maybe it's just me- but I think it's sad! Ken's wife- take it up with him! [23:25] Right Paean: everyone say hi to kens wife [23:25] Carys Dahlstrom: you are the HAUER here LOL [23:25] Vie Kronos: well I never [23:26] Skaja Carter: oh, yes you have [23:26] Keryn Karas: hi Ken's wife [23:26] Right Paean: YOU SHOULD VIE ITS FUN [23:26] Woody Doolittle: take it outside people [23:26] Right Paean: LOL [23:26] Methilde Hapmouche: how many ways can we spell whoer in one chat session? [23:26] Vie Kronos: take ME outside people [23:26] Pete Marellan: right on, Woody [23:26] Skaja Carter: hey...it's Woody...the bouncer... [23:26] XsaraJane Cortes: urm who started this [23:26] Right Paean: RUUUN [23:26] Carys Dahlstrom: Major Woody [23:26] Skaja Carter: ken's wife did [23:26] Methilde Hapmouche: LOL [23:26] Keryn Karas: lol [23:26] Skaja Carter: omg carys [23:27] Carys Dahlstrom: lol [23:27] Vie Kronos: Ken has some esplainin' to do [23:27] Woody Doolittle: don't make me come down there. LOL [23:27] Skaja Carter: you think so? [23:27] Methilde Hapmouche: where's Private Parts? [23:27] Skaja Carter: i'm not at PIER...i'm with Pan and Methy. [23:27] XsaraJane Cortes: hmmmmm am getting a bit worried about you guys [23:27] Right Paean: were not down there wwere here wherever that is [23:27] XsaraJane Cortes: maybe some counselling [23:27] Skaja Carter: omg, X...we so needed this. [23:27] XsaraJane Cortes: or some mediation [23:27] Right Paean: PIER therapy time [23:28] XsaraJane Cortes: hmmmmmm - [23:28] Vie Kronos: this is my counseling, was I misled? [23:28] Skaja Carter: who's the doctor on duty? [23:28] Methilde Hapmouche: everyone line up for your meds now... [23:28] Right Paean: WULLIE IS THE DOC [23:28] Woody Doolittle: As the Flying Spaghetti Monster is my witness, I'll crack some heads. [23:28] Skaja Carter: i already took my meds. [23:28] XsaraJane Cortes: bend over! [23:28] Vie Kronos: woo hoo ME FIRST for meds! [23:28] Right Paean: lmao [23:28] Skaja Carter: lol woody [23:28] XsaraJane Cortes: just a little prick! [23:28] Skaja Carter: is ken's wife still here, or did she leave? [23:28] Skaja Carter: cause i have some photos... [23:29] Methilde Hapmouche: rofl [23:29] XsaraJane Cortes: it will hurt me more than it hurts you [23:29] Right Paean: helloo kens wife thingy you there? [23:29] Vie Kronos: awww that's terrible [23:29] Methilde Hapmouche: is it his rl wifey thingy? [23:29] Skaja Carter: yes [23:29] Methilde Hapmouche: shit [23:29] Right Paean: yup [23:29] Vie Kronos: poor Ken's wife, Ken is so off my clientele... errr ummm friend's list [23:29] Methilde Hapmouche: HAHAHAHAHA [23:30] Methilde Hapmouche: that's frickin awesome!!! [23:30] Skaja Carter: lol Vie [23:30] Keryn Karas: lol [23:30] Carys Dahlstrom: I missed the beginning of this IM, someone send me what happened? [23:30] Right Paean: lmao [23:30] Skaja Carter: pan's saving it [23:30] Carys Dahlstrom: kk [23:30] Right Paean: i had to this is awesome [23:30] Carys Dahlstrom: thanks Pan [23:30] Vie Kronos: no Carys, this is a private group IM [23:30] Skaja Carter: suu's gonna be sorry she missed out [23:30] Right Paean: np:) [23:30] Carys Dahlstrom: LOL vie [23:30] Skaja Carter: lol Vie [23:31] Right Paean: hahaha [23:31] Kimber Boozehound: how do I close the pier chat [23:31] Carys Dahlstrom: hauer [23:31] Right Paean: and im not even drunk awesome [23:31] Vie Kronos: well if no one needs a hoe, I'm going to bed [23:31] XsaraJane Cortes: so ........... [23:31] Woody Doolittle: I would like to remind everyone that this group is not for chat, it's for events only. :) [23:31] Methilde Hapmouche: why ever would you want to close this?? [23:31] Carys Dahlstrom: click the X [23:31] Carys Dahlstrom: lol [23:31] XsaraJane Cortes: Kens wife is not happy [23:31] XsaraJane Cortes: no dont click on me! [23:31] Right Paean: THIS IS THE EVENT OF PIER this is awesome [23:31] Skaja Carter: hey G...how's Hula Hour? [23:31] Methilde Hapmouche: HAHAHA [23:32] Carys Dahlstrom: hurry and snd it Pan, I can hardly wait [23:32] Carys Dahlstrom: send* [23:32] Right Paean: okies "Oh my God, she killed Kenny, You b****" _____________________
|
|
Victorria Paine
Sleepless in Wherever
Join date: 13 Jul 2007
Posts: 1,110
|
10-11-2007 06:52
I would say that in nearly two years now on SL I have got to know maybe 50 people really well (as well as SL we email, Skype etc), and many more on an acquaintance or passing level. What has struck me is the number of people I know who were involved in the start of rl divorce proceedings while I have known them in SL. I did not discover if the separations were the result of SL activity, or whether SL was being sought because of unhappiness in RL already, with ALL my friends who are in the midst of this, but a few did reveal that a general void in RL led them to bite the bullet and change their lives because of the people they met in SL. I wonder how common this is? I suspect a lot of people who do divorce in rl, while in SL, do so because there was already things not right at home, and SL brought some sort of relief, but I also wonder if there are any cases at all of an otherwise happy marriage that was compromised, or led to divorce, DUE to SL activity. On a lighter note, I wonder if the SL divorce rate is higher, lower, or about the same as the divorce rate in RL. I attended a wedding in SL once, and received a WE ARE DIVORCED notecard the very next day. Is that a record? Rock My view is that everyone is in SL for a reason. Some are here to create, some to try their hand at running a small business, some to socialize with their RL spouses or mates, and some to explore new horizons. But ... I think everyone who spends a significant amount of time in SL does so because SL allows them to do things that they, for whatever reason, can't or won't do in RL. Again, this runs the gamut from creativity, to business, to sex, to relationship exploration and the like. Whether this becomes an issue for RL is very fact-specific. For example, I have met many women in SL who are either (1) unhappy in their RL marriages or (2) (more commonly) reasonably happy in their RL marriages but either somewhat bored, somewhat undersexed or underintimacied or (3) happily married but wanting to explore relationships with other women, fetish relationships and the like. In some cases, the SL relationship can cause problems in the RL relationship before the RL relationship has any visible problems, while in others the Rl relationship is already troubled before the SL relationship begins. What I think is a common thread, however, in these situations is that (in the typical monogamous marriage) the RL relationship is rarely 100% fine (despite what the spouses may say) if one of them feels the need to explore online relationships. There is something there that is not "enough". Now this doesnt always mean that an online relationship will cause problems for the RL relationship. For example, a couple may agree that certain needs one of the spouses has which the other spouse is not willing to provide in the marriage can be met in the self-contained, relatively safe world of SL -- for example, someone may be permitted to explore same sex relationships, or D/s relationships or what have you, while remaining fully committed and monogamous in RL. In these cases the Sl relationship can actually help the RL one, but the key component is the consent of the spouse for this, typically. And typically this consent is not sought, and if and when things are discovered down the road, that can lead to problems in the typically monogamous RL coupling. |
|
Malachi Petunia
Gentle Miscreant
Join date: 21 Sep 2003
Posts: 3,414
|
10-11-2007 06:59
Second Life does attract its share of people in the throes of escapism. So do bars, bowling alleys, country clubs, and Kiwanas groups; SL has the advantage that you can have a period of escape while your spouse and family are in the other room.
One of the reasons that you've seen such a high incidence of RL divorces starting in SL is people who are contented and fulfilled by their current situation rarely have the time or inclination to pursue escape. In that sense, a large part of the recurring players are self-selected because of their dissatisfaction or boredom. The biggest mistake that I've seen people make is that SL interactions can seem so much more intense than RL interactions. I once saw Vonnegut speak about how we've seen to many stories in our modern lives and all these stories - out of dramatic necessity - have grand swells and troughs. However in our real lives, we strive for stability and try to avoid the high drama of the storyteller. This tends to makes our lives pale in comparison to what we see and read to the point where you have one spouse say to the other "couldn't you... get some kind of kidney infection or something? not life threatening of course, just to bring some drama into our lives?". In this way, every SL relationship is far more dramatic than any RL relationship, because every encounter in SL is more like a first date than that boring schlub you are married to. Put another way, no matter how well you "know" someone in SL, you've really only scratched the surface and have no idea what they are like on a rainy tuesday evening where they'd just rather be by themselves. That is where I find people make the worst mistakes: they think that this new person - whom they mostly only "see" whilst scintillating - is in fact better than their current mate. This is an understandable but often gross mistake. Deciding who works in the virtual garden is far more enjoyable than deciding who takes out the RL trash, disagreements about v-furniture choices can be remedied in seconds. Perhaps most importantly, given that SL relationships are actually quite shallow compared to RL relationships, a person might (unknowingly) choose and reject multiple possible mates in SL in the course of a month. The recommendation that I make to anyone in SL or RL is that you should never leave a marriage for a new partner, primarily because you'll cause all kinds of pain in exchange for your fantasy of what the new partner seems, not what they are. If your marriage is bad enough to leave, it should be bad enough on its own merits otherwise you are better off asking your partner if you can fool around until your illusions are shattered (I don't really advocate that, but I hope it makes the point). To date, I think one person has taken that advice to heart. Does SL break marriages? I really don't think so. One has to be predisposed to be looking and your as likely to find that person in any sphere of your life. If SL contributes anything it is that false sense of intimacy and intensity, but I don't think it has the ability to turn a contented person into a discontented one. It may help them see their existing dissatisfaction in sharper relief, but I don't think SL can generate it out of nothing. All that said, I know a number of people who have turned SL relationships into working RL marriages. I also know people who found their "ideal" SL mate repugnant upon first meeting. I've yet to see any stable RL marriage compromised by any on-line activities. (Yes, I know there is a definitional problem there: if I see an RL marriage break up then it was, ipso facto, not stable). I hope this sheds some light on the original question. I also hope that people would listen to that bit about leaving their marriage for its own sake because I don't like to see unnecessary pain. By the same token, I do expect people to continue to be people and therefore don't expect that they will often heed it. |
|
Colette Meiji
Registered User
Join date: 25 Mar 2005
Posts: 15,556
|
10-11-2007 07:13
Online dating leads to its share of divorces.
Its not just Second Life, in fact its often NOT Second Life. Two of my inlaws (bother and a sister) have had marital problems because of cyber relationships started with people they met playing online Euchre! ------------ What you wonder is before the internet and before AIDS, these same people probably would have been having RL affairs with people they met at work, at bars , etc. Because no matter what - these people are just people, and monogamy is against human genetic make up. It takes a lot of work from both partners to make it work, and quite a lot people don't want to put forth the effort. |
|
Colette Meiji
Registered User
Join date: 25 Mar 2005
Posts: 15,556
|
10-11-2007 07:16
On a lighter note, I wonder if the SL divorce rate is higher, lower, or about the same as the divorce rate in RL. I attended a wedding in SL once, and received a WE ARE DIVORCED notecard the very next day. Is that a record? I know a couple of next day divorces in SL. SL divorce is several orders of magnitude more common than RL divorce. Mainly because I don't think most people consider themselves "Married" because SL is just a game. |
|
Victorria Paine
Sleepless in Wherever
Join date: 13 Jul 2007
Posts: 1,110
|
10-11-2007 07:27
Because no matter what - these people are just people, and monogamy is against human genetic make up. . Do you think? I've thought this as well, but it's interesting to hear it from others. What you wonder is before the internet and before AIDS, these same people probably would have been having RL affairs with people they met at work, at bars , etc. My view on this is that some people likely would have used any venue for an affair in RL, but the internet makes it so much easier and more accessible, the same way that it does for porn. |
|
Michael Bigwig
~VRML Aficionado~
Join date: 5 Dec 2005
Posts: 2,181
|
10-11-2007 07:38
I think a handful of people are too inclined to combine SL into RL (i.e. internet and real). If we as a species can not keep our inter-realities under control, then we will suffer. Personally, I feel like any drama that comes from this lack of control, is in due order. I call it: Natural Selection.
I'm not being harsh...I'm just being forthcoming. It takes a certain type of person to meet someone in SL, fall in love, get married in SL...then get married in RL...and then...who knows. The majority of cases all turn out bad...hmmm...I wonder why? I don't think it's very 'smart' to mingle the two realities when it comes to your personal life. _____________________
~Michael Bigwig
__________________________________________________Lead Designer, Glowbox Designs  |
|
Malachi Petunia
Gentle Miscreant
Join date: 21 Sep 2003
Posts: 3,414
|
a minor technical correction
10-11-2007 07:38
Because no matter what - these people are just people, and monogamy is against human genetic make up. |
|
errUh Oh
Registered User
Join date: 1 Mar 2007
Posts: 233
|
10-11-2007 07:46
If we as a species can not keep our inter-realities under control, then we will suffer. thats the biggest load of crap i ever heard |
|
Colette Meiji
Registered User
Join date: 25 Mar 2005
Posts: 15,556
|
10-11-2007 07:51
A more accurate statement would be "humans are primarily monogamous with certain situational polygamous tendencies". Extensive studies in Europe and North Amercia show very reliably that 80-90% of putative fathers are the actual fathers. Bibliography available upon request. Okay I request. Research on this actually comes in on both sides of the issue. And bias is pretty rampant since monogamy is favored by the religions practiced in those areas you have mentioned. Think of this a in a detached manner - Why is adultery so common even in a society where religion AND social pressures discourage it? Most of what I have read about people in much simpler societies (in other words where basic drives of humans are less influenced by their society) have suggested absolute monogamy is less common. |
|
Malachi Petunia
Gentle Miscreant
Join date: 21 Sep 2003
Posts: 3,414
|
10-11-2007 07:52
If we as a species can not keep our inter-realities under control, then we will suffer. Personally, I feel like any drama that comes from this lack of control, is in due order. I call it: Natural Selection. |
|
errUh Oh
Registered User
Join date: 1 Mar 2007
Posts: 233
|
10-11-2007 07:54
Please note that this is a purely ideosyncractic definition and has no connection at all with what is commonly known as "Natural Selection". Perhaps the word "Eugenics" was meant. whatever you call it its still crap |
|
Colette Meiji
Registered User
Join date: 25 Mar 2005
Posts: 15,556
|
10-11-2007 07:54
thats the biggest load of crap i ever heard Hey be fair. Ive heard bigger loads of crap. It would only be a medium sized load. |
|
Michael Bigwig
~VRML Aficionado~
Join date: 5 Dec 2005
Posts: 2,181
|
10-11-2007 07:54
thats the biggest load of crap i ever heard You can't just say something like that without backing it up with at least a tinge of sense. I'm not asking for an essay...but at least a glimpse into your viewpoint would be nice. _____________________
~Michael Bigwig
__________________________________________________Lead Designer, Glowbox Designs |
|
errUh Oh
Registered User
Join date: 1 Mar 2007
Posts: 233
|
10-11-2007 07:54
Hey be fair. Ive heard bigger loads of crap. It would only be a medium sized load. lol i stand corrected |
|
Michael Bigwig
~VRML Aficionado~
Join date: 5 Dec 2005
Posts: 2,181
|
10-11-2007 08:00
lol i stand corrected In my eyes, you don't stand at all--at least your argument certainly wouldn't in court. _____________________
~Michael Bigwig
__________________________________________________Lead Designer, Glowbox Designs |
|
Alicia Sautereau
if (!social) hide;
Join date: 20 Feb 2007
Posts: 3,125
|
10-11-2007 08:00
In my eyes, you don't stand at all--at least your argument certainly wouldn't in court. some one devorving allready so soon? _____________________
|
|
errUh Oh
Registered User
Join date: 1 Mar 2007
Posts: 233
|
10-11-2007 08:01
You can't just say something like that without backing it up with at least a tinge of sense. I'm not asking for an essay...but at least a glimpse into your viewpoint would be nice. well its just what youre saying doesnt make a whole lot of sense to me thats all. i wasnt really trying to be nasty, just funny. but seriously how can you make those types of statements. its not possible to keep sl and rl completely seperate. There are just too many possiblities for how sl can seep into and have an effect on your rl, besides just the obvious examples being discussed here. and to be honest, i dont see the point of having anything in sl if it doesnt have the potential to enrich your rl, even in some indirect ways. im not advocating anything. im just saying your statement and attitude doesnt ring true for me. |
|
errUh Oh
Registered User
Join date: 1 Mar 2007
Posts: 233
|
10-11-2007 08:02
In my eyes, you don't stand at all--at least your argument certainly wouldn't in court. dont be nasty |
|
Colette Meiji
Registered User
Join date: 25 Mar 2005
Posts: 15,556
|
10-11-2007 08:11
In my eyes, you don't stand at all--at least your argument certainly wouldn't in court. And yours would? How would you go about tangibly proving that people who have cant control their inter-reality damages the HUMAN SPECIES more than people who are always 100% open about their RL self having online affairs?. My guess is neither will make the species suffer, or even hiccup. Sometimes hyperbole for hyperbole's sake is pointless. |
|
Natalie Paderborn
Registered User
Join date: 25 Dec 2006
Posts: 17
|
10-11-2007 08:16
To expect what happens after you hit the connect button to have no impact on your life when you've logged out is foolishness.
|
|
bilbo99 Emu
Garrett's No.1 fan
Join date: 27 Oct 2006
Posts: 3,468
|
10-11-2007 08:25
A very interesting thread. Please don't let it degenerate into name calling.
I'm pretty much on the fence with this. Long before my introduction to the internet, my bike club had more broken marriages in, than happy ones. We never tried to diagnose the problem, just accepted it. Insofar as keeping SL and RL separate I'm sure I'm not unique here. My RL fiancee (some distance away) and I use SL as a descendant of the media we met in. We might dance, explore or go shopping and we know what we see is make believe, but when one of us falls silent for a while, the other gets concerned. When we try different outfits on, we ask each others opinions. Our comments relate to our RL tastes. Morgaines conservative tastes are at odds with my alts. I don't see where we can put a division in there. I think the phrase "the grass is always greener" has a strong grounding in the OP's question. How much simpler (and tempting!) to react to a visual delight in SL, sparking off a conversation where speaking to complete strangers comes as easy as stirring your coffee? So much easier than making the effort to dress up, go out and select a 'hunting ground'? It takes a special kind of person to meet in SL, fall in love, meet in RL, fall in love and live happily ever after, true. There are some posters who have done that. Scale that up by the fraction forum readers are of the total community and I think you'll have an impressive number. I know a couple who were penfriends. They were of two socially incompatable groups in a foreign country. They met. They fell in love and married and moved to UK. Sadly both departed now but a lovely couple. _____________________
Be polite .. that newbie could be your next ex-partner.
|
|
Brenda Connolly
Un United Avatar
Join date: 10 Jan 2007
Posts: 25,000
|
10-11-2007 08:28
Speaking of big loads of Crap, did anyone see South Park last night?
_____________________
Don't you ever try to look behind my eyes. You don't want to know what they have seen.
http://brenda-connolly.blogspot.com |
|
Trout Recreant
Public Enemy No. 1
Join date: 24 Jul 2007
Posts: 4,873
|
10-11-2007 08:36
People who are in unhappy or unfulfilling relationships often stay in them because it's easier and because they don't feel like they are worth anything better, or that there could be anything better for them out there. It's a miserable existence and at some point, they have to go seek what they need elsewhere. SL and other online venues make that somewhat easier. I tend to believe that in a lot of cases, the RL relationship that ended was bad for any number of reasons and if SL was a catalyst for people to go out and seek a happier existence then that isn't a bad thing.
Note that I have used pretty vague language there - relationships are so individual that they completely defy any attempt to categorize them. It's just that my experience with people in this sort of situation indicates that there were all sorts of problems that led to the RL marriage coming apart and that the online relationship gave them the courage to face those problems. Anyway - the usual disclaimers apply - it's only my opinion, subject to change, grain of salt, I'm a well-known idiot and almost always wrong, etc... _____________________
A Trout Rating (tm) is something to cherish. To flaunt and be proud of. It is something all women should aspire to obtain! |