The Effect of SL on RL

Hey...if you want to dish out the negative posts...then you can soak them up also. No hard feelings...excuse me for getting a little more abrasive when I'm told my post is a total load of crap...

Here is what I was saying, to be clear: I wasn't saying that RL and SL need to remain disconnected. I was illustrating the danger of going to extremes--especially in the personal life arena. Inter-reality is an exciting (relatively) new adventure...we must be responsible with it. If a person wants to fall in love online, and get married in RL...that's their decision--however the statistics show it will most likely lead to disaster.

And I think Darwin comes to mind when I think of people jumping out getting married in RL to their SL partners...leave the 'partnership' in SL...you'll be better off. If you get hurt, or are disappointed, there is no one to blame but yourselves.

Stand back…I’m a professional.
DaQbet it seems has some how became a magnet for unhappy married women seeking a taste of the wild side in SL. I say that not in jest or to boast but I cant swing a dead lolcat with out hitting a 38 year old married woman who wants to leave her husband, but cant because of the house and kids. In fact I too used SL as an escape from an increasingly tedious 21 year marriage that had taken a turn south. I was confronted by my wife, and accused of having an affair when she found out I was dancing with another woman in SL. Well of course it seemed different to me and we argued semantics but in the end she agreed to try SL herself and now we both enjoy an active social SL. We seldom interact in SL, for the occational..”dinners ready” type IM, but we have truly found a commonality that has brought us closer together in our RL marriage, and rekindled the spark that had faded.

I didn't say it would damage the human species. I said it would damage those involved in it--a clear distinction.

It's not a hyperbole in this case--there are statistic that prove these personal virtual and RL connections are more often than not disaster-prone and tend to lead to disappointment and heartache.

I'm not making this up.

Just a thought, but couldn't spending excessive amounts of time in SL, regardless of whether its socializing, extramarital affairs, creating, or other job, eventually have an ill effect on real life relationships if your significant RL other starts feeling neglected?... much like a workaholic or a spouse that spends too much time pursuing RL hobbies that doesn't include the other person.

But I suppose if it doesn't involve the romantic/sexual aspects, this could be remedied by getting them involved in your activities whether it be by getting them to join SL too or by talking about what you're doing instead of closeting yourself away.

Yes, moderation is always the key word. But there is a difference when talking about personal connections being made across the world via the internet.

If you are neglecting yourself--it is a victimless crime. If you are affecting others, than you need to ask yourself whether [they] are important enough to change [yourself] over.

Lunch time!

Actually .. you did.



Says species pretty clearly. Thats the line euruth said was a load of crap.



-------------------------

I agree with you that most online to RL connections lead to heartache.

I just think the species will get along just fine either way.

I have found similar .. not so much "wants to leave her husband", but rather women who are bored, undersexed, underintimacied, etc., but who come to SL to have those needs met. Relatively few of these are interested in taking relationships to RL, but no doubt their SL relationships can have an impact on their RL marriages regardless (sometimes good, sometimes bad).

I'm scanning this thread, trying to think of something intelligent to add, something about the state of marriages and the internet and how I work with women who's husbands have sexual addictions (which I do), etc. and then I read THIS - so of course I decide to respond to it instead.

/me loves South Park! Who cares about who is divorcing who and for what reason. Let us talk about crap!

Leave it to the Offensive Broad to derail this one

Mal, these studies were based on Western society. It would be interesting to view a more "natural" version of marital status among non-Christian, non-Muslim, non-Judaic bush tribes. I read one study (can't quote from it because I don't remember where it is) that said that bush tribes are often non-monogamous, and only the Western institution of "marriage" has infiltrated these tribes into adopting monogamous tendencies.

I do one thing, and I do it well. Being all thoughtful and serious is fine but I leave that to minds greater than mine.

I've said this in other threads, so you all might be getting tired of reading it. I met my RL husband in an online chat room. Not a virtual world, just straight chat. He was in England, I was in Pennsylvania. It was weird, because I had chatted with many other guys in the rooms, but with him there was an instant connection. (more than just the electronic one....lol) I can't say it was love at "first read", but we became friends very fast, and for all that we are different personalities, there was a lot in common. You do tend to become "intimate" (in thoughts and deeds) quicker in an online environment. Some of the normal social constraints of face-to-face real world interaction just aren't present. You're not being judged on your looks, but instead on your words, so it makes connecting sometimes easier.
When he first started on SL last November, it did cause problems for us. And it could have gotten much worse, I think. I was upset about it in the beginning, until I started sitting with him and watching him play, then I became more curious then anything else. Once I was able to play also, it became a new way to interact for us. I see a lot of "marriages" on SL that come and go very quickly. I see people who are married in RL, but specifically state on their profiles that their SL partner is their "life" their "love forever", etc. And I know that there's no way to know that for sure until you are actually interacting with someone on a daily basis. Believe me, my husband and I have had a tough line to walk sometimes, just getting to know each other's quirks and foibles which aren't revealed in normal conversation makes life hard sometimes. We've been married for 5 years now, and i have to say that it's only the last 6 months or so that it's all seemed to really come together. It's taken that long, really, to fully know all of the ins and outs of being married and raising a family together. I don't think SL causes the divorces, but if a marriage is already on the rocks, it can certainly cause it to crash a lot faster if one is involved in SL (and a SL partnership, etc) and their spouse is not. Marriage is definitely hard work, but if the foundation isn't there, if only one party or neither is willing to do that work, nothing can save it. In that case, SL is really a non-issue. If a marriage is strong, trusting, loving & above all, respectful, then SL is also a non-issue. At least in my opinion, and for what I've seen.

This is a little something I ran across (okay, I'm trying to debunk Mal's statement that humans are naturally monogamous...) It's an interesting article about evolutionary "sluts."

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2002/08/18/IN237263.DTL

[Edit: Quick quote from the article:]

That is not what I said...exactly, it has to be read as a whole. I didn't mean the entire species. If you read the entire post...you could deduce that. Or maybe you couldn't?

When you meet in real life you have to assume you dont know anything about this person and start all over again. This is hard to do because its easy to transfer emotions from online into real life without having your eyes wide open. You are compelled to do that because you have all these feelings or whatever left over from being online and its natural to want to focus them towards the real life person you meet. But its folly to do so. You hafta start all over again because there is no way to convey how a person behaves in rl over the internet, voice or cam . Everything is idealized online. Playing house in a game isnt the same as the day to day grind of real life. There are alot less responsibilities online, especially for men. And, unless you are willing to spend long periods of time discussing your partners opinions on everything from birth control to religion to whatever, youre not gonna really have a clue where your mate stands on anything really. And no matter how much you discuss lifestyle choices and other important topics, there are some things you just cant know from online connections. The main one i can think of is: pheromones. It makes all the difference in the world. id still like to think its possible for people to meet online and be happy in rl. But, i have moments of frustration dealing with people online who are convinced sl is a rl dating service. i dont wanna be negative. There are some really good things about exploring a relationship like this. i believe you can know someone's heart and i believe you can love someone online or in second life. i believe its real and in some ways just as valid as anything in rl. And i think alot of the relationships that break up after meeting online and moving into real life, well i think that happens to people who only meet in real life too. So i dont neccessarily blame meeting online for that. As long as you are aware that youll have unique issues to deal with forming a relationship online first, you should be ok no matter what the outcome.

well I didn't. It seemed to me you WERE referring to the entire species. So perhaps you need to reconsider your wording Michael.

Inc

My statement doesn't need debunking because I certainly didn't say that humans are naturally monogamous but mostly because my statement was conditional. You could also take the converse of my statement and read "10 to 20% of all children studied have biological fathers who are not their putative fathers". What philanderers we are!

I thought that discussion of the polygyny threshold model, the "sexy son" hypothesis (30 years and still not shot down nor promoted), differential parental investment as a determinant of mating strategy, intrauterine sperm competiton, comparative sexual dimophism among primates, and the polyandrous habits of Phalaropes to be a little bit esoteric. Perhaps I was wrong. I did run the "Second Life Brain and Behavior Seminars" a couple years ago and still have the slides and the ensuing dialogs. Should I run it again?

Errruh Oh hits an important point, which is that, at least in the US, more than 50% of marriages end in divorce, and I'm certain the majority of those have nothing to do with SL. Who knows how many non-marital relationships come apart each year. Most relationships fall apart. It's a sad part of life, but that's the way it is. Sl may be a catalyst for some of those relationships coming apart, but in many cases, the relationship was doomed. IOW, SL may have been the last straw, but it wasn't the only straw.

Why would the genetic father of children be the metric for measuring extramartial sex in a society with widespread birth control; and a majority of people being sexually active for decades beyond the years they conceive their children?

People who are having affairs are generally not trying to get pregnant, at least not in Western culture.

You're vicitmizing yourself though .

There are plenty of "gaming widows" out there. I have seen relationships fail becuase someone spent too much time playing WoW, or bowling, or just about anything else. This argument is like the old "rock and roll made mah boy a Satan worshipper!" shtick. People blame video games, violent movies, rock and roll, mini skirts and communists for what they perceive as the decay of morals, relationships, etc etc.. This is because they do not want to accept the responsibility for how their lives (or their children's) have turned out.

I'll bet you a dollar that people in SL who have failing relationships have the exact same problem in real life too for the exact same reasons. SL has very little to do with it. As someone else pointed out, it could just as easily be online Euchre.

Oh, and you guys arguing about monogamy are both right. and both wrong. Some people are monogamous and some aren't. No one is utterly at the mercy of gentics. You are really arguing nature vs. nurture and neither extreme is applicable to people or anything else.

SJ

Dude, I'm just saying that monogamy isn't necessarily the primary sexual practice as you previously led us to believe. Apologies if I misconstrued. When you say X% of North American and European societies, etc, you leave out a LOT OF PEOPLE.

I requote you:
"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."

I do believe that here you DO say that humans are primarily monogamous. And re: all those other things that you were talking about: Dammit, Jim, I'm an engineer, not a sociologist. If you want to go around spouting off terms that mean nothing to me, go for it. They still mean nothing to me.

The problem with 'online relationships' is little different than falling in love in any other pocket community.

You may flirt with someone at work, but is the chemistry enough to survive being taken out of that context?

You may have a bar you're fond of, and someone you're infatuated with, but is that someone you'd introduce to family and friends?

You may have someone online that 'gets' you, you confide in each other and have have great chats... but is it someone you could live with?

You may have a fantastic platonic roommate, but would sleeping with them improve things or result in eternal awkwardness afterwards?

Of the numerous 'communities of people' we participate in regularly... they are all connected by one inescapable component... ourselves.

If we know our actions in one world (online or at work) would get us in trouble in another (with spouse or family) ... then that is a problem with no legitimate excuse.

We are who we are in all the worlds we inhabit. Pretending otherwise is self-delusion.

People are also too quick to assume that because a relationship works well in one world, it will naturally work in all the others we choose to drag it into.

Ok...so, I've re-thought about what I originally said...and I've come to the conclusion that I believe both to be true--meaning, I believe the species suffers, as well as the individual.

How do you define 'suffer' in this case? I'll tell you. Suffer refers to a group of individuals all who relate to a similar pain. Studies show (as well as my own research) that internet dating and virtual hook-ups are on the rise--these same studies show that the majority of these 'connections' take a turn for the worse.

If we expound this effect by introducing the massive growth in technology and online worlds...we can see there is a possibility many of [us] will take it too far...it will be like digital crack (which WoW has already been related to several times). Remember the film Lawnmower Man?

Hence my point: the species will suffer.

But here enters my Darwin reference: those of you who delve fully into these connections and 'plug in' so much you find it hard to come back...well, I feel bad I really do...but that's natural selection in the works. This does not mean I'm a cynic...nor am I a bitter man--I'm a dreamer and a realist simultaneously...it's a hard knock life.

Have any of you read: Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep by P.K. Dick? This all reminds me a bit of 'Mercerism.'

completely agree but you left out the pheromones! im serious about this guys. its a deal breaker.

Agreed.

omg stop digging your hole any deeper its like watching a car crash