What % of women landing & propositioning other women are actually SGTWOH?

That would be "Sweaty Guys Typing With One Hand."

I'm going to venture a ballpark figure: 99.9999999999999999999999999743%.














(Yes, it's a Friday Thread®! But also, I'm genuinely curious about the consensus on this topic. I hope you will give me credit for refraining from making it a poll!)

Why do you pretend to care?

I guess I was wondering how many people would have had that thought, or something similar, when such an incident occurs.

Maybe I'm just too cynical.

(But I still betcha that was a guy.)

I like that figure... not because it's especially true, but because it slows down the propositions from the other SGTWOH =)

What does 'landing and propositioning' mean?

I understand the words separately, but not so much as a phrase.

And speaking to what I think is the question, I have no idea.

Projecting too much would be my guess



Who was?

Wow, you must be a trained psychiatric professional!

In this particular case, it was landing where I was working on a building. (Which I don't mind; if I did, I'd build only in skyboxes.) The compliments on my work and my appearance were a little too profuse for ordinary 'getting to know someone who might be an interesting new acquaintance'; gifts followed, and moving closer, closer, using animations of swaying, stroking her own hair...clearly reaching out to touch me would be next...

I REALLY needed to get that building finished.

(Also I have trouble keeping from laughing at the sight of avatars getting it on, which may or may not constitute a personality flaw. Real sex = pretty darned interesting; avatar sex = pretty darned hilarious.)

Oh - so it's the overdone aspect you're questioning. It's hard to say.

Some avs do seem a caricature of male/female conventions, I'll say that much!

But I used to get mistaken for a guy on text forums because I had opinions. So, never know. (I'm not a guy.)

I'm not terribly interested in how many guys feel the need to have a female avatar (or why they think that other female avatars would be more interested in an apparently same-sex adventure than one with the opposite sex).

What puzzles me is that, given the ridiculous way so many of them dress and shape their avvies, they actually THINK that they are passing themselves off successfully as RL females.

Or maybe I'm missing the point and am supposed to assume that the hooker with the bling shoes is actually male?

I'm so confused....

Me neither. And I'm afraid I followed the lead of many other women in assuming a gender-neutral first name, so as to avoid the too-widespread prejudices about women's writing.

You were brave to take a female-identified name. I mean, I wouldn't take a male-identified name---I wouldn't be Bob or John or Jason, because that seems deliberately deceptive. But a neutral name (Sigourney or Stockard or J.K. or whatever) seems like a good compromise to me.

Ah, THAT would be sneaky!

I do tend to assume that very over-the-top 'female' avatars are being operated by males. Probably a lot of people make that same assumption.

So a RL woman could use such an avatar and have others assume she was really a guy, while a man who wanted to use a female avatar but not be thought of as a SGTWOH would use a more mousy, less chesty/hookery avatar...

And you must assume too much.

Doesn't matter what gender the RL unit is. If it propositions me upon landing and never speaking to me before, they get either the dragon or the cold shoulder, depending on what I'm doing. Muting either way.

Nothing says, "mute my sorry ass," like popping up outta the blue with, "wanna sexorz!!" While I'm not interested in SL for that aspect, I would still prefer at least a, "hi," before I mute!

How so?

I agree, and to be clear, the person's first words weren't a proposition; the opening was compliments and gift-giving, then the moving closer and the fancy animations.

I mean, I don't care; I know that exactly this sort of thing (sharing sex animations with people you've just met in virtual life and will never meet in non-virtual life) is the whole reason for being in SL at all, for some.

I was just wondering about the gender aspect of it all.

Oh, sorry, I must have misread. Well, to answer your question then..

I was a role player, especially in the text-base medium. For a while there, it was kinda taboo (as in talking about it, kind of like, "don't ask; don't tell," to play opposite genders. So, if I knew a person's RL gender, I still addressed them as their character's gender, even in OOC.

So, I guess to say, if I was interested in cybering, it wouldn't matter. I'll "accept" the avatar's gender. Fortunately, I'm not, so the issue doesn't really crop up for me.

Very interesting, that it was taboo to play the opposite gender. I've heard a few things here and there about the text-based RP phenomenon, but hadn't heard of that aspect (not at I'm assuming they were all the same, but I bet some things were similar).

I'm pretty sure a lot of the female-shaped avs are GiRLs (Guys in Real Life). I'm equally certain that many are day-one, genetic females who choose that way to express themselves. Some may choose to be Frankenbarbies with ironic intent, lack thereof or some other reason entirely. Others try for something more realistic. Of the GiRLs, the motivations may be equally varied: suck-it-and-see bi-curious, transgendered, transsexual, transcontinental or pure gender-bait. In the end...

WHAT THE FUCK DOES IT MATTER?

If the cyber is good, it's good cyber. Accept it for what it is. Don't expect a fulfilling RL experience at the end of it. Labels are for jam.

*ahem*

Yes, some people find true love at the end of the rainbow. Good for them; and I mean that, sincerely, with zero (0) sarcasm. For the rest of us: this is not Facebook. Hell, even Facebook isn't *that* reliable. Your choices are: accept that you can't be sure, and be free, or delude yourself that you can tell the difference.

'frankenbarbies'....I love it!

As for the 'wtf does it matter' aspect---I feel 'wtf does it matter' about people's choice in how to present themselves. Whatever gender, whatever style, for whatever reason.

However, when it comes to having an actual personal interaction with another person (even if it's just cybering), an element of deception exists. And that--the choice to have a personal interaction deceptively---feels to me like a slightly different situation than the mere choice of appearance.

Depends on your take on SL, surely. If your perception is that it's a make-believe world where anyone can be who/what they want to be, where's the deception?

After all, if you choose to engage amorously with a dragon (or a neko, or a ferret, or... well, y'know, I'm trying to be inclusive), do you stop to question, "hmmm... wait a minute - is this a real dragon, or just some human pretending to be a dragon - oh noes! am I being deceived??"

I tend to think your estimate of 99.zillion 9's percent is pretty close. I've never met a RL woman in SL that was "interested" in fooling around with me come on like a guy would. From what I've seen in SL so far, real women are vastly more interested in YOU as an emotional person, and they're usually quite tactful about it. Much less given to quickly steering a discussion towards getting intimate than a guy would. Guys posing as women to get close to women are almost always a dead giveaway. Their thinking process is different, motivations are different, timing is different, level of respect is different, level of patience is different, the part of you they want to embrace is different (well.. mostly ). It's really not that difficult to pick up on as long as you pay attention.

and edit for Kelli: yeah, it IS possible to tell, but you're right in saying so what. For me it's always been about the interaction and not a tad bit about who's typing. Even when I've known someone was doing the switcheroo it's never mattered.

I'm sure it's *possible* to tell. I'm less sure it's likely that one can be certain. I've had strong vibes one way and the other, but its rare I've had confirmation I'd bet on. I'll admit I've been wrong on occasion, too. Maybe that's just my lack of judgement?

I doubt anyone can be 100% accurate going by the flimsy interactions we have in SL. It also all depends on if you need "certain", or "certain enough". One can be certain the person is "too manly" or "too girly" to feel comfortable with, and still not know, or care what RL gender they are. Of the ones I've had confirmation on, I wasn't wrong, but it also takes a fair amount for me to lean towards suspecting someone isn't who they say they are. If it mattered to me, I'm sure I would begin to suspect someone sooner, and with less provocation. The fact that I DON'T care, and don't jump to suspicion after the first questionable thing actually makes those "give away" clues easier to see, because there's no pressure if I'm wrong.

I've certainly had -- indeed, still have -- my suspicions about some people. That said, the two cases of gender-crossing friends that HAVE been confirmed took me ENTIRELY by surprise. So, no, it's not just YOUR lack of judgement ...

On the other hand, I actually don't care all that much. I start from the assumption that nothing in SL is what it seems to be, and I tend to find people who treat SL as a sort of cartoony version of Facebook, and expect SL and RL to coincide exactly, rather annoying. Surely experimentation is what SL is all about?