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

Well, then, clearly you misunderstood the entire situation. Or were pretending to. (And if that's the case, your readers can draw their own conclusions about you.)

The distinction which is either escaping you, or that you are pretending is escaping you, is that I never claimed that 'depictions of rape in virtual worlds = rape'----not in those words or in any other words.

My challenge to you to find some such formulation posted by me remains unanswered. You have been unable to find any such claim by me (unsurprisingly, since it doesn't exist!) and have been reduced to the SOPT of typing insults.

Really, do you think anyone is fooled by the 'You Can't Read' tactic? Anyone at all?

If so, why would you think that they could be fooled by it?

wrong thread!

So Davin you found something? Good.

Did you post it in the 'are women avs really women' thread, in mistake, though? I've been curious how you got along in your search but hadn't seen any updates in the thread you began about it.

Oh well at any rate, good luck!

(ETA: See you caught it. Ok. Question answered, then. Lol.)

Lita's rule number 3: All girls are presumed to be guys until proven otherwise.

Lita's rule number 4: It doesn't matter what gender is on the other side of the keyboard. SL is SL.

For what little it's worth PEP (please note spelling), I was never under the impression that Ponsonby's post(s) were making a reductive linkage between "virtual" and "real" rape: she is clearly talking about DEPICTIONS of rape without, so far as I can see, any sort of suggestion that it is "like" real rape.

What I think has happened here is a simple failure of communication. Perhaps you have made your inference from the fact that her post replied to yours about "virtual rape" not being an appropriate term because it implied an equation between "real" and "virtual" rape, without making it clear that she was not making such an equation: what she in fact insists upon is the existence of "depictions of rape," which we all agree are very much different.

God that was garbled ...

Not garbled.

You were saying that people should react upon what is actually said and not upon their own inference.

Thank you thank you, oh thank you!

/me weeps silently in relief that, for once, SOMEONE has not misread, misapplied, misinterpreted, or downright ignored her attempt to make something clear ...

Sometimes I think asynchronous communication just sucks.

Pretty much all human communication is asynchronous. Over.

Nonsense. I talk over people all the time in RL.

You are very welcome.

And yes it can be very hard to carry on a discussion/convo in such media.

"people should react upon what is actually said and not upon their own inference"


.....any chance of getting the Lindens to post this at the top of each page of the Forums?

My point. Over.

Being trolled didn't help either.

I may do it up as a teeshirt ...

It might give a few viewers pause.

Then again, one can't help suspecting that many people who do this sort of thing (display massive outrage over things that were never said) are quite consciously using this Strawman technique as a tactic.

(And one can't help wondering further what circle of hell would claim them, were there literal Circles of Hell.)

Some, maybe. And some are trolling, as Love says.

But I am more inclined to think that, for many or even most, it's an issue of language and perhaps logic? We deal sometimes with some pretty complicated subjects, and mustering the skills to both read carefully, and respond articulately, can be difficult. I certainly have problems sometimes. We don't teach rhetoric or logic, really, anymore; we barely teach writing for that matter.

Maybe the really scary thing is that the contributions to this forum ARE of a much higher quality, relatively speaking, than what one finds elsewhere on the internet. Check out the comments on most SL Herald stories (not to mention the stories themselves!) if you REALLY want to know what it is to feel despair.

They could do that and also put it as MOTD for a month, but....

It would NEVER catch on.


"People should react on what is accidentally said" indeed! Ha!

Too true.

And evidence of poor reading skills/limited vocabulary/bizarre reasoning processes is all too common in the so-called mainstream media, too.

Is this all the fault of largely-non-verbal activities such as SL itself (and gaming in general and hours spent in front of reality TV shows)? Is this evidence of generations of people who've spent so much of their lifetimes engaged in non-verbal activites that they can't make sense of language? Can't think things through logically, can't formulate or follow a line of reasoning, and can't understand the source of their own frustrations?

If you are going to claim that then you should have been more careful where you put your (single) quotation marks . . .

Pep ( . . . and been even more careful about your use of "we". )

Pep look up the wedding thread

Actually, for all the focus on the visual in SL, and despite the advent of voice, I think it is a remarkably textual and verbal world. The written word is how we present ourselves, far more so than how we "look" in-world.

Which might account for this: my perception is that the most "sought after" men and women, sexually, but also just as friends, often tend to be the most articulate.

Of course, depending upon the context, the "most articulate" may not mean much. But, as they say, in the land of the blind, the one-eyed man is king.

Yes lol, but I meant do people think "Snickers" is a male or a female or what (without seeing me)?

Indubitably female.

Pep (The power of nlp - although it *is* culture dependent)

You're too kind. It's a burden, but I try to bear it unselfishly.


Have you ever read the eponymous HG Wells story? It's entirely apropos.

Pep (is the world's tallest dwarf )

I have. I consider it a horror story.

One of my favorite writers.