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

I have found most men who play women that hit on other women have they wont voice in their profile.

Yes, a fluting falsetto would definitely give the game away.

*Everything* in SL is a lie; why worry about one particular facet of it unless you are going to take it to rl, in which case the truth gets revealed.

Pep (stays away from "won't voice" as it probably either means lies or paranoia, neither of which is attractive.)

Am I worried?

No. I am not.

But....I find the topic interesting. Those who do not, ought not to...worry about it!

In other words, you don't really know (cue voice & cam requests). FWIW, I used to think the same thing -- that the over-the-top females were most likely guys. I've since discovered that there are lots of women (including me now & then) who think it's fun to look trashy. Sort of like guys who dress like gangstas. When I first started SL, I made avatar me look like me. Little by little, avatar me has turned more glamorous.

But as to women propositioning women, I've suspected that some who have come onto me are guys but I've never known for sure. I had a lesi-fling early on in SL and it held about as much interest for me as soggy crackers. Then I met my wonderful long term bf here and got removed from the field of play for a long time. If the person on the other end of the mic or keyboard can carry on an intelligent convo then I'm happy. No trenches need to be layed.

The other day in SL I saw a large fox propositioning people, Im maybe too cynical but I found it hard to believe it was an actual fox at that keyboard.

A genuine fox would never have that much bling

What about shemales?
I haven't worked that scene out at all - not that I've tried to yet. They could be of either sex in RL. Couldn't they?
That definitely challenges the RL/SL comfort zones for some.

LOL!!

Point taken.

But was the fox a reynard or a vixen?

And to answer the OP's question, I have never given it a minute's thought, whether the person behind anyone's avatar is a guy or a girl, male or female.

I just take an sl male or female as what they appear to me. It's sl.

And I won't voice because I'm not really a ferret. I'm not gonna talk about my real species, it's embarrassing.

I have had a few times where some stranger's landed and propositioned me, out of the blue, when I was working... but I got all freaked out, just like I have in similar RL situations, and teleported out (which I wish I could do in RL). When I'm working on something, I'm pretty focussed on it and don't switch contexts easily.

I had a female av on only one of those occasions. Whether the other avatar was female or male, let alone whether the other player was female or male, was the least of my concerns.

Next time you really need to know, say "moshi moshi" to the fox. A real fox won't be able to respond in kind.

You usually use this to make sure you're *not* talking to a fox, but I suppose it can work in reverse, too.

I can't help wondering what the proportion of SWTWOH might be to SGTWOH?

Isn't that ghosts, they can't say the same word twice in a row?

Aren't all those attempting to be all sarcastic and whatnot (about how Nothing Is As It Seems in SL So Therefore Gender-deception is Not Worthy Of Comment) missing a rather obvious point?

To wit: A female can deceptively pretend to be a male and a male can deceptively pretend to be a female, because...either a male or a female COULD be at the keyboard. But no one is deceived that a fox may be behind the keyboard.

Given this, doesn't the attempt at sarcasm fall rather flat? Or worse, give the impression that the would-be wags simply haven't thought things through?

A bit of both. A fox can't say "Moshi" and spirits can't repeat words in a row. (^_^)y

Naw. They're just pointing out a somewhat common dialogue entitled, "Who cares?" (^_^)y

Which would only prove it was neither a normal fox nor a spirit. However it wouldn't prove it wasn't a speach capable mutant fox.

Did anyone read that recent study of gender differences using data from Everquest 2? Yes, the one where Sony gave researchers a ton of data. They found a 40% female population who play for social aspects, were more aggressive in romantic relationships and a large majority were bisexual. I've played EQ2 and SL is a lot more oriented towards women. I mean you can actually wear a dress in here. The closest thing you could get in EQ2 was a mage robe. Socializing in SL is much much more than EQ2. Sorry to poke holes into your all-male fantasy!

I wonder sometimes whether SL's population m/f ratio is at all reflected by the forum's ratio. This forum seems to me to have a VERY high proportion of actual women, compared to the (mostly customer support) fora I've experienced in the past. I also have made a number of good friends inworld who were clearly actual women.

I expected SL's forums to be heavy on nerds, and so they are, but there are bunches of other *female* nerds here, which was a pleasant surprise. *happy dance*

Is the proportion of males-playing-women actually a myth, or is there a huge population of them who just ... run in other circles?

From a sociological point of view, it's an interesting question. In my SL, though, a fox is a fox is a fox, an SL woman is a woman, a typist is a typist, and I don't feel I have any evidence to make stuff up about typist's lives based on what they choose for avatar pixels.

You're just begging to be quoted in someone's signature.

Welcome home, sister. Welcome home. *snif*



I have met a few and heard some on voice. Oddly the few who told me (unprompted, I might add - sometimes people just wish to be heard) they had played female avs all worked in the stripper/escort biz of SL.

It's a good question. I remember reading the SL Official Guide book and wondering why they would trust the overly-exact statistics--to two decimal places!--on "males playing males are 41.95%", etc., that they got from a Forum poll. (Must have been taken at least a couple of years ago, given the publication date of the book.)







I find it interesting mainly from the perspective of people's willingness to behave deceptively when they think there's little chance they'll be discovered.

But also, it's interesting from the perspective of considering whether gender CAN be inferred from behavior. I'm more on the side of 'not very often.' But at the same time, it seems likelier to me that a male would seek instant faux 'girl'-girl sex with a new acquaintance than that a high proportion of genuine lesbians go around propositioning people they've just met.

Though that's certainly posssible.

Quite right too. I may be a dizzy blonde in SL, but in RL I'm an old dragon!

Interesting. I know little of EQ, other than the reputation it has for being addictive.

In the first novel about something really like SL, the plot turned on one of the main characters turning out to be an escaped military AI.