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

One of the really attractive things about the Resident Answers forum is the enormous variety of topics that get covered here. I have read, and participated in, threads on subjects that range from good places to hang out in SL, to the Canadian medicare system and the political culture of the United States. Currently, the first page of the forum holds threads on (inevitably) Zindra, but also on a RL case of poison ivy, and another on internet access in Iran. I think all of these subjects are entirely valid. So apparently do you, as none of them has come under fire from you yet.

It is clear, however, that anything to do with women's issues in the context of SL is hot-button issue for you, and for a number of others. I'm not going to speculate (publicly) as to why this should be so, but I am going to insist that this subject matter belongs in this forum every bit as much as any other that I have named. Nor am I simply going to accede to the implication made by you, Dana, Nika, and all of the other “level-headed” people out there, that I am hijacking threads and railing alone to the dismay of everyone else here. The various facets of the topic which I have attempted to explore in these threads all arise quite logically and organically from the discussion or the theme of the thread. I also find it interesting that it is only I, personally, whom you target, despite the self-evident fact that other people ARE engaging me, and sometimes even agreeing with me, in discussion on these subjects. Or perhaps you are hard at work even as I write this on your rebuke to Ephraim for his essay-length posting on the subject?

You have expressed before your personal vision of SL as a sort of escapist VW Lite. That's wonderful: I hope you are enjoying it. And you have every right to either critique my views or ignore them. I am, in fact, sorry that you have chosen to ignore rather than critique them: I don't agree with your postings, but I find them interesting and stimulating. But the fact that you apparently do not feel the same about mine does not give you the right to silence me, either directly, or through the social dynamic of ostracism (“I apologize to everyone for ...”) towards which you and others are gesturing. I'm afraid that I reserve the right to take SL very seriously indeed, and to comment upon it in the way that I might upon any interesting and popular social phenomenon.

As for your rebuke of my use of sarcasm, I can only say that I have been on this forum long enough to have a pretty good sense of where along the spectrum of general nastiness my fairly mild quip at Dana's expense falls; I'm afraid for that reason that your application of school-marmish gravitas here abashes me not at all. Nor, given the prevalence in some people's posts of outright invective, ad hominem attacks, and the like, do I see sarcasm as a particularly outrageous way of responding to what was, after all, a fairly personal attack by Dana.

Strangely, I don't recall having seen you “correct” anyone else's tone in these threads, but perhaps I am a “special project”? If so, I am, of course, flattered. Otherwise, I wish you joy in your new self-appointed role as Ms. Manners of the SL forums; if my modest little nip at Dana was enough to draw your ire, I can only imagine how very very busy you are going to be in the future. Why, Pep's posts alone should provide you with useful employment for years to come!

For those of you that have siglines off:

Somewhere in this world; there is someone having some good clean fun doing the one thing you hate the most. (^_^)y

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!)

You portray women as sniveling, groveling, weak, victimized lost souls that can't think clearly and rationally, and have to educate men on how to approach them, because of their neurotic, over-emotional and helpless frame of mind, which lacks the ability to judge reality from pretend, and lacks the ability to act accordingly, using their brains.

Suggesting that levelheaded women consider discussing women's issues as a "hot-button"....just enforces my first paragraph of how you choose to portray women.

There is also a feature that allows those who do not wish to be portrayed as such an opportunity to speak their mind now and then, without having to write a 10 paragraph diatribe.

ETA Who - that is male - is enjoying that?

But it's abundantly clear from what you say that this is how YOU view the women in RL and SL who HAVE been victimized. Clearly they were too "sniveling, groveling, [and] weak" to expect any better, eh?

Blame the victim much?


.

Listening to a woman rant on about something inconsequential for the umpteenth time?

I hope the irony of Pep complaining about someone going on and on about the same unimportant thing isn't lost on anyone here...

one of the joys of this place is that they can do their thing and I can do mine - as long as their thing doesn’t include curtailing my free choice of how and what I play, we’ll all get along just fine

I hope the irony of Pep complaining about someone going on and on about the same unimportant thing isn't lost on anyone here...

Nor, given the prevalence in some people's posts of outright invective, ad hominem attacks, and the like, do I see sarcasm as a particularly outrageous way of responding to what was, after all, a fairly personal attack by Dana.

What I posted wasn't an attack at all, merely an observation of which topic you have a lot to say about. I'm sorry you choose to view it as such because, although I DO think it's a moot point as related to SL, I never said or implied you don't have a right to discuss it. As Nika implied, albeit with heavy sarcasm...it ceases to be a discreet sidebar discussion and becomes a full-blown derailment when expunged on so much and off topic to the thread topic. I don't think anyone would have you silence your opinion, but remind that if it's worth so many words, it probably deserves it's own thread... out of repect to original threads topic AND the readers who may wish to search for it, participate in it while it's NOT derailing something else, or avoid it. With the absence of any kind of iron hand moderating here, self-moderation and self-restraint are what keeps this place working.

I don't think the way anyone chooses to present themselves is necessarily an indication of anything past that they wanted to look that way. clothing (or even lack of it) is not an implied invitation, (unless they happen to be holding a sign that says "I want the sex!" or somesuch)

You are David Cassidy and I claim my 5$L.

Pep ("In a world that's constantly changing"

Please, if you're going to insist on an artist who covered that Brigati/Cavaliere song, rather than the original artists, then let's go with Dusty.

I hope the irony of Pep complaining about someone going on and on about the same unimportant thing isn't lost on anyone here...

im not exactly sure what you are asking.

Twisted...but again, confirms what I've observed here, about your genuine concern for women. (lack of)

"Virtual rape" doesn't exist so it can not be important.

Pep (What you are calling irony isn't irony of course.)

For my part, I don't feel anyone has taken over and hijacked the thread. It's seemed to develop quite logically, with various people making some interesting points which others have then taken up to discuss, and I've been finding it very interesting and thought provoking (right up until the unwarranted personal attacks began).

If, as Waterstar put it,

which I'd agree with, then surely the same principle ought to be applied to the forum discussions as well, i.e. read and/or contribute to the ones that interest us and skip over those that don't.

You are kidding, right? Just trying to evoke an emotional response?

Or it is some sort of semantic game, a la 'no actual bodies exist in virtual worlds therefore rape cannot exist' (and we'll pretend that this makes the numberless depicitions of rape in virtual worlds into a non-topic)....?

...it ceases to be a discreet sidebar discussion and becomes a full-blown derailment when expunged on so much and off topic to the thread topic.

You're too predictable.

Pep (Depictions of rape are not rape, like depictions of pie won't bust your diet.)

"too"?

Pep (I suppose you think that the sun rising in the East every day is a bad thing as well, for some unfathomable, over-emotional reason? )