Second Life in the News, Again!

One day I'll be able to post something on these forums without people jumping on me, attacking me, and twisting my words to suit their own needs.

Everyone makes choices in this game, consciously or unconsciously, as to what they want to go to and what they want to avoid.

What is the big problem? If I want to avoid going to gay bars, I'm perfectly entitled to, just as much as anyone else might not want to go to a Tringo game.

People forget that my personal choices do not affect anyone else. Discriminatory behaviour would be putting a sign up at my club excluding certain groups. That affects you. Choosing whether to go to property A or property B is my choice, none of your concern for my reasoning, and doesn't affect you.

As for the 'labelling' issue... frankly that's pathetic and been twisted beyond all sense of normality. If I go to a property for sale and it says in the discription "gentle hillside" to find out that it's basically a cliff, or the "fantastic views" happen to be of the back of a nightclub that popped up next to it before it was set for sale - wouldn't you feel misled? In the same way, if a property is labelled "gay club", then I know what to expect, and can choose not to go there, just the same as I'll not look at the land for sale that is honestly described as "next to a 20m high neon penis with spinning Bush signs all around".

Those of you who are screaming prejudice at me... take a look in the damn mirror.

Lewis

Well, I chose to be heterosexual long before I realised sexuality wasn't about choice, and that my choice (influenced greatly by my religious and homophobic peers) would have considerable ramifications on my state of mind and future, not to mention the stability and trust of those around me. I'm a divorcee now, I have a wonderful son, and have learned and gained a lot due to a strange period of my life so I wouldn't have it any other way (if it didn't kill you, don't regret it). But given the negative effects of my heterosexual "choice", this issue clearly transcends the decisions/persuasion of one particular grouping, or "community" as you put it.

"Gay community" -- gotta hate that term. It conjures up images of men wearing nicely knitted sweaters, discussing ways of tackling graffiti and litter in their local areas.

Nobody cares where you go Lewis, or your reasons or more often than not the lack there of for doing so.




Thats been my only issue with you in this thread, apart from summarily passing judgment on what was a rather pleasant and positive little article as "being all about sex" when it wasn't.



In what sense Lewis? You said as long as the gay community had a right to congregate on Secondlife you had the right to avoid it, yay you, but then you went one step too far and said that all gay communities should self-identify so you could more easily avoid them.

You don't see the parallel? Segregation? Apartheid? How many of the places you enjoy visiting in secondlife or think are 'neat' were crafted by solely or with the help and hard work of homosexual womenand men and are welcoming of all? Communities that have nothing to do with sex or mature areas.

They should all (by your previous demand to self-identify) add statements to their description fields,

"Warning made by and welcoming to all people, gay, straight, blue or green, gor or furry." or "Warning this is a tolerant welcoming area of all lifestyles and races! Lewis Nerd, and bigots may feel uncomfy! Please if you are either you may wish to avoid!"

You don't see your statements as insulting, discriminatory, bigoted? No of course you don't, you never do.

good gawd get off lewis's ass...

heh, well after reading that its kinda funny..

No, because as usual those with their own agenda and prejudices have twisted my words to suit themselves, rather than trying to understand what I'm saying.

If somewhere is explicitly designated as a gay/lesbian meeting place, where gay/lesbian intimate encounters take place openly, then I expect the property to be described appropriately in its property description, so that I may choose not to go there.

I think people have - perhaps in some cases deliberately - misread my use of the word "label" when I am simply referring to property descriptions. Presumably people have no problem using keyword labels such as "yiff" to attract people that are interested in that sort of thing - so why on earth is there such an uproar about someone wishing to use that same property finding technique in order to choose *not* to go there? If I called my club just a "nightclub", and a techno raver landed expecting to hear the latest beats only to be given an earful of YMCA... don't you think they'd be disappointed? It's the same principle, whether it's a musical style or a sexual preference that is being talked about.

This is a total non issue, and should never have degenerated into 12 pages of insults. There are people starving, children dying, wars being fought... and people get so passionate about something on a frickin computer game forum? Some of you should truly be ashamed of yourselves.

Lewis

Or perhaps the failure is your in your broad and blanket statements, provoking just such a reaction.



But that Lewis, isn't what you stated. You said.




No qualifiers as to whether said place was sexual or not, in fact as broad as possible, only descriptive was the word safe. If you meant to say "sexually explicit" when you said "safe" I think the failing is on you when the reader comes across that, if it was in fact a failing because you waited until twelve pages later to bother clarifying it if it was in fact a mistake, which frankly I doubt.




No it shouldn't have, the first failing was your blanket and false statement as to the nature of a article you never read and the second was a bigoted call for all gay communities in Secondlife to self-identify (if there was a failure to understand your words you waited until now to clarify them, twelve pages later, while defending them up to this point) so it'd be easier for you to avoid them.

Absolutely, will be passionate about blanket calls for segregation, or discrimination to further a bigoted agenda on this or any platform or in real life.




No, we shouldn't, nor am I neither for my sexual preference or standing up to a call for discrimination.

There really isn't any need to twist your words Lewis they read loud and clear.



You really enjoy playing the martyr don't you? No matter what you say or do it always comes down to Poor little Lewis the Martyr.

pathetic.

I know this flys against political correctness, but at least for me, my homosexuality (actually, I'm bisexual) IS a choice.

And it is a choice I am quite proud of. I've been able to overcome my bigoted sexual training that society has imposed on me from an early age, i.e. the social training that says I must reject sexually half the human race based on superficial characteristics of their bodies.

To me at least, to say that I have no choice is to imply that if there was a choice, I wouldn't do it, that there is something wrong with it. And I deny that categorically.

And when you are not playing martyr you play the moral superiority role. Well done.

well you could look at it that way.. but you could also look at it as being more instead of less... we already have predisposition towards things...
and he is simply pointing out that it is natural.. and not something "unnatural" as some like to put it.. :/

ok, you people that have nothing better to do than to tear each other down...
I have a few things to say to you, grow the hell up and why don't you go and get some fresh air.. maybe go on a real date instead of pretending that you have one here...

you act like an ass i am going to treat you like one..

gawd, can you tell im a mom? well i don't say ass to my daughter, but you knwo what i mean.. lol

You haven't read a damn word I've said have you?

I have tried MANY TIMES to explain what I mean, and whether you are deliberately ignoring it or can't comprehend it I don't know, but I really can't be bothered to waste any more time trying to explain a very simple principle to you.

Lewis

lewis, come on.. there is no winning the arguement, both your points have been made... what are you doing?

Trying to help people understand what I am saying, instead of letting their imagination run riot and calling me all sorts of abusive names because of their misinterpretation of a very clear statement.

Lewis

It isn't imagination if you actually say it and then back peddle 12 pages later.



Or perhaps the failure is your in your broad and blanket statements, provoking just such a reaction.



But that Lewis, isn't what you stated. You said.




No qualifiers as to whether said place was sexual or not, in fact as broad as possible, only descriptive was the word safe. If you meant to say "sexually explicit" when you said "safe" I think the failing is on you when the reader comes across that, if it was in fact a failing because you waited until twelve pages later to bother clarifying it if it was in fact a mistake, which frankly I doubt.




No it shouldn't have, the first failing was your blanket and false statement as to the nature of a article you never read and the second was a bigoted call for all gay communities in Secondlife to self-identify (if there was a failure to understand your words you waited until now to clarify them, twelve pages later, while defending them up to this point) so it'd be easier for you to avoid them.

Absolutely, will be passionate about blanket calls for segregation, or discrimination to further a bigoted agenda on this or any platform or in real life.




No, we shouldn't, nor am I neither for my sexual preference or standing up to a call for discrimination.

It has been clarified several times.

There is no need for everyone to "label themselves" when out and about when it doesn't actually matter.

But, as a matter of common decency towards other residents, if you are likely to be engaging in behaviour that may offend others - regardless of whether you feel it is right that others are offended by something you feel is perfectly acceptable - that you help others be aware of what they are likely to find. May I refer you to the community standards:

Second Life is an adult community, but Mature material is not necessarily appropriate in all areas (see Global Standards below). Content, communication, or behavior which involves intense language or expletives, nudity or sexual content, the depiction of sex or violence, or anything else broadly offensive must be contained within private land in areas rated Mature (M).

Just because something may not be considered "broadly offensive" in your culture does not mean it isn't to someone else. In Thailand, for example, it is considered offensive to show the soles of your feet (such as putting your feet up on a table), yet in many other parts of the world most people wouldn't give it a moment's thought.

Lewis

You may well find that, after careful consideration, a lot of the thread was actually posted during times where, here in the UK, it is considered night-time, and most people are asleep.

I'm humbly sorry for choosing to sleep when most people sleep in my part of the world, instead of staying up all night to post on an internet forum.

Lewis

I thought this was a post about 2nd Life being in the news again.

If I was in charge of Lewis's PR, I would post to this thread:

"Hay guys. I am sorry that I didn't bother to read the article, and that I immediately marginalized the homosexual community as a bunch of crazy single-minded humpers. I did not realize how offensive I was being, because I usually don't think before I post, and I had to get in a little 'zoooomg not another sex reference guys listen SL has more to offer than sex stop banging pls' zinger."

Choice!

People can choose how they advertise their properties.

Others can choose not to go there based on that advertising

Every individual has the right to choose their own labels (or choose not to have one at all)

Nobody but the individual should be allowed to choose who wears a label or what it says!



That's the cause of the uproar!

No You waited till page twelve to toss out this clarification:



Which is entirely different than what you said which is what people became offended at and rightly so was this:



No twisting of words, no qualifier of offensive, broad or otherwise, no mention of sexually explicit, just that all gay communities should identify themselves as such so they would be easier to avoid (i.e. discriminated against).



Exactly. Which your statement:



...fails to take into account and why people whom have read said reacted to it as bigoted because it flatly is.

Its like going up against a brick wall.. they have no desire to meet you half way, they refuse..

Wrong wrong wrong again!

Making a choice not to visit certain areas is not discrimination, it is me exercising my right to decide for myself what I do or don't do.

Now, standing by a well known gay meeting place doing a Fred Phelps with placards would, quite rightly, be AR'able.

Big difference. What I am choosing to do cannot possibly offend anyone, or break any rules.

If I was leading a campaign for all properties to properly describe themselves so that they could increase their traffic - most people would probably be supporting me. However, because people pick up on the fact that homosexuality is a contributing factor, added into the PC culture that pollutes many places, that is the real root cause of the rabid foaming-at-the-mouth reactionary bullcrap that I have been subject to.

Lewis