Linden Lab! Please do NOT ever implement any kind of gender verification in SL!

This is admittedly a rhetorical question because I don't cyber, and wouldn't unless my husband was also in SL. But if you didn't trust the person you were with, why would you cyber with them in the first place? And that having been said, how would I verify to LL that I am female? Send them a drop of blood so they could have a lab run a gender test on it? The whole thing sounds silly to me. Kathryn is my main avatar, the one I identify with and play the most. But I also have a male avatar that I use for exploring new places without getting harassed. And just for fun, I have an av who is a robot. It couldn't care less about gender.

I thought the whole idea about cybersex is that it's supposed to be a safe kind of casual sex? If that's so, then aren't the avatars on the screen what matters? If someone is so worried that the person behind the keyboard might be the wrong gender that they want the Lindens to verify it, then that sounds to me, IMHO, that they're getting emotionally involved and this isn't a no strings attached situation at all. In that case putting off getting too involved until they know and trust the other person better seems like a smart thing to do.

Exactly. And if you do get that involved, then you need to be hashing this out in private, amongst yourselves.

To the bold above: No. Actually, you do NOT have that right.


I could say, just as (in)validly as you have above, that we deserve to know if the person we're interacting with is FAT.

I would say that knowing whether someone is morbidly obese or rail thin says more relevant things about a person's priorities, values, interests, perhaps even character... than their gender.

People come in all sizes and flavors, there is more diversity within each gender than there is between them.

Insisting on knowing someone's actual gender (ignoring the small percentage of XXY, XYY and other permutations that occur in our population) as a basis of identity is about as offensively prejudiced as suggesting that you need to know someone's income, or religion, or ethnicity, or weight.

None

of

your

business.


If you can see it when you're talking to someone face to face... that can't be helped.

That doesn't make it a "right".

Guess I don't have the right to ask someone their age? So...if I meet someone in real life and have sex with them and later find out they're underage...well...it wasn't my RIGHT to ask...

...just trying to explain the degree of absurdity we've reached.

Okay, fine, point noted. I'll hedge some:


You are not my government, my doctor nor my medical insurer, nor my fiancee.

You don't have a legal or moral right to knowing my gender.

Even LL doesn't have the "right" to ask a resident their age, they simply end up as an unverified or denied service altogether if that person was reported as alledgedly underage and they don't voluntarily offer it up.

There are certainly consequences to not volunteering information, but you do not have any right to ask someone their age. If you want to sleep with someone in real life who looks underage then that is a choice you make, and asking that person for their age won't change your responsability in the matter, nor would they be under any legal obligation to answer truthfully.

You may feel entitled to some kinds of information, but that's something entirely different.

Many thanks to those of you in this thread who are opposed to gender verification. It means a lot.

This is what I got today from the Office Hours with Robin Linden. "You" in this is Brenda Archer.

[11:07] You: I wanted to pass on a question asked in the forums last week: it is difficult in some countries for transgendered people to get their documents lined up during gender reassignment; this may mean for example, that someone could have a driver license but be unable to get a passport. If someone can't produce one kind of document, will there be a way to provide a different document instead?
[11:08] Robin Linden: Brenda - that will be covered in the FAQ


[11:22] You: I heard a rumor there may eventually be gender verification. As a RL female, I found this pretty alarming. It opens women who won't verify vulnerable to accusation and those who do vulnerable to harrassment and stalking.
[11:23] Robin Linden: Brenda - all identity authentication is voluntary, including age.
[11:23] You: it's not voluntary if it's on the Profile
[11:24] You: If I refuse to verify, I will be accused of being a male, or of loose morals.

[11:42] You: I still want to ask what exactly would be done with gender verification. Will it gon on the Profile, or Friends list, or where exactly? Strangers do not have the right to know if I gender verified.
[11:43] Robin Linden: Brenda - should someone decide they want to authenticate their RL gender it would show up in their profile.
[11:43] You: Robin, I am certain that wil make SL a much less welcoming place for RL women who don't verify
[11:44] You: because we dont' verify, we'll be open to accusations.

[12:01] You: I wanted age verification, but I strongly oppose gender verification, making it optional doesn't solve the problems it creates.

[12:03] Robin Linden: we can talk about age verification again next week, but I'll also post my transcript from last week on the public wiki

I wonder if real life name will just "show up in their profile" as well if someone chooses to "opt-in". I would think that of all the people who might see value in identifying their RL name and would opt-in, a number of them is going to hesitate or just decline if it's an "visible to all" thing.

Of course you have a right to ask. You just don't have a right to know if the other person is not willing to tell. Your right to ask does not mean they have an obligation to tell. If they don't tell or if you think they are lying, it is simply both your right and responsibility not to have sex with people you suspect might be minors. In other words, you are entitled to saying "unless I see some age verification, I won't have sex with you" while you are not entitled to saying "you are obligated to show me age verification no matter what".

It's the same with gender. In your personal dealings with others you have a right to ask about their gender, and a right not to interact with people of unknown gender. You have a right to say "prove your gender or I won't chat with you." In my opinion that would be rude, but you do have that right. That however does not mean the other person is under any obligation to tell. If people won't share things about their personal life that you want to know, just walk away instead of calling them 'morally repugnant'.

I have no problem with age verification, I prolly won't use it since I never visit "Adult" areas. Gender verification is completely insane however. Should something like this be implemented and I would refuse to use it, ppl like mr. Nilsson would point their fingers at me and say: "You're a guy!" that would be very offensive, to say the least.

Age verification, ok. But for the love of God, no gender verification!

Mandy C

Read between the lines of what he is saying. He's an ageplay apologist, looking for equivalent scenarios to "pull down" to the same repressed state, under the impression that this will somehow make the ageplay situation better. It's the same kind of logic that drives factional terrorism in places like Iraq, which is why he's jumped to the "you are all repressing me".

Fact is, there is a massive difference between having someone's details on file, and making them visible. He's just about the very best possible example of the kind of disaster that awaits when details are made visible...

I agree, in that case SL will never be the fun place anymore like it is now. Ppl will become suspicious and will question anyone who is not "verified"

Mandy C

Full RL disclosure is required. There is no room for imagination in SL.

You are joking, I presume?

Mandy C

Hmmm .. wow

I still dont get how she thinks it would be voluntary.

If it existed - it would be basically mandatory for any woman looking to date online.

Just becuase you can "choose" to display it or not - doesnt mean its voluntary as a practical thing.

If shes not willing to admit for many it would be functionally mandatory and still be for it, then she doesnt have a justification for it.

Actually, she DOES have a justification; you don't happen to agree with it, is all. There's another angle to consider here, too: a lot of people just don't "get" the idea of roleplay online. They might understand roleplay if "you" are clearly a knight in armour on a horse, or Luke Skywalker - but anything more subtle and their brains just stop dead. They insist that you, are you - any fully-constructed alter ego is inherently a bad thing or a sign of dishonesty and is to be avoided. This faction are getting very close to having their day in the sun - see the other thread where a news article is posted about a letter from Law Enforcement types to MySpace, asking for the RL details of alleged sexual predators roaming the MySpace setup...

That's not roleplay - that's a first life thing. The issue with ageplay here and gender ID isn't about the character in role - it's about first lives, and what the barriers and conduits are between first & second lives. No TOS or online database is going to address those issues, nor will it change the mental makeup of those who automatically identify fantasy players as dangerous. You have to put yourself in the shoes of people who really, basically, don't think like you do, to understand the pressures and justifications the Lindens are working with here - and they are not SL pressures. They are industry-wide pressures.

What does this post have to do with my coment other than you latched onto the word "Justification"?

I said Robin Linden claims that gender identification if availble would be "voluntary" But for practical purposes it would not be voluntary - becuase Women would be expected to either use it or not be believed.

If Robin cant admit that- then she cant justify Gender information being displayed - in my opinion.

Im saying if she wants to justify gender verification she needs to be honest about the results.

Your post doesnt even seem to refer to the context of mine. Perhaps im not getting what you are trying to say.

I agree! The whole voluntary thing is becoming a word to hide behind for LL. They can't force ppl obviously so they label it as voluntary. Personally I will NOT use this, I think it's insulting. It's like: prove your gender or we will not believe you.

Mandy C

This only makes me want to get gender verified as female, despite being very obviously male.
Then I'll verify as XYY or XXY or some other weird hermaphroditic compound, only to screw with people's heads.
Then I'll be verified as genderless, just because I can.
Then I'll revoke my permission to have my gender details supplied. If it's voluntary I can choose to not have it published after giving permission.

And I plan to go without verifying my age as long as possible while still selling the things I sell.

I'd like to point out that this was a highly speculative conversation: IF we were to verify gender, where MIGHT it be visible.

There are many aspects of real life identity that SOME DAY some one MIGHT want to authenticate. Gender is one.

Right now the only verification we're working on is age, and that is to address issues of illegal behavior.

I definitely wanted to say what Robin has just said: This issue is speculative, and while I completely identify with those that do not want gender identification, we all need to be careful about appearing to be shouting about skies falling, and so forth.

That said, I would be strongly against gender ID for the same reasons many have given. While I understand why a company would consider this possibility, especially if there seemed to be a way for all the customers to get what they want (by giving them options), I do think it's important to point out that sometimes the very existence of a choice makes all other options moot or less effective than one would want.

This is one of them.

It really needs to be understood by the decision makers that the very existence of gender ID makes the choice of not displaying it a difficult one, fraught with issues. The bottom line is that it will not 'give everyone what they want' - it will give people who want more disclosure what they want, but cause trouble for those that don't. This is not a 'have your cake and eat it too' situation at all.

From a business standpoint, I'd consider the number of people gaining a benefit vs. the number of people being harmed; I'm willing to bet that the vast majority of players in SL would be in the latter category, whether they know it quite yet or not.

Many of us came to SL because it seemed hassle-free; very little red tape upon joining, very little concern about real world issues hampering online entertainment. I know for myself, I looked at several online world variants before settling on SL, and I did it because:

The others were more hassle to join and more invasive of my real life.


I imagine I'm not the only one.

Thank you Robin, for looking in on this thread.

Just in self-defense:

1--I'm not an age-play apologist...I AM, however, frustrated with the randomized 'lines in the sand' produced by todays moral hypocrisy. This frustration holds for a GREAT MANY ISSUES, not just gender, age, race, or sexual preference. It is absolutely ridiculous that we say some things that are morally offensive to many are o.k. and shove it...and other things that are morally offensive to many are not o.k. and shove it.

EASIEST example: Both homosexuality and polygamy are morally offensive to a great many people. One, however, MUST...absolutely MUST...be accepted...whereas the other MUST...absolutely MUST...be regected. At least by the 'elite' who claim 'moral-relativity' and try to enforce the 'my morals are your morals' ideal by trying to cry that those opposed are doing the same thing. It sickens me...absolutely sickens me. Accept or reject BOTH. Treat equal things equal. Otherwise, it's very seriously like saying "Blacks, we won't be racist against you, but Asians, you're screwed and we hate you."

2--I would not make any assumptions as to someone's sex based on their refusal to define sex through a profile box or use of voice. Please do not lump me in with ignorant and emotionally reactionary people.

Kenn, you are saying that we must accept everything or reject everything. Not only is that not possible, but no society, whether online or offline, is structured that way.

Drawing lines in the sand is how we human beings coexist. SL is trying to figure out where it must draw its lines, just like any human relationship, family, culture, or nation must do at some point.

Mistakes will be made, debate will be had, but those lines must and will be drawn. Let's help define them rather than rail against their existence, shall we?

I actually accept both, as long as it's practised among consenting adults. I accept ageplay too by the way, also as long as it's practised among consenting adults.



You are lumping all kinds of moral stances together on the premise that they are 'equal' and as such should be treated equally. But you have done nothing to prove that all these issues actually are equal. They are not. Homosexuality and polygamy are both about interactions between consenting adults. With ageplay, a concern for children is added to the mix, begging the question whether it should be banned to protect children from future molest. I think not, but I do see why this makes for a different possible evaluation of the activity.

Age verification is a different matter altogether: while I see no reason why you should have a right to know someone's age, children, who by definition are not consenting adults, should not be in adult areas of SL. In my opinion they should not be on the Main Grid at all, but it's a start. And as weare already voluntarily playing a game that is meant for adults only, we apparently have no problems with sharing the information we are over 18.

However, the fact that we are willing to share the fact that we are not minors, does not mean we have to be willing to share our gender. Apples and oranges. Nor are there the same reasons to even want gender verification. We don't need it because of possible legal issues, as with age verification. We don't need it because of a danger of involving people who are not consenting adults in all too 'mature' activities, as with age verification. The only reason we would 'need' it, is the fact that some people, like yourself, are uncomfortable interacting with people of unknown gender. That discomfort in itself however is no reason to dictate morals to others.



OK, I'll just lump you with those who would knowingly give those ignorant and emotionally reactonary people the instrument with which to harass others. Better?

There is alot of **** people might want to verify but it isn't any of their business. Unless you plan on selling information about subscribers I can see no reason why RL gender would ever be required.