Gor Lands

Hi Everybody

first: sorry, my language is not english

I want to make an observation that I can't be silent anymore about Gor Lands.

I know the lands are private and I have no obligation to visit them but:

ALL THE WOMEN ARE SLAVES (except a few, I think). THE MEN ARE SUPERIOR TO FEMALES.

ok, it's a game following the rules from Gor books.

Now, change the word 'females' and write 'Black People'. What do you think now?, isn't it aberrant?

why it's not aberrant when the slaves are females. Are females different from black , asian or white?

I think Linden Labs should take action about this aberrant rules.

Gor Books Rules?, ok, change that rule for SL, it's easy.

Remember that Gor World was written, only, by one man.

Why not to change and make our equality world in SL, with the same different tribal people , with different culture, with our wars, with serious differences in the context of the game.

To consider all females inferior to men and that all women must be an slave goes too far, out of the game context.

if you want to have an slave and she/he want it, do it, but not under a world rule.


Thank You

First of all, *all* the women are not slaves. There are free women. And there are men who are slaves as well.

A person's status is not fixed in stone. A person can change from being a slave to free and vice versa.

As you point out, it is voluntary. A person can leave whenever they like.

Also, SL Gor is not one monolithic thing. It's many sims, each with its own rules. In some, being a "slave" is much like being a princess.

If the goreans were coming to other sims and carrying people off against their will, it would be a problem, but if people want to play that game, it's up to them.
.

Focus on this, practice tolerance, and your SL will be very happy.

I'm not into Gor, but I've spent time in their sims, and here is the most important thing about them: there is an IMMENSE difference between RL slavery (or any behavior) and Gor (or any) roleplay. These are adults roleplaying for their mutual entertainment. There are no implications for their, or certainly for your, RL circumstances. A slave in Gor can be a RL CEO, a happy housewife who's stuck at home looking after a sick kid and wants some thrills, a 30-year old guy, anybody.

I think your need to censor other adults is aberrant, but I am not demanding that you leave the grid

Gor sims make it very clear that they are for roleplayers only. If you are offended by any other person's sim in SL, don't go there.

Yay! Here's that insane Gor thread we've been waiting for! \(^o^)/

Can I talk about ballgags yet? (^_^)

If you don't like Gor, there's always dollification. Typically there are no men allowed on doll sims. (^_^)y

Aha.. A friend just corrected me about men in dollificatoin via IMs...



=^-^=

If they were following the gor books closely there would be more Free Women than slaves.

The other day I came across an old thread, recently resurrected, on the subject of Gor, over the road. "The intrepid Victorian-era explorer Rose Queen from the Commonwealth of Caledon" paid them a visit and took some magic lantern pictures while she was there. I strongly recommend them, together with her commentary, to those who haven't seen them before. http://www.sluniverse.com/php/vb/general-sl-discussion/11261-so-i-visited-gorean-sims-2.html#post243404 and http://www.sluniverse.com/php/vb/general-sl-discussion/11261-so-i-visited-gorean-sims-2.html#post243552

Hey there, since this is a virtual world and we all just playing whatever game we wanna make it, don't put too much stock in that particular fantasy world. If you are not into that, just move along and do your own thing.

Of course women are equal (or superior in some cases ) to men. But women's lib begs the question that shouldn't women be free to do whatever they want (including becoming fantasy slaves in a virtual reality game)?

Well, yes. Some of us call this "Fun Feminism": reap the rewards of feminism without taking responsibility for the decisions that you make, or "giving back" to the movement.

I think it's perfectly legit to take this approach: feminism HAS fought long and hard to allow women to express their sexuality THEIR way. It's just a little disturbing or upsetting to see that some of them choose an expression that runs so counter to the very principles that allowed them to make that choice in the first place.

Gosh . . . I miss all the FUN threads!!!



ETA: Never visited this forum before. It's like a minefield . . .

I MUST behave!

Except this is a FANTASY world!!! They are not going out in the streets and advocating women be chained up against their wills... Oh well, we been through this argument before, Scylla



Unless you want a spanking ))))

Yes, of course. But it's still not quite as without consequences and impacts as you might like to believe. In fact, given your OWN well-articulated position as someone who "blurs" the edges between RL and SL, I'd have thought that you, of all people, would see that.


Never really "got" the spanking thing. But then, maybe that's the point?

For some, it's the difference between being a sex object in general and being their own sex object in particular. Such is freedom. (^_^)y

Don't let your political beliefs hamper your imagination

Some people whom you may find playing kajirae in Gor:

-- Successful and conservative middle-aged men. (I call this the "J. Edgar syndrome"

-- Highly successful women who are tired of being in charge all the time, have no significant other, and are too busy to pursue sexual release IRL.

-- Women who have been long married to men who abdicate within the marriage, thrusting upon their wives the roles of chief wage-earner, mother, primary decision-maker and sexual leader.

-- Gay guys who find the role fun.

-- Classic "subbie princesses", who successfully manage a D/S relationship from the role of submissive (one could argue that in most longer-term D/S relationships, the sub is in charge. Cf the fact that many administrative roles in Gor sims are held by kajirae.)

-- Sexual or D/S adventurers (some of these sell their services for a week or two in the slave markets, just to get a variety of experience)

-- People who actually LIKE the Norman novels (though purists seem to say that SL Gor is not enough in line with the novels)

-- And, of course, a small number of self-loathing men and women for whom it is not at all healthy. These people will create self-abuse no matter what they are doing.

Gor is about escapist roleplay; RL sexual politics has less to do with it than RL repression does. And repression occurs more commonly through life circumstances than through abusive relationships.

Yep. And I get that. I also get that some people, for whatever reason, find this kind of fantasy liberating, and even vital to their sense of self. Which is why I wouldn't want to try to stop them from doing it.

I guess what I would like to see is some acknowledgment that there are potential consequences and impacts -- real ones -- to behaviours like this. And some acknowledgment, as a result, that accommodations are probably desirable to account for those impacts.

Too often, however (although I certainly DO know exceptions) it's all about "me," and to hell with everything else. It's a pseudo-"rights" based view that fails to take into account anyone else's rights, or the responsibilities that should go hand in hand with rights.

In some places I have the right to carry a gun. But there are limits to my rights as to how I may use it, because of the possibility of consequences. I have to use that gun responsibly, for instance. In most places, I can't simply wander around with a loaded weapon in my hands, because that would be threatening, and have an impact on the rights of others. And I can't shoot someone I don't like, for instance, because exercising a "right" to do so would deprive someone else of THEIR rights.

Really, virtually all of our freedoms and rights have these kinds of limits to them, because a society without them would be "free" only for the strongest and most selfish.

By analogy, you should certainly have the right and freedom to engage in fantasy of all sorts here. But you should also be obliged to do so in a responsible manner, that will not cause harm, and not infringe upon the rights of others.

I'm sure you are right about all of this, Nika; I try not to be too reductive in my understanding of who is attracted to this kind of thing, and why.

But, again, I think that there is evidence that, in some contexts, this kind of fantasy has RL consequences. These need to be better investigated and understood, but the potential for this to be true also needs to be acknowledged by those who undertake these sorts of activities. And, if necessary, steps taken to minimize those consequences. For me, that mostly probably means keeping such activities "private," with the understanding that "private" and "public" can mean a lot of different things.

I do continue to believe that Gor -- as opposed to BDSM -- is something of a special case, because unlike BDSM, it is not gender-neutral, comes attached with a speciously coherent political philosophy, and has adherents who aren't simply "role playing" it, but are carrying that philosophy into RL.

But (she said nervously) I'm not sure I really want to get into a debate about Gor right at the moment. I'm feeling a bit ill, you see. And the cat needs to be let in . . . And there's a stack of dishes that really DOES require my attention . . .

Oh Scylla!! By "blur" I think you mean my absurd insistence that I am a real person interacting with other real people in a virtual world!!



I'm sorry to hear that you've not received a proper spanking... /me spanks feminists