Jump to content

What is Gorean?


You are about to reply to a thread that has been inactive for 1603 days.

Please take a moment to consider if this thread is worth bumping.

Recommended Posts


LlazarusLlong wrote:


JeanneAnne wrote:

i guess what i wonder is why some heinous stuff is allowed while other equally terrible stuff is tolerated ~~ ~ ~ ~

Just try and get a discussion going about i n c e s t if you want to see LL REALLY get in censorship mode - despite it being legal in the majority of even "civilised" judiciaries.

[And no, there is no logical justification - other than threat of litigation by the USA, Germany or whoever - for the (im)moral lines they draw in the sand.]

what would constitute i n c e s t in SL? if RL sibs logged their avatars in & had pixel SLex would that be i n c e s t ?? or if 2 unrelated ppl called their avatars sibs & gave them the same last name would that be ?? aren't we all named "resident" already ?? isn't it all i n c e s t ?!? :catvery-happy:

yeah~ litigation .. LL made a killing off gambling 'til the US passed laws restricting online gambling ~ so then they "banned" it which only drove it underground ~~ ~ i didn't realize this until the club where my sister DJed had this special 'sploder now & then & there'd be a huge crowd as many as the sim could hold ~ & it'd pay off huge amounts of L$ & the 1st time i ever actually experienced a griefer shut down a sim was when a sore loser from that 'sploder did it ~~ ~ & then i had it explained to me that these 'sploders went from club to club whose owners were in on it & where & when they were going to be was spread by IM to ppl who liked to gamble ,,, so LL hasn't eliminated gambling only made it go on behind the scenes which is likewise true of i n c e s t & pedophilia & every other sordid thing that goes on in SL ~ yet Gorean misogyny slavery & sexism is tolerated or even encouraged rite out in the open ~ go figure!

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 158
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic


JeanneAnne wrote:

what would constitute i n c e s t in SL?

Well, a friend of mine partnered a blue werewolf and bore twins - one boy, one girl - and they all used to have orgies.

Which covers most of the previously discussed perversions, plus bestiality.

Although of course it only involved two consenting adults.

Playing silly games in a cartoon world.

Link to post
Share on other sites


Leia36 wrote:

je suis Gorean

Tu es sûr? Sans blague?

You're making recourse to the freedom of speech to justify a role play which includes slavery and rape? I quite don't understand this link between both ideas, because there is a logical mistake for me.

Could you please explain me? (thank you.)

 

And for sure, you're free to say/role play what ever you think, and Norman had the right to write all his novels, but why wondering, that people, who love freedom and equal rights for all, are criticising it? This is also covered by the freedom of speech.

And I've heard, there are also so called "life stylers", which is not so "funny" and playful for me as a role play. Where do the people draw the line?

Sorry, but I have an issue with oppression, slavery and the promotion of it. And in the context with the life stylers, I am wondering how we will explain one day to the girls really enslaved by Boko Haram, that it is "great fun" to role play enslaved women being raped with, people who are convinced that women should be the slaves of men. (If these poor girls will survive this.)

Link to post
Share on other sites


Ardvinna wrote:


Leia36 wrote:

je suis Gorean

Tu es sûr? Sans blague?

You're making recourse to the freedom of speech to justify a role play which includes slavery and rape? I quite don't understand this link between both ideas, because there is a logical mistake for me.

Could you please explain me? (thank you.)

 

And for sure, you're free to say/role play what ever you think, and Norman had the right to write all his novels, but why wondering, that people, who love freedom and equal rights for all, are criticising it? This is also covered by the freedom of speech.

And I've heard, there are also so called "life stylers", which is not so "funny" and playful for me as a role play. Where do the people draw the line?

Sorry, but I have an issue with oppression, slavery and the promotion of it. And in the context with the life stylers, I am wondering how we will explain one day to the girls really enslaved by Boko Haram, that it is "great fun" to role play enslaved women being raped with, people who are convinced that women should be the slaves of men. (If these poor girls will survive this.)

I presume that you have also written to a multitude of authors and people involved with TV and the movie business about their presentation - and therefore implict promotion - of injustices and illegalities in every field of human "rights" and conflicts between groups desiring power over one another, or control of resources, or even demanding - with menaces, albeit effeminately - just the right to sit at one specific end of the sofa.

[Also, since you are claiming to be an expert in comparative morality, like another of your hyperemotional philosopher colleagues recently in this forum, perhaps you would like to explain why the enslavement of girls by Boko Haram is morally more concerning than their slaughter of males?]

Link to post
Share on other sites


Ardvinna wrote:


Leia36 wrote:

je suis Gorean

Tu es sûr? Sans blague?

You're making recourse to the freedom of speech to justify a role play which includes slavery and rape? I quite don't understand this link between both ideas, because there is a logical mistake for me.

Could you please explain me? (thank you.)

 

And for sure, you're free to say/role play what ever you think, and Norman had the right to write all his novels, but why wondering, that people, who love freedom and equal rights for all, are criticising it? This is also covered by the freedom of speech.

And I've heard, there are also so called "life stylers", which is not so "funny" and playful for me as a role play. Where do the people draw the line?

Sorry, but I have an issue with oppression, slavery and the promotion of it. And in the context with the life stylers, I am wondering how we will explain one day to the girls really enslaved by Boko Haram, that it is "great fun" to role play enslaved women being raped with, people who are convinced that women should be the slaves of men. (If these poor girls will survive this.)

Freedom of speech is self evident, its called Role play, google it.. or are you in fact trying to say that star wars role players are really evil magic users beant on conquering the galaxy in RL?????

oh, yes that reminds me, but of course.  in fact, I planned to kidnap and force into underage marriage several hundred school girls after coffee this morning.  

maybe chuck a few adulterers off buildings after lunch .. fun fun fun :matte-motes-evil:

Link to post
Share on other sites

This is totally twee to insinuate, that I would claim to be an expert in comparative ethics. You are really cute!

Since it is the "nature" of Gor to humiliate more women than men, I had chosen this example with the girls. and I meant it in the context with the "life stylers".


I may hereby mention again that I am for equal rights for all, and I can also emphasise hereby that I am opposed egalitarianism. (Happy now?)

I'm not hyper-emotional (maybe a bit), but I still deny to raise Amorality above everything and every value, so that the only rule, which should be acceptable, is "anything goes". Because precisely the acceptance (of amorality) requires understanding, empathy, and a kind of compassion, which is equal to a moral claim. - Hence the requirement to accept immorality is a very interesting aspect here.

And, by the way, I am activley committed, but certainly I will not raise my voice everywhere, because I'm taking also the right to say or not to say and think what I want.
... I never required that all do/think the same, as I do/think. Have a beautiful weekend. :)

Link to post
Share on other sites


Ardvinna wrote:

I may hereby mention again that I am for equal rights for all, and I can also emphasise hereby that I am opposed egalitarianism. (Happy now?)


Not at all happy, actually!

I am a true Marxist - to each according to what they deserve.

And most people don't deserve squat.

"Rights" are privileges temporarily granted by the strong to the weak.

And no two individuals are "equal" - whatever that means.

[Oh, and don't confuse ethics and morality; one is personal, not community-defined, and the other is even more personal.]

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 1 year later...
You are about to reply to a thread that has been inactive for 1603 days.

Please take a moment to consider if this thread is worth bumping.

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...