Linden Lab is building a NEW virtual world

[Celestiall Nightfire]

---

Madelaine McMasters wrote:

---

Celestiall Nightfire wrote:

---

Monalisa Robbiani wrote:

Really, that's whyFacebook,Google, Apple, Disney,flickr, Yahoo,Skype etc. are niche products whileSL has billions of users, private and corporate. Oh wait, it's the opposite. It's the adult content that cripplesSL to a niche for "socially inept weirdos" you better not talk about.

---

None of those products are creative virtual worlds.  Those other products aren't even comparable to each other, let alone to SL.   Those are ridiculous ananolgies.

 

I'm not a socially inept weirdo

, nor are the people, with which I associate in SL.  On the contrary, they're mostly highly social, educated, and cosmopolitan people in RL...and they happen to also be in SL.    If

you

identity with the "socially inept weirdo" label, then that's your own personal problem.  (perception)

 

 

 

---

Wait! When did this happen?

Can we still be friends?!

---

Bahahawaha!  (your post made me laugh out loud)

 

Also, I include you in that people "with which I associate" group.  Hahaha  ; )

[kiramanell]

---

Thomas Galbreus wrote:

Imagine a new user stumbles upon this thread (which is linked in blogs etc.). Not only see they porn in SL vigorously defended, but also those who have a problem with it repeatedly told to go and stay away.

Will help the stigma a lot.

---

In one of the many, many replies, someone mentioned BDSM folks were, overall, psychologically more healthy than 'normals.' I can see the validity of such a statement. Not about BDSM per se, but that ppl like you, obsessed with porn and sexuality in general, tend to be more mentally unstable than ppl with less obsessive attitudes about sex, and sometimes pose a danger even (like an activist killing ppl at an abortion clinic or something). I mean to say, I'd probably feel more unsafe around you, in SL, than with someone just wearing their silver collar, is all.

Take from that what you want.

[Phil Deakins]

---

Gavin Hird wrote:

---

Phil Deakins wrote:

---

Gavin Hird wrote:

And how often do you vote for a new government?

You have had multiple elections where you could have voted In a government to take you out of the union.

---

That's not true. You're not very good at getting things right, are you? Yes, we've had plenty of general elections but none of the parties that were able to win any of them wanted us out of the EU. All they did was promise referendums, and promptly broke the promises when they were elected.

Btw, I'm neither for nor against the EU right now, and I've no idea how I would vote in a referendum to decide whether or not we stay in it. I'm just raising a point that you were unaware of but tried to put across that the people had voted for it. I don't know that many countries, if any, actually asked their people whether or not they wanted it. Certainly the UK didn't. However, I do object very strongly to the way that each country's home rule is being eroded.

---

I am fully aware of the political landscape in the UK, but if the majority of the people cannot muster the will to elect a government to get them out of the union, then tough **bleep**. That is how a democracy works. (and technikally the UK is not a democracy and bla bla... you know the drill.)

---

I don't know that British people would vote to come out of the EU, given the choice. What I do know is that we haven't had had a major party (one capable of being elected) giving us the choice. They each promised referendums on it, and they've each reneged on their promises. There is, however, a newish party on the up, that might well want us out, and may grow big enough to get elected before too long.

But this is nothing to do with the thread. I merely pointed out an error on your part.

[Phil Deakins]

---

Gavin Hird wrote:

---

Perrie Juran wrote:

If someone does not like or understand a contract then they should not enter into it.  But if they do then they should take responsibility.

 

---

I am not going to claim that LL's TOS are fraudulent, but many content providers felt that way and left last year. 

---

I think you're refering to the ToS changes last year that gave LL total rights over everything - uploads and the lot. That's not fraud because it's all there in the ToS, and everyone who logged in after the change agreed to be bound by the ToS.

I do know that it was awkward for a few people because accepting the ToS and logging in would confer rights to LL that the user didn't have. Maybe many creators left because of it, but not because of fraud. It wasn't fraud.

[Freya Mokusei]

---

kiramanell wrote:

In one of the many, many replies, someone mentioned BDSM folks were, overall, psychologically more healthy than 'normals.'

---

This reply was likely mine, the source of the single study that I used was here. You're entirely correct that most of the benefits stem from the ability to be honest with yourself and your intimate partner(s) about what you enjoy, how you're feeling and the ability to 'equalise' obsession and lust in a protective and loving environment.

Other studies exist that lay waste to further ignorant claims made in this thread. Such as this one that finds female pornstars - far from being misogynistically oppressed - typically have more enjoyable sex, are safer regarding STI's/STD's and have higher self-esteem and social support.

And of course this one, that suggests pornography is used - by minors - to help substitute poor provision of sex education - a statistic that the US (and other countries) demonstrates with its massive, off-the-charts teen pregnancy rate.

There is - by contrast - very little research showing any social or health-based benefit to censorship, strict control of access to adult material and denial of sexual stimuli (e.g. 'abstinence'-based 'sex education').

It's clear to anyone in the field of psychology that many aspects of personal and interpersonal wellbeing are partly dependant on safe and healthy exploration of sex and kinks. Expression of sexuality withing a caring and loving relationship where communication is high can enable high levels of self-esteem and life satisfaction, as well as highly stable, long-term relationships and better social health within a population. Safe education and honest, practical information given to those just beginning their sexual experiences is just as important - it's these ideas that people take with them when selecting their own partners and relationship dynamics.

I'm grateful that Linden Lab are very clearly staying on the right side of this issue.  Like many others in this thread I grew up queer and kinky, I'm happy to be welcome here.

[Perrie Juran]

---

Phil Deakins wrote:

---

Gavin Hird wrote:

---

Perrie Juran wrote:

If someone does not like or understand a contract then they should not enter into it.  But if they do then they should take responsibility.

 

---

I am not going to claim that LL's TOS are fraudulent, but many content providers felt that way and left last year. 

---

I think you're refering to the ToS changes last year that gave LL total rights over everything - uploads and the lot. That's not fraud because it's all there in the ToS, and everyone who logged in after the change agreed to be bound by the ToS.

I do know that it was awkward for a few people because accepting the ToS and logging in would confer rights to LL that the user didn't have. Maybe many creators left because of it, but not because of fraud. It wasn't fraud.

---

This thread can really wander off on a lot of side topics

The only way it could really be considered Fraud was if the whole time they were promising "A" they knew they were planning on doing "B".

The reason it made people feel awkward is that the TOS is a Contract of Adhesion.  People felt like they were damned if they do or damned if they don't.  It would be like me showing up at a property I rent and the Land Lord is standing their with a new lease and told me I could not enter unless I signed it.  No Court would accept this and a Court would order that I be allowed reasonable time to find a new place and vacate the old.

But it was like the one girl who complained in one of the Threads that she had no way to log in and Cancel her account and remove her payment info without agreeing.  I pointed out that she could write LL (TOS 11.3) and request they cancel her account, etc, etc.

Likewise, if anyone had wanted to liquidate their assets in SL, if anyone had written LL requesting they be allowed to log in without agreeing to the new TOS, LL would have been legally obligated to allow them a reasonable period of time to do so.

What I don't believe is that a Court would or could force LL to do is allow someone to continue to use SL without agreeing to the new TOS. 

None of the above means that I "like" the TOS.  It's only my layman's understanding of the situation.

[Celestiall Nightfire]

---

kiramanell wrote:

---

ThomasGalbreus wrote:

Imagine a new user stumbles upon this thread (which is linked in blogs etc.). Not only see they porn in SL vigorously defended, but also those who have a problem with it repeatedly told to go and stay away.

Will help the stigma a lot.

---

In one of the many, many replies, someone mentioned BDSM folks were, overall, psychologically more healthy than 'normals.' I can see the validity of such a statement. Not about BDSM per se, but that ppl like you, obsessed with porn and sexuality in general, tend to be more mentally unstable than ppl with less obsessive attitudes about sex, and sometimes pose a danger even (like an activist killing ppl at an abortion clinic or something). I mean to say, I'd probably feel more unsafe around you, in SL, than with someone just wearing their silver collar, is all.

Take from that what you want.

---

Hello Kira, I had posted a link to some research done on mental health, and BDSM practitioners, on page 159 of this thread, here's a link to my comment:

http://community.secondlife.com/t5/General-Discussion-Forum/Linden-Lab-is-building-a-NEW-virtual-world/m-p/2792194#M190552

 

(Later in this thread, Freya also posted that link, so yes....it's not news that BDSM people are better adjusted mental health-wise than their counter-parts in the general population.  But, apparently news to Thomas)

 

[Perrie Juran]

---

Celestiall Nightfire wrote:

---

kiramanell wrote:

---

ThomasGalbreus wrote:

Imagine a new user stumbles upon this thread (which is linked in blogs etc.). Not only see they porn in SL vigorously defended, but also those who have a problem with it repeatedly told to go and stay away.

Will help the stigma a lot.

---

In one of the many, many replies, someone mentioned BDSM folks were, overall, psychologically more healthy than 'normals.' I can see the validity of such a statement. Not about BDSM per se, but that ppl like you, obsessed with porn and sexuality in general, tend to be more mentally unstable than ppl with less obsessive attitudes about sex, and sometimes pose a danger even (like an activist killing ppl at an abortion clinic or something). I mean to say, I'd probably feel more unsafe around you, in SL, than with someone just wearing their silver collar, is all.

Take from that what you want.

---

Hello Kira, I had posted a link to some research done on mental health, and BDSM practitioners, on page 159 of this thread, here's a link to my comment:

http://community.secondlife.com/t5/General-Discussion-Forum/Linden-Lab-is-building-a-NEW-virtual-world/m-p/2792194#M190552

 

(Later in this thread,

Freya

also posted that link, so yes....it's not news that BDSM people are better adjusted mental health-wise than their counter-parts in the general population.  But, apparently news to Thomas)

 

---

I'm not going to make a judgement one way or the other regarding the "mental health" of those who engage in the behaviour.  My own experiences, which I will admit are very limited, with people who are involved is a mixed bag.

However if you are basing your statement, "That BDSM people are better adjusted mental health-wise," on that article I willl quote from the article:

"The study is somewhat limited by a self-selecting response pool and by the fact that BDSM practitioners could have been answering in ways to make themselves look better and avoid stigma, Wismeijer said — though the fact that the participants didn't know the reasons for the study ameliorates that concern somewhat."

At best it could be said based on that Study that there is a possibility.  That particular study seriously lacked any of the necessary controls for it to make valid conclusions regarding this topic.

 

eta:clarity

 

[kiramanell]

---

Celestiall Nightfire wrote:

---

kiramanell wrote:

---

ThomasGalbreus wrote:

Imagine a new user stumbles upon this thread (which is linked in blogs etc.). Not only see they porn in SL vigorously defended, but also those who have a problem with it repeatedly told to go and stay away.

Will help the stigma a lot.

---

In one of the many, many replies, someone mentioned BDSM folks were, overall, psychologically more healthy than 'normals.' I can see the validity of such a statement. Not about BDSM per se, but that ppl like you, obsessed with porn and sexuality in general, tend to be more mentally unstable than ppl with less obsessive attitudes about sex, and sometimes pose a danger even (like an activist killing ppl at an abortion clinic or something). I mean to say, I'd probably feel more unsafe around you, in SL, than with someone just wearing their silver collar, is all.

Take from that what you want.

---

Hello Kira, I had posted a link to some research done on mental health, and BDSM practitioners, on page 159 of this thread, here's a link to my comment:

http://community.secondlife.com/t5/General-Discussion-Forum/Linden-Lab-is-building-a-NEW-virtual-world/m-p/2792194#M190552

 

(Later in this thread,

Freya

also posted that link, so yes....it's not news that BDSM people are better adjusted mental health-wise than their counter-parts in the general population.  But, apparently news to Thomas)

 

---

Thank you for the link. And page 159, hehe, yup this thread is looooooong.

[Celestiall Nightfire]

---

Perrie Juran wrote:

---

Celestiall Nightfire wrote:

---

kiramanell wrote:

---

ThomasGalbreus wrote:

Imagine a new user stumbles upon this thread (which is linked in blogs etc.). Not only see they porn in SL vigorously defended, but also those who have a problem with it repeatedly told to go and stay away.

Will help the stigma a lot.

---

In one of the many, many replies, someone mentioned BDSM folks were, overall, psychologically more healthy than 'normals.' I can see the validity of such a statement. Not about BDSM per se, but that ppl like you, obsessed with porn and sexuality in general, tend to be more mentally unstable than ppl with less obsessive attitudes about sex, and sometimes pose a danger even (like an activist killing ppl at an abortion clinic or something). I mean to say, I'd probably feel more unsafe around you, in SL, than with someone just wearing their silver collar, is all.         Take from that what you want.

---

Hello Kira, I had posted a link to some research done on mental health, and BDSM practitioners, on page 159 of this thread, here's a link to my comment:

http://community.secondlife.com/t5/General-Discussion-Forum/Linden-Lab-is-building-a-NEW-virtual-world/m-p/2792194#M190552

 

(Later in this thread,

Freya

also posted that link, so yes....it's not news that BDSM people are better adjusted mental health-wise than their counter-parts in the general population.  But, apparently news to Thomas)

 

---

I'm not going to make a judgement one way or the other regarding the "mental health" of those who engage in the behaviour.  My own experiences, which I will admit are very limited, with people who are involved is a mixed bag.

However if you are basing your statement, "That BDSM people are better adjusted mental health-wise," on that article I willl quote from the article:

"The study is somewhat limited by a self-selecting response pool and by the fact that BDSM practitioners could have been answering in ways to make themselves look better and avoid stigma, Wismeijer said —

though the fact that the participants didn't know the reasons for the study ameliorates that concern somewhat."

At best it could be said based on that Study that there is a

possibility

.  That particular study seriously lacked any of the necessary controls for it to make valid conclusions regarding this topic.     eta:clarity

---

Perrie, I bolded a pertinent section above.  Also, the study says:

 

"They also sought participants who didn't do BDSM via a women's magazine website, a personal secret website and a university website."     (Control group) 

 "None of the participants knew what the surveys were about, other than they were on "human behavior."

 

"We did not have any findings suggesting that people who practice BDSM have a damaged psychological profile or have some sort of psychopathology or personality disorder," he said."     (He being researcher Andreas Wismeijer)

----------------------------

All voluntary social science studies have "self-selecting" groups, as it's not possible to do the study otherwise. 

I think the study shows more than a possibility of BDSM people being normal, and that further studies will show the same.  In addition, I think that studies will also show that BDSM people have (on average)  have higher IQs, are better educated, more apt to explore, adapt, and be creative.    (Yes, I'm basing that on my own personal experience which is anecdotal, but I think the sampling of people I've encountered is a representation of the whole.) 

 

 

 

 

[Freya Mokusei]

Oops, sorry Celestiall I hadn't seen your link to the same study. Keeping up with a thread at terminal velocity ain't so easy.

Wasn't trying to steal any thunder.

I've enjoyed your posts to this thread a lot!

Can second your anecdotal experiences, as much as that helps.

[Thomas Galbreus]

---

Celestiall Nightfire wrote:

---

Germany comes in with , "

12.47% of their traffic takes place on adult sites

."  That means that Germany has a higher percent of their traffic devoted to adult sites (porn) than average of all countries

---

You still made a mistake by several magnitudes in your previous post by implying Germany would cause 12.47 % of the worlwide internet traffic concerning porn, because you confused national traffic with world wide traffic.

 

---

Celestiall Nightfire wrote:

---

So, perhaps you should be focusing your efforts on the people within your own country, and stop trying to regulate the morality of people in

other

countries.

---

I don' t have a problem with people consuming porn as such, as I said several times. I don't see any moral issue with that, not even in Germany.

My problems begin when women get systematically degraded in porn, when that is accessible to minors, and - most relevant in this thread - if people can't use a virtual world other than one which gets mainly associated with porn, so that many either won't be using it or don't like to be open about using it. All said for a thousand times now.

The main tactic of those who defend porn in SL is impertinently ignoring what has been said and making things up they find easier to deal with.

This happens a lot in forums, especially with a majority being of the side with the weaker argumentation.

Seeing themselves in the majority, most people find that sufficient to bask themselves in, don't see the need of a sound argumentation anymore, impertinently ignore clear statements etc. (You are not the worst in that respect, but I think it is appropriate at this point to rub some noses in it.)

[Thomas Galbreus]

---

Drake1 Nightfire wrote:

---

Thomas Galbreus wrote:

---

unless minors are safley excluded from accessing it.

---

you mean like their parents actually paying attention to what they do online?

---

I don't mean anything there, I just quoted the German law, which demands a technical exclusion of minors from porn.

[Thomas Galbreus]

---

Amethyst Jetaime wrote:

The links you provided do NOT say it applies to internet sites that originate outside of Germany.

---

Wrong.

 

---

Amethyst Jetaime wrote:

parents are the ones responsible for watching their children to be sure they don't go on web sites which would be harmful to them.

---

Sure, only wonderful parents exist.

 

[Thomas Galbreus]

---

Celestiall Nightfire wrote:

---

you who poked them with insults

---

I explained I citizised certain behaviour in general, always providing an explanation - instead of simply uttering disapproval or personal dislike (which lots of my antagonists do all the time) - and that is nothing but practising freedom of speech.

Seems I was not reported, or if so, I was not moderated. Some of my antagonistst were reported and some insults disappeared after that, one user (who already received warnings by LL in other threads) got banned for 30 days. I thought I should mention that, since it is only the opinion of Linden Lab that counts, as someone has put it.

 

---

Celestiall Nightfire wrote:

---

I also call BS on your lack of responsibility for people getting angry

---

I did not expect that (amount of) anger, because I thought (and still think) the idea of SL being dominated by porn enthusiasts is just a wrong cliché produced by biased media reports, but of course I take responsibility for it. I only said I can't help it - I won't activate an inner censor in my brain to avoid people being wrong getting angry.

 

---

Celestiall Nightfire wrote:

---

I belong to some science grids, and Sci-Fi roleplay grids

---

Sounds interesting. I'm afraid I could only take part in German RPs though because of my English being limited (even more in real time conversation).

[Thomas Galbreus]

What a BS post. You quote a random post of me in it's entirety, only to address not one syllable in that, but to conceive random rants about me being an awful person.

Such behaviour in a forum is 100 % proof that someone lost the argumentation completely.

[Thomas Galbreus]

In standard porn only male orgasms are catered for and shown - if female orgasms are shown, then usually faked by terribly bad acting. If young people are influenced by this a lot - poor future women.

Porn, which often depicts promiscuous sex in which condoms are never used, is clearly not helpful to prevent STDs and pregnancies.

[Freya Mokusei]

I don't think you understand sociological cause and effect.

Given your tendency to invent and condemn without experience, I don't find your opinions on 'standard porn' useful or interesting. I think you've just put 'standard' in front of something to claim conformity exists where it doesn't. You've pushed your personal agenda above reality many times already. Shadowboxing is a waste of my time.

The adult industry in the US and Germany (and other countries) have certain issues, but I'd be surprised if any of these profit-motivated problems transfer over to virtual worlds where no organised 'industry' exists.

My experience in this field runs in direct opposition to your claims, and without evidence I'm continuing to discard them in accordance with Hitchen's general principle.

You'd do far better concentrating on dealing with the legal issues, where you at least appear to grasp the concepts, if not the resulting actions.

The law clearly only has power over German citizens, and its implementation doesn't have any scope to affect foreign services or overseas age validation methods in any way. It remains unreasonable for Germany to expect compliance outside its own borders, and I've seen no intention for Germany to prosecute German citizens who merely experience erotic RP. There is no apparent threat to German Second Life users - the only claim it makes to overseas services is in stating the obvious negatives of a state-mandated policy on age verification (which the court ignored).

[Leia36]

---

Thomas Galbreus wrote:

---

Seeing themselves in the majority, most people find that sufficient to bask themselves in, don't see the need of a sound argumentation anymore, impertinently ignore clear statements etc. (You are not the worst in that respect,

but I think it is appropriate at this point to rub some noses in it.

)

---

this is the real issue here, your lack of decorum when discussing this. You seem more interested in goading a response than the actual points discussed.

You yourself have also ignored clear statements, read into people's posts what you want to read in them, and consistently stirred up the other posters against you, I am beginning to suspect that you enjoy all this attention far too much.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------

Amethyst Jetaime wrote:

The links you provided do NOT say it applies to internet sites that originate outside of Germany.

---

Thomas Galbreus wrote:

Wrong.

------------------------------------------

No sir, it is you that is wrong. Germany or any other country does not have the power to dictate to other countries their laws. I do believe 2 world wars were fought somewhat about this kind of mentality.

Many people have weighed in on this issue about german law and you sir have been consistently been shown to be wrong, not that you have belaboured those posts, you have simply ignored them which is highly ironic considering that you accuse others of doing the same.

--------------------------------------------

Thomas Galbreus wrote:

In standard porn only male orgasms are catered for and shown - if female orgasms are shown, then usually faked by terribly bad acting. If young people are influenced by this a lot - poor future women.

SL is not standard porn as I understand it, so your assumption is incorrect.

 

[Perrie Juran]

---

Celestiall Nightfire wrote:

---

Perrie Juran wrote:

---

Celestiall Nightfire wrote:

---

kiramanell wrote:

---

ThomasGalbreus wrote:

Imagine a new user stumbles upon this thread (which is linked in blogs etc.). Not only see they porn in SL vigorously defended, but also those who have a problem with it repeatedly told to go and stay away.

Will help the stigma a lot.

---

In one of the many, many replies, someone mentioned BDSM folks were, overall, psychologically more healthy than 'normals.' I can see the validity of such a statement. Not about BDSM per se, but that ppl like you, obsessed with porn and sexuality in general, tend to be more mentally unstable than ppl with less obsessive attitudes about sex, and sometimes pose a danger even (like an activist killing ppl at an abortion clinic or something). I mean to say, I'd probably feel more unsafe around you, in SL, than with someone just wearing their silver collar, is all.         Take from that what you want.

---

Hello Kira, I had posted a link to some research done on mental health, and BDSM practitioners, on page 159 of this thread, here's a link to my comment:

http://community.secondlife.com/t5/General-Discussion-Forum/Linden-Lab-is-building-a-NEW-virtual-world/m-p/2792194#M190552

 

(Later in this thread,

Freya

also posted that link, so yes....it's not news that BDSM people are better adjusted mental health-wise than their counter-parts in the general population.  But, apparently news to Thomas)

 

---

I'm not going to make a judgement one way or the other regarding the "mental health" of those who engage in the behaviour.  My own experiences, which I will admit are very limited, with people who are involved is a mixed bag.

However if you are basing your statement, "That BDSM people are better adjusted mental health-wise," on that article I willl quote from the article:

"The study is somewhat limited by a self-selecting response pool and by the fact that BDSM practitioners could have been answering in ways to make themselves look better and avoid stigma, Wismeijer said —

though the fact that the participants didn't know the reasons for the study ameliorates that concern somewhat."

At best it could be said based on that Study that there is a

possibility

.  That particular study seriously lacked any of the necessary controls for it to make valid conclusions regarding this topic.     eta:clarity

---

Perrie, I bolded a pertinent section above.  Also, the study says:

 

"They also sought participants who didn't do BDSM via a women's magazine website, a personal secret website and a university website."

     (

Control group

) 

 

"None

of the participants knew what the surveys were about, other than they were on "human behavior."

 

"We did not have any findings suggesting that people who practice BDSM have a damaged psychological profile or have some sort of psychopathology or personality disorder," he said."     (He being researcher Andreas Wismeijer)

----------------------------

All voluntary social science studies have "self-selecting" groups, as it's not possible to do the study otherwise. 

I think the study shows more than a

possibility

of BDSM people being normal, and that further studies will show the same.  In addition, I think that studies will also show that BDSM people have (on average)  have higher IQs, are better educated, more apt to explore, adapt, and be creative.    (Yes, I'm basing that on my own personal experience which is anecdotal, but I think the sampling of people I've encountered is a representation of the whole.) 

 

 

 

 

---

Many years ago I had the "privilege" (add a sarc mark there) of being in a tightly controlled group with one of the original companies that developed the original pre-employment psych evaluations that are so abused by companies today.  I could write a book on that experience.  There were several hundred of us employees involved in that and quite frankly I don't think the study if done today could survive the current ethical requirements for doing research.

It is naive for a researcher to think that even when people don't know the purpose of a study to think that people don't tailor their answers.  From experience I can assure you that the controls necessary to really begin to draw valid conclusions are anything but happenstance.

The study admits a possibility and it may be a reasonable one.  But that is all it does.

 

[kiramanell]

---

Thomas Galbreus wrote:

What a BS post. You quote a random post of me in it's entirety, only to address not one syllable in that, but to conceive random rants about me being an awful person.

 

Such behaviour in a forum is 100 % proof that someone lost the argumentation completely.

---

Instead, I addressed the entirety of your posts. And concluded that your continual obsession with porn and sex would probably make me feel less safe around you than I would be with others who have a more normal attitude towards sex. And that was a far-cry from a rant, and a far-cry from me saying you're an awful person.

Obsessive people tend to do radical things, though; and, when frustrated enough, are more prone to hurting themselves and others. That's probably not something you want to hear either, though, but something you objectively probably know to be true.

As for argumentation, I offered none in that post: we're way past that: I merely made (a somewhat sad) observation, is all.

[kiramanell]

---

Perrie Juran wrote:

Many years ago I had the "privilege" (add a sarc mark there) of being in a tightly controlled group with one of the original companies that developed the original pre-employment psych evaluations that are so abused by companies today.  I could write a book on that experience.  There were several hundred of us employees involved in that and quite frankly I don't think the study if done today could survive the current ethical requirements for doing research.

It is naive for a researcher to think that even when people don't know the purpose of a study to think that people don't tailor their answers.  From experience I can assure you that the controls necessary to really begin to draw valid conclusions are anything but happenstance.

The study admits a possibility and it may be a reasonable one.  But that is all it does.

 

---

And it's at 'reasonable' that I came in. I hadn't heard of the studies mentioned -- thanks for the links, though -- but it simply made sense to me that ppl not riddled with many (unresolved) issues about sexuality are mentally healthier than those who are. Sometimes things just make natural sense.

[Coby Foden]

:matte-motes-yawn:

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Linden Lab is building a NEW virtual world

Linden Lab is building a NEW virtual world

Linden Lab is building a NEW virtual world

Linden Lab is building a NEW virtual world

Linden Lab is building a NEW virtual world

Yay!        :matte-motes-big-grin: :smileyhappy:

[Coby Foden]

---

Thomas Galbreus wrote:

 

I just quoted the German law, which demands a technical exclusion of minors from porn.

---

:matte-motes-yawn:

- - - - - - -

Linden Lab is building a NEW virtual world

Linden Lab is building a NEW virtual world

Linden Lab is building a NEW virtual world

Linden Lab is building a NEW virtual world

Yay!  :matte-motes-big-grin: :smileyhappy:     :smileyhappy: :matte-motes-big-grin:

[Drake1 Nightfire]

---

Thomas Galbreus wrote:

In standard porn only male orgasms are catered for and shown - if female orgasms are shown, then usually faked by terribly bad acting. If young people are influenced by this a lot - poor future women.

Perhaps you need to find better porn... How do you know its bad acting? A female orgasm is  not always accompanied

by a physical showing. A male one 99.9% of the time is. It is rather silly for a man to fake it.

Porn, which often depicts promiscuous sex in which condoms are never used, is clearly not helpful to prevent STDs and pregnancies.

Condoms are a part of mainstream porn nowadays. Usually if you do not see one it is due to the fact that the actors are monogamous with each other. Or in some cases are married. You really think Porn stars dont use birth control?!?

---

Again though, i will state, you are only talking about some weird pron you have seen. You keep saying how "almost all porn is misogynistic." You still are using that word wrong. It means HATRED for women. Just because they tie up a woman and treat her like a sex toy does not mean they hate her, nor does it mean she is being abused.