Women degrading advertising in search

[Rhonda Huntress]

BDSM in 500 words or less ...

What do people think we do anyway?  You see a picture or a movie and base everything off of that?  Do you judge Australia off of the Mad Max movies?  How many, many cop shows have you seen?  Don't you realize it is fantasy?  The vast majority of police offices will go their entire career without drawing a weapon. Sure there are those rare few emotional problems and a badge but most are people doing a job they enjoy.

 

So, here is what happens.  We talk.  A lot.  We get to know each other, what we want, what they want.  Are our wants compatible.  Then we do things together.  It can be stopped at any time if anyone is does not like what is happening.  After that, we talk.  Cuddle, kiss what did we like, what do we want to do next time and did anything happen emotionally that needs to be addressed.

 

What you see in the adds and in SL poses is where we are painting the fantasy.  Some people can get very immersed in that fantasy but in the end, that's all it is in SL.  

One more analogy.  Lets go to Disneyland.  That picture in the ad where the kids are on top of a roller coaster with wide eyes and a jaw-dropping smile; that's the ad pic.  They don't show everything else that happens.  Standing in line is not exciting. That pic is one flash in an all day experience. One small moment of joy, excitement and fear along with the rush of wind and the physical sensations as the body id tossed about in the roller coaster's seat.

Not everyone is in to roller coasters and that's cool. They can be frightening.  But can't you at least understand that some people enjoy that frightening experience?  Besides, the aftercare (which you never see in pics) can be sublime.

 

Bottom line: we talk a lot --  A LOT;  Like bunches.  But that is not good fap bait for the vanilla day trippers so you'll never see it. 

[Phil Deakins]

I don't know if that BDSM tutorial was actually aimed at me, though it was a reply to my unrelated post, or if it was aimed at all of us. I assume it's the latter.

I said earlier that I've never got into BDSM, so I've no idea if I would enjoy it or not. I also said twice that the fantasy of being 'taken by force' is in many women, and forcing women is in many men's fantasies. So I'm not your opponent in this thread

I haven't said this before but I'll say it now. I've never been on a roller coaster in my life, and intend it to stay that way

[kali Wylder]

 

---

I've been incinerating people in SL since the day I discovered fire, some more than once. I get great pleasure out of doing it. There has been no uprising against me... yet. I have good reason to believe that every one of my flaming victims...

---

Some more than once?  What about me?  Did you even burn me?  or just that other av I used to use?

[Madelaine McMasters]

---

kali Wylder wrote:

 

---

I've been incinerating people in SL since the day I discovered fire, some more than once. I get great pleasure out of doing it. There has been no uprising against me... yet. I have good reason to believe that every one of my flaming victims...

---

Some more than once?  What about me?  Did you even burn me?  or just that other av I used to use?

---

Oh dear, it does seem your soul's most recent incarnation has gone without a thorough cleansing. The crematorium is buried deep in my purse, under all the furnishings I was forced to pack when Forgotten City slipped out from under me. Once I've got it all back together and connected a new propane tank, I'll come a calling.

I know where to find you.

I know where to find all of you.

[Rhonda Huntress]

---

Phil Deakins wrote:

I don't know if that BDSM tutorial was actually aimed at me

---

Oh no, Hon. No no no.  I should have watched which "reply" button i pressed.  It was a bit of frustration of being painted by large strokes of an uninformed brush for several people but you were never one of them. 

But then I'm sick both mentally and morally with my two way communication in the bed room of all places so what do I know.

[Dresden]

---

Phil Deakins wrote:

I haven't said this before but I'll say it now. I've never been on a roller coaster in my life, and intend it to stay that way

---

PRUDE!!!

...Dres

[Madelaine McMasters]

---

Rhonda Huntress wrote:

BDSM in 500 words or less ...

 

---

 

Two hundred thirty five, ignoring the introductory paragraph. I applaud your efficiency.

 

Regarding Disneyland. My one childhood day there was made immensely more enjoyable by my parents, who wound me into a lather of anticipation over it. Standing in line was made bearable by observing the people ahead of us and making up silly stories to match their look and demeanor. What I remember most about that day (and my entire childhood) is not the rides, but Mom and Dad.

I own a go-kart in RL. It's not the sort of thing a grown women is expected to drive down the road in my neighborhood. That's half the reason I do it. My shy neighbor has been in ill-health for years. When I zoomed into her driveway, stopped at her feet and offered her the wheel, she demurred. I became insistent. She acquiesed. When she returned from her short spin down the road, she was giddy. So was I.

She recently asked (to my great surprise) if there was a kind of go-kart she could take to the market. I offered my Miata, she demurred. She doesn't drive stick, so we struck a compromise. She now admits that riding in the snow with the top down is more enjoyable than she expected. That makes me happy, and I can hope that when she remembers these experiences, she remembers me.

I like "forcing" people to do things I believe they'll enjoy, and I like winding them up in anticipation. It can take effort, but it's worth it. If this is as close to being Mistress Madelaine as I ever get in RL, that's just fine.

;-).

(And there we go Rhonda, 500 on the nose.)

 

[Madelaine McMasters]

---

Phil Deakins wrote:

I've never been on a roller coaster in my life, and intend it to stay that way

---

But... after your death?

[Dillon Levenque]

---

Madelaine McMasters wrote:

---

Rhonda Huntress wrote:

BDSM in 500 words or less ...

 

---

 

Two hundred thirty five, ignoring the introductory paragraph. I applaud your efficiency.

 

Regarding Disneyland. My one childhood day there was made immensely more enjoyable by my parents, who wound me into a lather of anticipation over it. Standing in line was made bearable by observing the people ahead of us and making up silly stories to match their look and demeanor. What I remember most about that day (and my entire childhood) is not the rides, but Mom and Dad.

I own a go-kart in RL. It's not the sort of thing a grown women is expected to drive down the road in my neighborhood. That's half the reason I do it. My shy neighbor has been in ill-health for years. When I zoomed into her driveway, stopped at her feet and offered her the wheel, she demurred. I became insistent. She acquiesed. When she returned from her short spin down the road, she was giddy. So was I.

She recently asked (to my great surprise) if there was a kind of go-kart she could take to the market. I offered my Miata, she demurred. She doesn't drive stick, so we struck a compromise. She now admits that riding in the snow with the top down is more enjoyable than she expected. That makes me happy, and I can hope that when she remembers these experiences, she remembers me.

I like "forcing" people to do things I believe they'll enjoy, and I like winding them up in anticipation. It can take effort, but it's worth it. 

If this is as close to being Mistress Madelaine as I ever get in RL, that's just fine.

;-).

(And there we go Rhonda, 500 on the nose.)

 

---

 

That's also as close as you get to being "Mistress Madelaine" in SL, at least as far as I've ever seen, and It's just fine with me, too. Quite fine, in fact. For some reason reading that post had me smiling inside and out.

You can drop a Rawr just by way of rebuttal, to show how fierce you are. I like when you Rawr. ;-)

 

[Madelaine McMasters]

---

Dillon Levenque wrote:

You can drop a Rawr just by way of rebuttal, to show how fierce you are. I like when you Rawr. ;-)

---

 

Wouldn't you rather have a cookie?...

Just to be clear, I imagine you wearing bibs and an updo as you sashay down the walk.

[Dillon Levenque]

---

Madelaine McMasters wrote:

---

Dillon Levenque wrote:

You can drop a Rawr just by way of rebuttal, to show how fierce you are. I like when you Rawr. ;-)

---

 

Just to be clear, I imagine you wearing bibs and an updo as you sashay down the walk.

---

 

At first I thought, "Sashay? Dang, I thought my walk ani was fairly mild compared to some I've seen", but then I put it together with the bibs and updo and realized you were talking about the rehearsal.

Maddy and I were both 'members of the wedding' at a mutual friend's wedding recently. I was a bridesmaid, she was the PASTOR, if you can imagine that. In fact, she did a very nice if completely unorthodox (not Unorthodox Jewish, unorthodox period) service in which she probably didn't painfully offend anyone (she may be disappointed in her effort in that regard).

At the rehearsal I had my hair in a favorite sorta updo and was wearing bib overalls. The sashay was the 'Bridesmaid's Walk'. We went up (and at the end of the service back down) the aisle one at a time, slowly. The built-in walk was the most outrageous sashay you ever saw in your life.

It's a good thing that all our gowns for the real service were mesh; if we'd have been wearing flexi formals the guests at aisle-side would have suffered eye injuries!

[Madelaine McMasters]

---

Dillon Levenque wrote:

unorthodox period

---

I had one of those once. It scared the hell out of me!

[Prokofy Neva]

Most people are not practitioners of BDSM, Phil. That's the truth and I don't have to prove that because you can Google it. It's in any study of human sexuality. 

What's going on here from Freya is just an old and stupid story -- trying to "normalize" BDSM and turn the tables on people who are liberal and make them think it's illiberal to condemn the violence and oppression of BDSM, which is inherently illiberal.It's a game of disruption that is part of the whole sick BDSM psyche. People like Freya get terribly energized to come on the forums and do battle with people she/he thinks she can "show up" or "skewer" or "prove wrong". It's not worth wasting time on.

Then there's the silly selective cherry-picking of statistics claiming violence is down, and gaming is up, and gaming doesn't cause violence, well, except when it does as with reclusive gamer mass killers.

All of this was argued 15 years ago on the Alphaville Herald and nothing new has occurred except that BDSM has succeeded in commercializing their culture with the book.

The minute they try to appear at bus stops in real-life cities with other humans on chains like dogs, however, as they do routinely in Second Life, I think they'll find themselves at the police station, which would be the merciful outcome rather than a lynch mob.

BTW, good for Carlotta sticking to her guns and continuing to argue for women's rights and true liberalism in the face of the usual authoritarian mob and cunning Alinskyisms and all the rest. 

[Ceka Cianci]

I would say,if you don't like those kinds of things  then just uncheck adult rating..

it's that simple really..it's a choice and not something forced on people..

That section was made for a lot of those things.. complaining about seeing adult things in an adult search is like complaining about getting dog show adds while shopping for a dog..

 

I unchecked adult and don't get those kinds of things in my searchs..

The world is not supossed to be 100% all one groups way..so it's been divided up pretty well..

What's normal is not really for anyone to say,especially if they live in a free country with many ways  of thinking..as long as it's within the law or laws of the land, then it's allowed..

If you ask me,Liberal extremism is just as terrible as conservative extremism..That is if people fall for them anyways.. both trying to guilt everyone into their corners to control their thinking using fear and humiliation .

myself,I'll fly the middle flapping both wings picking my own direction, rather than flying in circles..

 

 

[UnicornNightmares]

I agree with the original poster (and I generally disagree with most of you all, though I haven't read all the comments)  

When you don't want to see women being degraded, "un-check the adult box" should not be the only option.  Have you all considered that some of us actually crave adult or erotic content?  Even if we don't want to see degraded women.  

Your suggestions to un-check the adult box, would be like telling a person who enjoys watching stand- up comedy, but who is against racism.  That if they don't like comedians who make racist jokes, then they better stop going to see comedy at all.   

In other words, sex is supposed to be fun or appealing.  Including for people who do not like when it portrays aggression towards women.  After all, appreciation for sex is a natural thing.  But sexism really is *not * natural or healthy...  And shoving the unhealthy stuff in our face when we don't want that, is like shoving images of things that are disgusting to you, when you were hoping to look for something appealing.

 By the way, I don't think it's true bdsm, when it's *always * women who are put in humiliating poses.  Just like, if you wrote a story in which all people of color in that story were bad guys (or were humiliated in some way),  that would still be racism and would not make it a good story.  Regardless of it being otherwise normal to 'Have bad guys in your story.'  I think you know what I mean.  ("Why don't you just stop reading stories ever? Prude!")

I also don't think it's true bdsm, when humiliating images are shown to people who don't want to see that - people who were just looking for sex in general.  Bdsm is fine, but it's supposed to be consensual, not shoved at people who don't want it.  Nor packaged as though it represents all sex as being humiliating, ever.

Being against these things, does *Not * mean being oppressive to people who enjoy bdsm.  Nor trying to 'control' anyone.  There are people who want things to be much better, that's all.  And for the person who implied that she should be quiet about it, because she's not the one who decides what content is allowed on SL.  There is a thing called freedom of speech, or at least there should be...  it should be used by anyone who wants to express how they would like their community to be a better place.  

If there were Images of racism everywhere on SL, even if it were not against the rules and even if people were making money off of it.  That still would not make it right, and is not fair that you are trying to similarly silence OP about images of sexism.  

[Phil Deakins]

---

Prokofy Neva wrote:

Most people are not practitioners of BDSM, Phil. That's the truth and I don't have to prove that because you can Google it. It's in any study of human sexuality. 

---

I didn't even hint at, let alone suggest, that most people are practitioners of BDSM. You really should first read what you are replying to, and then reply to it

[Conall DeCuir]

It has less to nothing to do with BDSM but is kinky play and people being involved are kinksters and it annoys me at times a lot when being "just" kinky is messed with and mixed up with being submissive or dominant as it has nothing to do with it.

 

[Freya Mokusei]

Gosh I remember this thread. Controlling arguments outside of a fetish environment are so predictable.

---

UnicornNightmares wrote:

When you don't want to see women being degraded, "un-check the adult box" should not be the only option.

---

Sure, I agree. If only there was a way to also specify what type of adult content you wanted to see. Some kind of... text... entry... system that could lookup words and respond with results based on those queries. What a world that would be.

Search options are limited, and there could be checkboxes for softcore, hardcore, foot fetish, all that jazz. There aren't. All we have, is a checkbox that tells the search system that "I can be an adult about this", and logically separate "things I want to see more of" and "things I want to see less of" without throwing a tantrum. Seeing something in search - finding out that something personally distasteful exists - doesn't have to lead any further than "Naaah".

(Disclaimer: this statement assumes everything in Search always meets the requirements of the ToS, CS, Maturity Guidelines)

---

UnicornNightmares wrote:

After all, appreciation for sex is a natural thing.  But sexism really is *not * natural or healthy...  And shoving the unhealthy stuff in our face when we don't want that, is like shoving images of things that are disgusting to you, when you were hoping to look for something appealing.

---

I'd disagree that sexism isn't natural, this seems like a reframing and possible anthropomorphising to fit a convenient narrative (which is common when folks use words like "natural" and "healthy" - and, oh god, that stupid projective metaphor of "shoving" in faces and down throats). Humans are sexually diamorphic, like many animals - and our 'natural' state is not all that civilised. Overt sexual appetites and animalistic reproductive methods that are light on egalitarianism are expressed in our history on the regular. Living in a gutter but looking up at the stars enables us to push ourselves and do better, to try our best to respect people and to work to create a better world for our children. Reducing societal barriers to individual success (e.g. of which reducing sexism is a part) may not be natural, but it's still definitely good.

As for the rest... I don't believe anyone has any odds for only finding things they like. That's what - in nature - makes humans great; we have a fantastic ability to judge situations for ourselves, when presented with evidence. Our brains are super at sorting good from bad, friend from enemy. Our senses want to be pushed, to try new things and reach new heights - whether that's space exploration, social studies or sexual taboos. Without choice and difference of opinion our critical thinking atrophies, we fall into cult-like behaviour, and oppression grows stronger. The real world isn't only full of things that I like, I hope it's not only full of things that you like. The important thing is that you can find happiness in a world that has little of it by default.

--

The rest of your post is sadly meandering into territory that feels less useful. I don't feel I'm equipped to talk about racism, and feel it's awkward to conflate these two issues in this way. Systematic and dogmatic oppression of women is its own Bad Thing - believe me, I understand this. I also understand that you want better out of the world, but I promise there is nowhere in the realms of space and time where things have improved by someone demanding that things "should" be a certain way, or someone declaring something to be "universally abhorrant". I absolutely have sympathy for those with strong preferences, and those that worry that people exploring their senses in healthy expressions of kink are part of societal oppression. I personally don't see the correlation, kink communities are by far more egalitarian and often focus on progressive concepts of consent and communication that many "vanilla" groupings do not. Many are cliquey and have blindspots, sure, but recognising the problem is often better than other groups have managed in millenia. Energy could be far better spent criticising groups that do perpetuate these oppressions directly and demand obedience while doing so - for example, fundamentalist religion (#truthbomb).

Didn't think I'd be be equating science and kink today, but there we are. All we've got is shades of grey, and that's the way our brains thrive best. There don't have to be exactly fifty, but there should be at least fifty shades of grey to choose from.

[Phil Deakins]

---

UnicornNightmares wrote:

After all, appreciation for sex is a natural thing.  But sexism really is *not * natural or healthy...  And shoving the unhealthy stuff in our face when we don't want that, is like shoving images of things that are disgusting to you, when you were hoping to look for something appealing.

---

You seem to be relating the word 'sex' with the word 'sexism', but sexism is about gender, and not about sex. And sex is about physically intimate relations, but not about gender.

There's nothing wrong with differentiating between genders. For instance, men are generally stronger than women. That's sexism because it's about gender, but it has nothing to do with sex. It's my opinion that women generally make better managers than men. That's also sexism, because it shows an attitiude of difference between men and women, but it has nothing to do with sex. When a store hires a shop assistant for their lingerie or makeup departments, one of the criteria they'll use is gender, and choose a female rather than a male. More sexism that has nothing to do with sex. Of course, sexism can be bad, but it isn't inherently bad.

Not only that, but sexism isn't inherently unhealthy, as those examples show. Some forms of sex may be unhealthy (I'm not saying they are), but that's sex and not sexism.

Just thought I'd throw that in

[Freya Mokusei]

---

Phil Deakins wrote:

You seem to be relating the word 'sex' with the word 'sexism', but sexism is about gender, and not about sex. And sex is about physically intimate relations, but not about gender.

There's nothing wrong with differentiating between genders. For instance, men are generally stronger than women. That's sexism because it's about gender, but it has nothing to do with sex. It's my opinion that women generally make better managers than men. That's also sexism, because it shows an attitiude of difference between men and women, but it has nothing to do with sex. When a store hires a shop assistant for their lingerie or makeup departments, one of the criteria they'll use is gender, and choose a female rather than a male. More sexism that has nothing to do with sex. Of course, sexism can be bad, but it isn't inherently bad.

Not only that, but sexism isn't inherently unhealthy, as those examples show. Some forms of sex may be unhealthy (I'm not saying they are), but that's sex and not sexism.

Just thought I'd throw that in

---

Good point! One that I was looking at tackling, but I don't always do

.

Thanks for these valuable words.

[Phil Deakins]

And thank YOU for that link. I'd never heard of Vi Hart, but she's fanstastic. After watching the video you linked to, I watched another of her videos, and I'll watch more. Thank you for that

[Freya Mokusei]

She's so good. So good. My total hero.

Check out Hexaflexagons and all her Fibonacci stuff.

Okay sorry, off-topic done.

Enjoy your weekends!

[Phil Deakins]

Dunnit. I watched the whole series on Hexaflexagons - brilliant! Being a HUGE lover of gravy, I watched that one too. The only problem with it is that she didn't peel the spuds! Yuk!

[Madelaine McMasters]

I'm enjoying the conversation, and being reminded of Victoria Hart. I love her work, and her attitude. I usually watch her videos twice, the second time with the audio turned off. It's great fun to watch her think, and then join in.

I like this line from "Gender"...
"My condescending teenager attitude came from a false belief that other people are basically like me."

Check.

Curiously, my condescending adult attitude comes from the belief that nobody is like me.

 

[Madelaine McMasters]

---

Freya Mokusei wrote:

She's so good. So good. My total hero.

Check out Hexaflexagons and all her Fibonacci stuff.

Okay sorry, off-topic done.

Enjoy your weekends!

---

Dad introduced me to the patterns of nature when I was little. People still think I'm weird when I stare straight down at plants in their gardens to observe branching patterns. Well okay, they're probably thinking I'm weird for other reasons, but we all rearrange the deck chairs of the HMS Perception to bolster our self image.

And the primary reason I jumped in here was because you're off-topic.

Moving on from sexism to racism, Vi's most recent video is...