Jump to content

Second Life on TV - "Taboo" Fantasies?


You are about to reply to a thread that has been inactive for 3124 days.

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

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 75
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

The age of his sl "daughter" doesn't even hold as much importance in the thought process as the simple word "daughter" does. THAT is what makes it intriguing. I wouldn't go as far as to suggest someone is a sicko or weirdo irl, myself. But again, I AM an sl resident and am well aware of what goes on in sl(even stuff I may not agree with). Others who are not all too familiar with sl will sit there scracthing their heads wondering what kind of dude sleeps with his daughter. Pixel sex or not, it *sounds* creepy, wrong, weird, whatever have you. It doesn't matter that those folks don't know this person(irl or in sl for that matter). There are certain things that stick out to us when we watch/read something. That happens to be an element that won't quickly leave the mind. That, and only that, element is what makes what this one person does "taboo". Nothing else about his life is interesting enough to call it taboo. Yes I am sure he and anyone else will disagree with that statement, and I am not suggesting *I* think his life is uninteresting. What I am saying is that those who are watching that show, or reading an article about that one person will find that one aspect, out of everything, to be the one interesting fact that makes them ponder. It really wouldn't matter *who the article/show is about either, so it's definitely nothing personal against one single person. ANYONE who has ever been "exposed"(for lack of better term here, sorry) as doing something many would likely consider hugely "wrong" in a moral sense, would get the same reaction.

People, as a whole, simply don't approve of folks sleeping with their daughters/sons <shrug>, who knew ;) Others looking on from the outside in, and even some in the inside out, won't understand that "daughter" to some in sl, doesn't actually mean daughter. Hell even *I* don't know what some folks consider their "family members" to really be. They use names we associate with, close, family members. " I have pixel sex with my daughter in sl" sounds completely different(and will be taken different) than "I have pixel sex with a good friend of mine in sl".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Media lives on sensationalism.  No matter how much a journalist may claim to be neutral, It is still sensationalism that sells newspapers.

When an internet relationship moves successfully to RL, knowing that we do need a break occasionally from the bad news, the Media will give us the feel good stories.  But they will taint it with the idea that the successful ones are the rare exception to the rule.  According to the Media, the rule is that the Internet is a very dangerous place to meet people.

So the Media in order to sell papers has to make it look like SL is nothing but sex, sex, sex.  No doubt that there is a lot of sex in SL.  I don't hide here that I am sexually active in SL.

However none of us know what percentage of activity in SL is actually sexual.  I don't  have the time now to go dig out the statistics Linden Lab threw at us during the move to segregate adult activity to Zindra.  Nor do we know their methodology for determining their statistics (probably very flawed), but the Lab claimed it really only represented a small percentage of what goes on in Second Life.

So these shows like Taboo really piss me off because they offer a completely inaccuratepicture of the truth.  The show, as all journalism is, is biased to sell newspapers, because that is how they make their money.

I am paraphrasing Frank Zappa here a little now but he once said, "The purpose of TV shows (and I will add to this thought, the news media) is to get you to watch commercials."  Cause it is still all about separating you from your money.  If it wasn't sensational you wouldn't watch it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

First never watched the clip however second are my views.  One of the biggest problems is in misunderstanding, largely misunderstanding of the various lifestyle dynamics plausible surrounding M/s and/or D/s relationships.  There are a whole mess of people attempting to mimic lifestyle choices on sl in which they have not taken the time to research or understand.  The whole daddy/daughter, or family dynamic is very prominent in the communities at large.  Doing your daughter does not mean incest, it is guidance role more than anything.  A Dominant may have a submission who he/she will care for in a somewhat parental manner, aka daddy and daughter.  The submissive could very well be double your age.   If you are still having a hard time understanding practiced dynamics go read about the leather lifestyle - Daddy/daughter - Polygomous (spelling) - Evolving M/s and/or D/s dynamics.  If you are and still can't find information (which there is plenty online) go out into the local communities and ask questions, but first thing anyone needs to do before playing with bdsm is get the *bleep* out of the box.  Being openingly judgemental on others lifestyle choices is not so welcome, the 'my fetish is not your fetish and i am fine with that' is quite common knowledge around kinksters.  Perhaps that is lesson number one for many !!!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 


Kala Manx wrote:

First never watched the clip however second are my views.  One of the biggest problems is in misunderstanding, largely misunderstanding of the various lifestyle dynamics plausible surrounding M/s and/or D/s relationships.  There are a whole mess of people attempting to mimic lifestyle choices on sl in which they have not taken the time to research or understand.  The whole daddy/daughter, or family dynamic is very prominent in the communities at large.  Doing your daughter does not mean incest, it is guidance role more than anything.  A Dominant may have a submission who he/she will care for in a somewhat parental manner, aka daddy and daughter.  The submissive could very well be double your age.   If you are still having a hard time understanding practiced dynamics go read about the leather lifestyle - Daddy/daughter - Polygomous (spelling) - Evolving M/s and/or D/s dynamics.  If you are and still can't find information (which there is plenty online) go out into the local communities and ask questions, but first thing anyone needs to do before playing with bdsm is get the *bleep* out of the box.  Being openingly judgemental on others lifestyle choices is not so welcome, the 'my fetish is not your fetish and i am fine with that' is quite common knowledge around kinksters.  Perhaps that is lesson number one for many !!!!

 

 

The OP asked this question: "My question for discussion is what kind of message you think these shows are sending about Second Life?"

Whether I agree/understand/participate in this type of RP was NOT the question.  You can justify RP'ing with *your* daughter all you like, but I don't want to know about it.  It is your SL experience - cool.  It is not mine.  Is it the right message about SL?  I say no.  Absolutely No!  Perhaps this is lesson number one for the few.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is getting a bit off-topic, but I want to clarify that I do have some experience with RL BDSM. I was involved in a local community for a few years & never heard anyone describe their sub as their "daughter".  While I'm sure this sort of role-play is part of BDSM for some people (hence the term "leather- daddy"), it is not common or considered "normal" for most people.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I just caught a re-airing of this Taboo episode a few hours ago, and just happened to switch over right as Strokers segment was starting. Not bad IMO. It didn't paint SL in a bad light, which is a rarity, although some of the screen clips could've been done better. I did cringe a little bit at the "sex with SL daughter" thing, but I can see that was more of an initial reaction to the implied family status of the word "daughter" than it was anything to do with the reality of it all. Overall it seemed pretty tame and grounded.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 


Persephone Emerald wrote:

This is getting a bit off-topic, but I want to clarify that I do have some experience with RL BDSM. I was involved in a local community for a few years & never heard anyone describe their sub as their "daughter".  While I'm sure this sort of role-play is part of BDSM for some people (hence the term "leather- daddy"), it is not common or considered "normal" for most people.

In then gay BDSM community, of which I have some RL experience, it's not unheard of to see a couple in a "Dad/son" relationship (this is especially true in SL). It has little, if anything, to do with incest.

A "Dad" would take more of the role of mentor to the person they call a "son" than, say,  a "Master" would to his "slave". It just a differentiation of the distribution of control that a "Dom" exerts over his "sub". This dynamic is just more appealing to some. I see how this could apply to a Dad/daughter relationship as well, though I don't have experience with that type of scenario for obvious reasons.

Considering this, I see nothing wrong with it, as long as it's entered into by consenting adults. And by definition, that is what's required to be in any BDSM relationship. If the participants are not adult and do not give their consent, it isn't BDSM anymore. I'd consider that abuse or worse; and that I do not endorse.

...Dres

Link to comment
Share on other sites

One one hand the show let people see what SL is to many people in SL but it also showed a side of SL that many others have no interest in and that is responsible for SL having a bit of a bad reputation.

If I had seen this before I joined SL, I may not have joined at all.

SL has given me the ability to visit places and times I wouldn't be able to visit in RL, I don't care about virtual hanky panky or all that relationship stuff.

SL is so much more then shaking naked pixels about the place a bit, but because of documentaries like this, tv items and because to many their first visit to SL involves all this, people often think that is what SL is all about.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


Jo Yardley wrote:

One one hand the show let people see what SL is to many people in SL but it also showed a side of SL that many others have no interest in and that is responsible for SL having a bit of a bad reputation.

If I had seen this before I joined SL, I may not have joined at all.

SL has given me the ability to visit places and times I wouldn't be able to visit in RL, I don't care about virtual hanky panky or all that relationship stuff.

SL is so much more then shaking naked pixels about the place a bit, but because of documentaries like this, tv items and because to many their first visit to SL involves all this, people often think that is what SL is all about.

Jo, I certainly agree with your assessment that the lowest-common-denominator sensationalist-pandering "documentaries" such as the one mentioned in this thread are not putting SL in the best of lights.   But, it is human nature to use those sorts of titillating snippets to lure people into viewing, reading or buying.   That "documentary" is just the TV version of the trashy supermarket rags found near checkout.  (people buy..and read them)   I don't own a TV, so I never heard of the show called "taboos"...or whatever it was.  But, I recognize that type of "journalism".

Unfortunately, people don't seem as interested in doing a documentary about the fascinating non-sex aspects of SL.  Like you, if all I had heard about SL prior to coming here were pseudo-sex-stories, I would have had a lot less interest too. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 months later...

They probably did the above for sensationalism.  Sensationalism sells, sex beds too apparently.  lol  He made millions selling sex beds?  I think I might try that, the selling sex beds that is. 

As far as the father/daughter, father/son lingo used, well the forum would probably bleep what I'm thinking.  /me shakes my head too.  boing, boing, boing

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

I think it's so ironic that bringing down Stroker is so high on your agenda, but your involvement actually makes him look like the good guy. Pretend incest, kind of ew, and full perm release of item without full rights to do so, not cool. But on the other side there's you, all gangsta wannabe with the cyberstalking and taking an SL spat into someone's real life and clouding up the issue.

I mean from following all the threads, I've certainly changed my original position. But your presense is actually detrimental to your purpose.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My question for discussion is what kind of message you think these shows are sending about Second Life?

A sensationalistic one, biased towards the audience-grabbing smuttier side of SL, but which is, in all honesty, a pretty vital part of the platform.

 

Do they invite potential customers with "wholesome"  or "prurient" interests? 

I’m guessing more prurient than wholesome. But then, adults are adults and most have some interest in sex and so I suppose many will sign up for “the kicks”.

 

 Do they show a virtual environment parents would be likely to send their teenage children into? 

I hope not. I signed up for SL when it was supposed to be for adults only. If I wanted to hang out in places youngsters gathered, I’d go to Saturday matinee performances of Harry Potter and Disney films to enjoy the full onslaught of chattering, squeals and crunching popcorn.

 

Do they show an environment most companies would want to use for business dealings? 

Probably not. But then again, I didn’t sign up for a game which was publicised as being developed primarily as a platform for RL businesses.

 

Do they show an environment most internet users would want to check out?

Probably. Haven’t seen the show, but I get the drift from the posts –and I’m led to believe that sex is one of the Internet’s biggest attractions. After digital university libraries, of course.

 

And do they show a realistic view of Second Life?

I’ll certainly take a look at it when it comes round my way. My expectation, after reading others’ posts, is that it probably does, though maybe over-stressing one single aspect of SL.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


Stella Carver wrote:

I think it's so ironic that bringing down Stroker is so high on your agenda, but your involvement actually makes him look like the good guy. Pretend incest, kind of ew, and full perm release of item without full rights to do so, not cool. But on the other side there's you, all gangsta wannabe with the cyberstalking and taking an SL spat into someone's real life and clouding up the issue.

I mean from following all the threads, I've certainly changed my original position. But your presense is actually detrimental to your purpose.

Virtual gangsters, forum tough guys & pixel sex. How  incredibly exciting indeed.

Fantasy = la la land. The general public has cast it's vote it would seem.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Don't kill the messenger! Using second life as a taboo fantasy simulator is beyond ew. National Geographic Taboo is a real live show that a certain someone chose to go on and be creepy on. He even flogged his appearance irl here. Since I'm goin to he'll anyways might as well be hated on the journey! :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Considering the paranoia and hysteria about everything related to sexual ageplay in SL, the outrage about incest play is understandable, but one does not necessarily have anything to do with the other. Incest play is very common in SL. While it does break a (RL) taboo, it does not break any law if all participants use adult avatars. I didn't see any child avatars in this National Geographic video. While I didn't know Stroker personally, from what I've seen in TV documentaries and SL snapshots the female avatars that he surrounded himself with looked clearly adult.

Polyamorous SL roleplayers and BDSM lifestylers often form RP "families" in SL and refer to their close friends and lovers as their parents, daughters, aunts, cousins etc., without engaging in sexual ageplay involving child avatars. So this is nothing uncommon or unusual in SL terms, and, like I said, perfectly legal. Even in RL, people often refer to a generous older lover as a "sugar daddy", or use terms of endearment such as "baby" (which implicates a much younger age than the age-neutral term "daughter") or "sweetie" when referring to their own lovers.

Establishing family-like bonds with SL lovers simply leads to a higher level of emotional intimacy, and it can help to structure polyamorous "families" into a certain hierarchy. Large polyamorous groups can get really complicated without a more complex and tiered social order than the traditional two roles of husband and wife or boyfriend and girlfriend.

 

ETA: Aside from that, I don't even see any problem with incestuous relationships between adult and consenting RL relatives. After all, we live in the age of same-sex relationships and contraceptives, where sex rarely ever results in offspring. Other than protecting minors and non-consenting parties, there is no need for governments to legislate the majority morality and try to regulate people's sex lives. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites


Jumpman Lane wrote:

Sat side by side with a bunch of wierdies the guy from second life made the whole grid look bad but himself even worse! If people don't like me for sayin so I unno if I care hehehe

SL is weird. Humans are weird. SL just lets humans express their weirdness. I'm not convinced that's a bad thing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


Persephone Emerald wrote:

I don't have children myself
, but if I knew him in RL and my daughter were a friend of his daughter, I wouldn't mind letting her go over to play at their house.

 

I can assure you, if you had a daughter, you couldnt have answered that so casualy. Its nerve wracking sending your child to an absolutely normal, no scandals ever house. I cant imagine sending my little girl anywhere there has ever been a hint of what's been talked about here. I havnt watched the clips, have only an inkling of whats being discussed, but its enough for alarm bells in regards to my daughter going near there. His daughter could come to my house instead.

 

Now I'll finish reading the thread lol, may have more to add...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You are about to reply to a thread that has been inactive for 3124 days.

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

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share


×
×
  • Create New...