Jump to content
Bree Giffen

Making SL more welcoming to males

Recommended Posts

My, my, my...we have wandered far afield!

But, before we get locked or edited, I wanted to quote @Prokofy Neva who said, "...I've also noticed there is a certain type of blogger or podcaster who hates SL because they aren't used to having their porn talk back."

To which I say: Kudos, Prok!  Witty, dry, funny...and true.

See?  I don't ALWAYS take issue with everything you say.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Indeed.  First life and Second Life are much the same. If anyone actually cared about making life more welcoming to males, Cosmopolitan Magazine would exist. 

  • Haha 1
  • Confused 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A Brief Timeline of Men Not Feeling Welcome in RL

  • Ca. 5000 BCE - ca. 1964 CE -- Men run everything and own everything. The world is a wonderful place.
     
  • Ca. 1964 CE - Present Day -- Women start demanding that they too be allowed to run things and own things. Mass panic ensues.
  • Like 3
  • Haha 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, Lindal Kidd said:

But...but...Cosmo DOES exist!

kate-upton-covers-cosmopolitan-november-2012-02.jpg&f=1&nofb=1

When did Cosmo start publishing in SL? How many issues have I missed!? :P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Selene Gregoire said:

When did Cosmo start publishing in SL? How many issues have I missed!? :P

Oh...not in SL.  Desiree said, "... If anyone actually cared about making life more welcoming to males, Cosmopolitan Magazine would exist."  (emphasis added).  I assumed she meant "life" to mean "Real Life and Second Life".

Even though magazines are a pain to read in SL, I'd love it if there was an equivalent to Cosmo in world.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Lindal Kidd said:

Oh...not in SL.  Desiree said, "... If anyone actually cared about making life more welcoming to males, Cosmopolitan Magazine would exist."  (emphasis added).  I assumed she meant "life" to mean "Real Life and Second Life".

Even though magazines are a pain to read in SL, I'd love it if there was an equivalent to Cosmo in world.

You took my post seriously. xD

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Scylla Rhiadra said:

A Brief Timeline of Men Not Feeling Welcome in RL

  • Ca. 5000 BCE - ca. 1964 CE -- Men run everything and own everything. The world is a wonderful place.
     
  • Ca. 1964 CE - Present Day -- Women start demanding that they too be allowed to run things and own things. Mass panic ensues.

I'm not going to Google it, but I'm pretty sure that coincides more or less to when John Nobhead started dropping his turds. Don't even know how many of those things he's sh@t out to date, but it must be dozens by now.  That's an awful lot of words for, "I can't find the c******s."
 

Edited by Amina Sopwith
  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Scylla Rhiadra said:

A Brief Timeline of Men Not Feeling Welcome in RL

  • Ca. 5000 BCE - ca. 1964 CE -- Men run everything and own everything. The world is a wonderful place.
     
  • Ca. 1964 CE - Present Day -- Women start demanding that they too be allowed to run things and own things. Mass panic ensues.

Present Day -- Women start to wonder where all the good men have gone .....................

  • Like 2
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, Conall DeCuir said:

Present Day -- Women start to wonder where all the good men have gone .....................

You never did explain why you consider women who don't all think the same to be a "snake pit", or why you think it's possible to strangle a woman to death purely by being a bit thick. I'm still curious, if you'd ever like to tell me. 

Edited by Amina Sopwith
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, Amina Sopwith said:

or why you think it's possible to strangle a woman to death purely by being a bit thick. I'm still curious, if you'd ever like to tell me. 

I never said that! That is what you wanted to read.  You might want to re-read without being biased by gender studies :) Once you are able, we maybe could talk. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, Conall DeCuir said:

I never said that! That is what you wanted to read.  You might want to re-read without being biased by gender studies :) Once you are able, we maybe could talk. 

I confess I paraphrased a bit. What you actually said, in response to a discussion about an article on women being choked and slapped during sex without their consent, and in some cases to the point of death, was: 

 

On 11/28/2019 at 9:27 PM, Conall DeCuir said:

Many Vanilla people going kinky have not learned how to consent or how to ask for it. 

I did actually try to be nice and give you the benefit of the doubt. I explained to you that this is exactly what these murderers want us to think. That's their entire defence: that they're just idiots who don't know any better. They're not, they know exactly what they're doing, but they want you to believe that they don't. You replied:

On 11/29/2019 at 12:51 PM, Conall DeCuir said:

What is described in the article is mainstream kink. People are bored and seek for more excitement .. harder .. faster .. more.  


I explained yet again, but you accused me of being a feminist, presumably meant as an insult, and not wanting to "understand" you. Then you flounced. (Was there a hair toss, by the way? I do hope so.)

But even all this aside, you still haven't explained your lovely "snake pit" comment, or why you're bringing "gender studies" into it now. Last time I asked you to explain your "snake pit" term, you accused me of "shaming" you, but you still didn't answer the question. Jaysus man. These are simple questions. You've made several statements now that I find to be quite alarming. Can you just explain them without resorting to weird attacks about feminism, gender studies, shaming and whatnot?

You do realise that you can even say, "Oh feck, you know, now that I think about it, I think I've changed my mind"? You do know you can do that, right? 

I'm still waiting for an answer. And despite what you probably think, I am honestly not trying to catch you out. Quite the opposite. I think various forms of hatefulness survive not because everyone actively endorses and believes them, but because they just kind of let them slide when they see them and don't think very hard about what they're saying. Do you honestly, seriously believe that women are like vipers just because they don't all agree with each other all the time? Do you honestly, seriously believe that a man can choke a woman to death, seeing her turn blue, her eyes roll back, her extremities jerking, then going limp, and sincerely not know what he's doing?

I don't believe you do. I know we don't see eye to eye, but no, I do not believe you really are that person. Which is why I'm asking you to think critically about these sorts of comments and, if you realise that no, that's not who you are, retract them and use your new understanding going forward. 

 

  • Like 4
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't know, men who are a bit thick certainly make me choke. On venomous bile, thereby proving the snake theory.

But then again, women who are a bit thick cause that too, so I'm not sure it's a gender thing.

this wonderful post was brought to you by the exhaustion of a full day christmas shopping with inlaws

Edited by Cinos Field

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, Amina Sopwith said:

I confess I paraphrased a bit. What you actually said, in response to a discussion about an article on women being choked and slapped during sex without their consent, and in some cases to the point of death, was: 

 

I did actually try to be nice and give you the benefit of the doubt. I explained to you that this is exactly what these murderers want us to think. That's their entire defence: that they're just idiots who don't know any better. They're not, they know exactly what they're doing, but they want you to believe that they don't. You replied:


I explained yet again, but you accused me of being a feminist, presumably meant as an insult, and not wanting to "understand" you. Then you flounced. (Was there a hair toss, by the way? I do hope so.)

But even all this aside, you still haven't explained your lovely "snake pit" comment, or why you're bringing "gender studies" into it now. Last time I asked you to explain your "snake pit" term, you accused me of "shaming" you, but you still didn't answer the question. Jaysus man. These are simple questions. You've made several statements now that I find to be quite alarming. Can you just explain them without resorting to weird attacks about feminism, gender studies, shaming and whatnot?

You do realise that you can even say, "Oh feck, you know, now that I think about it, I think I've changed my mind"? You do know you can do that, right? 

I'm still waiting for an answer. And despite what you probably think, I am honestly not trying to catch you out. Quite the opposite. I think various forms of hatefulness survive not because everyone actively endorses and believes them, but because they just kind of let them slide when they see them and don't think very hard about what they're saying. Do you honestly, seriously believe that women are like vipers just because they don't all agree with each other all the time? Do you honestly, seriously believe that a man can choke a woman to death, seeing her turn blue, her eyes roll back, her extremities jerking, then going limp, and sincerely not know what he's doing?

I don't believe you do. I know we don't see eye to eye, but no, I do not believe you really are that person. Which is why I'm asking you to think critically about these sorts of comments and, if you realise that no, that's not who you are, retract them and use your new understanding going forward. 

 

I did not changed my mind! People ARE bored (BOTH gender) and want it harder, faster and whatever without knowing what they are really doing or asking for. I never meant to say it is ok for a male to strangle a female to death (or the other way around). Those people are sick (both gender ... those who do it and those who demand it having been done to them). They wrongly think they are doing BDSM, while they do not have the slighest clue what BDSM is about ... it is Consent and being responsible (that applies for both gender and for sub and dom equally). If i would get the slightest hint about her being into such stuff, i would be gone. 

The problem today is that in our hook-up culture 'some' just do not take their time to find out about the other person (that applies to BOTH gender equally). They jump in without vetting, talking about limits, etc. and ... the bad thing happens. Again, that is no excuse to strangle anyone to death or to cut off any other blood circulation. 

I never said i approve. 

I am very much opposed by kink done by people who have no clue, who do not care, who just want to get their kick off without being responsible. I call that mainstream kink = kinky fun for the clueless.

 

Edited by Conall DeCuir

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Conall DeCuir said:

Do you honestly, seriously believe that women are like vipers just because they don't all agree with each other all the time?

I do not generalize. I do not want to be generalized as well. I never say "all". If i use "all" i drank whisky. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Conall DeCuir said:

I did not changed my mind! People ARE bored (BOTH gender) and want it harder, faster and whatever without knowing what they are really doing or asking for. I never meant to say it is ok for a male to strangle a female to death (or the other way around). Those people are sick (both gender ... those who do it and those who demand it having been done to them). They wrongly think they are doing BDSM, while they do not have the slighest clue what BDSM is about ... it is Consent and being responsible (that applies for both gender and for sub and dom equally). If i would get the slightest hint about her being into such stuff, i would be gone. 

The problem today is that in our hook-up culture 'some' just do not take their time to find out about the other person (that applies to BOTH gender equally). They jump in without vetting, talking about limits, etc. and ... the bad thing happens. Again, that is no excuse to strangle anyone to death or to cut off any other blood circulation. 

I never said i approve. 

I am very much opposed by kink done by people who have no clue, who do not care, who just want to get their kick off without being responsible. I call that mainstream kink = kinky fun for the clueless.

 

Oh boy. I suppose I could go into asking you why you think women (because let's be honest, that's who it is) are somehow responsible for not "taking time" to "find out about" men who go on to murder them in the sack, but frankly I'm scared of what might happen to your head, and I am actually trying to engage it. So for now, leave aside the blather about whether it's BDSM or idiot vanillas, consent, etc etc. Just answer me these two questions:

  • Do you honestly believe a man can choke a woman to death because he's too stupid to realise he's killing her? 
  • Do you honestly think women are like snakes because they don't all think the same?

 

Edited by Amina Sopwith
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Conall DeCuir said:

People ARE bored (BOTH gender) and want it harder, faster and whatever without knowing what they are really doing or asking for.

OMFG. Do you have any idea how difficult it is to actually kill someone? It doesn't happen by accident in the heat of the moment by bumbling idiots who haven't studied under a master dominant. These are men who hate women and call themselves dominant (even though they are extremely weak) and can't control their rage and hide behind BDSM, using it as an excuse for their blood lust. This is not kink gone wrong. This is violence towards women.  

It's not that hard to understand. 

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Beth Macbain said:

OMFG. Do you have any idea how difficult it is to actually kill someone? It doesn't happen by accident in the heat of the moment by bumbling idiots who haven't studied under a master dominant. These are men who hate women and call themselves dominant (even though they are extremely weak) and can't control their rage and hide behind BDSM, using it as an excuse for their blood lust. This is not kink gone wrong. This is violence towards women.  

It's not that hard to understand. 

Ok, i have no clue about such doings and stay away from such people. I bow to your insight.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...