Jump to content
You are about to reply to a thread that has been inactive for 98 days.

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

Recommended Posts

4 minutes ago, Drakonadrgora Darkfold said:

actually its a proven biological response why some men or women get aroused at what they see. its a primal instinct, that many people are still affected by even to this day. you cant really take the beast out of man or woman. for women do it just as bad and as much as men do. Just because some people dont like it, doesnt make it not true.

 

Being attracted is one thing, in the moment. Everything beyond is a choice. Glaring, dreaming about a woman starring in your personal sexual head flicks, all a choice. And all normal, really. Except when used as an excuse for not having to take responsibility for (predatory) sexual behavior. For instance, even up til the 19th century, it was quite common for a woman in England to be prosecuted for 'seducing the man', after having been raped. "I couldn't help myself, Your Honor, she was just too alluring."

Not saying all men are still like that to date, of course; but 'My eye couldn't help but see' continues to sound just wee too much off for me. Sorry.

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 262
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

But in SL....   maybe they do?

I've been skirting around this issue for a minute, but I'm going to bring it right to the forefront for @Kristin Linden and the governance people.  In the photography threads, pictures that inclu

My Father was born in 1920 and served in the Navy from 1936 to 1947 (yes, he lied about his age to enlist) and spent most of that time in the South Pacific. His first introduction to Polynesian cultur

Posted Images

On 5/28/2020 at 4:59 PM, JenniferWind said:

Another way to control women (personal opinon) 🤔

there is always someone seeking to control someone in some form or another. there will never be true 100% equality in this world as long as there are different genders and opinions and views and ethics and morals and standards.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
On 5/14/2020 at 9:28 PM, Beth Macbain said:

Considered sexual by whom? Men? Tough. Get over it. Should SL also not allow partnerships between gay couples? There are some parts of the world where that would get you killed. Legally a woman can whip her shirt off literally anywhere in the US and let it all hang out so long as she’s feeding a child. Also, once upon a time it wasn’t acceptable for a woman to show a bare ankle, or an elbow. Times change. Laws changes. There are cities right here in the USA where I, a filthy woman with my dirty pillows, can walk down the street shirtless. I know you’re gasping in horror!

Please cite the federal, state, county, or city law that would make it illegal for a privately held company in the US to show the bare breasts of any consenting adult on their website. There are thousand of US-based adult entertainment websites that would like to know as well. 

other women fine them sexual to. but I am with you on this one Beth.   

Edited by Tarina Sewell
d
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/27/2020 at 1:11 PM, kiramanell said:

 

Being attracted is one thing, in the moment. Everything beyond is a choice. Glaring, dreaming about a woman starring in your personal sexual head flicks, all a choice. And all normal, really. Except when used as an excuse for not having to take responsibility for (predatory) sexual behavior. For instance, even up til the 19th century, it was quite common for a woman in England to be prosecuted for 'seducing the man', after having been raped. "I couldn't help myself, Your Honor, she was just too alluring."

Not saying all men are still like that to date, of course; but 'My eye couldn't help but see' continues to sound just wee too much off for me. Sorry.

Had a friend argue once that women shouldn't be allowed to go topless, because if he was driving and saw a topless woman he'd become distracted and likely end up crashing into something. Which, is probably true. But that's still HIS fault for not controlling HIS reaction. Not the womans.

Personally, that argument frustrates me so much. We shouldn't be stopping people from doing things, unless the action is directly causing or promoting harm, because of someone else's reaction.

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
8 hours ago, SimplyNemz said:

Personally, that argument frustrates me so much. We shouldn't be stopping people from doing things, unless the action is directly causing or promoting harm, because of someone else's reaction.

In the US, many schools have strict dress codes specifically because something like "seeing a girl's belly button" is just too darn distracting for the guys.

What does that teach young women about their bodies?  What does that teach young men about our faith in their ability to control their responses?  If the school says that a midriff top or an above-the-knee skirt is too distracting for the guys, how do we ever get past the notion that men can use women's clothing as an excuse for their lecherous behavior?

Edited by LittleMe Jewell
spelling
  • Like 5
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

100% equality between both genders will never happen as long as there is misogynistic people in the world male or female. So short of rounding them all up and executing them it will never happen. Even then it wont happen for there will be someone who still will see it as morally or ethically objectionable for one reason or another and not care if others agree with them or not. So lets get rid of morals and ethics and standard and values now.. well someone religious may still become offended.. so lets get rid of all religions at that point. someone spiritual or non may get offended lets get rid of them too then.

Short of abolishing all laws and turning the world loose against itself and dog eat dog and cat eat cat its not going to happen. even then it wont happen.

equality between the genders is an idealistic view that cannot exist not even in a Utopian society. unless everyone is brainwashed and mind controlled and genetically modified to think and behave and act in only one way.

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Drakonadrgora Darkfold said:

100% equality between both genders will never happen as long as there is misogynistic people in the world male or female. So short of rounding them all up and executing them it will never happen. Even then it wont happen for there will be someone who still will see it as morally or ethically objectionable for one reason or another and not care if others agree with them or not. So lets get rid of morals and ethics and standard and values now.. well someone religious may still become offended.. so lets get rid of all religions at that point. someone spiritual or non may get offended lets get rid of them too then.

Short of abolishing all laws and turning the world loose against itself and dog eat dog and cat eat cat its not going to happen. even then it wont happen.

equality between the genders is an idealistic view that cannot exist not even in a Utopian society. unless everyone is brainwashed and mind controlled and genetically modified to think and behave and act in only one way.

Just because something isn't achievable doesn't mean you can't strive for it. There will always be injustice in the world, that doesn't mean we get rid of laws and courts.

 

True equality may not be achievable. I'd argue that it isn't. That won't stop me from trying to work toward it though.

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/27/2020 at 5:43 AM, kiramanell said:

 

When I first read it, I was greatly annoyed by a stanza in William Wordsworth's poem, Expostulation and Reply

"The eye--it cannot choose but see;
We cannot bid the ear be still;
Our bodies feel, where'er they be,
Against or with our will."

Typical male, 18th century thinking. Because there's no law that says you MUST leer, or that you MUST get aroused, or that you MUST sexualize. That's all just between your own ears! Don't blame nature. Just take responsibility for your own actions!

I don't understand what you mean here.  Wordsworth wasn't talking about sexualizing anything.  His friend had asked him why he was sitting by a lake watching the world go by instead of being productive and reading a book to enlighten himself.  You quote part of his answer, that he was enlightening himself by observing nature.  I don't see this as "Typical male, 18th century thinking" except that it is a good example of the Romantic movement.  The Romantics might blame nature for a lot of behavior but, in this poem, he's not doing what you describe.

  • Like 5
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
6 hours ago, Skyler Pancake said:

Just because something isn't achievable doesn't mean you can't strive for it. There will always be injustice in the world, that doesn't mean we get rid of laws and courts.

 

True equality may not be achievable. I'd argue that it isn't. That won't stop me from trying to work toward it though.

its a waste of time and energy to strive for the un-attainable. its better to work on what can be achieved then what cannot be. but go right ahead and waste your time and energy on something that will never exist in the world. false hope is useless and a waste of life. 

true equality is not possible for as long as there is differences in opinion and there always will be between the genders. as long as humans have free will there will be no equality ever. equality cannot be forced. you cannot make others care or believe your beliefs on what is fair or not.

as long as rules exist and laws exist and society exists, there will be gender discrimination, its built in to the human brain and cannot be removed or stopped or changed. 

at the end of the day no one has to care if anyone else thinks anything is unfair. they will still continue to do what they do no matter how much they are complained too or at by anyone.

short of females taking over the entire world(not going to happen)and forcing men to bow to their will until the men then scream unfair.. equality between genders it just a fantasy. there will always be one side or the other oppressing the other because they can or want too.

 

as long as the human body is sexualized by either gender there is no equality and cannot exist. and yes even women sexualize other women or men. so its not just men that are the problem.

as long as their is objectification of either gender it will never exist.. which means for as long as there are misogynistic males or females it will never be.

Edited by Drakonadrgora Darkfold
Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, Drakonadrgora Darkfold said:

its a waste of time and energy to strive for the un-attainable. its better to work on what can be achieved then what cannot be. but go right ahead and waste your time and energy on something that will never exist in the world. false hope is useless and a waste of life. 

true equality is not possible for as long as there is differences in opinion and there always will be between the genders. as long as humans have free will there will be no equality ever. equality cannot be forced. you cannot make others care or believe your beliefs on what is fair or not.

as long as rules exist and laws exist and society exists, there will be gender discrimination, its built in to the human brain and cannot be removed or stopped or changed. 

at the end of the day no one has to care if anyone else thinks anything is unfair. they will still continue to do what they do no matter how much they are complained too or at by anyone.

How is it a waste of time if it still improves our situation? Sure, you might not succeed with what your ultimate goal is, but you'll still make improvements.

One of the most important lessons any of my teachers ever taught me was to dream big. It's something a lot of successful folks will tell you. Don't fear failure, accept the risk and even often the likely chance of it.

Your comment implies that we should also give up on all anti-pollution measures. Because we'll never completely eliminate pollution. There's always going to be accidental leaks, natural disasters, etc that cause pollution of one form or another. The goal is never to fully prevent all forms of pollution, but to minimize and counteract pollution where possible.

It's the same idea with equality. Sure, we may not be able to reach full equality, but we can still work toward it, improve things where able, and try to balance out things where we can't.

I would also strongly argue against the idea that things like gender discrimination are built into the human brain. It's something built into our society and has deep, deep roots, but there's no evidence of our brains being hardwired to think certain ways. If there is, please enlighten me.

28 minutes ago, Drakonadrgora Darkfold said:

short of females taking over the entire world(not going to happen)and forcing men to bow to their will until the men then scream unfair.. equality between genders it just a fantasy. there will always be one side or the other oppressing the other because they can or want too.

 

as long as the human body is sexualized by either gender there is no equality and cannot exist. and yes even women sexualize other women or men. so its not just men that are the problem.

as long as their is objectification of either gender it will never exist.. which means for as long as there are misogynistic males or females it will never be.

What you're describing here isn't equality. It's female superiority. Which isn't something we are talking about at all. But while we're on the subject, feminism is also NOT female superiority.

And, as I mentioned above, even if there are still misogynistic or misandrist men or women, that doesn't mean we can't make efforts to counter balance those thoughts and actions. Nor is it impossible for them to try and actively prohibit their own thoughts.

There's a very lovely song I love from Avenue Q called "Everybody's a little bit racist." And as the song goes, it's true. We're all a little bit racist. But it's actively acknowledging your thoughts and not permitting them to control your behavior or actions. The same goes for sexism and any other type of discrimination. Acknowledging it exists and then finding ways to prevent it from negatively impacting folks is the important part. And maybe you won't be able to stop all of it, but you can at least make efforts to do so where it matters the most.

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Skyler Pancake said:

And maybe you won't be able to stop all of it, but you can at least make efforts to do so where it matters the most.

I applaud your effort and thank you for supporting my campaign to free the female nip, but arguing or trying to reason with is person is futile. They’ve already admitted somewhere pages back that they’re only here to be a contrarian. No matter what stance you take, how you word it, or try to make this person see beyond their edgy little nose, they’ll keep up with the word vomit until you drown in it.

It’s their game. It’s tempting to jump into it because they do excel at being aggravating but it’s ultimately an experience much like banging your head against a brick wall covered with sulphuric acid covered spikes.

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, Beth Macbain said:

I applaud your effort and thank you for supporting my campaign to free the female nip, but arguing or trying to reason with is person is futile. They’ve already admitted somewhere pages back that they’re only here to be a contrarian. No matter what stance you take, how you word it, or try to make this person see beyond their edgy little nose, they’ll keep up with the word vomit until you drown in it.

It’s their game. It’s tempting to jump into it because they do excel at being aggravating but it’s ultimately an experience much like banging your head against a brick wall covered with sulphuric acid covered spikes.

There is always two sides to anything, there is never just one side ever. No matter how much some people may want to think there can be or should be.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

So I have noticed something about this issue, which I have been hesitant to point out, though it does seem to reflect a common attitude regarding images of nipples. I posted a picture of my avatar standing in front of some of my virtual artwork as I was preparing for an art show. In the picture my avatar has all the bits covered but in the virtual painting behind me I am naked. This apparently was totally acceptable. With such an image in RL, one could argue that the real flesh and blood nipples should be covered but the image of nipples made by putting paint on canvas are not real nipples and so can be shown. In SL however that difference does not exist. The only.difference between the nipples on my avi and the nipples on the virtual painting are that the ones on the painting got more post processing. Do we accept the image of the virtual painting because it is art? Isn't every image we create here however art. No one is posting pictures of actual bodies.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Talligurl said:

So I have noticed something about this issue, which I have been hesitant to point out, though it does seem to reflect a common attitude regarding images of nipples. I posted a picture of my avatar standing in front of some of my virtual artwork as I was preparing for an art show. In the picture my avatar has all the bits covered but in the virtual painting behind me I am naked. This apparently was totally acceptable. With such an image in RL, one could argue that the real flesh and blood nipples should be covered but the image of nipples made by putting paint on canvas are not real nipples and so can be shown. In SL however that difference does not exist. The only.difference between the nipples on my avi and the nipples on the virtual painting are that the ones on the painting got more post processing. Do we accept the image of the virtual painting because it is art? Isn't every image we create here however art. No one is posting pictures of actual bodies.

The thing is, your avatar is a virtual you per say, so its not art. its of a virtual living being. where as the painting was not, it was art.

sl avatar = living being because some people do actually try and make their avatar look as close to them in rl as possible. so in that case showing off any bits would be like posting nude photos of their rl self.

just because some want to see everything in sl as just virtual and not real does not mean everyone else does. To some people sl is an extension of their rl self, so everything seen and done is real to them and not just roleplay or virtual to them like others might want it to be seen as.

Link to post
Share on other sites

For me, discussions like this highlight the absurdity of many cultures, including our own. Everyone has a strikingly similar body, we all procreate and poop and pee, but our cultures tell us that we should hide these things and be embarrassed of them. Why? Humans are the only animal with such attitudes. Porpoises, cats, and lemurs aren't embarrassed of their bodies or bodily functions. We don't find dog, rat, or horse nipples offensive or alluring; why should human ones be thought of any differently? If we're OK with giraffes not wearing clothes, why do we think of humans not wearing clothes differently?  Why do we think of our naked selves as "flaunting" rather than just someone washing the dishes or reading a book or getting a drink? I suspect the answer may lay in our inability to control our sexual desires. Sexual desires are a tool of every species' survival, but if buffalo can function without thoughts of screwing blinding them all day, surely we can too.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Waiomao said:

For me, discussions like this highlight the absurdity of many cultures, including our own. Everyone has a strikingly similar body, we all procreate and poop and pee, but our cultures tell us that we should hide these things and be embarrassed of them. Why? Humans are the only animal with such attitudes. Porpoises, cats, and lemurs aren't embarrassed of their bodies or bodily functions. We don't find dog, rat, or horse nipples offensive or alluring; why should human ones be thought of any differently? If we're OK with giraffes not wearing clothes, why do we think of humans not wearing clothes differently?  Why do we think of our naked selves as "flaunting" rather than just someone washing the dishes or reading a book or getting a drink? I suspect the answer may lay in our inability to control our sexual desires. Sexual desires are a tool of every species' survival, but if buffalo can function without thoughts of screwing blinding them all day, surely we can too.

You would think that.. but  unfortunately it is not true for everyone of either gender.  Hence there are common decency laws about what can be seen in public.  Else everyone everywhere would be allowed to walk around totally naked. Top and bottom..regardless of where they were in public.. store..school..work..parks.. etc...

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

12 minutes ago, Drakonadrgora Darkfold said:

work

I am pretty sure OSHA wouldn't allow this and they would not site decency as the reason.

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

 

I am pretty sure OSHA wouldn't allow this and they would not site decency as the reason.

Makes no difference really.. as long as there is any control there will be rules regarding public nudism.  Which means some people will always find showing nipples of females inappropriate.

It would take a complete paradigm shift of human thinking which is not going to happen anywhere soon.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Drakonadrgora Darkfold said:

Makes no difference really.. as long as there is any control there will be rules regarding public nudism.  Which means some people will always find showing nipples of females inappropriate.

It would take a complete paradigm shift of human thinking which is not going to happen anywhere soon.

You took my comment entirely to seriously.

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

You took my comment entirely to seriously.

I took it how the majority of humanity would take it.

I know that osha would site it as safety reasons, and they would be correct in some cases. both because of possible tool harm to the body or other harm.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/7/2020 at 1:53 PM, Talligurl said:

I posted a picture of my avatar standing in front of some of my virtual artwork as I was preparing for an art show. In the picture my avatar has all the bits covered but in the virtual painting behind me I am naked. This apparently was totally acceptable.

   There's a portrait of me and someone that I posted on the forums. Behind us is another picture we did earlier, where I'm eating her out - I think it's an issue of whether the moderators, or someone who gets offended enough to report it, notices it. I'm pretty sure that the moderators aren't actually monitoring all pictures that make it to the forums, that'd be a fulltime job and a half, lol.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
You are about to reply to a thread that has been inactive for 98 days.

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

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...