Discrimination rules to be added to TOS?

[Jordyn McGregor]

1 hour ago, Scylla Rhiadra said:

I'lll focus on gender for the moment because it's the most egregious one: there is literally nothing one cannot simulate doing to a woman in SL. You can vivisect her and slow cook her, all the while sexually violating her. You can shoot her in the head or impale her while sodomizing her.

 

Well can you at least be fair and point out that this kind of role play can (and does) go on with men being on the receiving end too.  And whilst we're here, don't forget that the "victims" in question are consenting and can TP out any time without any real physical harm having been done to them.

Do I agree with or condone this type of role play?  Heck no.  I don't get the appeal or think it's sane or would ever in a bazillion years be a part of.  

Shoes go on the other foot too.

[Rowan Amore]

5 minutes ago, Rolig Loon said:

And of course, that's in the forum guidelines too:

No Vulgarity, Profanity, and Sexually Explicit Content: Name calling, using profanity/expletives, or any language that is offensive, violent, pornographic, sexually explicit, or containing hate speech will not be tolerated on the Second Life Forums.

So mixed messages it is.  They disallow sexually explicit content yet not really. 

They still don't allow sexually explicit content in the forums.  Nudity, yes.  Inworld is a whole different story.  They even made a continent just for explicit sexual content (adult).

[Luna Bliss]

1 hour ago, Scylla Rhiadra said:

I'll focus on gender for the moment because it's the most egregious one: there is literally nothing one cannot simulate doing to a woman in SL. You can vivisect her and slow cook her, all the while sexually violating her. You can shoot her in the head or impale her while sodomizing her.

Yeah why is violence against women always accepted under the guise of it being a sexual kink?

[Scylla Rhiadra]

1 hour ago, Innula Zenovka said:

Maybe I phrased my first point poorly.   I had in mind forms of RP where the point is for people to get their kicks by enacting particular sexualised roles, demeaning or degrading though these might be, rather than intentionally to demean or degrade particular groups and to encourage others so to do.   

I suspect it's a mix of the two, based upon what I've seen in descriptions and profiles, but I'll agree that mostly this isn't explicitly intended to attack or belittle another group as a sort of polemic. And I think that a lot of this stuff is sort of badly mangled and distorted BDSM, which is not, by its nature, gendered, but is sometimes played as though it were by those who don't really understand it.

There's also a bit of hair-splitting here, though. If you are racist to someone, perhaps unconsciously even, but don't believe that you are racist or aren't trying to make a point . . . well, you've still been racist.

[Scylla Rhiadra]

1 hour ago, Seicher Rae said:

Actualllllllly, yes, it can be non-consensual, especially with RLV, and there are a lot of jerks out there. And people who have agreed to xyz in a RP have a jerk decide in the middle of it 'I'm also gonna do efg because you're so into it."  If you are someone who immerses, you have now have an emotional assault to deal with. The lines between RL and SL and RP and "real play" can get very blurry.

Of course if that happens, depending on the sim, you a) TP out of there or turn off SL and exit the RLV etc. and b) report the abuse to the sim owners. I assume there are places, though, where "whatever. you're here, you got what you got."

This is a good point. I'm not unaware of it (which is one of the reasons I mentioned coercion), but I didn't want to muddy the waters too much. It's one of those nuanced things that could be the subject of a whole thread to itself. 

Thank you for pointing it out, though.

[Scylla Rhiadra]

49 minutes ago, Jordan Whitt said:

Well can you at least be fair and point out that this kind of role play can (and does) go on with men being on the receiving end too.

It definitely does. In my 2010 exhibit on the subject, I featured a scripted and animated table that allowed a woman to castrate a man. (I used it on my then bf, who was very sweet about it, but none too thrilled. Got a good pic from it though!)

There are of course also groups for male "slaves" and humiliation. On the whole, though, the market for representations of sexual violence is dominated heavily (by a factor of about 1 to 15) by objects and groups/sims that feature a female "victim." (I know this because I've counted.)

You make a very good point in one regard: I don't think LL is any more likely to move against misandry than misogyny, even of there is a lot more of the latter overtly visible.

The take-away is that it's the category of discrimination against gender generally that is pretty meaningless.

56 minutes ago, Jordan Whitt said:

And whilst we're here, don't forget that the "victims" in question are consenting and can TP out any time without any real physical harm having been done to them.

If you read further up in my comments, you'll see that I say both of these things. I explicitly say that there are no real "victims," for instance (although see Seicher's point above). This is also why I'll most often refer to this as representations of sexual violence. It's not "the real thing," nor would I suggest it should be treated as though it were.

 

[Coffee Pancake]

1 hour ago, Rowan Amore said:

You agree that you will not:

(v) Post, display, or transmit Content that is obscene, hateful, involves terrorism, or is racially, ethnically or otherwise objectionable; or

"Obscenity" alone is enough to ban most everything even vaguely adult in SL and leaves it all subject to the whims of the interpreter, the rest is just gilding the Lilly.

 

[Scylla Rhiadra]

1 hour ago, Rowan Amore said:

So mixed messages it is.  They disallow sexually explicit content yet not really. 

They still don't allow sexually explicit content in the forums.  Nudity, yes.  Inworld is a whole different story.  They even made a continent just for explicit sexual content (adult).

And that, put beautifully succinctly, is the overall point I'm making. LL is entirely arbitrary about what in the CS and ToS they permit, and what they don't. A lot of both documents isn't worth the screen real estate it appears on.

On the whole, LL gets it right, I think. But again . . . it's complicated. Which explains the inconsistencies (as well as leaving LL less liable for stuff that does happen here).

 

 

 

[Rowan Amore]

5 minutes ago, Coffee Pancake said:

"Obscenity" alone is enough to ban most everything even vaguely adult in SL and leaves it all subject to the whims of the interpreter, the rest is just gilding the Lilly.

 

Which is kind of my point that goes back to the OP.  Discrimination, especially in regards to your avatar, is not something LL cares about.  They don't even follow their own rule on obscene/explicit content.   If they did, they might as well lock up the doors now.

[Scylla Rhiadra]

51 minutes ago, Luna Bliss said:

Yeah why is violence against women always accepted under the guise of it being a sexual kink?

Because some of it is kink, Luna. The difference between the two, of course, is consent.

[Kalegthepsionicist]

On 8/1/2022 at 10:27 AM, WinnieTheWerewolfPup said:

This has been bugging me for quite some time. I have been playing secondlife for over 3 years now and it boggles my mind that there is rampant discrimination of people simply because of their choice of avatar. People flip their lids if a certain type of avatar shows up and immediately ban said person from events, public sims, and public stores even though the person did nothing wrong other than choosing an avatar that other people dont like.  We all have our opinions but this is starting to get ridiculous that certain avatars cant go practically anywhere because people are "scared of them" or just simply dont like them. that is not how this place is supposed to be. secondlife is supposed to be a fun, nice place to be yet its hostile and discriminatory. ive been waiting for 3 years now and all Linden Labs has done is ban gatchas. because THAT of all things was the biggest problem. So I am asking Linden Labs. when do you all plan to do something about all this racism, discrimination, and intolerance running rampant across SL? Even when we report people that very clearly violate TOS you do nothing. Do you plan on doing anything about this? or are we just going to have to suffer and avoid expressing ourselfs for who we want to be in order to participate in the game? does anyone else agree? Its been getting worse and worse and Linden Labs wont lift a single finger about it. 

+1 for this

👍

[Scylla Rhiadra]

Last point, returning to the OP.

To reiterate: I have never heard a case of a region or parcel owner being compelled to not discriminate for any reason they want.

Has anyone here heard of such a case?

Bottom line, so far as the OP's point is concerned, I think. The rubric against discrimination is utterly meaningless in the context of who can or cannot be banned from a privately owned region or parcel.

[Paul Hexem]

2 hours ago, Scylla Rhiadra said:

But it kind of makes a joke of the language against discrimination in the ToS, doesn't it?

2 hours ago, Seicher Rae said:

It isn't unusual to see in certain places, "humans only" and "no child avatars." ok. But if that sign were to read, "white humans only"??? My logical brain says, if you can say "female only" and "no children" and "nothing with a bento tail" then you should also be able to say "whites only." Ick ick ick.  I'm still leaning towards that (ick) and would never go to such a place. I'm sure the place would be packed. Sigh. 

19 minutes ago, Scylla Rhiadra said:

And that, put beautifully succinctly, is the overall point I'm making. LL is entirely arbitrary about what in the CS and ToS they permit, and what they don't. A lot of both documents isn't worth the screen real estate it appears on.

5 minutes ago, Scylla Rhiadra said:

Last point, returning to the OP.

To reiterate: I have never heard a case of a region or parcel owner being compelled to not discriminate for any reason they want.

Has anyone here heard of such a case?

Bottom line, so far as the OP's point is concerned, I think. The rubric against discrimination is utterly meaningless in the context of who can or cannot be banned from a privately owned region or parcel.

Worth considering- all of LL's discrimination rules are regarding the person, not the avatar.

I can ban all the male avatars I want from my parcel like I said, but if they come back as a busty blonde avatar and tell me I'm amazing, I have no (TOS allowed) way of knowing the difference, unless they tell me. Same applies to any other protected class of person. We have no way of really knowing someone's race or gender unless they inform us. And even then, we don't know for sure.

Granted that adds "I shouldn't have to hide who/what I am" to the debate, but I don't think LL cares about that as much as they care about what they can be sued for.

Edited August 23, 2022 by Paul Hexem

[EliseAnne85]

2 hours ago, Scylla Rhiadra said:

I'll focus on gender for the moment because it's the most egregious one: there is literally nothing one cannot simulate doing to a woman in SL. You can vivisect her and slow cook her, all the while sexually violating her. You can shoot her in the head or impale her while sodomizing her.

I said this before but I'll say it again, for what it's worth...I've come to realize in my older years that men and women really do have different brains.  I don't know too many women; well, actually none who would think of doing the above in a simulation to men avis.

As I've pondered my heterosexual relationships with men in my older years, I feel that some choose the path of cheating on me simply because men need to hunt and they need prey and they need to conquer that prey.  And, sometimes when they conquer it, they no longer want it.  Maybe, it's part of their Id or their ego as the "hunter"...I'm not sure.  Most women don't have those instincts as strong.  However, btw, we are a kind of animal after all is about all I could say in defense of some men's actions (not the above necessarily).  Perhaps, we still need to evolve as humans.  And, perhaps all I've said here is bs and none of what I've written is actually true about men and animalistic behavior.  I've just been pondering it in my older years about men and preying.

Nonetheless, the above is grotesque.  A violent content warning would be appreciated.

And, as far as child avi's.  Kids under 18 are supposed to be in certain areas only, such as G rated sims or whatever it is.  So, I don't see the difference with child avatars being allowed in only certain areas either.

Edited August 23, 2022 by EliseAnne85

[Kalegthepsionicist]

16 minutes ago, EliseAnne85 said:

I said this before but I'll say it again, for what it's worth...I've come to realize in my older years that men and women really do have different brains.  I don't know too many women; well, actually none who would think of doing the above in a simulation to men avis.

As I've pondered my heterosexual relationships with men in my older years, I feel that some choose the path of cheating on me simply because men need to hunt and they need prey and they need to conquer that prey.  And, sometimes when they conquer it, they no longer want it.  Maybe, it's part of their Id or their ego as the "hunter"...I'm not sure. 

nope

is justva horny man that try to find fun. in SL. i found many pervert in SL tbh lol

addicted to sexual acitivity

Edited August 23, 2022 by Kalegthepsionicist

[Scylla Rhiadra]

30 minutes ago, EliseAnne85 said:

I said this before but I'll say it again, for what it's worth...I've come to realize in my older years that men and women really do have different brains.  I don't know too many women; well, actually none who would think of doing the above in a simulation to men avis.

As I've pondered my heterosexual relationships with men in my older years, I feel that some choose the path of cheating on me simply because men need to hunt and they need prey and they need to conquer that prey.  And, sometimes when they conquer it, they no longer want it.  Maybe, it's part of their Id or their ego as the "hunter"...I'm not sure.  Most women don't have those instincts as strong.  However, btw, we are a kind of animal after all is about all I could say in defense of some men's actions (not the above necessarily).  Perhaps, we still need to evolve as humans.  And, perhaps all I've said here is bs and none of what I've written is actually true about men and animalistic behavior.  I've just been pondering it in my older years about men and preying.

Nonetheless, the above is grotesque.  A violent content warning would be appreciated.

And, as far as child avi's.  Kids under 18 are supposed to be in certain areas only, such as G rated sims or whatever it is.  So, I don't see the difference with child avatars being allowed in only certain areas either.

I am extremely reluctant to attribute these kinds of behaviours to anything inherent in the male of the species, for all sorts of reasons. For one thing -- and I really am sorry to hear about your own experiences! -- my own experience of men in my life, both SL and RL, has been overwhelmingly positive. Almost all of the men I know are lovely.

But in general, this kind of "essentialism" -- men are from Mars, for instance, and are "like" this, while women are inherently "like" that -- ignores the enormously important role of culture and socialization in how we become who we are. I think patriarchy (yes, that awful word, sorry!) has distorted masculinity, and repressed men too, albeit in very different ways.

And if we accept that men are the way they are because of their "Y" chromosome, or "evolution," or things like that, then we abandon real hope for change. The same of course is true of women, who historically have been socialized to be, for instance, "nurturing" and "soft." Well, we know that women can be those things, and also strong, smart, capable, and enterprising. Similarly, men can be strong and protective and so forth and also sensitive and even nurturing. I know men who are like this!

I think we've seen positive changes in our understanding and expressions of both masculinity and femininity within my own lifetime -- almost all of them positive. I hope that we can continue with that.

Edited August 23, 2022 by Scylla Rhiadra

[Ceka Cianci]

I just go cold if someone tries to get me to do anything I don't want or try to push a conversation into something more intimate, when we may have started off talking about beaches or mesh heads or photography or whatever..

I don't give a crap what gender they are, it gets really old..

I hate when someone IM's under false pretenses thinking they are going to pull something over on me and get me into a position where I'm gonna feel like they have committed time into me, as if I led them on and owe them some sort of quicky or whatever it is they were after..

If I could biotch slap someone over the internet, it would be for that.

Instead, I just close the IM and go about with what I was doing and act like the IM's aren't dinging anymore..

I'm at the point where, if someone throws hugs or kisses at me, I start saying to myself.. Not this crap, C'mon already.

At the end of the conversation yes, but through out it just makes things very awkward. Just don't.

And call someone by their name.. it's not Baby Sexy, sexy momma hot Mom or anything other than their name.

Going cold in my opinion works better than anything.. as much feed back as it gets when they've figured it out , you would think you shot their puppy.

hehehehe

Vent over

 

[Scylla Rhiadra]

11 minutes ago, Ceka Cianci said:

I'm at the point where, if someone throws hugs or kisses at me, I start saying to myself.. Not this crap, C'mon already.

At the end of the conversation yes, but through out it just makes things very awkward. Just don't.

And call someone by their name.. it's not Baby Sexy, sexy momma hot Mom or anything other than their name.

Yeah. I've dropped a few men friends over the years whom I couldn't convince to stop stuff like this. Their friendship wasn't worth the sense I had of continually fending off their advances, especially as they didn't seem to respect me enough to stop when I asked them to.

On the other hand, I have a male friend who calls me "babe" a lot. He's a conservative Texan, and I suspect it's just his idiom. It's not a come-on, from him -- it's just how he talks. And he's provided abundant evidence, not merely in his words but also in his actions, that he respects me as a person. So . . . I let him to do it. He's worth the tiny bit of aggro it causes me.

Edited August 23, 2022 by Scylla Rhiadra

[Ceka Cianci]

27 minutes ago, Scylla Rhiadra said:

Yeah. I've dropped a few men friends over the years whom I couldn't convince to stop stuff like this. Their friendship wasn't worth the sense I had of continually fending off their advances, especially as they didn't seem to respect me enough to stop when I asked them to.

On the other hand, I have a male friend who calls me "babe" a lot. He's a conservative Texan, and I suspect it's just his idiom. It's not a come-on, from him -- it's just how he talks. And he's provided abundant evidence, not merely in his words but also in his actions, that he respects me as a person. So . . . I let him to do it. He's worth the tiny bit of aggro it causes me.

Ya the whole babe and momma thing and sexy and everything else but my name ,is just from first meetings.. Friends, we give each other nick names and casual names..

Like at work, I didn't care who it was, I called everyone Maynard.. hehehe it was just my way of saying hi.. I get in a mood where I just say Maynard, even to my kids.. They know I'm in a good mood when i call them that. hehehe

The reason I even said anything at all about it was, it's a daily thing.. I've had three of those types of IM's already today and I haven't even left my sim one time today.. I have no idea where these people are finding my name.. lol

I had just gotten out of one and  came in to catch up on threads and seen where the topic was at and felt, Hey I'm there right now!  hehehe

I love getting a little flirty now and then, but I don't think it should be what holds up a friendship.. there needs to be a better foundation than, wow we have good flirt chemistry.. hehehe

 

Edited August 23, 2022 by Ceka Cianci

[Jordyn McGregor]

1 hour ago, Ceka Cianci said:

I called everyone Maynard.. hehehe it was just my way of saying hi.. I get in a mood where I just say Maynard, even to my kids.. They know I'm in a good mood when i call them that. hehehe

I call everyone Fred.  Even my tv is registered as Fred.

[Scylla Rhiadra]

2 hours ago, Ceka Cianci said:

Like at work, I didn't care who it was, I called everyone Maynard.. hehehe it was just my way of saying hi.. I get in a mood where I just say Maynard, even to my kids.. They know I'm in a good mood when i call them that. hehehe

You'll be delighted to know that Maddy signed off tonight by wishing me a "Good night, Maynard."

This is your fault, Ceka.

[Lewis Luminos]

7 hours ago, Seicher Rae said:

Do you ever just send an IM and ask for them to get inline with your dress code? 

Back when my club was still open, this is what I would do. The dress code for events was pretty strictly PG (less so when not during an event) and the same rules would apply to adults as kids - I allowed child avatars if they were appropriately dressed but the moment they said or did anyting sexual I would have banned them (that never actually happened in the whole 9 years). IM first and eject if they don't comply.

Suppose I ran a G-rated or M-rated beach instead, and that avatar turned up... again I would IM. I would give them 30 seconds to teleport away and change their appearance - either wear something more modest on the child av, or keep the same suit and make their av more obviously adult.

Failure to teleport away in time and I would eject and teleport home with another IM to say they can come back when they meet the request.  Only if they came back a second time without changing, then I would eject and ban.

The worry as a land owner is that the presence of sexualised child avatars can be a cause for getting the land closed down and the land owner banned from SL, if a case of a sexualised child avatar is present.  My 30 seconds grace to teleport away is problematic; another visitor could take a snapshot in 30 seconds, then add it to an AR against me saying "look, Lewis allows sexualised child avatars on his beach" and poof, I'm gone. Linden Lab does not investigate. They do not "ban first and ask questions later". They just ban, permanently. 

The last few pages of this thread itself have proved that different people have different opinions of what counts as sexualsed. Most land owners (myself included) don't really know for sure what counts as "too much". And that, combined with the prevalence of avatars which are, according to their profiles, supposed to be 18+ but they look more like 14, well it's hardly surprising that some venues ban child avatars altogether.  It's the only way the land owners can be 100% sure to be safe from a false AR.

Another factor also shows itself in this thread - the number of customers who will themselves teleport away and never come back if the land owner allows child avatars, even if the kids are appropriately dressed and fully compliant with the TOS. The number of customers who do this far outweighs the number who actually have child avatars, so it also makes economic sense to ban the child avatars and keep the rest.

I allowed furries in my club too, (appropriately dressed) and I once got a snotty IM from a customer who said that it proved my club was clearly not the classy kind of place she wanted to be seen at. Even though the furry in question was fully appropriately dressed in the same formal wear as everyone else.  I sent the snotty customer a LM to Frank's and said that would suit her better. 😁

[Love Zhaoying]

12 hours ago, Seicher Rae said:

1) I haven't read this thread since way back in the beginning when I posted and we were still kinda sort discussing the OP, which I forget what it is! :::squirrel!:::

You didn't miss much. The OP never came back. The topic is all over the place. The usual suspects post "edgy" pictures and "controversial" things. And it keeps going. 

[belindacarson]

9 hours ago, Cate Foulsbane said:

My partner and I own two parcels devoted to sailing activities...both are open to the public. I can't be in both places 24/7 but visit regularly to check for debris, etc. If I see an avie looking like the one mentioned/shown, I ban. It is my judgement that the clothing is not appropriate, it's my place, I'm the boss, I can do what I want. Same goes for avies that show up with a slave in chains or leashed...out, gone, presto. I don't advocate LL banning everything I don't like, but I do think I have a right to keep my own places free from things that are disturbing to me. My partner agrees.

Finally a common sense posting on here ^^

[pizza7]

9 hours ago, Cate Foulsbane said:

My partner and I own two parcels devoted to sailing activities...both are open to the public. I can't be in both places 24/7 but visit regularly to check for debris, etc. If I see an avie looking like the one mentioned/shown, I ban. It is my judgement that the clothing is not appropriate, it's my place, I'm the boss, I can do what I want. Same goes for avies that show up with a slave in chains or leashed...out, gone, presto. I don't advocate LL banning everything I don't like, but I do think I have a right to keep my own places free from things that are disturbing to me. My partner agrees.

this is what i would call, typical Putin behaviour, i dont like it, ban. sorry, but i tend to be outspoken.