Scylla Rhiadra

If you promise to poke me in the ribs whenever I appear to be too blasé or unfeeling about the travails and hardships of our juniors, I'll promise to do the same to you. (Unless there's somewhere else you'd prefer to be poked, of course.) Deal?

The government is an illusion, as you'll see if you just take this red pill. All there really is, is Maddy. Everywhere. All the time.

Well, arguably "feelings" are pretty much the main appeal and point of a virtual world like Second Life, no? And if our experiences of those didn't feel very "real" indeed, none of us would likely be here at all. But yes, thank you for the reminder: no one is actually being dismembered at the neighbourhood dolcet sim. I don't mean to pick on you, James: your response is actually a fairly moderate and reasonable one, and I apologize if I seem to be singling you out. But I find it odd how the moral panic that sometimes seems to arise when anyone critiques the ethical implications or social impact of content in SL (and most especially sexual content) invariably takes three forms: A reminder that what we see in SL "isn't real," which is often framed in terms such as "You can't actually be raped in SL, you know!" Well, duh. The suggestion that really it would be much better for everyone if we just ignored the stuff we found problematic here because . . . well, just because. But for god's sake, stop talking about it where people may read it. The accusation that what any critique is really trying to achieve is a sort of puritanical or PC censorship of all those precious rape sims out there. And yet, no one here is suggesting any such thing. Chill, people. We're not stupid: we know the difference between "real" and "virtual." And we're not trying to take away your toys. We're just discussing the implications and meanings of these things. You're welcome to join in and disagree: in fact, I've learned heaps over the years from people who did just that/ (Tolya, where are you when I need you!!). But let's all start from the assumption that we are all reasonably intelligent, open-minded people who are exploring the many bizarre facets of this weird new thing, virtual worlds, together.

Who are you going to believe, Maddy or Wikileaks? Or you could just wait until Robert Mueller has published the full results of his inquiry.

Hmmm. Szavanna isn't ringing any bells (although maybe it should), but I certainly knew Medora and Junivers, although not especially well. I worked most with millay Freschi, and a bit with Trill Zapatero and Any1 Gynoid as well, but I was really only on the periphery of Four Bridges and that community. They did host an information centre about sexual abuse that I built, and the 16 Days of Activism against Gender Violence that I helped organize in 2010 (almost exactly 7 years ago. YEESH!). Mostly I helped run two feminist groups, and a socialist umbrella group called the SLLU. Oh, and I owned and operated a woman's bookstore in-world for about 4 years. I ended my activism (and indeed most of my activity in-world) about 6 years ago though. I got kind of burned out, and RL started getting very busy at the same time. Cool, though, that we were running in more-or-less the same circles. Perhaps we were at a party together and even chatted briefly!

I've written and spoken a fair bit in my time about representations of sexual violence in SL, but I'll admit I've never thought of this particular issue before. Trigger warnings for extreme content are pretty important, and not infrequently used, but that's usually with people who are themselves victims of violence in mind. When I was in my 20s, a good friend of mine killed himself in a particularly nasty way. It was at least a year before I could watch a movie with anything like graphic violence in it without feeling physically ill, so I get where your panic was coming from. I'm so very sorry you experienced that! I think that forums and bulletin boards -- and sometimes even simple social media platforms -- can encourage a certain kind of aggressiveness, particularly where there is a strong sense of "community" or "coterie" that seems to license aggressive behaviour. There were times when I frequented this place, a number of years ago, when it was largely unpoliced by mods, and could get very nasty, especially to newcomers. In such cases, it doesn't matter how calm and collected you are: until you are seen as a "participant" or even "member," rather than as an interloper: there's a likelihood that a few, at least, will take issue to your entrance upon the scene. So don't blame yourself: I thought you sounded very calm and reasoned. This is very cool (as is the rest of your story)! I was working with a few inline NPGs like Amnesty International Online and Four Bridges Project at about that time and after. I wonder if we had overlapping circles of friends and colleagues? And if she invites you to join her Top Secret Society, "The Ladies Who Lunch," be especially wary! They were responsible for all sorts of mischief, including the Kennedy assassination, the faked moon landings, 9/11, and Donald Trump.

I'm entirely unsurprised, because these things are general throughout our culture. It's impossible not to be infected by them. I know that in my field it's frequently the older, established women who are the least likely to serve as allies or mentors for younger women. It's weird, but probably easily explicable on a psychological level? Oh, I'll never manage to rid myself of it, and I don't really try. Mostly, I just work to ensure that my biases and prejudices aren't expressed in my everyday interactions with people; in that sense, it's nothing more than an extension of my desire to be, well, a "nice person." Feminism asserted a half century ago that "the personal is political," and I believe that's true in this way also: making a "real difference" is most effectively done in treating other people well, regardless of who they are.

Oh, agreed. I don't think it's going to stop me from doing it. Fear is a powerful motivating force. But it does sadden me.

Yes, this, totally. Sometimes I worry that I'm over-solicitous in my sensitivities to discrimination. Not every "victim" wants to be identified as such: in fact, most don't because it's disempowering. I try to be "positive" in response to the garbage I see happening around me, but mostly I'm cautious because I don't think other people want me to tell their stories for them. There's another odd effect too. Like many (most?) women, I can feel nervous or even afraid in certain contexts, and I've occasionally (rarely, but still . . .) done the key-clutching thing at night while crossing dark parking lots and such. I remember on one occasion thinking, as a guy who was walking behind me on the sidewalk passed me hurriedly, that my nervousness and unease was, in some ways, another form of gendered discrimination: I was assuming that the mere fact that he was a male made him at least a potential threat. It made me think about ways in which I was guilty of sexist stereotypes. And wonder if he noticed my discomfort, and felt belittled or insulted or upset by it?

Right now, there may well be someone whose fingers are trembling over the keyboard, itching to type "Libtard," or "PC," or something equally dismissive in response to some of these posts. But your point is exactly right: that's not a tendency that's limited to the Right. I have many progressive friends who will dismiss out of hand pronouncements with which they disagree by labeling the source a "fascist," or "conservative." Identifying a cultural tendency -- Alabama does have a distinctive political culture that is very conservative; progressives sometimes do have a tendency to want to shut down debate through reference to a form of self-defined ethical superiority -- is one thing. Dismissing individuals by simply identifying them as part of cultural stereotype is stupid, lazy, and intellectually dishonest, whether it's coming from the Left or the Right.

I'm not sure that "evil motives" or "racist intent" have much to do with it. The point of culturally-induced racism (or sexism, or homophobia, or whatever) is that it's embedded in the way that we think, and is most frequently unconscious. Someone who clutches her purse a little tighter when a man of colour walks by isn't necessarily responding consciously or with "intent," and certainly not with "evil motives," but it is racist nonetheless. I think, myself, that limiting one's concerns to those with "evil motives or racist intent -- NeoNazis, for instance, or members of the KKK -- is in some ways a form of avoidance, because they are easy and identifiable targets. Most of us don't have to think very hard to condemn outright racists (unless, apparently, one is the President of the US?), and it generally requires, I assume, little in the way of self-reflection. In fact, that kind of "anti-racist" action is very reassuring: we can feel good about ourselves because we don't wear white hoods or have swastikas tattooed on our arms. The most pervasive, insidious, and ultimately dangerous kind of racism isn't signaled by flags, or placards, or memes, or fascist signs: it's unconscious, built into the assumptions we were educated to accept. And it's in all of us (yes, even me). Maybe "virtue" doesn't reside in not "being racist," but rather in KNOWING that one is racist, and consciously correcting that tendency through self-reflection and acts of generosity, kindness, and inclusivity? In that context, some might argue that any kind of "race bending" (or interracial role play) is bound, almost by definition, to be racist, even if that is not the intent, because in representing others we are enacting and reinforcing our own unconscious stereotypes. We are telling others what they are "really" like, in our own minds. That's why we try (or should try) to avoid things like kiddie Hallowe'en costumes that represent stereotypical "Indians," or "Chinese," or "Gypsy." I don't think we worry that the kids wearing these have evil motives or racist intent. But they are reinforcing and imposing upon others racist stereotypes without even knowing it.

Oh dear god. Where's the "facepalm" emoji when I need it? (Actually, seriously, where is the "facepalm" emoji???? It would be so useful!!) It's typical that I managed to master at a minimum level of competence so many things in SL, but was continually defeated by the simplest things. And, invariably of course, at the worst possible times. I'm sure you must have many other embarrassing memories of me: I committed more than a few idiocies here in my time. It is actually generous of you to offer them as a shared giggle, rather than hold them over my head as decent blackmail material. Then my work here is done! /me wipes her hands with self-satisfaction, and turns to make a dramatic exit, walking into a glass door in the process. Yeah, but only the ones who don't actually know me! Really, I'm only going to be remembered as the incompetent who sent a small gathering of earnest do-gooders and SJWs plummeting to their deaths from a height of 600 metres. And I'm good with that, actually.

It's almost worth the experiment . . .

Oh, Dillon . . . I'm sooooooo pathetically predictable, aren't I? So easy to bait. Actually, I was really most attracted to this thread by the concept of what (for want of an easier term) one might term "race bending," because, as a committed immersionist (at least in theory, if not in practice), I am uncomfortable with the idea. But I instead found myself tripped up (and frankly kind of horrified) by this "rodeo f***ing" thing. I'm still not sure if it's a real practice, or just a bit of idiocy dreamed up years ago on Something Awful or 4Chan. It's hard to believe it would actually work as described, to be honest. Anyway, to a humourless Feminazi such as myself, it's like waving a red flag at a bull. But (to return the compliment), if my appearance here accomplishes nothing more than affording me the opportunity to hear from you, then it was time well wasted!

Well, yeah. Precisely. What did you think I meant? I should have thought that was rather obvious. Assuming that this is NOT consensual role play (i.e., your partner isn't just pretending, by mutual consent and knowledge, to be outraged), then she clearly wants you off her. In other words, she's withdrawn her consent. And if you don't oblige, well . . . that's pretty much the definition of rape, actually.

I first started posting here -- well, not "here," technically, but in the ancient General Discussion forums about 9(?) years ago -- on this very subject. It did not go well. That was in part probably because I was not, initially at least, as "open minded and reasonable" as you on the subject. I was here to make a point and there was, somewhat unsurprisingly in hindsight, some very vocal resentment about my lecturing at people. But, as they say these days, I persevered. And in the process, I learned an awful lot -- not from the dismissive or angry ones who quoted the TOS at me, or deliberately misread my comments to score points, but from those who sensed that, somewhere buried beneath the apparently uptight feminist polemicist, there was someone who was actually interested in learning and listening. So I made slowly made friends with many people who, bizarrely enough, disagreed with me -- including more than one Dom, a couple of Goreans, and more than a few *ack* Republicans. They helped me see their perspective, and understand the issues much more broadly. And, I flatter myself, I did the same for them. The experience of talking these issues out over several years both here and in-world did not change my overall view -- I remain a bleeding heart progressive and unrepentant feminist -- but it did educate me and make my understanding of the issues much more nuanced and (I hope) generous and open than they had been. So, when I created an in-world exhibit on depictions of sexual violence in Second Life, I tried not to use it to harangue or scold. I wanted it to educate residents who, like yourself, didn't really know the range of this kind of material available, but I also wanted to ask a question (which also in part formed the title of my exhibit) of those who engaged in role play of extreme sexual violence: Why does this turn you on? I don't know that I ever got a completely straight answer to that, but the point was not to yell "J'accuse!," but rather to enjoin dialogue and discussion. (Not everyone thought that's what I was doing, however). Anyway, enough. Most people, I firmly believe, are pretty nice and welcoming. I hope you find these, and have a smoother and happier entry into the community here than I did. But even if you don't, if you persevere, they will find you. I have never regretted entering this community, even when things got "hot," and I know you won't either. PS. Watch out for that Madelaine McMasters person, and her evil henchperson, Snugs. They're both insidiously and dangerously kind and funny. And if they ever send you a TP in-world, DON'T ACCEPT IT!!!!! You'll get burned for certain.

Drake, that sounds rather sad! One of the reasons I've never given D/s a serious try is that I know I'd be doubled over with laughter 30 seconds in.

Maddy, you are as always a model of generosity, restraint, and common sense. Gosh, this thread brings back such memories! It's a bit like an acid flashback. Or, you know, ghost pain in a severed limb . . . I agree with most of what you say above, but I wonder if this need necessarily be about "disapproval"? Is it not sufficient to raise the issue because it's complicated (pace Solar, above, who says it's "simple"), interesting, and somewhat potentially problematic? Or is it simply impossible to discuss behaviour, even virtual behaviour, in a disinterested way? I myself am looooong past being "offended" by Gore, Dolcet, snuff, etc., in the sense of a personal, emotional response -- maybe as the result of a kind of desensitization? -- but the issues raised here are still intellectually interesting and do have possible social and ethical implications. AshaShanti, I'm not here very often anymore, but I'd like to echo what Maddy says: you should stick around. And don't be afraid to ask the difficult questions. You'll get burned at first, but when people come to realize that you are, as you certainly seem to be, an open minded and reasonable person, you will be accepted. (I can speak from personal experience on this!)

Sorry, BilliJo. I should have been clearer: I caught that you were being "jokey," and wasn't suggesting that you were seriously advocating this. I was speaking of the thing itself. Is this an actual "thing"? Or is it just an edgy 4Chan-ish meme? Because, if the former (remembering again that I'm not talking about role play, or SL), then surely it really is a form of rape. Sorry, I know this is a derail of what is, in some regards, a very interesting and problematic thread. Just curious, really.

Hmm. Somehow I've managed to miss this variation before. Assuming that we're talking RL rather than SL, and that it's not consensual role play (which would surely defeat the point), how is this not rape?

I was sure that this was going to be a thread about virtual birth control methods. Sooooooo disappointed.

Great advice, actually. But very uncomfortable. Actually, one of the interesting things about starting again with Laskya was having to find, and try to integrate myself into, new communities in-world. It proved more difficult than I'd thought, although I did find one club that wasn't too bad.

Yep. Of course, it's not just this particular version of the forum that does that, or even just SL forums. It's a pretty common thing, I think. Communities are happy to absorb people who "they" judge not to represent a threat to an established social order, but not so good at accepting people who are obviously different, because such people can change the entire dynamic. And, too, one way to define a "community" is by exclusion. Being ultra-judgemental about someone is one way of drawing the line between who's in, and who's out. It's sad and unfortunate, because all communities need new blood, and new perspectives, or they become echo chambers. At various different times that I've been around, the forums have devolved into that: self-obsessed, cliquey, and unwelcoming.

An interesting perspective, which seems to me to sort of straddle the augmentationist / immersionist line . . . or maybe complicate it, which is probably a good thing. I take your point about SL functioning as a mirror, but with this caveat: I don't think I possess a single identity. I think I am different -- sometimes very different -- in different contexts, and Second Life is no exception to that. Indeed, I'd say I have multiple Second Life identities, or even multiple forum identities, not just in the obvious "OMG SHE HAS ALTS" kind of way, but in the sense that I take on different voices here according to context. I've actually really noticed this about myself on occasion: sometimes, for instance, I'm really earnest and serious and . . . prolix and boring? And sometimes I'm playful and a bit idiotic. That's just two; there are variations. It's not, obviously, that those different identities are not all recognizably "me," because I think they are. But they constitute not just different ways of writing, but different ways of responding and, often, actually thinking about stuff. Sexuality in SL is a particularly intriguing subject because I think it's such an important part of why many people are here, and it often becomes a really important element of self-expression and identity-creation. A really large percentage of residents, I suspect, are sexually quite different here than they are in RL, sometimes subtly (as in your own case as you describe it), but, obviously, sometimes very radically. Gender-bending, experimentation, and so forth are the obvious things. I've known so many people who were "gay" only in Second Life. And a lot of it is about fantasy, obviously. But that all varies from person to person. In any case, I think it's more complicated than "I can do stuff here I wouldn't do in RL." I think, more fundamentally, "I can BE a different self here than I am in RL." So, if you are more open about sexuality, talking sex, and so on here, it's not so much because you are "hidden" here: you have become someone different, by the very process of acting differently. You are performing a new self. (The above is probably an example of me in full-flight "Earnest and Boring" mode, btw.)

Oh good Lord. I feel absolutely ancient. PS. IBTL