Celestiall Nightfire

Madelaine McMasters wrote: Imagine how many officers are patrolling YouTube and Craigslist. As often happens, my random wanderings in search of something interesting to add to a conversation brought me to this page from online behavior research firm SimilarWeb... http://blog.similarweb.com/uk-online-porn-ban-web-traffic-analysis-of-britains-porn-affair/ In which I find... UK porn consumption above Worldwide average but Germans take the crown The Worldwide average share of adult traffic is 7.65%, nearly a point below UK (8.50%). Interestingly, Ireland also consumes less adult content than the UK and it’s slightly below the global average with 7.45% share of adult traffic. Stereotypes are bad but Germans take the crown when it comes to porn consumption – 12.47% of their traffic takes place on adult sites. So, Germans are like Baptists and Cats. You know they're having fun, but you can't catch them at it. ;-). Oh my. I guess it's like the religous people who want to stamp out sin, when it's really them who's doing all the bad stuff. (I'm referring to one of the posters in this thread) Amazing that the small country of Germany has that high percent of world-wide porn consumption. Yet...they restrict it to minors...so surely all that porn is being looked at by adults. ; )

Madelaine McMasters wrote: Drake1 Nightfire wrote: Thomas Galbreus wrote: Drake1 Nightfire wrote: Wow... You really took the wrong meaning to this one.. She talks about all of the fun things to do and meeting her RL husband in SL.. By the way.. the quote you decided to use as ammo.. Yeah, that was a quote from the first story you quoted.. The second one was a positive message about SL. No, mentioning this shift from lectures etc. to sex clubs etc. is not from an older article, the only quote from that is the expression "strange second life". And the reporter is speaking here, she has not met her husband in SL. The reporter is interviewing a woman named Judy who has nothing but good things to say about SL.. How is that a negative article? BTW, Judy met her RL husband in SL.. Reading comprehension goes a long way. ETA... when was SL all about lectures? I have been here for 8 years, I don't remember any lectures. I attended NPR Science Friday discussions years ago (they've since left because the audience signal-to-noise ratio was horriffic, and Celestiall often invited me to science lectures, though I don't recall who hosted them. I've never been fond of lectures, I prefer to read, but SL lectures are better than RL lectures, because I can paint my nails during them. Though I admit I never tried doing that in RL, so I might be giving RL lectures a bum rap. Maddy the science lectures I invited you to were the fabulous MICA series! (Meta Institute for cCmputational Astrophysics) and they were more like entertaining science talks, than lectures. We had large turn out each Sat morning for them, and very enjoyable. Here's the archives (with text and audio) if anyone is interested: http://www.mica-vw.org/wiki/index.php/Popular_Talks Now, just this last Friday I started hosting the inworld Science Friday, "listen and discuss" group at the Science Circle and on Sunday the "Naked Scientists" also. (In the Science Circle's sim) A great group (31 people showed up : ) We're in contact with the Science Friday people to see if we can get a direct contact to them, so we have be able to reopen that connection. (Ira Flatow still has his avatar listed in the Science Friday group, but I doubt he personally will be inworld.) I used to go to the old SF episodes inworld too! Such lag! arrgh. *laughing* Here's info for anyone else who is reading this thread and is interesting in dropping by for our science talks and science gatherings (Also info in my Picks) : http://community.secondlife.com/t5/Upcoming-Events-and-Activities/11-AM-SLT-Science-Friday/td-p/2791146 http://community.secondlife.com/t5/Upcoming-Events-and-Activities/10-11-AM-SLT-Naked-Scientists-Radio-Discussion/td-p/2792540

Gavin Hird wrote: Innula, you know equally well as I if a slave in full regalia walks up to you, or a child avatar is pestering you, or a "mentor" stands there boasting their lifestyle, the search setting can be what it wants as the avatar has no adult setting associated with it. Hence they can shove their message or role play inanyone's face as much as they want without consequences regardless how unwanted or inappropriate for the land, venue, setting or event it is. Gavin, quite a few sims in SL have covenants (private sims) where they clearly state things like, "no child avatars" or "no slaves, no bdsm, no gorans, no furries, etc) This is usually enforced too. So, the issue here is really up to the land owners. I also agree with you, in that the people who do "push" their out of the norm lifestyles, avatars, and behavior are a problem. When out and about in SL, I dress according to the environment. (Dressy, professional, roleplay, etc) I loathe seeing obnoxious roleplayers taking their RP into shops, and around SL in general. I'm sure many do it just to get attention, as the behavior smacks of, "look at me!" childishness. But, that is a personal, and immaturity issue, not an issue with the different lifestyles and roleplay options. It's a specific, and small number of people that bahave badly, much like greifers are not representive of the whole.

Pamela Galli wrote: Bottom line is that Second Life is a lot like RL: you get out of it what you put into it. Yup, exactly Pam. (...and we met on the old, old, old SLX forum!....before XStreet even : ) *waves*

Thomas Galbreus wrote: Celestiall Nightfire wrote: I see no reason to ban that which we do not like So do I, but I see a reason to hide porn from minors and to seperate virtual worlds with and without porn content to save the latter from stigma and growth limit. I see no reason to hide porn from minors. Is there anyone in this thread who didn't see porn when they were a minor? (I'd be surprised) Heck, we had a XXX out-door drive-in near where I lived, and people could see the screen from the country roads. *laughing* If parent's don't want their children to see porn, then they need to keep them off the Internet, away from stores, away from friends, and well...society. Gee, that sounds healthy. I don't see any stigma. I think that the articles written about porn and SL only helped it! Hell, LL couldn't buy free press that good. As for growth, the porn helped that too. As for separate worlds....that's not a real world then Thomas, but a fake Disneyland. You want that? Well, I don't.

Thomas Galbreus wrote: Celestiall Nightfire wrote: Why you'd even write the words "murderers" and "evil people" in the same discussion is beyond me. As there's no connection. You don't think evil murderers have a character problem? I meant in the same discussion as BDSM, when there's no connection. You're trying to make an association where there is none. Thomas Galbreus wrote: I didn't say those who suppress in relationships are as bad, I said even murderers can be healthy and happy despite having an even more severe character failure. There is no suppressing. This has nothing to do with murderers. You just completely make **bleep** up. Talk about character failure. Thomas Galbreus wrote: Of course "character" is not a precise scientific category, which makes it a matter of opinion. I think I am free to express my opinions here. Yup, and I'm free to tell you that you're typing ignorant hyperbolic nonsense. Thomas Galbreus wrote: Sounds pretty "vanilla" (seems to be your term for reasonable) then. It's not my term, it's one used by the general public. (Perhaps if you read a little ; ) It also doesn't mean "reasonable", it means without an acknowledged dominant or submissive (or m/s) element in the relationship. Which is rather amusing, as all relationships have those elements. But, most people are not in-tune with themselves, or confident enough to acknowledge it. (I do mean all relationships, as it's in our employment situations, schools, families, friends, etc. ) Thomas Galbreus wrote: Elsewhere you said the most exciting thing for you would be getting dominated by a man, at the same time claiming you were dominant yourself. So now I am confused and don't now whether you are submissive, dominant or reasonable. Well, we do know one thing, you have a reading comprehension problem. *laughs* Go back and read my comment again. ; ) Thomas Galbreus wrote: Doesn't change my point that they scored constantly lower than their "masters". By the way I would prefer a person with a mental health issue over a person with a character issue as a company anytime. Quite a few people don't stay as a submissive, or a dominant. They sometimes change (switch), so your conclusions are off, as at any given point, the scoring, per person could change. (But, all the BDSM people would still score higher than your group. ; ) *Still no character issue with the BDSM people. So, you're actually saying you would prefer a person with a mental health issue over a perfectly nice normal person that you have an irrational prejudice against. Got it. *Repeating a false statement doesn't make it true Thomas.

Thomas Galbreus wrote: By the way, Jo Yardley is one of the poeple who work hard in communicating to the outside world that SL has interesting things to offer that don't comform with the cliché, and I salute her for that. So in that sense she is not "ashamed to mention SL to people". I tried to do that in the past, but not as committed, and gave up because it didn't seem to help the raised eyebrows. She's posted that she was ashamed to mention SL due to the adult content and articles. I've read her comments where she wrote that. But, there are people all over SL who actively work to promote SL, to the larger world, and due so without making negative asides, for the things they don't like. I give them many more Kudos.

Thomas Galbreus wrote: I pointed out several times that I am not against any form of porn, only against porn that I consider an assault on human dignity, like misogynic porn - which sadly is the majority of porn. Concerning that, should it also be painted on some cave wall: Humans have been assaulting human dignity in any imaginable form for thousands of years. Long practise does not mean legitimation. Thomas, it's all in the eyes of the beholder. There's no universal "form of porn" that all will agree is objectionable. So, I shall reject your assessment, as you've posted commentary that I find quite offensive. As such, I don't see you as a valid source for determining objectionable material. Also, I see no reason to ban that which we do not like. If we go that route, where do we stop? By who's definition is content deemed acceptable? So, no....I take a libertarian stance. Let the individual use their free will, to either see, or not see, that which they do not like. This is a virtual world for adults, those who wish to visit "Sanitized World" can go elsewhere. Thomas Galbreus wrote: I consider virtual imitations of erotic activity very dull compared to the real thing. It's not what I'm after in a virtual world at all. Good, then I won't have to eject you from my adult sims. ; ) Thomas Galbreus wrote: You mean I would be an alt of Jo Yardley? I think she is interesting, so I see it as a compliment. Sadly my English is not as fluent as hers, so if you still think I'm her, it is another compliment. Jo lobbied for no porn? Do you have a link? Anyone could be alt of another I suppose. I don't have a link to Jo, but she has repeatedly stated that she's embarrassed to mention SL to people. (Due to the adult content associations and articles) That she doesn't like the "adult" type content in SL, and she goes out of her way to say that she doesn't have that in her sims. (She also implies through her many posts, and comments, that the adult segment of SL is a detriment to SL.) So, all that (In my opinion) is her not so subtle way, of "lobbying" against inworld porn and adult content.

Thomas Galbreus wrote: I did not mean it in the sense of psychological health problems, but see it as a character problem. I don't doubt for a minute that even outright evil people, even murderers, can be healthy and happy. Character problem?! LOL Oh my, you're going off some unsubstantiated prejudices here. (Why you'd even write the words "murderers" and "evil people" in the same discussion is beyond me. As there's no connection. Thomas Galbreus wrote: If someone has the character distortion of finding pleasure in supressing a woman, of course he feels splendid if he finds a victim. And concerning the victim who also feels good about being one: "None are more hopelessly enslaved than those who falsely believe they are free." (Johann Wolfgang von Goethe) Being a dominate isn't about "suppressing" anyone. Nor, is being submissive, equal to being a "victim". Good grief. Now you're clearly showing your ignorance. There's no enslavement, as all are free and equal in the relationship. Thomas Galbreus wrote: The text you linked includes the statement: "These roles showed some links to psychological health, such that dominants tended to score highest in all quarters, submissives lowest and switches in the middle." That supports my thesis that letting someone enslave you is not the wisest of ideas. No, it doesn't. ALL those in the BDSM study scored at least the same or better than people who are classified as "vanilla". You failed to include the full quote: "These roles showed some links to psychological health, such that dominants tended to score highest in all quarters, submissives lowest and switches in the middle. However, submissives never scored lower than vanilla participants on mental health, and frequently scored higher, Wismeijer told LiveScience. Why are using the word, "enslaved"? I can tell you that no one is in that category. (it does illustrate how confused you are in your thinking) Thomas Galbreus wrote: One commentator pointed out: "They did the study by filling out questionaires. On questionaires, it is often those who lie best about themselves who look best. They were not actually studied by psychologists." Of course, if a study doesn't say what you want it too, you'll choose to disregard it. LOL Thomas, you're not showing your logical thinking here yet...when do we get to see it? ; )

Naked Scientists Radio Discussion! Today The Science Circle presents: The Naked Scientists (Radio BBC) Sunday 10 AM - 11 AM SLT Join us for an interesting hour! Discussion and good company! http://maps.secondlife.com/secondlife/Shamash/49/55/22 "For the Love of Science!” (*Note: Avatars need to be clothed, as the sim is Mature ; ) I host this hour of science, discussion, and fellowship. *smiles* Visit, and check out the sim too! There are wonderful nooks, crannies, a pub, and places to gather for talk and relaxation.

Snugs McMasters wrote: Celestiall Nightfire wrote: People involved with BDSM practitioners are actually emotionally healthier than those who are described as "vanilla". http://www.livescience.com/34832-bdsm-healthy-psychology.html From the survey... "BDSM practitioners either did not differ from the general population or if they differed, they always differed in the more favorable direction". Maddy will not be happy to hear this. She's as oppositional as they come. If she can't be different, she's unhappy. And if she can be different, "favorable" is not the direction she chooses. I can't complain. She's steady employment. Perhaps she's got no habenula? Laughing out loud here! ; ) I'm sure Maddy has a *habenula... *it's output is a vital neurotransmitter! ...and if it shrinks one can have depression and memory loss..yikes!

Thomas Galbreus wrote: gobbledygook Hey Thomas, I read quite a few of your comments in this thread, and you've posted some muddled thoughts. 1) Porn is a normal healthy part of real life. Humans have been creating porn for thousands of years, as is demonstrated through the many ancient ruins, preserved ancient societies (Pomeii and the Kama Sutra are good examples), and world-wide phenomena. The fact that we have porn and adult content in SL means that we have normal healthy people here who are sexual beings. That's part of life! Since SL reflects RL, it's a quite healthy and if we didn't have porn and sexual expression here, we have a false projection of humanity. 2) BDSM is also a normal healthy expression of human sexuality. 3) *Women who are "submissive" aren't demeaning themselves, nor is a person who is a "dominant", someone who feels insecure and/or needs to lord their power over others. (You had indicated this in an earlier comment you made) 4) A virtual world without adult content would be very dull indeed, just as real life without sex and adult interactions would be very dull. 5) I think if SL followed your advice, it would shrink on the vine and die. 6) You sure read a lot like Fraulein Jo. (You're against adult content, say you have no *TV, claim to be ashamed to mention SL to people, lobbying for no porn, etc) But, you say you're a man...mmmm? *BTW, I also have no TV, and haven't had one in over ten years. ; )

Thomas Galbreus wrote: Being voluntarily submissive can also be seen as a form of self destruction. Nonsense. I double dog dare you to find a way that my submissive nature is a form of "self destruction". On the contrary, as an Alpha female, my submissive nature only happens when I find that rarest of men....the true Alpha male. It's one of the most deliciously freeing experiences....and expands my mind....as I'm channeling my inner self. I end up stronger, bolstered with a euphoric endorphin rush that is quite remarkable. I think if more women, (and men!) could experience that feeling, we'd have less depression, and less illness, (as immune systems are compromised with depression) and certainly a happier society. When I am experiencing the Yang to my Yin...I grow in strentgh and value. *smiles* Thomas Galbreus wrote: If someone leads a whole life like that, I can't consider it sane. The rest of your comment isn't relevant. As anything could be not sane if done to excess.

Thomas Galbreus wrote: Drake1 Nightfire wrote: When referring to a Master/Mistress slave relation ship it is always M/s. the Master/ Mistress always is referenced first. My goodness, your ego is so fragile that you must not only seek a submissive woman, but you have a crisis if her letter is not smaller than and after yours. LOL. Drake is merely citing what he and some others do. There's no one or right way to write those words. I don't use upper and lower case for denoting dominant or submissive, nor do I care if others do. But, you're way off base with the ridicule here. People involved as BDSM practitioners are actually emotionally healthier than those who are described as "vanilla". http://www.livescience.com/34832-bdsm-healthy-psychology.html (Edited for typo)

3- 5 PM SLT! Swing, & Jazz! ~ The Swamp Jazz Club! Two hours of Retro-Fabulous Swing and Jazz! Get your smooth groove on! Shake and shimmy! Come dance, mingle, or sit and listen. I take requests and dedications. Attire: Retro or Vintage. Join us! http://maps.secondlife.com/secondlife/Mystic%20Valley/36/84/32 This club is a beautiful, funky, jazzy build worth exploring, and home of the Pixel Fusion Band! : )

Dresden Ceriano wrote: Celestiall Nightfire wrote: 3. Can Animals Go Mad? Well this is easy... of course they can. I've seen it happen on this very forum. :matte-motes-silly: ...Dres Hahah...yes. ; )

11 AM SLT! ~ Science Friday! Today we Kick Off with Science Radio on the Shamash sim. I'll host! Science Friday Time: 11 AM - 1 PM PDT (SLT) 1. Ebola Outbreak Continues in West Africa 2. How Ultramarathons Affect the Heart, Blood and Brain 3. Can Animals Go Mad? 4. Trapping Into Musical Memory 5. Can’t Stop Worrying? Blame It on Your Habenula 6. Will Big Data Answer Big Questions on Health http://maps.secondlife.com/secondlife/Shamash/49/55/22 The fabulous weekly get-togethers, for listening, discussing, and enjoying our Science fix! Join us! *smiles*

3- 5 PM SLT! Jazz, Swing, & Rockabilly! ~ The Swamp Jazz Club! Two hours of fab Retro (Rockabilly, Blues, Jazz and Swing)! Get your smooth groove on! Shake and shimmy! Attire: Retro, Vintage, or Rockabilly. Join us! http://maps.secondlife.com/secondlife/Mystic%20Valley/36/84/32 *This club is a beautiful, funky, jazzy build worth exploring, and home of the Pixel Fusion Band! : )

CashNoise777 wrote: As for the future, I am building something big, new, exciting, and completely different in SL. I'm currently using AutoCad software on my friends computer which is awesome. Hey Cash, this sounds good. I'd be interested in hearing if you're using auto-cad for something that will translate/transfer to SL? Also, yes, the creative freedom we have here, it's a revelation. A wonderous thing. *smiles*

6 - 8 AM SLT! Breakfast Blues! I spin the Blues for your morning! Come on over to Toby's, we have the friendliest people and great music. Sit at the bar, dance, or snuggle in the back of the house. Join us! *smiles* http://maps.secondlife.com/secondlife/Tobys%20Juke%20Joint/220/242/21

2 - 4 PM SLT! Celebrate Independence Day! We're doing Day Two of Rebellion Day Celebration! Fireworks! Music! Dancing! As always..clothing optional! and pets...welcome ; ) Join us! (Free party hats and sparklers! : ) A BDSM/Adult sim http://maps.secondlife.com/secondlife/Pleasure%20Bound/58/27/22

Shroom Steinbeck wrote: "Others aren't obligated to live their SL the way you want them to." I never said they had to. But what is the point of being private on a game aimed at being social? Don't get me wrong, I understand the argument. But at the end of the day: My pixels have come to your pixels to say hello. I don't think I am disrupting peoples lives to the point where they have to be so apprehensive. No they don't have to be polite, but is it so hard? But thanks for the reply. You're right. The game isn't the game I enjoyed nearly a decade ago. Shroom, you're taking things too personal. Whether it was in my early days when I wandered into people's houses, or now....if a stranger doesn't want to talk to me...it's cool. Also, there could be many factors involved for the incidents you describe, none which have anything to do with you (personally). I will ask you this though: Have you upgraded your avatar since 2005? Or are you using an avatar that is disconcerting or odd? Some people won't be bothered by this....but many will. An avatar is a visual calling card telling us something about the person. It's important...and the same few seconds of, "make a good impression" also exist in SL. Your profile has it been updated? If so, is it written to be open and friendly? These are the types of things that make a difference. Just like in RL, how you're perceived, goes a long way. One of the keys to life in general, is to not take things personal, but also make an effort to present well. (End of unsolicited advice ; )

I've been enjoying the Sloth Kong series put out by the Tico Times, so thought I'd share it here. : ) http://www.ticotimes.net/2014/06/25/sloth-kong-reigns-costa-rica-conquers-uruguay-england-and-italy-and-tops-group-d http://www.ticotimes.net/2014/06/13/oddsmakers-doubt-that-costa-rica-will-even-score-a-goal-at-the-world-cup http://www.ticotimes.net/2014/06/20/despite-upset-costa-rica-still-getting-no-respect-from-oddsmakers-against-italy http://www.ticotimes.net/2014/06/23/still-no-respect-seriously-winless-england-predicted-by-oddsmakers-to-beat-costa-rica Click each link to see a new Sloth Kong! *laughs*

The Dutch team was promised a TRIP TO SPACE!! if they win the world cup. : ) http://www.whoateallthepies.tv/world_cup/193567/holland-squad-promised-free-trip-into-space-if-they-win-the-world-cup.html http://www.independent.co.uk/sport/football/worldcup/netherlands-vs-mexico-dutch-squad-promised-free-trip-into-space-if-they-win-the-2014-world-cup-9570051.html Personally, I'm in a quandary, as I was rooting for both Netherlands and Costa Rico, and now they play each other in the Quarter finals. Also, the winner of that game could conceivably play USA....arrgh!

OR or Cardboard.....none of these people get it. I don't want to wear something on my head to experience VR. Ugh.