Newcomer/Oldtimer Engagement and Rapprochement

Here you might discuss basically everything.

Moderator: SC Moderators

Beathan
Forum Wizard
Forum Wizard
Posts: 1364
Joined: Sun Oct 29, 2006 3:42 pm

Newcomer/Oldtimer Engagement and Rapprochement

Post by Beathan »

This is moved from a posting in the CARE group. It is intended to address several problems which have been highlighted in these forum discussions or in inworld conversations I have had with other citizens.

However, I will observe that this whole mess about CARE being organizedin an unconstitutional way -- along with the mess concerning the Judiciary Act -- are both symptomatic of serious problems with new-comer aggressiveness. The CDS is an open community -- and an inviting one. However, it is also a longstanding one, with its own history, networks of relationships, and developed ethos. It is unwise and harmful for newcomers to come in and do what they want before they have integrated themselves into the community, learning at a minimum the social rules that govern their political goals. We should not create a second-class citizen status for newcomers -- but, at the same time, newcomers should act with proper circumspection and not make bold moves before they have learned the lay of the land. Unnecessary tensions, even hostilities, even feelings of exploitation, result if newcomers do too much too soon with too little information.

However, the fault here does not just rest with newcomers. I have found that I had to make noise and draw attention to myself to receive the attention of longtime residents who could show me the lay of the land. I have spoken to several other newcomers who have not made nuisances of themselves, and they have said that they feel rather neglected -- left unregarded in their lonely houses. We can and should do better than this. We need a process to draw the community together inworld -- at publicized social meetings without a political agenda that forces the kind of debate that turns many people off.

The Simplicity Party has proposed that we plan sim-specific social calendars based on sim theme. I think that the activities we would schedule through such a process are just what the doctor ordered.

Beathan

Let's keep things simple enough to be fair, substantive enough to be effective, and insightful enough to be good.
michelmanen
I need a hobby
I need a hobby
Posts: 812
Joined: Sun Nov 19, 2006 2:53 am

CARE Openness&Inclusivity Rules irk Simplicity Party Mem

Post by michelmanen »

Beathan,

You wrote:
[quote:2obtzsmf]
I will observe that this whole mess about CARE being organizedin an unconstitutional way...[/quote:2obtzsmf]

It is fascinating to see that you have appointed yourself as judge, jury and executioner. We are not aware of any official CDS body having held open and public hearings on this, having issued any rulings, having given any directives. Until and unless this happens, CARE will continue to pursue its vision, mission, and goals, recruit new members, and field candidates for the RA elections, regardless of what you may or may not find to your taste.

MM

Flyingroc Chung
Passionate Protagonist
Passionate Protagonist
Posts: 198
Joined: Thu May 25, 2006 2:55 pm
Contact:

Re: CARE Openness&Inclusivity Rules irk Simplicity Party

Post by Flyingroc Chung »

[quote:zgdspeyq]
...and field candidates for the RA elections...
[/quote:zgdspeyq]

Isn't it too late for that?

User avatar
Carolyn Saarinen
Seasoned debater
Seasoned debater
Posts: 90
Joined: Sun Dec 03, 2006 2:12 pm

Re: Newcomer/Oldtimer Engagement and Rapprochement

Post by Carolyn Saarinen »

[quote="Beathan":cs7wv90o]The CDS is an open community -- and an inviting one. However, it is also a longstanding one, with its own history, networks of relationships, and developed ethos. It is unwise and harmful for newcomers to come in and do what they want before they have integrated themselves into the community
Beathan[/quote:cs7wv90o]

I'm both a newcomer and - at least presently - a member of CARE. I am a member of CARE principally because it is the only CDS faction that has so far given me the time of day. Persons wishing to help me integrate into the community would be most welcome. Perhaps they could follow CARE's example by acknowledging my existence?

Oh, and a hint to faction leaders: Public expressions of your disgust for my sexual orientation will not win you my vote, and I [i:cs7wv90o]do[/i:cs7wv90o] vote.

User avatar
Aliasi Stonebender
I need a hobby
I need a hobby
Posts: 586
Joined: Fri May 26, 2006 12:58 pm

Re: Newcomer/Oldtimer Engagement and Rapprochement

Post by Aliasi Stonebender »

[quote="Carolyn Saarinen":15kaucxl]
Oh, and a hint to faction leaders: Public expressions of your disgust for my sexual orientation will not win you my vote, and I [i:15kaucxl]do[/i:15kaucxl] vote.[/quote:15kaucxl]

Has ever been made? I believe the closest I've ever come, m'self, is open distain of Gor and all it entails, and that's limited to those who take the whole thing as a serious philosophy and ideal method of living (as opposed to a roleplaying exercise).

Member of the Scientific Council and board moderator.
Beathan
Forum Wizard
Forum Wizard
Posts: 1364
Joined: Sun Oct 29, 2006 3:42 pm

Post by Beathan »

Carolyn wrote [quote:3vhko9ip]I'm both a newcomer and - at least presently - a member of CARE. I am a member of CARE principally because it is the only CDS faction that has so far given me the time of day. Persons wishing to help me integrate into the community would be most welcome. Perhaps they could follow CARE's example by acknowledging my existence? [/quote:3vhko9ip]

This is the very problem I was trying to draw attention to. I agree it is a problem. I have heard it cited as such by other newcomers (I am one as well) who are not as pushy as I am. I think that we need, as a community, to do better than we are at having community functions to bring us all together to meet and talk to each other.

With regard to your sexual orientation -- which, I take it, is submissive -- I have nothing against it. I have been the dom in a RL d/s relationship -- and found that I believed myself unworthy of the honor. However, I understand that there is something noble in the interaction -- provided there is real worthiness in the people in it.

That said, I do have concerns about such things as a general rule. My concerns actually mirror my concerns about the Judiciary Act and the legal elitism of CARE. I don't think lawyers are worthy of such power just because they are lawyers. Similarly, I think it takes an exceptional person to be worthy of the dom position in a d/s relationship. I will grant that giving power to the right person is the right thing to do -- in politics and in life -- but if there is any doubt whatever about the rightness of person, power must be withheld or only granted with reservations (or safe words).

I tend to refer to Goreans as examples for two reasons. First, along with Furries, Goreans are probably the dominant (or at least most visible) SL culture. Second, it is a culture based on a power dynamic -- and on the distribution of power among members of the culture. The CDS is actually a similar project. Both Gorean culture and CDS culture provide mechanisms for determining and distributing power among participants in the culture.

However, the assumptions and bases of power distribution are very different -- even based on conflicting assumptions. For this reason, I do tend to use Goreans as an example -- or thought experiment -- in some of my discussions because I think there is a ready accessible contrast in the comparison. I do no mean it as a form of disparagement -- but as a rhetorical contrast -- much as Jesus referred to Samaritans in some of his parables. In fact, I am on record -- in some of my discussions on emergence and acceptance of culture -- of suggesting that we include (or at least that we could include) entire sims of Goreans without losing the coherence of our state.

I also note that I have personally gone out of my way to meet and greet people in CN (and, to a lesser extent, in NF). I don't tend to send blind IMs to people who happen to be on the CDS citizen list merely because they are on that list. I tend not to start conversations, except face-to-face conversations, with people I have not met. I don't believe that I have had the pleasure of meeting Carolyn -- or most CARE members -- inworld yet, but I will keep my eyes peeled and will continue to try to get to know every CDS citizen who cares to get to know me.

Beathan

Let's keep things simple enough to be fair, substantive enough to be effective, and insightful enough to be good.
User avatar
Carolyn Saarinen
Seasoned debater
Seasoned debater
Posts: 90
Joined: Sun Dec 03, 2006 2:12 pm

Re: Newcomer/Oldtimer Engagement and Rapprochement

Post by Carolyn Saarinen »

[quote="Aliasi Stonebender":zvl53imu][quote="Carolyn Saarinen":zvl53imu]
Oh, and a hint to faction leaders: Public expressions of your disgust for my sexual orientation will not win you my vote, and I [i:zvl53imu]do[/i:zvl53imu] vote.[/quote:zvl53imu]

Has ever been made? I believe the closest I've ever come, m'self, is open distain of Gor and all it entails, and that's limited to those who take the whole thing as a serious philosophy and ideal method of living (as opposed to a roleplaying exercise).[/quote:zvl53imu]

How interesting that you assume that I was referring to you, and such a quick response too! Let's consider:

[quote="Aliasi Stonebender":zvl53imu]There were slaves in ancient Rome; should we now welcome all Goreans and hardcore D/s lifestylers?[/quote:zvl53imu]

[url:zvl53imu]http://forums.neufreistadt.info/viewtop ... e&start=15[/url:zvl53imu]

[quote="Aliasi Stonebender":zvl53imu]I... find the mentality personally disgusting[/quote:zvl53imu]

[url:zvl53imu]http://forums.neufreistadt.info/viewtop ... e&start=30[/url:zvl53imu]

I see no qualification in your original remarks stating that you restrict your predjudice to a specific minority of Goreans. Do you also find homosexuals 'personally disgusting' ? How about ethnic minorities? And whether you do or not, what part of the CDS Constitution appoints you as the cop in my bedroom?

User avatar
Carolyn Saarinen
Seasoned debater
Seasoned debater
Posts: 90
Joined: Sun Dec 03, 2006 2:12 pm

Post by Carolyn Saarinen »

[i:3cqd0vv9]Two[/i:3cqd0vv9] swift responses in fact. I have a distinct sense of being double-teamed.:)

[quote="Beathan":3cqd0vv9]
With regard to your sexual orientation -- which, I take it, is submissive -- I have nothing against it. [/quote:3cqd0vv9]

Big of you. I'm a Domme. Hence not a Gorean. If you'd met me you'd know that of course.

In addition, the two people who first welcomed me to CN, offered me help and showed me around were both Furries. Perhaps what CDS needs is not just more of us weirdos, but wierdos in office?

User avatar
Sleazy_Writer
Master Word Wielder
Master Word Wielder
Posts: 429
Joined: Wed Dec 06, 2006 6:38 am

Post by Sleazy_Writer »

This is an interesting new discussion!

[quote="Aliasi Stonebender":1doscpm1]There were slaves in ancient Rome; should we now welcome all [...] hardcore D/s lifestylers?[/quote:1doscpm1]

Doesn't that depend on *how* hardcore a person is?
*Too* hardcore can be criminal :D

[quote="Carolyn Saarinen":1doscpm1]What part of the CDS Constitution appoints you as the cop in my bedroom?[/quote:1doscpm1]

It's not in the constitution, but if you look closely you'll find it at the bottom of that new 100 page judicial document (in small letters).

[quote="Carolyn Saarinen":1doscpm1]Perhaps what CDS needs is not just more of us weirdos, but wierdos in office?[/quote:1doscpm1]

Or perhaps we could make our current officials more furry.
Like give our chief judge Ashcroft a furry outfit and make him walk around in it at least once a week. :D

Diderot Mirabeau
Master Word Wielder
Master Word Wielder
Posts: 453
Joined: Thu Jun 01, 2006 6:28 am

Post by Diderot Mirabeau »

[quote="TOPgenosse":1x9eimc9]Or perhaps we could make our current officials more furry.Like give our chief judge Ashcroft a furry outfit and make him walk around in it at least once a week. :D[/quote:1x9eimc9]
I suggest a white rabbit costume. It would go well with the powdered wig.

User avatar
Patroklus Murakami
Forum Wizard
Forum Wizard
Posts: 1929
Joined: Fri Jun 02, 2006 5:54 pm

Re: Newcomer/Oldtimer Engagement and Rapprochement

Post by Patroklus Murakami »

[quote="Carolyn Saarinen":245zwoj6]Oh, and a hint to faction leaders: Public expressions of your disgust for my sexual orientation will not win you my vote, and I [i:245zwoj6]do[/i:245zwoj6] vote.[/quote:245zwoj6]This issue seems to have taken over so I'll address it first before going on to the subject of the thread.

First of all, welcome to our community:) I haven't had the pleasure to talk inworld (though I think you were at the CARE launch I attended) but I look forward to the opportunity.

It's become clearer later on in this thread what you meant by 'disgust for my sexual orientation'. I think we need to separate out opinion from attempts to police people's private lives. I don't agree that holding an opinion about d/s inevitable involves an attempt to be the cop in anyone's bedroom. Personally, I couldn't care less what you, or anyone else, gets up to in the privacy of your own bedrooms. I might find it distasteful, sexy, disturbing, horny or none of the above but I don't want to hear about it or be drawn into it in any way (and I would like that choice to be respected). So, I won't tolerate being addressed as 'Master' by anybody or being told I can only speak to people 'respectfully' or spell certain words a certain way (capital D for d/s for example). I am perfectly civil to people who are d/s enthusiasts who rent shop space from me in Orient but, my shops are PG only and I won't tolerate bdsm items to be sold (or weapons and other items I don't approve of). That's my choice.

I'm uncomfortable with your connection of d/s and homosexuality. I don't think they're the same thing and acceptance of the diversity of sexual orientation including same-sex and opposite-sex relations does not mean one has to accept power relations based on dominance and submission. There is a perfectly valid set of objections to d/s based on moral, ethical and political grounds. No one should be afraid to express these because to do so is 'intolerant'.

[quote:245zwoj6]I'm both a newcomer and - at least presently - a member of CARE. I am a member of CARE principally because it is the only CDS faction that has so far given me the time of day. Persons wishing to help me integrate into the community would be most welcome. Perhaps they could follow CARE's example by acknowledging my existence?[/quote:245zwoj6]I think you've identified a key failing of the CSDF, the DPU (and possibly the Simplicity Party?) We haven't made enough of an effort to connect with new citizens. In our defence I'd say that the CSDF has been holding weekly open meetings for over six months now but I recognise that our 'come to us' stance falls far short of the kind of outreach that Michel has been engaged in. That's a valuable 'lesson learned'. I think that there is a tendency, both within our factions, and the CDS as a whole to be too 'RA-focussed' at the expense of the wider community. That's part of the reason why I started the CDS Traders' Association; we need to have a thriving civil society with many NGOs and voluntary associations to be a functioning society. I've seen a lot of legislative focus and constitutional argument since I came to what was then Neualtenburg seven or eight months ago, I'd be interested in discussing how we get beyond that so most of our activity is focussed on business, commerce, the arts, education, building and other creative activities. If you have any ideas I'd be happy to explore them.

User avatar
Carolyn Saarinen
Seasoned debater
Seasoned debater
Posts: 90
Joined: Sun Dec 03, 2006 2:12 pm

Re: Newcomer/Oldtimer Engagement and Rapprochement

Post by Carolyn Saarinen »

[quote="Patroklus Murakami":7au9v8pm]
It's become clearer later on in this thread what you meant by 'disgust for my sexual orientation'. I think we need to separate out opinion from attempts to police people's private lives. I don't agree that holding an opinion about d/s inevitable involves an attempt to be the cop in anyone's bedroom. [/quote:7au9v8pm]

When you couple that opinion with the conclusion that D/s lifestylers should be excluded from membership of CDS it most certainly [i:7au9v8pm]is[/i:7au9v8pm] an attempt to "police people's private lives". Because it punishes people for their sexual orientation. The message it sends is clear: Because of your sexual orientation you will receive worse treatment than other people.

[quote="Patroklus Murakami":7au9v8pm]
I'm uncomfortable with your connection of d/s and homosexuality. I don't think they're the same thing and acceptance of the diversity of sexual orientation including same-sex and opposite-sex relations does not mean one has to accept power relations based on dominance and submission. There is a perfectly valid set of objections to d/s based on moral, ethical and political grounds. No one should be afraid to express these because to do so is 'intolerant'.
[/quote:7au9v8pm]

D/s and homosexuality are both sexual orientations. The difference is, I suggest, that anyone within CDS who openly expressed disgust for homosexuals and suggested that it would be best not to allow them to join the organisation, would be a lot less likely to get away with it.

I could go on at some length about how any relationship is, to some degree, a dominance/submission relationship. I could also question what 'moral, ethical and political grounds' you have to objecting to what one group of consenting adults do in private as opposed to any other group. Instead I'll quote you this from the Community Standards:

"Actions that marginalize, belittle, or defame individuals or groups inhibit the satisfying exchange of ideas and diminish the Second Life community as whole. The use of derogatory or demeaning language or images in reference to another Resident's race, ethnicity, gender, religion, or sexual orientation is never allowed in Second Life."

I think that referring to people as disgusting and suggesting that they barred from CDS on the grounds of their sexual orientation is in breach of the above and therefore of the CDS Constitution. I also, personally, think it's a crappy way to behave. 'Welcome to our community' indeed!

Brian Livingston
Veteran debater
Veteran debater
Posts: 213
Joined: Sun Jun 04, 2006 7:19 pm

Post by Brian Livingston »

This whole debate is pretty interesting, academically, as an example of one of our founding documents, the UNDHR, seeming to argue against itself.

Article 4 states that:
[quote:bmpgw5n6]No one shall be held in slavery or servitude; slavery and the slave trade shall be prohibited in all their forms.[/quote:bmpgw5n6]

whereas Article 7 states:
[quote:bmpgw5n6]All are equal before the law and are entitled without any discrimination to equal protection of the law. All are entitled to equal protection against any discrimination in violation of this Declaration and against any incitement to such discrimination.[/quote:bmpgw5n6]

[i:bmpgw5n6]Without[/i:bmpgw5n6] taking Article 7 into consideration, it would be safe to argue that the d/s arrangement is contrary to our founding documents and as such a prohibition on the active practice of such a lifestyle could be upheld.

However, with Article 7 thrown in, the whole situation seems to get a bit more complicated. Article 7 prohibits discrimination and provides for equal protection. However, again, Article 4 states that slavery [i:bmpgw5n6]in all [its] forms[/i:bmpgw5n6] is prohibited.

So we get to the question of what is d/s to be considered? Is it slavery, albeit optional, with one individual subjugating another? Or is it an optional lifestyle that should be protected under Article 7?

Looking at the nature of our existence in SL, I would have to lean towards it being an optional lifestyle that is protected under Article 7. As we are free to being and terminate any relationship in Second Life with relative ease and given the relative transitive nature of our indentities on this system, although the d/s lifestyle includes one idividual having control over a given individual, it seems that this control is not the ultimate control over such an individual, no matter how binding the agreement is that has been entered. As such, as a simple citizen, it seems contrary to the constitution to prohibit individuals from participating in a d/s lifestlye in the CDS.

Now, that being said, I do believe it is unfair to use a small snippet of a quote out of context to imply that because someone has said that the concept of such a relationship is repugnant to them, that they must automatically believe that followers should not be members of the community. If you read the full post and, really, the full discussion, it should become quickly obvious that this is not the case.

As a note and for the record, personally speaking, I similarly find such a relationship disturbing, considering the struggles that repressed persons around the world and throughout history have had to go through and the countless lives that have been lost, all to secure the rights of all people to be on equal status as all others.
However, what I feel is morally just and what is constitutionally protected are two seperate issues and I am relieved that they are.

--BL

User avatar
Ashcroft Burnham
Forum Wizard
Forum Wizard
Posts: 1093
Joined: Thu Aug 03, 2006 3:21 pm

Post by Ashcroft Burnham »

It seems to me that a great many people are confusing genuine oppression with the mere artifice of control that one finds in the ultimately consensual relationships under discussion herein.

Ashcroft Burnham

Where reason fails, all hope is lost.
User avatar
Patroklus Murakami
Forum Wizard
Forum Wizard
Posts: 1929
Joined: Fri Jun 02, 2006 5:54 pm

Re: Newcomer/Oldtimer Engagement and Rapprochement

Post by Patroklus Murakami »

[quote="Carolyn Saarinen":2vrb8xdx]When you couple that opinion with the conclusion that D/s lifestylers should be excluded from membership of CDS it most certainly [i:2vrb8xdx]is[/i:2vrb8xdx] an attempt to "police people's private lives". Because it punishes people for their sexual orientation. The message it sends is clear: Because of your sexual orientation you will receive worse treatment than other people.[/quote:2vrb8xdx]I'm not aware that I, or anybody else, has suggested excluding people from CDS citizenship on the basis of their involvement in d/s activities.

[quote:2vrb8xdx]D/s and homosexuality are both sexual orientations. The difference is, I suggest, that anyone within CDS who openly expressed disgust for homosexuals and suggested that it would be best not to allow them to join the organisation, would be a lot less likely to get away with it.[/quote:2vrb8xdx]I don't agree that d/s is a sexual orientation. Unlike homosexuality it's a lifestyle choice. Disgust for d/s can be based on a number of factors - revulsion at the eroticisation of the institution of slavery, political repulsion towards the humiliation of women, ethical objections to the celebration of inequality in relationships... or simple prejudice. On your latter point, as a gay man in RL, I would be offended by expressions of disgust towards homosexuality by a member of the CDS... but I would defend their right to express their point of view. What I would object to would be any attempt to limit my rights of citizenship or free speech on the grounds of my sexuality or, for example, a campaign to make 'partnership' in SL only available to heterosexual avatars. I don't want to regulate others' opinions, only their attempts to regulate me.

[quote:2vrb8xdx]I could go on at some length about how any relationship is, to some degree, a dominance/submission relationship.[/quote:2vrb8xdx]And I'd have to question that. There's a world of difference between the negotiation, compromise and interplay between two adults in a loving partnership of equals and the acting out of d/s roles. Please don't try to characterise all of us as part of that world, we're not.

[quote:2vrb8xdx]I could also question what 'moral, ethical and political grounds' you have to objecting to what one group of consenting adults do in private as opposed to any other group.[/quote:2vrb8xdx]Actually I didn't say I did object. I don't really care what you do in private, but other people do and they have a right to express their views without being threatened/silenced by (mis)quoting the community standards.

[quote:2vrb8xdx]Instead I'll quote you this from the Community Standards:

"Actions that marginalize, belittle, or defame individuals or groups inhibit the satisfying exchange of ideas and diminish the Second Life community as whole. The use of derogatory or demeaning language or images in reference to another Resident's race, ethnicity, gender, religion, or sexual orientation is never allowed in Second Life."

I think that referring to people as disgusting and suggesting that they barred from CDS on the grounds of their sexual orientation is in breach of the above and therefore of the CDS Constitution. I also, personally, think it's a crappy way to behave. 'Welcome to our community' indeed![/quote:2vrb8xdx]Like I said earlier, no one is suggesting barring people from the CDS on the grounds of participation in a d/s lifestyle. But if Aliasi, or anyone else, thinks that the Gorean mindset is 'disgusting' or wants to express criticism of d/s then it's surely their right to express that opinion... and your right to reply.

Locked

Return to “General Discussion”