|
Voltare -> RE: References (12/17/2006 2:25:28 PM)
|
Rover,
If I came off a little harsh sounding, I do apologize. Sometimes when I get started with a thought, I forget to go back and tone it down as I should. Believe it or not, I share your frustration, even if I don't agree with the remedy - I did spend a couple years actively searching online with mostly disastrous results. The hardest thing for me to accept wasn't that there were 'fakes' but rather my own lack of realistic goals and lack of attention to self-improvement: that it wasn't 'their' fault, but my own; that nobody 'owed' it to me to be honest, I owed it to myself to be realistic.
The idea that two people could meet mind to mind, hit it off, and later make it so in the flesh was fascinating to me. It was also an almost total failure, because that's not reality.
quote:
ORIGINAL: Rover
You seem like a genuinely nice guy, Stephan. And I've enjoyed reading many of your posts. But what business or concern is it of yours what someone else's relationship objectives are? I hope not to be the first to tell you that some folks want to be objectified in their relationship. Others want an emphasis upon service. Not everyone is seeking a relationship based upon the "traditional" social values. We're not all the same, nor are we all seeking the same relationship dynamic. You can't persist with this point of view without appearing to be incredibly short sighted, or a devotee of "the one true way".
Without question, people have the right to search for any type of relationship they wish. I believe that social BDSM activities don't thrive well under 'professional' style constraints. If I wish to have a session with a tall, blonde, green eyed slave who specifically enjoys pony girl play, crops, and latex, wouldn't it simply make more sense to contact a lifestyle friendly escort service? It's not that I believe there's only one way to have a BDSM relationship, it's that I believe the very thing foundations of relationships tend to be on naturally shared interests and experiences. The interview process might certainly be exciting for some people, but I don't believe the majority would agree.
quote:
Like it or not, we live in a litiguous society, and people sue for any reason at all. I have already heard of successful lawsuits regarding personal relationships in which material facts were misrepresented. The only new aspect of your example is that it would involve a lifestyler, most of whom wouldn't want the public scrutiny.
Honestly? I don't like it. I find the trend of frivolous lawsuits to be one of the most expensive exploitations of our society, ranking up there with mortgage refinancing salesmen and government pork. That it happens doesn't make it right, or acceptable.
quote:
There are some people who claim to be able to do just that. Perhaps you're unfamiliar with the recently deceased Jon Jacobs. There was even a recent effort to establish some sort of online "BDSM Certification". I think it's all quite silly, but people are regularly known to be silly. Doesn't stop them though, nor you and I (evidently) from having (or expressing) an opinion about it.
I seem to remember one or two online verification services, though I've never personally gave them much thought. To be honest, I would actually feel much more comfortable making use of an independent service like this. As someone mentioned before, they 'don't have a dog in the fight.' They don't have any personal stake or favor to return in verifying information, and as I understand it, they don't actually release all of information given. Rather, they keep verified records and only reveal certain private information under specific circumstances (i.e. criminal investigation.) But I could be wrong.
quote:
I think you'll find that most women who meet someone online desire a more substantial "getting to know you" period before meeting real time. There's no standardized time frame, of course. When I was new to the net, I was an advocate of "not rushing" things, as I heard of all the awful things that seemed to happen regularly to poor defenseless submissives meeting crazed lunatics from the internet. It only made sense.... until such time as I realized that it didn't make sense. There were no accompanying newspaper articles or expose on 20/20 or Primetime Live, no corresponding string of real time victims in any of the (many) places I traveled, no death notices, no police investigations... you get my drift, don't you?
Point is, genuine or fraud, many folks are influenced to take an inordinate amount of time prior to meeting. Often this influence is from less than honorable sources.
Again, if I sounded uncaring, it wasn't my intent. I've been there, done that. I flew to California to meet girl from online - to learn she had a live in boyfriend, had sent fake photos (likely of her boyfriends ex girlfriend, though I never really found out) etc etc. After almost two months of daily contact, it was quite disappointing. That's why I say, in retrospect, the most successful meetings I had were with girls who were within an hours drive away, and saw our meetings as nothing more then coffee and get to know ya. Because so few people take the internet (and online relationships) seriously, the risk of serious financial, emotional, and temporal loss can be quite high if we permit it. Better to think of it as playing the horses - don't bet what you aren't willing to lose.
quote:
Because a bunch of online do-gooders has convinced her that she should wait months before meeting, since Dominants are frequently axe murderers. You know another good reason for references? Anyone out in the community knows this is utter BS, and simply uses good judgement about where and how to meet.
Again, I totally agree - fear of meeting people online (as opposed to any other venue) is unwarranted. If I was actively seeking someone through the net, I simply wouldn't allow myself to spend months getting to know someone 'virtually' before I met them - the person I would come face to face to most likely would be quite dissimilar from the person I was getting to know virtually.
quote:
It's true that many folks claiming to desire a real time relationship are just fibbing in hopes of manipulating someone into an online relationship that they can draw out for an extended period of time. If your expectations are genuinely for a real time relationship, whose expectations are unrealistic? What is unrealistic is to take people that you meet online at their word because... hold on to your seat... people on the internet lie about themselves and their intentions (*gasp*). Knowing that someone is out there in the community, is single, gender appropriate, etc. goes a long way to ensuring that your not the victim of someone who might fabricate the truth.
This point has already been beaten into the ground on both sides, I think. There are valid points on both sides, and ultimately it will be up to individuals to go with what makes sense to them. All I'll add is that if we did not invest more than we are willing to lose online, there would be no victims in the first place.
quote:
There are a few fundamental flaws in your example, Stephan. In your example you know the woman's gender, what she really looks like, have spoken to her on the telephone, can reasonably ascertain that she is single (no one else answers, she doesn't ask you not to call in the evening or to leave messages that unwanted ears might hear, etc.), you know something about her personality, decorum, how she dresses, interacts with others, etc. And despite the fact that there are no guarantees that she (or you) will want a relationship with each other, you can reasonably assume that she wants a real time relationship with someone.
Contrast that with meeting someone online who may require weeks of tedious emails and IM's before speaking on the telephone (it's ok to give out your number to a stranger in a bar, but a Dominant you meet online could be an axe murderer), assuming that they actually want a real time relationship at all (versus an enjoyable online fantasy), you don't know their actual gender or whether the photo received in email is actually her, whether she is single or married with three children, whether she has overpowering BO, brushes her teeth or hair, wears clownish clothing, swears like a stevedore... are you catching my drift?
To equate meeting someone face to face with "meeting" them on the internet is flawed at the outset.
Personally? I never entertained the idea of meeting someone real life, if they weren't willing to speak on the phone within the first week. I already had enough chat buddies.
quote:
Really, you sound a bit jaded. Now I'm not suggesting that I would intentionally ignore obvious signals, but like most people who have run into interesting potential partners online, I have surely been strung along only to find out that it was all a fabrication. And for every time I've been strung along, the effort to do so has been made twenty times. I'm not complaining, mind you. I realize this problem is inherent to the internet (and given that I am "out there" regularly, and over a rather substantial geographic area, the internet is far from my sole source of potential partners).
Now, define for me what is a "reasonable time" to meet? Ask ten people and you'll get ten answers. If your first meeting is simply to "authenticate the basics" (ie: gender, appearance, etc.) then a reference can do so much more easily and quickly.
Personally, I prefer to meet sooner rather than later for many reasons, some of which have been mentioned in this post. If I'm interested in someone, I have no problem flying out to spend the weekend somewhere to share some good food and conversation. If they're active in their local community, I enjoy attending a munch, workshop, etc. with them and to meet their friends. Seriously, what is so unrealistic about that?
As I illustrated earlier, I have definitely become jaded - but I don't think my expectations would be unrealistic, either. At any rate, obviously the only person who knows 'when is too soon, when is too long, and when is just right' is a personal choice. Better questions, though, are 'what is the longest I am willing to wait for specific markers, talking on the telephone, agreeing on a meet date, and the actual meet date.' Different people will answer these questions differently, but by experience, I found that most 'fakes' don't usually come clean until they have canceled once or twice. I'd elaborate, but it's not really relevant to the topic.
quote:
Why would you assume such a thing? Who said anything about a kinky date? Are you inferring that anyone willing to travel to meet someone of interest is simply looking for a "kinky date"? Are you saying that such a person should hire the services of a prostitute? Really, Stephan... that sentiment is more than a little objectionable. In fact, it's downright offensive and says quite a bit about you.
Again, I do apologize for how that came out, and it wasn't intended personally. That being said, I've already addressed how it irks me that people expect a social meeting to conform to any specific criteria, as references suggest. The attitude that demands (as opposed to enquiring about) references, to me, suggests someone who doesn't really want to put the time and effort to actually undergo the 'get to know you' phase. It's the attitude Master X might adopt when in search of slave number fourteen (he stopped naming them after four.) It's the attitude for SubbieMoneySim looking for her prized diamond Dom. People are more than the sum of their references, work experience, and vital statistics.
Personally, I wouldn't be offended if someone asked me about my experiences, where I've done what with whom. I would be offended if I felt that I was being judged based on those answers, and livid if I got a phone call from an acquaintance telling me that submissivesally from Collarme had called them checking up on me. Even if most people aren't sincere online, I am - and without an initial, basic sense of trust, there isn't likely to be any relationship left to build.
I hope that illustrates my position better.
BTW, I'm jealous - I've never been to Vegas. What I'd give to live in Southern California, too. (Yes, not the same, but it's close.)
|
|
|
|
