Creating Change – “The Great Filters”

My name is Khannea Suntzu, I am pansexual, generally submissive, passive-fetishist, eager-to-please. I am a very restless and feral girl.

The following is a presentation I was invited to hold for the VenusPlusX organization for Sexual Freedom, where I was invited by Dan and Alison, at the Creating Change Conference in Minneapolis. This text will be read in somewhat edited form at the conference. Parts of this presentation may be experienced as offensive, pedantic, irreverent of alienating. Reader discretion is advised.

The Introduction

Today I will be talking about how we are moving into a very strange new world because of the compound effects of new technologies. I will be talking about relationships. I will claim we let our rules and taboos run amok and I will wonder why humans act like this. I will wonder why humans have an unhealthy and useless obsession with making other people obey for the sake of bullying. I will hypothesize that human beings may have been bred by and for autocratic societies. I will then claim we are entering a world where the tidal wave of new technologies generally favors early adopters, but that eventually the bully genes in the human species will catch up with freedom, if we let them. I will claim that in the next decades the human species can experience a quite remarkable era of personal and interpersonal creativity. And yes I will claim this will have profound effects on how we engage in relationships and how we have sex. And yes – I will do all this unscientifically and in the format of a brainstorm.

Yes you can ask me questions. I will delineate from my opinions, my hypothesis, testable theories, hearsay and what I allege as facts. If you have questions, please write them down for the duration of this talk. Please ask yourself if the questions you have are questions that require an elaborate answer, and don’t need to run through the forum of peer verification of the audience here – in that case feel free to email me afterwards and I will publish the questions and answers on my blog. If you’d really like to ask me questions here and now save them till the end and I will answer as many as I can as best and as colorful as I can.


Let me write down a disclaimer – I am a freethinking western-European, whatever that means. In the context of US politics I suppose many would call me a flaming-mad leftist liberal, but sadly the US central concept of ‘liberal’ doesn’t translate very well into the political spectrum of my home country. In my country the “liberals” are the far right “social Darwinist” market-fundamentalists. Even at that they inhabit the political spectrum to the left of US democrats, and all parties in my home country of the Netherlands are (even with a marked slide to the right in recent years) still all to the left in the political spectrum to the most extreme right wing party. Our right wing parties actually favor or tolerate gay marriage.

So my cultural legacy is one of uninhibited freedom, and a rejection of governmental interference that might disorient many Americans. One the one hand most Western-Europeans accept and welcome (or even demand) nanny state protection and civil society that has no equivalency this side of the Atlantic – as long as it makes sense to the dutch and keeps the needy fed, clothed and housed. We have very little in terms of religious-inspired ‘charity’ to care for the poor and we actually want the government to mop up the social issues with tax money rather than outsource these concerns to moralistic busybodies and hope for the best. However we demand as the Dutch a level of governmental respect for personal freedom and integrity that would not translate to the US.

In essence I remind you I prefer not to be judged in the context of the politically dualistic culture of the United States.

My Core Values

I am one of those people that favors freedom in the formation of relationships and to keep other people from interfering in their respective relationships unless explicitly invited. I would see personally prefer “marriage” privatized – I see no use in any government legislating cohabitation or relation of any kind. I like people marrying – but I do not feel compelled to honor their private arrangements, or I would object to the state for discriminating against me if I find alternative arrangements. Tax laws that favor “the married” I regard as predatory. I would like to see any human being feel free to formulate their own operational rules (or lack thereof) for interacting with other free-minded people.

I would reserve space for protection of the young or those with relative incapacity as a separate societal contract, but even there I am can get a little bothered by the annoying interference of governments, religions, moralists and others. I think children should be more liberated as well.

Unfortunately we live in a world where a range of degrees of bullying is strangely easy or even institutionalized. It is easy to bully people to be afraid to act as they feel the need to. I am of the conviction that we as a society have an excess of social bullying, rules, punishment and fear. I think we are far out of balance favoring conservatism and repression. I believe there are genetic reasons in the human species for this.

I would be personally inclined to conclude that we can’t easily liberate ourselves from the shackles of outdated feudal societal bullying when it comes to the free formation of interpersonal relationships, especially when it comes to the constraints that have been imposed by some orthodox religious systems. I know these religious systems insist on what they consider sacred inalienable truths, but I can do the same and we’ll be bickering till the end of times (or killing each other till the end of times like base uncivilized animals) if we do not grow a compromise gland. The compromise is pretty straightforward here, at least from a European perspective – live and let live.

Human beings are frail beings, especially when it comes to their mind, and attempting to deprogram what has been hammered in to them from youth (if that is in itself not a form of immoral interference of course) is a no win situation. I know the most sensible arguments will fall on the deafest ears. So we may end up needing new kinds of leverage to escape a stalemate imposed upon us by allegedly “sacred dictums”. I will claim we are in a quiet technological revolution that will shake up how we engage in relationships, and this revolution will make a mockery of societal constraints in the next few decades. I claim the conservative element will lose this, and they will lose this very very soon.

A Storm Is Brewing

The 21st century will a period be unlike humanity saw before. There will be totally new things under the sun. Right now all of us here are in the first stirrings of revolutionary change. We can all sit around and be cavalier, or dismissive about the change – or take the impacting changes for granted for a while – but we won’t for much longer. Each little bit of change may be a gentle shove – but a million gentle shoves will be in effect a tsunami that will deposit us not just into a new cultural paradigm – but also in a fundamentally new type of civilization – and it may change us effectively into a totally new species composed of inseparable parts of nature and technology.

All that will mark a change most humans scarcely can envision, let alone meaningfully prepare for. And it is very important to realize that it isn’t some ‘elite conspiracy’ working to push these changes on the rest of humanity – it is just the compound impact of modern informational society spinning out of control.

It is what we humans have been doing for some time now – we change the world and we change each other – and we in doing so change the way the world works itself. We change the rules in often irreversible ways.

I’d wish to highlight a single domain of all the changes that are impacting the world – and that is the formation of human relationships, and specifically the formation of human relationships based on gender or sex or sexuality. And if I call this correctly I really think we’ll be in for quite some revolutionary changes in this area quite soon.

The Cruel Old Days

In the past there was tribal order, there were dominant men, there were limited supplies of women, most women died prematurely in childbirth or domestic violence, and people rarely took a mate that had not lived more than a sturdy walk from where they had been born.

The only people who married long distance were the smart or the powerful. Kings and priests arranged marriages with distant landowners, for political reasons. The most likely reason for a commoner to engage in relationships in a faraway place used to be when a common woman or daughter was bartered outside the tribe, taken as a slave or kidnapped. In this system breeding rewarded selective criteria and societal norms where women were subordinated to domination and quick turnover. The more women were bartered and commidified, the easier the most successful specimen of society could garner access to the more desirable women. This benefited woman to a minor extent, but only incidental – they got strong males, but they often got dominant males as well. Unfortunately for all people in such a society (male or female) can be argued to have become the victim of thousands of years of selective genetic pressure – rebellion increased the chances of premature death considerably. Hence I would proclaim the hypothesis that we as a species have been bred to associate sexuality with alternating submission, dominance, acceptance of sexuality as reward, expectation of a higher authority that cannot be questioned and has control over life and death. I know such a hypothesis would be very difficult to falsify or test, but I would argue this to be a potentially very important hypothesis if we are to move forward into the future. I would argue that the mere suspicion of this hypothesis might be of merit to conclude the human species is irrational, insane and prone to acting predatory to its own species. That is a no-brainer – but we might also have explanations for elusive phenomenon such as religious devotion, sadomasochism, suicidal behavior and depression – as well as other very curious psycho-sexual behaviors. If we can understand how these behaviors emerge we can work to give them a meaningful place in our world.

We may at this point allege marriage at some time “was instituted” as something more than just the call of breeding instincts and tribal decorum. It became romantic, and it became “sacred”. That in itself may have been a logistical improvement at the time, but after a few thousand years the context of the institution of marriage can be argued to have lost some of its functional merit.

Marriage has changed to such a degree to modern society that the contemporary formula would have little relevance to even Victorian society, and that is just fairly recent. Marriage as we know it today would have been a blasphemous institution for people just a few centuries ago. Very briefly ago all marriages were always politically arranged or socio-economical or in part based on acute necessity. People from a few centuries would regard a woman that consented to a man (or sought one out) with disdain or apprehension. Not long ago any woman that chose was implicitly a whore.

The mechanism of the love-centered marriage is a novel and liberal one, and would not have made much sense a few centuries ago. It doesn’t even make much sense in most continents outside the western world to this day.

Yet here we are, still many people consumed with the urgency to find “the right one” and do so “till death do us part”.

Let me speculate wildly here – we so often assume that terrestrial natural constraints evolved humans in a fairly neutral manner, as if we are psychologically objective blank slates. What if we are not? We may have evolved under significant societal evolutionary pressure in the last ten thousand or so years. What if the vast majority of the human species was able to breed to the current numbers only because it lived under severe autocratic rule most of the last few thousand years?

To compare – domesticated animals that are overbred may develop curious psychological hang-ups. What if we were bred to constantly deal with tyrants, persecution, cyclical famines, wars, tribal conflicts, feudalism, torture and over-taxation. What kind of humans would we have become if this hypothesis were true? How would our ingrained anticipation of an all powerful and utterly ruthless silverback autocrat manifest in our expectations in life? How would be gain validation from submission? Could we have been bred to actually gain joy from fear, pain, being dominated (or from dominating others)? Could we have all these diffuse cross-links in the pleasure centers of our brains propelling us in all these complex and often seemingly unnatural sexual behaviors? Might we be hardwired to respond with joy to punishment?

But it doesn’t have to be like this for much longer. We no longer have to take out our darkest genetic urges on each other and societally victimize one another. We might become liberated and transcend all this – if only we had safe ways of visualizing what we really want, experiment with it, understand it, learn from it and safely gain pleasure from it. And fairly soon we will have precisely that.


When I state we live in unprecedented times I state we live in an era where we see the emergence of new media of communications that have the potential to ….. :

1 – Reach more people in the world, and reach then faster, and interact with them in a more detailed manner than any previous set of communications anytime in humanity has ever done.

2 – Introduce smart selective programming or systems that select from the overwhelming people markets to find people you would actually would like interacting or forming relationships with.

3 – Present yourself in a way that is more flattering to your outside self, presents your good qualities better, or allows you to emulate a version of yourself that is more palatable, or is a more true version of what you are on the inside.

4 – help visualize what you are, how you can change your fundamental thinking on relationships or your sexuality, experiment safely with new types of relationships or sexuality, or how you could be someone that would be in effect happier than you currently are.

I won’t go into abuse, exploitation or intimidation other the mention it. There always are drawbacks to changes, probably as much as there are drawbacks to exaggerated conservatism, xenophobia or luddism.

With automation based communication and social media we have seen the usual suspects : child abuse, date rape, addictive behavior, obsessive-compulsive behavior and ‘accusations of moral deviancy’. In every new media is also widespread outright lying, there is false representation or there are hidden agendas. I am however fairly sure that if people have access to technologies or choices, they will societally generate quite adequate solutions to the sharp edges of the more volatile options. Can I prove this as much as anyone can disprove it? Takes only half an hour of Googling I suppose.

We have seen abuse (and false accusations lf abuse) of new technologies by the wagonloads. I would argue that after a period of acclimatization either society comes to terms with any negative effects of new technologies (such as is the case with vehicular deaths or petrochemical-caused pollution) or the effects turn out to be wild exaggerations or plain cultural envy (such as is clearly the case with modern computer game culture) or in fact what was perceived to be negatives turn out to be positives (people were awfully negative about computers and internet and mobile phones a few decades ago – look at all of us now).

I would go further. I would claim that when it comes to the emergence of new technologies, excessive caution is over-all pretty bad. Moralism applied as a constraint would be particularly bad and I can give you several mechanisms on how it can ruin economies and opportunities as well as lives. Along those same lines superstition should be regarded as plain awful – if not functionally equivalent. Prejudice ditto. Luddism is bad. Reactionary conservatism? – a sith gradient of interfering societal evil.

Ideally, the market takes care of supply and demand. That only works with good access to information and fair operating rules, empowered, sane, healthy constituents and freedom. Free flow of goods and services disrupted or corrupted by monopolists, imperialists and unilateralist.

If we create new technologies we instantaneously generate new demand. I become suspicious when we see self-appointed crusaders argue against free choice in these options and implement “prohibitions” or “censorship”. The dark side of either is crackdowns, law enforcement excesses, gut-based populism and the formation black markets. These bullies may in fact be resorting to a genetic imperative to take “silverback” control over as much as they can. What do men with power want – more power… consequently – if we simplistically refer to a gene such as this as “The Saddam Gene” we can safely state what we see happen in the world as the “Saddamization” of the world.

Pun intentional and please quote me.

I’d argue that if we let people and society evolve coping mechanisms to deal with the actual practice of radical freedom, and let people and society sort out their own lives with either (without negative interference or bullying) even currently very frightening problems would become non-issues very quickly. Narcotic addiction wouldn’t be anywhere near the problem it is alleged to would be, as is clearly evidenced by examples of ending militia-driven persecution and marginalization.

As for the example of prostitution, a decent dose of vocational training, sensible certification and liberal and free unionization (and weeding out the actual bullies on the side with proper policing) would solve the problem overnight. It would be just more “free markets” without any “victims”. I am not sure we can extend this metaphor indefinitely – in my country the free availability of firearms would not be negotiable, and I am certainly being inconsequent on this topic. I believe that we may eventually delineate between empowering and peaceful technologies, and against destructive or inhibiting technologies, but I would let that particular debate rest for now.

It most in all cases people engaging in free interaction or relations of whatever kind they see fit, with the state working to empower the free flow of traffic rather than disrupt it.

Going back to the above four (and let me repeat them so you really remember these for later on) …

1 – Relastionship markets of billions
2 – Outsourcing our needs, wants and preference and have machines to them for us
3 – Create allegorical or metaphorical or poetic virtual renditions of ourselves
4 – Self-scrutinize ourselves in totally new virtual playgrounds and grow from these experiences.

We are moving into a world where the impact of these fields of technological empowerment may put the world on its head. Facebook is a clear example of a finely grained and widespread device that allows at this half a billion people to interact. In a few years this will be a billion people and not long after any human being on earth will be able to use Facebook, ‘futurebook’ or something we cannot even conceive of to allow close to all human beings on this planet to

1 – communicate with everyone, immediately insofar with constraints of meaning
2 – select from the worldwide market what type of people you allow to communicate with you
3 – present your strongest points in the best manner, without explicitly lying over your frailties
4 – actually use these tools to conquer our collective frailties…

An Existential Sandbox Full of TOYS


The terms I would now introduce is “sandbox world”. This term signifies the most difficult medium to grasp in traditional “gaming”, by and large because it isn’t gaming. Sandbox worlds have minimal rules as to allow the janitors of such world to make them manageable (or sustain them in a viable business model). The formal term for “sandbox worlds” would be as to regard these media as “elaborate consensual toys”.

There currently is a population of sand box worlds, such as Kaneva, Utherverse, IMVU, Onverse, Active Worlds, SmallWorlds, Blue Mars, Twinity and of course Second Life. I would not say these virtual spaces are in 2011 by and large easily accessible ‘play spaces’ – the typical user still needs an expensive machine to explore them. Worse, offering a wide range of freedoms to navigate these world makes the controls of your virtual self there quite challenging. As an example – Second Life takes anywhere between a month to half a year to attain a level of expertise that an average user can move around in the world that she or he is generally no longer regarded as a Noob. To fully be able to grasp all Second Life has to offer might take an average user over a year. That learning curve is too steep and in quite a few cases this is simply flawed design or bad management by the janitors the this virtual space.

If we simply and state that the first robust virtual spaces appeared around 2000, then this medium is ten years old. Second life appeared in the year 2003. Second life is still unappealing to the vast majority of potential users. Worse – many old media and users see reasons to actively vilify and slander the medium. For all intents and purposes the growth of Second Life continues, but as things now stand Second Life will not grow much more. Over a million people “use” Second Life, but as the population expands the natural attrition rate is inching closer and closer to the new people trickling in. So unless the formula of Second Life radically improves in a few years we will have a numerical sequence of repeat users of a few million and then some more million – but nowhere near the explosive adoption rate of Facebook, or Youtube.

So… Why Is Second Life Relevant AT ALL?

Second Life emerged in 2003. It now exists over eight years. It is in effect still in the development stage of what would constitute a stable, easy to use and compelling new medium. This state of affairs is in interesting since it is somewhat comparable to airplanes between 1903 and 1911. In 1911 most people wouldn’t dream to get near these infernal contraptions. But another lesson is that while in the 20th century airplanes really took off and now billions depend on them or travel with them (about as many as registered facebook users incidentally) – but very few of the companies that were founded in the early twentieth century. Incidentally the oldest airline company in the world is the KLM, and it was founded in 1919. So by that silly analogy we might be years removed from these virtual world even starting to mature as globe spanning media.

But it takes one company that really ‘gets’ virtual space management and you may very well have a growth spurt as fast as Facebook. Facebook was started, more or less in 2004. If the right company starts a virtual space – or if the right sponsor gets Linden Lab to straighten out its act, we could have hundreds of millions of users inside a virtual sandbox in less than a decade. I should say – in less than decade a few hundred million people might want to be in some kind of virtual sand box world. And there would be things to do there people don’t even have words for. Email me for examples 🙂

And typically this would be the younger and more adventurous of people.

For demonstration purposes I will focus on Second Life – not because SL is any particularly good (It isn’t nearly as robust as I think it could be in 2011) but by and large because I think it is a quite adequate showcase of what we are in store for in the next decades. I’d go as far as stating that while it is debatable whether or not a game such as Second Life will be there in the future, I think it is pretty sure that something like Second Life (but far better) will completely and irreversibly change the way people interact, socialize, meet up, find one another, have sex, engage in relations and come to regard relations. And I sincerely believe representational media will irreversibly change society and fundamentally ways and increase the expectations of many people in society.

Right now I state that in Second Life there are already the first stirrings of a true sexual revolution. I think there is something new happening, and this will not stop should Second Life stop. This brushfire is spreading, gaining momentum and changing the rules. And I have no idea where it will end.

I myself started doing representing myself as the hypersexualized succubus Khannea in the same manner in late 2005 because simply put, I needed to. I may be ahead of the curve (but I am not sure sure of that) a little but I think many more will experiment with fantasy and sexuality in the same radical and total way I have done for all my life.

The name Khannea has now existed since the mid 1980s, and I have done what I am doing for literally decades, so what I am doing is more a feature of my fundamental personal identity and sexuality. Others would claim it is a sign of my deep inner deviancy but let’s conveniently ignore that for now.

The problem is that I increasingly see staunch heterosexuals in Second Life experiment with depicting themselves as avatars of the other sex. I see heterosexual males representing themselves as the most evocatively beautiful females. This clearly gives them considerable pleasure. I have seen quite a few real life females do the same. This is nothing new in itself. What is new is that these same alleged heterosexuals have now opened up to playing with similar playmates, engaging in extremely creative new sexual archetypes and sexual roles – and quite bewildering new relational formats. I see alleged heterosexuals fall in love with one another, after engaging in largely imaginary pornographic fantasies.

This is about playmates engaging in fairly intense sadomasochistic fantasies and deciding they like it, deciding “it makes no difference” and deciding a vanilla relationship makes no sense at all anymore. I increasingly see quite beautiful romance emerge in these entanglements, and I see these people think about creating the conditions for meeting together and entering into actual relationships.

Mind you, I am not lambasting marriage.

I tried marriage myself (and I was married to an obsessively monogamous female partner, and I never cheated on her) and do not care much for the institute of marriage anymore… But I will not bother anyone who prefers that kind of kink. I will however take significant relish in charting out, analyzing, describing and eventually heralding this thing what I clearly see as a sexual revolution. If my words cause others to take marriage with a grain of salt, so be it. It is a free world.

The Supply, The Demand, and the Yummy

So, what are the market implications for all these developments in virtual world?

Blushing, Shy Corporations

Bad News for preudish corporations – Sex has now become the norm.

Old media know it. I talked this over in 2006 or 2007 with a representative of Talpa media in Second life in 2008, and he agrily agreed – sometime, in a few years, there will be an elaborate ecology of virtual worlds where people will go that now watch TV and where media companies make even more money than the now make with cinema, music, TV and advertising combined. This is unavoidable.

Already games generate more money annually than cinema.

The problem is that traditional Games suffer from piracy – Once you publish a game it will get cracked or replicated in a manner that breaks the revenue stream. That’s the success of World of Warcraft – Blizzard could reinvesting indefinitely because capital loss with WOW was negligible on account of piracy. The percentage of private servers is so small it is negligible. All other users for WOW are funneled in an online, server-based business model and as a result Blizzard now makes over a billion US dollars annually, from an initial startup investment of just over 20 million US dollar.

Looking at World of Warcraft I bet a large number of executives were angrily asked “why didn’t our team didn’t think of that?”.

In all these world, World of Warcraft included, a certain percentage of clients will engage in sexual behavior, erotic roleplay (ERP) and consensual fetishist fantasies. It has been a corporate legacy from old centralized media that sexual content was not desirable, largely for reasons of litigation. If kids played these games, the mere possibility that one day a video would turn up where the game would potentially suffer widespread media stigmatization as “a warren of putrid iniquity” (and conservative media diving on the old beast humping it for all the glory in the multi-verse, because they know that for each copy of new media sold a kid visits a church 28.9 hours per month less). It’s all competitive media at the end of the day. Moralist media aren’t interested in morals – they are interested in their market share, same as the Vatican or Hammas isn’t interested in “birth control”, rather it doesn’t want children growing up richer, and as a consequence more educated and hence less likely to be respectively devout Catholics or Muslims.

So … people in virtual world engage in Sexual activity even if the host of a company really does not want that. In WoW a player starts a “Queer friendly guild” and the player (a strikingly cute girl apparently) was banned. Blizzard was not amused, it was a public relations disaster from one perspective – but it got in a lot of new players curious abut all the cute lesbians I bet. In another part of WoW there is a notorious server region where the kinky crowd constantly comes up with the most elaborate sexual fantasies. I haven’t been there, it is a US server unfortunately but I hear it get’s steamy, with players trying to get their respective mounts to pleasure the night elfs. It is a dirty job but someone gotta do it. No attempts by Game Masters have succeeded in suppressing this activity – and if they do, what’s the use for Blizzard in banning clients in the long run? It’s a no-win in PR and it’s slaughtering their income base.

Another example is Sony Home. That is probably an even more sinister corporate example of cookie cutter wholesomeness. The operational world is “child Safe” (which is a euphemism for litigation safe) but even in Sony Home the users engage in “sexual interactions”. There is even elaborate prostitution there. What pisses off the Sony Home executives is that some girls there hang around, flash their software assets and then have the nerve to lure prospective clients to Second Life, where there are far more options available. And guess what – There have been studies – few of those users ever return.

Once people see hot pixels on-screen, their fantasies light up like a Christmas tree. Right now the avatars are clearly entering in the realm of ‘pretty attractive’ and it will only get better. I would argue that free toy worlds where people can engage in these activities without censorship (or without exploitative credit card rates) will win over restrictive alternatives – at least in the long run. Of course the moralists still have the upper ground in bullying free traffic of sexual experiences, and prejudice reigns supreme, but I’d go on the record and state that in the future any level of censorship will fail, backfire or literally cause a virtual world to become uncompetitive.

Of course for now unbridled salaciousness is still an embarrassing strategy for any company. But I guarantee you we will all be laughing looking back at the relative virtual prudes of the early years of the 21st century. I state – we have seen nothing yet, and by 2025 even Disney will knowingly find special spaces to facilitate the most depraved interactivity models in their virtual worlds.

An Epidemic of Collars

While officially we live in a society where we have a contractual engagement called marriage – however in virtual worlds, (specifically in Second Life), people seek new engagements. The collar has become more normal than the one-on-one relationship.

In fact same sex lesbian (genderbended or not) in Second Life rarely engage in one-on-one. Most people wears a collar and in the clubs you routinely spot Masters and Mistresses wander by trailing several slaves on collars. And Mistresses sometimes exploit their slaves in elaborate forced prostitution fantasies. I did it for years in Second Life, and trust me it is glorious.

I wouldn’t dare to offend people to try and explain this phenomenon.. but do let me offer a few analysis.

….. if humans (ever) have more time on their hands (born males more so than females) they will become sexually more active and sexually more creative. Eventually a sizeable percentage of society will no longer conform to constrictive societal standards of relationships, exclusivity, sexual constraints. There will be more fornication based interaction, and eventually there will a free-flow ecology of ritualized sexual conduct – a free market of masturbation.

This will cause severe trauma and anxiety in those not taking part in this market, either out of fear or envy or alienation. This will be a considerable problem in society as a percentage of people will try to do as they please and the other half will try to outlaw perceived deviancy back into the proverbial bottle – if need be they will do so by using violence. As indicated, humans may have developed a gene to enforce conformity, and to do so by force. And that is the paradox inherent in conservatism – quite often conservatism itself is a sadomasochistic snake feeding on its own tail.

But they will never get this idea when I explain them that.

The Lowest Common Denominator

For a splendid object lesson in how the more fundamental extremes of human sexuality is the orgy of simplistic archetypes called Gor.

I have studied Gor in a state of total bewilderment for years since 2006. Right now there are literally hundreds of ‘sims’ in Second Life, each with slightly diverging rule-sets, background stories, assumptions and culture. The basic theme is the same – take a distant Conan the Barbarian analogue world, with strong men, breathtakingly beautiful women and consistent archetypes of sadomasochism where male Masters (and occasional gender radical feminist “panther” girls) can engage in their own unique consensual fantasy. In Gor (most) woman like to serve, and be mounted with vigor. In Gor men Know Best and feminism makes absolutely no evolutionary sense. Women are the most charming sexual servitors, and willingly so, and men achieve at least 3d4 orgasms per night.

Now do understand I affirm this idea has some appeal to me, for obvious reasons. For a few hours being a woman like that and bleeped silly, my face vigorously thrust into the pillows, has a certain appeal. But when I tried these little roleplay expeditions myself around hour three they always kicked me out – “I got a big mouth” – and I am clearly so intellectual the males in Gor consistently “doubt my real world gender”. Which is in itself quite hilarious...

Seriously – they are REAL lesbians!

A brief note on lesbianism in Second Life. A very dear friend and amazing human avatar in SL, who goes by the name of Meringue Pavlova once did a thorough scientific analysis (using considerable ingenuity) to see how many females in Second Lifes are males (genderbending) and how many are actually female. In 2008 he came up with the basic number of >80%. I do not agree with that high a number, and surely by 2011 this number is closer to 60% than ever before, but my insights are more based on intuition.

An interesting virtual ecology of relevance when it comes to gender is the underground of ‘exclusive’ lesbians in Second Life. I would immediately affirm real world Lesbians would might respond with intense annoyance but they miss the point my a wide margin. The reality may be that in a club in Second Life where these intensely beautiful feminine shapes gather

  • Male shapes are treated with hostility and immediately booted out…
  • The majority of avatars may be males masturbating on a lesbian fetish…
  • The males there will all be highly predisposed and open to feminism…
  • The minority of females there may not all be lesbian but will be engaging in consensual sexual activity..
  • The minority of females there will be somewhat tolerant of at least the possibility their masturbation partners are highly feminist or feminized males.
  • These are simple and obvious conclusions that show a perspective on consensual sex that used to be exclusive gender roles. All these gender archetypes have become placed in “parenthesis” in the context of a shared role-playing experience. Interestingly enough such experiences can and do last years. A Spanish SL woman picked me up (who turned out actually being a Spanish man-hating lesbian IRL ironically) and she fell in love with me. I stayed with her in Second Life for over a year, I still love her, and she still loves me. We are still more or less in a “off-ish relationship”. She knows me in the real world and even if she is one of these “exclusive man despising Lesbians” she has not sought me out or sought to get into a physical relationship with me. Actually at some point she has stopped all sexual advances towards me, after a somewhat silly incident, while before she had a rather vicious, rapacious attitude towards me. So yah there is even some stretch in that area.

    Yes, a majority of these alleged “lesbian” venues in virtual spaces, markedly in Second Life, have a strongly masochistic component. These couplings tend to not strictly yield traditional sexual or monogamous relationships. For some reason, the collar is substantially more common than the purity ring.

    Immersing myself in Futanari

    A breathtaking phenomenon in Second Life is the phenomenon of Futanari. This involves the idea of women in various states of femininity or hyperfemininity (sometimes with gargantuan milk oozing breasts) with a penis – often a penis of considerable proportions, able to yield surreal amounts of ejaculate. Futanari is, like me, unabashedly pansexual. They do anyone, anywhere, anyhow.

    I can only emphasize that from a personal perspective a classic Futanari would be my ideal sexual partner. I would not have a male or female preference if Futa would exist – I’d be futasexual. Fortunately a agreeable percentage of Second Life agrees with my assessment. Even in the Futanari community real world women are not a glaring minority. I know they exist – woman roleplaying sex in Second Life who fantasize of having a massive erection and using it on another female shape. Often unabashedly anal.

    If you anyone in the audience feels this curious flutter of interest (and I am looking at you Dan. And Alison) I’d strongly urge you to run to a PC after this presentation and look closely at all the art of the artist Dmitry. This person creates the kind of art that is center stage Futa, and it is breathtakingly and primordially hypersexualized. Is this masturbation art? Yes, it is. However, is this art also signposts new relationship models, transgendered experimentation and fantasies, self-assessment, mental deconstruction of constrictive gender roles and delicious wide angle emancipation.

    One day surgical nanotechnologies might allow the average consumer to change his or her body to become a Futa. Many would.

    Conquering the pigmentation barrier

    A small mention for overcoming race. In virtual world I have noticed that racial bias is collapsing faster than Tunisian gold reserves. It is very easy to choose your skin color in Second Life.

    As you see I am a bit melanine-challenged myself, but as soon as I am able to self-determine my racial qualities, I self-define my avatar as strongly mixed-race, with a clear emphasis on Mediterranean with more than a hint of Algerian, Indian, Jewish, Native American Indian, Black African, Burmese. I do this because it’s hot. Others in SL find similar reasons to liberate themselves from everyday casual (often scarcity/constraint based) prejudice. Consequently every day I have found it more easy to empathize with other “ethnicities” in the world when I shape my ideal avatar shape like “them”. I find myself not even noticing anything sometimes.

    Free Virtual Worlds such as Second Life conquer racial divides by inspiring empathy, affinity and cultural interest. I have seen it happen over and over. Before Second Life I would not have looked too closely at some people of other cultures or “races” (within parenthesis) or considered them for any relationship of any kind. After Second Life I can’t help wondering how it would be to actually live there as one of “them”.

    The Wild Bunch

    I am not a furry nor have I ever been a furry. Furries are.. remarkable. I can’t claim I fully ‘get’ them. Mind you I love getting laid in Second Life by furries, but to my shock they find that my insistence on realistic female avatars is too human for them and they tend to not hit on me. “Furries” like being nonhuman and literally base their core sexual integrity on an emulated affinity with being anthropomorphic. It would be silly saying “all furries are sexual deviants” but one can safely say most are bisexual, and pretty wild. They have their own animal based ethics, urges and interactions. I don’t generalize when I state that from my outsider perspective I have found that in the Furry communities, inside Second Life or in the vast teeming Furry communities online, you’ll find the most extreme, explorative, experimentative and acutely often bewildering sexual fetishes I could envision – and several that struck me as so far out there I seriously didn’t get them a priori. For anyone interested in the Furry phenomenon, please have a look at fourchan.

    Does Age-Play Empower Pedophyles

    In the year 2006 an assistant of the dutch district attorney’s office I was in contact with casually sought out my “educated” insider opinion on what is the insignificance of pedosexual play inside Second Life.

    Regardless of my take on this topic (which I will share on you on my email later on if you ask me) the dutch DA decided, on national TV no less, that activity of any kind, even between consenting adults, that involved even the rendered depiction of minors constitutes an act “that must be investigated to the full extent of the law”. (1)

    The argument here, which I shall not grace with a charitable opinion, is that virtual pedosexual emulation cannot be risked to ‘vector’ into real world sexual behavior. In that sense, virtual pedosexuality of any kind is regarded as an automatic precursor to real world pedosexual crimes.

    I can only say I do not support this theory at all, I think it is a wrong theory, I think it is a corrupt and populist inspired approach and I think it is driven by sinister paramilitary impulses in human nature. I allege humans have something like “conformity genes”, and many humans heed the instincts linked to those genes by seeking out a range of real or perceived societal deviants and “teaching them a lesson”. While I am seriously worried about the scale of child abuse in the world I think current persecution of pedophiles constitutes a pathology of abuse in itself.

    I think all experimentation in a virtual world between consenting adults, involving all themes, should be legal and permissible. I think age play should not be an issue inside Virtual Worlds, when I is done between consenting adults.

    I have been married for a decade and I engaged in elaborate nonsexual age play for years with my ex. We were both in our thirties. I hasten to add that I was not the initiator of that age play, or that it was sexual in nature, but I do state I really understand how it works. Quite often it is about innocence, the loss of innocence and the recovery of innocence.

    Eat Me All Up – Dolcett Play

    Dolcett is intended to offend. Consequently nearly anyone is offended by it, and a few are turned on by it. Dolcett is a fantasy and with fantasies it is the case it rarely if ever get practiced in the real world. I used the world Dolcett – however I can also refer to this as cannibalism or vore. Some categories of these fetishes are consensual, others are just masturbatory sadism. Some variants are excruciatingly painful for the virtual participants (and pure Dolcett is epic in its misogynous character). Sometimes these fantasies are not murderous, but involve forced castration and feminization, such as “after this you are a girlie and there is no way back for you”.

    I offer no comments and just mention that a future with very pervasive and free virtual realities, there will be far more horrendous images created in a violent sexual context than we can now see in a movie series such as Saw. This is distressing to most people, but denying the reality of won’t make it go away. I will leave it at that.

    The Work Has to Get Done

    The following may be quite shocking to people of an American persuasion. It appears that of all the sacred rules the one regarding the free markets are the rules that will evoke the most controversy. This is understandable since so many Americans have so abundantly and unhistorically profited from (or in) this unique modern age. Free markets are essential – and more important, people having a jaw is essential.

    Let me go on the record here and make a claim.

    We are in a statistical ascend along a ‘hockey stick curve’ of irreversible unemployment and unemployability. Most people becoming non-term unemployed now will never get a job again. There are no mechanisms reversing this trend. In one or two decades we will demystify this trend and we will conclude that ever since (around) 2000 all ‘developed’ countries in the world will have acculated over 1% more unemployable constituents per year, ever year.

    It is my belief, and the belief of many with me, that the current form of free markets where people are regarded as free agents with no special rights can not endure. Right now in most ‘rich’ countries animal pets are treated better than the unemployed in those same countries. Worse, we live in a world of personal accountability where societal marginalization of these people will continue for quite a while. But as things go in exponential times – this will have to quite suddenly change or we will all fall flat on our faces. Provided my conclusions are correct of course.

    In short – a tidal wave of nanofabrication, 3D printing, nanotechnology, advanced prototyping, automation, on demand, JIT, crowd-sourcing, outsourcing, robotization will destroy jobs at an exponential pace while new jobs will appear quite fast, but not at an exponential one.

    It won’t be long before producers will face overproduction. Even if he underemployed are obfuscated in government statistics to sustain an economic illusion. This process was clear some time ago and its prophets were marched out of town tarred and feathered.

    We will have to contend with underwhelming solutions until we come up with solid solutions. am aware that doubting the market is akin to sacrilege, but I do remind “the market” that 30% unemployment is not a market where you will sell many goods, and that a world where the unemployed have no alternative but to constantly hammer the desperation key and vote for populists or welfare and nanny state enablers won’t be a sustainable trajectory for a stable future either.

    What is certain is that a lot of people will very soon have a lot of time on their hands. This will in parts be pretty awful, but it might also signify the biggest cultural advancement ever.

    It is my sincerest expectation that people like me, who haven’t had a honest job all their lives, but still try and make the best of the situation, will be indicative of this transition. The misfts already got the memo a while ago: ‘This world would rather see you all die’.

    Very soon however the misfit demographic will become a voter base and it will demand a fair share, and it will vote to get one. That will be in effect “demand and supply”, even if the Keynesians will scream blood murder. They do have ‘the tide of progress‘ against them in many ways however.

    The future looks bright indeed for playing gaming at home. The future looks bright to self-analyze and reinvent your core identity as something else than a consumer. Virtual worlds seem to me inescapable and rather ideally suited to deal with the extraordinary stresses of such an existential societal transition, to help reduce the anxieties and anger triggered by and in people realizing their redundancy in the old paradigm. One can only hope this will result in an increased sense of sexual creativity as well, rather than crackdowns against it.

    Context – Depth Perception, Motion Capture and New Interfaces

    Games and Virtual worlds make use of in-game “assets”. By and large these are bits of data, organized as Graphics (JPG, BMP, GIF), video files, animation data, databases, 3D mesh data, sound files and a range of other minutia. By interlinking these assets in a smart way with good software and up to date hardware you can in effect create the illusion of a place that does not actually exist, or persons that are wholly imaginary. I’d say we are very close to this being better than normal pornography. In some cases it is distinctly funnier.


    We are however on the verge of several technological revolutions. Right now the hot thing is Kinect, and specifically how Kinect is manipulated or ‘hacked‘ to create image or interface effects that go far beyond the design parameters of the creators. Another signpost towards a more future that goes deeper would be some kind of new stereoscopic display tool. There have been cautious experiments with this in Second Life, but I would prefer them liberated from traditional monitors to something new. I am not sure headsets would work. In practice what will work is the simple solution that will reach market penetration first. There will be widespread sales for a 100 pound monitor that burns as much electricity as a clothes dryer.

    Other incremental steps to allow us all to play, express, chat, emote, socialize and have the sekseh, would be many. Every years dozens of those upgrades accumulate – look back at progress in the last five years and we easily see several things we would have never expected. That rate of progress is set to accelerate in the next decades.


    The future cannot be predicted, but at a certain point some things should be petty obvious. We have embarked on a societal experiment that is nothing ‘normal’ or ‘preordained’ or ‘choreographed’. From here and onwards we make it all up. We haven no blue print for the future, only our best intentions and wish lists and hopes. We all know what we’ll end up in the long run, and it shouldn’t have to hurt to have a little fun together on the way. If we make a sincerest effort we might end up with something we didn’t expect that’ll be better than our wildest dream.


    Let’s all meet up there in the future and make it the best blind date ever.


    The myth of Violence
    Here be dragons :
    LGBT In Xbox
    LGBT In Wow
    Prostition for a horse
    Goldshire in Wow
    Sony Home Kink
    Kinky interactive
    RL Gor
    Hentai Foundry
    Dmitry Deviant Art
    Declaration of Independence
    MMO Demographics
    Hard Blush Furry Porn
    Valkyri Ice
    Not So Superficial: Rethinking cosmetic enhancements
    Rainbows end
    What did I REALLY say?
    Halting State
    Rule 34
    The End of Work
    Avatar Parties
    Marshal Brain
    The Lights in the Tunnel
    The Metaverse Roadmap
    Adaptivity, not control
    Do you want to..

    2 thoughts on “Creating Change – “The Great Filters”

    1. Marvelous post! So much to digest but I am very impressed with your reasoning. I most agree with your idea concerning bullying and the use of fear by institutions and individuals, and that the creative, edge-of-the-envelope pioneers are often overtaken by such bullies. Don’t get me started on how Microsoft ranks as Bully Numero Uno! Much to ponder here. Keep up the good work.

    2. A monumental post. One comment re “most Western-Europeans accept and welcome (or even demand) nanny state protection”:

      I am a Western European and I support the welfare state. I would even extend it to BIG for everyone, no questions asked.

      And of course I am happy that we are protected from violent crime, health problems and extreme financial hardship. I think a decent society should provide some degree of protection to everyone.

      But I don’t want to be “protected” from things that I choose, and I don’t want to be “protected” from others’ lifestyle choices that have no actual impact on me. When it comes to victimless crimes and personal lifestyle issues that don’t actually harm anyone else, the only acceptable regulation is no regulation and the nanny state can go fuck itself.

      I am also against the current obsession with “protecting children”. When we were kids nobody protected us from lnudity, alcohol, tobacco smoke and violent videogames (we had no videogames but we did have equivalent things). Nobody protected us from other children, nobody protected us from life, and I don’t think we are worse person for that. I think we should use the same courtesy to the next generation, and let them live and grow more freely.

      Of course children are smarter than us and find creative ways to circumvent our “protection”. So perhaps this just trains them to solve problems, which is something good.

      In general, I think the Western European and American societies are geriatric nanny states for senior citizens who never go out because they fear the sun, the wind and the rain, and I think we should do something about that.

    Comments are closed.