Additionally, I take some umbrage in Stephen’s apparent accusation. I have used both terms interchangeably in conversation and in written articles, yet I am not (or have ever been) part of any so-called ‘hate group’, nor had any associations with any organizations who have any sort of intent to deny equal rights and Constitutional liberties to any one for any reason. Nor am I personally a ‘hater’.

With all due respect, I believe Stephen may have read one too many press releases from the Southern Poverty Law Center or similar groups who receive funding via the creation of boogey men and bad guys.

Again, execelent article…I am very much looking foward to any follow ups you post, Keara.

Acting offended by such phrasing does more harm against gay equality than any hate group could possibly do.

To imply that I have a biased position — or that I’m ignorant of the subject matter — because of the fact that I’m supporting the author’s choice of terminology is, frankly, ludicrous.

Keara’s suggestion to you was an excellent one, and I’m disappointed you didn’t take her up on it. I, for one, would have been very curious to read it.

Best of luck to you. Take care.

I am surprised, Stephen, that you did not point out the real weakness in that article: I did not attempt to disguise myself as ‘gay’ the way I did with the other prejudices (age, color, and weight). I really had no idea how to go about it effectively. All I did was observe and report. It became the motivation for my other article in here -- the one on cross-dressing -- because I discovered that there was a very wide range of preferences and not all of the people accused of being gay were actually homosexuals.

What this magazine needs (and I am not equipped to write it) is an inside view of what it is like to be a homosexual in Home. You seem to be quite articulate, Stephen. Why not contact our editor and discuss it with him? I would love to read what you could contribute on that subject.

The human-behavior stories in Home are fascinating to me. How people act when they’re conveniently and safely anonymous is a wonderful look underneath the veneer of civilization we abide by in real life.

While I have no doubt as to the certainty that there are a percentage of home users who have allowed petty bigotry to become part of their general nature (both in and out of Home), I have some suspicions that may not be the case with every encounter of pixilated prejudice.

There are some who go around Home with the sole intent of causing some sort of disturbance. This is, apparently, their idea of “fun”.

Case in point: while in CP not too long ago, I saw someone dressed up in a sombrero (from RDR, if I’m not mistaken), milling about the space. He would let loose with a venomous diatribe against some ethnic group or another; in between each tirade he would mutter, “Just spreading my Hate”. While the person may indeed have been a hate-fueled dullard in real life, my gut was telling me that he was doing it just to get a rise out of people. And he succeeded to an extent, as those around him (including me, at first) reacted negatively to what he was saying.

Then there are some who simply don’t know any better. I was approached once by a fellow who started up a conversation with, “I am going to molest you”, followed up a moment later by, “jk”. After letting him know that this was an inappropriate way to say ‘hi’, he claimed he was “only kidding” and that “I shouldn’t take him seriously.”

Having teenage children, I can attest that there is indeed a current social phenomenon which allows for one to say something completely inane (or even downright rude) followed up with “jk” or “only joking” as if that makes what one said acceptable. Perhaps some of this foolishness we see in Home is an extension of such, with the ‘jk’ implied as it is only a virtual world.

You also pointed out in your article that certain forms of prejudice are seemingly allowable while others are quickly condemned. The blame for that, in my opinion, lies firmly at the feet of the TV media.
When we watch the news (or any program, for that matter) we see strong condemnation of apparent acts of racism. On the flip side we also see almost a celebration of a variety of other dehumanizing behavior.

While it is considered out of bounds to portray some racial stereotypes on TV, negative generalities of other human aspects ( weight, age, religion, and so on) are regularly bandied about; very often the exact same stereotypes are used in show after show ad-nauseum. Reality shows are filled with small-minded, selfish, insipid, petty, and vain people who we probably wouldn’t want to share a car-pool with…yet they are cheered on and encouraged as some sort of twisted paragon to be aspired to. Aspirations, in my opinion, which some in Home have apparently taken to heart.

Some of the negative behavior can be ode to ‘group think’ (or monkey-see-monkey-do-ism), as some users try to find acceptance in a strange place. Some others may be the school bully in real life…or the victim of such abuse striking back angrily at the world in their own fashion.

Unfortunately, much as in the real world, there is very little that can cure such problems. Perhaps articles like this one, as well as patient Home users, will serve as a tool for education to some who would perpetrate such nonsense with the hope that at least some of this behavior can be stemmed.

Sorry for getting a bit long winded, heh heh, but I found your article and investigations fascinating. I’m looking forward to reading more of your observations in the future.