So read this yesterday, and it's been on my mind. I see some people are a bit confused on why this would shake people up so badly, and to an extent, I get it. At first glance, it's just text after...
Exemplary
So read this yesterday, and it's been on my mind. I see some people are a bit confused on why this would shake people up so badly, and to an extent, I get it. At first glance, it's just text after all. No actual harm done, right? But it's a bit more nuanced than that. Just keep in mind I'm going to be a bit blunt at points about some potentially triggering topics.
The first thing you need to understand: from what I can tell, LambdaMOO isn’t strictly role-playing the way some people here might be thinking.
Most people’s image of role-playing is the formal, character-based type: fully-defined characters with unique backstories and unique personalities, quirks and belief systems that may or may not align with the player’s actual self. That’s the kind you see in TTRPGs, LARPing and a lot of online role-playing. Sometimes people play essentially fictionalized versions of themselves that isn’t as heavily defined and allows aspects of themselves to bleed into the character, other times they play murder-hobos with elaborate histories of PTSD.
However, when it comes to online interactions, there’s another more “casual” type that’s more of an online “persona” than a separate character. A fictional version of yourself that’s a bit ridiculous and exaggerated, but still reflect core aspects of you.
On IRC and certain forums, I was a shapeshifting demon. My best friend was a phoenix. One member had a Shuckle avatar and leaned into that. Yet these personas weren’t the dominating and defining part of our interactions. We’d have regular conversations about a large variety of topics, both serious and silly. We could go weeks without mentioning our personas. It’d just come up occasionally, little bits of playful role-playing where I’d sprout wings and carry someone to drop into a volcano.
We were ourselves, just with different mental images of how we looked.
With LambaMOO, while the article uses the word “characters”, the descriptions feel much closer to these online personas than that. These personas obviously have some different traits from the person behind them, like legba being a woman offline and a trickster spirit of indeterminate gender in Lambda, but it sounds more like they’re avatars you’d find in any MMO game. Extensions of the user themselves.
The characters in LambdaMOO are basically the user, just with a different name and skin.
That said, I still want to go over some basic aspects of basic role-playing etiquette. Role-playing is built around communication, trust and boundaries. You lay out ground rules—for example, a lot of DND campaigns have a “no PVP” rule. People roleplaying privately online typically discuss major events and attacks in a “meta” space. In all forms of role-playing, you never just kill another player character with zero warning. Many games also have rules that you can’t just attack other players with zero warning or hints of intent.
Perhaps most importantly, you never assume control another person’s character. You can only control your own character, maybe some NPC’s depending on the setting. However, the player characters belong to the player. This is a universal rule for all forms of role-playing.
With that part down, I need to tackle one more topic: sex.
Sex is an incredibly intimate act, and in some ways, it could be defined as the ultimate form of human interaction. It involves a good deal of trust, because while both parties are participating in the act, you can only control your own actions. You’re not just vulnerable in the sense you’re removing clothing and armor/protection from attacks, you’re also exposing your most sensitive areas to another person.
When you consent to have sex, you trust the other party to listen to you, and not do anything you're uncomfortable with. You cannot control the other person’s actions, you must trust that they won’t use the opportunity to harm you.
That is what makes rape so traumatic.
Rape is about power, and humiliation. Attraction is sometimes involved in why they choose a specific victim, but ultimately, the appeal for rapists lies in the sense of power over the other person, of having total control. I realized this when I saw a news article about a local woman in her 90's being raped by burglars. There was no attraction involved, just some sick fuck wanting the heady sense of power over a weak, vulnerable person who couldn’t defend herself.
That removal of control is what makes it so traumatic for victims. Sex centers around trusting the other party to not harm you while you’re at your most vulnerable, so to have someone completely ignore your wishes and wellbeing in the most physical manner possible... Words can’t do justice to how terrifying that is.
Victims are left aware of one thing: they cannot control another person’s actions.
Rape defies a basic trust—not just in the rapist, but in people in general. Even if it’s a nonviolent rape, the victim is left with a newfound keen awareness that there’s nothing stopping other people from acting out against others than their own willpower. The fact it happened during sex, the most intimate form of interaction, just emphasizes it.
Or, to put it another way: you suddenly realize that society is kind of built around the expectation that people won’t randomly decide to be dicks.
That’s a bit of an understatement, but that’s the basic gist of it. Prison isn’t the most effective deterrent for crime, especially as the criminals’ position in society rises. Just look at the punishments for multi-million dollar embezzlement schemes that indirectly ruin people’s lives versus a homeless man stealing a measly $100. Or, for a more relevant example, look at Brock Allen Turner, the convicted rapist. Who served three months of a six-month sentence for undeniable, clear-cut rape, seeing as fully unconscious people can’t consent to sex.
Then you get the people who just decide they don't care about the consequences because they're just living embodiments of hatred and cruelty unfortunately cloaked in human skin.
Basically, we never really think about how much we depend on people subscribing to a basic “social contract” to just... not be horrid monsters. Laws help define consequences, but they usually only come into play after the act is committed. Even actions as simple as going to the grocery store are dependent on us assuming some random person won’t decide “screw consequences” and randomly burst through the doors shooting everyone in sight. (I admittedly think about this a lot as an American, but that’s a talk for another topic.)
As rape involves sex, one of the most intimate forms of trust of all, well. You can see how it can screw up people’s trust in that basic social contract. Physical wounds can heal, but mental wounds can take years to mend, if they even can. Mental scars are far worse than physical.
I think this line from the article sums it up well:
Since rape can occur without any physical pain or damage, I found myself reasoning, then it must be classed as a crime against the mind -- more intimately and deeply hurtful, to be sure, than cross burnings, wolf whistles, and virtual rape, but undeniably located on the same conceptual continuum.
That brings us back to the article, and why this shook people up so badly.
@triadderall_triangle described the people in this article “LARPing as rape victims”, but that’s inaccurate because role-playing a rape victim implies the person consented to the entire scenario.
The victims in the article never agreed or wanted to play out a rape scenario. They logged on that day like any other, probably planning to talk to friends and play around a bit, and then had their characters suddenly forced to play out graphic acts. They had no control over their character’s actions, all control lay in the hands of Dr. Bungle thanks to his voodoo doll.
I want to remind you that these are users’ personas, not completely separate characters. These are extensions of the users themselves. It may not be their actual selves, but those names are part of how they picture and view themselves when in that space.
If it helps, imagine you’re randomly scrolling online and stumble upon a story about you, yourself. Seeing [YOUR NAME HERE] forced into degrading positions, masturbating furiously while humping a table leg and begging people to piss on you. And then think about how this story is online where anyone you know can see it. You can reach out to the site to take it down, but that won't remove it instantly. Even if it does get removed, there’s no guarantee another, even worse story won’t be posted in its place someday.
That’s a fairly close comparison, given that this happened in a public space in the game with others present to witness it. The witnesses will forever have sentences like “Starsinger jabs a steak knife up her ass, causing immense joy.” forever seared into their memories. People who read the article will forever associate the names with this specific incident. Even if it's not an actual rape, at the very least, forcing your sexual fantasies on other people by making them endure graphic erotic writing about them is a form of sexual harassment. It's still derived from the same desire for power and forcing your will on other people that motivates actual rapists.
The victims never consented to participating in it. The witnesses never consented to watching it. Only one person went in there with plans to simulate and write out a graphic rape sequence using other people: the assailant.
Take away the sex, strip it to its barest frame, and you’re left with the same core: the victim is stripped of autonomy and forced to endure degrading acts, totally subject to the whims of the assailant.
The most basic trust is broken. Suddenly, a formerly safe space is now dangerous because you can’t predict if there will be a repeat incident. Not even keeping your distance from the assailant will keep you safe in LambdaMOO, as the article states the voodoo doll isn’t limited by proximity. It took someone with moderation powers putting him in a cage that nullified voodoo dolls’ power to stop the rampage. You can be anywhere in that game, at any time, and suddenly see the text “[YOUR NAME] suddenly stops and lunges for the nearest chair, tearing off their pants to rub their now-bare groin furiously against the wood while moaning sensually.”
The only thing stopping every other person with access to something like his voodoo doll from doing that is whether you trust them not to do so—and since he seemed to be a normal user, that means everyone can do that.
There may not be physical rape involved, but it ends with the same sort of loss of your sense of basic security. You might not feel physically unsafe like in real life, but mentally? The damage is there. You're left in a state of paranoia and constantly on-edge every time you enter that space.
And heaven forbid that any of the victims in this scenario had been actual victims of rape.
This was long-winded, as many of my posts are, but I hope this helps clear up some things and explain why this would shake up people so badly. It's easy to dismiss it as "just text", but as Dibbell said, rape is a crime against the mind just as much as it can be a physical assault. The mental damage is far harder to heal, and the scars much deeper.
Can you provide a more succinct profile of what and why you think it? Like what is the bottom line of all this that we're all kind of quibbling over to no avail in your view? I can't deal with...
Can you provide a more succinct profile of what and why you think it? Like what is the bottom line of all this that we're all kind of quibbling over to no avail in your view? I can't deal with this Great Wall of Text right now...
Its going to require extreme evidence and not extreme prose or rhetoric in the alternative to convince a not-insignificant sample size of readers that this whole situation isn't rape LARPing.
Like, I really want to respect and give latitutude to the victims but I feel like its a severe grey area and not at all palpable that these folks are truly victims in the traditional sense of the word in the context of sexual violence.
Not OP, but why are you asking for a TL:DR? I feel that Tildes's philosophy encourages the creation and consumption of more thoughtful and in-depth content and comments, to which asking for a...
Not OP, but why are you asking for a TL:DR? I feel that Tildes's philosophy encourages the creation and consumption of more thoughtful and in-depth content and comments, to which asking for a summary is antithetical.
Second, I am uncertain why you have been so active and oppositional in this thread? Could you explain what in the article sits wrong with you? The author already acknowledges what the victims went through isn't the same as IRL sexual assault but does place it on the same spectrum, which feels like an appropriate placement for the e-assault. To me, your comments feel like they are attempting to deny/minimize their lived trauma for unclear reasons, which makes me (and I assume other tildes users) uncomfortable.
For what it's worth, @CannibalisticApple's post took me less than 10 minutes to read and did a good job of convincing me that the two situations are not as dissimilar as I would have initially...
For what it's worth, @CannibalisticApple's post took me less than 10 minutes to read and did a good job of convincing me that the two situations are not as dissimilar as I would have initially thought. It is one of the better written and persuasive posts I've seen on this site. Virtual sexual violence is different than the actual physical crime, but after reading the above post I'd be inclined to say they do exist on the same spectrum, and while the effects of the virtual violation are almost certainly less extreme than something happening "IRL", it is not to say it is not still a violation in the same vein.
What exactly do you take opposition to that isn't already covered in the article? It seems like you take offence at this type of virtual violation being equated to the physical kind. I can see that, but I also don't think the article really does that. The author acknowledges the two are not identical and that one is worse. Even the title reflects this: violence "IRL" takes many forms, so why can it not also manifest in virtual realms? If that is your objection, it's not an objection with the article as it is written.
Title changed to avoid triggering word. This article contains descriptions of sociopathy, sexual violence, and psychological abuse in a virtual world as well as their emotional consequences. It...
Title changed to avoid triggering word.
This article contains descriptions of sociopathy, sexual violence, and psychological abuse in a virtual world as well as their emotional consequences. It should be considered highly triggering to anyone sensitive to those issues.
It also contains an insightful account of how a case of virtual sexual assault led to the institution of online suffrage in LambdaMOO.
Brilliant piece, thank you for sharing. This seems nearly a socratic dialogue rather than a retelling of what happened, and I really enjoyed it. I'm particularly fascinated by this part: I'll be...
Brilliant piece, thank you for sharing. This seems nearly a socratic dialogue rather than a retelling of what happened, and I really enjoyed it.
I'm particularly fascinated by this part:
And yet, on the other hand, I can no longer convince myself that our wishful insulation of language from the realm of action has ever been anything but a valuable kludge, a philosophically damaged stopgap against oppression that would just have to do till something truer and more elegant came along.
Its interesting that he leaves off there rather than making some kind of prescriptive attempt or fumbling towards what that might look like. It almost makes me more suspicious because he fails to...
Its interesting that he leaves off there rather than making some kind of prescriptive attempt or fumbling towards what that might look like. It almost makes me more suspicious because he fails to answer the "so what?" aspect we kind of expect from any given line of analysis this extensive.
Does the writer perhaps believe that text-based or phone sex that is "non-consensual" should be prosecutable? Its a dangerous territory, that's already sort of the law I believe in certain jurisdictions in terms of written text regarding children and sexual descriptions. Is this not kind of a "viewer's dicretion is advised" or "reader beware, you're in for a scare" type deal? How do you even establish that it was so non-consensual that you couldn't stop reading your own rape in real-time (you couldn't put the screen down, so to speak). That's legal, its called slash or erotic fiction, I think...
Not gonna get in a debate about that but that would seem to be an obvious conclusion that is implied to the reader without ever necessarily using a set of words that sum to that conclusion explicitly or directly.
I guess I just have a problem philosophically with the notions of Thoughtcrime and Writecrime despite the (like in any aspect of human behavior, activity, abd interaction) potential harms that are always theoretically possible but just really can't be addressed within the province of law in general, unfortunately. At most, this seems to be a TOS and admin/moderation issue in my view.
Too easy to abuse against normal internet users and activities and not at all possible to establish a reasonable consensus about. Like, I cannot take this seriously on a meta level, its both insane and inane despite my sympathies for those who feel they were wronged.
Anytime there's an "article" like this (not to undermine the assumption of good faith and spirit of helping) on all things internet and "cyber"-related or adjacent, I tend to view them as having...
Anytime there's an "article" like this (not to undermine the assumption of good faith and spirit of helping) on all things internet and "cyber"-related or adjacent, I tend to view them as having an agenda that ultimately boils down to supporting that thing that wants everything authenticated and tied to a name/person/trust module that's a big debate right now. Something, something trust module/TPM/SecureEnclave/Social credit blah blah blah :/
I understand and I'm empathetic to that position but, respectfully, this (I would kinda sorta compare this with pearl-clutching) is literally how it always starts. Its straight from the...
I understand and I'm empathetic to that position but, respectfully, this (I would kinda sorta compare this with pearl-clutching) is literally how it always starts. Its straight from the prohibitionist playbook.
I don't believe there is much more I can add, other than the sense of sadness I experience when I encounter someone that is somehow stuck in the suffocating circular motion of a long held belief...
I don't believe there is much more I can add, other than the sense of sadness I experience when I encounter someone that is somehow stuck in the suffocating circular motion of a long held belief that works like a self feeding and self fulfilling prophecy.
It sounds like a rigid and unfulfilling way to live :/
I prefer the lack of final summarized conclusion. He talks about the feelings and reactions of those that were affected, and about the interesting middle space such places occupy, and if there is...
I prefer the lack of final summarized conclusion. He talks about the feelings and reactions of those that were affected, and about the interesting middle space such places occupy, and if there is a conclusion to be drawn from his retelling of events, so be it. However I'm not quite sure this falls under the umbrellas of Thoughtcrime or Writecrime though, since there were real people really affected. Perhaps I don't understand what you mean.
I feel its dangerous because it is not forthcoming about what I sense is its implicit agenda. "There's this bad weird niche thing that happened one time where people got sex-story "raped" and we...
I feel its dangerous because it is not forthcoming about what I sense is its implicit agenda.
"There's this bad weird niche thing that happened one time where people got sex-story "raped" and we now need to put everyone using the internet for normal stuff under the microscope to make sure it never repeats. Also it wasn't illegal and was technically voluntary and it could happen to anyone...What is really needed is media literacy education and better social support mechanisms so people aren't so vulnerable to this kind of nonsense.
Voodoo dolls are no joke, man. For real though, AITA here?
I have a "joke" about forced analysis. I came up with it in the context of film studies, but it works here too. I used to say that if you torture a film long enough, it will confess to anything...
I have a "joke" about forced analysis. I came up with it in the context of film studies, but it works here too.
I used to say that if you torture a film long enough, it will confess to anything you want.
Ultimately, forced analysis says more about the analyst than the object.
CanI respectfully inquire as to what you hypothesize this article is about or its purpose? Do you truly feel its agenda is to simply report isolated facts on a very niche internet happening?
CanI respectfully inquire as to what you hypothesize this article is about or its purpose? Do you truly feel its agenda is to simply report isolated facts on a very niche internet happening?
I simply don't function in a way that makes me inclined to ascribe occult evil agendas (edit: or any agenda, really) in the first place. Read my bio ;)
I simply don't function in a way that makes me inclined to ascribe occult evil agendas (edit: or any agenda, really) in the first place.
I kinda like you and we definitely share some—let's call them characteristics in common that I'm not going to disclose—but the bio is a little "chip-shouldery", and tad suggestive you consider...
I kinda like you and we definitely share some—let's call them characteristics in common that I'm not going to disclose—but the bio is a little "chip-shouldery", and tad suggestive you consider yourself an arbiter of truth as it relates to internet discussions you anticipate participating in. Not a fan of disclaimers but I definitely don't hold it against you when considering the points you make.
Still, I never say no or take harm from healthy discourse with good-faith verbal companions ;) The wost thing in the world is not being talked to, not (not?) about :)
I don't mean any invective here but I would honestly remove it, wholesale. I don't think it serves you in any palpable way and if I'm completely candid with you, it honestly looks just like...
I don't mean any invective here but I would honestly remove it, wholesale. I don't think it serves you in any palpable way and if I'm completely candid with you, it honestly looks just like something I've written countless times when I've taken too much Adderall or stimulants.
Your arguments (replies and comments) need to be able to stand alone or at the very least in aggregate without a disclaimer-type forward that attempts to distract and delegate the heavy-lifting that can only come from the force of a good or at least provocative (in the positive, good-faith sense) response or timely/relevant content you share. Cult of personality really shouldn't have any place here in Tildes if I'm reading the room correctly or even if not, its not realy relevant to any discussion. It kinda makes things about you particularly when you reference it as a companion to parsing that which you put out there.
No worries but seriously, its not a helpful or useful thing in my view. Defintely don't delete ur account but consider deleting that particular aspect of ur account. In lawyerly terms, it is prejudicial to your case in all the worst ways to the extent you should consider suppressing it.
I'm having trouble understanding your response, or where you are coming from, but, apart from any of that, why would you think we could be anything close to adversaries? We are merely in...
I'm having trouble understanding your response, or where you are coming from, but, apart from any of that, why would you think we could be anything close to adversaries? We are merely in disagreement. I would never think of you as an adversary, but I would be glad to count you as a friend!
I just meant more in like a dialectical kind of way, hence the friend part (actually another lawyer joke, if unintentional beyond my recognition of it just now), although I'm open to the...
I just meant more in like a dialectical kind of way, hence the friend part (actually another lawyer joke, if unintentional beyond my recognition of it just now), although I'm open to the suggestion that I may have lost or gotten lost in the plot somewhere along the way.
I should probably see my family/friends or go outside, ironically (I think ;)
Don't take anything but my suggestion (re:the bio) all that seriously, we're all just random weirdos on the internet trying to make sense of the world or at least win some of those "sweet" internet points that go nowhere :(
Honestly, maybe we're not so different from the people in this article in some sense...just luckier maybe. I dunno, I gotta take a break aha. This article+thread obsesses me in all the wrong ways because of its craziness and a morbid fascination with internet culture.
I didnt read the article, just the Wikipedia, was this just like an old school cyber sex with just words? (I realize unwanted) I dont really understand why this was such a big thing, do we all...
I didnt read the article, just the Wikipedia, was this just like an old school cyber sex with just words? (I realize unwanted) I dont really understand why this was such a big thing, do we all have thicker skin today being raised on the internet?, I got my first (family) computer at the age of 7 in 1996, and have been addicted to the internet since, ive seen lots of crazy shit, someone taking over my avatar and initiating sex with words would be annoying, but I'd just be angry not broken up over it
Some people place great value in their digital identities, and violence against their characters equate to violence against themselves. That is a common phenomenon in virtual worlds and online...
Some people place great value in their digital identities, and violence against their characters equate to violence against themselves. That is a common phenomenon in virtual worlds and online spaces even today. It happens offline as well, and sexual violence is a contentious topic in RPG groups.
I honestly feel like some commenters here think I'm taking crazy pills in not seeing this as a real issue or something that is actionable, per se. They would not be wrong in this made-up vignette...
I honestly feel like some commenters here think I'm taking crazy pills in not seeing this as a real issue or something that is actionable, per se.
They would not be wrong in this made-up vignette in my head that I've been prescribed the odd pill (pun intended) that I'm spinning up here but that is beside(s) the point.
I feel kinda bad cuz obviously some people feel hurt and violated but I just can't take this whole situation seriously. I just can't, its profoundly asinine and I think a very silly attempt to...
I feel kinda bad cuz obviously some people feel hurt and violated but I just can't take this whole situation seriously. I just can't, its profoundly asinine and I think a very silly attempt to crystallize a [not] new half-baked internet moral crusade. I really just dunno
Edit: these folks are LARPing as rape victims imao. Its honestly shameful to me
This article is thirty years old. Regardless of how much you're reading into the original intent of the author, I hope we can all agree that something that happened and was written about thirty...
I think a very silly attempt to crystallize a new half-baked internet moral crusade
This article is thirty years old.
Regardless of how much you're reading into the original intent of the author, I hope we can all agree that something that happened and was written about thirty years ago isn't "new".
I will concede the new part, the remainder of my observations I stand behind. Like, yes, you are correct, but its a bit nitpicky relative to the general spirit of my assessment. The overall agenda...
I will concede the new part, the remainder of my observations I stand behind. Like, yes, you are correct, but its a bit nitpicky relative to the general spirit of my assessment.
The overall agenda in conjunction with the moral tenor of the piece, I believe, are timeless, and infinitely recurring.
If anyone's curious, LambdaMOO is still running at lambda.moo.mud.org port 8888 (via telnet or MUD client). Apparently in its original form. I just checked, there are 52 people online.
If anyone's curious, LambdaMOO is still running at lambda.moo.mud.org port 8888 (via telnet or MUD client). Apparently in its original form.
I just can't even. These people respectfully need to work on getting a full-sensory-based First Life. In my view, these folks are LARPing as rape victims and I think its pretty damn disrespectful...
I just can't even. These people respectfully need to work on getting a full-sensory-based First Life. In my view, these folks are LARPing as rape victims and I think its pretty damn disrespectful to people who were actually extrinsically and physically violated by an abuser (IRL, as they might say).
I can't help but be dismissive of this (not you), its just so inane/insane to me and I really hope people can find something a little more edifying to occupy themselves and/or satiate their ennui...
The site is not secured. I'm not opening this with all the 0day and MITM going on. If someone could share it here, I'll be thankful. edit: found it on web Archieve
The site is not secured. I'm not opening this with all the 0day and MITM going on. If someone could share it here, I'll be thankful.
Talk about adding real insult to fake injury. Jesus, this whole thing is the peculiar brand of trainwreck that can be easily looked away from but not without causing a whiplash-inducing shaking of...
Talk about adding real insult to fake injury. Jesus, this whole thing is the peculiar brand of trainwreck that can be easily looked away from but not without causing a whiplash-inducing shaking of the head whilst doing so.
So read this yesterday, and it's been on my mind. I see some people are a bit confused on why this would shake people up so badly, and to an extent, I get it. At first glance, it's just text after all. No actual harm done, right? But it's a bit more nuanced than that. Just keep in mind I'm going to be a bit blunt at points about some potentially triggering topics.
The first thing you need to understand: from what I can tell, LambdaMOO isn’t strictly role-playing the way some people here might be thinking.
Most people’s image of role-playing is the formal, character-based type: fully-defined characters with unique backstories and unique personalities, quirks and belief systems that may or may not align with the player’s actual self. That’s the kind you see in TTRPGs, LARPing and a lot of online role-playing. Sometimes people play essentially fictionalized versions of themselves that isn’t as heavily defined and allows aspects of themselves to bleed into the character, other times they play murder-hobos with elaborate histories of PTSD.
However, when it comes to online interactions, there’s another more “casual” type that’s more of an online “persona” than a separate character. A fictional version of yourself that’s a bit ridiculous and exaggerated, but still reflect core aspects of you.
On IRC and certain forums, I was a shapeshifting demon. My best friend was a phoenix. One member had a Shuckle avatar and leaned into that. Yet these personas weren’t the dominating and defining part of our interactions. We’d have regular conversations about a large variety of topics, both serious and silly. We could go weeks without mentioning our personas. It’d just come up occasionally, little bits of playful role-playing where I’d sprout wings and carry someone to drop into a volcano.
We were ourselves, just with different mental images of how we looked.
With LambaMOO, while the article uses the word “characters”, the descriptions feel much closer to these online personas than that. These personas obviously have some different traits from the person behind them, like legba being a woman offline and a trickster spirit of indeterminate gender in Lambda, but it sounds more like they’re avatars you’d find in any MMO game. Extensions of the user themselves.
The characters in LambdaMOO are basically the user, just with a different name and skin.
That said, I still want to go over some basic aspects of basic role-playing etiquette. Role-playing is built around communication, trust and boundaries. You lay out ground rules—for example, a lot of DND campaigns have a “no PVP” rule. People roleplaying privately online typically discuss major events and attacks in a “meta” space. In all forms of role-playing, you never just kill another player character with zero warning. Many games also have rules that you can’t just attack other players with zero warning or hints of intent.
Perhaps most importantly, you never assume control another person’s character. You can only control your own character, maybe some NPC’s depending on the setting. However, the player characters belong to the player. This is a universal rule for all forms of role-playing.
With that part down, I need to tackle one more topic: sex.
Sex is an incredibly intimate act, and in some ways, it could be defined as the ultimate form of human interaction. It involves a good deal of trust, because while both parties are participating in the act, you can only control your own actions. You’re not just vulnerable in the sense you’re removing clothing and armor/protection from attacks, you’re also exposing your most sensitive areas to another person.
When you consent to have sex, you trust the other party to listen to you, and not do anything you're uncomfortable with. You cannot control the other person’s actions, you must trust that they won’t use the opportunity to harm you.
That is what makes rape so traumatic.
Rape is about power, and humiliation. Attraction is sometimes involved in why they choose a specific victim, but ultimately, the appeal for rapists lies in the sense of power over the other person, of having total control. I realized this when I saw a news article about a local woman in her 90's being raped by burglars. There was no attraction involved, just some sick fuck wanting the heady sense of power over a weak, vulnerable person who couldn’t defend herself.
That removal of control is what makes it so traumatic for victims. Sex centers around trusting the other party to not harm you while you’re at your most vulnerable, so to have someone completely ignore your wishes and wellbeing in the most physical manner possible... Words can’t do justice to how terrifying that is.
Victims are left aware of one thing: they cannot control another person’s actions.
Rape defies a basic trust—not just in the rapist, but in people in general. Even if it’s a nonviolent rape, the victim is left with a newfound keen awareness that there’s nothing stopping other people from acting out against others than their own willpower. The fact it happened during sex, the most intimate form of interaction, just emphasizes it.
Or, to put it another way: you suddenly realize that society is kind of built around the expectation that people won’t randomly decide to be dicks.
That’s a bit of an understatement, but that’s the basic gist of it. Prison isn’t the most effective deterrent for crime, especially as the criminals’ position in society rises. Just look at the punishments for multi-million dollar embezzlement schemes that indirectly ruin people’s lives versus a homeless man stealing a measly $100. Or, for a more relevant example, look at Brock Allen Turner, the convicted rapist. Who served three months of a six-month sentence for undeniable, clear-cut rape, seeing as fully unconscious people can’t consent to sex.
Then you get the people who just decide they don't care about the consequences because they're just living embodiments of hatred and cruelty unfortunately cloaked in human skin.
Basically, we never really think about how much we depend on people subscribing to a basic “social contract” to just... not be horrid monsters. Laws help define consequences, but they usually only come into play after the act is committed. Even actions as simple as going to the grocery store are dependent on us assuming some random person won’t decide “screw consequences” and randomly burst through the doors shooting everyone in sight. (I admittedly think about this a lot as an American, but that’s a talk for another topic.)
As rape involves sex, one of the most intimate forms of trust of all, well. You can see how it can screw up people’s trust in that basic social contract. Physical wounds can heal, but mental wounds can take years to mend, if they even can. Mental scars are far worse than physical.
I think this line from the article sums it up well:
That brings us back to the article, and why this shook people up so badly.
@triadderall_triangle described the people in this article “LARPing as rape victims”, but that’s inaccurate because role-playing a rape victim implies the person consented to the entire scenario.
The victims in the article never agreed or wanted to play out a rape scenario. They logged on that day like any other, probably planning to talk to friends and play around a bit, and then had their characters suddenly forced to play out graphic acts. They had no control over their character’s actions, all control lay in the hands of Dr. Bungle thanks to his voodoo doll.
I want to remind you that these are users’ personas, not completely separate characters. These are extensions of the users themselves. It may not be their actual selves, but those names are part of how they picture and view themselves when in that space.
If it helps, imagine you’re randomly scrolling online and stumble upon a story about you, yourself. Seeing [YOUR NAME HERE] forced into degrading positions, masturbating furiously while humping a table leg and begging people to piss on you. And then think about how this story is online where anyone you know can see it. You can reach out to the site to take it down, but that won't remove it instantly. Even if it does get removed, there’s no guarantee another, even worse story won’t be posted in its place someday.
That’s a fairly close comparison, given that this happened in a public space in the game with others present to witness it. The witnesses will forever have sentences like “Starsinger jabs a steak knife up her ass, causing immense joy.” forever seared into their memories. People who read the article will forever associate the names with this specific incident. Even if it's not an actual rape, at the very least, forcing your sexual fantasies on other people by making them endure graphic erotic writing about them is a form of sexual harassment. It's still derived from the same desire for power and forcing your will on other people that motivates actual rapists.
The victims never consented to participating in it. The witnesses never consented to watching it. Only one person went in there with plans to simulate and write out a graphic rape sequence using other people: the assailant.
Take away the sex, strip it to its barest frame, and you’re left with the same core: the victim is stripped of autonomy and forced to endure degrading acts, totally subject to the whims of the assailant.
The most basic trust is broken. Suddenly, a formerly safe space is now dangerous because you can’t predict if there will be a repeat incident. Not even keeping your distance from the assailant will keep you safe in LambdaMOO, as the article states the voodoo doll isn’t limited by proximity. It took someone with moderation powers putting him in a cage that nullified voodoo dolls’ power to stop the rampage. You can be anywhere in that game, at any time, and suddenly see the text “[YOUR NAME] suddenly stops and lunges for the nearest chair, tearing off their pants to rub their now-bare groin furiously against the wood while moaning sensually.”
The only thing stopping every other person with access to something like his voodoo doll from doing that is whether you trust them not to do so—and since he seemed to be a normal user, that means everyone can do that.
There may not be physical rape involved, but it ends with the same sort of loss of your sense of basic security. You might not feel physically unsafe like in real life, but mentally? The damage is there. You're left in a state of paranoia and constantly on-edge every time you enter that space.
And heaven forbid that any of the victims in this scenario had been actual victims of rape.
This was long-winded, as many of my posts are, but I hope this helps clear up some things and explain why this would shake up people so badly. It's easy to dismiss it as "just text", but as Dibbell said, rape is a crime against the mind just as much as it can be a physical assault. The mental damage is far harder to heal, and the scars much deeper.
Can you provide a more succinct profile of what and why you think it? Like what is the bottom line of all this that we're all kind of quibbling over to no avail in your view? I can't deal with this Great Wall of Text right now...
Its going to require extreme evidence and not extreme prose or rhetoric in the alternative to convince a not-insignificant sample size of readers that this whole situation isn't rape LARPing.
Like, I really want to respect and give latitutude to the victims but I feel like its a severe grey area and not at all palpable that these folks are truly victims in the traditional sense of the word in the context of sexual violence.
Not OP, but why are you asking for a TL:DR? I feel that Tildes's philosophy encourages the creation and consumption of more thoughtful and in-depth content and comments, to which asking for a summary is antithetical.
Second, I am uncertain why you have been so active and oppositional in this thread? Could you explain what in the article sits wrong with you? The author already acknowledges what the victims went through isn't the same as IRL sexual assault but does place it on the same spectrum, which feels like an appropriate placement for the e-assault. To me, your comments feel like they are attempting to deny/minimize their lived trauma for unclear reasons, which makes me (and I assume other tildes users) uncomfortable.
For what it's worth, @CannibalisticApple's post took me less than 10 minutes to read and did a good job of convincing me that the two situations are not as dissimilar as I would have initially thought. It is one of the better written and persuasive posts I've seen on this site. Virtual sexual violence is different than the actual physical crime, but after reading the above post I'd be inclined to say they do exist on the same spectrum, and while the effects of the virtual violation are almost certainly less extreme than something happening "IRL", it is not to say it is not still a violation in the same vein.
What exactly do you take opposition to that isn't already covered in the article? It seems like you take offence at this type of virtual violation being equated to the physical kind. I can see that, but I also don't think the article really does that. The author acknowledges the two are not identical and that one is worse. Even the title reflects this: violence "IRL" takes many forms, so why can it not also manifest in virtual realms? If that is your objection, it's not an objection with the article as it is written.
Title changed to avoid triggering word.
This article contains descriptions of sociopathy, sexual violence, and psychological abuse in a virtual world as well as their emotional consequences. It should be considered highly triggering to anyone sensitive to those issues.
It also contains an insightful account of how a case of virtual sexual assault led to the institution of online suffrage in LambdaMOO.
Followup reading: https://www.cc.gatech.edu/classes/cs8113h_98_spring/LTAND.html (Ctrl+f LTAND2).
Brilliant piece, thank you for sharing. This seems nearly a socratic dialogue rather than a retelling of what happened, and I really enjoyed it.
I'm particularly fascinated by this part:
I'll be thinking about this for a while to come.
Its interesting that he leaves off there rather than making some kind of prescriptive attempt or fumbling towards what that might look like. It almost makes me more suspicious because he fails to answer the "so what?" aspect we kind of expect from any given line of analysis this extensive.
Does the writer perhaps believe that text-based or phone sex that is "non-consensual" should be prosecutable? Its a dangerous territory, that's already sort of the law I believe in certain jurisdictions in terms of written text regarding children and sexual descriptions. Is this not kind of a "viewer's dicretion is advised" or "reader beware, you're in for a scare" type deal? How do you even establish that it was so non-consensual that you couldn't stop reading your own rape in real-time (you couldn't put the screen down, so to speak). That's legal, its called slash or erotic fiction, I think...
Not gonna get in a debate about that but that would seem to be an obvious conclusion that is implied to the reader without ever necessarily using a set of words that sum to that conclusion explicitly or directly.
I guess I just have a problem philosophically with the notions of Thoughtcrime and Writecrime despite the (like in any aspect of human behavior, activity, abd interaction) potential harms that are always theoretically possible but just really can't be addressed within the province of law in general, unfortunately. At most, this seems to be a TOS and admin/moderation issue in my view.
Too easy to abuse against normal internet users and activities and not at all possible to establish a reasonable consensus about. Like, I cannot take this seriously on a meta level, its both insane and inane despite my sympathies for those who feel they were wronged.
The article is more of a narrative than an argument. I think that's an interesting choice that allows for great insight.
Anytime there's an "article" like this (not to undermine the assumption of good faith and spirit of helping) on all things internet and "cyber"-related or adjacent, I tend to view them as having an agenda that ultimately boils down to supporting that thing that wants everything authenticated and tied to a name/person/trust module that's a big debate right now. Something, something trust module/TPM/SecureEnclave/Social credit blah blah blah :/
I have no interest in defending the author, but not everything is argumentative and sometimes it pays to be less defensive.
I understand and I'm empathetic to that position but, respectfully, this (I would kinda sorta compare this with pearl-clutching) is literally how it always starts. Its straight from the prohibitionist playbook.
I don't believe there is much more I can add, other than the sense of sadness I experience when I encounter someone that is somehow stuck in the suffocating circular motion of a long held belief that works like a self feeding and self fulfilling prophecy.
It sounds like a rigid and unfulfilling way to live :/
I prefer the lack of final summarized conclusion. He talks about the feelings and reactions of those that were affected, and about the interesting middle space such places occupy, and if there is a conclusion to be drawn from his retelling of events, so be it. However I'm not quite sure this falls under the umbrellas of Thoughtcrime or Writecrime though, since there were real people really affected. Perhaps I don't understand what you mean.
I feel its dangerous because it is not forthcoming about what I sense is its implicit agenda.
"There's this bad weird niche thing that happened one time where people got sex-story "raped" and we now need to put everyone using the internet for normal stuff under the microscope to make sure it never repeats. Also it wasn't illegal and was technically voluntary and it could happen to anyone...What is really needed is media literacy education and better social support mechanisms so people aren't so vulnerable to this kind of nonsense.
Voodoo dolls are no joke, man. For real though, AITA here?
I have a "joke" about forced analysis. I came up with it in the context of film studies, but it works here too.
I used to say that if you torture a film long enough, it will confess to anything you want.
Ultimately, forced analysis says more about the analyst than the object.
CanI respectfully inquire as to what you hypothesize this article is about or its purpose? Do you truly feel its agenda is to simply report isolated facts on a very niche internet happening?
I simply don't function in a way that makes me inclined to ascribe occult evil agendas (edit: or any agenda, really) in the first place.
Read my bio ;)
I kinda like you and we definitely share some—let's call them characteristics in common that I'm not going to disclose—but the bio is a little "chip-shouldery", and tad suggestive you consider yourself an arbiter of truth as it relates to internet discussions you anticipate participating in. Not a fan of disclaimers but I definitely don't hold it against you when considering the points you make.
Still, I never say no or take harm from healthy discourse with good-faith verbal companions ;) The wost thing in the world is not being talked to, not (not?) about :)
I appreciate your criticism of my bio. How would you suggest me to improve it?
Keep it. I like it. I've always noticed it to be relevant a hilarious amount of times over the years.
(particularly the north america bit)
I don't mean any invective here but I would honestly remove it, wholesale. I don't think it serves you in any palpable way and if I'm completely candid with you, it honestly looks just like something I've written countless times when I've taken too much Adderall or stimulants.
Your arguments (replies and comments) need to be able to stand alone or at the very least in aggregate without a disclaimer-type forward that attempts to distract and delegate the heavy-lifting that can only come from the force of a good or at least provocative (in the positive, good-faith sense) response or timely/relevant content you share. Cult of personality really shouldn't have any place here in Tildes if I'm reading the room correctly or even if not, its not realy relevant to any discussion. It kinda makes things about you particularly when you reference it as a companion to parsing that which you put out there.
No worries but seriously, its not a helpful or useful thing in my view. Defintely don't delete ur account but consider deleting that particular aspect of ur account. In lawyerly terms, it is prejudicial to your case in all the worst ways to the extent you should consider suppressing it.
Smiles, internet adversary/friend ;)
I'm having trouble understanding your response, or where you are coming from, but, apart from any of that, why would you think we could be anything close to adversaries? We are merely in disagreement. I would never think of you as an adversary, but I would be glad to count you as a friend!
I just meant more in like a dialectical kind of way, hence the friend part (actually another lawyer joke, if unintentional beyond my recognition of it just now), although I'm open to the suggestion that I may have lost or gotten lost in the plot somewhere along the way.
I should probably see my family/friends or go outside, ironically (I think ;)
Don't take anything but my suggestion (re:the bio) all that seriously, we're all just random weirdos on the internet trying to make sense of the world or at least win some of those "sweet" internet points that go nowhere :(
Honestly, maybe we're not so different from the people in this article in some sense...just luckier maybe. I dunno, I gotta take a break aha. This article+thread obsesses me in all the wrong ways because of its craziness and a morbid fascination with internet culture.
I didnt read the article, just the Wikipedia, was this just like an old school cyber sex with just words? (I realize unwanted) I dont really understand why this was such a big thing, do we all have thicker skin today being raised on the internet?, I got my first (family) computer at the age of 7 in 1996, and have been addicted to the internet since, ive seen lots of crazy shit, someone taking over my avatar and initiating sex with words would be annoying, but I'd just be angry not broken up over it
Some people place great value in their digital identities, and violence against their characters equate to violence against themselves. That is a common phenomenon in virtual worlds and online spaces even today. It happens offline as well, and sexual violence is a contentious topic in RPG groups.
I honestly feel like some commenters here think I'm taking crazy pills in not seeing this as a real issue or something that is actionable, per se.
They would not be wrong in this made-up vignette in my head that I've been prescribed the odd pill (pun intended) that I'm spinning up here but that is beside(s) the point.
I feel kinda bad cuz obviously some people feel hurt and violated but I just can't take this whole situation seriously. I just can't, its profoundly asinine and I think a very silly attempt to crystallize a [not] new half-baked internet moral crusade. I really just dunno
Edit: these folks are LARPing as rape victims imao. Its honestly shameful to me
This article is thirty years old.
Regardless of how much you're reading into the original intent of the author, I hope we can all agree that something that happened and was written about thirty years ago isn't "new".
I will concede the new part, the remainder of my observations I stand behind. Like, yes, you are correct, but its a bit nitpicky relative to the general spirit of my assessment.
The overall agenda in conjunction with the moral tenor of the piece, I believe, are timeless, and infinitely recurring.
If anyone's curious, LambdaMOO is still running at lambda.moo.mud.org port 8888 (via telnet or MUD client). Apparently in its original form.
I just checked, there are 52 people online.
That's amazing. I still kinda don't get what it is honestly. Its pretty oblique even still.
I updooted you btw 😜
It's text-based Second Life but players can alter the source code.
I just can't even. These people respectfully need to work on getting a full-sensory-based First Life. In my view, these folks are LARPing as rape victims and I think its pretty damn disrespectful to people who were actually extrinsically and physically violated by an abuser (IRL, as they might say).
I can't help but be dismissive of this (not you), its just so inane/insane to me and I really hope people can find something a little more edifying to occupy themselves and/or satiate their ennui...
See my response to @Gopher.
Also, may I respectfully ask, have you read the article or just the Wikipedia?
Anyone have a TL:DR? This is such a bizarre story and I can't even hope to parse it at this time.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Rape_in_Cyberspace
Wow that was a really interesting read.
The site is not secured. I'm not opening this with all the 0day and MITM going on. If someone could share it here, I'll be thankful.
edit: found it on web Archieve
Talk about adding real insult to fake injury. Jesus, this whole thing is the peculiar brand of trainwreck that can be easily looked away from but not without causing a whiplash-inducing shaking of the head whilst doing so.