Lootequiette: Pmann's Totally Original/Unaffiliated Thread

[OrdinaryPerson]

I've been giving this a lot of thought and I'm gonna be way more honest than i expected;

I think one of the primary reasons why I don't e-bone here is because I don't want to navigate that scenario where I find out what someone looks like and it changes my whole perception of a person. I have a hair trigger when it comes to turn offs. Looks aren't everything but they do play a part in my attraction.

Isn't this a possibility even if you don't bone?

 

[OrdinaryPerson]

Don't agree that being accepted is a need, I believe it is a want.

You are 100% that no one has an obligation to talk to you. With few exceptions, I don't think groups are being purposely ecluding, just getting lost in their conversations with their friends.

I think we can be accepted even if we are different. Variety is the spice of life etc. But as social animals, we are biologically wired to want to be accepted into a group.

 

[aussiegeekygal]

Isn't this a possibility even if you don't bone?

Sure, but it's not as visceral ya know?

 

[OrdinaryPerson]

Sure, but it's not as visceral ya know?

Yea I get that...

Which is why I'm also available for text and voice chat

 

[Donotrustanybody]

I think we can be accepted even if we are different. Variety is the spice of life etc. But as social animals, we are biologically wired to want to be accepted into a group.

I prefer a small group of trusted friends, I do not want to be in a group.


When I was young, I had a few friends, but they had a lot of people with them. So, when 1 person got into some bs, we all had to join a violent situation ( I lived in the hood lol )that had nothing to do with me. Since then, I stay away from big groups.

 

[deefalttwunnyfor]

Throwing out pairs of shorts and pants every time you talk to me seems even more wasteful

Throwing them out would be super wasteful every time. There’s a niche market/subculture for these things. Come(heh) to my onlypants and see the resale deals for yourself

 

[aussiegeekygal]

Yea I get that...

Which is why I'm also available for text and voice chat

Right, but even after that happens if I do happen to learn how someone looks it changes things. At least for me

 

[aussiegeekygal]

Do you feel different, than most on Lit ?

I feel different than most in life. I can't also find a boatload of similarities. They feel more academic at times though

 

[Bry1313]

A lot of the talk centered around the culture of Lit. Are there cliques? Is it inclusive? If people feel left out, why? That merged into discussions about the subcultures of different threads in Lit.

As someone who found himself at the center of the conversation I’ll chime in.

Are there cliques? I’d say there are people who have made friendships here and have a tendency to interact. What I haven’t observed much of is that any of them are inpenetrable. If someone comes in with kindness and wit, almost any friend group can be welcoming here.

Often where people get left out are two ways, the first is they come in way hot and end up saying things you just shouldn’t in your first few messages with people or they aren’t sure how to jump in, and that’s hard. I empathize with the latter group not the former.

What do you like about Lit's culture? What do you dislike? Do you feel like an insider or an outsider? What would you change? Do you feel that you behave in a manner consistent with how you wish Lit would be?

What’s good? The wit and the candor that takes place.

What’s bad? A lot of folks keep secrets or double lives behind each others backs and can often make it hard to trust people. My actual trust circle here is pretty small.

I never feel like an insider, I have a few people I engage with frequently but in the larger lit world, im on the fringe and rarely know what the hell is going on (plus I miss all the pics)

What would I change? Nothing other than fewer trolls. Trolls always suck. Oh, I’d have @crazychemgirl finally admit I’m #1.

90% of the time I behave how I wish this place would be. Every now and then some comment will irk me for one reason or another and then salty me kicks in.

Bonus points if you list the specific names of people you would ban.

Someday @hotwords229_A and @deefalttwunnyfor will do hot boy anal.

 

[LadyLascivious1]

One for you.

https://ibb.co/y8Jp6qQ

You're also cheating in that you didn't post the promised boobs.

I remember it clearly. I have a perfect memory. You, @morelikeasong, @Wand3rlust, @LadyLascivious1, @OrdinaryPerson and some other women were all saying that they would post their tits in this very interesting thread if I'd just post both my moobs. That's how that happened.

Mine are nicer.

*poof

Oh I’m up for unsolicited boobs pics in my inbox all the time.

As for comparing nips, I really don’t know what to say

This can be arranged

but that's not the look that gets my vag wet.

I think you mean “dick rock solid”

I like being different.

I do thoroughly enjoy your different.

Yeah I had one, but we’re getting divorced

Smart. You’re much better naked.

So, when 1 person got into some bs, we all had to join

That’s a dynamic I wouldn’t be fond of either and something to watch for in bigger groups. I think it’s easier to fall into online. I happen to think friends tell you when your head is up your ass.

 

[Lord Pmann]

I actually wanted to respond to this, but I got distracted by other things, so here it is now...


Are you talking about Lit or the population in general?

Lit, I'd agree. I can talk to a random woman on the Playground and have a 90%+ chance of having an interesting conversation. If I talk to a random man, its like maybe 10%. But, you're still wrong that the top men here are a luxury, because there are so many more men on Lit. There is still enough really great men for all the women to talk to. What is actually difficult is weeding out all the mediocre men that women feel too guilty to not respond to. So maybe then, the hot and nice women have a more difficult time.

In the general population, I think the difference is much less obvious. Maybe because more men are not currently holding their dicks while they talk to you.


I think we make a lot of assumptions based on looks in offline life. As soon as we see someone, we already have an idea of if they are attractive. Our interactions may change how much we find them attractive later, but that initial appearance based opinion is the baseline that has to be overcome.

Online, unless you're just hanging out only looking at pictures in AmPics, we make our first impressions based on words rather than appearance. That is the baseline that then gets swayed by a voice or a picture. And the appearance influence is much lower online since you're mostly interacting with words rather than appearance.

My question focused on Lit.

I do agree there are more men on Lit, but you have inferior dick for days. That boutique dick is a commodity. I would say if you throw out the bottom half of the bell curve, you have a significant number of women versus men (as a percentage of population). When you get to the farther end of the bell curve (like the outliers), I believe they are mostly made up of men. I think they are more of a commodity. I think a man who has the qualities it takes to stand out on the playground is less common than a woman who has those same qualities. Therefore, they are more in demand.

As a whole, attraction for men will hold higher than for women. Again, it's biology and it's pretty impossible to fight. I think it does become slightly less important on an internet forum where words and clever thoughts are the form of currency. Opinions are formed by these factors other than looks, initially. But how many times have you been pressured by a guy for a pic? Let's throw out all of the interactions with creepy guys and just consider normal, polite messages with people you might consider entering into some kind of interaction (friendship or otherwise). I feel pretty confident that if we compared statistics on the number of times you have been asked for a pic by a guy versus the number of times I have been asked for a pic by a girl, you would win. Overwhelmingly so. Is that because it is presumed I am hideous and people just want to bask in the glow of my winning personality? Maybe. But the point is, men value physical attraction more than women.

Im really interested in examples of who you think has different interactions, because I don't really see the different or variance. I'm also not convinced that all men find the same subjectively hot person the most physically appealing/ attractive. Maybe this is the difference between men and women, but I can appreciate a fit muscular guy with a six pack, but I also don't think it is the most sexually appealing body type. Kind of like... I can appreciate how objectively good younger men look, but that's not the look that gets my vag wet.

I could easily name some names, but I think it might be in poor taste or make them uncomfortable. So, out of respect for them, I am not going to point them out.

However, there are some objectively attractive people here at Lit. There are some pretty scientific standards of beauty based on proportionality. Are there going to be some people who don't find Sofia Vergara attractive? Maybe. But they are statistically negligent.

Let's say an objectively attractive female enters into a thread. This person may have posted pictures or for whatever reason, it is well known what she looks like (avatar, onlyfans link, etc.). This girl is going to have an easier time in a thread than anyone else (even an equally attractive male). There are a couple of things at play. Women are considered safer. Even if they are trying to fuck other women, they are much less aggressive about it. But the attractiveness plays a huge role. Guys want to be near pretty girls because we like pretty girls. Girls want to be near pretty girls, too (see Regina George). However, those reasons are different.

A simple post by this girl will get significantly more interaction and reactions than other posts of similar quality, style and frequency. Imagine comparing an equally as interesting but middle of the road attractive male. You cannot honestly say that you think that guy would have similar responses. If you don't believe me, go look in SnS. That is a good example. Look at the interactions between various people and who often gets quoted or gets the most reactions. You will find that attractive females certainly get more attention and are widely accepted in almost any location at Lit (there are some catty places where that might not be true). That's why I balked at the SnS thread being an example of inclusiveness.

I feel like I am generally well-liked or at least engaging here on the forums. I can be polarizing, but even people who don't like me tend to interact with me. I tend to write in more verbose threads and I don't prefer the fast moving threads. For the most part, I do not really feel excluded or left out at Lit. I am not particularly shy, so that makes things a little easier. However, if I was looking at my level of responsiveness versus an attractive girl, I wouldn't even come close. Maybe I am not as clever as I think I am (jk). Maybe people don't want to interact with a wall of text. But if I posted the same way, I wouldn't get an equal response. I am not saying I should or bitching about it. Not at all. It is just true.

I am sure the length of this post is going to make Bry cry.

 

[Lord Pmann]

Mine are nicer.

Yours have less hair. We can agree on that.

 

[OrdinaryPerson]

Someday @hotwords229_A and @deefalttwunnyfor will do hot boy anal and someday @crazychemgirl will lie to me and say I’m #1.

So you're threatening to ban her if she doesn't say you're #1? This is why I'm so much closer to being #1 than you.

 

[Lord Pmann]

As someone who found himself at the center of the conversation I’ll chime in.

Are there cliques? I’d say there are people who have made friendships here and have a tendency to interact. What I haven’t observed much of is that any of them are inpenetrable. If someone comes in with kindness and wit, almost any friend group can be welcoming here.

Often where people get left out are two ways, the first is they come in way hot and end up saying things you just shouldn’t in your first few messages with people or they aren’t sure how to jump in, and that’s hard. I empathize with the latter group not the former.

I would like to address something from the other night. Before I say it, I want to be clear it isn't an attack. You were not particularly snarky to me or anything, so this is just a discussion.

I think the other night is a good example of what could be considered as cliquish. Here is my reasoning.

The discussion started out as talking about the existence of cliques. I think there was a pretty directed comment from Woody towards the SnS group, accusing them of being cliquey. A number of people from SnS came into the thread, all denying the existence of cliquish behaviour in SnS. These are people that normally don't interact in that thread (with some exceptions like Tig, who is a regular poster there). And the idea that cliquish behaviour could exist was just considered outlandish and even labeled as "bullshit". Bogey went as far as to compare me to Trump and say I am talking out of my ass for having a rather calm and collected conversation. He even said someone was going to hell for agreeing with my opinion.

Furthermore, Cock Talk turned into a SnS style thread with rapid fire posting, something not typical of that thread. People are welcome to talk, as it is an open forum and things ebb and flow. But one of your complaints about Woody was he came in hot and didn't read the room or culture of the thread. I think the same could be said for some of your behaviours.

So there is a bit of irony in that the people claiming cliquish behaviour doesn't exist swarmed into a thread where they don't normally interact to vehemently deny the existence of groupthink and her mentality. Every one from that group held the party line and wouldn't even consider the possibility. Then, some attacks were thrown out there for no real reason.

To be clear, I have never felt unwelcome in SnS and there are several of the posters in the group to which I am referring that I like and I think are kind/interesting/etc. But rather than bury your heads in the sand, simply look at how everyone held the line. Some were willing to discuss. But very few actually afforded the possibility that what Woody said was true.

I reiterate that this isn't an attack, just some pedantic commentary

 

[aussiegeekygal]

Yeah, even though I kind of encouraged a little horse play in the beginning, I'm now waiting for it to die back down so we can get back to regular programming.

I offered two sets of boobs and alas! It's still popping off over there...

 

[Bry1313]

My question focused on Lit.

I do agree there are more men on Lit, but you have inferior dick for days. That boutique dick is a commodity. I would say if you throw out the bottom half of the bell curve, you have a significant number of women versus men (as a percentage of population). When you get to the farther end of the bell curve (like the outliers), I believe they are mostly made up of men. I think they are more of a commodity. I think a man who has the qualities it takes to stand out on the playground is less common than a woman who has those same qualities. Therefore, they are more in demand.

As a whole, attraction for men will hold higher than for women. Again, it's biology and it's pretty impossible to fight. I think it does become slightly less important on an internet forum where words and clever thoughts are the form of currency. Opinions are formed by these factors other than looks, initially. But how many times have you been pressured by a guy for a pic? Let's throw out all of the interactions with creepy guys and just consider normal, polite messages with people you might consider entering into some kind of interaction (friendship or otherwise). I feel pretty confident that if we compared statistics on the number of times you have been asked for a pic by a guy versus the number of times I have been asked for a pic by a girl, you would win. Overwhelmingly so. Is that because it is presumed I am hideous and people just want to bask in the glow of my winning personality? Maybe. But the point is, men value physical attraction more than women.




I could easily name some names, but I think it might be in poor taste or make them uncomfortable. So, out of respect for them, I am not going to point them out.

However, there are some objectively attractive people here at Lit. There are some pretty scientific standards of beauty based on proportionality. Are there going to be some people who don't find Sofia Vergara attractive? Maybe. But they are statistically negligent.

Let's say an objectively attractive female enters into a thread. This person may have posted pictures or for whatever reason, it is well known what she looks like (avatar, onlyfans link, etc.). This girl is going to have an easier time in a thread than anyone else (even an equally attractive male). There are a couple of things at play. Women are considered safer. Even if they are trying to fuck other women, they are much less aggressive about it. But the attractiveness plays a huge role. Guys want to be near pretty girls because we like pretty girls. Girls want to be near pretty girls, too (see Regina George). However, those reasons are different.

A simple post by this girl will get significantly more interaction and reactions than other posts of similar quality, style and frequency. Imagine comparing an equally as interesting but middle of the road attractive male. You cannot honestly say that you think that guy would have similar responses. If you don't believe me, go look in SnS. That is a good example. Look at the interactions between various people and who often gets quoted or gets the most reactions. You will find that attractive females certainly get more attention and are widely accepted in almost any location at Lit (there are some catty places where that might not be true). That's why I balked at the SnS thread being an example of inclusiveness.

I feel like I am generally well-liked or at least engaging here on the forums. I can be polarizing, but even people who don't like me tend to interact with me. I tend to write in more verbose threads and I don't prefer the fast moving threads. For the most part, I do not really feel excluded or left out at Lit. I am not particularly shy, so that makes things a little easier. However, if I was looking at my level of responsiveness versus an attractive girl, I wouldn't even come close. Maybe I am not as clever as I think I am (jk). Maybe people don't want to interact with a wall of text. But if I posted the same way, I wouldn't get an equal response. I am not saying I should or bitching about it. Not at all. It is just true.

I am sure the length of this post is going to make Bry cry.

The length of the post just made me stop reading halfway through. No tears though.

 

[Bry1313]

I think the other night is a good example of what could be considered as cliquish. Here is my reasoning.

This reply is not an attack, just my attempt to address how I felt about that discussion

The discussion started out as talking about the existence of cliques. I think there was a pretty directed comment from Woody towards the SnS group, accusing them of being cliquey. A number of people from SnS came into the thread, all denying the existence of cliquish behaviour in SnS. These are people that normally don't interact in that thread (with some exceptions like Tig, who is a regular poster there). And the idea that cliquish behaviour could exist was just considered outlandish and even labeled as "bullshit". Bogey went as far as to compare me to Trump and say I am talking out of my ass for having a rather calm and collected conversation. He even said someone was going to hell for agreeing with my opinion.

Ok, so you are starting the discussion one post last. The original post was by Tig, just stating the mere existence of friendships. Woody, who had been someone making unwelcome jokes, repeatedly to the same select people, and calling others giant assholes, in response to that accused Tig of demonstrating cliquish behavior, again just by implying she’d had sidebars. Context is extremely important in communication. Had a poster who interacts in good faith made the statement Woody made, it would have been far different.

You, while not attacking in Trump style, were engaging in a Trumpian style tactic of discussing Woody without knowing Woody’s patterns or behaviors with a group of people who were already sick of his shit.

Hell doesn’t exist, so saying someone is going there is a non-starter

So there is a bit of irony in that the people claiming cliquish behaviour doesn't exist swarmed into a thread where they don't normally interact to vehemently deny the existence of groupthink and her mentality. Every one from that group held the party line and wouldn't even consider the possibility. Then, some attacks were thrown out there for no real reason.

They key element of cliquish behavior that separates it from merely people who are friendly is that they discourage outsiders entering. A few of the voices that evening would have been considered outsiders as recently as this spring. During that discussion, I asked for examples of actual behavior that was discouraging of outsiders who approached in a good faith manner, not in either a creepy manner or trolling. Again, if you have examples, I’m happy to hear them.

To be clear, I have never felt unwelcome in SnS and there are several of the posters in the group to which I am referring that I like and I think are kind/interesting/etc. But rather than bury your heads in the sand, simply look at how everyone held the line. Some were willing to discuss. But very few actually afforded the possibility that what Woody said was true.

I’m willing to have the discussion with someone mature enough to have the discussion, as we are having now. Woody was the wrong champion for that discussion. His insistence that he hadn’t made any untoward posts reflected his inability to understand his behavior and how it impacted how people responded to him.

I reiterate that this isn't an attack, just some pedantic commentary

This isn’t an attack in return, rather an invitation to engage in this topic and ask again for actual examples. That doesn’t include people not receiving emojis to their posts. My ratio is about 1 1/2 per post and I’m damn funny. It’s hard to get emojis without boobs.

 

[Bry1313]

Yeah, even though I kind of encouraged a little horse play in the beginning, I'm now waiting for it to die back down so we can get back to regular programming.

I offered two sets of boobs and alas! It's still popping off over there...

You are welcome to discuss my cock at length. I can present a reference if needed

 

[OrdinaryPerson]

My question focused on Lit.

I do agree there are more men on Lit, but you have inferior dick for days. That boutique dick is a commodity. I would say if you throw out the bottom half of the bell curve, you have a significant number of women versus men (as a percentage of population). When you get to the farther end of the bell curve (like the outliers), I believe they are mostly made up of men. I think they are more of a commodity. I think a man who has the qualities it takes to stand out on the playground is less common than a woman who has those same qualities. Therefore, they are more in demand.

I can think of just as many "boutique dick" as there are interesting women on the PG. You might just be discounting too many men that we women find attractive or too blinded by the sea of mediocre dick.

As a whole, attraction for men will hold higher than for women. Again, it's biology and it's pretty impossible to fight. I think it does become slightly less important on an internet forum where words and clever thoughts are the form of currency. Opinions are formed by these factors other than looks, initially. But how many times have you been pressured by a guy for a pic? Let's throw out all of the interactions with creepy guys and just consider normal, polite messages with people you might consider entering into some kind of interaction (friendship or otherwise). I feel pretty confident that if we compared statistics on the number of times you have been asked for a pic by a guy versus the number of times I have been asked for a pic by a girl, you would win. Overwhelmingly so. Is that because it is presumed I am hideous and people just want to bask in the glow of my winning personality? Maybe. But the point is, men value physical attraction more than women.

I think most men have sent me pictures before I sent them mine. The boutique dick here lets you know that a picture would be welcomed but would never pressure you for one. By contrast, as a woman, it is much more accepted for me to ask for a picture. My guess is that more women have asked you for pictures than men have asked me. Im pretty sure I asked you for a picture before you asked me, if you ever did.

I could easily name some names, but I think it might be in poor taste or make them uncomfortable. So, out of respect for them, I am not going to point them out.

However, there are some objectively attractive people here at Lit. There are some pretty scientific standards of beauty based on proportionality. Are there going to be some people who don't find Sofia Vergara attractive? Maybe. But they are statistically negligent.

Let's say an objectively attractive female enters into a thread. This person may have posted pictures or for whatever reason, it is well known what she looks like (avatar, onlyfans link, etc.). This girl is going to have an easier time in a thread than anyone else (even an equally attractive male). There are a couple of things at play. Women are considered safer. Even if they are trying to fuck other women, they are much less aggressive about it. But the attractiveness plays a huge role. Guys want to be near pretty girls because we like pretty girls. Girls want to be near pretty girls, too (see Regina George). However, those reasons are different.

A simple post by this girl will get significantly more interaction and reactions than other posts of similar quality, style and frequency. Imagine comparing an equally as interesting but middle of the road attractive male. You cannot honestly say that you think that guy would have similar responses. If you don't believe me, go look in SnS. That is a good example. Look at the interactions between various people and who often gets quoted or gets the most reactions. You will find that attractive females certainly get more attention and are widely accepted in almost any location at Lit (there are some catty places where that might not be true). That's why I balked at the SnS thread being an example of inclusiveness.

I don't dispute that females get more attention. The men want to talk to women and there are not that many women on Lit. However, the "attractiveness" difference really baffles me. I don't see what you're talking about on S&S, and honestly cannot even guess who you think is "objectively attractive". I've interacted with the men and women on there mostly before I saw anyone's face there and I dont think knowing what they looked like has ever altered my interactions with them. Heck, @Mr_bogey does just find without showing what he looks like.

I feel like I am generally well-liked or at least engaging here on the forums. I can be polarizing, but even people who don't like me tend to interact with me. I tend to write in more verbose threads and I don't prefer the fast moving threads. For the most part, I do not really feel excluded or left out at Lit. I am not particularly shy, so that makes things a little easier. However, if I was looking at my level of responsiveness versus an attractive girl, I wouldn't even come close. Maybe I am not as clever as I think I am (jk). Maybe people don't want to interact with a wall of text. But if I posted the same way, I wouldn't get an equal response. I am not saying I should or bitching about it. Not at all. It is just true.

You will never get the same responses because there are so many men on Lit that just want to talk to girls. That doesn't mean an "objectively attractive" girl gets more responses than any other girl

I am sure the length of this post is going to make Bry cry.

It better not because thats my job.

 

[Photog1rl]

What do you like about Lit's culture? What do you dislike? Do you feel like an insider or an outsider? What would you change? Do you feel that you behave in a manner consistent with how you wish Lit would be?

Bonus points if you list the specific names of people you would ban.

A good friend suggested I just stay away from these discussions but I'm not so great at heading advice like that so I'm going to post anyway.
I agree with so much of what @Wand3rlust had to say. I think she really nailed so if I am repeating I do apologize.

What do I like about Lit culture?
The ability to be who you are and find like minded people in this seemingly anonymous online forum. The way folks can be flirty, funny and engage in deep conversations all in one place. Shit there is even a politics forum here. It is a small community of folks looking for some kind of sexual outlet, exploration or opportunity to be, discover or have something they often don't in their day to day in person life. It is a place where sex of all varieties is socially acceptable. That is rare. I think that most everyone at lit is broken in some way and they are hoping to find some relief here. I love that there are spaaces for that. I think that from what I've heard old Lit(when photo sharing was harder) really did allow for connections that were not initially skin deep and that is incredibly rare.

What don't like about Lit culture?
The inability of people to be direct and honest with each other. I think people try to be “nice” in situations where they don't want to be nice. So instead they hold it in and resentment builds. The amount of times I have been told that I can’t just say to a person what I'm thinking and that I should let things fade away by ignoring people until they get the hint is horrifying. That is not a way to treat someone. I think that people are not always truthful with themselves about why they are here. This makes it impossible to be truthful with others. I know that this is complex because feelings develop and morph and change but a lack of clarity combined with an unwillingness to be direct(or truthful as I call it) causes confusion and hurt.

I also think that Lit allows people to reinvent themselves as the people they wish they were or amplify bits of their personalities and play down others. This is neither good nor bad but it can mean people are not their genuine selves as much as they want to be or think they are.

What would you change about Lit?
I wish that more genuine expression of feelings was the norm on Lit. I said once that no one likes a sad girl and being accused of creating a thread to spew hate highlights that point. I know folks come here for fun and laughter and escape but there is a lot of reality happening here and that is both good and bad. With all of that being said, I don't know if I would change anything. Lit is a community and it is not any one persons place. It should work for majority and I think it does that.

Do you think you are in insider or outsider?
Both? It depends on where I am and how I am feeling.

I try to behave in a way manner consistent with how I’d like to lit to be.

As for banning folks, that is not my choice but I would not cry if the man that regularly posts without consent was banned I would not cry.

This obviously does not apply to everyone but in generalized terms I think this applys to folks here.

As for the pretty privilage-yes its real even online. Attractive folks get accepted way faster and easier than others. It may not last if the person is an asshole but it makes the initial entry easier.

I clearly also think cliques exist. A clique is more than a group of people who get along or a group of people who are in communication outside of lit. Those can be groups of friends and no one has to be friends with someone they don't want to be friends with. But when that group discusses other people on lit or makes decisions about things and brings it back to Lit that is cliquey. Please do not tell me this does not happen it does. Is it hard to see a clique as anything more than a close circle of friends? It can be when you are in the clique.

I didn't name names Pmann but I did open myself up again. Fingers crossed we can have a respectful dialog.

 

[aussiegeekygal]

What do you like about Lit's culture?
Oh my gosh.. So much!
This place is magic. There is innuendo and nudity and deep conversations about all kinds of things. I've explored so much of myself in this place and made some incredible people. It's a brilliant study of human sexual nature. There is magic here
What do you dislike?
Having to navigate entitlement and dull dudes
Do you feel like an insider or an outsider?
Insider. I've spent a lot of time here and I do think people know who I am. I know a lot of the stupid jokes and history of this place. It's like small town America up in here.
What would you change?
The pace. Faster isn't necessarily better. There was a deliciousness in the old format that I still miss at times. Notifications really affected this place.
Do you feel that you behave in a manner consistent with how you wish Lit would be?
Yeah, for the most part. I can be a little oblivious at times and that may result in my being annoying, but I do try to keep things light and can let things go.

 

[OrdinaryPerson]

I would like to address something from the other night. Before I say it, I want to be clear it isn't an attack. You were not particularly snarky to me or anything, so this is just a discussion.

I think the other night is a good example of what could be considered as cliquish. Here is my reasoning.

The discussion started out as talking about the existence of cliques. I think there was a pretty directed comment from Woody towards the SnS group, accusing them of being cliquey. A number of people from SnS came into the thread, all denying the existence of cliquish behaviour in SnS. These are people that normally don't interact in that thread (with some exceptions like Tig, who is a regular poster there). And the idea that cliquish behaviour could exist was just considered outlandish and even labeled as "bullshit". Bogey went as far as to compare me to Trump and say I am talking out of my ass for having a rather calm and collected conversation. He even said someone was going to hell for agreeing with my opinion.

Furthermore, Cock Talk turned into a SnS style thread with rapid fire posting, something not typical of that thread. People are welcome to talk, as it is an open forum and things ebb and flow. But one of your complaints about Woody was he came in hot and didn't read the room or culture of the thread. I think the same could be said for some of your behaviours.

So there is a bit of irony in that the people claiming cliquish behaviour doesn't exist swarmed into a thread where they don't normally interact to vehemently deny the existence of groupthink and her mentality. Every one from that group held the party line and wouldn't even consider the possibility. Then, some attacks were thrown out there for no real reason.,

To be clear, I have never felt unwelcome in SnS and there are several of the posters in the group to which I am referring that I like and I think are kind/interesting/etc. But rather than bury your heads in the sand, simply look at how everyone held the line. Some were willing to discuss. But very few actually afforded the possibility that what Woody said was true.

I reiterate that this isn't an attack, just some pedantic commentary

1) I feel bad about the Cock Thread cause typically it is a much more thoughtful, topical, thread and people should have a space to do that without it being overrun by people with verbal diarrhea or the inability to not make a stupid joke. Sometimes, we end up not being able to help ourselves. But yea, we really should have gone somewhere else with most of the thread.

2) What you're suggesting here in your post is that people in S&S went to the thread just because their friends were just to all say some agreed upon opinion. That members of the perceived clique all have to abide by a "party line." That has not been true in my experience. The majority of people in that thread that night have all been in that thread at some point and yea when you talk about S&S, people who post in S&S probably have something to say. Of course most people are going to say they are not intentionally excluding people, nor is the thread actually exclusive in the negative way that you're suggesting right now. I can admit, as well as I think most people in S&S, that threads like that can FEEL exclusionary to some people, but that is not the same as the thread actually excluding them (other than in some general sense of maybe the thread isn't for some people so they self select out of it). It has never been my experience that anyone has huddled and group said that someone cannot be friends with another person or that someone cannot be interact with anyone else. Or that anyone has to have the same opinion on anything.

I have, many times, had different opinions about things than my Lit friends. It has all be fine. There is no one I actively exclude from interactions except one person. Everyone else, it is sink or swim by what you post, and sometime's I will respond more to people I'm friends with because I know they will understand my banter and I enjoy theirs (which is why we are friends in the first place). I don't consider that in itself exclusionary, but I can see how some people may feel like that.

 

[Bry1313]

So you're threatening to ban her if she doesn't say you're #1? This is why I'm so much closer to being #1 than you.

There were too many sections and words, I got lost as to which parts I was replying to

 

[LadyLascivious1]

What do you like about Lit's culture?

I love so much about it. I think in some ways it exists in its own parallel universe where people can in many ways be a more authentic version of themselves. They’re free to be more vulnerable, explore, and show aspects of themselves usually hidden in public spaces offline. Deep conversations and real relationships of all varieties happen. Some nights or threads are pure magic.

What do you dislike?

Alts and trolls with hateful intentions. The same anonymity that allows wonderful things can also breed unnecessary rudeness and disrespect. And pile ons. Even when deserving of being called out on terrible behavior, they almost always devolve into behavior on par or worse than the original bad behavior.

Do you feel like an insider or an outsider?

Overall I think I fly under the radar in most threads because I’m not consistently here. In some groups or threads I feel very at home and like an insider. In others more like an outsider. Both are very interesting in their own ways and I enjoy being able to feel like I experience both to some extent. I also enjoy pushing myself out of my own comfort zone which I recognize makes feeling unknown or like an outsider not a huge issue for me when it’s happened.

What would you change?

Very little because the good, bad, sexy, and boring all make Lit what it is. And it’s an ever changing vibe and landscape.

Do you feel that you behave in a manner consistent with how you wish Lit would be?

I would like to think so. I try to not get defensive or respond from a place of negative emotion. I can not love particular things, behavior, or people without being an asshole about it or making it about me. I try to be inclusive and welcoming even though I am sure to some and at various times I’ve been perceived to be part of a clique. I try to give people a fair shot and form my own opinions of people. And I generally don’t takes things too seriously and instead focus on having fun and enjoying this place and these people.

 

[MindYaBitness]

I would like to address something from the other night. Before I say it, I want to be clear it isn't an attack. You were not particularly snarky to me or anything, so this is just a discussion.

I think the other night is a good example of what could be considered as cliquish. Here is my reasoning.

The discussion started out as talking about the existence of cliques. I think there was a pretty directed comment from Woody towards the SnS group, accusing them of being cliquey. A number of people from SnS came into the thread, all denying the existence of cliquish behaviour in SnS. These are people that normally don't interact in that thread (with some exceptions like Tig, who is a regular poster there). And the idea that cliquish behaviour could exist was just considered outlandish and even labeled as "bullshit". Bogey went as far as to compare me to Trump and say I am talking out of my ass for having a rather calm and collected conversation. He even said someone was going to hell for agreeing with my opinion.

Furthermore, Cock Talk turned into a SnS style thread with rapid fire posting, something not typical of that thread. People are welcome to talk, as it is an open forum and things ebb and flow. But one of your complaints about Woody was he came in hot and didn't read the room or culture of the thread. I think the same could be said for some of your behaviours.

So there is a bit of irony in that the people claiming cliquish behaviour doesn't exist swarmed into a thread where they don't normally interact to vehemently deny the existence of groupthink and her mentality. Every one from that group held the party line and wouldn't even consider the possibility. Then, some attacks were thrown out there for no real reason.

To be clear, I have never felt unwelcome in SnS and there are several of the posters in the group to which I am referring that I like and I think are kind/interesting/etc. But rather than bury your heads in the sand, simply look at how everyone held the line. Some were willing to discuss. But very few actually afforded the possibility that what Woody said was true.

I reiterate that this isn't an attack, just some pedantic commentary

There's a touch of history here that you're missing. I'd seen him around a bit lately, making comments that fell flat & came across as a bit creepy. However, assuming that he was new I figured he'd find his feet eventually. We were all new once, and can acknowledge that it takes some time to get the swing of things. I'd rather show patience with a newbie than crucify him, and I saw other ladies showing the same measure of patience. However, he always came across as the guy looking for offense, expecting rejection.

Then he took far too seriously my comment about a spreadsheet to rate our interactions with men, a joke in a lady's group chat. Then he lost all sense and things devolved from there. By his strict definition of a clique, anyone who doesn't include everyone in everything they do is a click. i.e. Ladies wanting a place to discuss everything from glass dildos to bottom surgery are just cliquey jerks in his opinion.

I left for the day, because believe it or not, we've all got lives outside of this microcosm of depravity, and returned to find that all hell broke loose.

Calling a perceived group of friends a clique has a subtle accusation of malicious intent. There are groups of friends everywhere, that doesn't mean they can't or won't like you. However, what you focus on expands, so if you're expecting rejection, you'll get it.

Threads like S&S or FMK can move quickly. It's like learning to play double Dutch, eventually you're just going to have to jump in & get smacked in the head a few times for your trouble before you get the hang of it.

The general board, the politics board, even authors forum, all have groups of people who chat outside of here. I've been attacked more than once in politics because I didn't know the life's history of someone I agreed with, and therefore must be a nazi like him

My point is, friends groups do not always equate to cliques. Several people taking acception to one person's post might mean that person should step back & examine their own behavior, not necessarily accuse anyone who finds fault as having an a secret gang aimed at their demise.

We're a social species, seeking connection is chiseled somewhere in our DNA. If you come here expecting to find friends, you will. However, if you come here and drill a strange lady with big tits & golden schlong as her AV, about whether or not her lady's thread was posted with a public invite, you'll likely not find the connection you were hoping for.