SL Conversations: Recreating Romance In-World
NMC Symposium on the Evolution of Communication
December 3-5, 2007, In Second Life.
Phylis Johnson, Ph.D., Associate Professor
Southern Illinois University, Carbondale, IL 62901-6609
phylisj@yahoo.com
Dedicated to Sonicity Fitzroy & Shock Soderstrom
Abstract: What is it about an online environment that entices people to talk with
strangers, ignoring the old adage and common sense? This paper examines how Second
Life has changed the way we interact, date, and romantically engage online in virtual
settings.
Introduction: Seeking Romance in Uncommon Spaces
In September 18, 2007, a couple made headlines when they met online in a chat room,
but they had no idea that they were already married – and to each other. They struck up a
conversation that turned into a heated online romance, and ended in a bitter divorce when
both realized that they had “cheated” on each other, well sort of you might say. It would
seem that they had more in common after all. You also might say, by divorcing, what
they did was to cheat themselves out of that common bond that drew them together first
in RL and later in SL. Remember the last time you traveled by plane, sitting next to a
stranger. You wound up sharing your closest thoughts to a person who you would never
see again – and perhaps you counted on that fact. Is there a place we need to go to
confess and connect with others to seek answers to deeper, yet common, questions about
our identity and relationships – from others who are willing to listen to our side of the
story?
What is it about an online environment that entices people to talk with strangers, ignoring
the old adage and common sense not to do so? Some might suggest that circumstance is
not much different from meeting a stranger in a RL club; indeed a SL space might be a
1
bit more authentic and safe (not that SL hasn’t had its share of grief). This paper
supplements my presentation, and offers to explore how Second Life has changed the
way we interact, date, and romantically engage (or not) online in virtual settings. My
review of on-relationship literature, and my speculation thereof, focuses on the virtual
aspect of “communication” and veers away from much more adult considerations (wink).
In this way, this paper shares recent communication research regarding online
relationships, and considers how Second Life draws people into conversations and
relationships through its ability to “romance” us with its mystery, magic, and makeover.
First we begin with the mystery….
Revealing the Mystery of Self: The Stranger in All of Us
I met a young woman the other day – introduced by a friend of a friend. She is
paraplegic, and seeks company through Second Life. I have spent a few hours here and
there, interacting with her online. I can’t help but feel nervous about someone breaking
her heart. She is beginning to date in SL. I can tell from her tone and her text that she is
moving quickly in this regard. On the other hand, I feel the same about my 22 year-old
daughter in Real Life. How do we determine if a particular partner or friendship is safe
in comparison to another – by appearance and causal conversation; is that not superficial?
I made a conscious decision that my avatar would be an improved version of me. But I
know, after nearly one year, I am becoming increasingly like her or she like me in several
ways. More interestingly, my husband and I are stepping up on our exercising and
dieting to look more like our avatars. At times, I am aware that my avatar Sonicity
Fitzroy has her own mannerisms. I am coming to know her as an individual, as well as
know that she is intertwined into my being. Wow. Crazy. Sonicity and I were strangers,
and now we share the same cosmic, virtual space.
Second Life provides a space to get to “know yourself,” all of your personality traits,
even those hidden. As a college professor, I remain somewhat restrained in my actions
on SL. And I would not compromise the integrity of Sonicity. Maybe that is merely my
take on how SL has changed my perspective of myself. That insight is important to me
2
because it helps me to understand my relationship with others to whom I interact with in
various SL spaces.
The Stranger in Your Relationships
The introduction of this paper began with a news story about a married couple who were
cheating on each other through their own avatars. How was their online relationship
successful, but not their real marriage? From personal experience, I enjoy not talking
about bills in SL, nor do my husband and I argue online about who is taking the dog out
for a walk. What if there were designated space where people could actually talk apart
from the distractions of RL? For a moment, consider what is more authentic to
relationship building – a sharing of your inner most feelings in a romantic setting, while
dancing, or a sharing your disgust with your partner over dinner about the idiot at the
office.
Consider the many divorces in the real world, and you begin to wonder can we ever
really know someone. What don’t we know about each other, and what can we learn
from each other apart from RL problems. That is not the point, however. The world is
hungry for relationships, something beyond watching a Friday night video at home and
something deeper than hanging out at a night club. Think about what Second Life can
do – it can “get” people talking with each other, engaging them, in a completely different
context that draws them together into a space – either through chat or voice. What do we
know about SLers? We know that they like to communicate? That is a start. We know
that they are probably looking to connect to others. We can also find out about them
through their profiles, and that is easier than some awkward Q&A on the first meeting of
someone in RL. You can find out their interests, by noting what circles they like to travel
– the botanical club, the furry artists club, the weapons club. For example, if I noted that
a particular avatar had joined the latter, I would TP out in a few seconds with a quick
“Excuse me, I am experiencing lag. I must go now.” That again is a PERSONAL
choice. Yes SL members could lie about themselves, but that problem is not so unique to
in-world relationships.
3
When one begins to define the concept of stranger, an individual soon learns that the
dictionary is only of marginal assistance. Let’s see how Houghton Mifflin Online
Dictionary defines stranger: “One who is neither a friend or an acquaintance, a foreigner,
newcomer, or outsider …unaccustomed to or unacquainted with something specified…a
visitor or guest.” Merriam Webster Online Dictionary notes that it is rooted in 14th
Century Middle English, from Old French “from estrange.” It adds to the Houghton
Mifflin definition: “one who does not belong to or is kept from the activities of a group.”
I might suggest that SLers are defined by their membership or by the fact that have a
common interest in virtual reality, as one has an affinity for country-western clubs.
Indeed, in SL, participation is limited to those with computer access and basic computer
skills. Yet, that is more than is required for other public spaces, such as parks. In SL,
when you meet someone in a park, you can click on profile, and perhaps learn more in 30
seconds about someone than in a chance meeting in a RL park. Voice offers greater
potential for discernment of one’s character, to a point of course. Williams, Caplan, &
Xiong (2007) found that the addition of voice to World of Warcraft was favorably
received among game players who were pleased to be able to more accurately determine
authenticity in gender, intelligence, and character, and this, in turn, increased levels of
trust among relationships than when text-based communication was relied on exclusively.
As for my online relationship with my husband, I like him much better as avatar Shock
Soderstrom at times, especially the quieter version of him that text allows in SL. I like
the space that text allows for interpretation, although sometimes I have to ask him to
explain his messages. I like to multi-task, watch TV, listen to RL music, and text
provides such opportunities. I find myself a bit more creative in my text responses than
when I use voice, and likewise Shock is similarly more experimental and romantic when
keyboarding. Beyond that, at least by my perception, he seems much more nurturing in
SL than RL and wants to dance and take me places….of course that is because he doesn’t
have to leave the comfort of his upstairs office in our house; I sit downstairs tapping
away on the keys of my desktop. I have learned to appreciate the depth and diversity of
his personality over the past several months and maybe more so than our two decades of
4
marriage. Most of all, we have had fun in the process. Text provides room for one’s
imagination to fill in the gap during a conversation, as each party perceives each others’
intentions. RL couples, for this reason, may have an advantage in reading between the
lines than those who know one another only through Second Life. But that is not always
the case, as already discussed.
Not being able to separate work from fun, I have documented the romantic experiences of
Shock and Sonicity through photos and have taken note of the progression of their
relationship. You can browse through that file included among the presentation
materials. My SL experiences have moved me as a media ecologist to examine the nature
of online relationships (and friendships) in general, and specifically on SL.
Online Romance: The Wildermuth & Vogl-Baur Studies
Wildermuth & Vogl-Bauer’s (2000) study based from an undergraduate sample indicated
that 46% of the respondents reported involvement in online romances or they knew
family members or friends who had been involved in one, now or in the past. In 1998,
Parks and Roberts reported that more than 90% of Internet users engaged in relationships
online, and of this number more than 25% were “romantic in nature” (Wildermuth &
Vogl-Bauer, 2007, p. 211). The 2002 Nua Internet Survey also reports that relationship
building, which includes friendships and romantic partnerships, comprises more than
70% of the average Internet users’ time (2007, p. 211).
Wildermuth & Vogl-Baur (2007, p. 212) address the scarcity of scholarly studies dealing
with online romance: “Research often subsumes romantic relationships, friendships, and
sexual partnerships under the general category of online relationships (McQuillen,
2003).” They call for studies that provide greater depth into understanding the
characteristics of such relationships, and those which might provide clarity among
“paradoxical” findings (p.212). Wildermuth & Vogl-Bauer (2007) point out, the problem
however, is that much research has focused on Internet use as the central variable, rather
than meanings within the communication, citing the work of Whitty & Gavin (2001).and
Riva (2002) who depicts the user “as social actors who shape the online context for
5
themselves” (p. 212).
In the Wildermuth & Vogl-Bauer study (2007, p. 215), approximately 70% of the
respondents were female, and the majority of participants were White, USA citizens, and
had attended college. Most respondents had attended “common interest” chat rooms,
and 92% resided one hour or more away from their online partner, and more than 30%
had an international partner (p. 215). Approximately 30% of respondents stated that they
were either married or involved in a relationship apart from the Internet. Sixteen percent
reported having a “mutual online friend” (p. 215). Forty-seven percent reported a
successful relationship online, and almost 40% stated that they had met at least one
online partner face to face. Wildermuth & Vogl-Bauer (2007, p. 215) stated that
respondents experienced emotional intensity (87%) and “strong linguistic connections”
(43%). Furthermore, their study indicated that more than 40% percent approached their
relationships with caution. They conclude that when an online environment provides
minimal contextual information (i.e., relying on text messages), participants are more
likely to hold on to their idealized version of the relationship (2007).
Making Contact
A recent study by Anderson & Emmers-Sommer (2006) explored the predictors of
relationship satisfaction in online romantic relationships. Those predictors, according to
the researchers, are “intimacy, trust, and communication satisfaction” (p. 166). They
continue, “as partners grow close and depth increases, trust develops and as trust
increases, so do levels of intimacy” (p. 166). Wright (2004) noted online relationships
tend to progress quickly through a sense of openness that leads to increased intimacy
(Anderson & Emmers-Sommer, 2006, p. 166):
…the role of intimacy in predicting relationship satisfaction in this
study is consistent with a wealth of personal relationship [research]
that indicates intimacy is a key component of relationships and marital
satisfaction (e.g., Feeney, Noller, & Ward, 1997; Hassebrauck & Fehr, 2002).
6
Indeed, Anderson & Emmers-Sommer (2006) remind us that the “online relationship is
the relationship,” so it makes sense that one’s contentment with one’s relationships would
be directly related to “communication satisfaction” (p. 166). Relationship experts on talk
shows taut books and seminars that offer to provide effective communication strategies to
mend marriages and friendships.
In an earlier study conducted by Parks & Floyd (1996), it is suggested that online
relationships need proximity, eye contact, voice communication, and physical appearance
to mature into intimate, authentic experiences. Wildermuth & Vogl-Bauer (2007), in
contrast, dismiss such variables as unnecessary qualifications, and suggest through their
findings and conclusions that perception has a much greater role than has been otherwise
assumed. With that in mind, might a virtual experience like SL lead to greater emotional
investment and intensity for online romantic relationships? The perception of proximity
could then be as much an indicator of successful contact as such fulfillment in RL:
…eye contact, body language, facial expressions, vocalization, hugs,
pats on the back, cries, embraces, kisses and giggles are fundamentals
of our evolutionary social emotional well-being.” (Nei, 2001, p. 432)
Wildermuth & Vogl-Bauer (2007)’s speculate that authentic relationships need to be
“tactile” to create “a lasting bond” (p. 224). Can a tactile bond be accomplished through
a mediator such as an avatar? That is also merely speculation at this point. Wildermuth
& Vogl-Bauer (2007) conclude:
There is an irony here in that the technological and disembodied
world of ICTs that has often been depicted in depersonalized terms
may also provide a haven where authenticity, negotiation, and the
development of trust may lead to romance. (p 220)
Hardey (2004) presents a historical account of courtship to dating, and tells us that
“significant changes during the second half of the twentieth century” have redefined our
7
relationships (p. 208). Hardey (2004) points out that modern dating has become centered
on the individual, and authenticity and trust are considered worthy components to a
successful relationship, with a big part of that trust determined by communication.
Gaming virtual worlds, in which identities are drawn from fantasy, counter this notion.
Hardey suggests, however, that “authenticity is finally ‘tested’ when people move from
mediated communication to meeting in the flesh” (p. 208).
Aesthetics of Relationships as Learned Experiences
Wildermuth & Vogl-Baur (2007) draw briefly upon the work of Marshall McLuhan, the
medium being the message (McLuhan & Fiore, 1967), and the idea that the Internet
allows one to extend their relationship reach (Levinson, 1999; McLuhan, 1964; McLuhan
& McLuhan, 1988). I would like to extend upon that premise, for McLuhan (1964)
envisioned technology as a means toward the global village. He wrote on how
technology was an extension of our humanity, social and physical. Might Second Life be
that global village, if we are particularly discussing the notion of mediated
communication? The automobile allowed us to experience a new freedom and mobility,
as noted by McLuhan (1951). He envisioned television as a means to link households
with the world. Virtual spaces offer similar experiences but within our imagination.
These experiences are contextualized within visual and aural aesthetics Second Life
extends our communication across national borders and into the homes of strangers.
As an instructional designer as well as a media professor, practitioner, and scholar, I
would be amiss to overlook the significance of the message design, once we have
established the need and the essence of the message. The setting or context of our
conversations and experiences are relevant to relationship building, albeit work, home or
on the dance floor at a SL club.
On Valentine’s Day, we light a few candles on the dinner table, or better yet head for a
nice romantic restaurant. So why should setting or context be alien to other experiences,
online or offline? Certain settings work better than others, depending on the goals to be
achieved. You want to have a late night intimate swim with a friend; well a public pool
8
is not the appropriate setting. Image is important. Yet, a message delivered apart from
an appropriate context risks being not validated by the receiver. We learn about romance
through our experience, as well as from talk show experts and books. We learn what
works, what doesn’t. I make brief note of Albert Bandura’s theory of social cognition to
remind the reader that how individuals engage in context is an experience that draws
upon personal, social, and environmental influences. We learn from others, and from
watching others, but we respond uniquely based on past experiences and the situation at
hand. In general, however, we can make some general assumptions about human
behavior.
Romance is not merely a state of being; it is the end product of learned social behaviors.
The Van Gogh Museum in Starry Starry Night conveys romantic ambience within SL
whether or not, I have a partner with me to enjoy the virtual art and the interactive
exhibits. Romance novels stimulate our imagination, and reading is a solo activity for
the most part. Some of the popular SL spots are Caribbean Breezes Jazz Club, Jade’s
Jazz Lounge, and MidSomer Isle, and these sites encourage interaction because the
majority of dance and pose balls are created for couples. Second Life allows us to
encounter romance in various settings, with various people. The other person often helps
us to validate our perception of romance as adventuresome, reflective and interactive
(with others and/or the environment).
Second Life not only offers access to others, but access to the imagination of others in a
multitude of settings. We go beyond simple interests, to those untapped feelings and
expressions not readily communicated on a first date or encounter. There is perhaps what
might be referred to as too much reality in a relationship that draws couples apart – bills,
chores, office talk. Granted many SL couples want some sense of reality in their
relationship (i.e., “in what country do you live”; “you’re not my brother right”; “do you
have a RL job”), but there must be a willingness for both people to extend their
communication beyond that which might limit their relationship to the mundane.
9
The Marrying Kind: Player Commitment
Science Daily reported on a study by Catherine Mosher of Duke Medical Center and
Sharon Danoff-Burg from the University of Albany (also, Mosher & Danoff-Burg, 2007).
The researchers posited, “…men may be more willing than women to sacrifice
achievement goals for a romantic relationship” (Springer, 2007). They asked more than
200 respondents a series of questions based on personality traits and life goals. “Overall
both college men and women showed strong desires for individual achievement and
relationship intimacy” (2007). When I first conceptualized this paper, I did not consider
elaborating on in-world marriage. I came to understand what I believe to be the primary
motive behind SL marriages and their relevance to my discussion on social relations.
Marriage is often considered the ultimate commitment in a relationship, and interactive
worlds like Second Life have facilitated such extensions into virtual space. For example,
in the case of Lucas Arts' Star Wars Galaxies and other titles, it becomes obvious that
partnership is fundamental to online gaming, especially in terms of trust and commitment
to the game:
There are many husband and wives who play MMORGPS together. ..Although
they are married in the RL they lead very separate lives in game play. This
separation can often lead each spouse to an in-game romance with other people.
A curious offshoot of this is the husband and wife who play together, on the same
server, many times in the same Player Association…and still choose to romance
others. Their motives can be for fun, the thrill of “safe” relations outside of the
primary relationship, or a genuine sense of role-playing not connecting what goes
on from between being Out of Character (OOC) or In Character (IC). More
expected, though, is the RL couple who also pairs off in the game.
(Torrone, 2004).
10
Often one of the couple persuades the other to play, avoiding any romantic snafus. In
Spohn’s (2007) column on Role Playing and Romance, he points out how couple gaming
is increasingly becoming a strategic consideration, and City of Heroes/Villains “allows
them to make superhero characters that compliment each other”:
Playing along with someone you know in real life can make a game quite a bit
more interesting, especially if that person is your significant other. It's long been
said that couples who play together stay together, and this may turn out to apply
to online games as well. Stories about wives that have been turned on to games by
their husbands abound on game forums, and you'll even see a few cases where
wives have lured their husbands into the hobby.
In-world marriage is becoming increasingly common for such games, and EverQuest
actually boasted of the first wedding conducted in-world and in real life. The wedding
was held at the 8th Annual Sony Online Entertainment Fan Faire, and the event became a
11
major headliner (Gaudiosi, 2007). The faire drew more than 2,000 people eager for a
“sneak peak at upcoming games,” and to watch history in the making (2007):
While there have been thousands of virtual weddings set within the worlds of
EverQuest and EverQuest II, as well as many married couples who first met in the
virtual massively multiplayer online (MMO) game world; this marked the first
time two people were married in both the real and virtual world in one ceremony.
After the ceremony, the couple moved to “the side of the stage where two PCs sat and
each took control of their in-game characters -- Lady Quaddra and Lord Garthan”
(Gaudiosi, 2007). You Tube has become a unique archive for an increasing number of
these virtual marriages, with this link documenting the RL/EverQuest cherished union:
http://videogames.yahoo.com/feature/happily-everquest-after/525578.
Similarly, I note the following You Tube description of a SL wedding between
avatars ScubaSteve and Polly that also took place in 2007:
They met each other in a pond building area in April 2007. Together they like to
laugh, explore second life, find places to ride their horses and making a nice home
at Vero Beach. Alone Scuba likes to come up with surprises for Polly and Polly
likes to find cozy spots for them to come back together to visit. Polly likes to call
scuba Ghost and scuba likes to call Polly Muse. Their persistence and
determination to not be over come [by] the forces from within and outside SL that
would otherwise stop them from seeing each other had made the relationship
resilient and magical in every sense of the word. One day they will even find the
answer to the ultimate question in every avies mind can sluv conquer lag? Only
time will tell."
12
The accompanying video runs about 8 minutes.
Watch it at http://youtube.com/watch?v=QVimvYMtwo&feature=related. The MP4
version is available at http://www.justvirtual.com/slwedding_... (145MB)
Eales (2007) reports another wedding story, which was published in the Second Life
Daily Herald. It would appear in this case, the couple were good friends who had made a
strong commitment to play together:
It's hard to say whether Bert and Alle are representative of the typical Second Life
couple. Both are convinced that their marriage is no more than an enjoyable
progression of their game playing in Second Life. They are not planning to meet
in the real world….For Alle, marriage is part of the fun of the game. "It's a
celebration of the commitment you have to the game and the friends you make,"
she says. "I've always thought that internet relationships which involve more than
friendship are pure drama. The easiest way to understand our relationship is that
13
our avatars are in love and the real people in front of the screen just like to talk to
each other and share SL experiences."
The duo proclaims love for each other, but only in-world for now. One thing that
becomes strikingly clear is that for many in-world residents, being alone is not as much
fun as sharing your experiences with someone. Reuters (2007) reported that some avatars
have married several times, and the in-world bridal industry is profitable. Marriage
announcements are routinely posted in the wedding section of SL newspapers.
In an article published in the Houston Chronicle recently, a reporter goes in-world to seek
some answers on some of the social aspects of Second Life, including the desire to marry
as avatars. He concludes:
But "in world" nobody calls Second Life a game. The emotional connections you
make are real. If you offend someone, they'll remember. If you flirt or make a
romantic gesture, it doesn't just disappear into a black hole; it's received by a
14
human being on the other side…People spend millions of real dollars building
their lives here because emotionally, it's more than a game. (Peralta, 2006)
Conclusion
A call for the “Most Romantic Places in SL” in April 2004 was published in the Linden
Lab blog, and it asked “Where would you go with your loved one for that hug and kiss
that both of you would never forget again?” At the end of this paper, I have listed the
results from my “SL Group” search using the words “romance” and “romantic,”
narrowing down my finds to the top items. In addition, I have included the top romantic
places according to blogger Natalie Zelmanov, a self-proclaimed romance expert. Her
list was complied in 2006. Many of the sites I have visited, and I would concur with her
for the most part. I have included her summary for your browsing. I have not been to all
those listed, but she promises in her column that they are “nice” places.
I conclude this essay by asking you to consider whether romance leads to adventure, or
adventure leads to romance? Regardless, it appears that the journey bonds people –
albeit through a medieval battle or carving out some space on the virtual frontier.
Romance is the exhilaration that beckons us toward adventure. The concept has been
associated with the chivalrous medieval times dating back to the 12th century and the
romantic literary period of the 18th century. Wikipedia states, “The story of the medieval
romance focuses not upon love and sentiment, but upon adventure.” Romanticism in the
18th century was a resistance to the growing industrialization, and a desire for liberation
and exploration. Romance might also be thought of an unfolding mystery. In the case of
romantic fiction, the reader is taken captive for a few hours, and led astray into a fantasy.
In Second Life, the mask is always present, yet the emotional connection is real (good or
bad). In the end, Second Life becomes meaningless to many unless someone can enjoy
their company and appreciate their experiences.
15
16
References
Anderson, T. L. & Emmers-Sommer, T. M. (2006, June). Predictors of relationship
satisfaction in online romantic relationships. Communication Studies, 57(2), 153172.
Ben-Ze’ev, A. (2004). Love online: Emotions on the internet. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press.
Eales, K. (2007, September 9). Wedding stories in the metaverse. The Second Life
Herald. Retrieved November 26, 2007, from
http://www.secondlifeherald.com/slh/2007/09/wedding.html
Feeney, J. A., Nollen., P., & Ward, C. (1997). Marital satisfaction and spousal
interaction. In R. J. Sternberg & M. Hojjat (Eds.), Satisfaction in close
relationships (pp. 160-189). New York: Guilford.
Fossett, A. (2007). The psychology of voice. ArtsPlace SL. Retrieved November 27,
2007, from http://artfossett.blogspot.com/2007/08/psychology-of-voice.html
Gaudiosi, J. (2007, August 13). Happily EverQuest after. Retrieved November 23,
2007, from http://videogames.yahoo.com/feature/happily-everquest-after/525578
Hardey, M. (2004). Mediated relationships: Authenticity and the possibility of romance.
Information Communication & Society, 7 (2), 207-222.
Hassebrauck, M., & Fehr, B. (2002). Dimensions of relationship quality. Personal
Relationships, 9, 253-270.
Levinson, P. (1999). Digital McLuhan: A guide to the information millennium. New
York: Routledge.
McLuhan, M. (1951). The mechanical bride: Folklore of industrial man. New York:
Vanguard Press. Reissued by Gingko Press, 2002.
McLuhan, M. (1964). Understanding media: The extensions of Man. New York:
McGraw Hill. Reissued by Gingko Press, 2003.
McLuhan, M., & Fiore, Q. (1967). The medium is the message: An inventory of effects.
New York: Bantam Books.
McLuhan, M., & McLuhan, E. (1988). Laws of media: The new science. Toronto:
University of Toronto Press.
McQuillen, J. S. (2003). The influence of technology on the initiation of interpersonal
Relationship. Education, 123, 616-623.
Mosher C. & Danoff-Burg, S. (2007). College students’ life priorities: The influence of
gender and gender-linked personality traits. Gender Issues, 24 (2).
Nie, N. J. (2001). Sociability, interpersonal relations, and the internet. American
Behavioural Scientist, 45 (3), 420-435.
Nua Internet Survey. (2002). How many online. Retrieved June 11, 2003. from
http://www.nua.ie/survey/how_many_online/index.html
Parks, M. R., & Floyd, K. (1996). Making friends in cyberspace. Journal of
Communication, 45, 80-97.
Peralta, E. (2006, May 26). In second life, the world is virtual. But the emotions are real.
Houston Chronicle. Retrieved November 23, 2007, from
http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/ent/3899538.html
Reuters, R. (2007, May 28). The price of tying the virtual knot. Reuters News Service.
Retrieved November 21, 2007, from
17
http://secondlife.reuters.com/stories/2007/05/28/the-price-of-tying-the-virtualknot/
Riva. G. (2002). The sociocognitive psychology of computer-mediated communication.
The present and future of technology-based interactions. CybeerPsychology &
Behavior, 6, 581-598.
Small, B. (2004). Online personals and narratives of the self: Australia’s RSVP.
Convergence: The Journal of Research into New Media Technologies, 10 (1), 93107.
Spohn, D. Roleplaying and romance. Retrieved November 27, 2007, from
http://internetgames.about.com/od/mmorpgs/a/romance.htm
Springer News (2007, August 28). Men choose romance over success. ScienceDaily.
Retrieved November 25, 2007, from
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2007/08/070828110650.htm
Torrone, P. (2004). Love and romance in the world of massive multi online role playing
games. Retrieved November 25, 2007, from
http://www.joystiq.com/2004/10/06/love-and-romance-in-the-world-of-massivemulti-online-role/
Whitty, M., & Gavin, J. (2001). Age/sex/location: Uncovering the social cues in the
development of online relationships. CyberPsychology and Behavior, 4, 623-630.
Wildermuth, S. M., & Vogl-Baur, S. (2000). The effects of stigmatizing discourse on the
quality of online relationships. CyberPsychology & Behavior, 73-84.
Wildermuth, S. M., & Vogl-Baur, S. (2007). We met on the net: Exploring the
perceptions of online romantic relationship participants. Southern
Communication Journal, 72 (3), 213-227.
Williams, D, Caplan, S, & Xiong, L. Can you hear me now? Voice and online
community. Human Communication Research, 33, 427-448.
Wright, K. B. (2004). On-line relational maintenance strategies and perception of
partners within exclusively internet-based and primarily internet based
relationships. Communication Studies, 55, 239-253.
Zelmanov, N. (2006, November 2, 2006. A mermaid’s adventures in SL: Romantic
Places. Natalia Zelmanov's Second Life Diary. Retrieved November 25, 2007,
from http://slnatalia.blogspot.com/2006/11/dating.html
18
SECOND LIFE, COMMUNITY “SEARCH – ROMANCE (11/26/07)
Top Groups/Parcels
Dream, Poesy and Romance
Number of members: 91
Jazz Club - Elegance
Number of members: 69
BJ's Jazz Club
Number of members: 60
Rainbow Romance
Number of members: 35
Dating & Romance
Number of members: 238
Cincin VIPs
Number of members: 132
L's SkyClub VIP
Number of members: 516
Reggae Romance
Number of members: 929
*~* Moonlight Salsa & Romance *~* Number of members: 221
URBANITY Club Update
Number of members: 158
Romance Ice Skating & Roller Skate Number of members: 53
FOR 2 CREATIONS LABS
Number of members: 103
Lover's Lounge VIP
Number of members: 42
Cafe Society
Number of members: 202
! Seduction Jazz Club!
Number of members: 300
AA matrimonial agency
Number of members: 30
Mystic Dreams Gardens & Weddings Number of members: 12
Universal Romance VIP
Number of members: 201
The Love Bugg Club V.I.P
Number of members: 363
The lost EDEN
Number of members: 64
The Real Life talk
Number of members: 36
Number of members:
My Blue Heaven
1,306
***MAGIC MOUNTAIN Sbg.*** Number of members: 109
Juliet's place
Number of members: 47
The Arbor Group
Number of members: 78
Xstasie Club & Casino
Number of members: 86
Java Island
Number of members: 124
! Once in a Blue Moon - Jazz Club
Blue Moon Bay/200.745/85.3557
PARADISE -THE METRONOME JAZZ CLUB
Jazzers Paradise/21.401/169.176
19
SECOND LIFE, COMMUNITY “SEARCH – ROMANTIC (11/26/07)
Top Groups/Parcels
ROMANTIC LOVE BALLROM Number of members: 116
Teazers
Number of members: 148
Wondering Minstral
Number of members: 158
Spicy Club
Number of members: 480
Salsa Romantica
Number of members: 383
STARK PARADISE
Number of members: 124
Candy Rose VIP
Number of members: 500
Number of members:
CLOUD NINE V IP
1,164
Selene
Number of members: 392
COCO XI SINGS!!
Number of members: 52
LOVE UNDER THE STARS
Number of members: 47
Shop&Jazz Istanbul Edition VIP Number of members: 676
CasaBlanca Society Lounge
Number of members: 796
MoonLight Jazz Club
Number of members: 237
Jaquelines Team
Number of members: 261
Jazz Bar Casablanca
Number of members: 47
The Moonlight Lounge
Number of members: 42
The Lucky Love Bugg Slingo
Number of members: 58
Number of members:
Jade's Jazz Lounge
5,441
Half Note Jazz Club ::.
Number of members: 217
H2O Enjoy it !
Number of members: 69
Dream, Poesy and Romance
Number of members: 91
Luica's Ballroom
Number of members: 99
Heaven's Wind Mall & Club
Galactica/131.693/249.502
Beautiful Residential Land For Sale - Romantic Love
Romantic Love/162.0/66.0
! Once in a Blue Moon - Jazz Club
Blue Moon Bay/200.745/85.3557
Heaven's Wind Romantic Club & Park
Galactica/171.769/201.904
NYMPHETAMINE Boutique (Unique Ladies Clothing)
Isle of Nymphetamine/92.1563/152.999
20
Romantic Places, by Natalie Zelmanov (2006)
http://slnatalia.blogspot.com/2006/11/dating.html
Acropolis Gardens: Large multi-sim garden with mountains, waterfalls, lakes, a volcano,
and beautiful hiking trails
Angel Dorei: A beautifully decorated Japanese romance garden, along with a museum
with Contemporary art
Avilion Grove: Visit the enchanting medieval-themed sim for some formal ballroom
dancing and walk around the gardens
Bliss Basin: One of the premier dating spots in SL, with 2 trails circling a large lake with
beautiful views and waterfalls; lake is rumored to be visited by mermaids :P
Blue Note Retro Jazz Lounge: A classy jazz lounge for couples dancing and socializing;
features live DJ on the weekends
Caribbean Breezes Jazz Club: Come dance somewhere warm and tropical, with one of
the largest pirate ships in SL, and many little private areas for chatting
Cocololo Island Resort: Need a quick vacation? Try this island resort complete with posh
lounges, spa facilities, activities, and even a wedding chapel
Fairytale Gardens of Sinano: A lush, beautifully landscaped garden with fairytale
cottages...
Gypsy Moon: Explore a hidden gypsy-themed moon with unusual colors, beautiful
details, and secret romantic spots
Heavenly Rose: A rose garden and one of the top romantic spots in SL, with an amazing
number of poseballs! Also has a cool underwater house and dance area :)
Inspire Space Park: Hang out in space :) With spacey scenery, floating poseballs, and lots
of people
Lost Gardens of Apollo: Garden sim with semi-secluded sitting areas and beautiful
sunsets, great for...um...chatting
Midsomer Isle: A romantic themed garden with streams, greenery, and lots of secluded
areas; perfect for a stroll or sitting together for a chat
21
New Paris: Its Paris with an Eiffel Tower! Need I say more? Poseballs and champagne
everywhere
Phat Cat's Jazzy Blue Lounge: Ballroom dancing and romance, a packed sim featuring a
large ballroom, lots of people, and shops for ballroom outfits
Riverwalk: A well-built outdoor art museum, garden, amusement area, and community
center; take a swan boat tour with a friend, watch the fireworks, or just wander through
the gardens
Romantic Joy: A garden sim with beautiful trees, flowers, brids, and plenty of secluded
spots for you and your friend to explore...
Second Chance Trees: Dedicate a tree to your sweetheart and contribute to a good cause;
a lush garden sim designed by Luna Bliss of Bliss Basin fame
Second Life Botanical Gardens: A garden with wonderful sounds and sights, with trails
winding through waterfalls and secluded spots
Secret Reflections: A giant sim-sized cave with waterfalls, greenery, and lots of
poseballs; also the adjacent lake at Midnight Reflections
Serenity Falls: Come see 2 sims worth of model homes and walk among the beautiful
gardens
22