Well, maybe the "suck" part, but then it would depend on the context and the man, I think. Telling someone you don't wish to play anymore is not rude though. Potentially awkward, yes. Rude, no.
I do find that some women can be unnecessarily harsh with men in a way that just makes me cringe and want to apologize for my gender. It's that whole pound of flesh thing. You can tell someone that you are not enjoying the play and that you wish to stop without unleashing the hounds of hyperbolic-ghetto-blasting-diva hell on some poor guy.
I would prefer, if limited to these choices, that someone fake a crash, play dumb or hide (temporarily) over continuing to cyber with someone they are not enjoying though. Really. What the hell are you doing otherwise?
I personally handle this particular problem a number of ways, the most common of which is that I just say, "Hey, you know what? I don't think we're a match." Different styles, choices, preferences, whatever, but not a match. Then, depending on whether I feel it is worth saying more, I might say something about how it was nice to meet, "thank you for asking me," "good thing we found out early and can move on to find something that suits us both better" and "enjoy your day," and then I excuse myself and leave. Then I open up the "Notes" tab on his profile and type "No" and a short line on why. And then I move on.
Here's an extremely generalized rule of thumb.
The Joe Wannafuckers who treat you like a game construct and approach you with random TPs or lines like "Wanna fuck" or "Get on your knees and suck me bitch," and then hop on a poseball and press the menu button like a manic lab rat on cocaine while not making any real effort to engage with you are not gonna lose one iota of momentum if you tell them they "suck at cyber" and you don't want to play anymore. Choosing to either stick with it until he is done or, God help you, repeatedly agreeing to have cybersex with him, or sending him an onslaught of continuous colorful criticism is a complete waste of time.
The Peter Pararoleplayers are another story. These guys are more sensitive. They're making an effort. I would ask that women handle them with a tad bit more consideration. That does not mean playing with them if you don't want to play with them. That does not mean faking your way through to an exit. You can say no in a firm and respectful manner. Again, I just say it's "not a match." That's not a criticism so much as it is a preference and a valid and honest one at that.
My main issue is with people who agree to cyber AGAIN and AGAIN out of what...some misguided sense of courtesy or obligation? Let's talk about that some more.
I will confess I have completed cybersex with someone I wasn't particularly enjoying, but usually only when I was well into it and could tell it had a reasonably short end time and it wasn't totally abhorrent. If I get started with someone who is clearly a multi-hour paraRPer, there is no way I'm going to roll with that until the end. Why give hours and hours of your life to some stranger when there is no benefit to you? And why perpetrate that kind of fraud on the other person? Cut bait for both of you so you can find better catches. But that's why I talk about a "cybersex sales cycle" and highlight the probing and listening and setting of expectations. The ideal scenario is not getting into that situation because you sorted it out up front.
Also, there's some pretty rough and bizarre stuff in Second Life and on the internet. If someone unwittingly gets into a cybersex situation where the roleplay is deeply disturbing and upsetting, then again, why keep doing it? Why do that to yourself? And for who? What's that about? Stop it.
Here's a thought. What if neither of you are enjoying the cybersex, but both of you stick with it until the other has "had their fun"? Seriously. Stop it.
![[IMG]](http://i602.photobucket.com/albums/tt104/MissLee_photos/Smile/th_Wink.gif?t=1299273958)
( I would cite Fidelio by Beethoven which has 4 overtures all better than the opera)