What are some of your pet peeves?

[JermaniSteele]

4 minutes ago, Pussycat Catnap said:

This is why I bought my mesh head from Mayreal

1. MORE quality than the tops brands.
2. 1700-1999L in price head depending.
3. But... more complicated HUD you have to spend time figuring out. Basically she crams 1,000,001 things onto a single panel small HUD. You have to click this to enter that mode, then click that to select what, then this for how, and that for do... She could use a new UI/HUD designer... but her mesh heads are the BEST. And the Janet is the ONLY head I have found that does good African and Latina shapes... While I use another for an Asian alt. Just like other brands they're all base designed 'Caucasian looking'... (/sigh... There is an African head from Angel Rock but I didn't like the looks it gave me, they looked exaggerated, but maybe if I spent more time with it), but these adapted very easily to other looks.

Ooooh interesting! Thanks for this.

[Pussycat Catnap]

2 minutes ago, JermaniSteele said:

Ooooh interesting! Thanks for this.

I'm wearing the Janet in my image on the forums here. And most of my more recent images... elsewhere (NSW)...

I have angled the eyes a bit for a 'sharp catty look' as a Neko. That's not default. Though the shape is my own and not the one any of her heads come with. I found that, with every mesh brand I tried, I had to change the lower jaw a lot. Either my old classic shape had a serious underbite I never noticed, or all these mesh heads have a very small chin... And Mayreal was about 1.5 times smaller in the chin than other brands - but once I dialed that out it just popped into a refined version of my old classic head, and then I noticed I could add specific desired features like more prominent lips, without getting cartoony.

[LittleMe Jewell]

18 minutes ago, Pussycat Catnap said:

This is why I bought my mesh head from Mayreal

1. MORE quality than the tops brands.
2. 1700-1999L in price head depending.
3. But... more complicated HUD you have to spend time figuring out. Basically she crams 1,000,001 things onto a single panel small HUD. You have to click this to enter that mode, then click that to select what, then this for how, and that for do... She could use a new UI/HUD designer... but her mesh heads are the BEST. And the Janet is the ONLY head I have found that does good African and Latina shapes... While I use another for an Asian alt. Just like other brands they're all base designed 'Caucasian looking'... (/sigh... There is an African head from Angel Rock but I didn't like the looks it gave me, they looked exaggerated, but maybe if I spent more time with it), but these adapted very easily to other looks.

Mayreal is one of the brands I grabbed demos for.  I practically never change skins - other than a few fantasy ones for special pictures - and I seldom even change makeup, so I've been checking out all the not-as-popular brands. As long as I can put an Omega skin and some makeup on it (and make the shape into something I'm comfortable with), then I'll be good.  I definitely do not need to worry about getting one that "everyone makes stuff for".

[Asylum Habilis]

UGH I'm unboxing all my xmas stuff, and I'll tell you. A box inside a box because you wanted to put it in a christmas box but instead of putting the thing in it, you put the already boxed item from whatever other freebie you were running inside another box! You know we don't see the christmas box but for a second, right? Then we delete it? And never think about it again? 

[Lindal Kidd]

8 hours ago, LittleMe Jewell said:

I never liked the system skirts much because of the way they made the butt huge (requiring a special shape just for them) and they stretched weird in the front when moving - worse than the mesh pencil skirts do.  I do like nice pencil skirt outfits, but not for dancing.  I never liked the flexi skirts/dresses when sitting, specifically because of that 'fall through your legs & chair' stuff.  I did have a script that I could put in that would keep it from falling, but then it ended up keeping the flexi pieces up at too much of an unnatural location.  I always wanted the flexi pieces to recognize the physics of the avatar and thus drop to the lap but not pass through that.

Put me down as another voice in favor of cloth physics!

[Saravendi]

Pet peeves- 

1- Voice. I hate hearing random yelling or talking at places like London City etc... I believe it’s local chat. For whatever reason, it confuses me and interrupts the vib and music. Hate it. I tp outa there quick. Always a bummer and ruins the venues experience for me.

2- Sims like London City, Keyhole, Orgasims (many others) where newbies first head off to and explore. First off I feel like it gives SL a creepy first impression, and these places are usually crowded and the Lag is insane. I always feel like I need a rl shower afterwards. 

3- Clothing or outfits without a fatpack option, where I’m required to buy each color individually! Eerrrrrr! 

4- Aggressive people/avatars. Rude behavior- I have no time for that.

5- “Hey Baby”... pick up lines

And so much of what you guys have previously mentioned! I agree with most!

[Maryanne Solo]

Voice lol. I started SL on dial-up internet in a remote tropical part of Australia believe it or not. You couldn't do much but it was still absolutely fascinating at the time. When broadband finally became available I thought oh yay! voice! Turned it on and heard grunting, wheezing, farting, eating food, riotous children in the background, babies crying, sleazy come-ons etc etc, nearly vomited and never went back to it  Being quite OCD and maybe some other stuff, the varying volume levels of different users drove me insane. I just cant cope with that.

Edited December 30, 2018 by Maryanne Solo

[Donna Underall]

21 hours ago, LittleMe Jewell said:

I always wanted the flexi pieces to recognize the physics of the avatar and thus drop to the lap but not pass through that.

I would have paid a ton for this.

[LittleMe Jewell]

Aarrgg, probably already been stated, but just got reminded again:  Grab some demos from some stores; TP home and try them all on; decide which to buy, use the LM in the Demo box and end up some place where a security orb boots you back home, so you then have to go back through your TP history or Search for the store in order to go buy the stuff you want.

I know it might be a PITA, but please update LMs in Demo boxes when you move your store.

 

Edited December 31, 2018 by LittleMe Jewell

[Skell Dagger]

Okay, I'm biting here, and I'm really biting. It's a good job this forum doesn't allow swearing. Luckily, my blog does, so have a post I wrote a while ago about this kind of thing. (The start of the title is a generic one and it's aimed at anyone I need to vent about, not just women.) Sadly, nothing has changed.

Pet peeve: Women who belittle men's attempts at dressing well, or who go on about how men don't have a clue or don't care about looking good, or who think it's funny to joke about how men are stupid and can't get to grips with things like Bento mesh heads, or...

I am so thoroughly sick and damned tired of that attitude. Ladies, it's unlike me not to behave like a gentleman toward every woman, but quit with that BS, please.

[LittleMe Jewell]

And add to my previous post - Hunt LMs that take you someplace where you get booted by a freakin security orb.

 

[Ivy Mysterious]

Thought of a couple new ones (I may have already said these, but I ain't about to read through 11 pages worth of replies to see lol)

People with ridiculous names like "Billy bobs baby girl" or" Jimmy's worthless slave"

When people I decide to cut contact with and block IM's members of my SL family asking why I blocked them

Being told that how I have my avi dressed isn't " The way a woman should dress"

Admins of RP sims who won't follow their own rules but expect everyone else to

Edited January 1, 2019 by IvyLarae

[Polenth Yue]

I wouldn't say I have any people peeves, because the things I don't like are about basic respect. As long as it isn't harming anyone, I don't see a problem. Wear whatever avatar you want. I'm a mushroom. I can't really judge.

Places are another matter. No fly is my biggest one. I tend to walk if I can, so no flight wouldn't be a problem on its own, but you can guarantee this will be the sim where flight is needed to get around poor sim design. A classic is to not check under the water, so anyone who falls in finds they're in a deep abyss with vertical sides and they're completely trapped. Bonus points for places where the official landing point wasn't moved after a redesign, so all visitors teleport directly into the watery abyss.

[Scylla Rhiadra]

9 hours ago, Skell Dagger said:

Okay, I'm biting here, and I'm really biting. It's a good job this forum doesn't allow swearing. Luckily, my blog does, so have a post I wrote a while ago about this kind of thing. (The start of the title is a generic one and it's aimed at anyone I need to vent about, not just women.) Sadly, nothing has changed.

Pet peeve: Women who belittle men's attempts at dressing well, or who go on about how men don't have a clue or don't care about looking good, or who think it's funny to joke about how men are stupid and can't get to grips with things like Bento mesh heads, or...

I am so thoroughly sick and damned tired of that attitude. Ladies, it's unlike me not to behave like a gentleman toward every woman, but quit with that BS, please.

Sometime around 2008 or 2009, some clever advertising person -- almost certainly a woman, I think -- came up with a bright idea to connect products to more women, who increasingly had disposable income to spend. The idea was to exploit the relatively new status and power held by women, and our pride in our collective achievements, by focusing upon feminine ascendancy over "the enemy," i.e., men. They would highlight this by "playfully" denigrating men -- because the easiest way to dramatize ascendancy is to contrast it with the corresponding fall of the Other. Women were to be flattered by their depiction as society's new "winners." And you can't have winners, the reasoning went, without there also being "losers."

And so, the "Hopelessly Stupid/Incompetent Boyfriend/Husband" trope in advertising was born.

https://youtu.be/cDwOWW0x41E

What made these new ads so effective (and got them noticed by cultural critics and commentators) was that they tapped into an existing social phenomenon: the tendency of some women, in some contexts, to denigrate men's competence, particularly in areas conventionally associated with the female sphere.  So,  in the ad I've posted above, men are incompetent in the kitchen. In your own blog post (which I enjoyed, btw), women are making fun of the inability of men to function properly in another area traditionally associated with women: clothing and appearance. What this demonstrates, I think, is that the root of this phenomenon is a sense of disempowerment, and the perceived need to establish superiority in spheres, particularly domestic ones, over which women have been granted some authority, because the perception is that this is where women can "win."

So, in the 50s and early 60s, at a time when women's rights and social status was actually moving backwards in many respects, the ability of women to trash talk men among themselves probably, I think, served a real social and psychological need: in a world where women were continually being told that they were not as smart, capable, strong, or even important as men, it provided a mechanism by which women could support each other and counter that narrative. It was in some ways actually a rather subversive undercurrent in feminine culture.

So, when advertisers began to use this, it was immediately recognizable to most women as a familiar part of "our" culture. Even if you were a woman who didn't denigrate men in the company of other women -- and a great many, perhaps most, weren't -- it was a trope we recognized. And although there was increasingly less reason to boost our sense of selves by denigrating men, because women were no longer without power, I suspect that the ad campaigns actually reinforced that now outdated tendency.

All of this is not in any sense intended to excuse the attitudes of the women whose criticisms of men you document. But, by historicizing it a bit, I think it helps explain it.
The thing, of course, is that this is 2019, and not 1959. There really is no need to boost women's sense of self by denigrating men, because women are proving themselves every bit as capable as men in all of those areas once closed off to them.

So, tl/dr version: yeah, you're absolutely right. This kind of attitude is stupid, insulting, and counterproductive. Speaking as a feminist, I'd also say it's reactionary because, again, it invariably focuses on women's supposed superiority in conventionally "feminine" spheres, such as clothing, personal hygiene, and the domestic world. Feminism isn't about "ascendancy"; it doesn't pitch itself as a "battle of the sexes." It's about equality.

But if one is going to combat these attitudes, it's valuable to know where they come from. They are, in fact, lingering vestiges of the sense of inferiority that women have long been encouraged to nurture in themselves.

 

Edited January 1, 2019 by Scylla Rhiadra
Corrected a couple of typos

[Callum Meriman]

47 minutes ago, Scylla Rhiadra said:

Speaking as a feminist, I'd also say it's reactionary because, again, it invariably focuses on women's supposed superiority in... clothing, personal hygiene, and the domestic world.

Are you claiming that men are these days unwilling to help about the house, have no sartorial style, and stink?

[AyelaNewLife]

49 minutes ago, Callum Meriman said:

Are you claiming that men are these days unwilling to help about the house, have no sartorial style, and stink?

Please don't just skip words when reading someone else's post. The word "supposed" is crucial here.

[Callum Meriman]

5 minutes ago, AyelaNewLife said:

Please don't just skip words when reading someone else's post. The word "supposed" is crucial here.

Question still stands, if Scylla believes this. Considering her justification is from the 1950s.

 

(edit: btw Ayela, I left in supposedly, I removed conventionally feminine spheres - because it's time to break down all gender stereotypes)

Edited January 1, 2019 by Callum Meriman

[AyelaNewLife]

2 minutes ago, Callum Meriman said:

Question still stands, if Scylla believes this. Considering her justification is from the 1950s.

Wait... what?

Scylla is referencing the supposed superiority of women in those areas. That's the impression, the trope, the stereotype that almost everyone is aware exists. Nowhere did she say or imply that she thought it was accurate - if anything, she implied the opposite.

[Callum Meriman]

1 minute ago, AyelaNewLife said:

Wait... what?

Scylla is referencing the supposed superiority of women in those areas. That's the impression, the trope, the stereotype that almost everyone is aware exists. Nowhere did she say or imply that she thought it was accurate - if anything, she implied the opposite.

We read it differently.

[Amina Sopwith]

5 minutes ago, Callum Meriman said:

We read it differently.

I read it the same way as @AyelaNewLife. Especially this part:

2 hours ago, Scylla Rhiadra said:

All of this is not in any sense intended to excuse the attitudes of the women whose criticisms of men you document. But, by historicizing it a bit, I think it helps explain it.
The thing, of course, is that this is 2019, and not 1959. There really is no need to boost women's sense of self by denigrating men, because women are proving themselves every bit as capable as men in all of those areas once closed off to them.

So, tl/dr version: yeah, you're absolutely right. This kind of attitude is stupid, insulting, and counterproductive. Speaking as a feminist, I'd also say it's reactionary because, again, it invariably focuses on women's supposed superiority in conventionally "feminine" spheres, such as clothing, personal hygiene, and the domestic world. Feminism isn't about "ascendancy"; it doesn't pitch itself as a "battle of the sexes." It's about equality.

But if one is going to combat these attitudes, it's valuable to know where they come from. They are, in fact, lingering vestiges of the sense of inferiority that women have long been encouraged to nurture in themselves.

 

Tbh, I do wish that the worst thing I'd heard from a man in SL is that my av looks stupid, especially since, right now, she really does. With that said, if this is indeed happening at a cultural level, it's not OK and should stop.

[Callum Meriman]

1 minute ago, Amina Sopwith said:

I read it the same way as @AyelaNewLife. Especially this part:

I didn't I read it as a justification, a way to explain away the bad behaviour.

This is how I read it (succinctly) "Yeah it is wrong, but this is why women do it".

Why even justify it?

[Amina Sopwith]

6 minutes ago, Callum Meriman said:

I didn't I read it as a justification, a way to explain away the bad behaviour.

This is how I read it (succinctly) "Yeah it is wrong, but this is why women do it".

Why even justify it?

Because, as she said: "But if one is going to combat these attitudes, it's valuable to know where they come from." A context is not a justification. It is an explanation. If you think these attitudes occur in a vacuum, you won't be equipped to fight them.
 

[AyelaNewLife]

Just now, Callum Meriman said:

I didn't I read it as a justification, a way to explain away the bad behaviour.

This is how I read it (succinctly) "Yeah it is wrong, but this is why women do it".

Why even justify it?

Because no one has ever had their mind changed by someone screaming "that's offensive!" in their face. Understanding the root cause of a problem is the first step in fixing it.

[Syo Emerald]

10 minutes ago, Callum Meriman said:

I didn't I read it as a justification, a way to explain away the bad behaviour.

This is how I read it (succinctly) "Yeah it is wrong, but this is why women do it".

Why even justify it?

No offence, but you come off as if you _want_ to read her text as that and selectivly skip over the parts were she literally says that it isn't an excuse and that this behavior is outdated in 2019. Describing a historic background to a stereotype, used and boosted in advertisement, isn't justifying the stereotype.

 

[Donna Underall]

17 hours ago, Skell Dagger said:

Okay, I'm biting here, and I'm really biting. It's a good job this forum doesn't allow swearing. Luckily, my blog does, so have a post I wrote a while ago about this kind of thing. (The start of the title is a generic one and it's aimed at anyone I need to vent about, not just women.) Sadly, nothing has changed.

Pet peeve: Women who belittle men's attempts at dressing well, or who go on about how men don't have a clue or don't care about looking good, or who think it's funny to joke about how men are stupid and can't get to grips with things like Bento mesh heads, or...

I am so thoroughly sick and damned tired of that attitude. Ladies, it's unlike me not to behave like a gentleman toward every woman, but quit with that BS, please.

Well, I love when a guy dresses well.  I think it shows he cares and is invested in SL enough to be interesting.

Edited January 1, 2019 by Donna Underall
changed "in" to "is"