Jump to content

What I learned about SL this week.


You are about to reply to a thread that has been inactive for 365 days.

Please take a moment to consider if this thread is worth bumping.

Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, Scylla Rhiadra said:

To which the reply (which, while it does not use "s***" is actually more objectionable:

I'm tired of women being commodified through language. Using these characterizations is just. So. Unnecessary.

It should be possible for men and women to express their sexual selves in all of the diverse ways, including submission and rape fantasy, that they can without this kind of public and reductive characterization of the gender.

I missed the censor-dodge, that's fair enough.

I'd still argue that, while your overall point is sound, this is a very poor example of it. The language you're critiquing is entirely inline with the (perfectly valid) sexual expression of the women Alyona is describing, and you're (unintentionally) coming dangerously close to suggesting that said expression should be verbotten.

We had a thread full of perfect examples of what you're criticising, so I do agree with what you're saying... just not here.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 82
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Those that collar someone or allow themselves to be collared within a day also demonstrate how much they don't know about BDSM. 

I would have hoped the context of my entire comment would have given the impression that the line you quoted was in jest as an attempt at humor. Those who have seen my posts over the months and years

Posted Images

6 hours ago, BelindaN said:

It's not for me though, I'm just too rebellious.

Yeah you toss the word 'slave' around in my presence and my RL self starts feeling violent.

The one time a friend tried to show me how interesting the BDSM scene was in SL was the beginning of the end of that friendship. They were on my friends list for almost another 10 years... but with very little communication and no real interest to ever pursue it again.

Someone thought once... OK, so you're a DOM... which ended just as badly.

That scene is for some people... but it's not for me...

 

That said... I actually use an RLV collar... for the kink and such it's very handy. But I don't have any 'connection' to it as a D/s thing... merely as a tool for my avatar.

(My most common use of it is actually quick changing my outfits... But when I go to XXX sims I usually flip it to public access - it can be a way to avoid having to write term-papers... er... emote at people...).

 

Edited by Pussycat Catnap
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, janetosilio said:

We just gotta work on your mic drops

 

1B8CAC80-7719-43B1-92FB-3380B401AADF.gif

I've been getting better, but I still have slippery fingers. I think it's seriously oily-looking skin on the Legacy mesh body I keep trying to turn off. :)

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Orwar said:

   Neck seams are fairly straightforward, in so far as: they're there. All 3D mesh objects have seams due to the UV maps being 2-dimensional; bodies themselves have them, as well (usually along the inside of the arms and legs, along the waist, by the wrists and ankles, and over the shoulders). The reason the neck seem in particular tends to be problematic is because the head and body are two separate entities, that are separately lit within Second Life - furthermore there can be differences in the magnitudes of the specular and normal maps, furthering the blatancy of the border of the two meshes.

   If you T-pose your avatar, and put on a studio WL to over-light the scene, and match the two entities to perfection - well, the moment you change the lighting setup for your scene or move your avatar, you'll have another lighting to work with, and the seam will be back (this is also one reason that, particularly men in Second Life, may find other body parts difficult to match in colour).

   Neck sheathes may improve that one hard line across the throat, but, it suffers from the same issue of being a separate entity, and whilst it tends to go out in a gradient towards both sides, this gradient is rarely perfect, especially if your head moves so that it cuts into your hair instead, or just leave a beam of skin poking out of your neck and seemingly smelts into the empty space around it. If I had to hide the seam, an accessory such as a choker avoids such issues.

   But it's also one of the easiest things to fix in editing, as far as SL photography is concerned. In GIMP (and probably more or less the same in PS):

  • Select the Heal tool.
  • Select a brush with a relatively smooth gradient.
  • Set the spacing to 0.
  • Set the brush opacity to between 80-90%.
  • Take a sample of the skin near where you wish to edit it.
  • Make short, overlapping strokes across the grain of the seam.

Seam.thumb.png.0464fcbfbafac5fb08ef22a139dec757.png

Thank you very much for this. This is most helpful and it seems I’m continuing to learn this week. I would love to try that script. 
 

thanks for being so kind and sharing. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Alyona Su said:

I would have hoped the context of my entire comment would have given the impression that the line you quoted was in jest as an attempt at humor. Those who have seen my posts over the months and years have pretty much gotten a bead on my antics and I will be first so admit that at times my attempts are epic failures.

Therefore, a non-politically-correct spin on an apologize, though instead,  a genuine one: I will not say I am sorry that you've taken offense at that line, but rather I will say I am sorry that I offended you.

I'm going to respond by apologizing to you, Alyona. I am -- and in fact was, at some level, even when I posted -- aware that you were speaking in jest. One of the main reasons I quoted your post was because of the particular response to it, which I also posted. I should have been much more careful and contextualized my citation of your comment, and for that I do definitely apologize.

As a side note, and not at all to qualify what I've just said above, but to make clearer my objection to this kind of language in other contexts: I am not "offended" by this word, or by this kind of language, in the sense that my feelings are hurt, or my ears turn pink, or I am personally affronted. My own language can be every bit as colourful as this, even more so. And, actually, this particular word is one that I use not infrequently, in very specific and particular contexts, in my teaching. My problem with this kind of language is not that it "offends" against my sensibilities, but rather that it is term associated with, and that contributes to, a very old and still sadly prevalent attitude towards women and their sexuality. It's not that it is "upsetting," in other words, but rather that it has, at least potentially, certain social effects, reinforcing dated and always highly suspect attitudes. Again, however, I do understand that this is not the sense in which you were using it, and I apologize for citing you in a way that suggested that I thought that it was.

Edited by Scylla Rhiadra
  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, AyelaNewLife said:

I missed the censor-dodge, that's fair enough.

I'd still argue that, while your overall point is sound, this is a very poor example of it. The language you're critiquing is entirely inline with the (perfectly valid) sexual expression of the women Alyona is describing, and you're (unintentionally) coming dangerously close to suggesting that said expression should be verbotten.

We had a thread full of perfect examples of what you're criticising, so I do agree with what you're saying... just not here.

Yeah. Sort of. This is probably one of those instances where I should have thought to myself, "You're too cranky to hit 'send.' Give it an hour before you decide to do so."

Having said that, however, I will say that I am not sorry for what I said (except with reference to Alyona; see above), but rather for the fact that I said it. If that makes sense.

The key point that I was trying to get at is context. If someone talks about me as a "s***" in the context of RP, or BDSM play, or even just intimacy, it has a very particular meaning that is determined by those contexts. It can, for one thing, be assumed that I have consented to that kind of language being used in relation to me. The meanings of the word are also circumscribed by context: I am not going to leap to the conclusion, within the contexts mentioned above, that the person using this or similar language of me is actually saying that this is somehow true of me, or integral to my identity. When we're done, and we leave the bedroom, dungeon, sex sim, or whatever, I revert back to being "not a s***" again.

That context is missing here. This is not a dungeon, sex sim, or whatever: it is a public forum. One thing that means is that the user of such language cannot possibly obtain consent for its use, because it's general and public. And I for one do not consent.

For the rest of my remarks on this, I'm going to address Erwin directly, in order to give him an opportunity to respond, and to make it clear that I am not "calling him out," or merely talking about him, but trying to engage with him on this subject.

Erwin, this remark:

6 hours ago, Erwin Solo said:

That's the ticket. It really cuts down on the drama-potential when they ask for it. That, and the fact that the women have the men so outnumbered. It is just impossible to keep up with demand.

in which you respond, unironically, to Alyona's comment, is made not within the framework of an agreed-upon and understood context. You aren't role-playing here, and you haven't received consent for characterizing women the way you have. You are making a broad characterization about all women in SL, noting that it's great when they just submit themselves to men and "ask for it." You've said something similar before, and I commented on it on that occasion: had you said something like "there are lots more women in SL than men, which makes it really easy for men to find a sexual partner," I'd have no objections whatsoever. The problem here is that, working from the context of Alyona's remark, you are characterizing women as so many packages of meat, just begging to be consumed by you.

Language matters, your choice of words matter, context matters. You could have said substantively the same thing in a way that did not utterly objectify the women you are referencing: instead, you have decided to characterize them as slavering or would-be submissives who are just begging to be serviced by you. To repeat again: this is a public forum, not your BDSM dungeon. Choose your language accordingly, please.

Yeah. Probably shouldn't have said any of that, and just let if roll off my back. I get so weary of this stuff though.

 

Edited by Scylla Rhiadra
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, Alyona Su said:

Which reminds, me - I still need to send that money to Orwar for my specialize, exclusive, super-insult

Are we about to go diving off down the Fin-dom trail now? Please - no!

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Odaks said:
20 hours ago, Alyona Su said:

Which reminds, me - I still need to send that money to Orwar for my specialize, exclusive, super-insult

Are we about to go diving off down the Fin-dom trail now? Please - no!

I'm not sure how you arrived at the findom subject from my comment. Better context would be helpful here.

The part of my comment references a fun post by Onward expressing disdain at "lazy-speak" and how even insults are lame and offered "professional personal insult"... blah, blah. So it was more or less an inside joke toward @Orwar and I surely could have added more context myself, but there already was some there. LOL

As for the very idea of findom, I must admit: serious eye-roller for me there.

Edited by Alyona Su
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, Marut72 said:

 

I am researching and buying up flattering poses. I am also researching beautiful sims to use as the backdrop, and eventually I will need a volunteer or two to go out shooting with me sometimes.

I would love to volunteer.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd like this thread to get back on track as to what we learn, but just one more comment, from RL news today in the UK

That violence in consensual sex is becoming widespread and "normalised". The feature continued by interviewing some of the victims. It will be somewhere on the BBC news feed.

I'll make no further comment on this.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Alyona Su said:

As for the very idea of fandom, I must admit: serious eye-roller for me there.

   Aw, but I thought you were one of my fans!

6 minutes ago, BelindaN said:

I'd like this thread to get back on track as to what we learn

   Agreed.

   This week I learned how a pendulum is used for divination. Turns out it's as easy as knowing your cardinal directions and holding the end of a string. I still don't 'believe' in it, and whilst I suppose the case for subconsciously trying to get it to swing towards a certain answer could have some merit - but it also feels like self-deception, which is a cardinal sin for a satanist. Now if only I could squeeze some ornithology and Catholics' theocratic succession rites in here, I would be able to wield the word 'cardinal' by every, to me, known definition.

   ...

   I looked it up. And I also learned that those appear to be all uses for the word 'cardinal'. I have mastered this word!

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Orwar said:

Aw, but I thought you were one of my fans!

I am, but the one and only thing I hate about macOS is that darned auto-corrupt. I cannot live with it and I cannot live without it. So went back and fixed it LOL Ugh.

On topic, though: This week I've learned to be so wary of Linden Lab promises that I should probably give them more credit as it's not the same Linden Lab from years ago. I get the impression they have better leadership going on now. I'm not saying it's the best, etc. - but definitely better than previously.

Edited by Alyona Su
  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, LyricalBookworm said:

She asked if she could come in to talk to me about her God because she was afraid for my soul after looking over my profile.

   Rushes off to look at your profile.

   Have hope?! Laugh!?! Repent!!

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, BelindaN said:

I'd like this thread to get back on track as to what we learn, but just one more comment, from RL news today in the UK

That violence in consensual sex is becoming widespread and "normalised". The feature continued by interviewing some of the victims. It will be somewhere on the BBC news feed.

I'll make no further comment on this.

I saw that article too. Sadly, it didn't really surprise me. Neither did the hand-wringing and pearl-clutching that followed the research.

Ultimately, the only people responsible for abuse are abusers. Men (and women) are not mindless beasts incapable of rational thought, acting only on animal instinct. Finding something else to blame - be it adult videos, or BDSM acceptance in the 'mainstream' - absolves those abusive men (and women) of responsibility for their actions. It's only marginally different to "it's not his fault, did you see how she was dressed?" And I reject that wholeheartedly.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
You are about to reply to a thread that has been inactive for 365 days.

Please take a moment to consider if this thread is worth bumping.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...