Smoking: Influencing vs Programmability

[Sammy Huntsman]

1 minute ago, Luna Bliss said:

I self-censor, yes. I don't want what is supposed to be a beautiful art piece tarnished by a destructive habit which kills so many people each year.

But you are expecting everyone else to do the same. Like somehow freedom of expression and imagery if it pertains to that, should not be allowed. 

[Shiera Kealoha]

2 minutes ago, Sammy Huntsman said:

Let me try to word this right. By telling people they are influecing someone to do something, IE gluttony, addiction through art. You are practically telling them that they shouldn't put it in there. Then to top it all off, by saying we shouldn't glamorize smoking. Basically it means take all that out of your picture or that you need to somehow give warning to what is in the picture and explain why it is bad. So either we censor ourselves or we put a warning label. 

I understand what you are trying to convey. I just simply do not agree with your perspective. To take accountability for your content being able to influence someone is not telling someone that they shouldn't do something. That is your interpretation (and the interpretation that others unfortunately have as well). But, maybe we can just agree to disagree. We don't agree with each other's perspectives, so I don't really see a point in arguing.

[Luna Bliss]

1 minute ago, Sammy Huntsman said:

4 minutes ago, Luna Bliss said:

I guess just having the opinion that glamorizing smoking is not a good thing because it kills 8 million people yearly worldwide is some sort of horrid censorship for these freedom lovers!

You might as well censor all other vices or anything that could have a bad influence on all people too. And well we have a right to freedom of expression, that comes hand in hand with freedom of speech. Meaning we are unhindered in what we say or depict. I mean if it is hate speech and it incites violence. Then it is wrong. But depicting smoking in an SL pic is not classified as hate speech nor does it incite violence. 

Well yes, I believe it would be better not to glamorize all destructive behaviors in our art, whether in SL or RL.  This would absolutely be better for the world...make it a better place.

The above is a far cry from arresting anyone for it, or making rules to inhibit its presence. Unduly graphic destructive "art"...yes...is ok to censor that.

[Rowan Amore]

8 minutes ago, Arielle Popstar said:

Luna was promoting the idea of censorship, hence the longish thread even though most others are in disagreement with her.

Wonder if the Right wing feels the same.  The only thing they seem to not want censored is their social media.

[Luna Bliss]

5 minutes ago, Sammy Huntsman said:

7 minutes ago, Luna Bliss said:

I self-censor, yes. I don't want what is supposed to be a beautiful art piece tarnished by a destructive habit which kills so many people each year.

But you are expecting everyone else to do the same. Like somehow freedom of expression and imagery if it pertains to that, should not be allowed. 

I am wishing others would do the same...

[Pixie Kobichenko]

Holy macaroni.  
what a thread.

what happened to taking ownership for our choices?

[Sammy Huntsman]

2 minutes ago, Pixie Kobichenko said:

Holy macaroni.  
what a thread.

what happened to taking ownership for our choices?

That is not a thing in Luna's world. Lol 

[Shiera Kealoha]

11 minutes ago, Arielle Popstar said:

Luna was promoting the idea of censorship, hence the longish thread even though most others are in disagreement with her.

"Nobody said you must censor your content.

The only suggestion is that it's beneficial to imagine how what you choose to do could affect others.  It's within our power to make the world a better place by considering how our choices influence others.

Like I said, if I'm trying to create something beautiful it would not include an aspect that has caused such harm to others.  A dystopian scene might be different."

Doesn't sound like she was advocating for censorship at all. She has said that she self-censors though, for her own personal opinions. Nothing wrong with that.

[Luna Bliss]

8 minutes ago, Sammy Huntsman said:

But you are expecting everyone else to do the same.

You seem unable to accept that I believe it's wrong, as if I'm supposed to adhere to your belief that all censorship is wrong.  Some absolute belief you're trying to force me into believing.

The issue is not so black & white though...we have to take into consideration so many nuances in our evaluation...what might be okay in one situation might not be in another.

You want some absolute -- All Censorship BAD.   Reality is just not black and white.

[Luna Bliss]

5 minutes ago, Sammy Huntsman said:

7 minutes ago, Pixie Kobichenko said:

Holy macaroni.  
what a thread.

what happened to taking ownership for our choices?

That is not a thing in Luna's world. Lol 

Absolutely not true.

What I believe is that each individual has a relationship with the rest of the world....and both parties should take ownership or responsibility....it's never the burden of only one side.

You want black and white, when it's both.

Edited September 30, 2021 by Luna Bliss

[Sammy Huntsman]

4 minutes ago, Luna Bliss said:

Well yes, I believe it would be better not to glamorize all destructive behaviors in our art, whether in SL or RL.  This would absolutely be better for the world...make it a better place.

The above is a far cry from arresting anyone for it, or making rules to inhibit its presence. Unduly graphic destructive "art"...yes...is ok to censor that.

No it is not, the art is for the individual to interpret. If they somehow can't tell the difference between reality and fiction, that is not my problem. That is their problem. I feel like you need to understand, I am not responsible for how someone interprets my art. If I post myself in a dark corner smoking. Maybe I am trying to convey a message of sadness or depression, or maybe I am trying convey an escape from something.  But hey instead of doing that, I will just show why I am really depressed or stressed. Wanna see a picture of someone dead in bed, and I am crying over them? Wanna see that? I mean I could get very graphic. My dad died, and I don't want to show that, I want to show my way of escapng from that thought and using smoking as a method to cope. Is that glamorizing smoking? I don't think so. 

[Silent Mistwalker]

40 minutes ago, Rowan Amore said:

 

I think I'm being bullied.  OMG, I hope she doesn't come to my rescue!

I have to remind myself. Don't be like Alice. Don't go down the  🐇🕳️. 🤫

[Sammy Huntsman]

Just now, Silent Mistwalker said:

I have to remind myself. Don't be like Alice. Don't go down the  🐇🕳️. 🤫

It's too late for me. Lol 

[Luna Bliss]

2 minutes ago, Sammy Huntsman said:

11 minutes ago, Luna Bliss said:

Well yes, I believe it would be better not to glamorize all destructive behaviors in our art, whether in SL or RL.  This would absolutely be better for the world...make it a better place.

The above is a far cry from arresting anyone for it, or making rules to inhibit its presence. Unduly graphic destructive "art"...yes...is ok to censor that.

Expand  

No it is not, the art is for the individual to interpret. If they somehow can't tell the difference between reality and fiction, that is not my problem. That is their problem. I feel like you need to understand, I am not responsible for how someone interprets my art. If I post myself in a dark corner smoking. Maybe I am trying to convey a message of sadness or depression, or maybe I am trying convey an escape from something.  But hey instead of doing that, I will just show why I am really depressed or stressed. Wanna see a picture of someone dead in bed, and I am crying over them? Wanna see that? I mean I could get very graphic. My dad died, and I don't want to show that, I want to show my way of escapng from that thought and using smoking as a method to cope. Is that glamorizing smoking? I don't think so. 

Look, we are talking about a habit that kills 500,000 people in the U.S. each year.  I said there's no need to glamorize it....make it look like it's cool to do it.  This is different from what you're describing...depicting yourself as depressed.

This is what I meant about nuances...each case would need to be discussed.  In some cases I'd fall on the side of censorship, while in others I would not.  But you are saying censorship is always bad, and I can't agree with that.

[Arielle Popstar]

4 minutes ago, Luna Bliss said:

You want black and white, when it's both.

I do get the sense though that what might be 50 shades of gray for you will result in it being a black and white issue for how you apply it to others.

[Luna Bliss]

1 minute ago, Arielle Popstar said:

8 minutes ago, Luna Bliss said:

You want black and white, when it's both.

I do get the sense though that what might be 50 shades of gray for you will result in it being a black and white issue for how you apply it to others.

Because I don't agree with those who believe all censorship is bad? lol

Like I said, you have to examine each case...the situation...the audience...the purpose for your artistic presentation.  People will naturally not agree on everything, but that is not an excuse to make a rigid rule such as "all censorship is wrong".

[Luna Bliss]

4 hours ago, Ayeleeon said:

Artists generally are very concerned with their content and how it affects others. Especially great artists are driven by the desire to make the World a better place. Picasso painted Guernica to protest war. Similar feelings led John Lennon to write "Imagine". The notion that artists just create in a vacuum with no regard for anything else is wrong.

Just had to re-quote the best comment on the thread.

👋

[Silent Mistwalker]

35 minutes ago, LittleMe Jewell said:

Can I get my weed in the form of gummies?  I'm in need of an extreme sugar fix while we are all poisoning our bodies.

[Sammy Huntsman]

6 minutes ago, Luna Bliss said:

Look, we are talking about a habit that kills 500,000 people in the U.S. each year.  I said there's no need to glamorize it....make it look like it's cool to do it.  This is different from what you're describing...depicting yourself as depressed.

This is what I meant about nuances...each case would need to be discussed.  In some cases I'd fall on the side of censorship, while in others I would not.  But you are saying censorship is always bad, and I can't agree with that.

You really can't pick and choose what depictions of smoking is bad or not though. As with censorship, if you censor one depiction, you have to censor them all. 

[Luna Bliss]

Just now, Sammy Huntsman said:

You really can't pick and choose what depictions of smoking is bad or not though. As with censorship, if you censor one depiction, you have to censor them all. 

I don't follow your logic..

[Pixie Kobichenko]

3 minutes ago, Luna Bliss said:

t each individual has a relationship with the rest of the world....

I’ve been trying to just lurk this week cause I know I get very biased & opinionated…. That said- 

Each individual on the planet can not account for the  worldview of 7.5 billion people.  That would only be possible in a dystopian utopia.  Can’t happen.  Won’t happen. Should never happen, because of fundamental extremists who would likely kill just about everyone on the planet until there was no one left to voice their own opinion,

All I can hope I raised my child to understand is he should just be kind, helpful, honest & faithful.    Work hard, because- Murphy’s Law.  Never stop learning & believe people when they show you who they really are.  That’s the relationship I hope he has with the world.

[Chris Corvinus]

I smoke because stupid people exist. 

[Shiera Kealoha]

1 minute ago, Sammy Huntsman said:

You really can't pick and choose what depictions of smoking is bad or not though. As with censorship, if you censor one depiction, you have to censor them all. 

That is flawed logic. That is like saying, "You can't choose what depictions of sexual content is bad or not though." Even though pedophilia is a huge problem.

[Rowan Amore]

1 minute ago, xLunaea said:

That is flawed logic. That is like saying, "You can't choose what depictions of sexual content is bad or not though." Even though pedophilia is a huge problem.

Not at all the same thing.

[Luna Bliss]

4 minutes ago, Pixie Kobichenko said:

18 minutes ago, Luna Bliss said:

t each individual has a relationship with the rest of the world....

I’ve been trying to just lurk this week cause I know I get very biased & opinionated…. That said- 

Each individual on the planet can not account for the  worldview of 7.5 billion people.  That would only be possible in a dystopian utopia.  Can’t happen.  Won’t happen. Should never happen, because of fundamental extremists who would likely kill just about everyone on the planet until there was no one left to voice their own opinion,

I think you're misinterpreting my intent. I'm only saying both the artist and those she/he chooses to show their work to have equal responsibility -- it's not only one side that should bear the responsibility.  I'm not some super 'artiste' who gets to do whatever the hell I want just because I'm an artist -- I have to consider my effect on the world too.