Simulated intimacy in SL vs the world ..

[Love Zhaoying]

Hmm..if "adult stuff" wasn't a little "shameful", or "forbidden", or "dirty", would it still be as fun?

Maybe "hiding" the "adult stuff" in plain sight was on purpose!

Brilliant!

 

[Amberyl Ethaniel]

I agree the animations look really dated, but I haven't had "relations" in SL for years cause to me, there's so many other interesting things to do and see. I am amazed at the creativity of sim builders and people who sell in SL.I do wish there was a way to search popular sims and exclude the sex sims though..is there?

[Hunny Bunny]

1 minute ago, Amberyl Ethaniel said:

I do wish there was a way to search popular sims and exclude the sex sims though..is there?

Lol yeah set your maturity level to general/moderate ... best we can do.

[Amberyl Ethaniel]

3 minutes ago, Hunny Bunny said:

Lol yeah set your maturity level to general/moderate ... best we can do.

OH! That's a good idea, I don't know why it didn't occur to me to do that..😆at least it'll screen out some..

[Katherine Heartsong]

9 hours ago, Coffee Pancake said:

I really really wish people at LL and moles would go play some games, and then come back here with fresh eyes. We let so much horrendous stuff slide because of baked in assumptions, and 20 years of "this is how it is".

The seven most limiting/silly words in UX design is when management says ...

"Because, that's how we've always done things."

[Coffee Pancake]

7 hours ago, BilliJo Aldrin said:

Why not advertise Second Life as the success where all the other virtual worlds have failed?

"Second Life, 20 years old and growing stronger every day. Join us, You can do and be anything you want, plus you get a complete avatar too, not a floating half body like that other guys world"

Strong "No, were not dead" vibes.

Which might be a fair option considering most people have had an SL account at this point and they all think it died they day they left.

(no really .. this question with that same implication is a genuine FAQ)

 

1 minute ago, Katherine Heartsong said:

The seven most limiting/silly words in UX design is when management says ...

"Because, that's how we've always done things."

"UX design" .. what are these words, surely you mean "programmer art".

 

The SL viewer is a hodge podge of different design paradigms, implemented with an inconsistently applied propriety handwritten XML based UI  (with no UI editing tools) that's been kludged into doing the new thing over and over. SL UI is systemically barely fit for purpose.

Could LL hire someone to rework this using an actual off the shelf standard framework, that would both perform better and present a self (and industry) consistent UI paradigm, work in every language they cared to throw at it and support external accessibility tools like screen readers?

No.

[Love Zhaoying]

35 minutes ago, Coffee Pancake said:

Strong "No, were not dead" vibes.

Monty Python: 

"Bring out your dead!"

"I'm not dead yet!"

 

[Silent Mistwalker]

1 hour ago, Love Zhaoying said:

Monty Python: 

"Bring out your dead!"

"I'm not dead yet!"

 

[Paul Hexem]

It's worth pointing out that collision animations means collision bones (he said bone), which benefits a whole lot more than just adult animations, or even just animations.

Flexible hair and clothes that aren't phantom, furniture that detects accurate height or limb/ body locations, limb damage for roleplay and combat systems, the list goes on. 

[Scylla Rhiadra]

In the broad sense, @Coffee Pancake, I don't think we're as much in disagreement as your response seems to indicate, because I've agreed that LL can, and possibly should, promote the sexual side of SL more than it does.

What I've suggested is that it needs to do so carefully, thoughtfully, and strategically, mindful of the complexity of the SL social scene and its economy. That hardly seems to me a very controversial view?

What I find a bit alarming is the implication in your response that, well, care, thoughtfulness, and a strategic approach built upon a recognition of that complexity is either unnecessary or even undesirable. Unless I'm misreading (always possible!), you seem to be suggesting that SL is already mostly about sex, and so a full-steam-ahead-and-damn-the-torpedoes approach to promoting sexuality on the platform is not only logical, but the best way to go.

And I disagree strongly with this premise, frankly, that sex is "practically all people are here for."

I am reminded, reading your response, of the parable of the blind men, each seeking to describe the elephant on the basis of their own limited and subjective experience of it.

We all range around SL in our own little bubbles to be sure. If you're mostly here for sex, then, yes, sex is mostly what you're going to see. If you're here for the "art," or music, or dancing, or RP, then, surprise surprise, those things are going to comprise the majority of your experience of the platform.

These bubbles overlap a great deal, obviously. If you're into sex, you probably are going to clubs and listening to music and dancing. And if you're into music and dancing, it's entirely possible -- maybe even likely -- that you're hooking up there. But to argue that music and dance exist here solely as a backdrop for the sex that may or may not result from clubbing is, frankly, nonsense. This particularly is an absurdity:

17 hours ago, Coffee Pancake said:

The singular reason we have a clubbing and music scene at all is so people can find and meet other people. The music is a backdrop and not an end in of itself.

SL is full of people who follow particular DJs or live performers: they go to the clubs where these play for the music, as well as for the social scene. Three of the DJs to whose sets I go weekly have a loyal band of followers who show up to nearly every set. The social scene is a part of the experience of course: you become comfortable in each of these coteries. But enjoying the company of familiar friends in the context of music you enjoy, even if romances and sexual encounters sometimes come out of these associations, doesn't make them "about" sex. That's like suggesting that RL coffee shops are notorious hookup joints because people often have first dates, or meet their Tinder pickups there.

Yes, of course there are clubs that are primarily pickup places. If I go (as I very occasionally do) to Fogbound, there's a good chance I'll get hit on, maybe more than once. But at the places I go for music and dancing -- and I'm a very active clubber -- the talk is overwhelmingly in local, not IM, and, barring the occasional dirty joke, it's not about sex.

I can say the same about the gallery openings I go to. I go to, generally, about two of these a week, and get invites to many more than that. And there is music, and dancing, and a crowd that can range from about 20 to upwards of 60 or more -- but the people are there for the art. Do these people also have sex, sometimes with people they've met at openings? I'm sure. But that's emphatically NOT the same thing as arguing that these openings are not ends in and of themselves, and serve only to help people hookup for sex.

That's two of the bits of the elephant that I regularly grope; a third is more nebulous: the world of fashion, avatar customization, and what my friends often call "playing Barbies" in SL. I have a huge number of friends who spend a really large proportion of their time shopping, playing with mesh heads, hair, skins, and new clothing. And no, they are NOT doing so in order to attract sexual partners: they are doing it because it is, in its own right, fun. You suggest that the high placement of one particular set of sexual attachment is proof that sex is main draw, and economic engine of SL. I'm not going to deny, at all, that sex is a major component of the SL economy (or of activities here), but the fact that one particular garment rigged for one particular body by Addamsberry or whatever doesn't appear at the top of the list shouldn't obscure the fact that avatar customization and fashion are huge here. We have no way of knowing for sure, obviously, but I'd lay money that women's clothing easily outperforms sexual aids and equipment in terms of economic impact. Do you go to the sales and events? I do, and I know what I see there, and where the crowds of buyers congregate. And it's not in front of the vendors for sex toys.

None of this is to suggest that I disagree that sex is important here. Of course it is: remove it, and you undoubtedly kill this platform.

But remove fashion, or music and clubs, and you'll drive a stake into its heart just as surely. Removing the ability to do SL photography might not outright kill SL, but it would severely disfigure and hobble the place.

All of this is just to say, again, that SL is a really complex machine, and reducing it, as you seem to, to the status of virtual hookup joint is mischaracterizing it badly. Explore other parts of the elephant, Coffee -- or don't, but at least acknowledge that your subjective experience of it is not the only one.

And actively endeavouring to turn the entire place into a sex site will destroy it. The day that the enormous diversity of SL becomes nothing more than a backdrop to people hungrily seeking out sexual partners is the day that I log out for the last time. And I won't by any means be the only one.

Edited June 20, 2023 by Scylla Rhiadra

[Paul Hexem]

19 minutes ago, Scylla Rhiadra said:

the elephant that I regularly grope

I'm not really replying, I just wanted to quote this out of context.

[Scylla Rhiadra]

1 minute ago, Paul Hexem said:

I'm not really replying, I just wanted to quote this out of context.

Are  you kink-shaming, Paul? 😮

[Silent Mistwalker]

18 minutes ago, Scylla Rhiadra said:

In the broad sense, @Coffee Pancake, I don't think we're as much in disagreement as your response seems to indicate, because I've agreed that LL can, and possibly should, promote the sexual side of SL more than it does.

What I've suggested is that it needs to do so carefully, thoughtfully, and strategically, mindful of the complexity of the SL social scene and its economy. That hardly seems to me a very controversial view?

What I find a bit alarming is the implication in your response that, well, care, thoughtfulness, and a strategic approach built upon a recognition of that complexity is either unnecessary or even undesirable. Unless I'm misreading (always possible!), you seem to be suggesting that SL is already mostly about sex, and so a full-steam-ahead-and-damn-the-torpedoes approach to promoting sexuality on the platform is not only logical, but the best way to go.

And I disagree strongly with this premise, frankly, that sex is "practically all people are here for."

I am reminded, reading your response, of the parable of the blind men, each seeking to describe the elephant on the basis of their own limited and subjective experience of it.

We all range around SL in our own little bubbles to be sure. If you're mostly here for sex, then, yes, sex is mostly what you're going to see. If you're here for the "art," or music, or dancing, or RP, then, surprise surprise, those things are going to comprise the majority of your experience of the platform.

These bubbles overlap a great deal, obviously. If you're into sex, you probably are going to clubs and listening to music and dancing. And if you're into music and dancing, it's entirely possible -- maybe even likely -- that you're hooking up there. But to argue that music and dance exist here solely as a backdrop for the sex that may or may not result from clubbing is, frankly, nonsense. This particularly is an absurdity:

SL is full of people who follow particular DJs or live performers: they go to the clubs where these play for the music, as well as for the social scene. Three of the DJs to whose sets I go weekly have a loyal band of followers who show up to nearly every set. The social scene is a part of the experience of course: you become comfortable in each of these coteries. But enjoying the company of familiar friends in the context of music you enjoy, even if romances and sexual encounters sometimes come out of these associations, doesn't make them "about" sex. That's like suggesting that RL coffee shops are notorious hookup joints because people often have first dates, or meet their Tinder pickups there.

Yes, of course there are clubs that are primarily pickup places. If I go (as I very occasionally do) to Fogbound, there's a good chance I'll get hit on, maybe more than once. But at the places I go for music and dancing -- and I'm a very active clubber -- the talk is overwhelmingly in local, not IM, and, barring the occasional dirty joke, it's not about sex.

I can say the same about the gallery openings I go to. I go to, generally, about two of these a week, and get invites to many more than that. And there is music, and dancing, and a crowd that can range from about 20 to upwards of 60 or more -- but the people are there for the art. Do these people also have sex, sometimes with people they've met at openings? I'm sure. But that's emphatically NOT the same thing as arguing that these openings are not ends in and of themselves, and serve only to help people hookup for sex.

That's two of the bits of the elephant that I regularly grope; a third is more nebulous: the world of fashion, avatar customization, and what my friends often call "playing Barbies" in SL. I have a huge number of friends who spend a really large proportion of their time shopping, playing with mesh heads, hair, skins, and new clothing. And no, they are NOT doing so in order to attract sexual partners: they are doing it because it is, in its own right, fun. You suggest that the high placement of one particular set of sexual attachment is proof that sex is main draw, and economic engine of SL. I'm not going to deny, at all, that sex is a major component of the SL economy (or of activities here), but the fact that one particular garment rigged for one particular body by Addamsberry or whatever doesn't appear at the top of the list shouldn't obscure the fact that avatar customization and fashion are huge here. We have no way of knowing for sure, obviously, but I'd lay money that women's clothing easily outperforms sexual aids and equipment in terms of economic impact. Do you go to the sales and events? I do, and I know what I see there, and where the crowds of buyers congregate. And it's not in front of the vendors for sex toys.

None of this is to suggest that I disagree that sex is important here. Of course it is: remove it, and you undoubtedly kill this platform.

But remove fashion, or music and clubs, and you'll drive a stake into its heart just as surely. Removing the ability to do SL photography might not outright kill SL, but it would severely disfigure and hobble the place.

All of this is just to say, again, that SL is a really complex machine, and reducing it, as you seem to, to the status of virtual hookup joint is mischaracterizing it badly. Explore other parts of the elephant, Coffee -- or don't, but at least acknowledge that your subjective experience of it is not the only one.

And actively endeavouring to turn the entire place into a sex site will destroy it. The day that the enormous diversity of SL becomes nothing more than a backdrop to people hungrily seeking out sexual partners is the day that I log out for the last time. And I won't by any means be the only one.

Thank you for putting it all into words. You said everything I've been wanting to say for a very long time but have bitten my tongue because fallout.

[Love Zhaoying]

1 minute ago, Scylla Rhiadra said:

4 minutes ago, Paul Hexem said:

I'm not really replying, I just wanted to quote this out of context.

Are  you kink-shaming, Paul? 😮

My favorite of the 3 blind men said the elephant was soft, squishy, and smelled like poo.

[Paul Hexem]

2 minutes ago, Scylla Rhiadra said:

Are  you kink-shaming, Paul? 😮

Until I hear the elephant's side of the story, I am. 

[Love Zhaoying]

It is interesting how one's view of Second Life says a lot about the lenses through which they view it!

 

[Scylla Rhiadra]

Just now, Paul Hexem said:

Until I hear the elephant's side of the story, I am. 

Everything in SL is consensual by definition, Paul. You know that!

The elephant doesn't even use RLV.

[Love Zhaoying]

Just now, Scylla Rhiadra said:

Everything in SL is consensual by definition, Paul. You know that!

The elephant doesn't even use RLV.

The elephant hopefully knows better than to go AFK in an elephant "sling".

[Scylla Rhiadra]

5 minutes ago, Love Zhaoying said:

It is interesting how one's view of Second Life says a lot about the lenses through which they view it!

 

This is exactly my point, yes!

My own view of SL is far from complete: there are huge swathes of the platform I know only indirectly, slightly, or not at all. And I've not begun to touch upon the enormous diversity here: I didn't discuss role play, for instance, or building, or landscaping and decorating, or or or . . .

None of us is in a position to define SL as "this" or "that." What we can know is that its enormous diversity is a delicate and complicated thing that somehow magically coheres and "works." And I think it's just common sense to be aware of that before advocating for really dramatic shifts in the focus here.

A first step, though, is acknowledging that complexity and diversity. And because we are all in bubbles (or groping isolated bits of the elephant, as Paul might prefer to put it), that can be difficult to see.

Edited June 20, 2023 by Scylla Rhiadra
Omitted word

[Jennifer Boyle]

18 hours ago, Coffee Pancake said:

...the immense barriers to entry...

Yep.

[Rolig Loon]

1 hour ago, Scylla Rhiadra said:

None of us is in a position to define SL as "this" or "that." What we can know is that its enormous diversity is a delicate and complicated thing that somehow magically coheres and "works."

Sort of like RL, in fact. The larger and more complex the world around you is, the more likely it is that you are only perceiving the part that's inside your own bubble corner. I am reminded of this whenever I travel. It's a humbling exercise, discovering that most of the world is not like me, has totally different interests and worries, and is just as ignorant about my small corner.  Whether the focus is RL or SL, most of my knowledge comes from a handful of fuzzy, poorly curated snapshots.

[Love Zhaoying]

   I doubt the folks in Second life now in their 70's stuck around primarily for "the Slex".  There's so much more to Second Life. Heck, I'm "only" 57 and hardly ever think about the Slex, except people on the Forum keep talking about it.

 

[Cinnamon Mistwood]

1 hour ago, Love Zhaoying said:

It is interesting how one's view of Second Life says a lot about the lenses through which they view it!

 

This.

Almost everyone I meet in world thinks everyone is there for the same reason they are.  Let me call someone out who likes to tell me a similar belief to that of Coffee's. @Bagnu.  

No, we are not all here for sex.  However, if all sex animations disappeared tomorrow, my SL would be much less.  I have many friends who are very active that way and I would miss them if they left for "friendlier" platforms. 

I have so many non-sex interests that I have trouble finding time for all the things I want to do and see and all the people I want to meet.  Most of that is not in an adult region.

Since the topic asks for comparisons to rl, my real life interests are much the same as in SL.  I just don't have to travel as far or get dressed.

[Love Zhaoying]

3 minutes ago, Cinnamon Mistwood said:

However, if all sex animations disappeared tomorrow, my SL would be much less. 

Somehow, the idea of relying more / solely on Roleplay typing and, if "you" are lucky, voice, is more exciting to me than animations. 

ETA: Speaking only for myself, perhaps having had "more than the average number of RL partners" is part of why I'm not all about teh sax.

Edited June 20, 2023 by Love Zhaoying

[Scylla Rhiadra]

26 minutes ago, Rolig Loon said:

Sort of like RL, in fact.

Actually, I nearly said just this, but I was already being rather prolix.

I have a pretty large and pretty active friend's list. I don't know how many of them have "sex lives" in SL -- certainly some do, and a fair number are in relationships that probably, I imagine, include sex. And their sexuality is part of who they are, just as it is in RL. But it's not their focus 24/7, it doesn't solely comprise their many activities here, and it is, in most cases, probably not what brought them to SL.

Just as in RL, when sex is important -- it's important! But that doesn't mean that it occupies all, or even anywhere near most, of our waking lives and thoughts.

26 minutes ago, Rolig Loon said:

The larger and more complex the world around you is, the more likely it is that you are only perceiving the part that's inside your own bubble corner. I am reminded of this whenever I travel. It's a humbling exercise, discovering that most of the world is not like me, has totally different interests and worries, and is just as ignorant about my small corner.  Whether the focus is RL or SL, most of my knowledge comes from a handful of fuzzy, poorly curated snapshots.

Yes, absolutely. And, again, SL is soooo very complex, and in that sense, really unlike other purpose-built and dedicated MMO platforms. I know that there is a variety of activities available on Minecraft, or WOW, but they are not nearly as open, nor (I very much suspect) as diverse as SL.

I do explore a fair bit, and I have friends who belong very much to other parts of SL that I don't much see. I have one friend, for instance, who is here for BDSM, and was barely aware that anything else was to be found in SL. She literally almost never left BDSM hookup places.

And of course that's fine -- until one starts making assumptions about other people's experiences, or about the platform in general, based solely upon one's own experience.

Edited June 20, 2023 by Scylla Rhiadra
Ugh. Proofread, girl!