Modesty Patch Discussion

[Codex Alpha]

47 minutes ago, Lexxi Gynoid said:

Other than the top modesty bra, I do not see a difference between the four images above.  

Is it the hair? Do you know how many boys have ponytails now-a-days? Tons. Girls with basically shaved heads is rarer, but crew cut (or buzz cut) hair-styles is also a modern day girl hairstyle.

I do not wish to insert a bunch of RL images, so I won't.  Instead I'll mention, if people wanted to see what I mean, going to Shutterstock. Tons of boys with ponytails (like above quoted image), girls with crew cuts; boys with ponytails & crew cuts (sides of head), etc.

Basically: if a boy in SL wanders around with a ponytail, will they need to wear a modesty layer? It can't be the hair that determines things, right?

I blended both images together for funsies and to point out that the same base avatar shape was being  used.
And the added point was how perception can change (and the need for a top or not) with just the simple addition and subtraction of a ponytail.

So yes, the only thing that changed was the ponytail

[Codex Alpha]

16 hours ago, Madi Melodious said:

I like how some of you are just blowing this off like it's not a big deal.   I can most certainly guarantee you that this is a big deal to some people.   The person that came to me never had a chance to express their selves.  They said they were in tears because this is the happiest they have ever been.   Now they have no certainty what they are going to do.   They said it was like they are lost all over.

There will not be a simple answer to this one.

 

I feel I have a good grasp on reality, vocabulary and I certainly read things through. People who trust me will ask me and I might as well share relevant stuff with them that they didn't read. They in turn tell me things about stuff they're more into reading and we trade info. If any of us doubt the other, we go to their citation and see for ourselves.

For me, if my 'interpretation' wasn't enough, and I wasn't even coming close to doing any aberrant or illegal behaviour on SL and I got banned, I'd be 'f - it' at that point and never return. Then I'd tell everyone. I don't think that would happen anyway, so I'm pretty confident.

[LittleMe Jewell]

I was not able to make it to the inworld meeting today.  Did anyone ask about the side and back straps for the female top modesty panel?

[Ayashe Ninetails]

50 minutes ago, LittleMe Jewell said:

I was not able to make it to the inworld meeting today.  Did anyone ask about the side and back straps for the female top modesty panel?

Yep. Check brodiac's new thread - he's got the details on that.

[Gael Streeter]

I am a skin creator and I do not understand at all why the modesty layers should be built in the skins (and not be wearable above layers).
This rule prevents from nothing at all when you can change your skin (for an "adult" one) with one click !
Built in skin layers would be very limiting for the end users (to choose their underwear, swimsuits, clothes etc).
The real rule should be simply the child and teen avatars should always wear underwear hiding what should be hidden.
In BOM, all the layers are even baked together in only one texture, so your BOM skin and your BOM underwear become ONLY ONE !
The child and teen SL community should really discuss this with Linden Lab.
 

[brodiac90]

54 minutes ago, Gael Streeter said:

I am a skin creator and I do not understand at all why the modesty layers should be built in the skins (and not be wearable above layers).
This rule prevents from nothing at all when you can change your skin (for an "adult" one) with one click !
Built in skin layers would be very limiting for the end users (to choose their underwear, swimsuits, clothes etc).
The real rule should be simply the child and teen avatars should always wear underwear hiding what should be hidden.
In BOM, all the layers are even baked together in only one texture, so your BOM skin and your BOM underwear become ONLY ONE !
The child and teen SL community should really discuss this with Linden Lab.
 

We have and we have pointed out the technical issues. I think LL want it baked into the skin because you're less likely to change your skin as often as you might use BOM for other things. It's much harder to argue you accidentally changed your skin compared to say putting on the wrong bom etc. 

[Coffee Pancake]

3 hours ago, Gael Streeter said:

The child and teen SL community should really discuss this with Linden Lab.

Not for lack of trying ..

[Jishin Rain]

LL should have gotten some feedback from their customers in the community, especially creators, in the first place before even writing the policy. I also think putting Lullabeebs and any other female baby avatar in little bras is going too far.

[Persephone Emerald]

6 hours ago, Gael Streeter said:

I am a skin creator and I do not understand at all why the modesty layers should be built in the skins (and not be wearable above layers).
This rule prevents from nothing at all when you can change your skin (for an "adult" one) with one click !
Built in skin layers would be very limiting for the end users (to choose their underwear, swimsuits, clothes etc).
The real rule should be simply the child and teen avatars should always wear underwear hiding what should be hidden.
In BOM, all the layers are even baked together in only one texture, so your BOM skin and your BOM underwear become ONLY ONE !
The child and teen SL community should really discuss this with Linden Lab.

Thank you for weighing in on this important subject.

From what I've seen on MP, some skin creators already sell skins for child avatars that don't have genitalia drawn on them. I think this is how all skins for child and under 18 avatars should be sold. If a creator markets a body or skin to child avatars with genitalia, they would at fault and should be ARed.

If someone puts an adult skin with genitalia on their child or under 18 avatar, they'd be at fault and should be ARed. If some wants to use the same body for both an adult and a young teen, they could save a separate skin and shape for each version, and just be sure to put BOM undies or a bathing suit on their underage version. 

[Jaylinbridges]

3 hours ago, Persephone Emerald said:

From what I've seen on MP, some skin creators already sell skins for child avatars that don't have genitalia drawn on them. I think this is how all skins for child and under 18 avatars should be sold.

I have never seen male genitalia drawn on a male skin, or BOM body.  How would that even work?  If someone tried to draw a 2D peeenis on my body, I would want to cover it up.  How silly would that be?  Males need their own rules, not made by women.

If women are so concerned about a brush stroke down there, then let them wear panties.  But teenage men?  There is nothing there, so why cover nothing up?  

[Stephanie Misfit]

1 hour ago, Jaylinbridges said:

I have never seen male genitalia drawn on a male skin, or BOM body.  How would that even work?  If someone tried to draw a 2D peeenis on my body, I would want to cover it up.  How silly would that be?  Males need their own rules, not made by women.

If women are so concerned about a brush stroke down there, then let them wear panties.  But teenage men?  There is nothing there, so why cover nothing up?  

Perhaps drawn on male genitalia could become a thing, as an alternative to the freenis?

[Jaylinbridges]

1 hour ago, Stephanie Misfit said:

Perhaps drawn on male genitalia could become a thing, as an alternative to the freenis?

I think they already are on those paper avatars. And cardboard ones too:

They look like kids to me.

Edited May 15 by Jaylinbridges

[Theresa Tennyson]

14 hours ago, Jaylinbridges said:

I have never seen male genitalia drawn on a male skin, or BOM body.  How would that even work?  If someone tried to draw a 2D peeenis on my body, I would want to cover it up.  How silly would that be?  Males need their own rules, not made by women.

If women are so concerned about a brush stroke down there, then let them wear panties.  But teenage men?  There is nothing there, so why cover nothing up?  

So the bare backside doesn't make suggestions about what the not-necessarily-visible front side is doing.

[brodiac90]

Since I'm a photographer and enjoy expressing myself through art, I thought it might be interesting to offer some perspective on how child avatars might be feeling through photography. 

Note, this is not an attempt to argue against the recent TOS changes since I agree with them, this is more about exploring the more emotional side of things. 

 

[Qie Niangao]

Catching up on Inara Pey's  blog entry from yesterday's Content Creation User Group, I didn't expect the part I bolded below:

Quote

The latter part of the meeting included (an occasionally heated) discussion on the new Modesty Layers being proposed by Linden Lab (see: 2024 SL Governance meeting week #19: Child Avatar Policy). However, as this was somewhat entangled with matters of policy, and those directly involved in making the changes to said policy / overseeing changes were not available  / present at the meeting, ad what was suggested as to possible technical solutions was somewhat speculative, I would prefer to leave further reference out of this summary, and leave matters until those at Linden Lab responsible for the policy have more fully engaged directly with content creators.

I wasn't at the meeting and don't know what was said by whom, it just seems that we should be past the point where there'd be speculation about possible technical solutions. I'm all for the Lab being open to feedback but given the timeline there must be at least one established, unambiguous path to compliance for skin creators, and another for body creators. Maybe there is, but still uncertainty about what alternatives might also comply.

[Gael Streeter]

As a skin creator, I wondering which size should have these modesty layers...
Should they be exactly like on the Linden Lab pic ?

or can they be smaller (and hide only what should be hidden) in order to allow more clothes options ?
Do you have the info or a link to such information ?
Thanks !

[Roxy Couturier]

On 5/14/2024 at 10:50 PM, Jaylinbridges said:

If women are so concerned about a brush stroke down there, then let them wear panties.  But teenage men?  There is nothing there, so why cover nothing up?  

You do know there is a back to the front, right?

[Bloodsong Termagant]

2 hours ago, Gael Streeter said:

As a skin creator, I wondering which size should have these modesty layers...
Should they be exactly like on the Linden Lab pic ? or can they be smaller (and hide only what should be hidden) in order to allow more clothes options ?
Do you have the info or a link to such information ?
Thanks !

from what i understand, those images show the LEAST amount of acceptable coverage.  (double check if/when they make the final decision on the 'back' side of the female top.)

personally, i would make the female front not have 'scallops,' but just be a flat band, since that's less 'suggestive.' ::shrug::

Edited May 27 by Bloodsong Termagant

[Jaylinbridges]

14 hours ago, Roxy Couturier said:

You do know there is a back to the front, right?

No, I never noticed.  I heard this will be the new modesty underwear:

[Coffee Pancake]

13 hours ago, Bloodsong Termagant said:

from what i understand, those images show the LEAST amount of acceptable coverage.  (double check if/when they make the final decision on the 'back' side of the female top.)

personally, i would make the female front not have 'scallops,' but just be a flat band, since that's less 'suggestive.' ::shrug::

My understanding is those are just examples of modesty layers, not the least acceptable coverage.

Linden have not sat what that is and honestly, I don't expect them to, because why draw clear lines.

So ..

As long as there is an obvious modesty layer as part of the skin, it should be fine. That could be under wear shapes. it could also be dinky triangles, there is no way to know till someone gets reported for failing to have one.

 

This is one of the things we have been trying to get sorted out.

[m0ld]

I'm currently reworking all of my skins intended for child avatars to have modesty patches and it's a slow process... Mainly leaving them as un-exported psds in case things change.

What I am currently trying to figure out is what will happen to teen RPers who use bodies such as Maitreya, Legacy, and Rebirth Eden that have built in genitals.

Although these are not "attachments", as described in the TOS, the mesh is still visible if you were to right click someone's body or view transparent parts.

A skin with a modesty layer can easily be used on any of these bodies, and I don't expect any issues with teen avis utilizing them.

Currently, there are not really bodies on the market created for use by teens. Rebirth Eden is probably the closest but has the aforementioned issues. Tweenster is meant -- as in the name -- for tweens.

Going to Adoption Options, I still see many teens using all of the bodies described above. They look very obviously like teens and separate from the adults and caretakers present in the area. What in the world is a teen Avi to do?!

Edited May 28 by m0ld

[Coffee Pancake]

7 hours ago, m0ld said:

What I am currently trying to figure out is what will happen to teen RPers who use bodies such as Maitreya, Legacy, and Rebirth Eden that have built in genitals.

I have been asking about this too .. and ..

@Tommy Linden 

The FAQ hasn't been updated since the 8th, obviously we all still have questions.

[Starberry Passion]

On 5/14/2024 at 12:35 PM, Gael Streeter said:

I am a skin creator and I do not understand at all why the modesty layers should be built in the skins (and not be wearable above layers).
This rule prevents from nothing at all when you can change your skin (for an "adult" one) with one click !
Built in skin layers would be very limiting for the end users (to choose their underwear, swimsuits, clothes etc).
The real rule should be simply the child and teen avatars should always wear underwear hiding what should be hidden.
In BOM, all the layers are even baked together in only one texture, so your BOM skin and your BOM underwear become ONLY ONE !
The child and teen SL community should really discuss this with Linden Lab.
 

The thing about this is that teen bodies are not always a teen body and can blur many lines.

People have stated, came forth and have said "When i was a teen I was very voluptuous."

or "when I was a teen, I had full set of double Ds"

or "WHen I was a teen, people couldn't tell if I was a child or not, they mistaked me for adult."

And there have been adults that have said they are slim/ slender/ get carded still, some people mistake them for a child. Some have said they have kids and they get mistaken as the child instead of the parent.

Some adults have the same body type as they did when they became a teenager, this is where that can become a slippery thing to talk about. That will only serve to push for adult bodies to be censored, as well.

[Coffee Pancake]

11 minutes ago, Starberry Passion said:

The thing about this is that teen bodies are not always a teen body and can blur many lines.

Yes, but the rules clearly state that child avatars can not have genitals.

So .. does this mean the rebirth (an avatar designed and sold FOR child avatars) is a ban hammer for everyone using it (of all ages)., and are those using maitreya ok or not, etc etc etc.

The teens in those bodies are not wearing attached genitals, but genitals are present.

[Tommy Linden]

We are aware that the community still has questions, we have received a ton of feedback that we have been reviewing. We are working on more updates for the FAQ, we just want to get through all the feedback first before we make an update.