Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by JaedenDelanaire

  1. Did I just get rejected on the skype idea? What if I opted to read you All Things Great and Small with my gloriously froggy voice? We can cry over the little wounded kittens together. No? Christmas has most assuredly been ruined, then. You're assuming that most people need assurance beyond basic disclosure and occasionally voice verification (which is laughably easy to fake) to begin making their first impressions. They don't. Decisions on whether or not they're going to interact with a person are made on these first impressions without need for verification, especially for us snobby RPers. The argument is that discrimination begins when there is a disclosure made that the avatar's gender is not the same as the real life gender, not whether or not they're being truthful. The question is specifically directed at the thought processes and reasonings that take place. You apparently have enough of a brain to string all those pompous sentences together, why couldn't you figure that out for yourself? As for the humiliation, I think I'm getting off on it. Just a little. My pruriency knows no bounds!! @Klisties SeMio - Totally missed what you said!! Just found it with my sleepy eyes. Oh my!! You're very strongly worded! But I think it's harsh to point blankly say that people incapable of separating OOC preferences with how they interact in a virtual world have no business enjoying SL the way they choose to. More often than not, when people make characters they make them with their own limits in mind. If a person is truly and inflexibly heterosexual, I doubt they'll make a character with bisexual tendencies regardless how capable they are at separating IC and OOC. Tari pointed out earlier that when you're faced, mentally, with the realization that the person you're interacting with are not the same gender they are in real life, then mentally things occur that cannot be overcome with rationalization. Whether it's deep seated misandry, misogyny, or a belief that said person won't be able to play the role as a different gender as well as they should--take your pick. Not saying it happens to all, but it seems to happen to some.
  2. LaskyaClaren wrote: (And there goes my status as a forum lurker.) One of us! One of us! I liked that link. The writing itself was detestably pompous, but good content none the less.
  3. Syo Emerald wrote: I want to play with people who understand, that (for example) my character smiles at them and blushes not because I want to hit on them, but because this reaction makes sense for my character. This. A million times this. This is the reason why IC and OOC separation is so thoroughly important to me, but that is an idealism. I would say the majority of people who RP intimate things do so because those individuals are not keeping those needs met in their real life. Personally, if I could get all the abuse, man-handling, and plain ol' sadism that I thrive off of in a safe environment in the real world, I wouldn't need to log into SL at all save for the occasional desire to play dress up. Otherwise, why would you want to? You alone directly determine the sexuality that goes into your character. If a person isn't into kinky sex, chances are they're not going to make a character who desires those things. In fact, characters they create will have motivations and goals that allow them to avoid it altogether. So when I play, I don't particularly care why people choose to interact with my character. If it's because they're horny in real life, m-kay, so long as it's believable when their character starts hitting on me. Yet... nothing squicks me faster when people get it into their head that because I'm involved with them in a story setting, that it's okay to start forming expectations.
  4. Yeeeey for a cruddy graphics card. Anywho, bam. Vanity.
  5. @Tari Landar - That's an interestingly honest (and well thought out, I might add) response. I want to make it clear that I don't believe there is any 'wrong' side, and I fully agree: everyone is entitled to discriminating preferences. Furthermore, I'm not attempting to state that anybody who decides to abstain from play with another based on gender preference is somehow a lesser individual--but as someone who personally doesn't, it's an interesting point for conversation. Would it be correct to simplify everything you wrote into a quote from your post? "It may affect how we interract. I can't pretend it won't. ... Not because I can't separate rl from sl, but because you're presenting me with two face values, not one." People have varying degrees to the extent of which they can keep their RL preferences from seeping into their RP. Those who participate in extreme scenarios need to be twice as gifted at it, and yes, sexual intimacy is extreme for some. Having to deal with "two faces" seems a tough perspective to begin with, and I don't blame people who want to avoid it altogether. Sometimes immersion is a hard enough objective to achieve as is without extra complications. :matte-motes-big-grin: And now. Rudi. Sweetheart. My little pumpkin muffin. Why are you justifying your statement with anecdote? This is the internet, silly boy. How am I ever to belieeeeb you? I fully support those who can't help but to seek and partake in confrontation, but to devote yourself to antagonizing others is not the behavior of a healthy individual. As for your passive aggression, there are several traits I could list outright, but the biggest is your desire to stick around in a thread when your only contribution was to nit pick at the chosen wording of a question, one which you haven't bothered to answer for yourself. Your continued presence is undesirable, yet here you are. The gnat on the fruit of my labors. Perhaps we should skype and watch the Grinch Christmas special today. Your wife never needs know, unless your heart should grow a size bigger. My private inbox is open to you.
  6. Animazoo has several good static poses that you can pick off and add to your AO list. Tuty's may have some that are more quiet and reserved. However, my secret solve-all solution to avoid having my avatar look as though she's doing the foot shift dance while waiting in line for a toilet is picking up some male AO's. There are many made for men that are quiet, subdued, and frankly unisex, and I know I use at least three of the male stands from animazoo regularly.
  7. ::giggles!:: Oh, oh, oh--don't get me wrong! I totally approve, and if you guys were into any the BDSM things I'd probably latch onto the idea in a heart beat. Unfortunately anything light of whips and chains leaves me apathetic these days. The only way I'd watch a three hour intro into porn would be if there was a heavy involvement of Mr. James Deen.
  8. That seems more like straight up cybering and naughty adult play. RP implies a bit more substance than a five minute porn intro. :matte-motes-big-grin: Good luck in finding your playmates! It might be easier to attract the people you want by uploading a few 'teaser' pictures of your avatars into your post. Eye-candy is always oh-so-much-more enticing. Mrowr.
  9. My dear, dear (and most certainly confrontational and passive aggressive) Rudi, that's eight in a row! Are you going to grace me with a ninth? I shall wait anxiously. But on the note of passive aggressiveness, I'm curious how many psychologists you've had the privilege of meeting to make the conclusion of how they manage their practices? I wonder if I should turn this into a cheap shot at your mental health while I'm at it. Hmmm. N'aw. @Amethyst Jetaime - Each reason you've brought up echo my own fathoming for why it occurs. Specifically, the fear that your Rp partner may not be capable of playing the gender they desire to well. I mostly RP with women, so I've come to find that women who are inclined to do so can RP men just as convincingly as any man can lay claim their own gender. In fact, more oft' than not, I actually prefer it when women will play male characters for me as opposed to finding male players. I'm not entirely sure about the homophobia based ideas, though. My friend noted that when they played their RL gender, they often found heterosexual members of their same sex willing to play with them with better ease than with the gender bender twist in there. This lead my friend into pondering the whole, "Maybe 'normal' people just think it's odd or something" idea. I remember we were preparing to do a scene together with a person we'd just met, and the friend stated their gender to ensure there would be no surprises later down the road, the first question was sort of an incredulous, "Why don't you play your own gender?" And, perhaps for reasons other than that, the scene never got on its way. I do agree that when sexual intimacy is involved, a great deal of RL preferences are carried over. I'm mostly heterosexual IRL but I swear, as soon as I get to RPing I'm at least 90% batting for the other team, though that may just be my predisposition to gravitate toward well written individuals. :matte-motes-bashful-cute-2: @Monti and Marybeth Cooperstone - Regardless whether or not the question applied to the both of you, as you've both stated you're non-RPers, your input is still invaluable to me and it's warming you took the time to note your own opinions! @Tex Monday - That's wonderful to hear, that you and your friends are able to keep happy while ignoring gender barriers! Sounds like you have some lovely and lucky maids. @Syo Emerald - Huehuehue! Well, I wouldn't necesarily make a blanket statement and call them bad. Sexual preferences are a pretty valid thing to maintain from OOC into IC. But yes, it is rather indicative in neutral settings if a person avoids interactions with another on the basis of their real life gender and for that alone. As if it matters over the internet. :matte-motes-not-entertained:
  10. I actually like Pussycat Catnap's response, a lot. It's an intelligent and well thought out answer.
  11. Crack den comes to mind, but it's not quite a wholesome venue. Activity begats activity, so even if you just idle out in a empty location, someone somewhere will eventually mosey over.
  12. If you're seeking out an RP cantina of sorts, what is preventing you from picking out an RP sim that features a bar / club / dance area? Many modern and dystopian RP Sims include some aspect of city life, and it isn't too wildly left field to answe the where are you from questions with a complete and total fabrication--or, if you feel skittish of naming an existing place, answe with, "oh, a place within an hour's drive..."
  13. JaedenDelanaire wrote: Every single post I've seen from you has been a not-so-helpful and passively aggressive confrontration to anything being stated. RudolphFarquhar wrote: There's no need to role play - and very badly, at that - an online psychologist (I have yet to find a real psychologist who uses the phrase "passive aggressive", nor one that is willing to hazard a professional guess as to what the common herd might actually mean by it) while admitting that you must have only viewed (or noticed, or remembered - but that is more to do with your own bigoted personality disorders and failings of mental faculties) a very small subset of my extensive postings, which include both positive and negative views (well, one man's meat is another man's poison, as the misquotation from the French has it) as well as constructive, deconstructive, and reconstructive information regarding the indequacies of others. Or prehaps you feel that a forum should be a place where everybody agrees? Or maybe they should just agree with you? **********Rudi********** Oh, oh, oh, and then he followed it up in the next one for three in a row! :matte-motes-big-grin-squint: RudolphFarquhar wrote: You don't know with any degree of certainty what their rl ******* gender is anyway, so your OP is multiply redundant. **********Rudi********** How redundant is it anyhow to sign your name beneath your already titled posts? You, Sir, are a hoot.
  14. RudolphFarquhar wrote: Everybody in SL is rping, whether they admit it or not. So the OP's question is redundant. **********Rudi********** You are such a troll. :matte-motes-big-grin-wink: Every single post I've seen from you has been a not-so-helpful and passively aggressive confrontration to anything being stated. The question refers to the specific and intentional act of playing out predetermined roles between two story tellers, but that's a bit long to write out. Monti Messmer wrote: The word, or abbreviaton, RP says all. If that´s clear from start - no problem. About the desirability i cannot tell because i do not RP, it´s allways me. Monti For the sake of the question, yes. It's clear from the start. No deception is made. It was observed in the conversation I had that it's easier to find RP partners as a specific gender so long as you're already that gender or lying about it.
  15. Madeline Blackbart wrote: Hey I just calls 'em like I see's 'em. What you describe sounded that way. Take it or leave it. No, it was a valid yet condescending observation--but I suppose offering anyone advice who doesn't ask for it can come off that way. Either way, it was water off my back and it warmed me to see someone showing kindness and concern to another who potentially needs it.
  16. Q: If an RPer plays a gender other than his/her own in real life, does it affect their desirability as an RP candidate, and if so, why? If the word gender fails to apply to your avatar in SL and you'd still like to answer the question, simply substitute gender for whatever you feel is appropriate. Yes, furries, its and trans, it's your night to shine. A friend of mine noted that there was a distinct difficulty in getting people to play with their heterosexual RP characters of the opposite gender when they were upfront about their RL gender. I cannot comment, since my first foray into online RPing consisted of using all male characters as a RL chick--and I've met the majority of all my bestest SL friends while they were in an avatar of a gender not the same as their RL gender--regardless of knowing that up front or much later in confidence. On second thought, I can comment: I'm baffled there seems to be a difficulty at all. But for those of you for who it does matter, come one come all.
  17. RudolphFarquhar wrote: Suggestions? My Dad told me long ago that if one isn't enough, two certainly isn't - and as for three, you might wish to consult Robert Silverberg's "Two At Once". **********Rudi********** That's... An incredibly prejudiced remark. Realize that polyamory is as much a sexuality issue as heterosexuality and homosexuality, and that monogamy is a predominately Christian forced idealism. A good many people are capable of having enriching sexual relationships with more than one person at a time. It has nothing to do with one person not being good enough.
  18. Surely there is a more impressive word we can use here in lieu of the phrase 'putting together an outfit'. I propose: avatarscaping. In all seriousness without snide commentry, what is being trivalized is actually somewhat complicated for some individuals on Second Life, and flat out calling the process art or not is an unfair generalization for those who don't give two flips, and those who have spent work money and months following their favorite fashionista bloggers. It's more than putting together an outfit. It's skin, shapes, hair, eyes, eyelashes (seriously, until you've tried to fit eyelashes to your eyelids, you can't say there isn't work involve--and please note, I say this very tongue in cheek), and making it all come together in something pleasant and befitting. Hell. Us SLers have even come up with a specific breed of 'humans' that us snobbier elitists enjoy calling fugs; ya'know, those weird chinless Mongoloian-eyed and African-American nosed orange-tanned creations that walk around with pony rider hips and impossibly tall torsos. Let's not forget the tiny vestigial T-rex hands. These grotesqe creations are admirable in their own right in that it defines what characteristics people find beauty in. Usually big boobies and THUNDER THIGHS and CRACKALACKIN PHAT booties. But the distinguishing facial characteristics of the avatars is interesting, as well as that these people seem to think that they're the embodiment of hawt. Maybe that's getting more into anthrology rather than art. But what better source to study humans than by what they define as attractive? Anywho. If the argument is that art is a form of expression and that there must be intent to provoke an emotional response, then it doesn't need to be any more advanced than a hoochie mama dressing it up (or rather, dressing it down) to get her male (or female) clientele aroused. It doesn't have to be fancy stuff. This is why I mentioned that there was a needless amount of justification. Either you intend your avatar as art or you don't, and there really isn't much more of a qualifier than that. To state that there needs to be an elevated idea beyond that for anything to be qualified as art is pretentious. That said, yes, I do value other art forms far more than 'avatarscaping', and I don't believe there is a very high skill level involved in making appealingly individualized avatars.
  19. Word. Rhetoric is art. Even when it's bad. :matte-motes-big-grin-wink:
  20. "The ability to dress oneself in the morning does not an artist make." Saying something is art and claiming that it makes you an artist are two connotatively different suggestions. "If you consider dressing yourself to be the pinnacle of artistry" Nothing I've written could have possibly lead you to infer this. In fact, I said the exact opposite (basic does not equate pinnacle), but I could infer that you like to spout off nonsense before reading a statement thoroughly.
  21. Yes there is. Go watch your kiddo or young cousin or whatever go doodle out a sketch to proudly present, and then tell them, "Nope, that ain't art, it's too basic." Being a condescending sarcastic twerp in response does not, a valid rebuttal, make. That said, intention has everything to do with what is and isn't art. If you're not intending to do **bleep** then that's your perogative. For people trying to mimic something close to how they dress in real life, or even their shapes for that matter, then yes, it's art, and it is work, because that **bleep** can take forever, yo'. I know I've clocked at least ten hours on modifying my main shape over the years everytime I get it into my fancy that it can be improved.
  22. I feel like there's a needless amount of justification that people are putting forth for their answer. Art at its basic form is an expression of self. Yes, putting on an outfit in the morning could be considered art. Yes, putting on an outfit in SL could be (edit: if the intent is there) considered art. Whether you're trying to be a hoochie mama, a thug looking gangsta, or some RP character you're buying pieces of created items designed and produced, and then hand selected by a discerning eye for pieces that are sensational, exciting, or otherwise.
  23. Indeed! Specifically, it's Whisper - White Rose. The skin is extremely cute and well made.
  24. Hey there! I'm not looking for this specific skin, but I absolutely adore the shadowing at the nose and how it dips against the cheeks. It really appeals to me on a visual level and I'm wondering if anyone has seen a skin similar to this for sale? I attempted asking the avatar herself, but I didn't get a response, and I didn't expect one either; many people seem to hold their avatar specifics sacred. EDIT: FOUND. I IM'd the avatar a second time and it turned out it was just SL difficulties. She sweetly gave the information. :) Happy I am!
  25. Oh my! I don't think I ever expected to get any replies back to this (hence why I seem to be checking back after a FULL THREE MONTHS!!!). To steal a quote from Family Guy, I'm happier than a pig amongst guinea pigs! Jillian McMasters wrote: Your interests are pretty "interesting". Sometime when you have a minute or three, feel free to IM me and we can discuss related topics in more detail :-) As soon as I can get my butt onto Second Life (probably in the next day or so) I'll shoot a message your way. Real life became unexpectedly busy, and as usual, the second life suffers the most from it. Incidentally, thank you (along with Madeline, of course) for the vote of confidence. Burper Tilling wrote: Perhaps you should seek psychiatric help. Oooh. Like a less than ethical psychiatrist? A sexy behavior modification specialist? Can breastless straight jackets be involved as well? My head is brimming with filthy ideas now. Shakango wrote: ...please shoot me an IM ... Will totally send you an IM as well as soon as I find the time.
  • Create New...