LaskyaClaren

I think I like this "Experiences" thing!! It has real potential . . . 

Madelaine McMasters wrote: LaskyaClaren wrote: Maybe the true point is that we should be HOSTING a party like that? Mmm hmm. ;-). We'll talk. (I wonder if there are physics-enabled mesh skirts and animations that would actually do that?)

Hoshi Kenin wrote: When you start thinking about age...you are indeed getting 'old'. The bad news is, this does not happen to everyone at the same age. Some are indeed 'old before their time'. Equally, as some card once remarked, there is nothing sadder than an old hipster. But, hey....why not drag down SL with it's potential miracles that we would dearly love to have available in RL, and make it more like RL is for many as they wither on the vine? I'm far from advocating for a sort of one-to-one correspondence of avatar "age" with our own chronological age. In fact, I'm sort of a committed "immersionist," in theory anyway, and have no problems with all sorts of dissonance between how we represent, and how we are defined in RL. That said, I do think that there are some interesting questions that arise from tendency to remain relatively "static" in SL even as we change in RL. Part of that is that "change," even in age, isn't necessarily always or in every regard a bad thing. And part of it is, too, that the fact that 90% (or more) of us represent as 20-somethings says a whole lot about RL attitudes towards age that we are, apparently, unwilling to question in SL. So, are we really employing SL in this regard as a "potential miracle" . . . or are we just using it to mindlessly reflect an ageist agenda pushed in RL by advertisers, the fashion industry, the entertainment industry, etc.?

Madelaine McMasters wrote: LaskyaClaren wrote: <snip> We dwindle inside: <snip> Age cannot wither us. Well, which is it? Well, it's both, isn't it? That's the essential contradiction: the growing disconnect between how we represent in a virtual context, and how we live in time in a real one. As an old-fashioned semiotician might put it, there's a gap between the signifier, and the signified. I'm not actually necessarily suggesting that this is a big problem, though. I'm more curious as to how we handle it. My RL wardrobe is actually older than my SL wardrobe. I hate shopping in both worlds. I weigh about as much as I did in high school, and (thanks to tiny boobs) it's still distributed more or less as it was then. My face is showing signs of age, and I don't wear heels every day anymore, but the part of me that orchestrates it all appears to cause as much or more eye rolling now as it did when I was three. Am I aging? Yes, of course. Am I dwindling or withering? Not without a hopefully silly fight. If it comes to a fight, my money's on you. I think there's a distinction to be made about being "true" to the things that are core to who we are -- which in your case, seems to involve traits that invoke eye-rolling -- and clinging to things that are time- and age-contingent. I think aging . . . whether it's the transition from 10 years of age to 14, or the slower but no less dramatic shift from 35 to 45 -- is an important thing, because it shows that we are changing, dynamic, fluid beings. And it's not all negative, after all. And I hate shopping too. But I probably owe it to poor Scylla to engage in some in-world consumerism one day. A couple days ago, someone necroposted to an old thread of yours, in which we had this exchange... Me: Nothing sets the mood for a summer party faster than squealing "Look, I'm wearing big-girl pants!" while hiking my sundress over my head to reveal jean shorts. You: Why am I never invited to parties like this???? I did not reply to your (rhetorical?) question at the time, but I will now... I've never been invited to a party like that either. And that's the point. ;-). Maybe the true point is that we should be HOSTING a party like that? PS. I want to institute a new forum feature: you're not permitted to necropost in an old thread until you demonstrate at least a Grade 6 level of reading comprehension.

SirLeighBastard wrote: LaskyaClaren wrote: See Maddy's suggestion, above, about being able to prevent people from logging out, Can we extend this to include also certain select forum posters? They can't even prevent them from logging in! ***Call me Sir B'versive Ah. You're here, are you then?

Darrius Gothly wrote: *GRINZ* Excellent list .. and I agree with every one of them. But we do have to add one more: Auto-correct on Female Avatar chat (nearby and IM) that changes the word "no" to "yes". (Because we all know that's what you really mean anyway.) So with that one single addition, yup ... you've nailed the perfect virtual utopia. /me pops his earplugs back in and resumes smiling in a most agreeable fashion ... Darrius, you old troll -- I've reserved a cabin for you at one of our Re-Education Camps, located in the midst of the Glorious Canadian Tundra.You'll love it! ;-)

Dashti Crumb wrote: I'm not sure if you're trolling or just a massive Feminist. but if it's the Latter, please Stfu and stay on tumblr where you belong. Dear Dashti, In answer to your question(s): Yes, I am a "massive Feminist." Or, more accurately, a fervent and committed feminist: it's not very gentlemanly to make remarks about my putative size, and anyway it's "body-shaming." Expect a visit shortly from one of our maurading bands of ELFs ("Emasculating Lesbian Feminists") soon. And when they arrive, just remember: nothing bad can happen to you if you keep your legs tightly together (as I'm sure your grandmother told you). No, this thread was not "trolling." It is something that we Feminazis like to call "humour." You should try it one day! I know not what this "Stfu" thing means. You seem to have left out most of the vowels! Please explain at more length. Finally, thank you so much for your lovely in-world message. We Feminists have a great deal to learn from the winning ways and persuasive charm of thoughtful critics such as yourself. Next time, however, could you please refer to me as a "Feminist Goddess"? Unless of course you are making a polemical point about gender fluidity, in which case, yay! All the best, Laskya ELF-in-Chief

Madelaine McMasters wrote: LaskyaClaren wrote: Venus Petrov wrote: Loose end on top. Always and forever. It's how I roll. :matte-motes-bored: This. The very notion of having to reach under the roll to find the loose end is just barbaric. Now, when are we going to address the vastly more important and socially contentious issue of toilet seats? What issue? https://www.flickr.com/photos/58030004@N06/6293216931/in/dateposted-public/ Just . . . ewwwwwwwwwwwww. I'll find a nice big tree, thank you.

Sy Beck wrote: LaskyaClaren wrote: Venus Petrov wrote: Loose end on top. Always and forever. It's how I roll. :matte-motes-bored: This. The very notion of having to reach under the roll to find the loose end is just barbaric. Now, when are we going to address the vastly more important and socially contentious issue of toilet seats? Solved already, not by social enquiry, but by economic analysis http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2938211/Economists-expose-mathematical-inefficiency-leaving-toilet-seat-down.html I note that both cited researchers are male. 'Nuff said, right? ;-)

Venus Petrov wrote: Loose end on top. Always and forever. It's how I roll. :matte-motes-bored: This. The very notion of having to reach under the roll to find the loose end is just barbaric. Now, when are we going to address the vastly more important and socially contentious issue of toilet seats?

Venus Petrov wrote: Nice to see a longer post, in excellent English, and posing a question that requires more thought than a C&P from the Answers Forum. Refreshing! Venus has been in SL nearly 9 years. I tend to dress her in whatever pleases her operator on a given day (occasionally more than once in a day). I don't pay much attention to the age factor although she has worn skin that appears a bit older (just to one friend, mind you, who I think doesn't wear her glasses as often as she should). What has improved is the quality of mesh clothing and accessories. I am much more picky because I can be. So, no, Venus has not aged much in the past nine years but she's learned a few things along the way. P.S. I still have those boots you like. Thanks for the kind words Venus. :-) I think your attitude is probably the healthiest one? I've always been a sort of militant "immersionist" in SL in theory, but in practice I really tend towards the augmentationist, with the result that I admire people who can make and remake themselves in SL even as I myself am more comfortable with a stable identity. Certainly, a sort of obsessive regard for the correspondences between RL and SL selves seems to me to undermine the very point of this place. It should be about "play," in the broader sense of experimentation and exploration. Re. mesh clothing. Oh god yes. One of the reasons I am so reluctant to bring my older account in-world (although I do on occasion) is that her clothing just looks awful now. It didn't when I bought it, but mesh has raised the bar so much that I'm literally embarrassed to bring her out into public. I suppose a really extended spell of shopping would fix that. Maybe one day. And with regards to boots . . . like leather jackets -- in fact, even more so -- they know no constraint of age! I still have and wear a pretty wide (and relatively expensive!) range of those, from engineer boots to thigh highs. I'm sure I'll still be wearing them when my avatar is using a walker . . . And yes, I remember your boots fondly and covetously. ;-)

Kelli May wrote: LaskyaClaren wrote: I think you and I probably fit within pretty much exactly the same age/cultural box, Kelli, so I recognize in myself some of what you are saying. I do, as you say, dress smarter in SL because I can, and I'm certainly not going to pretend that I've gone to great lengths to age my avatar, who now probably looks at least a decade younger than me. Your point about youth and the SL default somewhat mirrors something I said in a blog post a while ago . . . that what we would by RL standards call "sexy" is actually the norm here, with the result that being perceived as sexy in SL requires something like hypersexualization. And that being "ugly" or "old" here requires a significant effort, and is therefore a reflection of conscious choice rather than, you know . . . gravity. ;-) On the point of sexualisation: a dress I was wearing recently was seen as fairly demure, yet it was sleeveless, mid-thigh and the bottom four inches of hem were crochet... more holes than fabric!). In RL it'd be something you'd need a fashion model body to carry off (and yay,in SL, most of us do) and would still be considered extremely revealing. In SL, it was everyday, and if anything, unusual because it wasn't that extreme. Yes, indeed. My clothing tends, generally, to be pretty demure, and always has been, really, except on rare occasions when I was deliberately being provocative. But I had the curious experience a few years ago of being sort of told off by a friend and feminist colleague over an off-the-shoulder top I was wearing that displayed a fair but not excessive amount of cleavage. It struck me as a silly response both in the context of modern-day feminism, and of Second Life more generally, but it did highlight some interesting possibilities for departures from the SL norm on sexualization.

Kelli May wrote: I've spent my mid-30s through to mid-40s in SL and my RL clothing choices haven't changed a lot. A bit of weight gain has meant the skinny T-shirts have been repurposed as dusters, but basically I range from casual to dressy as the occasion demands. Among my friends I've always been the one most likely to go the extra mile for a special occasion, and I've never had the spare cash (nor inclination) to slavishly follow fashion. In SL I can wear what I like, when I like. If that means I fancy going shopping in a rubber catsuit, then off I go. I can go dancing in a tux, a ball-gown or a burlesque corset and barely an eyelid batted. Sometimes it's more about costumes than clothes, and there I have a free rein too. I tend to dress smarter in SL simply because I can. As for the other signs of aging... many people tell you that they'll grow old gracefully. They sneer at the rich and famous for their plastic surgery, hair transplants and personal trainers. They'd *never* go that far to look good. But if it was as easy as it is in SL, they probably would. I would. The reason we don't is often because we can't. Most of it is expensive, time-consuming and horribly unreliable. In SL, though, the equivalent is cheap, quick and flawlessly effective. And most importantly, if you don't like the result, instantly reversible. Finding an older, wrinkled skin is more difficult than a smooth, youthful one. Wearing an older shape can (doesn't have to, but can) make fitting standard mesh sizes more difficult. Youth has become the default. I think you and I probably fit within pretty much exactly the same age/cultural box, Kelli, so I recognize in myself some of what you are saying. I do, as you say, dress smarter in SL because I can, and I'm certainly not going to pretend that I've gone to great lengths to age my avatar, who now probably looks at least a decade younger than me. Your point about youth and the SL default somewhat mirrors something I said in a blog post a while ago . . . that what we would by RL standards call "sexy" is actually the norm here, with the result that being perceived as sexy in SL requires something like hypersexualization. And that being "ugly" or "old" here requires a significant effort, and is therefore a reflection of conscious choice rather than, you know . . . gravity. ;-)

Sy Beck wrote: You ask for views from older users and then reference ancient Greece. Quite how old you think some of us are I'll let pass. Anyway, I believe you and I fall roughly within the same age range and whether it's cultural or the acceptance of age I too have set aside my youthful phase, which much like yours, seemed to go on 10 yrs longer than nature intended and I think I've now made that cultural leap of jumping from fashion to style. Wow. That's a really wonderful distinction. I wish I'd made it! And yes, it probably describes, to some degree, what I've undergone, at least insofar as "fashion" can represent the ways in which we choose to identify with a particular cultural subset (in my case, I guess, sort of trendy-lefty postpunk/alt). I do think that that is less a concern now, in SL and RL, and so I've made the same leap. However, for males in SL the range of clothes styles is far fewer than what are available for women so the availability of options that are reflected in real life just don't exist. At one end of the scale you have an androgynous Asian style, hipsters filling the middle range and a Sears catalogue and formal suit combination taking up the other end. Not to say that rare examples don't occur, but that's the general impression I get. I think it's far easier for a man to find a better range of fancy dress outfits than anything "appropriate" to post 30s. Maybe the lack of choice for men is a kind of apt revenge, as it is generally much more socially acceptable to be an older man than an older woman (just ask Hollywood). As regards body parts I've always kept mine to my rl proportions though saying that I should possibly review it. Looking downwards right now then if I do have a six pack stomach it's being carried in a rather padded bag. Hair is more problematic I guess for men than women. I don't recall ever seeing a balding man in SL. Grey hair I've seen occasionally, but very rarely on a woman avatar if ever; then again irl I rarely see grey-haired women anymore. One of the ironies is that my first avatar generally wore platinum or even just "white" hair with streaks, at a time when, in RL, I really had just a few streaks of grey, but my current avatar is brunette with streaks, even as my RL grey hair has grown apace. I don't think there's actually a connection between those, but maybe I'm wrong, and it's subconscious? So in conclusion I would say that much like Western society endeavours to stay ever young looking then art will reflect life, but of course it's a lot simpler and cheaper to achieve it in Second Life and requires no dieting, exercise or beauty regimes to be adopted. Meanwhile in real life, industries and consumers will aspire to reach the day when life will imitate art and you can fall out of bed in the morning and with one click you can be washed, dressed to the nines and looking like a 20 yr old; teleporting would be cool though. A good point. Maybe shifts in cultural attitudes and affordances in RL even within the last 10 years have changed our attitude to age? Is it less acceptable in RL to be "old" because it's become easier to avoid looking it? Are RL and SL converging in that regard? P.S. Good to see you back though, as Derek hinted, this forum has become arid. Though your neo-progressive 3rd wave feminist nonsense may get me checking in more :matte-motes-big-grin-wink: Thank you! It does seem a bit, as you say, "arid" here -- but it's been sort of that way for a few years now, really. I'll do my best to enliven things for at least a little bit with more of my particular brand of nonsense! ;-)

irihapeti wrote: when I first played on SL I tried to be older. Which basically meant wearing as few clothes as I could get away with and not go red (: 10 years later I bought my first leather jacket, and I wear it i am turn into my mother I think. Is true bc I went to Muddys instead of Dance Island tonight (: Actually, I think a leather jacket was one of the very first things I actually paid money for in SL. I still wear those: they are ageless. :-) Your case though, generally, seems to echo mine. How much longer before we're shopping for ankle-length granny dresses, and scouring the Marketplace for knits?

Derek Torvalar wrote: I am surprised you got Tithonus by Hades' minions here in Montag's underworld. The breast, or the mere reference to it in any colloquial form, is not allowed here . That being said, in answer to your question, my representaions are fluid, shifting between what is by whim or neccessity appropriate. On another note, I love the sound of cicada in August. (Sort of like this place now, shriveled, decayed emitting a long, lonely drawn out buzz as opposed to the popular cliche chirping of crickets) Enjoy your turkey. I should send you mine inworld but, again, we can't speak about that here. I think that there is probably a sizable subset of people whose representations, as you say, "fluid," but on the whole -- and I may be wrong, so correct me if you think so -- that most people identify so closely with their avatar that they prefer a more stable representation? I guess what we're coming down to is that old and overused "immersionist-augmentationist" distinction again, although in an odd way, as one might expect augmentationists to want their avatars to more closely represent their RL age, whereas I think that the actual case is that they probably care relatively little about such things. It's the immersionists who likely invest so much in their avatars that they probably mostly avoid fluid representation? Another indication, perhaps, that the distinctions are much more complicated than the binary suggests. (I like cicadas too, so long as I don't actually have to see one. They're kind of ugly, which maybe doesn't speak well of Eos's taste in men?)

So, I guess this question is largely targeting people who've been around for a while, but I'd be interested in anyone's views, really. In ancient Greek myth, the Goddess of the Dawn, Eos, fell in love with the handsome youth Tithonus. Wishing to preserve that love forever, she asked Zeus to grant him eternal life. This he did . . . but she had forgotten to ask that he also retain eternal youth. And so Tithonus did indeed live forever . . . in a body that slowly decayed and shriveled until at long last he dwindled into a cicada. Sometimes I have thought that Tithonus in reverse would be an apt emblem for the typical SL user. Slowly, inexorably, we grow older, even as our avatars do not. We dwindle inside: it is only the surface that retains the promise of eternal youth. Many of us -- surely the vast majority, in fact -- represent here as younger than we really are. The index of time that marks its passage upon our physical bodies in the physical world here is meaningless: not only are our virtual bodies free of the scars that measure the passage of years and decades, but we can actually move back and forth through body-time. At least, we can in theory. Most of us remain static, trapped in an endlessly ephemeral "now" that knows no before (we were, most of us, never children or teens here) or hereafter. When I first began in SL, I was in my mid-30s in RL, but dressed (and probably acted) more-or-less like my RL self had between 5 and 10 years earlier. It wasn't an "accurate" representation of who I was then, but neither was it so far off the mark that it felt inauthentic. When I came back to SL, however, some 5 or so years later, and created a new avatar, I consciously aged her a bit. I made her shape a bit thicker, and the clothes she wears are more "mature" and, I suppose, conventional. Gone are the ripped jeans and the Clash tees. I still listen to 90s alt; I just can't imagine dressing as I did when I was listening to it in my 20s anymore. (Interestingly, I also can't imagine re-designing or "aging" my first avatar. She belongs in ripped jeans, tees, and leather jackets. It would be oddly "inauthentic" to change HER look.) So, what of the rest of you? Have your avatars "aged"? Do the shapes and skins you wear, the clothes you buy, reflect the march of time in RL? Or do you remain trapped in amber? Age cannot wither us . . . but surely without age, custom will indeed stale our infinite variety. How can we grow without change?

Madelaine McMasters wrote: LaskyaClaren wrote: How long before SCOTUS bows to pressure and legallizes marriages between Furries, dragons, robots, and sports cars? I'm my '99 Miata's second owner, but she's my first Miata and I'm in love. It's not the kind of D/s relationship I had in mind, but she goes where I steer her... so quickly it makes me giddy. So if they make it legal for me to marry her that would be two kinds of awesome. "D/s"? That's a kind of transmission or motor, right? I don't drive myself, which means that I can only be an "ally," I guess, but as I once became inordinately attached to the streetcar that stopped regularly just outside my front door, I sort of understand your feelings, We are completely non-judgemental here, in any case: whatever makes your starter roll-over. ;-)

"'Second Life has sanctioned partnerships between couples regardless of gender or identity for years," explained Justice Anthony Kennedy, 'and it's begun to hurt our bottom line. America has permitted itself to fall behiind SL and countless other MMOs. This country can no longer afford to let the growing Marriage Gap go unanswered: we are begining to lose users!'" Of course, this is a slippery slope. How long before SCOTUS bows to pressure and legallizes marriages between Furries, dragons, robots, and sports cars? ;-) More seriously, congratulations to the US and to my American friends for this ringing confirmation of the power and importance of Love. :-)

Drake1 Nightfire wrote: LaskyaClaren wrote: Laurin Sorbet wrote: Yeah! That happened! Drake's panties are very nice. Oh, that's quite lovely! In a very weird sort of way. As for status of Drake's panties . . . TMI, thanks very much. ;-) I made those, you silly goose. This is sounding more sordid by the minute . . .

Laurin Sorbet wrote: Yeah! That happened! Drake's panties are very nice. Oh, that's quite lovely! In a very weird sort of way. As for status of Drake's panties . . . TMI, thanks very much. ;-)

Laurin Sorbet wrote: Demure as ever, my steely eyed girl. Steel eyed, perhaps. But not, as you are soon to be, steel boobed. ;-)

Laurin Sorbet wrote: Drake1 Nightfire wrote: Canoro Philipp wrote: materials are coming, they are like bump mapping and shiny, but more complex, objects using that feature wil show a more realistic texture that will behave differently to light and angle of view. Ummm.. Materials are already here.. Normal maps and Specular maps have been around for a while now. I made a scale mail bikini that looks like it is actual scales, yet is a flat mesh. Wants! Is that on the open market? It'd go well with my feathers. You always preferred the "understated" Laurin . . . ;-) Does it come with a dragon?

Theresa Tennyson wrote: LaskyaClaren wrote: I found this comment interesting: "a club is not the place to be bringing up polical issues." This strikes me as nonsense, first because the legacy of Nazism isn't "politics," it's history. This is a bit like saying you don't want to condemn Attila the Hun because you don't like discussing politics. In North America that statement may be viable, but not so much in Europe. There are extreme right-wing parties in most European countries that can at least be associated with Nazi thought today. This is a really interesting point, and it does muddy the waters somewhat -- but someone who is dressing up in a costume that clearly alludes to the Germany Nazi party (fl. 1920-1945) is more obviously referencing the historical party, rather than (say) The Golden Dawn or the National Front. But I'll agree that there are likely to be contemporary resonances to some European observers that are not so obvious to someone from North America. LaskyaClaren wrote: But it's also nonsense because "political issues" are everywhere and in everything we wear, say, and do, in clubs and outside of clubs. Saying you don't want to discuss political issues insulates you from having to think about the implications of the very real ideological impact of nearly everything we do. "Politics" is in how "sexily" we chose to dress, or whether our avatar looks staid, or punky, or conservative. It's in the slang we use. It's pretty much everywhere. You can certainly argue that -- IF you don't mind words having their definitions stretched to the point they become nearly meaningless. I assume the point you're replying to referred to the much more specific case of discussing the legal governance system of a specific place, which can be even more inappropriate in a Second Life "club" because the "attendees" come from a wide variety of real-world places -- as witnessed by your thinking that Nazis are a "historical" topic and Europeans considering them a "political" one. Really, I was just making the point that "politics" isn't present only in the overt ways in which we may choose to discuss or display it -- uniforms, slogans, discourse and so forth -- but in other ways too. The distinction between explicitly addressing "political issues" and subtly (or sometimes not so subtly) embedding them in the other things through which we represent outselves is a false one. Also, that "politics" isn't just about political parties.

Americans have a rather different view of this than most of the rest of the world. Most of us have "hate laws" that place restrictions upon freedom of speech when a particular group is being targetted with what is obviously hate speech. You can get away with saying and doing things in the US that just wouldn't fly in Canada or most European countries. Sometimes that's a good thing, and sometimes not so much. The Westboro Baptist Church just wouldn't be able to operate the way it does where I live. I found this comment interesting: "a club is not the place to be bringing up polical issues." This strikes me as nonsense, first because the legacy of Nazism isn't "politics," it's history. This is a bit like saying you don't want to condemn Attila the Hun because you don't like discussing politics. But it's also nonsense because "political issues" are everywhere and in everything we wear, say, and do, in clubs and outside of clubs. Saying you don't want to discuss political issues insulates you from having to think about the implications of the very real ideological impact of nearly everything we do. "Politics" is in how "sexily" we chose to dress, or whether our avatar looks staid, or punky, or conservative. It's in the slang we use. It's pretty much everywhere.