Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Everything posted by Catrie

  1. I think it's sad that feminism is being used to shame the women that posed for this picture. Because that's pretty much what I've seen from this. The women were called "ornaments". When one said she willingly posed for this, the reply was something about being on the same level as an accessory to hijacking. It's also been said that the picture inferred that the women were "weak" and shames them for the appearance of being "sexually available" to the man in the picture. Zeta was the one that posted it in here, not Orwar. Zeta was one of those behind the making of this picture. Basically, those talking about "feminism" are saying that the women didn't know what they were doing, didn't know how it would be portrayed and just overall aren't able to make their own choices, simply because a gasp man is shown in the proverbial seat of power. When it could be said that he is only there because they want him to be there and he could easily be replaced by them. In that event, who is/are really the one/s in power?
  2. from first hand experience, I can say he is very cuddly. I'm a little sad I wasn't invited to the remake, Zeta. lol
  3. does it though? I don't see it that way. I don't see the picture imagining them as weak. Even in Playboy, the women,outside of Marilyn Monroe, have willingly posed for those pictures. I've always seen it more as empowerment for women. Yes, they are sex symbols, but they know it and revel in it. They are secure in their bodies and don't care who knows it. Nothing in this pic screams "these women are weak" to me, not their expressions, not the positions, nothing. They are exactly where they want to be, when they want to be. I'd be more concerned if it were 4 women fully clad, surrounding a man, where they looked tired, dejected and resigned to their "place" like they are stuck with no way out.
  4. I wouldn't really call this a "reversal", as he's posing with statues, that are probably of Ancient Crete/Babylonia likenesses. He's not posing with fully clad female avatars. Also, he posts a lot of pics in his undies,so it's not like this is that different from his normal shots. I like the pic's coloring, and the contrast between ancient statues and laser lights, but I wouldn't say it's a "neat reversal". You know, we did a similar shot 2 years ago, and it was very organically put together, with two of the three women (Zeta and myself) pushing for the lingerie shoot. Pretty sure we posted it in here, and no one talked about becoming "more actively feminist". While I wasn't involved in this one, I'm going to go on a limb and say Zeta was behind this shot. lol It's actually kind of sad that women can't take these kinds of pics without someone thinking they are "ornaments" and not "strong women." You are clearly reading what you want into this.
  5. Tried a new, to me, technique in Photoshop. I'm slowly trying to better my skills in it.
  6. lol that's actually a Genus Babyface head. Thanks, though.
  7. I have some layers that I got from a Photoshop YouTube tutorial once. I've used it on a few pictures in the past. I actually started by putting this in Pixlr and put a dust and a dark vignette layer on it and it just wasn't "weathered" enough for me, so I went back to Photoshop and dug out these layers and added the other 2 dust layers and the aged paper layers.
  8. I was inspired by a song written by one of my favorite fantasy authors, Mercedes Lackey. I had a picture in my head of what I wanted the pose to be, but couldn't find it on the MP. I don't have any of t he fancy poser thingies, so I hopped on Black Dragon and attempted to make the pose in there. This isn't quite what I envisioned, but for my first time doing something other than adjusting a finger here or there, I'll take it.
  9. Got busy and forgot to post this earlier.
  10. I don't think it's "toxic masculinity". However, I think Society at large has this fixation on what someone has to be. They have to fit certain molds. If they don't, there's "obviously something wrong with them." If women put in their female friends, then they aren't looked down upon, nor is their sexuality questioned. However, if a guy puts a guy friend in their pic, their sexuality is questioned, as the other man is automatically assumed to be their lover or significant other, even if that isn't the case. It is far safer for the men to put their female friends in, as then they are seen to fit in the box others have put them in. It took quite a while before I put anything in my profile, and I did remove someone, simply so that others wouldn't project their feelings and/or thoughts on me still having that person in mine, or sending comments to that person. At the end of the day, it's really no one else's business what a person puts in their profile. Their profile is simply what they feel comfortable letting the world of Second Life know about them. There are a lot of private people, who have very close friends of all genders, that don't feel the need to put them all on display for the SL world to see.
  11. I REALLY like this one, because of the shadows, especially in the folds of the shirt. really well done.
  12. Thanks so much. It's actually a pic of my DnD character. I needed a new pic for her token on Roll 20. lol
  • Create New...