Jump to content

Scylla Rhiadra

Resident
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    20,071

  • Joined

  • Days Won

    183

 Content Type 

Everything posted by Scylla Rhiadra

  1. Scylla Rhiadra
    I've been doing so many ballet shots recently, that it occurred to me I should actually purchase some dances for it. Apologies for the frame rate: I had to load this as a GIF.
  2. Scylla Rhiadra
    This is so wonderfully baroque!
  3. Scylla Rhiadra
    Well, look at you, you handsome chunk o' . . . monkey.
  4. Scylla Rhiadra
  5. Scylla Rhiadra
    I don't really understand "brand loyalty." A brand is, essentially, a marketing concept, or at best a collection of things made by a single producer, usually impersonal and corporate, and I don't feel loyalty to things. I feel loyalty to people. So I wouldn't say that I've ever felt any "loyalty" to Slink as a brand. I like its look, and, pre-BOM, the HUD was one of the best around, so I stuck with it as my main body for as long as it was reasonable to do so. When it became difficult to wear new clothes because it wasn't rigged for Physique anymore, I bought a Maitreya, not because it's a better body (it isn't) but because it's well-supported and relatively easy to use. (It also has the Petite add-on, which I like.) Slink is a brand, but Siddean is a person. I don't think "loyalty" would describe my feelings about her, but I admired her achievements and in my dealings with her, as well as second-hand, she made it clear that she was a really nice person. But that's not the same as being loyal to Slink. The distinction between brand and creator is maybe even more important with reference to Genus. I wear a Genus head, and I have every intention of continuing to wear a Genus head for so long as it is viable to do so. That's not out of loyalty, but rather purely because I've achieved (after LONG work) a look I like with it. I own, and have tried to work with no less than four different modern LeLutka heads: they are objectively superior to Genus -- but I can't make them look the way I want them to. So, no. I remain a Genus user. So sticking with Genus is, for me, purely about my own needs, not about the "brand." It's also not really about the trials and tribulations of the creator of the heads either, but I do think some might exhibit a bit more tolerance and understanding with regard to her. First there was a long nuisance DMCA that literally knocked the head off the market for months. That likely had some pretty significant spin-off effects, perhaps financial in nature, in RL. Then, as I understand it, there was a pregnancy and a new child. And then -- Covid, and the war in Ukraine. I'd say there are some pretty significant mitigating factors here. Judging SL merchants in the same way we judge RL corporations -- Amazon, or GE, or whatever -- is kind of silly. Most of these "companies" are single craftspeople producing everything themselves, for a relatively marginal profit. If Jeff Bezos breaks his foot, or gets pregnant, there is a fleet of people to step in and keep things running. If something untoward happens in the RL of a Second Life creator, there isn't going to be that sort of cushion. Unless there is real evidence of fraudulent intentions, I think it would be good to cut SL creators, who are really the independent "artisans" of the digital world, a bit of slack.
  6. Scylla Rhiadra
    I said I was sorry! Twice! 😞
  7. Scylla Rhiadra
    This is another shot made to appear within a pic, featuring @Saskia Rieko's lovely back.
  8. Scylla Rhiadra
    Well, it's interesting. I just did a quick count of the number of posts on that subject, excluding yours above, and the two most recent by Kali and Garnet. There were a total of 34 posts, made by 15 different people. I was, unsurprisingly, the top contributor, with 11 posts. Every one of these, except the first, was in response to something someone else said. The second top contributor was . . . you. With 9 posts. 8 of my 11 posts were in response to . . . you. Peeve: People who can't count, and have conveniently selective memories.
  9. Scylla Rhiadra
    I refuse to return to the FC Hangout until they've swept away all the cobwebs you left hanging from the ceiling.
  10. Scylla Rhiadra
    Thanks so much, Nando! And yes, Degas is definitely the inspiration for this batch of pics!
  11. Scylla Rhiadra
    They have been teasing a new update of Genus, with screenshots, in Genus group chat in the last few days. I couldn't nail them down on an actual date, but it looks like it is coming.
  12. Scylla Rhiadra
  13. Scylla Rhiadra
    🙄
  14. Scylla Rhiadra
    There are a great many places in SL where "chat" IS the main function, but it's not the only point of the platform: people do many different things here, sometimes quietly by themselves, and sometimes in large, sociable groups. It's quite like RL in that respect. If it's social engagement you're looking for, it's out there: you just have to find it. Coffee houses often feature a lot of this, as do some clubs. ALL of the clubs I go to have very active and engaged public chatter -- and all are very welcoming and friendly. (There are other clubs, mostly pick up places, which are quieter because everyone is in private IM.) Remember too, that like RL, different parts of SL will be busy at some points during the day, and quieter at others: there aren't too many 24/7 hubs of activity (although there are a few). Start with the Destination guide, perhaps, and see what places are currently buzzing. Visit them: if one suits, then great! If not, try another.
  15. Scylla Rhiadra
    I don't know! (And thank you!) My suspicion is that they merely took the "easy route" -- if in doubt, nuke it. I find these sorts of things interesting because they really do reflect our culture at one level or another. I think that this is less about LL or SL than it is about the perception of what is "acceptable" in media today. Sex has been used to sell goods forever: a gorgeous woman tantalizing the viewer with semi-exposed breasts barely registers these days. Breastfeeding on the other hand -- or indeed, nearly anything to do with women's bodies that isn't about sexuality -- is still a bit of a taboo. ETA: I should probably make it clear that I have zero objection to nudity or "sexy pics." The pic I alluded to is quite a nice one: I don't have any issues with it having been accepted. I'm just perplexed by the apparent double standard.
  16. Scylla Rhiadra
    Peeve! A relatively minor one, because it's not entirely unexpected, and I don't really care all that much. My image of a woman breastfeeding a child on steps beneath a shining star has been "rejected" by SL's "Official" Flickr page. Interestingly, it was permitted here, on the forums. The image shows a woman in a jacket and jeans, one breast entirely covered and the "important bits" of the other hidden behind the baby's head. And it's not a close-up. The image was part of my Christmas series, and references (among other things) iconic images of the Virgin Mary breastfeeding the baby Jesus. Meanwhile, in the same batch of new pics that have been approved for the SL Official Flickr, is a pic of a literally topless woman, her nipples and maybe a third of her breasts covered by her arms. There is far more of her breasts visible than of mine. Sooo . . . it's apparently not about the "nudity." It seems that images of a woman nurturing a child are a no-go, but ones of topless women asking us to use our "imagination" about what she really means by "smoking" (she has a cigarette in her mouth) are fine. As I recall, even Facebook, that paragon of middle class and middle brow virtues and mores, was compelled to permit images of (real women) breastfeeding. But not SL? I'm not sure who is responsible for vetting pics for the Official Flickr page? @Strawberry Linden maybe? Or people under her supervision? As I say, I don't care all that much -- but I'd be interested to hear a justification. ETA: Just on the off chance Strawberry or a Linden does see this, I want to make it clear that I'm not looking for a justification for rejecting my particular image. I totally understand why LL can't defend every decision it makes like this. Nor am I looking to have the decision reversed: it doesn't matter to me that much. What I am hoping for is essentially a statement on policy. Are images of breastfeeding permitted? And if not, why not, especially given that so many images that sexualize breasts are permitted?
  17. Scylla Rhiadra
    https://modemworld.me/2023/01/01/slink-et-al-siddean-shutters-her-brands-in-second-life/
  18. Scylla Rhiadra
    *coughs* You used an example, which I agree was good. It's not an analogy, which is what I used. I employed the N-word as an analogy -- a parallel instance that sheds some light on the original example -- because I think it is more familiar to most people. I didn't suggest that you did. Which is actually pretty much precisely what I said myself, no?
  19. Scylla Rhiadra
    Honestly, Sam, this is my preference too. I feel exactly the same way about terms like "sl*t"and "whore," which I dislike deeply -- but I'm not going to police other women about the language they use to describe themselves. And, despite my personal agreement with you on this, I'm certainly not going to tell POC what words they are permitted to employ with reference to themselves. There is something to be said for the reappropriation of language as a means of self-empowerment: Love's example, "Queer," is good one in that regard. But it's often a double-edged sword in my view.
  20. Scylla Rhiadra
    Well, it's always difficult to take back words! It's a deliberately political move that is, by definition, breaking norms, right? That's literally the point of it: you are telling people that they "shouldn't" use a word in a particular way, because you want to redefine (or reclaim) it. Reclaiming words is also always going to be problematic, because there are always going to be those who refuse to go along. And what that means in practice is that who is using it, and how it is being used, needs to be treated critically. To use the example you give: I use the word "queer" in some technical and specifically academic senses. I teach "Queer Theory," and I use the word as a verb: such and such a person is "queering" our understanding of something (which means seeing it from a new and radically strange perspective). But as a cishet woman, I'd be very careful about my use of it as a personal descriptor, as for instance, "She is queer," because there are too many people who use it that way negatively. An analogy is the modern currency of the N-word. People of colour have a right to use it how they please: it refers to them. I, on the other hand, would not, because it's not "about" me, and it can too easily be read as a slur coming from someone who is not black.
  21. Scylla Rhiadra
    No, not really Love, because I can't be responsible for how others use the word. I think my explanation makes clear my view: you "shouldn't" use a term if some deem it insulting, and you dont wish to insult them. It's not the same as "mustn't" or "can't." In the instance to which you are referring, I think that I too was being "admonished," at least implicitly. I learned from the experience, actually.
  22. Scylla Rhiadra
    These are all demonstrably peeves, and we are, as one does on a forum, discussing them. There are means at hand should you wish to avoid seeing them, Garnet.
  23. Scylla Rhiadra
    I agree very much overall with what you say here, although personally I find "cis" (speaking as a cis woman myself) fairly unproblematic: I think the term itself is largely descriptive rather than judgmental. (Which is not to say that there aren't instances of people insulting or dismissing cis men and women. Of course there are.) I've never felt insulted by being termed "cis," and in fact am very comfortable describing myself as such. In general, I try to avoid "labels." I get called an "SJW" a lot. It doesn't really bother me much, in one sense: the "SJ" very nicely describes things that are definitely of central interest to me. But I also recognize that it's used dismissively, and in that sense, because it means that the person using it isn't really listening, but is just sort of waving me off as a "type," I dislike it. And this is why I try not to use other such labels such as "MRA" or even "TERF." On a purely semantic level, these are, again, descriptive terms that were initially employed by members of those communities to describe themselves, but whatever their origin, they've become, like such terms as "SJW" or "woke," a reductive way of not listening to what such people have to say. If I refer to someone as a "TERF," I'm bundling them up together with a whole bunch of attitudes that I'm implicitly suggesting aren't even worthy of a serious response, and I'm ensuring that the person I'm so labeling will not bother listening to me. And that, it seems to me, defeats the entire point of communication. That said, I'm also not going to try to dictate what language people use. I understand why members of the trans community use the term "TERF," and even if I don't like it, I'm not about to tell others who are much more vulnerable than I and whose very existence is literally under attack by such people, that they "shouldn't" use it.
  24. Scylla Rhiadra
    "Shouldn't" is a rather vague word. I will agree that the more extreme varieties of "political correctness" that engage in attacks upon people for words they might have unknowingly employed are counter-productive and frequently ugly. What, I suppose, should dictate one's choices about the use of a word is one's understanding of the impacts it causes. If one is using a slur or a term associated with a toxic viewpoint or culture, then one is having very real impacts, negative ones, upon one's auditors. Where a person is doing so unknowingly, then it is beneficial to them to explain what those impacts are. Where a person is doing so deliberately, then they are saying something about themselves as bigots or what have you, and they probably deserve the grief that they have invited. In my experience, it's generally not difficult to tell these two apart. If I am using a term that is problematic to some people, I want to know that, and I'm grateful when someone points that fact out to me because it empowers and educates me. For instance, at one point some time ago, I was frankly unaware of the difference between the terms "trans woman" and "transwoman." There are real cultural and semantic reasons why the former is acceptable, the latter viewed as a kind of slur, and I was extremely thankful that this was pointed out to me, as the last thing I wanted to be doing was unintentionally insult people I believe deserve support. Language is a tool, and sometimes a weapon. And any intelligent user of either of these things wants to be as fully educated and skillful in their employment as they can be.
  25. Scylla Rhiadra
    Should you want to know more (and god knows it would be understandable if you don't), the best overall introduction to the history and culture of that community that I know is Natalie Wynn's vodcast on the subject. Wynn is a former academic (she was doing a PhD in philosophy, I think) who has remade herself as an influential commentator on online culture; her vodcasts are thoughtful, informative, well-researched, and almost always immensely entertaining in a (deliberately) campy sort of way.
×
×
  • Create New...