Jump to content

Scylla Rhiadra

Resident
  • Posts

    21,141
  • Joined

  • Days Won

    201

Everything posted by Scylla Rhiadra

  1. Oh god, I do that too of course! I am a veritable catalogue of nastiness, Love! You'll find my pic next to any of these definitions in the dictionary!
  2. Thanks Luna for this, but I'll have to admit that I can also be a real b*tch when I want to be, or sometimes when I'm not paying attention to my tone (Oooooookay . . .). I am also a racist, a homophobe, and even have some internalized misogyny. Most of us are guilty to some degree or another of these things, as well as a tendency to just be mean on occasion. The important thing is that we acknowledge those things in ourselves, recognize that they are wrong, and do our best to overcome their influence on our actions and communications. And, like anyone else, I've had mixed success doing so. But I do try. (This actually mirrors a discussion I had with Maddy yesterday. Weird.)
  3. Thank you, as I definitely do not belong there. I am, as you correctly discern, very human indeed. But I am also self-aware enough to know that I frequently fail, and I do my best to acknowledge that, and remedy my mistakes. So, although I'm not sure what you are specifically responding to, please do accept my very genuine apologies if I hurt (rather than merely disagreed with) you. But yeah, no pedestals please. I get vertigo.
  4. Hmm, I don't know that version of the myth! In the versions I know, it is Hades who r*pes Perseophone (literally: he seizes her forcibly and carries her off to the underworld where she becomes his Queen). But the case of Cassandra, the prophetess whose ability to see the future is discounted by everyone, and who is dismissed as mentally unstable, would be an example. Another good example might be Eros' treatment of his lover Psyche. Or Jason's betrayal of Medea.
  5. Well, serious answer (sort of). I try not to be an ***** even to assholes, because 1) I don't think it's as effective to respond in that way, and 2) I don't like myself when I sound like an *****. So, I actually do try not to be too sarcastic or flippant or mean in my replies to people whom I think are jerks. What is ALSO true is that I'm not always very good at it!
  6. In the sense that there are people who care about others, on the one hand, and assholes on the other? Oh, definitely. If I've accidentally hurt someone, and even if I think that they are being a bit unreasonable about feeling "hurt," I will apologize, because it was not my intention to cause hurt. Because I try not to be a sociopath.
  7. Sadly, yes, that's sort of what I'm hearing from some people here. I don't get it myself. Will it hurt their feelings, though, if I call out their behaviour and label them an ***** for it? Nah. Who cares! Toughen up, snowflake!
  8. It's amazing how complicated this all seems. If you've hurt or upset someone doing something that you should reasonably know might cause hurt or upset, you're being an *****. If it was legitimately inadvertent, apologize. Why not just . . . don't be an *****?
  9. Correct! Meanwhile, Olivia, who is in reality a boy playing a girl, falls in love with Viola, whom she thinks is a boy, but is actually a girl (played on stage by a boy). And Viola (who is, as we've established, a boy playing a girl pretending to be a boy) has fallen in love with Orsino (a boy playing a boy). Complicated! With some possible homoerotic elements included into the mix! When I did this for a pic, I used a male head and skin for Olivia, but dressed her up as a girl (I used a female body), and an androgenous-looking male head and body for Viola. I'm honestly not sure how well it worked. Should Viola, when she is disguised as a boy, retain in her looks something "feminine"? Or would she just be played in a straight-up fashion as boy (which would be easy, because of course in RL she was a boy.)
  10. A "different take" is exactly the right way to describe it, because really worthwhile literature always continues to produce new meanings and ways of being read -- or else, honestly, we'd probably stop reading it. Literary readings are evidence-based, like anything else, so there are wrong ways to read a text (there's no textual evidence for it, or the textual evidence undercuts a particular reading), but a nearly endless variety of possible "right" ways to read it -- and every reader, every culture, and every age will of course see "new" things in a text because of their particular perspective. In the 19th- and especially early 20th-century, psychology (as you say) becomes a thing in criticism, sometimes usefully and sometimes stupidly. (An example of the latter might be a reading that over-literalizes Hamlet's Oedipus Complex, as though he were a real person with a real childhood, rather than a fictional construct made of words and stage actions). Anyway, readings that overlook Hamlet's emotional abuse of Ophelia and see her death as the result of, essentially, a broken heart, aren't necessarily "wrong," but they prioritize certain kinds of evidence over others, and view her character through the very limited frame of a particular set of cultural assumptions. As, arguably, do I. "Trauma Studies" aren't really my thing, but it's actually a newish sub-field within literary and cultural studies, and it would be pointless to claim that I'm not influenced by it. Probably for as long as there's been literature? I could certainly find instances in Greek myth, for example. Shakespeare might not have known it as "gaslighting," but there is no question whatsoever that he'd have recognized the phenomenon.
  11. I think in practice gaslighting tends to be done by men to women, in large measure because it involves the assumption of a kind of "authority" upon which men can more "naturally" call in our still-gendered culture. Women, on the other hand, still tend to be characterized as more "emotional" and "fickle," and so seem more likely to misread on the basis of their emotional responses to things. But I don't think there is anything necessarily gendered about gaslighting per se. I can't see any reason why a very self-confident women couldn't do it to an insecure man. But one thing that hasn't been discussed here extensively is the relationship of griefing or trolling to power and control more generally.
  12. You might recall that when I was doing this project I did something like this, and posted about in My Avatar: I wanted to use a male teen or late prepubescent to represent Viola from Twelfth Night, as would have been the case on Shakespeare's stage. It was complicated by the fact that Viola spends most of the play disguised as . . . a young boy.
  13. I gave some thought to this possibility, but as I really only needed the silhouette or shadow of a child, it didn't seem either worthwhile, nor indeed courteous to any potential models to ask them. It's also a rather dark image (it's about loss), and might have been upsetting. https://flic.kr/p/2pTT6RM Should I do a shot in the future that involves a more detailed and focused role for a child, I'll certainly consider that idea again, though.
  14. Oh, interesting! In my text for my interpretation of Ophelia for my Shakespeare's Women exhibition last year, I said this about her (the image was entitled "The More Deceived"): I'd call that "gaslighting." Personally, I've always thought Hamlet was a major POS.
  15. I'm buying a child avatar. For a pic -- it's got nothing to do with the current kerfuffle. My peeve is that if I wanted to do this "properly" and in a way that will allow me to conform to the new rules that come in effect in a month, I'd have to spend waaaay more time and money than I want to, especially just for what will likely only be a single photo. So instead I'm buying a cheap throw-away all-in-one that will, along with pretty much all of the others I saw on the MP, become unusable by the end of next month.
  16. Ugh. I'm so sorry to hear that. 😔 I've been lucky, I guess. I've met scores of forumites in-world over the years -- many, but by no means all of them through the old Forum Cartel group here. I've bumped into many by accident, but most of the meet-ups were purposeful and deliberate, so I guess I got to "pick and choose" the ones I wanted to meet for the most part. A lot of them are good friends now. In fact, I met my best friend in SL here about 15 years ago. I hope you have better luck in the future!
  17. Congrats on redefining virtually any disagreement between two people as "gaslighting," thereby rendering what is actually a fairly useful term utterly meaningless.
  18. This assumes though that the definition of griefing is determined by the ToS. I'm not sure I'd agree.
  19. I think you sometimes are a troll here, but not in this particular instance. I'm sure that will happen one day. I promise I'll be gentle. 😏
  20. The key to that definition, which is fairly close to how I'd define it, is this part: In other words, not merely disagreeing, but trying to convince the other person that their actual understanding is irrational and dysfunctional. A classic example would be someone asking a woman with whom he disagreed whether she was PMS. Another might be insisting that an opponent was simply imagining something that they can remember happening. I'm not sure how this applies.
  21. Scylla has been asking you a simple question. If I take you out for a beer afterwards, will it be ok?
×
×
  • Create New...