The July 2017 round of Collabor88 marked the first foray of well-known and well-regarded SL shoe brand Reign (stylised as REIGN.-) into vehicles. Now, I’m not particularly known for using – much less reviewing – SL vehicles, as I’ve always found them to be rather terrible to use, so this post is a foray into what could be considered uncharted blogging territory for me.
I guess one could say we girls are spoilt for choice when it comes to clothing, shoes, hairstyles, jewellery, and all sorts of accessories and trinkets in Second Life. Well, compared to what the guys have to make do with, I guess it’s true. There’s a wild variety of styles, mostly derived from Real Life (RL) fashion, available for us, and about three months’ worth of average Jane salaries is more than enough to stock a female avatar’s inventory to the hilt with hairstyles, clothes, shoes, lingerie, and so on.
However, it’s when you start looking at what is actually available that the wares on offer by SL vendors and content creators that you realise your options aren’t as many as you’d have liked. Today, I’ll talk about jewellery, and ankle and foot jewellery in particular.
In recent years, I avoided wearing jewellery in SL. It’s not because I don’t like jewellery; I love it. In fact, when I go for a boho kind of look in RL, I wear a fair number of rings on my fingers and toes, and I also have a few piercings in RL. The problem is… Well, there’s no polite way of putting it: The vast majority of SL jewellery designers offer pretty crappy stuff, and they even price it ridiculously. Even these days, we see necklaces, bracelets, collars, rings made of tortured prims, which drive up your complexity through the roof and, with their full bright textures and bling, make you look like you escaped from the worst visual nightmares that 2006-era Second Life had to offer.
Some designers have managed to graduate to the geometrically wasteful lagmonsters that are called sculpts – and they’re pretty determined to stay there for eternity. Also, the jewels are loaded with all sorts of scripts; especially wedding and engagement rings, which have various rather pointless and stupid scripts to locate your significant other(s) on the map – as if you haven’t already given them map rights already – , activate or deactivate full bright and bling, make obnoxious sounds etc. And don’t even get me started on the complete lack of elegant, understated, engagement and wedding rings in SL, but that’s another story.
Mesh jewels are rather rare in SL. Rigged, fitted mesh jewels for mesh bodies like the ones that are currently popular (Belleza, Maitreya, Slink, The Mesh Project, etc) are few and far between, so users of these bodies are essentially penalised. And the ones that are available aren’t always the best you can find. I’ve seen a certain creator whose fitted mesh intimate jewellery doesn’t really have any texturing to speak of, and still uses default shininess.
The situation is even more pathetic with ankle and foot jewellery. Good luck finding ankle and toe rings that are mesh, fitted, and elegant. Most of what’s available is sculpted and, even if it’s mesh, it’s merely positioned rather than fitted. Not to mention the “barefoot sandal” bandwagon that’s everyone jumped on; yes, I like barefoot sandals myself, I have a few pairs in RL too, but I want to find nice, realistic-looking anklets and toe rings in SL that don’t try to make me look like a third-rate knock-off of a Bollywood star and don’t look like an idiot’s first attempt at goth styling. And many anklets are designed to sit so high above your ankle that you wonder if they were glued there, because no amount of friction could counteract gravity in RL.
So, here’s what I hope to see w.r.t. SL jewellery:
- Mesh. And by mesh, I mean properly designed in a real 3D graphics application, not prims that were converted to mesh with Mesh Studio or something like that.
- Fitted. Yes, go out and acquire the dev kits for the most popular bodies. Then learn how to rig the jewellery for them. In fact, when it comes to anklets and rings (finger and toe rings) in particular, here’s a strategy you can follow. You can provide a package that will include:
- All of the rings of the pack, fitted to the hand or foot;
- Each individual ring of the pack, fitted to the hand or foot;
- A box with individual, non-fitted rings, for those who still use the “classic” avatar.
- Realistically-sized textures. People, I’m sorry to break it to you, but you don’t need 1024×1024 textures for diamonds and gems. In RL, gems are really small things and there’s no way in hell you can justify using such high-resolution textures for them. No, you’re not giving us “quality” by splashing such textures on gems whose diameter is a paltry 2mm. You just make our avatars ridiculously laggy and you also make yourselves look like idiots. Always remember the RL size of what you’re trying to depict.
- Use materials. The default shininess has become obsolete now.
- No full bright, or bling. Period. These things weren’t cool even in 2006, what makes you think they’ll become cool now?
- Meaningful scripting. We don’t want green spam from your jewellery. We don’t want our jewellery to announce we belong to xXTonyaMorriganXx Resident, we don’t want mapping scripts; if we really think xXTonyaMorriganXx Resident or .:xXXXSugarDaddyPimpXXXx:. Resident means anything to us, we’ll give them map rights and they’ll be able to spot us through the viewer, there’s no need for you to add extraneous lag with such stupid scripts. Likewise, we don’t need scripts that’ll make the ring or other jewel light up or announce anything to anyone if other avatars of our household are in the region. Just give us a colour/texture-changing HUD and a resizer that supports resizing per individual axis, and we’re happy campers.
- Quit trying to imitate the blingiest, flashiest, bulkiest crap you see on TV. Harry Winston’s stuff is only for showoffs, and it’s overrated. Give us elegance. In fact, if you want, I can point you to numerous gorgeous RL designs that you can draw inspiration from.
- Let’s go back to rigging: Be prepared to provide fitted and Bento-fitted versions of your jewellery; three months after the Bento-capable release of Firestorm is launched is a good time to launch Bento-capable jewels and update earlier designs.
- Quit jumping on bandwagons.
- If you’re going to design intimate jewellery (i.e. body piercings), then it must be mesh and fitted.
OK, that’s it for today. See you again later!
This is the second time I sit down to blog about a build I’m tinkering with. Last time around, I had turned my attention to the Iona Conservatory by Trompe Loeil. Did it turn out well? Well, the stair steps I made for the entrance left a bit to be desired, but I’ll get back to work on that particular build some time in the not-too-distant future. Ever since then, I launched a two-pronged (for the time being) effort to adapt, customise and optimise builds for a new, public access, sim I am planning and which will, hopefully, be put in place sometime next year. The basis of both projects are builds by well-regarded and award-winning SL architect Apple Fall. Chronologically, the first one I started to tackle was the Country Hall, which was featured in January’s Shiny Shabby event. The second, which is the one I’m currently working on, is the Portobello Corner Store, which was featured in The Liaison Collaborative last year.
Both builds are inspired by British architecture of the past two centuries. I’m no expert, but I think Victorian RL designs must have influenced the creator in his efforts. Now, Apple Fall is an extraordinarily gifted 3D artist, whose meshes are very clean, efficient, and with almost infallible physics. He’s also very gifted at texturing his builds, with textures that suit the mood and feel of his builds impeccably.
However, nothing is perfect. There are some characteristics of his designs that make one think twice before putting them on a busy sim. These characteristics have both to do with textures. Apple Fall uses a plethora of textures on each build, and most of them are 1024×1024 in resolution. The Country Hall, for instance, was burdened with more than 300MB of textures; we need to keep in mind that almost all SL viewers limit the amount of graphics card RAM that may be allocated to textures to 512MB. When a single house takes up nearly 60% of this memory, it is understandable that precious little will be left for the textures of the house’s surroundings: Trees, cars, pavement, bicycles, the clothes and skins on other avatars, even other houses. This leads inevitably to a huge drop in performance, severe texture thrashing, and, eventually, viewer crashes.
But why does this happen? Apple Fall’s builds are characterised by a nostalgic, shabby look, which seems to try to appeal to the hipsters of Second Life. Much like their RL counterparts, SL hipsters want everything around them to look “vintage” and careworn. As is the case in RL, this wear and tear has to be uneven and dependent on which areas of any specific build – from an acoustic guitar to a house – suffer the most from everyday use and / or neglect. This makes it necessary for the builder to divide a square floor (for instance) into four faces (or more), each having its own texture, showing its own wear and fatigue pattern. The same applies to walls, window frames, doors, door frames, and the like. As one can understand, the texture count of the build goes through the roof. And, with almost all of the textures being 1024×1024 in resolution, we are talking about a build that is, in, of, and by itself, quite hard on the user’s graphics card. And when you start adding furniture (again, chock-full of 1024×1024 textures), you’re really asking for trouble – and that’s without taking taking into account the lag that will be caused by the texture, attachment and script load of any avatars on the region.
Another issue with Apple Fall’s buildings is that all of them feature pre-baked shadows, which are a great convenience if you don’t normally have shadows turned on in your viewer. Here’s the catch, though: If you have shadows turned on, then you will see the pre-baked shadows heading in different directions than those of the in-world light sources (sun, moon, projectors) you may be using. This can be inconvenient in photo shoots and in-world filming (machinima making). I really wish Apple Fall would provide, even at an extra cost, packages containing the buildings’ textures without pre-baked shadows, as well as the AO maps. I know I’d gladly pay extra for such a package, and I believe others would, too. That said, I have to once again say I admire Apple Fall’s meshes. They’re clean, very efficient, and quite nicely detailed too.
Performance issues aside, I’m not a fan of having a sim full of builds that look like they once belonged to a rich family that fell on hard times and sold them off to an upstart who bit more than he could chew, saw his businesses fail tragically, and then left everything unmaintained. I get to see enough of this in RL, as I live in a country whose economy is in shambles and also has its share of pre-aged fetishist hipsters, so I’d really rather not put up with it in SL as well.
Don’t get me wrong: I do like seeing the patina of time on a building – it doesn’t have to look like a glossy advert for brand-new, über-modern condos and villas in Miami. I like a building that looks and feels “lived in”, that looks like it’s packed with memories and is actually being used by the people living in it, but I want it to look like the people responsible for it are taking care of it. Let’s be honest: The smells I associate with most of the hipster-oriented, “shabby” (a euphemism for crumbling) builds in SL are those of mould and a two-inch thick crust of asthma-inducing dust. I’m not into that. I want the images that will portray my sceneries to be bring to the viewer’s mind the smells of freshly-baked bread, a good wine, the perfume of the lady living there, the fresh air that comes in through the windows, and the flowers.
So, what did I make of the Portobello Corner Store? Well, I was inspired by seeing it used on Canary Beck’s famous region, the Basilique. There, it is named “Silky’s Café” and it’s placed in the centre of an urban neighbourhood that mixes Venetian and London-style elements.
I wanted to make something similar: a classically-styled corner café for the more artsy folks out there, smack in the centre of an elegant city mixing British and Greek neoclassicism (think Theophil Hansen and Ernst Ziller), Art Deco, Art Nouveau, and even Modernism, in an arrangement that would give the feeling of a place evolving gradually over the course of several decades, marrying the changes in tastes and movements as society progresses, with some public places remaining relatively unchanged over time, serving as the glue that brings the city’s people together.
I had decided right from the start on a few basic principles:
- No sculpts. Ever. Whatsoever. Sculpts are extremely wasteful, geometry-wise, look downright terrible, and cause an awful lot of lag.
- Various textures would be replaced, optimised, and / or customised to suit my particular wishes for the build.
- All of the lights would be scripted: Most of them would turn on automatically when the sun would go down (according to region windlight settings), and some would be switchable. For the time being, I’ve only done most of the automatic ones.
- While I have no problem showing my influences and inspiration sources, the final build would have to be “me”.
- To make transporting the whole thing around easier without needing scripts like Rez-Faux, I needed to link new stuff to it. Most of the decor would be permanently placed in the build anyway. So, the items I would add as the build would progress would need to have copy / mod permissions.
So, I scoured the marketplace and the internet in general for the kind of accessories I wanted: Awnings, sconces, ceiling fans, air conditioners, radiators, posters, that sort of thing, and started fiddling around. The build is still very much work-in-progress, but I think it’s close to reaching its final shape. I also cannibalised several builds I happen to have in my inventory, so that I would use parts of them in this project.
That said, this project is still ongoing. There are several bits of work that still need to be done, and these are:
- I need to come up with a name for the café and create logos (textures and a 3D one in mesh);
- I need to come up with street names and design appropriate signs;
- Add chimneys;
- Add electrical equipment (switches and power outlets);
- Add rosettes where the ceiling fans are attached to the roof;
- Add decor to the floor above, but this will be in accordance with the identity and nature of the place that will be placed there – and this hasn’t been decided yet.
Once all of these tasks have been completed, then this build will be ready to be placed in its intended urban environment. OK, that’s all I had to say for now. Now, I’ll let you see what I’ve done so far.
Of course, other buildings will be added, which will be adjacent to the building of the café, but these will come later on – the plan is to make the whole setting look like a neighbourhood. And now, here’s what it looks like after dark.
OK, that’s it for now. I hope you enjoyed it; the new sim is still in the planning stages and, to be honest, what will be done will always depend on how much disposable income I have, and how much time I have to run things.
Much has been written about a type of relationships generally referred to as “D/s”, where “D” stands for “Dominance” and “s” for “submission”. This type also includes BDSM relationships, where the dominant part of the relationship or encounter takes pleasure from causing physical and / or other forms of pain (such as emotional) to the submissive part, and the submissive part, in turn, derives pleasure from surrendering to the dominant part and receiving what the dominant part wants to give to them.
In erotic and romantic literature, whether in the form of essays, diatribes, novels, poems or what have you, engaging in D/s relationships has been both derided and dismissed as a sign of a disturbed soul and, every bit as much, revered, even discreetly and sometimes not without a bit of demure shame in more mainstream writing, as a higher form of emotional and carnal immersion. The concepts of willing submission, consensual slavehood, dominance, discipline, willing acceptance of humiliation and bodily pain – or even need for humiliation and bodily pain – all have contributed to the creation of a mystique around D/s, which enjoys the image of an almost spiritual type of romance, as opposed to the “plain”, “vanilla” relationships, where the participants are equal to one another.
The hierarchical nature of D/s
Try writing “d/s” instead of “D/s” while communicating in written form with a dominant, and they will quickly correct you for your ignorance or disrespect for their chosen form of relationship. There is a logic behind it: The “d” in the words “dominant” and “dominance” is capitalised to show that the dominant in a D/s relationship is superior to the submissive, by merit of either the dominant’s decision to adopt the title, posture, attitude, language, and related regalia and paraphernalia, or the reverence and deference given to them by their submissives, and whatever respect and appreciation they may enjoy from other dominants. Similarly, pronouns are capitalised when one is addressing, or referring to, a dominant, and not capitalised in the case of a submissive. In more “extreme” settings, the submissive does not use a personal pronoun for themselves, but, following practices that seem to be derived from the military, refers to themselves as “this slave”, “this girl”, “this sub” and so forth, being deprived of personhood completely.
Now, it may be true that the linguistic convention of capitalising traces its roots in internet chatrooms, where it is claimed it was first used to make it easier to denote a user’s orientation, but we see a manifestation of hierarchy: The dominant is by definition the one who must be respected at all times, while the submissive is, again by definition, conditioned and expected to defer to their dominant and any other dominants they may encounter, whether within the context of a D/s-related gathering or not. The only contemporary non-D/s social setting I can think of where one is expected to show deference to complete strangers they meet merely by virtue of their title is the military. Clearly, in D/s relationships and D/s social circles, priority is given to the dominants, their views, their wishes, their desires, even their whims, merely because they have adopted that title. As for the submissive… Well, the submissive will have to wait.
In this sense, the D/s world does very little, if anything, to promote equality in the relationship. The submissive must be given permission to speak; the submissive needs to assume certain positions and postures that show their submission and availability (in ritualised settings and scenes); the submissive needs to address a dominant with the “proper” and “expected” respect, otherwise they may be punished. And so on. So, there really is nothing egalitarian about D/s, as it prioritises the dominant, giving them greater importance, over the submissive.
We must not overlook the importance of discipline in D/s: The submissive must adhere to a certain set of behavioural guidelines, otherwise punishment shall be meted out. It is often argued that the submissive may deliberately misbehave in a session, so that they shall receive a punishment they look forward to. While this is true, the concepts of discipline and punishment point to older days, where corporal punishment of children was acceptable, and slaves and servants were regularly beaten (see such references in Alexander Pushkin’s “Eugene Onegin”, for instance) by their bosses, and this was – again – considered perfectly acceptable.
In other words, the principles around which D/s is built have nothing to do with love and everything to do with ownership, control, and exploitation. You can romanticise and sugar-coat it all you want, but the core remains the same:
- The dominant owns the submissive;
- The submissive must defer to the dominant;
- The dominant’s image, worth, wishes, and desires are more important than those of the submissive;
- The dominant is given primacy by virtue of their title, and it remains to be seen if they prove unworthy of the respect given to them;
- The submissive is by definition and by virtue of their title of lower importance, and is often depersonalised altogether.
Thus, D/s does seem to create a class system, with two distinct classes of participants, whose roles are discrete and the underlings “know their place,” even though things can be fluid, i.e. a full-time submissive may eventually become a full-time dominant and vice versa; and there are people defined as “switches”, who move between the dominant and submissive roles according to their mood at the time. But still, despite the mobility between the two classes, D/s is still a class-based, hierarchical world.
D/s from a social and political perspective
D/s is often celebrated in certain socially and politically progressive circles as a form of sexual and romantic liberation, because it deviates from the norm that society accepts: in D/s circles, polyamorous relationships are not uncommon, and it is also quite common to see a female being dominant and having a male as a submissive. So, because non-monogamous and polyamorous relationships are not frowned upon within D/s circles (which pleases libertines), and because the role reversal of putting a male in a submissive role, contrary to societal norms, is considered “rebellious” and “radical”, we see D/s as an attraction or even a sub-movement within progressive movements like the movement for LGBTQ rights – do have a look at Pride parades, for instance.
An inherently hierarchical approach to romance and sex, informed by the – bolstered by millennia of patriarchy and primacy of the landowner over his slaves and serfs – idea that it is acceptable for a person to own other persons, is accepted by progressives, whereas one would expect them to frown upon it. This would initially seems strange, but the libertine element, with the fact that it embraces taboo forms of relationships (same-sex relationships, non-monogamous relationships), taboo sexual practices (such as anal sex, bondage, etc), along with the role reversal in female dominant / male submissive relationships and in practices and sessions where the male receives oral and anal penetration from a woman, have made it easy for D/s to be viewed as a perfectly acceptable form of relationship for a socially and politically progressive individual.
But this brings us to the adage that everything begins at home. How progressive can a lifestyle dominant be in their politics when they see their lover as an inferior person, who must be given permission to address them, and only using the “proper” pronouns and honorifics? Similarly, how progressive can someone be when they want to be treated as a superior by their romantic partner? How progressive can someone be when they view their partner as their property? How progressive can someone be when they take pleasure from humiliating their partner? I will get to that in a bit, but first…
Women are “meant” to be submissive
This is a myth that keeps coming up every now and then. It is based on the findings of a 1995 study, according to which “[p]reference for the dominant-initiator role was expressed in 71% of the messages by male heterosexuals, 11% of the messages by heterosexual females, and 12% of the messages by homosexual males” and “[p]reference for the submissive-recipient role was expressed in 29% of the messages by heterosexual males, 89% by heterosexual females, and 88% by homosexual males.”
What this really reflects is a manifestation of conditioning of the individual through centuries of indoctrination regarding gender roles. We are taught by our parents, our grandparents, our social surroundings, even by the toys we use as children, to accept certain, very discrete, roles based on the genitals we are born with: Girls are meant to be doting and docile, incapable of doing anything technical, and their place is at home, taking care of the kids and housework. It is merely a more subtle and palatable packaging of “barefoot and pregnant“-grade sexism. On the other hand, boys are taught that they are the hunters, the breadwinners, the dynamic, strong part of the equation, which deserves to be waited on hand and foot, by a submissive, eager-to-please, obedient, Stepford-like wife. So, in a nutshell, these findings are a manifestation of a way of thinking that is instilled in us by the conditioning we have received as children.
Still, such findings are used by misogynist groups to justify their claim that women are genetically inferior to men; I have even encountered an MRA (Men’s Rights “Activist”) troll in Second Life who used to go on about how women are genetically made to be “less rational” by men due to the “fact” that they have a “reptile brain” and, because of that, are more inclined to be submissive. There is, however, no real, scientific evidence of that. Instead, we have every reason to understand that the different responses to D/s-related roles across the genders are the result of our upbringing, with the stereotypes about the “acceptable” and “expectable” roles of each gender and / or sexual identity.
Humiliation, depersonalisation, and dehumanisation
We need to be blunt here: The mere concept of putting someone in an inherently inferior position to someone else in a relationship contains the element of humiliation. All the sweet talk about how “precious” the slave, sub, pet (or however else the dominant calls the submissive) is to the dom(me) cannot hide it. One might claim that the roles and titles have more to do with who initiates a scene, but the requirement that a submissive (especially in a lifestyle D/s relationship) adheres to a protocol dictating their behaviour says otherwise.
Then we have the “this slave” or “this slave” linguistic convention, where the submissive is depersonalised; here, the submissive does not say, for example, “I would like to…”, but, instead, “this sub would like to…” or “this slave would like to…” Even if the submissive has a natural submissive streak, even if this submissive streak has been further reinforced by their upbringing, no one in their right mind would encourage someone to act as if they were not a person. The very moment someone loses their personhood is the very moment they lose their rights as a human being – and it goes downhill from here, because there are more extreme forms of depersonalisation, even dehumanisation, in D/s – try having a look at Simon Benson’s themes, for instance. None of these stories treat the submissive as a cherished, loved person. Instead, they glorify rape and every kind of physical, emotional, and mental abuse imaginable.
You not me
By definition, D/s places far greater emphasis on the needs and desires of the dominant, not those of the submissive, as it was clearly conceived by dominants for dominants. This is evident in the vast majority of essays written by D/s practitioners: They instruct the dominant on how to maintain the loyalty, respect, and devotion of their submissive(s); they instruct the submissive on how to be a good, obedient, dedicated, subordinate. Of course, there are treatises that explain to the dominant how to ensure that the submissive will not feel ashamed as they exit “subspace” (which is merely a pre-orgasmic state that can be evoked and prolonged with suitable play), but even those articles that seem to be written in order to promote the mental, emotional, and physical welfare of the submissive are actually written as an owner’s manual, advising the dominant on how to extract more time of good, loyal, enthusiastic service from the sub; even the articles that present themselves as “balanced” w.r.t. the importance of each participant’s wants, fears, needs, desires, worries, problems, emotional baggage, still manage to inject a few words here and there that make it evident that primacy is given to the dominant.
Is it impossible then for a healthy person to engage in D/s?
I am not going to adopt narratives like those of Steven Shainberg’s “Secretary” or the horrendously badly-filmed “Fifty Shades of Grey“, the adaptation of E.L. James’ already abysmal book. In both cases, the protagonists were screwed up. In “Secretary”, Maggie Gyllenhaal’s character (the submissive) suffered from borderline personality disorder: She was the very sensitive youngest daughter of a dysfunctional family who sought relief from her anxieties and fears in self-harm. And in “Fifty Shades”, Christian Grey is a person who had been abused in his youth and employs abusive practices to derive sexual pleasure and the thrill of power and control. In fact, there are scenes where his behaviour justifies a restraining order – at least.
I have to be blunt: It is not healthy to want to rule over, and own, someone else, especially in a “total power exchange” or “lifestyle” setting. It is not healthy to want to own someone else. It is not healthy to want to punish someone for stupid stuff like not addressing you properly before other self-styled dominants, or for “topping from the bottom” (i.e. directing you as to how they want to be fucked, as they would in a balanced sex session). Yes, I am pretty sure that most lifestyle dominants should own up and start dealing with their desire to control others. That said, I can understand how someone would want to dabble in a little dominant kinky play every once in a while to unwind; letting go in sex helps someone regain their balance. But wanting to have somebody else assume, on a permanent basis, the role of your slave, your possession, your property? Sorry, that is simply medieval, and I am being undeservedly kind here.
What about the submissives, then? Well, like I said earlier about domination, willingly surrendering to your lover in order to unwind is perfectly understandable and acceptable. But seriously, the notion that, by relinquishing your freedom and your control over your life, you gain actual freedom is pure bullshit. Freedom is having power and control over your life – and yes, it comes with its own responsibilities. Of course, this notion is also used to explain the desire of sexually repressed people (mostly women) to submit: They were taught that having a libido, sexual desires, fantasies, and a sex life is a sin; so, by submitting to someone else, they feel they can tell themselves (and others) that what was done was against their will, so they cannot be held to account for their “sinful” acts. But do we liberate these repressed – and most certainly abused – people by making them the property of a dominant? I do not believe this addresses the problem, as it merely offers them an excuse. These people need to be brought to the point where they can finally feel strong and confident enough to say “I am my own person; I have my fantasies, my desires, my needs, and I need no excuses for what I am, what I want, and what I do, since I am not harming or hurting anyone.”
But weren’t you part of a D/s relationship yourself?
I knew this question would come, so I shall be upfront about it: Yes. I was part of a D/s relationship myself, even though the other party constantly denied that this was a relationship, probably because of my lower national status (I happen to be a “lazy, profligant, corrupt Greek who lives in a permanent siesta and mooches off the hard-working Germans and Britons and corrupts the paragon of honesty and decency known as the European Union” in RL), as well as a significantly lower financial and social status, as I was born into a working-class family and uneducated parents who would much rather I were born with the “right” set of genitals, and I had never married a banker or gone on a paid-by-others joyride on the Concorde. Also, I never had the chance to be particularly well-read, as I had been doing odd jobs to supplement my allowance and, later, support myself, since I was a teenager. And I had been dealing on my own with depression since I was fourteen, after a cousin favoured by my family tried to rape me. There you have it.
Regarding my current stance on D/s: I used to see myself as a submissive, because of my own emotional and other needs. I saw in it a way to rehabilitate myself sexually, as a way to get rid of any sense of guilt and, therefore, stop seeing sex as a sin after I was sexually assaulted. I readily admit that various aspects of D/s and BDSM intrigued me, and some still do, and I do incorporate some kinky stuff into my sexual encounters in RL every now and then. I will also admit, without hesitation, that I like adding a fetishistic touch to my SL and RL attire whenever I can get away with it. But this is where the line is now drawn.
As for the fact that I was a submissive, I felt the need to surrender myself to someone who would care for me, in order to feel safe, cherished and protected, not least because I grew up as a lonely, unwanted child whose presence was merely tolerated and whose constant attempts to attract attention through good grades at school went unnoticed. You see, I believed that I would be loved if I could prove that I was “good enough,” that I could “earn my keep,” with being doting, eager (or, rather, over-eager) to please, always there to lend a willing ear… And I saw the thinly-veiled contempt with which my efforts were viewed, and I received all this from someone whose writings on D/s still inform many SL fetishists. So, after realising that much of what was happening to me was not only because of the other person’s character, but also because of the highly hierarchical and, like it or not, patriarchal (even in femdom relationships), nature of D/s, a nature that appeals to characters with certain traits, I decided I had to speak. Enough with the pampering and the coddling to dom(me)s, and enough with submissive writers sucking up to dom(me)s in the echo chambers we know as fetish blogs and websites.
Yes, I know: You can really hear the crickets in my blog, as the intervals between posts are now in the region of months. It’s true that I don’t blog anywhere near as often as I used to, as I have neither the time nor the willingness to give my SL blogging the effort I used to. I’m far too busy in RL and, truth be told, the things happening in RL make all the SL-related drama look like the bitching about First World Problems it really is.
I know this will offend a bunch of people, but when people are driven to suicide by the chronic unemployment to which they’ve been “sentenced” by the neoliberal psychopaths in charge, when people in our neighbourhoods become homeless overnight because the “bailout” programmes have made even renting a small apartment untenable, I really can’t be arsed to give much thought to the technicalities and intricacies of SL, Sansar, High Fidelity or whatever. Thus, until further notice, this blog shall remain a mere pastime for me, whenever I feel like blogging something.
Truth is, I don’t venture into SL that often anymore; I might log on twice a week or thereabouts, and I’ll spend up to thirty minutes in a sitting – no more than that. It’s not that I don’t like SL anymore, but I’ve put things into perspective and I’ve come to the conclusion that I don’t want SL to absorb the amounts of time and energy I used to allow it to absorb in the not-too-distant past, and I really can no longer justify the expenditure it used to represent for me. Even on Plurk and Twitter, one could say my presence has become the definition of boring, because I can’t really be bothered to discuss SL matters, and, quite frankly, I find it hard to relate to many of the things other people write about.
But really, I’m not complaining: Regardless of the fiscal and (geo)political circumstances in RL, I’m quite happy (at long last) with my life, and I’ll leave it at that, as the friends I have in SL already know the things I wanted to tell them – and I’m not too keen on allowing lower forms of online life to dissect my RL. Sorry if I sound blunt, but that’s the way it is.
Anyhow… Writing this post, which is my second fashion-related post in a row, feels a bit odd, as I’ve never actually thought of myself as a fashion blogger. I’ve become known for my often long, in-depth analyses of all matters SL, and I’ve never wanted to be a fashion blogger. But still, it’s all I can be bothered to write about these days. Does this make me lazy or something? Maybe, but I don’t care. After all, I’m just taking a break from my RL activities to write this post, I’m the one who makes the decisions regarding my blog, and who knows when I’ll find the inspiration, the willingness and the time to write my next one?
So, after this lengthy prologue, I shall proceed to the main topic without further ado. Yesterday, Valentina E. announced their new “ZigZag” dress, which is available at the Shiny Shabby event, and comes in versions compatible with the Maitreya Lara and the Slink Physique and Hourglass mesh bodies, and two “standard sizing” sizes (small and medium). Upon seeing this dress, I had to have it. I love risqué clothing, both in RL and SL, and garments that allow for a bit of déshabillé really push my buttons. So, I teleported to the venue and bought it, and also took a bunch of photos to show you all. Flickr album
will come lateris here.
What I’m wearing and using…
- Body: Slink Physique
- Hands: Slink Casual
- Feet: Slink Deluxe
- Hair: Exile The Evening Lights (from the Collabor88 event)
- Skin: *League* Jen Suntan PinkChampagne
- Face Makeup: **NOYA**
- Eye Makeup: LAQ
- Eyes: IKON Perspective – Coffee (I can’t find them at their marketplace store anymore; perhaps you should try their in-world store)
- Ears: [Mandala] Simple Ears HUTUU
- Eyelashes: Lelutka 2011 (sculpted – no longer available)
- Piercings: Tam’s Trousseau – Two Jewel Nipple Piercings with HUD
- Dress: Valentina E. ZigZag Dress Night (from the Shiny Shabby event)
- Shoes: REIGN. Avery platforms (black)
- Poses: Colleen by Diesel Works
- Props: Apple Fall Country Hall (heavily modified and retextured), Dutchie Cast Iron Fireplace