Taco Rubio suspended for 3 days according to source.

I appreciate this post, Taco. Thank you.

I am offended and many different levels (as you can tell by my recent extraneous posting).

Objectification of women is greatly overlooked and considered acceptable in pop culture. Representing an act that I consider offensive or disturbing isn't necessarily bad though (lots of avatars shoot each other in SL). However, you did more than mere "representation". This was more of a form of roleplaying. You intruded into other's game play, involving them in something that they could find objectionable.

To further illustrate this, there is no 100% disconnect between SL and RL. Any time somebody plays SL, their RL self is *interacting* with either their SL self or other avatars. Some people stop there. Others don't. If I saw a burning cross in SL, I would be offended IRL. Some people wouldn't. However, please don't make the decision for me by involving me in something that I could find objectionable. I am not talking about the ridiculous nature of privacy and the such that some people have taken the argument into (ie pics of avatars at events). I am talking very specifically about issues and representation of issues that do violate social norms of morality.

Understand that even though you didn't take *actual* upskirt pics, you involved others without consent in the emulation of that behaivor. My arguable point here is *choice*. My actual standpoint is disgust at the notion of this kind of representation (which I will not impose on others).

Great Panda, but I'm asking was I disgusting and expliotive when I looked up the skirt, when i took the picture, or when I posted it?

It's going to be hard not to see upskirts, I'm 3'1" in game. Happens literally constantly.

That's why there is freedom of speech and protest in America, though not all see some things in a eithical viewpoint; it goes both ways, we can only pose our views weather it is in regards to sybolism, religion or politics. If I see someone burning the American Flag, I may find it offensive; but by Law they have the right to do it.

I hereby declare that you are suffering from delusions of adequacy......

Well, while I agree that everyone has the right to be offended or not offended by any subject matter, I would just like some clarification.

LL allows people to shoot guns at each other, something clearly not acceptable in most RL, polite social gatherings. LL restricts this to certain occasions and certain areas. If I walk into Jessie I can be shot and teleported home, without anyone asking my consent. Some folks would view this type of violence far more offensive then panty shots. Yet it is an accepted norm in Second Life and many other large online environments.

Why is that? Because real people aren't getting shot and killed. Only thier online avatars. So what makes this different? Honestly, I'd like to know. I find violence far more offensive then panties or genitalia in both RL and SL. It's far more disruptive in both. Yet one is allowed, and the other isn't. Both being done with no consent.

While I understand that my morals and beliefs are different from many others, I still would just like a reasoning or clarification on these matters.

If we are going to apply RL rules of society upon SL, then shouldn't pixelated violence be outlawed?

I really don't believe disallowing up-skirt shots would be a disaster, but I do believe it should be clarified, and I do believe it will hamper the freedom of snapshots taken without the "intention" to capture what might be up a skirt. And as another person pointed out, does that mean every woman not wearing "decent" covering over her genital areas in PG sim should be abuse reported?

And LL made the avatars without genitals. It is the customers choice to create, purchase and/or attach them to these otherwise barbie-doll like figures. So should LL step in if someone decides they want to take snapshots of what a customer has decided to attach to thier avatars?

To make it clear again:
I personally would never take an upskirt photograph without the consent of the AV's creator, or at least a reasonable assurance that they would not object. And I certainly would never post in public such a shot unless it was made clear that I had permission. However, that is my moral code, not any rule or law that I can find within LL's Community Standards or ToS.

So I guess my whole point boils down to: If you decide to attach such, don't be suprised if it gets captured in a snapshot, and if so, what are LL's rules on this. Does it have to show a clear intent to only take a picture of a crotch area? Is it ok if it's accidental? If just a small part of the groin is visible? What is considered private by LL and what is not?

Just alot of interesting questions involved...

I don't know you (or almost anybody else posting here, I'm pretty new) and I'm sort of a "let he who is without sin cast the first stone" kind of guy.

Having said that, let me ask you.... why did you put up the display? Did you think it would be cool? Did you think it would be a good way to get some dwell? Are you thrilled by the thought of catching a glimpse up the skirt of females?

I think it's a creepy thing to do, personally, whether or not you ask for permission or do it without. If you were looking for a way to get people to visit your property, and didn't stop to think about the ethics/morales of what you were doing, then I'd say you made a mistake. If you really enjoy taking snaps up women's skirts, and thought lots of people would think it was cool too, then... I'd say you made a mistake there too.

I don't believe you did it to hurt or embarass the people you took pix of, but it ended up doing both to some of them, and to others as well.

So, bottom line, no lectures - you did something that hurt other people's feelings, and I think we should all be doing things that help make other people feel good, not bad.

I think when you posted it.

I won't comment on you looking up a skirt or about taking a pic. Even if I found that behavior offensive, It wouldn't be my place to judge you over it.

Once you post the pic, however, you can refer to how I feel in the previous post.

Maybe I would like consent the next time someone burns the America Flag because my Uncle represented this country in battle and or sacrificed his life for America. He represented America in Battle.

Yeah that's what I figured the general consensus would be. Thx

Holy crap, you make no sense. I am not patriotic, but your rambling even offends me.

It's called "Tolerance" something we have to face.

I would say, look all you want-- that's not being disgusting, it's just being a guy... just being human. And I don't think taking the photos is so much the problem, as long as you're keeping them to yourself, for your own enjoyment.... though I would try to be discreet about it. But when you want to post them somewhere, you need consent first.

No comment.

Comparing flag burning to upskirt photo consent is so stupid that it insults both patriots and women. I swear you have to be an alt. of the best griefer in the metaverse.

You can have consent the next time someone burns YOUR flag.

In your opinion me defending a symbol of America from someone burning it may not be justified, but; that is your opinion. Everybody has one.

No. Making convoluted comparisons shows no ability for higher thought and is insulting to the subjects of your retarded commentary. That is what I was speaking of. So next time you put words in my mouth, take the foot out of yours first.

You're the one that made the comparison of a Burning Cross to a Symbol of a Vagina, not I. I was giving you an example as you did us.

No. I compared my reaction to the representation of a burning cross to my reaction to representation of sexism. That comparison made sense. You are just typing to keep your fingers away from your nose.

Thanks Iliannexsi for summing it up in a succinct manner.

For me, this is what the issue has been about all along, and for the record I voted "give him a warning". I would have simply voted *take down the pics if those portrayed so desire* but that was not an option. I never wanted him suspended and I am glad that the suspension was lifted.

All these people lamenting the length of this thread, and talking down to those who do not choose to employ a total disconnect between RL and SL in 1/2 page diatribes, have only one person/action to thank; Taco not asking permission. Had he done so, we wouldn't be here right now.

Personally, I think this compartmentalization is just an easy out and a handy excuse.

Whatever the reason, I do not understand why certain folks continue to sarcastically deride the fashion in which others choose to view and participate in SL? Not very tolerant for a set of people who clearly value free speech and expression.

For the poster who sarcastically stated (I believe it was a response to Panda) that he can read the Lindens thoughts on this issue, I find it ironic that you did the very same thing when you surmised that the Lindens suspended Taco because *certain* players complained, and not due to any rule(s).

I rest my case. This has certainly been interesting.

Looking: I don't care for it, but I tolerate it. If there was a way I could punish those people, I would NOT. But I think more highly of someone that shows me respect.

Taking photos: I consider this highly disrespectful to me personally. I will consider you an unpleasant person. If an individual did this chronically I would think that the person had RL boundary issues, power hang-ups when it came to women, a disregard for the feelings of others and I would consider them "creepy". HOWEVER these are just my personal thoughts. I would NOT want the Lindens to take action.

Posting without permission: Very bad. It's more apparent contempt for women. The image portrays me in a way that I consider obscene (it's just my opinion, but then, it's just my av!). Ask Marilyn Murphy to confirm how much I REALLY DON'T WANT TO BE IN PORN and how I don't want to be known as someone that appears in porn. A photo like that is slanderous in that it creates a false impression of me and my behavior. "Oooh I didn't know Aimee was that kinda girl...I think I will send her some disrespectfully suggestive IMs that skirt the gray areas of the TOS/CS." Lindens should make the individual take the image down and punish him if he doesn't.

Posting without even TELLING ME?: Now we are sneaking around in the bushes? I don't even have the opportunity to object since I haven't a clue about how you are displaying me. Taking the picture down AFTER you get busted is too late as people have already seen! If I bump into the photographer at an SL expo or conference in RL I would politely dismiss myself, and quietly herd any nearby children into safety. As for Linden action? Absolutely should be punished as though it were harassment.

Taco's case should have resulted in a warning because he truly saw a gray area in this matter. Fine. Now lets clear it up in the CS so next person can't use the "I didn't know" defense.

Hehehehe