Outrageously Offended

I think it is funny your name is Taco given the subject of the pictures!

With all due respect David, please stop telling women (and men) what we should and should not be offended and/or insulted by.

If they were "just pixels" as everyone keeps claiming, why would they be put up on display in a museum? Why aren't they shots of elbows?

The other side of the coin is, we didn't ask Taco to go down to city hall to fill out 20 forms in triplicate and get finger printed before doing all this. We asked him to send a one line IM to the owners of the exposed genitals before using them for his exhibit. I really don't see what the big deal is.

-aimee

A consensus of YOU. I keep asking you to drop the name calling, but you seem to be unable to.

Fundementally we differ in that you feel that you have a right to privacy that extends to the genital region of an AV. I disagree. There isn't a point in debating this with you, Aestival, in that I'm not going to convince you that our AVs, while in public, are public domain, and you're not going to convince me that taking a picture of a women's panties in SL is an invasive practice.

I'm also not going to let you bully me anymore. You've attacked me personally when you didn't get me to agree with you, and you've done the same to others in this thread. You've brought up hotbutton replusion issues like Pedophelia (talk about lookign for a reaction?) and have completly lost the ability to seperate your opinions "no amout of wrapping yourself blah blah blah" with facts and logic.

they are just pixels and yet people are offended. that is what is what makes it such a great artistic expression.

/me nods

But honestly you're all being naive if you think the fact that it's sexual doesn't make a difference in how offensive the intrusion is

We're playing with dolls... not block or toy soldiers.

Offense does not make art, Jauani, or Howard Stern would be Michaelangelo. I think you know that very well, but I know how much you like to take an opposing stance to whatever is presented, so I won't take away your fun.

So true, all great artists are jerks who use the art of others to express themselves. This is not art it is a cry for attention a reactionary impulse of an artless fool...tabloids are not news and this is not art.

The choice of title for this thread tells me all I need to know.

Isis, I don't get the offense. Have you ever actually seen upskirt photos of your av?

I was headed to this "art museum" to make sure none of me or my friends ar up and I can't get there cause some jackass is hiding his percious sex dundgeon or whatever with a script that kept TPing me home. Jackass!

Since you ask so nicely, I won't honestly express what I feel about your behavior any more. /me is all sugar and spice and everything nice now.



Actually I think my right to privacy extends to my entire Avie. You take pictures of me use them in an ad for your store, or photoshop them in a way I find offensive and I'm going to be mad.

I have a *greater* expectation of privacy when we're talking about what's under my clothes. An expectation thats supported by the very nature of a world with up and down, day and night and people shaped people who wear skirt shaped skirts.

So yeah... I guess we disagree. I really hope LL also disagrees.

'Cause I personally think your actions are abusive, harassing, vulgar, and invasive of another's privacy. Not to mention hateful of women and generally objectionable.


Wow... I'm speechless. I stand up for privacy and I'm a bully. Guess that would make the guy who runs around taking pictures of what's under women's skirts with out them knowing and then publicly posting it.. what? A poor victim?

Give me a break! You know in RL this is wrong and there are abusive sickos who set up webpages of this kind of stuff. You use the same kind of 'upskirt' slang even.

You wanna play in SL at non-consensual invasion of privacy? Great! Go for it! Get your friends to put on their nicest undies for you and go visit some really public PG places and snap your camera away! You wanna play non-consensual sex when you get back home with the girl's you've "stalked", please be my guest! Post the pictures, stage a show! Get your jollies any way you want, so long as it's consensual and between competent adults you can play at any abusive fantasy and I'll be screaming at anyone who wants to keep you from doing it!

But keep your camera out of my pants!

OK. I would like look at this issue in a slightly different light, if only for a moment. I posed this question to Taco but it would be good to hear everybody's opinion on it.

I like to wear skirts. Sometimes mini, but not TYPICALLY in a trashy way (your opinions may vary). I would like to wear nice underwear under them (rather than a Taco-proof chastity belt)...but I don't want to be displayed in exhibits like Tacos....

My question is...Can you guys recommend a compromise? IS there a way I can get what I want while Taco gets what HE wants?

See I THOUGHT my suggestion would work. By asking permission first, Taco can have his upskirt exhibit, and I can have my privacy. But with the enormous resistance against prior consent, can you recommend something else? Or am I out of luck? Am I saying "photograph my cooch and stick it in a museum without telling me" every time I wear a skirt?

I am looking forward to your ideas.

-aimee

i agree sometimes offensive is just plain offensive. but in this case didn't a part of this thread deal with the question whether the avatar is me and whether i have been violated? i think that was part of taco's intention, and whether he is attention craved and perverted in his artistic expression is rather besides the point to if this is art.

hence my footnoting duchamp who as we all know created quite the stir and his "fountain" was considered quite offensive to peoples sensibilities at the time.

You decided it for yourself but you are not everyone and neither am I. The most we can do is state our opinions on the matter and hope that the situation is taken care of by the authorities at LL (whether that is doing nothing and allowing this behavior or suspending the miscreant).

Aimee, unfortunately, although you're not asking for someone to put your lacy frillies on display every time you wear a skirt, it's an example of what might happen if you do. Matter of fact, it's not even the worst-case scenario of how you could possibly be exploited. I've seen ghosts that have accidentally been left behind when an avatar teleports, and the things that people have done to them, and while very funny in an adolescent sort of way, the photos that resulted have produced some heated reactions from the unsuspecting suspects. Here's an example where your avatar might be made fun of, humiliated, put into kinky wierd sex situations, etc, and "you" weren't even there to possibly witness it or put a stop to it, because it was a ghost image that you left behind when you teleported.

The Lindens might change the rules about this, but until and unless they do, you don't have to ask to have your avatar's panties photographed. You only need to know that:

1. It's possible.

2. In a world of more than 15000 users, if even a very small percentage of people are snapping photos like this, that is still more than enough for you to want to watch out.

3. Short of a glitch in the asset server, no one will be able to photograph anything that you don't wish to show them. That may mean some creative covering on your part.

You are correct. The psychology of interaction and role playing through the use of "dolls" is so effective that this method is used routinely by physicians, psychologists and law enforcement to enable children to communicate about a sex crime.

You're missing the point.

A woman's not *asking* to be raped if she wears provocative clothing, it's just an example of what *might* happen.

We all know it can happen. Griefing can happen too. Copying no copy objects can happen too. We know it, what should we do about it?



THANK YOU! ^_^

Yes we're dolls, but we're putting a little bit of our souls into these dolls otherwise they wouldn't matter so much to us!

might I add observation?

perhaps we shouldn't be so pissed about the shape the "art" took on, as much as we should be pissed at how this thread started? he advertised it himself.... I would be more annoyed not at having my "vagina" photographed but at having my vagina photographed and then the photographer going "look at what this ASSHOLE did!"

and his publicity obviously worked, given the fact that this thread has nearly as many posts in a day or so as the "war in jessie" thread does, which was started in like june.

it might be virtual but really, use some common sense. maybe it's just rude because it's just rude? the arguement "I'd do it to myself!" doesn't work either.

digital cameras are tools that allow you to take photos anywhere, and now they're prevalent on cell phones and soon fucking pencils. that doesn't mean the person on the seat across from me on the subway has the right to take my photo without asking "just because I had the tool." that's about the MOST moronic arguement I've ever heard.

but whatever, you're obviously someone looking for the negative attention. only people like that start out their protests with an attitude of "say whatever you want, I can take it!" and then spit out a prewritten script.

I have always been aware of and sensative to the fact that there is a real person behind the Avatar in world and the Forum personality off world. What actually surprised me was that the Avatar was so much more than a mere pixel representation that we can make to look in any way we want.

The way I view my AV is like putting on a coat, which one should I wear today. So yes - it surprised me that people personafied the AV in of it's self. Though I do see what I do with my AV as a type of artistic expression. But - "I" am not Rose Karuna. Rose Karuna is a virtual representation of "me". No more , no less.

I doubt that I am the only person in all of SL that thinks this way because more than one person has said they really did not understand all the hostility that Taco seems to have invoked.

I don't see how my questioning the emotional response that Taco's actions have evoked as shoving "my morality" down your throat. I just could not fathom how a picture of a virtual vagina in a virtual gallery could evoke the reaction that it did.

Based on the posts that I've subsequently seen, I have a better understanding. Though, I still am disconnected from my AV enough that I do not personally share the outrage. I do think that consideration dictates that Taco should ask an AV's permission - but then - that would ruin the game for him wouldn't it?

we might animate our dolls, but they are not us. i can tell you from experience there was huge difference in cutting my sisters hair and her dolls her.

perhaps the amount these dolls matter to us is just a little unhealthy?

Written in fact, by the AV that created the controversy. What a way to advertise.

Isis - I DO find sexism offensive in RL - I certaintly have been on the receiving end of enough of it, but I simply did not connect the vagina on an Avatar being photographed with exploitation. Though as I've said before, I do think, in consideration of the person behind the AV, that Taco should have asked before taking a photo of this nature.

I'm not saying that racism is a greater or lesser issue than sexism. All I'm saying is that I initially considered what Taco has done as trivial in nature because I consider my AV to be trivial. As such - I cannot claim to feel the outrage that many who have posted feel.

Also - I did state in a previous post that based on reading the posts from people who were greatly offended, I gained a better understanding of how people view their Avatars.

It will be interesting to see how the Lindens handle this.

The funny thing is I do too... and I change Avies a lot as I play. But for who ever I am, I don't want to be photographed and displayed for any reason without my permission. And if I'm playing with or as a doll thats wearing a skirt, I REALLY don't want pictures taken up my skirt and posted publicly!


Sorry, what I was responding to was:

I don't agree - different moralities I guess (^_^);; I was mad in general, so I apologize for taking my frustration out on you. m(_ _)m

Apparently TACO! didn't get permission from the subjects to take the lewd pictures he took. And while he claims to have taken sufficient steps to guard the identities of the individuals, his lack of respect for a fellow human being is apparent.

I mean, the only thing that's keeping this "work of art" from being "sexual harrassment" is a mere technicality. If there is a shred identifying information in any of those photos; there can be a lot of trouble; virtual or not.

Voyeurism, while it does nothing for me, has a strong appeal to many people. I just think there are better ways to explore it through art without exploiting other people. Capturing an "upskirt photo," is a sexual act and if it is unwanted -- it's sexual assualt. Displaying it publicly is sexual harrassment.

So before running around crying that removing this exhibit is tantamount to growing censorship from the man... realize that there is a line between voyeurism and unwanted sexual acts. There is but one fine detail that is only barely protecting this guy from possible charges.

If you're going to be a voyeur and panty-shots get you off; whatever. Just keep it to yourself.