How do YOU refer to your avatar?

Well yeah; it seems a no-brainer to me. She is the same human being I learned to call friend, and to care for before I knew this information. It seems insignificant information, certainly nothing to change my feelings of friendship. Absolutely nothing changed in my feelings for her with the receipt of that info. And it's a shame that she was afraid it would, or might.

I don't see how to interpret "maybe says some things about your self esteem you didn't want known) there's really a lot of subtext to be read in there, and none of it is looking to good....." any other way than as that you were passing judgment on people and how they think and feel about themselves.

And by the way, for the record..."I'm sorry that you misinterpreted what I said," doesn't qualify as an apology. Not that you owe me one.

"I" or my real life name, latter only applies to close friends or my partner~*

Having read Void's posts with more attention, I think I see what she was trying to say. If I've got it right (and my apologies, Void, if I've got this wrong), she is saying that our fundamental identity is our mind; our perception or awareness, and everything we care about, etc. is what is really us. Changing the medium through which we interact with other people doesn't change that.

Or, to put it more crudely but visually: a book in a plastic carrier bag is a book; it doesn't become more of a book by taking it out of the carrier bag and wrapping it in shiny paper. The latter might be a better present overall, but in both cases it's still the same book.

Is that right, Void?

The thing is, in RL the wrapping really can matter. Sometimes not only does it have a direct effect on the individual concerned, but there is also the problem of how others respond to that wrapping. In Naz's case, there isn't just the misery of having to live in the wrong sort of body (in RL, I mean), but there is also everything that goes with it in terms the expectations people have about Naz.

Were Naz to wake up tomorrow as a woman in RL, I think it would be understandable if she thought of herself as being "more" herself than she'd ever been before. I think Void would say she was a "better" Naz, but not "more" than the old Naz, and that is because the mind, heart, dreams, etc. would remain the same.

So maybe we are tripping up over mere words here, and I jumped in to criticise too quickly? In which case I apologise unreservedly. The stuff about self-esteem did appear judgmental, but perhaps that was just the result of a poor choice of words?

Oh this can be so complicated. And one's response depends so much on one's attitude towards SL -- that immersionist vs. augmentationist thing again.

I've had two very close friends reveal that they were a different gender in RL than they appeared in SL. One was a close female friend who turned out to be a (much younger) male. The other, more complicated . . . a male friend, a lover in fact, who revealed, some time after we broke up, that he was a she. She has abandoned her male avi, and uses a female now.

Both revelations were, to put it mildly, a shock, especially (obviously) the latter. But, in the final analysis, what Treasure says here is right: they are same people, at heart, that I loved before I knew who they "really" were. I believe that gender -- as opposed to biological sex -- is in great measure a social construct: we have expectations about what it means to be male or female not on the basis of immutable "truths" about the nature of these things, but because we have been taught them. I think that Treasure's insight (and my own responses, when these things happened to me) demonstrates this: these people remained who they essentially were, and any disconnect I felt upon the revelation of their RL sex was simply the stripping away of the inessential cultural meanings that I still attached to the labels "male" and "female."

I remain very good friends with both of these people. Why wouldn't I? I loved them for what they were, and they still ARE all that I loved about them.

Yes, I agree completely. Taking my book/carrier bag/shiny paper analogy (metaphor? I always get confused by those), any other response is to value the bag/paper over the book itself.



Again, yes. It often strike me that gender (as opposed to sex) is something we "do", having learnt it, rather than an immutable aspect of ourselves.




Sadly, lots of people just don't see things this way. And it's not just gender either. I have a RL friend who was dumped when the person she was getting on well with via letters realised she was fat (a very pretty fat, I might add). What an ******! She was still the same person.

Absolutely. Gender is just one component -- although maybe the most important component? -- in the larger issue of "identity." That our attitudes towards body type and shape are also culturally conditioned is fairly evident to anyone with more than a passing familiarity with fashion history: the "waif" look, for instance, is a pretty recent cultural phenomenon. The "Rubenesque" woman really IS a reflection of Renaissance attitudes towards the female body.

essentially yeah, even more to the point, it doesn't matter if the words are in hebrew, gaelic, or klingon for that matter, what the font used was, or even what kind of media it's on... the essence of the message and thought is what it's about.

my point (and my only point) is that changing the representation of a something (or someone) doesn't change the person (although one may transmit that information better than the other, or more accurately) but it can't be "more" than what it represents. for it to be "more" implies that what it's based on is "less" (in which case it wouldn't be representing that thing or person, and is what I meant by the self esteem comment). that implication may not be intended, but it's there, true or not, as a result of the words used.

in analogy, if I break my back in RL, and can't walk any more, am I still the same person? of course I am, even if my physical circustances change, the person behind them is still the same... If I was born with no fingers, it might affect my development, but it doesn't change the person that I am. and in neither case would it make my avatar "more" than "me" even if the avatar walks around, or flips people off =) maybe a better representation of my personality (or not, I don't generally go around flipping people off), but not "more" than the persona that drives my body.

@Naz specifically,
You, the real you, are not your body, that's just a vehicle for your mind. if your avatar can better represent that mind, then I think that's awesome. it lets us get to know the REAL YOU better. you might consider your avatar better than your own body (heck I know I do with mine), but it's not better than YOU. it can't be. without YOU, both your RL body and your avatar are nothing but collections of parts. so, no, I won't be apologizing for thinking you are better than any representation of yourself, physical, digital, or otherwise. "YOU" are so much more than a body or a picture, or an avatar, despite what various media would have you believe. I AM sorry you felt I was somehow demeaning you, or putting you in a position of "less than" anyone else... that was definitely NOT the intent, and I feel badly that it came across that way...

I'm far from perfect myself, and I don't always read the same contextual meaning into words that other people do... and obviously I don't write in a way that always gets my meaning across... if there are still any doubts though, my PMs are open, and I'll do my best to make better sense of what I mean =)

Reality is in the eye of the beholder.

I definitely see what you're getting at, Void, and yes, it does seem like we're splitting hairs here a little. Gay people often get into the semantic trap of arguing, on one hand, that their sexual orientation is not "them", that they are the same person they were before you knew they were gay, so you shouldn't think of them any differently, and, on the other hand, making the argument that being gay is an inherent part of who they are, since they were born this way, and it's not a choice. (As far as that goes, I think that's a red herring anyway, since we should all be free to choose what we do with our own lives, so even if being gay IS a choice, SO WHAT?) So let's just wrap all this up by saying that I feel like my avatar is more like who I would want to be in RL if I could, and my RL self (body, mind, behavior) are much less desirable to me. SL allows me to more approach my ideal. So I guess that "a better me" from your standpoint, Void. My point is...was...that the ideal me is SO different to the RL me that there's no real way I can ever reconcile the two.

If my av does something odd, funny or somehow otherwise ridiculous I might point to it in words and say 'my av is...'

Otherwise it's me, I, etc. Anything else would be too confusing - for everyone in the conversation.

When my character is speaking, she refers to herself as "I". When I am describing what my character is doing, I refer to her as "she". Thus:

"I love your hair."
appears in chat as: "Jasmyn Chau: I love your hair."

"/me runs her fingers through Brenin's hair."
appears in chat as: "Jasmyn Chau runs her fingers through Brenin's hair."

Mostly in first person pronouns. "Kitsy" if I'm talking about myself in third person.

Kitsy ^.^

One of the sexiest moments I had in sl was love-making with a man who openly declared he was over weight to me and his avatar showed it. I knew he was lonely by the way he im-ed me.
Truly, I wouldnt make love with him in real. Yes, I AM that shallow - and he would never be in a position to be me either. But here I wanted him desperately at that moment and it worked for us both.
Gneder is a non-issue for me. People get so hung up on this gender thing. I just see who is in front of me as being the av.
Gender anyway is not a straight male and female opposite poles thing. And I'm sttracted to women also. I wouldnt mind if a woman pretended to be a bloke when they went out with me.

Santa!?

Wow, lots of posts on this thread, way to many to read in the time I have, so, I'm going to post my reply directly from my profile.....

Want2 is a graphic image of me. I use physical actions to control Want2’s movements. Want2 cannot do anything physical, however, he controls me through emotions. I think your situation is much the same. If you don’t think so, ask yourself this question, “Does what happens in SL cause me to smile, laugh, cry, get angry, happy or excited”? If you answered no, then you’re fooling yourself.

Sure. Gifties, you know?

So, basically though you refer to your avatar in the 3rd person? That's really what this thread was about to begin with. I refer to my avatar as 'me' or 'I' always when interacting, inworld. Occasionally elsewhere, I will do the 3rd person thing and discuss 'Treasure' but mostly, it's 'me'. I don't think of her as a seperate entity from 'me'. Interesting and a little scary, eh.

I will have to say as many else have, that I use "I" and "me" a lot inworld. I can use third person too, but not often. I really didn't think so much about it, but I use third person more in forums.

I don't go into such deep philosophical discussions, my English is only good enough to discuss shopping in SL or other trivial matters. I leave the philosophy to others.

Do I see my avatar as "me"? Not 100%. It is me, the real me who type what she will say. So much of my beliefs and actions will show through. I always keep a line, a distance between RL and SL.

My SL life is The Bachelorette life. My avatar looks like a retired supermodel who live in a very modern, minimalistic beach house and who sometimes do naughty stuff in SL, but is picky who she does it with. I feel no need to roleplay family in SL, I log into SL to get a break from that. I don't want a boss in SL, I have one in RL and SL is my free time from all that.

Is SL only a game to me? Yes and no. I really don't want to meet anyone in RL or mix SL and RL. I think I am still a kind person, since I don't try to fool anyone into thinking I want to meet them in RL.

I am rather satisfied that I keep a distance to SL. There are people in RL that are my first priority, and I honestly wouldn't change my RL life to my SL life. I don't look half as good in RL and my feet hurt if I try to wear heels. I really wish I could have that gorgeous hairstyles in RL, but well... it could be worse.

Another benefit of this is that I really don't mind what ppl are in RL. Like someone say, they are another sex in SL. I treat the avatars I meet at face value. I know some of my friends are another sex in RL, but I think of them as their SL gender. They really are their avatar for me. I know what they like and what they think about things, and instead of connecting that with a RL image I connect that with their SL image. I even treat their different avatars different, I am more flirty to the male avatar and the female avatar is totally my friend who I love to shop and hang out with. Even if I know they are run by the same person in RL.

Reading back, I see that I use both "me" and "my avatar" in this post. I am sorry if you find it confusing. I just wrote it down as the words came through my mind. I could go back and edit it, but I think it is a true representation of how I talk/type. I see that I use third person mostly when I will describe how my SL is different form my RL. I speak about "my avatar" then.

Yes, Treasure, I do the same. I described in my profile my thoughts of my relationship with my avatar, but, when conversing in SL with others, I am Want2 Tinkel and Want2 Tinkel is me. We are one and the same.

So many cool responses to my post and I am grateful to everyone for being so honest.

If someone with whom I'm interacting tells me "look (he/she) is kissing you" rather than referring to themselves in the 1st person...that's kinda scary for me and destroys the fantasy and magic of it all for me. In fact, it actually leads to mistrust that I may not be dealing with a real personality..which for me anyway is a turn off.

But everyone deals with sl in their own way and that's the beauty of it.

Interesting question.

When I'm in-world and interacting, it's all first person me/my/I stuff, unless I emote, and then I slip into third: /me adjusts her halo and smiles from behind the comfy couch pillows she's nesting in.

I do it because that was the IRC system of interaction, and old habits die hard. ...However... if I'm in the avatar adjustment screen and actively changing my avatar's appearance, or thinking about doing so, then it becomes "my avvie" and "her" and so on.

I also will use "my avvie/her" to discuss things when I'm on voice, primarily just to simplify which "me" I mean when speaking.

BreninLlwyd....that's not necessarily the case, when they do that. For some...they are describing an "action" when they do that....actually trying to make it MORE real for you.

In real....you would not say "I am running my fingertips through your hair." You would just do it. You would not "say" it. Here...some try to make it seem real like that....by using the 3rd person, rather than saying "I am running my fingertips through your hair." That actually breaks the "reality" for some.

Did that make sense?