Good Role Playing

I have mentioned plenty of times how in my view the main ingredient in a good RP partner is sincerity and commitment to the scenario. It's not technique - there is no "right" way to do it. All that is required is for my partner to react genuinely as if she were in the peril (or the moment, wherever we are in an RP).

It occurred to me that this might be seen as incompatible with a true "role play" in the sense of, say, a superheroine character who is very extensively defined as to capabilities and personality.

I don't think so. Anyone RPing such a character is doing so because it gives him or her a thrill or some other rewarding experience. So even if the character has personality traits unlike that of the person typing at the other end, he/she has (ideally) revealed something by choosing that character. If my RP partner is fully participating in a fully reactive way, writing as if she *were* that character, then her role is still sincere. If she is second guessing her response, consciously checking for consistency, it's not genuine and then, for me, not fulfilling.

I actually do think I can tell the difference. It's harder with email than IM -- in IM indifference or calculation reveals itself in countless ways. But even in email the truth ultimately comes out.

Oh yes, and if I have written something for you, and you like it? I do expect a little reciprocation.... let me in. Make a little effort and I'll meet you 90% of the way your end.

Happy and Safe Holidays to All

...and best wishes for 2011....

Evil Henchgirls

Second only to my love of good damsels in distress is my love of bad girls in service of the villain. I know Vanessa Doofen-whatever (of Phineas and Ferb) is not really evil, blah blah blah, but work with me here. Since I enjoy damsels in the clutches of evil villainesses (villainesses get away with more torture of the damsel before it gets icky or creepy) what better than a sexy evil female minion to torment a damsel I have captured?

Sexy female accomplices were a staple of the old campfest 60s Batman series: characters like Lydia Limpet or Pauline were the perfect accompaniment to the ridiculous arch villains they served.

There is even a discussion of the hottest Batman evil sidekicks. I even like the idea of an unwitting female accomplice turning on her villainous boss, only to be captured and placed in peril herself!

I was living in a black and white world.... part 1

In an meandering search for silent movie peril scenes on Youtube (a thankless task) I came across a scene of sorts with silent star Olive Thomas. Now, I know a little about silent movies. Certainly Pearl White, Ruth Roland and Helen Gibson are names that last because of their famous serials. But I was a lot less aware of Olive Thomas -- mostly because she did more straight films than chapter plays.

My goodness, what a hottie! Seriously, look past the fashions of c.1920 - do you find her as remarkably pretty as I do? Folks at the time did - she won the "Prettiest Girl in New York" contest in 1917 or so, then got discovered by Ziegfield, and went on from there. She was also the first screen "flapper" -- before Clara Bow or Louise Brooks. Although you can't see it in a b&w photo, she apparently had violet eyes, just like Elizabeth Taylor (swoon).

Too bad she wasn't in peril more!

Found a cute video from yesteryear by accident: "The Mayor of Simpleton" by XTC (c. 1988?) I happen to like the group and the song, but what's of interest is their spoof of the Avengers video here:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5Da9sc6YDBo&playnext=1&list=FLumd-rMlZsos



The Mrs Peel character even gets tied up! (Not in the catsuit, but still....) and she's quite cute in a 1960s Mary Quant way.

A Holy Grail I did not know even existed!

Since by now everybody interested in the topic has seen the photo of Taylor Swift tied to the tracks for the new single, I thought I'd put up some lovely themed photos sent by a very good friend.....

Madness

For a depressing view of the hypocrisy of today, look at this:

http://rivals.yahoo.com/highschool/blog/prep_rally/post/Connecticut-cheerleaders-want-uniforms-with-more?urn=highschool-274505

Here's enough of an excerpt to get the gist:

Earlier this year, cheerleaders in one Florida district had to get special permission to wear their skirts on game day, because the uniforms were too skimpy for a new dress code. In a fascinating twist, last week cheerleaders in Connecticut begged school officials to help make their uniforms less skimpy.

According to the Connecticut Post and NBC Connecticut, Heidi Medina, the captain of Bridgeport Central's cheerleading squad, stood before the Bridgeport Board of Education in her team's standard uniform, which bares athletes midriffs and uses either small shorts or baggy sweatpants as bottoms, to make a statement that it was inappropriate.

[Related: Team welcomes first cheerleaders since 1934 ]

Medina and fellow seniors insist that the Central uniforms do not meet regulations that require cheerleader uniforms to cover an athlete's midsection when they stand at attention.

"It really hurts our self esteem," Bridgeport Central senior Ariana Mesaros told the Board of Education, according to the Post. "I am embarrassed to stand up here dressed like this. Is this really how you want Bridgeport to be represented?"

As noted by NBC Connecticut, the Bridgeport cheerleaders' plea comes on the heels of a recent study of college cheerleaders, which found that college cheerleaders whose uniforms exposed midriffs faced a significantly higher risk of developing eating disorders.

etc....

Dear Miss Mesaros: your self esteem is hurt? You're a cheerleader for Chrissake! Not a Supreme Court Justice. That's why we have cute young girls in skimpy skirts and old ugly farts in black muu muus. As to your question, is this how we want Bridgeport represented: hell, yeah!

As for the "recent study" I hope my tax $ did not fund a study so blindingly obvious as this -- a "study" with a pre-ordained result. Now, repeat after me: correlation does not imply causality. Repeat as needed to get it into your head.

Studies show that repeated exposure to idiotic studies give higher IQ people ulcers. I think my health, and public health in general, are being attacked by these silly studies. Studies prove it! So what's more important, your self-esteem or my physical health?