Stop Acting Childish
by Jessica Holyoke on 14/11/07 at 7:09 am
LL reminds residents they really don’t like ageplay
by Jessica Holyoke
What about babyfur avatars?
In another 5pm post from the Labs, Ken D Linden reminds the Community that Sexual Ageplay is not allowed on Second Life. This is not the first warning – but this time the Lab goes a bit further detail and scope.
The unsurprising prohibition is the depiction prohibition. You can’t "appear to represent minors" in any Sexual or Lewd Act . Keep in mind that any form also includes text. So if you and your partner look like adults, you may not be able to call him "Daddy". (…whether, based on the circumstances, an avatar is speaking or acting like a child (e.g. “My Mommy says…”)).
The second non-surprising no-no is showing children in a lewd or sexual manner. So at least one of the Lisae Boucher pictures of this summer might be prohibited using this definition – depending on who you are and how you define lewd.
The third prohibition is placing child avatars near sex beds or pose balls. On the surface, this seems ok. You can’t say that a playground is innocuous if you can get a BJ behind the slide. But what if you are roleplaying a family? Must Mommy and Daddy now remain chaste if they have a child in the house? Will mall owners have to enforce "no children avatars allowed" if one store features sexual content?
The standards are to be applied objectively, just like the gambling standards are applied to residents. That would be where two Lindens see the same program and one views it as bannable and the other views it as ok.
Granted, the Lab is in a bad position; balancing public perception, international law,without mentioning exactly which law they are applying and why, and the reaction to the recent Sky News article about paedophiles in SL. At the same time, making the sexual ageplay ban broader to include activities that do not include sexual or lewd acts makes "Your World, Your Imagination" into "Your World, Your Imagination* (*Certain restrictions apply.)"
Melissa Yeuxdoux
Nov 15th, 2007
If SL activity were limited to that for which there is a “legitimate use,” how much of it would remain?
Anonymous
Nov 15th, 2007
Good. Now banish bestiality and we’re good to go.
UhNope
Nov 15th, 2007
First of all, civil libertarians are constantly faced with the false attack that defending our inalieable rights (that much of Europe doesn’t believe in), necessarily supports child predators, Nazis, holocaust deniers, racists, hatemongers and other “bad people”. Today’s boogy man is the terrorist, who is not worthy enough to have a fair trial. This fallacious reasoning is a tired tactic and quite common.
Clearthinker,
“yet the speech trnsmitted through a prvate company CAN be censored”
That’s not true in all case, for example in the case of private companies acting as common carriers (Telecommunications Act of 1996). As Mitch Kapor, Founder and then President of the Electronic Frontier Foundation (which is dedicated to protecting free speech and privacy online) explained in Congressional testimony in 1991:
“Common carriers are companies which provide conduit services for the
general public. They include railroads, trucking companies, and
airlines as well as telecommunications firms. A communications common
carrier, such as a telephone company, is required to provide its
services on a non-discriminatory basis. It has no liability for the
content of any transmission. A telephone company does not concern itself
with the content of a phone call. Neither can it arbitrarily deny
service to anyone.
…
A telecommunications provider under a common carrier obligation would
have to carry any legal message regardless of its content whether it is
voice, data, images, or sound.”
Yes, this is the same Mitch Kapor who is the Chair of the Board of Directors of Linden Lab today (and who pondered to Adam Reuters whether avatars have rights). The debate as to how far certain rights can and should go is continuing today with the Net Neutrality controversy. Of course, the EFF supports Net Neutrality.
Avatars do not have rights today, but obviously humans do. No “rules” Linden Lab sets up are able to take certain fundamental inalienable rights. As Linden Lab was reminded (or learned) in Bragg v Linden Research, no Terms of Service can supercede basic Constitutional rights. The fact of the matter is that people who click the ‘I agree to the rules’ button to join, as it were, not only have certain basic rights as consumers at the state (especially California) and federal levels in the United States derived from state and federal Constitutions, but also are expressly having certain rights retained to them in the Terms of Service itself – in this case intellectual property rights – which compounds their rights even more. I’m not saying that people necessarily have a right to transmit anything they want through Linden Lab’s service nor that the service is in any way a common carrier, but I am saying that having “no rights” is entirely false and the choice to either “take it or leave it” with respect to their contractual rights (agreeing to certain behavior in order to make use of recognized intellectual property and possibly other rights) is very likely a false choice.
With that, I would take a different view about the context of the policy making and also of the presumption of any private service provider’s unfettered right to prohibit anything at any time, remove any user at any time, etc without sufficient cause, if there is a greater public or private interest at stake because obviously a Terms of Service, as a contract, will always be superceded by US contract law. Intellectual property rights are the obvious substantial private interest and explicitly recognized by Linden Lab. As I recall, during Bragg v Linden, the Terms of Service was changed to say that such interest doesn’t confer any right of access to the service, but I would even be skeptical of the ultimate legal validity of that, given the right set of circumstances and monetary values involved. US Courts take intellectual property rights very seriously.
On a different point, the “Community Standards” are relevant to policymaking because they are adopted with the Terms of Service as part of the contract between customer and provider. The customer reasonably expects the rules set out when the contracted is agreed to will be the rules that govern his or her access to the service. According to law, if a rule is “clarified” then the contract must have actually been written in a way that an objective observer could reasonably have interpreted it that way, if there is ever a legal dispute. As this policy was “clarified” without changing the Terms of Service or Community Standards, then Linden Labs apparently claims it was. I simply take Linden lab at its word, that it was meant as a “Community Standard”, and argue why I believe it could not have been a “Community” standard if it does not affect the “community” (like IMs), is different in nature from all other Standards (regulating inter-”community” behavior), and has applied to it a fundamentally different standard whereby it can not be subjectively interpreted like other behavioral Standards. Add to that the (unfortunate) injection of morality by Linden Lab in its own press release and it looks more and more like this was an extraneously devised regulation not part of the Terms of Service agreed to. Linden Lab’s community is a moralistic community because Linden Lab itself made it that way when it invoked morality. As for “freedom”, customers are already given a certain amount of freedom to subjectively determine the rules themselves, when terms like “harassment” are defined or redefined, etc.
It may well have made business sense, but the extra step taken to justify it contractually is precisely what makes all of this relevant. Given this, I can see why Linden Lab would not want debates about “freedom” and “morality” to be relevant because it questions the legitimacy of its contract and whether Linden Lab lives up to it, itself (and I sincerely wish anyone pushing its “any or no reason” reasoning luck in Court).
As for issues of “free speech”, it’s no secret that Linden Lab doesn’t believe in it; when you see the phrase being used, do what Linden Lab does: just think of it as a “metaphor”.
Penance Sautereau
Nov 15th, 2007
GODDAMMIT! How many times do I have to log in before it fucking acknowledges my log-in?
This is why idiot Trolls think my wife and I are the same person.
For the record, the long-winded post credited to Larluna Woodget is from me. I KNOW I clicked my sign in, but the stupid thing keeps logging me out before I finish typing. Guess I AM long-winded.
Sonofa….
ichabod Antfarm
Nov 15th, 2007
“What legitimate reason could you have acting like a child in virtual reality?” Answer: I can move through crowded sims more easily by darting between the legs of all the legitimate, smug, self-righteous blingtards.
bleh
Nov 16th, 2007
Pfff. Not that it all matters anyway.
The Linden Game Gods have spoken, and there is no amount of talking or even proving it’s bullshittyness that’s gonna change it.
This is not about what the ‘community’, or even about the US law. This is a stupid publicity stunt to draw even more people to SL so the total users figure will be nice and high.
So I can go tell how I see it as a game just like GTA, and then you guys can go and whine how killing hookrs in GTA is healthy, and totally normal and soooo different from what happens on SL, but it wont change jack shit, so I wont bother.
you could also go talk to child AV’s, find out why they wanna play children if you don’t believe me, but you all wont bother and AR anything under the totally unnaturally tall average AV height. Good luck with the innocent bystander/real life child abuser ratio. dont think it will be too favourable, but go ahead, organise another witchhunt.
AR all furries and nekos for bestiality and all vampires and combat roleplay fans for violence and murder while you’re at it.
Welcome to Second Disneyland everyoone!
Too bad the ones who like to roleplay children for the pure pleasure of being able to forget their an adult with boring jobs, wont be around to enjoy it.
Suu Miles
Nov 16th, 2007
Personally I think LL haven’t leaned out of the window… Child avis should be banned from the adult grid. It is SICK!
All that mommy here and daddy there ageplay should be banned too, btw.
When I came into secondlife I really thought this would be a great environment to learn, built, create and meet various people from all over the world on the basis of intelligent conversations, having fun, being interested in learning more about each other, etc…. Guess I shouldn’t expect common sense. Unfortunately, the longer I “play” now, the more people I get know, the sicker of them I get… what is wrong with you people that you need to be a child again? Need to mommy and daddy role play? I don’t even mind all the mind-numbing monosexual cybering anymore… but child avis? No way I am ever going to tolerate that.
help/Abuse report…
corona
Nov 16th, 2007
Re =Child avis should be banned from the adult grid. It is SICK!
how is merely portraying a child sick – paedophiles may be
but to denounce people merely being children is just one of many fantasies or roles played that could be called sick
were will the line end
it is all cultural – hardcore muslims would condemn Gor – becuase the women go around barely dressed
someone who is a paedophile is not neccesarily a childmolester
however such a person – by definition has a sexual interest in person below the legal age of consent
given that merely playing a child avatars is not sexual – such portrayers cannot be called paedophiles – whatever else they might be
moreover – governments dictate the sexual age of consent – and that specific age varies between countries
in the UK for example the age of sexual consent is 16 years
an age at which many are still in school
in Holland it is 14
while in Iran it is nine years for girls – a muslim country in which all gor players would be banned for being under dressed- especially the women
before condemming child avatars in SL there really should be a definition of what a child avatars actaully is
(PS in SL no age is real )
Minx
Nov 16th, 2007
Well, the first thing that popped into my head after reading the article is some Frank Zappa:
“If you were my daughter I’d….
What would you do, Daddy?”
But, onto my point.
My avatar has been mistaken on at least one occasion for being much younger than I had intended. Furthermore, in RL I have been mistaken for being much younger.
My AV happens to be a little petite, and by choice I refuse to copy the 6′ blonde busty norm that seems to be everywhere in SL. Is this the appearance one needs to take to be considered an “adult”?
Now, I need to clarify that the mistake was not that I was so young as 10 or 11… the “person” I was speaking to put me closer to 16 or 17. When questioned, I give my RL age of 23 without hesitation. There is nothing in my profile that would indicate my AV is anythin other than.
So, if I happen to engage in sexual roleplay on SL and someone makes the assumption that the acts they are performing are on an avatar below the age of consent, am I putting myself at risk?
Vioce of reason
Nov 16th, 2007
@corona
The only reason the Age of Consent in most Muslim countries is is nine d is due to the fact that Muhammad “consummated” his marriage with his wife Aisha when she was nine. (He was in his 50′s and she was seven when they married) Thats right, the prophet was a pedophile, so its ok.
Voice of no reason at all
Nov 16th, 2007
I’m going to make a list of every person in SL shorter then the average, so that we can all collectively AR them for being pedophiles.
Then I’m going to make a list of all fashion designers who have something in their collection even remotely looking like a schoolgirl outfit, as well as the people who bought that outfit, so we can collectively AR them for being pedophiles.
Then I’m going to make a list of all furries in SL, so we can collectively AR them for abusing animals.
Then I’m going to make a list of all neko’s in SL, so we can collectively AR them for abusing animals too.
Then I’m going to make a list of all Goreans in SL, so we can collectively AR them for kidnapping and slavetrading.
Then I’m going to make a list of all people who ever used a cussword in SL, so we can collectively AR them for offensive language.
Then I’m going to make a list of all people who own a gun or a sword or anything that can be used as a lethal weapon in SL, so we can collectively AR them for being murderers.
Then I’m going to make a list of all the people in SL who are different then the rest of us, so we can all collectively AR them for being different.
Then I’m going to make a list of all the remaining people in SL, so we can all collectively AR them for being suspiciously plain and normal looking. That last list will be the easiest to make, with only one or two entries.
Too bad LL doesnt even LOOK at AR’s anymore, or else we’d have a squeaky clean grid that any normal person who has a straight relationship, visits church every sunday and doesnt watch the Simpsons, as that is too vulgair, to have on our grid. Maybe then we’ll have a community that LL and all you people can be proud of.
Oh no wait… churchgoers should be AR’d too for supporting peodophilia. Everyone knows priests are the biggest pedophiles on the planet. oddly tho that the Vatican, who would give all of you a pat on the back for wanting to protect the children, doesnt seem to have problems with that.
Guess I’ll have to AR the pope too.
Come on everyone, cleanup time!!!
Al Sharpton
Nov 16th, 2007
Excuse me but I find your persecution of priests very offensive. However you forgot that LL hates black people, too.
Voice of no reason at all
Nov 17th, 2007
Nono, I did include those. They will be on the ‘different then the rest of us’ especially the ones with the afros and the suits.
Jessica Holyoke
Nov 17th, 2007
About the photo. The photo above is the one I wanted to run initially. I thought it was cute and ironic, especially given the eventual title. Its just that I didn’t take it as part of an interview and I wanted to have the story run while it was timely, meaning soon after the initial blog post. The baby fur picture was taken from a public vendor so I used that photo as a place holder until I could get permission from the resident to use the final picture. And the little girl crying about the baby furs is still applicable.
Sophia
Nov 18th, 2007
The other day while on my land talking to my friend. I heard a thumping. Then I saw on the patio a tag name flowing along by. I thought hmm someones here..so I looked below my patio and there was a little girl holding a bunny. She was spying on us. She knew i caught and Poof she was gone. so I thought and said “well thats wierd” but then again its an open parcel to the public. Then poof there she was again standing on my runway stage on my plaza. I observed her and said “hello may I help you” she repleid “I want my Daddy” ok that creeped me out. Thats all she kept saying. So I said “oh your role playing” and then snapped a photo to get her name tag. She was up to something I had a feeling and i wasnt about to be her Mommy.
Iv got a kidnapping role playing group to the left of me and a huge Mall the size of the sim thats a pretty robbins egg blue and two lovely women living below me I never have trouble with. To think of it we all live pretty good together…hmmm…The kidnapping thing I never witness. When im alseep they are awake. Time difference you know. Phew..but a few of thier members have browsed I guess into my gallery to look around. Everyones an art lover.
I have to say Iv come across allot of different characters in SL and my first impresion most times was “oh god what a nutt” or “Oh god they are looking for trouble putting that in thier profile” but most times they end up being pretty normal. They do some things for the shock factor sometimes.
But this Child role play thing does creep me out and I do think its possible that those desires could play out in real life or spark something thats already there. There was a program about this mentioning the dangers of this and the likelyhood of these children av’s being possibly socialy a threat. It’s an adult site Second Life and its not a place for children. Not just because of allot sexual mature content…were adults we do do those things in rl..well most of them..and maybe not to the extremes we see in SL. And yes we dont want LL to turn into big brother but come on Children AV’s it is sick I think and thats my opinion.
There are allot of people from all over the world on Second Life and we cant monitor them all. You cant have a traffic cop at orientation Island asking you what your sexual preference is and stamping you with approval and directing you to your destination. Wont happen….how are they going to know who is just role playing it for fun or for not?
Im a mother and I know the sickos out there will try anything to get thier jollies off. It scares me to tell you the truth. I dont know what the answere is…I dont even know where that little girl came from…but I hope she doesnt come back…and I hope she lost her Daddy..One day I went to a Christmas sim to look for a Christmas tree and went into this building and there were two children AV’s laying next to the fire hugging and kissing..it was a bit odd again. Iv walked thru the sim where they had childrens furniture ..cute at first but now I am thinking about it..is this cool? Uh Uh
I saw a woman on a youtube film give birth in a hospital with family and friends present and thought well maybe this was one way for a couple who couldnt have children to experience childbirth and the emotions. It was actually touching. That kind of made sence but does the child grow and do they continue a family? Not sure on that one ..but thought hmm maybe that was theraputic for that couple…something constructive there.
What about little people?..Drawfs they have a right to represent themselves as they want and that may appear to be a child..its a really sensitive issue…makes me really think about who’s behind these little av’s…
But my opinion is to play it safe and keep pedophiles off the site..How? well Im not sure what can be done..avoid the little suckers ….I dont like them..look at how many people have gone missing from having met a stranger on the interent and meeting in RL. I just dont want it period. No kids on SL Id like to say find your own site but then that isnt the answere…you know its not just the look of the AV its how they talk and cry and what Iv heard they do in role play. Its plain sick!..Boy I guess that hit a cord in me..well lets see what the future holds for the little people of SL…..this will be interesting..so much to ponder….
Sophia
Nov 18th, 2007
Thats wierd how did my comment get posted by Jessica lol..another ponder.hmmmm
Lorelei Mission
Nov 18th, 2007
Wow y’all, okay so pedophilia in real life is wrong. Well, so is war and shooting each other. Hmm what’s MORE wrong in real life – killing people or molesting them? I’m gonna go out on a limb and say killing. Therefore nobody should be roleplaying killing in Second Life, not even if the players consent with each other to roleplay the battle. …. okay that’s how idiotic people sound when they start picking WHICH real life stuff needs to be banned in Second Life. If all the wargames people in SL aren’t murdering people in real life, why are y’all so sure that other stuff translates to RL? No logic here…
Mark (the other mark)
Nov 18th, 2007
I think that these tools who obsess on this topic are self-repressed pedos.
Sophia B
Nov 18th, 2007
I just want to make it clear so there is no confusion about which Sophia is who..I’ll be Sophia B lol I posted the comment made November 17th at 1:44pm ….Im done have a good day!
just a random quote that's appropriate
Nov 23rd, 2007
Why is Freedom so important?…
Why speak up about things that don’t seem to affect you?
Perhaps Pastor Martin Neimoller’s view in one version of his quote will answer that question.
He supported the Nazis until he realized, too late, what they were really about and was sent to Dachau concentration camp.
He was one of the fortunate to be freed and live until 1984.
First they came for the Communists,
and I didn’t speak up,
because I wasn’t a Communist.
Then they came for the Social Democrats,
and I didn’t speak up,
because I wasn’t a Social Democrat.
Then they came for the Trade Unionists,
and I didn’t speak up,
because I wasn’t a Trade Unionist.
Then they came for the Jews,
and I didn’t speak up,
because I wasn’t a Jew,
Then they came for me,
and by that time there was no one
left to speak up for me.
KK
Nov 25th, 2007
Jeez….this is sad.
Not that this will do a damn bit of good to the thick headed whiners, but here’s another (futile) attempt to clear up the picture here.
Grown adults having sex with minors = illegal here, not illegal elsewhere…ERGO the ire against LL for trying to legislate it ACCORDING TO US STANDARDS is the problem people are having. Yes, LL is a US based entity, but its software is being used worldwide and will NEVER practically be monitored effectively anyway. As much as I’ve learned about the SL vision, it seems to me that the whole LL provision is lip service to shut the nutjobs up, they couldn’t possibly police it beyond a few token bans even if they tried. They can’t even keep up with tech support emails.
Now, as for personal rights, I’m in the US. In OUR country we HAVE a Constitution that I’m sure every whackjob religious nut would just love to see burned to a cinder so as to outlaw everything that threatens them, but the spirit of this document in people like myself and countless others is what isn’t going to GET BANNED no matter how much some people whine and throw their little “godly” bitchfits.
A grown adult and a child is illegal, so LL says NOPE.
A grown adult and a grown adult consenting to age play is THEIR OWN BUSINESS. You might think it’s the creepiest thing in the world, you might be so offended you pee carrot juice but the bottom line is IT AINT YOUR DAMN BUSINESS what ANYONE else does.
Nobody “makes” you feel all creeped out. You are creeped out because of a PREEXISTING mental fixation on sexual repression and every other kind of repression, and you already believe (flawed as it is) that anything and everything “external” has some inherent power to “cause” you to feel anything at all, and when you start twitching and flipping out, losing your mind – that’s YOUR OWN psychology causing it. You want to get rid of everything that threatens you, the problem isn’t with external reality, real or virtual, the problem is, you have a screwed up, malfunctioned, mythological bullshit set of assumptions that are so disconnected from reality that you can’t sleep nights unless you can get rid of what threatens you.
Newsflash: you never will because you live your life on your knees ANYWAY. We could outlaw everything until there’s nothing left but a few men and some rocks and you, and the day will come when one guy can’t control his own insecurity and hang ups that he bashes some other guy’s head in with a rock and then you will jump up all over again hollering about let’s outlaw rocks!
The problem isn’t the expression. It’s the one’s doing the expression, and no matter how badly that threatens your entire sense of self (low as it is), IT’S NOT YOUR DAMN BUSINESS what anyone else does, for good or ill if you aren’t personally involved. If you’re the one getting slammed in the head with the rock, THEN you can bitch. Until then, shut up and mind your own business.
THAT is what people are defending, not the rock bashers or the pedos. Sure pedos have problems…but it’s NOT YOUR BUSINESS unless one of them is screwing YOUR kid. They’re not going to get therapy for their issues no matter how much you pitch a fit.
And for LL to impose this rule on people who are NOT ENGAGING IN ACTUAL pedophelia is not right. Consider this please – on two other articles here there’s the Katrina Eales crap where she got griefed and wrote this bullshit and EVERYBODY (except 2 or 3 idiots) called her out that IT’S NOT ACTUALLY RAPE, YOU WERE NOT RAPED OR ASSAULTED. And that guy running the avatar isn’t necessarily some budding serial rapist because he knocked her ass off a mountain with his giant dick.
Well the same thing goes for the ageplay business. You don’t have any idea who’s behind the avi. LL should be fixing the sign up process to do everything it can to insure minors do NOT join, but by and large, grown adults are consenting to ageplay and it is NOT pedopheilia. All it does is gross some people out. But that’s your problem if you’re grossed out…it doesn’t give you the right to holler ‘ban’ – you got the issue, you get the therapy.
Personally, ALL RELIGIOUS NUTS offend me by their very existence. I would love nothing more than for you idiots to really have a rapture so you’d get the hell off our planet, but I recognize that’s a delusion that won’t happen in real life and that it’s still illegal for me to launch a religious death camp for all of them. So instead of getting in SL and bitching and moaning about the religious fucks spewing their delusional crap all over the place, I’m reasonable enough, and secure enough, and have spine enough to just keep scrolling, or go on about my business, and ignore them.
I think they’re all completely full of shit and 100% responsible for the shape of this planet…but unless and until they show up at MY door blathering that crap on me personally, they don’t threaten me and I am fully capable of ignoring them.
If you want to be all self righteous about pedophiles, turn the damn computer off and go through your neighborhood and start exposing the ACTUAL pedophiles who actually ARE screwing children, and keep your nosey beaks out of the business of grown adults getting off to whatever their kinks happen to be…THEN maybe somebody will accept that your a bastion of civility in the community. Until then you’re just a pios pain in the ass.
Rabbit
Mar 22nd, 2008
Child Avatars are nasty because it is an adult playing with other adultsd who like to play with them dressed as toddlers. The other grown adult enjoys being talked to and treated like a pedoo….i mean..toddler.
DOWN WITH PEDO….i mean…CHILD AVATARS!
rolling eyes
Jun 26th, 2008
Most of you are really stupid.
1. Pedos are people who pray on REAL CHILDREN. child avis are not real children. if a pedo was on sl and i am sure they are all over the teen grid where actual children really are… then i doubt very seriously they would be playing a child avi. That just plain does not make sense.
2. I guess if someone wearing a child avi makes them pervs or pedos, then i guess all of the furries have sex with their dogs, all the whores on sl work street corners in rl everyday of the week, I do seem to remember running into a place on sl where people were rping eating other people… so lots of hanible canibles out there too, and lordy at the rapists in real life, and the real slaves *eye roll* I don’t think most of you realize how stupid you sound. Seriously.
And those of you who said that without ageplay and beastiality that we would have a decent community….ROFL!! maybe if we all had pg sims, no nudity, no sex… then it would be decent. But sl has a long way to go before it can ever hope to be called “decent”
Get a life folks
Amelia Rajal
Oct 1st, 2008
RP’ing is one thing but when they post REAL LIFE pix of beastiality and the like, then theres a problem. And if some would smarten up and file an abuse report there may be a chance that SL MIGHT not have issues with this sort of thing. Some just dont understand what RL and SL is. But then again even a retard will hump a doorknob.
Moral Oral
Sep 16th, 2009
We should also ban any sex, violence, anyone who doesn’t think like me, ie the hate mongering, Christians, Jews, Republicans, anyone who beleive in the Bill of Rights, right to free speach, in order to have a pure and just society we must ban any pro-freedom people. Unless they act and think exactly as I want them to. After the bill of rights was written by christian white male slave owning racist sexist radical liberals.
Vergil
Jul 26th, 2013
There is a very fine line between innocent age play, and malicious age play. If you mean to look and act like a child to capitalize on the repressed perverted thoughts of a deviant, obviously its bad. If you play a midget adult who just so happens to be engaging in sexual activities with a full grown male nothing is wrong. I hate sexual age play because its simulated pedophilia. I also hate simulated bestiality. I’m all for freedom, but some people are just downright toxic.