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.)"
Rico Roizman
Nov 14th, 2007
So, I guess it says AGEPLAY IS OKAY. Just dont have children playing in sexual or lewd acts.
Still who would on earth would be sick enough to have their kid do sex within them or who knows.
and?
Nov 14th, 2007
You are obsessed with ageplay. Get over it.
Lol
Nov 14th, 2007
Oh come on SLers, you can’t be serious? you guys are defending pedophilia? Oh and as for babyfurs, the only way to save the world from that disaster is fire.
humanoid
Nov 14th, 2007
Censorship is never applied objectively. It is the nature of the beast.
LMAO @ Rico
Nov 14th, 2007
Rico Roizman is about the most laughable wannabe griefer in SL. Nice to see Rico figured out how to press the “post” button. Didnt even think he could do that. And yes, he loves age play.
River
Nov 14th, 2007
Wow…I find it hard to believe that people can actually look at this and see concern over the broadness and ambiguity of the policy as “defending pedophelia”. Since ostensibly no one involved in any of the scenarios being discussed is *actually* a minor, I fail to see how it could be called pedophelia in the first place. That aside, in my mind the larger issue is that under these rules, the size of the grey area is determined largely by the “moral” standards of the person reporting the infraction or the Linden ruling on it’s legitimacy. And really, who can tell if an av is meant to be 19 or 16 years old? And should it matter? I realize the intent is to prevent people from initiating sexual age play with seemingly “childlike” avs, which to me implies pre-pubescent…but the explanation posted refers to “minors”. This could mean that if you were RPing two high school age avs getting busy on prom night and someone decided that you were having too much fun for their tastes, you could be banned. I fully expect the masses of unimaginative people who use SL mostly as a 3D dating service to applaud this “clarification” and miss the much larger implications, but to the people who enjoy the opportunities SL opens up for role play and just plain ol’ “playing pretend” this policy throws the baby out with the bathwater and calls into question far too many innocent and innoccuous activites.
moses
Nov 14th, 2007
how precious…lindens are looking out for us again ! so what is NEAR a sex bed or pose ball ? 1 metres …two metres….three metres….? what if i am walking in a sand box and i pass NEAR a sex bed or pose ball that some arse head has put there for sale. am i going to be reported for this that is not my fault ? because there is enough juniour jesus residents that hates every one that does not look like a seven foot porno star around. Feh.
Morgana Fillion
Nov 14th, 2007
There go the jazz clubs with lewd ageplay lyrics like
” Hush-a-bye, “I’ll buy you this and that,”
You hear a daddy sayin’.
And baby goes home to her flat
To sleep all day”
FrizzleFry101
Nov 14th, 2007
Oh boo hoo, the babyfuckers and puppyfucking furries feel persecuted. Stop pretending to be children on the internet, problem solved.
Witness X
Nov 14th, 2007
Thank god they’re pushing the paedophiles out. All they need now is to push the animal fuckers out and we JUST MIGHT have a decent community.
D.B.
Nov 14th, 2007
In Real Life, I’m a 27 year old male.
In Second Life I’m a 19 year old prostitute. Anyone wanna report me for that? I’m in SL, also mother of two daughters, nearly one and three years old, their players IRL about my RL age.
The crib of the youngest is in my bedroom, two metres away from my Sexgen bed, where I conduct most if not all of my buisness. Anyone wanna AR me for that?
In RL, I am in a relationship with a very sweet and caring man, 37, who on Second Life plays an 8 year old boy. I am not involved with him at all in Second Life because of the age he chooses to let him represent in SL.
This pains me, as I would love to share some of the fun roleplaying with him as I do with my clients, but sadly I’ll have to make due with making love to him in RL.
His avatar is sexually active, and I will do anything I can to defend his rights to do whatever he wants to do on Second Life, just as I would defend anyone else’s rights to do as they please on Second Life.
Does this make me a peadophile? According to the dictionary meaning, yes. I love children.
Do I wish to do anything to a child what causes them harm, or do I want to do ‘lewd’ or sexual things to children? No, as I already said I love children, and will do anything in my power to protect them from any harm, from sexual predators or otherwise.
Would I turn someone’s face into a bloody pulp if I find out that person preys on children? Yes, definately, so help me God.
Would I turn my boyfriends face into a bloody pulp if I find out he preys on children? Yes, definately, despite the fact that I love no-one more then I love him.
Am I going to do so now that he just walked in the room, after coming hime from work? Of course not, cause I know he would NEVER do anything to cause any child any harm. He’s not a sexual predator, not a peadophile in the way that everyone and LL means. In fact, he’s not even a peadophile in the dictionary xplanation, he hates kids, they annoy him to no end.
Yet, he plays an 8 year old boy on Second Life.
Now, explain to me, why he would be oh such a big threat?
Maybe for possibly getting caught in the act on Second Life, and make LL lose face?
LL does that quite well without his help.
Anyone want to AR my boyfriend? cause he’s such a big threat, and me, not ARing him personally, obviously am in favour of kids being violated IRL.
(That last bit above was sarcasm.)
OF COURSE there are RL sexual predators active in the ageplay community in SL. and OF COURSE they will NOT be the ones playing the child AV’s.
The effect of this all?
- The real predators, the dangerous ones using SL to make contact with eachother and share child porn, will dive under even further, making it only harder for LL and the RL ustice system to catch them
- The sexual ageplayers who are NOT RL predators and don’t form any threat except maybe for the image of the company, will get bnned left and right while not doing anything wrong, or will dive under and go into hiding further, or find other venues to conduct their harmless roleplay
- The non sexual ageplayers, adult babies, those who just want to look cute and young, or simply play family with friends and leave their RL ‘have to behave like an adult’ shit behind them for a little bit online, will be banned left and right by idiots who wouldnt recognise a RL sexual predator if they were raping a 2 year old in front of their own RL eyes.
Any positive effects of this? Yes…
- all the bigots who enoy their own utter freedom on SL to do whatever they want, get to file AR’s against anyone who in their eyes is ‘weird’. As long as their own hobbies arent in danger, they will be happy.
Congrats LL. You fucked up again. While saving a teeensy bit of face for the press, screwing over your own customers.
Anon
Nov 14th, 2007
“Still who would on earth would be sick enough to have their kid do sex within them or who knows”
Who on Earth would be sick enough to pretend they are a child, period? Do these “Mommy and Daddy age-play folk” realise how absolutely pathetic they sound while playing out their fantasy? Something is very wrong in their heads.
IMO, child avatars should be banned from Adult Second Life.
Witness X
Nov 14th, 2007
anyone else think that the babyfur pic has a penis pacifier?
moses
Nov 14th, 2007
a ‘decent’ comunity is not one that goes around trying to screw every thing that moves.
Aya Pelous
Nov 14th, 2007
stop defending pedophilia you fuckers
Witness X
Nov 14th, 2007
ITT D.B tries to get his sick practice unbanned by BAWWWWing at SHL and fails hard.
FrizzleFry101
Nov 14th, 2007
haha oh wow
A pedophile calling all non-pedophile’s bigots. I guess the world is just not “advanced” enough to appreciate fucking children.
Chris Hansen should be doing a special on Second Life, not CSI.
D.B.
Nov 14th, 2007
In Real Life, I’m a 27 year old male.
In Second Life I’m a 40 year old male prostitute. Anyone wanna report me for that? I’m in SL, also father of over 9000 deformed sons which now flood the metaverse with cosby cubes.
The crib of the youngest is in my bedroom, two metres away from my Sexgen bed, where I conduct most if not all of my buisness. Anyone wanna AR me for that?
In RL, I am in a relationship with a very sweet and caring man, 32, who on Second Life plays an 27-year old Linden. I am not involved with him at all in Second Life because of the age he chooses to let him represent in SL.
This pains me, as I would love to share some of the fun roleplaying with him as I do with my clients, but sadly I’ll have to make due with making love to him in RL.
His avatar is sexually active, and I will do anything I can to defend his rights to do whatever he wants to do on Second Life, just as I would defend anyone else’s rights to do as they please on Second Life.
Does this make me a Lindophile? According to the dictionary meaning, yes. I love Lindens.
Do I wish to do anything to a child what causes them harm, or do I want to do ‘lewd’ or sexual things to children? No, as I already said I love Lindens, and will do anything in my power to protect them from any harm, from sexual predators or otherwise.
Would I turn someone’s face into a bloody pulp if I find out that person preys on Linden? Yes, definately, so help me God.
Would I turn my boyfriends face into a bloody pulp if I find out he preys on Lindens? Yes, definately, despite the fact that I love no-one more then I love him.
Am I going to do so now that he just walked in the room, after coming hime from work? Of course not, cause I know he would NEVER do anything to cause any child any harm. He’s not a sexual predator, not a Lindoophile in the way that everyone and LL means. In fact, he’s not even a Lindophile in the dictionary xplanation, he hates black people, they annoy him to no end.
Yet, he continues to be a Linden on Second Life.
Now, explain to me, why he would be oh such a big threat?
Maybe for possibly getting caught in the act on Second Life, and make LL lose face?
LL does that quite well without his help.
Anyone want to AR my boyfriend? cause he’s such a big threat, and me, not ARing him personally, obviously am in favour of kids being violated IRL.
(That last bit above was sarcasm.)
OF COURSE there are RL sexual predators active in the Linden community in SL. and OF COURSE they will NOT be the ones playing the child AV’s.
The effect of this all?
- The real predators, the dangerous ones using SL to make contact with eachother and share child porn, will dive under even further, making it only harder for LL and the RL ustice system to catch them
- The sexual ageplayers who are NOT RL predators and don’t form any threat except maybe for the image of the company, will get bnned left and right while not doing anything wrong, or will dive under and go into hiding further, or find other venues to conduct their harmless roleplay
- The non sexual ageplayers, linden sysadmins, those who just want to look cute and young, or simply play family with friends and leave their RL ‘have to behave like an adult’ shit behind them for a little bit online, will be banned left and right by idiots who wouldnt recognise a RL sexual predator if they were raping a 2 year old in front of their own RL eyes.
Any positive effects of this? Yes…
- all the bigots who enoy their own utter freedom on SL to do whatever they want, get to file AR’s against anyone who in their eyes is ‘weird’. As long as their own hobbies arent in danger, they will be happy.
Congrats LL. You fucked up again. While saving a teeensy bit of face for the press, screwing over your own customers.
d3adlyc0d3c
Nov 14th, 2007
HAHA NASTY LITTLE SHITS. I LOL’d.
Bladen
Nov 14th, 2007
DELICIOUS COPYPASTA IS DELICIOUS
Tenshi Vielle
Nov 14th, 2007
As Presidential Candidate for SL ’07, I would have to say that this whole topic makes me quite ill.
Now. Anyone want a juice box?
MT
Nov 14th, 2007
It’s amazing to read these posts.
This is a virtual world. That means it’s not real. That means that you can’t teleport, fly, have sex with a furry creature unless you want some part of your anatomy bitten off and when I watch people here argue about the “rightness” of someone doing something in a “virtual” world I don’t know whether to laugh or cry.
Who are we protecting? Are we protecting the children under the age of eighteen who are here illegally? Are we protecting the parents of the children under eighteen who have stolen their parents credit cards or lied to them about what purpose they are being used for or are we simply accepting that a person who lies about their age to get in here might be “harmed” by someone else’s imagination. The Chinese are probably laughing their balls off at our “free” society and how we defend the first amendment. After all since none of this is real and no physical acts are being committed the only thing we are protecting is the moral majorities right to hinder free speech and ideas.
To my religious or prudish friends who take offense to my words I would like to thank you for your contribution to communism. In those countries people like you who tell us how to think flourish. Glad I spilled blood defending free speech in this country for you.
Mike T
Nov 14th, 2007
Once again I’m amazed at the stupidity I see.
This is not the real world – this is a virtual world. For those of you who don’t get it reach up to the screen and pinch your avatar. I doubt your feel anything.
One of the things about a virtual world is that you don’t starve to death if you don’t eat.
So since we’ve not established that your avatar is not really alive let’s look at who were protecting from whom. Is Linden Labs protecting children under the age of 18 who have lied or scammed there way into what is essentially an adult establishment? Or are we protecting the dumb ass parents who have given a child access to a computer and possibly a credit card for the purpose of decieving others?
What scares me about the bans I keep seeing is what it really means. Since nothing here except our typed speech is real that means that our religious or prudish friends are trying to prevent other people, with different ideas (right or wrong) from expressing those ideas. I’m sure the Chinese are laughing their balls off at how you’ve embraced communism as your goal. You see in communist countries they take away the rights of adults to speak with other adults, “Because they are protecting them from those damn capitalists.”
I sometimes wonder why I spilled blood for a country that is bound and determined to take away the right of free speech even in an adult forum.
It’s getting to the point where you can’t go into a bar in some cities and have a smoke, soon alcohol will be probably be banned (except for sacrificial whine). What next? I just hope that on a slow news day that some paper doesn’t print an article about devil worshiping in SL and how it gives the residents the ability to fly and teleport. If it does, oh geez, then will teleporting and flying go away? Don’t take a furry into a combat zone or the zealots might call that animal sacrifice.
Folks I don’t applaud real life pedophiles or gun nuts or people that believe that religion is a cure to (since most wars are started based on religous beliefs)everything.
Your world (doubtful) How about Our World and no imagination
UhNope
Nov 14th, 2007
Linden Lab has become a joke. This not about “sexual ageplay” per se. Linden Labs applies “Community Standards” to APPLY TO ENTIRELY PRIVATE SITUATIONS, where even Instant Messages between two people are disallowed on moral grounds (Linden Lab admitted to making a moral judgment in its press release).
In essence, not only is it playing thought-police on moral grounds – an egregious offense in itself – but it is telling participants in its “community” that in order to be a part of that “community” you must behave a certain way, even when your behavior CAN NOT BE SEEN, EVEN INADVERTENTLY by any other member of that “community” who not not want to see it (as the case for IM “text” content between residents).
The entire point of “community standards” in communities is to regulate behavior between members as they interact with EACH OTHER, respecting the subjective sensibilities of those whom may be offended by certain behavior. Yet Linden Lab believes this extends to situations where members privately interact with assurances that any participant’s communicative behaviors do not offend any other participant involved.
At the same time, Linden Lab creates a double standard where certain behavior is “allowed” privately (in IM) so long as participants agree on the subjective interpretation of “Community Standards” behavior as to whether or not it’s offensive to those involved, such as when members agree that “roleplay” harassment is not real harassment, as defined, or even that degenerate argumentation does not qualify to them as harassment (even though had the argument happened between other members, at least one person could have been offended and qualify it as such). Linden Lab carved out a behavioral exception in this case – again on moral grounds (leaving the topic of Linden Lab morality for another time) – to say that this single particular behavior in question could NOT be subjectively interpreted as to whether or not it’s offensive to those involved (only allowing for subjective interpretation of whether a “virtual minor” is somehow implied).
Because of that fact and that Instant Messages are not required to involve “community” members who could be offended or even any of the rest of Linden Lab’s judging “community” per se, this policy should be more accurately described as a “Personal Standard” to fit into Linden Lab’s “community”, not a “Community” standard to protect members from each other.
Well I appreciate the effort Linden Lab made to instill its version of morality into its customers, but I take my own moral cues from elsewhere. Any community with personal standards is not a community that I want to be a part of – especially when it’s managed by a for-profit corporaton.
Raven Welesa
Nov 14th, 2007
We are not defending pedophiles! We do not support pedophiles either. As for those that say that us stop pretending to be children and the problem will be solved? I’m sure you have some dirty little secret you carry as well. I guarantee every single one of you has something that others would not consider normal. We will prevail over all the haters like we have for so long.
Too late:
Nov 14th, 2007
http://brutalhonestysl.blogspot.com/2007/08/second-life-family-freakshow.html
Clearthinker
Nov 14th, 2007
Second Life is not a “country”! It is a business. You and your avatars do not have a Constitution. Your avatar does not “rights’. Folow the rules or uninstall. The above arguments that mention this being a free speech issue are sorely confused. You may have freedom of spech as a person, yet the speech trnsmitted through a prvate company CAN be censored. Can you use your RL employer’s email and internet conection to say and do whatever you please? Linden Labs cannot allow any hint of child molestation/rape to circulate in their business. Its simple. Thank you LL for trying to eradicate the deparivity.
FrizzleFry101
Nov 14th, 2007
@Raven Welesa
“We are not defending pedophiles!”
Yes you are, stop it.
Stop it.
Mytwo Cents
Nov 14th, 2007
Mike T wrote: “For those of you who don’t get it reach up to the screen and pinch your avatar. I doubt your feel anything.”
I followed your suggestion and almost broke my finger on glass of the screen. I feel pain.
—
I think a lot of people in discussions around Second Life and “freedom” and “morality” are missing the point.
Despite its catchy name, Second Life is actually not a life, a world or a society. It is particular kind of online communication and entertainment product (or service if you like) that can be used for recreational, educational and commercial purposes provided and operated by LindenLab.
As such, LindenLab has reserved the right to define which kind of action and behavior is accepted in Second Life and which is not. And you agreed to this wholeheartedly when you created the account and decided to log into Second Life, btw.
So, if LindenLab believes that it is not beneficial for the future of its product/service to be associated with virtual depiction of pedophilia (regardless of whether or not real minors are involved), the company has the right to exclude users that engage in such actions whether you like this or not.
The key criteria for LindenLab to decide whether or not to accept or tolerate a particular kind of action is how it affects the value of the product/service – not constitutional rights of US citizens towards their government and the like.
Obviously, LindenLab has come to the conclusion that virtual depiction of pedophilia is damaging the reputation and the image of Second Life and might hurt its future success (whereas the simulation of other controversial sexual practices such as BDSM for example can be tolerated because it does not seem to have much of an impact – or might even entice people to join).
Hence, the ban of sexual ageplay is purely a decision about business strategy and product positioning. Debates about moral, double standards and freedom of expression might have a certain entertainment value but are irrelevant in this context.
Matt
Nov 14th, 2007
Great Article ! Amazing writer
Greefin Oh
Nov 14th, 2007
Hey all you Sexual Ageplayers. I got a simple solution for you all. Just apply a beard to your avatar when trouble comes your way, and say that you’re a midget, and little people have rights too! That’ll shut those mean nasty Lindens up….
LOL!
Arara
Nov 14th, 2007
http://www.explosm.net/comics/1075/
Fair enough.
Mike T
Nov 15th, 2007
I did not write the article that has my name attached to it.
However.
We are not arguing that pedophilia is right. What I and some people are arguing is – where do you draw the line? It’s easy to say that Linden Labs has to follow the laws of the United States. It’s becoming arguable that when two people disagree here that the moral majority have turned this into “You disagree with me and it’s against the law.” Many of the “depictions” that occur in SL are against the law – Somewhere. What I’m repeatedly, it seems, asking is if we keep caving on every little point because it MIGHT offend someone, somewhere, then why not turn this into a text only system, with a filter that screens out any word that some might call offensive.
The original creators of this world had imagination. Now it’s slowly becoming the religious rights version of Disney World for adults who don’t want to accept that humans have varied imaginations.
What next will we be required to have a prayer hour once a day. Will Sundays become a day of no gunfire? Let’s just eliminate anything that doesn’t exist in the RL and we can close the doors here. Some of these people are the same people who want to legislate what I can do in my own home in RL with another consenting adult and it’s getting scarier every day.
Bladen
Nov 15th, 2007
Hahaha, the furfags bawwwww’d until they got the picture changed. TOO BAD YOU FORGOT TO CHANGE THE TEXT
“What about babyfur avatars?”
WHAT INDEED.
WTF
Nov 15th, 2007
WTF!? In African American and Latino urban hip-hop culture words like “Daddy” short for “Sugar Daddy”, “Baby Boo”, “Baby Girl”, “Big Papa”, “Mami”, “Papi”, “Chica”, “Chico” to name a few are prevelant to describe girlfriend/boyfriend in relationships among adults. Can’t call anybody “baby” or “babe” any more either if sexual situations are involved cause that’s an infant?
Every heard of MTV? Ever heard of YouTube? Ever heard of popular and successful music genres primarily consisting of racial minorities, a majority of whose American consumers are white? Why don’t Linden Lab decision makers take a minute to climb of that high horse and see what other cultures are about!? What does Linden Lab know about cultures of those of darker complexion? Is this some kind of racial slight against urban African American and/or Latino culture? Just how many black and hispanic people work at Linden Lab? How many are from urban background? Or are they all paedophiles and all going to hell? They need to be asked.
Mark
Nov 15th, 2007
Ok, I can understand the no sex between child avies thing, but they’re not allowed to call each other mommy or daddy in IMs? Wtf is that all about?
Holy gestapo batman.
Child porn is illegal in RL, so I give them the benefit of the doubt on outlawing child avies knocking nasties but how in the world is two people RPing in IM child porn?
I wonder why prostitution has gone virtually unscathed while this child stuff and gambling where given the boot?
This is not the same SL I signed up for and if they are going to go this overboard then they need to outlaw weapons and talk of “killing” too.
Pathetic.
Nacon
Nov 15th, 2007
Well… I believe that’s going to be a big problem for Tenshi.
D.B.
Nov 15th, 2007
Aaand witness X proving he cannot read. amazingly enough, since appearently he IS able to find the letters on his keyboards to spell his name.
Copypasta, really cute yeah. I didn’t LOL, I would, if this whole ZOMG PEDOPHILES THINK OF THE CHILDREN!!!! bullcrap wasn’t so horribly sad.
Never mind you guys, I never expected any of you to have any intelligent replies. Can’t expect something with the intelligence of the average amoeba to converse on an adult level.
It does prove however, who should really be banned, there are children on SL.
THINK OF THE CHILDREN!!! Witness X, and all the pathetic little anons need our protection. At least till they are old enough to go from their V-techs to real computers and start taking drivers lessons.
anon
Nov 15th, 2007
“V-techs”
v-tech just kicked in, cho.
Larluna Woodget
Nov 15th, 2007
Like any touchy subject, this is a tightrope act. (How furries got dragged into it is beyond me but anyway…).
There’s a fine line here. First of all, defending someone’s right to just present themselves as a child avatar in a completely non-sexual fashion is NOT defending Pedophilia. Defending depicting children sexual regardless of the age of those at the keyboard however IS.
To those who think virtual pedophilia is peachy if it’s two adults; Do you REALLY think there’s nothing wrong with you if you WANT to engage in a sexual fantasy involving small children? That’s not healthy, period. And it shows signs of underlying issues. If your 6 year old av is having sex it’s virtual child porn at the very least, and if you’re getting off on even the VIRTUAL image of a small child being fucked, you need help.
Now, as to those narrow enough to think ANY virtual childhood is just as sick, god, get the stick out. Has it never once occurred to you that some people might be trying to use the less limiting world of Second Life as therapy? I’ve adopted SL children. One of them is a young woman battling stomach cancer, whose rl mother treated her very abusively. She portrays a child so she can have a second childhood in her free time, one more positive and nurturing. It gives her positive feelings and helps her feel loved and reassured. Anyone who can say something that gives a cancer patient hope and happiness is sick and wrong when there is absolutely no sex involved ever is a heartless narrow-minded nitwit who’s never been hurt in real life, because you have to be heartless to not feel this woman’s pain.
I myself an unable to have children but I have a strong maternal instinct and a need to nurture. So my daughters and I give each other something therapeutic that helps us grow and heal and feel good about ourselves. We’ve never felt the need to even discuss sex. That’s a very huge difference from two adults playing virtual pedo games to get their rocks off.
Those distinctions are easy to make. I have rules in my home. Nothing sexual or adult is to be discussed when the kids are around, and the kids are asked to leave the house when I’m having intimate time with a love. I have safe places designated for them to TP to when I’m occupied, and under no circumstance may they EVER enter my bedroom. Simple easy boundaries even an idiot should be able to come up with.
Now, the harder question; Regardless of my personal feelings, do I think such RP should actually be outright banned? Well that’s harder. Personally I think it should never happen at all, but I also think banning and censoring is a delicate thing too easily misused. However sick it is, if two consenting adults discuss it, and act it out privately, and nobody gets hurt and they don’t try to solicate strangers or actual children, well, I dunno, I think they’re sick but it’s their private fantasy.
If an adult sees a child av wandering around and tries to lure them INTO sexual ageplay? Yes, that should be against the rules. They’re a stranger, not your lover. You don’t have the right to go out trying to lure strangers into your fantasy. An age fantasy is like a rape fantasy; the only way it should really happen is between two consenting adults who love each other or at the very least fully trust each other.
The problem with banning private behaviour is that moralistic crusaders, (or just plain jackasses), could use the banning of one act to try and ban others. I know there are probably hundreds of losers chomping at the bit to ban furries on the grounds that THEIR sexual roleplay could be construed as advocating bestiality which it’s not. (And as much as pedo RP disgusts me, I begrudgingly admit that private rp between lovers isn’t actually advocating pedophilia either. It’s just gross to me).
This is the kind of thing that makes this issue so polarizing. Everyone has a point, everyone has a take. Do you censor something you hate just because you hate it? If you do, how then do you justify defending what you LIKE when someone who hates it tries to censor you? How can you be for one fetish and against another and no be a hypocrite?
I’d personally like to obliterate any form of pedophilia, but does that NEED to include roleplay between adults in private? Or does including that act in a wish to get rid of real life pedophilia just mean I’m imposing my own views on someone else’s private fantasy?
Honestly? I don’t know the answer to that. I really don’t. I know what I believe personally. I know I love my SL kids as if I gave birth to them myself. I know if some creep tries to hit on them I’ll tp in an instant to scare him off, and I WILL file an abuse report.
But will I go hunting for everyone who roleplays in private away from an audience?
No. I’m one person. It isn’t my place to force anyone to believe as I do. Some of my abundant troll fanclub on here like to think I do, but I don’t. I just voice my opinion. That I DO have a right to do.
So my opinion is if you fuck a virtual child for sexual gratification, you’re sick and need help. But I won’t stop you from doing it virtually or in private. Real life? I’d castrate you with a rusted tuning fork if I ever caught you near a child.
That’s my OPINION.
Hopefully the damn comp keeps me logged in as myself. This is Penny talking. Do make note that, as per my new policy, once I post this comment I will no longer read this thread, because the trolls are to be ignored. But I wanted to voice my opinion on this subject since I have SL kids and I’m a target of griefers who think how I live and behave is sick. Thank you for your time.
@Laruna
Nov 15th, 2007
“To those who think virtual pedophilia is peachy if it’s two adults; Do you REALLY think there’s nothing wrong with you if you WANT to engage in a sexual fantasy involving small children? That’s not healthy, period. And it shows signs of underlying issues. If your 6 year old av is having sex it’s virtual child porn at the very least, and if you’re getting off on even the VIRTUAL image of a small child being fucked, you need help.”
Have you ever concidered the possibility that some people might not be getting off to it at all? But do it for entirely other reasons?
Or that they are not getting off to the fact that it’s a child in a sexual situation, but that the child in that situation might be representative not for children, but for something different?
I know that roleplaying a child in a sexual situation is a way for some to come to terms with something that happened in their past, for instance the story I read of a young woman who had been sexually abused by a family member as a child, and relived that situation trough roleplay, where this time, she was able to keep the nastyness of being raped out of it, and in her roleplay turned it into what sex should be, an expression of love between two people.
This had helped her come to terms with her past and even tho she didn’t like the role, she also helped others in her situation with it, by roleplaying the adult in similar scenes so that they would be able to come to terms with it in the same way she did.
So in essence, yes it could be concidered virtual peodophilia. It’s the underlying thought however that made it something utterly different then what it seemed…
And that is the biggest problem here:
It looks like all of the sexual ageplayers are just wanking off to seeing a child being sexually abused, making them seem like sexual predators.
Everyone knows the basic line, don’t judge a book by it’s cover.
NO-ONE knows what anyone else is thinking, what goes trough their minds. And in assuming every child AV on SL, sexually active or not, can be nothing but a bad person who wants to rape children IRL, is just plain wrong.
Of course there are always exceptions, there are indeed really sick and twisted people on SL that do sexual ageplay for the wrong reasons. But there’s always more then one possible reason for people to do things.
Yes, people need help. It’s exactly the freedom and endless possibilities that SL offers, that is help for a lot of people.
There’s more ways to get help and come to terms with things in the past, then lying on some overly expensive shrink. And SL has become one of them.
We might not like it, I certainly am not a fan, and I rather see it gone, for the good of the entire SL population.
There is a lot that I would want to see gone from the grid forever. But I cannot and will not judge people on who or what they are or do, without knowing the entire story.
And I think no-one should.
Plot Tracer
Nov 15th, 2007
Same old chestnuts and same old pretendy journalism asking questions no-one wanted answering only the fevered imagination of the pretendy journo. I mean, if someone is roleplaying a family, and the puppeteers are making their mummy and daddy puppet have sex while the other puppeteer is watching, wtf? They are all adults. All adults! Or did you think children had credit cards?
Anyone with an ounce of sense would know that this is about the visual depiction of child abuse. And it is wrong… Just plain wrong. Child abuse is not entertainment, and getting kicks from child abuse is not something any community should be wishy washy about. It does not belong in society- it is anti social- and the people who feel it is not, need help- and somewhere other than an open forum.
The argument that this is people working through issues is just stupid. Issues so harmful to society and to the individual and to common decency should be in closed forums, with professional people at hand- not played out in public.
And what a crock of shit to say that peadophiles will NOT play kids. Of course they will. This is a visual media. And if you or your partner are into simulating sex with children, yes you have peadophilic tendencies – and you need help because you are in denial. Grown up. If you are wanking off while watching children have sex, there is something seriously wrong. GET HELP!
oh and thanks to the herald journo(?) for pointing out sl is not a world but a medium for communication. those who believe the advertising – “Your World, Your Imagination” are definitely the ones who believe if you brush your teeth with colgate you will have a glowing ring around your gub and that using a certain brand of petrol will mean you have a real life tiger in your tank. “Your World, Your Imagination” has always had strings. we in europe have known that for a very long time. the string? US law. we knew this when lindens allowed nazis to run riot during january/february (and are still peddling their daft ideology) we knew this when we started being taxed by the lindens ( not by the seller which is how vat works, you gumballs- and we don’t pay vat on goods purchased in america get it right lindens!)
sl has laws. they are called US laws. so it is our imagination within the us legislative system.
ThoughtRyder
Nov 15th, 2007
Ageplay more than a touchy subject in SL
The Second Life Herald posted an article concerning the recent post by Linden Lab about ageplay and the companys new policy clarification in its regard. One line specifically caught my attention:
[]making the sexual ageplay ban bro…
Joe
Nov 15th, 2007
I want everyone to think about this for a minute. I wrote an article concerning this issue (http://thoughts.joeryder.com/2007/11/15/ageplay-more-than-a-touchy-subject-in-sl/) and I think it’s important to post as a rebuttal to this article’s liberal consideration for needed policy.
The fact that child roleplayers are not children does not excuse the acts of the user. It is also not required for pedophiles to look for child avatars and child roleplayers to be normal people. There are all sorts of needs met for pedophiles by becoming a child themselves. The fact that you’re an adult, in and of itself, is not a dismissal of liability.
If you are an adult acting as a child, why is that? What legitimate reason could you have acting like a child in virtual reality? Does that mean that, by not doing anything sexual, you are free and clear to do anything else you want?
My concern, and that of Linden Labs, is that there is no way to define what consequences in real life would come from ageplay in SL. How do Linden Labs, real life law enforcement or even a psychiatrist really know that you are not a threat to real life kids? Pedophiles are an unpredictable breed, and you don’t have to be a pedophile to be dangerous to a child. Recreating yourself in child form and then being disciplined by a virtual parent can be a gateway stimulus to unpredictable mental states. How can you as the subject in the child suit guarantee that the “child” you are playing is only a persona? Where does it go from there if you have other unmentioned issues like prior child abuse or PTSD? Even psychologists can’t predict how stimuli will affect the brain as neuropathway creation is as unique as a fingerprint.
The only legitimate use of ageplay in SL that cannot be questioned is that of a sanctioned performance art installation. Just like any other production, Linden Labs, local communities and visitors are notified that the installation is staged and open for public criticism, just like any other art. If you’re a rogue artist even, not notifying Linden that there is a performance being done, you have no right to be considered safe from an ageplay policy. It is a hindsight policy that says, “you had no legitimate right to ageplay, so you are banned.” It’s not a personal attack; it’s a call to safety for both in-worlders and out-worlders.
For more insight on this, read my article.
For those who take this comment and my own article to task, I suggest you find me a psychiatrist that can, without a shadow of doubt, support the legitimacy of ageplay for either sexual or non-sexual depiction. If you can, I’ll write an apology myself. Until then, live with the fact that you are affected by something much deeper than just a desire to go back to your childhood, and a psychiatrist may be in order anyway.
PrimRod Stewart
Nov 15th, 2007
Does this mean I have to take “Gladrags and Handbags” off my music stream?
…and ALL the “Sting” songs too?
don’t stand so close to me
moses
Nov 15th, 2007
i think if you look very very hard you can find some ‘experts’ who will tell you what ever you want to hear.
lf
Nov 15th, 2007
‘For more insight on this, read my article.’
I would, but the excessive quantity of babble in your post doesn’t allow me to imagine that much further insight will be found there.
kid606
Nov 15th, 2007
I play as a child in SL, an 8 year old boy in fact, Why? becuase i don’t have to become one with the wannabe gangsters, barechested longhaired strange shaped muscle freaks, have no desire to be into Gor, BDSM and any of that, I log on to SL to chat with friends, fly around in flying saucers, turn into a dalek or robot and generally mess about.
It’s a way of relaxing from my RL where i have a proper job with major responsibilities for others safety. Yet according to some of the commentators here i’m a peadophile/child abuser, what an utter crock of shite. I do not do sexual ageplay and none of my friends do either,to use that brush to smear the whole of the SL kid community with this taint is pathetic.
Most of those squealing about this probably do nothing in RL to support agencies and charities that deal with chid abuse and it’s awful consequences. Instead they pontificate in SL where it’s easy and costs them nothing in monetry, or emotional value, (virtual protesting, why bother getting up of your couch and help, when you can sit there and feel smug about the *virtual* difference you are making)
The sexualisation of children has unfortunatley occured in society even without the help of SL, think about the child beauty pagents held in the USA, where 6 year olds are made to dress and parade as adults in makeup, the Brat dolls, which all look like sluts, crop tops sold to prebubescent girls.
And as for that peusdo-intelligent gibberish from Joe, it would make a good piece in peusd’s corner in Private Eye magazine, i mean “Pedophiles are an unpredictable breed, and you don’t have to be a pedophile to be dangerous to a child”…so what you are saying is that everyone even if they are not a peadophile have peadophilic tendencies?
You really need to take your head out of your arse and take a deep breath of fresh air
Entropy Nikolaidis
Nov 15th, 2007
WitnessX:
“In Real Life, I’m a 27 year old male.
In Second Life I’m a 19 year old prostitute. Anyone wanna report me for that? I’m in SL, also mother of two daughters, nearly one and three years old, their players IRL about my RL age.”
I’m not trying to personally attack you, just mulling this over in my head. So RL you’re a nearly thirty year old guy. You log into second life to pretend to be a nineteen year old female, where you then pretend to be the mother of two very young children who are actually played by other thirty year olds.
At this point I was wondering where you were going with your post, then I scrolled down a bit more.
“In RL, I am in a relationship with a very sweet and caring man, 37, who on Second Life plays an 8 year old boy.”
“..I would love to share some of the fun roleplaying with him as I do with my clients,…”
Great. So you want to pretend to fuck a eight year old. Disturbing.
“Yet, he plays an 8 year old boy on Second Life.
Now, explain to me, why he would be oh such a big threat?”
Maybe becuase unless there was a rule against it, he’d be engaging in sexual acts with his eight year old avatar? No one wants to see that shit!
And then your post just went downhill.
“The real predators, the dangerous ones using SL to make contact with eachother and share child porn, will dive under even further, making it only harder for LL and the RL ustice system to catch them”
Christ. Sharing “child porn” or any other data over the Internet between two parties who wish to have their data protected and remain annoymous is hardly a complex task. It’s not like Second Life has opened up some brand new magic portal that allows this material to change hands. It’s been a problem before, it’ll be a problem after Second Life is long and gone.
“The sexual ageplayers who are NOT RL predators and don’t form any threat except maybe for the image of the company, will get bnned left and right while not doing anything wrong, or will dive under and go into hiding further, or find other venues to conduct their harmless roleplay”
I enjoy your use of the term “sexual ageplayers”. Dosn’t sound so good when you replace it with “The people that enjoy using Second Life to pretend to fuck small childen who are NOT RL predators….” and so on. As far as i’m concerned, if you want to see small children getting fucked, getting banned from using Second Life is the least of your problems. GET HELP. Professional help. Please.
“The non sexual ageplayers, adult babies, those who just want to look cute and young, or simply play family with friends and leave their RL ‘have to behave like an adult’ shit behind them for a little bit online, will be banned left and right by idiots who wouldnt recognise a RL sexual predator if they were raping a 2 year old in front of their own RL eyes.”
Cry me a fucking river. Welcome to the world! You have to give up a small amount of your personal freedom in order to conform with the community and the community leaders. Just like in the real world. Wake up. No one expects you to “behave like an adult” in SL, most players are not capaible of that. We just don’t want to see you fucking kids, pretending to be a kid, or any of that shit. It’s fucked up. Plain and simple.
“all the bigots who enoy their own utter freedom on SL to do whatever they want, get to file AR’s against anyone who in their eyes is ‘weird’. As long as their own hobbies arent in danger, they will be happy.”
This is where you’re confused. I don’t care if someone is “Weird”. No one gives a fuck. I’ve never filled out a single AR in my entire life. Weird the community can handle, no problem. All this pretend family baby bullshit my boyfriend is a 8 year old and my pretend children don’t seem to care bullshit is beyond the fucking point. No one wants your creepy story about what you and who you pretend to fuck does, and no matter how you tell it, you’re telling the exact same story. Shall I quote you again?
“In RL, I am in a relationship with a very sweet and caring man, 37, who on Second Life plays an 8 year old boy.”
“..I would love to share some of the fun roleplaying with him as I do with my clients,…”
The reality of this situation is that you get off on pretending to fuck children.
“Does this make me a peadophile? According to the dictionary meaning, yes. I love children.”
Did you even use the dictionary? It’s okay, I did for you.
***Pedophilia or paedophilia (see spelling differences) is the sexual attraction by adults to prepubescent youths. A person with this attraction is called a pedophile or paedophile.[1] The ICD-10 and DSM IV, which are standard medical diagnosis manuals, currently describe pedophilia as a paraphilia and mental disorder of adults or older youths, if it causes clinically significant distress or impairment in social, occupational, or other important areas of functioning.***
Translation: If you and your boyfriend want to pretend that he is a 8 year old child so you can engage in sexual activity with him, you are a Pedophile.
Keep on trying to justify your disorder and force the grid to accept Pedophiles like you as “Normal”, i’m sure it’ll go well!
Entropy Nikolaidis
Mark
Nov 15th, 2007
“The fact that child roleplayers are not children does not excuse the acts of the user.”
Ohhh, can i play?
The fact that military roleplayers are not children does not excuse the acts of the user.