Age Play should NOT be banned

Did you read it?

Dude, in your own friggin link:

Computer technology allows pornographers to create so-called "virtual" images of children. In fact, the children in these images do not exist. Are these images illegal?

The federal Child Pornography Prevention Act of 1996 included an attempt by Congress to ban "virtual" child pornography, so that visual depictions of what "appears to be" minors engaging in sexual conduct would be criminalized, even if it could not be proven that the depictions were of actual children. However, in April 2002 the United States Supreme Court, in Ashcroft v. Free Speech Coalition, 122 S.Ct. 1389, struck down this prohibition.

The Court found that a ban on virtual child pornography abridged freedom of speech and was overbroad and unconstitutional under the First Amendment. Congress, together with the U.S. Department of Justice, has been working to craft new federal legislation that would overcome this Supreme Court decision by adding new language to the law so that virtual images indistinguishable (or which appear virtually indistinguishable) from images of actual minors engaged in sexually explicit conduct would be banned. If this legislation is enacted, another series of constitutional challenges is likely.

Images VIRTUALLY INDISTINGUISHABLE from images of actual minors. SL is not that.

So this is what I've been saying all along.

you beat me to it. though I said it better.

If you think I have "Christian Coalition stamped values" - go ahead, ask around a bit. (I don't in the least, and am certainly not Christian)


Second - an open question - If you are correct that only images that can be mistaken for child pornography are unlawful, how do you explain Sociolotron's ban?

That site is designed to simulate rape, STD infection, and murder, and yet THEY stay away from it. None of their shoddy images could ever be mistaken for real acts with a minor.

So why do even they avoid it?

I've never heard of Sociolotron.

If I were to venture a hypothosis however, I'd say they avoid it because of the stigma attached to it that renders otherwise normal people incapable of thinking reasonably and constipates their synaptic pathways. They can't see adults doing whatever with other adults and instead see the precious children being controlled and manipulated by evil grown-ups.

And you don't have to question if I'm correct about the imagery or not, you can see it in the link the guy provided helpfully above.

Those people thinking a signed petition will do the trick and stop age play...please think again. Age players are used to carrying out their play hidden and under ground. That will continue if LL bans age play. Some petition and a company saying it's no longer allowed won't stop it from happening.

Simple Answer:
It's their own choice, their game, their rules.

Long Answer:
Sex/rape/illness/kidnapping/rape are at the core of socio and cannot be avoided (unless you log out, and even then there are other complications). In SL those things are optional, roleplayed, and can be avoided (by not going to those places, or barring them from land/sim you control). With that said, allowing child avatars into socio would mean many people could leave because they may have moral/value/religoius/fetish issues and since they cannot avoid it, they leave. While leaving is an option in SL, they can also be avoided/barred with the above reasons.

I was just herding it into the corral and it stopped short. I swear!

Actually, from what is shown in that link, I do believe you are right.


That said, I still think that it is in my best interest to keep my ban. Here is why:

All it would take is one image that was 'possibly real' in the eyes of a jury, and I'd be in whopping trouble if I was condoning such.

I am thinking of the work of a friend in SL that does RL photography, and who also makes Second Life avatar image snapshots. He strives for realism, and in close-ups, he actually gets it.

I'm just not willing to stick my neck out on this issue. I don't think it's likely to come up, but I do see tacitly allowing child avatar sex as a real potential liability, if someone takes "good pictures".

I'm just not willing to possibly ever go to court over something like this.



Joshua, I'm not keen on your presumptions about me, but I must say, you have won this point.

Just because a person finds images such as this repugnant does not mean they are being unreasonable or not thinking clearly. That just means people have varying opinions about various topics.

The link provided above states clearly that SO FAR it isn't illegal.

But folks can and do make choices on how far they want to take things when it comes to taboos and fetishes, even in a VR type situation. It's a rare person that would see a pixelated child splayed face down on a table, her little pedal pushers unable to reach the floor, being taken from behind by a grown pixelated male avatar and not flinch.

Sorry for the graphic description, but THIS was the subject of a picture for an advertisement in SL and can't possibly do LL any good.

I would just like to point out the main goal of ::Grim Babies:: is not to be shaken and killed. It is an option to those people that choose to use it. The point of a ::Grim Babie:: is to keep it alive, we made them more like a game, if their abuse meter gets to high, they die, if their spoiled meter gets to high they scream all the time.

And banning age play? Where will that stop? Banning small avatars? Banning clothing that COULD be considered childish? What about Tinys? or Minis? Skins without pubic hair? Pink lipstick. Toys? Boys with blond hair, small framed avatars?

I have a friend that is a Doll; would you ban her for looking somewhat like a child? Or the vampire children (they are some 1000s of years old, but died as children). THIS is the point of second life. BE WHO EVER YOU CHOOSE TO BE.

~Grim

Someone sent me the petition and I discarded it. What happens between two consenting adults is their business, as long as no actual children are involved. The last thing we need in this country is more censorship and more groups telling other people how to live their lives, and what to do, or not to do in their bedrooms, be it in SL or RL.

I don't like the image either, and I want it to be clear to you guys when I make this statment that I'm in a position to make it moreso than most of you arguing against.

when I was eight I was molested continually by a neighbor over the course of a year. I'm not going to get into gritty specifics, but please understand that if I'm able to make out a distinction between actual child molestation and virtual "pretend-play" then anyone else should be able to.

Desmond, my apologies if my assumptions were incorrect, but this issue tends to be argued by those with a certain mold. I understand if you have legal considerations to contend with but I'm sure that you could get out of them just as easily as LL would be able to in the same situation. Those who rent/own the land are responsible for it, not those who rent it out.

again, personally the idea of sex here in any regard is strange to me. it's not what I'm here for. but adults should be able to do what they want when it's consentual and there are too many people both inside SL and outside that strive to control arbitrarily. I will never be for that.

observations from a veteran player of 3 years

I have been a beta test player of Sociolotron ( see my profile) for several years and quite frankly the 'game' is still pretty basic, 2.5 view limited 1/4 screen graphics, inept movement system and it's only appeal is the so-called 'sex elements' in it which while clever and innovative are greatly under-delivered. 10 minutes in Socio with it's tiny sprite characters all with exact same size and shape bodies and its cumbersome and primitive system of movement and ur bored with the sex unless you are a chronic obssessive.

That game will never be more than a novelty with it's 'Sims' type graphic little play screen and the object lesson here is that the original concept of a lawless sexual anarchic world was in fact ruined by the tedious moral arguments of (mostly American) players who reduced it to a world where you can't now even walk naked (let alone have sex) in public places without being 'beaten' by guards and 'criminalised' earning the disapporval of other residents and being 'imprisoned' . What was done to Socio (in the name of 'decency'.. ) by a vociferous 'few' was essentially to destroy the point of such an anarchic concept. In fact Socio is merely a crude little 'sex-fest' chat interface not much more and of no relevance in pointing out where we should go with Second Life.

Ok so they ( like many others) scream out their furious denials of so called 'virtual underage' sex without one shred of attention to the fact that across the world LEGAL ages approved by sovereign states and everyone in them from child to adult vary enormously. Being Japanese I am used to others accusing us all of being 'perverts' because we have a LEGAL age of 13, and a tolerance towards hentai anime, schoolgirl sex imagery, lolita material and much more and this resulted in agressive pressure from the west to do away with various facets of Japanese life like 'Enjyo kousei' ( compensated dating) in which younger girls went out with older men for commercial 'gifts' and lifestyle improvements. Japan like many countries ( some in 'so-called civilised europe' have lower real (1st LIfe) ages of consent than USA and UK. In those two countries especially even nudity is shameful, persecuted, limited, restricted and looked on as 'wrong' at any age let alone a healthy view of our bodies such as enjoyed on europe's mostly nude beaches of all ages. Yet one of those countries has the largest porn industry on the planet. In fact in 1st Life ( the so called 'frame of reference from which the agressive moralists draw their apparently 'right' thinking from) some countries in Europe have LEGAL ages lower than here in Japan. Thank goodness for the fact we are NOT all ruled by agressive minorities with fixed moral compasses.

Second Life is not just another place for the tired old ' do as I say cos I have to be right cos I say so' brigade to play their tired old game. As a free thinker who in fact spends 99% of my time in Second Life in 'harmless' creative object building, newbie helping, landscaping and chat nothing offends me more than some bunch of self appointed 'right thinking' moral nuts fuelled by their crazy western religions telling everyone else what to NOT do under fear of their retribution/ We do not want them turning the newest frontier of virtuality into another 'shame/guilt/fear/' driven culture ruled by a few loud campaigners. I have seen in some threads in the anti age play genre some of the stupidest and most ignorant mob thinking possible, yet my overall impression is most SL residents can understand that it things like virtual 'age play' are NOT REAL and have labelled the 'anti's' rightly as a bunch of troublemaking extremists.

I do not have to sympathise with anyone's sexual taste be they furry, vampire, age player, or roly-poly BBW lover to find the 'anti-brigades' offensive. I am tired to death of this topic surfacing like an old potato and know full well that if we let these people drag in their arguments about why everyone should be stopped from doing things THEY don't like with their enforced moral arguments we will all be losing our essential 2nd Life virtual world freedom.

We should all be creating brave new worlds NOT replicating the mistakes of the meat world. Virtualism is not about limitation, I do not care if people have sex with 7ft high bunnies or blue elves or pink flying sheep so long as they go about it in a mannered way and don't dump trash all over my land. Ban griefers, ban idiots. ban counter productive interfering and nuisance people.. but leave the gays, lesbians, furries, plushies, age players and BDSM communities and all, to flourish in their private and gloriously individualistic lives as is their right in a new futurist virtual world.

If we ban anyone let's ban Interfering Moral Self Appointed evangelists who all think they have the right to dictate to everyone else that we should live their lives. If I wanted to live like that as a woman I'd go live in one of those other equally nutty places and walk round in a black sack told what to do by men all the time and fearing a stoning for showing an ankle.

As the songwriter once said. ' I'm not scared of your ( name ur own God here) I'm scared of what ur doing in thr name of your God. '

petitions/campaigns/ fuss making .. please... how far will you go to keep kicking your own bogeymen it won't make your lives any better, when you are tired of ageplayers you will find someone else to persecute because that is your nature.. basically it's moral fascism and should be opposed at all costs even if you don't agree with those being persecuted..we have all seen where these sort of people take it and what happens when they get their way...who will be next - maybe women in short skirts with enhanced breasts.. if so I am on the run..

LL seems to be taking the sensible option of consigning this to a PvP argument and letting it run out of steam which it surely will as there's no LEGAL basis for banning it. There are more important things to do in virtual life than allow the 'thou shalt nots' to rule the world - we have had enough of that kind in 1st Life than you very much.

Oh! Did anyone say where the gorean furry weenie roast was? I've become a bit peckish.

/me licks his lips in an-ti-ci-pation.

This is a very brilliant and completely reasonable post. I've no doubt it'll be torn to shreds in a moment.

Where's Kevn nowdays? Did he finally get banned for being Jesus' buttbuddy?

Why Why Why are threads like this always poping up? For getting attention??!?!??! Its no wonder the forums are getting shut down!

Junk threads and alts posting in them to hid their real Avie names. Gesh We are suppose to take this junk serious??!?!??!?! Go watch TV.............

Role Play = anything goes

"I will refuse to deny someones right to do something that I wouldn't do" - Jami

Life is bigger than you...and it's an online sim...let em do what they want to do on thier own island.

-I think I voted : "Yes" - It should NOT be banned...

With the prevelance of Infantile behaviour in SL, you must be a Bit troubled a Great Deal. I've seen in this game Grown people behaving in a Fashion that would embarass a Kindergartener Far to Frequently in SL to be troubled it.

It's by Far Harder to Find the ones acting like Adults.

This Particular Issue for the Vast Majority IS about the sexual aspects of Age play that some choose to explore. It concerns people.
It Violates neither terms of Service, Nor any Law that anyone has been able to quote so far but i have to admit the Practice Bothers me a Bit also.
However,
My Personal Discomfort is NOT sufficient grounds to Curtail someone elses Legal and consensual activities.

Part of being an adult is accepting that you can't always have everything your own way.

Angel.

I know the sexual part of it is a major concern, but not the only issue. Like I said, the way I see it is that the child sex part is purely ficitonal, while the 35 year old men playing as 7 year old girls isn't. To ME, that is far more alarming.

"Part of being an adult is accepting that you can't always have everything your own way."

Well see, that was actually part of my main point. Sure I can't change what these people do, but I sure as hell can judge them. Why? Because they are full grown adults playing as children.

Part of being an adult is accepting that people will call you out when you do crazy shit like this.

And part of being an adult is accepting that sometimes your judgements are irrational and worthless when applied to anyone else's life or choices, and just because you don't like something doesn't mean that everyone should also not like it.

Which is why I used the word personally, and not the term "everyone in the universe". Although it does seem like a big enough deal to warrent dissusion every damn day.

Tren let's make out.

kay

I have nothing else to offer.