does anyone know the LL position on depictions of sexual violence?

I don't know whether it's mores, psychology, or simple linguistics. The verb "kill" has multiple meanings, not all of which refer to evil acts. Similarly for "slay" and "murder". These aren't just colloquialisms (such as "killing a hamburger), but are accepted dictionary meanings (such as "kill the pain".

The verb "rape" doesn't have those sorts of variations.

I don't know why the language evolved this way, but it's certainly not as simple as saying that current mores or propriety make one acceptable and the other not.

I didn't say or mean that. I also hadn't mentioned child rape. To me extreme is either hovering around "All men are rapists." or "It's ok to have sex with children.".

What I am saying, is most people are fine and can keep a handle on these r/p's. It's the pushing or maybe assumptions from these extremes that is offending people, and at times, even pushing them more into one of these extremes in their own defense.



Again, I haven't mentioned child rape or insinuated people are for or pro it or rape or pedo.

I know there are nut cases around who are dangerous. I have mentioned here myself at times.

But over all I just think most people are pretty stable. Also I think people in general want freedom to explore their fantasies and can do this in an safe way. Sorry but I don't find it in any way indecent. Basically it's the safe, sane and consensual kind of creed.

You have totally mis understood my post. I don't care for you saying I am on about child rape either.

People veer both ways. Some think it's pixels and have no emotional attachment, others feel it in a personal sense.

Both are real enough experiences to have relevance.

Ian I am glad you clarified, but I was clearly discussing child SEXUAL roleplay. Sex with a child who is not CAPABLE of informed consent to sexual activity, is by definition, child rape.

I said "depictions of child rape" - which "depictions of adult sex with children" certainly is in any form. Depictions in this instance, this forum discussion, meaning virtual representations, in Second Life. Which people here seem to have forgotten is incidentally against Linden Labs TOS. Or at least, no one's mentioned it while defending its useage or questioning why it's distasteful at the least.

Here is again what you said, that I was replying to, Ian:



So what type of child roleplay were you referring to, then, if not depictions of child SEXUAL roleplay, which is what is being discussed in the thread you just posted it in? (And again, sex with a child is by definition 'child rape.' So 'depictions of child rape' would be a blunter way of saying 'depictions of sex with children.') I think it's fair to ask: How else was I to interpret your sentence, there?

You then seem to contrast being 'against rape' with "decent" people. You seem to equate being against rape or child sexual roleplay, with being "dogmatic" and "extreme" and "idealistic." If not, perhaps your paragraph was unfortunately constructed. Your follow-up post seems to indicate you feel that a middle stance is more reasonable, which is a reasonable thing to say. (Even if I disagree with it in this one instance - anything involving harm to children.)

And when did I say that YOU are for child rape?! I don't recall making it about you personally.

Honestly sometimes forum discussions are like a telephone game.

I agree with this as stated upthread.



I make one exception which I've discussed a bit overmuch really, in this thread. And so, having said my case I believe I will exit the thread. This is supposed to be pertinent (the forum) to SL and I think I've said all I can as regards my position on virtual representations of pedophilia in SL, or all I feel is appropriate in this forum at least.

*waves and exits*

At least no one got too nasty to anyone (unless I missed some posts): no one learns a (constructive) thing from impolite debate.

This is the last post I will make to you.

I said extremes pro or against.

I consider myself somewhat reasonable in this point. What I do 'physically' to my avatar is just pixels. From a 4000 meter drop onto rocks to being shot at by a neko with my combat HUD on to being chained to a wall while..... Heh... I'll spare you. =^-^=

At the same time, the emotions are real. Immy is my me that's more "me" than I am, myself. The visual, behaviour, personality, and mentality are all me and reflections who who/what I am. (^_^)

Virtually simulating a visual fantasy scene of rape, abuse, beating, killing, dancing, walking, flying, ... you name it... is just a visual. No harm comes from it. (=_=)

Psychologically affecting a person, be it though abusive language, coercion, manipulation, ostrification, gaslighting, ... you name it... is genuinely real. But, this is the internet and you ~can~ disconnect. Just like a bad TV show, the user has every ability to put the content aside and go do something else. (=_=)

So, this rally cry that often comes up against the "bad" things in SL. Heck, even the current "broadly offensive" bans. It holds no ground to me. As long as the visual isn't intrinsically illegal according to local, state, or federal law in the U.S. (where SL is primarily hosted) there really shouldn't be a rule against it. "Offensive" is in the eye of the beholder. I am more offended by the blocking of content then the presentation of it. You can see this in my completely empty mute/ignore list. (^_^)

But, apparently, the world of the human imagination is too scary a place for a select few. Sadly, this select few is a very noisy group and their primary goal is to hinder imagination, thinking, and creativity until the world packs easily unto their fragile little bubble of "right" and "wrong". (=_=)

Ian, there is nothing "extreme" about being against virtual pedophilia. I understood your post, now you're twisting it round again - did you or did you not mean to refer to being against virtual pedophilia as extreme? I know what "pro or against" means. The thing you took issue with was my interpretation of your phrase "rape or child rp" to include *sexual* child roleplay. Sheesh.

How in the world else is a person to interpret that statement though? A bit unfair to lay that at my feet.

FWIW "extremes" is also a subjective word. So being in a lather about a somewhat vague statement being 'misinterpreted' seems counterproductive.

Don't post to me again, I honestly don't care. I just wanted it clear that I wasn't wantonly twisting your words, to me they clearly state anyone being against virtual pedophilia is being extreme.



"Extremes" as undefined by yourself and left to interpretation. Since one is EITHER for or against it, or neutral, that pretty much equates extreme with anything but being neutral. (Further bolstered by the rest of that particular post - neutral stance = "Decent" people.)

It's fine we saw the same thing differently but don't blame me for interpreting a basically vague sentence. And now I'm really out of the thread so please *don't* post to me again, that's just fine!

Yeh, the off button is vital and it helps no matter what your stance is.

It's a very fine line between censorship and personal responsibility, I generally veer to trusting the majority are responsible.

That said, the variations of how people are affected, good and bad, are to wide to have an absolute rule that fits this.

I'm actually more cynical - I do not think the majority of the populace has enough common sense.


Around here, I tend to believe the opposite.


I am a survivor of horrid sexual abuse across many years of my childhood and I am not in denial of any sort. As a matter of fact, I spent many very difficult years in therapy working thru all of the issues and impacts in my life. I personally find images of children being raped to be disgusting and the actual act should continue to be unlawful and should actually be punished in far crueler ways than we currently do. However, I am a very big believer in allowing consenting ADULTS to do as they please with each other. If one of them wants to pretend to be a child, I do not care -- no REAL CHILDREN are involved there.


While it might be worse in the statute books, I'm not so sure it is worse to the people involved. If I was murdered, it would take me from those that love me - thereby injuring them emotionally - but I would be dead and therefore no longer affected by the murder. If I was raped, it would not only impact those same people that love me (due to my emotional and behavioral changes afterwards), but I would have to live with the emotional scars for the rest of my life. I guess I would have to call this one a toss up.

the biggest problem isn't media or the like... to be honest

It's people not being able to realize that humans are animals with animalistic drives same as any other animal out there.

It's being honest with oneself first. You're an animal with the primal urges of such. When angry, upset or horny.

We are also the only real animal that tries to forget it is one. A thinking animal to be sure, but still an animal.

People are going to have the urges to do things that are wrong (you have them everyday when you think about the guy that just cut you off in traffic, the sexy person that walked by, etc...)

It's not the fault of anything or anyone but you if those urges are acted upon.

They may have poor control over their urges, but it is still them making the decision to act.

virtual in sl, movies, songs, etc... doesn't change the fact it is still someone's decision to do something.

Stop blaming things and folks for the decisions someone makes.

It's like the bs over GTA... I mean you had 4 people iirc try to say it influenced them... out of how many copies of the game?

Porn of all sorts is available online, and yet what percentage of those that view it go out to be rapists and the like? Pretty damn small amount I would say.

z

In response to Imnotgoing Sideways (sorry it won't let me quote for some reason)

I'm with you, right up until the point you decide to attack the people who hold the alternative view rather than the view itself... not exactly the position of someone who welcomes plurality in all things.. unless of course it's slightly skewed in your favour.

To paraphrase Ben Franklin.. "Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety, deserve neither safety nor liberty"..

But both sides of this argument have liberty to be preserved, and the ubiquitous nature of the web means that, like TV and Film, switching off is not necessarily an option. Anyone who thinks it still is hasn't travelled in a train or driven through the city streets recently.

Censorship may be the devil, but at its best it simply requires a level of accountability and responsibility from those who decide to publish their world views for the delectation of an audience.

This is the price required from anyone demanding this particular "freedom".

In my experience all freedoms have been bought at a price and demand at least rental from those who might still want to make use of them.

It's hard therefore to appreciate the validity of a supposed couragous claim to liberty, when it comes hurled from behind a veil of craven anonymity.

I agree, the authors of The Federalist Papers and The Anti-Federalist Papers were a group of craven cowards.

Not to mention the irony in who and how that was posted...

There definitely is a fine line between personal freedom and being responsible that it doen't impact someone else's freedom negatively. We do show an inability to take that responsibility at times, aided by our institutions and governments who now deem it necessary to decide what we do and where we can do it, if at all.

There is a proper time and place for everything, I think if we remebered that more often, things would be a lot better.

I don't claim the desire of any "plurality" or "liberty" so to speak. There ~are~ things that annoy me. Take a look at my posts in 'bot' and 'adfarm' threads. (=_=)

What I ~am~ talking about here is the human imagination. People in SL are role playing a fantasy that is accessible to others. It is not plastered in billboards or city buses. Regardless, switching off will always be an option. (=_=)

It's difficult for me to make an example of this because I'm not easily shocked or offended. But, say, a bus had an advertisement depicting me hanging from a tree with my stomach cut open (I guess something like that is supposed to offend me, right?) as an exhibit for a museum, I would be haunted, chilled, and a bit grossed out. But, in the end it wouldn't bother me none because it's just a fantasy. I'm still happily tooling around in my car with Crass in my CD changer, blasting away. (^_^)

There are already a few web pages out there that include picture posts of my avatar with notes about accusations and offenses that have nothing to do with me. I ~could~ cry "OMG, shut that site down! They're defaming me!"... but... I simply don't bloody care. There, that wasn't hard, was it? There is a person inworld spreading rumors about me being a child molester. People forward IMs to me all the time. Again, whoop-dee-freaking-doo! It's their word against mine. They carry no evidence. It's just a fantasy. (=_=)

I could also care less about "courage" or "anonymity" and how they relate to each other. In the end, this is ALL virtual... Unfathomable... Immaterial... Non-bloody-existent... Someday the hard drives will be wiped, we will be gone, and some futuristic archeologist will be digging up our keyboards and marvel at the fact that we used such a primitive means to communicate. (=_=)

Really... This all reads to me like the international campaign against masturbation. Give it the unimportance it deserves and change the channel. (^_^)y

Those old-fashioned promises of "for better or worse ... in sickness and in health" stand for me and I'd much prefer to be there for a loved one, however damaged they might be by their experience, than to be paying my respects to a patch of turf in the cemetery.

What are we saying with this bullshit when both victims and sympathisers alike so casually blow the crime out of proportion to murder?

That rape victims would be better off dead?

And the person that it actually happened to, might or might not agree with you.

It is totally subjective as to what crimes are better or worse than others.

I have never been raped as an adult and I never used that term to describe what happened to me as a child, though others might. However, there were many times in my childhood that I truly thought I would have been better off dead and even prayed for such many times over.


When you have been brutally victimized in that way and have also had to deal with the death of the most precious person to you, then we can discuss this better. Until such time, you are simply making guesses as to how you would feel in each situation.

I totally disagree with you.

And I won't be drawn on detailing the extent of my experience to justify discussing this issue.

I think maybe the reason that rape is more a touch button word then murder is the shear numbers. Many more people will have personal experience with rape then with murder. I haven't checked the statistic lately, but last I took note of it one in six American women will deal with sexual assualt of some type in thier lives. Not all those assaults will be rape, but this figure is also only talking about reported cases. It is a truely appalling figure.

I don't think you can sit and compare which is more devestating. Rape and Murder in RL are both devestating for the victim and the family. I am just not convinced that depictions of it in SL are harmful. I lean towards the camp that feels that exploring these darker things can be helpful and cathartic. I really suppose it depends on the individual. If we all worked the same then we could easily fix our broken parts.

I'm happy to be alive.

And I could care less if there is rape RP in SL.

Well I'm certainly not going to campaign against masturbation, if nothing else it supposedly keeps my prostate healthy.

However, can we at least agree with Brenda when she says there is a time and a place.

It's when the guy opposite me on the crowded commuter train decides to relieve the pressure on his prostate that I kind of have to draw the line.

By all accounts he should feel free to do so, given that:

- I don't know him from Adam, so his anonymity is preserved.
- I can also stare fixedly out the window, thus retaining my right to "switch off".

But at the end of the day, it's just not seemly.

In my post Chris, I didn't actually say I was against free speech - anonymous or otherwise.

Of course secure anonymity is critical in many circumstances, political dissention being only one.

In my view though we can disagree with a message and question the validity of an argument for no other reason than the credibility of the source is unknown. Particularly if that message or argument relies on a level of authority (based on education or experience for instance) to make its point.

It's also true to say that the right to anonymous speech, as protected by your First Amendment and repeatedly by your Supreme Court, may be used by both the brave and the not so brave, for good or ill.

That's also a good thing, if only because history has shown us that power is often initially perceived as "good", and the minority voice as "ill"

In my view however (and it is a personal one), when push comes to shove, real change only comes when people stand up and are counted.

But that's just me talking.

If you actually look at my answer, you'll see I was disagreeing with the use of an ad hominem argument.

My point (not particularly well made, I'll grant you) was that if you choose to adopt such a strategy, you tend to lose credibility (if using such hadn't already done that) unless you at least come out from behind the veil and allow your opponent to retaliate in kind.

See? Your example crossed the line. Reality and the real world are not the subject here. In reality, murder is a crime because people die. In reality, rape is a crime because people are actually forced upon against their will. In reality, falling from 4000 meters is considerably painful immediately before your unavoidable demise. (=_=)

But, reality is not the subject here. This is a virtual world. In a virtual world, murder is someone flinging pixel-pellets at me until my meter runs out and I'm teleported home. In a virtual world, rape is a long series of emotive chat lines combined with a couple BVH files blended into the mix. In a virtual world, a 4000 meter drop triggers a really cute 'stand up and brush off the dust' animation if you don't lag out or have an AO do something else. (^_^)

Your bus example falls flat. Riding the bus is a relative necessity for certain commuters and is a general service to the public. One would hope that they could make their trip without any additional stains on their clothing or risk of STDs along the way. So, yes, wanking on a public bus is a bad thing. But, that limo in the other lane? You know, the the stretched H2 with the blacked out windows? There's an orgy going on in there. (=_=)

SL is a virtual world with continents, estates, regions, parcels, teleports, flying, and mute. You go to a place in SL in order to see something. You leave in order to avoid it. If you want to build, go to a nice sand box and mash away at prims. If you want to dace, TP to a club. If you want to be mass-gangbanged by a pack of lycans, have ~I~ got the sim for you! XD ... Just... Don't go building in the RP sim. Be careful when RPing in the sandbox. And, if you TP to the club with a 3' long lycan pen0r on, do be surprised if you suddenly get a little blue box on your and you're suddenly swimming. (^_^)

Really... If a virtual tree falls in a virtual forest and nobody is on the estate to hear it. It does ~NOT~ make a sound. The script merely triggers an algorithm to send an audio file to any clients that are present. If there are none, the data is dropped to null. (^_^)

Fantasy | Reality << Find the line. (^_^)y