A certain something left the grid this week - Good or bad?

Well, to answer the OP's question, how do I feel, i have to ask another question:

Which would you rather have happen, Second Life be shut down by the Feds, or some small unregulated Grid? I know which I would want. And I think that makes how I feel clear.

Sexual Age Play is moving away from an adults only grid that's relatively policed and monitored to a certain degree. It is now transitioning to an open grid with nearly no enforcement of age requirements nor an organized abuse report/handling system. Thereby increasing the potential of RL kids getting involved. Which, to me, is the key problem.

At least on the adult SL grid, SAP has been a matter of grownups with grownups living out their deviant fantasy, no matter how controversial. Since the ban people have been working out alternatives in effort to keep practicing their fantasy yet still avoid the banhammer around every corner. At the same time, people outside the circle have been wrought with accusations due to relatively diminutive avatar sizes that have no relation to the subject.

Well... The witch hunt has been a "success" and most of the SAP circle is now moving on. But, as I said before, they are moving on to a situation that could lead to much greater amounts of harm to the human condition as a whole.

I'm glad it's gone.

I'm no fan of censorship or forcing views about private morality on others either, let alone the sort of witch-hunting mentality we have sometimes seen here.

But neither am I a fan of condoning a demonstrable evil in SL ...

They banned SAP because they decided self censorship was better than the bad publicity as a playground for pedophiles, and the threat of international criminal prosecution with all the lawyers and court fees fighting that would entail. LL makes policy decisons on what is in their companies best interests, not what is in the interests of the community, and without regard to fairness.

Seriously, I get the gist of what this is about but have no idea where this camp was, what it was called and tbh I am rather glad that I didn't. Good riddance!

Is "tolerate" the same as "condone"?

So, what evil shall we cleanse the grid of next?


I think that's all I need to say here.

IIRC, another factor was German laws prohibiting any depiction (not just photography) of SAP, laws that applied to SL due to German customers.

In any case, I agree with Darien.

Har, I completely agree with everything you just said. (we should have a drink to celebrate that) but I think in this case it is important enough to point out, and remind other participants in this and other threads, that "ageplay" is not a term that we should be using in this context. It needs an entire phrase.. "sexual age play".

We all know what you mean, but there are folks who play children with no bad intent, and that minor omission of distinction can too easily cast them on the same stage.

Well, I have zero idea what it is that has gone. Does that me make me ... ME!!! ... an innocent?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Har Fairweather

"I'm no fan of censorship or forcing views about private morality on others either, let alone the sort of witch-hunting mentality we have sometimes seen here."

[Lear Cale:]Not a fan of, but evidently not against it.

You misunderstand; this was ironic understatement. I have always denounced censorship in any form; I have nothing but contempt for morality police of all kinds and persuasions; and I have been very hard on evident witch-hunters in these very forums. What LL is doing is not really any of these things: it is banning certain virtual behaviors when they are public or notorious out of self-defense. The age-players, to the extent they stay in SL (and I'm sure you will agree they won't be missed), will have to go deeper underground. I am >IRONIC UNDERSTATEMENT ALERT< not against LL protecting itself.

Quote:
"But neither am I a fan of condoning a demonstrable evil in SL ..."

[Lear Cale:] Why is role playing a "demonstrable evil"? Is "tolerate" the same as "condone"?

This particular roleplaying in SL is demonstrably an evil FOR SL, as far as the reputation and ultimate survival of SL and LL are concerned. Whether it is an evil in a larger sense would depend on the motives and character of the people roleplaying and what their personal outcomes might be, and I am not making a judgment about that because I don't know.

I'm returning to this because I think it is an important distinction. Suppression of thought, ideas, or discussion about them is wrong. Period. Suppression of manifestly destructive (to SL in this case) behaviors in order to counteract the destructiveness is a very different matter. It should be done only when absolutely necessary, in self-defense.

So, we can talk about, even defend ageplay here without being banned. Doing it publicly in SL or doing it in ways that make it notorious we are doing it can get us banned. Different thing: LL overlooks well-concealed ageplaying as far as we know; it cannot overlook public or publicly known ageplaying if it wants to survive, and so will not.

Har, I completely agree with everything you just said. (we should have a drink to celebrate that) but I think in this case it is important enough to point out, and remind other participants in this and other threads, that "ageplay" is not a term that we should be using in this context. It needs an entire phrase.. "sexual age play".

We all know what you mean, but there are folks who play children with no bad intent, and that minor omission of distinction can too easily cast them on the same stage.

I agree wholeheartedly, Imnot.

We all agree that child abuse is completely intolerable.

IMNSHO, role playing between adults is not child abuse. However, in the well-intended laws of certain countries (esp. Germany), even artificial portrayal such as animations of child abuse is illegal. Role-playing is not, but the fact that in SL this role playing involves animations of avatars that look like children makes it illegal, and LL has little choice but to comply. (Fortunately they don't bother to heed the laws of Iran, which makes almost everything LL does illegal, including having avatars at all, depicting faces, not to mention sexual issues. This is a marketing decision as well as legal: Germany is a very big customer base for SL. Iran is not.)

Many people feel very strongly that even depicting age play should be banned (as it is banned). It's understandable, because we have very strong instincts to protect our children. However, it's a fallacy based on an illusion -- these people are being fooled by their instincts, just as the baby who will not crawl out onto a solid glass surface, seeing the apparent drop below them.

There are those who argue that age play encourages real acts of child abuse. This is a valid subject for debate, though I suspect that the opposite is true. I haven't seen any rational, fact-based discussions of this point; it's a matter of opinion on which intelligent people can disagree.

But those who vehemently oppose any kind of age play on the grounds of "protecting our children" are simply having a knee-jerk reaction to their instincts, forcing their views on others, without a rational basis other than (possibly, but not demonstrably) the caveat mentioned above. It's simply that they find it disgusting so nobody should be able to do it. Of course, they would object if activities they enjoy that disgust others were banned for equally specious reasons.

The bottom line, though, is that age play is against the law of this land (SL). I think this causes more harm than good, but that's just my opionion.

Something vehement objectors should keep in mind is that for the most part, peoples' preferences are not a matter of choice. Their *actions* are. We can't blame someone for the *desire* to engage in child play, or to have sex with someone of the same sex, or to have sex outside of marriage, or to have chocolote ice cream rather than vanilla. Yet, when it comes to this subject, the rigid anti-ageplay crowd tends to vilify anyone who has these desires, regardless of the rectitude of their actions towards children. I challenge these people to have more consideration for the issues faced by others that are not a matter of choice.

BTW, I have no interest in age play. I am attracted to women, not girls or boys, or men or animals for that matter. This isn't about me or my desires. I'm simply lucky to have desires that are acceptable to society. Many people are not so lucky. I would rather see them enjoy their fantasies with a safe outlet than to be repressed.

Fortunately they don't bother to heed the laws of Iran, which makes almost everything LL does illegal

There are those who argue that age play encourages real acts of child abuse. This is a valid subject for debate, though I suspect that the opposite is true. I haven't seen any rational, fact-based discussions of this point; it's a matter of opinion on which intelligent people can disagree.

But those who vehemently oppose any kind of age play on the grounds of "protecting our children" are simply having a knee-jerk reaction to their instincts, forcing their views on others, without a rational basis other than (possibly, but not demonstrably) the caveat mentioned above. It's simply that they find it disgusting so nobody should be able to do it. Of course, they would object if activities they enjoy that disgust others were banned for equally specious reasons.

Something vehement objectors should keep in mind is that for the most part, peoples' preferences are not a matter of choice. Their *actions* are. We can't blame someone for the *desire* to engage in child play, or to have sex with someone of the same sex, or to have sex outside of marriage, or to have chocolote ice cream rather than vanilla. Yet, when it comes to this subject, the rigid anti-ageplay crowd tends to vilify anyone who has these desires, regardless of the rectitude of their actions towards children. I challenge these people to have more consideration for the issues faced by others that are not a matter of choice.

BTW, I have no interest in age play. I am attracted to women, not girls or boys, or men or animals for that matter. This isn't about me or my desires. I'm simply lucky to have desires that are acceptable to society. Many people are not so lucky. I would rather see them enjoy their fantasies with a safe outlet than to be repressed.

Ahhh..sort of like when I found out that 7' Blond Hunky Avatar "Robert84" was really a 84 year old playing from a nursing home .... that made introducing him to the parents difficult......

I have to wonder, did they actually leave? Or did they just go deeper underground? I can't see them having a meeting and announcing they are all moving to XXXX.

Without naming names, I can't say much. But that's basically what happened. There has been a persistent announcement of sorts of the availability and migration to a specific open source grid. Now that the majority of the group had moved on over, the parcel has been closed down. (^_^)

Wah... I sound like a frigg'n legit front!!! (>_<