Zero Tolerance = Zero Common Sense

I love it when people like yourself come into the forums and post this crap. I like it for two reasons:

1. I can go into SL and pre-emptively mute you.
2. I can add you to my ignore list here, which will happen as soon as I finish this.

Go ahead and reply, I won't see it. There is nothing you have to say that is even worth considering.

I'd like to say more, but I ador-um some forum decorum and you detract from the eloquence. Do me a favor while you're out, though, and step in front of a bus.

Actually, LL decided to roll up the sexual age play carpet after some European countries made it clear they did not want it. Remember the German media "exposé" where they blindsided Robin and over-dramatised the whole thing? It cameout shortly after that the "abused" (at least for the sake of this particular programme) were avatars controlled by this German outfit. EDIT: Rika, I looked at your join date, so you may not have been aware of these events, my apologies. This mostly took place in 2006, if I recall correctly.

The Netherlands and Italy also put pressure on LL, at that time. Many of the vocal residents on the forums who are anti-sexual age play were Dutch, and a couple of them were a bit over-the-top, when discussing this topic. One of them actually got an RL lawyer involved.

Surprisingly, some Euro countries laws are actually stricter than the US when it comes to depictions of child sex and their definitions. The argument in the US currently is mostly over that - definitions.

I do agree with your point, in the broader sense, and I was actually a bit perplexed when it was some Euro countries who tipped the scales. You'd think some of the fundie religious nutter groups in the US would be all over SL.

My personal feelings on the issue...

I think that the whole "gateway drug" argument is the argument that is overused. It's classic fear-mongering.

Unless there are real children involved, directly or collaterally, I say let it be. But I don't make the rules. The people who do, are in truth, afraid of their OWN thoughts. That's been my experience anyway.

They should be asking themselves why they see paedos behind every corner, and not trying to make themselves feel a little better at the expense of other people's freedom of expression. When pigs fly.

These two sentences do not fit together:



You're funneh.

I doubt many of you have actually worked with pedophiles or studied their bahavior in a professional setting. I hate to break this to you, but pedophiles do not believe what they are actually doing in the RW is wrong. So they sure are not gonna come into SL and "play" at it to hide it. If they thought it was wrong, they wouldnt be doing it in RL. If the DO think it is wrong, they can think about it all they want - which btw is NOT illegal - but their reasoning mind will keep them from acting on those fantasies. There is a HUGE difference between age play in SL and acting it out in RL...and it is that difference that keeps a true pedofile acting in RL.

I personally believe that to police someone's thoughts...which is essentially what we are talking about...NOT RL actions...is trying to manage something that we have no biz getting into. And to put it another way...if we are trying to save people from themselves...meaning their own desires...that is certainly a lost cause.

it's about age, not development.

besides then she/he'd look like like an adult... you contradicted yourself.

Interesting.

But unfortunately Moot.

You'll never convince the Public.

And its bad press that drove Linden Labs.

And therefore unless someone could convince Fox News, that Sky thing in Germany and all the rest to not report on Sexual Age Play in Second Life .. it really doesn't matter what makes sense.

I think what LL will continue down its present course.

And if it stops working they will ban Child Avatars and make it difficult to create their shapes.

Now there you go... injecting logic and experience!

Here it comes....

wait for it....

...you must be a paedophile!

No, not really. But when I first ventured onto these forums a couple of years ago, those of us who prefer logic to fear were called paedos ourselves for presenting our views. Someone in this thread is sure to go there eventually (one already got close).

Great post, I agree 100%.

It may be moot in the sense that it won't budge LL, but I reckon that wasn't her aim with that post. I'm always for logical approaches to contentious subjects in these type of conversations, so, in the context of this conversation, I don't think her points are moot. Further, it's always a good thing to shine light on silliness, even if silliness wins.

Here is some homework for the kiddies in the forum:

Okay, how many video games involve pedophilia? Name one that is available for sale through your local Walmart or equivalent.

Name one major social network that doesn't have extreme rules against pedophilia and still allows minors on it.

I can't. I've Googled and most often than not, any mention of either brings up SL. Gee, that's a great rep to have for a video game/social networking site!

With that in mind, is it any wonder LL decided to ban sexual ageplay?

LL should have setup in some freedom of speech paradise.

I would have...
Every country has it's own definition of legality, if you want to be international, your virtual world is bound to be tied by the most restrictive laws of all the countries that think they can pput pressure on you, while getting none of the rights they offer.

If only peoples would stop being so deep into their neighbor's private bedroom.


My idea would be that LL should have a datacenter in all the major countries SL is in, if you own an SL sim they rent one the country you chose and everything in this server will be bound to the country's law.

This way LL can put their repsonsabilities out saying "sorry this server is located in country X, we aren't responsible if it doesn't abid to laws of country Y" .

Now thats a really smart idea shame LL aren't that smart yet

Moot in the case of the future decisions of LL, and the US and Europe (and surely other places) on this issue.

The ideas themselves aren't useless, just that they wont matter.


I also my idea there need to be protections for non-Sexual Child Avatars and smaller adult avatars is also moot.

I think innocent people WILL get banned because of over-zealous AR happy residents.

Yeah, in the big picture, they won't matter, but then I have never led myself to believe that anything we say here matters to any government and ESPECIALLY LL anyway.

I'm definitely with you on the overzealous ARing thing.

The internet, and places like SL in particular seem to be personality amplifiers. I have pondered, for years now, why people (including myself, at times) become so extreme online. I was at a graduation party this past spring, and my cousins and I were talking about it, and one cousin simply said, "Because they can." I just sighed because I knew he was right. I also realised that I have to accept it, because it would be a double standard if I didn't. It still makes me a bit sad for our species though.

That would be the go back to schooldays chasing the cheerleaders thing, girls and guys who where in begining of adolescence and had enough maturity to understand sex, no infants and kids who are prepubescent and have no understanding of what is being done to them other than shame & pain.
Yeah there's a grey area there for teen play, but 12 yo is way out of it, very few places anywhere consider sex with children that young as normal.
If it's your thing go off to one of the other shady grids run by people of that mindset so the apropriate people can observe you all together.

What types of sex may or may not be illegal in any part of the world does not matter one bit, because SL bumping is not real sex. There is no physical contact. It is really silly to even bring that up. The reason age play was banned is simply because the "depiction" (Main Entry: de·pict 1 : to represent by or as if by a picture) of having sex with a child, either by photographic or digital creation, is illegal in some places. There does not even have to be an avatar behind it. It is the digital representation that is off limits.

Unfortunately the logic behind who is and is not able to understand such things is both moot in this case and in the current generations wholly false.

Middle and elementary school kids in the current generations have boy/girlfriends and some actually do engage in intercourse. when asked about it, many know perfectly well what they are doing and are shocked that others do not understand.

I have seen this in my own hometown people ... It happens.

There is something to note however about these particular kids: The ones engaging in intercourse are all too often the ones that cannot get enough of it later in life. They do it because they enjoy the feeling of it.

even my own generation developed in this manner early ... Christ, I was a horn dog at twelve! I may not have had sex then ... but I understood what it was, what it meant and for that matter I also understood why society looked down on kids of that age being like that.

It is because of this development that I personally believe that society's view on age is an ancient one that needs to be revised. What should count is maturity.

while there are other age old concepts that do not really relate to tis issue, I feel I must list one that affected me personally: Society has no problems with a man dating a woman that is younger than him, even if the man is forty and the woman twenty but the moment you reverse those roles, people tend to revolt.

I once dated a woman that was twenty years older than me folks ... The looks I got made me angry. Now granted, I'm still interested in older women ... I just play it a little closer to home now.

I completely fail to see what your point is.

You are suggesting the Age of Consent should be LOWERED to 12?

Actually, I wouldn't say that, but I do somewhat agree with Solar's attitude.

The problem we're having now is that we're labeling older teens (15-1 as children, when they aren't children. They aren't adults either, but they aren't kids. They've got all the hormones and urges of an adult, but not the experience to handle either. We're pretty much telling them these urges are wrong until a certain 'magic' age. But they've got these urges and they're not going to magically disappear until a certain age. *sigh* I'm not sure what would fix that, but...

That's another thread and actually has very little to do with the topic of this one.

I think LL has done what they feel is best to reduce the 'bad' reputation they have improperly earned via the witch-hunt.

No dear, nowhere in my post did a suggestion concerning the age of consent arise. simply my own observations and experiences.

But since you asked? The 'Age of Consent" needs to be on a case by case basis.

Have one mandated: let's say 16. Then make it flexible so that the overzealous, morally 'superior' types cannot get their way by taking a couple that has done nothing wrong to court.

Well,

thats not a Linden Lab call

15 year olds having sex with each other is an all together different prospect from 40 year olds sleeping with 15 year olds.

And Like you said - its a completely different topic. None of the Sexual Ageplayers are underage.

It has happened.

Anyway - why are we even debating this?

Because we're bored?

Because LL wont put it in clear language in the TOS.

Until they do well get people making these threads.

Yes, you're right.

I'm quite aroused by this thread.