New controversial kid-avs-in-Zindra thread!

so your hard core evidence of pedophilia in SL lias is....

gavin said,
that someone said to someone else...
who said to gavin that....
xyz happened... did i get that right??

which part is the hard core evidence that this involved a child OR a pedophile? im open to learning this and understanding...but i do not see anything here that convinces me...just he said that they said that someone said....

Shhhh, you keep asking questions like that, they will come get you in the night.

JoJo - I accepted you do not think there is pedophilia in Second Life. But you still want to be convinced. Gavin is obviously lying and everyone else that posted they have witnessed it is fabricating also. Maybe you can find someone to convince you.

These threads always end in blanket denials - after the same people have discussed the subject for dozens of pages- they then deny the subject exists. I guess that is a good cop-out when you run out of arguments.

Then move aside and allow others to discuss the issue. If you forgot the issue please refer to post #1.

I would agree with that sentiment, if it weren't for the fact that age verification for SL is a sham. It's only purpose is to indemnify LL. They don't care whether it serves its purported purpose, only whether it serves their legal interests.

No one sees it the way you are seeing it.

An adult avatar unsucessfully solicited a child avatar for sex. The adult avatar is the one at fault in that case and should be the object of your wrath.

Funny... I have a tail, pointy ears, and considerably full boobs. But, you STILL wanted to use a picture of me walking among the penises as some sort of example of kid AVs in Zindra. Have your avatar age standards shifted? (^_^)y

You are just blaming the victim. If it wasn't for that child AV, then the adult wouldn't have been tempted into asking for hot cyberz. Just like how McDonald's ads are the reason some people are fat.

Evidently you can't see the difference between someone masquerading as a youth -- pretending to be one -- in order to seduce one, from play-acting as one with other adults, with no deception involved.

Where the heck is your moral compass, if you can't see that the former is far, far worse than the latter?

If you can't see the extreme difference, you must be morally deficit, and inherently evil.

(OK, just kidding ... sorta .. but mostly because I DO believe you can see the difference.)

the reason i am asking is because i thought there were laws made about this..
so i was hoping to find that document..or at least a real definition..sorry but i would like to understand it myself..

lias to be blunt...if everyone else sees it one way and you do not....im thinking it may be faulty logic on your part...i am not saying anyone lied...however, heresay evidence is NOT even admissable in RL court rooms...so im still puzzled why anyone should give it more weight here than in RL.

Some see it - just not the child apologists posting here. And this is not a group effort - just a forum conversation.

IMHO, common decency includes keeping your nose out of what goes on between two consenting adults.

Absolutely correct, and nobody here disagrees.

I think you were more correct about this earlier, when you showed that they were pressured into it by various groups. That's not necessarily a bad thing. But it doesn't mean that what LL calls "common decency" actually is what's commonly considered decent by the majority of residents.

And since we're all humans, we shouldn't see any animal or mythical creature avatars, either. Good logic!

or like that Benjamin disease where he is born 90 years old and gets younger and dies of old age looking like a baby.. hehehehehe

oookay, Jojo - understood - no pedophilia in Second Life. Gotcha.

Using one of the terms Scylla referenced... Lolicon... It's a common Manga form that, to date, has no legal problems in the U.S. Youthful and/or young "loli" characters are depicted in Anime stylized art. It's not hard to find, Wikipedia has a full page on it, and most Anime image boards have a category for it. (^_^)

In *chan culture... It's /cake/ (^_^)y

And this is what it boils down to. It may take a few more concerned voices to get LL to realize that episodes of virtual child pedophilia in Second Life are broadly offensive and that the current sanctions do nothing to stop it from occurring.

Look how long it took for lL to understand the adfarming issue.

I'm sure there's EVERYTHING in Second Life. The question is, is this common and notorious enough to make it a problem?

I contend that if it were, there would be more evidence than hearsay and a year-old video.

Hmm, so then, a childlike avatar with kitty ears and a fuzzy tail can do anything he or she wants?

hmmmm

Wow, that's an important distinction!

You know, folks will always function in the gray areas and game the system. That s why LL needs to send a clear concise message to their user base that child avatars are not acceptable forms of expression on this adult grid.

You have presented no compelling evidence that LL's policy disallowing ageplay is ineffective. To the contrary, the fact that you are citing videos from 2007 suggests it has been very effective.

There are isolated violations of all of LL's policies, otherwise the incident report would be blank every day.

LL's policy on ageplay works.

lias is it possible that your motivation in all this is not to protect any children who might be on the adult grid in SL from pedophiles but really to protect your own deviant sexual x rated businesses in sl?

it just puzzles me that you are so quick to believe any blog post, statement by an anonymous avatar etc. in your campaign to ban child avatars. so i was thinking of why this might cause you to be so passionate on the issue. what comes to mind is that you run a club for adults and other risque businesses and that it might come to pass that LL will eventually see those things as the real danger to any any underage folks in sl, especially if the grids merge and that they might actually ban deviant sexual play of any type. ths would severely impact your livelyhood and activities in sl in my view. and tbh honest this seems much more like a reasonable event in the future since SL is courting educational and corporate partners.

if that is the case, then your arguments and passion make much more sense to me than this campaign to ban child avs. in most of the world deviant sexual stuff is the danger and not someone acting childlike.

personally i believe sl should not restrict the activities of its residents regarding sex, etc....so in that respect im actually on your side...lol...but this incessant ranting about child avatars is just not making that much sense.

There is a US Federal law against animated child porn, that was struck down in court as unconstitutional. There may be and probably are a number of state laws.

There's a German law against animated child pornography. It was one of the big issues that I believe caused LL to adopt its policy. I don't blame LL for their policy; I probably would have done the same, even though I don't think that sexual age play in SL is harmful to real children. (I do think it's icky, as are vampires.)

We can agree that (regardless of my personal feelings) sexual age play is a no-no, and is definitely considered "broadly offensive" by many, and against the TOS.

However, child avatars are not "broadly offensive".

Making child avatars against TOS would not stop anyone who engages in proscribed behavior from continuing to do that. If they're going to break one rule, they'll break another.

Anyway, folks, have fun.

I've been feeding the troll, and enjoying it, but really, it's a bad habit and I'm going to force myself to stop!