Well, I guess Ageplay is now Officially banned

if it was not Wrong..... then it would not cause such a stir.

http://www.swr.de/report/-/id=233454/cf=42/nid=233454/did=2148514/pv=mplayer/vv=play/1ljj862/index.html

Anyways thats the link to the Video Interview with Robin Harper AKA Robin Linden.
Now if you watch it you can point out that they showed Robin the Real Life Photos they found in Second Life. /me Point's disgust on her face.

What also urks me is they have those photo's. And then they showed them to Robin... Looked kinda unexpected.

I feel like the whole world is against SL and LL. In 2 years SL will be a locked down mental hospital.

Hate how the media seams to bully LL into doing stuff.

Project Open Letter.
German Media.
Probably more on the way.

As far as the big picture, Others have posted it better then I can form it into words. So why should I waste the time?

Also: Please do not flame the Heck out of me

Regardless of the depiction, they are still not children.

Yes, the club in the video was vile and should not be allowed. I'm not disputing that. However, there are people on SL that have healthy relationships that involve this as part of it, just as there are healthy BDSM relationships and healthy... hell, as long as they're not hurting anyone, it's none of our business. To label these people as paedophiles, as has been discussed ad nauseum on other threads, is just incorrect.

Some guy who goes to a whorehouse, looking for a kid? Yeah, that's a little not on (however, I do firmly believe that many, if not most, do realize that the other person is an adult.) but ageplay in and of itself is not paedophilia and a child AV is not a child. It just isn't.

No, they are not children. They are collections of pixles that do not exist elsewhere except on computer screens. If you can't distingush this then I wonder about your ability to seperate fantasy from reality.

You're kidding, right? Are you even paying attention?? Go back and read it again and think about it first. Reading comprehension is half the battle!!

I'm saying the EXACT OPPOSITE of what you're trying to imply I'm saying. I'm putting emphasis on the fantasy aspect of paedophilia and ageplay to draw comparison.

Ageplay is two adults having a fantasy of child sex. They're both the same thing to me. Paedophiles rely on imagery most of the time. It doesn't matter how old the guy/girl on the controls is...it's still the image of a child.

I wonder whether you'd therefore condone two consenting adults looking at child pornography. Hey they're not children, they're just looking at pictures that they didn't take.

Child avatars engaging in sexual activity are depicting child pornography, it's wrong, end of story.

The difference here being is that you (in this scenario) assume the person in the UK to be a child, as there are no age restrictions on using MSN.

In SL you know that the person on the other end is an adult, as the TOS for SL require you to be an adult (and I bet you dollars to donuts that whatever kids manage to get on to SL won't be playing child AVs).

This is an oxymoron if I ever heard one.

Im sorry to break this to you but, having sex with children or fantasizing about having sex with children is NOT healthy. If you, as a couple, have fantasies about having sex with children, you are sick and you should seek help.

As has been mentioned several times already, there is nothing wrong with being an adult and dressing up like a child. That is simply two adults in costumes.

There is a huge difference between the vision of two adults in costumes having sex, and the vision of one adult having sex with a six year old.

If you can't see the difference, or if you feel there is nothing wrong with that then you may want to consult a psychiatrist. I can't help you with your problem.

Goddamn, what a moronic statement.

Child pornography is just that: pornography invilving very real children.

A child AV in Second Life is an adult playing dress-up.

The "media" did not create Project Open Letter, the residents did. And thousands signed it. To ask SL to fix things. I guess we want to kill SL.

Children can not and should not be prepresented as sexual objects.

FFS anybody who thinks sex with kids is ok ..... virtual ... pixelated ... cartoon..... literal or through the magical world of SL... is in the WORLD not acceptable.

Ok ... lets ask THIS question .....

dont defend the acts of Age Players .... ask the question ... would you trust your kids etc ... with a person you KNOW goes on to SL and has sex with virtual children .... and yes ive seen the pics ...
Playgrounds
Underdeveloped genitals
No breasts
Child clothing

I shudder at JUST the thought ....

It's funny that people here aren't aware that there might be actual RL police officers that are members participating in this forum

In my opinion, if some of these people that participate in this sick disgusting activity should be ashamed of themselves. How would you like to explain to your child that you had internet sex with someone that was playing the part of a child and you got off on it? It's just not normal behavior and people who do this have some serious mental problems.

As far as things being illegal in the US....Well, my department runs stings all the time when we portray a child over the internet. When the suspect asks to meet in person we arrest his sick ass. Even though the officer was an adult portraying to be a child...the act of the suspect was still very much illegal.

I find it hard to believe that the persons involved in this age play act are visualizing an adult behind a child AV. I'm pretty sure they are imagining a child behind the AV. And that my friends is just a stepping stone to performing the real act.

If they were playing dress up, they'd be adult av's dressed as children. They are not playing dress up when they are child av's.

Try painting a picture of a child engaging in sex with an adult and explaining to the authorities that it's just ageplay. You won't get very far.

Real actual children are not being presented as sexual objects here, adults (get that? adults) are playing dress-up.



I wouldn't leave my children (if I had any) alone with that person. But I feel that person should have the liberty to act out that fantasy with other consenting adults on a computer game.

tell you what Lestat .... your bloody spot on there mate .....

What is it in these peoples minds

There's nothing illegal about painting a depiction of a child in any kind of situation. Know why? Because it's not a child, it's a blob of paint.

So? Something now illegal about debate and discussion?

When an adult plays dress up they still look like an adult.

Actually,depending on where you are it will. That's the whole argument. Some countries do say that it isn't child porn if an actual child isn't involved.

And when they go on a computer game and create an avatar that resembles a cartoonish child guess what........



They're still not a child (big surprise I know).

Its the mindset though ... thats its sexual kicks from the THOUGHT of kids ... thats wrong to me ....

I'm curious as to where the line is drawn legally regarding defining something as pornography.

I don't just mean for children I mean like all pornography.

At what point does texture mapping or sufficient number of 3D polygons become too realistic.

The whole Child roleplay thing is sick as hell. When talking about it with others, at first I was like hmm, well its a sick thing to do but, i'd rather they took out their needs virtually with another adult, instead of actually going out and doing it!.

But then when I chatted with another friend who studies psycology she said that actually no, the reverse is true. The more they live out that fantasy, the MORE likely they are to do it in real life.

She may well have a point there.

What the hell is that supposed to mean?

It may be wrong to you, it may be offensive and distasteful to you, but it still should not be banned.

As I said in another thread about this same subject: I'm not into ageplay. However I am very much into aware, consenting adults having the liberty to do as they wish so long as it does not harm or harrass others.

Well -

Whatever anyones personal feelings are:

If you want to Ban something the order goes like this.

1. Ban the activity - Make it clear its banned.

2. If people are still doing it - ban the people.


Its not

1. Ban the people

2. Say the activity is bannable.


----------------------------------------------------
If you want to claim it was already Bannable from the begining by the TOS/CS - fine then come out and SAY that, dont let something go on and allow it to exist then suddenly Ban people without warning.

However the fantasy here isn't ageplay is it, the fantasy here is child abuse. The difference is very clear. I'm generally in the "consenting adults" camp but this sort of thing with child avatars is a step too far.

Adult avatars engaging in ageplay is upto them, not my cup of tea but their business, but when they bring the child avatars into it, sorry but that's sick.