Calling out ageplayers

In all of my 2 years in Second Life I have never come across an age player in the sense that was depicted by the OP but that doesn't mean they don't exist. I suspect they lead dark secretive lives which is the way it should be.

I did come across one. ONE. In almost 30 months. But, I did take a look at her groups and saw a number of them relating to it, so I know they are out there.

We had one in the welcome area one day spouting off about how having sex with children being taboo is only infact a reletivley new development in humans or some crap, I AR'd her just because I couldnt throw rocks at her LIke I would RL if someone said that to me >.<;

oh and she/large man with beard was an age player (as per her groups)

If the situation was that this person was having a conversation with another person and you happened to overhear it, then you ARed someone for saying something you didn't approve of in a private conversation that had nothing to do with you.

If this person was loudly spouting about the topic to all who would listen then more likely it was just some idiot trying to get attention and cause trouble ... your standard troll.

Since you point out that her groups were ageplayer groups (assuming you're sure) I imagine it was the first scenerio.

Even if I just overheard the conversation it was in the WELCOME AREA!!!!! so everyone hears it.. regardless who she/he/it wants to hear it. keep the filth to IM's I guess. people were rezzing for the very first time in SL as she said that.. what you think they thought? ooh first convo I hear is about child sex.. this going to be fun! >.<

So, you abuse the AR system, and are prone to attacking people in RL, who express an opinion that you don't like?

I'm glad I'll never meet you in RL.

And they were technicly correct, going by entire history of humanity, its only been in the last few thousand years. And not always then. Depending on where you define child, of course.

Well, sorry to burst your bubble, but she is absolutely correct. Around the time that Child Labor laws became popular was the end of that era. At one time as soon as a child reached puberty they were expected to find work, get married, get on with their lives.

Now we try to make our children behave as children for far too long. It's also why there is so much teenage angst.

BLEH! using that to justify current behavior is not right, though factually yes shes probably correct..

as for the post before you, if you actually think I would ACTUALLY throw rocks at someone I dsagree with then you needto REALLY read humour 101, kthnxbai. (heh.. just seen who it was, yes you REALLY do.)

Hey? So is ok to play a really old man/woman???

"HEY YOU KIDS!!! Get off my grass!!!!"

"That didnt used to be there!!"

"When I was your age, we had to script & torture our prims to get that Flex look!!"

oh please have we not heard enough about this why cant you all just leave people fucking alone and let them live there second lives the way they want. Everyone has skeletons in the closet how would you like it if some one publicised your shit in these forums.

get a fucking life and leave others alone that are not hurting any one. this goes for every thing in second life every one has there own way of living there second life if you don't like it then don't go to places you will encounter it. why not go start up your holyer then though sim and we can then all worship you and your righteousness.
your all just a bunch of

oh teh irony.

well I never said i was'nt one

seriously though it gets old after a while seeing so many threads about
people complaining about the way others are living there second life when they are not hurting any one, it gets me mad. thees people are not hurting any one so just leave them be this is all just virtual role playing nothing more. If you don't like how some one is role playing they go some place else in world get away from it. SL is a big place and there are may places to go with out ever encountering this.
well except these forums because some ass is always bring up the subject .

Just because people did something in the past doesn't mean it's okay for our future. People learn and accepted that maybe having sex with 13 year olds wasn't good.

People used to burn women and label them witches...do we still do that? No. Did we learn our lesson? I hope so.

Sorry but I bet you subscribe to rantings of Nambla and justifications used in so called pyschology as though it's an unfair witch hunt against child molestors because they have rights too. ..or did you discover your newfound tolerance through playing Second Life too much?

*walks into topic*

ageplayers? hate em I do! I was at a resort area and there were 2 old people, 1 man and 1 woman, I was rather confused over this and (being the evil person I am) shot them in the face with my AK47, I ran to the hills never to return...

yeah, I prefer bullets over handshakes to settle my problems

Actually, I was trying to get information from ageplayers themselves. Instead, it turned out to be another forum for nonageplayers to tell the world what ageplay is about. I thought if I encouraged people involved in the activity to explain what it's about, that maybe we could all learn something. I thought that those who don't actively participate might stfu long enough to listen.

My mistake.

You and I normally don't get along, but I do respect what you tried to do.

It amuses me enormously how some of the most stridently anti-ageplay advocates act so... childish.

Thanks. You know, I'm not that bad

*smile* I doubt you'll be ignored this time. Thank you for coming foward. It is refreshing to hear your thoughts instead of hearing thoughts ascribed to you.

Perhaps, but we can try to change the facts underlying it.


She's right.

True. But the mere fact that such emotional issues can swing completely one way then completely the other simply over time should make you more cautious about making moral statements such as "X is absolutely RIGHT!" or "X is absolutely WRONG!" generally.
You can still call things right and wrong if you wish, but being cautious in your judgement of moral issues is probably a good thing.





Urgh, this is about the ugliest thing I've seen said on the forums this week.
Who the hell are you to start *assuming* so much about the speaker?
I've noticed that any politician who advocates for greater state intervention is labelled a facist... any scientist who suggests that Blacks and Whites may actually think in different ways is labelled a member of the KKK, and anyone thinking about moral issues who notes how historically shakey the prohibition on sex with children is, is automatically labelled a NAMBLA member.
C'mon people, stop trying to pick 'evil' categories to assign people to in order to ignore the valid points they are making. You can argue, rationally, against them perfectly well, without having to do this. You can say something like "yes, we used to do that, but we now feel that is wrong", and that's fine. You may be asked "doesn't this show that the moral rules you follow are much less absolute than you think?", and you may be stuck for a reply... but that does not entitle you to start making personal attacks on people.



Damn straight. That's probably be pretty fun if one was grouchy but not old enough yet to be accepted as a grouchy old guy...
"you young'un programmers, with your 1s and 0s! Back in my day we diddn't even have 0s! We had to make do with capital 'o's!"



Now you realise why ageplayers don't talk much. As soon as they get involved in a conversation, legions of clueless people join in and drown them out. That's why people who seriously want to learn about ageplay go and buy books on the subject (yes, they do exist, good ones include "The New Topping Book" and "The New Bottoming Book", which are BDSM books with excellent chapters on ageplay), or go and talk to actual ageplayers.

It wouldn't even be solved by giving the thread starter the ability to moderate posts in his topic (as has been suggested before) - due to the fact that people would just create other topics flaming the first. It's a sad fact, but this is exactly the sort of thing that pushes ageplay into hiding - the sheer volume of cluelessness and personal attacks directed at ageplayers who dare to even point out basic facts... the sentiment of "omgwtfurageplayerurevil!" pushes them away from public space.

I have a few things that squick me, that just make me feel like "get that thing out of my sight". If I can learn to live with them daily despite having serious cases against them, so can other people. Hell, I'll even share some tips with you :
1) focus on what you enjoy, not what you dislike. Stay focussed on the good things.
2) avoid viewing people who do things you dislike as automatically 'evil', or the people who do them as 'flawed' or 'stupid' in some way. Doing that is just the primitive man's way of dismissing what they have to say without noticing that some of what they say may well be true.
3) when you can't handle an argument - walk away. There is no shame in admitting that you can't handle an argument, and it's better to do so then to start making a fool of yourself in public.
4) If you're in doubt, ask questions and reserve judgement until after you've got the answers AND thought about them AND crosschecked them with other *smart* people, AND tested them yourself.
5) Don't waste your time arguing with anyone who bases their position on 'faith' - they're not open to rational argument. Just completely ignore them, using technical means if possible (like ignoring their forum posts, or muting their avatar in SL), to avoid spending any effort interacting with them. Some people with incredibly strong moral beliefs also fall into this category - you'll never convince them of anything, and it's not your job to save the world by trying, so it's best to just ignore them and carry on. This may seem harsh, but frankly it's the only way to deal with the fact that they won't listen but will keep talking at you endlessly. If they offer an argument, reply to that, but ignore the rest of it.
6) Always aim to have respect for people who disagree with you, UNLESS they attack you personally. Sometimes, the people who can be nice and friendly with you whilst at the same time disagreeing with you are some of the most valuable people in existance, because you can both have a good time *and* learn from them. Normally, most people will only let you have a good time with them if you agree with them. The people you can have a good time with while still disagreeing with are valuable, educational and should be treasured.



Yes, I have noticed that too. My theory to explain this is :
1) it is the immature who are most attracted to railing at things they don't understand. The mature reserve judgement on issues they do not understand.
2) ageplayers channel their childishness into the ageplay they do, and thus sate it somehow, so they can act very maturely the rest of the time.
3) ageplayers are used to having to deal with pretty serious topics (such as what is and what is not ethical in sex, what their place in society is, etc). This tends to encourage them to be more mature.
4) the ageplayers here are few, and thus have to post very good material to keep up with the many anti-ageplayers posting less good material. Fewer people holding the line leads to each having to do more.

I don't see how age play in SL is the equivalent to calling your partner "daddy" or being spanked in RL. I would think that a true equivalent in SL would be two adult avatars doing the nasty with one dressing and acting as a child. The age play I have a problem with combines the sexual with a virtual image of an actual child. I find that distasteful on so many levels.

I ackowledge that this is not pedophilia. It's roleplaying between consenting adults. However, I get a little tired of folks saying that there is no comparison between age play in SL and pedophilia. If there was none, then why have the child avatar at all?

Here's a question: what if there was a virtual magazine (a la Slustler) devoted to age play? Would any of you have a problem with the depiction of the sex these avatars are having? All we'd have is an image, and the word of the publisher that these are depictions of age play and not pedophilia. But without physical evidence of age, it can be anything you want it to be. One man's depiction of age play is another sicko's depiction of pedophilia. One is right and one is wrong. But it's not easy to tell which is which is it?

In the virtual world the lines are blurred. And with blurred lines I don't think the truth is so black and white as age play apologists, detractors or even the players themselves would have us believe.

Thanks to you, Angel, and to Sayuri Itomae, and Adrian Zobel for stepping in to answer the OP's questions. Thanks to the OP for asking them. This is a very interesting topic, and I understand more now than I did before. You have my respect for how well you've presented yourselves and your explanations.

Hum, all I was doing was responding with a history factoid and you expand it into this hopeless attack... I daresay you protest too much. I see that all you have posted with this name of yours is to ageplay topics. History also shows that those that protest the loudest about something are the ones with the worst things to hide.