"Age play" in SL

You could be right, but I don't like it.

You're entitled to your opinion.

I personally find all of the kinks a bit weird, but then, I'm a pretty boring guy.

Nevertheless, I approve of adults acting out their sexual fantasies with each other, as long as it's safe, consensual, and fun.

IF you take one away, you must take them all away.

LF

Just the fact that any adult would need even the thought of a child or child-like partner to derive sexual gratification is disturbing.
Acting out is only a step away from actually doing....or so the accepted psychological rhetoric tells us.(check into why so many children are being drugged if they show even a minor penchant towards being normal and having abundant energy..I think they call it add or addsmgpt...whatever the bloody amount of letters add up to these days to protect the administration from doing their job when comes to young students lol)

lol
ahh well....here is a link that pretty much covers the needs of so many that I have witnessed hin SL...hopefully if the acting out becomes unfullfilling...maybe going to this site will help keep our animals and children safe by redirecting the "need"...

http://www.geocities.com/absteelrivendl/

This is an important discussion that bears consideration. We're laying the foundation for the next generation of communication media. What we decide here, may influence future metaverses.

Unfortunately, due to the vagaries of the English language, we're all talking about different things. Let's try to get to the bottom of exactly what people don't like.

I suggest that no one has a problem with "ageplay", but most of us have a problem with simulated sex with prepubescent images.

---

Age Play: Pretending to be any age which you are not.

Exhibit A) Humans pretend to be older than they are. My Avatar appears a fair bit older than my human. Is this ok?

Exhibit B) Humans pretend to be younger than they are. Due to the prevalence of avatars with 18-20 years of apparent age, I assume this is everyone else. Is this ok?

We've now established that nearly everyone in SL engages in age-play. Is this ok?

----

Let's continue.
If we have no problem with pretending to be different ages, then we must have a problem with pretending to be under the American age of majority.

Exhibit C) Adult humans who prefer to be treated as infants. Sure it's distateful, but adult infantilism is a common fetish. Are they harming children? Probably not. Is this ok?

Exhibit D) Adult humans who think schoolgirl images are sexy. This one might be distasteful, but we have to consider that western media propagates this image. Consider Britney spears, FHM magazing, Maxim magazine, MTV, among others. I suspect that 8 out of 10 adult american males think schoolgirl uniforms are sexy. Is this ok? The age we're talking about here is 14-18. Consider that people once married at 14. Consider also that in the evolutionary timeframe, humans would have been having babies as soon as biologically possible. Therefore, the attraction may be innate and only curbed through society. I'll suggest that society is letting us down here. The media image of schoolgirls has been heavily capitalized upon. If images of simulated schoolgirls should be illegal, then we have a lot of prosecuting ahead of us.

Exhibit E) Adult humans who pretend to be somewhere between infant and puberty. If they don't engage in sex, is this ok?

Exhibit F) Adult humans who want to have simulated sex with prepubescent appearing avatars.
This is the one that I think most people are upset about. I agree it's distasteful. Should we criminalize it? I'm not sure. The challenge lies in objectively identifying the specific activities which should be targetted.. We've already determined that most of us engage in ageplay by appearing a different age than we are. Should it be illegal to have simulated sex with an avatar which has an apparent age of 18, but has a flat chest? Should it be illegal to have simulated sex with an avatar which has a large chest but carries a teddy bear? Must there be a combination of factors from a checklist before the person is banned?

How exactly do you determine what's over the line?
If we ban ageplay, then I will expect to see a lot more avatars having apparent ages outside the 18-22 range. Enforcement might be a little difficult.

How exactly do you determine what's unacceptable?

---
What we do at Withnail Academy is recreate a Victorian finishing school. This includes punishments of the type that were common in Victorian schools. Virtual caning is quite popular. Because It's a finishing school, there are no prepubescent girls. Our students are hard to distinquish from the rest of the SL population, except that they wear more modest clothing than most.

I consider Withnail Academy to be a mostly-accurate historical recreation. It also provides an opportunity for consenting adults to act out their schoolgirl/teacher and BDSM fantasies. Should we ban schools? Should we ban historical recreation? Perhaps we should ban virtual willow switches soaked in virtual water.

Please, if you really want to ban something, please make an effort to be more specific about which type of activity you want to see removed from SL. Consider the impact to other activities which you may enjoy.

---

I apologize for the long post, but vague rhetoric doesn't help us lay the foundation for the next generation of metaverse law.

-WW

Sorry, Lordfly - with all the bombast and rhetoric in your post, you still have not dealt with the fact that children are different than adults - biologically, psychologically, legally, and in terms of status and power. Covering that fact with misdirected appeals to the status of women in society, or the potential problems of other forms of sexual behavior will not work. Nor will all-or-nothing appeals that sound good in a speech, but have little practical value in the real world.

It remains the responsibility of all adults to behave toward children in a way that befits their vulnerability - like it or not for whatever reason - sexual practices, personal preferences, or misguided politics.

Actually, the real danger of child abuse is not that children are vulnerable and powerless.

There are tonnes of vulnerable and powerless people in society which do not get adequate protection - for example, the poor.

The problem with child abuse is the fact that it destroys not just their lives but also the lives of those around them as they grow up into a culture of abuse.

Child abuse is a viral crime, one that impacts far more than just the victim. It undermines not just the present but the future of culture as well.

This is why many modern governments focus so hard on early childhood development. It's not so much they want to provide a better life for children (that's a good idea in itself) but also because they are trying to create a positive culture for the future.


As for protecting our privacy in SL, there are some pretty good reasons for prosecuting the private communication between two people - for example, if they were developing plans on developing a nuclear bomb.

It's true, we can't be sure that they are going to actually use the nuclear bomb, but we certainly can not take a chance that they are not.

So anything goes in SL is pretty obviously out of the question.

In fact, this could probably go for someone who is writing down plans for creating a nuclear bomb as well. So really, there is no such thing as fundamental freedom of expression, but rather you are free to express ideas which are not harmful to others.

Is it harmful to others to role play criminal acts? That's a pretty tough question and I think you need some deep psychological studies to back up your reasoning and it needs to be on a case by case basis.

I suppose if there was a high enough correlation between those who virtually role played child abuse and those who actually committed the abuse, then we should proactively monitor and prosecute.

The question is .. how high should the correlation be? 50%? 90%? 10%?

And should it be a correlation or a causation? If it's just a correlation, that could be the common cause fallacy. Should we have to prove a causation from roleplaying to enacting?

What about consenting adults? That's what this thread is about.

It's not about sexxing it up with your 12 year old neice. It's about grown, legally adult people acting out fantasies.

You continue to confuse the two concepts.

Furthermore, the concept of childhood is a modern day one, a mere blip on the radar of human history. Is it a good blip? Definitely. But children survived for millenia without having any special status doled to them; they're stronger and smarter than you think.

Nevertheless, that is neither here nor there. The issue at hand is whether grown people acting out ageplay fantasies is any more wrong than any other kink in SL.

I have read through this thread with a mixture of interest and dismay. As a victim of child abuse from a very young age, and then growing to a woman that thought that abuse and coersion/rape were the norms in society, it really saddens me that so many people feel a need to act out fantasies of these behaviours. There is nothing even remotely appealling about physical/sexual abuse, or rape.
That they are fantasies for so many speaks volumes about the psychological constructs in our society, and that in so many minds sex is somehow equated with power/pain/denigration.

That being said, I do believe that we need to be able to seperate fantasy from fact, and realise that one is not necessarily the other. That one person may play out sexual relations with another adult playing a child, and then go on to actually molest a child is a possibility. But do we ban it on that basis?
There has been songs/movies/games that have then led to person/s actually committing violence. But does that mean that all people that watched or played or listened to that same material has? No. Should we ban those products because of certain individuals? Again, no.

Several people have said that "age-play" is just another kink, like all the others. That I don't disagree with. It has also been mentioned that what two consenting adults do is fine, again, I don't disagree, as long as there has been no coersion. And when one of the parties involved wishes to end that role-play they are freely able to do so. For some that have ventured into these forms of role-play ending the role-play has resulted in real life consequences.
Also if two consenting adults wish to play out one or more of their kinks, then should not that be done in a private manner? So often though it is done in an in-your-face way that can be distressing to others around them, specially if the fantasy they are living out is one where others have been real life victims of said kink.

I thank you for your post, William; I was unable to attend your in-world chat (10 pm being quite late for me local-time) and I think we can salvage this thread yet.

I agree with your basic reasoning, and I feel it is instructive to seperate actions into those that are unethical/unmoral, and those that are merely unwise.
I'd personally like to re-state is that I do not feel the sexual aspect, in an SL context, is unethical. I do not feel it is a wise thing to do, just as I do about Gor; violence (such as in video games) gets the bye that, by and large, it's fantastical situations, and often ones that would be acceptable in real life. (If Mars Base actually is invaded by demons, I think picking up your shotgun and having at it is offically Allowed.) Much the same applies to other kinks - either's there's nothing really wrong with them inherently or it doesn't actually exist.

Whereas... slavery and pedophilia (and I don't mean "getting it on with a teenaged schoolgirl"; given the many standards of maturity in cultures worldwide I'm specifically referring to sex with someone who is unmistakably an immature child) really do exist and are considered harmful.

As an additional note, my yardstick of ethics is "doing unnecessary harm to another", so I want to make clear that I'm not considering the issues the Pope might have with it; I'm considering the issues I do. Since it's ultimately all adults agreeing to wear masks and have at it I find no evil in it... but shouldn't you be curious about why you want to wear that mask in the first place?

Freaks.

What about woman plays cartoon boy av, woman plays cartoon, wolf daddy av?

You have to be very careful about banning things. You may cut off someones safety and security.

A few years ago I had a relationship which turned a little bizarre. Once she became confident with me in the intimate department, she began asking me to play what you are here referring to as "age play". She wanted at first just to cry out "daddy" in intimate moments and later wanted to be cuddled and comforted and looked after like a six or seven year old, at the end of which she wanted me to make love to her, while she pretended to be nervous (not frightened).

I was pretty reluctant, but I loved her, and tried to do what she wanted, though with misgivings. Eventually, in a little girl voice, she began to tell me things about her childhood.

She had been brought up by her grandmother, and sexually abused by her uncle from the age of about three (she thinks). At first it distressed her, but by the age of about seven something in her woke up (far too early of course) and her enthusiasm steadily grew until, quite suddenly (at the age of about 10) he left home, got a girl friend, and dropped her as though it had never happened. She was mad with jealousy, and subsequently tried to seduce each of her mothers boyfriends in turn ( with a disturbing level of success). When I met her she was divorced with two kids, and so was I.

Anyway, the point is, she had this astonishing need to be simultaneously sexual and a child. Not just that. She had never met her father (still hasnt - he refuses) and it seems that from an early age she had fantasized that her daddy would come and rescue her, and the rescue had changed as she grew sexual into a sexual rescue.

So she had these two needs, muddled up together and more or less inseparable.

I insisted that I would only play this way if she got help, and during our four or five years together we spent thousands on therapy in which this whole thing was openly aired. Both psychiatrists told me that this play was something she needed, would not make anything worse, and would probably help, and that I should think of it as therapy for someone I loved. They strongly advised against refusing.

She adjusted, and it helped her a great deal, but it seemed to be too late to alter what, deep down, she needed. She had selected me because I already had children, and she had seen my care and love for them, and been envious. Part of her wanted to be my child too, although we were nearly the same age.

In the end we broke up. I don't know if she has a "daddy" now in RL. But if not, then something like SL is one of the few places she could find one safely. Could we really say, if she were to arrive here believing that she would be free to express her true self, that we would prevent, report, or criminalise her, adding to the burden she already bears ?

And yet we allow simulated beating, torture, slavery, humiliation, rape, murder, even simulated disembowelling (so I've heard). All this, and yet we pick her out as beyond the pale, and tell her that hers is the one need too appalling to be allowed ?

Letting her pretend to be young was awkward for me at first, but I loved her and adapted. It was only about a quarter of the time, and always involved her cuddling up first and pouring out her heart in a way she otherwise could not. It didn't harm or alter me. I never fantasized about young girls, and I never sought anything like it again in a later relationship. I just did it for her. It was her special thing, and I did it out of love.

Do you really want to single her out from all the other bizarre preferences you welcome here, and harm her again by telling her she is a pariah ? I say no !

Barmovic I didn't quote your entire post because of it's length but I agree with you. Who are we to question someones motives and morals in Second Life? Of course most of us are against child abuse and you can't go wrong crying out "Sexually abusing children is evil" but what does that have to do with Second Life? Nothing.

This entire thread is an attempt to regulate other people's actions which is very very sick in my opinion.

In case anyone is wondering I sometimes work with the victims of child sexual abuse in First Life and I can assure you all that this thread has nothing to do with what happens in real life.

i must say i expressed my opinion pretty wildly on this topic and i have to explain why, i really believe that we should stop looking in our neightbor lawn, freedom of speech and expression has a price sure but this price i am happy to pay it, a true freedom has no moral or exeptions.
We live today in a society where the child abuse have more or less been made public, and paents are frightened, i can understandthis, however i am not ready to give up my freedom for it, preventing child abuse, or terrorism or rapist or whataver cannot be done at the loss of any expression right or individual liberty. I i was a star wars fan i would call it the dark side of the force, censoring toughs and comportment so you "might" disarm the peoples you fear, is dumping napalm on a forest to destroy a few toxic mushrooms.

Going to play devil's advocate here for a moment on this quote.

Now we all know that sometimes minors do get onto the adult grid, ok?
So what would be the situation if a person who was a pedophile in real life found out about SL, and the fact that one can pretty much play out any fantasy they like here. This pedophile then creates other accounts with the express purpose of using SL to abuse children he has managed to get access to. After all pedophiles are often quite adept at using online communities to prey on children. And for the sake of argument here, let us say that this pedophile is part of quite a large and well-organised pedophillia ring.
Then let us say that a parent of one of these children becomes aware of what is happening to their child in SL. And how it is openly acceptable for people to play at adult male/child sexual relations.
In this case it has everything to do with real life.
Not only that would most likely result in some form of criminal prosecution for LL. (Not sure on the latter as I don't live in the US). Most definately though it would result in a lot of adverse media coverage, and also destroy our online community.

As much as personally a lot of what I see regarding sexual roleplay openly played out for all to see does upset me, I still don't want to see us censoring some forms of behaviour. But to claim that what occurs in SL has nothing to do with real life is fallacy.

Children are abused all over the world everyday and I don't think that Second Life is a contributing factor.

That, Midnite, is what I call really scraping the barrel. The most unlikely illogical scenario I've heard in years.

As an aside, I very much doubt that a child who sneaks onto the adult grid is going to roleplay as their actual age. They're going to do their best to appear, physically and mentally, as an adult. There's no way they are going to advertise their RL age to anyone else on the grid, much less a stealth paedophile resident.

The online venues where paedophiles do go after children are those where the children have no reason to hide their age (AOL chatrooms etc.) - which is why there are much more stringent safeguards around who can get onto the teen grid.

This thread is about behaviour on the adult grid, and as such, your scenario is, at worst, unlikely.

I confuse no concepts. I know exactly what you are arguing. You, on the other hand, confuse my rejection of your argument with confusion. And you continue to confuse the issue with false analogies and appeals to irrelevant points. (A better analogy than women, the poor, or animals, for example, might be the mentally disabled. Are there people in SL who "disable play"? If not, why?)

I can only repeat the argument that I and others have made about the relative vulnerability of children in our society, and the responsibility of adults to behave according to a different standard when it comes to issues relating to them. You - and others - have yet to present any evidence that such conditions and such a standard are not necessary.

Ultimately, I think it's a question of priorities, Lordfly. In most instances, we probably share the same priorities when it comes to rights and privacy. Regarding children, however, mine are different than yours.

But see, that's the key. There are no children involved. That's the point you seem to keep missing.

Policing what adults do censensually, without breaking any laws or abusing anyone, is a giant step too far if you ask me.

I'm all for going after child molesters and predators. I'm for public impalements when it comes to child abuse. However, I'm a strong believer in an adult's freedom to let their imaginations run wild and play whatever they wish with other consenting adults. Thjey really are two seperate things. Adult + Adult = 2 adults. Notice the absence of any children in that equation?

shacking the child abuse flag to force acceptation of yor opinion isnt the good solution

/me second david valentino's argumentation

Weeeeee! It had been a long time since we discussed this matter ^_^
The fun is back in the forum.



Technically, I don't think age play is only child molestation, I suppose molestation is only a subset of age play ; the other being "consensual" (not in legal sense). (Let's not discuss the fact that consensual AP is or isn't realistic. It's fantasy.)

And I don't agree that people who role-play child molestation should be watched carefully. Unless there is no right to privacy. At the very least, if they are watched carefully, then every other people should too in the name of equality ; but that's just my oppinion...



Half of SL fit that IMO. BDSM, fisting, anal bleaching tables, Porn theaters, escorts, sexballs, the twin tower + plane thing, etc...

Let's delete all mature SIMs + a few bits from PG and forbid AV attachments. To be sure nothing vulgar or offensive to anyone gets on SL.

I will ask the following:

"Is the disturbing issue here, NOT that people have kinks or fantasies, but that in SL we are able to create avatars that appear as our fantasy?"

I ask this question because I see two trains of thought on this.

First, those that are opposed to any notion that an adult would have sex with a child.

Second, those that see adults role playing and as such no harm is done.

In the later case, I will agree but I think we ALL agree that in real life, if one "age plays" one does not appear physically as a child. I can be in my 40's and pretend I'm that studly high schooler all I want, but I appear physically to all as a 40 something year old man. This would be the case of Barmovic Boffin real life situtation he told us of.

In second life, I can create an avatar that makes me appear to be 5 years old, hence the image to those that see me, is one of a child dealing in adult situations. BTW I have seen this in SL in mature clubs with child avies wielding massive phalic prims. I'm sure it was done for shock value, I found it stupid.

Now comes the icky part. Does that visual constitute in people's minds a gross violation of the TOS for this site? Keep in mind, the adults behind the screen are that.. adults, but are they creating images that would fall under child pornography at the least if it were any other media?

It's a complicated issue, but at least in my opinion, the clearest way to not confuse others that you are age playing AS adults, would be to not create a child avatar, but yet costume an adult avatar to wear child like clothing.

I would side with those that would say to visually create a child having sex with and adult is just that...creating child pornography IMAGES that would be illegal at least in the US.

I do not see it as child abuse inside of game as no child is being harmed, but I would consider it the publication of images that would in fact not be permitted in print or video media.

-Taylor

If it's illegal in the US to create picture (the computer screen running SL being one, of course) depicting fictionnal CP then it should be forbidden in SL ; I totally agree on that. I suppose nobody wants SL shut down by the law.

Just wanted to clear things up, this statement is likely to cloud the issue

http://archives.cnn.com/2002/LAW/04/16/scotus.virtual.child.porn/

hence, it is not illegal to create images involving no actual sex acts with minors in the US

that being said, legality has no place in this discussion. This is purely based on morality, proactively prosecuting "thought crimes," and the limits of expression in this medium

for the record, age play creeps me out, but since SL is set up and designed to be used by adults only, then intention is the key (with the intention of SL based age play logically presumed being to role play with other adults)

so age play, as much as some of us do not like it, should be protected as any other fetish that any of us have a distaste for, otherwise, we risk having our own particular recreations taken away on the basis of potential harm in real life (shooting, fishing, mafia, escort, gambling)

see, in SL we can fly. What if someone gets so excited by flying in SL, and they climb a building and try to fly in real life. We must protect society from people trying to fly, so lets ban flight in SL