Minors in SL having Sex. Is it ok?

Ace the big deal is it is a breeding ground for petafiles

Cat

Those damned animal lover lovers!

Nolan sorry that does seem a bit confusing.

I was saying that I wouldnt let my kid play in the teen grid because I have no way of knowing if he was talking to another teen or a pervert. That is why my kid does not talk in chat rooms either.

Cat

Pen your right; NO i have no right to tell other parents what to do. To each their own.
Yup if LL doesn't someone else will.
Great let someone else offer it. Why would they even want to open themselves up to all that goes with it is beyond me. Will they be hiring a whole different team to deal with that grid and its issues or will they further strain themselves just for the revenue?

Its not just about the moral issue, I would like to know how far back our issues will be pushed while they are making the kiddies comfy?

Cat

Now THAT is my main concern!

I dunno, isn't the whole "stereotyping" thing what the KKK does?


Now you're demeaning me. Very mature.

Oh, wait, it's not.

The mature way of saying this might have been, "I disagree with your arguments."

Would that have been too hard to have excluded the personal attacks?


Who's saying anything about sexual repression? I'm talking Linden Lab protecting itself legally. Since when is Linden Lab a vanguard of sexual liberty for minors? I don't see that on the mission statement.

Sexual repression is a red herring in this topic. It has nothing to do with whether or not Linden Lab should protect itself legally.

Please don't demean me for something I'm not even getting into the ballpark about debating.

Cat,

To clarify your position: are you opposed to:
(a) the kiddie grid in general
(b) Linden Lab leaving the leaving the legal loophole of not explicitly saying kiddie cybersex i is not permitted
(c) both?
(d) other

Cat, we can only wait and see. I am unhappy about the advent of this grid too, however, any amount of second guessing and assuptions will not change it. They are going to do it. The fact that they stated a few weeks ago that they were considering it but not anytime soon, then it happens *soon* is troubling to me. It really makes me worry about their plans as far as a player run government goes.

For now we can either wait and see how this pans out, hopefully and most likely they will give us more info soon. Either that ar we can sit here and tear each other to pieces and let our RL views on net interactivity scare us silly. That's not productive.

If it sucks so bad that it affects the main grid and/or tarnishes SL as a whole, I will probably participate a lot less. Quitting or backing off are really are only ways we have to voice our disapproval.

"Who's saying anything about sexual repression? I'm talking Linden Lab protecting itself legally."~ Hiro

That too is an excellent point.

Cat

Nolan; Naw don't want to tear anyone apart over our opinions. Everyone is entiled
Like I said nothing I have said is written in stone and my opinion can change. I talked with my kid some more and he loves the creative side of sl he would love to build like i do. I would love for him to do that. Maybe the solution for me would be to set our computers side by side. Its an option in my case on the moral issues I have with all this.

I am concerned still about resources to even see this threw. Also like you I thought about the gov't issues as well when I read what you did about this happening with little or no discussion of it.

We all love SL that much is still true today

Cat

It can't be a red herring because you stated that net relationships are fucked up. You went there. Not me.


I said initially we have to wait and see. They are going to do this. Your statement about net relationships spoke the loudest of any of your points to me. It was *DEMEANING*.

Now, you can either:

-admit that you stirred the bee's nest with that Archie Bunkeresque statement

-continue to cry foul when someone takes exception to your point(s)

-ignore me

-toughen up

Your choice.

For the record I disagree with you about net relationships. There are plenty of the same problems with RL ones. If some one fucks themself up over it, they are to blame, not the net. I suppose if I have an affair with a person I meet at a bar, the grocery store, church, or an ice cream social and it lasts only a few days I should be mad at the venue, and start preaching against it?

LL is a PROVIDER> What people do with it is up to them. The risks are self assumed. Did Maxis get sued when there was a underage *prostitution* ring in their world? They may have, but nobody was successful at it. They aren't just a provider. They are a self encompassing game. (TSO)

How will LL police that? It's the same problem with the kid grid.

Yup I suppose it is, how tempting for me as an adult to reach over and control his sim when he leaves the room, hmmm interesting

Cat

I have no problem with teens having cybersex ... most of them aren't cybervirgins anymore anyway. And I myself lost my (real) virginity when I was 16.

And anyway they're going to do it whether we think it's ok or not. Pedophiles could prove to be a problem; however since they're on childrens' and teenagers' chat rooms anyway, what on earth could we do to prevent them? Besides, that's LL's problem.

No one is saying that pedophiles on TeenSL is ok, but it is such a specific issue that the only way to prevent that sort of thing is to either A) Trust that LL's on it, or B) make lots of noise to LL to get them on it. Just because it MIGHT happen doesn't mean that they should scrap the whole idea.

Everyone is worried that some kid's parents is going to spy them flirting or having cybersex or whatever, sue LL, bankrupt/destroy them, and then there will be no SL anymore. LL would be nuts to not consider this and I am sure they are taking every precaution. So what on earth is the big deal?

sigh I would not like to wait for something to happen. Put a fox in the hen house and sooner or later a hen will die.

Cat

Again, you take me out of context.

The context was dispute resolution. If you are permitting cyber for kids, you are going to get all sorts of dispute resolution requests from kids and parents. That's gonna be a huge clusterf***. At least if you explicitly say that it's not permitted, then you can head a lot of those complaints off at the pass.


Why? Did I say any of yours were? I could make a long book of stories about all the messed up net relationships I've witnessed in SL alone in 11 months. I clearly said that it was from my observation. If a clearly qualified statement expressed clearly as an opinion offends you, then you should not participate in this discussion.

I have also witnessed a few shiny good examples of good online relationships. I stress: A few.


That's a loaded question. Archie Bunker never expressed his opinions as "opinions". He never held back from attacking people personally. He always expressed his opinions as truths, as moral imperitives, or as humor.


Re-read. I took exception to you questioning my motives and attacking me personally instead of my arguments.


I only ignore people when it's clear they aren't even responding to my comments. (Ignoring me.) In this case you are responding, however I may disagree.


I'm tough enough to stand against your line of reasoning, that's for sure. I have responded to your comments and questions directed at me, and I have only attacked your statements, not you personally. I have respect for you, but I don't feel you give me the same respect. We're adults here, there's no reason people should have to "toughen up" to bullying personal attacks.

In fact, it's stated so in the forum posting rules.


As you can see, I'm left without one.


There, that is a decent rebuttal against that one point of mine. I agree, RL relationships have their problems. We disagree over the idea that online ones are way more messed up. It's okay to disagree.


I'm not familiar enough to this case, so I can't respond. I would need to know:
a. Did Maxis explicitly ban sexual contact in TSO?
b. Did Maxis take reasonable action to prevent and/or shut this down?
c. Did Maxis allow the RL$ sale of items, character, services, and game money?

It certainly gave them some bad media, though. Maxis is also a HUGE company with a lot more staff and capitol to deal with this. Linden Lab is 30 people + liasons. Linden Lab would sink under the sheer cost of legal litigation of that magnitude, regardless of whether they won or not.

Exactly. This is why I originally posted:

*yawn*

Minors have been having tinysex - um, I mean cybersex - um, I mean AV sex - for years now. No amount of saying it's wrong is going to stop that. Just as no amount of saying underage sex in RL is wrong is going to stop teenage pregnancies.

Oh, I remember screaming when I first realized that my friend's fourteen-year-old brother was engaging in certain activities on a MUSH with someone I knew to be in their early twenties. Did I let her know how old he was? Of course I did. Did it stop? I have no idea. He's now grown up to be a well-adjusted young man in his mid-twenties himself. Is he scarred for life? Hell, no.

I may be biased, having grown up in a country where the age of consent is lower than the legal age for driving (which radically changes the social dynamics), but I dunno. If the internet had been around when I was growing up, I think I would have been much better off using that for sexual experimentation than Real Life.

Oh, I voted Yes because the title of the poll was misleading. I thought it was asking it it happens currently, not if it is okay. I abstain on the question on if it's okay.

On a related note to parents spying, I found this article extremely interesting. I think it's somewhat bogus that keystroke loggers and reading your childs email is legal but monitoring their phone calls is not. it should be all or none in my opinion.

In a case of snooping parents vs. their children, a mother's eavesdropping on a telephone conversation between the woman's daughter and her daughter's boyfriend violated the children's privacy, the state Supreme Court ruled yesterday.

There's a difference between whether it's allowed and whether it's wrong. Wrong denotes ethics or morals. Allow denotes rulesets.
Something can be wrong and allowed. (Especially if "wrong" is subjective / cultural / religious)
Something can be not wrong and not allowed. (Issues that are just plain out of the scope of the environment - we can't fly underground.)

The thread is "Minors in SL having sex. Is it ok?" not "Minors in SL having sex. Is it wrong?"

In this case, vying for a ban on sexual contact in the kiddie grid is not because necessarily two minors doing it is wrong, but because there is a larger legal and safety issue involved that would be reckless to ignore.

If two kiddies want to fool around on the net, kiddieSL or SL is not the place to do it, because it poses too much of a danger and legal risk to Linden Lab.

Wow, very interesting. I agree that parents should be able to moniter their children's phone calls if they can read their email and so forth. Besides, the boyfriend was a jackass and I'd have been worried if my kid was going out with someone like that.

That's really interesting, Nolan. I had heard of a similar case where a father trying to take away a child's cell phone was found in the wrong.

The essential difference is that even without eavesdropping, a parent can still legally look at the call records and see whom their children speak to. On the Net, there's essentially no record. (Though some chat clients have logging, it can be toggled off.)

Though, these do seem like contradictory laws, I agree absolutely.

EDIT:
What's really interesting is that normally, while police can't use evidence that THEY obtained illegally, they can use evidence that OTHER people obtained illegally, as long as the police had no part in it.

premarital sex is a sin and your all going to hell any ways.

Yes, but in the fastest, flashiest red sports car you ever saw.

Already there, It rocks if you have a bag of marshmallows or a pack of hot dogs. Hard to find a stick though...