Linden Lab is Correct to Ban Sexual Age-Play

I still think it's important to discuss these issues, which are very important to the future of safety and freedom in SL, and to have this debate out in the open where others can read it and make their own minds up. After all, right now LL are discussing the same things in private and wondering what the best path is. We are properly doing the same thing.

I did think the OP might be a troll, but the posts are consistent with other posts that Virile Vampire has made, I think she just expresses her opinions loudly and without compromise - which is probably what debating different sides is about, right? I think it just comes across like that because of the subject matter and some people just think "bbzzt, does not compute" and want to make like the whole thing will go away. Likewise they might read my posts and think I'm not super-protective of kids - which I am - I can just see where this is going and we might as well close SL down if we're gonna ban anything that might lead to bad things.. and BTW closing SL would not prevent those bad things either.

Take Care,
Lorna.

Greetings all:

Thanks everyone for your feedback whether I agree or not. I refuse to address the personal attacks or be baited into personal confrontations so I will make a general statement before preparing my day for work.

Please stick to the subject of thread which is sexual age-play and stop playing games with comparisons. There is a huge difference between fantasies involving the comparisons you listed to sexual fantasies involving innocent children.

The reason this thread was created (should be obvious) was to show support to the decision made by Linden Lab for making sexual age-play revolving around children illegal in Second Life as it should be. I started this thread because there were several threads opposing this decision. Honestly it shocked me to see people and still does.. to openly support sexual age-play as if it is perfectly acceptable to actively engage in 3D virtual sexual role play revolving around children.

For me there are no shades of gray here. It is all clear. It is simply wrong. It saddens me to see that people are not ashamed to openly post in a public forum that sexual age-play revolving around children is ok when it is clearly not ok. It makes me wonder about humanity as a whole.

I am not so naive to think that this demented disease of the mind sexually desiring children can ever be abolished completely because like most dirt, it finds a way to hide in the cracks. However, that does not mean we can not make a difference by making our voices heard for the safety and protection of the children.

I do not apologize for my stance nor shall I back down. I may however discontinue the discussion in this thread as it seems have turned into a battleground of baiting and drawing others into personal confrontations. Not productive at all.

Final word, sexual age-play revolving around children is not acceptable. Sexually desiring children is not acceptable. Virtual simulated child pornagraphy using digital avatars in a sexual role play situation is also not acceptble. Much of this simulated porn makes its way into the underground market for child pornagraphy. All of this either directly or indirectly hurts real life children. These acts are not harmless.

Have a nice day all.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lolicon#Legal_status_in_the_United_States


Vryl Valkyrie

Nice try...

Although you word it a little stronger than I might, I'm mostly in agreement with you, Vryl.

Ah, I see, you don't have to defend your views because you have the moral high ground anyway, is that it? Well, if you are so obviously right, you should have no problem doing exactly what you assumed those in favour of non-harming personal freedom wouldn't do: proudly announcing who you are. Your challenge for people with different opinions to name themselves was indeed an attempt to troll. No doubt you expected others to be afraid to share their identity on-line for privacy reasons anyway, not because of any 'shame' about their beliefs. Just like you obviously won't share your identity yourself. Too bad your attempt to suggest those in favour of personal freedom would be anonymous creeps comfortably lurking in the shadows of a nick name was brought up short by someone without desire to be anonymous. It's actually amusing to see you trying to wriggle your way out of this. 'No need to prove yourself' indeed, you already did.



If this remark came from someone willing to discuss in a civilised manner, I might actually be insulted by it. But I think I'll pass up on this opportunity to feed the troll.

Tell that to birth control.

I personally do not see children as something more important than any human life, especially not over freedom of thinking and expression. But as said by the OP it's my own opinion to see the same lump of meat in each of us )

Since way too long the childrens have been the hostages of some "good thinking" politicians to shove everything down our throats, lets not step on this way, lets not let a few puritans govern what is appropriate to think, draw, paint , render under the smoke mirror of protecting kids.

And speaking of the OP this thread is totally off topic, there is no section in the forum to "express" his personal likes or dislikes, you have myspace for this.

Thread reported

rewrite

Hello Kyrah and thanks for your post.

First of all, do you seriously think that Linden Lab making sexual age-play revolving around children illegal has anything to do with with Big Brother trying to harness our artistic or intellectual freedoms? Of course it is not about that. The only smoke screen I have seen here are others who use unrelated excuses as a comparison to somehow justify sexual age-play for adults who desire children.

I do feel that children should be protected since they cannot protect themselves. It does not mean that one life is more valuable than another. However, it can be interpreted many ways.

As for myspace or the expression of opinion, we are all expressing our personal opinions even if we all do not agree. Most of the time when someone posts anywhere on the net, he/she is expressing a personal opinion just as we all have done.

We can not all agree. It is not possible. However, that does not make an opinion unworthy because all deserve merit whether we agree or not simply due to the fact that we all have the human right to express ourselves freely.

This thread was created to express an opinion. Others have responded with their opinions. We have disagreed. That is not important.

I have asked that people at least stay on topic and not sway to other issues or play word games with the real issue at hand.

Even though the thread (like all threads) consists of opinions, it is not about opinions. It is about the decision that Linden Lab made to make sexual age-play revolving around children illegal (as it should be).

I must admit that I am still in shock that anyone can support sexual age-play concerning children. I find it disturbing. However, I still feel all have the right to express his/her belief even if I or the majority disagrees.

Thanks again.

Vryl Valkyrie

I am in shock that anybody would think it is any of their business to judge, let alone prohibit what consenting adults do with/to each other. I find it disturbing.

Hi Suzy,

Did you realize that allot of these virtually simulated adult/child 3D encounters make their way into the underground child pornagraphy market? How do you feel about that? Thanks.

Vryl Valkyrie

Before this turns into an assisted suicide debate I'm going to lock the thread.

This forum isn't for general discussion; there are many Resident Sites where this discussion is appropriate — Resident Answers is for Resident-to-Resident help. I'll close this thread...

Vryl kindly pointed out to me in a PM that this isn't the RA forum. Guess I'd better do this proper then.

The Age-Play debate tests the forum guidelines. On the one hand the guideline give permission to debate policies but on the other this topic is rooted in morality any debate on morality unless it is very careful is going to violate the Community Standards Intolerance or Harassment rules. Not to mention that such a hot topic is very enticing for trolls. As a moderator it puts me in a tough situation, I've been trying to turn a blind eye to them but that has become harder and harder. I'm stuck in a Catch 22.

Forum GuidelinesCommunity Standards