Ban Childsex, not Ageplay

Simple, LL included Robin & co take note, define more clearly guys what we are all debating and there will be less pointless arguement and more support for Ageplay to continue to be possible as we all know that regardless of laws childsex is morally wrong to most of the population, whereas if you want to wear a diaper and pretend to be a baby then that's a bit bizzare perhaps to many but ok.
This will retain Avatar freedom, and for the small minority that want those avatars to engage in sexual acts, they better be darn well descreet about it rather than having public groups and clubs and be prepared to wear the risk.
In reality 2 adults playing Childsex is still less worrying than an adult and a minor in an adult AV engaging in sexual acts.

Wearing a diaper and pretending to be a baby is "adult babies", not ageplay.
Sexual ageplay (having sex with an avatar that looks like a child) is morally wrong to a great many people. Turning a blind eye is never the same as supporting it.

Homosexuality is also morally wrong to a great many people...

...as is bestiality/yiff-play...

I am not saying that I personally am offended by ANY of the above--I'm also not saying that I'm not personally offended by ANY of the above...

...what I am saying is that we seem to be drawing lines wherever it strikes the fancy of the moment rather than along moral beliefs or feelings of majorities.

It may surprise you that A LOT of people feel that it is more morally acceptable to have sex with a consenting 15-16 year old than with a member of the same sex.

(Again...just to be clear...I am not offering any personal beliefs whatsoever...I am discussing in an abstract manner very real points of view that seem to be outright missed by a lot of the people arguing on this subject)

Sexual Ageplay can also depict elderly people having sex too.
Ageplay as far as I've seen involves playing a different age from your own. So wearing a diaper for nonmedical reasons is Ageplay whether it is sexual or not.
People & LL are calling to ban all Ageplay, some of them by misdefinition.

It is alike to them banning Childsex by banning all sex.
So if we support banning of Childsex, we should start calling it that.

I'm not arguing against it becuase it's "morally wrong", I was simply wondering where support for it would come from if LL possessed more clarity. If people find it morally wrong, they aren't going to support it no matter how well things are defined.


Yes, ageplay can presumably cover all sorts of variations in age. I think what people are calling for is a ban on the type that involves sexual acts with children. I've seen only one or two comments about child AVs being "freaky", and a few half joking (I presume) calls to ban any AV under 7ft, but I doubt the majority would go with it.

I don't believe that LL can clarify what is being debated, as LL are pretty much withdrawn from all debate on the matter. If there is something to be clarified, it'll have to come from us.

Which leads to a question. You've mentioned "childsex" in both posts. I really don't want to ask google for a definition on that. Are you refering to real photos of sexual abuse of a child (which is an issue that was raised by the german news report), or the specific subset of ageplay that is both sexual and involves child AVs?
I'm sure that if a lot of people asking for ageplay to be banned were informed of the proper name for that subset, and how there is ageplay that is non sexual, they'd change what they're asking for.

I suggesting that childsex covers the act in RL, depiction of it whether by photo or virtual world AV.
There are grey areas on these subjects when you consider all peoples views and always will be, they will be the things that will happen in private, not advertised in the classifieds for the media to find in a 1 minute search, and great number of the population while knowing child sex is possible aren't willing to give up child AV's or sex for AV's to prevent it from happening.
We have a great number of issues raised from this event, restriction of unverified AV's from sexual areas and what acts constitute a banning from second life and referal to the authorities, who may not even bother to follow it through anyway. What is the German Government going to do if one of the AV's is in India and the other is in Antartica, Extradite them for a virtual childporn trial for something happening on a server in USA that was viewed & recorded in Germany?

True, but I like to think that the same sex morallity thing has improved a lot more in acceptance by the general community in the last 50 years, if adults decide they don't want "normal" sex together they are making an informed dicision, whereas I can't see the same happening to childsex because it is involving those with a very limited & still developing mind and lacking any ability to prevent any physical/mental harm.

There are a lot of grey area's, possibly 2 adults with AV's depicting a late teen guy having sex with a late teen cheerleeder as a sexual fantasy from younger years? Ok with me and I guess many would tolerate it even if they did not find it interesting.
The same with a 40yo AV and a cute little 10yo, hmm that's a worrying fantasy to have I suspect whether or not they are adults behind the AV's. Is the 10yo doing this just for money or for their own fantasy?
Start sliding the ages up and down and 18yo seems to be a green light or the age where we release them from the nest, let them have full control & rights to choose their paths and wear the results. When they reach sexually capable ages we discourage under 18's from having sex with each other for their own protection from a lack of knowledge, not because they are generally taking advantage of significantly younger partners with less knowledge.

I see a bunch of people on the forums misrepresenting and intentionally clouding the issue. It seems reasonably clear to me that what the Lindens are specifically worried about is the simulation of child abuse. I would be willing to bet my Second Life account that LL doesn't give a rat's ass about adult avatars in diapers, and I'm also reasonably certain that the few people who keep bringing that up here in the forums are not actually under the impression that LL cares either. Seems pretty disingenuous to me.

So, yeah, I suppose it might be good to specifically state that "virtual or simulated rape of an avatar that appears to be a young child will not be tolerated", but that won't stop people from talking about (and inventing) every conceivable angle here on the forums.

.

Yes, it seems those that some that do support Childsex/abuse would rather use the Ageplay term to get more support and risk losing everything for everyone else too, rather than keep their heads down without forcing coded restrictions to happen.

I think you are right, there are people engaged in the simulation of child sex that would prefer to obfuscate the issue by calling what they do ageplay, because it's such a general term that encompasses much more.

Nevertheless, it's pretty clear what *Linden Labs* means when they discuss the issue, whether they use that particular phrase or not. It's fairly obvious to me that while their words are perhaps less precise than many people would like (and just give the lawyers and word smiths some time), their actual concerns are somewhat less broad than many people would like to pretend.


.

Why dont those into the adults who are clearly adult sexual activity that has nothing to do with child Avs or claiming someone is under 18 ...

Call it something else.

Since that seems to be the definition for sexual ageplay in SL.

The Medias already onto the Ageplay name -

Id suggest not one else use it to mean anything.

Including the kid roleplayers who arent into sex - they shoudl use something less Media magnetic like "Second Childhooders" or simply Kid roleplayers.

Agepleay, in a way, promotes pedophilia. So, that is kind of like saying "make the videos illegal, but the sound clips legal!" >>

Proof of this?
Links?
Anything?

It's all about the context the term "ageplay' is used in. When spoken in conjunction with sex it's identical to "childsex" (and, no, I don't for a minute anyone would really believe "ageplay" could be likened to senior sex.........that's taking it an absured limit). People are playing word games here...........it can be intertaining but it's really sad to think reasonably intelligent people would put up some of the arguments I've been reading lately.

The simple word "driving" can have so many different "meanings" just according to the context in which it is used.
I have a "driving" desire.....
I'm "driving" to work.........
I'm "driving" a nail.........
My "driving" leaves much to be desired on the golf course........
You're "driving' me crazy.........

Word games for the sake of an argument.

And you could also then say Sex promotes pedophilia too then.
TV's promote pedophilia too then so should be illegal.

i personally don't care about this situation, it doesn't offend me or feel that it is immoral, people are taking this game far too seriously. so ur saying if we are adults playing as kids we are being pedophiles to one another? i don't think so. people that bitch and moan about this clearly have no fun in their lives. it's a game. when i first joined sl is was amazing, now it's just becoming real life. if this continues rl will be sl.

There have been so many Forum entries concerning childsex in SL, so it may be that I am repeating something that has already been said, but...

Even if we have Age-Verification, that will not stop people having a child's AV and having sex with an adult AV in SL.

As long as this goes on, the press will pick it up and write articles condeming SL, whether the owners of the AV's are adult or not.

One simple solution would be to copy an idea rom Disneyland and other amusement parks...

Don't allow AV's to be under a certain height in Mature areas.

If two adult AV's want to dress up as children etc. and participate in agesex, thats fine, but then the press won't have screenshots of childsex to publicise.

I guess it's a language thing here. Nothing I've read on the blogs or anywhere else "official" has said an avatar cannot be be short, flat chested, wearing pig tails, teddy in one hand and a lollipop in the other can't exist in SL. Nor have they said an avi cannot be be a puppy dog or kitten..............nor a slave in chains. They have said that depictions of child sex (maybe mis-called "ageplay", beastiality, and torture are actions that may get you in trouble. Everyone seems to need exact words defining exactly what is considered okay or not okay. Exact words are hard to come by when people apply their very own definitions. Can't anyone read the whole sentence or statement and get what is meant? I know what they are talking about...........why can't so many of you know too? Words do have different meanings according to the context, you know.

I think most everyone knows. But they'd rather pick apart every word and put their own personal and special meaning to it. Ageplay mentioned by the Lindens in their poor style of commnunications, means "childsex".

Sorry if American English is not your native language.......but Linden Labs is located in the United States of America where American English is the language spoken and it would help you greatly to, at least try to understand the whole thought before you go off on speciific meanings of statements. And for the Americans...........I think you know perfectly well what the meanings of statements are. You simply choose to ignore them.

Soooo... are you saying then that combat sims promote real world killing... the gangster roleplayers in here are promoting real world crime... and when I pretend my SL boyfriend is ravishing me, I'm promoting real world rape?

Would anyone like to tell me why SL sex roleplays of the weird kind are supposedly "promoting" crime, while murder/war roleplays are totally okay and no one is worried about it?

For some reason most of the USA has been brainwashed into believing that violent fantasy is okay but sexual fantasy is EEEEEEEEK

Sighhhhh

For some reason I don't think you know what you are talking about. Childsex is not okay............and as far I know it's not okay anywhere in the civilized world. Sexual fantasy is perfectly okay in the United States. It's actaually a way of life in many cases. Violent fantasies are much more looked down upon than sexual fantasies. Child sexual fantasies are way low in the eyes almost every American alive.

I don't know where you are from.....obviously not the United States. But your "facts" are very wrong.

Wow, someone finally took a survey!



I thought this all started because of Germany.

What height? My female avatar is 5' 4" (if I recall exactly) without shoes - and looks like a kid next to 'normal' avatar heights. My male avatar is 6' 2" or so and STILL looks short next to people.

The 'normal' height should be determined before any of this is decided..

I know how you feel. My original shape was 5'8, and in all honesty I'd love to go back down to that but the girl I am seeing has her height much taller, simply because EVERYONE is much taller. They need to adjust the so-called "height-scale" to reflect the way everyone has designed their avatars. My avatar is somewhere around 6'9, but even then he's shorter than a lot of avies I've run into. It's silly.

I think they were refering to ANY and ALL sexual fantasies, as "anything broadly offensive" is now banned.
Which means all sex ever, as someone is bound to get upset over a few prim peni.

I find it bizarre and rather sick that role-playing a child is considered to be so terrible as to be banned, but role-playing a vampire or a demon is quite OK.