I have had enough

I tempted to have a final word on this..and to make it final as Linden Labs has already decided, the discussion is moot. I believe that they have done the right thing rationally legally, ethically, and it is the only alternative that they really had. I wonder for myself how it is possible to have a community of sorts, and to have compassion for so many different points of view. But I don't have a lot of sympathy for arguments about rights, creativity, or slippery slopes. There are so many other issues that fall within those realms to get excited about. What we are talking about is adults who want to spend their time simulating sex with children, and to do that in a way where it is publicly advertised promoted and celebrated. That seems to be the bottom of a slippery slope to me. I don't see that as the first step to where you will see Shakespeare or even Lady Chatterly's Lover being banned.
When you read about Second Life it often is described as a wave of the future...you can have telepresence with people all over the world, there are new opportunities for learning, cultural interchange, commerce, and entertainment. One can well wonder given the hype and the advance of technology what virtual communities like Second Life will be like in the future....what will happen to "reality"when VR is as real as real. It already real enough that many of us spend many hours online, and count online friends whom we never met, as close or closer than real life friends. But the whole issue about ageplay and the quality of the discussion reminds me of what a TV commentator said of a U.S. Presidential debate in the 80's:
"We have the most advanced and costly technology, miles worth of cable, all so we can hear one grown man tell another 'I told you so.'"
It really seems that Second Life is almost like a microcosm for the internet. Will these virtual communities bring people together in new positive ways, or isolate them, individuals sitting alone before computer screens seeking only to gratify themselves in one way or another? (and caring less about real world issues like child abuse.)
While I don't have a lot of sympathy for some of the arguments, I have great sympathy for individuals who have suffered sexual abuse as children. I have to, as I work with them as a counselor, have had friends among them, and know children who have had it. I realize that some of those people may be on the opposite side of the argument than I am.
There may be some who feel they are working through their issues in this way, or some who feel that this is just the way they are made now, and this is a form of entertainment for them. To the former as a counselor I would say that you will never be able to work though your issues in this way, please talk to someone. To the latter, I would ask, If you don't consider yourself a pedophile, and you are probably not one, what does it mean that become so exercized about your rights to be able to simulate sex with children? People who are convicted sex offenders sometimes undergo a form of behavioral treatment, they attach what is called a genital seismograph that measures blood flow and then take measures as the person watches images to see what makes them aroused. If simulating sex with children in Second Life turns you on...I would ask how could it not affect your perception of reality....of children and of your own sexuality. If you believe that this is a natural and purely understandable form of entertainment involving human rights, creativity, and self expression, I would ask you to take a test. You've expressed your outrage in these forums...sitting alone as we do in front of a computer screen; would you tell a neighbor about it? a coworker? your boss? a relative? Would you write a letter to the newspaper or to a public official complaining of this challenge to your human rights? If the thought of adults simulating sex with children does not send a shudder up your spine....but this does...I would pay attention to that shudder...and ask yourself what does it mean?
Finally I have to reiterate that I believe that Linden Labs has done exactly the right thing..and I don't believe that other fantasy groups have any need to fear censorship.
May the Second Life Community flourish, may all who have participated in this discussion flourish.
Respectfully,
Pablo Umpqua

Any person who, in a circumstance described in subsection (d), knowingly produces, distributes, receives, or possesses with intent to distribute, a visual depiction of any kind, including a drawing, cartoon, sculpture, or painting, that—
(1)
(A) depicts a minor engaging in sexually explicit conduct; and
(B) is obscene; or
(2)
(A) depicts an image that is, or appears to be, of a minor engaging in graphic bestiality, sadistic or masochistic abuse, or sexual intercourse, including genital-genital, oral-genital, anal-genital, or oral-anal, whether between persons of the same or opposite sex; and
(B) lacks serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value;
or attempts or conspires to do so, shall be subject to the penalties provided in section 2252A (b)(1), including the penalties provided for cases involving a prior conviction.

Ok then its ok to do things that are in real life tacky and unlawful In RL like age play is a sexual way it ok...

Child abusers SHOULD NOT BE PROTECTED MY LAW

Ageplay is illegal in RL? Really? An adult dressing up like a child and having sex is unlawful? Seriously?

The activity, no. The depiction of said activity, yes.

Remember, the avs are representations. They're bound by the same laws that govern photos, movies, etc.

Wait. The depiction of ageplay, (which Wiki says is "...a form of regressive roleplay in which a physical adult takes on the role of a child." is illegal? Showing two adults engaging in roleplay is illegal?

Ageplay is illegal in RL? Really? An adult dressing up like a child and having sex is unlawful? Seriously?

And who said that child abusers SHOULD be protected by law? Now, I've only skimmed some of the longer posts, but from what I can gather, no one has said that they should..

Or were you saying that adults that enjoy dressing up as kids for whatever reason, sexual or not, shouldn't be protected by law?
Or were you saying that adults that enjoy this are child abusers, even though there are no children involved in this?

Now, don't get me wrong, I find ageplaying as squicky as anyone, but this hysterical "Ageplayers are childmolesters" is getting crazy.

Usagi,

Ageplay is not illegal in real life - it is not comparable to pedophilia.

Are you serious???????

What? my point is if you go back and read the other posting some nutcase is just trying to use the currents laws of freedom os speach to get around child abusers

As you know during this crazy rebirth of this topic there been a increase of child avie in the game.

Due to threads like this just for the please idea of doing something that is wrong to begain with.

. LLabs is now saying that ageplay is banned But is it really? Infact its grown again because there is always a people wanting to be against something and do the wrong thing for the fun of it.

People just take issues like this so so easy, like actions like child abuse would never happen in their family. But infact people use this platform of sl just to get themselves off with underage play on sl......I said this once i say it again. One time LLabs well get a court order to totally banned age play why? because One day there wil be a involvement where child(s) were harmed in rl due to this Format (case in point Second Life Game ), where underage child were involved. OR They found out the person(s) in questen. was involved in second and says Second LIfe caused him or Her to act out in rl what he or she did in Second Life.....

Ok fine but it leads some to pedophilia.............To those that have No control over their selves.

Ok fine but it leads some to pedophilia.............To those that have No control over their selves.

I repeating myselve again......
..I said this once i say it again. One time LLabs well get a court order to totally banned age play why? because One day there wil be a involvement where child(s) were harmed in rl due to this Format (case in point Second Life Game ), where underage child were involved. OR They found out the person(s) in questen. was involved in second and says Second LIfe caused him or Her to act out in rl what he or she did in Second Life.....

Ok fine but it leads some to pedophilia.............To those that have No control over their selves.

Reguardless of my personal dislike of sexual age play with child avs - I was always of the "just hope I dont have to see it" becuase I didnt beleive I had a right to impose stuff on Adults. I always felt it shouldnt have been advertized becuase its so distasteful.

I have opinions on it of course. Made those pretty clear in these threads.

The fact that the outside world's going to judge SL based on Age Play being allowed or not changes things a great deal.

Its simply not worth Second Life potentially failing on the priniciple of virtual first ammendment rights in all cases. Since its not the governement - Its a business.

Ok fine but it leads some to pedophilia.............To those that have No control over their selves.

Diagnostic criteria for 302.2 Pedophilia
Over a period of at least six months, recurrent, intense sexually arousing fantasies, sexual urges, or behaviors involving sexual activity with a prepubescent child or children (generally age 13 years or younger).
The person has acted on these sexual urges, or the sexual urges or fantasies caused marked distress or interpersonal difficulty.
The person is at least age 16 years and at least 5 years older than the child or children in Criterion A.

Note: Do not include an individual in late adolescence involved in an ongoing sexual relationship with a 12- or 13-year-old.

Specify if:
Sexually Attracted to Males
Sexually Attracted to Females
Sexually Attracted to Both

Specify if:
Limited to Incest
Specify type:
Exclusive Type (attracted only to children)
Nonexclusive Type

Are you going with Daniel Webster says of it, or what the psychologists do? I mean, are you going to go with the experts or not?

The DSM* isn't a grocery list; it's a diagnostic tool. I believe there is a practical difference between a dictionary definition for the purpose of clarity in a discussion and a diagnostic tool used by a doctor to evaluate a patient's illness. There are inherent problems with confusing the two. Nevertheless, if you look a few paragraphs above your quote, you'll find this: "Individuals with Pedophilia who act on their urges with children...." Obviously, the phrase "who act" implies that not all pedophiles act on their urges with children. For that matter, look at your own quote. It says that the patient can act on the urge OR be distressed by it. Of course the insidious problem is that many pedophiles don't think there is anything wrong with their behaviour, so they aren't distressed, and, consequently, don't seek help.

That's it for me. Good night. Even very tasty bait will be ignored.




*In the name of accuracy, I should point out that the DSM IV section on paraphilias was revised, and the revision specifically dealt with this passage. You have quoted the current text, but the reasons for the revision are relevant. However, my making a summary of it here would be overly pedantic in a thread already laden with hair splitting, so I'll let you do your own research.

As you know during this crazy rebirth of this topic there been a increase of child avie in the game.

I've not seen any visible increase in the number of kids in the usual kid spaces (Inner Child Depot, HardKnock, etc.) nor have I seen a marked increase in membership of Second Life Children or other kid groups that could be linked to this.

Mari

Oh ffs. For those people, the Sears catalog, children's underwear page, could lead them to it as well. BAN IT!

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mickey McLuhan
Ageplay is illegal in RL? Really? An adult dressing up like a child and having sex is unlawful? Seriously?



The activity, no. The depiction of said activity, yes.

Remember, the avs are representations. They're bound by the same laws that govern photos, movies, etc.