April 12, 2006 4:00 AM PDT

Phony kids, virtual sex

In the increasingly popular, adults-only virtual world called "Second Life," a player can pretend to be a bear, an elf or just about anything else he or she imagines.

But even in the open-minded "Second Life" community, what people consider to be acceptable may have its limits. Some of the virtual world's biggest fans are shaking their heads over what users call "age play." This age-based role-playing can take on various forms: It can be as innocuous as people acting out a family dynamic, or as potentially troubling as two adults engaging in sexual role playing, with one of the avatars made to look like a child.

While "Second Life" maker Linden Lab acknowledges that age play occurs in its virtual world, the extent to which it happens in its most discomfiting form is unclear. The game's forums frequently buzz with debates over the appropriateness of "age play," but no one interviewed by CNET News.com said they have actually "seen" what could bluntly be described as graphically playacting the behavior of a pedophile.

Even so, legal experts said such virtual behavior between adults isn't likely to break the law, since there are no real children involved.

"It would not be (illegal) under child pornography laws because no actual child was used in the act," said Jack Balkin, a professor of constitutional law at Yale Law School and an expert on legal issues surrounding virtual worlds. "Child pornography laws receive special treatment under the First Amendment because children are sexually abused and people traffic in the results of that abuse." This does not apply in the age-play situation, he said.

Illegal or not, virtual role-playing that could easily offend many players puts "Second Life" creators at Linden Lab in a tricky spot: Do they try to legislate morality when it's likely that no laws are actually being broken? Or do they let people do as they wish behind closed virtual doors?

"Second Life" requires all players to be adults--and acts to remove anyone it can prove is underage. It has a separate grid for teenagers. And Linden Lab states categorically that it has zero tolerance for exploitation of actual children, such as uploaded images, in "Second Life" and will act quickly against anyone engaged in such behavior.

"If this activity were in public areas it would be viewed as being broadly offensive, and therefore unacceptable."
--Robin Harper, Linden Lab vice president of community development

When "we have evidence of child pornography or abuse that involves children in the real world...we will act to protect the child and notify the authorities," Robin Harper, Linden Lab vice president of community development wrote in a posting on the official "Second Life" forum (free subscription required). "The individuals involved, if it's proven the exploitation occurred, will be banned."

But when the issue of age play has surfaced, as it has on numerous occasions in the forums, Linden Lab has taken pains to address the more complex issues that the behavior raises.

"There are people in ('Second Life') who are role-playing (as) children engaged in sexual activities," Harper wrote in the forums. "While not a terms-of-service violation--no illegal activity--it could be argued that this behavior is broadly offensive and therefore violates the community standards. If this activity were in public areas it would be viewed as being broadly offensive, and therefore unacceptable."

A teenage girl and her 'daddy'
In an interview with CNET News.com last week, Harper said that if a critical mass of "Second Life" participants were to ask that something additional be done about sexual age-play, Linden Lab would tackle the issue in some way. So far, there hasn't been a general outcry, she said.

But Harper also pointed out that what has made "Second Life" popular among its 170,000 players--and it's growing at a rate of about 20 percent a month--is the freedom it affords people who want to try out new personas, particularly in private sections of the virtual world, she said.

"We've tried very, very hard not to broadly ban role-playing type behaviors," Harper said, "because when all is said and done, the ability to try new behaviors and try new things out is a big reason people are in virtual worlds."

Still, it's not clear how often people are engaging in age-play types of pretend behavior. But two "Second Life" players told CNET News.com about their experiences witnessing sexual or sexually charged age-play.

CONTINUED: What pretend play may portend…
Page 1 | 2

See more CNET content tagged:
Second Life, virtual worlds, behavior, children, law

105 comments

Join the conversation!
Add your comment
What a joke!
Who the hell cares what adults do with their avatars in a virtual community?! Jesus! We're not just talking about adult interacting with adults here... it's NOT EVEN IN REAL LIFE!! Get a grip, people!
Posted by meast (2 comments )
Reply Link Flag
What a Joke
What the joke is...is that you don't even realize that "real life" can
be affected and altered by all kinds of actions?virtual or not.
YOU need a "reality" check.
Posted by godseyesore (28 comments )
Link Flag
SO TRUE SO TRUE PEOPLE HERE IN THE US COULD NOT LIVE IN COUNTRY'S WHERE SEX IS OPEN AND NOT AS MUSH SEX CRIME AS HERE.
Posted by mrwicked1 (3 comments )
Link Flag
Shows that WOW is till better.
I mean really now.
It is a joke.

Who in their right mind would sell mirror eyes for $65
Posted by inachu (963 comments )
Reply Link Flag
Vista doesn't need the firmware required inorder to stan anylonger.
Media Eleven is coming and all this Tin Indian C.R.A.P. will be ashes over Hawaii.
Posted by Pop4 (88 comments )
Link Flag
This is just the biginning.
My first concern of people lack of concern is that computers are getting so good that future games like second lfe might start to look to true to life that people will enevitanly become a lot more offended.
Looking further ahead there is other issue where the simulated spite might become so real that even killing it might seem immoral. You might say i'm talking nonsense but consider this-

Picture I transfered you into a optial computer simulation so that i could see what it was like to torture and kill you sevral times over.

Just how far can we go before those line blur to much.
Posted by wildchild_plasma_gyro (296 comments )
Reply Link Flag
Great...Virtual Chomos'
Nice that everybody in the Tech media ring has waken up to the
reality of these online services that the affect's they will have on
our youth.

It's sad that it takes something like MySpace.com before the
Media become proactive. Maybe CNET News.com doesn't realize
the impact that they [CNet] have on society when they publish
articles like this.

Online Media Giants like CNET News.com have a big influence on
how company's and corporations handle there services as well as
there data. Article's like this scare entities like MySpace.com into
putting money back in the Web R&D necessary to ensure a safe
and effective online environment for everybody.

For this alone I would like to thank you personally, CNET
News.com for being the "Online Tech News that Makes a
Difference". I truly believe the article's that are published here on
CNET News.com truly contribute to the overall nature and well
being of the World Wide Web.

Thank You,
~Justin
PS. If I had it my way you could all take Friday off for being so
damn good at what you do!
Posted by OneWithTech (196 comments )
Reply Link Flag
LL is Being Reasonable... if maybe a little late
It is clear that Linden Labs realizes this is an issue that is potentially explosive. They are now stating that they will act if a critical mass of "residents" make it known they do not wish to tolerate their product being used as exercise for pedophiles. In my opinion, that is just a matter of time. Everyone I've spoken to has stated flat out that if it is happening in SL it should be a banned behavior.

The idea that because it is not a real child being victimized makes it somehow okay is silly at best. The reason normal people don't want this behavior to occur is because any mature reasonable adult can surmise that if an adult is creating situations by which he can watch a realistic 3-D rendition of himself having sexual relations with a 6-year-old child, then there is something dangerous about what he considers "sexy."

Just as SL is being used by UC Davis to train medical staff and being used by groups helping troubled teens to learn to socialize in a healthy manner, SL activities can potentially also be used to dangerous ends. Just like those troubled kids will hopefully bring back their positive social skills learned in SL to the real world, a grown man role playing child sexual abuse will likely also bring back his practiced behavior to the real world.
Posted by ShaneInseine (22 comments )
Reply Link Flag
Great article in Financial Times about online sex
The article was called "Not tonight dear, I'm online". It said that
for a majority of computer pornography enthusiasts, online sex
was better than whatever else they were into before, like sex
with their spouses. Often, this leads to broken primary
relationships, as sex with a real partner outside of marriage also
often does. Ardor is not so much cooled as fastened onto
another. Real or virtual, I would expect it to be uncomfortable
for the abandoned partner.

I may be old fashioned. I've been with the same woman for 35
years and I helped computers become what they have, and for
me there is nothing I could get from looking at any image on
any screen that could be as good as what's available in real life.
I also fail to respond to video games for the same reason. To
me, there is no way you can simulate the sensations of actually
driving or skiing or flying aerobatics, at least not with stuff on
my desk. I do have an idea for a digital virtual suit of clothing
that would transmit and receive tactile data - in other words,
feelings - thereby allowing new levels of personal online
interaction. Virtual capitalists take note. The real Killer App is
at hand. Make the check out to Jack, and Let's Roll!
Posted by JackfromBerkeley (136 comments )
Reply Link Flag
whole new meaning of virtual....
Not sure which side you're on, but you do realize that about 2 seconds after your suit works, somebody is going to offer up the opportunity to (in the words of Denis Miller) 'F**k Claudia Schiffer for $29.95', right?
Posted by skeptik (590 comments )
Link Flag
So Role Playing is bad?
Give me a break. ADULTS role playing is somehow a crime, somehow wrong? I love it when my wife and I play naughty Catholic school girl! She even bought the outfit! So now we are considered pedophiles because of our consential adult actions?

Once again, the uptight idiots want to control the sex lives of others. If you ask me, that is what is really perverted and sick.
Posted by miketkrw (86 comments )
Reply Link Flag
Use Common Sense
When two adults are role playing in real life they can't lose sight of the fact that they are both adults. In a virtual world where one of the players actually looks and sounds like a child, they can suspend disbelief. The reality is that if someone is becoming aroused at the 3D depiction of and adult having sex with a small child, there is a problem with that adult's view of what is "hot."

Think of it this way if you have children, would you care if your child's 3rd grade male teacher is role playing with his wife? No, most of us couldn't care less. How about your child's teacher going into SL every night to role play him having sex with 8-year-olds for 3 hours a night?

Use common sense.
Posted by ShaneInseine (22 comments )
Link Flag
Victimless crime.
If they aren't real children, then what is the problem? As long as
they don't spill out into the real world and hurt anyone in real life,
we should just leave them alone. Who cares if the cyber-act is
offensive? Just stop looking at it and ignore it.

If people got rid of everything they found offensive, then there
would be no one left. Just live and let live.
Posted by LandMineHare (29 comments )
Reply Link Flag
Spilling Out?
If someone walks into a virtual strip club to watch women dancing naked, is it not a reasonable assumption that it is because they find naked women sexually arousing?

If someone takes part in a virtual orgy with a room full of naked people, is it not safe to assume they find that a hot scenario?

What if your next door neighbor spends hours every night finding virtual 6-year-olds to have sex with?

Second Life does not exist in a vacuum. Every person engaging in activities that are by definition pedophile behaviors, lives in the real world and deals with real children.

The definition of a pedophile is someone who fantasizes regularly about children under the age of 13. Being a pedophile is not the crime, it is the illness that leads to a crime.

Giving pedophiles the tools to further enhance their fantasies and role play them out with visual imagery that makes it more realistic for them, simply adds to the chance that they will soon victimize a real child. Almost all child sexual predators start by viewing child pornography and work their way up to the crime of victemizing a real child.
Posted by ShaneInseine (22 comments )
Link Flag
It's illegal to simulate a minor having sex right?
If it shows there is a pattern then it should be banned because it encourages breaking the law. And yes I don't like violent video games with no message. For instance I like Quake 3 because it's arena combat but I don't like crime orientated games that show crime pays somehow.

Plus I wouldn't mind if law enforcement got involved somehow like with MySight I think.

From MySpace to Safer Space:
<a class="jive-link-external" href="http://www.businessweek.com/technology/content/apr2006/tc20060411_341338.htm?chan=technology_technology+index+page_today" target="_newWindow">http://www.businessweek.com/technology/content/apr2006/tc20060411_341338.htm?chan=technology_technology+index+page_today</a>'s+top+stories

The biggest problem that started in the 90s is people encouraging others to break the law becaseu of indirect modes of communication
Posted by Blito (436 comments )
Reply Link Flag
Sickness
You think quake arena has a message? Yeah right, kill people. You are one sick mother dude. Plus you are a pervert, interested in what other people due in their private lives virtual or not. Seek help.
Posted by miketkrw (86 comments )
Link Flag
Unclear
From what I recall there was a federal law but it was
struck down as being unconstitutional.
Posted by Jackson Cracker (272 comments )
Link Flag
hypocrisy defined
"For instance I like Quake 3 because it's arena combat but I don't like crime orientated games that show crime pays somehow."

Either simulated violence causes real violence or it does not. The rest is your moral agenda.
Posted by skeptik (590 comments )
Link Flag
This is what Adult Videos are suppose to prevent.
Chome
Posted by Pop4 (88 comments )
Reply Link Flag
Thoughtcrime...
Are we really this close to putting forward the idea of thoughtcrime? Ultimately, this virtual world is only an expression of thought. Actions in such a world, as long as they don't extend beyond that world, remain merely thoughts. So what I hear this article saying is that people want even the thought of pedophilia made illegal. Wow... now we are really slipping into the Orwellian nightmare. I am not trying to defend the truly vile acts of a pedophile... nor would I want to witness them in any fashion... but to contemplate making any virtualization illegal is boggeling... we will have done just that... we will have made thoughts illegal.
Posted by Source00 (12 comments )
Reply Link Flag
Hyperbole Anyone?
No one is talking about laws of any kind!

It is a game and it has rules. You can't spew out hate speech and yet you have every right to do so in the real world.

Pedophilia is a mental illness characterized by "thoughts" or fantasies of sex with children under 13. Pedophilia is not a crime, but child sexual abuse is a crime. Child sexual abuse is the result of a pedophile acting out on his fantasies.

A private company that makes up rules for its game has every right to say that the game may not be used to pass on hate speech and it may not be used to create 3D images and videos of virtual child sexual abuse.

For you to confuse real world laws and online game rules, is ridicules. Your charges of thought crimes and Orwellian nightmares are hyperbole and you know it. Is it an Orwellian nightmare that you can't put houses on your Monopoly property until you own all the colors for that land? No, it is just game rules.
Posted by ShaneInseine (22 comments )
Link Flag
sting operations?
Many online sting operations don't ever involve any
real children either, but people still get arrested.
These role players probably need to watch out and
make sure they aren't being set up too.
Posted by Jackson Cracker (272 comments )
Reply Link Flag
But belief and expectation play into that
In a sting operation, the person being "stung" believes he or she is trying to arrange sex with a person below the legal age of consent. Any reasonable person, interacting with the simulated victim, would believe that victim to be underage. (In fact, if the accused can demonstrate in court that "Any reasonable person would conclude the purported victim was in fact of legal age, and I so concluded at the time", that is quite sufficient to be found Not Guilty.)

Within Second Life, every player knows that every other player is 18 or over; LL guarantees and enforces that, and the "Reasonable Person" is entitled to rely on that.
Posted by jdzions (85 comments )
Link Flag
It could be useful.
Sure they could use this as a sting operation. This can be bait for a predatory criminal, and allow direct contact with someone who is willing to admit to past transgressions. Such conversations could provide substantial enough evidence to grant a warrant for arrest and for searches of this individual’s property.

Is that such a bad thing? I honestly don’t think so. It would be a shame if someone thought they were “role playing” into a confession for Police resulting in their arrest for something they never did. It would hardly be the first time for someone to get arrested for something they didn’t do though.
Posted by zaznet (1138 comments )
Link Flag
Easiest solution I can envision
I've never seen "Second Life." My only exposure to it is through articles such as this.

That being said, I think that the easiest solution to keep people from being offended is to create "zones" for "perverted" activity. Anyone not wishing to be offended would be able to play freely with little risk of seeing anything offensive. Action in the "perversion-free zones" would be strictly limited.

How limited, though, is anyone's guess. Some people are offended by viewing same-sex acts - so would this be disallowed? Some people are offended by group activity. Some people are offended by the use of "props." For that matter, some people are offended that "Second Life" even allows sex acts at all.

It's the classic cliched "slippery slope." Once you give in to one group, the rest get offended that you didn't cave in to THEIR demands.
Posted by Jim Harmon (329 comments )
Reply Link Flag
Simple Solution
No, the problem people have is not in the viewing of it. That is like saying that the problem people have with child porn is JUST that children were harmed in making it. Most people ALSO have a serious problem with people who JUST want to look at it. The problem is in using any tool to further enhance the fantasy of child sexual abuse.

The simple solution is to have a stated policy that child avatars are not to be used for sexual fantasy play and that those caught doing so will be banned from SL.

It is enforceable on one obvious level because out of the 170,000 people playing, there will always be a few who will take it upon themselves to "sting" other players that are partaking in this behavior. Simply getting screen shots of them doing so could result an investigation and eventually to their banning.

You can never stop it completely just like you can't completely stop it in real life. But an official rule regarding this would allow normal people to feel better about a game they are paying for and make pedophiles feel like it isn't a free zone for them to enhance their dangerous fantasies.
Posted by ShaneInseine (22 comments )
Link Flag
already are zones
Second Life is divided into PG areas and Mature areas. In PG areas there is no sexual activity allowed. As for this so called child avatar sexual activity... I spend the majority of my time in Mature areas of second life (not everything about the game is sexual by the way, its only a small segment) and I have NEVER seen what these few (emphasis on FEW) players have claimed is happening all over.
Posted by allanaD (2 comments )
Link Flag
Its about your ability to think, really...
Lots of people get lots of ideas which would be unacceptable to act upon. The gaming industry is driven primarily by our proclivities towards shooting one another in the head. I've personally played video games which involve me "nuking the planet". This does not make me a practitioner of genocide against all humanity (even though it was fun pretending to do it (a bit of a rush, in fact)).

When it comes to sex, everyone gets all prickly and pissy about things. Again, here we are only talking about people "playing pretend".

I've dated women (2 in fact) that had fantasies about being raped. Yep. Role-played whole deal. They each had their own specific requirements, and honestly, its not "my thing". But being the boyfriend, I played along with the game. On other nights, I'd get to play my way, instead.

Now that was a game, you see? If you believe that these two intelligent women actually *wanted* and *actual* rape, well, you're smokin' some powerful stuff.

Rape is insanely icky stuff in reality. But as a game, they two found it exciting.

If you could scan the minds of everyone you see on the subway or bus, on the street, at work and in your church, and peek into that little file-o-fax in their brains where they keep the things that "turn them on", you'd probably freak out.

I know one guy who wants desperately to find a severely overweight woman who'll defecate on him. No lie.

In summary: Lots of people think up crazy wild stuff. Sometimes they like to play pretend ("nuke the earth", "rapin'", "naughty schoolteacher and pizza boy"). Just because some people's make-believe upsets you to imagine it ("300 lb woman dumping a steam pile on your face"), doesn't mean you have to interject your standards on others. Start banning one person's "turn on" and you'll end up banning everyone's.

Rape is some awful stuff, for example (I never knew what the two prior gf's saw in it, actually). But pretend *is* pretend.

So what this whole argument boils down to is a fight between:

"Those who have a clear sense of what is real and what is pretend"

versus

"Those who have a hard time seperating fact and fiction and want to impose this lack of understanding upon others"
Posted by BuckTurgidson (2 comments )
Reply Link Flag
Its about your ability to think, really...
Lots of people get lots of ideas which would be unacceptable to act upon. The gaming industry is driven primarily by our proclivities towards shooting one another in the head. I've personally played video games which involve me "nuking the planet". This does not make me a practitioner of genocide against all humanity (even though it was fun pretending to do it (a bit of a rush, in fact)).

When it comes to sex, everyone gets all prickly and pissy about things. Again, here we are only talking about people "playing pretend".

I've dated women (2 in fact) that had fantasies about being raped. Yep. Role-played whole deal. They each had their own specific requirements, and honestly, its not "my thing". But being the boyfriend, I played along with the game. On other nights, I'd get to play my way, instead.

Now that was a game, you see? If you believe that these two intelligent women actually *wanted* and *actual* rape, well, you're smokin' some powerful stuff.

Rape is insanely icky stuff in reality. But as a game, they two found it exciting.

If you could scan the minds of everyone you see on the subway or bus, on the street, at work and in your church, and peek into that little file-o-fax in their brains where they keep the things that "turn them on", you'd probably freak out.

I know one guy who wants desperately to find a severely overweight woman who'll defecate on him. No lie.

In summary: Lots of people think up crazy wild stuff. Sometimes they like to play pretend ("nuke the earth", "rapin'", "naughty schoolteacher and pizza boy"). Just because some people's make-believe upsets you to imagine it ("300 lb woman dumping a steam pile on your face"), doesn't mean you have to interject your standards on others. Start banning one person's "turn on" and you'll end up banning everyone's.

Rape is some awful stuff, for example (I never knew what the two prior gf's saw in it, actually). But pretend *is* pretend.

So what this whole argument boils down to is a fight between:

"Those who have a clear sense of what is real and what is pretend"

versus

"Those who have a hard time seperating fact and fiction and want to impose this lack of understanding upon others"
Posted by BuckTurgidson (2 comments )
Reply Link Flag
Real Danger?
I'm all for kicking pedohpiles off of the net and into jail, but I have to question whether or not stopping sex age-play on the web would do more harm than good.

These people are adults doing the dirty with other adults who are only pretending to be children.

It's weird and creepy, but if these loosers are engaging with other adults, then at least they're not looking at real child porn or chatting up real children. Cracking down on age-play would likely disperse these people to places where real children go.

I know there are arguments that people might transition from age-play to real children, but I think that most of these people are just sad armchair perverts and that most of those who would transition would probably do it anyway.
Posted by perfectblue97 (326 comments )
Reply Link Flag
That is very astute...
the most pragmatic &#38; realistic comment on this article so far.
Posted by (1 comment )
Link Flag
this is nothing new
This kind of crap goes on in IRC channeles and yahoo all the time. So they have another method now.

I hope the department of Homeland Security's LAN/WAN team blocked acces to the Second Life's domain though, we don't need anymore high profile arests.
Posted by Bob Brinkman (556 comments )
Reply Link Flag
virtual sex
whats the educational value of teaching a child this?, and at what age?
Posted by newcreation (118 comments )
Reply Link Flag
video games
ive seen studies shown that teens that play more violent games have more displine problems in school,what makes you think playing out sexual fanasys be any different?.
also schools are for learning whats this have to do with anything besides a very liberal teachers union
Posted by newcreation (118 comments )
Reply Link Flag
games in school
boy who jerk off five times a day. will have behavior problems too
Posted by cockholebang (2 comments )
Link Flag
You people are sad
To whom it may concern


You know it people like YOU! That start so much trouble of a virtual game, I mean come on man get a life, and seriously it is Fiction Fiction Fiction do I have to say it again. I rather have someone role-playing there fantasy than doing it in real life. But go ahead stir up trouble; you news people are good at it never thinking always wanting a good story.
You remind me of those people that chase off car clubs when there hanging out on parking lots, minding there own business chit chatting. People like you always chase them off I guess you rather have them go cause trouble than have a harmless chit chat.
Well to let you know people will always have fun doing fictional things and there is nothing you can do about nothing. So continue ranting I all enjoy sending you more and more stupid comment for your stupid stories.

Sincerely
Just another kid living a fictional life!
Posted by bmwchild (2 comments )
Reply Link Flag
Misconceptions about Ageplay
This article seems to imply, and from reading some of the comments, at the very least a lot of people have infered, that the normal ageplay dynamic is an adult who wants his or her partner to play the role of a child.

Most people in the ageplay community are actually adults who wish to roleplay and be treated as children, and feel lucky to find a partner to play the role of guardian.

What we want is to feel like a child. Some people want a completely innocent activities, while others may incorporate sexual and/or BDSM elements. And many sometimes want innocent roleplaying, and sometimes want kinky roleplaying.

In any case, ageplay has absolutely nothing to do with pedophillia. It is adults roleplaying, and even if they act out scenarios that should never happen to a real child, they still find real child abuse abhorrent.
Posted by Laimah (1 comment )
Reply Link Flag
Huh? What?
Personally, I’d like to hear a psychologist’s theory on this. (If I missed it in the threads I apologize.)

If I wrote a game that taught the players how to build bombs in their kitchen, IRA style, would I be wrong? Would I attract home chemists and bomb enthusiasts who fantasized about building these devices? Would I be held responsible for who know what havoc I might release?

How can some of you folks think this sort of thing won’t attract pedophiles and allow them to further their sickness through widespread acceptance and fantasies? We’re not talking about grown-ups in pigtails and high skirts or what have you were talking about children. I applaud the makers of this game for adding true ageplay into their system as opposed to pedophilia.

Check this baston of anti-censorship and free speach out.

Shangrila
Telnet: shangrila.mushpark.com
Port: 9999

It’s a MUSH, which is a text based role-playing environment. Here you can play the role of a 12-year-old child, be brutally raped (think broken bones brutal) Cut and left bleeding, defecated and urinated on and tortured in any manner you can think of, I saw one suspended by hooks and torture-raped once, all in the pursuit of one handed typing and other stimulation.

All that and there’s zero age verification done at the door. Grab a mud client and check it out. Then tell me this is ‘innocent’ sexual experimentation and harmless fantasy.

Want to cry censorship? I bet the writers of those freedom of expression ideals never considered this.

A society needs lines of decency somewhere, go ahead argue that, and if not drawn here then someone tell me where they should be drawn.

Thank you,

Syrron
Posted by Syrron (1 comment )
Reply Link Flag
Better online than on real
Having an outlet for fantasies is a good thing, especially where child/adult fantasies are concerned. It provides a safe, private manner for people to engage in their own home without seeking out the physical world to so engage.

It us a privacy issue and the religious thought police should stay out of people's private bedrooms. Such voyeurism by the thought police should not be allowed.

I'm reminded of an occurrence that I saw on cable TV in Seattle in the 70's with a bunch of my friends. It was a snuff film. One of the real ones that those filmmakers from Columbia, South America were making whereby they actually kidnapped women and snuffed them live (then dead) on film. The one we saw was particularly brutal and lasted about 8 minutes. I can still recall each scene visually and word-for-word dialogue.

At the end, a message came up that asked if you liked this kind of viewing to please contact such-and-such clinic somewhere in a Canadian city. They actually used it for social purposes in helping people who had inclinations to engage such fantasies.

Before passing judgment upon the private thoughts and fantasies of both children and adults and the complex nature of the human mind and sexual psyche, we must first get over judgmentalism based upon antiquated notions derived from the systems of religious indoctrination and self-righteousness.

fighting.4justice
Posted by fighting.4justice (3 comments )
Reply Link Flag
Better Virtual Than Real
Having an outlet for fantasies is a good thing, especially where child/adult, adult/child fantasies are concerned. It provides a safe, private manner for people to engage in their own privacy without seeking out the physical world to so engage.

It is a privacy issue and the religious thought police should stay out of people's private bedrooms. Such voyeurism by the thought police should not be allowed.

I'm reminded of an occurrence that I saw on cable TV in Seattle in the 70's with a bunch of my friends. It was a snuff film, one of those real ones that those filmmakers from Columbia, South America were making whereby they actually kidnapped women and snuffed them live (then dead) on film. The one we saw was particularly brutal and lasted about 8 minutes. I can still recall each scene visually and word-for-word dialogue. It was very sad, and we didn't learn until months later for a fact (after they busted the filmmakers) that it was real, although we knew it when we saw it but couldn't understand how it could be.

At the end, a message came up that asked if you liked this kind of viewing to please contact such-and-such clinic somewhere in a Canadian city. They actually used it for social purposes in helping people who had inclinations to engage such violent fantasies.

Before passing judgment upon the private thoughts and fantasies of both children and adults and the complex nature of the human mind and sexual psyche, we must first get over judgmentalism based upon antiquated notions derived from the systems of religious indoctrination and self-righteousness.

It is better that people engage in a virtual world than going out into the real world to so engage. This is a medicinal and preventitive social therapy that people can engage in their own privacy, with the stipulation that if they want counsel, they are notified of availability.

The slippery slope theory that if someone does it in the privacy of their own home or bedroom, they will go out and do it in the real world is a proven false theory by the demographic facts that if this slippery slope theory were true, all violent-video game enthusiasts would be mass murderers. Being a worn-out Doom 95 player (no, I haven't played any game systems more recent than that and I'm not embarassed to say so), I would be at the top of the list.

fighting.4justice
Posted by fighting.4justice (3 comments )
Reply Link Flag
3dgirlz.com
www.3DGirlz.com
Posted by freed0mz (1 comment )
Reply Link Flag
I'm new guy in town
Hey would you show me where there is a place to get a drink?
Posted by cockholebang (2 comments )
Link Flag
 

Join the conversation

Add your comment

The posting of advertisements, profanity, or personal attacks is prohibited. Click here to review our Terms of Use.

What's Hot

Discussions

Shared

RSS Feeds

Add headlines from CNET News to your homepage or feedreader.