News Child abuse in Second Life?

Um. I don't think the examples you cite are anywhere near comprable. There's virtualised violence for entertainment and then theres realistically pretending to be a pre-teen so that somebody can seduce you. No wholly different ball games IMO.

 

BAH!

Its either all ok or none of it is.

I think you have a problem separating "play" and "reality".

At the end of the day, consenting adults roleplaying extreme violence towards one another and consenting adults engaging in age related roleplaying for kicks have two intrinsic things in common.

1) Consent

2) Fantasy

I'm not saying that CSS equal to child abuse, I am saying that it is a fantasy done for entertainment and gratification purposes - exactly the same thing that Age-Play is about.

People are whinging about the age-play issue because they dont understand it and in this culture of heightened awareness and irrational and pathological fear of anything that involves children it is hardly surprising that people are villifying a harmless piece of fantasy.

 

I agree Hivemind, but I think you're reacting to this more strongly than is needed. Nobody in this thread said that they thought people who have fantasies involving virtual child abuse should be punished in anyway, just that in their opinion it is a bit weird.

Like I said before, I don't think it's important to discuss what some people get off on. It's more interesting because of the fact that in Germany, even virtual child abuse is illegal. Is the German legal system correct? Or should people be able to have whatever fantasies they desire so long as it doesn't harm anyone in any way?

 

There's a game you can play where you get to hurl abuse at, and make cry, those loud obnoxious 3 feet tall bags of poop who infect everything with more germs than a sewer and absolutely refuse to go away?

I wanna play!

 

No, it's not a black white issue. It doesn't have to be all right or all wrong, the world is made of infinite grey areas.

Bear in mind that CSS isn't roleplay at all for most people, it's simply a team sport or game. Roleplaying indicates getting further into the character and manifesting their persona or reality - which is where ageplay can get creepy. Don't get my wrong, a girl dressed up in a sexy schoolgirl uniform etc is fine by me, but when that girl also goes around talking, acting and constantly pretending to be a fifteen year old who wants to hang around an older man (or genders reversed) and get it on - thats when I get nervous.

I'd feel the same if I saw a load of CSS people running around role-playing, shouting extremist phrases and taking things too seriously.

The distinction between reality and fantasy in games is a fine one and for me the line is drawn when somebody uses games to manifest their fantasies as a reality in a game and when those fantasies would be considered illegal or morally suspect in most societies.

In regard to your final paragraph, I have two points. One; its entirely possible for someone to understand ageplay and still disagree with it. I can understand why some people find ageplay attractive and I can understand the surrounding issues, as I am a rational and well educated person. However, the rational part of me can still choose to disagree with it.

Two; the reason people are villyfying ageplay is because it could be considered a springboard to real abuse, just as video game violence is often associated with actual violence and low-level drugs are associated with higher level drugs. It's not nessercarily going to be true that the two are linked, but an investigation into the issues from any angle, if purseued by rationally minded people, cannot hurt and may actually increase awareness to the act. You don't need to be so defensive.

 

Thats fair enough, but the word "sick" and "disgusting" were both used (albeit by one poster).

(to cardjoe)

Opinions are fine but they do not constitute facts. You can morally disagree with something but that does not make you right (see the Catholic Church's stance on Gay Marriage for example).

As for age-play and role playing being a spring board to other things ... there has never been, nor will there ever be, a single, conclusive study that shows a direct, causative link between video games (or books, movies, tv etc) and violence. The same can be said for role playing.

If it were the case that role playing led to disillusionment and peculiar behavior (rather than mental disturbance or emotional issues leading to such) then we would see a far greater number of people running around dressed as Jedi or confused Trekkies wondering why their transporter array is malfunctioning. It doesn't follow and its the same bloody minded attitude that gives the Tipper Gore's of this world and the morons at the board of censors the ammunition to curtail what see, hear, interact with and do.

 

You had me at "sexy schoolgirl".

http://youtube.com/watch?v=i0sdwQtKA4M

 

Then please bear in mind that your opinions are only opinions also and are not facts. In fact, one may go so far as to take your reaction as being indicative of an interest in ageplay and therefore regard you as biased on the issue. Myself, I've had contact with it and read about it a bit (psychology at uni), but I've never involved myself in it, which one might argue makes my opinion more valid. Supposedly.

As for jedis and trekkies, we already have bloody millions of them. Used to be one myself until I lost interest in it all at the age of twelve.

I'm not going to go so far as to say that ageplayers are disturbed or weird but, given that they are a minority and have an interest which could easily be connected to a real world issue which is deeply distrubing, I would suggest that an open and frank investigation and discussion with ageplayers is in the best interests of everyone.

The simple scenario I heard given at university was to ask an ageplayer that, if they found out that the person they had begun ageplaying with was legally underage and was actually the age they thought that person was only pretending to be, would they be more or less attracted to the person. If the answer is honestly less then I can willingly take your point that its just play and not real at all. If the answer is they'd be more attracted then it just highlights the concerns that everybody has and these groups deserve investigation.

Of course, the same is true of CSS players. I'm sure that most players, if quizzed on how they'd feel if they really killed somebody would indicate they would be upset, distrubed etc and would like the game less. From my point of view, that ability to take pleasure in the fantasy but not in the reality is what distinguishes 'harmless fun' from potentially harmful activities.

And don't get me started on FPS Doug and Pure Pwnge etc...

 

Doug is a legend!

 

My understanding is that this child pornography contention involved Hentai, not live imagery, which is legal to view for some and *possibly* permitted in Second Life, provided that it is contained in adult-rated districts. Admittedly, Hentai's depiction of the stuff often begs the question of age.

 

And we could all claim to be doctors, scientists, lawyers or spacemen and online no one is the wiser nor able to judge without reasonable experience and education regarding specific subject matters. resorting to petty implications and allusions to someone who is making an argument of equivalency and base line equality is frankly the kind of petty high school tactic employed by failing debate teams.

I do not posit opinion as fact. I use fact for their intended purpose, to back up my position and opinion. Perhaps a little difficult for some to extricate one from the other but its not an excuse to ignore it.

While your analogy of the college experiment is colourful it is neither scientific nor useful to the discussion. There is no actual study involved and the value of such responses are no better than those in a magazine poll.

Your position is to suspect and vilify before comprehending and investigating whereas mine is to give the benefit of the doubt to a unfairly maligned group within society (and growing in their presence on the net by all accounts). Equating ageplayers, infantalists, regressives etc to paedophiles, child molesters and others with serious sexual dismorphia's is irresonsible and the fundamental reaction of the folks on this thread from the outset was to do just that - hang 'em before we know 'em.

There is absolutely and catagorically no evidence to suggest a lnk between age play and child abuse and a lot of evidence supporting a contrary position. From a cursory investigation into the subject (admitedly over the internet and a small number of books available in the public library) it is possible to discern a small number of facts. The most impoprtant of these to my argument are that most online communities of infantalists, ageplayers etc are openly hostile towards paedophiliacs and are known to report any and all instances of solicitation etc. A large number of ageplayers were, infact, victims of said abuses and use the scenario "headspace" in order to take control of negative emotions and feelings to create a positive and productive use for them. Lastly there appears (at least on the surface) to be a very strong sense of community amongst the sub culture (similar to LBGT groups) where an air of openness and mutual support and advice regarding relationships is prevalent with many borrowing from the BDSM sub-group (notably the "safe, sane, consenual" maxim) and a defintie sense of consensual adults engaging in consensual role play.

I am not defending the rights of peadophiles, on the contrary, they should be removed from positions of temptation until such time as they can be counselled of their issues, however, I can not abide by the mentality of lumping everyone "different from me" into the same boat as them. That approach leads to the kind of nonsense like adding homosexuality t the list of psychological disorders in the early 20th century or declaring that 66% of homosexuals are peadophiles. It's codswallop.

I am not saying that there has never been, now will there ever be a scenario where someone is exploited involving the kind of thing that occurs during age-play situations - however I would argue that it is the poor intentions of the perpetrator and not the actions nor the trappings of the scenario that are to blame. Much in the same way that a psychotic kid might play Manhunt and then murder someone - it is the fact that the kid is psychotic and nothing was done about it that is to blame and not the video game.

Surely that is not a difficult position to understand?

 

The issue of Hentai is sticky. There are many countries (Germany I believe is one of them) where the possession of materials (ranging from photos to crude pencil drawings) of minors will land you a jail term. There are countries, Mexico and certain Eastern Bloc ones I beieve, where no such laws exist and the age of consent is more a local custom than a strict law.

Second Life is online which means, by its very nature, it is everywhere at once and as such certain things said, done or alluded to may be legal in one country but not in another.

The issue itself seems to be more about peoples irrational and unfounded fears than about anything of substance. Child abuse and kiddy-pr0n are separate issues from paraphilia, role play and the like.

At the end of the day though, surely the point of second life is to take on an alter ego to express your fantasasies? Provided you arent messing with someone you shouldnt then whats the problem?

 

I don't think you understood what I was saying before, maybe I wasn't being clear. The college experiement I talked about (as you called it) wasn't an experiment, simply a hypothetical situation intended to outline the fears many people associate with ageplay.

I've never heard of abused people using ageplay techniques to help overcome childhood abuse and, from my knowledge and experience of psychotherapy and psychodrama (of which I have some) it wouldn't be very advisable.

The tie between CSS and ageplay isn't really valid and, even if it was, it serves only to outline my arguement further - that investigators need to open public, frank dialogues with these groups (gamers, ageplays) to increase understanding. Gamers however are not a subculture and make up a large part of society anyway, and every step we as a community has made has been to increase understanding. Ageplayers such as yourself (assumedly) come across over defensively or do not even want to have these discussions.

The fact is that investigation in question began when suspicions of child abuse were raised within the group and the group was then investigated. I can't see any arguement with that from anyone.

I never indicated in any of my posts were to suspect and villify, merely that the entire practice is unusual to me and, because of obvious associations, suspicious to a lot of people and that I myself would be wary of it. I haven't condemned anyone at all, merely put forward a hypothetical point to illustrate the fears (which may be warranted or unwarranted) of others and suggested that a sane, safe route out for everyone would be a public, frank investigation and discussion - which is whats needed no matter how you look at it, I think.

You've been given an oppourtinity to respond and win support here, but instead you've ending up alienating through your over defensiveness.

 

Actually, you have missed my point, though I conceed I may have misunderstood you slightly.

Firstly, I will address, for the second time, the allegation of me being an "ageplayer" as you put it. I am not. I am approaching this from the position of equal rights, civil liberties and utter disgust at the attitudes people take, not just here but in the world in general. I have had similar knock down drag outs with the type who cant seem to realise that CSS is just a game an not a tool for Al Qaeda to recruit its next zealot. I am sorry if I appear "defensive" rather than "assertive" or "aggressive" but there is little I can do to point out the fallacies in your argument if you are going to attempt to paint me as a particular stereotype.

Regarding the issue of people using roleplay as a method to come to terms with, control and comprehend traumatic experiences it is strange that you have made the comments you have. Roleplay has long been used as a tool by counsellors for a multitude of things ranging from understanding marital difficulties, to anger management to rape counselling. Further more, if you do your research (which you have made allusion that you at least know how to) you will find that their is a significant number of people who use "rape play" as a cathartic experience to overcome issues stemming from traumatic events (a kind of controlled recreation in which they are actually in control). While this may seem strange, even abhorent to many people it none the less used by many people.

The argument of equivalency between CSS (or any violence based video game) and age-play in Second Life is valid. I am not denying that an open dialogue is useful and sorely needed but from what I can tell it is the "havent a clues" that are the problem since most of the community websites are happy to explain what they are doing.

The reason it is valid is beacuse in both cases participants take on the alter ego of a fantastical character to engage in a passtime that would otherwise be deemed abhorrent. In one case it is the wanton slaughter of living creatures (e.g. Soldiers, Terrorists and in the case of Bioshock children). In another it is the recreational role play as a young person, child, infant whatever. Why is one more difficult to cope with than the other? For the participants it is merely "a bit of fun" whereas to an onlooker ignorant of the pass time it might appear to be a revolting pantomime of horror. This is not an opinion, it is a simple fact of lilfe.

The article makes few distinction between child abusers and age-players and suggests that the roleplayers were being investigated because they happen to indulge in a specific fantasy. That is profiling albeit excusable when out of ignorance (it ceases to be excuseable upon even cursory investigation). This paints age-players as being paedophiles or connected to paedophiles in the same way as the some idiot in a trench coat murdering college students is linked to people who have seen "Old Boy" or the gimp who shot John Lennon being linked to anyone who has glanced through Catcher in the Rye.

The issue I have is with freedom of expression and the unfortunate attitude of people to assume that something is unsavory simply because they do not understand it. If we are free to express our base desires for violence in a manner where no one is actually injured then why are we not free to indulge are base sexual desires when no one is even physically touched?

Your hypothesis itself is anecdotal and as irrelevant as I have already said. It fails to take into account other peoples base ignorance of the subject and propagates a stereotype that it is "ok to vilify some groups becausse we dont vilify others" - I'm not saying that it isnt a good indication of peoples reactions but it is a reaction from a position of ignorance and therefore worthless.

Your posts are conceived from a similar position of ignorance and while there is a need for an open forum, I can state that it is not the sub culture that need to make the effort at this point. It is people who assume they understand something without evidence, investigation or comprehension. Browse the web yourself (as I have) and you will find that most if not all websites pertaining to this passtime carry explanations, disclaimers etc If that isnt taking the first step then I honestly dont know what is.

Lastly, gamers are a sub-culture. They are a culture within a culture and that, by definition, makes them a sub-culture. English language 101.

 

It seems we're all viewing the same painting with different glasses, so to speak.

With regards to viewing video games as a sub-culture, it will grow out of that niche in time. Although 'just a medium', the degree of decision-making and consequence afforded by games from their exceedingly invasive methods of interaction will root itself as an established culture of its own--lives will be lost in the bits and bytes of alternative realities, and it is something we cannot avoid nor afford to neglect. Likewise, the progressively sexual overtones in each of these tainted ageplay scenarios are a direct reflection of the human vileness that has elusively imbued itself into our existing reality. Ageplay is by no means wrong, it's just inevitable that erotica will hastily consume it with a vampiric efficiency.

 

To be honest, I've only read half of your last post. Why? Because you say you fight this arguement from both sides, which to me suggests you are either just looking for something to argue about, or you want to both have your cake and eat it - either way I get the impression your just going to go on and on. I think its evidenced by the fact that you've apparently joined only to combat me on this

As for Rape-play and role-play, etc. That wasn't what you spoke of before. Before, you mentioned ageplay specifically. I do know a bit about psychodrama and such practices, and I know about role-play being used in therapy, and I'm familiar with rapeplay to a degree, though I don't really agree that rapeplay specifically is as useful as other forms of role play. Age play however relates to the practice of using age fantasies for pleasure, not for therpeutic reasons or any type of regression. Thats why I was skeptical about its uses in therapy, it may be possible if handled rightly, but in that case it would be greatly seperated from the conventional understanding of ageplay anyway.

English Language 101 has nothing to do with whether gamers are a culture or not, it's to do with the perception of the size of the group. The industry of games etc is almost larger than the music business according to some, making it not a subculture in my mind.

As for the open discussion, well if the ageplayers don't want to make the effort to have this dialogue then they have to accept the consequences of this. If you don't tell people what you're thinking then they won't be able to read your mind and will have to ask questions/investigate in their own way to get answers.

I'm not going to continue on with these discussions however and have only attempted to clarify previous points here rather than raise new ones. I just don't see this debate doing anything but escalating.

 

A play which, by your own definition, recreates a fantasy. Now I am happy to regard it as just another variation of submissive-dominant sex play with age being the variable which determines the roles. But there is the slightly uncomfortable notion in my mind that one of the usual first steps in engaging in child-abuse is overcoming internal inhibition and arousal/preparation though fantasy (usually by looking at pornographic material), and that this play could be a function of that. Which brings me to...

Actually, I am just in the process of writing a piece on this. There is a staggering amount of research that shows a direct, causal link between violent video games/movies and acted-out violence. There is an equally large body of research showing the importance of certain types of pornographic material in sex crimes. This does not mean that the material causes people to behave in such way, but that some people are predisposed to behaving in this way and use the material for stimulation and in preparation of the act. This is presumably also why, although we don't have masses of people running about acting like Jedi or Trekkies, we do have the occasional nutter who does.

Role play is very tricky. With sensitive issues such as sex or rape, it needs to be facilitated by a very experienced psychotherapist. Although it is natural for people to try and resolve experiences by acting them out in relatively safe pretend situations, this can result in a traumatic reliving of the abuse rather than a resolution of it. The problem is that people replay relationship dynamics even when they are not explicitly aware of it, and that resolution only works by a conscious awareness of, and deviation from, the usual pattern towards a more functional interaction/resolution. This essential fact is often overlooked and incompetent practitioners or well-meaning support groups can end up entrenching or reinforcing the pattern rather than resolving it.

I am therefore not sure that the comparison between recreational age-play and therapeutic role-play is a valid one. The agenda is very different. In the former, people act out fantasies that they feel comfortable and familiar with; in the latter people try to understand and change/resolve patterns of behaviour. They don't want to relive, they want to move on. It is not recreational; it is bloody hard and painful work.

Back to the whole thing of age-play. In age-play where one person plays the adult and another plays the child, the fantasy is about a sexual relationship between adult and child, which in real life would be inappropriate. Now I understand the argument that CSS involves killing people and that this, in real life, is also an inappropriate relationship to say the least. But most people do not run about in full combat uniform shooting at people, like most people do not run about with CCFL tubes pretending to be Jedi, or with tricorders waiting to be beamed up, and similarly, most people in age-play fantasies do not go about abusing children in real life. Most people understand the difference between real life and fantasy. So no harm done, no?

Mostly not. But as we all know, a few people are unhinged and not so good at making this distinction. Just as there are a few violent nutters who use CSS as "inspiration" in preparation of their real-life massacre, so there are likely to be a few child abusers who may use age-play as a rehearsal/preparation for the real thing. This does not mean that we have to pull the plug on age-play as a whole, because after all we do not feel the need to pull the plug on CSS. But neither can we live in denial of the fact that age-play, like CSS, may attract a certain brand of offender. And that is where the German police is coming from.

 

Real life issues intruding on Virtual world environments seems crazy. Surely one cannot be held accountable for what goes on in an imaginary world? If the setting in second life was an alien world with non human avitars, would the case for "child abuse" still be valid in the game. If people are gonna be accountable for what they do in virtual worlds, whats next? Minority report future anyone? As Prince once said "If a man is guilty for what goes on in his mind, then I'll need the electric chair for all my future crimes". If there is real life child abuse going on, this needs to be dealt with. If it's just some sick roleplay, leave it online and don't drag it into the real world.

 

Ladies and gentlemen I give you the prime example of premature declaration of victory.

You have unrelentingly attempted to undermine my position by making allusions etc to my character. You repeatedly state that you have "some" knowledge of these things yet any idiot with a net connection can point you to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Age_play#Inner_child_therapy which, while not exhaustive (nor by any means an authoritative source) it should give you some idea of the concept I have mentioned.

You have ignored, omitted and deliberately characterized me during this conversation as a means to justify your argument and assertion, which I have demonstrated to be wrong by means of moral equivalence.. I did not, as you put it "join to harass" you (sic) I have been reading bit-tech for ages but had no reason to say anything. The fact that you made a statement and have failed completely to justify or back it up is the reason I have argued with you.

Perhaps my last post was long but at least I had something researched to say - I veered off point but only to justify my argument.

I advise you to re-read my point on open discussion. It is the outer community who do not wish to engage in a discussion. There are numerable disclaimers, explanations, interviews etc regarding the subject yet for someone who claims to be educated you appear to have difficulty finding them. Here's a tip : www.google.com

 

The problem is that occasionally, it is the role players who do. South Korea set up a Virtual Crime Unit for a reason... Incidents which manage to make the headlines in particular are people killing each other in real life for a (perceived) wrong experienced in a MMORPGs.

This is my whole point. Occasionally a player blurs the boundary between reality and fantasy (remember the elf lingerie thief?). Occasionally an unbalanced player decides to act out his on-line pecadillos in real life. Age-play is not any more immune from that than any other virtual role-playing community --and that is when real-life police steps in.

There is a discussion taking place right here. Feel free to join in.