News Child abuse in Second Life?

I guess the debate is over. Even with the varied views on the same issue, we can probably all agree that 'ageplay' in Second Life (or any other virtual universe) is:

• often a misinterpreted role as a whole and sometimes wrongly connotatively viewed
• sometimes an antecedent to pedophilia
• an intentional semblance using the anonymity afforded by the Internet for some personal endeavor (with a good intent, we hope)

 

Do you realise how crazy what you have said sounds? Are you going to believe anything just because it is socially accepted? In any case, fantasizing about child abuse is not considered morally or socially unacceptable and hence it is not legally unacceptable (in most places) either. Of course the line between fantasy and reality may be a bit blurry for some people and that is partly what this thread is about. If you read the main bulk of this thread we are indeed disputing that virtual child abuse is acceptable/unacceptable. The other part has been to do with how unwilling a lot of people are to debate the issue and how most people's opinions on the subject are apparently formed due to their ignorance of the subject. Then you come along and slap all the painstakingly thought out arguments in the face by not even glancing through them. There's no point in starting up the debate again so if you want an answer to your questions, come back after you've at least read the first couple of pages.

 

Kind of not what we were discussing here. Hence the "non-sequitur" comment. Good night!

 

No, I've not. And no, I won't. As I said, I could continue to discuss this much longer and if I wanted to then I would do as you say and come back with more points. I've simply had too many arguements along these lines on other forums before and I know they never end, so I'm bowing out at early stages of boredom. I'm not proclaiming victory, and bear in mind that if I really wanted it then I could edit your posts, close the thread and ban the account. I'm simply taking my leave and allowing other people to make their points.

Also, just because I have some knowledge of psychotherapy doesn't mean I know everything about it, so gaps in my knowledge are to be expected. As for vilifying you, I haven't intended to but it does appear that you came here only to argue - which is fine, but I don't have to argue back anymore if I don't want to. My assumptions that you were an ageplayer and that you joined to argue may have been wrong, and I apologise if thats the case, but given your arguement it was a reasonable assumption to make.

As I said, I'm not interested in discussing this any further, but Nexxo is an intelligent guy with greater knowledge than I and, from what I see, he's giving the same points as I was , albeit more successfully. I have work to do now.

 

Frankly, it is extremely unprofessional to make statements like this. Bit-Tech have a reasonable reputation as an impartial source for hardware/software review and industry news - personal comments and unprofessional attitudes damage this and undermine any authoritative position.

You have;

Twice made allegation about my sexual practices - a petty, childish and frankly libelous thing to do when you are a staff member of a firm.

Made veiled threats to abuse your power as a staff member by deleting the accoutns of people (me) who have a differing opinion which they wish to express on a particular topic.

Implied that I have joined the forums to specifically start a fight with you, an arrogant and self induglent position to take, especially after I explained my reasons for joining and posting on this specific thread.

Stated you do not wish to read posts and have used this as the basis for dismissing other peoples (my) point of view.

All in all, your conduct has been highly questionable at best and outright libelous and offensive at worst. If you are a member of staff for a group or a company or a firm etc please try to maintain a professional decorum with the punters for your sake, that of Bit-Tech and those who wish to have discussions in an open and frank manner.

Lastly, on a personal note, if someone takes the time to respond to you then you should have the common decency to at least read what they have written before formulating a reply it saves you looking foolish and shows at least a base level of politeness one should be able to expect from a member of staff.

 

I'm not sure I agree with antecedant. I would view it as a predatory individual using it as camoflage or a proving ground but not as the precursor of later behavior.

That was my original point (or part of). Consumption of "entertainment materials" does not dictate future crimes. It is psychological and genetic predisposition towards criminal or violent activity that preceeds later offences.

The rest of it is fine.

 

I would amend point 2 with:

• Occasionally (ab)used as stimulation in the context of paedophilia

As Hivemind187 says, the predisposition (and I would ague, the intention) is already there.

 

Ok, due to the nature of your last post, I shall re-enter the discussion.

No, I didn't. Read my words carefully and you'll see that I did not allege anything, merely infered that it was an assumption I was making based on your apparent support of it. I have also never condemned it as a practice, merely suggested it require investigation. I've also already apologised for this mistake publicly on the forums, believing it to be a reasonable mistake to make.

Again, no I didn't. I simply said that it was something I could have done if I had wanted to - as you acused - declare a hollow victory. I did not, nor will I ever abuse my position for anything other than free games . In fact, even when I announced I did not want to respond in this debate anymore, I left the thread open and encouraged others to join in. I think this is something which needs discussion - something I have said all along - I just don't want a place in the discussion any longer for various reasons

Yes, I said that, but not before you stated that you had been reading bit-tech for a while and had only joined the forum to discuss this. However, given that you created a new account solely for this thread and have not (AFAIK) posted anywhere else, I feel it is an understandable mistake to make. Still, apologies for making the mistake at all.

Yes, I said I no longer wished to read your posts, though I did not use it to dismiss your views. Your views are your own and you can do what you will with them on these forums, within the guidelines. In fact, all I said was that I no longer wanted to continue my role in this debate. If anything, I was concedeing defeat through exhaustion. You can do what you will with your views, but you can't force me to listen and it goes against your own arguements to say you can. I did not try to silence you at all, I merely bowed out of the arena of debate for previously stated reasons.

I'm sorry you feel this way. Consider this a public apology. However, I have been very careful in what I have said and do not belive it to be libellous - we were after all discussing hypotheticals mostly and, when not, discussing groups you do not belong too.

I myself have tried to encourage open and frank discussion - it has been the single thing I have said ageplayers need with other groups, in fact.

As for reading your posts, well I did give you advanced warning that I would be bowing out and, while it is common courtesy to listen, I'm not condemnable for not doing so fully, especially when notice has been given beforehand. I apologise if I came across as rude, but nobody has the right not to be offended and I feel I have no given a full and frank apology; if not then I'm sorry again.

I will not be participating in any more discussions to do with ageplay and if you wish to discuss this matter further then you may contact me through e-mail at joe.martin@bit-tech.net, as all readers are invited to do. I will be keeping an eye on this thread of course, as I do not believe it is the correct place to air rivalries between members of staff and readers. You are obviously still free to dicuss ageplay with others however, a right we would never take away.

I hope this misunderstanding will not stop others from reading bit-tech in the future, as we have a strong and steady community here and feedback is always welcome to help us guide the site in the manner the community wants.

 

Works for me.