Cyberrun

[Tinuviel]

@Pandora said in Cyberrun:

So all the arguments about 'Being attracted to anyone under the age of 18 makes you the devil' are null and void.

I mean... no. Just because something is legal doesn't mean it's right.
But that's also not the point, at all. It has nothing to do with legal consent.

It does have to do with producing written pornographic work featuring characters indistinguishable from children, though, if you want to talk legal talk.

[Pandora]

@Tinuviel Archive of Our Own rakes in millions in donations each year while hosting thousands of explicit stories tagged 'Extremely Underage'. They have a score of lawyers and win prestigious awards for their work in archiving said pornographic works featuring characters that are in fact specifically stated to be children.

Somehow, I think your stance might not be the correct one, even if it feels like it should be.

[Tinuviel]

@Pandora said in Cyberrun:

Somehow, I think your stance might not be the correct one, even if it feels like it should be.

Oh, no. My stance is that we shouldn't be associated with it. I don't care if it exists, just that it shouldn't be... here.

[Pandora]

@Tinuviel No, you just said if you want to talk legal talk.

[Tinuviel]

@Pandora Yes. I said if you want to talk legal talk, the age of consent is irrelevant and the only legal angle I could think of was the production of pornographic material featuring children. That's not my stance, I don't care about the legality.

[Pandora]

@Tinuviel said in Cyberrun:

@Pandora Yes. I said if you want to talk legal talk, the age of consent is irrelevant and the only legal angle I could think of was the production of pornographic material featuring children. That's not my stance, I don't care about the legality.

?

[Killer Klown]

I'd insert that Michael Jackson-eating-popcorn gif, but I figure given the ongoing news about him and all it might be in bad taste.

[Auspice]

@Killer-Klown said in Cyberrun:

I'd insert that Michael Jackson-eating-popcorn gif, but I figure given the ongoing news about him and all it might be in bad taste.

[Ghost]

@Pandora said in Cyberrun:

Archive of Our Own rakes in millions in donations each year while hosting thousands of explicit stories tagged 'Extremely Underage'. They have a score of lawyers and win prestigious awards for their work in archiving said pornographic works featuring characters that are in fact specifically stated to be children.

"prestigious"
"millions in donations"

Didn't need to know the website name, but I'm sure they're grateful for the plug! Sadly, non-pedophiles like me learn more about pedophiles every day!

Also: Add this to the bucket of reasons that we deserve to be hit by an asteroid.

[Pandora]

@Ghost I'm glad you're a good person and not a pedophile, and I'm also glad you're not the person who decides the definition of pedophilia, or what people can or cannot write. I hope you're as fervent about protecting actual children, none of whom are harmed by 2 adults writing bad smut while pretending to be 2 adults wearing bio-engineered teenage skin suits.

[Selira]

I suspect you might be a tiny bit biased here, @Pandora. Just a teensy bit.

[ZekeTheG33k]

@Pandora said in Cyberrun:

@Ghost I'm glad you're a good person and not a pedophile, and I'm also glad you're not the person who decides the definition of pedophilia, or what people can or cannot write. I hope you're as fervent about protecting actual children, none of whom are harmed by 2 adults writing bad smut while pretending to be 2 adults wearing bio-engineered teenage skin suits.

I get this is free speech. I get this is only fanfic. The problem with this is that it takes a specific mindset to actually actively engage in this. And while, and I have no doubt about it, there maybe some people who are able to write about this in a purely clinical view point, meaning they don't find it arousing or sexual, even if they are writing about it. Most of the writers from those kinds of sites are more than likely involved in the "Scene" as it were. It would be like writing about a BDSM novel and not really being part of the scene. You are probably missing something that would show if someone in the scene wrote the same novel.

But, more importantly, I think that allowing such things leads to temptation and that's a bad path.

[Rinel]

***I talk very frankly about sexual abuse of children in this post. If that's going to upset you, please don't read the post.***

click to show

My sole concern when writing this post was, as mentioned above, the potential for minors on these games to be exposed to and/or groomed for this sort of thing. So I think multiplayer games should be out of the question. There's just too much opportunity for harm.

But with relation to disgusting shit like animated pornography or ageplay between adults or drawings or things that don't involve actual human children? Call me jaded (because I am, because I am currently taking a break from reading a transcript of a trial for actual child pornography in which the nature of said child pornography is being described in extremely accurate terms), but I think there is a difference of kind and not merely degree in this sort of situation.

If a person who is a pedophile is getting their rocks off by writing smut to another person, that's a lot better than a situation where twelve jurors are having to watch a video of a twelve-year-old girl getting raped in a bathroom stall (hey everybody guess why I just took a break from transcript reading). It's so much better that after having dealt with enough of these cases I think things like animated child pornography is, if it can be shown not to be a "gateway drug" to actual child pornography or other actual forms of abuse, probably a legitimately good thing to have.

Pedophiles, as far as I'm aware, do not lose their sexual interest in children barring some sort of physical intervention like castration. So your options to avoid children getting harmed, as far as I can tell, involve either: castration; a shitload of therapy and prayer that abstinence is going to work for this particular group; or a shitload of therapy and some sort of alternative that doesn't harm real children.

I am very okay with the existence of disgusting smut if it is an alternative that works and does not lead to the harm of real children.

[Roz]

It is probably worth noting that some of the people who write and/or consume fanfiction featuring child abuse (and many types of abuses) are people who actually experienced similar abuse IRL. It's not an uncomplicated issue.

[Ghost]

I generally understand the argument of "let the pedophiles be pedophiles online rather than in real life". It is less immediately damaging and while backed by lawyers might be deemed questionably legal (yet still distasteful).

However, logically you have to ask yourself the following questions...

By providing the role of a minor in a TS scene, are you..

1. ...contributing to pedophilia in a way that could result in it being taken to RL? Could doing so result in unexpected damage to strangers?
2. ...providing an outlet for a predator who is on the National Sex Offender Registry for sexually abusing a minor?
3. ...partaking in a loggable scene of minor-on-adult sexual roleplay that could be stored on the same hard drive alongside child pornography and could become evidence in a felony?

By providing the role of an adult in a TS scene with a minor, are you...

1. ...roleplaying with a child?
2. ...roleplaying with an investigator?
3. ...breaking the law?
4. ...creating a paper-trail for your pedophilia?

No matter how it's cut, it's not pretty. It's not something the community at large supports. While YES the immediate physical damages are less when you're an iPedophile, the truth remains that by arguing its right to exist you are providing a don't-ask-don't-tell zone where sexual abuse of minors could literally be taking place on your game. I think it's fucked up that more people aren't on board for trying to keep that out of the hobby.

By running/owning a playspace that allows depicted sex with minors are you...

1. ...breaking the law?
2. ...hosting logs of live action grooming of an OOC minor having a rendezvous with an adult who is grooming them?
3. ...providing a haven for sex offenders?
4. ...placing your safety and legality at status due to owning creating a space that allows this to happen?
5. ...actually comfortable with the concept that you allow depictions of sexual interludes with minors in a way that you wouldn't lose any sleep if someone reported your game to a watchdog group or investigator?

I suppose this could be tested. Has anyone consulted the Internet Watch Foundation as to whether or not this qualifies?

[ZekeTheG33k]

@Ghost https://www.iwf.org.uk/what-we-do/how-we-assess-and-remove-content/laws-and-assessment-levels

That's what they assess it by.

[Ghost]

@Seamus I'll read through that later. I'm busy, but curious.

[Deleted]

It could be said that playing a game where you murder people doesn't lead to murder, so playing a game where you sleep with children should be the same.

However, to that I say...

Fuck off. I don't care about logic or reason or cause and effect. I do not accept pedophilia in any context.

[Rinel]

@Admiral
I think that's understandable. But I also think that when we're looking at policy on a broad scope (by which I mean a societal level, not a MU* level--whether or not there are MU* games that allow that sort of behavior is utterly irrelevant), and when the desired result is reducing the harm done to children, what we do and do not find palatable must by necessity take a backseat to logic, reason, and statistical evidence.

Generally speaking. There are still hard lines (as I've said elsewhere, I'd still walk away from Omelas).

@Ghost said in Cyberrun:

No matter how it's cut, it's not pretty. It's not something the community at large supports. While YES the immediate physical damages are less when you're an iPedophile, the truth remains that by arguing its right to exist you are providing a don't-ask-don't-tell zone where sexual abuse of minors could literally be taking place on your game. I think it's fucked up that more people aren't on board for trying to keep that out of the hobby.

Well, as I said, I don't support it in MU*s because of the high probability of minors accessing those games. But as to your other questions, especially:

@Ghost said in Cyberrun:

...providing an outlet for a predator who is on the National Sex Offender Registry for sexually abusing a minor?

The idea of ageplay disgusts me, but the idea of "providing an outlet" for a registered sex offender? Nah. Doesn't bother me in the slightest. If "providing an outlet" means he's less likely to harm children, I'd advocate for volunteers to go out and do it.

The problem is that, as far as I'm aware, it's still a very big "if." Our hyperpunitive mindset when it comes to pedophiles makes it difficult to find methods of harm prevention.

[Auspice]

@Rinel said in Cyberrun:

I don't support it in MU*s because of the high probability of minors accessing those games.

This is really the crux of the discussion here.
Minors do access MUs. Maybe not in the volume and frequency they did when we were all teenagers, but they do.

And ousting pedophiles from our community is something we can all work together to do, vs. trying to play it off as 'well it's not video....' 'well it's not in person....' Except how many of us do engage in OOC/RL friendship/communication? How easy does a MU make that to happen? Pages, @mails... these aren't monitored for player safety.

So I am 100% behind disallowing this behavior to be engaged in on any level within our community.