No self respecting person could argue that the staging of virtual pedophilia is anything but sick and should have no place within Second Life

Whoa, hold on there. If you were to follow that train of thought then “no self respecting person” should be playing any of hundreds of computer games where you shoot and kill other people, including Grand Theft Auto 3. “No self respecting person” would also read many of best selling author Ian Mcewan’s novels.

What I think is absolutely sick is real life pedophilia. If someone can get their rocks off playing pedophile against some other pedophile acting as an underage character on Second Life, I’m going to vote for that every time rather than some unfulfilled pent-up pedo suddenly getting the idea to try it in Real Life.

Sorry Peter, but I see these images and I cant help but feel like throwing up. Some where there has to be a line.

No self respecting person could argue that the staging of virtual pedophilia is anything but sick

Strange, no self-respecting Libertarian would give two hoots what two consenting adults do in the privacy of their own home. However if those consenting adults so much as choose to have flat-chested midget avatars and engage in a virtual rubbing of parts then certain Libertarian’s true colours begin to emerge showing that they’re really not very libertarian at all. Just saying, k.

Duncan, the line is with the real pedos. It’s distinct, clear and certain. What you propose is a thought-crime. How tall does an avatar have to be before it’s considered a child-avatar? Why don’t you include furries in your faux-morality? I don’t do virtual sex. I don’t get it. It’s not for me, but consenting adults should be allowed to do what they like in privacy especially in the virtual world.

Skribe
this isn’t in their own home, this is in a publicly accessible virtual world. If they want to dress up as kids at home, as much as the thought is repulsive, I have no objection to it. As I said in the earlier comment: libertarian or not there has to be a line somewhere. Did you see the footage in the video?

Hey skribe, cool to see you read techcrunch too.

On the note of this topic, I find the report particularly damning. I’m one of the biggest supporters of do-what-you-want in SL, however this has edged over a big line. While I have no problem with people having their BDSM fantasies in SL where they are roleplaying as adults, there is a line here that’s crossed.

Just to add some balance for Techcrunch readers who aren’t involved in Second Life, there was a story posted here http://www.secondlifeinsider.c.....-too-real/ that has quotes from members of the “ageplay” community, essentially saying they have posted numerous abuse reports about this Wonderland area to Linden Labs that have gone unheeded.

Just today, Linden Labs released a statement quoted here, http://www.secondlifeinsider.c.....d-scandal/, which essentially says that LL has found no wrong doing so far.

Having been a resident of Second Life for over 2 years, I have found rare occasion to question Linden Labs’ handling of major issues. However, I recently found myself in a position where a well-known and widely disliked blogger in SL made a death threat against me in a public area. I reported the issue to LL, and I only received a response after I called their corporate office 3 times over the course of 2 days. The only response was essentially “we will investigate it”, and after 3 days of initial filing, it was closed and no apparent action was taken against that person.

Duncan, the only “line” there “has to be” is that of not infringing on other people’s will. If tastes and mores played any role in the matter we’d still be 17th century Puritans.

Hold on. they aren’t actually children, they are grown ups pretending to be children, fantasizing with other grown ups pretending to be children….or women…or furry animals.
Where are the children and who is actually getting hurt? Sounds like a bunch of lonely nerds jerking each other, in 3d. Nothing out of the norm here.

The whole concept of Second Life is ludicrous to start with. This just adds another dimension to an already shallow and pointless activity.

And from a journalism viewoint, you take away the dramatic music and scaremongering voice over, and it’s just standard SL footage.

You guys keep comparing this to libertarian governance. It is not. Libertarian governance has some laws, specifically ones that make sure people are not coercing others.

What Second Life has is much closer to Anarchy where their is a complete lack of government.

Robert is correct. The line should be drawn with those that prey on children in real life.

A virtual child, played by a real life adult, does not have nor hold the same connotations as a real world child, nor should it.

Lest we forget, the internet is full of many sexual deviancies that common people would find repugnant, disgusting, or in an extreme view evil.

Many people are made uncomfortable by things that are “TOO DIFFERENT” for them to mentally be capable of dealing with, but this in effect is essentially a compulsion to interfere with other people’s lives to try to force them to be more like yourself.

There’s a good deal of things on the net that are rather repugnant to me, but I’d never advocate equating them to real life activities.

If these people, for whatever reason, want to roleplay severely underage human beings having some form of sex… it’s their prerogative. Anything else is a form of thought-crime and pressaging others to conform to self-defined senses of good and evil.

The people those are making controversies really don’t know about the actual concept of second life.

We all know Second life is a POS. Still, people in this part of the game are adults, doing private things… You dont want to see virtual pedophilia? Dont go to wonderland…
I think here people are confused.
First there is a difference between pedophilia and virtual pedophilia, and second, what you dont like wand what other people like is different..

i mean its like a Sex shop… if you dontwant to see tapes of orgies… just dont go in a sex shop..

As shitty and awful second life is, its only adults ( in that aprt of the grid).

I would have to agree that this is consensual role-play between ADULTS, and should be left alone. You wouldn’t arrest someone for playing as an adult baby with their partner in real life, so why do it in the virtual world simply because they can create a better visual? I mean really, what IS the difference?

If you want to crack down on pervs on the internet, why not start with one of the creeps that lurk around every corner in flickr, lewdly commenting on anything that remotely shows female skin, or one of the 1800 people i have blocked on youtube for doing roughly the same thing. I find people like that WAY more offensive, because they often choose to say something that makes me suspect I’m being included in their sex life whether I like it or not.

So if I my avatar contains children I’m probably a pedofile? nice.
Have you ever seen what sort of extreme sexual things people are doing in WoW and other mmorpgs?

Also, Duncan, SL itself might be a publicly accessible virtual world, but that doesn’t mean that all areas of the grid are accessible to the public. Many are not and you should clarify that. I have had a home and office in SL for close to two years now, and I can easily keep you from getting inside of it should I choose to do so, the same way I can easily hide items of an adult nature. In other words, I HIGHLY, HIGHLY doubt that any of these child avatars (or most ANY avatar, for that matter) was willing to strip down and get horizontal with your dolly right there in the park, where anyone could stumble past and see. It’s not how prostitution works in SL, pretty much EVER. Just like real life, people meet each other in a public space and go back to private spaces to do private things.

As someone else said, if you don’t want to see sex in SL, don’t go to the sex clubs. There’s hundreds of other (more enriching) things to see and do there, from interactive art to live music to amazing 3D builds. Go find one. I’ll happily recommend some to you if you need a list and take you there myself.

The problem with line drawing is that the moral spectrum is wide and varied. Even though murder is a more grave crime than pedophilia, online communities where people murder each other on a regular basis aren’t on the receiving end of such high morals. Some people are sexually conservative but violence liberal, and vice versa, but I think we just need to trust our existing legal system to defend the line along some kind of middle ground.

Pedophilia, in all its forms, is evil and shouldn’t be tolerated and applying moral relativism to this issue in no way minimizes this fact.

Generic_Guy: There are some people that feel the same way about BD/SM, or really, anything that is even remotely sexually deviant.

You construe imagination as being the same thing as reality. There is a fundamental difference. I have imagined violence against some people in my life, it does not bear the same weight as actually committing violence against someone.

As for moral relativism, I think you will find that moral relativism is far more accurate than an absolute moral system. You will encounter people who do not share your moral values, do not believe in what you think of as evil, and have their own values and mores that you might be appalled with.

There are people who do and do not believe in a supreme being. Neither position is more right than another, though some will argue.

Some people argue that homosexuality is evil, and right up there with pedophilia. I tolerate the presence of Homosexuals just fine, provided they don’t force their issues on me.

I’m glad to see that reason has prevailed in some of these comments. Villifying people’s free choice to roleplay things to suit their desires is only to drive underground and force into being worse case scenarios. People are the way they are, choosing to express it in such a way as not to hurt anyone but only for mutual enjoyment is perfectly acceptable. I’m really sick of people being narrow minded and self-righteous. You go on about “good and evil” when all you do is hurt and no good for anyone. I have great respect for those who have expressed similar viewpoints (incl. you pete well done for #1 comment) and just disgust at the self-righteous preachers who clearly need to RTFM.

If it makes you feel like throwing up that’s your weakness and inability to get out of your own head into a more balanced view of life, it’s not the fault of anyone else.

Marcus, I believe the more we tolerate evil the more it becomes normal and acceptable and the more we suffer as a society. Everyone posting in this thread has acknowledged the repulsion they feel regarding this issue and I think this is a natural response to this particular form of evil. I’m intolerant when it comes to the abuse of children, virtual or otherwise. At some point in our society and in this world we have to draw the line.

It’s foolish to think that acting out a repugnant desire in a virtual world acts as a release for that desire. On the contrary, it makes that desire grow. The same goes for porn. Who looks at porn and doesn’t act on it (if only by themself). Does porn satisfy sexual desire - or inflame it?

What makes virtual pedophilia (or virtual bestiality, etc) wrong is that it allows people who may initially just be curious, grow use to it and become comfortable with it.

Second Life always has been plagued with people pretending t be people they aren’t. I was a user for 4 years and many of the users are under the 18 year old age restriction, especially since the credit card requirement was removed.

It is wrong to even think about raping people and other such actions let alone acting out such fantasies in 3D.

I hope they clean up the metaverse, then hopefully more respectful people will return. I may even go back on there..

I have friends who use SL, they try to stay away from the Mature content but there is just too much of it. If you have kids in the house they may see things they shouldn’t, even if you are trying to prevent it by staying away from those areas.

Ether way you look at it, this is all just plain wrong. Something should be done to clean it up.

Generic_Guy, That is certainly a quaint belief. I’ve always been of the opinion that intolerance is the primary cause of much evils in the world.

Gene, whether you think it is foolish or not is not an argument. I am unaware of any studies that actually demonstrate that viewing porn inflames desires, and my own view on such a concept is that it is positively puritanical.

I’d love to know where this mindset originated, the idea that indulging in something makes you more likely to indulge in it again. If I ate cheesecake every day, I’d get mightily sick very quick. If I read the same book every day, my brain would turn to soup.

There are some things that I’ve been exposed to on the internet that I have absolutely no interest in. Such as Scat and other such things. Personally, I think those people are kind of troubled… but whatever floats your boat as it were.

This is the same argument that having a preference for blondes in your pornography means that it will inflame your desire for sex and cause you to rape blondes. Likewise, I don’t think if someone deluged me with child pornography, I’d suddenly become interested and inflamed for children sexually.

Gene, if I may ask, are you also against any sort of deviant desires such as Furries, BDSM, Vore, etc. being portrayed in adult one-on-one sex-play?

If indulging causes such a prediliction, I’d love to see evidence for it.

Marcus,
Thanks for the reply. I’ll see what I can find during my lunch break in the way of studies (I’m sure they’re out there). But from my own experience and frank discussions with friends, we come to the same conclusion that fantasy inflames rather than satisfies desire. You make stronger that which you dwell on.

In regards to your second question, I don’t know (and don’t care to know) what those are - but in general there’s a sharp distinction between fantasy that involves only adults and fantasy that involves children. Like Generic_Guy said, at some point we have to draw a line. The line I’ve drawn for myself is in line with the teachings of Christ. The line we have to draw for society is one to protect our children. Any sexual fantasy that involves children should not be tolerated. Tolerance can only go so far - it is not an absolute.

Gene, I draw the line between reality and fantasy. Indulge in any and every fantasy you might ever have the heart or interest in doing so, but if it is harmful either physically or emotionally, be sure that you can discern between fantasy and reality.

That includes fantasizing about little girls and boys. I personally don’t find it appealing, and I think we can all agree that it is something that really turns the stomach. But there is a difference between acting out a fantasy and acting out a reality, and if we forget that and start legislating and punishing fantasies, then nobody should have the right to fantasize about anything that may be repulsive or evil to anyone else.

I see one of the main problems here is the line between real and unreal, between fantasy and reality.

The problem is with people that can’t make the difference, and mix up fantasy and reality. I dont have problems with normal people, furries, whatever, when they make the distinction.
The real problem is education, parents have to teach their children the difference, how to step back and think ” ok, this is just fantasy”.

LMFAO I am absolutely SHOCKED by some of the comments in this thread. If you morons don’t understand Duncan’s opposition to the “pseudo” kiddie sex in SL, then you know absolutely nothing about the psychology of pedophiles. The pathology of pedophilia is NOT EVEN REMOTELY SIMILAR to that of a normal, healthy adult, and as such, should not be evaluated in the same manner.

Do some f*cking research before you open your ignorant mouths about such a complex subject, for Christs sake.

God damn the ignorance in this thread pisses me off. I just CAN’T believe how f*cking STUPID and uneducated you idiots are.

#’s 1,3,4,6,7,9,10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 17, 18, and 20 (and anyone who agrees with them after this post): If I could bring you all together in a virtual world, I would torture and execute each and every one of you for imbecility.

Oh, but wait–it’s just fantasy roleplay, though.

Ponder that scenario, you f*cking peasants.

Well Json, what research and higher knowledge are you trying to invoke, exactly? Of course the pathology of pedophiles is different from that of your average person. So is the pathology of people who are into S&M and that of homosexuals. Do you propose outlawing all their fantasies because they’re unusual?

Just because someone gets off on the thought of tying people up doesn’t mean they’ll start kidnapping people to fulfill those fantasies. I think providing an outlet for fulfilling these fantasies without harming anyone goes a long way towards reducing the incidence of harmful acting out, but that’s my conjecture and I’d like to see some studies.

Thats pretty bad publicity. I think they will append some privacy and defensive measures in Second Life.

Json’s response is perfect example of emotion controlling ones evaluative faculties. I’m not one to say that the subject isn’t a heated and precarious one to discuss, most people have very strong feelings about the matter.

If we really wanted to split hairs, there is a vast difference between Rapists and people who fantasize about Rape (Trust me, there is a subset of people who both write and read such stories, some people who want to be victimized and some who want to victimize in the stories, men and women alike).

Just as there is a vast difference between Child Rapists and Pedophiles. One is an act, the other is a mental predilection towards being attracted to pre-pubescents.

The act itself is probably the most vile and heinous of things a criminal can do. However, to think about doing something does not equate to doing it.

It never should, and if it does, then you had best worry about your own thoughts.

There is more then a few people in this comments thread I would NOT recommend leaving your children with.

Marcus, and everyone…
unfortunately my lunchtime research effort has ended unsuccessfully. I couldn’t find any research on the topic of whether fantasy satisfies or inflames desire (or both).

But for what it’s worth, I subscribe to the idea behind this quote from Frank Outlaw:
Watch your thoughts, they become your words.
Watch your words, they become your actions.
Watch your actions, they become your habits.
Watch your habits, they become your character.
Watch your character, it becomes your destiny.

Thoughts have real (though often imperceptible) consequences. We have to be our own “thought police” if we want to be true to whatever moral code we follow. (BTW, for those who follow Jesus, remember that we are held accountable for our thoughts - “anyone who looks at a woman lustfully has already committed adultery with her in his heart”).

In regards to SL, we have a responsibility as a society to not allow these kinds of tools/games to facilitate fantasy that includes harmful behavior toward children. This kind of fantasy should not be tolerated.

It simple if you don’t like that don’t sign-up with them and by mistake if you’re there don’t try to land on wonderland.

The argument about whether or not actual pedophilia is being perpetrated when the participants are virtual, is facetious. Enacting pedophilia is being done, the people doing it are pedophiles, the only thing in question is whether or not real children are involved in that particular act. With SL’s policy of permitting free accounts, it would be naive to believe that minors are not on the adult grid. SL further makes it a TOS violation to speak about who one really is, thus protecting the charade that minors maintain and ensuring that children are cast into adult situations, whether using a child-avatar or not.

You don’t have to go to some pedophile-specific or bestiality-specific location in order to encounter this, or the signs over. Whenever you encounter child avatars, in a store or a park, there’s an excellent chance they’ll be talking in the open about their sexual intentions. Do a search for “swans” and you’ll receive no warning that just outside the tree where one place sells swans for water-features, one can come upon a group of people taking turns performing oral sex on a horse. The pedophiles and animal-lovers do not confine their behavior to private quarters.

We can argue about freedom of expression and moral relevancy indefinitely, but the real question remains; is this behavior legal and socially acceptable within your community’s standards of behavior?

Perhaps if SL did away with anonymity, requiring people to use their real names in the virtual world, the disconnect between action and accountability would at least partially bridged. The best argument against this is that SL is a game and people should be permitted to play their game as they please, and that they have a right to privacy. However, privacy ends in the public venue, and in SL, unless you’re on a private, restricted island, there is no actual privacy. As for SL being a game, that paradigm may work for some, but not for all. For many, SL is a business, or business forum, or educational forum, it’s grown far beyond the nonconsequentiality of an X-Box game.

In the end, the sickest part of all is not about the virtual pedophilia , but the minds behind it… the humans behind it.. they are sick. They will figure out another way to fulfill their sickness with or without Second Life, as it is happening in our real world…. it’s been happening since the existence of human kind.

It would seem that people with a certain moral code and objective want to believe that the world works in ways that it does not necessarily work… and put forward that the way things should be is how they feel they should, such as criminalizing certain forms of thoughts.

There are people, alive nowadays, that strongly believe that homosexuality is a disturbing sickness and want it outlawed. They have the same reaction to homosexuality as people have to the idea of someone being sexually attracted to minors.

There are also a lot of claims of being able to find adult content anywhere in Second Life. I assume if you’re LOOKING for it, you’ll certainly find it… but having fiddled around with Second life for a couple weeks, I never came across anyone who solicited myself or was doing anything “Inappropriate” in a public place, so I have to doubt the veracity of such claims.

It’s clear that people cannot be rational about pedophilia. As stated, it is a subject loaded with emotion for most people.

It does boil down to people hating the idea of other people having a particular idea, even if that person perhaps can’t help their predilection.

Essentially, the rational people responded with appropriate skepticism by stating that if it is two adults “Age-Playing”, then there should be NO grounds for anyone else to interfere.

I hold to that. If it’s a fantasy, and two adults are playing around, it really isn’t anyone else’s business.

http://www.ludd.luth.se/mud/ab.....voice.html

1993 called, it wants its issue back.

When I first read the post and watch the footage, I felt a little like Duncan. But as I read some of the comments I realized the gravity of this post and what’s going on.

I agree that the line needs to be drawn with real life criminals. Pedophiles, murderers, etc., and let virtual worlds take their course. But it is hard to take. I look at it as the father of my children and I want to protect them; so my reaction is to crack down on these things, real or virtual. But then I look at the whole thing as a “political” person and take a more objective view and the reaction is different. But either way, certain securities and protections need to be put in place. A safeguard that will assure children are not molested. This is true for all such sites dealing with the “problem”: mySpace, Facebook, Club Penguin, etc.

Also, I think that anybody that would take his/her virtual persona to the real world has issues that would have arisen regardless of the virtual world or video games or TV.

Tough spot to be in.

Latest Hot US, World,
Local,Entertainment,Political,Business,Science,Sports News only at http://www.hotnews.co.in.

Marcus,
unless you are able to point to research that supports your opinion, it seems to me that you are equally guilty of wanting “to believe that the world works in ways that it does not necessarily work”.

In my opinion, virtual pedophilia results in an increased desire for actual pedophilia (at least for those who suffer from that predilection), and in your opinion it doesn’t.

Do you care to do some research and let us know what you find?

@38: I’ve only played SL very infrequently (I hate the client), but AFAIK SL already has those “safeguards” — minors have their own “grid” that is composed strictly of teenagers. I think its called the Teen Grid or something. My homie who does play SL a lot says, “its better than letting the rugrats fuck everything up here.”

AW, The real issue Duncan and others commenting have has little to do with protections and controls to prevent children from being exposed, and a lot more to do with the EXISTENCE of Pedophilia. That is my speculation, at the least.

Gene, you made the initial claim that pornographic content induces behavior. As far as I’m aware, there are no studies that draw a direct causation linked to erotic literature or pornography. Since you made the initial claim, the onus of evidence falls to you.

Just from a two minute search, though, I find this link…

http://www.sexwork.com/coalition/lesscrime.html

… Which Discusses Kuchinsky’s 1971 study of the effect that legalization of pornography had on sexual related crimes.

In stark contrast to the expectation that increase in circulation of pornographic material, the reality is that there is a cathartic effect which either has little effect or a lessening effect on sex related crimes.

And here is a paper from Northwestern School of Law where it is shown that since the 70’s, incidence of Rape has declined while availability of Pornography has increased.

http://anthonydamato.law.north.....s/porn.pdf

I could certainly dig for more, but the prevailing opinion garnered from most studies is that there is no causation of sex related crimes to porn or pornographic material.

Despite the fact that you made the initial claim, I hope this engenders some amount of contemplation concerning your stance. If not, I can always cite more studies of both law and psych.

@42, Marcus:

Maybe what they seem to find more disturbing is that the concept that virtual pedophilia / age-play / whatever has the potential to be completely harmless. Sort’ve like your best friend telling you he’s into jerkin’ it to Guro (do _not_ Google that) but seeing “real” gore (Hostel, Saw 13.2) is a big turn off to him. Perhaps it indicates an aberrant thought process, but aberrant isn’t necessarily hostile or dangerous, and because of that I suppose there are people who would have problems reconciling that rationally.

Maybe all the 2nd Lifers could go over to weblo.com
This would remove the difficulty of virtual versus ‘real’ since weblo.com is real everything. We are always going to face the challenge that in a truly free society
nothing will ever be ‘fair’…the whole world is trying to move to America because we value liberty over equality. porn is definitley a four letter word … but whatdayado?

@Marcus;

I’ve been in SL for about a year, and while you’re entitled to “doubt the veracity” of my statement on finding sexually explicit activity and conversation involving pedophilia and bestiality, your doubts are based on your own very limited experienced in the environment and so, by your own admission, you aren’t qualified to make a valid observation on the matter. To be fair, since SL announced a few months ago that activities which are “broadly offensive” would be curtailed, much of it has indeed been taken from open view, but it does still occur.

While I’m sure you can find numerous articles supporting the theory that indulging in fantasy can produce a cathartic effect, I’m equally sure that I can find numerous articles supporting the fact that for some people, the fantasy is just the first step in a journey which requires more in-depth and realistic experience of progressively more radical instances of whatever their ‘high’ happens to be, in order to obtain the same degree of ‘high’ they initially experienced at a much lower level of exposure. Distance running, gambling, BDSM, and drug use are well documented examples of this latter progression and sexual excitement obtained by violating legal and social taboos can certainly fall into the same paradigm. That this will not be the case for all people does not mean it will not be the case for *some* people, but ultimately, that’s not the point in this issue.

While you dance around your key point of ‘freedom of expression/thought’, attempting to justify it by making any who disagree look like narrow-minded bigots, what you’re missing is that society, any society, by definition cannot permit or condone absolute individual freedom. Further, your ‘freedom of expression/thought’ doesn’t seem to extend to the right of others to find a particular pursuit to be repugnant. Ultimately, the society’s laws will determine where freedoms end, and the obsessive attempts to continually stretch the boundaries of freedom simply force society to make legal rulings one way or the other. Naturally, there’s no way to make everyone happy and the complaints will always be made.

In this case, the laws of the various nations will eventually catch up to the new paradigm of virtual societies and make those rulings clear. Some will disagree, but the majority will accept it because it fits with their social mores, and anarchy will have to wait yet again.

The US Supreme Court is currently wrestling with exactly this issue, and their ruling will determine whether or not the deliberately purveyed impression of child pornography will constitute a crime, whether or not actual children were involved, or not. A Google News search with the parameters of “’supreme court’ porn” will turn up the relevant coverage.

Marcus,
thanks for your research. I looked over your sources briefly and, not surprisingly was not convinced. But of course, this is a tangent we’re on. I never said that porn leads to rape - I said “Does porn satisfy sexual desire - or inflame it?”

Porn does not necessarily depict illegal behavior - virtual pedophilia does.

Lion said it very well above: “the fantasy is just the first step in a journey which requires more in-depth and realistic experience of progressively more radical instances of whatever their ‘high’ happens to be”

Considering I did provide some cursory examples to back the view that fantasy does not induce behavior in reality, but in fact may alleviate such behavior I would ask that you provide similar courtesy.

Lion, A society that criminalizes thoughts and impulses that do not harm someone is not moral, it is mob rule and is on a precarious road towards oppression.

Equating a thought to an action is a break in logic, flawed reasoning, and essentially valueless as an argument as this current argument relies entirely upon a plea to emotion. One which people who clearly SEE a difference between virtual pedophilia and real world pedophilia as completely separate and different things.

The onus of proof that VIRTUAL pedophilia induces REAL pedophilia is on the claimant.

That you don’t like it, find it repugnant, socially diseased, or downright evil is totally irrelevant. That you want to believe it causes a slippery slope, resulting in enforcing that pedophilia is okay is also irrelevant, unless you provide a sound basis for your argument.

Rather than merely claim there are studies that support your views, cite them. Rather than say, “Well, I could find information to back me up too,” why don’t you go and find it?

My stance is to defend the people that others won’t, especially if they have done nobody wrong and hurt nothing except the sensibilities of the morally self-righteous.

I State again, the line should be drawn between real world actions and fantasy.

Marcus:
your evidence is not relevant to our discussion, as it only suggests that porn does not lead specifically to rape.

There’s no need to look any further than our own experience to know that porn affects your thoughts and increases your desire (are you not more aroused after viewing porn?). Again, I’ve never said anything about rape.

Once again, our difference is that in my opinion, virtual pedophilia results in an increased desire for actual pedophilia, and in your opinion it doesn’t. Unfortunately, there doesn’t appear to be any scientific evidence one way or another on this (at least none that I can find).

Anyone else care to vote on which they agree with?

As the women on the video above says, we need to be focused on getting the people involved in this kind of virtual activity help. If you find yourself attracted by virtual pedophilia, please seek help.

For those who don’t see this as much of a problem, consider taking a few moments to read this article - The Problem of Pedophilia - http://www.narth.com/docs/pedophNEW.html