Lolitas. A sneaky attempt to by-pass age-play ban?

[Pussycat Catnap]

---

Marigold Devin wrote:

---

No, I know it's not against ToS to be a frankenbarbie (great word for it btw), but I still don't have to like it.

---

The term has been around since this kind of attack against small avatars started. A frankenbarbie is just a word for the kind of avatar that usually launches the attack: one of those giant 7-foot + tall pimped out super boobed avatars.

I think you're getting the term backwards right up there... Since the term applies mostly to your own side of thise debate.

[Dogboat Taurog]

its the represention of a child combined with an air of sexuality that bothers me and always has done, its dangerous and gives a green light to paedophilic activity.

i would like all child avs kept out of mature and adult land.

[Innula Zenovka]

---

Dogboat Taurog wrote:

its the represention of a child combined with an air of sexuality that bothers me and always has done, its dangerous and gives a green light to paedophilic activity.

---

Sorry, I don't understand.   The fact that there's avatars wandering round the grid whose appearance bothers you in this was doesn't mean LL gives "a green light to paedophilic activity" and neither does it mean that the criminal law, in the USA or anywhere else, "gives a green light to paedophilic activity".    Who do you say is labouring under the massive misapprehension that it does?

 

[Marigold Devin]

 

Someone requested photos. ok. Seen while generally exploring.

Combined with profile contents.

A kid or an adult?

Too ambiguous to sit comfortable with me.

Yes, Immy, I have a problem with it. But Immy, how many times is it that someone has "wrongly" ARd you? I'm not the only one with this "problem".

@ Dogboat - they need to make up their minds if they're roleplaying as kids or roleplaying as adults, and LL need to put a fine divide between the two. It does give the pedos the green light.

In my opinion. And that is all it is.

[Carole Franizzi]

---

Ayrea wrote:

So, OP is saying that by RPing a slutty 19 year old, I'm breaking some kind of moral code? My avatar is around 5'10" - 5'-11" with A cup breasts and a very petite figure. I look TINY next to the horribly over-scaled 10 foot avatars in second life. I find this terribly insulting, you're basically calling me, and all other like minded girls in SL, pedos. I don't log onto second life to play a middle aged woman. I play my avatar for her youth, her LEGAL youth. I'm very sorry that this offends you, actually I'm not that sorry, considering the attitude you came to this forum with.

I think the OP has violated the ToS with her ranting, finger-pointing post more so than anyone that choses to RP a youthful avatar. Have you ever stopped for one moment to think that the reason people act insulted when you pull the child card on them, is because they ARE insulted. No matter what, there will always be ill-minded people in second life, do NOT punish the rest of us for the actions of others.

 

---

Oh, I just can't resist - wasn't going to add anything more but this prize-winner in the "I-shan't-actually-read-what-you wrote-so-I-can-rant-to-heart's-content" competition is just SCREAMING at me to be replied to....

N O

one second...

NO

actually, let me try again...

 

NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO, I did NOT mention 19 year old slutty avies.

With a bit of luck that just might have got through to you and some of the other numpties muttering incoherently about normal or even short sized adult avatars in adult sims. The OP was NOT - I repeat not about small adults. It was NOT NOT NOT about child avatars in PG sims - it was....sec and i'll make it nice and big for all of you who seem to be having severe comprehension issues:-

It was about CHILD avatars in VERY adult sims and the fact I'd noticed an increase in their number.

Evidently, however, the topic was too hard for many to grasp, or maybe it was targeted by a number of people marching to an agenda so absorbing and word-blinding that it caused basic comprehension difficulties...whatever...waste of energy and in truth I didn't intend adding a word more but the tone and content of the new replies is so stunningly irrelevant and disconnected to the OP and the topic that I just had to choose one prize-winner for my special Barking Up the Wrong Tree Award. A consolation prize to the genius who suggested I publish photos of the sort of avatars I mean. Now, wouldn't that be a super-dooper witch-hunting anti-ToS idea?

My apologies to those who posted intelligent, non-flaming, non-trolling contributions - but if I do my usual - ploughing through every post and writing a reply to each one, a good few would send my blood pressure sky-high.

 

[Carole Franizzi]

---

Dogboat Taurog wrote:

its the represention of a child combined with an air of sexuality that bothers me and always has done, its dangerous and gives a green light to paedophilic activity.

i would like all child avs kept out of mature and adult land.

---

 

What I'm seeing and what I was trying to discuss (I'd emphasise the word "trying") is child avies of a very sexualised nature in sex-theremed clubs and the seeming increase in the phenomenon.

[Carole Franizzi]

Okay....not sure how ToSish it is to publish photos of other people's avatars but that's kind of what I'm talking about though I've seen loads "worse" - read: more childlike in body and clothes - and not in shops like in your photo, but in sex joints. And yes....the profiles....for all those screeching about witch-hunts and filthy minds contorting the sweet innocent fun of child avatars reliving a second childhood, the profiles make the intentions MORE than clear. Unless you're marching to your own agenda and have a vested interest in keeping the attention away from what is pretty much blatant disregard of the ToS concerning age-play.

Thank you Marigold.

[Dogboat Taurog]

---

Innula Zenovka wrote:

---

Dogboat Taurog wrote:

its the represention of a child combined with an air of sexuality that bothers me and always has done, its dangerous and gives a green light to paedophilic activity.

---

Sorry, I don't understand.   The fact that there's avatars wandering round the grid whose appearance bothers you in this was doesn't mean LL gives "a green light to paedophilic activity" and neither does it mean that the criminal law, in the USA or anywhere else, "gives a green light to paedophilic activity".    Who do you say is labouring under the massive misapprehension that it does?

 

---

i think that any adult who doesn't use SL would be quite shocked to see adults using lolita style child avatars in a virtual world.

i dont accept it either.

however thats just my opinion, and i'm not going to make the mistake of being dragged into a flamefest again.

[Melita Magic]

---

Carole Franizzi wrote:

---

Melita Magic wrote:

Lolita in the Nabokov book was 12. 12 year olds usually have bust development of some kind. Usually not totally flat chested.

12 is still a child.

Use your intuition is my policy on enforcing rules and bans.

---

Melita, I'm not in a position to ban anyone as I don't have land. In theory I could report. In practice, I'd spend a good part of my time in SL typing out reports as I'm seeing them more and more. Do I want to spend my SL time volunterr policing? Not really. Plus, the whole point of this thread was my admission that they're borderline - HIGHLY ambiguous balancing act between adult and child avatar. If I was talking about pure child avies in sex sims rather than waste time discussing it here, I'd just make a report. It's because it's not quite clear - and whatever it is I see - it's on the increase. But scanning through the replies, I see I'm the only one who seems to note the phenomenon.

---

/me smiles.

I meant my post to be supportive of your intuitiion and intelligence. In no way did I mean to suggest which sort of action you should take. 

If the land owning part does not apply, and you are not on the staff in the place you frequent either, then take a more general meaning from it I guess.

ETA: Even if I don't have as much time to spend on other people's land as I used to, so I'm not usually away from my own land, I still understood what you meant.  I'm sure you didn't mean to imply the rest of us are unobservant or stupid. Lol. There are some who agree with your perceptions and are not confused on your point. I even think most are not but some are simply talking about another topic for whatever reason.

 

[Innula Zenovka]

---

Dogboat Taurog wrote:

---

Innula Zenovka wrote:

---

Dogboat Taurog wrote:

its the represention of a child combined with an air of sexuality that bothers me and always has done, its dangerous and gives a green light to paedophilic activity.

---

Sorry, I don't understand.   The fact that there's avatars wandering round the grid whose appearance bothers you in this was doesn't mean LL gives "a green light to paedophilic activity" and neither does it mean that the criminal law, in the USA or anywhere else, "gives a green light to paedophilic activity".    Who do you say is labouring under the massive misapprehension that it does?

 

---

i think that any adult who doesn't use SL would be quite shocked to see adults using lolita style child avatars in a virtual world.

i dont accept it either.

however thats just my opinion, and i'm not going to make the mistake of being dragged into a flamefest again.

---

I don't like it, either, but I'm just trying to make sense of your comment, is all.    

Are you saying that, when you say it gives "a green light to paedophilic activity, in fact you mean, "it might give someone who isn't familiar with SL the completely mistaken impression that LL condones paedophilia"?

[Dogboat Taurog]

---

Innula Zenovka wrote:

---

I don't like it, either, but I'm just trying to make sense of your comment, is all.    

Are you saying that, when you say it gives "a green light to paedophilic activity, in fact you mean, "it might give someone who isn't familiar with SL the completely mistaken impression that LL condones paedophilia"?

---

if i meant that i would have said it.

 

[Innula Zenovka]

---

Dogboat Taurog wrote:

---

Innula Zenovka wrote:

---

I don't like it, either, but I'm just trying to make sense of your comment, is all.    

Are you saying that, when you say it gives "a green light to paedophilic activity, in fact you mean, "it might give someone who isn't familiar with SL the completely mistaken impression that LL condones paedophilia"?

---

if i meant that i would have said it.

 

---

Well, who do you say is giving this "green light" and to whom?  

[Penny Patton]

>Someone requested photos. ok. Seen while generally exploring.

While they do have child av groups, that avatar is clearly adult. "Short" for SL, but she has exaggerated super model proportions. Her dress isn't really child-like either. More 80's looking than anything else.

 A good rule of thumb is "without any height context, just this avatar by itself, would a reasonable person consider it "child-like?"

 There are no rules against someone going to kid-av places, wearing a kid avatar, then turning around, wearing an adult avatar and heading to an adult rated sex sim. LL does not need to "put a fine divide" between these activities and have people "make up their minds to play one or the other".  Personally, I find this sort of "thought crime" mentality far more disturbing than the issue at hand.

 

 On the ither hand, I'm not dumb. I know there are people out there using SL's scale issues as an excuse. Avatars running around in clearly child-like avatars claiming to "just be short". Usually avatars that look 15-16, but dress like a five year old. And it doesn't even have to do with height. I've seen avatars over 6' tall who were clearly trying to make their avatar look like a pre-teen, they just weren't very good at it.

I wouldn't worry about the "on the line" stuff. If it's not entirely clear, there's no issue. If it makes you uncomfortable, go elsewhere. Let the Lindens and sim owners police their own policies. If seeing even a clearly adult avatar woman come up to only the navel on the typical 8' tall SL guy makes you queasey, rather than harassing the person who has a clue about scale, complain to LL that they need to stop encouraging 8' tall avatars by starting new users out that way and stop letting bugs like AgentHeight persist.

[Lexie Linden]

This has been a rather "spirited" discussion but it also contains a number of posts that are borderline violations as well as many verging on flaming. I think this thread has run it's course. I am going to lock this thread for those reasons.