1. Some people clearly think that a place to do "safe" extreme sex *is* "a better world." It's not my thing, but I don't have a problem with what consenting adults do behind closed doors.

However, I do have a problem if someone says they are acting with the community's wishes in mind, when there hasn't been much of an attempt to find out what the community really wants. There's more than enough of that in Real Life, and I don't want to see it in Second Life.

Now, it's possible that LL would find out that lots of the community would like SL to be Sex Life, and LL isn't interested in doing just that. Then they could say "sorry, guys, we're not going there." That would be acting on actual information gathered, and I'd be ok with that, because it would be an honest decision based on real data.

Posted at 3:36PM on Jun 6th 2007 by Cyn Vandeverre

2.
Well, what Robin hints at is that "forced" and "slavery" are not good (better). Probably meaning freedom is better than bondage. Freedom usually meaning the ability to make choices according to own preference.

And yes, in line with that, I think it is a lot better if people are free enough to even chose bondage and forced sex if they like than if they are not able to make those choices if they prefer.

Because, even if I would not make those particular choices, limiting those people with their choices, will sure backfire on me sooner or later when I make choices in other areas when these are not approved by the majority.

Given the fact that there is no real force in SL, yes, a better world would include consentual rape and consentual slavery because, as odd as it may seem, this means more freedom.

Posted at 4:03PM on Jun 6th 2007 by Nicholaz Beresford

3. Freedom to ask a lover to remove freedom as a part of creating intimacy is the ultimate second life. Its intimacy we are talking about, and SL allows people to be vulnerable to each other by actively engaging in acts of vulnerability that are NOT bound by the real, therefore creating an intimacy deeper than most friendships, and often deeper than real live relationships. This comes about because in fact the "victims" can trust the SL environment when they actively participate and help create the circumstances of their "victimhood". IF SL can be a place where simulation and anonymity and freedom from our ordinary bounds in our ordinary lives, then that deeper intimacy results. An intimacy which is actively built, enjoyed and explored consensually, and can result in a better sense of self, and of needs, and of what true intimacy is. We need to get off the idea that SL slavery is equal to real life anything, its not. Its only equal to intimacy in a simulated environment, period.

IF suddenly that ability to create unimpeded intimacy is threated by the short sighted introduction of real life rules and real life bounderies and real life stigmas into a place where great efforts by all participants are made to free themselves of such limitations safely, then we have lost all the promise of what a virtual experience can be about.

Posted at 4:16PM on Jun 6th 2007 by praetor hax

4. If for no other reason than to thoroughly explore the dark places in one's soul, both safely and responsibly, then yes, there is a place for such things in any Utopia. Again, an ideal world should never be an imposition from the top down; indeed, the idea that you are excluded from content 'for your own good' seems to smack of dystopian ideals instead. LL needs to watch its step very carefully.

Posted at 4:46PM on Jun 6th 2007 by akela.talamasca

5. "Let me ask you all this. When faced with an opportunity to create a new world where things are supposed to be better, do you think there's a place for slavery, forced sex, and the like?"

SL is a better world as im not forced to be a slave or have forced sex, i have the choice. Im now forced not to have a choice by Linden Lab. A better world is not a place where we rule out and deny the darker corners of the human soul.

Posted at 5:05PM on Jun 6th 2007 by Loki Eliot

6. Robin Linden: We may find there are times when behaviors that we have allowed in the past, e.g. ageplay, are viewed strongly enough by some jurisdictions that we have to decide, for the sake of the business, that we aren't going to allow them anymore. I doubt very much that ageplay is the last behavior that will come under this scrutiny.

...chilling...

Posted at 5:12PM on Jun 6th 2007 by Myrrh Massiel

7. There is no slavery or forced sex in Second Life.

There's slavery and forced-sex *roleplaying.*

It's just like TV or the movies, except the writers, audience, and actors are all the same people.

Posted at 5:12PM on Jun 6th 2007 by Mitch Wagner

8. LL has acheived the Better World Robin speaks of. Unlike my RL - in a Bible Belt community where all manner of victimless acts are deemed to be criminal, I can not walk down the street in the dark without always being vigilant about the possibility that I might be attacked, robbed, raped, or murdered. And I live in one of the safest areas I know of - regardless of that, the possibility is always there and always a part of my awareness.

In SL, none of those things can happen to me and I can explore at will. At worst, I can be annoyed - but I'm a big girl, and can get over that trauma.

In RL, my involvement with BDSM means I must lead a very careful and circumspect life or risk informal and formal censure from my community (which can not guarantee my safety in truly nonconsentual situations). In SL, I was able to establish a home base on a sim that openly advertises a friendly opinion of alternate lifestyles.

My First Land, on the other hand, was deliberately chosen on a PG sim and continues to be a fun place to explore building without worrying about sharing space with low rent stripper bars.

Now here's the real irony - I live on a sim where everyone there is involved in some variety of kink, and I spend most of my time in sims that focus on role play, including sexual role play but have solid rules about where and when. That is, enjoy yourself but don't force your private playtime on others.

And the result is.... I don't even recall the last time I witnessed sexual activity among random strangers or, for that matter, people I know. My RL partner is my SL partner and we are monogamous, so we don't hunt sex. And in spite of living where we knew we would not be shunned or accidentally irritate our neighbors, our sim is the residence for some of the most polite and neighborly people I've come across in SL or RL. And yet... I now worry that the witchhunt atmosphere currently in force will cause us to once again go into hiding or face harrassment in the form of ARs for something no one will ever be aware of unless they spy beyond the confines of our walls.

Meanwhile - sex for pay isn't ever mentioned as potential issue (and I'm not saying it is, either - I'm just appalled that that seems to be the one and only form of sexuality in SL that is declared appropriate, and it's the one least likely to result in any emotional involvement whatsoever. That's a cold view of sex, there).

And I have to wonder about all these pearl clutching SL residents gasping over how the sex is everywhere! And they can't avoid it! I wonder just where they hang out. If you aren't interested in sex in SL, get away from the pole dance clubs and start exploring some of the beautiful and intricate sims out there where the rule about sex isn't about 'better' or 'morality' and is all about being respectful of both those participating in it and those who aren't. If you don't like it being in your face, get your face focused on something else.

It's there. You just have to want to see it, instead of gasping and tsking at what other people are doing.

And yes, Robin, I want a better SL. I want somewhere where I can be left alone and not made to feel wrong because I find meaning in something someone else doesn't. If they catch me in the streets with it, assaulting their senses, then by all means come after me. But first, could you get rid of some of those horrible rotating signs and abandoned builds that assault my senses around my First Land? I bet they're more annoying to others than my sexuality is on my most ribald day.

Posted at 5:33PM on Jun 6th 2007 by Morgana Fillion

9. At least some things are explained. But I still don't see how saying "these things were never tolerated" is the same as "these things are only on M-rated land"

Whatever. I'm not really concerned, because I don't do this stuff. Hell, I haven't seen any of it; the worst was some guy in a monkey avatar making a humping motion. In the welcome area near Linden Village. Two words - TELEPORT. Rape in SL isn't really rape. At best, you can _pretend_ to be raped. But SL isn't architectured to allow for realistic sexual violence. Which is good. Unless teleports are down, you're on no-fly land, and you've just been caged... but still, all you have to do is logout.

Posted at 6:18PM on Jun 6th 2007 by KirbyMeister

10. No matter how deeply we are immersed in SL, let's not forget that slavery in SL is not real slavery and forced sex in SL is not real forced sex. They are only fantasies, they are only thoughts, and they are only a form of expression. Preventing and punishing slavery and forced sex in RL is right and moral. Doing the same in SL is restricting freedom of thought and freedom of expression.

If we can make movies in which we can present any aspect of life that we want, do we want to make only Disney movies? Why would we also want war movies, horror movies, porn movies and so on?

I don't know why, but we do. And the world is a better place if we explore all the possibilities as long as it is done in a safe way and in a safe environment. Personally, I have even no intention to participate in age-playing, gorean role-playing, BDSM, or anything else like that in SL. However, I find SL fascinating for giving all of us a window into what other people think and want, no matter how weird that may be (or may seem).

So I will even affirm that SL is already a better world for giving us an insight into what humanity really is, not what we want it to be. And THEN we can work towards making the world even better by offering better opportunities and by letting people make the right choices, not by restricting the choices we don't like.

Many of us see this as becoming something like "1984". It seems to me though that LL sees this as turning into a "Lord of the Flies". That left without supervision, we end up making the wrong choices. But they are not the adults and we are not the children and LL are not better at "supervising" us than we are ourselves. At most, we are ALL children in this world of SL and the choices we are making are part of growing up. And that's ok because, as opposed to "Lord of the Flies", we can't end up killing each other.

Posted at 7:25PM on Jun 6th 2007 by Lem Skall

11. I 100% back what Eloise Pasteur and Mitch Wagner said.

You cannot be forced into sex or slavery in Second Life. The idea that building a "better world" (who gets to define what that means, anyway?) means eliminating certain kinds of sexual role play is preposterous.

That statement, particularly from a Linden Lab spokesperson, reflects a disturbing level of confusion regarding the line between virtual and real experiences.

Please, if we're going to embark on the virtual frontier together, let's try remind residents that they control their own experiences (outside of lag and crashes anyway). We have enough disempowered individuals in the real world.

I think a "better [virtual] world" is an environment where everyone is empowered to determine their own experiences--a valuable experience to take into the real world. And that's what's at stake right now.

Fight for it.

Posted at 9:39PM on Jun 6th 2007 by Myg

12. I actually see several underlying messages in Robin's comments:
1. LL will act against certain behaviors because they are legally pressured to do so.
2. LL will act against certain behaviors because those behaviors are immoral.
3. LL want SL residents to work together with LL.

There is no contradiction between #1 and #2, but LL's message is all muddled because of this duplicity. And as long as morals are even just a factor and LL picks and chooses their legal battles based on what LL finds moral, then they are plain wrong. Interestingly enough, Robin basically states that they might not be influenced by such legal issues once "SL is big enough that you can all go to your respective legislatures and say leave us alone". So now I am really confused, which one is it after all, legal or moral?

As for SL residents working together with LL, this relationship will be sour as long as:
1. LL passes any moral judgment on the SL community
2. LL sends muddled messages like these

Posted at 12:59AM on Jun 7th 2007 by Lem Skall

13.

Well, scuttlebutt has it she’s the source for this ‘do nothing’ policy.

On the other hand, this policy is going to have them doing alot of things. What happens when not France, but Germany (obscene symbols, personages) comes knocking? Greece (graven images)? Turkey (non-secular speach)? Iran (hair)?

Linden Labs would be on better footing if they fought things in their local court instead of allowing other courts to set the stakes.

She could’ve written ‘they cannot condone’ instead of ‘they cannot allow’. One means they don’t like it, but have no control - the second means they control it.

And if LL controls the speech and actions on the grid… They’re legally responsible for it.

Posted at 6:24PM on Jun 7th 2007 by Crissa

14. Why should I bother with Robin's question? She didn't answer any of our own.

Posted at 8:24PM on Jun 8th 2007 by Nobody Fugazi