And as for Gor – well let’s not even go there!

I’ve got a wacky idea. How about we just look at the law? The servers reside in the US oddly enough.

http://www.adric.us/wp-content/uploads/2009/06/generallaw.jpg

Noting the Bush admin changes..

http://www.adric.us/wp-content/uploads/2009/06/virtual.jpg

You basically have a few bars to reach here (I did an article, but I am not going to whore a link on this upscale site), one the image is clearly a minor, second it’s doing that nasty OR Miller which I am sorry to say depends on if your jury is in Utah or New York (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Miller_v._California). Best of luck to you.

What this underscores for me is that the relationship between virtuality and “reality” isn’t nearly so hard and fast as is commonly understood. Much of what I read about Second Life tells me that a virtual world is like a parallel universe out of a cheesy sci-fi show and that, as such, what goes on there is akin to “what goes on in Vegas” (i.e. it stays in Vegas!) I no longer accept that interpretation because there are other worlds beside the “real” and the “virtual” that stitch those two supposed opposites together at the seams. I mean, of course, the Imaginary and the Symbolic – but, if that seems too technical, lets just call it Discourse. Discourse doesn’t admit the distinction between virtual and real as readily as the freedom of speech folks suppose because the real Real we inhabit *is* Language itself and Language is always-already a “collapsing of a multitude of possibilities.” In other words, the distinction means little when the stuff of reality is composed of virtualities in various states of collapse.

I think its best to think of Second Life as an interface, a connection point, but not a connection between otherwise self-sufficient realities, more like a foreign exchange where the flow of desire is converted into the appropriate coin of the realm. It is against that backdrop that I have to place the “virtual” depiction of adult males gang-raping a six year old. Does it really matter if “no actual children were harmed” (as the mantra goes?)

It is really easy to say one right reigns supreme, but in reality there are limits to rights (yelling ‘Fire!’ in a crowded theatre) in US law just as there are in other legal systems. The difference is that US law tends to state a right as unlimited and then develop limitations through the courts, where Canada, for example, provides for a legislative process to develop limitations subject to a couple of constitutional tests.

Sometimes the US model results in greater freedom, But sometimes it does not. Canada for instance, despite the power of Canadian parliaments and legislatures to enact limitations, allows all prisoners to vote as a result of Sauve v Chief Electoral Officer. The US has a less stellar practice when it comes to prisoners and ex-prisoners voting.

So I cannot see ageplay only as a free expression issue. I do not know where the balance between a child’s right to safety and the right to expression should be drawn. I do say that the thing is not as simple as merely citing free expression as a supreme value.

well this says it all:)

What’s the real story? That as a culture we havent dealt with virtuality for 30 years?

And last time i checked every ANIME style virtual world or animated show had “childlike” 8 year old looking characters that were supposed to be 25 year olds. And that style has grown, mainly because of “money-cost to produce” in the west and globally so lets not even really pundit about how 3d realtime immersive media” has very much to do about any of these issues.

we are a media induced psychotic retarded culture growing globally before we even THOUGHT locally:).

how will the future look? how will we deal with it? watch a TV. cause it is exactly what rich media- virtuality looks like.