On SL5B

A whole lot of people know by now that Linden Lab, the company which owns and operates Second Life, has decided that it will not permit builds submitted by the SL kid subculture to be entered as part of the SL5B celebration - although they will be allowed to attend. The given reason was that allowing such would not be in SL's best interest right this moment.

Although it hasn't been explicitly stated, many people have extrapolated that the motivation for LL's decision is recent bad publicity; to wit: a certain US Congressman's insistence that SL, because of its enormous wealth of adult-themed content, is dangerous to kids (RL kids, that is). The argument is that there are essentially no measures in place in prevent minors from pretending to be adults and accessing all of the explicit stuff. Therefore, says the Congressman, Second Life should be banned from places like schools and libraries.

Others have determined that the motivation for LL's decision is past bad publicity, in which some news outlets have exposed the fact that some people who use kid-sized avs in SL are using them for sexual purposes. This activity (called "ageplay"), though not explicitly illegal in many places, is still considered scandalous by the world at large, and is specifically prohibited by the SL Terms of Service.

Frankly, I tend to think it's the latter; simply because I don't see what the former really has to do with anything - unless the fear is that the two seperate issues will become juxtaposed should people with mercenary motives see a kid's build in one corner of a sim, and find a mature-themed build in the opposite corner, and proceed to draw the kind of Rube Goldberg-inspired conclusions that such people are good at coming up with. Yes, that could be very bad for LL.

So here we have it: a great, great many people are upset over this. Some of them blame LL for not "standing up" for those of its users - many who pay a considerable amount of money, I might add - who choose to innocently portray kids on SL. Others blame the Congressmen, and people who think like him, for drastically overstating problems and stoking irrational fears.

Well, my opinion on the matter is a bit different from most, I guess.

Firstly, Linden Lab is not an advocacy group. It's a business - in the business of staying in business. Businesses are inherently amoral entities; within certain ethical guidelines, their job is to make money for their investors, and to do things and change things in whatever way is necessary to achieve that end. What that means in this case, is that LL's duty, first and foremost, is to keep the Grid alive. If, in their opinion, directly supporting and advertizing the SL kid community would invite such criticism and scrutiny that it would be difficult for them to keep SL running, then (reluctantly) I can't begrudge them that decision. So, I don't blame LL for this, not really. Perhaps there is some culpability there, but it isn't a whole lot I don't think.

Secondly, the Congressman in question may be overstating things, true. But, he does raise some legitimate concerns - yes, there IS an exorbitant amount of mature-themed material in SL; and yes, it IS incredibly easy for a minor to gain access to it. Perhaps there's really nothing that can be done about those things, but they're still true. And why on earth would a library or school allow SL on their computers anyway? Playing on the computer isn't what libraries and school computer systems are for. Most of them probably couldn't even run SL, and in all likelihood those institutions wouldn't allow SL even despite Congressman Whatsit's rambling. All that is much ado about nothing. So, I can't even really say I blame the Congressman for this mess, either.

So who's to blame, then?

Well, it seems obvious to me. A lot of people object that so many see kid avs and automatically draw the conclusion that they're ageplayers. That is a shame, yes, but...who's fault is it? In my opinion - ageplayers. They, and those who (even today) openly advocate for their alleged "right" to do what it is they like to do. Yes, they exist - to deny the problem completely is at least as bad as overstating it, wouldn't you agree? Shoddy outfits like Sky News may have irresponsibly exaggerated the extent of the ageplay problem in SL - but they didn't invent it out of whole cloth.

The fact of the matter is, I get weary of contantly having to explain to new people that no, I'm not into that stuff, most SL kids aren't here for that, etc, etc. Why should I have to? I've done nothing wrong. I certainly don't remember having to assert my innocence constantly when I was a RL kid. But I do here. And I know well who's fault that is.

(Cody TP's into a new area, looking to do some exploring)
NOOB: ....ew! one of those freaks!
CODY: (spends a half an hour explaining that most SL kids aren't freaks)
NOOB: why u want 2 b a kid then?
CODY: (spends another twenty minutes explaining how he came to be a SL kid)
NOOB: ....
NOOB: .....ew! one of those freaks! (files an AR and TP's away)
CODY: :(

It irks me.

Luckily, I've run into a few very cool people who've already gotten a good impression of kid avs, so it's not all hopeless. I have the tireless efforts of kids like Marianne McCann to thank for that.

But the rest of the time? I'm left to apologize for the actions and attitudes of sick individuals whose only connection with me is avatar height. Think about it: if they weren't around - if nobody had one day seen what THEY do and spread the word - nobody would look at SL kids and automatically think "one of those freaks!". There would be no Sky News reports. There would be no "controversy".

And kids wouldn't be excluded from SL5B.

So, if you're a SL kid, and in the unlikely event that you run into an actual ageplayer...please, try and take some of your frustration over the current plight of SL kids out on them. And whether you're a kid or adult, when you run into an ageplayer - for heaven's sake, AR them so they can be banned.