ext_3375: Banded Tussock (0)
Nile ([identity profile] hairyears.livejournal.com) wrote in [personal profile] tamaranth 2007-05-09 02:37 pm (UTC)


Where's the dividing line between realistic CGI representations of illegal acts and grainy video footage of the real thing?

The answer is that UK law makes no distinction, and the issue has existed for over a century: images can be created by hand as well as by camera, and anyone can hire actors who look a lot younger than they are - who can of course simulate rather than commit an illegal act...

So the law is about images depicting illegal acts, and a Second-Life sequence that depicted underage sex would be in clear breach of the law.

As for the morality of it all, English law has a sound moral principle which is difficult to define in practice: we forbid material likely to 'corrupt and deprave'. I believe that an immersive reality that allows people to develop and act out fantasies of sex with children is doing precisely that.

If someone has a fascination with children that has sexual overtones, that's the worst thing that they could do - and by the time they sought help from a psychiatrist, they would be thoroughly conditioned to sexual arousal by children - 'real' as well as virtual - and very difficult to treat. Corrupted and depraved, indeed.




Post a comment in response:

If you don't have an account you can create one now.
HTML doesn't work in the subject.
More info about formatting

If you are unable to use this captcha for any reason, please contact us by email at support@dreamwidth.org