Second Life residents fret about possible bestiality crack down
By James Cornelius
Second Life really is another world, one where the norms and values of this world don’t seem to apply. With Linden Labs cracking down on “broadly offensive content” such as child pornography, some Second Life “residents” are now concerned that there may be a crack down on bestiality.
When someone joins Second Life and selects an avatar they’re given the option of taking human form or animal form. Animal avatars are known as “furries”.
Cinnamon Twist from the Second Life Herald recently posed the question: “If one uses such an avatar, and one has sexual congress with another avatar, either human or furry, is that bestiality?”
According to Twist, some animal avatars are quite realistic and anatomically correct, and it’s also possible to buy animal sex props. Twist wondered: “Where will the community draw the line with regard to ‘broadly offensive’?”
Responding to Twist’s post, some residents were outraged by the idea of banning bestiality.
The prophet left this comment:
“It’s called virtual ,it’s not real so I don’t see anything wrong with it. Just someone’s playing animal. So I don’t know what is going on but I just find it stupid stop taking virtual things real its a game . so shut up if you don’t like it and leave.”
Or how about this from Anonymous:
“I’d much rather see SL digital dogs doing this than real dogs. I don’t give a shit what people do in games, as long as it stays in the game. Simulating sex with animals hurts no people and no animals.”
Natu had a more considered response:
“I have no personal desire for any of the activities mentioned in the article. I do, however, support a resident’s *option* to do so because I find it more appealing to allow what I may dislike than to be thought-policed for things that 1) hurt no one, 2) occur between consenting adults and 3) take place in a virtual world.”
If you step back from the issue, it is really quite bizarre to see people defending what amounts to simulated digital bestiality. No one in the real world could ever defend bestiality, and yet because this is happening in a virtual world, it’s considered by some to be acceptable. However, the issue is even more complex, as HazimGazovX points out:
“I kill animals all the time in World of Warcraft, is that murder?”
HazimGazovX makes a very interesting point, and it begs a broader question. In this age where depictions of violence and sex are easily found online and in computer games, have our standards already too become broad because we’ve become so accepting of simulated violence? Or are sex and violence two different issues that should be treated separately, as they have been in the world of film, where graphic violence is OK, but graphic sex is not.
A computer game featuring bestiality would be banned by most government regulators because it would not meet community standards. I’m not sure that Second Life should be treated any differently. Like it or not each of us are members of a broader community, and simply going online doesn’t mean that we can ignore community standards completely. For this reason, bestiality in Second Life is not acceptable.
Related:
Entry was posted
on Monday, July 23rd, 2007 at 11:49 am
under 
Print This Post
Read more entries by James Cornelius.
Stumble It!
July 23rd, 2007
I do not agree. At all. Atm I am having sex with a poodle, while my girlfriend and her cat is watching. Okay, not IRL, but in my mind. Is that acceptable? Oh, and yes. Now I’m telling the world about it. ow about them community standards?
July 23rd, 2007
“If a man even looks upon a woman and lusts after her in his heart, he has already committed adultery’, according to Jesus Christ.
So, that means there is no difference between actually committing adultery, and ‘just’ thinking of committing adultery(or ‘just’ lusting).
The sin is the same in both cases, I think, according to Jesus Christ.
So, if men/women think to commit ‘bestiality’, then they have already done that sin, too.
So, if men think or act out bestiality, in SL, then they are committing the same sin known as ‘bestiality’.
‘The wages of sin is death’.
So, according to this philosophy, all the video games that have wanton murderings/killings going on, are sin.
Killing a ‘man’/'woman’ in a video game is the same sin as killing a man/woman in real world.
That is because men had the thought to kill.
Same sin.
The sin of looking at national geographic books, and lusting, is the same sin as looking at playboy books and lusting, is the same sin as looking at avatars and lusting.
But, the sin does seem to be getting a bit different when ‘avatars’ are involved, for many reasons.
But, if men say that it is not sin, then I think they are wrong.
So, yes, it is sin to commit adultery in sl, and it is sin to commit adultery in sl.
Yes, it is the same as doing it in the real world.
bestiality is perverted. I think it might be against the law, in many countries. Certainly it is transgression against the ‘HOLY GOD OF ISRAEL’.
July 23rd, 2007
It is really amazing the depths of depravity people will invent and participate in. Are these people’s lives so selfish and lacking content that beastiality is interesting, even in cyberspace? How low is their self-esteem and level of “entertainment” to resort to this? If something is available in virtual reality, what is to stop the next step of real beastiality? The concept is evil and depraved even if it is only virtual.
July 23rd, 2007
First of all, bestiality is something that might occur in real life. Stuff that happens in a virtual world, is just that: virtual. There is no beastiality in Second Life, because there are no “beasts” involved, only people controlling avatars wearing the appearance of cartoon animals.
Come on people, get real!
Are Saturday morning cartoons next on the list? When Donald Duck kisses Daisy Duck, is that beastiality? Is it wrong? Or is it simply a cute anthropomorphic expression?
Perhaps the thought police should be hunting down perpetrators of anthropomorphism, that’s the real threat here! Hee hee.
July 23rd, 2007
And another thing…. beastiality is when a human has sex with an animal, yes? Well, what if two people in a virtual world control avatars that are wearing animal appearances…. two weasels, for example… and the weasels engage in virtual sex… how can this be considered beastiality?
It’s two HUMANS, pretending to be two BEASTS, not a human and a beast.
If you’re going to get upset about such nit picking terminology, at least try to fully understand it and be accurate about it!
July 23rd, 2007
“. No one in the real world could ever defend bestiality,”
Sure we can, it’s called zoophilia, look zoophilia up in the wikipedia.com site
July 23rd, 2007
Gosh, this is ridiculous!
I’m not a DOG damnit, I’m a human wearing quite a funky outfit in SL which is the likeness of a dog. It’s an outfit, a mask, a costume. Yeah, there are some *really* good ones there, but they’re NOT REAL!
The biggest problem, which appears to have been completely overlooked, is the same with all ‘computer games’. It’s people who translate things ‘in game’ into RL… people who spend hours shooting things ‘in a game’, then go buy a gun RL. People who spend however long in SL, then feel that because they could do it in SL, that they can go out in RL and… well, whatever.
But then, if someone justifies buying a gun and shooting someone based on ‘it happened in a game’, and doing whatever with an animal ‘because I can in SL’… you can’t blame the game or SL for those things. Not at all. It’s down to *that person*.
T
July 23rd, 2007
“it is really quite bizarre to see people defending what amounts to simulated digital bestiality. No one in the real world could ever defend bestiality, and yet because this is happening in a virtual world, it’s considered by some to be acceptable.”
Wrong! It is acceptable because it is happening between two consenting adult humans. Minors are not allowed on the main grid of Second Life. And nobody yet proved that there are animals registered as SL users too. Community standards have nothing to do with what adult humans are doing if all involved agrees about what they do. It is their free will. And, mind you, free will is one of the corner stones of modern civilized society. It is quite bizzare to see people accusing other people for having and using imagination.
July 24th, 2007
In Second Life you will only find humans beings, no dogs, cats, vampires, crows, mechas, cyborgs, hybrids or any other avatar forms . They are all credit card holding humans. Don’t be fooled by appearance, these are simulations. James, dear boy, you wouldn’t happen to be a closet fundamentalist, by any chance now, would you? BTW is that your avi wearing blue Morpheus pince-nez?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:RedBluePill.jpg
July 24th, 2007
There are things people can explore by electronic proxy that they cannot or will not in real life.
With regard to ageplay, bestiality, “capture roleplay” and other sexual exploration in SL, a lot of the ban-happy brigade seem to me to assume that anyone who indulges in activities they find offensive cannot tell the difference.
Mind you, they’re probably the sort of people who complain about ads that upset them as well.
July 24th, 2007
Btw, bestiality, I just found out, is legal where I live. So there :P
July 24th, 2007
Every day I put on my bunny ears and fluffy tail and head out to the mansion where Hugh Hefner’s boys watch me parade around. If they have the money then they can get more. I am often asked to keep the bunny ears on. My friend is a pony girl and works at the pony club. Neither of us are about the be shut down in the real world and I don’t think Linden is about to shut this down in the virtual world.
The child play crack down was at the request of the government from various countries including Germany. If the laws of a country tell Linden Lab they must comply they have no choice but until then there is no substance behind this article.
July 24th, 2007
Won’t somebody think of the children???
July 24th, 2007
I totally agree. Bestiality is sick. In game or out of game, it is gross. And if you are doing it in a virtual world it is because you enjoy it. And enjoying it is sick! But isn’t bestiality “Sexual relations between a human and an animal. ” So, then the humans that yiff the furries should be banned! But wait…. are furries animals? They walk on 2 legs… they can talk (and yes furries are an RP community, so some people that aren’t furries and are JUST animals, do not talk, but they don’t have sex either usually). Actually, lets just say they ARE animals. 2 animals having sex is bestiality? Are you stupid? Fur against fur… is not human skin against fur. It is RP. The human at the screen is not thinking “ohhh yeah i’m fucking a dog” they are thinking of 2 furries yiffing. Not a furry and a human. It’s nice that you think bestiality is bad. But you didn’t even address how having sex as a FURRY is bestiality. So yeah..bestiality sucks, but should furries be banned because bestiality is bad? Yeah….about as much as every single human should be banned beacuse child porn is bad. Furries were never once full blooded animals, you humans are having sex with people that were once CHILDREN!! MY GOD!!! Disgusting.
July 24th, 2007
I’m just trying to figure out, when using your imagination became an issue. Tesla used his imagination, so did our founding fathers, Einstien, Newton, Socrates, the list goes on and on. When you try to stifle creativity, you destroy everything that us, humankind, has to offer. Without imagination, and being able to think abstractly to either conquer complex problems, or creative new inventive things. I’ll be cliche and mention a line, that I’m sure most of us know. “When they came to take the jews, I said nothing because I was not a jew. When they came to take the blacks, I said nothing, because I was not black. When they came to take the homosexuals, I said nothing, because I was not gay. When they came to take me, no one spoke up, because I was the only one left.”
July 25th, 2007
Not only is digital bestiality not bestiality, but virtual sex is not sex.
It’s expression; it’s a right you are born with. You don’t have to participate; so I suggest: judge not, lest we find out later that you too — all to often and with great vigor — express yourself sexually.
July 25th, 2007
I really hate the presumed furry/beastiality link. Furries arose in part from the old science-fiction canard of using ‘animal-races’ for aliens. (Such as the Kzinti, Chewbacca, etc.)
While if you look hard enough you will probably find furries who are into actual beastiality, but for the vast majority the “anthro” part is as necessary as the “morphic” part. It’s not animals, but intelligent, sentient, free-willed beings that resemble animals that’s the interest, and surely there’s no moral problem with consenting adults of any intelligent species getting it on?
July 25th, 2007
There is one glaring flaw in your post; if someone were to publish a video game featuring humans having sex with animals, there is nothing ‘government regulators’ or anyone else could do to ban it. They could prevent it from being shown to children, but simply producing it is protected speech under the First Amendment.
Whether Linden Labs chooses to ban it from SL is, of course, up to them - their server, their rules, not bound by the U.S. Constitution.
August 10th, 2007
More flamebait, on a topic that the furries themselves have already been talking into the ground for years. I’m glad to see the SL population at large just ain’t going for this tripe.
November 13th, 2007
Nothing that goes on in Second Life is “bestiality” - a) the people behind the avatars are humans, there are no actual animals involved and no animal rights being violated, b) they are consenting adults, c) it’s not even sex, it’s actually digital cartoons in animated sex poses, with humans behind keyboards imagining the scenario.
Do we really want to entertain a “Morality of the Imagination?” Bestiality might be sick, I for one think its immoral, but thinking about it, imagining it, or talking about it is another matter entirely.
If this stuff is being displayed to children, fine, I can see one regulating it (but understand that we’re regulating the display of images/ideas to children, not the images/ideas themselves). I can even see a (small) problem with doing this stuff in “public” virtual spaces, where other adults who aren’t interested might be subjected to it (let’s be fair though, the majority of Furries are fairly discrete and engage in this stuff in Furry clubs or private residences). However, what occurs between two *consenting* adults is of no business of yours, mine, or even within the domain of public morality/community standards.
November 19th, 2007
Anyone who likes furry sex has to have a slight interest beastiality, its not much different(visually), I dont think it should be banned because its just virtual……Im just saying yiff and beasitality are very similar, if you like furry sex don’t claim you hate beastiality.
December 26th, 2007
People here are really overreacting. I mean, come on. It’s fictional. Not irl. If this “bestiality” deal were so “wrong/illegal”, I suppose games like GTA would have to be banned, as well, since they involve sexual stuff and shooting and whatnot. >_>
Mind you, I don’t support bestiality at all. But if it’s anthroxhuman, and there’s no sexual activity involved, then I actually find it rather cute. ^_^
March 19th, 2008
THIS IS RETARDED IM CALLING THE FBI ON SECOND LIFE FOR THE BEASTIALITY SICK FUCKS
YIFF IN HELL FURFAGS!!!!!!!!!
HAVE FUN IN JAIL BWAHAHAHH
April 4th, 2008
^Yeah, I guess you ignored all of what I just said. -_-
I doubt anything will happen anyhow. It’s not real, and as such, isn’t illegal.
April 29th, 2008
“mehere” you can’t base a valid opinion using christianity or any other religion as your “alliby.” saying that it is sin so it shouldn’t be in the virtual life is just like saying it shouldn’t be in real life. And I believe that would be god’s decision if people thought or took in beastiality, or someone else up there, not your’s.
August 23rd, 2008
because every other point has been nailed? WHO CAN TELL ME WHATS WRONG WITH BESTIALITY?
i mean, if the animal’s consented, and it should be pretty fucking obvious whether an animal wants to fuck or not, if a horny chick and a dog or a horse or whatever nasty shit is going on there, if its mutual, why doesnt someone give me a valid point , and say something aside from “its disgusting” or “godddd doesnt like it”?
September 16th, 2008
As long as they keep the RL beastiality out of SL, there wouldnt be any issues
September 21st, 2008
Can someone please tell me WHY there is groups in SL that can “discuss” beastiality in RL? Is this what people that wish to enjoy a FANTASY game have to run across in SL?Yes this is RL beastiality, not furries who are avs but some furries that have RL groups in SL. I cant believe I wasted my money.