Second Life - moral/ethical implications?

[tocis]

Heya,

suddenly it's all the rage over here, TV reports, written reports et al. I'm referring to the online game "Second Life". For those who don't know, it's pretty much what the name implies - you get a virtual character in a virtual world, without any plot or storyline. Want to work for (virtual) money? Jobs are available. Want to find yourself a cool party? Check out the event list. Et cetera, et cetera.
Now there's an adult-only and an children-friendly mode as far as I've seen (I've been dabbling with it a bit), but that's not the topic here. As far as I've seen, for adults a nice deal of... umm... kinky and other stuff is being offered. I've been checking out a clothes store some time ago, turned around on the street, and found myself almost in a S/M toy shop.
Of course whatever you do in that game, it's virtual persons, bits'n'bytes basically... or is it? They are controlled by humans after all. So, if I have some virtual fun with a lady of whom I only know the avatar... would you consider that fornication? If I gamble for virtual money, would those who oppose real-life gambling oppose this too?

(Granted that this virtual money can be converted into real bucks and back, so maybe this question is easier to answer than it might seem at first)

Anyway, your thoughts?

 

[ReverendDG]

Heya,

suddenly it's all the rage over here, TV reports, written reports et al. I'm referring to the online game "Second Life". For those who don't know, it's pretty much what the name implies - you get a virtual character in a virtual world, without any plot or storyline. Want to work for (virtual) money? Jobs are available. Want to find yourself a cool party? Check out the event list. Et cetera, et cetera.
Now there's an adult-only and an children-friendly mode as far as I've seen (I've been dabbling with it a bit), but that's not the topic here. As far as I've seen, for adults a nice deal of... umm... kinky and other stuff is being offered. I've been checking out a clothes store some time ago, turned around on the street, and found myself almost in a S/M toy shop.
Of course whatever you do in that game, it's virtual persons, bits'n'bytes basically... or is it? They are controlled by humans after all. So, if I have some virtual fun with a lady of whom I only know the avatar... would you consider that fornication? If I gamble for virtual money, would those who oppose real-life gambling oppose this too?

(Granted that this virtual money can be converted into real bucks and back, so maybe this question is easier to answer than it might seem at first)

Anyway, your thoughts?

IMO you arn't having sex, but it depends on how you go about defining what isn't and is sex, to me sex is a physical act that can only be preformed by flesh and blood people

if you define anything involving sexual innuendo, or just talking about it or fantasizing about it with another person as sex, then i guess it is
its just like the argument about porn, if you define adultery as just lusting after a person then i guess it is.
this might fall into this same idea.

i always found the idea of exchanging fake money for real a stupid idea, it puts it into another realm altogether, if you want to call it a game, it wouldn't be a fun game for me, i pay to have fun even if i have to pay for it.

 

[Eudaimonist]

As I see it, this has the same moral implications as cybersex. Even if it isn't a "real" sex act, the feelings involved are real, including those of the partner being cheated on.

As long as no one is being cheated on, I don't see anything wrong with it, and at least it doesn't spread STDs.


eudaimonia,

Mark

 

[MoonlessNight]

As for the money. It's not virtual, because there is an exchange rate to American Dollars. Sooner or later this is seriously going to mess up the tax system more than it already is (because if you make income in game it should be taxed because it is essentially money, but then why not apply things like capital gains tax there? And if it works for this game, why not something like say, World of Warcraft (not taxing income, taxing capital gains)? And from there there are no good outcomes.)

But I stray from the topic.

Anyway, I think the thing that we have to realize is that there are external actions and internal actions. A fantasy may not have an effect on the real world, sure, but it certainly has an effect on the person.

I don't really want to talk about the morality/immorality of it all as I've found that that's a bad idea when it comes to anything related to sexuality in an open forum.

But I will say that I think people shrug off any concerns when it comes to the internet all too often. They think, "most of it is just fantasy from me, and as for the rest of it everyone is anonymous." It's a virtual world of bits and bytes, as you say, so who cares what goes on there?

I am a bit troubled that attitude. It reminds me of a political scandal up here where a politician's staff went through the restricted portions of their opponent's website to get a whole bunch of unreleased campaign ads and so forth. Now the argument from most of that candidate's supporters amounted to "if they wanted to keep it a secret, they should have had better security." In other words because a person was able to get somewhere online, that meant that they automatically had a right to be there. We would never think like this in the real world. If the documents had been left on the opponent's back patio with the doors unlocked, would a person be justified in taking them? I don't anyone would say so. But suddenly online anything goes.

I think that it's a similar attitude that rules a lot of second life, and it troubles me.

 

[Robbie_James_Francis]

I think it is similar in some ways to reality. If the online cyber-sex or whatever is causing, or resulting from, or fomenting, some deeper emotional issues, then it could be harmful. I don't think I could see any justification in a monogamous relationship to be having cyber-sex or phone-sex or whatever. Obviously not as bad as actually engaging in sexual activity, but perhaps indicative of some lack of fulfilment in the 'real' relationship. Otherwise, it's just a bit of fun.

So, if I have some virtual fun with a lady...

Read: elderly man posing as a lady.



peace

 

[Mling]

I would considered it somewhat uncouth for a married person to have casual, joking-around cyber-sex with somebody not their spouse. I would consider it adultery if they developed a serious, romantic relationship via their respective characters.

 

[rebelEnigma]

Sounds like an interesting game, minus the virtual sex and other "suggestive" elements.