[GuruPlayer]

IMHO Mudsex has no place on any MUDS when you cannot control access to minors.  So no, I don't engage in it, neither have I ever been approached by other PC's in that manner.  Why? I wasn't looking for it!  People who engage in mudsex have to be looking for that kind of gratification, & I do not buy Mr.Tau's argument that: "Sex in a RP enviroment can add a level of attachment and depth that nothing else can match. RP is 'enhanced life' and the same things that move us in RL are supposed to be a part of RP."  Bullsh*t!! You're looking to get your rocks off, & that's OOC not RP!!

Yet in the same post he states: "The people who run games have no absolute way to tell how old their players are. They can ask, they can monitor, but in the end it is never going to be more than that."

I've played D&D since it's invention, & would not consider RPing sex with other player-characters, as that is not why we play D&D.  It would be embarassing for the other players not involved, even though we are all adults over 18.  So I fail to see why it would be OK on a MUD, when you can't ID how old the person is behind the character you are trying to screw.  

I wonder what kind of MUD Mr. Tau is developing, one where instead of killing the dragon (he stated "but I find real violence to be FAR more objectionable than sex.") you give it oral mudsex??

[Netwyrm]

Originally Posted by (the_logos @ Dec. 09 2005,17:00) Originally Posted by (Brody @ Dec. 09 2005,14:29) What makes the act of consensual virtual sex between two characters in a private place any more unsavory than acts of virtual violence? If we're really trying to protect the young from things that might hurt their psyches, it's kind of hypocritical to encourage violence while dismissing sex as goofy and harmful, right? Three words: Fundamentalist Christian A**holes. You know, the sort who -freak out- about sex generally but who are happy to engage in violence and murder on a massive scale. With leaders like these, can you blame the rest of the culture if it follows along? --matt

The morbid and overwhelming fear that somewhere, at any given time, someone else may be enjoying themselves?

I think we should put Anafranil* in the water supply, personally. I am firmly convinced that fundamentalism is a mental disorder which masks itself as freedom of religious practice.

But yes, I *can* blame the culture if it follows along. I'm very proud, of all things, Ford Motor Co. at the moment. It's a sad thing to see a corporation defending the Constitution more handily than the Congress.

*Anafranil is a treatment for obsessive/compulsive disorders.

[Traveler]

Originally Posted by And I am frankly a little tired of the 'sexual predator' boogyman. Yes there are terrible sick people out there, and yes it is worth some time and effort to catch/stop/treat them. But not every aspect of life should be governed by what some sicko MIGHT do because of a game.

Are you tired of the sexual predator boogyman or are you becoming defensive because you MUDsex? It is not what people MIGHT do, it is what they DO. I worked with an individual, a 'family' person, for several years who murdered his live-in girlfriend because she dared interfere with his CHATsex.

Originally Posted by Three words: Fundamentalist Christian A**holes. You know, the sort who -freak out- about sex generally but who are happy to engage in violence and murder on a massive scale. With leaders like these, can you blame the rest of the culture if it follows along?

Ah yes reverse bigotry. It's bad to be a bigot but it's okay to hate the bigots in return.

Originally Posted by MU* can be played from some libraries, schools, and other places that parents would not be able to take responsibility. That is when the responsibilities fall into the hands of the librarians, the schoolteachers...and the game makers.

The best point that has been made thus far in my opinion.

Originally Posted by It never ceases to amaze me that people are so concerned about sexual content and so uncaring about the violence and blood that literally drips out of almost every Mud ever made. I guess we do not worry about what kids take in anymore and just about what is done to them.

I am still truly suprised that people find this to be a valid argument. Violence is bad and we let kiddies play violent games so introducing them into an uncontroled sexual environment is okay.

Originally Posted by That can sometimes be true, but not always. Often, if it is properly roleplayed, it can be a very strong RP development between two characters that love each other. Far from destroying RP, it can encourage it. I play an RP-enforced MUD, and I've done it twice so far, neither time have I broken role, neither time have I dropped everything for "cyber-kicks". It has been a very powerful event between my character and the character he is in love with.

Well then I am sincerely happy for you. I find your case to be the exception and not the rule in my experience.

[WarHound]

*cries a river*

I don't get off on 'mudsex' in the slightest. In fact, I found it more awkward than anything else, but deriding and condemning those that do do it is assinine, in my opinion. Yes, it does add to a scene and can contribute greatly to developing relationships and, no, not everyone who partakes is a drooling pedo, cruising for kiddy love.

Don't like your kids looking at or participating in such 'naughty' stuff? Maybe you should be busy parenting instead of condemning these perverts, mmm?

I can point you to a hundred, no... a thousand, no... a ****ing MILLION sites out there that feature stuff far, far, far worse than reading 'The blue eyed man sucks your nipple' in the oh-so-erotic tones of Zmud green, mmm.... All of these sites are easily accessible by unsupervised children, perverts, ex-cons, or closet-homosexuals who are, in fact, Presbyterian ministers in their spare time. Let's shut down the internet. It's obviously too dangerous to be allowed to run wild like this.

Ahhh. Nice to laugh hysterically when people blame their lack of parenting on Mudsex, violent video games, or Flowers for Algernon.

I've no doubt that many mudsex sessions are simply an outlet for one handed typers to get their rocks off, but so are many an AoL chatroom, IRC room, and a thousand other places. The mud Niche is probably a tiny one in the ped-cruising internet underbelly, eh?

[Threshold]

Originally Posted by (Jazuela @ Dec. 08 2005,18:18) Most of the time I would "fade to black," meaning, get some kissing and a bit of groping started but once it comes to the hay-rolling part I (or the other person) would send an OOC message saying we'll just assume it happened and skip to the zipping the pants back up part.

Margaret Weis and Tracy Hickman have a GREAT term for this: They call it "the boot scene." I read about this in one of their annotated reprintings of (I believe) the Companions series.

Basically, the idea is that the characters are sorta getting hot and heavy, and then next thing you see, they're putting their boots on.

Ever since we read that book, if my wife and I are watching a movie and there is an annoying "love scene" that adds nothing to the movie and is just a pure time waster, we start saying "Boot scene! Boot scene please!"

[Richter]

Originally Posted by Margaret Weis and Tracy Hickman have a GREAT term for this: They call it "the boot scene." I read about this in one of their annotated reprintings of (I believe) the Companions series. Basically, the idea is that the characters are sorta getting hot and heavy, and then next thing you see, they're putting their boots on. Ever since we read that book, if my wife and I are watching a movie and there is an annoying "love scene" that adds nothing to the movie and is just a pure time waster, we start saying "Boot scene! Boot scene please!"

Right, this was within the annotated Chronicles trilogy, and it is an excellent point, though it works for what Weis and Hickman were going for. The entire point of their books was to tell the story, their linear story, that no one could change, because it is a book.

What MUDs do, better than any other game, is create an immersive roleplaying realm, that you can do (or may try to) do anything in. I'm not going to nessecarily argue for nor against it, but are we trying to make a real world, or are we not? I suppose it depends on what game you play.

Originally Posted by MU* can be played from some libraries, schools, and other places that parents would not be able to take responsibility. That is when the responsibilities fall into the hands of the librarians, the schoolteachers... and the game makers.

I'm going to have to disagree. Just because someone can access something in public does not mean that it should not be allowed within the game. You can access pornography, hate sites, and shock pages from a public library, most of the time. What on earth are you doing playing games in a library anyway? I think it's fantastically amusing to say that it is the responsibility of a game maker to censor the above mentioned actions because someone might play it in public. I might also read a Playboy in public, I might play Grand Theft Auto in a mall, I could use a chatroom at a netcafe for underhanded purposes, I may do any number of things. But if we're going to start limiting what can be done because it may be done in view of others, then we're going to bloody well remove half of the internet, and most of today's movies and television.

[Zrothum]

Glad to see some decent people in this thread finally.

Hi, I'm William. lol

[the_logos]

Originally Posted by (Traveler @ Jan. 14 2006,19:22) Originally Posted by Three words: Fundamentalist Christian A**holes. You know, the sort who -freak out- about sex generally but who are happy to engage in violence and murder on a massive scale. With leaders like these, can you blame the rest of the culture if it follows along? Ah yes reverse bigotry. It's bad to be a bigot but it's okay to hate the bigots in return.

Yes, I do believe it's ok to hate bigots. I have absolutely no problem telling you that someone who thinks black people should die is a scumball, or that someone who thinks that homosexuals are an abomination is a redneck piece of crap.

--matt

[Earthmother]

I stopped playing out MUDsex scenes a long time ago, because if I'm putting that kind of time into it, rather than killing (aKa furthering the larger game-story/life), I'm definitely getting my rocks off somewhere, and the other person better be, too.

I see text-sex as a 'real' form of 'sex', because I don't define 'sex' as 'intercourse.' To that end, it involves real emotions and real gratification. Spending time like that since I've been married in real life is... cheating. It stops being role-play, and becomes sex. I'm not adverse to it, in fact, I *love* texting, and I miss cybering with people, because it's a sexual facet that I no longer really get to engage in. But it was *never* really role-playing, if I took the time to do it...his schlong better have been rock, and he'd better have been typing one-handed, because if he wasn't, he was wasting my time.

Our game has places specifically designed to accomodate cybering, those locked and snoop-free zones A. Tau was talking about. They are consistently empty. Cybering is best in IM, because MUDding is just...not real enough.

[Davairus]

99% of the time I see people who know each other come on the mud to fantasize somewhere private, and in normal gameplay they dont flaunt the relationship. I dont do anything about people like that, but if someone does anything like "emote rapes you." I feel right in deleting that character. Possibly ban. The wording we gave our rule is just "no sexual harassment".

[Traveler]

Originally Posted by Don't like your kids looking at or participating in such 'naughty' stuff? Maybe you should be busy parenting instead of condemning these perverts, mmm?

Originally Posted by Ahhh. Nice to laugh hysterically when people blame their lack of parenting on Mudsex, violent video games, or Flowers for Algernon.

Your opinion might change if you were ever the victim of sexual abuse. To excuse an internet pervert or any molesters actions because of lack of parenting is down right disgusting. Small comfort to the child giving the offender a get out free card by saying 'hey kid your parents should have known better'.

Originally Posted by Quote (Traveler @ Jan. 14 2006,19:22) Quote Three words: Fundamentalist Christian A**holes. You know, the sort who -freak out- about sex generally but who are happy to engage in violence and murder on a massive scale. With leaders like these, can you blame the rest of the culture if it follows along? Ah yes reverse bigotry. It's bad to be a bigot but it's okay to hate the bigots in return. Yes, I do believe it's ok to hate bigots. I have absolutely no problem telling you that someone who thinks black people should die is a scumball, or that someone who thinks that homosexuals are an abomination is a redneck piece of crap.

Generalizing is nearly as bad as bigotry itself because it can be a breeding ground for bigotry. I have no love for religious fundamentalist of any kind. I have no love for liberal reactionaries either. Being cavalier by using terms like scumball or redneck is pointless posturing and chest thumping.

Originally Posted by I'm going to have to disagree. Just because someone can access something in public does not mean that it should not be allowed within the game. You can access pornography, hate sites, and shock pages from a public library, most of the time. What on earth are you doing playing games in a library anyway? I think it's fantastically amusing to say that it is the responsibility of a game maker to censor the above mentioned actions because someone might play it in public. I might also read a Playboy in public, I might play Grand Theft Auto in a mall, I could use a chatroom at a netcafe for underhanded purposes, I may do any number of things. But if we're going to start limiting what can be done because it may be done in view of others, then we're going to bloody well remove half of the internet, and most of today's movies and television.

Once again because other bad things happen it does not make the perpetuation of other bad things okay. The constant argument is that we can't be held responsible because bad things MIGHT happen. Bad things DO happen. Walk your fingers over to google and search a few statistics and check the sex offender registry while you're at it.

Movies have rating systems, video games have ratings systems, TV channels can be changed by parents in the room, and most modern TV's can have channels blocked as well. MUDs rarely come with such labeling. Even if parents have a content blocker on their PC it won't block many MUDs either unless they know to directly block a specific MUD. I know I turned mine on and was still able to access most of the sites I have accounts on.

MUDs and console games/movies/TV aren't comparable anyway because games/movies/TV don't have a live person on the other end actively seeking to cyber with someone. You'll probably never find an enforced labeling system on MUDs , especially commercial ones, because that could cut into their profit margins.

Defending sexual predation is to use Matt's words the action of a 'scumball'. Sexual predators don't seek just kids either.

Anyway. As stated way back before the recent activity in this thread I'm not opposed to MUDsex happening. I don't like it because IMO when people get into a MUDsex relationship they throw their RP out the window. Its a nasty hornets nest. If such a relationship SHOULD be taboo in an RP enforced/encouraged MUD the moment it is questioned the RL freedom brigade comes out and the personal smear campaign begins. I've witnessed firsthand attacks via forum, IM, IRC, and in game against PLAYERS not characters because their character dare questions another’s sexual antics with the enemy of their race, faction, city, guild, nation, etc. The same players who are one moment touting the virtues of a virtual world are the next proclaiming it to be either just a game or applying RL mores.

Maybe I'm a bit jaded but I've had it happen to me personally and I've seen it done to other players on multiple occasions. I've had some excellent intimate RP myself (with people I've assured myself are adults) and have no issue with private liaisons so long as both persons are consenting adults. It is the people who go in for their cyber kicks irregardless of storyline that annoy me and there always seems to be a few of them around. If you are going to make getting your jollies a public issue in an RP encouraged/enforced game be prepared for the consequences. If you make it public then it affects everyone else’s RP too so accept it and forego the character assassination of the player.

[Threshold]

Originally Posted by (Traveler @ Jan. 15 2006,21<!--emo&[img http://www.topmudsites.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/wow.gif[/img])]Anyway. As stated way back before the recent activity in this thread I'm not opposed to MUDsex happening. I don't like it because IMO when people get into a MUDsex relationship they throw their RP out the window. Its a nasty hornets nest. If such a relationship SHOULD be taboo in an RP enforced/encouraged MUD the moment it is questioned the RL freedom brigade comes out and the personal smear campaign begins. I've witnessed firsthand attacks via forum, IM, IRC, and in game against PLAYERS not characters because their character dare questions another’s sexual antics with the enemy of their race, faction, city, guild, nation, etc. The same players who are one moment touting the virtues of a virtual world are the next proclaiming it to be either just a game or applying RL mores.

I want to preface what I am about to say by also saying I don't have any objection, moral or otherwise, to people choosing to engage in "Mud Sex" or IC relationships or anything of that nature.

I wanted to discuss two side points related to what you just said that I have also witnessed.

1) Romeo & Juliet Syndrome: This is what happens when two people who chose characters that are diametrically opposed, decide they are the exception to the rule and have a relationship anyway. This happens when either their races are enemies, clans are enemies, or something of that nature. Sometimes this is fine, but there are times when the animosity is something that is CORE to the game world (like two races that utterly despise each other for a lot of good reasons) and thus there really should be no exceptions. Sometimes, the reason a game world is defined in a certain way is so those definitions can give a foundation to the game world.

In real life, exceptions are not ruinous because they are just that- the exception. But in a game world with only hundreds or thousands of people, it only takes a couple exceptions to create a sense that the "rule" is really not much of a rule.

Also, the "Romeo & Juliet" situation usually comes about for OOC reasons anyway. It is usually just two people who like each other personally (or have come to like each other from the way they play the game), and have decided it would be fun to have mud sex. So they throw the game world definitions out the window.

2) Another negative aspect that arises out of MUDsex is when two characters (or players) invest too much of their character into someone else's character. This can be a very detrimental development. If one of the people in this duo quits, takes a break, or leaves for any other reason, the other person's character is darn near ruined. Suddenly, they do not have much connection with the game world, they haven't made any other friends or allies, and they are like half a person wandering around lost. I generally try to advise people to be careful about this and make sure they never get their character development too wrapped up into a single individual.

[Mulisha]

Probably thread necroing, but heres my 2 cents.

Mudsex is as dirty as you make it. If you wanna do the whole "fade to black" emote scenario, thats cool. But it shouldn't be a problem if 2 consensual partners decide to engage in simulated text intercourse. If one of them happens to be 60 years old, and the other person is 13, thats not the admins fault. Its really the parents fault for not monitoring the kid in the first place.
Of course, then you have to ask yourself, why the hell are you trying to shield a 13 year old from mudsex in the first place? I remember my middleschool years, I heard far dirtier words in the lunchroom than on a text game. Everyones hung up on this notion that we have to "protect the children", we need to shield them from "the evil realities of the world".
Take that GTA "Hot Coffee" mod for example. Politicians across america flipped out because a game that was rated 17+ had unlockable sexual content if you downloaded a certain modification, but nobody paid attention to the fact that the game was created for a mature audience in the first place.
The same goes for MUDs. Its ok to cleave a goblin orc in half with a rusty battleaxe and loot its corpse, but god forbid you simulate a little intimacy.

[Traveler]

Originally Posted by The same goes for MUDs. Its ok to cleave a goblin orc in half with a rusty battleaxe and loot its corpse, but god forbid you simulate a little intimacy.

I will just reiterate my previous point. Why does the common occurrence of one bad action lend legitimacy to the occurrence of another?

Do you really think it is okay for a 60-year-old man to engage in sexually explicit activity with a 13-year-old girl? Or, alternatively, vice versa? Why do we blame the parents but not the pervert who does not care if they are MUDsexing with a minor? Were you a parent would you think it was okay for a 25 year old to be talking dirty to your 15-year-old child just because they were pretending to be in a fantasy world?

As a parent, I can tell you I am on edge any time the kids are not in my sight (at school, at a friend’s house). Every crime show on TV as well as the evening news tells stories of how at the slightest moment of relaxed attention a tragedy can occur. Now, my kids are not old enough to have an interest in MUDs, but my concern does not end at my children.

Look at the recent exposes on MySpace. An unregulated avenue like a MUD would be a virtual world playground to some of these sickos.

I do not have an issue concerning MUDsex between consenting adults although I know nearly first hand how dangerous that can be. I do not like it because I think it adversely affects the RP of a MUD. That being said I do prefer adult only MUDs because mature storylines can be much more complex and thereby much more enjoyable for me as a gamer.

[Fifi]

Originally Posted by (Traveler @ April 13 2006,10:42) Originally Posted by The same goes for MUDs. Its ok to cleave a goblin orc in half with a rusty battleaxe and loot its corpse, but god forbid you simulate a little intimacy. I will just reiterate my previous point. Why does the common occurrence of one bad action lend legitimacy to the occurrence of another? Do you really think it is okay for a 60-year-old man to engage in sexually explicit activity with a 13-year-old girl? Or, alternatively, vice versa? Why do we blame the parents but not the pervert who does not care if they are MUDsexing with a minor? Were you a parent would you think it was okay for a 25 year old to be talking dirty to your 15-year-old child just because they were pretending to be in a fantasy world? As a parent, I can tell you I am on edge any time the kids are not in my sight (at school, at a friend’s house). Every crime show on TV as well as the evening news tells stories of how at the slightest moment of relaxed attention a tragedy can occur. Now, my kids are not old enough to have an interest in MUDs, but my concern does not end at my children. Look at the recent exposes on MySpace. An unregulated avenue like a MUD would be a virtual world playground to some of these sickos. I do not have an issue concerning MUDsex between consenting adults although I know nearly first hand how dangerous that can be. I do not like it because I think it adversely affects the RP of a MUD. That being said I do prefer adult only MUDs because mature storylines can be much more complex and thereby much more enjoyable for me as a gamer.

For what it's worth, Traveler, I agree with you. However, we can't do anything about the perverts, so while it doesn't excuse any wrongdoing on the part of predators, ultimately the responsibility for keeping kids safe falls on the shoulders of their parents.

[lovechiefs]

My perspective on this is very simple and may offend some of the readers/players.As such I will first give you some info on my background(no personal info)
Born in Bulgaria,lived for 10 years in France,moved to the US at the age of 20.I spent my teenager/beginning of adult years in France(age 10-20).
As far as sex goes,I think people are too uptight about it(especially in the US).Too many times,when you start talking about sex,people get offended or look at you like you are a pervert.So to begin,mentality has to change.SEX IS GOOD!!!!Sex is not a monster
As far as mudsex,I haven't encountere the situation,as I am still new in Achaea(level 10),however if I encounter the situation,I have no problem with the complete acting out.It would actually add to the imaginary reality
Kids wise,here is the thing that most readers will hate.As far as I am conc