I've been in a few situations like that--typically I just end it at them lip locking and sinking down onto the bed/floor/whatever, or some similar moment.

I don't think it's needed, and I think it's rather idiotic, to actually write out the sex part. Different strokes for different folks, but for me it's always been an irritation when people want to role play out the entire sex scene, and I always refuse to. If they want cyber smut, they can get it elsewhere.

For me, Role Playing is about developing the character. I feel that a sexual relationship between two characters is a -very- important character builder (depending on the char) but that writing out the actual sex doesn't advance any kind of development.

I think it really depends on the situation and the characters involved, and the players' personal threshold for acceptance of that sort of detail.

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.

There were a couple of times when it seemed pretty important to act it out. One in particular, my character had been molested by her father as a child and was -completely- afraid of intimacy growing up and throughout her young adulthood. She finally met someone she felt comfortable with - who had also experienced intimacy issues. I wanted to see how things would progress. Would she get to "that moment" and freak out? Would she submit utterly and let her passion overcome her fear? Would it be something in the middle? I really wasn't sure where it would go, until I took it there. So - I did, with the consent of the other character's player (who also wanted to know if this "moment" would resolve his character's issues).

Mudsex, for its own sake - isn't a focus for me at all. I don't shy away from it, but it isn't why I roleplay. If the situation presents itself, and it doesn't look like it's gonna turn into some crazy 2-hour marathon, I probably wouldn't object to it. But again, it isn't the focus of my roleplaying, and there are usually more interesting things to do in roleplaying games.

The question that's worth posing in response to that, it seems, is this:

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?

Most of the time, if it involves people that are not me? I'm apathetic to the matter. Private place, consenting adults... I have more important interests than who's having sex where.

As for myself, I'm not into it. I can do scenes that lead to sex, but I don't get into the whole idea of watching the 'mechanics' scroll along my screen. If I want that, I'm already on the internet.

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

Agreed. Christian fundamentalism in this nation (and fundamentalism of any religion throughout the world) is a big reason for many of the problems faced by humanity and the reason that despite the progress of man technologically, we're still a child-race as a species. The hypocrisy that goes with Christian fundamentalism (it's horrible to have an abortion, but perfectly acceptable to blow up an abortion clinic or to nail a gay man to a fence or to kill thousands of Iraqis over wounded pride and oil) is probably the most disgusting aspect of American society.

And despite what Christian fundamentalists will say, "normal sexuality" is anything but in American culture and that's long been the case. It's just narrow-minded and ignorant denial that has led many to believe that what they consider "good" or "normal" is actually so.

That's not to say that sexuality shouldn't be handled in the context of the role-play, if appropriate. That is to say, if there are cultural taboos in place, they should be considered when role-playing. But as far as portraying sexuality in role-play, it's something that is up to the individuals concerned, but it's nothing that a PC should feel obligated to do or not to do based on someone else's belief regarding it.

Whatever floats your boat.

Take care,

Jason

I think the main thing everyone is forgetting is that, while some of you all find it okay between consenting adults to RP sex, the majority of the players in your playerbase may not be adults. As an IMP, I and our staff have a responsibility to the entire playerbase to provide a game that caters to as many people as possible. Sex is a road, in my opinion, that doesn't need to be traveled down.

And BTW, again the text medium stole my sarcasm. For a while, that has been always the argument raised by those who do want RP sex is that it is hypocrisy to outlaw that but then have a game full of violence and mayhem and killing. The thing is this: First, if you advertise as a MUD that is R-rated or allows sex, fine. Just let people know what they are in for when they play there. We advertise as a medieval fantasy, player-killing MUD. People know what they are getting. Second, no state that I'm aware of has special laws protecting children from being exposed to violence (outside of actual criminal acts against them). It is, however, often the case that laws exist to protect children from online sexual predators. Another good reason to not have explicit sex on your MUD. Third, as I mentioned earlier, lots of the players are NOT adults. Only adults can consent legally to sex. Fourth, you invite behavior that can drag your MUD down, i.e. harassment, vulgarity, and other things that make playing your MUD unpleasant for the person on the receiving end of these unwanted advances.

Again, my responsibility in my position is to the entire playerbase; to provide fair gaming and fun for all of them. The sex stuff doesn't need to be there.

I've written columns for Top MUD Sites in the past, and one of them dealt with sex. I've described virtual sex as "a waste of bandwidth" and I've talked about the issues of young people doing this. While I agree that online predators are a threat and that we shouldn't condone that, I think we also need to remember that there's a significant difference between roleplayed activities between characters and an adult finding some way to lure a child into a compromising situation IRL. Is it really that likely to happen, via a MUD?

Can we really hope to police all kinds of behavior? If they don't do it on your game, they can do it on IRC or AIM or MSN Messenger or via email.

In any event: This thread really isn't meant to be a discussion of how MUD administrators police sex. It's meant to be a discussion of whether players just fade to black or if they play it out. For purposes of this discussion, we'll assume the people behind the characters are adult and consenting.

So, putting the thread back on the rails: If you don't do it, why? If you do, what's the value in it and how do you do it without making it seem "goofy?"

Good RolePlaying is after all about wordplay. For some people, many people really, sexual content is enjoyable. As far as keeping it from being goofy, well it is no more silly than 'thee' and 'thou' or any other suspension-of-disbelief aspect of the games.

I met my wife playing Muds, and then we created one together. Mudsex was certainly a part of our romance for a while.

The idea of public conduct, and private, spaces on the game is generally a good idea. Both Immortals and Players should respect the private spaces in a realistic way. Really, with Language, Violence, Intense emotional scenes, Scary Images, and the rest that makes up a good Mud, they are never really going to be less than R rated anyway.

Anyone under the general age of consent should not be playing without parental permission. Being that these games are on the Internet, the best you can do is state that up front in big bold letters.



A.T
(-)

The debate about having violence and mayhem on muds and not allowing sex on muds can be answered another way.  Children often engage in fighting amongst themselves (hopefull not killing each other), and frequently play cowboys and indians or cops and robbers.  This is a form of violent play early in a child's life.  But unless your child is playing "doctor", sexual play is strongly discouraged. You can explain why killing and slaughtering is inappropriate out of game context, but introducing children to sex online is not appropriate and should be restricted to protect young players.

Sex inside the game has been a topic of converstation for me of late because my new game project is going to include babies. Players can breed with other players or with NPCs.



I am sorry for the people I am about to offend, but I find real violence to be FAR more objectionable than sex. And since we are talking about 'text' here I feel quite comfy with my voluntary underage flag. I use every manipulative trick I know to get people to tell the truth when the Mud asks 'Are you over the age of consent in your home Country?'. Lying about this can get you removed from the game, and sooner or later anybody, especially a kid, is gonna get found out.

If you lie, somewhere a clock starts ticking. When it dings, your time on the game may very well be over, f o r e v e r.


I think a certain level of reality is needed in the relationship between the players for it to be much fun. But game sex can of course become obsessive very easily, so it has to be part of a pretty intense game setting. And really, of all the other creative arts, music, literature, paintings, and on an on, what topic tops Sex except Love?

Private spaces, with locking doors, and snoop-shields, are really good ideas if you allow this sort of play. Public spaces should remain PG to allow everyone free run of the game. Knowing you are blocked from every form of remote viewing available to anyone, Saff (except Admin), and all other players is really necessary. On a game that is based on Role Playing the GameMasters have to watch you quite a bit. Being able to 'turn off the lights' has to have some extra game functions attached to make things work properly.



A.T
(-)

It is indeed true that only adults can consent legally to sex, but that doesn't strike me as relevant to MUDs, since there is no sex going on in MUDs. There are only people typing commands that provide (sometimes very fertile) material for sexual fantasy.

--mat

1) I'm no lawyer, but I doubt there is anything illegal with having virtual sex with virtual beings in a virtual environment.

2) I don't think you can say "assume everyone is an adult" because generally speaking, you have no idea how old the other party is. This is my personal objection to online "text sex", but I see it more as creepy/manipulative and not illegal.

3) Our own rules don't discuss sex, and instead deal exclusively with sexual harassment-- when you persist despite one party clearly demonstrating a lack of consent. I doubt this is illegal, but it's not a good thing to permit if you want people to play your game, and that's reason enough to forbid it.

4) Our game is also roleplay-mandatory, which has two important consequences:

- We can and do observe mortal interaction as we see fit, since one of the rules of the game is that all interaction is In Character. The playerbase is generally positive about this, given that we have a number of reward mechanisms which are most often visited on people who don't know they are being observed and evaluated. The assumed lack of potential privacy means people will seek other venues to pursue explicit encounters, which we're fine with.

- This also precludes the type of activities which might involve law enforcement-- soliciting minors for RL encounters, exchanges of personal information, etc., since that's all out of character. If we see it, we already have grounds to remove or suspend the character, and if the intent is clearly shady/creepy, we're more likely to throw the book at the person in question. (Typically, a character who slips OOC would get a reminder not to do it, at least initially. But there's latitude depending on what the player is trying to accomplish via the rules breach.)

I reiterate: Just answer with how you, personally, as a player handle it. I'm not interested in whether you think a MUD should be PG-rated or R-rated or NC-17-rated.

If virtual sex isn't your thing, type something like:

"I just fade to black."

or

"It's just not my thing."

You may, of course, feel free to elaborate on your reasons for feeling this way, but steer clear of discussing general MUD policies.

This isn't a thread about what MUD policies on sex should be. It's a thread about how players handle virtual sex. Thanks!

Hm.... actually I would go for a PG-like sex interaction unless the actual roleplay requires it. Though I once found myself in a situation like that, and I must say that said MUD was not fully RP, so I wasn't sure what to do.

So basically my idea is, if you're comfortable on going all the way, do it, if not, there is always...

/emote makes love to (player).

I think you will find it nearly impossible for anyone to address a topic labeled sex without branching out into the various aspects of how it can have an effect upon a game.

To answer the question however, I do not participate in MUDsex. I will play out romance to a very intimate level if I am reasonably assured that my counterpart is an adult who has a firm grasp of the complexity of story telling. Unfortunately in relation to sex in story telling finding such an individual is nigh on impossible. So when the romance progresses to hank-panky for me it is time to play a little Metallica and 'Fade to Black'.

To address the tangent that others have taken I think CHATsex has been a destroyer of many an otherwise good game. Frankly as soon as people get their cyber libido going any adherence to story-line and RP is often tossed right out the window. I have seen this occur even is so called RP encouraged and enforced games. Some people seem to care about getting their cyber-kicks more then the integrity of the lore of the game they play. Such is what it is. Some people enjoy it I just pick up and move on to a new game.

I don't mind discussing how it affects other facets of a game, so long as it's done in the context of a player's personal choice (rather than an administrator, such as myself, declaring that it's off limits, wrong, etc. on their particular game). If you don't engage in virtual sex because you believe it can ruin the game for yourself and others, that's totally valid.

I like the idea that your pc could have sex if they wanted. I just don't want to be there when they do. It seems kind of silly and time consuming, and...I don't feel completely comfortable with the whole thing. Also, it takes too long. The game days spent rping sex could be better used to take over the world. Right Pinky?

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.

RE: The logos

You don't see any relevance why mud-sex should be penciled out of public MU* environments? It's the same reason you have to be 18 to get into porn sites. Sexual predators who attack children in a MU* could easily contact the player for their personal information and do whatever they see fit from there. You'd feel really good if something like that happened at Iron Realms, eh?

I really fail to see your point of view on this. Although it is your opinion, and as much as I respect it, I cannot help but be sickened by it.

Video games are violent and played by all ages. But you don't see or read about naked bodies doing the hump-hump in them. And it's for a reason. Do you have kids? Would you like your ten year old humping with some 35yr old bulgarian in a text-based game?

I'd rather have my 10 year old humping a 35 year old person (don't know what you have against Bulgarians...) than my kid at the age of 35 (still a virgin) humping a 10 year old.

But in both scenarious I would wonder the same thing:
WHAT THE #### IS WRONG WITH ME AS A PARENT THAT I'M TRYING TO PUT THE BLAME ON THE GAME INSTEAD OF TAKING MY OWN RESPONSIBILITY

I do not believe the point here is who is to blame. I believe the point is doing what we can from making it worse.

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.

Porn is made for audiences that are monitored.
Rated R and Explicit Lyrics CDs are monitored when sold.

Why would you let sex into a game where you know children of all ages can potentially play?

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 mean if you are going to talk about Ratings, how can you just ignore all the other things that can earn an R or an X?

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. The Teachers, Librarians, and Parents do know, and they are in the best position to keep kids away from that which they do not see. They are also the ones who are responsible for teaching their children how to NOT let the sickos get their hooks in. Muds cannot teach this and it is unfair to expect them to do so.

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.

It is like 'rabies', is there anyone reading this who at some time or another when growing up was not sternly warned not to mess with some animal because 'They carry Rabies!!!'. And of the people here, how many have ever even SEEN an animal with rabies?

Like any powerful thing, sexual content can overwhelm the normal play of a game. But that is a weakness in the game, a lack of power in other places, and that is what needs to be addressed. Simply banning sex is a cheap and easy way that does nothing to address the real problems. Not surprisenly, it is the most popular route to go.

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. It can also be purile, cheap, and distracting, just like in RL.


A.T
(-)

The fact remains that young children, children who aren't even in middle school, play these games. Is it fine for some 30yr old behind the identify of a character to start having fantasy sex with them?

If you say yes, you are one sick ####.

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??

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.

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.

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

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

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.

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

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.

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.

Glad to see some decent people in this thread finally.

Hi, I'm William. lol

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

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.

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".

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'.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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 concerned,if you are 15 and older,you have the right to know,talk and have sex.
There was a study made by Fox Channel and O'Reilly Factor(a few month ago) and that study found that in France(for example),there were much less teenage pregnancy and STDs compared to the US.The main reason for that is that parents talk to their kids about sex,STDs,protection.They even go as to provide them with condoms and birth control pills.
This you don't see in the US
By to come back to the subject:
I am all for the mudsex and the complete acting part
If people want to protect kids,mud owners could create private rooms and/or characters can rent a inn room or something and go there

Truthfully.. whatever floats their boat man. Some people like being ****ed on, some people like touching minors. Its not at the top of my "save the world" agenda. Hell, girls even get married off at 12 years old in some cultures. Screw em, y'know? Who are we to say sh**? I'm not saying we should all run off and bang a minor, but you can't preach tolerance for one fetish (same-sex intercourse) and bomb another.
And as my main point in my post, which you happened to skip in your reply, was that mudsex isn't going to scar a child for life. I remember when I was 13, sneakin' pornos under the mattress and showing them to all my friends. I think I grew up pretty ok.

lovechiefs: April 13 2006,13:29
I totally agree there. it always struck me as totally ridiculous that people accept the most explicit, graphic violence in computer games, and then get all in a huff about anything that has to do with sex.

To each their taste. I have no problem with people indulging in mudsex, as long as they are reasonably discreet and not too tacky about it.

However, I'd never do it myself, for 2 reasons:

1. I prefer the real thing.

2. I've seen too many mud relations go bad over mudsex that went sour. True, there are some mud relationships that end happily, but the majority don't.

Consensual fetish sex (I do not think homosexual relationships are fetishes) between adults (which I have no problem with) is very different then any type of sex between an adult and a minor. Just because some cultures allow grown men to have 12 year old child-slave brides , which your statement seems to condone, doesn't mean it's a good thing. If you think pedophilia is okay then there is nothing I can say or write to you.


I don't let my kids play graphic violent video games either. I personally am not getting in a huff about 'anything' that has to do with sex. I am stating my opinion that MUDsex is potentially dangerous and disruptive. Dangerous when it involves possible interaction between an adult and a child. Disruptive because in my experience because many people can't seperate their libido from the game.

With this I whole heartedly agree. I've also many people who were otherwise spectators, get dragged into a horrible mess, when they were just trying to RP their character the way it should be played.

*rolls eyes*

This is why what was it, Israel? Has a policy of not giving roleplayers security clearance.

Let's be blunt - sex has been a very personal thing in the vast majority of cultures all over the world for all of known history. That is why it is an issue for so many people, not because of the horrible, horrible Christians.

I wasn't even going to post on this thread because I felt out of place being the only person who appears to enjoy a little mud sex now and then. Oddly, I am also one of these horrible, horrible uptight Christians who, for example, is not all that upset about the Iraq war, among other things.

Politics, specially flame baiting politics, really seem out of place to me in a discussion about games.

My two cents.