Tuesday, November 13, 2007

there'd be no doubt, only she's forgotten much more than she's lost

But will they learn?

Apparently not.

Note, I'm not irked at that 'clarification' because I desire sex with or as a child. It's this passage that's making me see red:

We understand that in some cases there may be an element of subjectivity as to whether an avatar (or other image) appears to be a minor. Objective factors which will be used to decide include whether an avatar has child-like facial features, is sized as a child, has clothing or accessories generally associated with children, and whether, based on the circumstances, an avatar is speaking or acting like a child (e.g. "My Mommy says...").

Bold sections mine.

So much for my pixie, who is three feet tall, but is not a child. So much for my original doll, who is four feet tall but sized appropriately. So much for most of my doll outfits, which include pigtailed hair, Lolita dresses, Mary Jane shoes.

I am not a child! How dare they make me live in fear of losing my account like this?!?

There is going to be screaming over this one. Mark my words.


Alexandra Rucker said...

I did notice the additional comment:

"...Please note it does not violate this policy merely to have a child-like avatar. It is not our intent to banish child-like avatars in and of themselves..."

I don't know if that helps specifically in your case, but I wasn't sure if you'd even caught it... *hugs*

emillyorr said...

Oh, I caught it. But they follow that *up* with the passage I quoted.

Which is very *specific* about the fact that, if the wrong person sees my pixie, or my shorter doll? That I could *lose everything*.

We're right back where we started, where child avatars are afraid to walk outside, where short avatars are afraid to act in affectionate ways with more adult-sized ones....

It. Is. UNFAIR. That for the actions of a few idiots, the rest of us have to self-censor to the point of ridiculousness!