Why is cannibalism, adultery, slavery, torture, forced starvation, organ harvesting and more all allowed, but pleasuring yourself alone in a room is so taboo that it's completely banned from the game?
https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=931707775
Why **exactly** is this banned in a game where all of the above mentioned and more are not just allowed, but encouraged?
It's jerking off. Guys. Seriously? It's self-pleasure. If that's too "adult" for you, then why the fuck do you have a game where you can imprison people, harvest their organs, cook them for dinner, then sell their underage relatives into slavery?
You aren't gonna see much success here for the same reason you won't see RimjobWorld on the steam workshop, albeit that being the more extreme end of the spectrum. The fact underage pawns can be generated in the vanilla game (although their limit is like 16-17) probably doesn't help your case.
There's better hills to die on, man.
Masturbation is perfectly legal for anyone at all - DISPLAYING it, however, is completely and utterly fucking illegal in almost all first world countries. You'll note the use of the word "depictions" instead of "pictures of", which means that if a below 18 year old pawn in RimWorld should masturbate, then Ludeon Studios could legally be complicit in enabling the creation of child pornography - the mod creator would DEFINITELY go down for it.
The PR nightmare that would follow is something that no developer would want to touch with a 10" pole. It's just not worth it. Just be glad that you CAN make mods like that if you so wish, instead of being pissed off about the distribution.
Quote from: ReZpawner on March 18, 2019, 08:20:27 PM
Masturbation is perfectly legal for anyone at all - DISPLAYING it, however, is completely and utterly fucking illegal in almost all first world countries. You'll note the use of the word "depictions" instead of "pictures of", which means that if a below 18 year old pawn in RimWorld should masturbate, then Ludeon Studios could legally be complicit in enabling the creation of child pornography - the mod creator would DEFINITELY go down for it.
The PR nightmare that would follow is something that no developer would want to touch with a 10" pole. It's just not worth it. Just be glad that you CAN make mods like that if you so wish, instead of being pissed off about the distribution.
There are mods that do far worse than allowing the possibility for masturbation to be a source of joy (including minors of all ages), and no one is chasing them with pitchforks. In-game loving of minors already exists between minor and adult pawns (if we are going to call the Vanilla min. age a minor).
This mod is essentially the same animation as "meditation" so there is no graphic display of anything sexual. Seems a bit absurd to flag the mod, unless you're going to pretend that masturbation is so heinous and no one should participate in it to any extent.
https://www.justice.gov/criminal-ceos/child-pornography
QuoteFederal law defines child pornography as any visual depiction of sexually explicit conduct involving a minor (persons less than 18 years old).
https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/2256
Quote(8) "child pornography" means any visual depiction, including any photograph, film, video, picture, or computer or computer-generated image or picture, whether made or produced by electronic, mechanical, or other means, of sexually explicit conduct, where—
(A) the production of such visual depiction involves the use of a minor engaging in sexually explicit conduct;
(B) such visual depiction is a digital image, computer image, or computer-generated image that is, or is indistinguishable from, that of a minor engaging in sexually explicit conduct; or
(C) such visual depiction has been created, adapted, or modified to appear that an identifiable minor is engaging in sexually explicit conduct.
In short: Not a single industry professional in their right mind would go anywhere near this shitstorm. And this is only the legal aspect of it, not moral or ethical issues.
I do not really care about whether Masturbation could/should be in the game.
but it amuses me that human sacrificing is allowed in call of Cthulhu mod in comparison.
It's like this: The US was originally colonized by Puritans. These were guys with buckles on their heads who were kicked out of England because everyone else was just plain tired of their dour asses. They thought dancing called the Devil, FFS, don't even bother asking about SEX! And these humorless bastards were the beginning of the trend; titties are ee-e-e-vil but bloody violence is A-OK, USA #1!
So yes, we have more laws restricting sexual behavior than violence. And yes, all moral issues aside, Ludeon simply isn't going to kick that particular hornets' nest, if they can help it.
The argument that "X is wrong but allowed, so Y which is also wrong should also be allowed" has always amused me.
Well, who's fault is that that violence is less forbidden subject than sex? That's a weird and very old holy war.
Quote from: p0sTpWnEd on March 19, 2019, 10:03:09 AM
The argument that "X is wrong but allowed, so Y which is also wrong should also be allowed" has always amused me.
That is not the argument here.
The argument is "X is wrong but not allowed, but Y is much worse, yet allowed."
QuoteIn short: Not a single industry professional in their right mind would go anywhere near this shitstorm. And this is only the legal aspect of it, not moral or ethical issues.
It might strike some as surprising, but Rimworld characters are not "minors" no matter what number you put next to them. They are not real people, nor are they depictions of real people. In vanilla there isn't even a difference in appearance between characters vastly different in age.
On legal grounds there's nothing relevant to this thread. If there were, the vanilla game's "lovin" would have the same issues because you can have someone 25+ sleep with someone who is < 18. In the strict sense, this would violate anything the mod allegedly violates.
There is also no viable moral argument against fictional characters in this context either. I'd probably extend that to in general, but certainly for Rimworld. That's doubly true in a game that allows slave trade, organ harvesting, and outright murder (sometimes against the player's will!). I'm not seeing how anybody can come up with coherent reasoning that a 16 year old getting shanked through the eye by a steel knife until they die is somehow more acceptable.
I see no reasoning masturbation that adds anything to the game. You can just pretend that's what "meditation" means and get the same practical result. Doesn't make a gameplay difference. However, there's also no reason to flag this mod, OP is correct to call it hypocritical.
Is the Shinji hospital scene in nge CP?
Quote from: TheMeInTeam on March 19, 2019, 12:48:12 PM
QuoteIn short: Not a single industry professional in their right mind would go anywhere near this shitstorm. And this is only the legal aspect of it, not moral or ethical issues.
It might strike some as surprising, but Rimworld characters are not "minors" no matter what number you put next to them. They are not real people, nor are they depictions of real people. In vanilla there isn't even a difference in appearance between characters vastly different in age.
On legal grounds there's nothing relevant to this thread. If there were, the vanilla game's "lovin" would have the same issues because you can have someone 25+ sleep with someone who is < 18. In the strict sense, this would violate anything the mod allegedly violates.
There is also no viable moral argument against fictional characters in this context either. I'd probably extend that to in general, but certainly for Rimworld. That's doubly true in a game that allows slave trade, organ harvesting, and outright murder (sometimes against the player's will!). I'm not seeing how anybody can come up with coherent reasoning that a 16 year old getting shanked through the eye by a steel knife until they die is somehow more acceptable.
I see no reasoning masturbation that adds anything to the game. You can just pretend that's what "meditation" means and get the same practical result. Doesn't make a gameplay difference. However, there's also no reason to flag this mod, OP is correct to call it hypocritical.
You have never dealt with governmental regulations. Do you think they exist in a world of logic and planning? HA.
If you notice pawns in rimworld are never younger than 14. There is a reason for that. Regulations are weird random and the people who enforce them give exactly zero shits what you intended or not.
Simply put, it's Ludeon's game and they can decide what they will and won't allow in their game.
QuoteYou have never dealt with governmental regulations. Do you think they exist in a world of logic and planning? HA.
If you notice pawns in rimworld are never younger than 14. There is a reason for that. Regulations are weird random and the people who enforce them give exactly zero shits what you intended or not.
You've moving the goalpost. I don't think anybody is surprised to hear government regulations are arbitrary nonsense. That doesn't change the point of what you quoted. If "masturbation" would be a violation, so must be vanilla Rimworld's "lovin".
Regardless, the law quoted above isn't relevant. Rimworld characters are not "persons". They are not real. That is why you can make one sponge 30 bullets from a rifle for fun or forcibly remove organs until they die w/o consequences. If they were "persons", doing these things would get you a life sentence at minimum in most states/countries, regardless of their age.
QuoteSimply put, it's Ludeon's game and they can decide what they will and won't allow in their game.
Nobody in this thread has said otherwise. OP is making a case that restricting this mod is hypocritical, and that assertion holds. Whether or not you care in this particular case, this is a demonstrably hypocritical situation because any credible standard applied to block it should also block vanilla mechanics.
I don't care about the mod, but I do care about the precedent. Dishonest moves lose trust.
Quote from: TheMeInTeam on March 20, 2019, 10:46:19 AM
Regardless, the law quoted above isn't relevant. Rimworld characters are not "persons". They are not real. That is why you can make one sponge 30 bullets from a rifle for fun or forcibly remove organs until they die w/o consequences. If they were "persons", doing these things would get you a life sentence at minimum in most states/countries, regardless of their age.
*ahem* Keeping gory comics, with a lot of brutal scenes, isn't a reason to send you to jail basically in any country.
Keeping japanese doujinshi comics, with completely fictional underaged women with lolita complex in them, is a reason to send you to jail in many states/countries.
Quote*ahem* Keeping gory comics, with a lot of brutal scenes, isn't a reason to send you to jail basically in any country.
Keeping japanese doujinshi comics, with completely fictional underaged women with lolita complex in them, is a reason to send you to jail in many states/countries.
I don't know every country's inane laws. For any country with that nonsense on their books, Rimworld would already be illegal regardless of the mod (minors can do "lovin" in vanilla), so the mod would not change anything. Unless there is a country that legally accepts depiction of sex but not masturbation?
Quote from: TheMeInTeam on March 20, 2019, 10:46:19 AM
QuoteSimply put, it's Ludeon's game and they can decide what they will and won't allow in their game.
Nobody in this thread has said otherwise. OP is making a case that restricting this mod is hypocritical, and that assertion holds. Whether or not you care in this particular case, this is a demonstrably hypocritical situation because any credible standard applied to block it should also block vanilla mechanics.
I don't care about the mod, but I do care about the precedent. Dishonest moves lose trust.
The precedent is that the game's creator doesn't feel like having THAT PARTICULAR THING in his game, so has blocked THAT PARTICULAR THING. His feelings on other aspects are utterly irrelevant.
If he wanted to make a game where torture was encouraged, while blocking atheism, he can.
The only precedent here is that the creator is blocking things he doesn't feel should be in game. full stop.
QuoteThe precedent is that the game's creator doesn't feel like having THAT PARTICULAR THING in his game, so has blocked THAT PARTICULAR THING. His feelings on other aspects are utterly irrelevant.
If he wanted to make a game where torture was encouraged, while blocking atheism, he can.
The only precedent here is that the creator is blocking things he doesn't feel should be in game. full stop.
Just to confirm, it's Ludeon doing this and not Steam? It's a hypocritical practice regardless (Steam is on record for objectively lying about its censorship practices and wildly inconsistent enforcement of their non-stated rules so I would not put this past Steam). In fact if you asked me to guess who would block this mod in advance of seeing the thread I'd first suspect Steam, because they have an extensive track record of hypocrisy and lying. Ludeon being so openly hypocritical would be surprising in contrast.
Regardless, we're talking about explicitly blocking a mod, not about choosing what goes into the default game. A mod that is legal under any standard the game itself is legal, that at worst violates a social norm (as if burning people to death doesn't violate a social norm).
Sure, Ludeon/Steam can do this, just like they could "block atheism" in Rimworld. I'd have the same objection in both cases, or even if they blocked the inclusion of poodles because reasons. It's necessarily arbitrary enforcement and when that is practiced the sensible response is to trust the person/organization/whatever doing it less.
It's both within rights to do it, and also within rights to denounce objectively hypocritical choices as such.
It's not blocked. It's just not being distributed through Steam. Ludeon hasn't put in extra code in the game to prevent that mod from working, which seems to be what some people think. It's simply a mod that they do not wish to promote or host.
Quote from: ReZpawner on March 20, 2019, 02:44:15 PM
It's not blocked. It's just not being distributed through Steam. Ludeon hasn't put in extra code in the game to prevent that mod from working, which seems to be what some people think. It's simply a mod that they do not wish to promote or host.
By "they", are you referring to Ludeon or Steam?
If it's the latter it's both less surprising and suggests the title of OP is mistaken. Steam management is worse than just hypocritical, though that's certainly still an accurate assessment of them.
Not sure if it is on Ludeon's side or Steam. My first thought is that some self-righteous people are reporting the mod on Steam, and it's just auto-removed b/c a certain number of reports was hit. Honestly not sure how that flagging system works. OP might know more about which party is behind the removal.
Either way taking down the mod, whether it is from Steam or Ludeon, is ridiculous. Especially considering Vanilla mechanics and the general modesty that the mod has. A lot of people used the mod as well, so it wasn't just some niche creation that only a few people found useful. I can also understand the distress of the mod author, because the removal is so arbitrary. I would be upset if Ludeon or Steam decided to remove one of my mod creations from the Steam Workshop, especially if a similar concept was already incorporated into the game.
I commented on the Steam side of things.
I don't get what's the big deal about a line of text. But hey, that's just me.
Quote from: TheMeInTeam on March 20, 2019, 10:46:19 AM
You've moving the goalpost. I don't think anybody is surprised to hear government regulations are arbitrary nonsense. That doesn't change the point of what you quoted. If "masturbation" would be a violation, so must be vanilla Rimworld's "lovin".
Regardless, the law quoted above isn't relevant. Rimworld characters are not "persons". They are not real. That is why you can make one sponge 30 bullets from a rifle for fun or forcibly remove organs until they die w/o consequences. If they were "persons", doing these things would get you a life sentence at minimum in most states/countries, regardless of their age.
No there is a difference in government between murder and sex and yes the limits are very strange. Take a look at sims games. They "woohoo" because of a ratings flag and teens can only "fool around" to avoid legal issues with child porn. It's a minefield where some things are explicitly stated and others are up to the enforcing body. Sex and children of any kind are very explicitly stated as "the concept of sex and children". Murder, on the other hand, requires an actual death with evidence of a body. It's government regulations in a nutshell.
That said all of the above is only valid on the actual game. A mod is immune to any consideration other than the suggestion of child pornography and it would be a stretch to get masturbation in rimworld to meet that requirement.
/edit it should be noted that america, mexico, canada, most of europe, japan, korea, and shockingly china have extremely brutal limits on content showing actors or suggestions of actors below the age of 15. Even if you have an actor who is older than 18 portraying a 14-year-old and that character engages in sexual acts on screen it constitutes child pornography in all of those countries. Every single law pretty much says "if it remotely suggests a child is engaged in sex it cannot exist in any media or be possessed by any individual or organization".
QuoteThat said all of the above is only valid on the actual game. A mod is immune to any consideration other than the suggestion of child pornography and it would be a stretch to get masturbation in rimworld to meet that requirement.
I know I've said it multiple times, but I'm still interested in an explanation for how masturbation could possibly break any laws that "lovin'" in the game would not also break. Short of modding younger characters, new art, or some other thing OP's mod doesn't do I don't see how anybody could possibly make such a case.
Either Rimworld is breaking the law right now, or it isn't and therefore the mod couldn't be.
Quoteit should be noted that america, mexico, canada, most of europe, japan, korea, and shockingly china have extremely brutal limits on content showing actors or suggestions of actors below the age of 15. Even if you have an actor who is older than 18 portraying a 14-year-old and that character engages in sexual acts on screen it constitutes child pornography in all of those countries.
Interesting, and very bizarre considering what is allowed. Still, the law quoted here refers to "persons". That law as written can't apply to Rimworld, as pawns are without question inhuman (they are literally aliens, and I've yet to meet a person on Earth that can haul an adult elephant unaided). It would be hard to make a case even against the Sims with that code, though I could see why devs would want to avoid being too near that line, way more risk than reward.
Quote from: TheMeInTeam on March 21, 2019, 02:44:52 PM
QuoteThat said all of the above is only valid on the actual game. A mod is immune to any consideration other than the suggestion of child pornography and it would be a stretch to get masturbation in rimworld to meet that requirement.
I know I've said it multiple times, but I'm still interested in an explanation for how masturbation could possibly break any laws that "lovin'" in the game would not also break. Short of modding younger characters, new art, or some other thing OP's mod doesn't do I don't see how anybody could possibly make such a case.
Either Rimworld is breaking the law right now, or it isn't and therefore the mod couldn't be.
Quoteit should be noted that america, mexico, canada, most of europe, japan, korea, and shockingly china have extremely brutal limits on content showing actors or suggestions of actors below the age of 15. Even if you have an actor who is older than 18 portraying a 14-year-old and that character engages in sexual acts on screen it constitutes child pornography in all of those countries.
Interesting, and very bizarre considering what is allowed. Still, the law quoted here refers to "persons". That law as written can't apply to Rimworld, as pawns are without question inhuman (they are literally aliens, and I've yet to meet a person on Earth that can haul an adult elephant unaided). It would be hard to make a case even against the Sims with that code, though I could see why devs would want to avoid being too near that line, way more risk than reward.
It's not persons. Its anyone representing a person or a possible person. Technically you cant paint an actress green, call her a 14-year-old alien, and have her engage in sex without violating CP laws. "Art" related issues are different by country but generally very close. An example is Canada and bestiality rules. Did you know that technically "furry art" can be interpreted as bestiality if the actors in the images are too human-like? Yes. Drawing a dog having sex with a human is a crime in Canada even if it is just art. Being "illegal" and being "enforced" is different though. I don't think anyone would(or has) be(en) charged with furry porn unless it was explicitly to bypass something like CP restrictions.
Most of these rules exist entirely to stop CP proliferation and trust me when I say those who traffic in CP are god damn pernicious shitbags.
In the case of "loving" its one of those grey areas that are technically not defined. Similar to how the sims say "woohoo"(adults) and "fooling around"(teens) in the flavour text but on the actual code its referenced as what could easily be defined as sex in that both tags go under the same "statistic". If they don't actually display sex or anything remotely looking like sex it's not technically sex unless called sex. Confusing right?
It's similar to making a technical copy of a song legally distinct enough to not have to pay the original author royalties.
As to how the mod could come under question but not violate laws that is an easy one. It would take a moderator two seconds of reading even one post saying "teenage masturbation" to lock that file down quick and send it for review. The moderator isn't probably a rimworld player and is just operating on SOP of "kill CP dead fast". In steams cases, this is probably just some ultra sexually conservative minds reporting the mod until it triggers an automatic lock though. With so many different opinions in the world, it happens quite often with automated systems.
My original point is just that I can easily see how an uninformed moderator could leap first for safety reasons knowing exactly how harsh the law can be about such things.
The weirder part though is technically if the mod allowed a legally underaged individual to display a sexual act(even masturbation) it would actually violate the law in many countries. Even if the issue was via a bug if the author did not correct it once notified. Action probably would not be enforced unless that particular trait of the mod started to expand though(which is how one CP ring attempted to traffic their content via games involving drawn images of underaged persons). The reason so many things can be interpreted as violating CP laws is to ensure no loopholes ever exist to allow CP propagation.
QuoteMost of these rules exist entirely to stop CP proliferation and trust me when I say those who traffic in CP are god damn pernicious shitbags.
For sure. That just seems so far away from gaming/OP's situation that it's not worth considering. If laws consider this and that under the same umbrella they're glaringly too broad.
What if the alien species is an insectoid that matures at age 2? Is 14 still too young then? Are the dreams of hot megaspider action dashed after all?
QuoteIf they don't actually display sex or anything remotely looking like sex it's not technically sex unless called sex. Confusing right?
So if you changed "masturbation" to "fun alone time" or something that would work the same then? That's pretty bizarre, yes.
QuoteIn steams cases, this is probably just some ultra sexually conservative minds reporting the mod until it triggers an automatic lock though.
I'm not going to give Steam any benefit of the doubt. They first claimed "if it's legal we will allow it" and then censored/banned a game rated T by the ESRB, all while being *very* inconsistent with this enforcement (mysteriously lax in AAA titles like the witcher), and still allowing games that for all intents and purposes enable children to gamble.
Ludeon I give the benefit of the doubt, but Steam's track record doesn't grant it that.
QuoteAction probably would not be enforced unless that particular trait of the mod started to expand though(which is how one CP ring attempted to traffic their content via games involving drawn images of underaged persons). The reason so many things can be interpreted as violating CP laws is to ensure no loopholes ever exist to allow CP propagation.
At least, I THOUGHT it was far removed from gaming. They were using it as a means to cover up distributions of drawings of actual people? That's crazy, but if it's happening I can at least understand why they'd use algorithms to screen that stuff out.
QuoteWhat if the alien species is an insectoid that matures at age 2? Is 14 still too young then? Are the dreams of hot megaspider action dashed after all?
Technically it could be considered CP if the similarities were close enough to a human in whole or part. IE if you had a butterfly with a human or part human body. Again this would be to prohibit loopholes of simply doctoring images "just enough" to allow distribution.
If it was simply an ant and the story revolved around the lifecycles of an ant then no one would care.
If you used "ant" in a story to replace the word "child" it might fall under CP laws if the story was obviously not about ants though this would be a challenge to prove.
QuoteSo if you changed "masturbation" to "fun alone time" or something that would work the same then? That's pretty bizarre, yes.
Provided you did not show a sexual act, yes a simple name change counts.
QuoteI'm not going to give Steam any benefit of the doubt. They first claimed "if it's legal we will allow it" and then censored/banned a game rated T by the ESRB, all while being *very* inconsistent with this enforcement (mysteriously lax in AAA titles like the witcher), and still allowing games that for all intents and purposes enable children to gamble.
Ludeon I give the benefit of the doubt, but Steam's track record doesn't grant it that.
While I agree they should define their rules better they are technically a private enterprise. As such they are judge jury and executioner of their content and can exclude anything they wish for any reason as long as it doesn't violate a countries laws(such as racial laws). Honestly, laws are not often black and white until many many court cases have been done to establish a broad list of precedents about a subject. This is why "accept what i do not what i say" is more applicable for things like steams management.
Quote
For sure. That just seems so far away from gaming/OP's situation that it's not worth considering. If laws consider this and that under the same umbrella they're glaringly too broad.
At least, I THOUGHT it was far removed from gaming. They were using it as a means to cover up distributions of drawings of actual people? That's crazy, but if it's happening I can at least understand why they'd use algorithms to screen that stuff out.
Doesn't have to be actual people. Just young images and yes it's been done multiple times.
One recent case from last year involving skyrim... (https://www.yorkshireeveningpost.co.uk/news/stupid-leeds-pervert-created-animated-child-porn-using-the-elder-scrolls-v-skyrim-1-9379230) is a really easy case for why the laws are so broad and why its important they stay broad.
QuoteWhile I agree they should define their rules better they are technically a private enterprise. As such they are judge jury and executioner of their content and can exclude anything they wish for any reason as long as it doesn't violate a countries laws(such as racial laws).
I'm not saying Steam can't do what it wants (within its own legal limits). I'm saying I won't give them benefit of the doubt because what they've chosen to do is lie outright and screw over developers in the process while applying obvious double standards (they didn't just lie, their behavior pattern follows obvious favortism/$$$ incentives). Even if such is legal I can still call them out for it. Being a jerk is legal too etc.
Ludeon's reputation doesn't deserve to be in the same space as that.
QuoteOne recent case from last year involving skyrim... is a really easy case for why the laws are so broad and why its important they stay broad.
That's certainly very cringey. I'm not sure it should fall under CP rather than obscenity or some different categorization though. When I think "CP" what comes to mind is the stuff that literally ruins lives. Lives of the victims, and often the victims' family. That damage is permanent in most cases too, an otherwise healthy person never recovers/winds up in an institution directly from suffering that. Likening weird Skyrim guy to that cheapens the gravity of the crime. It's also awkward to see a "CP" conviction get 2 years or less when in terms of its damage to real people the only obviously worse crime is straight up murder.
But at least it's more clear to me why this mod got shot down so hard, even if it's really not comparable even to the Skyrim case.
NON-graphical depications (in other words, that don't qualify as "obscene" under the law, a very specific label but not easy to define without its own freaking dissertation :-X) of underage sexuality are completely legal in the US. Otherwise, Nabokov's "Lolita" would be illegal, as an excellent example. It is also quite legal, in specific cases, to own depictions of nude children, if it can be classified as "art", rather than "obscenity" (again, yes, the law is quite vague about this). Don't be wrong or you'll be very, very sorry :o!
This has already been through the courts more than once in the US, all the way up to SCOTUS. In fact, "Lolita" itself faced a lot of the same scrutiny and pressure. The legal precedent so far, is that *actual, graphic depictions of sexual acts* (penetration, oral sex, and so on) are illegal, but otherwise, this is protected speech, just like any other.
And none of this means diddly, if Ludeon simply doesn't want even the hint of a sniff of this type of scandal hooked to their name. They already get enough guff for encouraging slavery, cannibalism, and fashioning your neighbors into fine eveningwear, wouldn't you agree? They also probably have had quite enough of ANYTHING re: sexuality/gender, considering the brouhaha over gender assignment they already faced ??? . And legal or not, Ludeon also has to placate both Steam and parents, as RimWorld is marketed to all ages.
As noted repeatedly above, both Ludeon and Steam can do as they damn well please, as private entities (that *are not* beholden to laws re: "freedom of speech", by the by).
Should correct something. It's not technically legal in America(the laws are still broad and require interpretation of the courts). It's just not legally enforced under certain conditions. IE all things related to CP require eventual legal interpretation. This wasn't done without thought. Different states have different definitions of what is defined as "underage" in America.
TLDR:
-CP is always illegal in America.
-Anything "underage" performing a sexual act in any form of media is illegal.
-"Underage" is ambiguous and often requires a definition for situations not involving actual persons.
-Enforcement of situations not involving an actual person generally doesn't get looked at unless there is a complaint or its blatant(like the skyrim case)
-Certain limited cases have to be allowed existence due to technicalities. In the case of Lolita, the girl is not the 12-year-old from the original book but rather a 14-year-old. 14 is legally capable of both marriage and sex in many American states which was actually one of the primary reasons it was allowed.
Children and situations involving them are not granted arbitrary freedom of speech from the government like adults. Children are granted legal freedoms as they age. There is no allowance given for freedom of speech as related to art and underaged children.
It should be noted that anime has a subtext similar to Lolita though for the life of me I can't remember it. This is STILL a hotly debated and monitored media because it sits squarely on the line of legality. These types of legal arguments and the lawyers who pursue them are critically important to our legal system. People like to assume a law is just a law... but laws only come from long and brutally detailed debates on subjects.
Um, no. Again, if it doesn't show *an actual sexual act* (literally showing penetration, NOT just suggesting it's happening) yes, it is legal in depiction. You don't get to gainsay SCOTUS, sorry.
Ever seen the movie "Kids" (http://v)? Legal. And that's live action, to boot.
I'm not too interested in going into discussion on the technicalities in this context, I at least understand that the laws on this are different from what I guessed.
I've seen the effects abuse has on actual children and their family. It's awful. Even considering OP context under the same legal definition defies logic. These are not the same thing in the same sense that acts of violence in video games are not the same thing as acts of violence in reality. Ask the victims in each case.
I don't blame devs ducking legal issues though, bizarre or not.
Quote from: Bozobub on March 22, 2019, 11:18:31 PM
Um, no. Again, if it doesn't show *an actual sexual act* (literally showing penetration, NOT just suggesting it's happening) yes, it is legal in depiction. You don't get to gainsay SCOTUS, sorry.
Ever seen the movie "Kids" (http://v)? Legal. And that's live action, to boot.
The Child Pornography Prevention Act of 1996 was struck down on only two points. The original wording of CPPA could have been construed as anything remotely
resembling an underaged person which would, in fact, restrict freedom of speech without actually engaging in anything nefarious(Romeo and Juliet comes to mind). The strike did not convert any aspect of CP laws to allow CP of any kind and it remains fully illegal in America under the previously listed points.
It again boils down to the on the spot definition of what constitutes an underaged person and what constitutes a sexual act. This is explicitly
not defined very well and is considerably different between states. One state may suggest dry humping is sex. Another requires penetration. Age also varies between 14 and 18. Due to free trade with Mexico, we also have to consider it can be as low as 12. In the event of a federal crime(such as CP) The general stance is to take the
least extreme starting position. Especially with media which travels across borders state or national.
Its the "sims" category again. If you explicitly describe or display the act it is considered the act. If you just have two actors above the age of 14 grunting and groaning in the back seat of a car with no physical nudity displayed that is NOT considered a violation at this time. The supreme court decision was NOT in reference to this interpretation of CP. It was EXCLUSIVELY in reference to the CPPAs wording being too ambiguous as to allow situations in which someone who APPEARS young to be considered as REPRESENTING a child.
Even in the film being discussed before it was allowed to begin filming the MPAA required the age be altered to comply with CP regulations. These types of films are always treading a very fine razor's edge. Hell, the only reason the book is allowed is due to its historical status similar to Romeo and Juliet.
If you are wondering about my references to this... I once took a long stint helping PTSD victims as I've suffered from the condition myself and didn't eat a bullet getting over it. I didn't know when I agreed that two of the victims were children. I've since ensured any who ask are fully aware of their rights and obligations concerning this topic.
The. Movie. "Kids". Was. And. Is. Perfectly. Legal. Haven't seen it, have you? Because yes, it depicts underage sex.
Sorry, no. You aren't as well-informed as you believe you are.
- I highly doubt there was group of people who flagged the mod on steam since the mod got re-uploaded and removed once again. (hasn't it been on there for awhile?) Maybe you have a better chance keepin it there retitled as self lovin with different previews uploaded by someone else.
- I've never used the mod, but it doesn't reveal much right? just as much as "lovin" does? If that is the case then TheMeInTeam raised a valid point.
- Unless I've missed something, it seems to me no one still knows if it was Ludeon or steam. I'm leaning more towards steam at the moment. So just upload the mod to the forums. If it was indeed Tynan or anyone from Ludeon that got it removed then they definitely should've stepped up and said something about it by now if they haven't already.
I think i kinda blame Steam on this part and not Ludeon...
I don't know but you said something in the mod page about adding in a new filth type... But i think rather not do that with that sticky- well i rather not say it, since that's why people are freaking out...
I even never used this mod either, however in vanilla Rimworld i know what 'Lovin means' similar to what 'Woohoo means' in The Sims, and they are more in the G or PG Rated stuff instead...
I don't really know if someone in VALVE or Ludeon is actually removing your mod from steam... But i think i kinda agree what Jibbles said, maybe you should put your mod into the Ludeon Forums instead with a Dropbox or a Google Drive link instead, so that it won't get auto removed here...
That sounds like a good idea to me. Even if it WAS removed, I'm completely certain the reasoning would be given to you, unlike Steam's opaque BS >.<'.
Quote from: Bozobub on March 23, 2019, 12:33:16 PM
The. Movie. "Kids". Was. And. Is. Perfectly. Legal. Haven't seen it, have you? Because yes, it depicts underage sex.
Sorry, no. You aren't as well-informed as you believe you are.
Shits and giggles time. I just finished watching this movie with the aforementioned mental health professionals I used to work with.
Explicit talk. Limited nudity. No minor nudity. Actors above the technical legal sexual age. All scenes explicitly crafted to ensure they did not cross the razor edge into CP. Suggestion is only act when explicitly depicted. Explicit description is not act without nudity. We also actually checked the related movie laws of GB, Canada, and america. My previous statements still stand as accurate.
Yes. I do know exactly what I'm talking about with this subject. I know it well enough to know how the people who do this kind of garbage have to tread a fine line for their perversions and how they continue to lobby to legalize their perversions. I also know why its the one issue that will make war hardened agents break down into full blown sobbing tears... and I know this fact very intimately.
As this is a video game forum though and all possible information on why a masturbation mod could have been incorrectly moderated as CP or automatically moderated by complaint of uninformed individuals this will be the last post on CP subject matter by me. If you want to further educate yourself with how to spot, handle, and prevent CP contact me via PM.
Quote from: Bozobub on March 23, 2019, 03:57:23 PM
That sounds like a good idea to me. Even if it WAS removed, I'm completely certain the reasoning would be given to you, unlike Steam's opaque BS >.<'.
All I get is this email. No message on Steam or anything else. This is the whole email (minus the "Dear [Steam Username]" at the top).
(https://puu.sh/D4u0M/12eb2cd6cf.png)
Anyways, I'm not going to fight this anymore. I haven't even played the game since 0.18. I just wanted the 8k+ people to still be able to use my mod. But this is all just pissing me off and not worth the energy anymore.
Quote from: Jebus on March 23, 2019, 10:39:51 PM
All I get is this email. No message on Steam or anything else. This is the whole email (minus the "Dear [Steam Username]" at the top).
(https://puu.sh/D4u0M/12eb2cd6cf.png)
Anyways, I'm not going to fight this anymore. I haven't even played the game since 0.18. I just wanted the 8k+ people to still be able to use my mod. But this is all just pissing me off and not worth the energy anymore.
Interesting.. Sorry about the mod being banned. For what it's worth I call bs on it too.
On the legal end, isn't Ludeon based in Canada? That'd make things a lot more complicated. I think RimWorld would also have to comply to the laws in each country it gets sold in, not just the country in which they're based. Given how the laws and interpretations are so varied in just this thread, I think it's safe to assume they're just trying avoid dealing with the issue entirely.
For violence, I remember Left 4 Dead 1/2 both had to remove a lot of gore and special effects to be sold in Australia. It's not unheard of for games to have to cut content to sell internationally.
Violence and the depictions therof are just a lot more legally clear on what you can and can't do. Even depictions of adult sexuality can be a legal minefield depending on the country, let alone when someone <18 is invovled.
That said, I think logically, in the context of this game (including it's highly abstracted graphics), it's not like making or using this mod is weird, creepy, or wrong. It's unfortunate that the OP got caught in crossfire so to speak. I think it's fair and understandable for him to be upset.
Sad...
But there is always another way outside of the steam workshop like Github and other download sites out there.
Jebus if you really want people to use your mod, put it somewhere else...
But i could see why VALVE Wouldn't like the mod being in the Workshop. And some games have to remove some content that is gorey, bloody or +18 rated to make it to be played and sold in some countries out there...
Christ on a raft, just stick it on loverslab or something with the rest of the cartoony gameporn. Why on earth would you put it on steam anyways? The people looking for that particular kind of mod would use the page previously mentioned, or something like it, not steam workshop.
QuoteFor violence, I remember Left 4 Dead 1/2 both had to remove a lot of gore and special effects to be sold in Australia. It's not unheard of for games to have to cut content to sell internationally.
I didn't realize that, and I have a few online friends from Australia.
You're reminding me that I actually censored a game myself in one context: Gears of War. I don't mind gore generally, but the game was a bit too liberal with leaving effects on-screen. Since it was obstructing my view in a shooter it had to go once I started doing MP. I'd rather see where the enemy is.
QuoteChrist on a raft, just stick it on loverslab or something with the rest of the cartoony gameporn. Why on earth would you put it on steam anyways? The people looking for that particular kind of mod would use the page previously mentioned, or something like it, not steam workshop.
Considering the "porn" in question amounts to a text edit, that's a *bit* disingenuous to the OP.
Quote from: ReZpawner on March 25, 2019, 07:13:29 AM
Christ on a raft, just stick it on loverslab or something with the rest of the cartoony gameporn. Why on earth would you put it on steam anyways? The people looking for that particular kind of mod would use the page previously mentioned, or something like it, not steam workshop.
I didn't stick it on LoversLab because I am legally not allowed submit content there, nor to any other website created with InvisionCommunity. It's unfortunate, but when two companies get into legal battles, all of their employees can suffer. Believe me, LoversLab is the very first thing I thought of when determining where to put this mod.
Sike.
I know shit-all about that website. Never heard of it. The mod was put on Steam because that's the most accessible place and because that's where I got most of my mods.
Remember that we live in a world where in many places you can join the military and be potentially sent off to active combat duty before you're legally old enough to do, under normal circumstances:
Consume Alcohol
Rent a car
Rent a home
Buy a car
Buy a house
Get a bank loan
Engage in intercourse with an adult
Have a full time job
Get married
You're not old enough to do that, but you are old enough to be sent out to kill and/or be killed. So yeah, a lot of things don't make much sense.
I imagine it's probably 100% the choice of the developer because I think there are far more racy and mature games on Steam that are allowed to be there.
In the end, agree or not it is their choice. There is nothing stopping you from releasing it where the developer has no power, however.
This thread I think encapsulates the meaning of "mountain out of a molehill."
Quote from: Jebus on March 25, 2019, 06:08:08 PM
The mod was put on Steam because that's the most accessible place and because that's where I got most of my mods.
If you'd like, can you upload this "new" mod under the name of
Nirvana? I've edited it in such a way that there should be no more unreasonable efforts to taking it down (considering there is no reasonable argument aside from legal nonsense).
[attachment deleted due to age]