Talk:Cybersex

message: Is the image of the webcam really needed?  It's really redundant. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.129.57.41 (talk) 10:55, 21 June 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Good point.  I removed it for that reason.  --Onore Baka Sama (talk) 18:38, 13 February 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Webcam

message: While there are a lot more women online than there used to be, and many of them do "cyber," there are a lot of guys out there who take female "avatars" and do cybersex just to get their rocks off.  And there are lots of guys out there who have cybersex, knowing that the person on the other end is a guy, and not really caring because it's just role-playing.
: Umm, doesn't everyone who has cybersex do so to "get their rocks off"? Just a thought...
::Not particularly.  It's quite possible that the sex scenes are part of a roleplay and describing the acts can lead to something else that's part of the story.  --Onore Baka Sama (talk) 18:38, 13 February 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Purpose of cybersex

message: A small question: What's an ephebophile? --Two Halves not logged on
: Google is your friend 
:: Haha.  Ephebophilia has a Wikipedia article.  In case it's not linked, someone should do it.  --Onore Baka Sama (talk) 18:38, 13 February 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Ephebophile

message: While I know that it is illegal for youth to participate in sex before a certain age, is it illegal for somebody to have cybersex?  And if not, is it being considered?  Just a question.--Thecosmos 02:39, May 20, 2005 (UTC)
:not sure, while you might get away with it. if you are an adult though you could face charges of child grooming.Mathmo Talk 23:46, 15 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Philippine law makes it illegal to do that. Law just passed recently. Ominae (talk) 02:15, 16 September 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Legal age for cybersex

message: This was nothing more than a pov-laden emotional rant, and while I've cleaned it up, this is not a well-written article. It needs to be significantly improved before the tag is removed. Let's write encyclopedia articles, shall we, not rambling u.s.-centric diatribes about cybersex' "emotional damage" of teens, while a huge number of adults engage in some sort of sexual interaction online, be it flirting, roleplaying or cybersex. Also, this article does not make clear that a good deal of roleplaying is not that different from standard erotic literature (albeit often very badly written). -- Zantastik talk 10:32, 14 Jun 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, objections.  Please read WP:EL for guidelines on suitable external links - forums are almost never appropriate. ~ Booya Bazooka 21:30, 8 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cleanup 

message: Could someone add more disadvantages? This is immoral. It's absolutely stupid anyway. I'm getting tired of seeing these stupid, "Sex Texting" on the Cellphone. --66.218.11.146 07:25, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  What? 

message: "Debate continues among moralists on whether cybersex is a form of infidelity." That doesn't seem to take account of the possibility of two committed people in a long-distance relationship, or even a married couple unavoidably separated for a while, having cybersex, which would certainly not be infidelity! Loganberry (Talk) 04:58, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Agreed. That people debate it is perhaps worthy of mention somewhere, but it's not clear that it's a disadvantage. I mean, normal sex most definitely can count as infidelity, but people wouldn't say that a disavantage of sex is that it's a form of infidelity! Clearly the problem is with the infidelity, not sex (physical or cyber) in general.
However, recent reports suggests that the Legend, the man himself, Bloodninja, is lurking around in a videogame, StarCraft II: Wings of Liberty by Blizzard Entertainment, on an online-multiplayer interface known as Battle.net, in a chat-channel "Zerg Strategy" Mdwh 20:39, 10 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  More cleanup maybe? 

message: Cyber Sex Game is a new wave of cyber sex. As you can not have sex with anyone online, you can try and pursuit different people and have sex with them online.
This would be more of a community based and would have the capability of builing a ranking from it.
Sex Standing http://www.SexStanding.com is an example of the above.
I should also announce that I am linked to Sex Standing. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 74.14.22.153 (talk) 15:20, 4 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Add a new page for Cyber Sex Game 

message: Seriously, what's with the pictures in this article? A computer monitor, a webcam, and a keyboard are not really good examples of cybersex, regardless of how they're used in it. Just wondering if anyone had any good justification for those particular pictures. --clpo13(talk) 05:18, 22 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Pictures should help increase an understanding of the topic, the images in this article fail to do that in any way. Just because images can be added, doesn't mean they should be added. Neitherday 20:29, 23 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree, and based on a recent conversation with an editor after I reverted his addition of a picture because I didn't believe it added anything to the article (to shortly be reverted myself by someone who did) I think all images should be removed from this article as none of them add anything to it. Anyone else feel the same? I don't particularly want to be bold if I'm the only one who thinks this... Astral (talk) 18:09, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Well I could say I agree to get rid of the pictures of webcam and keyboard but it adds at least some illustrations to an article that would appear a bit too "textual" without them. As for the recent image I added I can understand that may be shocking to some people but honestly: 1) it's correctly linked to the subject contrary to the other pictures, 2) the composition and the attitude of the woman aren't creating any porn aspect of the subject since we don't really see anything really explicit nor details of her intimacy. So for all these reasons I'd say I'd keep everything! --86.67.47.68 (talk) 07:51, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Random assortment of pictures 

message: Seriously people... c'mon. 99% of this article is POV and focuses on 'CHILD PREDATORS ZOMG!'. The other 1% makes cybersex look negative and whatnot while also managing to do this and that.
I have very little knowledge on the subject. But hopefully some ppl can fix this?. 
I mean goodgrief, cybersex between a 46 year old and 15 year old over the internet isn't technically illegal. 
Because It's not a real life sexual encounter.
But a 46 year old ENCOURAGING or TELLING a 15 year old to meet him in real life IS illegal since the lowest age of consent in the U.S. is 16... 
But cmon, this article is so bad it makes me wanna claw my eyes out.
Nateland 16:08, 9 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  This page=garbage 

message: I have removed the image.  Surely everyone conducting "cybersex" does not sit at the computer nude with a dildo in the person's mouth.  Is there a better, more accurate image available?  I can make one that is more descriptive and less, for lack of a better word, trashy, if need be.  Thoughts? NonvocalScream (talk) 00:46, 19 December 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I think the removal was a good idea, seems to be a rather extreme and staged example, neither of which makes it encyclopedic or even helpful to understanding the topic.  For that matter, since there's bound to be quite a variety of methods used and the common thread is really the textual chat, shouldn't we be considering illustrating that aspect instead? Shell   babelfish 19:07, 20 December 2008 (UTC)

text: I think I found a better one, added. NonvocalScream (talk) 14:52, 16 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Image 

message: "Since cybersex can satisfy some sexual desires without the risk of sexually transmitted disease or pregnancy, it is a physically safe way for young people to experiment with sexual thoughts and emotions." (...) I had no idea that "experimentation" with "sexual thoughts and emotions" would otherwise explicitly entail that the participants had sex... I believe that the male body experiments with sexual thoughts and emotions all by itself, and I'm pretty sure that it works the same way for women... As for the non-involuntary aspect, there is always the old standby, "talking". Also, there is the discussion-dodging fragment "can satisfy some sexual desires". Come on. What sexual desires are we talking about? Viewing or listening to someone being sexually explicit? It's certainly overtly sexual, but implying that it is a FORM of sex is silly. Asperger, he'll know. (talk) 04:35, 22 March 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Agreed. When I first saw the article I just thought "people are crazy" and that the subject doesn't seem worthy of an encyclopedia entry. First it sounds too serious, for the theme, maybe there should be an introduction preparing the reader for this nonsensical behavior. Perhaps the article has to be renamed, I didn't check the sources, but the whole thing looks very fishy. JMCF125 (talk) 22:46, 27 March 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ahem... "loaded" terms 

message: The article makes it sound like all cybersex consists of fantasizing and roleplaying actual sex, but I don't think that's true. For one, camsex really doesn't require much suspension of disbelief. But even with text based cybersex, it's perfectly possible to, say, describe in detail how you're touching yourself, or even give explicit orders on what to do to oneself. Surely this still qualifies? 70.36.140.183 (talk) 11:45, 7 June 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes. The article currently lists rp as a “colloquial” term for netsex, but I’d say it’s a subset thereof… As such, I’m editing the lede accordingly. —Wiki Wikardo 23:28, 20 August 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Roleplay 

message: I edited the brief mention of World of Warcraft as it was seriously inaccurate. In WoW, cybering is by no means "widely accepted" - it occurs largely on roleplay servers (which are only a small percent of the servers to begin with), and the "erotic roleplay" community is smallish. The average, traditional roleplayer, when asked, will probably either claim that ERP is not really roleplay and has no place in the community or say that, while they don't participate in it, they don't mind so long as it's private. Public ERP is largely looked down upon. In fact, cybering's technically against WoW's terms of use. However, people are very rarely punished for engaging in ERP, so I changed the term to "largely unmoderated". That's the best term I could use to adequately describe the situation without devoting an entire section to it. Someone else might want to look up the issue in the other games listed to see if they are similarly inaccurate. 74.100.197.20 (talk) 21:24, 4 August 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I would not call it "largely unmoderated" in World of Warcraft. As with all other offences in the game, the Blizzard moderators act reactively, not actively - that is, you have to write a report before they take action as they don't actively go around policing the servers. However, if you do write a report on any offence, they will investigate into the matter and take approprite actions. As you say yourself, cybersex in World of Warcraft is indeed a bannable offence, and let me add that since it's a 12+ game, I'm quite certain Blizzard take cybersex reports quite seriously. If justly reported for participating in cybersex, people do and will get punished with bans and warnings. I will edit the article to reflect this. --85.81.86.44 (talk) 09:54, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  In MMOs 

message: "In more recent years, there has also been growing concern[according to whom?] that frequently engaging in online relationships (sexual or otherwise) encourages antisocial behavior. This is often attributed to teens or young adults, especially those who are considered, or consider themselves apart from the social norm[vague]. The belief is that, with the ease and anonymity of the Internet, many may choose to interact predominantly with online partners, rather than develop interpersonal relationships with "real life" people.[citation needed]"
This is surely the point of view of somebody who strongly oppose Cybersex (Neutral Point of View guideline, please) WITHOUT *any* proof or source to back this up, being extremely offensive towards those who adopt this pratice. I would like to reword this and say that it COULD result in that sometimes etc but as I'm not good at wording this and I have no sources, I'll just be bold and remove this for now as it serves no purpose but trying to offend cyberers with somebody's point of view without any source. I agree that something in these lines is needed, somebody please do it with neutral point of view and reliable sources. As it is now, simply NO.
189.103.53.72 (talk) 19:53, 9 December 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: That use of the word antisocial is wrong, antisocial means to be actively hostile. What the writer meant was asocial, which means not social. However, even then it would be wrong in this instance, as socialising online is a genuine form of socialising. Jim Michael (talk) 16:45, 18 October 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Lack of neutrality and sources on offensive statement 

message: This line is outdated: "Unlike phone sex, cybersex in chat rooms is rarely commercial".  If you look up web sites by popularity, you will see that livejasmin.com is in the top 50 most visited websites in the world.  Further, more people visit livejasmin.com than groupon.com, and groupon.com was recently valued at five to twenty billion.  Livejasmin.com is only one of many rapidly growing sites.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Muilenta (talk • contribs) 20:25, 19 February 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: While Livejasmin may rank quite high in hits thats because its an automatic popup on every thepiratebay search! (and has managed to get round the firefox pop up blockers somehow Dasy2k1 (talk) 12:30, 7 July 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: There are many popular commercial webcam sites, so I've removed that sentence. Jim Michael (talk) 16:48, 18 October 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Outdated 

message: There are some good historical references (back to 1985 and earlier) mentioned in an AOIR listserv thread which starts here (see also threadsort), if someone wants to follow those up. Jodi.a.schneider (talk) 03:32, 11 June 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Historical references 

message: So, the signature and only picture for this topic is "A West Midlands Police poster attempting to inform children about how to respond to online sexual abuse".
Yup, that's NPOV right there.
Also odd - the article doesn't mention it at all!
So how about
- write a section on this side of things
- stick the picture down there to illustrate how it is taken seriously
- get a NPOV image for the top picture?
Preferably not a webcam picture...  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.108.225.209 (talk) 22:09, 27 June 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Non-neutral picture and at odds with articile 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Cybersex. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.nydailynews.com/archives/news/1996/02/02/1996-02-02_cybersplit__online_affair_sp.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 12:44, 1 April 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: ben bir erkegim 78.170.200.70 (talk) 05:53, 25 October 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: hello 130.105.183.193 (talk) 19:14, 12 January 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Seks 

message: The article states the following:
Non-marital, adult, consensual paid cybersex counts as illegal solicitation of prostitution and illegal prostitution in multiple US states. 
It cites https://scholarlycommons.law.cwsl.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?referer=&httpsredir=1&article=1186&context=cwlr .
The source cited is a an old scholarly article (2002), which states in the conclusion:
It remains undecided by the courts whether a person that provides consideration to gain access to an adult Web site and subsequently views a live-sex show, or directs an Internet performer to masturbate, is engaging in criminal behavior. 
In other words, the source contradicts the statement asserted in this article. Unless, someone can find a legal case where a person has been prosecuted for cam sex, when all parties were of consenting age, this statement should be removed from the article. 66.68.15.192 (talk) 05:27, 29 November 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Prostitution? 

message: Gusto po ako pag pasok ng cybersex kasi ang hirap ng palilya ko 49.149.181.119 (talk) 15:52, 19 March 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Enter for cybersex 

message: Link po yan ang cybersex 49.149.181.119 (talk) 15:56, 19 March 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Website