Oh. After reading through my own link, I noticed this...
"This is not about criminalising art or pornographic cartoons more generally, but about targeting obscene, and often very realistic, images of child sexual abuse which have no place in our society."

Selling or distributing such material is already illegal under the Obscene Publications Act, but owning drawings or computer generated images of child abuse is currently not an offence.

Alongside a very unrealistic image of (adult) Second Life avatars. Imagery in SL is very much more "realistic" than that these days. So it opens up the age-old question; "what is obscene and what is not"? And, even, what is "realistic"? I'm assuming that, since the sale and distribution of obscene material is a criminal offense, that there are legal definitions of such.

It is important, though, that Second Life has specific definitions for "child avatars" and special terms of use regarding them.
What is a Child avatar?

Quite simply, a child avatar is any avatar that attempts to present as a youth. This is not limited to humans, and can include furries (referred to in this instance as "cubs" or "babyfur"), neko, vampires, and other avatar selections. Some doll avatars might also fit in this category.

This does not necessarily include fairies (which may be child-like in appearance, as well as smaller than the average avatar), tinies (although human baby-shaped tinies do exist), or those wearing gothic lolita and/or cosplay fashions and styles.

.....

Child avatars are allowed within Second Life.[1] A child avatar, even within a mature or adult region (but not participating in adult (in this case, sexual) ) activities is allowed. A child avatar is allowed do everything any other avatar is, with the following exceptions:

Child avatars in sexual situations (sexual congress obviously, though it is unclear beyond this) are not allowed and abuse reportable (ARable).

Public promotion (classified listing, profile, etc.) of sexual situations with child avatars is not allowed and ARable. [added by me: an AR is an "Abuse Report"]

Creating areas for the purpose of sexual ageplay is not allowed and is ARable. This includes having items with sexual content (sexual poseballs or equipment) in proximity to items traditionally associated with children (swingsets, etc.)

Indicating that the *real age* of a child avatar (as opposed to a stated SL/role playing age) is below main grid age is not allowed and ARable.

Child avatar nudity has been called into question as well. While no language specific to nudity was included in the initial policies, child avatar nudity of the genital or chest regions, including in otherwise non-sexual situations (skin vendors, for example) can be a violation. This also applies to parcel descriptions: nudity or "clothing optional" language can not be included in a parcel description on a kid-specific area.

Note that child avatars are allowed on PG, Mature, and even Adult public parcels, provided with the latter that they are adult verified. Note that this does not necessarily apply to private parcels where one has the option to eject or ban as desired. The allowance of child avatars on adult rated land such as Zindra does not invalidate any of the above rules.

As with all things, context is key, and err on the side of caution.

http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/Child_Avatar


I tend to agree with that and think it has been well thought out. So I would say that any graphical depiction, real or virtual, of children should not include gratuitous violence, abuse or sex.