I definitely see the logic in your statement (and it seems like tech/logic-oriented people tend to agree with you and me), but I lament that most of society ope

I definitely see the logic in your statement (and it seems like tech/logic-oriented people tend to agree with you and me), but I lament that most of society operates on a much more "feelings-based" basis, and thus they generally see something like "$Person engaged in a detailed $deepTaboo simulation with computer using the $SoftwareProduct" and start looking around for someone to crucify (usually both $Person and the owner of $SoftwareProduct) for 'promoting' $deepTaboo -- without asking "who was harmed?" Even if the constitution is actually consulted and the parties are spared pearl-clutching prosecution about it, the court of public opinion will punish the company just as hard, pressuring gatekeepers like Apple to ban it, etc. And thanks to the deep, disturbing taboos that can be involved, it's super hard to find someone who will stick their neck out to challenge all this. I know I wouldn't, because I know I would be immediately branded as "Joe Bloggs, Fan and Advocate of (Insert disgusting perversion)" I wonder if this is something more advanced societies would come to terms with. I know ours is not equipped to handle it in a smart way.