this post was submitted on 24 Jul 2023
291 points (95.0% liked)
Fediverse
28732 readers
277 users here now
A community to talk about the Fediverse and all it's related services using ActivityPub (Mastodon, Lemmy, KBin, etc).
If you wanted to get help with moderating your own community then head over to !moderators@lemmy.world!
Rules
- Posts must be on topic.
- Be respectful of others.
- Cite the sources used for graphs and other statistics.
- Follow the general Lemmy.world rules.
Learn more at these websites: Join The Fediverse Wiki, Fediverse.info, Wikipedia Page, The Federation Info (Stats), FediDB (Stats), Sub Rehab (Reddit Migration), Search Lemmy
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
So blahaj.zone defederated a whole instance because one community on lemmynsfw has pictures of (verified) adults that don't look adult enough? That seems... extreme, and rather insulting to the women whose bodies/appearances are supposedly too close to actual children to be worthy of attraction. Glad that's not my instance, though to each their own.
If it's as presented in the quote then yeah, this feels like that australian porn law they tried where "if you look like you could be underage, it counts as child sex material" and one specific example from the text was "too small or flat breasts". Which was just patently absurd.
I seem to remember a guy being convicted for possession of child porn, and the very much adult porn star actually came to his trial to testify in his defense... I'll see if I can find a link about it, but that will be some risky searching.
Lupe something.
And he wasnt convicted, but was going to. The state had a "medical expert" show up and testify that there was no way an adult woman could look like that. Just 100% sure of himself and smug as fuck about it.
Then the defense called the pornstar to the stand and she was in her late 20s or something and working in the industry for over a decade.
It was something that never should have made it to trial, and gets used a lot as an example for how shit expert testimony can be. The prosecution doesn't try to find the person who knows the most, they find whoever can do the best job of convincing a jury that the prosecution is right. So the people who do it (some are professional "expert witnesses") are just the most overconfident people. Even if they're not sure, they play it up that there can't be any doubt.
Ah, found the story. That is wild. Also amazing of her to actually fly over to testify, I thought it was in her own country or something. Amazing person! <3
Lupe Fuentes. What’s worse is that she was already registered in multiple US studios since she made films here, too, so the prosecution could have easily verified her documents, which the defense attorney asked her to do. Instead, she had the CBP agent who made the arrest and an “expert” doctor testify that Lupe couldn’t have been more than 13.
Good article on it here: https://reason.com/2010/05/03/porn-star-saves-man-from-incom/
That crap is borderline Puritanism, wtf is wrong with people?
People be saying they aren't like the other side but they be
Search safe my son.
"personalization settings, son! They activate in response to physical trauma. You can't hurt me, Jack."
There's some further correspondence in the linked post, and yeah that's basically what it boiled down to. What a strange world. I can't believe that's a real law.
lawmakers are not intelligent or discerning people
They're pandering to voters with laws like that. The politicians probably don't care.
Makes the story about ChatGPT passing the bar exam a lot less impressive.
Those changes were the sole reason women in the media in australia got bigger tits all of a sudden. Nice!
God I feel so bad for all the women who were in the "illegally small boobs" category. Therapist and psychiatrist visits must have skyrocketed.
And to think Hannah Hayes is quite old in Porn industry terms. She should be doing milf vids in about 2 to 4 years if my calculations are correct.
Lemmynsfw literally has a community called fauxbait.
I’m thinking that they may have either made a mistake in picking another community, or that they saw what they thought was content from that community and called it out immediately. Let’s not forget that if anything Lemmy is less immune to the moderator god complex than Reddit. Since most “mods” of Lemmy/fediverse instances are also paying a physical price they feel even more attacked. Rather than just announcing simply “Blahaj has defederated from Lemmynsfw” they made a whole post about it and then talked at length about culture war stuff. A simple “Blahaj states their reason for defederating is due to our hosting of potentially illegal content. We want to remind our subscribers and user that lemmynsfw does NOT support illegal content, will NOT host it and will remove anything that violates the law.” They chose to take it as an insult. It’s just business.
I assumed until someone said the problem community was adorableporn that the problem was fauxbait. Fauxbait gives me seriously sceevy vibes and I ended up blocking it on all three of my accounts (I think. If I havent I will)
The name REALLY doesn't help. Like, I know the women there are not under age for the most part because I have seen them around since I was in my 20s, which was 20 years ago. It's not my thing, but there are people who are attracted to slimmer proportions so whatever. Still, the name makes it sound like it's a CP false flag site.
First of all I want to make it clear that I don’t agree with this defederation, if the models are verified adults then there is no problem.
That said, as a Mastodon instance admin, I wanna explain something to y’all. CSAM is one of those things that you do not want to take your chances with as an admin. Beyond the obvious fact that it’s vile, even having that shit cached on your server can potentially lead to very serious legal trouble. I can see how an admin might choose to defederate because even if right now all models are verified, what if something slips through the cracks (pun not intended, but I’ll roll with it).
My instance defederates a bunch of Japanese artist instances like pawoo because of this. All it takes is one user crossing the line, one AI generated image that looks too real.
Aside from all that, there’s also a lot of pressure being put on many instance admins to outright ban users and defederate instances that post or allow loli/shota artwork as well. You’re quickly labeled a pedophile if you don’t do it. A lot of people consider fake CSAM to be just as bad, so it’s possible that the other admin felt that way.
I’m more lenient on loli/shota as long as it’s not realistic because I understand that it’s a cultural difference and generally speaking Japanese people don’t see it the way we do. I don’t ban stuff just because I think it’s gross, I just don’t look at it.
Anyway what I’m trying to say I guess is that being an admin is hard and there’s a lot of stuff y’all don’t know about so disagree with that person if you want (I do too) but keep in mind that these decisions don’t come easy and nobody likes to defederate.
EDIT: here’s a mastodon thread about the CSAM problem in the fediverse if you’d like to learn more.
If they offered that as explanation there would have been no drama.
Well yeah I’m not like defending them or anything. I just kind of understand where they’re coming from too.
As a woman who spent a good chunk of her adult life looking like a child I had to deal with a lot of pedos on MySpace etc trying to get sick pictures from me. Most of them fucked off once I told them I was in my 20s... it's disturbing and I find the idea that someone can find childlike attributes attractive to be repulsive. It's not ok to simulate racism or bigotry for the pleasure of racists and bigots, why is it ok to simulate CP?
The women on the community in question don't even look "barely legal" but well over 20 in most cases. People are losing their minds over nothing.
So presumably you are repulsed by your partners right?
Like when did the conversation become purely about physical appearance, and instead of the actual moral implications of dating a literal child.
Do you not have to apply your reasoning to anyone who ever found you attractive?
One post in one community and the title of the community.
I think this is an area where there is legitimate debate. They didn't name the community, but I'm guessing it's fauxbait, which has in the sidebar:
The title seems to be for "fake jailbait," so I can understand people assuming it's essentially simulated underage porn. There will be those who say that as long as the models are legal, it's fine, and others who say it's not okay to make what looks like child porn, even if it's not made with children.
I personally feel that, as long as they're up front about it being adults, it's okay for it to exist, even though some of the pics there are a bit gross to me. But I get that people will fall to the left and right of me. If it crosses a line for the admin there, defederating seems reasonable (since they can't block the community at the instance level).
The community was !adorableporn@lemmynsfw.com
Nothing to do with jailbait
The community in question is "adorable porn", from what I've read.
The concept of which is attractive but bubbly/cute women in nsfw circumstances.
I'm the new mod of !adorableporn@lemmynsfw.com, (not to be confused with !adorableporn@pornlemmy.com) , and since the female gender does not have a monopoly on the word "adorable", the community is inclusive of all genders.
I welcome all to join in the conversation at pinned post in the community: https://lemmynsfw.com/post/419923
I thought it was a different community that was causing the issues; the reaction makes much more sense with that one. While I still don't agree with the defederation it's not nearly as unreasonable as it first seemed to me. Thanks for clearing that up.
Edit - nevermind, it actually was adorableporn, so yeah still weird.