sh.itjust.works Main Community

7649 readers

13 users here now

Home of the sh.itjust.works instance.

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

TheDude@sh.itjust.works

manifex@sh.itjust.works

biela@sh.itjust.works

imaqtpie@sh.itjust.works

De-federate from instances with loli (sh.itjust.works)

submitted 1 year ago by InfiniteVariables@sh.itjust.works to c/main@sh.itjust.works

130 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Can we get a consensus on whether our community should de-federate with servers that host loli? I personally think we should block them, and if that ends up not being the consensus here then I'll probably sign up on another server. I hope we can all agree to set that boundary though because I like it here and it seems otherwise pretty cool.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] PigglyWiggly@sh.itjust.works 21 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (2 children)

As far as I know it isn't illegal in the US since the Ashcroft case in 2003, but exists in a gray area subject to the standard Miller test for obscenity that all pornography is subject to. I seriously doubt incidental viewing of it would be a crime. But I 100% could be wrong as I am not a lawyer.

[–] Finnagain@lemmy.world 9 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

I'm not a lawyer either, but a quick search shows that state law is the thing this could be breaking. It's not criminally punishable to possess it, but acquiring or distributing it via the internet is potentially illegal. Here's a page from a Massachusetts lawyer discussing the legality. https://anthonyricciolaw.com/is-lolicon-legal-in-the-us/#:~:text=Under%20federal%20law%2C%20a%20simple,state%20laws%20regarding%20child%20pornography.

Edit: apparently that's only part of the requirements for illegality. The other part is sexuality or not having "value" which is subjective. Either way, it's a dice roll on criminal acts.

[–] PigglyWiggly@sh.itjust.works 6 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

It is okay to admit you were misinformed. It doesn't reflect anything negative about you as a person, and shows you are open to growth.

[–] StarNyte@burggit.moe 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I've seen this image where it's basically a state by state case of legality

[–] PigglyWiggly@sh.itjust.works 2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Nice, I'm going to take that at face value since if I do any more googling about this Google is going to get some wrong ideas about me.