Bendavisunlv6

joined 1 year ago
[–] Bendavisunlv6@lemmynsfw.com 5 points 1 year ago (1 children)

A Buddhist temple.

[–] Bendavisunlv6@lemmynsfw.com 17 points 1 year ago

“I don’t know anything about this and I won’t educate myself directly, but I’ll give you my uninformed hot take nonetheless…”

[–] Bendavisunlv6@lemmynsfw.com 9 points 1 year ago

Their misrepresentation of your position is arguably slander in the legal sense in that it attributes a criminal intent to you. I would not be cool with their statement remaining as is. They can say that y’all disagreed about whether it was child fetishization in the first place, which is accurate.

[–] Bendavisunlv6@lemmynsfw.com 14 points 1 year ago

A lot of people are taking it at face value that fetishizing childlike appearances even happened here, which it has not. This instance’s rules ban even fictive depictions of the underage. Drawings, anything.

No one disagrees that fetishizing children is bad. No one. What you have here is the blahaj mods flipping out and thinking that this occurred when it did not. They even falsely claimed that the admins here are okay with that happening, which they are not.

Let’s not dignify their position by accepting their false premise and then saying “you know they kinda have a point.”

[–] Bendavisunlv6@lemmynsfw.com 10 points 1 year ago

Totally. They even have to right to be dead wrong about the reason, which they’ve exercised.

[–] Bendavisunlv6@lemmynsfw.com 16 points 1 year ago (3 children)

I really don’t see how being a trans community qualifies one to judge adult content. I think their objection, incorrect as it was, was based on overall aesthetics and framing, not just cup size. Apparently pearl-clutching is universal.

[–] Bendavisunlv6@lemmynsfw.com 9 points 1 year ago

I had this question too. It was adorableporn. It is not remotely comparable to r/jailbait so let’s not jump to conclusions. The lemmynsfw mods are absolutely in the right here.

[–] Bendavisunlv6@lemmynsfw.com 47 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Okay.. so it was adorableporn.

They are clearly wrong. Glad to have that settled.

[–] Bendavisunlv6@lemmynsfw.com 21 points 1 year ago (2 children)

They said that you were okay with the fact that users were specifically trying to make it seem like they were underage. Good to hear the other side of the story.

[–] Bendavisunlv6@lemmynsfw.com 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Who’s stopping that? I laughed in my own comment. I have the opposite problem of posting comments I should probably not bother with. Like this one.

[–] Bendavisunlv6@lemmynsfw.com 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

That’s surprising, since it’s such an important part of the creative work. I would guess that it was relegated to women and undervalued because it probably involved a great deal of manual work back in the day - splicing film and so on. I hope we’re talking about a long time ago, anyway. It’s certainly a recognized role now. The only film editor I know in the business (at Pixar) is a woman, fwiw.

[–] Bendavisunlv6@lemmynsfw.com 0 points 1 year ago

Laughing and pointing at the guy who expects sunshine and rainbows from Samuel L Jackson :D

view more: ‹ prev next ›