73
One of the admins at lemmy.blahaj.zone asked us to purge a community and all of
its users because they thought it was full of child sexual abuse material, aka
CSAM, fka kiddy porn. We assured them that we had checked this comm thoroughly
and we were satisfied that all of the models on it were of age. The admin then
demanded we purge the comm because they mistook it for CSAM, and claimed that
the entire point of the community was to make people think it was CSAM. We
vehemently disagreed that that was in fact the point of the community, but they
decided to defederate from us anyway. That is of course their choice, but we
will not purge our communities or users because someone else makes a mistake of
fact, and then lays the responsibility for their mistake at our feet. If someone
made a community intended to fool people into thinking it was kiddy porn, that
would be a real problem. If someone of age goes online and pretends – not
roleplays, but pretends with intent to deceive – to be a child and makes porn,
that is a real problem. Nobody here is doing that. One of the reasons we run our
instance the way that we do is that we want it to be inclusive. We don’t body
shame, and we believe that all adults have a right to sexual expression. That
means no adult on our instance is too thin, fat, bald, masculine, old, young,
cis, gay, etc., to be sexy, and that includes adults that look younger than some
people think they should. Everyone has a right to lust and to be lusted after.
There’s no way to draw a line that says “you can’t like adult people that look
like X” without crossing a line that we will not cross.
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.
Well no, they defederated because they have a problem with a community that tries to look like they’re underaged. Not individuals looking underaged but they’re saying they don’t like that there is a community for that type of content. It’s fine to disagree with them over the truth of that, but you shouldn’t change their reasoning.
Edit: see the very end of the chat on this comment https://lemmynsfw.com/comment/683605
I’m not sure what you mean about adorableporn trying to make anyone appear underage - I see no indication of that in the post in question, and that’s not the purpose of the community (it would even appear all non-OC posts must include proof of being above legal age). I’m not sure what your second sentence means. I had no intention of changing/mischaracterizing anyone’s post and I find it very ironic you say I did.
Whether or not that is what the purpose of that community is that is what the Blahaj admins believe the purpose of it is and that’s why they chose to defederate.
Edit: See the end of the chat in this comment, it shows what I am mentioning. https://lemmynsfw.com/comment/683605
They’re saying it’s (in their opinion, lemmynsfw admins disagree) a community devoted to crossing the line and appearing to be underaged. The Blahaj admins are saying that’s what the problem is, not just a few random users who look underaged.
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?
Yes as a survivor of abuse as a child I don’t see the big deal with thru decision.
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?
As someone who was in the same shoes as the person you reacted to: I was absolutely repulsed. It’s the main reason why I waited until my late thirties to get a partner for life.
When I got the slightest whiff of the men being with me because he liked that I was short / skinny / childlike that was the end of the relationship. It’s not only superficial, but also highly questionable to find your partner attractive because of these traits.
That’s absolutely nuts. You think it’s akin to pedophilia to find an adult woman attractive. If only you ever actually read up on what exactly pedophilia is I think you would’ve saved yourself a lot of trouble. It is exclusively an attraction to children, it has absolutely nothing to do with being attracted to petite adult women.
Like can you explain what exactly is the moral delimma in finding an adult petite woman attractive?
It’s superficial to find your partner attractive because of their traits? That makes absolutely no sense. Finding literally anyone in the world attrative is inherently superficial, that’s how it works.
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.
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
Makes the story about ChatGPT passing the bar exam a lot less impressive.
They’re pandering to voters with laws like that. The politicians probably don’t care.
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.
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?
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
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.
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.
Yeah, but on the other hand it is verifiably not CSAM
The problem is that if it’s hard to tell at a glance, there’s no way to know if actual CSAM gets uploaded there in the future. So what it boils down to is, is it worth the risk? That admin says no, it isn’t, so they defederate.
My Mastodon instance defederates pretty much any instance that allows sexually explicit or suggestive artwork or photos of people who look underage. It’s just not worth it.
then why even federate at all? someone else could post CSAM at any time
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
Where did she say that? The admin post I saw didn’t name it. Adorableporn makes no sense since half the pics there are clearly older women.
Look at the link in the OP here…
Look at the link in the OP here…
Imbecil
Look at the link in OP you are commenting on lol
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.
Full disclosure, I’m guessing - the admin post about it didn’t name the community, but she said something about “intentionally looking underage” or something like that, which is why I assumed fauxbait.
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.
Well that just makes no sense and makes me question the accuracy. I’m not sure that community even skews particular young, though probably at least a little… Adorable doesn’t necessarily mean young and young doesn’t necessarily mean adorable.
The accuracy? Admin posted the conversation
Oh, I hadn’t seen the conversation screenshot. It honestly so much doesn’t make sense that I’m wondering if she linked the wrong sub. I mean, scroll through that one - lots and lots of the posts are cute housewives.
Fauxbait, on the other hand, I could see being debatable. How could they have a problem with the one and not the other? Something doesn’t add up.
They did not link the wrong community. It’s just stupid, nothing more
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 could understand it if it were over an actual “fake jailbait” or “drawn little girls” community, that would make way more sense than this.
I’m looking at it right now and the vast majority of the posts there are clearly adult women and the ones that look young like Hannah Hayes are pretty easily verifiable adult performers. Also their tone in demanding them to purge a community and all their users when they’re so off base is absurd.
This all seems very goofy. This Ada person lives in a weird reality and I wish them the best.
That community exists on lemmynsfw too…
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 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.
That’s fair. So why not cite that particular community and ask for its removal instead of this one?
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.
Alas, Lemmy does not provide a way of making a local only post, or that is how it would have been done.
I acted on the report I received, which wasn’t for the jailbait community. At that time, I didn’t even know the jailbait community existed. However, it’s continued existence validates my initial concerns
So you didn’t even look into it at all before making demands about purging a community and all its users. Very cool.
Also don’t call it “a jailbait community”. Yeah it’s gross, but the whole point is that it’s adult women, hence the “faux”. Can’t believe I have to defend creeps against a person like you. There’s something very off with you.
You asked for an explanation. I provided one. You respond with personal attacks
After looking at your explanation, yes. Correct. Good job.
She’s a goddamned moron. Feel free to check my correspondence with her on her post. That being said, you guys do need to have a conversation about fauxbait. It is legal, obviously so to anyone with half a brain cell, but the name does kinda cast a poor shadow on the instance. As we know, morons are loud and obnoxious and draw all kinds of unwanted attention, but they usually get what they want. Ya gotta ask yourselves if the community is worth the trouble it is going to continue to bring.
I didn’t notice that blahaj defederated from us so much.
Mental illness is rampant in the blahaj
How do you know they are verified adults? Just because someone on the internet posts a picture and says it is? I think it is absolutely warranted to put communities under intense scrutiny which accumulate such content.
How do you know anyone is a verified adult? A 17 year old can look like a 22 year old. Should we ban all porn unless its of verified adults? Should one need a license to use their body in pornography?
Do you verify everyone to be of age in all pornographic material you consume? Unless you do, there is a decent chance you’ve unknowingly seen pornographic content involving someone just not quite of age.
To answer your question more directly, pornography companies where images usually originate obviously don’t hire underage actors. Sites for posting/selling self pornography also require documents, but that’s pretty prone to forgery.
When it comes to self posting on social media, all bets are off. Someone not quite of age can post pornography of themselves on twitter or reddit or they can even post it on self hosted blog.
So you have 2 solutions: Ban all pornography of people who would be asked for a driver’s license when they are buying alcohol. So probably like 30+ years of age. Requires a government license to post pornography of self, which would also require disclosing your legal name and other identifiable information when posting pornography.
Or we can continue being pragmatic and use our best judgement while understanding that our perception can’t tell who is 17 years and 363 days old and who just turned 18.
Erm, of course we should? Seriously? I wouldn’t want to accidentally run into that on Lemmy. In an ideal world we obviously should.
I do not consume pornographic material.
Let’s get back to what is discussed here. I never said we should ban all porn or whatever you try to twist my words into.
When a community allows amateur porn that can not be verified, as you state yourself, an instance or person who wants to make somewhat sure they aren’t seeing porn from or about minors should defederate from that instance. Or a user should ban that community. This is especially true if the community hosts “barely legal” porn.
I agree. In this case the pictures in question include the model name, who you can research yourself and see is above 18. That community is strictly moderated, and requires model name, source, and age verification.
One post in one community and the title of the community.