Edit - This is a post to the meta group of Blåhaj Lemmy. It is not intended for the entire lemmyverse. If you are not on Blåhaj Lemmy and plan on dropping in to offer your opinion on how we are doing things in a way you don't agree with, your post will be removed.
==
A user on our instance reported a post on lemmynsfw as CSAM. Upon seeing the post, I looked at the community it was part of, and immediately purged all traces of that community from our instance.
I approached the admins of lemmynsfw and they assured me that the models with content in the community were all verified as being over 18. The fact that the community is explicitly focused on making the models appear as if they're not 18 was fine with them. The fact that both myself and one a member of this instance assumed it was CSAM, was fine with them. I was in fact told that I was body shaming.
I'm sorry for the lack of warning, but a community skirting the line trying to look like CSAM isn't a line I'm willing to walk. I have defederated lemmynsfw and won't be reinstating it whilst that community is active.
For anyone wondering, this is lemmynsfw's take on the situation.
On a personal level, the vibes are off. Their defense seems really defensive and immediately moves to reframe the situation as body shaming. There's a difference between an adult who looks underage posting porn of themselves and a community dedicated to porn of adults who look underage. Reducing the latter down to body shaming seems like unfair framing to me.
Did you check the community in question? I'm quite suprised to hear one could think that's csam. To me it looks just like your typical low-effort onlyfans content. None of the models even looked "barely legal" but more like well over 20 in most cases.
The community in question listed "child-like" in their sidebar until after this defederation. Gross.
That's a stumble, but it was because they copied and pasted the dictionary definition of "adorable" into the sidebar. The same community has more than two million members on Reddit and has been a staple for almost a decade. However, they simply wrote "It must be adorable." instead defining adorable like Lemmy did, so there's that.
Idk, it just seems weird to be outraged when everything is legal, consensual, and not even a fringe kink. This is like Australia banning small-titted pornstars in their late twenties in a recent project against CSAM, because these adults aren't shaped in morally appropriate ways.
It seems weird to me that you're on the meta for another instance complaining about a decision that doesn't affect you.
There's plenty of other comments here about other awful shit going on at lemmynsfw and I don't feel like recapping that. From what I can see concerning the actual defederation, it is at worst the right choice for the wrong reasons.
The rest of the argument seems to be about the community's intent. Including "child-like" in the sidebar of a porn community because it was copy/pasted from a dictionary definition may have been a 'stumble' but it was still negligent.
When I checked their communities most were basically empty?
And I didn't see a community that fits that description.
Edit: I did try to enable nsfw content and tried from other accounts I have on other instances.
Your instance just deferedated from lemmyNSFW. You can't see any new content there anymore with that account.
Yeah. I don’t think they’re sincerely trying to “be inclusive”. I think they’re just trying to misuse progressive concepts to their own advantage.
They know full well what they’re doing. The fact that it isn’t legally CP is just a technicality.
I think it’s really strange to call that a technicality. Adults with babyfaces and braces doing porn (which appears to be what this was about, as far as I can tell) is worlds apart from children being abused. Calling that a “technicality” is like saying the difference between a slasher movie and a snuff film is a “technicality.” People who watch slasher movies arent actually wanting to see snuff films deep down inside. And people who find adults with babyfaces attractive arent actually lusting after kids deep down inside.
They literally said in the post no one looks too young to be lusted after. Major red flag right there.
I feel this needs to be clarified. The point is that anyone of legal age deserves to be lusted after if that’s what they want. You telling them “you look too young, no one is allowed to find you attractive” is a bit… fucked.
To an extent, but there kind of has to be a line somewhere. I hope beyond hope that they can find fulfilling love and lust, if that's what they want, in their personal lives. I'm all for body positivity in general. I'm just saying I wouldn't be comfortable if Sandra Rae started posting sexually explicit content of herself. Maybe a bit of an extreme example, but they did say nobody.
I thought we already drew that line: 18 years of age, able to consent, and consenting. For context: I looked at this article where it is said Shauna Rae is 22 years old, however due to a condition her growth was stunted. I don't think we should tell her not to date or do explicit things with her partner, when she finds one. It's her body, and she is an adult. Similar to others with growth related conditions, such as dwarfism, or simply people who look petite even after they've come of age, who also get thrown under the bus regularly.
Let's actually go that extra step and pretend she did make sexually explicit content. Now what? It immediately feels very wrong. Put that aside. I'm guessing most people are going to be worried about those with certain urges getting their rocks off..? (Honestly, not sure what to call them here, I was already unfamiliar with the term "CSAM", so I'll just leave it at that.) Now there's content that's legal and hasn't harmed a child. That seems ... better than the alternative?
I don't think a person with unhealthy sexual urges gets to choose whether they have these urges or not. Demonizing them to the degree that we are, leads to most of them not being able to get the help they need. If it can't be done by other means such as therapy, or therapy is not available, an outlet might help. And whether that's "questionable" but legal porn, roleplaying, or other content or activities involving consenting adults that seems to tick the right boxes, ... that's up to them, not us. Again, miles better than the alternative, even if the immediate reaction is to be disgusted.
It's an incredibly delicate problem. I'd say the right approach would be to do more scientific studies, but I imagine not many have or will be done because of the societal taboo. It's also very iffy trying to search for existing research on this matter on the internet, and even if I could find some, I don't have the expertise to know how scientifically sound it is.
In fact, in writing this and continuously re-reading my comment, I keep feeling like the points I'm making are scarily close to those of an apologist, or worse, someone who wants to normalize the sexualization of minors. I want to make it clear that I'm 100% against this. But I'm also against shaming the bodies of adults, telling them what they can't and can't do, because it makes me feel uncomfortable. (And I want to note that this is not meant to be an argument relating to the thread as a whole, as it would not want to tell the admins to host content I hypothesized in this post.)
Holy shit unrelated I recognize you from Vintage Story. I had a modding stint for awhile and used your guide to get started. Thanks!!
"The fact that the community is explicitly focused on making the models appear as if they’re not 18 was fine with them."
so this guy is lying
"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."
JFC what a shitty take. Roleplay of CP is still fucking disgusting.
all Im seeing is you showing me them saying that they're also not okay with it?
Read it again? They excluded roleplay as the act they find reprehensible
An adult role playing as a kid isn’t any different than them role playing as a dog, or a car, or a dragon. Are you going to tell me I can’t role play as a dragon while my partner role plays as a car?
Role playing as children having sex/being represented sexually is absolutely different from role-playing as a dragon fucking a car. If you can't see that you might want to rethink some things.
Ageplay is absolutely a thing, but the point is they are adults. pretending to be something else, doesn’t change what they are.
It’s creepy, I would certainly not take part. But the bottom line is, in reality it’s just two adults playing pretend.
I can see what you're saying, but it's way past my red line of what I find acceptable, ESPECIALLY on the internet where it can be hard to verify for amateurs. Just seems like giving pedophiles content they can fantasize about.
Why would a pedophile be interested in a grown ass adult pretending to be a kid? That’s like saying you’d be attracted to someone pretending to be short by walking on their knees…
Is... is that a thing?
Welcome to the internet!