this post was submitted on 23 Jul 2023
700 points (97.4% liked)

Blahaj Lemmy Meta

2353 readers
1 users here now

Blåhaj Lemmy is a Lemmy instance attached to blahaj.zone. This is a group for questions or discussions relevant to either instance.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

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.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 158 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (19 children)

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.

[–] [email protected] 87 points 1 year ago (6 children)

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.

[–] [email protected] 47 points 1 year ago (2 children)

The community in question listed "child-like" in their sidebar until after this defederation. Gross.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (5 replies)
[–] [email protected] 39 points 1 year ago (5 children)

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.

[–] [email protected] 101 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

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.

[–] [email protected] 29 points 1 year ago (1 children)

They literally said in the post no one looks too young to be lusted after. Major red flag right there.

[–] [email protected] 70 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (2 children)

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.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (17 replies)
[–] [email protected] 112 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (18 children)

I think both instance admins have a valid stance on the matter. lemmynsfw appears to take reports very seriously and if necessary does age verification of questionable posts, something that likely takes a lot of time and effort. Blahaj Lemmy doesn't like the idea of a community that's dedicated to "adults that look or dress child-like". While I understand the immediate (and perhaps somewhat reactionary) concern that might raise, is this concern based in fact, or in emotion?

Personally I'm in the camp of "let consenting adults do adult things", whether that involves fetishes that are typically thought of as gross, dressing up in clothes or doing activities typically associated with younger ages, or simply having a body that appears underage to the average viewer. As the lemmynsfw admin mentioned, such persons have the right to lust and be lusted after, too. That's why, as a society, we decided to draw the line at 18 years old, right?

I believe the concern is not that such content is not supposed to exist or be shared, but rather that it's collected within a community. And I think the assumption here is that it makes it easy for "certain people" to find this content. But if it is in fact legal, and well moderated, then is there a problem? I don't believe there is evidence that seeing such content could change your sexual preferences. On the other hand, saying such communities should not exist could send the wrong message, along the lines of "this is weird and should not exist", which might be what was meant with "body shaming".

I'm trying to make sense of the situation here and possibly try to deescalate things, as I do believe lemmynsfw approach to moderation otherwise appears to be very much compatible with Blahaj Lemmy. Is there a potential future where this decision is reconsidered? Would there be some sort of middle-ground that admins from both instances could meet and come to an understanding?

load more comments (18 replies)
[–] [email protected] 102 points 1 year ago (3 children)

For the people like me that don't know the term: CSAM is Child Sexual Abuse Materials. It's the term used instead of CP as "pornography" is more commonly used for pleasure or conveys the idea of consent.

As for the porn that uses people that look under age, it's no different than the anime children that are thousands of years old. It doesn't matter how old they are, they look like children and it's gross.

[–] [email protected] 28 points 1 year ago

The world is messed up. I feel like advertising any adult material as "barely legal" should be banned too. It skirts the boundary too close. Not as close as the aforementioned thousand year old child body but it feels almost as bad imo.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] [email protected] 100 points 1 year ago

I'm not on this instance, but thank you for being so swift and resolute in your actions. Happy to see all due caution is being taken. Not so happy that such a community made it's way here to the fediverse. Hopefully I won't see any of it while doomscrolling.

[–] [email protected] 85 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I enjoy NSFW content, but I certainly don’t want to stumble into “how close to CSAM can we get while staying technically legal?” content. And the bullshit lie about this being “body shaming” pisses me off.

This admin decision obviously isn’t up for a vote, but it’s just so obviously the right call. Thank you Ada for handling this, and I’m sorry (in the Canadian way, not the guilty way 😉🇨🇦) you had to see any of that.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 75 points 1 year ago (1 children)

was fine with them

That’s surprising since their rules say that not even fictive under-18 content is allowed:

Posting content involving any person who is under 18 is strictly forbidden. This includes real, drawn, and fictional content.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 58 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

I get the feeling there's going to be a lot of comments here from people who disagree.

This is not your instance. This is not even my instance, I am just signed up here (and thank you Ada, I like it here and I approve of this decision. CSAM-like porn is icky). There is no need to focus on the morality of sharing porn that ends up being viewed as CSAM. Hosting porn involves legal risk, and federating with an instance that has porn on it means that eventually you will host porn images. If you have your account here and you don't like this choice, consider moving instances or hosting your own.

Not only that, does anyone remember /r/jailbait on reddit? They did not do anything about that subreddit because the images were "legal", but the userbase they attracted began sharing real CSAM in the DMs. To be clear: I don't know what community we're talking about (lemmynsfw does not appear to have a jailbait community, I did not look hard) but you do not want the sort of people around that this attracts.

edit: remove unintentional link

[–] [email protected] 45 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Let's be honest; the only reason Reddit ever did anything with that subreddit is because CNN brought bad PR to them.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 57 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (23 children)

the same community (adorableporn) is also on reddit btw with 2.2m subscribers.

i have no grand moral opinion on this type of content. for me it is the same as femboy content for example, where people also push for a youthful, girly aesthetic.

as long as the content is made by consenting verified adults, i don't care.

it's like adults cosplaying with japanese school uniforms or calling your partner "mommy" or "daddy".

probably not the best move in terms of sexual morals for sure, in the grand scheme of things tho this is just how people express their sexuality i guess.

load more comments (23 replies)
[–] [email protected] 57 points 1 year ago (3 children)

Anyone wanna save me from having to google what CSAM is?

[–] [email protected] 67 points 1 year ago (1 children)
load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[–] [email protected] 52 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Thank you. Just the spam in new was bad enough, but CSAM? Holy crap.

[–] [email protected] 70 points 1 year ago (14 children)

To be clear, it is not CSAM. It is legal porn deliberately designed to look like CSAM

load more comments (14 replies)
[–] [email protected] 52 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Tbh shoutout to Connect, let's me block whatever. My block list primarily the hundreds of gross, weird porn that has popped up on this site.

[–] [email protected] 56 points 1 year ago (3 children)

You don’t appreciate 46 different sub-genres of furry porn, each with a separate community, filling up your feed?

load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 51 points 1 year ago (4 children)

It's ironic this went down over adorableporn and not fauxbait

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] [email protected] 44 points 1 year ago (9 children)

Kinda glad that server is blocked. I've had to block over 100 subs from them over the last few weeks.

The amount of porn that was coming in on my feed was crazy.

load more comments (9 replies)
[–] [email protected] 39 points 1 year ago (22 children)

I guess Trans Littles can just go fuck off then? One of the biggest Trans comics artist is openly a little. Why are we in the business of regulating what consenting adults do?

load more comments (22 replies)
[–] [email protected] 38 points 1 year ago (3 children)

If I believe the mod of the community in question is telling the truth, Seems like the incident in question was just a misunderstanding. The community name is

spoileradorableporn

I will refer to this as "the first community" in the following text.

The mod of the community copy/pasted the dictionary definition from vocabulary.com, which contains the word "childlike".

IMO, the community in question is not trying to skirt the line of Child Sexual Abuse Material (CSAM). In fact, there is a subreddit of the same name which has absolutely nothing to do with people that appear underage.

That said, the same mod also moderates, and posts to a different community with a concerning name. The spoiler below shows the name and the first three paragraphs of the sidebar as they appear:

spoilerCommunity is now open to posting. Posts not having verification info will be removed.

FauxBait is a place for sharing images and videos of the youngest-looking, legal-aged (18+) girls. If you like fresh, young starlets, this is the place for you!

Just to be clear: We only feature legal, consenting adults in accordance with U.S. Laws. All models featured were at least 18 years old at the time of filming.


Also, I'm not sure if the timestamps can be trusted, but said mod was instated as the only active mod of the first community at the same time that Ada made this post, which would mean that the mod account could not have been the one that wrote the original sidebar of the first community. Not sure what to make of that. For the sake of balance though, said mod does seem to be doing verifications of the age requirements. Also, the modlog for the first community shows two admin removals from at least 10 days before this debacle, both of which err on the side of caution, so at least the admins to seem to care about enforcing their rules.


The situation seems very muddy, but I personally don't think the original incident was that big of a deal (assuming the mod is telling the truth). However, I certainly don't blame the blahaj admins for defederating as it's certainly the safest option. Wouldn't want blahaj lemmy to get taken down :| Also happy to see less pron in my feed; I'm too lazy to block the individual /c/. Personal Instance-level blocking can't come soon enough.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] [email protected] 36 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Bloody hell this thread is a mess of people from other instances complaining. I wish Lemmy would add the ability to set a community as private to it’s instance. Or only commentable by instance members. If you’re not from this instance, this defederation doesn’t affect you and you should step off. The admins job here is to protect us, the users on this instance. Not appease you.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 35 points 1 year ago (3 children)

I feel like the people getting upset over this are taking these hypotheticals of "young looking adults just wanting to be able to make porn equally and that technically the community did nothing wrong".

The problem is that just ignores the fact that pedophiles would definitely use communities like that as a "foot in the door" to a comminity that would naturally have a lot of closetted pedophiles. The issue isn't young looking adults making porn, the issue is a community based around youngest possible looking adults is naturally gonna attract and encourage pedophiles.

It's like they say, "all it takes is allowing one nazi in your bar for it to rapidly turn into a nazi bar".

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] [email protected] 31 points 1 year ago (4 children)

Lemmynsfw has been both cannibalizing itself and burning bridges with every other community. I don't think it'll be long before they topple down and its users scurry to the other established nsfw spaces, there's no way they can competently mantain a level of moderation, and that not counting what they want to allow, like what you found out.

Its good to have nsfw spaces, but so far Lemmy has not been shown to be a good platform for that (unless you're on the "no restrictions" type of user) so overall I'm glad with the action taken.

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] [email protected] 28 points 1 year ago

Nah, some people like to look at grannies. Some like newly legal models.

The key here is that everyone in these two buckets are consenting adults. If you don’t like it, that’s fine. Don’t look at it.

It doesn’t “skirt a boundary,” it’s 100% adults and within the boundary. I’m really glad you’re not the one making laws.

load more comments
view more: next ›