this post was submitted on 23 Jul 2023
4 points (100.0% liked)

Blahaj Lemmy Meta

2721 readers
2 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
[–] ProfessorZhu@lemmy.blahaj.zone 4 points 2 years ago (2 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?

[–] leigh@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Don’t be disingenuous. Genuine consent practices also consider that not everyone else consents to witnessing their play, so they don’t do it where it’s not welcomed. And it’s not welcomed on Blahaj Zone, in this case. That’s all.

[–] ProfessorZhu@lemmy.blahaj.zone 4 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Exscuse me but you're the one being disengenious, a NSFW instance had what!? Porn!? Stop the fucking presses. Are we going to defederate from all porn instances or just the ones you find icky? Where can I post my objection to having to be subjected to porn at all?

[–] leigh@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Let me know when you find out what the word “disingenuous” means.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] ada@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 points 2 years ago (1 children)

No one is looking at a little and thinking that they're physically 15.

[–] ProfessorZhu@lemmy.blahaj.zone 2 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (1 children)

I wrote a comment but got more aggressive than I intended. My overall point though is there are young looking adults, there are old looking kids. Making a sweeping statement like you did is just wrong

[–] ada@lemmy.blahaj.zone 2 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (1 children)

Young looking adults also aren't the issue.

The issue is a community that focuses heavily on models that are framed to look like they're not adults.

Not adults roleplaying. Not adults that incidentally happen to look younger than they are.

[–] ProfessorZhu@lemmy.blahaj.zone 2 points 2 years ago (1 children)
[–] ada@lemmy.blahaj.zone 2 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Again, the issue is a community with models that are framed to look like they're not adults.

There is no scenario where something that can be mistaken for CSAM will have a space here.

[–] ProfessorZhu@lemmy.blahaj.zone 3 points 2 years ago

And again, these are adults on an instance that was explicitly designated for NSFW works. Defederating was entirely within your right but these justifications seem really poorly thought out, and could have unintended consequences.

Should we shun non consensual play? Should we defederate from anything that shows BDSM? Because I can't see any reason why your justifications wouldn't apply to them

[–] kardum@lemmy.blahaj.zone 4 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (18 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 (18 replies)
[–] paris@lemmy.blahaj.zone 3 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (11 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.

[–] Thorny_Thicket@sopuli.xyz 4 points 2 years ago (1 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.

[–] noisehound@lemmy.blahaj.zone 2 points 2 years ago

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

[–] magnetosphere@kbin.social 1 points 2 years ago (8 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.

[–] ocasta@lemmy.blahaj.zone 4 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years 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.

load more comments (7 replies)
load more comments (9 replies)
[–] blazera@kbin.social 3 points 2 years ago (1 children)

What even was the community, I dont see any focused on CSAM, or appearing as it. Was it small breasts?

[–] ass_destroyer@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 points 2 years ago (1 children)

According to the comments on lemmynsfw it was adorableporn

[–] blazera@kbin.social 1 points 2 years ago (1 children)

So is this guy lying? There's nothing about making them look under 18. At least what I can see from my instance, it seems focused on being very softcore, not even a focus on small girls. In fact the latest post I see is from a milf account.

[–] ass_destroyer@lemmy.blahaj.zone 2 points 2 years ago

Honestly without anyone citing the actual post in question it's literally impossible for any of us to make up our own minds on the content. All we have is one admin's word vs another. I haven't personally seen anything even approaching CSAM-adjacent anywhere on lemmynsfw, but that doesn't mean it doesn't exist. At the same time it does kinda seem like the blahaj admins wanted to defederate anyway and finally found a convenient scapegoat -- it seems odd that one would completely defederate an entire instance over a single post. So I really have no idea what to think.

[–] copygirl@lemmy.blahaj.zone 2 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (3 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?

[–] leigh@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 points 2 years ago (8 children)

is this concern based in fact, or emotion?

Ada was clear in another comment thread that yes, emotion was absolutely involved in her decision. That isn’t a bad thing. Why is there a social attitude that decision-making is only valid if it’s cold and unfeeling?

Personally I’m in the camp of “let consenting adults do adult things”

Me too. I don’t think anyone is arguing against that. Anyone can still access LemmyNSFW’s content elsewhere, Blahaj Zone simply isn’t going to relay it anymore because some of it is incompatible with Ada’s goals in nurturing this community.

But if it is in fact legal, and well moderated, then is there a problem?

Yes. Legality has nothing to do with acceptability. This instance already bans lots of content that doesn’t actually violate any laws. It’s a judgment call.

[–] copygirl@lemmy.blahaj.zone 3 points 2 years ago (4 children)

The reason I brought up emotion in my reply was because I've felt that the lemmynsfw admins have been able to explain their decision quite reasonably and seemed to be open to conversation, wheras Ada was set on one goal and upon finding disagreement, wasn't in the right mindset to continue a constructive conversation. Which, to be fair, due to the nature of the content, is understandable.

If the content that the Blahaj Lemmy admins are concerned about are limited to certain communities, and part of the issue is the concentration of content in said communities in the first place (at least, as I speculated in my original reply), then I don't quite understand why blocking these communities only isn't something that was considered, rather than defederating the entire instance. I do respect Blahaj Lemmy's decision not to want to host such content. Or is there some technical limitation that I'm not aware of?

load more comments (4 replies)
load more comments (7 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[–] melmi@lemmy.blahaj.zone 2 points 2 years ago

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

[–] urist@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

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

[–] princessnorah@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

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.

[–] Mewtwo@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 points 2 years ago (1 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.

[–] emidio@lemmy.blahaj.zone 2 points 2 years ago

I agree with you but not on the last point. There is a difference since they are real people, adults, and that they consent on being sexually attractive and arouse. I am not attracted to young looking bodies but that's a notable difference to me. Also I don't know how I feel about a community (in a broader way than a lemmy comm) focusing and fetichising on young looking adults (I do know that it disturbs me but I want to talk about society wise), but I understand that some people are attracted to young looking bodies and/or juvenile ones, and I feel like adults that consent to answer their desires is better than CASM

[–] buffalobuffalo@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 points 2 years ago (2 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 (2 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›