The mods there have decided to allow underage looking content, skirting close to CP. Unless we want such disgusting stuff on our feed, I think we should defederate from that instance.

Pinging @ernest as well.

  • Flames5123@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    23
    ·
    1 year ago

    Access to content should be based on LEGALITY though. And it turns out this is ILLEGAL in a lot of places.

      • HERRAX@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        13
        ·
        1 year ago

        Why not just create a separate account for nsfw stuff? Why would you need it on the front page of your main account while scrolling anyways?

      • kat@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        13
        ·
        1 year ago

        Let’s flip that argument: should we all abide by American standards? After all, nudity is ok in a lot of places in the world, why should we blur chests?

        Tons of countries ban underage looking things, even digital art of it. Countries with bans include Canada, Australia, the UK, France, South Korea, Ireland, Norway, etc.

        • Kichae@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          And, uh, Poland. You know. That place where ernest is from, and whose laws he’s beholden to.

      • masterspace@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        We’re not talking about pornography laws that were enacted with no basis in harm reduction, we’re talking about child porn laws that were enacted to not encourage and normalize pedophiles and pedophilia.

        Some laws are justifiable, some are arguable, and some are completely unjustifiable, throwing out an unjustifiable one in contrast to a firmly justifiable one is not debating, it’s childish nonsense.

      • kat@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        21
        ·
        1 year ago

        Underage fictional content is banned in first world countries like South Korea, Ireland, Norway, Canada, Australia, New Zealand and France. Do you really want to lump the very real discrimination that LGBTQ people face with someone’s desire to get off to a 5 year old, sorry - 5000 year old school girl?

        • Otome-chan@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          13
          ·
          1 year ago

          loli/shota don’t refer to underage fictional content.

          I think this loli/shota hate can indeed lead to real oppression yes. I’m an adult, I look like a minor. Do you believe it should be illegal for me to send nsfw photos of myself to people? To have a relationship with another adult? simply because I look underage? This is the sort of thing we’re talking about here. Should I be banned from posting pics of myself simply because of the way I look?

          lemmynsfw already explicitly stated they ban underage content. so to bring up underage content is dishonest.

          • kat@lemmy.ca
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            11
            ·
            1 year ago

            I think this confusion comes from the phrasing of the original post, which was ambiguous about allowing underage content. Also, there’s a difference between being an adult and looking teenage, and looking like a literal child (which I doubt you do). But regardless of appearances, you’re a real person whose age we can verify. And yes, I’m a proponent of verifying people’s ages.

            An ambiguous image of a person that looks 10, but whose creator insists she’s a 5000 year old dragon, doesn’t hold up in many courts. Many international courts say “nice try but that’s a 10 year old”. And I don’t disagree with them. Overall I just don’t get it? Why the need to have that stuff on the major NSFW instance? By all means, put it on a side instance that can get blocked and banned, and if you really need to see it, either join a Lemmy that’s super lax or roll your own.

            • Otome-chan@kbin.social
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              9
              ·
              1 year ago

              Again, loli does not refer to age. You’re confused. There are underage and underage looking anime characters. some who are loli and some who are not.

              this isn’t “they’re a child and I just say they’re older”. non-loli anime children look different from loli anime adults.

              lemmynsfw is clearly banning underage content and content that looks underage.

              no matter how much you wish to try and twist words, the reality is that “oppai loli” is a thing that exists, and simply cannot refer to a child. to say that such is a child just shows you do not understand biology.

              In terms of legality, I agree that if the server host is somewhere with particular laws, it’s understandable that those laws must be followed. Perhaps lemmynsfw’s ruling leads to illegal content for wherever kbin is hosted. In that case, I think it is fine for kbin to defederate.

              Loli/shota do not refer to age. And lemmynsfw afaik has not allowed illegal content.

              • kat@lemmy.ca
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                5
                ·
                1 year ago

                I’m confused by your definition. When googling Loli, you get the lolicon Wikipedia page which has an image of girls that look… I’d say maybe 10? And Loli is named after Lolita, who in the book is like 12? I’m not seeing anywhere linking the definition of Loli to women that look clearly 18+ in any way. I’m not even seeing strong ties between Loli and girls that look 16.

                My argument is that to appease the large number of countries that ban drawn lolicon, the biggest NSFW instance should take a safe stance and ban that content across the board. I don’t care if other instances serve the needs of those who love lolicon, I’m happy to personally block any that pop up even if my instance doesn’t. But the biggest NSFW instance can distances themselves. This is clearly a contentious issue and it is one that the international community hasn’t made a firm decision on.

                • Otome-chan@kbin.social
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  4
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  1 year ago

                  Here’s a handy guide. Notably you’ll probably be interested in uzaki and hestia who are clearly mature (have large breasts). all of the loli characters in the image are canonically adults, most of whom are natural ages (no 5000 years shit) and clearly look like adults. The only one that even remotely looks like a child here is hayase. Under the “not loli” section we see a list of canonically underage characters. most of whom are teenage and have either teenage or adult physiology drawn in a non-loli style.

                  For reference here is a child with two teens.

                  As you can see, loli is not an age. There are child characters in anime, including underage-looking adult characters, who are loli. However, loli does not exclusively refer to these sorts of characters. When I read lemmynsfw’s rules, it’s clear they would ban nsfw imagery of the child character in the second image, of a character like hayase, while allowing the rest.

                  I’d like to understand where you are coming from though. In the first image, do you think all of those characters “appear underage”? Do you think they should all be banned?

                  Edit: both pics are sfw.

                  • blightbow@kbin.social
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    3
                    ·
                    edit-2
                    1 year ago

                    Speaking as a weeb, the comment with the link is probably the best comment to try and understand where Otome-chan is coming from. (I tried replying to it, but threading breaks this many levels deep)

                    The bigger problem is that “loli” has become an appropriated term. It means different things to different people, and it’s almost impossible to reach a rational consensus about it between in-groups and out-groups. To people outside the anime community it just means “pedo bait wank material”, and anyone who argues is “clearly” splitting hairs and trying to defend an unjustifiable fetish. (Edit: To be clear here I didn’t mean pedo bait in the “borderline” context that Otome-chan interpreted it below. Editing this in because I don’t want to belabor this topic with another reply.)

                    I like shortstacks. I don’t think normalizing pedophilia as an acceptable fetish in polite company is okay, keep that shit to yourself. I don’t think the person I’m replying to endorses carte blanche pedophilia on kbin. Hardliners are still going to insist that these concepts are mutually exclusive, but I think that’s as far as the discussion can usefully go.

                  • kat@lemmy.ca
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    ·
                    1 year ago

                    Is this image some sort of gospel? In that case, there’s no visual or stylistic difference between Hestia and Naruse. Even Rory looks the same as the others. So clearly this image is piss poor at communicating some sort of clear visual definition of Loli.

                    For the record, out of the lolis, I’d count the first five as looking underage, not just the first one. This is largely due to their giant heads, tiny bodies.

                    Now here’s the image Wikipedia uses for lolicon: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/8/89/Lolicon_Sample.png/1280px-Lolicon_Sample.png

                    I think the consensus is that for anyone who is not a Loli connoisseur, lolicon is pretty much defined by Wikis view of it, not some random image that doesn’t really clarify much about true Loli characteristics. I have no problem with hentai of adult or ambiguously adult characters. I’m just saying that if you’re gonna call it Loli, people are gonna expect the image I linked to.

              • masterspace@kbin.social
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                5
                ·
                edit-2
                1 year ago

                I looked underage for most of my adult life thus far, guess what I did? Dealt with it and enjoyed my life, I didn’t insist that we should be able to freely publish nudes of myself so that pedos can jerk off to them.

                Hell we’re not even talking about free society here, if you look underage but are overage you’re still free to exhibit your body in whatever art exhibit you want, digital or irl, that doesn’t mean kbin should allow potentially illegal loli content to show up in users’ feeds.

                • Otome-chan@kbin.social
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  5
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  Did you not read my comment? I just said that if it is indeed illegal where the server is hosted, then defederating to follow such laws is understandable and okay.

                  If it’s not illegal though? no issue.

          • geoffervescent@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            This has nothing to do with banning and everything to do with filtering. Especially at this early moment when everyone lacks the ideal tools and functions to curate your iwn content across the Fediverse.
            For now, you can always access both kbin and lemmy from a third instance thats federated with both, regardless of their direct federation to each other. When more tools exist for users to curate their own experience we can always federated up again.

        • Gordon_Freeman@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          7
          ·
          1 year ago

          Underage fictional content is banned in first world countries like South Korea, Ireland, Norway, Canada, Australia, New Zealand and France.

          Ireland is a third world country, literally

          The term “Third World” arose during the Cold War and it was used to define countries that remained non-aligned with either NATO or the Warsaw Pact.

          https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Third_World

          And Ireland remained neutral, like other countries Finland, Sweden, Switzerland or Austria, making those countries third world countries, literally

          Saying or implying third world countries are underdeveloped/poor countries is just a really bad stereotipe and shows your inculture

          • kat@lemmy.ca
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            11
            ·
            1 year ago

            Yeah ok, I really love that Reddit’s crappy pedantry about stuff that doesn’t matter is bleeding into the new world. First world, to most of us not using 50 year old definitions, means countries universally accepted to have decent human rights. The topic reeled into the Middle East’s laws surrounding LGBTQ people, which is a shit argument when talking about banning underage looking content which happens even in countries with great LGBTQ rights. Let’s not pretend that the world is this fantastic equal place where the human experience is just dandy across the board.

            Also I’m from a third world country! Yugoslavia was the founder of the neutral Non-Aligned movement. That makes it, by most definitions, third world.

      • LollerCorleone@kbin.socialOP
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        10
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Comparing the defederation of an instance for allowing underage sexual content with the very real discrimination faced by LGBTQ+ people is one of the shittiest takes I have seen.

    • kat@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      12
      ·
      1 year ago

      Yeah even fictional suggestive content is illegal in Canada. And I’m glad!