cross-posted from: https://multiverse.soulism.net/c/soulism/p/51754/multiverse-has-defederated-fedinsfw-app-for-hosting-child-pornography

Hello MULTIVERSE users and off-site visitors alike. We have recently defederated fedinsfw.app due to ongoing child pornography concerns which the fedinsfw admin team are aware of, and do not intend to address. Before I explain the key issue, I’d like to define a few terms:

  • In Australia, Child Pornography Material is legally defined by the Criminal Code Act 1995, section 473.1 as:

(a) material that depicts a person, or a representation of a person, who is, or appears to be, under 18 years of age and who […] is engaged in, or appears to be engaged in, a sexual pose […]; and does this in a way that reasonable persons would regard as being, in all the circumstances, offensive;

[…]

© material that describes a person who is, or is implied to be, under 18 years of age and who […] is engaged in, or is implied to be engaged in, a sexual pose […]; and does this in a way that reasonable persons would regard as being, in all the circumstances, offensive; or […]

  • Jailbait is a slang term for pornography depicting subjects who appear to be of age (adults), but are in fact underage (children; adolescents)

  • Fauxbait is faux jailbait - pornography depicting adults who appear to be children who appear to be adults.

According to the legal definition of child pornography material here in Australia, fauxbait is child pornography material, because of the implication that the actors depicted represent underage persons. And frankly, we here at MULTIVERSE agree with the law here. Fauxbait is disgusting. Legally and in our opinion, pornography depicting adult women who appear as adults is completely fine. But if someone posts a picture of an adult woman and calls it “fauxbait”, we are disgusted and the law is interested. Reality is not objective - the same legal picture of an adult person becomes illegal child pornography when it’s posted with a particular framing.

fedinsfw.app hosts a community, [email protected], which is for Fauxbait. I have contacted the admin of the site, @[email protected], both privately and in public, pointing out that the community breaks the site’s rules 1 and 8. The admin disagrees. Although they dislike the community, they don’t believe it breaks the rules, and do not wish to violate their impartiality by banning the community.

We here at MULTIVERSE have no such impartiality. The admin inaction on child pornography violates our Rule 3 on Restricted Violence, in that it’s fucking nasty. It’s degrading to the women being posted to call them fauxbait, it’s dangerous towards the users to expose them to risks of committing sex crimes, and it has the potential to desensitise people to child porn, making them more likely to re-offend in worse ways. We are joining the growing movement of instances defederating fedinsfw.app, and we ask if your instance has not, that you speak to your admins and ask them to do the same.

  • kingofras@lemmy.worldOPEnglish
    11·
    22 hours ago

    I’ll just quote you to yourself, as we’re pretty much on the same page:

    If you approve someone, you don’t need to explain yourself, you would just say “I agree with this guy”. There’s no substance to it.

    However, if you downvote, you are saying “this is wrong”. Which is much different. When you accuse someone of being wrong, you should explain yourself, otherwise you’re being a dick.

    It’s fine if someone already answered with what you were going to answer. You can just upvote that guy and move on.

    EDIT: I’m absolutely in awe that this comment specifically gathered so many downvotes. And this is a good example of what I was referring to. Lots of people downvoted, and 0 ppl said why.

    You may think that those upvotes explain the downvotes, but they really don’t. And they don’t to a small majority of the people, so perhaps you can help out. A good start would be:

    You’re getting downvoted because

    Or

    I’m downvoting your post/comment because

    Or if you feel the upvoted comments are indeed addressing my concern “legal porn that looks like CP is morally extremely questionable and either won’t help the growth of Lemmy or would attract people I rather not associate with”, you can copy paste it.

    I also want to state this is occurring at a time where we are discovering pedophelia run all the way to the white house.

    • calcopiritus@lemmy.worldEnglish
      1·
      17 hours ago

      You went through my comment history and quoted me, to just not read the whole quote.

      Here, I’ll help you:

      It’s fine if someone already answered with what you were going to answer. You can just upvote that guy and move on.

      As I said, there are already 3 top comments explaining to you why you’re being downvoted. I don’t need to explain myself when I mostly agree with them, I just upvote them.

      If everyone had to explain every downvote, we would have hundreds of comments on each post, and most of them would say the same thing.