Drama in the Fediverse
Welcome to the Lemmy Drama community!
This is a place to share and enjoy drama across the fediverse. Grab your popcorn, and dive in!
Rules:
1. Don't bring your own drama.
If you are a part of the drama, don't post it here. We're here to enjoy drama, not see it brought to this community.
2. Be civil.
No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. No ongoing drama.
if there’s been a comment in the past 3 days, wait until it’s settled down.
5. No interacting with the drama you find here.
That means no upvotes, no downvotes, and no commenting in the original thread.
6. Keep the drama focused on Lemmy and/or the fediverse only.
If it’s Kbin or Mastodon drama, it must be a quality effort post.
7. Don’t piss on the popcorn.
Inciting brigades is an automatic ban.
8. Mod Perogative
We reserve the right to enforce the rules however we like.
view the rest of the comments
"loli" is underage girls, and "shota" is underage boys? not 100% sure tho
What a terrible day to be literate
It's drawings, calm down
Drawings of some of the most heinous crimes humans commit, and thoughts they have. It’s natural for people to be disgusted by them.
So you never watch a movie with murder? I'm sorry I can just differentiate between fantasy and reality and know that drawings won't hurt people.
You’re starting an argument about something I never said. I said it’s natural for people to be disgusted by drawings of child porn. I don’t know why my statement made you so defensive.
You jump into an argument about whether something's morally wrong with a comment that very heavily implies that it is, and wonder why I'm defending my argument?
No one's saying people don't have a right to be disgusted with it. Just like people can be disgusted with any other type of porn, like rape or incest. But that doesn't mean drawings with no victim are immoral
That’s not the conversation I jumped into, are you paying attention to who you’re replying to? Someone said “what a terrible day to be literate” when they were told what loli and shota meant, because they were naturally disgusted, and you told them to calm down. I told you their reaction was natural, and you keep trying to drag me into a different conversation. I really don’t understand the argument you’re trying to start with me. People are naturally disgusted by child porn, whether it’s real or fake. None of the comments I’ve replied to have been about morality, and I’ve made no judgements one way or the other. Your interpretations of my comments are a reflection of your mindset.
undefined> Your interpretations of my comments are a reflection of your mindset.
How? Because I'm in the middle of an argument with someone else, and I didn't ignore all the ongoing context of that other side thread when replying to you?
I'm not really starting any argument with you. You posted in the same thread as other arguments I'm having.
It's still a depiction of CP. Changing the medium doesn't change the definition.
Engaging with this content is engaging with CP, fictional or not.
Except it's not. Is furry porn bestiality? Is a drawing of a drugs possession of drugs? Can a drawing murder? There's no child, so it can't be child porn.
Do you not play video games where you kill anyone? Engaging in that is murder, fictional or not.
They are not just drawings. They are admissions of a crime.
What crime exactly? Is grand theft auto admission of a crime?
Jacking it to anything that resembles a child is illegal in a lot of places you fucking moron. Indulging nonces in any way is morally fucking wrong.
So is being gay. So while you're right, some countries have banned visual depictions with no victim, it's not a crime here and I'm not interested in places where it is.
Fuck off comparing paedos to gay people you abhorrent cunt.
Unclutch your pearls and read my comment again. If you think I'm comparing pedophiles to gay people that's telling on you buddy.
What's really telling is you not being interested in places where you can't jack it to images of children lmao
What does that even mean? I'm not on lemmynsfw at all. But that doesn't mean I can't have an opinion. I also don't do drugs but I don't think drugs should be illegal or are morally wrong.
@Falmarri, I agree with a lot of your points. I don't think it is that there can't be opinions separate from the norm, but that pedophilia is a very sensitive and painful topic - and anything that reminds people of something that is that painful will trigger namecalling, rage and illogical conversations that just go nowhere because there is that much emotion involved. I would be somewhat caught off guard if people as a whole weren't emotional about it. I know as a survivor of SA, who has been receiving treatment for PTSD since I was in single digits, that the conversation is a difficult one for a lot of people, myself included. I strongly feel based on my work trying to prevent SA and supporting survivors, that there are things for me to be angry about in this world...a person wanking off on a drawing, who NEVER offends, is not something I am going to get worked up over.
IMHO People are going to have fantasies. But there is a very big difference between having a fantasy and acting on those fantasies, and most of society cannot see that difference, or the hypocrisy when they make their arguments. To say that a rape fantasy or game violence is somehow not as abhorrent as fantasizing with someone underage. Really? That disconnect to me is disgusting and vile, that people would honestly argue that even looking at a drawing of someone underage is evil (which in their rightful opinion is), but a bullet to the brain, or assaulting a cop in a video game before hijacking a vehicle isn't equally sick. At that point their argument loses a lot of merit for me, and I have to work really hard to listen.
Drawings made specifically for paedophiles to get sexual satisfaction, fuck off.
So you'd rather have them hurt real people than jerk off over drawings? Yikes
I, and many others, find the use of ‘loli’ content in this context to be morally questionable. The key concern is the normalization of such behaviors, which can perpetuate and potentially endorse harmful desires. Moreover, even though it involves drawings, it still fosters an environment that is fundamentally based on the sexualization of underage characters.
In case no one got the memo the world is run by pedophiles and human traffickers. Top politicians, entertainment industry, corrupt judges, bankers, the elite. Our entire world is morally questionable. I'm just not going to get worked up over fake children in fake worlds, when there are real children being hurt who need my outrage more.
As a side note, do video games normalize violence? Because if we are going to use the argument that people looking at drawings normalizes and endorses harmful desires then we really need to have the discussion about video game violence.
undefined> The key concern is the normalization of such behaviors, which can perpetuate and potentially endorse harmful desires
This is the same exact argument that violent video games "normalizes" violence. It was wrong then and it's wrong here.
Absolutely, people do not commit major crimes just because they saw them on TV or read it in the newspapers. They do it because they want to.
I don't know if I agree with that. Porn I watched has definitely affected what I want in real life. Even if its a fantasy world, its definitely made me think "huh this might be hot in real life". Thankfully its nothing harmful but nonetheless. I can definitely see how the abundance of certain porn enforces the thought that a certain fetish is common, normal.
That's pretty different from wanting to fuck kids. Wanting to try an activity is pretty different from changing who you're attracted to. Unless you think gay porn's existence will make people gay.
Stop comparing video games to very real sexual gratification you fucking nonce.
I feel like people minimize video game violence as if it is any less bad then getting off on a drawing. People minimize the violence in games where we glorify killing people and don't talk about the repercussions of war and the violence - real war with refugees and results of total annihilation like Syria.
War is no joke, violence is no joke, and killing people is just as bad as pedophilia - REAL pedophilia. But just like shooting someone in the head in a video game or burning a village down in a video game doesn't translate to someone in real life wanting to hurt other people, looking at drawings does not mean someone is going to act out on the drawings they see. Fantasies do not equate to hurting others. There are plenty of people out there who have rape fantasies, they may write about it, they may roleplay with their partner, but that does not mean they WANT to be raped or assaulted in real life and it gives no one a license to do that to them against their will. Fantasies are fantasies, that is all they are, and the few sick fucks who act on their fantasies are 100% different from the people who never do.
Why not? The comparison is identical.
People are into things in fantasy that they're not into in reality. And not everyone who defends victimless activities are into them. I'm not into loli, but it's fucking fantasy. People fantasize about being raped, that's a huge fantasy. But that doesn't mean they want to be raped. And most "loli" anime shit look absolutely nothing like real children. If you want to talk about photo-realistic AI generated porn, ok fine. But seriously, what's wrong with a "3000 year old dragon" in the body of a child? Can they consent? That's all that really matters here, consent.
No it's not, and you fucking nonces need to stop saying that getting sexual satisfaction from underage representation is the same as playing video games constantly, it's a bad fucking look.
Just because you enjoy one and don't enjoy the other doesn't mean they're not the same. It's concerning that you have a hard time distinguishing reality from drawings, and then try to accuse people who are saying that there's simply no victim here of being pedophiles when no one is even talking about any living person, let alone a child, is pretty telling.
The "reality" is that a paedophile is getting very real sexual gratification from these images, and indulging nonces is fucked up. If you can't differentiate that from video games, you're the one with the fucking issue.
undefined> The “reality” is that a paedophile is getting very real sexual gratification from these images, and indulging nonces is fucked up.
What? So anything a pedophile enjoys should be banned? Pedophiles probably enjoy violent games too. And I'm sure murders certainly do. What's your point? I'm perfectly fine with anyone getting sexual gratification over any drawing. Who does it hurt?
Holy fuck, indulging their fucked up sexual desires. Are you being intentionally obtuse, or are you really that dumb? Stop trying to defend fucking paedophiles.
You're making really specific distinctions just so that what you enjoy isn't covered by your outrage. If we're talking about pedophiles specifically, their fucked up sexual desire is wrong because their victims can't consent. If they could consent, there wouldn't be a problem. Now, if they instead want to jerk off to fictional depictions (however realistic or not) of children, why is that bad? No one is hurt, they get to get off, and a potential victim is spared. So unclutch your pearls.
lmao, fucking nonce defenders. They should be getting help to either stop jacking off to that shit, or get chemically fucking castrated so they don't have those desires any more. Fuck off with your paedo indulging.
undefined> They should be getting help to either stop jacking off to that shit
Clearly you don't know shit. Just telling people not to jack off. Wtf.
Also not really how it works.
It's pretty sad that you'd rather see children be abused just for your own righteousness drawings. I think you're the one that needs help here.
lmao fuck off nonce defender.
The sexualization of minors, even in fictional contexts like ‘loli’ content, is where I believe we cross a moral line. Children are a vulnerable and protected group in our society, and any content that even implicitly sexualizes them can contribute to an environment that trivializes or normalizes such exploitation. It’s about maintaining the inviolability and innocence of childhood, a value deeply ingrained in our society.
Explain how. What does this "normalization" look like? What examples are there?
Yet we're totally fine showing violence to children? Even violence perpetrated on children, as long as it's not sexual? Is this also why you don't support sex ed for children?
I just find it really weird that you can't distinguish fantasy from reality.
I get where you’re coming from with the video games comparison, but we’re talking apples and oranges here. The two just aren’t the same. Violent video games, sure, they’re a problem, and I’m not a fan of those either, especially when kids are involved. But this loli content? That’s another level for me.
We’re dealing with stuff that inherently sexualizes minors, albeit in a fictional realm. When something like this becomes just ‘another thing’, a part of everyday life, people may start shrugging off the real-life equivalent too. And that’s what worries me.
Sex education, by the way, isn’t even in the same ballpark. It’s about teaching kids the facts of life, about relationships, about consent. It’s about protection, not exploitation.
As for telling reality from fantasy, most people, sure, they can do that. For me, the line’s pretty clear. Anything that makes it okay to sexualize kids, real or not, that’s a step too far.
undefined> but we’re talking apples and oranges here. The two just aren’t the same.
They're by definition not the same because they're different things, but I don't see why the argument is different.
Why are they a problem?
Is there even 1 shred of evidence that this has happened or is even about to happen?
I’ve come across some studies on this stuff. One study I found actually found a connection between violent video games and aggressive behavior in teenagers. Now, it wasn’t a massive correlation, but it’s something worth keeping an eye on (https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamapediatrics/fullarticle/1850198).
As for evidence of normalization, it’s tricky. The concept of normalization doesn’t necessarily imply a direct cause-effect relationship, like ‘X’ content led to ‘Y’ real-world behavior. It’s more about subtle shifts in societal attitudes over time. It’s challenging to directly measure these shifts, but there are sociological studies that suggest media consumption can influence perceptions and attitudes.(https://www.researchgate.net/publication/22223200_Living_With_Television_The_Violence_Profile)
So, my concerns about Loli aren’t pulled out of thin air. It’s about the potential shift in our societal attitudes towards child exploitation. It’s not easy to put hard numbers on these effects, but given what we know about the impact of media, I think we should avoid it.
I'd rather them not fucking jack it to anything resembling children you fucking imbecile.
I would also rather you not glorify blowing anyone up/putting a bullet in someone's head who resembles a real human being in addition to people not jacking off to someone resembling a child.