One of the admins at lemmy.blahaj.zone asked us to purge a community and all of its users because they thought it was full of child sexual abuse material, aka CSAM, fka kiddy porn. We assured them that we had checked this comm thoroughly and we were satisfied that all of the models on it were of age.
The admin then demanded we purge the comm because they mistook it for CSAM, and claimed that the entire point of the community was to make people think it was CSAM. We vehemently disagreed that that was in fact the point of the community, but they decided to defederate from us anyway. That is of course their choice, but we will not purge our communities or users because someone else makes a mistake of fact, and then lays the responsibility for their mistake at our feet.
If someone made a community intended to fool people into thinking it was kiddy porn, that would be a real problem. If someone of age goes online and pretends -- not roleplays, but pretends with intent to deceive -- to be a child and makes porn, that is a real problem. Nobody here is doing that.
One of the reasons we run our instance the way that we do is that we want it to be inclusive. We don't body shame, and we believe that all adults have a right to sexual expression. That means no adult on our instance is too thin, fat, bald, masculine, old, young, cis, gay, etc., to be sexy, and that includes adults that look younger than some people think they should. Everyone has a right to lust and to be lusted after. There's no way to draw a line that says "you can't like adult people that look like X" without crossing a line that we will not cross.
EDIT: OK, closing this post to new comments. Everything that needs saying has been said. Link to my convo with the blahaj admin here.
As requested, the correspondence between me and the blahaj admin, posted with her permission. It started with this message (her* original message is on the bottom, my reply is on top):
Okay.. so it was adorableporn.
They are clearly wrong. Glad to have that settled.
Right? I don't think they know how long that community has been a thing. I remember it for at least most of the time I was on reddit too...which was just over 10 years so it's been around for a hot minute.
At this point Ada apparently had some communication with @[email protected] on Matrix, to which I was not privy. He told me, and I said that I had responded to Ada via Lemmy message. He had to step away, so I took over correspondence with Ada via Matrix.
Huge respect for the professionalism you've shown through this situation and in the way you run your instance. The quality of the content here is already impressive, and it's been the thing that's allowed me to cut my last cord with Reddit. Cheers.
That exchange is absolutely bonkers. I'm sorry but I have far less respect for Ada after reading that text exchange. Glad I don't use that instance.
To be clear, Ada has her own imperatives and her own community, and I'm not here to judge how she runs her instance. lemmy.blahaj.zone means a lot to a lot of people, and as a queer weirdo myself I appreciate that a place like it exists on the lemmyverse.
Hey, you're an instance admin and this kind of collegial statement is entirely appropriate given your role here.
Me? I'm a newbie here. I don't have much to lose. My assessment of that exchange is: she bonkers. But that's just me.
Well, I'm not familiar with who Ada is before this, but it honestly just sounds like she it's taking a very hard gut-felt position on simulated child porn, and explicitly refusing to consider the problematic implications of her gut feeling. Consenting adults of any body type can and should be able to be "adorable" as a kink or non-kink nudity or other expression. Even if I completely understand the need to heavily dissuade CSAM, that sub just doesn't fit that.
It looks like the turn in the conversation was the use of "mistake." It was accurate but clearly triggered Ada and she stopped listening at that point. I'm sure she is a good person worthy of respect, but she's in the wrong and I hope she reconsiders.
If you see how she runs her instance it's no surprise. I'm sure the ban list for their instance is long and will eventually include the entire fediverse.
Fun fact, if you click the "Instances" button in the bottom right of the page on any instance, you can see what other instances it's connected with, and if you scroll down far enough, which ones are blocked/defederated.
For reference, the instance we're on, lemmynsfw, has 4 instances blocked.
Echoing the statements elsewhere here, you handled yourself very well, and it's quite a different primary source representation from what was being described on their announcement post of why they were defederating.
Wow that was all something... Anyways sorry you have to moderate all this. Thanks for the transparency it clears up the misunderstanding(?) for me.
word.
I asked her to post the chats as well for transparency.
Not going to pass judgement on any side on this one... Just hate weird he said she said types of situations when everyone can just read the actual disagreement and go from there.
Now I can go back to other places in the Lemmyverse.
Edit: Ada confirmed the conversation is accurate and full. https://sh.itjust.works/comment/1425547
You had handled this as perfectly and professionally as one could.
It is unfortunate that she could not accept your reasoning and still chose to defederate.
I think your goof was the "I can't be held accountable for your mistake of fact". I believe they're clearly the one in the wrong regardless though.
It sucks but it is what it is.
I think it's been an interesting debate. You both make good points. Ads about how "it's similar to Loli in that it is trying to look underaged" and you with "we don't discriminate against youthful looking adults".
I guess I see it like DDLG kinks. I find it gross. I can see why people would want to ban it because they say they're pretending to do something illegal like CSAM, but a lot of links pretend to do something illegal. BDSM pretends to tie people up and torture them but people don't look at it and say "hey, you're intentionally trying to look like you're torturing people against their wills".
People seem to have a gut reaction to illegal things with children moreso than illegal things with adults and I guess that's why some people have this reaction to wanting to "purge" communities like that as opposed to ones that do things like CNC, BDSM, etc. But hey, as long as everyone involved is an adult and consenting that's totally fine.
I found that "mistake of fact" retort hilarious.
She obviously took it as a personal insult, but the whole debate is based on her own mistaken identification. So it is hard to address the topic without also seeming to target the person.
This needs to be pinned in its own thread so people can read it.
Why do those images stay the same small, almost unreadable (to my eyes) size no matter how far I zoom in?
As far as the back and forth, to be honest both sides are right after browsing that community.
I took a quick glance at the community in question, and while theres a lot of people who are clearly adults and being adorable.. they shouldnt be prevented or banned for being adorable adults making porn.. But there was also, just from my quick glance, several posts that leaned super heavily into looking underage and look barely a day over 14. . and I don't care how much you say they are verified and over 18, The people coming here looking at those pics arent thinking that. All they are thinking is they found a pedo safe haven.
and that makes my skin crawl.
And posts like that should fall under the same forbidden purview as Loli content, for the exact same reasons.
Why do you care if an 18+ year old who looks youthful does NSFW stuff? Take an extreme example, what if Hasbulla did nudes? He is 21 but looks extremely young. I can't see how telling him he isn't allowed to make nude content because of his appearance is anything other than ableist and body shaming. You don't have to like the content or even like the people who would look at it to think the content is acceptable.
If everyone is a consenting adult then everything is fine.
Its real life lolicon, and should be banned for the same reasons that that lolicon is banned. It doesn't matter if shes actually 300 years old if she looks like a 12 year old. Its literally the same shit, people getting off to the fantasy/idea of a child, trying desperately to hide themselves behind the argument of "its just a drawing!" or "they're really an adult!".
Anyone would mistake those 2-3 images for child porn. Just looking at them made my skin crawl, and thats after the admins claimed they were verified, and your argument shows thats all you care about. You don't care about community. You don't care about protecting the website. You care about keeping your pseudo-maybe-wont-get-you-thrown-in-prison child porn.
if you want that shit, go back to reddit and join Spez.
I'm not subscribed to that community. It's not my thing. I'm not into Loli either. Frankly, I do see a problem with Loli. I guess to me it is because the Loli "excuse" of "she's actually 3000 years old but just looks like a child" but then they proceed to portray them exactly as someone would portray a child. They (generally, I'm sure someone has counter examples) don't portray them as some wizened elderly woman in a child's body. That's why Loli generally feels disgusting to me.
Age verification is the correct thing to do. In the broader internet where things are less strict I'm sure you can find actual underage actors (who are possibly even being trafficked) where it could be avoided with proper age verification. Frankly I think that's just a super important thing (even apart from this specific discussion). An assumption I'm making (and I guess everyone is) is that the admins' age verification is adequate. So, assuming it is, I don't see a problem with allowing creators who appear young to make NSFW content of themselves. If it's not adequate then there's a much more important discussion that needs to be had. Based on some of the sticky posts over the past few weeks it seems like they're serious about it.
To your point, a lot of content makes my skin crawl. I just ignore it. If there's any I think is actually illegal I'd report it. Maybe I haven't seen the specific ones you're talking about so maybe that's why I don't feel the same way. I briefly went to the community when I heard about this and just now to see what the fuss was and it just seemed like legal but youthful looking people. Or just folks in their mid twenties just trying to look cute or wholesome. I didn't see anything that makes me feel the need to report anything as CSAM. That's just me. I believe you should report content you think is CSAM, I'm not trying to say you shouldn't.
I know I said it before but I really do view this whole thing similar to folks who may not understand forms of kink are consensual. It's not a one-to-one thing, but it is similar. Seeing a consensual rape-play session may make people question what the fuck is happening and may make their skin crawl. But if everyone is consenting then it's fine. I understand why people would have a hard time accepting that (especially if they themselves have been abused).
Lookism is gross, as long as people are grown adults it doesn't matter what they look like nor should it ever matter
We both know you're not looking at someone who looks 12 and thinking "oh my god, what an adult" while you're cranking it, so miss me with that fake enlightened-reddit lookism shit.
Can I ask what the stance is for adults intentionally acting as if the were underage regardless of what they look like? Perhaps that could be a line they could agree with?