@ChristiJunior@Suzu@rainignterror1080p i think they want to present themselves as trolls but the moment you block someone the mask of troll no longer fits
@ChristiJunior@Suzu@rainignterror1080p this one's funny, last time i checked asbestos was the instance that was sheltering a fuckin pedo because their admin thought he was a good person :kekw:
@rlier23@Suzu@rainignterror1080p Isn't that the edgy faggot instance? I'd be outright SHOCKED if a place like that doesn't harbor at least a couple of pedo-leaning users.
@rainignterror1080p@ChristiJunior yeah, lots of those lefty faggoty instances have problems with blockbots, because they don't like the blocks being paraded around as badges of honor, and they think it may lead to "targeted harassment" to the blockers
I see their accusation is that DRC finds lolicon to be acceptable, but so far, I’ve only seen it argued as acceptable in the abstract. I haven’t seen you guys post any actual lolicon.
I thought the “she’s a 500 year old vampire” defense was satire bro :laughingimps:
Really, the whole point of fedi is that you can have different content moderation standards going from one instance to the next. See, “different content moderation standards” doesn’t mean “no content moderation standards.”
I don’t like pornography, and I especially don’t like child pornography, or anything resembling it. While I’m guilty of having looked at pornography, I don’t like this about myself and wish to keep a lid on that kind of behavior. I want to minimize my participation in it.
Anyway, I deactivated rlier’s account and we’ll see if that solves it. If I get a bunch of different accounts loliposting to me from the instance I’ll just turn off media from it. It’s a simple fix and it works.
So any canonically of-age anime girl is okay to lewd, no matter how petite and flat, right? Or is this about certain female body shapes being off-limits, Australian-censorship style? Either way, it's autistic and arbitrary, an inherent consequence of trying to apply age of consent to Fictional characters.
Child pornography is any pornography that depicts children. Some forms of CP are legal in the United States and others are not. Illustrated or “virtual” CP is legal because the CP exception to the First Amendment only applies to depictions of real children.
However, as a private citizen, I find all CP, legal or otherwise, gross enough to merit jannying it, and I make zero apologies about that.
@NEETzsche@Suzu@rainignterror1080p@rlier23 You don't actually believe it's CP, otherwise you won't won't be hanging around on the Fediverse, which is full of "CP". You wouldn't be merely wagging your finger at someone like SJW, you'd be outright reporting him to the authorities. At least, I hope you would.
Watering down terms like pedophilia and child porn in an attempt to convict people of thought crimes is not something I see any value in - and between Lolicons and anti-Loli crusaders, my experience is that the former have done more of the heavy lifting when it comes to bullying the actual pedos on Fedi.
The SCOTUS didn’t conclude that lolicon isn’t CP. The SCOTUS concluded that certain forms of CP are legal. Furthermore, this isn’t a legal discussion, it’s a content moderation discussion, making what the SCOTUS rules irrelevant. If the SCOTUS rules that water rolls up hill, that doesn’t make it so.
So, not only does it not matter what the SCOTUS rules, but you’re incorrect on what the SCOTUS did rule.
@ChristiJunior@NEETzsche@Suzu@rainignterror1080p@rlier23 i mean i am here and was recieved with open arms have posted loli without marking it nsfw if neet feels so inclined to kick the hornets nest i'd be pleased to grant him what he wants :smug5:
I’m more a fan of just getting people to start instances for their purposes than I am creating one for the broader world. I initially intended IDDQD to be for my publication projects but I kind of got sucked into the fediverse vortex. I may start another instance on a different iddqd domain name to just get a fresh start.
I don’t take fediverse “culture” very seriously, even though I love the technology behind it. I’ve had this idea in my head for a while that instances should be interest- or community-based. I’d really like to see instances crop up where the point of that instance is like… a gaming clan or something. A particular Magic shop and its customers. A particular knitting circle. That sort of thing.
@NEETzsche@ChristiJunior@Suzu@rainignterror1080p@rlier23 Many people use DRC to keep an alt in reserve, which is great and should be encouraged. I’m happy whether people post actively or just keep a spare alt. I started DRC for the benefit of anyone in need of a platform, whenever that case may be, not as an ego flex over active user count.
I just have this image in my mind of some little old lady starting an instance for her coffee clatch gossip knitting circle group and then a bunch of anime avatars start typing racial slurs at her in all caps, until she figures out how to defederate e-wignat instances. The little old lady leaves feeling like she successfully repelled an invasion and the e-wignats feel like they’ve proven their racial theories correct by getting banned again.
@NEETzsche@ChristiJunior@admin@Suzu@rainignterror1080p@rlier23 >fediverse “culture” There’s some unwritten rule here that says blocking is gay or a moral shortcoming. Yeah, I’m the one with a character flaw for blocking someone who posts a child holding open her vagina. Major L on my part, right?
@EdBoatConnoisseur@ChristiJunior@NEETzsche@EdBoatConnoisseur@Suzu@rainignterror1080p@rlier23 I think the pawoo incident speaks more clearly than any dramafag argument. Dramafags are mysteriously quiet when actual CP or child predators are involved. They can yell and have all the moral outrage they want about anime girls being raped or deeply in love with a character. I don't take them seriously and they can't tell anime from real life or don't even care about irl kids at all..
@NEETzsche@EdBoatConnoisseur@ChristiJunior@EdBoatConnoisseur@Suzu@rainignterror1080p@rlier23 child pornography is child pornography. Adult fictitious anime girls hentai is not child pornography and neither is morally right nor healthy. Is simple people throw those accusations so lightly I don't care anymore. Defeding from pawoo is tangible action against cp and the same people that love to call everyone pedophile were mysteriously absent. My point is not to justify pornography but to make clear that anti cunny fags are nothing but toothless virtue signalers that devote too much energy on defending drawings sexual rights while not even doinf the bare minimum when real shit appears. This is way more disgusting for me than posting "Christ is King" and two hours later posting all kind of degenerate crap because as much disgusting as monster girl porn can be those who post that don't use the young and innocent defiled bodies to gain fediverse clout.
I mean, you guys die on the child pornography isn’t child pornography hill, then you project your pedophilia onto people. It’s rather disgusting, honestly.
The issue is that the fantasy-reality divide doesn’t cut it for a lot of things. I don’t want to be around people who even fantasize about fucking little girls, so I reject these abstract appeals to freedom of speech and cut right to the heart of the matter, which is: “I hate pedophiles.”
Having a foot fetish is gross. Having a fat fetish is gross. These things are strange and I’d really prefer it if people kept that shit to themselves, but I wouldn’t condemn someone to death over it. Having a little girl fetish is worse than gross. It is wrong. It is evil. I would condemn someone for that. I’d absolutely get up in their face over it. And I’ll take signs of that fetish being real pretty seriously.
Turns out, lolicon is a damn good indication of that. It’s not perfect, but it’s pretty damn good.
I don’t really get up in MAPniggers’ faces because I keep them at an even further distance from me than lolifags. I don’t speak to them at all because I block pawoo etc outright. Being into lolicon is an indication that someone has some pedophilic impulses. I agree, CSAM is worse than lolicon, but lolicon is worse than, say, MILF porn.
@NEETzsche@EdBoatConnoisseur@ChristiJunior@EdBoatConnoisseur@Suzu@rainignterror1080p@rlier23 I never say that porn in any capacity is alright, it isn't. On the contrary my only point is way lesa evil than actual CP(real kids involved) that again those who complaint about the most are the ones who do less. I don't care if someone's definition of cp includes cartoon girls or not, When real kids are involved I guess we can all agree is thousands if not millions times worse. If I don't see you bullying MAP fags or reporting CP to your admin or warning people about these things then your opinion or lolicon is meaningless and you are below those who post that content. Those who post anime porn regardless of age are mostly hurting themselves, and I don't have the energy of the interest to make a moral crusade for every spider anime girl getting ot that appears on my timeline.
If your pornography depicts children, it is child pornography. This places lolicon in the child pornography category. Period. This isn’t a debate, it’s just me explaining how English works to you.
So anyway, people who spend the amount of time you do defending lolicon are just pedophiles. Attacking lolicon is not disgusting at all, but defending it absolutely is. So, why are you defending it?
@NEETzsche@EdBoatConnoisseur@basadeskaiser@EdBoatConnoisseur@Suzu@rainignterror1080p@rlier23 The "Fantasy" aspect relates to the Cartoon girls embodying certain childlike treats, not actual underage girls. I mentioned it before, this is considered a hard line by the kind of rightwing Lolicons I've become familiar with. I'm not arguing that these people are "Ethical Pedophiles", because I've yet to see any evidence that such pedos can actually be ethical (certainly, no pedo arguing for pedo acceptance is ethical, even if he's too scared of the consequences to actually rape kids). I'm arguing that these people specifically are NOT pedos.
The reason Fantasy and Reality is easy to separate is that the age of an actual girl is an absolute Fact, so rejecting relationships with or fantasies about underage girls doesn't require coming up with any additional rules about acceptable height, bust size etc. If she's below a certain age, she's off-limits, period.