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.

  • LollerCorleone@kbin.socialOP
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    12
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    I have no idea about the context of that painting, but I don’t think the children are being sexualised in it. The under-age content that will be posted on lemmynsfw (fictional or not) will definitely be sexual in nature, and that is deeply problematic and might also be illegal in several countries. They can do whatever they want with their instance, but the users of kbin.social shouldn’t have to be looking at such content.

    • Gordon_Freeman@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      1 year ago

      but the users of kbin.social shouldn’t have to be looking at such content.

      Idk, as kbin.social user I was not looking to such content until you mentioned it. And since I don’t follow that instance I will not be looking to such content in the future

      • Alue42@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        9
        ·
        1 year ago

        You do “follow” that instance because you are part of kbin.social which is federated with it. You could go in and block each of the magazines/threads from there or whatever the term is on Lemmy, and block the users you don’t want to see content from, but kbin.social is federated with lemmynsfw, so that content has the ability to show up in your “all” or “random” feeds unless we defederate -which is the question being asked. So you very well could really l easily have that content in your feed in the best future

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

          You do “follow” that instance because you are part of kbin.social which is federated with it

          No, I don’t. My starting page is https://kbin.social/sub so I only see magazines I’m subscribed to. And most often than not I have federation turned off, as I find duplicated content annoying and useless

          Rather than blacklisting magazines I whitelist magazines and I only see the content I want.

          Also, I removed the “random posts” section with uBlock origin (uBlock origin does more than just blocking ads, you can select and remove parts of a website entirely, by doing that the website work load is reduced and also loads faster), so this situation you describe:

          So you very well could really l easily have that content in your feed in the best future

          won’t happen

          The only feature I really miss is having content ordered by “newest” by default (something I had on reddit using the third party app “Joey”)

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

      lemmynsfw said they don’t allow underage content though. so that’s unrelated to their ruling. their ruling applies to adult content, not underage.

      • Undearius@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        10
        ·
        1 year ago

        The linked post is saying they will allow non-irl underage-looking content.

        That is illegal in Canada.

        163.1 (1) In this section, child pornography means

        (a) a photographic, film, video or other visual representation, whether or not it was made by electronic or mechanical means,

        (i) that shows a person who is or is depicted as being under the age of eighteen years and is engaged in or is depicted as engaged in explicit sexual activity

        https://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/c-46/section-163.1.html

          • Undearius@lemmy.ca
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            10
            ·
            1 year ago

            I’d encourage you to read what I just posted because drawings would fall under “other visual representations”

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

                If you’re going to be that level of pedantic then it’s clear you already have an idea in your head and don’t care to be informed.

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

                  (i) that shows a person who is or is depicted as being under the age of eighteen years and is engaged in or is depicted as engaged in explicit sexual activity

                  this excludes loli/shota.

              • Bloonface@kbin.social
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                8
                ·
                1 year ago

                OK, more concretely then, sexualised drawings of people who are or appear to be under 18 are illegal in the UK.

                This is an odd hill to die on if you’re not interested in looking at sexualised drawings of people who are or appear to be under 18.

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

                  I could say all humans look under 18 to me, and thus all porn is banned.

                  ultimately, loli does not refer to actual human beings. it does not refer to an age. loli characters can be undeniably adults and appear as such.

                  Surely, if a character is canonically an adult, appears as an adult, is unmistakably an adult, and are not based on a real person, then they can’t possibly fall under what you are saying, yes?

                  • Bloonface@kbin.social
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    6
                    ·
                    1 year ago

                    Yeah but that would be bullshit, and frankly your definition (which appears to be being skewed by a desire to look at sexual cartoons of children) would not need to be believed by anyone else.

                    “Canonically” also doesn’t matter because someone saying “actually this person who looks exactly like a five year old girl is a million years old” also doesn’t have to be believed by anyone else.

                    That is why the UK law is “appear to be” - specifically to avoid consumers of child pornography, real or drawn, pulling dumb stunts like that.

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

            In the age of AI, it’s basically the same thing anyway. People can generate that shit now and it will look real. It’s not okay and it is illegal. It literally uses the word “depicted” which can refer to non-real stuff.

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

              this has already been covered in courts. realistic looking imagery of children counts as cp. drawn anime characters do not.

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

          So… is all My Hero Academia porn illegal in Canada?
          They started at 14, and are 16 now as far as I understand.

          I never heard anyone call that stuff CP, although it technically would have to be, as long as the artist doesn’t somehow clarify “this is art from a future version, where they’re all 18, they just look the same because awesome genes” or whatever.

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

            I’m not familiar with that so I cannot say. I’ve included a link to the law as it is written. If it fits the description, someone intended to be under the age of 18 displayed in a sexual fashion, then yes.