3 ms·

There is not a country in the world that does not believe some forms of speech are worth censoring. In most of the world, CSAM is treated similarly because they

There is not a country in the world that does not believe some forms of speech are worth censoring. In most of the world, CSAM is treated similarly because they don't believe people should spread depraved images of other humans being harmed. US Federal law treats animal abuse imagery in this way: https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/48 https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/48

richbell 3y ago
[flagged]
- f38zf5vdt 3y ago
  Iran executes pedophiles, but I don't have to love the Iranian regime.
- bemusedthrow75 3y ago
  People "ought to love" crude vigilantism?
  - richbell 3y ago
    > People "ought to love" crude vigilantism? I believe I said "you" and not "people". I'm not sure I would call documenting something online "crude vigilatiasm", but maybe that's just me.
- habinero 3y ago
  No, they don't. They pick on people and pretend it's justice.
  - richbell 3y ago
    > No, they don't. They pick on people and pretend it's justice. You're upset that Kiwi Farms picks on people that produces animal abuse imagery? Or are you saying "they don't do that at all"? The latter is easily verifiable, you can find many instances of people and sites referencing their collection of evidence. Eg: https://twitter.com/HopefulGracidea/status/1566503226345660419 https://twitter.com/HopefulGracidea/status/15665032263456604...
EarlKing 3y ago
It is irrelevant whether what other countries believe. Attempting to equate this with child porn (yes, call it what it is rather than the euphemism-du-jour CSAM) does not make your argument stronger, and indeed will just lead most people to distance themselves from you. They aren't providing material aid to terrorists, nor did they engage in those acts themselves. They're reporting on it (and in some cases reveling in it)....... but that is not illegal, nor should it be. People really should stop trying to be the mutaween of the internet. It's getting tiresome.
- bemusedthrow75 3y ago
  > Attempting to equate this with child porn (yes, call it what it is rather than the euphemism-du-jour CSAM) The reason the world has moved on from calling it "child porn" is - because the world has generally moved on from thinking consensual pornography is always morally indefensible - because consensual pornography is generally legal - and so because "porn" doesn't truly describe what is happening It's not a euphemism. It's a clarification. A minority of pornography with adults involves abuse. But _all_ of the material you think should not be "euphemistically" called CSAM intrinsically involves abuse.
  - EarlKing 3y ago
    [flagged]
    - Nursie 3y ago
      Calling it Child Sexual Abuse Material is doing exactly that. That is what is depicted, that is what has taken place to produce the material. It puts front and centre that this is abuse, categorically and by definition, not 'porn'.
      - didntcheck 3y ago
        Why would that not be "porn"? I would define that as "material intended to sexually arouse the particular audience". Merriam-Webster appears to largely agree The material being harmful and produced via abuse doesn't remove it from that definition, in the same way that rape isn't removed from the definition of "sex"

richbell 3y ago

[flagged]

f38zf5vdt 3y ago
Iran executes pedophiles, but I don't have to love the Iranian regime.
bemusedthrow75 3y ago
People "ought to love" crude vigilantism?
- richbell 3y ago
  > People "ought to love" crude vigilantism? I believe I said "you" and not "people". I'm not sure I would call documenting something online "crude vigilatiasm", but maybe that's just me.
habinero 3y ago
No, they don't. They pick on people and pretend it's justice.
- richbell 3y ago
  > No, they don't. They pick on people and pretend it's justice. You're upset that Kiwi Farms picks on people that produces animal abuse imagery? Or are you saying "they don't do that at all"? The latter is easily verifiable, you can find many instances of people and sites referencing their collection of evidence. Eg: https://twitter.com/HopefulGracidea/status/1566503226345660419 https://twitter.com/HopefulGracidea/status/15665032263456604...

EarlKing 3y ago

It is irrelevant whether what other countries believe. Attempting to equate this with child porn (yes, call it what it is rather than the euphemism-du-jour CSAM) does not make your argument stronger, and indeed will just lead most people to distance themselves from you. They aren't providing material aid to terrorists, nor did they engage in those acts themselves. They're reporting on it (and in some cases reveling in it)....... but that is not illegal, nor should it be. People really should stop trying to be the mutaween of the internet. It's getting tiresome.

bemusedthrow75 3y ago
> Attempting to equate this with child porn (yes, call it what it is rather than the euphemism-du-jour CSAM) The reason the world has moved on from calling it "child porn" is - because the world has generally moved on from thinking consensual pornography is always morally indefensible - because consensual pornography is generally legal - and so because "porn" doesn't truly describe what is happening It's not a euphemism. It's a clarification. A minority of pornography with adults involves abuse. But _all_ of the material you think should not be "euphemistically" called CSAM intrinsically involves abuse.
- EarlKing 3y ago
  [flagged]
  - Nursie 3y ago
    Calling it Child Sexual Abuse Material is doing exactly that. That is what is depicted, that is what has taken place to produce the material. It puts front and centre that this is abuse, categorically and by definition, not 'porn'.
    - didntcheck 3y ago
      Why would that not be "porn"? I would define that as "material intended to sexually arouse the particular audience". Merriam-Webster appears to largely agree The material being harmful and produced via abuse doesn't remove it from that definition, in the same way that rape isn't removed from the definition of "sex"