3 ms·

Eating disorders and dieting are not the same thing.

by lanthade 2y ago

dumbo-octopus 2y ago
Can you give an example of the type of content you want censored?
- chronial 2y ago
  Glorifications of eating disorders. That is very dangerous content, especially for minors. If you want more information: https://www.klicksafe.de/en/verherrlichung-von-essstoerungen https://www.klicksafe.de/en/verherrlichung-von-essstoerungen
  - dumbo-octopus 2y ago
    Can’t have anyone posting: > photos or videos of thin girls and women > Motivational texts, sayings and quotes for losing weight ?
    - chronial 2y ago
      You deliberately misquoted the article, you are clearly not discussing in good faith. I won't respond any further. > photos or videos of extremely thin girls and women or bodies that serve as weight loss motivation and ideal images
      - dumbo-octopus 2y ago
        “Extremely” is an undefinable crutch word used to make an otherwise orwellian argument seem somehow humane. The second bit was quoted as stands.
- weego 2y ago
  I've volunteered in crisis intervention and mental health coaching for a decade or so and this is a major part of certain communities. When ED issues come up, especially in teens, concerning topics are usually (not limited to) -How to hide it better from your parents/friends -how to be more efficient at it -selfies of teens showing dangerously low body fat as "goals" -shaming of people for eating (at all) -coaching people who are vulnerable from other conditions into ED as a way to feel better. Bear in mind in some cases were talking about people who will be trying to hide that all they consume is (relatively common amount) half a small orange and 1 egg white a day and as little water as possible. It's not 'dieting'. It's a mental health condition that, untreated, leads to death.
  - dumbo-octopus 2y ago
    [flagged]
    - codetrotter 2y ago
      To be clear, this is specifically about glorification of anorexia and bulimia. Are you familiar with these disorders? No one is saying they are not permitted to speak. But if you want to post on a platform, you will also have to adhere with the rules and guidelines of that platform. When you don’t, your posts will be removed. And if your platform of choice says to not glorify these disorders, don’t be surprised when posts glorifying the disorders get removed from the platform.
      - dumbo-octopus 2y ago
        Of course, I’m intimately familiar with particular individuals that society has decided is ok to constantly berate and tell them they know what’s best for them and that they’re too thin and they aren’t eating enough and etc etc etc. Keep in mind none of these folks are medical doctors, they haven’t seen any blood tests, they have no idea how much this individual actually eats, they really have no reason to speak about any bit of their medical status whatsoever. They have absolutely zero context, they are as a child who walks into a movie in the middle and immediately starts criticizing it. But somehow society has decided thin folks are an acceptable target for baseless harassment, and she has to deal with being a pariah anywhere except LA.
    - weego 2y ago
      I just believe that people shouldn't die from preventable MH conditions. You can look in from the outside with no working knowledge of the problem and think as you please.
      - dumbo-octopus 2y ago
        No knowledge? I wish. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41475017 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41475017
- unethical_ban 2y ago
  Do you think there is no ability to form a consensus on what is harmful content, or that the community has no right to discourage or remove content they have decided is harmful?
wpietri 2y ago
Exactly. A fundamental question for any platform is, "How much harm do we want to enable?" The answer can't in practice be "none". But "well fuck it" isn't a tenable answer either, because reasonable users don't want to be around the awful stuff and they'll migrate away, leaving you with an ever-increasing proportion of terrible users. One can't think effectively about free speech without thinking about freedom of association.
- Djdjur7373bb 2y ago
  How about let the user decide what he or she wants to see? Don't censor any discussion, but give users options on what things to hide, preferably with open source algorithms that anyone can create and share.
  - wpietri 2y ago
    That is a common novice take on the problem, but it only makes sense if the only way harm happens in the world is by people accidentally seeing things they didn't want to see and that can be easily filtered out.
    - Djdjur7373bb 2y ago
      I think we just don't agree on what the problem is. I don't want a discussion platform protecting me from "dangerous" content that I am choosing to engage with.
      - wpietri 2y ago
        Yes, I think most people feel the same way as you. The question then is what to do about the societal harms enabled by the platform. I think that's a question for society, but also for the people working at the platform. For example, if you read interviews with 4chan founder Christopher "Moot" Poole, you'll see that he started out with a similar ethos to yours. He ended up reining in things some over time, still grew miserable with what he created, and eventually quit. The problem is much larger for a platform that aims to be larger and not generally despised. If you look through the big platform rules, it's worth thinking about each item from a perspective of, "Am I happy devoting my life to enabling that?" E.g., the people who are into CSAM don't want protection from content their are choosing to engage with, just like you. But how many people want to go to work each day and say, "Yay, another day of supporting machinery to distribute child porn across the globe?"

Eating disorders and dieting are not the same thing.

dumbo-octopus 2y ago

Can you give an example of the type of content you want censored?

chronial 2y ago
Glorifications of eating disorders. That is very dangerous content, especially for minors. If you want more information: https://www.klicksafe.de/en/verherrlichung-von-essstoerungen https://www.klicksafe.de/en/verherrlichung-von-essstoerungen
- dumbo-octopus 2y ago
  Can’t have anyone posting: > photos or videos of thin girls and women > Motivational texts, sayings and quotes for losing weight ?
  - chronial 2y ago
    You deliberately misquoted the article, you are clearly not discussing in good faith. I won't respond any further. > photos or videos of extremely thin girls and women or bodies that serve as weight loss motivation and ideal images
    - dumbo-octopus 2y ago
      “Extremely” is an undefinable crutch word used to make an otherwise orwellian argument seem somehow humane. The second bit was quoted as stands.
weego 2y ago
I've volunteered in crisis intervention and mental health coaching for a decade or so and this is a major part of certain communities. When ED issues come up, especially in teens, concerning topics are usually (not limited to) -How to hide it better from your parents/friends -how to be more efficient at it -selfies of teens showing dangerously low body fat as "goals" -shaming of people for eating (at all) -coaching people who are vulnerable from other conditions into ED as a way to feel better. Bear in mind in some cases were talking about people who will be trying to hide that all they consume is (relatively common amount) half a small orange and 1 egg white a day and as little water as possible. It's not 'dieting'. It's a mental health condition that, untreated, leads to death.
- dumbo-octopus 2y ago
  [flagged]
  - codetrotter 2y ago
    To be clear, this is specifically about glorification of anorexia and bulimia. Are you familiar with these disorders? No one is saying they are not permitted to speak. But if you want to post on a platform, you will also have to adhere with the rules and guidelines of that platform. When you don’t, your posts will be removed. And if your platform of choice says to not glorify these disorders, don’t be surprised when posts glorifying the disorders get removed from the platform.
    - dumbo-octopus 2y ago
      Of course, I’m intimately familiar with particular individuals that society has decided is ok to constantly berate and tell them they know what’s best for them and that they’re too thin and they aren’t eating enough and etc etc etc. Keep in mind none of these folks are medical doctors, they haven’t seen any blood tests, they have no idea how much this individual actually eats, they really have no reason to speak about any bit of their medical status whatsoever. They have absolutely zero context, they are as a child who walks into a movie in the middle and immediately starts criticizing it. But somehow society has decided thin folks are an acceptable target for baseless harassment, and she has to deal with being a pariah anywhere except LA.
  - weego 2y ago
    I just believe that people shouldn't die from preventable MH conditions. You can look in from the outside with no working knowledge of the problem and think as you please.
    - dumbo-octopus 2y ago
      No knowledge? I wish. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41475017 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41475017
unethical_ban 2y ago
Do you think there is no ability to form a consensus on what is harmful content, or that the community has no right to discourage or remove content they have decided is harmful?

wpietri 2y ago

Exactly. A fundamental question for any platform is, "How much harm do we want to enable?" The answer can't in practice be "none". But "well fuck it" isn't a tenable answer either, because reasonable users don't want to be around the awful stuff and they'll migrate away, leaving you with an ever-increasing proportion of terrible users. One can't think effectively about free speech without thinking about freedom of association.

Djdjur7373bb 2y ago
How about let the user decide what he or she wants to see? Don't censor any discussion, but give users options on what things to hide, preferably with open source algorithms that anyone can create and share.
- wpietri 2y ago
  That is a common novice take on the problem, but it only makes sense if the only way harm happens in the world is by people accidentally seeing things they didn't want to see and that can be easily filtered out.
  - Djdjur7373bb 2y ago
    I think we just don't agree on what the problem is. I don't want a discussion platform protecting me from "dangerous" content that I am choosing to engage with.
    - wpietri 2y ago
      Yes, I think most people feel the same way as you. The question then is what to do about the societal harms enabled by the platform. I think that's a question for society, but also for the people working at the platform. For example, if you read interviews with 4chan founder Christopher "Moot" Poole, you'll see that he started out with a similar ethos to yours. He ended up reining in things some over time, still grew miserable with what he created, and eventually quit. The problem is much larger for a platform that aims to be larger and not generally despised. If you look through the big platform rules, it's worth thinking about each item from a perspective of, "Am I happy devoting my life to enabling that?" E.g., the people who are into CSAM don't want protection from content their are choosing to engage with, just like you. But how many people want to go to work each day and say, "Yay, another day of supporting machinery to distribute child porn across the globe?"