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.

    • Gordon_Freeman@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      Access to content should not be difficulted by puritan views. If people enjoy gore and create an instance about gore in movies showing very explicit (yet fictional) images of dismemberments and stuff in movies it should be banned too because is morally questionable?

      If you can’t distinguish between fiction and reality it should be a you problem not the whole instance you are inhabiting problem

      What do you think about this? (sorry the article is in Spanish, but there is no English article)

      https://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ni%C3%B1os_en_la_playa

      It’s a painting exposed in an important museum

      • Kichae@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        If you want legally questionable material, gore, or other shit, you’re free to spin up your own instance. Your access to it is not being fettered.

        You’re just not entitled to access it using someone else’s website.

        • Gordon_Freeman@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 year ago

          Paedos should be castrated and thrown into the deepest hole and never leave, as they hurt children. Nobody is defending those people, but drawings are not children, nobody is harmed. That’s an important difference

            • Gordon_Freeman@kbin.social
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              1 year ago

              This is your argument:

              We should ban violent videogames . Everybody know people who play violent videogames are violent. Peolpe claiming “It’S jUsT a GaMe” are protecting violent people

              P.S. I hope you don’t like shaved vaginas, btw, people who like shaved genitals are just ill people people who want to see kid-like genitals without any hair i.e. paedos

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

        You know what you can do if you want to see that content? Subscribe to that instance or an instance that is federated with it. Easy

      • LollerCorleone@kbin.socialOP
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        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.

        • Otome-chan@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          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
            0
            ·
            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
                0
                ·
                1 year ago

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

                  • Bloonface@kbin.social
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    0
                    ·
                    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.

        • Gordon_Freeman@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          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
            1
            ·
            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