Check the modlog for proof, a discussion post about moving this instance to an instance that shan’t be named now got removed for “linking to instance featuring pedo content”.
Ironically that exact possibility was reason for the discussion in the first place so seeing it happen this quickly is a bit funny.
Not sure how best to go about linking to said instance since it seems to get your content removed. DM’s would be the only solution I guess but not sure if those are checked as well.
Really showing your ass here by suggesting that you want to move to an instance with pedo content.
edit: undeleted for posterity
I see two options as to why you made that comment:
1: you just blindly believe what that admin said and have no opinion of your own, if that is the case I highly doubt a discussion is possible
2: you actually believe anime is csam in which case a discussion won’t be possible either because we don’t share the same definition of what csam is
As a closing note I find it hilarious that someone from hexbear of all places tries to ridicule people for trying to move to a safe space for their community
Edit: case in point against the csam claim is the fact that the instance in question got re-added to join-lemmy.org because the material that got it removed was not remotely seen as csam by the other maintaners
Well at first I assumed there was probably validity to what Dessalines said, because I consider them credible and I know enough about anime to know that there is a lot of csam that hides behind bullshit justifications. Even in this thread there’s discussion of a show that blatantly tittilates the audience with underage characters that would absolutely qualify as csam in any other community except in the anime community, for some reason.
And then I went onto the anime lemmy everyone is surreptitiously talking about, and the literal first post I saw was a body pillow design featuring an underage character that is right on the line of being csam. It was the only example I saw in my brief look, and it didn’t quite qualify, which is why I came back and deleted my comment.
I don’t care about what the maintainers’ view of the matter is, I make (and sometimes delete) my comments based on my own view of it.
Emphasis mine. If what you are saying is indeed correct (is it? dunno), this is a sign that the acronym “CSAM” was completely derailed.
Originally the expression “child sexual abuse material” was coined to avoid implications of consent brought by the word “pornography”, and it boils down to “evidence of child sexual abuse”. Consent and sexual abuse are legal notions that only apply to real people, not to fictional characters.
In the meantime, at worst the instance in question depicts images of clearly fictional characters in suggestive poses and/or clothing. It does not classify even as pornography, let alone sexual abuse. (Note that not even hentai depicting clearly adult characters is allowed in that instance.)
Given that this is a touchy subject, I think that this matter is better handled neither by the maintainers’ views nor by our own views, but by 1) legal definitions of governments that might be relevant in the matter, and 2) explicit moral premises.
I may have an extremely warped opinion on this due to several reasons (imo mostly due to irl encounters with adult people that would put you on a watch list due to how young they look) but I think in the end it usually boils down to anime/manga just being terrible media for portraying how old a character actually is. The oldest anime character you can draw will still look significantly younger than a person you meet irl simply because the art style hides a lot of the age marks.
Edit: which is not to say that there isn’t a lot of CSAM hiding, it’s just imo the stuff that gets popular on SFW platforms is rarely that stuff
If anime is child porn, then so is all live action media.
Not all anime of course, but you’ve got to be delusional to believe that the depths that anime sometimes sinks with regards to loli and shota content is matched by other mass-market mediums.
To be fair with the above, even considering that he’s being disingenuous*, his [AFAIK incorrect] claim is not “anime is child porn”, it’s “that anime instance has child porn”.
*note how he’s trying to transform “is this CSAM?” into a subjective matter. That’s rather close to the moving goalposts fallacy.