Comment on feddit.online will live on as a PieFed instance
cacheson@piefed.social 1 month agoEvery one wants to talk about supportive they are on sex positivity until some men in uniform knocks on their doors because they are running a website that is available for minors all around the world.
Are you speaking from first-hand experience, or is this conjecture? At least in the US, complying with the law isn't that difficult.
Also, I don't even want to get in the discussion of "sex positivity" being associated with "easily available porn".
That's an odd way to avoid discussing it. Do you think the availability of porn (or prohibition thereof) within an online space has no effect on what kind of culture develops there?
rglullis@communick.news 1 month ago
Of course it does have an effect, but there is a difference between “can be found” and “should be encouraged to be treated on equal footing as any other community forum”.
Much like “absolute freedom of speech” platforms that inevitably end up catering only people who want to say only repulsive things without repercussion, what do you think will happen if you create an online space and put a big billboard saying “here you will always be free to share your NSFW content”?
Content discovery of porn should not be as easy and it should not be trivialized under the pretense of “sex positivity”. One can have an absolutely open mind about sex and sexuality while still wanting to keep a clear boundary of when/how whom to talk about it with.
cacheson@piefed.social 1 month ago
You seem to be implying that I'm arguing something that I'm not? This thread started with me lamenting that piefed.social accounts are prohibited from accessing NSFW communities, and inquiring whether feddit.online would have the same policies. Along with some commentary on the general state of the threadiverse's culture.
Note that I haven't asked either admin to *host* said communities, and I specifically acknowledged the caching issue. Nor am I advocating for them to be treated on absolutely equal footing; they're specially marked so that people who don't want to see them can filter them out, which I think is a good thing.
If you're specifically advertising it as focused on that, then that's likely what you'll get. If you allow NSFW but don't center it, you'll end up with something like Reddit, Twitter, or pre-ban Tumblr. While there are things to criticize about those sites, very little of it has to do with porn.
Why? That absolutely sounds like a sex-negative attitude to me. It's treating sexuality as something toxic that needs to be suppressed and hidden even from those that are interested in seeing it. Sex positivity means treating sexuality as a normal thing that is not unusual for people to be interested in.
rglullis@communick.news 1 month ago
You lamented the fact that unlogged users can not see it and that they can not be found as easily. This is the same as “make it available to the public without any type of check”.
Sexuality != Porn, and “toxicity” is dose-dependent. Eating a bit of broccoli is good for you. Too much at once and you get thyroid dysfunction.
There are plenty of things that are good and normal, but need to be discussed/presented with a proper context and (most importantly) people need to have a better understanding of the potential bad consequences if it is abused or corrupted.
You don’t see young people destroying their lives because they were promised they could make a lot of money by knitting sweaters or working as electricians, but cases of vulnerable women who regret getting into sex work are infinite.