I think this is an area where there is legitimate debate. They didn’t name the community, but I’m guessing it’s fauxbait, which has in the sidebar:
FauxBait is a place for sharing images and videos of the youngest-looking, legal-aged (18+) girls. If you like fresh, young starlets, this is the place for you!
The title seems to be for “fake jailbait,” so I can understand people assuming it’s essentially simulated underage porn. There will be those who say that as long as the models are legal, it’s fine, and others who say it’s not okay to make what looks like child porn, even if it’s not made with children.
I personally feel that, as long as they’re up front about it being adults, it’s okay for it to exist, even though some of the pics there are a bit gross to me. But I get that people will fall to the left and right of me. If it crosses a line for the admin there, defederating seems reasonable (since they can’t block the community at the instance level).
I’m the new mod of !adorableporn@lemmynsfw.com, (not to be confused with !adorableporn@pornlemmy.com) , and since the female gender does not have a monopoly on the word “adorable”, the community is inclusive of all genders.
Well that just makes no sense and makes me question the accuracy. I’m not sure that community even skews particular young, though probably at least a little… Adorable doesn’t necessarily mean young and young doesn’t necessarily mean adorable.
Oh, I hadn’t seen the conversation screenshot. It honestly so much doesn’t make sense that I’m wondering if she linked the wrong sub. I mean, scroll through that one - lots and lots of the posts are cute housewives.
Fauxbait, on the other hand, I could see being debatable. How could they have a problem with the one and not the other? Something doesn’t add up.
I thought it was a different community that was causing the issues; the reaction makes much more sense with that one. While I still don’t agree with the defederation it’s not nearly as unreasonable as it first seemed to me. Thanks for clearing that up.
Edit - nevermind, it actually was adorableporn, so yeah still weird.
Full disclosure, I’m guessing - the admin post about it didn’t name the community, but she said something about “intentionally looking underage” or something like that, which is why I assumed fauxbait.
I think this is an area where there is legitimate debate. They didn’t name the community, but I’m guessing it’s fauxbait, which has in the sidebar:
The title seems to be for “fake jailbait,” so I can understand people assuming it’s essentially simulated underage porn. There will be those who say that as long as the models are legal, it’s fine, and others who say it’s not okay to make what looks like child porn, even if it’s not made with children.
I personally feel that, as long as they’re up front about it being adults, it’s okay for it to exist, even though some of the pics there are a bit gross to me. But I get that people will fall to the left and right of me. If it crosses a line for the admin there, defederating seems reasonable (since they can’t block the community at the instance level).
The community was !adorableporn@lemmynsfw.com
Nothing to do with jailbait
Where did she say that? The admin post I saw didn’t name it. Adorableporn makes no sense since half the pics there are clearly older women.
Look at the link in OP you are commenting on lol
Look at the link in the OP here…
Look at the link in the OP here…
The community in question is “adorable porn”, from what I’ve read.
The concept of which is attractive but bubbly/cute women in nsfw circumstances.
I’m the new mod of !adorableporn@lemmynsfw.com, (not to be confused with !adorableporn@pornlemmy.com) , and since the female gender does not have a monopoly on the word “adorable”, the community is inclusive of all genders.
I welcome all to join in the conversation at pinned post in the community: https://lemmynsfw.com/post/419923
Well that just makes no sense and makes me question the accuracy. I’m not sure that community even skews particular young, though probably at least a little… Adorable doesn’t necessarily mean young and young doesn’t necessarily mean adorable.
The accuracy? Admin posted the conversation
Oh, I hadn’t seen the conversation screenshot. It honestly so much doesn’t make sense that I’m wondering if she linked the wrong sub. I mean, scroll through that one - lots and lots of the posts are cute housewives.
Fauxbait, on the other hand, I could see being debatable. How could they have a problem with the one and not the other? Something doesn’t add up.
They did not link the wrong community. It’s just stupid, nothing more
I thought it was a different community that was causing the issues; the reaction makes much more sense with that one. While I still don’t agree with the defederation it’s not nearly as unreasonable as it first seemed to me. Thanks for clearing that up.
Edit - nevermind, it actually was adorableporn, so yeah still weird.
Full disclosure, I’m guessing - the admin post about it didn’t name the community, but she said something about “intentionally looking underage” or something like that, which is why I assumed fauxbait.