Reddit finally bans "Coontown", "WatchN*****sDie", & animated child porn forums

Status
Not open for further replies.

Brakke

Banned
You're not going to find many here that are openly sympathetic to your cause. You can see how that material makes people uncomfortable, right? They're essentially children, physically. Coontown was a legal forum technically as well. Doesn't mean it wasn't a necessary culling.

"They" aren't essentially children, "they" are essentially drawings. There isn't even a "they" there, we're talking about representations, not people.

I don't really see it as a moral issue. So for me that is reason enough.

There are some number of people who look at illustrated porn about children and see it as relief of some undeniable urge they experience and loath, and there are some number of people who see it as encouragement to pursue some predatory shit. I don't really know what the balance is for the anime kiddy stuff on reddit, I certainly didn't participate there. Was it stoking fires of predators or damping fires of people struggling with ugly urges? Just because the second exists, you can't dismiss the first out of hand.
 

Jazz573

Member
"They" aren't essentially children, "they" are essentially drawings. There isn't even a "they" there, we're talking about representations, not people.



There are some number of people who look at illustrated porn about children and see it as relief of some undeniable urge they experience and loath, and there are some number of people who see it as encouragement to pursue some predatory shit. I don't really know what the balance is for the anime kiddy stuff on reddit, I certainly didn't participate there. Was it stoking fires of predators or damping fires of people struggling with ugly urges? Just because the second exists, you can't dismiss the first out of hand.

No, I'm not dismissing the fact that for some people it's a moral issue, just that for me, myself, it's not. I've also never been to those subs either. I actually agree with you that they're just drawings.
 

Nightbird

Member
tumblr_n47km5I24z1t1i3epo1_1280.png

I like that a lot.
 

wsippel

Banned
No one is obligated to give a platform to something they don't agree with, much less a for-profit business. There's nothing illegal, amoral, or psychologically damaging about removing filth from your vicinity.

If you're just interested in defending the right to being filth, I don't really know what else to tell you.
I'm not sure what you're trying to tell me in the first place, actually. Are you disagreeing with me or what was the point of this post?
 
I'm not sure what you're trying to tell me in the first place, actually. Are you disagreeing with me or what was the point of this post?

You said you understand why reddit did it but don't agree with the decision on legal, moral, or psychological grounds, so what do you think should be done?
 

wsippel

Banned
You said you understand why reddit did it but don't agree with the decision on legal, moral, or psychological grounds, so what do you think should be done?
Ideally? Nothing. Realistically? I have no idea.

I find hate speech disgusting. But I'm willing to listen, if only to figure out where those mindsets come from and potentially do something about it. Because that actually helps. Simply telling people to shut up and calling them names solves nothing.
 

DrBo42

Member
"They" aren't essentially children, "they" are essentially drawings. There isn't even a "they" there, we're talking about representations, not people.

They're representations of characters either drawn to be children and labeled as being of age or actually children. The whole "They're not real!" defense is a bit thin considering what sexual acts with them represent and possibly encourage for some individuals.
 

wsippel

Banned
They're representations of characters either drawn to be children and labeled as being of age or actually children. The whole "They're not real!" defense is a bit thin considering what sexual acts with them represent and possibly encourage for some individuals.
Actually, the common opinion is that those drawings are more likely to prevent than encourage real sexual abuse.
 

SmokyDave

Member
Actually, the common opinion is that those drawings are more likely to prevent than encourage real sexual abuse.
I can believe that, it doesn't seem too dissimilar to excessive porn consumption killing sex drives.

I still don't think I'm cool with them being available on a publicly accessible website though. Perhaps issue them on prescription to paedophiles / anime fans or something.
 

Winter John

Member
Actually, the common opinion is that those drawings are more likely to prevent than encourage real sexual abuse.

I'd say the opposite is true. Having a group of pedophiles socializing and swapping images of children being sexually abused probably encourages them to go further. I just hope the authorities were monitoring every single one of them.
 
After seeing the amount of shit that flies without calls for the artists to be arrested in comics because everybody 'gets' that it's fictional and there's no actual victims, I think lolicon kinda falls into a convoluted argument over whether it's a loophole to get away with CP or if it's people finding a 'safe' alternative to acting on urges or if they literally just get off to anime but not the actual thing. I lean to the latter but with some of the stuff I've read happening in Japan and just how bizarrely 'normalized' the stuff was there (at least when I went to Akihabara), I can see why a lot of people side with the former viewpoint. Outside of a few major cases (I read one where a predator used hentai to convince a kid it was 'normal'), are there any research pieces on the issue?

I just have an issue rationalizing why graphic depictions of murder or even classical representations of nudity are considered fine and the blame's placed on the viewer if it 'encourages' them, but if it's a graphic depiction of something sexual it's the creator's fault for what the viewer may do and is way more taboo. Guess that also sorta goes beyond just the hentai issue and also fictional depictions of rape in media as well, but is the overall thought that sexual activities are easier to act on than murderous impulses?

Either way it would be insane for a big social media site that's trying to become a mainstream profitable business to host it. 4chan can get away with that sort of notoriety, Reddit probably can't. Same goes for the Coontown stuff as well, obviously.
 

Odrion

Banned
cartoon child porn is illegal in whole bunch of countries. regardless of any pro child porn arguments you have, reddit should probably discourage towards forums that will get you thrown into a bunch of first world prisons.
Actually, the common opinion is that those drawings are more likely to prevent than encourage real sexual abuse.
The common opinion, really? That is the opinion of the common person?
 
Which I outright said I agree with and can see why it's a growing issue, but I can also see why when you have similarly fucked up shit like Crossed (linked because googling it WILL bring up a ton of drawings of people doing things with dead bodies, among other things) amass a huge fanbase and stay perfectly legal, I can see why people feel the need to ask what the limits are exactly.

Like, given what I already saw on the writeups of Coontown I'm not under the delusion that these loli boards were just 'cute anime girl pics' and weren't far more graphic, posted under the impression Reddit wasn't going to do anything.

EDIT: Oh you were talking to wsippel, my bad.
 

Odrion

Banned
Sorry no. I am all for the banning of hateful subreddits, but the banning of the subreddits you are talking about in the last part of your post was complete bullshit. There was absolutely no reason to ban it, when it's perfectly legal in the US, where reddit is hosted.
1.) It's not "perfectly legal" in America. Stop spreading this nonsense.

2.) LMAO at the "it's legal in the country where the servers are!" defense. Like that fucking matters. This is the fucking internet and Reddit is a fucking internet company.
Jazz573 said:
Also it's not CP, since they're not real, and therefore aren't even people.
Cartoon child porn is child porn because the last two words in "cartoon child porn" is child porn. Also it's legally classified as child porn by a bunch of governments, and in America it's legally classified as "simulated child porn."
 
It's been more than a day and the front page of /r/all has not been bombarded with posts by /r/coontown renmant subs and posts calling for the resignation and/or facepunching of /u/spez.

I don't know if should be impressed or disgusted how these white supremacist didn't have as much of meltdown as the FPHers did when /r/fatpeoplehate was banned last month. But then again /u/spez is a white dude and not an Asian woman.

Look at what the front page of reddit is right now vs. what it was when /r/FPH was banned.

This is going to perhaps sound absurd, but I think the racists are perhaps less dedicated to being fucking babies about their toys being taken away than the sexists that reddit has given a home to. I feel like FPH, along with most of the Ellen Pao stuff, was predominantly an anti-woman thing (especially given that the thing which made FPH mad the most seemed to be women who were specifically anti-fat shaming).
 
SHE'S ACTUALLY 1000 YEARS OLD OKAY
what if it's a 6 year old in the body of a 1000 year old demon

Also reading through the thread some more, how did Coontown not conflict with the anti-harassment rules in the first place if the front page flat out has a call to purge out blacks?
 

marrec

Banned
what if it's a 6 year old in the body of a 1000 year old demon

Also reading through the thread some more, how did Coontown not conflict with the anti-harassment rules in the first place if the front page flat out has a call to purge out blacks?

What, you mean like a GOP Candidate?

I hope that's not the argument.

It is, isn't it?

I think, horrifically, the argument is that it's "harmless" or even "helpful".
 

I read most of that and I came out even more confused, although it does look like it's legal over there in the US. The latest clear ruling happened in 2008 where a judge ruled the lolicon part of the PROTECT act unconstitutional. (This also happened back in 2002) There are some cases where people were successfully persecuted, but that mostly seems to have happened because they entered into plea bargains.

All in all, it sounds like it's legal, but at the same time law is rather vague.
 

JDSN

Banned
Common amongst experts. Psychologists and such. This topic is a bit too complicated for laymen to form an informed opinion.

Please show some studies, the little I know from past discussions at class is that pedophiles are a huge multi-faceted group, because of that there is absolutely no evidence that child porn helps lessen recidivism, in fact consumption of CP might lead to interest in engaging minors.
 

Odrion

Banned
I read most of that and I came out even more confused, although it does look like it's legal over there in the US. The latest clear ruling happened in 2008 where a judge ruled the lolicon part of the PROTECT act unconstitutional. (This also happened back in 2002) There are some cases where people were successfully persecuted, but that mostly seems to have happened because they entered into plea bargains.

All in all, it sounds like it's legal, but at the same time law is rather vague.
"I think it's legal, but I'm confused" doesn't coincide with "perfectly legal."

It's a grey area, but there is a history of people being convicted and prosecuted as a result of having it. In the 2008 case the man was still convicted of an obscenity charge for having it.
 
"I think it's legal, but I'm confused" doesn't coincide with "perfectly legal."

It's a legal grey area but there is a history of people being convicted and prosecuted as a result of having it. In the 2008 case the man was still charged with obscenity charges.

That's fair enough, given the wording I certainly wouldn't have called it "perfectly legal", lol. On a semi-related note, I wish Obscenity laws weren't as vaguely defined as they generally tend to be, it's the same law that still bans the sale of sex toys in a few US states.
 

wsippel

Banned
Citation?
Got it from a hearing in the German parliament, I think it was around a year ago. There was a proposal to ban drawings of child porn, so a couple of experts were invited to give their opinion.


@JDSN:

"Recidivism" implies that the persons in question already abused kids - I wouldn't actually expect drawings to be enough for that group. But I'm also pretty sure that only a small percentage of those with such tendencies ever actually act on their urges in the first place, and the idea is that fiction potentially helps keeping that fraction so small.
 
That's fair enough, given the wording I certainly wouldn't have called it "perfectly legal", lol. On a semi-related note, I wish Obscenity laws weren't as vaguely defined as they generally tend to be, it's the same law that still bans the sale of sex toys in a few US states.
... What are obscenity laws? If it's a porn thing, does it only apply to CP situations?

Or is it meant for situations, like say the making of snuff film, where an act is going to actively harm someone? If it's more general sexual conduct/porn thing that bans certain acts/'themes' (BDSM for instance) that's a bit ridiculous.
 
... What are obscenity laws? If it's a porn thing, does it only apply to CP situations?

Or is it meant for situations, like say the making of snuff film, where an act is going to actively harm someone? If it's more general sexual conduct/porn thing that bans certain acts/'themes' (BDSM for instance) that's a bit ridiculous.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_obscenity_law#Obscene_devices

also

In fact, federal obscenity law in the U.S. is highly unusual in that not only is there no uniform national standard, but rather, there is an explicit legal precedent (the "Miller test", below) that all but guarantees that something that is legally obscene in one jurisdiction may not be in another.

Even at the federal level, there does not exist a specific listing of which exact acts are to be classified as obscene outside of the legally determined court cases.

I'd suggest to read this, but it basically just seems to be "This isn't really illegal, but I still think you should be punished, therefor I charge you with possession of obscene materials" Great law.
 
Common amongst experts. Psychologists and such. This topic is a bit too complicated for laymen to form an informed opinion.

Wouldn't it be more beneficial for these people to receive proper help, rather than normalising and facilitating an unhealthy and dangerous mindset?

Because let's me honest, that's all its doing.
 

marrec

Banned
Wouldn't it be more beneficial for these people to receive proper help, rather than normalising and facilitating an unhealthy and dangerous mindset?

Because let's me honest, that's all its doing.

Well ya, but you know... psychologists and such.
 

wsippel

Banned
Wouldn't it be more beneficial for these people to receive proper help, rather than normalising and facilitating an unhealthy and dangerous mindset?

Because let's me honest, that's all its doing.
The approach to treating paraphilie changed considerably in modern psychiatry. According to DSM-5, a paraphilia should only be treated if negative consequences are to be expected in a specific case. If somebody considers little kids sexually attractive, that's weird but not inherently dangerous as long as that person doesn't actually do anything. And given the vast amount of loli content, it's pretty obvious that the tendency is much more widespread than most would expect. It's also pretty obvious that the majority of those people never actually acts on those urges and is apparently content with drawings and literature. It's not really possible to do a proper study though.

But all of that doesn't actually matter because, let's be honest, how exactly do you plan to help anybody if nobody would admit to have such tendencies? So yeah, we should offer help. We should also realize that there's a massive stigma attached, so it's understandable that pedophiles prefer to remain anonymous.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom