EPTthose crazy Reddit users, at it again! - Page 8
| Forum Index > General Forum |
|
Zahir
United States947 Posts
| ||
|
MadProbe
United States269 Posts
i think u need a new plan. | ||
|
vaL4r
Germany240 Posts
On September 18 2012 01:47 Rotodyne wrote: TL.net could have a massive child porn ring going on through PMs. I wouldn't blame TL.net for that. To me that seems like a good point! | ||
|
emythrel
United Kingdom2599 Posts
On September 18 2012 05:07 besteady wrote: Freedom of speech does not include sexualizing underage kids, which for some reason a large part of reddit thinks it does Yes but not all redditors are from the US and in some EU countries the legal age of consent is as low as 14 and in other parts of the world even lower than that. Teenage girls sexualize themselves, they post suggestive pics on facebook et al, they dress in a way that they know will attract guys, in most of the western world it is perfectly legal for me to sleep with a 16 year old girl but if I take photos of her naked, suddenly its illegal. The line is arbitrary and blurry, if a girl is 15 and consents to sex with a 17 year old guy then no one will convict the guy of statutory rape, at least not in my country because they are of similar age. Same situation with 15 year old girl and 20 year old guy? Then you start gettin in to an area where you can argue that he should have known better or whatever argument you have against it etc etc etc. Every 15 year old girl I've ever met dreams of having an older boyfriend, many girls when I was at school were dating guys who were 18-19 and some even older. I completely get why the girls do it and I can also see why many guys do it too. Girls look physically the best they will ever look between the ages of 14-21, men are genetically programmed to find them attractive, any guy who says he doesn't is lying. The attraction to teenage girls is natural, acting on it is when you get in to morally questionable ground but again, depending on where you live, the rules are different. Why can a girl consent to sex at 14 but not consent to being photographed until 18? I don't know the answer to that question, I think that actual consent at that age only happens when the guy is of a similar age, when he is significantly older, she is probably feeling extremely pressured to say yes and that means she isn't really consenting but conceding. If a 16 year old girl takes photos of herself naked and then posts them on reddit, without being asked to do so, she just decides that she wants to do it, why is that wrong? She has made a decision to sexualize herself and make it publically available. Its all about context and subjectivity. If a 14 year old girl sleeps with a 20 year old guy, hes probably gonna get either convicted by the police or beaten up by her dad. If its a 14 year old boy and a 20 year old woman, the kid is a FUCKING LEGEND and his dad will probably high 5 him. How is that fair or right? I'm not saying the 20 year old guy was in the right, i'm just saying that its a double standard. Its either ok or its not, whether you are male or female shouldn't make any difference to the application of the law or whether your peers think its ok. I do not condone true jailbait, but often girls on jb sites are actually overage but look younger and I also don't think that if a 15-17 year old girl chooses to take pics and put them on facebook that someone else should get in trouble for looking at them. If a girl posts naked pics of herself on 4chan, she decided to do that, she made that choice, no one else. If someone forces her to do it, then by all means slap on the handcuffs. Girls often go on Stickam and the like and strip, they choose to do that, they sexualize themselves. In this as in all things, context is king. | ||
|
Grumbels
Netherlands7031 Posts
So I don't really see a good reason to shut those forums down, from a freedom of speech PoV, but I'm very wary about it, because it's just the thing to serve as a pretext for even more internet censorship. I'd really rather have that reddit put a stop to those subreddits, because some battles are worth fighting and losing whatever internet freedom is left just to placate some creeps that are deliberately provocative with their creepy antics (and also the real pedophiles that use these forums to get in touch with each other) seems not worth it. It's actually why I wish they legalized lolita or whatever they call hentai with underage girls. Yes, it's majorly creepy, but pedophiles do exist and why not give them more or less harmless outlets for their needs? At the very least it will serve as one less reason for why ISP's must monitor all internet traffic. And the scare about pedophiles is really annoying. I teach guitar as a part time job at times and most of my clients are parents who have me teach their kids, and basically all of them keep a very close eye on me to ensure I don't do anything troublesome with them. It's why I have to keep traveling around to their houses instead of the more convenient method of them coming to my apartment. Or when I was 20 and I had a crush on a 15 year old I kept feeling guilty and I was worried if there was something wrong with me for finding her attractive. | ||
|
KimJongChill
United States6429 Posts
User was temp banned for this post. | ||
|
fishjie
United States1519 Posts
in that case, we should be jailing/prosecuting/punishing the people who produce the content. it should not be illegal to watch child porn, because that is violating peoples rights to do whatever they want to in private. people get turned on all by all sorts of stuff, and its their legal right to be turned on by it. its only when they act out on it (a pederast as opposed to a pedophile) that it should be punished. we absolutely should not censor the internet, which is a bastion of free speech. once we go down that slippery slope, its all over. | ||
|
Zahir
United States947 Posts
On September 18 2012 07:08 KimJongChill wrote: OP you sound like a huge tool. "I'm personally disgusted about the child porn etc etc". Granted the whole beating women/raping thing is kind of bad, but I don't know enough about these subreddits to make any judgments. Most of the jailbait stuff is completely harmless, it's illegal because of the law, not because it's morally wrong. When you learn that an attractive and physically mature girl is 17 and 11 months old instead of 18, does that send waves of disgust throughout every fiber of your being and make you want to vomit? The argument works in reverse as well though. Moral outrage over a risque pic some 15 year old posted voluntarily to stoke the fires of perversion is questionable. Lack of moral outrage over an explicit cp shot of a child of... Well use your imagination, that would be even more ridiculous. I'm not saying that the latter type is at all common, but its surely there from time to time and I can understand anyone posting an emotional rant after being exposed to it, because it honestly is morally and even physically disgusting when you see an actual child being exploited for this purpose. | ||
|
emythrel
United Kingdom2599 Posts
On September 18 2012 07:34 Zahir wrote: The argument works in reverse as well though. Moral outrage over a risque pic some 15 year old posted voluntarily to stoke the fires of perversion is questionable. Lack of moral outrage over an explicit cp shot of a child of... Well use your imagination, that would be even more ridiculous. I'm not saying that the latter type is at all common, but its surely there from time to time and I can understand anyone posting an emotional rant after being exposed to it, because it honestly is morally and even physically disgusting when you see an actual child being exploited for this purpose. Yes but if you actually go to a jailbait website or look up the term the definition is of a girl who "looks" between the age of 13-17. There is a huge difference between cp and jailbait. CP is wrong, everyone knows that, even the people who are the ones making and consuming it. CP applies only to prepubescent age, girls in their teens are from a biological stand point sexually matured and from there it is all very subjective and laws vary from country to country. Most of the stuff that this article is calling CP isn't in the slightest, most of it is of teenage girls wearing clothes, which neither falls under the catagory of pornography or images of children, thus calling it child porn is wrong on every level. I'm sure you get true CP on reddit from time to time and there is probably a subreddit where it is regularly posted but to lambast a site for hosting CP and then list subreddits which are in no way related to CP is both wrong and idiotic. As rightly said by KinJong, if you met a girl and found out she was 17 years and 6 months old but you really found her attractive both emotionally and physically, not many people would then say "sorry have to wait until you are 18" in my country I wouldn't even have to say it since 16 is the age of consent. Granted at 29, if I met a 15 and half year old girl I would say "sorry, you're too young" but thats because she is almost half my age and not because I think there is something inherently wrong with it. What could we possibly have in common? I would be only dating her because she is young and physically attractive, I would be using her in short and I personally don't think that is right. I do not condone guys my age sleeping with 15 year old girls but I also do not see why waiting a few extra months makes it suddenly ok in the eyes of the law. Sleeping with a girl who is 15 years 364 days old is illegal, sleeping with a 16 years and 0 days girl is..... pretty stupid law in my eyes. Same with taking naked pics. You have to draw the line somewhere but there should be some fluidity and flexibility. once again, I'll say it.....Context is king | ||
|
wozzot
United States1227 Posts
Anyway, there's no need to go around bashing ShitRedditSays. SRS owns and it's where all the cool kids hang out  | ||
|
brian
United States9619 Posts
On September 18 2012 07:12 fishjie wrote: if the jailbait pix are girls taking photos of themselves, then there is no exploitation going on. there's nothing wrong with that, and it IS the girls fault in that situation. i dont consider that child porn. child porn involves actual exploitation and forcible rape of children, which is a much different beast. in that case, we should be jailing/prosecuting/punishing the people who produce the content. it should not be illegal to watch child porn, because that is violating peoples rights to do whatever they want to in private. people get turned on all by all sorts of stuff, and its their legal right to be turned on by it. its only when they act out on it (a pederast as opposed to a pedophile) that it should be punished. we absolutely should not censor the internet, which is a bastion of free speech. once we go down that slippery slope, its all over. so your argument is literally that perpetuating a market for videos of people raping other people should in fact be defended by free speech? | ||
|
FallDownMarigold
United States3710 Posts
On September 18 2012 08:10 wozzot wrote: This thread seems to be bringing the "ephebophiles" out of the woodwork. Anyway, there's no need to go around bashing ShitRedditSays. SRS owns and it's where all the cool kids hang out I definitely had to look up "ephebophile", but yeah, after skimming this thread that's exactly what I was thinking. Weird. | ||
|
Zahir
United States947 Posts
On September 18 2012 08:19 FallDownMarigold wrote: I definitely had to look up "ephebophile", but yeah, after skimming this thread that's exactly what I was thinking. Weird. I had to look it up as well and I think that's part of the problem. Not everyone in society is as open minded as we are here online (which is barely), and most would immediately dismiss the idea of a "pedophilia lite" and fall back on their socially ingrained, television exposé conceptions of child porn and overweight creepy stalker pedos who want to kidnap their children. There's almost no use pointing out that "jailbait" is different, because most people will simply label you, dismiss your objections as rationalizing, and possibly throw you in jail (which is itself implied in the term jailbait). | ||
|
Misanthrope
United States924 Posts
| ||
|
acgFork
Canada397 Posts
| ||
|
Steel
Japan2283 Posts
You really need to know nothing about reddit to have that kind of opinion. There are so many users who live to find this kind of stuff and get it removed. The users HATE IT. This is ridiculous, even back in the r/jailbait era there was no child porn. I've never seen any, and I've seen a lot of posts removed because a girl who was totally 18+ looked questionable to some users and the poster wasn't submitting proof. It's absurdly strict, and any subreddit that doesn't have mods that enforce this is removed as soon as it's figured out. You really can't do that much of a better job with so much submitted content every day. TLDR: Reddit is trying really hard to prevent this! It's not easy when you have so many users but they are doing a great job! | ||
|
Detri
United Kingdom683 Posts
| ||
|
Rhine
187 Posts
On September 18 2012 04:22 aristarchus wrote: When you use the internet, it doesn't benefit the people who put the awful things up. If you agree that these subreddits are bad and that reddit should take them down, then you believe reddit itself (the owners/operators) is bad, and you going to the site directly benefits them through advertising. You can debate whether reddit, which as a private website has the right to censor content that is posted, should use that authority, but if it *is* doing something very wrong, boycotting it is perfectly reasonable as a response. But the admins on reddit do ban those subreddits. Look at how many banned subs are listed in this thread alone. Every time one comes out and gets any popularity, it gets the hammer. There was some debate on the edge-wise legality of /r/jailbait, but it was decided to take it down. Now, there's all this furor about things that are constantly being banned and moderated. Is that not what we wanted? My point was that condemning an entire community of "those crazy Reddit users" and how "disgusting" it is to visit he same website where some users posted questionable content is silly. The internet is filled with bad places and we don't blame all its users. I'm not arguing that that jailbait should be a thing on reddit. I am arguing that user-created content should be taken on its merit and moderated if necessary (which is what is happening all the time, even on a "freedom" oriented site like reddit). | ||
|
moopie
12605 Posts
"Keep a teen off the streets. Put her in your van", and he reads it all seriously. | ||
|
APurpleCow
United States1372 Posts
On September 18 2012 06:53 Zahir wrote: I think looking at a picture should never be a crime, no matter it's contents. It might make me sick to my stomach thinking of the type of shit some people get off of, but ultimately, if they aren't hurting anyone and dont bring their sick fetish out in public, so be it. Better than that have pedophiles and worse out roaming the streets looking for gratification. We really have better things to do as a society than go out and persecute people for behavior that doesn't hurt others. By all means, investigate and prosecute the makers of cp/the ones conspiring to do so, but let's not go hog wild and become the state morality police and decide it is wrong for an unrelated party to look at a picture, no matter how abhorrent, in private. The problem with people looking at pictures of CP is that it's a privacy violation of the child. If you were raped and video were taken, do you think it would be just fine for anybody to have that video? | ||
| ||
