• Kairos@lemmy.today
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    19
    arrow-down
    9
    ·
    edit-2
    16 days ago

    No it absolutely does fucking not include cartoons. (Edit: at least in the US)

    And yes, even if it’s of a real person/child. Apparently they’re working on changing that.

      • Kairos@lemmy.today
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        29
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        16 days ago

        Okay, dickhead. Do you treat everyone who talks about child abuse laws as a predator?

        Let me tell you EXACTLY what will happen if the federal government treats cartoon pornofraphy the same as real CSAM: the amount of CSAM being viewed goes up. Way up.

        The reason why real child sexual abuse is heavily penalized and cartoon stuff isn’t is because real child sexual abuse is worse. Would you rather have people looking at cartoons or real children?

        On top of that, shows like Euphoria,/and others would become just as illegal as real child pornography. After all, the characters depicted are minors, but the actors are adults. Would you be okay with someone watching Euphoria being punished the same as somene looking at real child sexual abuse?

        “Oh but I would rather people not veiw anything of sexualized children, real or not-” well I hate to break it to you: its going to happen anyway. The point of criminal punishment is harm reduction. And punishing looking at a cartoon and child pornography the same is only going to increase viewership of real child pornography.

        And I’m not even defending it [cartoons] but I definitely would like for real child sexual abuse to decrease, so I’m okay with (edit: CARTOONS) existing. YOU are reading into my comment.

        • YabosMcGee@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          10
          ·
          16 days ago

          Kairos

          Holy shit. Before you “ackchually” maybe you should look up this shit? Images or video of a minor that depict an act of sex abuse against an identifiable minor CAN include drawings. There have been some cases where people have been convicted of only that (in other cases the person usually had “real” CSAM so it’s hard to determine what the outcome would have been). Here’s a highlighted excerpt from a case in the 5th circuit from a great thread literally about this:

          https://bsky.app/profile/jackscellphone.bsky.social/post/3ksissuq2ft2w

          And, yes, before you push your glasses up your nose and “buh buh buh”, it does say the charge is obscenity. But, again, I encourage you to read the full thread linked below to understand why that doesn’t fucking matter at all.

          The thread this is by someone that has extensive experience in trust and safety in social media. This very long thread has a lot of information you should read before you “okay, dickhead” and then slippery slope something that already happened:

          https://bsky.app/profile/rahaeli.bsky.social/post/3kuuk2nlkrk2a

    • SupraMario@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      arrow-down
      30
      ·
      edit-2
      16 days ago

      The fuck…you pedo shits are some brazen fuckers aren’t you.

      Edit: lots of neckbeard ass pedos apparently in this thread. CP is fucking CP even if it’s AI or fucking Anime you sick fucks

      • Kairos@lemmy.today
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        21
        arrow-down
        7
        ·
        edit-2
        16 days ago

        What indicated that I would be a pedo?

        And kind reminder, child sexual abuser != pedophile. (And the other way around)

        • SupraMario@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          12
          ·
          16 days ago

          Might be the fact that you’re defending this shit and acting like it’s completely ok.

          • T156@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            10
            ·
            edit-2
            16 days ago

            Are they defending it? Seems more like they’re saying that the US legal system doesn’t consider it to meet their classification of child pornography, as opposed to saying that it’s okay.

            It would be like saying the UK criminal justice system only considers penile penetration to be rape, with other forms being folded under sexual assault. That doesn’t mean that they’re defending rape, and saying it’s just sexual assault.

            • SupraMario@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              5
              ·
              16 days ago

              https://lemmy.world/comment/13282924

              That’s you defending it. CP is not magically going to increase because it gets banned, it’s not fucking smoking for teenagers. It’s literally grown ass men being fucking pedos, who feed into this shit. It’s like giving a taste of some drugs to an addict. You think they’re not going to go further into their addiction?