cross-posted from: https://sh.itjust.works/post/6400327
[https://sh.itjust.works/post/6400327] > In case anyone is wondering, it’s rqd2.
> > >
[https://sh.itjust.works/pictrs/image/93d08422-cab7-4b38-a23d-884c7925f346.webp]
> > The definition of paraphilia is “a condition characterized by abnormal
sexual desires, typically involving extreme or dangerous activities.”, which can
inclde pedophilia. > > It has recieved 4 censures from fediseer due to the
content contained on that instance
[https://gui.fediseer.com/instances/detail/rqd2.net] > > Not a good look for
Lemmy to be promoting any instance like that. > > You can see for yourself here
[https://join-lemmy.org/instances] > Update: A pull request was sent to remove
the sus instance. It should no longer show up soon
[https://github.com/LemmyNet/joinlemmy-site/pull/247]
see linked post. I believe this would count as one of the examples given in the federation policy https://lemm.ee/post/401063 :
An instance which is knowingly spreading CSAM into the federated network
Its honestly even more unfathomable to imagine talking people out of it in the case of what instance is being discussed for defederation here: an instance with a comm for pedophiles who are pro-contact and think children can consent. You can’t fucking debate a pro-contact pedophile out of being pro-contact. I’m a strong rehabilitationist so I wouldn’t want to execute them and would consider chemical castration a last resort (also, whats the science on that? does that even work?) so I would go with isolation from society where they can’t hurt kids and deep, deep fucking therapy, and possibly restorative justice if they have actually victimized anyone. But individuals online are not going to convince a fucking pro-contact pedophile that sex with kids is wrong. And you definitely aren’t going to be able to use debate to get them to stop being attracted to kids in the first place.
Like, fuck, if the comm was for anti-contact pedophiles who strictly gather for the purpose of supporting each other in remaining strong in their convictions, then I wouldn’t want to nuke the community from existence (as long as thats ALL its for, and they arent like sharing fantasies with each other and other shit). Still wouldn’t want to be federated with them though. Don’t want to see that shit.
also, whats the science on that? does that even work?
I’ve looked this up before (admittedly it was kind of cursory) and from what I could tell the conclusion was that it doesn’t seem to, that its apparent success cases seem to be from other factors (rehabilitation, gaming the diagnostic system, etc.) rather than the procedure itself having the desired effect. I don’t really know what is true, but just wanted to mention it since you asked.
Anyway, I think you’re correct in all of your assessments there. I’d even say federating with an anti-contact, anti-CSAM, anti-fantasy (etc.) instance would be worth considering once instances can be blocked, simply because they are trying to help people not be predators, but I can see why other people would be uncomfortable with such a thing. The instance in question, however, is not and cannot be any of those things and should be illegal to run.
CW: CSA
spoiler
Its honestly even more unfathomable to imagine talking people out of it in the case of what instance is being discussed for defederation here: an instance with a comm for pedophiles who are pro-contact and think children can consent. You can’t fucking debate a pro-contact pedophile out of being pro-contact. I’m a strong rehabilitationist so I wouldn’t want to execute them and would consider chemical castration a last resort (also, whats the science on that? does that even work?) so I would go with isolation from society where they can’t hurt kids and deep, deep fucking therapy, and possibly restorative justice if they have actually victimized anyone. But individuals online are not going to convince a fucking pro-contact pedophile that sex with kids is wrong. And you definitely aren’t going to be able to use debate to get them to stop being attracted to kids in the first place.
Like, fuck, if the comm was for anti-contact pedophiles who strictly gather for the purpose of supporting each other in remaining strong in their convictions, then I wouldn’t want to nuke the community from existence (as long as thats ALL its for, and they arent like sharing fantasies with each other and other shit). Still wouldn’t want to be federated with them though. Don’t want to see that shit.
I’ve looked this up before (admittedly it was kind of cursory) and from what I could tell the conclusion was that it doesn’t seem to, that its apparent success cases seem to be from other factors (rehabilitation, gaming the diagnostic system, etc.) rather than the procedure itself having the desired effect. I don’t really know what is true, but just wanted to mention it since you asked.
Anyway, I think you’re correct in all of your assessments there. I’d even say federating with an anti-contact, anti-CSAM, anti-fantasy (etc.) instance would be worth considering once instances can be blocked, simply because they are trying to help people not be predators, but I can see why other people would be uncomfortable with such a thing. The instance in question, however, is not and cannot be any of those things and should be illegal to run.
that’s hard to do without exposing victims of CSA to it. better I think to recommend people go there if they need a place to talk about it.
Fair enough