129
Hahahaha! Get fucked Vaushites! [CW: Vaush, discussions of CP]
(www.reddit.com)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 12 Feb 2024
129 points (100.0% liked)
the_dunk_tank
15988 readers
2 users here now
It's the dunk tank.
This is where you come to post big-brained hot takes by chuds, libs, or even fellow leftists, and tear them to itty-bitty pieces with precision dunkstrikes.
Rule 1: All posts must include links to the subject matter, and no identifying information should be redacted.
Rule 2: If your source is a reactionary website, please use archive.is instead of linking directly.
Rule 3: No sectarianism.
Rule 4: TERF/SWERFs Not Welcome
Rule 5: No ableism of any kind (that includes stuff like libt*rd)
Rule 6: Do not post fellow hexbears.
Rule 7: Do not individually target other instances' admins or moderators.
Rule 8: The subject of a post cannot be low hanging fruit, that is comments/posts made by a private person that have low amount of upvotes/likes/views. Comments/Posts made on other instances that are accessible from hexbear are an exception to this. Posts that do not meet this requirement can be posted to [email protected]
Rule 9: if you post ironic rage bait im going to make a personal visit to your house to make sure you never make this mistake again
founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
My knowledge of US law is very limited, but I think it has to do with the Miller Test.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Miller_test
If the virtual work depicting minors fulfills all three criteria, it's classified as obscene and in violation of the law. This does allow for quite a bit of semantics and wiggle room in theory. Especially with regards to the last point.
I could be wrong though.
Yeah, and point two is just shifting the problem of definition to "patently offensive".
I think the last point (while absolutely not what I would use to construct such a definition) would be the basic defense for most manga that aren't smut, since even if it has smutty elements (or just engages with the concept of sexuality), it is usually a minority of what is going on in the work, so you just need to defend the rest of the work as literary and legally it's done. I guess this is pretty precision-targeted at dedicated porn distribution and that sort of thing rather than really resolving the question of "what kind of sexuality is okay to depict?"
Kinophiles who have the Criterion edition of Salo: 120 Days of Sodom on their wishlist: