• Ilovethebomb@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    4 months ago

    See, this is on par with arguing semantics around how it’s not pedophilia because the victim wasn’t prepubescent. You may be technically right, but the fact that you’re making the argument is gross.

    • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      4 months ago

      And yet you claimed I have child porn and that I am abusing my child.

      When are you going to contact lemmy.world admin to have me reported to the authorities for child abuse and the possession of child pornography?

    • Dasus@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      4 months ago

      It’s really not.

      It’s not porn, because it’s not porn.

      It’s not our fault that you think of everything as sexual.

      There is nothing sexual about a naked body. If you ever can, do come visit Finland. By your logic, anyone visiting a sauna with someone else there is either committing or being the victim of a sex crime? (You’re not allowed to wear a bathing suit in the sauna for health reasons.)

        • Dasus@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          4 months ago

          Because of a right to privacy, sure. But I’ve actually had a camera in my local swimming hall and in the sauna while I was in there. A shielded gopro which wasn’t on, obviously, but it could’ve been, and no-one batted an eye. I had permission from the staff, we were doing a bit of underwater filming.

          Anyway, do you think infants have the right to privacy from their caregivers, even when they’re not even self-reliant?