flightsoffancy: (Default)
[personal profile] flightsoffancy
Ok, so I tried not to rant until I knew all the facts, but the more facts I see, the angrier I get. But first things first. All fandom people reading this: if you haven't already, go join [ profile] fandom_counts. Remember how LJ boasted of its 13 million journals? Basically, [ profile] fandom_counts is a tally of how many journals are used for fandom purposes. So go join with whatever fandom-related journals you have--if you use your main one for any fandom, join with it. RP journal for a fandom character? Go ahead. Writing journal? Welcome. And this is for any fandom, not just my pet one, HP. Go. Jump on the bandwagon. Over 12000 journals have joined before you.

Honestly, I can't express how angry it makes me that a group of amateur vigilantes (Google Warriors for Innocence--I dare you) can pressure LJ into taking down groups and comms that didn't do anything wrong. Just for an "objectionable" interest. First of all, if Warriors for Innocence is connected in any way, shape, or form with a law enforcement agency, they're not showing it. Any site that has instructions on how to impersonate a child in order to "catch a pedophile" is only making things worse. Admirable intentions, yes--I don't support child rape at all. But if anything, they're only making the situation worse in several respects. And by targeting groups, they're pretty much accusing the people who run these journals of either condoning or, heaven forbid, perpetrating pedophilia. It's libel, plain and simple. And I really would like to see a lawsuit declaring it so.

And what about at least warning mods about their journals? To go check to check LJ and find that one of the longest-running fic archives is gone because of some vigilantes is not pleasant, let me tell you. And it shows how much these people have done their research--last I'd heard, fiction depicting incest wasn't illegal, unless V. C. Andrews's books have been taken off the shelves? And Lolita, a classic, isn't illegal either, so why delete a comm devoted to discussing the book?

Also, really, why piss off fandom? Especially when, Six Apart, they're a significant portion of your user base? If LJ stops being the place to be for fandom, Six Apart stands to lose thousands. All for the sake of some vigilante witch hunters? I think someone has some serious rethinking to do.

If you need me, call me--I'll be in my room, seething about the sheer rampant idiocy in this world...

on May. 31st, 2007 04:27 am (UTC)
Posted by [identity profile]
Jesus fucking Christ. LJ, WTF is this shit? (Eep, now your journal will get banned because I swore.) Longer comment later, comms to join, rant to post. PS. Subaru icon plz? I imagine he has a lot to say about this.

on May. 31st, 2007 05:11 pm (UTC)
Posted by [identity profile]
I'm not so sure I'd defend pornish_pixies in particular. They -did- have stories and art relating to pedophilia. And not just borderline, but clearly depicted sexual acts with children under the age of twelve - which I, personally, am fairly certain is too young to be having sex, no matter who or where you are in this era. It was also rather clear that this display was in no way condemned, but appreciated, admired, or even celebrated on the site. I'm sure this does conflict with Livejournal rules, and I respect their right to limit freedom of speech when it pertains to matters such as the promotion of pedophilia (whether or not you believe the journal as a whole was actually promoting pedophilia, there was certainly some bits that strongly suggested such). I do agree, however, that the situation wasn't handled as well as it could have been. For example, I'd argue that pornish_pixies was only violating any rules in a very small percent of its archive, which Livejournal could have demanded be fixed within a given time period or deletion would follow. Either way, the Livejournal people made a mistake, acknowledged it, apologized, and are trying to fix it. I assume someone up there making those decisions has little children, or was perhaps a victim in his or her own youth, and reacted a bit rashly when shwon an example of true promotion of pedophlia on livejournal. Understandable. However, I really hope pornish_pixies hasn't lost it's archive...

on Jun. 1st, 2007 04:17 am (UTC)
Posted by [identity profile]
The thing is, the pedophilia was fictional. That was the line. In fact, pornish_pixies got attacked before for that kind of thing, and LJ defended it because it was fiction. But there are several journals that depict actual pedophilia, as in people going out and molesting children. And were these people deleted? No. So why go after the clearly marked (with warnings as well) fiction instead of the real-life criminals? Especially since pornish_pixies is obviously based on HP fiction?


flightsoffancy: (Default)

May 2011


Most Popular Tags

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags
Page generated Sep. 23rd, 2017 03:55 am
Powered by Dreamwidth Studios