I’m glad s/he was able to nuke the CSAM, even if other material was nuked with it. This crap is why I’m not hosting.
Please, call it CSAM (child sexual abuse material) and not CP (child pornography). The children in these photos/videos can’t make pornography, they’re sexually abused into making this material. CP insinuates that it’s legitimate porn with children. CSAM, on the other hand, calls it what it is: sexual abuse of children.
That is needlessly pedantic. I have never heard of anyone using the word pornography to imply legality or moral acceptability. There is no such thing as “legitimate” CP, so there is no need to specify that it’s not ok every time it is mentioned. No one in their right mind would presume he’s some kind of CP supporting monster for failing to do so.
No one in their right mind would assume that OP is. But the term was created to legitimize the material. So, while you’re correct in that it is picky, it is also picky for a reason. Words are powerful. We should fight to not empower the legitimation of that term, among other things.
But the term was created to legitimize the material.
Do you have a source for that? I can’t find anything that states the origin of the term itself is seedy. Besides, it’s just a plain description: it’s pornography with children in it.
The only sources I can find that support CSAM over CP claim that CP somehow implies consent. But I’m saying that simply isn’t the case. I am not saying that words arent powerful. I am not saying that no words ever need to be changed. I am saying that these words don’t need to be changed.
Based on those same sources, I’d speculate that this outrage is just misplaced anger. They almost immediately start talking about how bad sexual abuse is, which is not really relevant to whether it should be called CP or CSAM. Just because CP is bad, does not mean the term CP is bad.
Honestly, I don’t care what you choose to call it. Our world warrants us certain freedoms, and how we use those freedoms will set the stage for the future world. As you’ve said, CP implies consent. If you would like to spread the implication that these children somehow consented to be part of this sexual abuse material, then keep calling it CP. I, with the rest of those who wish to not spread the lie that they consented, will call it CSAM.
Not even close. Giving it a new name doesn’t magically fix the problem. Join the real world, no matter what name you give something, it’s still the same thing.
If I really wanted to seek some sort of discrepancy in the way its being named I’d argue youre changing the name so you can one day defend yourself by calling your noncey stash “legitimate” and therefore it is abuse material.
All in all, who gives a fuck what name its got. It’s pure, unadulterated idiocy to think abused children are hurting because of the fact us non-abusers call it child porn and not sexual abuse material.
Well I didn’t say it fixes the problem. I’m just saying you’re ignoring it. By ignoring the issue, you’re empowering the issue. Which is definitely worse than not doing anything. So your opinion is wrong and ill-educated.
Are you serious? Instead of doubling down on your ignorancy by asking rhetorical questions you could also try to inform yourself. The answer to your question is in OP’s post:
The children in these photos/videos can’t make pornography, they’re sexually abused into making this material. CP insinuates that it’s legitimate porn with children. CSAM, on the other hand, calls it what it is: sexual abuse of children.
Do you have an ad deal for this book or something? Bernays can eat a bag of dicks, this is case where the name doesn’t matter. The concept of it is always bad full stop. There’s no need to be pedantic. Honestly, I feel calling it CSAM could be detrimental because I didn’t know what that stood for before this thread. If I had just seen a post with “CSAM” in the title, I would have scrolled right on by because it meant nothing to me. Everyone knows what CP is and everyone knows it’s disgusting.
Nope. But he’s the father of modern propaganda. Doesn’t really matter if you agree with him, you’ve been influenced by him and you wouldn’t have known it (me, too. Everyone). The thing is, CP is only disgusting if you’re right in the head. Many people aren’t. They see it as exciting child porn, when it’s abuse (you see it as abuse, I see it as abuse, they see it as porn). The term change is a type of rebranding. I didn’t know what CP stood for until a few months ago, when they started talking about CSAM on tv and radio. Before then, I would have seen CP on this post and would have scrolled past. Being concerned with formal rules is the basis of our society, what brands CSAM as ‘abuse material’ and not ‘child pornography’.
I’m glad s/he was able to nuke the CSAM, even if other material was nuked with it. This crap is why I’m not hosting.
Please, call it CSAM (child sexual abuse material) and not CP (child pornography). The children in these photos/videos can’t make pornography, they’re sexually abused into making this material. CP insinuates that it’s legitimate porn with children. CSAM, on the other hand, calls it what it is: sexual abuse of children.
That is needlessly pedantic. I have never heard of anyone using the word pornography to imply legality or moral acceptability. There is no such thing as “legitimate” CP, so there is no need to specify that it’s not ok every time it is mentioned. No one in their right mind would presume he’s some kind of CP supporting monster for failing to do so.
If we spent more time fixing things rather than naming them the world would be a better place.
No one in their right mind would assume that OP is. But the term was created to legitimize the material. So, while you’re correct in that it is picky, it is also picky for a reason. Words are powerful. We should fight to not empower the legitimation of that term, among other things.
Do you have a source for that? I can’t find anything that states the origin of the term itself is seedy. Besides, it’s just a plain description: it’s pornography with children in it.
The only sources I can find that support CSAM over CP claim that CP somehow implies consent. But I’m saying that simply isn’t the case. I am not saying that words arent powerful. I am not saying that no words ever need to be changed. I am saying that these words don’t need to be changed.
Based on those same sources, I’d speculate that this outrage is just misplaced anger. They almost immediately start talking about how bad sexual abuse is, which is not really relevant to whether it should be called CP or CSAM. Just because CP is bad, does not mean the term CP is bad.
Honestly, I don’t care what you choose to call it. Our world warrants us certain freedoms, and how we use those freedoms will set the stage for the future world. As you’ve said, CP implies consent. If you would like to spread the implication that these children somehow consented to be part of this sexual abuse material, then keep calling it CP. I, with the rest of those who wish to not spread the lie that they consented, will call it CSAM.
Just because you aren’t affected doesn’t mean it is no problem. This isn’t needlessly pedantic, it just shows your ignorance and idiocy.
Not even close. Giving it a new name doesn’t magically fix the problem. Join the real world, no matter what name you give something, it’s still the same thing.
If I really wanted to seek some sort of discrepancy in the way its being named I’d argue youre changing the name so you can one day defend yourself by calling your noncey stash “legitimate” and therefore it is abuse material.
All in all, who gives a fuck what name its got. It’s pure, unadulterated idiocy to think abused children are hurting because of the fact us non-abusers call it child porn and not sexual abuse material.
Well I didn’t say it fixes the problem. I’m just saying you’re ignoring it. By ignoring the issue, you’re empowering the issue. Which is definitely worse than not doing anything. So your opinion is wrong and ill-educated.
Exactly what issue is being ignored by not changing an already established name for something thats already widely agreed to be vile and disgusting?
Are you serious? Instead of doubling down on your ignorancy by asking rhetorical questions you could also try to inform yourself. The answer to your question is in OP’s post:
Edward Bernays would disagree on the lack of power of words.
Do you have an ad deal for this book or something? Bernays can eat a bag of dicks, this is case where the name doesn’t matter. The concept of it is always bad full stop. There’s no need to be pedantic. Honestly, I feel calling it CSAM could be detrimental because I didn’t know what that stood for before this thread. If I had just seen a post with “CSAM” in the title, I would have scrolled right on by because it meant nothing to me. Everyone knows what CP is and everyone knows it’s disgusting.
Nope. But he’s the father of modern propaganda. Doesn’t really matter if you agree with him, you’ve been influenced by him and you wouldn’t have known it (me, too. Everyone). The thing is, CP is only disgusting if you’re right in the head. Many people aren’t. They see it as exciting child porn, when it’s abuse (you see it as abuse, I see it as abuse, they see it as porn). The term change is a type of rebranding. I didn’t know what CP stood for until a few months ago, when they started talking about CSAM on tv and radio. Before then, I would have seen CP on this post and would have scrolled past. Being concerned with formal rules is the basis of our society, what brands CSAM as ‘abuse material’ and not ‘child pornography’.