LJ/6A makes slashdot

[rm]

http://slashdot.org/~herejackback/journal/178719

Good summary and, dare I say it? an entertaining read. While it's snarky about fandom, that's slashdot and it makes LJ look just HORRIBLE.

Meanwhile, an open letter to LJ on the pro-ana situation: http://thevelvetsun.livejournal.com/248185.html

Comments

[askeladden.livejournal.com]

I think the pro-ana sites are appalling, but it seems strange that fandom should be calling for their community to be shut down. It's poisonous shit, but it's another free speech gray-area, and it seems to me that trying to put the clamps on communities like that is at odds with their own purposes. "Child porn made from real children is a crime; child porn made from fictional characters is legal" doesn't seem vastly dissimilar from "tying someone down and forcing them not to eat is a crime; encouraging someone to keep themselves from eating is legal."

I realize there are gradations to the argument; some people think that potentially overage porn should be given the benefit of the doubt but that obviously (or explicitly) prepubescent porn -- even fictional porn -- should be banned. I happen to disagree, but I also don't have much stake in the matter. If it doesn't have pubic hair, I don't wanna look at its naughty bits, no matter how old it is. That's just me. The point is that it's a thorny issue, and neither LJ's inconsistency and incompetence nor fandom's arbitrary line drawing is helping to resolve it.

I just think it's a potentially backfiring strategy to leap all over these other ethically (or legally) questionable sites in the effort to defend their own. Freedom of speech is dangerous. Regulation of speech is also dangerous. It's difficult but very important to negotiate a passage between them.

[rm.livejournal.com]

This thing has gotten complicated, but here's the short summary of where the outrage is coming from.

Childpornography must look like real actual children -- the legal definition of it can't be applied to drawings, cartoon or other art unless it is photo realistic and indistinguishable from a real child. So if LJ says they are only going to ban that which is illegal, they need to leave fandom alone.

BUT, LJ has (at varying points -- they contradict themselves a lot) said that they will ban anything they personally feel is harmful to children, which is there perogative, and fandom is also fine with this, if they would just tell us what the hell it is. But if they feel that some drawings are harmful to children, we're just looking for consistency -- teen girls telling each other how to starve themselves -- also harmful to children. IF LJ wants to get into limiting legal speech, we want them to see the can of worms they are opening up for themselves. Largely, this is us being spiteful, but I think it's justifiable when one considers the absurdity of the situation.

Finally, one of the artists was told she was banned not because her work was illegal or obscene or harmful to children, but because her work lacked any artistic merit. WOAH, WTF? Hence, again, people's decision to annoy LJ into saying something that makes sense and is internally consistent.

The Anger towards the pro-ana sites has been a long-standing issue on LJ. As is the anger towards abuse for refusing to address harassment in comments except by encouraging peopel to make their journals friends-only or ban the users in question.

This is no longer fandom vs. LJ. This is fandom, the people pissed off about the pro-ana, the folks who have been ignored by the LJ abuse team, random concerned citizens, the folks here for the car crash, the peopel who are pissed about the ads on LJ, etc. vs. LJ/6A.

Which is why the herding cats problem has just gone from herding cats to herding cats, monkeys, ferrets and more.

[phaenix-ash.livejournal.com]

This is no longer fandom vs. LJ. This is fandom, the people pissed off about the pro-ana, the folks who have been ignored by the LJ abuse team, random concerned citizens, the folks here for the car crash, the peopel who are pissed about the ads on LJ, etc. vs. LJ/6A.

the crunchies over at boo_ju_moo_ju have joined in too with the anti-babywise thing (linked on my last entry). i am greatly amused. it's all like a slo-mo trainwreck.

[rm.livejournal.com]

OH right, I forgot about Babywise (espite posting about that yesterda) and the breatfeeding icon people are still REALLY pissed.

[phaenix-ash.livejournal.com]

i thought that's where i got the link.

this reminds me of being in high school when there was this big argument about whether girls' culottes were just long shorts, so why couldn't the boys wear shorts (we had a really strict dress code). all this "if i can't do this, why can she do that" finger pointing. so amusing. it's just what LJ deserves, imho.

[fragiletender.livejournal.com]

I agree with the idea that you can't fight for free speech and equality by picking on another group. I also think it's bad tactics, it smacks of divide and conquer to me, it gets us fighting amongst ourselves and making enemies within LJ instead of getting the other groups onside.

That said I can absolutely understand why folks are doing it because the contradictions and hypocrisy that 6A/LJ are displaying are staggering.

It really is like watching a car crash, I keep telling myself to stop reading about it and get on with my life but they keep digging themselves in even deeper.