this post was submitted on 14 Aug 2026
470 points (99.6% liked)

News

38978 readers
2223 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious biased sources will be removed at the mods’ discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted separately but not to the post body. Sources may be checked for reliability using Wikipedia, MBFC, AdFontes, GroundNews, etc.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source. Clickbait titles may be removed.


Posts which titles don’t match the source may be removed. If the site changed their headline, we may ask you to update the post title. Clickbait titles use hyperbolic language and do not accurately describe the article content. When necessary, post titles may be edited, clearly marked with [brackets], but may never be used to editorialize or comment on the content.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials, videos, press releases, or celebrity gossip will be allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis. Mods may use discretion to pre-approve videos or press releases from highly credible sources that provide unique, newsworthy content not available or possible in another format.


7. No duplicate posts.


If an article has already been posted, it will be removed. Different articles reporting on the same subject are permitted. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners or news aggregators.


All posts must link to original article sources. You may include archival links in the post description. News aggregators such as Yahoo, Google, Hacker News, etc. should be avoided in favor of the original source link. Newswire services such as AP, Reuters, or AFP, are frequently republished and may be shared from other credible sources.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Couldbealeotard@lemmy.world 30 points 1 week ago (3 children)

"barely legal" is such a disingenuous attack.

Is it legal? Yes. What's the problem? Something will always be "barely legal". Even if we decide that it's immoral and make it illegal, something else will still always be "barely legal".

If you think something is immoral, then just say so. If a bunch of consenting adults do something that doesn't harm anyone, mind your own business.

[–] Fawkes@lemmy.zip 10 points 1 week ago (3 children)

Honestly, the obsession with 18 Specifically is also disingenuous. Many countries consider 16 to be an appropriate age. Some consider 18 to be too young. This obsession of "18 okay. 17 A LITERAL INFANT!!!" is just ridiculous. And I would bet money that this comment will have people clutching their pearls and accusing me of being a predator.

[–] underscores@lemmy.zip 6 points 1 week ago (1 children)

it's specifically stupid when it's high schoolers dating, omg one is 18 and one is 17 !!!!!

[–] Fawkes@lemmy.zip 4 points 1 week ago

The US has literally charged teenagers for distributing CP, because they exchanged pictures with each other.... The entire country is just fuckin' bonkers.

[–] Couldbealeotard@lemmy.world 4 points 1 week ago (1 children)

More than that, if the legal age of consent was 40, then 41 would be "barely legal". Why do people use the term negatively (or positively for that matter). It's just so arbitrary.

[–] Fawkes@lemmy.zip 1 points 1 week ago

Because it's moral posturing. I saw a post not long ago for an advertisement for alcohol-free beer. Clearly targeted at late teens and early 20's, and it was called "Under-Age beer! Great for driving!" And there were swarms of people complaining that "Advertising beer to children is awful!"

[–] Armok_the_bunny@lemmy.world 2 points 1 week ago

Believe it or not, most of the US has the age of consent below 18, even before factoring in Romeo and Juliette laws. I'm sure there are some restrictions on making use of that information, use of sex toys being banned being one of them if I recall and making porn being banned until 18 regardless, but 18 is hardly a universal thing even here.

[–] IronBird@lemmy.world 0 points 1 week ago (1 children)

i mean...still scouted girls while they were underage/in highschools iirc, the bar to beat is running international pedophile sex-trafficking blackmail ring though so...sure. better than epstein

[–] whereitsat@lemmy.zip 1 points 1 week ago (2 children)

do you have a point here?

if a teenage girl has a choice between college or posing for playboy, the studious teenage girls aren't going to choose playboy, and if they do, it's to fund their college education. the promiscuous, body confident girls are DEFINITELY going to choose playboy.

good for them.

who the fuck cares about this other than annoying, self-righteous fucks who try and speak for every single person? it's their decision. if someone came up to me right now and said 'eat a weeks worth of my turds and i'll give you 100k' i probably wouldn't fucking do it.

posing nude isn't really the same thing as this but you act like it is. the girl who posed nude probably landed some rich husband or possibly gained a modeling career. i doubt many of them ended up on welfare and in the end their path was less exploitative than a typical lower-class life in america, tits or not.

those girls exploited the system with their bodies--something that women give away for far less every single day; your average only fans model makes less than a playboy centerfold.

[–] IronBird@lemmy.world 0 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

i'm just saying there was alot more to rhe playboy empire than just...nudie magazines. plenty of girls were effecticely kept hostage in that mansion

only compared to scale of running international pedophile/rape trafficking ring does what hughe did look good by comparison. he drew the line at raping kids apparently, hardly praise worthy

if a teenage girl has a choice between college or posing for playboy, the studious

You have no idea what you're talking about. Plenty of girls with opportunity and means for a better life get abused and manipulated into joining the sex industry every day. You don't have the slightest understanding of the sex industry and why or why not some girls join.