Looks like we effectively agree.

I think if we to improve the state of NSFW content we also need to be very specific in our wording of the criticism because how criticism is worded can change the context and as we agree, context matters.

Agreed! I think Multiverse made quite the effort and did a decent job. Misunderstandings and mistakes still happen, which is why just talking like this to get to our goal can be useful :)

And I think you also blurred that line with the fiction story example.

Thanks for the feedback. Reading it again now, I wouldn’t know how to express it differently. But I can see how this might not be clear to people not living in my head. Useful to know.

aye. same.

Maybe. But for anyone reading who might be changing their minds. I’m not trying to step on anyone’s toes and guilt trip them or put them down.

Because right now, we can look forward to how good fedinsfw can actually be. It just seems like the fediverse has a beautiful opportunity to re-imagine internet pornography. And it’s realising this opportunity that I am arguing for.

If somebody posts a swastika, and uses it to critically talk about the nazi history, or the fertility symbol aspect of it, it’s not the same as if you’re posting it without comment in the context of a debate about racism, or in a PoC forum, etc.

Context matters and changes what it is we’re looking at.

Is it desirable to platform a community that basically says “jerking off to underage girls, but legal”? To put it another way…

I would like to imagine fedinsfw as something beyond the boundaries of ordinary porn sites. It can be so much better. And I say this regardless of this aspect we are talking about, though, just to keep in mind.

Alright, I don’t care about the legal argument. That’s for other folx to deal with. I care about a nice more or less ethical porn site.

And btw. Multiverse also agreed with the law, and I can see why.

I get the point of slippery slope arguments. So here’s the potential harm I see, which I think you’d agree with is passing a point on the slope we don’t want to cross: normalizing indulging in the sexualisation of minors, or just straight up normalising the sexualisation of minors.

If the community calls itself fauxbait, the mental process is one of sexualisation of minors, even if it isn’t what’s depicted. Just like a written story is just ink on paper and no performer is hurt, it’s about the mental process.

They are not looking at these adults and thinking about fucking an adult. Just like the brain would do with a fictional story.

It’s not just about the age of the performers, though. I also think most people here care more about actual harm than legality.

To me it looks like it’s about platforming the indulgence of the sexualization of minors. In a fictional sense, but still. Should they allow written rape fantasies of minors?

I’m gonna lean towards that this is rather normalizing and harm producing than helping people. I would love to read science on this, but this is not my field, so hard to research myself.

We have the same evidence, I can’t really add anything concrete to it.

What’s your point? That it’s more likely this was a self-sabotage? Or that it’s still a possibility? Without concrete evidence, I don’t know. And I don’t really wanna theorize, but having focused on this story, I care about the girls and the people at the school and their relatives. They are not just numbers. So I’ve thought about this a bit as well.

If they [the aggressors] missed that there is a fucking school with very young school girls as part of the compound, then it’s an intelligence failure and still the aggressor’s responsibility to have caused this tragedy through their shit senseless offensive. And if they did know, they failed a moral test by attack anyway.

I don’t accept that they needed to kill them as part of war strategies. Expect some damn accountability. That includes if Iran self-struck, but even that, as you claim being a rumoured strategy, is also something the aggressors should’ve known about.

I apologize, and thank you for your patience. I didn’t quite get your point about origin of strike.

It sounds pretty damn dodgy to me. But, yes, there is no verification of the strike’s origins to my knowledge.

Actually there is at least some verifying material:

From the last image of the Factmeh presentation

A map of the “Asef Guards Barracks” area shows that the Shajareh Tayyebeh IRGC Navy Girls’ School is located within the compound.

However, so far, the attacks of the US and Israel against Iran have been very precise and only legitimate military targets and personnel have been hit.

For that to be true, you’re gonna have to discount all this (more pending):

• school staff eye-witnesses speak of the strike, including of rescue efforts that match Revolutionary Guard footage shared on telegram.
• factchecking service used by major news org verifies video of the site-post impact.
• reuters verifies the same video
• Journalist in Iran aljazeera trusts enough to use his reporting ON IRAN, says there is more verification beyond the governmental statements.

Honestly, I shouldn’t even be listing these, when they are almost as concisely available in the linked updates.

https://piefed.social/comment/10332190

It’s also not unheard of that Israel targets schools, children, incubators, etc. on purpose and washes the narrative by targeting journalists and lying.

Like, has Germany even started calling it a genocide yet? You say it’s typical Iran. But do you acknowledge, it’s typical Israel that their horrors immediately get denied, put into question, etc.?

No, journalists allowed into the country do not count, as they only get to report what the regime allows them to.

Iran is not the US or Europe, and you won’t see much of reality if you only accept it on a silver-platter.

Do actual eye-witnesses count, at least?

God, this is complicated. Top-level comment of where I wanted to micro-update got deleted.

So, it will be here. Though, I don’t think there will be much more to say.

earlier update

source

Reporting from Tehran, Al Jazeera’s Mohammed Vall said of the attack on the girls’ school, “There are new reports confirming the number of people killed in that strike has now gone above 40. […]”

Recent updates

source

A staff member at the Minab school, who asked not to be named, told Middle East Eye she remains in shock at the intensity of the attack.

Through tears, she said she used to watch the young girls playing at school every day. After today’s strikes, however, she saw their bodies lying on classroom benches and in different corners of the school.

Pinging @diplomjodler3@lemmy.world FYI

source

Death toll rises to 85, according to Iranian judiciary.

At least 85 people, almost all of them young girls, have been killed in an air strike on a primary school in southern Iran, the Iranian judiciary said.

Also,

There were 170 female students at the school at the time of the attack. So far, at least 45 people have also been reported wounded.

The victims were between seven and 12 years old, according to Iran’s Tasnim and Fars news agencies.

UTC: 17:29 update

source

Capt Tim Hawkins, a spokesperson for US Central Command, said he was “aware of reports” that a girls’ school was struck and they were looking into them.

UTC: 18:15 update

Video circulating on social media of the site post-impact. I can’t verify the authenticity of this.

UTC: 19:43 update

The Guardian published an article with more information on this at 18.28 GMT.

Persian factchecking service Factnameh was able to cross-reference the video with other photographs of the school site, and concluded that the video was authentic. Reuters said it had also verified the footage as being from the school.

The school appears to be adjacent to a Revolutionary Guards barracks. If the death toll is confirmed, the school bombing would be the largest mass casualty event of the US-led attack so far.

UTC: 20:29 update

Here’s a imginn.com frontend link to the instagram post by Persian factchecking service Factnameh. It’s a mini presentation about the event.

Also

Middle East Eye has a more complete article now.

After hearing the blast, she [staff at the school MEE says they interviewed] ran back towards the school and was faced with a scene she says she would never forget.

“I felt like I had gone mute. I couldn’t speak,” the staff member told MEE. “You could hear the sound of children crying and screaming.”

When rescue teams arrived, she said, they began to understand the scale of the disaster.

“We still don’t know how many are under the rubble. Some are even saying more than 100. Some of these small children are severely injured. Their parents have come to the school, and this place has turned into a house of mourning.”

The air strike on the school left many inside the building trapped beneath the rubble.

There were 170 female students at the school at the time of the attack. So far, at least 45 people have also been reported wounded.

Footage posted by Telegram accounts affiliated with the Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps appeared to show people digging through the rubble.

Smoke could be seen rising from surrounding buildings, while a wrecked car lay in the street. People were heard screaming and wailing; others appeared to be in shock.

Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi denounced the attack on X and said the deaths of the children would “not go unanswered”.

“The destroyed building is a primary school for girls in the south of Iran. It was bombed in broad daylight, when packed with young pupils,” he wrote.

“Dozens of innocent children have been murdered at this site alone.”

UTC: 21:38 ending updates

Gonna micro-update here.

source

Reporting from Tehran, Al Jazeera’s Mohammed Vall said of the attack on the girls’ school, “There are new reports confirming the number of people killed in that strike has now gone above 40. […]"

Edit: top-level post got deleted, for anyone subscribing to updates, moved to here: https://piefed.social/comment/10332190

Yeah, that’s what I meant by

and saying that pretty much every news org is gonna take that statement right now is understandably not enough sometimes

Sorry, I can’t express what’s on my mind right now. I guess we can talk about this again once the situation there is more or less independently verified. :)

Friend…

I don’t wanna put skepticism down like this, and saying that pretty much every news org is gonna take that statement right now is understandably not enough sometimes… Maybe somebody can articulate this better why it’s nonsense not to roughly believe this right now.

OP, I think this belongs to !politicalvideos@lemmy.world / !politicalvideos@sopuli.xyz or maybe also !progressivepolitics@lemmy.world

sounds like an interesting video though :)

That’s some really good news! Congrats!

deleted by creator

Screenshot of this Mastodon toot, because I can’t get newlines to work in quoted-text.

Damn, what a compliment. Thank you.

I’m also puzzled by this choice of words.

Looking at the study, ‘female’, or ‘feminisation’/‘feminization’ isn’t used once. But ‘oestrogen’ appears a lot. I guess some of these materials interfere with hormone activity and they call that feminisation? Still puzzled.

Bisphenols: Mostly used in the manufacturing of polycarbonate plastics and epoxy resins, bisphenols are endocrine disruptors that mimic oestrogen , potentially leading to metabolic disorders, reproduc- tive issues, and increased cancer risk even at trace concentrations (Maffini et al., 2006; Rochester & Bolden, 2015)

PhP (Triphenyl phosphate): The most prevalent OPFR in our samples, TPhP is a confirmed endocrine disruptor (Hu et al., 2023; Li et al., 2025). It interferes with oestrogen and thyroid hormone axes (Ji et al.,

2022. and is linked to obesity and metabolic changes (Wang et al., 2019)

BPA (Bisphenol A): Binds to oestrogen receptors and alters gene expression and hormone activity (Alon- so-Magdalena et al., 2012). BPA has been detected in amniotic fluid, placental tissue, and umbilical cord blood, indicating transplacental transfer. Studies have confirmed that BPA can migrate from synthetic materials into artificial sweat (Wang et al., 2019), and dermal absorption is well established (Toner et al., 2018). These findings led to the EU ban of BPA in thermal receipt paper in 2020, although it has been widely substituted with BPS (ECHA, 2020)

BPAF (Bisphenol AF): Demonstrates stronger oestrogenic activity than BPA and is increasingly used in thermal paper and plastic applications (Moreman et al., 2017)

RDP (Resorcinol bis(diphenyl phosphate)): Used as a substitute to TPhP, RDP is an emerging neurotox- in and acts as an endocrine disruptor that interferes with thyroid and oestrogen pathways. It has been linked to metabolic imbalances in animal studies (Xie et al., 2023). Scientists report stronger oestrogen- ic effects than TPhP and RDP´s exposure showing metabolic disorders in rats and their offspring (Liu et al., 2023).