Discord's new family center feature is going to be extremely harmful to groomers on Discord

submitted by xoenix from reddit.com

all 79 comments
sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun

[–]ClassroomPast6178 9 insightful - 4 fun9 insightful - 3 fun10 insightful - 4 fun -  (0 children)

Lots of people pointing out that this is a child protection issue, which is good.

Lol at the people who are reminiscing about mythical “child-only” safe spaces online in the distant past, there have never been any safe spaces for children online, and the fact that some people think there have been or are just goes to show the level of retardation that is prevalent in these discussions.

Children aren’t safe online. The overwhelmingly vast majority of children are safe with their parents. Therefore it makes sense to give parents the tools and opportunity to monitor their child’s interactions online.

The only people that would argue against this are the people who are going to lose out from the change and the tiny tiny minority of children whose parents are not safe. For the first group, post harder and include some identifiable information, I’m sure some customer support representatives will be with you shortly. For the second group there are far better resources, available online and in the real world, than some random discord server full of random people lovebombing you and encouraging you to chop your cock/tits off.

TL;DR anyone complaining about this is a nonce.

[–]Clown_Chan 9 insightful - 2 fun9 insightful - 1 fun10 insightful - 2 fun -  (66 children)

Fucking finally

There's so many furries and troons grooming children on Discord.

[–]QueenBread 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (65 children)

Yo, I'm a furry and not all furries are degenerates. Some just like to draw animal-people fucking, because people with animal powers are cool.

[–]slavdude0 6 insightful - 5 fun6 insightful - 4 fun7 insightful - 5 fun -  (41 children)

LMAO. No. You people are a bunch of retarded, disgusting and dysfunctional weirdos.

Furry feminist. I fucking knew you are diddling your pets.

[–]jet199 3 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 2 fun -  (2 children)

Dogpilled

[–]slavdude0 1 insightful - 5 fun1 insightful - 4 fun2 insightful - 5 fun -  (0 children)

Catpilled.

Barbed for her pleasure.

[–]William_World 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

brutal

[–]QueenBread 3 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 2 fun -  (36 children)

By your logic, anybody who plays GTA wants to become a criminal, run over pedestrians and murder prostitutes?

[–]slavdude0 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (35 children)

You are comparing playing games to going off to animals?

[–]QueenBread 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (24 children)

You're the one doing that, it seems.

[–]slavdude0 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (23 children)

What? Bitch. Are you retarded? Maybe too much eating shit and it got into your brain?

[–]QueenBread 3 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 2 fun -  (22 children)

Are you quite ok?

[–]slavdude0 3 insightful - 3 fun3 insightful - 2 fun4 insightful - 3 fun -  (21 children)

Yes. I ain't doing weird and disgusting stuff like you do.

[–]QueenBread 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (20 children)

Drawing furry porn isn't "weird and disgusting", you poor repressed dimwit.

[–]Dzonatan 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (9 children)

Both are fiction.

[–]slavdude0 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (7 children)

So I assume you think that people liking "lolis" are also fine?

[–]Dzonatan 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (6 children)

Next to everyone else who enjoys fiction, Yes.

[–]slavdude0 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (5 children)

Ok pedo.

[–]Dzonatan 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

Ok lunatic.

[–]Airbus320 2 insightful - 3 fun2 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 3 fun -  (0 children)

Let's mod s/zoophilia together

[–]Clown_Chan 4 insightful - 2 fun4 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 2 fun -  (9 children)

Of course not all of them, but the absolutely majority is, tho

Basically the whole fandom is all about sex and almost nothing else. But not big suprise as it was created originally by gay men and it's full of lgbt freaks.

[–]QueenBread 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (8 children)

Well, unfortunately I have to agree. It's not that all furries are only into the sexual part of it, and not all of them are perverts, but the perverts who are into it only to make porn of foxies and tigers are definitely holding the wheel. They give a bad name to all furries.

[–]Clown_Chan 3 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 2 fun -  (7 children)

While I got your attention, I would like to ask you something. As you are female furry, how are you treated in the furry fandom? I heard that fandom have huge misogyny problem, many female furries report being harrased and mistreated by gay furries.

[–]QueenBread 3 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 2 fun -  (5 children)

I'm not American, the furry community is very different here. We don't even really have furry conventions. It's mostly just groups of people sharing their furry art or furry costume crafts on the internet channels and sometimes meeting at comic conventions.

I've never experienced mysoginy of any sort, but then again, back when I joined the furry fandom mysoginy wasn't trendy - now it is. Imo furry fans tend to be open-minded (as one should be when indulging in stuff that can be considered very weird).

Weirdest scenario was this butch, masculine-looking woman whose boyfriend was an open homosexual. Now that was one weird couple. Oh, and that one woman who was in an "open relationship".... very good artist tho.

[–]Clown_Chan 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (4 children)

I see, thanks for your answer.👍 Hmm, so the rapid misogyny and bullying of female furries is only on American side of fandom, it seems.

Weirdest scenario was this butch, masculine-looking woman whose boyfriend was an open homosexual. Now that was one weird couple. Oh, and that one woman who was in an "open relationship".... very good artist tho.

Oh wow.....well, how curious.

It's interesing that many furries are in some sort of poly or open relationships, they seems to rarely live in the traditional ones. It must be the LGBT influence on the fandom.

[–]QueenBread 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

I think it's the other way around, moving to the lgbt+ group because some started as furries in poly or open relationships. Still, I don't know how much worse things got in the fandom recently. I do know it used to be a really fun, chill place where you could discuss, and not all artwork had something to do with sex. It really was just people who like the concept of animal-humans.

Just saying, extremism ruins everything. I guess the furry scene is getting ruined the same way gay groups are ruined by the nutcase TRAs.

[–]Vulptexghost fox girl ^w^ 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

I noticed the opposite. In the old days it was very clearly a sexual cult. Now they're trying to change the definition to make everyone a furry, similar to the "trans umbrella" where literally everyone is trans.

[–]QueenBread 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Perhaps it was a sexual cult in America. That country is crazy and has an unhealthy fixation on sex and perversion.

[–]Vulptexghost fox girl ^w^ 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

It's a similar cult to LGBT, that's why there's such a huge overlap. u/QueenBread would not be liked because you have to be 200% "progressive" and completely validating of all trans identities. Furries are also as bad as reddit mods in that they'll hunt down and destroy anyone who opposes it even the slightest. They're also HUGE copyright nazis who make Disney and Apple look permissive.

[–]Vulptexghost fox girl ^w^ 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Anyone who isn't a gay man seems to be unwelcome. More recently it seems trans women and trans men are welcome. But straight men and cis women are exceedingly rare, and even then I usually see no evidence that they're actual furries except they buy the "everyone who watches cartoons is a furry" definition.

[–]jet199 4 insightful - 2 fun4 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 2 fun -  (3 children)

95% of male furries are so for sexual reasons.

You need to deal with that fact if you want to do your hobby in public.

I was going to say "promote your hobby" but with those stats I can't see that being moral in any way.

Everyone knows adult men use furry art to talk to boys and girls who believe it's just fun drawings and then to groom them. If you weren't a degenerate you wouldn't be an apologist for this by not addressing it and pretending it's all innocent.

[–]QueenBread 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

You need to deal with that fact if you want to do your hobby in public.

I don't need to share my hobbies in public, especially if people aren't interested in them. You're supposed to share your hobby with other people who enjoy that same hobby.

However, I also won't be shamed for my hobbies.

[–]Vulptexghost fox girl ^w^ 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Most furries don't get that

[–]Vulptexghost fox girl ^w^ 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Actually furries are one of those things where just as many of the females are in it for sexual reasons.

If you just like animals that doesn't count, you shouldn't associate with them. They're a toxic cult like LGBTQ. And like them they constantly expand "furry" to include as many people as possible.

[–]Dontcaretoday 3 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 2 fun -  (4 children)

I'm not a furry but the ones I've met are are really chill

[–]jet199 4 insightful - 2 fun4 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 2 fun -  (3 children)

Groomers tend to come across as great guys, that's how it works.

[–]Dontcaretoday 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

Do you really think every person who is into anthropomorphic animals is also into kids? Groomers exist, but to say every furry in existence certainly wants children involved is a bit overdramatic.

[–]Airbus320 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

Found the groomer ackshually

[–]Vulptexghost fox girl ^w^ 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Furries are much more specific than that (it's a cult, and a sex & porn centered one). They just don't want to say they are because they want to be mainstream.

[–]Vulptexghost fox girl ^w^ 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

That doesn't explain the fucking part. You have to admit it's weird. It's better than actually fucking animals though.

[–]QueenBread 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

Not anymore weird than people who like being pissed on or who think feet are sexy. You don't have to be afraid of your own sexuality if you know it's harmless. Everyone has some secret messed up fetish.

[–]Vulptexghost fox girl ^w^ 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I know that, but it's weird. What too many furries do is deny that it's a fetish, even though everything they do revolves around rule 34. Actually I think /r/yiff has more subscribers than /r/furry. And many of them do groom kids, just like the LGBTQ cult.

[–]Femaleisnthateful 5 insightful - 2 fun5 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 2 fun -  (11 children)

If anything, it enpowers the number one group of abusers to be even more controlling and abusive.

Parents. That's what they call 'the number one group of abusers'. These people are saying the quiet part loud.

Further down the thread people are sharing their experiences with family members and themselves being targeted by predators online. But that's the parents' fault for giving them access to the internet in the first place. But also, parents who monitor their kids' activity online are 'helicopter parents'.

[–]ClassroomPast6178 6 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 0 fun7 insightful - 1 fun -  (5 children)

‘Helicopter parents’ are a real problem, but this is not that. It’s not helicopter parenting to supervise your children using firearms, or cooking using a deep fryer or setting off fireworks or wandering through a crowded street festival and it’s not helicopter parenting to want to supervise your children online.

It’s like the retards using child protection language to talk about people in their early twenties, they’re using language that has a specific meaning and recognised harm and applying it wrongly with the hope that people don’t notice or nod along for fear of being called out.

[–]Femaleisnthateful 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

It's bizarre to me that the same people who set up 'safe spaces' with coloring books for college students exposed to people expressing opinions they don't share also think that children should have unfiltered access to the internet. I guess because they did, and they lack the self awareness to recognize how it impacted them.

I was just reading an article on MacLean's about kids addicted to Fortnite. Shit legit sounds worse than crack.

[–]ClassroomPast6178 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

The people who set up the safe spaces at universities were reacting to demands from students who had been brought up by helicopter parents. It also explains why child protection language is being used regarding adults, I’ve seen twenty-plus year olds claiming to have been “groomed” like they were thirteen year olds. Jonathan Haidt has written a lot about this stuff, he calls it reverse CBT - it is actually training children and young adults to be fragile and lack resilience. Hopefully it is a passing problem.

Regarding Fortnite, Games companies have hired behavioural psychologists to influence the game design for exactly that reason. It’s insidious, but social media, Meta and Twitter, did the same thing too.

[–]Wanderingthehalls 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

I may be remembering this incorrectly but I'm pretty sure I saw an interview with Haidt where he said one of the mistakes he made with his kids, was probably not letting them play online video games with real life friends earlier. That group games can actually be quite good for kids, especially boys. They aren't as good as real life play fighting/sports but the group strategising and team work aspects are still there in a lot of games and they are an important part of male adolescence.

[–]ClassroomPast6178 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Yeah, I’ve heard that online gaming, within reason, is good for boys and it also keeps them off social media. Michael Schellenberger has talked about that, I believe he was quoting Haidt and some other psychologists.

Of course, the problem parents have always had to deal with, whether it be books, TV or video games, boys in particular need actual physical play any teacher will tell you what happens when you take break/recess away as a punishment - it makes the boys even harder to deal with and your classroom is going to be difficult to manage. I stopped handing out that as a punishment very early in my career because it was so self-defeating.

[–]brimshaeBased Woodchipper Merchant 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

Jonathan Haidt has written a lot about this stuff, he calls it reverse CBT

Stopped reading right there. That's enough Saidit for one night.

[–]IMissPorn 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

Statistically I'm sure it's true that more child abuse is perpetrated by parents than anyone else. Not sure how relevant that is though.

[–]jet199 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

Only if you include things like neglect when you know people are talking about sexual abuse.

Step fathers are massively more likely to sexually abuse kids than fathers so real parents are not a big problem, no.

I think even the brothers are more likely to be the person sexually abusing kids than parents.

[–]Femaleisnthateful 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

I don't doubt that's technically true, because literally everyone has parents. These people have taken the position that all parents are suspect by default, hence their position on allowing students to 'come out' to 1000 of their closest friends, teachers and school administrators whilst keeping it a secret from their parents. And the insane 'sanctuary state' concept, where kids can run away from their parents and be legally transed by the state. There is a concerted attempt to undermine parents and enhance the power of activists and activist-run state mechanisms in the lives of minors.

[–]IMissPorn 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

A statistic can be true and still misleading. For instance I've also heard half of murdered women are killed by their partners. But it would be a mistake to read that and conclude that your partner is the biggest danger in your life.

[–]jet199 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

I think for men it's 10% are murdered by their partner, so it's not that men are specifically evil on that front. They just also have lots of other people who want to kill them while women don't.

[–]IMissPorn 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Hmm, not a big fan of monitoring stuff like this, but this honestly sounds like a fairly reasonable compromise.