The phrase „CSAM“

[Syntaxion]

The phrase 'pornography' implies consent

what about revenge porn then. or torture porn.

 

[wtfNeedSignUp]

History shows that every time someone tries to make a new term despite an existing one, it's to muddy the waters for incoming subversion. CSAM in particular suggest material that isn't abusive, which IS IMPOSSIBLE WITH CHILDREN. It's like saying "non legal murder", the only reason for it readying the concept of legal murder.

If it was legal speech than at least it would have been iffy differentiation, but trying to put it in popular speech is suspicious as fuck.

 

[Socrates]

Yeah pretty sure CSAM came about
1. As a way to avoid having to even think about the words child and porn together. it's just gross.

And

2. As a way to avoid online filters automatically flagging your content for discussing it. You'll see this a lot on heavily monitored platforms like Tik Tok, everybody uses euphemisms, suicide is "becoming unalive" etc.

Either way you're probably overthinking it, doubt there's any agenda beyond the 2 things I just mentioned.

 

[Needlemouse]

what about revenge porn then. or torture porn.

It's true that the porn industry is rife with rape and abuse anyway, but rather than calling abuse material porn because of it, I think depictions of abuse should be called what they are: Depictions of abuse.

Covered that already.

 

[Maldavius Figtree]

Porn does not imply consent, how do you even arrive at a conclusion like that?

 

[Sperghetti]

If it was legal speech than at least it would have been iffy differentiation, but trying to put it in popular speech is suspicious as fuck.

Yeah, that's what I find so off-putting about the term "child sexual abuse material"/CSAM, it sounds so clinical or legalistic. It really has that stilted feel of early 90’s political correctness about it.

Of course the term “child porn” is gross. It should be gross.

And like OP, I also find it bizarre that it got swapped out seemingly overnight, by everyone on both sides of the political spectrum. I can see using a legal/technical term to skirt around filters while talking about something because god knows how absurdly automated internet moderation is these days, but the sheer suddenness with which it happened is weird.

 

[Maldavius Figtree]

The thing is, I have to concede, simply typing „child porn“ feels like the FBI would blow up my door and shoot my dog the moment I click on „post“. I would much rather type CSAM. At the same time it really does take away the weight of the phrase, in a way. Reading „child pornography“ has an immediate emotional impact that „CSAM“ does not have. Nobody thinks it’s „less bad, because pornography implies consent“. If pornography is a word with positive connotations to you, no matter what precedes it, you’re already too far gone and I wouldn’t want you around children at all.

I‘m also fairly certain that pedophiles use neither phrase, but have an euphemism of their own, if only to circumvent detection.

 

[Balalaika Z Bree]

I've used it without thinking: here

Upon reflection, some things should probably be left longer, spelled out explicitly.
CSAM might be vaguer and cover more than a legal definition of CP, But given the broad definition of pornography it's probably not helpful in casual conversation.

We owe it to the victims of rape to say it, and those children exploited and abused deserve no less recognition. We should call child rapists just that, same for child groomers, abusers, neglectors etc.

Spoiler: More thoughts

One parents innocent swimming competition video is another mans highly charged viewing, even if not intended to be by the filmmaker.
I think detail and context are key, e.g. explaining that an accused offender has a collection of images from say "Toddlers In Tiaras" alongside images of sexual abuse, even of technical adults who look underage or just drawings/animations could be decisive, vs. an accused offender that possesses just the TV images or just the latter explicit materials.

 

[All my ghosts]

Tbh it's just all distasteful. The one time I went to 4chan in about 2008 I enc

 

[All my ghosts]

Encountered cp. Haven't been back.

 

[All my ghosts]

Encountered cp. Haven't been back.

Nobody wants to be adjacent to that

 

[Equal Rights for Androids]

I‘m also fairly certain that pedophiles use neither phrase, but have an euphemism of their own, if only to circumvent detection.

uwu just Little things!

 

[Weed Eater]

Nobody wants to be adjacent to that

You do realize you can just edit your post instead of triple posting like the newfaggot you are.

 

[Needlemouse]

Porn does not imply consent, how do you even arrive at a conclusion like that?

Okay. Let me rephrase.
Calling actual footage of people being abused sexually "porn" makes light of the issue and gives detractors reason to believe you are a sex-hating puritan. 'Buh porn bad tho' does not refute my point. If you want to rally against the rampant sexual abuse in the pornographic industry you have to spell it out or else people will not listen to you.

CSAM/CSEM as a term came about because;
1. There's been a growing trend of people calling everything under the sun 'CP', from drawings of two fictional characters holding hands to an adult wearing a hello kitty t-shirt for a photoshoot.
2. Not all child sexual abuse material falls under the umbrella of 'pornography'. People tricking children into playing into fetish scenarios through online 'challenges' on platforms such as youtube and tiktok skirts the line but is still very very bad and needs to be prevented.
3. The fact that many actual survivors don't want material depicting their abuse to be called porn should be enough.

 

[Maldavius Figtree]

I understand and accept point 1 and 2, but while giving thought to point 3, having a victim status does not give you power over the rest of society.
I am a sex hating puritan compared to the modern consumer. I think all pornography is harmful to the consumer, even the innocent thirst traps on tiktok, and most of it harmful to those depicted. And I think child pornography is the worst of it all. But: you are right that most people will simply not listen if you come in hot like that, so you have a valid point there as well.

Honestly, nobody under 18 should be allowed on the internet, because of the immense harm social media does. But if you do not immediately enforce this community wide, being the only kid not on the internet will probably do harm as well. Ugh, this is a bad situation, and I don’t know what I’d do as a parent

 

[Balalaika Z Bree]

Calling actual footage of people being abused sexually "porn" makes light of the issue and gives detractors reason to believe you are a sex-hating puritan. 'Buh porn bad tho' does not refute my point. If you want to rally against the rampant sexual abuse in the pornographic industry you have to spell it out or else people will not listen to you.

On the contrary, accurately describing abuse recorded for erotic stimulation as pornographic, especially when explicit, takes the motivation seriously. To deny why they record and/or sell this evil material would be like denying footage of cartels butchering live victims is intended to strike fear into the hearts of enemies or would-be "rats".

It also helps form better discussions on how to treat ambiguous (e.g. age and/or consent of performers unknown) or adjacent materials (e.g. simulated abuse/torture featuring underage looking but legally capable of giving consent performers) by honestly keeping the full slippery slope in view.

Growing up is a process and some legal adults appear very immature, some lack the understanding to give consent, and exploiters may see dollar signs when they encounter such persons, just as a pimp might, knowing there are niche markets for these people to be traded and brutalized.


Wanting people to only enjoy sex as God intended, is the opposite of sex-hating. Hating a gift from God is disordered, I think human dignity is such that pornography is by definition always abuse, not always of equal perversion or evil, but all evil. That is spelling it out.
If people believe porn is OK or even healthy, I pray their eyes might be opened and they are converted, shut out the evil flowing into their eyes and ears and turn instead to the light of truth, and if they are married to a healthy, loving, ordered sexuality.
Hating porn and what it does to adults, let alone children (who seem to be surrounded by it online from before puberty even), is not enough. We must oppose it.

CSAM/CSEM as a term came about because;
1. There's been a growing trend of people calling everything under the sun 'CP', from drawings of two fictional characters holding hands to an adult wearing a hello kitty t-shirt for a photoshoot.
2. Not all child sexual abuse material falls under the umbrella of 'pornography'. People tricking children into playing into fetish scenarios through online 'challenges' on platforms such as youtube and tiktok skirts the line but is still very very bad and needs to be prevented.
3. The fact that many actual survivors don't want material depicting their abuse to be called porn should be enough.

1. The term is thrown around too freely. Drawings, whatever media, can still be pornographic in nature. Grooming materials are often cartoons/anime I understand, as the "trans" promoters seem to prefer.

2.You're right, by a strict definition. As I wrote here:

One parents innocent swimming competition video is another mans highly charged viewing, even if not intended to be by the filmmaker.

We can't reasonably extend the definition of child pornography to all media featuring children or drawings of children. Some of it might be reasonably called "abuse material" as you describe when produced with that intention (e.g. the grooming done with sexualized dances promoted to children). Material repurposed, like my example above, might be better categorized separately, but we'd want to do so very carefully, to avoid loopholes in laws, or misinterpreting innocent motivations as ill.

3. Survivors feelings are important to the personal support we might offer them, but I fail to see how hobbling our language with false categories helps them or potential future victims.

 

[teriyakiburns]

Either way you're probably overthinking it, doubt there's any agenda beyond the 2 things I just mentioned.

Pretty much this. We're witnessing an example of the euphemism treadmill, where the original term for an offensive thing thing becomes offensive in itself and is replaced with a euphemism. That in turn will become offensive (it's already sort of happening with CSAM, replacing the "abuse" with "exploitation"). The change seems sudden because an inflection point was reached, but the new term has been bubbling around for a while, likely vying for dominance with a couple of other potential replacements.

 

[Whatevermancer]

I would assume that this term is used because large platforms will shadowban your content like comments and videos if you use "CP" instead. The same way how zoomers are saying "unalive" and "r-word" instead of "suicide" and "rape".

 

[Return of the Freaker]

I would assume that this term is used because large platforms will shadowban your content like comments and videos if you use "CP" instead. The same way how zoomers are saying "unalive" and "r-word" instead of "suicide" and "rape".

Or my favorite "she was the victim of a horrific essay"

 

[Fareal]

The term comes from survivor groups and law enforcement, not from beasts - I mean, users of the material.

Law enforcement agencies worldwide prefer it to using CP because porn is well, legal in most places, when consenting adults have made it.

That can never be true of images of child abuse, because children cannot consent to any of those acts, nor can they consent to their recording and dissemination.

Also, there is a nasty, masty tendency to consider users of CSAM as somehow not "real" abusers or "real pedos". The term CSAM reinforces that they are. They are not "looking at porn", a pretty mainstream activity. They are seeking out images of child rape. The fact people look for and pay for images of child rape causes there to be a market for it, which directly causes more children to be raped to produce it.

This is very much real abuse. These are real abusers. "porn" quite simply does not cover what is happening here.