files causing mental illness

[Jacoburline]

I can only say that those kinds of files go with the territory to some extent. Most of the people here have already ventured into an area that the majority of the population would find questionable... The strength of this Website is that we are allowed to explore these areas as we please, so long as we do not force others to do so who are altogether unwilling (dominance/submission themes aside.)

The important thing to consider is that all of the people here are supposed to be adults and therefore held accountable for their decisions. If someone wants to listen to a file that causes what you called "serious mental illness," that is his or her decision, and the consequences of that decision reside with that individual.

Now, I do think there might be cause for tighter standards in terms of making sure that files explicitly state all of the major long-term or temporary effects they have. However, the only way to accomplish this would involve a large effort on the part of a few people (to make sure that the judgment would be fairly even) to listen to every recording objectively and make sure all of the major suggestions are notated...and unfortunately, that is not really a likely event.

So, this is my basic point: The responsibility of what files someone does or does not listen to ultimately rest with that individual. If someone listens to a file and hears suggestions he or she does not like or that were not included in the description of the file, then he or she must choose whether or not to continue listening to that file. The fact of the file's presence did not force him or her to listen to it, and so there is no real reason to restrict the freedom of someone to post any particular file.

Now, obviously, there is a bit of a different scenario with files the encourage illegal activities. These should definitely be restricted; I doubt many would disagree on that point.

[uw_onsterfelijk]

Could you be more specific? List some of these files you deem potentially harmful/illegal?

- uw_

[EMG]

I'll throw my 2 cents into the fire here(and may move this to another forum as this isn't exactly a site improvement).

Do I like the file, NO, I would never even consider listening to it for it's intended results and I wouldn't ask anyone that I like to listen to it.

However, the file states EXACTLY what it is about, it doesn't lie, it warns that you could end up depressed and is that REALLY that much worse than my file that leaves you feeling degraded and humiliated if you don't lose weight. That tells you you're fat and the only way you'll have worth is to lose weight.

The files on this site represent choices, choices that people make that they believe will make their life better(or at least the way they want it). Not many of us will ever listen to Living on the Floor, but to some people it speaks. I know what my fetish's are, and I know that everyone else has theirs. I try not to step on those unless it involves something blatantly illegal.

So, I just have to ask my users to be careful in their decisions, to know themselves and to ask for help if something feels wrong.

Play safe, sane and consensual, it's not just for BDSM anymore ;)

[Liann]

I find it ironic that somebody who makes files advocating guys should get their cocks chopped off thinks other files cause severe changes in vulnerable people.
:twisted: :twisted: :twisted: :twisted: :twisted: :twisted: :twisted: :twisted: :twisted: :twisted: :twisted: :twisted: :twisted:

[Jacoburline]

Thanks EMG; I agree with your position wholeheartedly.

[gwyn]

great. then i will make a pain in the ass file. or one that is inducing schizophrenia. or a file for people with a fetish for paranoia. for all the people who really want that.

seriously, anyone who thinks such files make people happy are NOT playing SSC. they are acting out their complexes with the help of hypnosis.

*end of this thread*

Inducing schizophrenia? Like, so I'd hear voices or something? That sounds... rather awesome, if it's consensual. No need for psychoactive substances if I can hallucinate on command!

[sarnoga]

Greetings,

Some nice and thoughtful comments by so many. EMG's comments are very well made, yet I just cannot resist throwing in a few of my own thoughts for everyone's consideration.

I, for one, loath censorship.

The strength of this site is freedom of expression. There is a general theme that most files are of a sexual nature. EMG seems to interpret that fairly loosely and gives wide latitude in the content of the files posted. As this site has evolved a wide variety of interests have been welcomed and tolerated.

A prominent feature of this site is that those who come here to share or use files are allowed to make their own choices. EMG has done, and is doing, an excellent job of making and keeping this site a place where people can do exactly that; make their own choices rather than having others make those choices for them.

Freedom of choice promotes and encourages freedom of expression. Freedom of expression in turn cultivates the kind of variety that is found here. The variety found on this site in turn encourages more participation, and more expression. It stimulates creativity which adds to the variety. Everyone benefits. This community and the files available here continues to grow.

Censorship stifles creativity which in turn limits choices. It begins a vicious cycle of fear and repression and is the opposite of what we have here, what we have come to enjoy and depend on, what we dare to expect.

Before anyone starts using the DSM to define what should or should not be permitted on this site as a subject for a file, remember, it was not that long ago that the DSM listed homosexuality as a psychiatric disorder. The DSM still has a long list of sexual disorders that include, Exhibitionism, Fetishism, Transvestic Fetishism, Hypoactive Sexual Desire Disorder, Male Erectile Disorder, Male Orgasmic Disorder, Premature Ejaculation and a host of others. And one doesn't have to look too hard to find past examples of masturbation being viewed as both a mental and medical problem.

One might want to exercise caution before relying on the advise of psychiatrists and physicians, especially in sexual matters and what is acceptable. There were numerous psychiatrists and physicians who, in the not too distant past, would use various devises and means of genital torture to cure masturbation. They seemed to have no shortage of disturbed parents willing to pay to have their children cured of such deviant practices. If the patient continued to masturbate after being subject to the use of such devises and genital torture they would sometimes resort to surgery and finally, if necessary, castration, as it was considered less harmful than chronic masturbation.

I think EMG has the right approach in determining what is acceptable on this site. I would urge him not to make any changes.

As for there being "number of files on the site that intend to cause serious menthal [sic] illness - depression, anorexia, etc..", without naming any specific files there really is no way to even have a public dialog about what is or should be acceptable or unacceptable. There is no way to even discuss with particularity what is desirable or undesirable.

There may very well be files here that some find offensive, disgusting, degenerate, or possibly even harmful. It does not necessarily follow that such files should be removed or censored.

If someone can point to a particular file that promotes unlawful harmful violence directed at an unwilling party, they might get me to agree that it should be removed.

Regarding the subject matter of files on this site, EMG said, "I try not to step on those unless it involves something blatantly illegal." Of course, EMG does not need anyone's agreement, much less mine, to remove a file he deems unacceptable for his site. However, as stated, what EMG said would probably result in removing more files than I would remove. Blatant illegality alone would not bother me unless that illegality would cause problems for the site or would result in serious harm to someone other than one who made a knowing decision to listen to the file.

On the other hand, we do have a forum available here to discuss files. The fact that I am against censorship of files does not mean that I am against discussion of files and their merits or lack thereof.

Catgirl, if you or someone else wants to point out what you perceive as a problem file, or problems with a file, harm that you think it could or may cause, or is likely to cause, the forum is a good place for that. While I would object to a file being censored or removed, except in the most extreme cases, I have absolutely no objection to you, or anyone else, pointing out possible problems with files or warning of harmful effects you think may have not been considered by potential users. Rather than having the stifling effects of censorship it can promote healthy debate and discussion about what is desirable in a file and what users might want to consider before trying a file.

Such discussions in the forum may also aid authors in considering possible effects in files that they might have otherwise not considered. However, such discussions are more likely to be fruitful if the specific file being objected to is named so everyone understands exactly what is being discussed.

I loath censorship. One of its opposites is open debate.

If you see a file you feel is bad or harmful, come here and name it. Be specific about what the problem is. Make people aware of it. Talk about it, discuss it. Then, bad or not, lets leave it there unless it goes so far beyond the bounds of acceptability that it cannot be tolerated. In all the time I have been here I have only seen one file I thought was so bad it should be removed, and it was. Of course I don't know what others EMG might have removed without my notice, not counting those removed for other reasons such as not being full files but only teasers advertising another site. So what is that for a percentage, 1 in about 2300 files.

Lets not start making up additional rules and guidelines for making files. The rules we now have seem to be working fine. Any problem files that should arise can be discussed publicly and if anyone still considers them so blatantly illegal they should not be allowed here they bring them to EMG's attention so that he can evaluate them and make a decision.

Thanks for reading,

Sarnoga.

[Liann]

Any file which promotes M2F mindset, also inherently promotes SRS. One follows the other like night follows day. Don't play word games with me, missy. Not every body will go all the way, but you know some percentages will. From an outsider's perspective, you ARE promoting men to get their cocks chopped off -- they don't make the fine distinctions you might -- being female means bye-bye Mr. Happy.

In current society public sissification and public crossdressing carries a risk of hate crimes, to the point that the US passed special hate crimes laws this past year or so to protect the at-risk population. Doing legal but frowned on things should not give the insanely violent any permission to act out their evil.

Pushing a vulnerable person over the line with suggestions, where their native caution was over-ruled, can cost a person just as much danger of physical damages as any anorexia file.



That said, you don't know the circumstances of people who listen to each file -- you can only guess.

Based on experience I know that some people are better off giving in to their female desires than resisting them, even if it carries higher risk of being damaged by insane haters, or leads to surgical removal of an unsightly birth defect in the genital area.

In fact, if more sissies gave into their repressed desires there would be larger support networks, more voters pushing for law enforcement for hate crimes, and less novelty to trigger programmed haters to violence. Familiarity breeds boredom, not hate-crimes.

There would be more t-gurls setting roll models and public examples for those others suffering gender mismatch.


Aneroxia files very well may have a greater beneficial effect than negative.

TGs often need to shed weight to fit their ideal body image and fit the clothing sold off the rack. Who wants a tub-of-lard Go-Go girl?

Getting rid of blubber might be a better health outcome than keeping it -- fat kills too you know.

Maybe somebody is ready for a drastic purge.

Fat also stores all kinds of nasty fat-soluble chemicals, like pesticides, which store up for decades. Promoting change-over of body fat, with vigorous exercise to force disposal of wastes, is actually a rather healthy thing to do.


Far fewer people die from too little fat (at least in western cultures, where food is cheap and easily available) than die from overweight complications.


Why not offer weight-loss sessions, with a WMM erotic angle and attraction to steal away customers from the file you worry about?

How about pushing good body image files? It takes six months for a fill to pass into free, so you better get started if you want it widely available by May 2011.

[uw_onsterfelijk]

The site OWNER replied to catgirl stating his opinion and stance on her concerns... and this is a continued heated discussion why?

Judge not less ye be judged yourself. And when you are judged, it's not from your own view point!

[DKaiser]

The site OWNER replied to catgirl stating his opinion and stance on her concerns... and this is a continued heated discussion why?

Because it's amusing to watch. *munches popcorn excitedly*

[uw_onsterfelijk]

The site OWNER replied to catgirl stating his opinion and stance on her concerns... and this is a continued heated discussion why?

Because it's amusing to watch. *munches popcorn excitedly*

hehe.. I'm all for the "catgirl for 2011" campaign! :-P

[gwyn]

...
Judge not less ye be judged yourself. And when you are judged, it's not from your own view point!

Now that is a good point.

[Liann]

sorry liann, but you are talking extreme bullshit.

suggestions for srs are something completely different than suggestions for crossdressing or submission.

if you had any knowledge about anorexia you would know it is not defined as loosing weight for fat sissys, but having a Body weight that is inconsistent with age, build and height (usually 15% below normal weight).

that means a person would be so thin and light that it is far below the look of a normal girl. such a person does NOT fit the clothing sold off the rack.

instead of posting more "verbal diarrhea", you should return to the original subject of the thread.

I have been on topic. You started hysterically, eek, eek, there's files invoking depression and bad body image. That is the topic -- Your hysteria.

You fail to understand that just like anybody can go too far with an anorexia file they could go too far with a sex-change themed fantasy. Why are YOUR downloaders immune but other downloaders are "pushed too far"?

"Cross-Dressing" is a generic term covering a wide spectrum of behaviors, from private erotic feelings obtained by wearing a single opposite sex garment exclusively in the privacy of their home,all the way to Ru Paul professional female impersonators. Your files cannot be said to span the spectrum. You concentrate on persons becoming so feminized that they abhor their own birth gender clothing and manners in order to embrace your feminization goals posted in your descriptions. That is actually much farther than "cross-dressing" as most people use the term.

Does this sound familiar???

• Name: catgirl - Crossdress Experiment
Description: My new file "Crossdress Experiment" is really forced feminization, because it will cause you to stop wearing male clothes. You will have an intense desire to wear female clothing instead. You may feel an itch to start when you try to wear male clothing. Subjects with intense allergies may want to keep some antihistamines ready, just in case you want to wear male clothing again.

"Submission" is not in any way equivalent to FEMINIZATION. Femmes can be dommes, as example, google "Femdom" and see how many hits you get.

FEMINIZATION as used here, as used in your own file descriptions, involves pushing subjects completely outside of a male perspective, outside of any residual maleness state of mind.

That leads to SRS in people who want their body to match the state of mind, which YOU REFUSE TO ACCEPT RESPONSIBILITY FOR CREATING, even though you collect money promising to do exactly just that.

I am not saying that FEMINIZATION is bad, nor am I saying it's bad to collect money creating it.

It's bad to posture that you don't do exactly that and then duck behind ambiguous words that it's "only" cross-dressing and "only" submission.

REMEMBER THIS???

• Name: catgirl - Gogo Girl feminization
Description: Gogo Girl feminization was ... downloaded on WMM and other sites for more than 7000 times ever since. ... Also promotes other permanent feminization changes like submission to men, crossdressing, female self-confidence and wearing latex and other fetish wear. Intended for subjects who are desiring advanced feminization and listened to WMM files like StrokeSissy or M2F.

What is "ADVANCED FEMINIZATION"? How is this ADVANCED FEMINIZATION DIFFERENT from "other permanent feminization changes like submission to men, crossdressing" of which you speak? What do you mean by "M2F"?



REMEMBER THIS???

• Name: catgirl - New You Price: $15 Buy Now
Description: This intense curse file transforms you into a transsexual woman with the help of hypnosis. It is intended for everyone who desires permanent change. You will feel motivated to live a 24/7 life - en femme. Recommended for M2F transsexuals. Your personality may change into a more feminine version, forgetting you have ever been a man. Contains suggestions and post hypnotic suggestions to alter your memory, mindset, desires and needs for feminine appearance.

Why should anybody believe you when you now say that you only go as far as harmless dress up and simple submission, when you say in your own words that you will make them PERMANENTLY into a TRANSSEXUAL WOMAN, (without a penis, or else it's a SHE-MALE, not a "Woman").

NOW, I go back exactly to this hysterical thread starter and ask you to honestly admit that you, who openly promotes states of mind know to lead to castration of men and SRS in your file descriptions, cannot complain when somebody else posts files which cause changes viewed by some as unnecessary and undesirable.

Ask the average man if he's rather be anorexic or neutered. I wonder how many would choose plan B.



Having been hospitalized twice for cigarette smoking-related near-death health crises, I find files promoting smoking to be sinister. My response would be to post "quit smoking files" and make them more popular. I wouldn't threaten to make files even nastier, like schizophrenia, if I didn't get my way. Talk about "verbal diarrhea", sweety.




But at least I am honest. My feminization files ALL give warnings that you can take this past the point of no return and then you will end up with tits growing on your chest and possibly become a full woman. There is no self denial, and downloaders know exactly what they are risking playing with the files.

Every file is marked PERMANENT effects, likely irreversible.

I treat my downloaders as thinking adults who know what they want, and nothing important is concealed -- every file script is available for reading, every word in every file is disclosed.

They act of their own freewill to choose what outcomes they want in their life, a life which belongs to them, not you or me. If you can't exercise your freedom, then freedom is bogus. WMM is proof that freedom exists, and that it has risks and responsibilities.

[gwyn]

Okay, this is starting to piss me off. Why do you keep saying "menthal illness"? Menthal is not a word. It's mental.

Sorry for railroading the conversation, but it's very annoying.

[uw_onsterfelijk]

The file in question should stay, but this thread on the other hand... needs deleting!

[fabisandine]

The file in question should stay, but this thread on the other hand... needs deleting!

I think that the file should be deleted and this thread stay. The file is dangerous.
Illegal things, we don't want here, but legal things that could cause harm to the subject shouldn't be treated like illegal things? And we know how dangerous is Anorexic thing (to be a little specific), and how high is the mortality rate for persons with this disorder.

It's just my thoughts about this matter.

[gwyn]

My recommendation is, as every viewpoint has been represented, and EMG has made his own statement on the matter, this thread should be abandoned, and the status of the file should be decided by those actually in charge of the file, the creator and EMG. No one else has any authority, so whinging on about it is pointless.

[zapnosis]

nothing is completely safe,
nothing is completely sane,
nothing is completely consensual.

It is as easy to be an alarmist as it is to be careless. But I have known a couple of people with eating disorders and what struck me from their stories was how difficult these disorders can be to shake off. Then again, a little while back I was asked to make a weight loss file for a submissive and, being satisfied that they had people around who would be monitoring their diet, I agreed. I wouldn't have published it, I didn't - that was just a little too much responsibility for me to take. But this is a human judgement that people have to make for themselves in their own particular context. I respect that.

I also wonder if Catgirl has thought about the fact that this thread will only increase the number of people downloading that file??

[zzzzz]

ethical standards for atomic bombs?

:oops:

[Calimore]

Aww, come on - the files in question aren't quite on the level of atomic bombs. Frankly, I have yet to be forced to listen to any file so far, although suggestion has been known to play a part.

Seriously though, this all comes down to people doing things to themselves and, like tattoos, piercings and self-immolation, they all do it for personal, often intimate reasons.

Anorexia, the smoking fetish and fetishes involving feces all come to mind as things I would personally rather avoid, but I CAN see how some people could be curious about such things. That's their choice - Lord knows I was not put here to judge.

However, you won't see any files concerning such issues addressed by Yours Truly.

[sarnoga]

As usual, lacking the desire to refrain from further participation in this thread, and grossly underestimating the the benefit of occupying myself with other matters, here goes.

(passing DKaiser a bowl of popcorn)

second: sarnoga, this was a really long reply.

Ooops, sorry. Maybe we should promulgate some rules and guidelines for post lengths so I may have a better chance of being less offensive.

i never said that something should be censored. i just vote for adding rules and ethical standards regarding the files that are supposed to be published here.

Hm.... that is censorship, sweety.

just like there are ethical standards for surgery, medical care and atomic bombs, there should be ethical standards for the contents of hypnosis files.

How interesting.

Though I can't really imagine applying ethical standards for atomic bombs. Perhaps one could attempt to formulate such standards for their use. The problem with that is arriving at a consensus of what those standards should be and then finding a way to impose those standards on those few who have the atomic bombs and can use them.

As for ethical standards for surgery and medical care, there are various ethical standards employed in relation to those activities. Depending on the location where the surgery or medical care is being performed there may also be regulations that may or may not take into account various "ethical standards."

Generally speaking, surgery, medical care, and atomic bombs are neither means of communication nor expression of thoughts and ideas. While theoretically one may express thoughts or ideas in the manner in which they use atomic bombs, or on whom they use them, that expression is secondary to the physical result of using those bombs. The same would be true for performing surgery or providing medical care or for receiving the same.

Hypnosis files, on the other hand, are inseparable from the thoughts and ideas expressed therein. That is the content of those files. That is not to say you cannot attempt to regulate hypnosis files by requiring they conform to certain rules or ethical standards. However, when you start regulating the content of files other than your own, that is to say the files of another, whether you do so through rules or ethical standards, that is censorship. You may or may not find it desirable. You may or may not find that censorship acceptable. But it is censorship, regardless of what label you pin on it.

and i did not talk about crossdressing or some weird fetish. i was talking about severe menthal disorders.

Phewww... thank god we cleared that up.

your criticism about the dsm-iv or icd-10 definition of menthal disorders is not justified. first of all, these classification systems are an international consensus of leading international menthal health professionals. the taxonomy is primary aiming at classifying types of patients for the purpose of billing the health insurance. what is ill or what should be treated in the individual case depends on the judgement of the menthal health professional.

I believe you were the one who referred to the DSM in your attempt to promote or or justify regulation or censorship of the content of hypnosis files here on WMM. You also appealed to the DSM as authority in support of your particular interpretation of what those rules should be and again cited to it for authority for the "ethical standards" you hoped would be adopted as the basis for your regulation or censorship of file content.

While the DSM in particular, and the mental health profession in general, are certainly susceptible of criticism, that would be the subject of another topic or post. You state that the purpose of the DSM is "classifying types of patients for the purpose of billing the health insurance." As such I really have little interest in it. It is you who tried to cite it for authority in support of your "ethical standards." I was simply pointing out that it is unsuitable for that purpose, as you apparently agree by pointing out the intended purpose of the DSM.

the fact that homosexuality was removed from dsm doesn't mean anyone was cured or treated wrong. it just means that the international community has come to a consensus that the "disorder" either wasn't properly defined or research showed it doesn't deserve the status of a disorder that is billed for the health insurance. when you talk about transvestism, fetishism etc. you are omitting an important part: in the last thirty years hardly anyone was diagnosed or treated for this problem. a patient would have to go to a psychatrist and declare he is having severe problems regarding his family life, job, or other reasons because of transvestism. and most professionals would not treat the patient to stop the crossdressing, but treat the patient with marriage counseling, strengthening his ego etc. my old professor at the university always told me: do not code any diagnosis regarding to sexuality! but there are situations, when the diagnosis can be coded. think of the former pilot of queen elisabeth II: he was an elite army pilot. he murdered lots of women, not raping them, only to steal their underwear and make pictures of wearing them. obviously the transvestism is in relation to a forensic case. and the crossdressing has prognostic value (IN THIS INDIVIDUAL). again, i'm not saying that all crossdressers are criminals. but there are certain cases that can be pathologic and linked to a state where a compulsive disorder causes a criminal act for which the subject is not holding criminal responsibility.

It is nice to hear you have an education. Your point is? If you are saying that there is no causality between cross dressing and criminality, I would agree. Perhaps I am missing how that related to the topic.

now, to come back to the topic of anorexia and depression: i did not hear any complaint about saying these two disorders are not disorders.

Actually, that never was the topic. The post subject, as chosen by you, was files causing mental illness. In the body of the text you expressed your opinion that....

there is a number of files on the site that intend to cause serious mental illness - depression, anorexia, etc.. explicit and without any good reason. i don't know what kind of people are behind such ideas, but i think these files should not be allowed here.

Quite frankly, I don't give a rats ass about anorexia and depression or the DMS. Had you started a topic about that I doubt I would have bothered getting involved. I might or might not have become involved in the discussion if it had been limited to the stated post subject of "files causing mental illness."

What I was responding to was your statement; ".... i think these files should not be allowed here."

you could say that the definition of anorexia is too sharp. voting for a lower boundary. like saying 60 lbs for a six feet tall person is ok. but i don't think you will succeed in eliminating this from any psychatric manual. i think you would also talk differently if you had ever treated such patients before. same applies to depression.

I could say that. But I didn't say that. I don't care how those in the field of mental health define any particular behavior until someone tries to use those definitions to restrict my activities and behaviors. I have no interest in editing or contributing in any way to any psychiatric manual.

I am against censorship of files here on WMM beyond the criteria adopted by EMG. It is only when the mental health profession begins to meddle in affairs that effect me that I am concerned with how they define or describe things.

As I stated in my previous post, if a file promotes unlawful harmful violence against an unwilling person or if a file will bring legal trouble to this site, then I am in favor of it being removed. Just so that you are clear on definitions, that too is censorship. However, I am opposed to any censorship that goes further. I believe the standard adopted by EMG is adequate for that purpose and moving the line in the direction you advocate would be detrimental.

last thought: any community requires rules and moderation.

Spoken like a true regulator. Your elementary school teachers would be proud of you and likely paste a gold star on your forehead.

otherwise a small number of egoistic, sadistic people will spread havoc over the site.

Then you must think that is what is happening here. I do not!

it is just like in real life. the amount of moderation can lead from laissez faire to control freak admins.

The real question being debated here is where to draw that line. I am pleased with where it is. You apparently want to move it in the direction of more regulation. As you mentioned, you have your own site. Feel free to regulate that site to your heart's content. It is yours. Do with it as you please. I prefer EMG's approach of minimal regulation. My personal opinion is that it is largely responsible for the huge number of contributed files. I feel privileged to be a part of that and love that I can post a file, even a bad file, or a file that few like, a nose picker file or a doggy file or any damn thing I get the mind to without getting it kicked or having to get approval.

In the time I have been here I have seen an explosion of the files available to site users. Some are pay files, the majority are free or will be. I am proud to have contributed and am pleased that you and tanyaslave are also contributing members of this site. It is impossible to have the variety we have without ruffling some feathers along the sway. This site has come awful close to having something for everyone. In the process it probably has something to offend everyone.

I would love it if my list of files contained something that could please everyone. No doubt in the process I would have something to offend everyone. If there is anyone out there who has not found at least one of my files offensive, I hope they speak up. I may yet be able to remedy the situation.

i personally think that i saved a lot of people on my own site from a small number of psychopathic hypnotists whose primary goal is gaining control over people, manipulating and harming them with the help of hypnosis.

Congratulations.

there is a reason why crack is not sold in supermarkets. before you advocate for complete freedom of choice etc. you should define who is responsible for any damage that results from people who make bad choices. like listening to a file that induces depression, leading to suicide after repeated listening. i am sure that nobody will feel responsible for such a result here. not even the submitter of the file.

Yeah, the reason crack is not sold by the supermarkets is that it is unlawful and being unlawful other established crack merchants would take unkindly to the competition. Since they are denied access to the courts to settle their disputes, they would likely resort to extra-judicial means. Still, alluding to sale of crack cocaine or some other perceived horror is the style of argument typical of censors.

It goes like this: If we don't regulate what people think or say or what ideas they expose themselves to, before you know it they will be selling crack in the supermarkets. But let's not go there. The regulation of drugs in this country (both prescription and that not allowed to be prescribed) causes far more damage than the drugs could ever do. But that should be the topic for another thread if it concerns you.

the anonymity of the internet often leads to a kind of anomic structure. a place where rules are absent or not enforced. like child pornography sites.

Again, that style of argument is not based on logic but rather is an attempt to stir up unreasoned emotion and opinion in support of your position for more regulation. Do you really believe that lack of regulation on this and other internet sites is likely to cause such an erosion of standards and values that it will in turn create social instability? One can only hope.

Your comment leaves me wondering what world you live in. In the world I live in, anonymity on the internet is mostly illusory. If one wants to truly hide their identity, that is to make it untraceable, it takes a great deal of trouble. Not to mention that if the internet activity involves the exchange of money, most money exchanges, especially electronic ones leave a money trail. Bringing up child pornography sites is a desperate attempt to cloud the issue. It is the typical reactionary regulatory rhetoric used by those who want to bring all aspects of the internet under strict government supervision and has no basis in fact.

In the almost 20 years that I have been connecting to the internet I have never once managed to stumble across one of these legendary child pornography sites. One must assume, were there such sites, they are either operated for money or if not for money out of an altruistic motivation to provide child pornography for free to those who seek it. That is not to say that if you look hard enough you might not find some erotic or pornographic images of humans under the arbitrary government imposed age of 18 somewhere on the usenet news groups where those with access can get it for free. But for the most part child pornography sites are a non-existent bogeyman used to scare the public into accepting more aggressive government regulation of the internet.

now, to provide an example for such a file (please explain to me in detail, where the erotic or productive part of this file is supposed to be, sarnoga):

You are referring to the file below? Your request for an explanation from me about that file is what is known as burden shifting. You have posted below some of the comments on the file. Some of those comments are by the author of the file in which the motivation for writing, producing and posting the file was explained. I think tanyaslave's explanation is sufficient and more than enough to satisfy me, not that any explanation is needed. I certainly do not need to justify a files creation or placement on this site, nor does tanyaslave need to justify contributions to the site.

You, catgirl, are the one proposing censorship and removal of a file. When asking that a file, other than your own, be removed from the site, the burden is on you to justify that removal. That is and should be a very heavy burden. As EMG said,

However, the file states EXACTLY what it is about, it doesn't lie, it warns that you could end up depressed and is that REALLY that much worse than my file that leaves you feeling degraded and humiliated if you don't lose weight. That tells you you're fat and the only way you'll have worth is to lose weight.

EMG also explained how he makes judgments on removing a file for content.

The files on this site represent choices, choices that people make that they believe will make their life better(or at least the way they want it). Not many of us will ever listen to Living on the Floor, but to some people it speaks. I know what my fetish's are, and I know that everyone else has theirs. I try not to step on those unless it involves something blatantly illegal.

That is the standard. I happen to like it. If you can convince EMG that the file you want removed is blatantly illegal then he may do so. But the burden is clearly on the one asking for removal.

I agree with EMG that users on his site should be careful in their decisions. I do not agree with you that others should make those decisions for them and take the choices out of their hands.

(ps: i reported a complaint to the admins of this site regarding this file before. i don't want to start a new discussion about every new shit file on this site - like a bottom up strategy, i want rules and ethical standards what is defined as acceptable - top down strategy. discussions about details,experiences with acceptable files can be done in the rating and comment section of each file)

So there you have it. You want rules and "ethical standards" to suit your tastes. You may not like the word, but that is censorship. You want a safe place to play where you can abandon responsibility and play with anything you desire, safe in the knowledge that someone else has taken the responsibility of removing anything that might be dangerous to you.

If that is what you are looking for, you are in the wrong place. Not that I am trying to run you off, but if the freedom and chaos of this site makes you uncomfortable, perhaps you should go find a safer place to play. I like things here as they are and am willing to accept responsibility for my own choices. I am willing to accept the risk that something here could harm me if I do not choose wisely. I do not want others making those choices for me. Yes, I may make a mistake and make a bad choice. But at least it will be my mistake. I would rather live with the consequences of my own choices than have to live with the consequences of others making the choices for me.

I am sorry you do not want that responsibility. If you do not want to have further discussion in this forum over the content of this site and its files I am sure that will be something we can live with.

You said that you complained to the admins of this site about the file you dislike and apparently were disappointed with their response or lack of action. Now that EMG has clearly explained his criteria you need no longer waste your time and effort in complaining to him about files that do not cross that line.

If it is too much trouble for you to post in the forum pointing out problems you see with other files that do not merit removal by EMG, then all I can say is they must not concern you all that much.

I see in the comments below that the author explained why the file was written produced and posted. That explanation is good enough for me.

To be blunt, as I see from many of your posts is a style you favor, I think your reaction to this file is an over reaction and my suggestion would be to forget it. There are many files on this site I do not care for. So what. There are also a lot of good files. If someone likes them, enjoys them, or benefits from them in some way then I am glad they are there. I think Liann pointed out some possible benefits of the file you mention. It may be just what is needed by someone. Why should you get to choose for them. There are many that would have to leave here unsatisfied if a file had to fit my own personal definition of good, or your definition, or anyone's.

I don't know for sure why I bothered to respond further in this thread as I doubt that what I write will have much impact. I suspect I did so out of a perverse desire to amuse DKaiser and promote his excited popcorn munching. Anyway, I think I am tired of beating this horse. It has been dead a long time now.

Best wishes to all. May we continue to enjoy here on WMM the chaos and freedom of a minimally regulated website.

Sarnoga

[sarnoga]

Seriously though, this all comes down to people doing things to themselves and, like tattoos, piercings and self-immolation, they all do it for personal, often intimate reasons.

Calimore, you never cease to amaze me with the breadth of your imagination and sheer creative genius. Just when I had begun to think I had run out of new ideas for files there you are with one of your inspirational posts.

Brilliant, absolutely brilliant. Without your help and suggestions I doubt I would have ever thought of creating a self-immolation file. But now... wow... thanks for the suggestion.

Now all I need is a test subject. Hmmmm.......

Sarnoga

[gwyn]

I don't know for sure why I bothered to respond further in this thread as I doubt that what I write will have much impact. I suspect I did so out of a perverse desire to amuse DKaiser and promote his excited popcorn munching.

I disagree. You may not have impacted your target audience (assumedly Catgirl), but you made me feel smarter reading what you wrote, and now i know not to get into any kind of debate with you for any reason other than amusement.
8)

[DKaiser]

Well, I did enjoy the popcorn. And after such a long post, clearly you're deserving of some too. *hands popcorn to Sarnoga*

[sarnoga]

Well, I did enjoy the popcorn. And after such a long post, clearly you're deserving of some too. *hands popcorn to Sarnoga*

Hey thanks, D.

(munches popcorn and waits for more amusement)

[buttlicker79]

This has been such an enlightening thread. I'm glad I read thru the entire thing.

[Kimber1]

As a participant of this site, my thoughts are:
1. A few comments reference "censorship". Well, if its a matter of ethics, that is one thing, if it is a matter of illegal activity, that is another. I am not being "censored" when the law says I cannot shout "fire" in a crowded theater. On the other hand, it might be censorship if I were prohibited from writing an article saying "the movie sucked." So, if we are going to toss words like "censorship" into the discussion, lets use those words with some care.

2. The person who establishes a website, and publishes/operates a business in the US may face civil or criminal liability if he or she facilitates the commission of a crime.

3. I don't have any idea whether any files here would fall in that category, but if they do, they are fair game for being deleted.

4. In the US, it is common for medical practitioners to assist men with their gender issues, so I can't imagine that the fem files are a problem.

5. In the US, it is possibly unethical or even illegal for medical practitioners to facilitate a patient's commission of illegal activity. Can a person/web site operator be sued for damages or be put in jail for facilitating mental illness in another? I don't know.

6. It is EZ for anybody outside the US or who does not run this web site to whine about censorship. Would you pitch in for EMG or Catgirl's legal fees .... That's what I thought. Your ass isn't on the line.

7. Many of us really, really would be very sad to see anything bad happen to this site or the people who operate it.

8. So, time to get off the high horse and support EMG &/or Catgirl with whatever is decided on the issue. Liann, it is definitively resolved in the US that gender therapy is not illegal, and gender issues are NOT mental illness.

[sarnoga]

As a participant of this site, my thoughts are:
1. A few comments reference "censorship". Well, if its a matter of ethics, that is one thing, if it is a matter of illegal activity, that is another. I am not being "censored" when the law says I cannot shout "fire" in a crowded theater. On the other hand, it might be censorship if I were prohibited from writing an article saying "the movie sucked." So, if we are going to toss words like "censorship" into the discussion, lets use those words with some care.

Yes, Kimber1, lets use some care in the use of words.

You clearly do not understand the term censorship, and confuse unlawful censorship with that which is permitted. Simply because a certain type of censorship is not unlawful does not mean it is not censorship.

To begin with almost all censorship is perfectly legal when it is done by private actors rather than by government. Of course some means of enforcing private censorship may be unlawful even if the censorship itself is not. For example if it is done by force or threat of force, the censorship may be legal while the use of force or threat of force is not.

When a private company refuses to permit unwanted solicitation on their property, that is censorship, but generally speaking not unlawful censorship because they are not a government actor. Of course that too has rare exceptions if it is a place that is so public that it is generally considered to be a place traditionally used for public exchange of ideas. To see more about that go look into the area of equal time, etc.

So go back and re-read the thread. Nobody here ever suggested it is not within EMG's rights to choose what to have on his site. But while he can censor his own site if he chooses it is still fair to discuss what censorship he should or should not engage in. Just because it would be lawful for him to engage in such censorship does not lead to a logical conclusion that such censorship is desirable.

If you are punished for yelling fire in a crowded theater that IS censorship. If there is a law that says you cannot yell fire in a crowded theater, not only is that censorship but it is also censorship of a class known as prior restraint. You seem to be operating under the misconception that in the USA censorship is unlawful. Or that if a restraint on speech is lawful it is not censorship. That is not the case. Only some censorship is unlawful.

Generally speaking only the government and government actors are prohibited from engaging in censorship. It is generally considered unconstitutional for them to do so because of the 1st amendment guarantee to the people of freedom of speech.

Long ago the courts decided that the first amendment freedom of speech was not an unlimited freedom. But the government and government actors must be very cautious before engaging in censorship, especially that kind that would be considered prior restraint. Such censorship is subjected to what is called the strict scrutiny test and must be narrowly tailored to further a compelling government interest.

The US government as well as many of the state governments in the USA engage in quite a bit of censorship. Truth in advertising is censorship. That type of censorship falls into the category of commercial speech. The government is permitted much greater leeway when restricting commercial speech. The first amendment to the us constitution gives the broadest protection to political and religious speech. But while some censorship is permitted and some is not, it is all censorship.

Even though it would be prior restraint, a law prohibiting yelling fire in a crowded theater is likely to pass the strict scrutiny test. That is, it is likely to be found that it is narrowly tailored to further a compelling government interest, namely in that case to prevent panic and disaster that could result in many injuries or deaths. What that means is that while it is still censorship, it may be constitutionally permissible censorship.

So, like you said, if we are going to toss words like "censorship" into the discussion, lets use those words with some care.

Sarnoga.

[Icono]

Any file which cultivates an obsessive, negative perception of your appearance is seeding a bodily dysmorphic disorder. These are difficult to overcome, and people who suffer from them not only have their lives destroyed but also face a significantly higher suicide rate.

The people making these files, and those who are downloading it as a motivational tool to loose weight, are dangerously ignorant on the risks involved.

I'm all for letting people have freedom to their own self destruction, but geeze. Why are these files being made? I doubt it's just a protest to reaffirm freedom of speech.

[ohyouknow]

Any file which cultivates an obsessive, negative perception of your appearance is seeding a bodily dysmorphic disorder. These are difficult to overcome, and people who suffer from them not only have their lives destroyed but also face a significantly higher suicide rate.

Could it be though that people who have induced them deliberately, as a form of self-expression, might not have those negative effects, and might even benefit?

[bandler]

Any file which cultivates an obsessive, negative perception of your appearance is seeding a bodily dysmorphic disorder. These are difficult to overcome, and people who suffer from them not only have their lives destroyed but also face a significantly higher suicide rate.

Could it be though that people who have induced them deliberately, as a form of self-expression, might not have those negative effects, and might even benefit?

...
The people making these files, and those who are downloading it as a motivational tool to loose weight, are dangerously ignorant on the risks involved.
...

There are an infinite number of hypothetical questions people could ask to keep this thread going forever. And speculation is fun. So have fun speculating.

My 2 cents is this: from the description of the file, and the comments left by the author, it is clear that the author is dangerously ignorant of the risks involved, at best.
So it seems, sufficient warning signs are there, for anyone who cares to see them.

[Icono]

Oh, I'm quite sincere. But I'm not talking about rights or censorship or even morality; just motivation. That's the angle that gets people uncomfortable.

There are Pro-Ana communities online dedicated to sharing "thinspiration", and they'd be all over this file if they knew it existed. The author has distanced himself from responsibility, and the only explanation offered for making this file is, "someone, somewhere, might fap to it."

Will that be enough to vindicate your conscious, should you ever have to face the damage it caused? ;)