r/todayilearned • u/AhmedMostafa16 • 3d ago

TIL that in 18th century England, people would pay to attend Bedlam, a private lunatic asylum, to watch the mentally ill as entertainment

https://retrospectjournal.com/2024/03/24/bedlam-the-mental-asylum-that-became-londons-top-tourist-attraction/
3.7k Upvotes

98% Upvoted

270 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

289

u/SuspendeesNutz 2d ago

And how many subreddits are there devoted to people losing their shit in public or fighting each other?

Hell, there are entire subreddits devoted to gleefully celebrating men hitting women.

149

u/SprightlyCompanion 2d ago

Wtf are you fucking serious

Don't link that shit, I don't actually want to know but holy god what are we

170

u/Vertebruv 2d ago

It's been known for years that there are a lot of subreddits where things are pretty sketchy, bordering illegal.

For example, the TV Show Brooklyn 99 portrayed a convicted cannibal modding a vore/cannibal subreddit, where people ask "hypothetical" questions.

53

u/jesuspoopmonster 2d ago

One of the default subreddits for a long while was basically child porn

30

u/fnord_happy 2d ago

It was a default sub?

7

u/SparkyDogPants 2d ago

It was not a default sub

70

u/jesuspoopmonster 2d ago

Yes. Back then when you made a new account there were some subs that were automatically subbed to the account because they were the most popular. Jailbait was one of them.

57

u/SprightlyCompanion 2d ago

YIKES. Fucking yikes.

75

u/royalhawk345 2d ago

I don't think they're correct that that sub was ever a default. AFAIK, no NSFW sub was ever a default. 

Don't get me wrong, it was abhorrent that it was allowed in the first place, but I can't find anything indicating it was ever a default sub prior to its removal.

12

u/Mama_Skip 2d ago

I've been on reddit a long, long time. I can assure you, that sub was never default. Idk exactly the content, but it was known about as a problem sub, even more than places like r/clopclop or r/spacedicks and one of the first subs to go private.

Also, I'm not looking it up but last I heard it was still private meaning it might still exist in some capacity for those that can access it.

2

u/DwinkBexon 2d ago

Jailbait has been banned for a very long time now. I wouldn't be surprised if private subs along the same lines exist that no one talks about publically, but Jailbait itself is long gone.

→ More replies (0)

4

u/malphonso 2d ago

It was a long time ago, but I don't think nudes/ludes were allowed on there.

Not defending it, the comments were absolutely a marketplace for people looking for CSAM, but the posts themselves kept a veneer of deniability.

46

u/Stanford_experiencer 2d ago

You're listening to someone who has an account less than 4 months old tell you about what happened on this website over 15 years ago. They've even walked back their initial statement when I called them out.

12

u/isnotreal1948 2d ago

Most people don’t keep the same account that long

4

u/Stanford_experiencer 2d ago

Certainly not the person who replied to me in this thread and had to delete their comment and repost it several times because they kept swearing at me and violating site content.

→ More replies (0)

1

u/DwinkBexon 2d ago

The first account I ever made still exists (I think it just hit something like 12 years old a few weeks ago) but it feels like it was shadowbanned in a lot of subs, so I use it less now than I used to. (Though the last time I left a comment with it was 3 or 4 days ago, iirc.)

5

u/Kraymur 2d ago

Regardless of that…. Jailbait was a legitimate sub that you could just find by going through the sub list. Default or not that shit was up, had moderators and had a community.

5

u/Stanford_experiencer 2d ago

Regardless of that….

There's no regardless. The entire point of everyone talking about this is whether those images constituted illegal material. Not that it was distasteful.

Jailbait was a legitimate sub that you could just find by going through the sub list. Default or not that shit was up, had moderators and had a community.

I don't understand what you mean by legitimate. There was a subreddit that hosted photos of dead children, in part as protest to other subreddits being removed - that is also legitimate, by your same criteria.

→ More replies (0)

1

u/fnord_happy 2d ago

That's a different matter. I'm asking if it was a default sub

→ More replies (0)

9

u/ChaosKeeshond 2d ago

Wait til you find out who moderated it

9

u/Rheabae 2d ago

Albert Einstein

2

u/Basket_475 2d ago

Every now and again I think about that guy lol

10

u/isnotreal1948 2d ago

Also, Spez was a moderator of that sub :)

2

u/SprightlyCompanion 2d ago

OH GOOD.

/s to be very very clear

6

u/fnord_happy 2d ago

As far as I know you could make anyone the mod of any sub at that point.

3

u/isnotreal1948 2d ago

u/spez we know what you are

4

u/WalkingCloud 2 2d ago

Just straight up lying, so hot right now.

(It was absolutely not a default sub, come on)

2

u/Johannes_P 2d ago

And when Reddit removed them because of getting bad press, plenty subs protested over "censorship."

-12

u/Stanford_experiencer 2d ago

basically child porn

no the fuck it was not anywhere near CSAM

10

u/jesuspoopmonster 2d ago

Genitals werent shown but there is no question is wasnt sexualized.

-5

u/Stanford_experiencer 2d ago

Genitals werent shown but there is no question is wasnt sexualized.

Half of the images were selfies stolen from social media. People like you are why teenagers have been charged with producing CP of themselves. You've already walked back your statement hugely, I wonder how much further you're going to walk it back.

4

u/jesuspoopmonster 2d ago

A part of what makes child porn child porn is sexualizing. A picture of a kid in a bath isnt child porn but its considered child porn if its posted in a sexual context. When the premise of a subreddit is "I am tempted to have sex with this child even thought I might go to jail" then its child porn.

I understand you like jerking off to children. Dont be dishonest to yourself about it

3

u/Stanford_experiencer 2d ago

A part of what makes child porn child porn is sexualizing. A picture of a kid in a bath isnt child porn but its considered child porn if its posted in a sexual context.

No. The photo has to be produced in that context. Otherwise, swimwear catalogs would be a controlled item.

When the premise of a subreddit is "I am tempted to have sex with this child even thought I might go to jail" then its child porn.

Reposting a legal image elsewhere can never make it into pornography.

I understand you like jerking off to children. Dont be dishonest to yourself about it

I come from a country famous for child abuse cases where children were actually harmed in real life, and my immigration papers could be forged on a typewriter- seeing people act like reposts social media or anything near real children being harmed when images are created is incredibly stupid disgusting and enraging.

You should focus on children that are being harmed now, not stuff that happened the better part of two decades ago. Bringing up the jailbait subreddit is like mentioning they used to kill people for witchcraft in massachusetts.

0

u/jesuspoopmonster 2d ago

You are wrong with how the laws in America. Of course I dont care about splitting hairs to justify jerking off to kids. We can be concerned with kids being harmed now and acknowledge a fairly mainstream website had child porn on it. Oops, I mean pictures you think are cool to post because you are jerking off to them

→ More replies (0)

1

u/Big_Kahuna_ 2d ago

Really lost us in the second half there. You basically proved his point lmfaoooooo

2

u/Stanford_experiencer 2d ago

Instagram has been having a similar issue with content that is objectively legal:

https://www.nytimes.com/2024/02/22/us/instagram-child-influencers.html

It's why YouTube just doesn't allow comments under anything for kids at all.

There's a lot of legal content that can be viewed an entirely different way by some.

8

u/CleanishSlater 2d ago

How would you describe sexualised images of children?

-2

u/Stanford_experiencer 2d ago

We already have a way to categorize this- it's called the Dost test. The images on the deleted subreddit were largely stolen from social media and only considered distasteful in the context in which they were presented. A ton of the images on the subreddit were selfies.

10

u/Sufficks 2d ago

are you defending jailbait rn?

-14

u/Stanford_experiencer 2d ago

I'm sick of people like you purposely misunderstanding other's comments to incite rage.

I'm first gen immigrant and refugee/adoptee/orphan.

Part of how I got to this country would widely be considered trafficking. Especially the part where they had to bribe the doctor.

My home country stopped international adoption because so many cases turned out to be trafficking.

jailbait was full of selfies, not CP - half the images were stolen from social media / Facebook

reddit would have been taken down if it was what you people say it was

You people talk about this place like it's 4chan.

I come from a place with real suffering, not self-flagellation like you are doing over a dead forum on a crappy website

28

u/ChaosKeeshond 2d ago

I don't see what the fuck your Naruto villain backstory has to do with pedophiles

15

u/Xx_1918_xX 2d ago

They are saying that the teenagers who were sexualized were not transgressed upon, because they (OP) know what real transgressions look like.

Gatekeeping child abuse seems like a real call for help if you ask me.

-4

u/Stanford_experiencer 2d ago

Nor do I see what photos stolen from Instagram and other social media have to do with actual cp. The person who even made the initial statement is already walking it back. This is the equivalent of saying someone tapping you on the shoulder was assault.

13

u/mankytoes 2d ago

Oddly self righteous considering the context, but by UK law at least they could definitely be considered CP.

-4

u/Stanford_experiencer 2d ago

Oddly self righteous considering the context,

The context was someone comparing selfies taken by teenagers to material that can only be produced by harming a child, some of which are distantly related to me.

by UK law at least they could definitely be considered CP.

I'm really curious how clothed selfies could be considered anything of the sort.

1

u/mankytoes 2d ago

Calling them "teenagers" doesn't change the fact they are legally children, and it isn't a defence in court to say the victim took the pictures themselves.

Google it then, images are categorised by how serious they're considered to be.

→ More replies (0)

5

u/Kraymur 2d ago

The very existence of the sub revolved around adult men posting teenagers in revealing outfits or whatever the fuck in order please themselves. In that context it’s being used as CSAM. It’s not like they’re viewing it on their respective original platforms they’re posted in a sub directly revolving around sexualizing kids. Boohoo your childhood sucked kinda weird that you put a bar on what sexualizing a fucking child looks like though.

3

u/Stanford_experiencer 2d ago

The very existence of the sub revolved around adult men posting teenagers in revealing outfits or whatever the fuck in order please themselves. In that context it’s being used as CSAM.

That's not how the material is defined. Otherwise, swimwear catalogs would be a controlled item. The production itself of the material has to involve harm to a child.

Boohoo your childhood sucked kinda weird that you put a bar on what sexualizing a fucking child looks like though.

People like you show more concern over creeps online reposting teenage selfies that were largely of American white girls then you do for literal children suffering in other countries. It's the same underpinnings of missing white woman syndrome.

0

u/The_Flurr 2d ago

And the chief mod for it was given a custom trophy.

It was something along the lines of "pimp daddy" but I'm not googling it to find out.

1

u/jesuspoopmonster 2d ago

I think trying to Google that would get you raided by the FBI

2

u/RoarOfTheWorlds 2d ago

Anyone remember rSexWithDogs? It existed for years and it's exactly what you're hoping it wasn't about.

Years.

9

u/BoazCorey 2d ago edited 2d ago

Like most technologies, the internet has been used for horrific crimes since its inception. Two sided blade. Most of these early modern asylums/prisons were barbaric, but some were testing grounds for some of the earliest institutional care for mentally ill, and also primitive experiments in restorative justice. Simon Schama covers the history of 17th century Dutch asylums in his book Embarrassment of Riches.

16

u/shockjockeys 2d ago

There used to be worse on here. Sadly.

3

u/nderthesycamoretrees 2d ago

Not too sad that the worse subs are gone.

3

u/shockjockeys 2d ago

Its slowly getting better, but theres still some pretty awful subreddits that still exist where the entire point is to cause harm to people

2

u/GozerDGozerian 2d ago

I think they meant “sadly” about it existing at all, not that it’s gone.

1

u/starkistuna 2d ago

There still are. Sometimes I click the random subreddit and Russian roulette my eyes into stuff I can't unsee.

6

u/PMagicUK 2d ago

Don't worry, the opposite probably exists too, these things tend to come in pairs.

3

u/DarwinsTrousers 2d ago

Based on nobody linking to it, my guess is that either didn’t exist or more likely it did exist but was removed in the subreddit purge from a few years ago.

4

u/BeguiledBeaver 2d ago

I am almost certain they are referring to subs where girls hit guys or try to hurt them and the guy hits back. Many Redditors equate this to "fantasizing about beating women" but others say it's just showing that guys should be allowed to defend themselves, even if the attacker is a woman. Your interpretation may vary.

At least, that's the one I'm thinking of that was popular YEARS ago. Maybe there are different ones.

4

u/owlindenial 2d ago

What? Which??? Like as a kink thing or genuinely assault?

7

u/Crown_Writes 2d ago

The ones I've seen are more like the woman is beating on a man who is reluctant to defend himself, then when the man defends himself it becomes beating on a woman. People really like to see those and cheer the guy on I guess.

I don't like seeing any kind of video where someone is out of control angry acting like a toddler having a temper tantrum regardless of gender. I just find it repulsive

0

u/Various_Mobile4767 2d ago edited 2d ago

Its definitely also a kink thing though

https://youtube.com/@beyondwrestling?si=pqsXdeEC7OHI1BIR

Look at the most viewed videos on this channel. They’re all intergender matches. The top video has more than a hundred millions views isn’t even an intergender match, its literally a guy taking out his frustration on a defenseless female wrestler.

0

u/ExplanationLover6918 2d ago

Why aren't they banned?

-2

u/luugburz 2d ago edited 2d ago

because reddit is mostly men. it took years for the jailbait subreddit to be banned lol

im being downvoted because im right btw