411–420 of 1001 posts
However, nanny-laws like this suck and end up having a horrible blast radius for privacy and security.
What happened to parents setting up content filters on cellphones and computers? Why is it the government's job to police your kids?
I can't believe how far Hacker News has fallen. Now we're cool with de-anonymizing the internet? Ludicrous!
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Is there a mechanism for empowering a polity to protect minors from certain things the polity deems they're not ready for that doesn't rely on arbitrary rules?
Why do we need a policy? Why aren't parents doing basic things like setting up content filters?
Not a comment on the policy; I'm a parent and AFAICT none of my cohorts in town know how to do this.
Just the fact that pornography is being taken seriously as something that's dangerous for minors is a good thing really.
But is pornography dangerous for minors? Has it been researched? What "dangers" are there? Do these apply to all age groups of "minors"?
That manifested in unexpected ways for men recovering from porn-induced ED. The older men - those who hadn't grown up with high-speed internet porn - recovered significantly faster than the younger men.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That's a strawman no? You're trying to colour my argument by associating it with another one. There are some notable differences though. If I play a violent video game then no one is actually being shot. If I watch a woman being choked and ejaculated on by 20 men calling her a worthless slut whore in a porno then I'm watching that genuinely happening. It's more akin to letting children watch videos from actual warzon…
Except that you skip over the whole "Media contains certain content -> viewing this content leads to bad behaviour -> said media should be banned" argument as being valid, which is not. You have to demonstrate the causal link between the first two. Also, your subsequent argument is flawed. For the vast majority of popular porn, an actress in a scene where she is "abused" is doing so consensually. Part of having healt…
If I see an actress in a movie being shot, she's not actually being shot. If I see an actress in a porn movie being choked, she's actually being choked. That's not a question of consent, it's a question of content.
But on that note, have you ever worked a shitty or degrading job and had to do things you found painful because you couldn't afford to say no? I have. It's painful to go through. I can't imagine coupling that with the complex layers of human sexuality.
You're saying it doesn't equate because of consent but that's not the aspect I was equating.
Take a look at the front page of PornHub now. There's a video on there showing a man flashing strangers. Yes, they must be actors, but it's filmed in a way that suggests they're not. There's absolutely nothing there that would promote the idea of consent in the mind of a young viewer.
Yes, maybe parents could watch those videos and explain that it's normal to fantasise and play-act about assault. But I'd hope that at the same time we, as adults, would speak with qualified therapists and try to ascertain the roots of our attraction to forcing our genitals onto unsuspecting women.
Final point: PornHub has only required verification from uploaders since relatively recently, after dozens of women took them to court for hosting their rape videos and after it was widely publicised that there was a good deal of underage rape videos on there. There are still other popular sites such as chatpic.org or videos that happily allow abuse content to circulate without any concern for consent. That's only what's on the open web.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why do you think that? I think it's a good thing for minors to have unrestricted access to porn
My 22 year old son vehemently disagrees. And from what I've read from young men, many agree with him. When I (we?) were kids porn was Playboy or Penthouse or Hustler. Tame by comparison to today. As my son stressed with me, you can find _anything_ via the internet. Anything. ANYTHING. A developing brain can't unsee stuff and it does warp people's perceptions of what is normal. Having said that, I am deeply suspicious…
Multiple issues with this. It starts off with arbitrary definitions of what pornography is ( https://le.utah.gov/~2023/bills/static/SB0287.html ): "nipple of the female breast" You can suck on it when you are a baby, but god forbid you ever take a look at it again before you are married. What's wrong with these people? Even public nudity laws differ from city to city (e.g. in California), so clearly, people aren't al…
>What's wrong with these people? someone told me once "Think of the US less like a secular Western European country and more like a very rich Iran" and that really does help to make sense of a lot of these decisions
Note: You can get married at 16 in Utah. So you can be married but still too young to consume pornography.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Joseph_Smith%27s_wives
How do they block a state like this? Is there a directory where ip addresses can be looked up to see if they fall within these geographic boundaries? What about computers belonging to people visiting the state?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It’s probably about as dangerous to minors as sitting the minor in a room while 2 consenting adults have sex, or taking that minor to a strip club. Does the screen itself prevent trauma? Would you be ok with having your child exposed to either of these? What about a gentle and loving uncle molesting a child in a way not much different from playful wrestling? Wrestling is fine, but we all recognize the molestation is…
> It’s probably about as dangerous to minors as sitting the minor in a room while 2 consenting adults have sex, or taking that minor to a strip club. I think you have not seen the average porn online these days. Its way, way more extreme than this.
Whenever I see people argue that porn is just like sex they always turn out to be minors or young adults who have only ever experienced porn and not intimate relationships.