Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

PornHub blocks users in Utah, cites state’s age verification law

kslnewsradio.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

461–470 of 1001 posts

Re: PornHub blocks users in Utah, cites state’s age verification law

#461

Post by brookst »

robertlagrant wrote: post #385
brookst wrote: post #244

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, we jail parents who abuse their children. And if viewing pornography is so dangerous to children that it justifies restricting speech for everyone, surely that is such a compelling interest that we should punish parents who allow it to happen. Which is all to say, no. None of this is workable because none of this is about protecting children from life-altering harm. This law is intended to create a liabikity tr…

> it justifies restricting speech for everyone I don't believe everyone considers pornography to be speech, let alone practices it as speech.

Well, the US Supreme Court considers pornography to be speech[1].

And it turns out that restrictions on speech are unconstitutional independently of whether you want to exercise that particular speech. If a law is passed prohibiting discussion of mohair rugs, it infringes on my free speech even if I have no intention of discussing mohair rugs.

1. https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=101895573599950...

Re: PornHub blocks users in Utah, cites state’s age verification law

#462

Post by Brendinooo »

sophacles wrote: post #423
padobson wrote: post #375

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?

How about: If you don't want your kids to see it, that's on you. Either accept that you are a shitty parent who can't raise children to your satisfaction, or get better at parenting. Don't force consequences on me just because you are incompetent.

We don't apply this principle to something like peanut allergies. "If your kid touches a peanut, that's on you as a parent"? No, people recognized that peanuts are harmful enough to a certain segment of the population that it's worth making changes, even changes that might inconvenience others.

Besides, I'm not sure why you think that parents are able to be 100% in control of things that their children see/eat/etc. Should we legalize nudity on billboards, and would your suggestion then be to "simply drive on different roads"?

Re: PornHub blocks users in Utah, cites state’s age verification law

#463

Post by megous »

theclansman wrote: post #209
berkes wrote: post #193

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But is pornography dangerous for minors? Has it been researched? What "dangers" are there? Do these apply to all age groups of "minors"?

I feel like in our society we're always beta testing everything before researching its effects, shouldn't we research the effects of internet pornography in kids before allowing them unlimited access to it? I think the same thing should be done with social media. There's obviously a thin line where you have to use common sense (where do we start and where do we stop?) but the consensus has always been that this is ad…

> "shouldn't we research the effects of internet pornography in kids before allowing them unlimited access to it?"

Is that a rhethorical question? People of all ages capable of using it already have mostly unlimited access to the internet (and thus to porn). Sans parents understanding the internet more these days, and trying to set limits and failing.

Question should be whether somebody should do research before trying to limit access state/country wide in various ways. Ie. bigotry vs some informed decision making.

Re: PornHub blocks users in Utah, cites state’s age verification law

#464

Post by [deleted] »

bumby wrote: post #372
hhjinks wrote: post #208

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think it's perfectly fine to assume that pornography might warp a child's view of sex and intimacy. The solution shouldn't be to force people to identify themselves, though. Parents have all the tools they need to shield their children from pornhub, if they so wish.

I know HN tends toward the libertarian slant, but this same perspective can be applied to all kinds of ills that are regulated, from smoking to driving. This falls into the common refrain about "what do we do with kids who don't have responsible parents?" I'm not sure just letting the chips fall where they may when it comes to kids who got a shit roll of the dice when it comes to parents is a great societal solution.

[deleted]

Re: PornHub blocks users in Utah, cites state’s age verification law

#465

Post by nathan_compton »

sophacles wrote: post #423
padobson wrote: post #375

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?

How about: If you don't want your kids to see it, that's on you. Either accept that you are a shitty parent who can't raise children to your satisfaction, or get better at parenting. Don't force consequences on me just because you are incompetent.

I'm against forcing people to provide their ID in order to see pornography. Indeed, I am, if anything, supportive of adults being able to understand and fully experience their erotic lives, as long as no one is harmed, and to do so anonymously where possible.

But your attitude is, in a historical context, weird. At basically no point in history has it been the case that the sole responsibility for the well being of children lay entirely with the parents. If you look, for instance, at the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (see the Parenthood article section Parental Responsibilities), you will see, for instance, that throughout most of western history and for most people, there is an explicit or implicit understanding that it is, in fact, the parents who operate as stewards of children _on behalf of_ society and that the ultimate locus of responsibility for the security and well being of children is the society at large, not the parents. This is why, for instance, the state is typically understood to have the right to remove a child from the home of an abusive or neglectful parent. Given that understanding, there is a commensurate power in society to make rules which may protect children and in our particular historical moment these rules take the form of laws at multiple levels of government.

It places a powerful (and disordered) burden on parents to make them _exclusively_ responsible for the safety and wellbeing of their children.

Re: PornHub blocks users in Utah, cites state’s age verification law

#466

Post by dennis_jeeves1 »

ActorNightly wrote: post #212
theclansman wrote: post #182

Just the fact that pornography is being taken seriously as something that's dangerous for minors is a good thing really.

Except despite the vast amounts of counter-evidence, people still are somehow dumb enough to think that hiding stuff from kids works (drugs, guns, porn, e.t.c). Porn is absolutely fine for kids to watch as long as the parents properly contextualize it. The issue is that somehow societally accepted that its taboo to talk to your kid about sex at an early age, and plenty of otherwise normal parents are embarrassed to d…

I have even wondered why it's that big a deal for many people. I guess idle minds have nothing better to do other than think about solely sex, porn, food or drugs. And the only way they can prevent themselves from overindulging in these things is to have an external authority figure like the government impose strict restrictions on them.

Personal observation: most people just do fine if they are exposed to porn as kids. In fact they are more well-rounded, and intellectually mature compared to their peers who were never exposed to those things early on, just like all other topics.

Re: PornHub blocks users in Utah, cites state’s age verification law

#467

Post by AlecSchueler »

Aachen wrote: post #432
AlecSchueler wrote: post #266

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're equating porn with sexuality. I'm a grown man and I find most of what's on the front page of PornHub to be deeply disturbing. I see racism, misogyny, incest, even simulated assault. In a world where sexual assault is so common I think we need to seriously reconsider what we're consuming and what we're normalising by calling this stuff harmless. And I don't get what you're suggesting in saying hiding stuff does…

Then we should also ban any material that contains violence until there are no more homicides. Just watching, or even enacting (as in violent games), violence doesn't make them violent beings. Why would this other outlet lead to more real-world sexual assault? I understand why one might think it a priori (without having evidence either way), but we do have evidence: the reality we live in where, to my knowledge, it h…

To respond to your edit here are some general statistics about sexual assault in the US: https://legaljobs.io/blog/sexual-assault-statistics/

In terms of increase with the availability of pornography, take a look at this chart: https://www.statista.com/statistics/191137/reported-forcible...

You can see that the number of rape reports have almost doubled since the invention of web pornography.

Re: PornHub blocks users in Utah, cites state’s age verification law

#468

Post by crmd »

wkat4242 wrote: post #363
jen20 wrote: post #256

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I imagine teenage drinking is much easier these days thanks to the above When I was in (secondary) school in the UK, we could get served beer in the pub at lunchtime while wearing school uniform! Doesn't get much easier than that!

In Holland beer and wine was allowed from 16 years of age and only spirits were 18+. Unfortunately a recent conservative government switched it all to 18+. I'm much older but I think 16 is old enough for a beer. I didn't when I were that age but I don't begrudge them their beer. And it's not like the law will stop it from happening anyway.

People in the US seem to be at higher risk than Europeans of catastrophic problem drinking (where alcohol use leads to a loss of employment, housing, marriage / social connections, etc).

I have seen this with several European friends who relocated to the US and found their relationship with alcohol turning dark.

My personal theory is that life in the states may be on average more stressful than in Europe, perhaps due to lack of healthcare, at-will employment, etc., and this life pressure causes people here to be more at risk of self-medication problem drinking.

Re: PornHub blocks users in Utah, cites state’s age verification law

#469

Post by mrweasel »

Barrin92 wrote: post #349
wakannai wrote: post #328

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

Isn't the US still the world largest producer of porn?

Honestly we (Europeans) make the same mistake the Americans do in regards to us, we view the US as one homogeneous mass. The difference between states seems like it's often as great as between European nations. I'd be less concerned about the laws of the individual state, if companies did target the lowest common denominator for the entire US, just to make business easier.

PornHub is in my mind doing the right thing, blocking the state that's causing issues.

Re: PornHub blocks users in Utah, cites state’s age verification law

#470

Post by kevin_thibedeau »

taylodl wrote: post #332
whats_a_quasar wrote: post #269

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This happens to me at self-checkout at Safeway. I guess I can get somebody to come and check my ID, but seems unnecessary.

Right? Why can't you scan your ID and then be prompted what information to share with the system, like age? I scan my ID, the system asks to retrieve age information, it retrieves it, now I can proceed to scan my alcohol. No human interaction required. If the person manning the self-checkout operations thinks you look awfully young to be buying alcohol then they can always demand to see your ID. Simple.

Lots of places have mandatory ID checks regardless of appearance.
Post reply on HN