Live data from Hacker News

X has new rules that officially allow porn

theverge.com

71–80 of 147 posts

Re: X has new rules that officially allow porn

#71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It was one of the two sources I linked. I also linked more in another reply. Feel free to disregard byu, because plenty of other studies agree

was the NIH link there at the beginning or did you edit it in? Either way is fine, but it would be good for you to disclose that as it has an impact on the downvotes and the other comments are received.

None of my comments are edited

Re: X has new rules that officially allow porn

#72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

14 year olds can date other 14 year olds, but it also damages their relationships in the future. Porn is an addiction that is damaging.

If you think that general dating is skewed against men, but also against older women; just watch that one of 14 year old boys.

It is a minor miracle if you date at 14 years old. Just about everything is stacked against you. As a 39 years old I believe that this experience has irrepairably damaged my expectation of interactions.

It's completely OK if you're content with not having any romantic life at 14! But what if you're not?

WRT "damages their relationships in the future" - I can't imagine that, except by these superhuman types who are able to have relations at 14 not really feeling the need of having stable relationship when they in their prime, since they can JIT romantic life out of thin air. In any case, why would you owe anything to your future selves? They got all your stuff without lifting a finger, whereas they didn't lift that finger a bit to help you (since they're obviously in the future).

Re: X has new rules that officially allow porn

#74
I like this, they never had rules explicitly against NSFW, but tech companies love their unstated rules and boundaries and it's nice to have somewhat of a reversal on that, as small as it is.

YouTube, Twitch etc all have such vague standards on NSFW that it's pretty common for streamers to be completely unsure if something that could be perceived as NSFW would be considered as NSFW by the platform. It leads to all sorts of disappointing self-censoring for no logical reason.

Edit: I wonder if the idea behind this is to make it so legitimate accounts feel comfortable labeling their NSFW media properly, so that X can deal with the bot problem by detecting unmarked NSFW media.

Re: X has new rules that officially allow porn

#76
post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It was one of the two sources I linked. I also linked more in another reply. Feel free to disregard byu, because plenty of other studies agree

The link to the NIH paper in the commented I replied to is from the surgical wings of various hospitals in Lahore. In other comments USU extension is Utah State University... which while not BYU has similar influences. The impartiality of these sources is to be brought into question. I would also note there is a significant cultural difference between Utah, Poland (the sources for two other links), Lahore, and the US…

Poland, outside the country side, is quite progressive.

Instead of disregarding the sources because they originate from culturally different, let's attack any points made.

Re: X has new rules that officially allow porn

#77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

14 year olds can date other 14 year olds, but it also damages their relationships in the future. Porn is an addiction that is damaging.

[flagged]

Why do you keep trying to bring me, personally, into this situation? Why are you so obsessed with relationships between teenagers and adults?

Re: X has new rules that officially allow porn

#79
post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are dedicated porn sites like PornHub and friends considered somehow left wing? Or is it just that their NSFW freedom of speech isn't significant because it's not to the benefit of a billionaire that these politicians happen to like.

Dedicated sites have the issue of being targeted from all sides, right wing hates them for porn, left wing hates them for not being able to filter out exploitation, revenge porn etc and then they also have to fight payment processors who, for some ridiculous reason, are still allowed to screw with any business with zero accountability. I think all those factors combine to make them have to be kind of politically neut…

I think you might be drawing a false equivalence. Left wing solutions to things like porn, gambling, drugs, sex work, abortion - is to regulate them so that they are "safe" (harm-reduced) & then find ways to reduce those activities in first place & provide support for people to get out of those activities. Left wing considers these as social problems - not legal.

In contrast, right wing views these as problems to be solved also with the legal system. Ban entirely and enforce with police and criminal sentences. Thus the "hates" I don't think is quite equal between the two.

I will concede for sure though that if you go far enough left the degree of 'hate' levels out between right & left, but the number of people on the two sides is different.

The "silent majority" part of the right wing, the old Reagan coalition for a long time was a pretty sizable part of the Republican party. Meanwhile, the twitter left progressive wing of the Democratic party is not as large compared to the republican religious-conservative right.

If we think to the OG far-left hatred of porn - that was there before revenge-porn etc were even concerns. Those OG left-wing concerns that did want to ban porn - were concerned about how porn disempowers women, can glorify violence, further genders inequality, etc..

As a general left/right difference, the approach is not equal. In the cases where the approach is to ban entirely - there are just different numbers of people in the far left "porn should be banned" camp compared to the "porn is sin" camp.

Post reply on HN