4 ms·

I don't get why these filters are needed. I was relatively early to the internet compared to most people (I'm 33 but I grew up on the internet since around the

I don't get why these filters are needed. I was relatively early to the internet compared to most people (I'm 33 but I grew up on the internet since around the age of 7) yet I grew up perfectly fine without needing to be blocked from adult content. A kid seeing a sex scene in something they stumble upon is not going to scar them for life... Additionally I was never forced to use a piece of school equipment that had filtering. The most I experienced filtering was when I, on the rare case, happened to use the computers at the library instead of the ones at home and laughed at/was annoyed by the silly filtering. Much worse than adult content is addictive content that forms obsessive behaviors (things like Tiktok or more lightly social media in general). The other thing to be wary about is when it's possible for a child to give their private information away to someone in a way that can harm themselves. i.e. make sure cameras are non-functional on any child's device. That wasn't an issue when I was a kid but is very much a danger today.

pariainterpares 4y ago
Porn addicts might need filters like these.
the-printer 4y ago
I…I…I… Shame on people who would even fathom forbidding access to certain content on the devices that they likely pay for, internet that they pay for, homes that they pay for, and to children who they raise. Shame.
- a1369209993 4y ago
  Exactly. Child abuse is never okay, especially if the perpetrators think they have a legitimate rationalization for it.
- code_runner 4y ago
  The gall people have to make their own choices… and they won’t even affect me? Appalling.
culopatin 4y ago
“I don’t need it so no one needs it” is the summary of your post. Not a very constructive statement, and you’re not asking a question either, because if you actually wanted to know you would’ve looked it up, or if you’re so in tune with the needs of others, you’d already know. So what sort of conversation are you aiming to have?
- mlindner 4y ago
  I'm saying all children don't need it. Unless you can come up with a specific reason that would make it so one would.
  - code_runner 4y ago
    Then don’t get the addon? You’re not really saying anything interesting or constructive. I’m not sure why people wanting something you don’t would throw your world into a state of chaos.
_8j50 4y ago
It's called consent. For a minor, their parent or guardian must consent to show them adult or other traumatizing content. Despite your personal experience, parents and guardians ultimately have the right,authority and responsibility to do their best to ensure the well being of a minor under their care which could mean no porn or even no meat in their diet. You don't have to agree. > Much worse than adult content is addictive content that forms obsessive behaviors... There is literally nothing more addicting than porn. Not only that but the long term social and behavioral issues that result from porm addiction are far more harmful than for example cocaine or lsd (which isn't addictive). But let's say porn is not harmful or addictive, showing porn to people against their consent is a form of sexual abuse much like exposing yourself in public is (despite nudity laws). It boils down to the fact that biologically speaking naked people arouse a sexual reaction and sexual interactions of any kind must be between consenting parties. Period. This isn't about policing morality but consent and it is a shame that it is neccesary to begin with.
- DaiPlusPlus 4y ago
  > There is literally nothing more addicting than porn. Citation? > biologically speaking naked people arouse a sexual reaction Have you never been to a nudist beach? ------- > not [...] morality but consent "morality" is not distinct from consent: it's more that your/my/our position on sexual morality is grounded in individual consent. "morality" as a word is not shorthand for (Western) Christian or Victorian traditional attitudes and prejudices.
  - idontknowifican 4y ago
    people really loose sight of “normal habits” when talking about sex. there’s this intense religious shame, so the folks with the most fucked up libidos assume everyone must be like them. i see posts like this as a confession, much less an anecdote
    - gcr 4y ago
      as someone who used to have exactly this sort of internalized shame, i think you've hit the nail on the head 100%. let's look at the statement: "biologically speaking, naked bodies arouse a sexual reaction". i'm wary of this way of thinking. here's one possible consequence: "anyone who chooses to be naked around me is trying to interact in a sexual way" when boiled down, the same root of thought leads to dark conclusions, like - "she was asking for it because she wore revealing clothing" - "i was sexually aroused and therefore couldn't control myself"

pariainterpares 4y ago

Porn addicts might need filters like these.

the-printer 4y ago

I…I…I… Shame on people who would even fathom forbidding access to certain content on the devices that they likely pay for, internet that they pay for, homes that they pay for, and to children who they raise. Shame.

a1369209993 4y ago
Exactly. Child abuse is never okay, especially if the perpetrators think they have a legitimate rationalization for it.
code_runner 4y ago
The gall people have to make their own choices… and they won’t even affect me? Appalling.

culopatin 4y ago

“I don’t need it so no one needs it” is the summary of your post. Not a very constructive statement, and you’re not asking a question either, because if you actually wanted to know you would’ve looked it up, or if you’re so in tune with the needs of others, you’d already know. So what sort of conversation are you aiming to have?

mlindner 4y ago
I'm saying all children don't need it. Unless you can come up with a specific reason that would make it so one would.
- code_runner 4y ago
  Then don’t get the addon? You’re not really saying anything interesting or constructive. I’m not sure why people wanting something you don’t would throw your world into a state of chaos.

_8j50 4y ago

It's called consent. For a minor, their parent or guardian must consent to show them adult or other traumatizing content. Despite your personal experience, parents and guardians ultimately have the right,authority and responsibility to do their best to ensure the well being of a minor under their care which could mean no porn or even no meat in their diet. You don't have to agree. > Much worse than adult content is addictive content that forms obsessive behaviors... There is literally nothing more addicting than porn. Not only that but the long term social and behavioral issues that result from porm addiction are far more harmful than for example cocaine or lsd (which isn't addictive). But let's say porn is not harmful or addictive, showing porn to people against their consent is a form of sexual abuse much like exposing yourself in public is (despite nudity laws). It boils down to the fact that biologically speaking naked people arouse a sexual reaction and sexual interactions of any kind must be between consenting parties. Period. This isn't about policing morality but consent and it is a shame that it is neccesary to begin with.

DaiPlusPlus 4y ago
> There is literally nothing more addicting than porn. Citation? > biologically speaking naked people arouse a sexual reaction Have you never been to a nudist beach? ------- > not [...] morality but consent "morality" is not distinct from consent: it's more that your/my/our position on sexual morality is grounded in individual consent. "morality" as a word is not shorthand for (Western) Christian or Victorian traditional attitudes and prejudices.
- idontknowifican 4y ago
  people really loose sight of “normal habits” when talking about sex. there’s this intense religious shame, so the folks with the most fucked up libidos assume everyone must be like them. i see posts like this as a confession, much less an anecdote
  - gcr 4y ago
    as someone who used to have exactly this sort of internalized shame, i think you've hit the nail on the head 100%. let's look at the statement: "biologically speaking, naked bodies arouse a sexual reaction". i'm wary of this way of thinking. here's one possible consequence: "anyone who chooses to be naked around me is trying to interact in a sexual way" when boiled down, the same root of thought leads to dark conclusions, like - "she was asking for it because she wore revealing clothing" - "i was sexually aroused and therefore couldn't control myself"