4 ms·

> looking at hot people is why 90% of users are on instagram. Hehe, this is also why I was confused! And yeah, knowing more context now, I agree re parenting

> looking at hot people is why 90% of users are on instagram. Hehe, this is also why I was confused! And yeah, knowing more context now, I agree re parenting. Just feels like common sense that one needs to treat all social media as at least as bad/unsuitable as a British tabloid.

mrguyorama 3y ago
The problem I'm attempting to approach is that there is plenty of legitimate, genuine, not necessarily harmful to a child content on say youtube and twitch, but these kind of sites are often skirting lines around sexually explicit content for kids, because it's hella profitable. Look at the "youtube kids" nonsense with pregnant elsa, or the "just chatting" and "hot tub" sections of twitch where influencers have quite literally flashed their audience, "by accident", while they make hundreds of thousands of dollars from actual children. When television was invented, there were various societal reasons (ie prudishness) you could be pretty sure that your child watching TV wouldn't be exposed to anything "too heinous" even if the parent put zero effort into parenting. Sure, we don't have to be as absurdly puritan as we were back in the fifties but at the same time maybe "require every parent to be a near expert in childhood development and media consumption and whether your teenager is watching too many boobs in places there maybe shouldn't be boobs" isn't the panacea some people seem to think. At the very least, companies shouldn't be taking money from kids through the medium of softcore porn, and arguably they shouldn't even if they are funded by advertising to those kids instead of like "bits" and donations. I don't really think we should allow "selling softcore porn and sex to teenagers" as a business model. Porn isn't inherently bad, but kids aren't mentally developed enough to make smart decisions about paying for porn. If your suggested solution is "watch every single thing your child does 24/7", that's not a solution, and it won't work for most people. We shouldn't be leaving less privileged families to be freely exploited just because they don't have the time, or resources to properly moderate their children's media consumption. Mom works 80 hours a week, when is she supposed to research how to keep her child from being seduced by sex workers and parasocial relationships?

mrguyorama 3y ago

The problem I'm attempting to approach is that there is plenty of legitimate, genuine, not necessarily harmful to a child content on say youtube and twitch, but these kind of sites are often skirting lines around sexually explicit content for kids, because it's hella profitable. Look at the "youtube kids" nonsense with pregnant elsa, or the "just chatting" and "hot tub" sections of twitch where influencers have quite literally flashed their audience, "by accident", while they make hundreds of thousands of dollars from actual children. When television was invented, there were various societal reasons (ie prudishness) you could be pretty sure that your child watching TV wouldn't be exposed to anything "too heinous" even if the parent put zero effort into parenting. Sure, we don't have to be as absurdly puritan as we were back in the fifties but at the same time maybe "require every parent to be a near expert in childhood development and media consumption and whether your teenager is watching too many boobs in places there maybe shouldn't be boobs" isn't the panacea some people seem to think. At the very least, companies shouldn't be taking money from kids through the medium of softcore porn, and arguably they shouldn't even if they are funded by advertising to those kids instead of like "bits" and donations. I don't really think we should allow "selling softcore porn and sex to teenagers" as a business model. Porn isn't inherently bad, but kids aren't mentally developed enough to make smart decisions about paying for porn. If your suggested solution is "watch every single thing your child does 24/7", that's not a solution, and it won't work for most people. We shouldn't be leaving less privileged families to be freely exploited just because they don't have the time, or resources to properly moderate their children's media consumption. Mom works 80 hours a week, when is she supposed to research how to keep her child from being seduced by sex workers and parasocial relationships?