3 ms·
It's not a perfect analogy, but it goes to show that if you're distributing a product that is harmful to children, then you are responsible for keeping it out o
by jpcfl 3y ago
It's not a perfect analogy, but it goes to show that if you're distributing a product that is harmful to children, then you are responsible for keeping it out of their hands.
> I am not sure how well this will work
Same. Tobacco ID laws don't entirely stop kids from using, but they definitely help, and they create strong incentives for tobacco companies to stop kids from using their products. Tobacco companies have a history of exploiting children for profit, and continue to do when possible.
I'm sure children will continue to be exposed to porn on the internet, but we need to work to minimize that as much as possible, as we've done pretty successfully with tobacco (though vaping is turning that trend around). I'm a free market capitalist, but when it comes to harming children I draw a pretty hard line.
- shrimp_emoji 3y agoI think the harm of porn is heavily theoretical, while that of tobacco is not. Also, unless already addicted, people aren't programmed to impulsively seek out tobacco as a core physiological drive.
- jpcfl 3y ago> I think the harm of porn is heavily theoretical, while that of tobacco is not. For adults, the harm of porn may be less obvious and harder to quantify, but it's not theoretical. There are plenty of data to support the idea that porn is harmful. For children, we don't need data. It's just common sense, and you would be hard-pressed to find a parent who is okay with his child watching content on Porn Hub.