3 ms·

What political speech is the UK blocking? If the 'political speech' is not adult in nature, which is true 99.9% of the time, then it can't/won't be blocked und

What political speech is the UK blocking? If the 'political speech' is not adult in nature, which is true 99.9% of the time, then it can't/won't be blocked under this rule. Unless of course this political speech is happening on a porn site, or a subreddit that has been deemed 18+. Which I can't see a legitimate reason for.

nemomarx 1y ago
It seems like videos of violence are also getting blocked, and I expect eventually stuff about LGBT relationships etc will fall under it. Lots of things are adult that aren't porn.
- flumpcakes 1y ago
  'videos of violence' is quite wide: children shouldn't be watching videos of people being executed by gangs for example. A lot of LGBT content is aimed at adults. I think we should always be clear when we are making statements like this because it causes great stress, a worked example: People will claim that LGBT is under attack because this law potentially affects some LGBT spaces. These spaces will clearly be meant for 18+ audiences and so fall correctly under the law. Then other people see the first group of people, and from their point of view that group is complaining that their 18+ spaces are blocked from children. "Think of the children" drama ensues. It is similar to Steam taking down incest/rape games and people claiming it was an action against LGBT creators. I don't think that's an argument that should ever be made for obvious reasons. I don't think the government, even if it were under the Conservatives, have banning gay spaces on their current agenda.
  - newtonsmethod 1y ago
    Even if you think a lot of the content captured by the ban should be banned, I don't think age restriction mechanisms should be put on it. Talks around sexuality, the mere mention of certain crimes and unrest are being banned by social media companies, all because of this act. Companies seem to be acting out of caution. I simply don't want to be forced to provide my ID / face to be able to read or access politically important news on social media. Some people would be happier if the bill was limited to only pornography: they likely don't think it has a major effect on UK politics.
- mulmen 1y ago
  Why would LGBT relationships be considered any more adult than any other type of relationship?
  - nemomarx 1y ago
    I mean I don't think they should, but they get treated that way all the time in the US.
    - johnisgood 1y ago
      [flagged]
      - mulmen 1y ago
        This is a shockingly ugly and ignorant comment. These are very basic and tiresome arguments that the LGBT community has refuted for centuries. You are the problem. You are very very wrong and it hurts people. Please educate yourself and overcome these flaws in your worldview. > Because they swing their p*nis in front of children during parades and whatnot. I live in Seattle where public nudity is legal. We have nude public beaches. We have a solstice parade with nude cyclists. Nothing about the LGBT community makes them more or less likely to participate in these things that straight people also do because they are things people do. Nudity is not sexual. Wearing a bathing suit is not sexual. Wearing clothes is not sexual. If you find these things sexual it is because you sexualized them in your own mind. > Sounds like a good enough reason to me and it sounds pretty much "adult" to me, unless you think genitalia is not "adult", but then why do we have this porn restriction in the first place if some people could go outside and engage in this type of behavior, in front of anyone, including children? Good enough reason for what? Infringing the rights of citizens who have done nothing wrong? > Maybe they should stop shoving it (their "business") down your throat? It seems to me that the LGBT community has had a lot more forced down their throats in the form of marginalization and outright aggression. Where is the LGBT community forcing anything down your or anyone’s throat? > I do not have a problem with homosexual people. You clearly have a problem with homosexual people. The fact you conflate homosexuality with the LGBT community is even more of a red flag. > I have a problem with them only if they invite me to their bedroom. Inviting you to a bedroom is free speech. You can say no. Simply being lesbian or gay or bi or queer is not an invitation. Personal expression is not an invitation. If you interpret that as an invitation, especially a forced invitation, that is your own ignorance and insecurity showing. > It is none of my business, and please do not try to make it my business by force. That’s right. It’s none of your business. Where or when has the LGBT community forced anything on you? Demanding equal treatment is not forcing you to do anything other than mind your own damn business.

nemomarx 1y ago

It seems like videos of violence are also getting blocked, and I expect eventually stuff about LGBT relationships etc will fall under it. Lots of things are adult that aren't porn.

flumpcakes 1y ago
'videos of violence' is quite wide: children shouldn't be watching videos of people being executed by gangs for example. A lot of LGBT content is aimed at adults. I think we should always be clear when we are making statements like this because it causes great stress, a worked example: People will claim that LGBT is under attack because this law potentially affects some LGBT spaces. These spaces will clearly be meant for 18+ audiences and so fall correctly under the law. Then other people see the first group of people, and from their point of view that group is complaining that their 18+ spaces are blocked from children. "Think of the children" drama ensues. It is similar to Steam taking down incest/rape games and people claiming it was an action against LGBT creators. I don't think that's an argument that should ever be made for obvious reasons. I don't think the government, even if it were under the Conservatives, have banning gay spaces on their current agenda.
- newtonsmethod 1y ago
  Even if you think a lot of the content captured by the ban should be banned, I don't think age restriction mechanisms should be put on it. Talks around sexuality, the mere mention of certain crimes and unrest are being banned by social media companies, all because of this act. Companies seem to be acting out of caution. I simply don't want to be forced to provide my ID / face to be able to read or access politically important news on social media. Some people would be happier if the bill was limited to only pornography: they likely don't think it has a major effect on UK politics.
mulmen 1y ago
Why would LGBT relationships be considered any more adult than any other type of relationship?
- nemomarx 1y ago
  I mean I don't think they should, but they get treated that way all the time in the US.
  - johnisgood 1y ago
    [flagged]
    - mulmen 1y ago
      This is a shockingly ugly and ignorant comment. These are very basic and tiresome arguments that the LGBT community has refuted for centuries. You are the problem. You are very very wrong and it hurts people. Please educate yourself and overcome these flaws in your worldview. > Because they swing their p*nis in front of children during parades and whatnot. I live in Seattle where public nudity is legal. We have nude public beaches. We have a solstice parade with nude cyclists. Nothing about the LGBT community makes them more or less likely to participate in these things that straight people also do because they are things people do. Nudity is not sexual. Wearing a bathing suit is not sexual. Wearing clothes is not sexual. If you find these things sexual it is because you sexualized them in your own mind. > Sounds like a good enough reason to me and it sounds pretty much "adult" to me, unless you think genitalia is not "adult", but then why do we have this porn restriction in the first place if some people could go outside and engage in this type of behavior, in front of anyone, including children? Good enough reason for what? Infringing the rights of citizens who have done nothing wrong? > Maybe they should stop shoving it (their "business") down your throat? It seems to me that the LGBT community has had a lot more forced down their throats in the form of marginalization and outright aggression. Where is the LGBT community forcing anything down your or anyone’s throat? > I do not have a problem with homosexual people. You clearly have a problem with homosexual people. The fact you conflate homosexuality with the LGBT community is even more of a red flag. > I have a problem with them only if they invite me to their bedroom. Inviting you to a bedroom is free speech. You can say no. Simply being lesbian or gay or bi or queer is not an invitation. Personal expression is not an invitation. If you interpret that as an invitation, especially a forced invitation, that is your own ignorance and insecurity showing. > It is none of my business, and please do not try to make it my business by force. That’s right. It’s none of your business. Where or when has the LGBT community forced anything on you? Demanding equal treatment is not forcing you to do anything other than mind your own damn business.