2 ms·

> children with shitty parents deserve as much safety and support as they can get too. I had an abusive caregiver as a child and I can confidently say that age

> children with shitty parents deserve as much safety and support as they can get too. I had an abusive caregiver as a child and I can confidently say that age-gating websites wouldn't have done shit to help me. The way to protect these children is through the family court and foster care systems, which are both seriously under-resourced and overwhelmed.

Dylan16807 22d ago
There's different kinds of shitty and they didn't mean that kind.
- pishpash 22d ago
  Then don't use the shitty to justify what to do with the not really shitty. It's a logical fallacy.
  - Dylan16807 22d ago
    Nobody did that. When they said "shitty" they meant the specific kind relevant to the rules they were discussing.
crtified 21d ago
I had an abusive stepfather who began seriously hitting me when I was 6. No change to any family court system or foster care system would've changed that a single whit. Those may be the primary factors you've settled upon for yourself and others in your specific view, but were we to adopt that as "The Way" (to protect children from intergenerational harm), then we'd be leaving great swathes of children in harm's way for whom authorities like those aren't even a part of the picture. That man was always going to hit people. Because he was mercilessly hit as a kid himself. And it was baked into the culture of the country. And because society had, by that time, broken my young mother down with a chain of weird family dysfunction, sexual abuse, naturally leading to school failure, turfing out of society, and then mental health issues, young pregnancy, married, divorced by 21. So y'know, she wasn't available to protect me. Nobody was. Nobody was ever going to call any court or tell any authority. It's society, and it's many many layers deep. "Let's spin up extra bureaucracy, to increase our technical efficiency at rooting out the issue" is, I am sorry to say, never going to solve more than a small portion. It is society we need to change.

Dylan16807 22d ago

There's different kinds of shitty and they didn't mean that kind.

pishpash 22d ago
Then don't use the shitty to justify what to do with the not really shitty. It's a logical fallacy.
- Dylan16807 22d ago
  Nobody did that. When they said "shitty" they meant the specific kind relevant to the rules they were discussing.

crtified 21d ago

I had an abusive stepfather who began seriously hitting me when I was 6. No change to any family court system or foster care system would've changed that a single whit. Those may be the primary factors you've settled upon for yourself and others in your specific view, but were we to adopt that as "The Way" (to protect children from intergenerational harm), then we'd be leaving great swathes of children in harm's way for whom authorities like those aren't even a part of the picture. That man was always going to hit people. Because he was mercilessly hit as a kid himself. And it was baked into the culture of the country. And because society had, by that time, broken my young mother down with a chain of weird family dysfunction, sexual abuse, naturally leading to school failure, turfing out of society, and then mental health issues, young pregnancy, married, divorced by 21. So y'know, she wasn't available to protect me. Nobody was. Nobody was ever going to call any court or tell any authority. It's society, and it's many many layers deep. "Let's spin up extra bureaucracy, to increase our technical efficiency at rooting out the issue" is, I am sorry to say, never going to solve more than a small portion. It is society we need to change.