15
Oh fuck off.
Prohibitionists literally cannot contain themselves. It may as well be a religion at this point.
while protecting them from abuse and exploitation
I don't even remotely understand this talking point. Like, seriously, I wonder if these people live on the same planet as I do. How is it "abuse and exploitation" to allow someone, of any age, to access something they actively want to access?
Back in the day there were strip clubs strewn about without much oversight. Us kids wanted to actively access them because we were curious and wanted to see the naked ladies. Do you believe we should have been granted full, unadulterated access to such establishments?
If you honestly believe that, can you give us your full name, age, address and phone number here so we can be sure you are not a malicious person? Don't worry, it's for the children safety, so they can know who they are talking to.
Honestly believe what exactly? I'm not understanding your reply to my comment.
Honestly, I wouldn't see much of a problem with this either. I found it utterly stupid when I was a minor that there were (supposed to be) restrictions on what information I could access, and now that I've been an adult for a while, I don't find it any less stupid and wonder what the big deal would have been.
But whatever the justification for restricting this is, how is it "abuse and exploitation" to let people do the things they actively want to do? Abuse and exploitation are generally things people want not to happen in their lives.
I mean, there is definitely abuse and exploitation happening in online games. Roblox is a well-documented hellhole of predators. But intrusive age verification can't be the answer.
OK, that is probably true. But that wasn't the talking point in the original article. The vast majority of online interactions, no matter where, are not abuse or exploitation.
Ultimately, the Internet is meant to be a worldwide communication medium that allows everyone to communicate with everyone. That's literally its central purpose. If parents think their children aren't developmentally ready to communicate with a wide variety of people, they shouldn't be giving them access to a communication medium whose entire purpose is to enable them to do so.
Agreed.
So you're telling me you have no issue with allowing your kid to go alone to a strip club, letting them see scantily clad women of dubious age dancing for the pleasure of leering men (mostly), the liberal consumption of alcohol and possibly periphenalia of the illegal and damaging sort and the occasional violence committed by and against the customers, while also leaving them in the company of uninhibited individuals not quite sound of mind?
"Sure buddy, you can go to the strip club! Just remember, only look, no touch or the bouncer gonna throw you out! And if you get into a fight with the other customers, hit them over the head with a bottle or nick 'em in the groin! Have fun!"
allowing your kid
Well, I don't have children myself. If I did, I would be able to observe their development and decide for myself which aspects of adult life they are developmentally ready for, and which not; including whether they should have unsupervised access to the Internet. The government doesn't need to be involved in that.
the liberal consumption of alcohol and possibly periphenalia of the illegal and damaging sort and the occasional violence committed by and against the customers, while also leaving them in the company of uninhibited individuals not quite sound of mind
All of those things have nothing to do with access to information, which is what my argument is limited to. I do think it makes sense to have minimum ages for the consumption of alcohol and other drugs in order to prevent young brains from being damaged or becoming physically addicted. Looking at nudity isn't by itself damaging or physically addictive; those other things are.
That's nice, but here's what you miss: neither you nor the government are supposed to be all that can be when it comes to child development.
On one side there's government excess, but on the other there's also parenting excess. As one person, any one parent is not qualified to give their hypothetical child the best education they would deserve or objectively decide the levels of information they would need, appropriate to their age. They simply lack the qualifications.
Your comment would be hailed by anti-vaxxers. "I know better! The government can't force me to vaccinate my children!" Also by domestic abusers. "My daddy beat me with their belt until my bum was bleeding and i turned out just fine! I'll be damned if the government can tell me how to raise my kid!"
Now you might say "I wouldn't do something like that", but what makes you more trustworthy than the government? Being their parent? There's that one case being talked in the media which can be used as an example that parents aren't that trustworthy with the safety of their children.
See, people who really care about kids understand that some government interference is required. That people whose profession is to ensure the wellbeing of children are required. That neither side gets to decide alone what is best for the children.
Your opinion on what is or isn't damaging to your child isn't enough. You aren't trained for that. You haven't studied for that. And the one who suffers if you're wrong is the child who will have to live with your mistakes for the rest of their life.
Government overreach isn't the solution. Government uninvolvement isn't one either. A job of parents is to gather together and be a communal voice which takes the government to task and demands what is best for children.
But we don't have that, do we? Because, as a sad fact, a lot of parents are simply inadequate. Else this kind of BS law wouldn't even be a problem under their watch.
Yes. Do you think children will be traumatized for life by looking at tits? I'd be more concerned with them walking into a slaughterhouse
Depends on the tits. Not all tits are created equal. Inequality among tits is at an all time high. It's not tit for tit, but tit for tat. Great Tits for all!
Btw, i noticed you focused on the tits and not what the environment in which they are displayed represents for those displaying theirs. I admit it's my personal opinion, but I'd say most of the women working in strip clubs don't really do so entirely voluntarily or out of love for the profession. Would it be an exaggeration to say strip clubs are figurative slaughterhouses of young women in terms of exploitation? Perhaps. We might be thinking of different kinds of strip clubs after all...
There is an important point you should consider here, if a kid went there, they would just see a place where women are dancing naked and a bunch of men around; that's it. Kids judge things by face value because they have no prior knowledge. There is something important about this way of assessing reality that we should learn from them, to see beyond our biases and ideologies.
To say that a strip club is a 'slaughterhouse' of young women is to presuppose a misconception that isn't there. Under proper regulations, they wouldn't be more 'forced' to work there than a McDonald's employee would be 'forced' to work at McDonald's. Some of those women love what they do and their work should be valued and respected. If some don't quite enjoy it, a society that embraces sex as part of life and values the importance of sexual work would impose regulations to protect them.
I'm sure there's plenty of important points not being considered here as we each have a goal in mind and tend to ignore what doesn't push it along.
For example, you speak of proper regulations as if they already are the rule instead of the exception.
Our imagination can run wild as much as it wants, while reality remains fixed beyond these written words. And it isn't optimistic in whichever direction it looks to follow.
Can things still be changed? Yes, but it's highly unlikely. The fight happens beyond these tiny walls where better people than you and I make worse mistakes than we can imagine. Because theirs are grounded in reality and affect more than simple thoughts.
EU please stop stupid ideas from my government pls.
this post was submitted on 15 Sep 2026
15 points (100.0% liked)
Gaming
5274 readers
719 users here now
The Lemmy.zip Gaming Community
For news, discussions and memes!
Community Rules
This community follows the Lemmy.zip Instance rules, with the inclusion of the following rule:
- No NSFW content
You can see Lemmy.zip's rules by going to our Code of Conduct.
What to Expect in Our Code of Conduct:
- Respectful Communication: We strive for positive, constructive dialogue and encourage all members to engage with one another in a courteous and understanding manner.
- Inclusivity: Embracing diversity is at the core of our community. We welcome members from all walks of life and expect interactions to be conducted without discrimination.
- Privacy: Your privacy is paramount. Please respect the privacy of others just as you expect yours to be treated. Personal information should never be shared without consent.
- Integrity: We believe in the integrity of speech and action. As such, honesty is expected, and deceptive practices are strictly prohibited.
- Collaboration: Whether you're here to learn, teach, or simply engage in discussion, collaboration is key. Support your fellow members and contribute positively to shared learning and growth.
If you enjoy reading legal stuff, you can check it all out at legal.lemmy.zip.
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS