Transnational Thursday is a thread for people to discuss international news, foreign policy or international relations history. Feel free as well to drop in with coverage of countries you’re interested in, talk about ongoing dynamics like the wars in Israel or Ukraine, or even just whatever you’re reading.
PaperclipPerfector
2mo ago
(text post)
477 thread views
Transnational Thursday for September 12, 2024
- 8
- 4
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Notes -
It's also simply a solved problem: For small children, parents should fully monitor their screen time anway; For older children, it's trivial to set up a device with a whitelist; And for teens who are old/smart enough to get past these filters, just watching porn is the least of a parent's worry. In particular it's preposterous that the west claims it's impossible to keep teens from having physical sex, while simultaneously demanding that they can only access porn with 18.
The children angle is always, always, always BS. Any child old enough to have interest in b00bz and unfiltered access to the internet will find it. Especially in a Western country where internet access is everywhere. Ones with filtered access will likely find it too (they have friends, etc.) Shit I grew up before internet and I had access to porn as a teen too (pretty shitty quality, but still). Nobody will be hurt by it. Parents who are more honest just say they support this shit because they are lazy and want the government to do it so they won't have to educate their children and deal with it (yes, I have had multiple real people tell me that). But again, that's not why it's being done from the top. It's to establish a foothold for censoring any information on the internet. If we already have a setup for censoring porn, why not use it for censoring "vaccine misinformation" or "election misinformation" or "untrustworthy sites spreading foreign propaganda that threatens our democracy"? It's always has been, is and will be about control over information. Children is just a convenient excuse to get the foot in the door.
More options
Context Copy link
It's not about the children (it never is).
It's about making sure that if a young man wants to experience sex with a woman, he needs to buy it from her, preferably with his life.
Traditionalists and progressives are in agreement that this is how it should be; that is why it keeps coming up.
Porn puts limits on how much women can charge men for sex- in other words, it [by definition] devalues women. It's also very important that teenage women be kept from having sex, because women (especially the most desirable ones) merely wanting sex for the sake of sex (or worse, putting an explicit price on it) in opposition to Polite Society's attempts to make sure they're exploiting their only inherent value as hard as is humanly possible (rather than treating it as a fun toy) causes that scheme to break down.
People who see men and women as more equal in worth don't generally have as much of a problem with sex or porn, but they're too busy being distracted by said sex and porn to enforce that former consensus.
(It's probably noteworthy that the race of people whose women look like teenagers for longer than average is more liberal than average with their sexual politics- mainly thinking about Japan and Thailand here but the others are kind of like that too. People blame Abramic religions for this, but I think it's just because Asian women don't hit as much of a wall for a decline in looks, so they don't have to be as insecure about bagging a man before losing them, so their society is less neurotic about it.)
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link