51
[Discussion] How do you feel about age verification on Porn sites?
(lemmings.world)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 20 Dec 2023
51 points (77.4% liked)
Privacy
31609 readers
316 users here now
A place to discuss privacy and freedom in the digital world.
Privacy has become a very important issue in modern society, with companies and governments constantly abusing their power, more and more people are waking up to the importance of digital privacy.
In this community everyone is welcome to post links and discuss topics related to privacy.
Some Rules
- Posting a link to a website containing tracking isn't great, if contents of the website are behind a paywall maybe copy them into the post
- Don't promote proprietary software
- Try to keep things on topic
- If you have a question, please try searching for previous discussions, maybe it has already been answered
- Reposts are fine, but should have at least a couple of weeks in between so that the post can reach a new audience
- Be nice :)
Related communities
Chat rooms
-
[Matrix/Element]Dead
much thanks to @gary_host_laptop for the logo design :)
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
Prohibition leads to black and grey markets, where what is produced and consumed is frequently even more corrupted and dangerous/risky in its acquisition and delivery than whatever you think of the corollaries in the lit markets. It may also drive more deviant and destructive behavior where they may hide their actions and produce more shame and be labeled criminals.
My only divergence would be that the education planning starts at each individual family level rather than large-scale massive education buracracy, which is what we have now and is failing badly to produce good results.
Maybe once that first order family circle is built strongly, you can begin to expand the circle of influence to extended family, neighbors, friends and community.
I disagree. Family education is very important, but it's not something you can rely on. Just to point out some major problem:
I am fine with you disagreeing and forging your own path. I mean that sincerely. I would like to follow mine. We can each see how it works out.
Just please don't force me to support your approach, financially or otherwise, by using the state/gov or others as a proxy for your personal wishes, and I will agree to the same, as I already do.
Edit: Also, do not use those same levers of power to form a cartel that excludes my family, or those who choose to do it this way from participating in public life. We can all get along with tolerance and respect, despite our differences.
Upvote for the civil discourse and laying out your reasoning.
We are just discussing here. Why are you assuming I'm trying to force something into you or your family? How would I do it?
I'm sorry, I think I'm missing the point of your answer. It's a social and we're just discussing opinions, nobody can decide anything about anything.
I know we are discussing it. I appreciate the discussion! You have been civil and a good conversationalist presenting your views with thoughtfulness so far. That's rare on the socials sometimes.
I mean to drive at the manner of how you would accomplish your stated goals above. By voluntary enrollment of those interested who may agree with your approach? With the ability for those like myself who may live near you and who feel, think, believe and act differently to opt-out? Or by compulsory taxation, or other compulsory inclusion of my family in these services you pitch, with penalty of financial, legal, or violent force? For instance, no ability to peacefully remain in my location of birth and/or circumstance, but to opt out and to choose my own path AND choose not to pay for or participate in your scheme should I choose not to. Would that be acceptable?
I hope you can see the parallels I'm drawing to most regions in the world. I am compelled now to submit property tax and other tax for a similar model to what you describe above against my will, under threats, leading up to and including death, should I refuse to pay them, even if I choose not to participate in my neighbors preferred model. So thus under duress and extortion.
In this scenario, you (my neighbors) would not threaten me or use violence directly of course, but instead would use proxies with more manpower and weapons plus the false cloak of legitimacy or law to do it, which is cowardly and unjust. Beurocratic, legal and police action, again, up to and including violence, imprisonment and death force me to to comply to something I disagree with philosophically, morally, spiritually and logically. Today. Not hypothetically.
So what I'm saying is that I'm more than happy for you and yours to do things your way, even if I chose a different way. I wouldn't compel you to fund or support my way. I would request you afford me the same courtesy and we could coexist in harmony, or at least not conflict, even if we disagree on approach.
This is not how the vast majority of modern society functions today. Which is why I'm curious about how you would approach your hypothetical model.
edit: spelling, clarity, fat fingers