AGC said:Ag with kids said:It is not clear. What major organizations define porn use as an addiction? Or are they all liberal (oh sorry, "conservative" according to DI if I'm using his newly defined pronouns correctly)...AGC said:fka ftc said:AGC said:fka ftc said:
Still not making the connection to HB 1181. I did not read it as promoting porn to children nor causing them to look at it. Maybe you read it differently.
Seems to me like parenting is the mechanism to encourage children not to send and lead them to a path of righteousness. Not allowing for suits to be brought against companies providing legal content to adults, content quite clearly covered under the 1st amendment.
You're thinking about the world as it was 30 years ago as is every, 'be a good parent' person. Porn is not a playboy under your dad's bed anymore. Magazines aren't adductive and easy to carry around like what exists now, nor did porn have nearly the same effect on the brain as instant video and unlimited ease of access.
Age verification with ID is the first step on the only reasonable path. If someone's worried about being anonymous while watching strangers have sex they should ask themselves why. The companies already know who you are, they don't need to dox you nor do they care. If you're afraid of your family, work, or friend finding out that's usually an indication that you shouldn't be doing it.
I have a 13yo son. Appreciate the lecture on how porn works in the modern era.
Age verification is absolutely the lamest, weakest, absolutely ineffective way to limit the access.
Lots of things on the web have age verification and none of it is "effective".
Addiction to porn is VASTLY over dramatized. It's a convenient excuse for young folk and hard up husbands who get caught by the wife looking at dirty picks and choking their chicken. "It's not my fault honey, it's much purn addiction!"
Age verification is operating in an outdated paradigm: we all agree on that. Hence the bill that you're actively against since it's reasonable (government required ID) without being intrusive (all the porn sites know who you are anyways as do their marketers). So why is it such a big deal? Sure, kids can use their parents but that's no different than stealing a credit card or using a fake ID like 30 years ago. The law isn't to prevent any and all access. At least present a reasonable argument aside from, 'any regulation is bad.' Might as well pretend that modern day fentanyl is the same as marijuana when you were in high school.
The research is pretty clear. Porn use is like drug use in how it affects your brain. Impedes long term decision making and increases risk taking as it rewires it. It'd be nice if you pro-porn people would just be honest and say you want easy ubiquitous access. That's all the group fighting it is really working for. There's no credit card involved here since you're the product for these sites anyways.
No, it's quite clear. We have brain scans that prove the long term effects - there's no functional difference between the brain of a habitual porn user and heroin user. That's why it's hard to take you and fka seriously - the science doesn't actually support your beliefs. You're thinking is outdated and outmoded.
Dunno why y'all think unhindered access to watch other people have sex is a 'good' thing though. Y'all seem to not actually be able to defend that. Some vague notion of freedom and liberty isn't justification for it - it offers no tangible good for any participant or observer.
Could you please provide some links to the studies that support your view?
