‘Kids Online Safety Act’ will deliberately target trans content, senator admits.::undefined

  • @Mongostein@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    199
    edit-2
    2 years ago

    Of course it will. Then once they have all the trans people rounded up they’ll target the gays, then the blacks, the mexicans, and so on and so forth until everyone’s in camps that isn’t white.

    Republican supporters won’t wake up to this until they start coming after the stupid and obese.

    • Jay
      link
      fedilink
      English
      69
      edit-2
      2 years ago

      You’re not safe even if you’re white. If nothing else they’ll target people who like the color blue just to keep some “enemy” in their sights.

      White people are just further down the list of easy targets. At that point they’ll start by hair color and nitpick their way down from there.

        • @jonne@infosec.pub
          link
          fedilink
          English
          292 years ago

          As long as they don’t have any lefty thoughts. Don’t forget that the Nazis also put unionists, socialists and communists in camps.

          • @sock@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            62 years ago

            huge props to people that didnt blow their brains out at first opportunity going into camps

            idk how i would really react but death sounds a lot nicer than concentration camps

            • @Rilichu@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              9
              edit-2
              2 years ago

              You mean the fact that the biggest initial source of support the Nazis got was from the emerging business class who were scared of the rising influence of labor unions? Can’t imagine why that gets pushed under the bed.

              Not like we had that nearly happen here in the US or anything though. Just don’t look into the Business Plot or that many of the Jan 6thers turned out to be small business tyrants…

              Just remember that the most dangerous Nazis aren’t the skinheads on the corner but the ones on Wall Street.

      • @EzekielJK@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        22 years ago

        Working backwards, we could reasonably expect Italian, Irish, and Polish people. Discrimination really isn’t about the color of your skin if history is anything to go off of.

    • @weew@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      13
      edit-2
      2 years ago

      they’ll never target the stupid, those are the people who will support them no matter what. They’re already trying to demonize intelligence and education.

      the bar for what counts as stupid enough will continue to lower, though.

  • @randon31415@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    902 years ago

    “The bill – endorsed by president Joe Biden…”

    Why in the world would Biden support this Heritage foundation garbage?

    • @Arsenal4ever@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      452 years ago

      ‘Kids Online Safety Act’ will deliberately target trans content, senator admits

      He’s a granddad. We shouldn’t have granddads who can’t work a remote be president. I assume he can’t work a remote.

    • @asteroidnova@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      432 years ago

      This IS Biden. He’s always been a pretty bad human person. The only silver lining is that he’s been better than most recently. He’s a center-right politician just like most Democrats.

      • @assassin_aragorn@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        652 years ago

        This is actually a fantastic example of typical politics, but not in the way you’re imagining. It’s a classic poison pill. Write a bill with something good (protecting children’s privacy online, which I think we’d all agree is good) and then put something unpalatable into it (transphobia and homophobia).

        Someone votes for it, “Why do you hate LGBT people?” Someone votes against it, “Why don’t you want children to have stronger privacy laws on the Internet?”

        It’s exhausting and a lose-lose. That said, I prefer if they don’t vote for it and take heat for “being anti privacy”. You don’t negotiate with people’s rights.

        • @hglman@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          332 years ago

          Is it protecting children? Claims need evidence and rules need tests. Until we do that its fear-based, exploitable control for the sake of control.

          • @primbin@lemmy.one
            link
            fedilink
            English
            92 years ago

            Section 3a of the bill is the part that would be used to target LGBTQ content.

            Sections 4 talks about adding better parental controls which would give general statistics about what their kids are doing online, without parents being able to see/helicopter in on exaxrlt what their kids were looking at. It also would force sites to give children safe defaults when they create a profile, including the ability to disable personalized recommendations, placing limitations on dark patterns designed to manipulate children to stay on platforms for longer, making their information private by default, and limiting others’ ability to find and message them without the consent of children. Notably, these settings would all be optional, but enabled by default for children/users suspected to be children.

            I think the regulations described in section 4 would mostly be good things. They’re the types of settings that I’d prefer to use on my online accounts, at least. However, the bad outweighs the good here, and the content in section 3a is completely unacceptable.

            Funnily enough, I had to read through the bill twice, and only caught on to how bad section 3a was on my second time reading it.

            • @elscallr@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              22 years ago

              I think the regulations described in section 4 would mostly be good things. They’re the types of settings that I’d prefer to use on my online accounts, at least.

              Then put them on your accounts. Any regulation in this area is unacceptable.

          • @assassin_aragorn@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            62 years ago

            I don’t know that it does. If bills and the discourse around them were actually about the stated topic, it would be revolutionary to politics.

        • @AdmiralShat@programming.dev
          link
          fedilink
          English
          13
          edit-2
          2 years ago

          I legitimately can’t fucking stand idiots like you.

          You can agree with the overall or the majority of policy decisions of a political party while still criticizing their individual decisions as people. To think your political party is somehow ‘above it’ or morally just through and through is being willfully ignorant. It’s a level of mental gymnastics that’s outright absurd.

          Again, you can still vote for these people and still believe doing so increases the quality of life. And yes, we can make a distinction that one party isn’t just the ‘lesser of two evils’.

          But holy fuck, seriously. Both sides voted to invade the middle east, both sides vote to increase the military budget, both sides vote to increase their own congressional benefits, and both sides play the game where you need to vote on someone’s bill to get them to vote on yours, both sides have issues with the legal loop holes of bribery, both sides take lobbiest money, etc.

          Just because one is clearly better than the other doesn’t remove them from criticism and doesn’t deny the fact that they are still politicians doing political shit.

          Unstick your head from your ass, ffs

          • @Hackerman_uwu@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            52 years ago

            Dude you are basically Hyde from That 70s Show riffing after a joint trying to dunk on “The Man”. You never have to dog far with losers like you to find the conspiracy theories and alternative facts and we all know form there it’s a Misty mountain hop to alt right malarkey.

            Go sell crazy somewhere else.

            • @Meowoem@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              English
              122 years ago

              Anyone that doesn’t support the party is an evil right wing monster and must be destroyed by any means!

              You’re the crazy and dangerous one here

              • @Hackerman_uwu@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                62 years ago

                Anyone asserting that the party who dog-whsitles Nazis to threaten democracy is ‘just like all the others’ is a dangerous idiot. At best.

  • @AdamEatsAss@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    762 years ago

    “Trans porn must be curropting children because it’s all I watch now and my mind is way stronger than a child’s.” -Marsha Blackburn

  • @Hackerman_uwu@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    652 years ago

    I mean, at this stage you can tell that by the name.

    These deplorables love children so much that they don’t even bat an eye at using child sexual abuse as a political tool while simultaneously turning a blind eye to 300,000 children raped by clergy.

    • Gyoza Power
      link
      fedilink
      English
      42 years ago

      Or children starving because they have to pay for shitty food at school, or children starving and having a bad life because their parents can’t afford to pay for more even if they already work, or children at orphanages…

      Yeah, much like with forbidding abortion (but then never caring whether the no longer-aborted child will have a proper home to live), children are just a political tool.

  • @the_crab_man@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    432 years ago

    It should be the parents’ job to regulate what kind of content their children consume on the internet, not the government’s.

  • Queen HawlSera
    link
    fedilink
    English
    402 years ago

    This isn’t about protecting kids it’s about banning LGBT persons from the internet.

  • @captainlezbian@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    342 years ago

    Yep exactly as we all knew.

    She wants to confine children like I was to the years of confusion and alienation I had to go through. That’s cruel. I should not have had to feel so alone and nobody else should either.

    • SirStumps
      link
      fedilink
      English
      142 years ago

      Kind of like Citizens United, has a better ring than “Politician pay offs”.

  • GreenBottles
    link
    fedilink
    English
    142 years ago

    We need to harm the children to help the children don’t you understand?!!?!?!

    • @average_internet_enjoyer@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      12 years ago

      Yeah the 1st amendment has gone out the window here. (on the other hand, why are they pushing the lgtbtq movement on kids. Kids aren’t smart at all and won’t understand the deeper meaning…)

  • WuTang
    link
    fedilink
    English
    92 years ago

    which is good. kids should not get influenced or make any decision at such age.

    • @Poiar@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      18
      edit-2
      2 years ago

      If you grew up without anything influencing you, you’re either an inanimate object or a cat (those bastards don’t give a fuck)

      Good luck not being influenced by your surroundings. If you feel you haven’t, you’re blind

    • @chrischryse@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      132 years ago

      Ooooo totally because I (straight) was totally influenced by my gay uncle and other gay stuff I’ve seen online 🙄

      While we’re at it we should get rid of cartoons because kids shouldn’t see stuff like someone slowly falling with an umbrella and trying it in real life since they’re influenced.

      Just because someone is exposed to something at a young age doesn’t mean they’ll end up making decisions.

      • WuTang
        link
        fedilink
        English
        32 years ago

        I hardly find the link with trans… same with the argument to “then ban straight content too”. Gay guy doesn’t pretend to be an anime girl .

        trans is about mental disorder, dissociation between mind, body and frustration.

        • @HipHoboHarold@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          22 years ago

          Yall also said the same thing about gay people. It was considered a mental disorder. All of these talking points are recycled, but then just slightly altered to fit trans people instead.

          • WuTang
            link
            fedilink
            English
            12 years ago

            Yall also said the same thing about gay people

            FUCK YOU, I never said that. Can’t you just read what I write.

    • @legion02@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      112 years ago

      I’ve always thought that about religious youth programs. How is that not indoctrination of the youth?

      • @DarthBueller@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        42 years ago

        It is absolutely indoctrination. My youth group pastor spent many years indoctrinating us college-bound youth against the “world.” Evolution, climate change, premarital sex (“ladies, do you want to be like a used piece of gum?”), abortion (“ladies, abortion will make you kill yourself”), porn (“ladies, watching porn will make you unable to ever have an orgasm”), getting pregnant (“Tina is now going to be shamed in front of all of us, let us listen to her impregnated self tearfully apologize to us for having premarital sex and getting all used up”). Fuckers.

    • Cethin
      link
      fedilink
      English
      10
      edit-2
      2 years ago

      So all straight and cis content should be banned too, right, or is it only “degenerate” (to use the word the nazis used) content that should be influencing them?

      (straight cis white man speaking. I don’t have a horse in this race, but I’m sure not going to let people act like they have the moral high ground without them investigating their beliefs themselves.)

        • @rambaroo@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          6
          edit-2
          2 years ago

          Cooll so how exactly will you ban all straight content? You gonna ban stuff like Romeo and Juliet because you’re too lazy to supervise your kid and they might read it?

            • @dragonflyteaparty@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              52 years ago

              Yes, because women were not allowed to act. Another discriminatory practice. What are you suggesting by bringing that up?

              Are you going to answer their questions, btw?

              • @legion02@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                22 years ago

                Was just pointing out how silly the argument is. You gonna ban stuff like because you’re too lazy to supervise your kid and they might read it? Can literally be applied to any content and doubly so when your example has a history of gender-bending.

                I’m personally against banning any of the content because how can people make decisions without knowledge? Gay and trans people exist whether you like it or not, pretending they don’t is just bad parenting.

        • @dragonflyteaparty@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          32 years ago

          How are you going to prevent children from being influenced by any/all of the romantic relationships they see in every day life? If movies/books/ect are so bad, then what would be do with real life examples?

    • @pqdinfo@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      6
      edit-2
      2 years ago

      Removed as a protest against the community’s support for campaigns to bring about the deaths of members of marginalized groups, and opposition to private entities working to prevent such campaigns, together with it’s mindless flaming and downvoting of anyone who disagrees.

    • @HipHoboHarold@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      32 years ago

      Yall said the same thing about some of us being gay. Turns out when used all of the same talking points back then, we were still gay. I was influenced to not be gay, because gay people are disgusting pedophiles who worship Satan, and I ended up gay despite not being a pedophile or worshiping Satan.

    • @CaptFeather@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      22 years ago

      First of all, kids will question their gender and sexuality whether you like it or not - internet or no internet. Secondly, the Internet is a safe haven for lgbtq+ kids and taking away those supportive communities is going to be nothing but harmful. What evidence do you have that exposure to lgbtq+ communities “corrupts” children? I’m guessing none because it just doesn’t. Be better.