• JadenSmith@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    118
    ·
    5 months ago

    How could American politicians be so against pornography, when so many keep getting caught with prostitutes?

    Typical. Rules for thee I guess.

    • Jesus@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      71
      ·
      5 months ago

      They pander to the Christian nationalists for their votes. They just want power, they don’t actually hold those values.

    • sp3ctr4l@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      24
      ·
      5 months ago

      Because we live in a ravenous corrupt oligarchy barely able to keep the appearance of a functioning democracy.

    • Virkkunen@fedia.io
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      13
      ·
      5 months ago

      There’s probably a name for this just like the “author’s barely disguised fetish”. Usually when you see politicians campaigning this hard on topics like those, it’s probably because they themselves are doing it

    • rottingleaf@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      5 months ago

      Pornography and prostitution are different.

      One is information, allowing you to dream (maybe of stupid things), another is in the physical world.

      I don’t want to think a lot of these parallels, but I’ve noticed that people close to actual government bureaucracies are in general very sceptical of imagined things against physical.

      Among other things, consuming pornography doesn’t make you feel powerful, while a prostitute is a real human working for you.

      Also 30s’ propaganda had traits clearly aimed at, eh, sexually dissatisfied youth.

      So maybe it’s just about feeling their own power, and maybe it’s about returning that device of affecting minds. I dunno

    • Uriel238 [all pronouns]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      5 months ago

      It’s entirely about loyalty and institutionalized stratification. Laws are meant to constrain those outside the party, while those within the party are given a lot of latitude.

    • masquenox@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      5 months ago

      when so many keep getting caught with prostitutes sex workers?

      FTFY. If you’ve ever worked for a living, you’re a prostitute - just like the rest of us.

    • KillingTimeItself@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      5 months ago

      because they’re conservative, and that’s a thing cons do for some reason. google “i know it when i see it” to get some history on how batshit insane it gets.

    • Drusas@kbin.run
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      5 months ago

      The politicians who are against it are the vast minority, they’re just extremely vocal and irritating.

  • Kiernian@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    82
    ·
    5 months ago

    For those wondering about the upswing here:

    If the age verification movement goes unchecked, it’s possible that you could be forced to tie your government ID to much of your online activity, Gillmor says. Some civil rights groups fear it could usher in a new era of state and corporate surveillance that would transform our online behaviour.

    “This is the canary in the coalmine, it isn’t just about porn,” says Evan Greer, director of Fight for the Future, a digital rights advocacy group. Greer says age verification laws are a thinly veiled ploy to impose censorship across the web. A host of campaigners warn that these measures could be used to limit access not just to pornography, but to art, literature and basic facts about sex education and LGBTQ+ life.

    • sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      33
      ·
      5 months ago

      Yup, and this is exactly why I plan to use a VPN once my state starts enforcing this law. There’s no way I’m going to show ID to any website unless they absolutely need it. There are very few websites where that’s necessary, so I’ll just use a VPN to a neighboring state (or even to Canada) instead of complying with that nonsense.

      I already have to worry about identity theft, I don’t want to make that even easier…

      • KillingTimeItself@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        5 months ago

        i’ve been toying with the idea of hosting deep web porn front ends. Not sure how legal it would be. But morally, you’d be on pretty good grounds.

        I mean what 13 year old is using tor browser lmao.

      • toynbee@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        5 months ago

        I don’t think there’s any website where it is necessary, excluding ones that adhere to unjustified laws.

        • sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          9
          ·
          5 months ago

          I’ve had to submit it for remote work authorization, travel on a cruise line (not required, but strongly recommended), and to prove my identify for a web host when their automated check failed (that was the fastest way). So yeah, pretty rare, but still a thing.

    • m4xie
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      5 months ago

      It’s not a canary in the coal mine for censoring LGBT information and community, most of the proposed bills outright state that any LGBT related content is covered.

    • Mediocre_Bard@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      5 months ago

      I’m going to link my ID and look up the most mind blowingly vile, while remaining legal, porn. If they want to talk to me about it, then I am going to make them describe each video before I “remember” what I saw, after which point I will refuse to acknowledge it as porn.

      Sure, it’s dumb, but it’s fun dumb.

  • katy ✨
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    62
    ·
    5 months ago

    it’s not a war on porn; it’s a war on lgbtq people and content. the people pushing for these bills have straight up said that.

    • BreadstickNinja@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      40
      ·
      5 months ago

      It’s a war on both, but especially on LGBTQ people. The fundamentalists are anti-porn in the same way that they are anti-sex in other ways, like opposing sex education.

      But it is absolutely part of their strategy to define anything LGBTQ-related as sexual or pornographic, and therefore to criminalize any public visibility of LGBTQ people.

    • Persen@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      13
      ·
      5 months ago

      It’s a war on any free speech, they don’t like. They could just add more restrictions for certain people.

      • sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        edit-2
        5 months ago

        Exactly. They want to know who is saying what, which is why they’re making these services ask for ID. It’s about control, and “protecting children” is the excuse.

        It’s the same reason they’re trying to ban cryptocurrencies like Monero (private, non-traceable transactions), end-to-end encryption, copyright circumvention tech, etc. They want backdoors to access all the information under the guise of “security,” but really it’s about control.

        Screw all of it. Resist at every turn, and hopefully they’ll violate your rights so you can sue them (with help from groups like the ACLU) and force a policy reversal. That’s the most effective tool we’ve got.

    • rottingleaf@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      5 months ago

      It’s not a war, it’s a safari.

      I mean, other than surveillance and control, this allows them to feel their power.

  • ColdWater@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    31
    ·
    5 months ago

    So USA slowly becoming China now? What’s next VPN users will face jail time?

    • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      15
      ·
      5 months ago

      Too many American corporations rely on VPNs for that to happen. The last thing politicians want is to piss off their corporate masters.

      • sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        5 months ago

        They mostly use self-hosted VPNs, not your regular, everyday VPN like Mullvad or Proton VPN. So they’re not going to ban the tech, but maybe they’ll try to ban the public services.

        I already host my own, so they’ll have no power over me. Even if they successfully prevent me from making a VPN, I have other options (SOCKS proxies, SSH tunnels, etc).

    • GladiusB@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      5 months ago

      Fuck that. My VPN keeps my information safe. It’s a basic goddamn right. There ain’t no way they are taking it without me knowing about it and saying it’s ok. It may not be the best way, but it’s an easy effective way to stop most people trying to scam information.

      • rottingleaf@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        10
        ·
        5 months ago

        You can’t hide forever and eventually you’ll be cornered and will have to fight back. It’s always better to have the initiative in choosing the field of battle. If you hide until you are cornered, it’s your enemy who has that initiative.

      • sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        edit-2
        5 months ago

        VPNs don’t keep anything safe, they just make you appear as if you’re in a different location. Your information is secured by TLS, and that works with or without a VPN.

        What VPNs do accomplish is improve your privacy. Since you appear like you’re from somewhere else, and you can easily change where that somewhere else is, it’s much harder to track you across sites.

        I don’t see how it helps with scams though. Most scams come from data breaches, and they care far more about the data you provide to that service (credit card info, login creds, etc) than where you connect from. It’s more helpful to prevent tracking from the likes of Google and Meta.

        • GladiusB@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          5 months ago

          Well that’s because identify theft is based on WHERE you live. So VPNs mitigate that information. I am not saying it will stop all, but it helps. And it’s my choice. Not some corporations.

          • sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            edit-2
            5 months ago

            No, you can’t steal someone’s identity with their IP, that’s not how that works, and a regular attacker can’t figure out your IP anyway, unless you visit a website they control. And that info is pretty useless.

            Identity theft happens with a breach of some service you trust. So maybe a bank will expose your SSN (or equivalent in whatever country you live in), and they’ll cross-reference that with a breach in a streaming service that has credit card info (includes name, address, etc).

            A VPN won’t protect you from identity theft. Like, at all. That’s not what it’s designed for. What it does is three fold:

            • moves your IP to a different region
            • hides sites you visit from your ISP - make sure you’re using DNS over HTTP as well
            • mixes your traffic with others - mostly makes tracking more difficult

            None of that has anything to do with identity theft. If your VPN claims it does, then that’s stupid marketing and they’re probably hiding other issues they have (e.g. logging policy), and you should probably use a better VPN.

            • GladiusB@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              5 months ago

              As someone who has had identity theft happen and hired lawyers to fix it, I’m going to trust those close to the case. My information was definitely compromised. And what won in court? The dumbasses put a location I have never been to. Which was why it was overturned.

              I do hear what you say and agree with the fundamentals of your explanation. But my experience has shown that with even your location it can cost you thousands.

              • sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                edit-2
                5 months ago

                I don’t use a VPN and had someone try to steal my bank account. When they tried to scam me, they also used an invalid location. They weren’t trying to steal my identity, just my money, so it’s not quite the same thing.

                That said, identity thieves are just as lazy. They usually just buy some compromised credentials on the dark web and go to town opening credit cards and loans and whatnot. They don’t compromise websites you visit to steal your location, it would be much easier to grab that from another breach (just cross-reference one breach with another).

                So I’m standing by what I said, a VPN will do nothing to help here. Identity thieves and scammers don’t coordinate with hackers that compromise websites to steal your IP. If they get far enough that they’re pointing you toward a website they’ve created, a VPN isn’t going to help, they’re going after your login creds.

                So again, get a VPN to hide your traffic from your ISP, limit tracking by advertisers (limited value, they can track through fingerprints), and appear to be in a different area for things like streaming services. But don’t think that a VPN protects you from fraud, that’s BS. Your best options are to freeze your credit, use secure passwords (password managers are great), enable MFA/2FA, and check your credit every so often (once or twice per year is fine).

    • Zink@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      5 months ago

      Maybe our republicans will develop a strange love for China like they already have with Russia.

  • RustyNova@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    29
    ·
    5 months ago

    Why are they even in war against porn?

    /j lust is just the second layer, try doing something about worse stuff like greed or gluttony

    • Zier@fedia.io
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      29
      ·
      5 months ago

      Because christians think they can make the rules for the rest of us. And they use scare tactics like, “protect the children”, which they are molesting. Plus, they don’t want anybody to be happy and have any fun. That’s the point of christianity, to make everyone miserable, FOREVER.

      • Got_Bent@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        11
        ·
        5 months ago

        That’s how I try to describe growing up with it when people ask why I don’t to to church or subscribe to any religion.

        Aside from the many other aspects of it, even as a child, I couldn’t understand why I was supposed to be so enthusiastically smug that I belonged to this thing that seemed to exist only to impose rules on everything imaginable and that those rules would invariably be against anything even remotely fun or pleasurable. Hell we couldn’t even use most spices; thanks Dr Kellogg.

        At age six or so I legitimately perceived it to be sinful to smile or laugh for fear I’d be punished because there would be some arbitrary rule that whatever caused me to smile or laugh was too worldly.

        Fuck that. I’ll be miserable and curmudgeonly on my own terms!

        • Zier@fedia.io
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          5 months ago

          It’s nice to be free of all of that. No one should be allowed to join a religion until they are 21.

    • Obinice@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      5 months ago

      Religious extremists that work tirelessly to impose their god’s laws on everybody else.

      They’ve actually embedded themselves in US government now, over many years and much effort, and the burning embers of their religious war against the rest of us are finally starting to catch fire in a big way.

      They recently took away a person’s right to an abortion. Madness, I know. What will they take away next?

    • TipRing@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      5 months ago

      Because they want to use antiporn laws to restrict books and other media with LGBTQ content.

    • sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      5 months ago

      Because cops like to check ID, and this allows them to check ID more often. I think they want to check my ID at every website, if they could.

    • frezik@midwest.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      5 months ago

      They tried and failed to control Internet porn in the 90s. With Trump, conservatives think they’re more popular than they are, so they’re trying this shit again. As with lots of things in Project 2025, they’re quickly discovering that they’re not as well liked as they think.

  • MehBlah@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    27
    ·
    edit-2
    5 months ago

    Not Americans in the sense I see it. Flag pissing regressives is what they are. A minority that gerrymanders their way into power and pushes their childish backward thinking on the real Americans. Many the rot in their closets from which they only emerge every four years to crash grinder.

    • rottingleaf@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      5 months ago

      It’s not childish. This is just the appearance because people are not afraid of “stupid” politicians as much as they should be.

      In fact all these changes are consistent and all in one direction.

      Information is power, and all these actions create a system where you can’t avoid being identified and visible in everything you do. Then the people in power, if you somehow threaten that power, may assure that you won’t anymore without any open repression, without jailing you or murdering you or even censoring you. You just won’t get anywhere near visibility or power to affect the world, and it will all seem pretty natural and chaotic, so you won’t even see your path being corrected so that you wouldn’t affect politics.

      • MehBlah@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        5 months ago

        Sure that works as well but I myself prefer regressives. It speaks to their mindset that they want to take the country back to some imagined golden age. Where men were men and women were chattel. Where brown folks were not equals and it was okay to attack anyone who wasn’t them without fear of consequences.

  • Eggyhead@lemmings.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    22
    ·
    5 months ago

    A side thought: what would the world look like if you needed to be 18+ to make a social media account?

    • untorquer@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      5 months ago

      I assume practically the same in terms of child safety. Teens will find a way around or a more underground alternative to hang out with each other online.

      To your question: More headaches and invasion of privacy for everyone due to enforcement. How do you enforce it other than state issued ID? It would also exclude a lot of people who either don’t have that ID or don’t have access to it. Then there’s the whole question if whether you want the government to know what media you’re interacting with. For legal reasons the social media company would need to keep evidence on file of your identification, if not report it. Keeping is regardless of whether it’s part of that law, CYA and all.

    • fruitycoder@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      5 months ago

      Define social media and then imagine a constant argument of semantics where online communities get destroyed and created based on law suites.