7 ms·

Gay guy here. I have always said that these sort of laws designed to protect children will do precisely the opposite. An LGBTQ child is effectively forcibly ou

by morbia 3y ago

Gay guy here. I have always said that these sort of laws designed to protect children will do precisely the opposite. An LGBTQ child is effectively forcibly outed by this law, potentially before they've come to terms with their sexuality / gender themselves. Whilst I don't doubt social media causes a lot of harm on children growing up, giving parents full access to your messages is not the solution. In my opinion, based off a scale of a child's age and maturity, children are entitled to some privacy. Clearly a 4 year old shouldn't be left alone with unfettered access to the Internet, but equally a 16 year old shouldn't have to feel like their parents are watching everything they do or say. Both can cause long term psychological harm to a child.

nonethewiser 3y ago
> An LGBTQ child is effectively forcibly outed by this law, potentially before they've come to terms with their sexuality / gender themselves. How?
- Eumenes 3y ago
  This has me scratching my head too
- woodruffw 3y ago
  Presumably the "giving parents full access to online accounts" part. It isn't difficult to imagine scenarios in which a minor is "outed" because a parent exercises their power under the law.
- GrabbinD33ze69 3y ago
  How is it that difficult to imagine how someone could be outed as gay etc if another party has the right to read through all of their messages etc lol.
watwut 3y ago
They are not designed to protect kids. There is always campaign designed to elicit fear and contempt and then they take controlling laws. Talking about it as if safety was a goal instead of control is just falling into their lie.
- xboxnolifes 3y ago
  It's never about the kids protection/rights. Kids don't vote, parents do. Nearly every proposed law marketed as protecting kids is actually about increasing parent or state control over kids.
  - nine_k 3y ago
    It's always important to remember that the tools that enable freedom, like voting, can be used against freedom, if enough of the population does not value it.
realworldperson 3y ago
[dead]
pjc50 3y ago
Yes. This should be seen in the context of the huge set of anti-trans laws and the Florida book banning. There is going to be another attempt at making it illegal for kids to hear about non-straight people at all. And outing kids to their parents, even at risk of violence, is a part of that. The "land of free speech" always has a big "not you" exemption that can be wielded against people who aren't WASPy enough. Edit: see the absolutely huge number of people on HN downthread cheering this on because they hate Facebook. Strange world.
- rayiner 3y ago
  > The "land of free speech" always has a big "not you" exemption that can be wielded against people who aren't WASPy enough WASPs are the ones pushing pornographic books in schools. Florida is one of the most diverse states in the country.
  - pjc50 3y ago
    Neither of those things are true? The books being banned are not pornographic?
    - rayiner 3y ago
      “WASP” has the specific connotation of northeastern white people of longstanding American lineage. (The term typically excludes southern and Appalachian whites that technically also are Anglo Saxon and Protestant.) Those people are the vanguard of social liberalism today, in states like Massachusetts and Connecticut. In Florida, meanwhile, non-Hispanic whites are just 51% of the population (versus 65-70% in Massachusetts and Connecticut). And the white people who are there aren’t really “WASPs” in the typical sense of the word. DeSantis, of course, isn’t a WASP at all. He’s a Catholic. American social conservatism is primarily a coalition of southern whites, “ethnic whites” (German, Italian, and Irish), and Hispanics—none of whom were traditionally considered “WASPs.” The books are absolutely pornographic: https://www.ibtimes.sg/texas-school-sparks-outrage-after-mom-finds-gender-queer-book-sexually-explicit-cartoons-library-60974 https://www.ibtimes.sg/texas-school-sparks-outrage-after-mom.... They contain graphic depictions of underage people engaged in sex acts.
kvetching 3y ago
[flagged]
insane_dreamer 3y ago
In theory I agree with you and the other posters on this. But as someone with preteen kids there’s the other side of me that wants to a) protect them from all the actual shit out there, and b) perhaps more importantly encourage them to do something more constructive than mindlessly scrolling through TikTok clips that have no value whatsoever. In fact I’m far more worried about b) than a) because I know they can learn to discern a) but b) can become a true addiction. I want them to explore whatever their interests are - which may be very different than mine were at their age - what I don’t want is for them to become the equivalent of “zombie couch potatoes”. I’m also concerned about all the negative comparisons that come with “oh look how those peoples lives are so much better than mine” ; I suffered from that myself as an adult (even though I knew that what I saw on social media was not a true representation of peoples lives) and was happier after I deleted my FB account (not to mention wasting less time). Anyway I wonder how many people responding here have teenagers, because when you do, you think of this issue from a different perspective. (I’m not religious nor in Utah)
- insane_dreamer 3y ago
  PS. Having said the above, I do not agree with a law parental consent being required until 18. I would want my kids to have acquired good habits and be able to make reasonable decisions in their own without our involvement by 14 or so.
- fatnoah 3y ago
  As someone with a teen, it's tremendously difficult to navigate, and like all things related to child-rearing, it probably depends on the actual kids in question. For our teen, the rule is that mom and dad have full access to all devices at any time. Technological limits and locks don't seem to be good options, since there are so many ways around them that I think they provide a false sense of security. Also, as teens, they're always around others that may not have locked-down access, so we simply operate under the assumption that they're seeing anything and everything. Instead, we apply some time-limiting to certain things, and make sure the phone is in it's charger in a public place at night, and generally try to make sure there are breaks from the media throughout the day. Instead, we really try to engage with the content that they are interested in, and actually try to discuss it in a constructive manner, such as how most of what you see is stage-managed to present the best side of things, or to simply get eyeballs to build a brand and/or get advertising dollars. We never apply judgement or talk down to them in these conversations. With our child (and for many, I suspect) that's just a great way to get them to tune you out. There's also an upside. We moved to a different town before middle school, and it was via social media that our child was able to stay in touch with old friends and to stay in touch with new friends during Covid. They're also inspired to do creative things that they've seen on TikTok. They has zero interest in cooking or baking but, for whatever reason, seeing people make stuff on TikTok sparked their interest in a way mom and dad never could. This isn't to say that we're not worried, but at some point we have to do what we can to try to prepare them as much as possible. We were also worried the first time they walked to school alone, walked with a friend to the theater in the city for a 9:30pm movie showing, and will absolutely worry when they first get into a car at 16 and drive away. We also understand that social media is a totally different animal. It's full time, all the time, and designed to suck you in. Anything you post, even in private, will be public at some point. (This was one of our earliest topics of conversation! Unfortunately, there is a not of actual evidence to support this) All that said, it really depends on the child, their own self-image, friends, environment, etc. If we took TikTok away, our child would be upset but would be over it quickly. Getting rid of Discord, however, would be devastating as that's how they chat with their friends. Parents should 100% be knowledgable and involved, but I think legal efforts like Utah's are doomed to fail because they'll only be successful at making adults feel like they're doing something, and there are too many ways around it. I also worry that parents will have a false confidence that restricting access will somehow solve the problem and reduce parent-child dialogue about these topics, or that kids will suffer for being digital have-nots.
datavirtue 3y ago
The goal was to make kids unwilling to use social media.
stuckinhell 3y ago
Social media is not the same as it was 10 years ago. The level of which kids compare themselves to other kids took an exponential leap to a near hive mind level. Constantly comparing themselves to the instagram people with fake lives, rich kids, or extremely beautiful people is mentally damaging them. My daughter asked me for plastic surgery, and I was dumbfounded. So I went check her internet logs, and she's been watching rich kids of instagram/tiktok/etc. So now I'm trying to figure out how to talk with her about this. There is balance, but as her mother I don't think I'll be letting her have internet privacy until she's grown up and moved out.
- Version467 3y ago
  May I ask how old your daughter is? It's concerning regardless of age, but if she's ~17 than I can see how this came to be, vs. if she's ~12 then I need to update my mental model of the world. Also, did she ask about plastic surgery, or did she express interest in getting plastic surgery? I don't mean to pry, I'm just more surprised than I (apparently) should be and would like to fix my gap in understanding.
  - bcrosby95 3y ago
    I'm not sure why it would be too surprising. The problem with the internet is simple: it's easy to be constantly exposed to the top 0.001% of any aspect of life. Consider this website. How many people feel diminished in the face of the achievements of others? How many seek out their advice on how to up their game? If you could get surgery to make you better at software development, how many would do so? If grown-ass adults are subject to this sort of stuff, how do we expect children to be able to cope?
- whats_a_quasar 3y ago
  The mental health of teens and pre-teens has gotten really bad. This isn't just another "think of the children scare." Since the early 2010s the rate of self harm among girls 10-14 has ~tripled, and the rate of suicide among 10-14 year olds has doubled [1]. And there is now lots of evidence that this is because of social media and smartphones. The social lives of kids have changed drastically, in a way that does not meet their basic psychological needs [2]. I think that people's perceptions of social media are lagging behind the reality on the ground. There have always been moral panics and silly scares about whether the kids are alright, most of which were unfounded. So I think we are now reacting too slowly to the genuine health crisis caused by technology. [1] https://jonathanhaidt.substack.com/p/the-teen-mental-illness-epidemic https://jonathanhaidt.substack.com/p/the-teen-mental-illness... [2] https://jonathanhaidt.substack.com/p/social-media-mental-illness-epidemic https://jonathanhaidt.substack.com/p/social-media-mental-ill...
rayiner 3y ago
The science is that people’s brains aren’t fully developed until age 25. What they have access to before that time should be carefully curated by adults.
- random314 3y ago
  But peoples brains also deteriorate with time. I believe only men(women have a smaller brain size and never achieve maturity) between the ages 25 and 40 should pick books for everyone else.
brvsft 3y ago
Think of the gay children.
WeylandYutani 3y ago
It is well known that more teens commit suicide in insular religious communities. It's not social media it is people driving other people to despair. Ofcourse you can't really fix that.
- throwaway-blaze 3y ago
  Source? That isn't true.
camhart 3y ago
I disagree. I don't think full access to messages is always necessary, but it can be in some circumstances and it should be up to the parent to decide how responsible their child is online and grant privacy accordingly. A 16 year old is still going through tons of life changing events. Everyone needs help charting a course through life, especially at that age. Who better than a loving parent to guide them? Parents should be aware of what their kids are doing online. More and more of "life" is online. More and more harm is impacting kids online. A parent whos entirely unaware of what their child is doing online is simply failing to be a parent.
- PretzelPirate 3y ago
  > Who better than a loving parent to guide them? Many of us didn't have loving parents. We had parents who would weaponize any detail they learned about us in order to hurt us. I used the internet to get away from my parents when I physically couldn't.
  - mixmastamyk 3y ago
    A constructive solution to that is to call CPS or even run away. Getting hooked on tiktok as you would a drug is not. I don’t believe this bill blocks iMessage for example.
    - themitigating 3y ago
      So a child getting addicted to Tiktok is worse than them running away or calling CPS, which could lead to their removal?
      - mixmastamyk 3y ago
        Hard to judge "what is worse" without more information. What I do know is that tiktok is not a solution. CPS gets a bad wrap, often justifiably. But some in-fact-horrible parents do deserve to have their kids taken away to safety.

by morbia 3y ago

nonethewiser 3y ago

> An LGBTQ child is effectively forcibly outed by this law, potentially before they've come to terms with their sexuality / gender themselves. How?

Eumenes 3y ago
This has me scratching my head too
woodruffw 3y ago
Presumably the "giving parents full access to online accounts" part. It isn't difficult to imagine scenarios in which a minor is "outed" because a parent exercises their power under the law.
GrabbinD33ze69 3y ago
How is it that difficult to imagine how someone could be outed as gay etc if another party has the right to read through all of their messages etc lol.

watwut 3y ago

They are not designed to protect kids. There is always campaign designed to elicit fear and contempt and then they take controlling laws. Talking about it as if safety was a goal instead of control is just falling into their lie.

xboxnolifes 3y ago
It's never about the kids protection/rights. Kids don't vote, parents do. Nearly every proposed law marketed as protecting kids is actually about increasing parent or state control over kids.
- nine_k 3y ago
  It's always important to remember that the tools that enable freedom, like voting, can be used against freedom, if enough of the population does not value it.

realworldperson 3y ago

[dead]

pjc50 3y ago

Yes. This should be seen in the context of the huge set of anti-trans laws and the Florida book banning. There is going to be another attempt at making it illegal for kids to hear about non-straight people at all. And outing kids to their parents, even at risk of violence, is a part of that. The "land of free speech" always has a big "not you" exemption that can be wielded against people who aren't WASPy enough. Edit: see the absolutely huge number of people on HN downthread cheering this on because they hate Facebook. Strange world.

rayiner 3y ago
> The "land of free speech" always has a big "not you" exemption that can be wielded against people who aren't WASPy enough WASPs are the ones pushing pornographic books in schools. Florida is one of the most diverse states in the country.
- pjc50 3y ago
  Neither of those things are true? The books being banned are not pornographic?
  - rayiner 3y ago
    “WASP” has the specific connotation of northeastern white people of longstanding American lineage. (The term typically excludes southern and Appalachian whites that technically also are Anglo Saxon and Protestant.) Those people are the vanguard of social liberalism today, in states like Massachusetts and Connecticut. In Florida, meanwhile, non-Hispanic whites are just 51% of the population (versus 65-70% in Massachusetts and Connecticut). And the white people who are there aren’t really “WASPs” in the typical sense of the word. DeSantis, of course, isn’t a WASP at all. He’s a Catholic. American social conservatism is primarily a coalition of southern whites, “ethnic whites” (German, Italian, and Irish), and Hispanics—none of whom were traditionally considered “WASPs.” The books are absolutely pornographic: https://www.ibtimes.sg/texas-school-sparks-outrage-after-mom-finds-gender-queer-book-sexually-explicit-cartoons-library-60974 https://www.ibtimes.sg/texas-school-sparks-outrage-after-mom.... They contain graphic depictions of underage people engaged in sex acts.

kvetching 3y ago

[flagged]

insane_dreamer 3y ago

In theory I agree with you and the other posters on this. But as someone with preteen kids there’s the other side of me that wants to a) protect them from all the actual shit out there, and b) perhaps more importantly encourage them to do something more constructive than mindlessly scrolling through TikTok clips that have no value whatsoever. In fact I’m far more worried about b) than a) because I know they can learn to discern a) but b) can become a true addiction. I want them to explore whatever their interests are - which may be very different than mine were at their age - what I don’t want is for them to become the equivalent of “zombie couch potatoes”. I’m also concerned about all the negative comparisons that come with “oh look how those peoples lives are so much better than mine” ; I suffered from that myself as an adult (even though I knew that what I saw on social media was not a true representation of peoples lives) and was happier after I deleted my FB account (not to mention wasting less time). Anyway I wonder how many people responding here have teenagers, because when you do, you think of this issue from a different perspective. (I’m not religious nor in Utah)

insane_dreamer 3y ago
PS. Having said the above, I do not agree with a law parental consent being required until 18. I would want my kids to have acquired good habits and be able to make reasonable decisions in their own without our involvement by 14 or so.
fatnoah 3y ago
As someone with a teen, it's tremendously difficult to navigate, and like all things related to child-rearing, it probably depends on the actual kids in question. For our teen, the rule is that mom and dad have full access to all devices at any time. Technological limits and locks don't seem to be good options, since there are so many ways around them that I think they provide a false sense of security. Also, as teens, they're always around others that may not have locked-down access, so we simply operate under the assumption that they're seeing anything and everything. Instead, we apply some time-limiting to certain things, and make sure the phone is in it's charger in a public place at night, and generally try to make sure there are breaks from the media throughout the day. Instead, we really try to engage with the content that they are interested in, and actually try to discuss it in a constructive manner, such as how most of what you see is stage-managed to present the best side of things, or to simply get eyeballs to build a brand and/or get advertising dollars. We never apply judgement or talk down to them in these conversations. With our child (and for many, I suspect) that's just a great way to get them to tune you out. There's also an upside. We moved to a different town before middle school, and it was via social media that our child was able to stay in touch with old friends and to stay in touch with new friends during Covid. They're also inspired to do creative things that they've seen on TikTok. They has zero interest in cooking or baking but, for whatever reason, seeing people make stuff on TikTok sparked their interest in a way mom and dad never could. This isn't to say that we're not worried, but at some point we have to do what we can to try to prepare them as much as possible. We were also worried the first time they walked to school alone, walked with a friend to the theater in the city for a 9:30pm movie showing, and will absolutely worry when they first get into a car at 16 and drive away. We also understand that social media is a totally different animal. It's full time, all the time, and designed to suck you in. Anything you post, even in private, will be public at some point. (This was one of our earliest topics of conversation! Unfortunately, there is a not of actual evidence to support this) All that said, it really depends on the child, their own self-image, friends, environment, etc. If we took TikTok away, our child would be upset but would be over it quickly. Getting rid of Discord, however, would be devastating as that's how they chat with their friends. Parents should 100% be knowledgable and involved, but I think legal efforts like Utah's are doomed to fail because they'll only be successful at making adults feel like they're doing something, and there are too many ways around it. I also worry that parents will have a false confidence that restricting access will somehow solve the problem and reduce parent-child dialogue about these topics, or that kids will suffer for being digital have-nots.

datavirtue 3y ago

The goal was to make kids unwilling to use social media.

stuckinhell 3y ago

Social media is not the same as it was 10 years ago. The level of which kids compare themselves to other kids took an exponential leap to a near hive mind level. Constantly comparing themselves to the instagram people with fake lives, rich kids, or extremely beautiful people is mentally damaging them. My daughter asked me for plastic surgery, and I was dumbfounded. So I went check her internet logs, and she's been watching rich kids of instagram/tiktok/etc. So now I'm trying to figure out how to talk with her about this. There is balance, but as her mother I don't think I'll be letting her have internet privacy until she's grown up and moved out.

Version467 3y ago
May I ask how old your daughter is? It's concerning regardless of age, but if she's ~17 than I can see how this came to be, vs. if she's ~12 then I need to update my mental model of the world. Also, did she ask about plastic surgery, or did she express interest in getting plastic surgery? I don't mean to pry, I'm just more surprised than I (apparently) should be and would like to fix my gap in understanding.
- bcrosby95 3y ago
  I'm not sure why it would be too surprising. The problem with the internet is simple: it's easy to be constantly exposed to the top 0.001% of any aspect of life. Consider this website. How many people feel diminished in the face of the achievements of others? How many seek out their advice on how to up their game? If you could get surgery to make you better at software development, how many would do so? If grown-ass adults are subject to this sort of stuff, how do we expect children to be able to cope?
whats_a_quasar 3y ago
The mental health of teens and pre-teens has gotten really bad. This isn't just another "think of the children scare." Since the early 2010s the rate of self harm among girls 10-14 has ~tripled, and the rate of suicide among 10-14 year olds has doubled [1]. And there is now lots of evidence that this is because of social media and smartphones. The social lives of kids have changed drastically, in a way that does not meet their basic psychological needs [2]. I think that people's perceptions of social media are lagging behind the reality on the ground. There have always been moral panics and silly scares about whether the kids are alright, most of which were unfounded. So I think we are now reacting too slowly to the genuine health crisis caused by technology. [1] https://jonathanhaidt.substack.com/p/the-teen-mental-illness-epidemic https://jonathanhaidt.substack.com/p/the-teen-mental-illness... [2] https://jonathanhaidt.substack.com/p/social-media-mental-illness-epidemic https://jonathanhaidt.substack.com/p/social-media-mental-ill...

rayiner 3y ago

The science is that people’s brains aren’t fully developed until age 25. What they have access to before that time should be carefully curated by adults.

random314 3y ago
But peoples brains also deteriorate with time. I believe only men(women have a smaller brain size and never achieve maturity) between the ages 25 and 40 should pick books for everyone else.

brvsft 3y ago

Think of the gay children.

WeylandYutani 3y ago

It is well known that more teens commit suicide in insular religious communities. It's not social media it is people driving other people to despair. Ofcourse you can't really fix that.

throwaway-blaze 3y ago
Source? That isn't true.

camhart 3y ago

I disagree. I don't think full access to messages is always necessary, but it can be in some circumstances and it should be up to the parent to decide how responsible their child is online and grant privacy accordingly. A 16 year old is still going through tons of life changing events. Everyone needs help charting a course through life, especially at that age. Who better than a loving parent to guide them? Parents should be aware of what their kids are doing online. More and more of "life" is online. More and more harm is impacting kids online. A parent whos entirely unaware of what their child is doing online is simply failing to be a parent.

PretzelPirate 3y ago
> Who better than a loving parent to guide them? Many of us didn't have loving parents. We had parents who would weaponize any detail they learned about us in order to hurt us. I used the internet to get away from my parents when I physically couldn't.
- mixmastamyk 3y ago
  A constructive solution to that is to call CPS or even run away. Getting hooked on tiktok as you would a drug is not. I don’t believe this bill blocks iMessage for example.
  - themitigating 3y ago
    So a child getting addicted to Tiktok is worse than them running away or calling CPS, which could lead to their removal?
    - mixmastamyk 3y ago
      Hard to judge "what is worse" without more information. What I do know is that tiktok is not a solution. CPS gets a bad wrap, often justifiably. But some in-fact-horrible parents do deserve to have their kids taken away to safety.