4 ms·

I won't disagree with that. And "better parenting" is a solution. However, what about the children who don't have the advantage of "better parenting"? Rightful

by jenscow 4mo ago

I won't disagree with that. And "better parenting" is a solution. However, what about the children who don't have the advantage of "better parenting"? Rightfully blaming bad parents is reactionary

coldtea 4mo ago
>Rightfully blaming bad parents is reactionary So? Not all reactionary (if you mean "conservative") takes are bad. Sometimes they're better than the alternative: accepting bad parenting as some default and working around it with technological restrictions.
- Nasrudith 4mo ago
  "Reactionary"'s origins as far are pure political DARVO and gaslighting anyway. It originated in the French revolution and basically declared "You are morally wrong for being horrified at my horrific and evil actions." That origin tainted the term for me personally. The actual modern reactionary meaning of "referrant to a mythical past as a standard" always felt like it deserved a better term. But nobody would get what you were saying if you called them a "fairytaleland resident" or similar.
  - pocksuppet 4mo ago
    I always read "reactionary" as "oh no, someone did something! now I have to react by getting angry!" and it seems to fit well enough.
platevoltage 4mo ago
If parents don't want their kids on social media, get them a dumb phone, or use the parental control features. Maybe some parents don't care, and that's their prerogative. None of this is about protecting children, it's about "protecting" adults from "bad ideas".
- djaro 4mo ago
  The problem is many parents will not do that. Do those children then deserve to be taken advantage of by social media corporations? Generally, things that are harmful and addictive such as alcohol, cigarettes and casinos require age verification. We dont just put the onus on parents because a child with bad or absent parents still deserves to be shielded from alcoholism at 12 years old.
  - platevoltage 4mo ago
    Social Media companies taking advantage of people is a whole other conversation, and isn't just an issue with minors.
    - chadgpt3 4mo ago
      So are gambling and cigarettes. As a society we've decided a reasonable compromise is that you can get the freedom to harm yourself at a certain age where you're assumed to understand that you're harming yourself.

by jenscow 4mo ago

I won't disagree with that. And "better parenting" is a solution. However, what about the children who don't have the advantage of "better parenting"? Rightfully blaming bad parents is reactionary

coldtea 4mo ago

>Rightfully blaming bad parents is reactionary So? Not all reactionary (if you mean "conservative") takes are bad. Sometimes they're better than the alternative: accepting bad parenting as some default and working around it with technological restrictions.

Nasrudith 4mo ago
"Reactionary"'s origins as far are pure political DARVO and gaslighting anyway. It originated in the French revolution and basically declared "You are morally wrong for being horrified at my horrific and evil actions." That origin tainted the term for me personally. The actual modern reactionary meaning of "referrant to a mythical past as a standard" always felt like it deserved a better term. But nobody would get what you were saying if you called them a "fairytaleland resident" or similar.
- pocksuppet 4mo ago
  I always read "reactionary" as "oh no, someone did something! now I have to react by getting angry!" and it seems to fit well enough.

platevoltage 4mo ago

If parents don't want their kids on social media, get them a dumb phone, or use the parental control features. Maybe some parents don't care, and that's their prerogative. None of this is about protecting children, it's about "protecting" adults from "bad ideas".

djaro 4mo ago
The problem is many parents will not do that. Do those children then deserve to be taken advantage of by social media corporations? Generally, things that are harmful and addictive such as alcohol, cigarettes and casinos require age verification. We dont just put the onus on parents because a child with bad or absent parents still deserves to be shielded from alcoholism at 12 years old.
- platevoltage 4mo ago
  Social Media companies taking advantage of people is a whole other conversation, and isn't just an issue with minors.
  - chadgpt3 4mo ago
    So are gambling and cigarettes. As a society we've decided a reasonable compromise is that you can get the freedom to harm yourself at a certain age where you're assumed to understand that you're harming yourself.