71
submitted 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) by Sagan@lemm.ee to c/europe@feddit.org

From !esp@lemm.ee

Additional link:https://elpais.com/tecnologia/2024-07-01/el-gobierno-presenta-el-diseno-su-app-antiporno-que-obligara-a-los-adultos-a-tramitar-acreditaciones-que-caducan-al-mes.html

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] hsr@lemmy.dbzer0.com 51 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

"When we evaluate how minors interact with the internet, for 90% of them it is their first way of getting to know about sexuality. From there, 50% of them recognise that they generate imitation and even with approaches that have domination as a central element. There is an enormous distortion in the way they are going to develop their sexuality", she stressed. [via DeepL, emphasis mine]

Hmmmmm, if only there was a way to educate minors about sexuality before they ultimately turn to internet because adults just ignore the problem.

Edit:

Incibe is also collaborating, which is checking that browsers "control access based on URLs" to prevent access to minors. Cabanillas said that "a black list" of browsers that do not do so will be created.

It's a miracle politicians aren't targeted by scammers more frequently, given they have no idea how internet works.

[-] federalreverse@feddit.org 0 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

Hmmmmm, if only there was a way to educate minors about sexuality before they ultimately turn to internet because adults just ignore the problem.

Lots of children have access to the internet at a very young age. I guess what you're suggesting is sex education for 7-year-olds who might accidentally watch a video on the school yard, etc.? In fact, even 3-year-olds often use their parents' tablet to watch P*w P*trol and may wander off with it.

[-] hsr@lemmy.dbzer0.com 11 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

Whether a 7-year-old sees adult content accidentally, intentionally, because of peer pressure or any other reason, I still think age appropriate sex ed would be helpful. I acknowledge that minors do view inappropriate content and that it is generally unhealthy, but since it can happen, and does happen, a good approach would be to educate them preemptively.

For example, these guildelines for sex ed in EU, which caused some outrage in conservative circles a few years back, suggest that "sex in media and dealing with it" is a topic for 6 to 9-year-olds.

Of course you can't cover every outlier, but can you really stop 5th graders from sending weird shit to their friends because they're trying to be edgy?

Edit:

Another way to think about it:

  • Was the content accessed accidentally? If so, I would argue this law misses the point and better moderation would be more effective and also less, y'know, surveillance state adjacent
  • Was the content accessed intentionally? In this case, sex ed would probably help
[-] rumschlumpel@feddit.org 6 points 2 months ago

It's pretty easy to install device-based "parental control"-types of software that can't be circumvented by a 3yo. That is definitely the parents' job.

[-] DrFuggles@feddit.org 4 points 2 months ago

uh yes, in fact, I think that would be very healthy. Not in a horrific South Park way, but in a "sometimes adults get naked because they like each other. And sometimes they film it. If someone shows you a video if that, it's okay to not want to watch it. It's okay to walk away. I someone pressures you to watch it, it's okay to tell an adult" way.

this post was submitted on 02 Jul 2024
71 points (100.0% liked)

Europe

1306 readers
391 users here now

News and information from Europe 🇪🇺

(Current banner: La Mancha, Spain. Feel free to post submissions for banner images.)

Rules (2024-08-30)

  1. This is an English-language community. Comments should be in English. Posts can link to non-English news sources when providing a full-text translation in the post description. Automated translations are fine, as long as they don't overly distort the content.
  2. No links to misinformation or commercial advertising. When you post outdated/historic articles, add the year of publication to the post title. Infographics must include a source and a year of creation; if possible, also provide a link to the source.
  3. Be kind to each other, and argue in good faith. Don't post direct insults nor disrespectful and condescending comments. Don't troll nor incite hatred. Don't look for novel argumentation strategies at Wikipedia's List of fallacies.
  4. No bigotry, sexism, racism, antisemitism, dehumanization of minorities, or glorification of National Socialism.
  5. Be the signal, not the noise: Strive to post insightful comments. Add "/s" when you're being sarcastic (and don't use it to break rule no. 3).
  6. If you link to paywalled information, please provide also a link to a freely available archived version. Alternatively, try to find a different source.
  7. Light-hearted content, memes, and posts about your European everyday belong in !yurop@lemm.ee. (They're cool, you should subscribe there too!)
  8. Don't evade bans. If we notice ban evasion, that will result in a permanent ban for all the accounts we can associate with you.
  9. No posts linking to speculative reporting about ongoing events with unclear backgrounds. Please wait at least 12 hours. (E.g., do not post breathless reporting on an ongoing terror attack.)

(This list may get expanded when necessary.)

We will use some leeway to decide whether to remove a comment.

If need be, there are also bans: 3 days for lighter offenses, 14 days for bigger offenses, and permanent bans for people who don't show any willingness to participate productively. If we think the ban reason is obvious, we may not specifically write to you.

If you want to protest a removal or ban, feel free to write privately to the mods: @federalreverse@feddit.org, @poVoq@slrpnk.net, or @anzo@programming.dev.

founded 2 months ago
MODERATORS