Collective Shout, a small but vocal lobby group, has long called for a mandatory internet filter that would prevent access to adult content for everyone in Australia. Its director, Melinda Tankard Reist, was recently appointed to the stakeholder advisory board for the government’s age assurance technology trial before the under-16s social media ban comes into effect in Australia in December.

  • FauxLiving@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    169
    ·
    1 year ago

    Keep the pressure on.

    Collective Shout got them to change their position and they’re a small group. We are legion, as the kids say

    • Booboofinger@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      That’s something we all have to remember. We have to be just as vocal as these idiots or they take over. They are not the majority, they are only the most vocal.

    • Lebensmittel@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      66
      ·
      1 year ago

      The argument is control. Religious zealots are all about controlling society and subduing people to follow their rules (that they themselves tend to break all the time)

        • Lebensmittel@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          20
          ·
          1 year ago

          They precisely can and they kinda just did. “Think of the children” is the magic phrase to shut down critical thinking and give you carte blanche to do whatever you want.

          • ApatheticCactus@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            5
            ·
            1 year ago

            Not always. School shootings happen and suddenly crickets on gun control. “Think of the children” only applies to moral outrage, not tangible physical threat prevention. Also applies to school lunches and any other actual tangible thing to ACTUALLY benefit general child welfare.

        • Beero@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          10
          ·
          1 year ago

          They want a nanny state to do their parenting for them, cus they are shit parents who spend their time petitioning the government about things they could just fucking unplug.

        • stratoscaster@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          9
          ·
          1 year ago

          They are quite literally lying about the content of games like GTA V. They pulled the whole “the goal of the game is killing women” schtick

        • mriswith@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          1 year ago

          That’s their goal for sure, what I mean is how are they pretending to justify it?

          The same way they always do: “WONT SOMEBODY THINK OF THE CHILDREN!?!?!?!1111”

    • Echo Dot@feddit.uk
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      51
      ·
      1 year ago

      This group isn’t interested in protecting children they’re just interested in pushing their own beliefs on everybody else. The easiest way they can do that is to pretend that they’re interested in children. Which I’m sure some of them are, but not in the capacity that anyone wants them to be.

      It’s a classic right-wing tactic. Because nobody wants to be against a law that protects children.

    • rottingleaf@lemmy.worldBanned
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      1 year ago

      And the reason sexual things had to be filtered was that they are harmful and skew kids’ perception of healthy sexuality.

      Gambling wasn’t considered healthy even where and when marrying a toddler was normal. After all, a traumatized person with unhealthy sexuality does generally understand they are traumatized, a person taught that addiction is normal - not.

    • OrteilGenou@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      12
      ·
      1 year ago

      Yeah but Jesus definitely preached love thy neighbor, do unto others as you would have them do unto you, and also, ew gay people not in my back yard.

      I’m pretty confident on two of those anyway

    • explodicle@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      1 year ago

      everything you don’t like

      On issues like these, conservatives will discover the magic of actual reasons. It’s only “things you don’t like” when we’re talking about banning hate speech or something.

    • proton_lynx@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      1 year ago

      Don’t be fooled, that’s not the real reason. Parents that shove iPads in front of their children are not even remotely worried about what their kids are watching online. This is purely about control, has nothing to do with children.

  • Opisek@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    45
    ·
    1 year ago

    “[Elon Musk] said he wanted to get his own X payments platform «going soon»”.

    Surely that’s going to solve the problem. There’s absolutely no censorship on Twitter. /s

    • Echo Dot@feddit.uk
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      1 year ago

      Oh it’ll be interesting to see how he manages to make a worse payment processor than PayPal. I wouldn’t have thought it was possible.

    • rottingleaf@lemmy.worldBanned
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      1 year ago

      When there are enough competing parties, the argument of “I live in country A and I don’t care about B’s special services reading my messages”, where A and B are in a state of adversity, starts working.

      By competing parties I mean not just A and B, but a plethora of snakes in that pit.

      So - do it Elon. It’s fine.

  • n1ckn4m3@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    30
    ·
    1 year ago

    “Face backlash” = about 160,000 people signed a petition saying they disagreed with it, then went about their daily lives and totally, 100% without a doubt continued using their Visa or Mastercard credit cards.

    They don’t care, there are no alternatives. They can do whatever they want.

  • MiddleAgesModem@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    28
    ·
    1 year ago

    “The internet has no borders. Women and girls everywhere are impacted by male violence against women and misogyny in general which we believed these games perpetuated,” she said.

    Yet the fictional violence against men and boys is A-Ok!

    • Echo Dot@feddit.uk
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      Yeah there doesn’t seem to be any alternatives in my country other than cash which doesn’t work for online purchases.

      Apparently there is a complicated thing I can do where I have to go to the post office and then I can send money directly to a company. But that’s really inconvenient (it’s like a 30-second walk from my house, I’m not doing that) and I don’t think steam accepts that payment method anyway. In fact I’ve never heard of anyone except that payment method so I don’t really understand why it exists.

  • Whirling_Ashandarei@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    7
    ·
    1 year ago

    Good on her parents for putting Tankard in her name since you need at least one to deal with her bullshit. Bad on them for releasing her into the world instead of into a rectum where she belongs.