domain:betonit.substack.com
GBRK
11hr ago
It's deeply physical.
Implying that dirt isn't? Implied that a people aren't tied together by living together in the same place? This entire argument is 100% special pleading.
ChickenOverlord
11hr ago
Abbott districts in New Jersey are one of the best sources of data for this. They're funded at (or higher than) the wealthiest districts in the state but still have dismal outcomes:
thrownaway24e89172
naïve paranoid outcast
11hr ago
It is a privacy violation with the purpose of deterring adults pretending to be an age verification law. "Think of the children" is as usual nothing more than a cover story. As Kagan notes, if it were just an "age verification law" and the impact on adults was as minimal as possible while still achieving the goal of deterring youths then the law would survive strict scrutiny and the majority wouldn't have had to twist itself to support lower scrutiny.
quiet_NaN
11hr ago
Presumably, all sexual material intended to arouse is deemed "harmful to minors"?
I would argue that while presenting unsolicited sexual material to either adults or minors can indeed be harmful (to some degree -- I remember seeing porn ads when I was downloading cracks for games at age 12 or 14, and mostly went eeeewww and got on with my life, but it did not traumatize me. Getting DMed a dick pick would certainly be worse, though), things are often different when users actively search for such content.
Sure, there are things which are likely harmful to the person searching for it, a 10-yo searching for rape or beheading videos is probably better off not finding any. But I do not think that any person of any age or gender who is searching for "naked woman" is likely to be harmed by pictures or videos of naked women, even if they are sexually suggestive.
Quite frankly, I believe that sexual content consumed by minors is too influential to leave it to chance and adult entertainment companies targeting an adult audience. The sooner we accept that the effect of age verification laws is not that horny teenagers will not view sinful material, but at best that they will learn how to connect to a VPN service, the sooner we can start producing more age-appropriate porn for minors.
I do not think that viewing PIV sex on video after searching for it is intrinsically harmful. The stuff which is harmful is all the stuff where porn differs from what one would recommend as sex acts for beginners. A median porn video teaches a teenage male that of course a woman will be enflamed with desire as soon as you touch her, enthusiastically give you oral sex for a while, then be ready to get fucked however hard you want to fuck her, then happily switch to anal and finally let you cum on her face. Communication about consent, boundaries, or birth control? Nada (except for BDSM porn, which typically discusses boundaries explicitly on camera). She implicitly consents to everything, has no boundaries and is solely responsible for contraception. Getting her off? She just gets off being used by you, man, no need to learn anything about female anatomy or psychology. Pillow talk? Just call her a dirty whore.
Then you have all the kinks which are mainstream in porn. Incest? Super hot. Unhealthy power dynamics? "I would do anything to get a passing grade in your class ..." Spying on women? When caught, they are flattered and will have sex with you. Respecting your partner? Nah, they like to be degraded. Now, there are plenty of kinks which are fine between consenting adults who are into them. But the context "this is a thing which most women are not into" is generally missing in porn.
Just hire some 20yo porn actors and make them act out healthy sex scenes (where the actors play a couple (or actually are a couple), discuss boundaries, contraception and all that), put them on the web in 4k (or even better, find popular but healthy sex tapes produced (semi-)commercially and just buy the rights) and tell the minors in sex ed "it is actually normal and healthy to be interested in how sex works, if you are interested here are some videos which are more realistic than what you find on pornhub.
Sure, some will still prefer to watch gangbangs in 480x320, and for a few unlucky ones the good porn might actually be a gateway to the mainstream stuff, but by and large this will do much more to prevent minors from getting wrong ideas about sex (or see seriously disturbing stuff because they were curious how sex looks) than Texas just making the big US porn vendors do age verification and pretend that this will prevent any horny teen from watching porn.
But my suspicion is that the Texas move was never about protecting minors in the first place, it was about getting the filth off the Texan internet by pretending to care about minors seeing boobs and dicks.
thejdizzler
11hr ago
I'm immediately skeptical of this whole thing because they are using DUOLINGO of all things for language learning. You're much better off doing something like dreaming Spanish + Anki and/or paying a talented SL teacher to do comprehensible input for younger kids then add in YouTube/Graded readers. Duolingo is okay I guess for the really basic stages of language learning, but it quickly veers off into territory that is IMO not useful (way too many reps of vocabulary that undermines the spaced repetition, forced translation, early output). I've learned far more Spanish (and even Italian) through reading+Anki then I ever learned doing Dutch Duolingo.
urquan
Every one who exalts himself will be humbled, but he who humbles himself will be exalted.
11hr ago
Who was he?
you are objecting to laws being broken to try to get the illegal immigrants out. The law was very definitely broken to let the illegals in; either you objected to this, or you did not. If you did not object to it, why object now? If you did object to it, then you observed that your objections were ignored then, why would you expect your objections to carry weight now?
If you do believe that the law should not be broken here, but you offer no remedy to the law being broken before, then is that not accepting violation of the law to allow illegal immigrants in? If you say you do not accept it, what does "not accepting it" mean in concrete terms?
hydroacetylene
11hr ago
I think high spending high performance blue states throw the correlation into something too crazy to be a correlation.
VoxelVexillologist
Multidimensional Radical Centrist
11hr ago
public high schools in the US average around $19k in per student spending, no correlation between spending and outcomes.
Is that true across public schools? I've often wondered if the extra funding thrown at Title 1 schools that typically underperform actually makes the correlation negative, but I've never found an actual dataset.
FistfullOfCrows
11hr ago
The whole point of PP is to provide abortions, everything else is a smoke screen.
OracleOutlook
Fiat justitia ruat caelum
11hr ago
I think the article describes that Ms. Zito is not a "Normal person" any longer and has gone "crunchy." Crunchy women get into charting for all sorts of health reasons, including mental health awareness, productivity boosting, meal planning and exercising, etc. There are lots of books out there that recommend women do X task on one part of their cycle, eat a specific way on another part, etc.
EverythingIsFine
Well, is eventually fine
11hr ago
Oh man, looking at the pictures I can totally see what they were going for but… it’s still so painfully ugly. I wonder if that’s one of those cases where if you stare at something long enough and tweak it in minor ways enough times you become blind to the overall impact it has on someone seeing it for the first time.
hydroacetylene
12hr ago
But then again, we have sealed food order bags for the delivery apps for 'peace of mind', so its likely that this type of thing is common, even for low value goods.
I suspect tamper proofing is less about drivers stealing and more about liability for the order coming through wrong.
hydroacetylene
12hr ago
Pathetic, disgusting. Using your child as a shield and making them do bad things. I have heard that some places like SF dont have felony charges unless you dont strike a threshold amount, meaning that you can legally send kids to steal a lot of stuff regularly and not face any consequences legally either.
The use of minors to commit crimes is quite common; the main reason in the US that dads don't do this more often is that the criminal class are, uh, not very involved fathers. They do like to befriend fatherless adolescents(even ghetto mommas don't like their kids kids hanging around criminals much) to recruit them into being patsies though.
hydroacetylene
12hr ago
NFP is overwhelmingly a method used by hardcore Catholics and not the underclass; actual lower class people use condoms.
hydroacetylene
12hr ago
Normal people do not use NFP to refer to anything other than using it as birth control, unfortunately.
EverythingIsFine
Well, is eventually fine
12hr ago
The chances of actually striking it down in its face are actually zero. I mean that completely. Zero. If it happens I will shave my head and never comment anything about politics again ever on any website. Zero.
The chances of them weakening it via some kind of practical or legal obstacles, to the point where it is effectively dead is extremely low but not impossible. Under 5% surely. Maybe 1-2%? Still quite a reach. Maybe still that’s high.
The chances of some other procedural weakening where it is merely super annoying, that’s a little higher. I’m not sure exactly where to peg it.
The chances of practical and legal burdens and even unalterable mistakes for those currently giving birth in the next year or so are actually kinda high. But that’s by definition temporary. Not much comfort if you or your wife are pregnant right now and lack papers. Honestly I think this is the true target and goal of the administration. If you are cruel and capricious enough you might get enough people to self deport, or not make the trip over, and this helps the near term numbers and politics.
The long-term outlook for birthright citizenship is not really under any actual threat. You still need an amendment to change it. At most, beneficiaries will have to budget a little bit more on practical or legal bills surrounding the birth, but that’s already the case to some extent with any new baby birth (it’s never free)
hydroacetylene
12hr ago
Just curious- other than one great grandfather, all of my ancestors were in the continental US before 1776(many were in then-Spanish Louisiana, but the rest were in the thirteen colonies). Do I count?
dr_analog
top 1% of underdog fetishists
12hr ago
I get your conflict theory view on law.
I don't understand this part though
You accepted violation of the law to allow illegal immigrants in. On what grounds do you appeal to the law now?
Where have I accepted violation of the law to allow illegal immigrants in?
EverythingIsFine
Well, is eventually fine
12hr ago
You mean the literal exact argument that leads to authoritarianism and the destruction of democracy? I think Democrats obviously freak out over stuff way too often and too loudly, but this is a pretty classically un-American view. The irony is rich here.
hydroacetylene
12hr ago
The one who banned the abortion pill?
hydroacetylene
12hr ago
This is about teenagers, not homeless people. It is, specifically, an age verification law- yes, getting around it is probably very doable for a motivated young lad, but we can reasonably assume that the people the law is explicitly targeted at are the ones most affected.
I think you believe that citizenship is an entitlement that belongs to the parent, rather than the child, and that they distribute it according to their will. In that model, it would make sense to say that, mechanically, "giving a child citizenship" is equivalent to "giving their parent the right to make their children citizens." Consequently, you perceive birthright citizenship as a reward to illegal immigrant parents.
Is that accurate?
More options
Context Copy link