[ExI] Internet age verification spreads worldwide

[Ben Zaiboc]

On 02/09/2025 20:32, Adrian Tymes wrote:
> Not disagreeing with the rest of what you said, but this -
> specifically, the target of exposing minors to pornography - has been
> studied, and while not all of the claims (by any stretch) were found
> true, a nonzero amount did hold up.  I asked an AI to summarize:
>
> ---
>
> The commonly cited harms of exposing minors to pornography fall into
> several categories, though the research quality varies significantly
> across different types of effects:
>
> Commonly Cited Harms
>
> Sexual Development and Behavior:
>
> Unrealistic expectations about sex, bodies, and sexual performance
> Earlier initiation of sexual activity
> Increased likelihood of engaging in risky sexual behaviors
> Normalization of aggressive or violent sexual acts
> Confusion about consent and healthy sexual relationships
>
> Psychological and Emotional Effects:
>
> Increased rates of depression and anxiety
> Body image issues and self-esteem problems
> Potential for developing compulsive sexual behaviors
> Difficulty forming healthy intimate relationships
>
> Social and Relational Impact:
>
> Objectification of others, particularly women
> Changed attitudes toward gender roles and relationships
> Potential impact on academic performance and social functioning
>
> Research Quality and Limitations
>
> The evidence base has significant methodological challenges:
>
> Stronger Evidence Areas:
>
> Correlational studies consistently show associations between
> pornography exposure and earlier sexual initiation, more sexual
> partners, and riskier sexual behaviors
> Research on attitudes shows fairly robust links to more accepting
> views of sexual aggression and objectification
>
> Weaker Evidence Areas:
>
> Causation vs. correlation: Most studies are cross-sectional, making it
> difficult to determine whether pornography exposure causes problems or
> whether teens with existing issues are more likely to seek out
> pornography
> Long-term outcomes: Limited longitudinal research following
> individuals over time
> Dosage effects: Little research on whether different amounts or types
> of exposure have different impacts
>
> Research Challenges:
>
> Ethical constraints limit experimental research with minors
> Self-reporting biases in surveys about sensitive topics
> Rapidly changing technology outpaces research
> Difficulty controlling for other variables (family environment, peer
> influences, etc.)
>
> The scientific consensus generally supports concern about pornography
> exposure in minors, but researchers emphasize that more rigorous
> longitudinal studies are needed to better understand causal
> relationships and identify which young people may be most vulnerable
> to negative effects.

Yes, well.
"Commonly-cited harms" means precisely nothing, except maybe that some 
people want there to be harms. Nevertheless, let's just accept that, and 
do a thought-experiment:

If we stigmatised ball games to the same extent we stigmatise sex, then 
all these things could also be said about ball games, or sports in 
general (ask the AI to summarise the commonly cited harms of exposing 
minors to videogames, see if the results are much different).

The problem is not sex and pornography, it's the way we react to it 
(which boils down to how we have been educated to react to it).

Suppose that the abrahamic religions had decided that sports, instead of 
sex, was evil and had to be controlled by making people feel guilty 
about it:


“The commonly cited harms of exposing minors to pornography depictions 
of sport fall into

several categories, though the research quality varies significantly

across different types of effects:


Commonly Cited Harms


Sporting Development and Behaviour:

Unrealistic expectations about sports, bodies, and sporting performance

Earlier initiation of sporting activity

Increased likelihood of engaging in risky sporting behaviours

Normalization of aggressive or violent sports acts

Confusion about social norms around sports and healthy sporting 
relationships


Psychological and Emotional Effects:

Increased rates of depression and anxiety

Body image issues and self-esteem problems

Potential for developing compulsive sports-related behaviours

Difficulty forming healthy sporting relationships


Social and Relational Impact:

Objectification of others, particularly other players

Changed attitudes toward sporting roles and relationships

Potential impact on academic performance and social functioning


Research Quality and Limitations

The evidence base has significant methodological challenges:


Stronger Evidence Areas:

Correlational studies consistently show associations between

sports exposure and earlier adoptions of sports activities, more sporting

partners, and riskier sports behaviors

Research on attitudes shows fairly robust links to more accepting

views of aggression in sport


Weaker Evidence Areas:

Causation vs. correlation: Most studies are cross-sectional, making it

difficult to determine whether sports exposure causes problems or

whether teens with existing issues are more likely to seek out

sports-related material

Long-term outcomes: Limited longitudinal research following

individuals over time

Dosage effects: Little research on whether different amounts or types

of exposure have different impacts


Research Challenges:

Ethical constraints limit experimental research with minors

Self-reporting biases in surveys about sensitive topics

Rapidly changing technology outpaces research

Difficulty controlling for other variables (family environment, peer

influences, etc.)


The scientific consensus generally supports concern about sports

exposure in minors, but researchers emphasize that more rigorous

longitudinal studies are needed to better understand causal

relationships and identify which young people may be most vulnerable

to negative effects”


And, of course, we would see extensive censorship of media featuring 
sports, a rating system, pixellation of cricket and baseball bats, balls 
etc. (as well as concern amongst the ‘guardians of morality’ about any 
object that looks vaguely bat-or-ball-shaped)

The problem is not sex, descriptions or depictions of sex, the problem 
is our reactions to these things. Learned reactions. Sex can be risky, 
of course. So can sports. Early exposure to sex/sport can affect 
people’s lives, leading them to different behaviours than if they hadn’t 
had this exposure. The same is true of music. And politics. And a host 
of other things that are seen as perfectly normal and natural.

The answer is education, not restrictions. If you want someone to be a 
confident sportsman and well-balanced human being, you don’t prevent 
them from handling (or even seeing!) baseball bats, balls and protective 
gear, you don’t ‘protect’ them from sports programmes on the TV or the 
internet. If you want young boxers to keep safe, you don’t prevent them 
from accessing information about boxing, protective headgear, footage of 
people being repeatedly bashed about the head and the resultant brain 
trauma etc., until they turn a certain arbitrary, evenly-applied age.

When I say education, I don’t mean lectures, I mean access to the 
relevant material, information and discussions, without restrictions, 
without age limits and without moralising. Nobody thinks this is a bad 
idea with regard to sports. Why should sex be any different?

We are actively damaging society with all this stupid censorship. We all 
need to grow up.

-- 

Ben
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20250905/de5a01b9/attachment.htm>