This is hilarious and harmless. Who cares?
I find it far more offensive that you wouldn't even be able to post this headline without self-censoring in the major social media apps for fear of The Algorithm. How far the internet has fallen.
This is hilarious and harmless. Who cares?
I find it far more offensive that you wouldn't even be able to post this headline without self-censoring in the major social media apps for fear of The Algorithm. How far the internet has fallen.
It’s objectively not harmless, and clearly lots of people care.
Subjectively, yes. Not sure about objectively.
Subjectively, porn has been shown to cause lots of dangerous effects.
> This is hilarious and harmless. Who cares?
Our daughter is 8. As her father, I’d rather she not be exposed to pornography, and I know my wife would agree with me on that. Of course, she’s sure to somehow be introduced to it eventually, but I hope not until she’s significantly older.
If I lived in a middle eastern nation, worrying about my daughter seeing a few seconds of porn would be so far down the list of worries I have for her that it wouldn't even register.
I’m not in the Middle East, but I don’t think the question of the appropriateness of displaying pornography in public places is country-dependent.
There's a huge difference between "appropriate" vs "harmful".
How do you define "harm"? I think there are reasonable definitions by which it would be considered "harm".
Many jurisdictions worldwide criminalise exposing people to pornography without their consent – see for example, Sexual Offences (Scotland) Act 2009 section 6 [0] – and especially doing it to minors. Criminalising doing something to someone without their consent constitutes an official judgement that such an act is harmful.
[0] https://www.legislation.gov.uk/asp/2009/9/section/6
it could be minutes if traffic
[dead]