Popular porn sites now display unproven health warnings thanks to Texas law::Popular online adult film sites in Texas are posting health warnings about watching porn, despite the fact a law requiring them to do so was blocked in August.

  • Uglyhead@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    192
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    edit-2
    11 months ago

    “potentially biologically addictive” and “proven to harm human brain development.”

    These warnings should be required for all social media sites every time you open any webpage or app.

    • totallynotarobot@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      39
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      11 months ago

      While they’re at it they could add “potential to cause spontaneous human combustion” or “potentially damaging to time-space continuum.” Potentially. I’m no porn fan, but my understanding is the evidence on the addictiveness claims is super weak.

      The causal arrow between porn and the brain development thing could easily go either way. It’s hard to tell.

        • SoylentBlake@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          8
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          11 months ago

          It must, that label is on everything, so it effectively means nothing. This exchange happened between my wife and I a couple months ago

          ‘oh honey look…this pink Himalayan salt, which expires in…2 weeks?!? is known to the state of cancer to cause California. Ah, science. What a time to be alive’

          • BossDj@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            11 months ago

            The amount of lead in Himalayan salt (it’s mined from mountains in Pakistan) can be above allowed limits, and especially can cause developmental issues in children. Europe has same or possibly more stringent lead expectations.

            I guess the two takes could be “ugh California has warnings on everything so it’s meaningless” or “wow, FDA really doesn’t give a fuck and allows all this stuff to go unchecked”

      • iopq@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        10
        arrow-down
        11
        ·
        11 months ago

        I mean, there’s such a thing as being addicted to porn. I fall to see how you get such an addiction without looking at it

        • FishFace@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          11 months ago

          Yes, but there’s such a thing as being addicted to sex, too, and pretty much any pleasurable activity. It’s generally pretty rare.

    • CrowAirbrush@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      13
      ·
      11 months ago

      Please don’t the 17 attempts for me to surrender my cookies are already exhausting my willingness to use the web.

      • Uglyhead@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        10
        ·
        edit-2
        11 months ago

        *It looks like you searched with Google!

        Would you like to log into Google?

        Would you like to log into Google?

        Would you like to log into Google?

        Would you…

        Would you…

      • FishFace@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        11 months ago
        • Do you accept cookies?
        • Bonus GDPR consent because we couldn’t be bothered rolling cookie consent into it!
        • Subscribe to our newsletter!
        • Enable notifications!
        • Log in to Google!

        These popups are worse than the actual pop-up ads - at least those were in separate windows or tabs and so could be closed easily with keyboard shortcuts.

        • CrowAirbrush@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          11 months ago

          I often decline their cookie bull, they’ll just keep asking with every new page i load from that website. Preferably with a pop-up that covers 2/3rd of the screen.

          • nyan@lemmy.cafe
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            11 months ago

            If you can figure out which script is responsible for the pop-up, it’s usually possible to block it by, for instance, feeding its URL to your ad blocker. Just takes a bit of patience.

          • FishFace@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            11 months ago

            I think but haven’t done any proper investigations, that some sites only store your cookie response if you accept a certain kind of cookies. Basically every site now divides cookies up into functional, optimisation and marketing, and I have at least observed:

            1. go to website, receive prompt
            2. decline all non-required cookies
            3. go to next page within website, receive prompt again
            4. decline all but functional cookies (or similar wording
            5. go to next page, no prompt.
  • Otter@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    126
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    11 months ago

    This sounds like it’s going to further erode people’s trust in the health systems and the advice of doctors.

    • Max-P@lemmy.max-p.me
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      39
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      11 months ago

      Who was out there discrediting doctors during the pandemic? The exact same people pushing for those kinds of laws and making those bogus health claims.

      It’s always projection with the right.

  • elvith@feddit.de
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    52
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    11 months ago

    If you’re a resident of Texas, please be aware that watching porn is bad for you, jacking off will make you blind and that you’re a filthy person for coming here. If you’re from the rest of the world, why are you reading this instead of watching porn?

    • WaxedWookie@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      edit-2
      11 months ago

      Here I am, unzipped, and a little bruised, but standing at attention, and you’re kink-shaming me?

      Lucky me - that’s my fetish too! Who needs porn!

      • jjjalljs@ttrpg.network
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        23
        ·
        11 months ago

        You can’t expect internal consistency among conservatives. If stopping abortions was a top priority, they wouldn’t be so anti-gay. It’s all about controlling outgroups.

      • bobs_monkey@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        11 months ago

        No no, you see, porn is bad because it keeps men from focusing on snaring a woman and making sure she fulfills her obligation to produce worker bees for God and capitalists. Also, sex is bad, unless you’re a guy. If you’re a women, sucks to suck I guess, get married and make babies.

        • Texas religious leaders, probably
      • SulaymanF@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        11 months ago

        There’s two schools of thought about this. One is that porn extinguishes sexual desire and Poe replaces sex, and the other that it only feeds the desire until people actually go out and have more sex. There’s competing studies on the topic.

        • HappycamperNZ@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          7
          ·
          11 months ago

          No, but if it stops me having a drunk hookup with a random it has the same effect.

          Good old steak v hotdogs arguement

  • arc@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    28
    ·
    11 months ago

    Masturbation makes hair grow on the palms of your hands - it’s science people.

  • AutoTL;DR@lemmings.worldB
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    11 months ago

    This is the best summary I could come up with:


    The move comes after a US appeals court temporarily overturned an order blocking a Texas law that required porn sites to verify users’ ages and display government health warnings.

    Though they don’t require age verification, every Vixen Media Group site — which includes Deeper, Blacked, and Vixen — now displays factually debatable disclaimers warning that porn is “potentially biologically addictive” and “proven to harm human brain development.” The warnings appear to users within the state of Texas.

    It’s not clear how long the disclaimers have been online, but they appear to be a reaction to Texas’ HB 1181, which was initially scheduled to go into effect on September 1st but has been hotly contested in court.

    HB 1181 requires adult sites to display disclaimers and verify users’ ages with government-issued identification.

    However, a district judge agreed to block it in late August after a group of adult entertainment activists and companies — which included Pornhub, Brazzers, and the Free Speech Coalition — filed a complaint arguing it was unconstitutional.

    The lawsuit criticized the law’s required health warning, calling it a “mix of falsehoods, discredited pseudo-science, and baseless accusations” and “a classic example of the state mandating an orthodox viewpoint on a controversial issue.” District Judge David Alan Ezra agreed, rejecting both the age verification rule and the health disclaimer.


    The original article contains 409 words, the summary contains 218 words. Saved 47%. I’m a bot and I’m open source!

  • schnurrito@discuss.tchncs.de
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    9
    arrow-down
    25
    ·
    11 months ago

    Remember when people on the Internet generally universally agreed that it was bad when the government (or anyone) regulated or censored the Internet?

    I want those times back. It isn’t any better whether it is because of left wing causes like “misinformation” or “hate speech” or right wing ones like the thing this article is about or “piracy” or “terrorist propaganda”.

    • Dark Arc@social.packetloss.gg
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      11 months ago

      That was before someone on Twitter’s best addition to the conversation was to call me “a caribou diaper baby” … which while a very creative insult … is pretty ridiculous conduct.

      I agree the government regulating speech is a fine line. We don’t need real information being suppressed, but we also need a way (with checks and balances) to shut people that are entirely full of shit (or people that if the Internet was a real establishment would be kicked out for being deranged and unhinged) up.

    • SulaymanF@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      11 months ago

      It’s not censored, it’s a warning label you can click past.

      Internet porn addiction is a genuinely harmful thing.

      • schnurrito@discuss.tchncs.de
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        11 months ago

        This is why I also mentioned “regulated”, not just “censored”.

        In my teen years I was convinced that the government shouldn’t have any business telling us what to do on the Internet and thought that that is what the future would be like, that we were then living in a temporary situation where governments were still trying to do so but eventually the Internet would win.

        That turned out different. I really wish I knew how to help achieve a utopia of free worldwide communication.

    • vacuumflower@lemmy.sdf.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      13
      ·
      11 months ago

      See those downvotes? Yes, that’s because those times were conditioned by the Internet being a niche thing. You can’t expect such adequacy today even here.

      That aside, legally fighting “misinformation” is outright obvious censorship, not even trying to pretend to be something else.

      • schnurrito@discuss.tchncs.de
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        11 months ago

        I once hoped that if the Internet were more popular, society at large would become more like the Internet.

        Hahahahahaha no

      • SoylentBlake@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        11 months ago

        I am 100% fine with censorship of known falsehoods. Let them appeal it in court. Even the tools behind 1/6, besides the biggest tool at the top, won’t even risk perjury and probably contempt, in court, with the risk of jail, unlimited fines, and permenant censorship from mass media on the line.

        I would prefer the falsehood to left up, colored a deep red and shrunk down to like 8pt font with a pop up on your curser that comes up when you hover over it, stating the fact of what it is; such as ‘unproven’, ‘demostrably false’ hyperlinked to evidence, ‘conjecture’, or ‘MTG - Jewish Space Laser crazy’.

        Pick up social issue, it doesn’t matter your stance on it. Chances are, there is a science behind it that clearly takes a position. Facts over feelings.

        Changing your mind when given new information is a strength, not a weakness. Doubling down on error…? That’s some flat earth, you are definitely going to an old folks home now, kind of shit. That’s how it looks. Onset dementia.

        I apologize to those with real onset dementia, we know you didn’t choose it, you’re still worthy of respect.

  • AndyLikesCandy@reddthat.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    10
    arrow-down
    29
    ·
    11 months ago

    “unproven” because it’s Texan. Fuck The Verge, Internet porn addiction is as real as those beetles that have sex with beer bottles because they’re brown and perfectly glossy like an ideal mate.

    • ramenshaman@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      18
      ·
      11 months ago

      those beetles that have sex with beer bottles because they’re brown and perfectly glossy like an ideal mate.

      Um. What?