What even is 'adult' content? [NSFW]

Well, many things are natural. Still we have many rules for it. I.e. naturally stronger animals kill weaker ones. Yet we don't want this happen in the human community.

>It's a much bigger question why, such a completely natural and normal thing, like nudity, [...] be made and exclusive thing.

As Nietzsche said, the time has come when we have to pay for having been Christians for two thousand years. That's the simple answer, nudity and sexuality (also entirely natural and normal), have been deemed sinful, you're supposed to avert your eyes from it, and so on. It's so deeply ingrained in Western culture even secularized people still haven't shaken it.

It varies though, being German with half of my family having lived in the GDR, it is funny to see in particular Americans when you talk about nude beaches or mixed saunas and the general Freikörperkultur (lit: free body culture) that was so common and still has carried over.

>It's a much bigger question why, such a completely natural and normal thing, like nudity, in the supposed to be educated - at least in basic biology - 2025, be made and exclusive thing.

Western culture and its morals around sex, gender and nudity are founded on the patriarchal taboos of the Abrahamic religions, whereby human nudity in general, and female nudity in particular (because women are the source of original sin,) is to be considered shameful.

That and we're currently in the midst of a right-wing political reactionary shift against the progressive norms of prior generations (and a moral panic about "groomers" and "pedophiles") which makes censorship of this type far easier.

Let's take Star Wars. Not "graphic," but a lot of killing going on. Some would argue that making the killing less "graphic" actually desensitizes children to the violence.

I am not even talking about really graphic violence, just your run of the mill crime story, shooting your husband to get the life insurance.

"Graphic violence" meant "violence in images" in my lifetime.

Because so many people "learn" words by guessing their meaning from context, it now means what Anthony Burgess called "ultraviolence" in A Clockwork Orange.

Cartoons have already had several re-thinking of what's appropriate as norms have changed.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Censored_Eleven

There is of course sexual content that is inappropriate for children but I did not advocate for letting children see any sexual content out there instead of an anvil onto the head of a cartoon character. But I think it would be better if the husband comes home and has sex with his wife instead of shooting her in the back.

And killing/hitting/maiming another human being is a healthy impression of the human experience compared to it?

Pornography has never been easier to access and teen birth rates have been falling for decades.

Once puberty hormones kick in, teenagers are going to start figuring out that there’s something going on. We’re far better off educating them about the risks involved rather than letting them blindly experiment.

Pornography is probably the worst way to accomplish this goal, of course. Comprehensive sexual health education is vastly preferred. But pretending sex doesn’t exist is how you end up with pregnant kids.

Is there any evidence for that? Why would it not be the opposite, why would a less tabooed treatment of sexuality not lead to better informed children with a lower risk of accidentally getting pregnant?

Why would this be the case? I understand that intuitively it makes sense, but does it actually? What evidence do we have that girls are just like... predisposed to be "sluts"?

In cultures where sex is more taboo, they have bigger problems with teen pregnancy and early marriage. In the US, as access to porn has increased teen pregnancy has plummeted.

Making sex shameful doesn't just magically make people not do it. Tell kids "be abstinent, mmkay" doesnt lower teen pregnancy - it increases it.

As far as I know, there isn't a serious implementation of this that is ready for production and that has enough adoption in the affected regions (e.g. UK).

Chrome and Safari are working on browser APIs that seem reasonable, but will only be available around the end of this year. The various region specific identity providers (like GOV.UK One Login) will also need to integrate with those (possibly through Google/Apple Wallet or their own app).

That means one has to use shady 3p age verification services (like Persona) which do who-knows-what with customer data and cost on the order of $1 per verification.

Do they have that implementation? When I looked into it I thought you had to send your passport scan to a vendor of some kind?

I am planning a blog post soon on this topic and all the ways a "VPN Block" can be bypassed and how even trying could cause internet bills to skyrocket.

Maus is a depiction of Art Spiegelman's father's experience as a Holocaust survivor.

It was an autobiographical comic about the Holocaust? How's that not a representation of history?

There's more than a subtle misogyny to the anti-OF messaging people throw around, not to label the grandparent comment as falling into this issue.

I have seen comments along the lines of "Onlyfans spotted, opinion dismissed," numerous times online under posts/videos completely unrelated to a content creators OF business. The idea that a person is a sex worker and therefore a slut (in a derogatory rather than reclaimed sense) and therefore they and their opinions are worthless, is the unstated logic of this sentence.

The misogyny drips off of the concept of an Onlyfans lessening someone.

“Porn is fine, but Javascript, no thank you” :)