Youth rights and children rights should not be forgotten. These rights are the most impacted here, which fundamentally causes them to succeed in the eradication of privacy rights.

Totally unenforceable

I’d like to add, while it might be totally unenforceable, it provides a much more higher attack surface for the general populace allowing the authorities to abuse the system even further.

Don’t worry, if it all goes as planned it will even have a gender or even race verification; for your protection.

*Ruling class rapists.

I do agree with you; however, the ‘just because’ part should be emphasised here. For non medical body alternations such as this, there should be a period of time to actually decide if you truly want to undertake this, along with an basic assessment. I’m not advocating for bans, but regulation on how this should be approached in the first place.

Well I do respect your opinion; however, teenagers should have more autonomy in terms of their own body. Age of consent should remain just that - the age of consent to sex, not anything else.

In addition, I don’t think we should rely on arguments grounded on opinions - just as its the case with it matching the age of consent, without further clarification. There are also publications such as WHO which further exemplify the point I’m trying to make.

Also, according to this Neuroscience article which is related to gender affirming care:

adolescents possess the capabilities required to engage in adult-like cognitive control and decision-making

To conclude, the original argument had unclear motives and objectives - of course feedback had enabled to see this problem. Further evidence has been provided to reinforce the position of decision making to not be based on age of consent. Additionally, within research, age of consent has no influence on personal decision making - in terms of your own self.

I still think you have a misunderstanding of what the age of consent is. It’s simply the age where a person is deemed mature enough to consent to having sex with an adult.

I am aware of that fact. The point here is that people below the age of consent shall be able to decide what they want to do as opposed to waiting till the age of consent, as stated within my first argument.

In essence, teenagers should have a degree of say, because they are capable of understanding medical decisions and shouldn’t be restricted towards the age of consent - which usually is used for sexual consent with another person. In addition, age of consent already does one thing, which is sexual consent to others. It shouldnt dictate what you do to yourself.

Yes that is correct, but you’re misinterpreting my initial argument. As by sexual maturity I mean the average age of sexual maturity which as implied within my statement was 13.

But, alas. It is a problem on my end with my argument not being clear enough on that - I can thank you on pointing that error out.

and if possible at age of consent.

While I agree with the majority of the argument, I don’t agree with this point. Age of consent is mainly a political thing, disregarding the actualities involved with teenagers and sexual life, and discrediting those who have problems before that set age.

Biologically, pubescence which is around 13 is where this decision should be undertaken, as this is the point where the individual is sexually mature.

Medical problems start before the age of consent so the individuals which are sexually mature should have the option to treat this condition.

Its actually hurtful to watch the strong opposition to cirumcision involving girls yet barely any opposition involving boys. It looks like another take on sexism and like one commenter said, it makes it more difficult for trans people.

Circumcision for both genders should only be a medical decision, not a thing you or your parents decide just because.

I agree, this is basically an attack at many individuals.

Atleast, the meme mentions “sex offenders” which is more accurate than pedophilia.

The most fallacious statement spoken by the fascist scum.

The packaging was just a taster for what’s to come, I.e. discrimination leading to fascism.

I agree, social media is harmful for all, no matter the age. We shouldn’t be destined to further segment and disfranchise individuals solely because they’re “inferior”, based on age or any other discriminatory factor - the thing is, who is the victim and who is the abuser in this case? Because the situation at hand seems like the victims are getting punished for the wrongdoings of the abuser.

This is where we are at, the corporations flipped the script, and we as a society gulped it all down, tightening the handcuffs around the wrong hands.

But besides the point, relating to the logic within your statement, who are you trying to ban here? Because you mention both “everyone” and “them” - which consequently makes it ambiguous, which introduces double meaning.

Also, the system is not predatory, there are simply predators in the system

I’m just going to leave it at that. Glorifying capitalism is onething but adding discrimination to the mix, and the insifignificance of experience, and the apparent need for fascism to protect the kids and eliminate the need for parenting is absurd to say the least.

The fact that predators are enabled to flourish within the system, while minorities are suppressed and their rights stripped is exactly why that statement is invalid.

Yep, it really seems that all that money goes into coehersion so everyone uses their proprietary format. It is hard to actually come across high quality video releases that are in AV1 - even if you prefer the loyalty free nature of AV1.

But in terms of hardware, AV1 is getting more popular. For one, it is a relatively new format.

Thats what ambiguity enables, a logical fallacy that allows evil corpos to do as they please. And thats basically capitalism, or even feudalism at this point.

To be fair, having experience in OSes from childhood is certainly a life lesson to the upcoming years within teenhood and adulthood. I’m not undermining this attribute, as within a world of complexity, having any experience already puts you further than most.

Please stop trying to justify fascist laws. Ageism is still discrimination. And like people, without prior experience it is quite logical they will be susceptible. This of course applies to anyone any age.

The only problem here is the predatory system that is designed to exploit people. The victims are not the predators so justifying how their rights should be stripped based on an arbitrary number makes this whole argument insignificant.

Like other types of discrimination: racism, sexism, there are other ways than to introduce more social segmentation which always leads to fascism.

Actual studies say

The general consensus is the studies say that usage of devices impacts everyone. Let’s not cherry pick a particular minority here, just to explain that stripping their already insignificant rights is a good thing. In addition teenagers, which are not children, are dismissed here. According to studies they are more similar to adults in therms of decision making capabilities - dismissing that is ageism.

I think no phones until 18 would be doable

This is essentially the same speak as the laws trying to ban privacy for all. First of all where is the consent? Also, what is the sense of punishing the minority for being who they are, stripping their rights, if the perpetrators are still unharmed? In essence, phone and laptop usage wouldn’t be so bad for anyone (not just kids or teenagers), if we focused on the actual problems not turn to discrimination.