That’s what ignorance is all about. They cared more about the disenfranchisement of their own people than the direct consequences. Ageism is what they wanted, and fascism is what they are going to get.

think opposite of Epstein circle

In no way the Epstein circle is the opposite. Rape is not love, those people are rapists not pedophiles.

Considering all the atrocities and unlawful practice which occurred, the USA should be banished from NATO.

borderline paedophilic

That’s not what paedophilic even means. Manipulative, maybe. But not close to paedophilic. Precisely, teleiophilia is the type of chronophila that is present there.

Then parents need to teach kids to stay away from these places

First of all, those parents need to teach themselves, because it is an all ages problem. In reality, the majority will follow the biggest group - that group being the fascist platforms.

I do agree, that it is basically pointing fingers. But the fact is, the social media landscape is engineered to chain the users up into their ecosystem. Teaching will only do so much - regulation of those platforms is what should occur.

Child: “a young person especially between infancy and puberty” (Merriam-webster)

teenager: “someone who is between 13 and 19 years old” (Merriam-webster)

Something doesn’t add up here…

But the thing is, the author is not a child and they didn’t declare that they expected a daycare. The only thing that they wanted was a friendly interaction with their peers - as opposed to misogyny.

Banning social media for under 16 is not equal to uploading IDs.

Bans

Yeah, no. That is straight up fascism, and there is no excuse to be banning a minority just because you believe they should. We fight for an anti discriminate world yet ageism is still prevailent, and you are helping to drag it along.

This is essentially a ploy, the statement “Social media is literally proven to be harmful for developing brains.” Is basically a strawman. The fact is, it has been proven that it is harmful for all the people. In addition, you seem to be inconsistent with the “developing brain” concept: (https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2026/02/260218031606.htm).

Stop trying to equate this to cigarettes or alcohol without looking at the metrics. There are countries which vary with the minimum age of consumption and tell you a different story. But the thing is, they all have a similar conclusion: it is harmful for all.

I would’ve said the same thing if safe alternatives where as widely availabe and as compatible as the common medias. This unfortunaly, is not the case.

Word it like that, the guardian has some pretty authoritarian leaning shit.

The main pieces of the article don’t read like fabricated and are possibly genuine; however, the last part about the ban might be an deliberate attempt to manipulate the reader using emotional baggage after reading the main section. It may aswell be injected there by the Guardian, and its probable the author didn’t even think about the bans.

This yet again is ageism in a nutshell. The Guardian has completely invalidated the authors claims, just because they are a minor. This is where humanity is going: misogyny, ageism, and deliberate injection of stories with malicious intent.

Exactly, this is basically finding excuses to justify these actions. A treatment treats a condition, yet what does this treat - an ego of an person apparently.

deleted by creator

While a ban may make sense on paper, it doesn’t take into consideration that fast fashion is literally designed to last a couple of days. If only the production of fast fashion was more regulated…

not stored.

This is simply incorrect. How is balant lying excusable in this situation? We shouldn’t forget about the fact that there was a massive leak of sensitive information from discord - this alone should strengthen the premise that their supposed intentions are not equal to what they factually do.

It is a drive towards fascism, the corpos and the state has no right to be disrespecting children and the youth, to do a thing they promise to do yet do the exact opposite.

A pedophile rapist

Also a nepophile rapist and a rapist of teens and woman.

been a vile racist for his entire adult life

This suggests that there was once a time where he wasn’t racist - as a kid and as a teenager. Honestly, as a kid he probably threw rocks at people if they didn’t correspond to the color code.

deleted by creator

Since when is australia the 2nd, considering the amount of discrimination that is persistent in that country. Firstly it was the Aboriginals, now its ageism caused by these “protection laws”.

I’d really consider again if that list is accurate.

Agreed, there is no need covering the story with “biden was actually very good”. The truth needs to be spoken, and the truth is that democrats are essentially centrists rather than leaning left.

For change to occur a new party that is actually leftist should be appointed.

The current system is basically composed of tiny changes made by democrats and huge changes made by conservatives - tilting the definition of “centrist” ever so slightly each day.

And I don’t think there were allegations of him being member of a pedophile ring.

I don’t really see a point in that comparison - These two people are evil on its own, there is no point in playing games on who is less evil in this regard. Also it is misinformation to be saying trump is worse than him, as you’re forgetting about the genocide that he did - trump isn’t yet at that point.

It is also important to bring in the fact that trump wasnt just a pedo, but a sex offender. Him being both doesn’t make him worse than hitler.