[ad_1]
Although Blackburn did not specify what she was referring to when she said children were being “inundated,” she was likely referring to the idea of “social contagion”. This thoroughly debunked idea, which is a favorite talking point of right-wing anti-trans activists and influencers, is that children are, en masse, being persuaded into identifying as transgender after encountering trans content on the internet.
Blackburn’s statement is a vindication of the myriad warnings that digital rights advocates have been issuing for months: While the bill ostensibly aims to hold platforms responsible for preventing and mitigating any potential harm that could come to minors who interact with various kinds of content online, what constitutes harm would be left up to Attorneys General — the same officials like those who have blocked access to medical care for trans youth in states like Texas and Missouri.
As a 2022 statement from digital rights group Fight for the Future points out, under KOSA, online services would face “substantial pressure to over-moderate, including from state Attorneys General seeking to make political points” about what content is appropriate. This over moderation could include blocking access to content that promotes “sexual exploitation,” self-harm, suicide, and “other matters that pose a risk to physical and mental health of a minor.” At a moment when books that discuss LGBTQ+ identities and anti-racism are being banned and trans kids are being demonized and denied access to care, vulnerable young people shouldn’t be denied access to what might be one of the few avenues they have to information.
Despite this, KOSA enjoys bipartisan support, including a July endorsement from President Joe Biden. And although multiple LGBTQ+ advocacy organizations initially signed onto a 2022 letter opposing the bill, as Vice reported, LGBTQ organizations like GLAAD and HRC have since dropped their opposition.
As the Advocate reported last month, supporters of KOSA include a “who’s who of anti-LGBTQ+ organizations.” But the ACLU, Electronic Frontier Foundation, and Fight for the Future continue to fight against the bill’s passage.
“Members of Congress aren’t qualified to tell people what to read — kids or adults, online or offline,” writes Joe Mullin, policy analyst at Electronic Frontier Foundation. “We wouldn’t let attorneys general remove books from a school library because they could be depressing or promote substance abuse. We shouldn’t let them have such censorial power over the internet, either.”
Get the best of what’s queer. Sign up for Them’s weekly newsletter here.
[ad_2]
Source link
Author Profile
Latest Entries
SportsSeptember 30, 2023Nevin seeks to build on her promise with Leicester City – FTBL | The home of football in Australia – The Women’s Game
Women's RightsSeptember 30, 2023Experts back decriminalization as the best means to enhance sex workers’ rights
World NewsSeptember 30, 2023What risks do China’s shadow banks pose to the economy? | Business and Economy
LifestyleSeptember 30, 2023Costco has begun selling gold bars