Collective Shout, a small but vocal lobby group, has long called for a mandatory internet filter that would prevent access to adult content for everyone in Australia. Its director, Melinda Tankard Reist, was recently appointed to the stakeholder advisory board for the government’s age assurance technology trial before the under-16s social media ban comes into effect in Australia in December.

  • Eximius@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    22
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    20 hours ago

    if the LGBTQ+ games were not sexual in nature (why does it not say?), then that is quite damning and I approve of this conspiracy theory.

    • chaonaut@lemmy.4d2.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      32
      ·
      18 hours ago

      It’s not all that much of a conspiracy theory as those pushing this line at the payment processoers openly advocate that since LGBTQ+ references sex by way of sexuality and gender, then that is sexual content, and is therefore inappropriate for children. This, of course, completely ignores heterosexuality and cisgender because they consider queer people existing to be harmful to children. And trying to get through to them about how important age-appropriate sexual education is in combating child abuse is an exercise in frustration.

    • thanksforallthefish@literature.cafe
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      43
      ·
      20 hours ago

      If you google Tankard-Reist you’ll find it’s not a conspiracy theory - she has actively tried to block queer representation at every level in every way for decades

    • katy ✨@piefed.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      26
      ·
      19 hours ago

      politicians have literally said that the reason for censorship bills about the internet are specifically to go after lgbtq spaces.

    • Potatar@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      17 hours ago

      How can you know a game is LGBTQ+ if they don’t talk about sex/gender? They look like normal humans to me, which differ in sexual preferences only? Example: How can you say this guy is gay without knowing his sexual preferences?

      • sexybenfranklin@ttrpg.network
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        17 hours ago

        There is a difference between talking about sex and gender and something being sexual. If a shopkeeper mentions his husband, I can extrapolate that he’s at least bi, but that doesn’t mean the game is sexual.

        • MBech@feddit.dk
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          8
          ·
          17 hours ago

          In some jurisdictions, something being LGBTQ+ is inherently sexual. Places like Florida have a very psychotic view of what makes something sexual, and bans media for containing LGBTQ+ themes.

        • MiddleAgesModem@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          17 hours ago

          While that makes sense to logical people, there is a rabid right-wing movement in the US that in intent on defining any acknowledgment of LGBTQ+ is inherently “sexual”.