Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by dryarzeg 40 days ago
>>Almost seven in ten (69%) support age verification checks on platforms that may host content related to suicide, self-harm, eating disorders, and pornography.

>>eating disorders

I'm genuinely sorry, but... wait, what? Okay, suicide, somewhat understandable (although some forums where people just share their feelings are endangered by this). Same applies to self-harm. Pornography - well, at least I can understand the motive/justification, although I don't welcome such intrusions in personal privacy. But eating disorders? What? I'm sorry, WHAT? Where's the reasons behind this? Any adequate justification? I apologize, again, maybe I don't understand the thing, but how eating disorders ended up in the same line as suicide, self-harm, pornography and similar?

1 comments

Eating disorders are self-harm.
They are not. Eating disorders are, in fact, mental disorders. If you're defining eating disorders as self-harm, then depression and other similar issues are self-harm as well.

To clarify my point: I'm not saying that eating disorders don't harm one's body, but that's a mental health condition.

Well what are we talking about with "content related to"?

If it's informational then that doesn't sound like something that needs an age check. If it's encouragement then the encouragement related to an eating disorder is generally encouraging the self-harm behaviors, not (just) encouraging the mental aspect. And a site encouraging depression, if that actually exists and works?, sounds like it goes with the rest of the list too.

> Well what are we talking about with "content related to"?

> If it's informational then that doesn't sound like something that needs an age check.

That is actually the main problem with all that. Because, as far as I know, some informational websites and forums were legally challenged (sorry if I'm expressing this in a wrong way) because they were hosting content "related to self-harm". Does informational content encourage self-harm behaviours, is it dangerous and should it be brought down? Well, I'm not a doctor and I can't really say, but... I hope you get my point.

---

> And a site encouraging depression, if that actually exists and works?

There's a lot of such websites. They're called "news websites" (joke intended)

I know the whole concept is deeply flawed, I'm just saying that it makes sense to put eating disorders right next to some of the other ones.