How Junk Science is Being Used Against Trans Kids

Also, too: https://www.readtpa.com/p/congress-is-about-to-pass-a-very

This is about KOSA, a bill that says it’s about protecting children, but it protects children the way USA PATRIOT protects all of us. (I borrowed that from the author. There are photos, tweets, and links on the page, click through to help. This affects everyone who doesn’t want to give yet more personal info to the internet.)

“So, there’s a bill making its way through the Senate right now called the Kids Online Safety Act (KOSA). Its co-sponsors, Sens. Richard Blumenthal (D-CT) and Marsha Blackburn (R-TN) claim that it will empower “kids and parents to take control over kids’ online experiences to better protect their health and well-being.”

“Sounds good, right? And who could object to kids’ online safety? Yeah! Empower those kids and their parents! Sure! Well…

“Like a lot of legislation (see: the post-9/11 Patriot Act), the name can be wildly misleading. That’s certainly the case with KOSA, which would drastically reshape the online world. It is a significant threat to privacy, civil liberties, and the LGBTQ community.

“Jason Keeley at the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) has voiced concerns that KOSA would “increase surveillance and restrict access to information in the name of protecting children online.” The bill would enforce monitoring of anyone under the age of seventeen and give state attorneys general the power to censor content. This could lead to the suppression of discussions on sensitive topics like substance use, suicide, and eating disorders due to legal fears.

“Additionally, Keeley warns that KOSA could mandate1 age verification for online platforms, undermining anonymity and requiring all users to disclose private data, regardless of age. This could lead to a more divided and censored internet. He writes, “KOSA would not enhance the ability of users to choose where they spend their time. Instead, it would shrink the number of options, by making strict requirements that only today’s largest, most profitable platforms could follow.”

“The potential for misuse is especially troubling when considering its impact on the LGBTQ community. In a Teen Vogue op-ed, Fight for the Future organizer Sarah Philips draws attention to the fact that right-wing groups such as the Heritage Foundation have openly stated that KOSA will allow them to censor content they deem unsuitable for young people, which could include LGBTQ content. That might even include this very newsletter.

“Philips points out that KOSA gives state attorneys general the power to decide what content is harmful to children, which could result in the removal of content about gender-affirming care or abortion if a state attorney general argues that such information could cause depression or anxiety in a child. As the article states, “We don’t live in a country where there is a consensus about what is harmful to children, so how could the government determine what’s appropriate for every kid?”

“The internet should be a space for learning, exploration, and connection for all, regardless of age or identity. While protecting children online is crucial, it’s equally important to ensure that these protective measures don’t infringe on civil liberties and privacy rights. KOSA fails to strike this balance. As the EFF puts it, “It is not a safety bill—it is a surveillance and censorship bill.”

“I don’t often use this newsletter to urge people to take action in response to specific bills, but today’s a bit different. See, KOSA isn’t just one of those Republican bills that will pass the House but die in the Senate; KOSA is, as I noted earlier, Blumenthal’s baby. It has co-sponsors who are Republicans and Democrats, and just this week, President Joe Biden called on the Senate to “pass it, pass it, pass it, pass it, pass it.” No, the Senate should not pass it, and Biden should not sign it.

“So here’s what I’m asking you to do:
Go to this page on EFF’s website.

“Click the “Take Action” box, and fill in your address information. This is so it can find your members of Congress.

“It’ll ask for your first name, last name, phone number, and email address. Leave the boxes in the “Contact these representatives” section checked.

“Edit the message on the next page so it matches what you want to say to your representative and senators, and click “Submit.”

“Share the EFF site (or this newsletter) on social media.

“Fight for the Future director Evan Greer wrote the following in a May Twitter thread in response to changes to the bill meant to limit the potential for Republicans to use the bill to target LGBTQ and abortion-related content:

“Even with the new changes, this bill will allow extreme right wing attorneys general (the same ones that are banning gender affirming care, targeting abortion providers, and investigating trans kids’ families) to dictate what content platforms can recommend to younger users.

“Narrowing the duty of care to specific mental health disorders does nothing to prevent an attorney general from arguing that, for example, platforms recommending LGBTQ content to kids is causing them to become depressed, anxious, or suicidal.

“The phrase “consistent with evidence-informed medical information” does nothing to prevent that, because AGs can always find cherry-picked studies to support their wild claims. They’re doing this right now. In his “emergency” order attempting to ban gender-affirming care, Missouri’s attorney general cited a Swedish study that claims there is a lack of evidence to support the efficacy and safety of gender-affirming care.

“There is no legal definition of “evidence-based.” Those are just words. This bill will absolutely allow AGs to go after platforms for recommending speech they don’t like to younger users. Tying the duty of care to specific mental health outcomes is also problematic because it will lead to suppression of all discussion around those important but controversial topics.

“Platforms are not going to distinguish at scale between, for example, content promoting substance abuse and content where teenagers talk about their experiences with substance abuse and how they got help. There’s no way a platform like Instagram or YouTube would take on the liability to make such a determination — they’ll just suppress content across the board if it contains certain keywords or appears to be about a topic that might be covered by the duty of care.

“Recommended reading:
The Kids Online Safety Act Would Harm LGBTQ Youth, Restrict Access to Information and Community (Sarah Philips, Teen Vogue, 7/27/23)

‘Pass It, Pass It, Pass It, Pass It, Pass It,’ The President Says About A Bill The GOP Says Will Be Useful To Silence LGBTQ Voices (Mike Masnick, TechDirt, 7/26/23)

Influencers Starting To Realize How The Kids Online Safety Act (KOSA) Will Do Real Damage (Mike Masnick, TechDirt, 7/25/23)

The Kids Online Safety Act is Still A Huge Danger to Our Rights Online (Jason Kelley, Electronic Frontier Foundation, 5/2/23)

How KOSA’s ‘Parental Tools’ Mandate Will Almost Certainly Lead To Abuse (Matthew Lane, TechDirt, 12/6/22)

1
Additional context added 7/27 4:04 pm ET: a de-facto mandate. Kelley’s May EFF piece goes into more detail about why this is.”

LikeLiked by 1 person

2 thoughts on “How Junk Science is Being Used Against Trans Kids”

ali redford says:

July 27, 2023 at 7:22 pm

Also, too: https://www.readtpa.com/p/congress-is-about-to-pass-a-very

This is about KOSA, a bill that says it’s about protecting children, but it protects children the way USA PATRIOT protects all of us. (I borrowed that from the author. There are photos, tweets, and links on the page, click through to help. This affects everyone who doesn’t want to give yet more personal info to the internet.)

“So, there’s a bill making its way through the Senate right now called the Kids Online Safety Act (KOSA). Its co-sponsors, Sens. Richard Blumenthal (D-CT) and Marsha Blackburn (R-TN) claim that it will empower “kids and parents to take control over kids’ online experiences to better protect their health and well-being.”

“Sounds good, right? And who could object to kids’ online safety? Yeah! Empower those kids and their parents! Sure! Well…

“Like a lot of legislation (see: the post-9/11 Patriot Act), the name can be wildly misleading. That’s certainly the case with KOSA, which would drastically reshape the online world. It is a significant threat to privacy, civil liberties, and the LGBTQ community.

“Jason Keeley at the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) has voiced concerns that KOSA would “increase surveillance and restrict access to information in the name of protecting children online.” The bill would enforce monitoring of anyone under the age of seventeen and give state attorneys general the power to censor content. This could lead to the suppression of discussions on sensitive topics like substance use, suicide, and eating disorders due to legal fears.

“Additionally, Keeley warns that KOSA could mandate1 age verification for online platforms, undermining anonymity and requiring all users to disclose private data, regardless of age. This could lead to a more divided and censored internet. He writes, “KOSA would not enhance the ability of users to choose where they spend their time. Instead, it would shrink the number of options, by making strict requirements that only today’s largest, most profitable platforms could follow.”

“The potential for misuse is especially troubling when considering its impact on the LGBTQ community. In a Teen Vogue op-ed, Fight for the Future organizer Sarah Philips draws attention to the fact that right-wing groups such as the Heritage Foundation have openly stated that KOSA will allow them to censor content they deem unsuitable for young people, which could include LGBTQ content. That might even include this very newsletter.

“Philips points out that KOSA gives state attorneys general the power to decide what content is harmful to children, which could result in the removal of content about gender-affirming care or abortion if a state attorney general argues that such information could cause depression or anxiety in a child. As the article states, “We don’t live in a country where there is a consensus about what is harmful to children, so how could the government determine what’s appropriate for every kid?”

“The internet should be a space for learning, exploration, and connection for all, regardless of age or identity. While protecting children online is crucial, it’s equally important to ensure that these protective measures don’t infringe on civil liberties and privacy rights. KOSA fails to strike this balance. As the EFF puts it, “It is not a safety bill—it is a surveillance and censorship bill.”

“I don’t often use this newsletter to urge people to take action in response to specific bills, but today’s a bit different. See, KOSA isn’t just one of those Republican bills that will pass the House but die in the Senate; KOSA is, as I noted earlier, Blumenthal’s baby. It has co-sponsors who are Republicans and Democrats, and just this week, President Joe Biden called on the Senate to “pass it, pass it, pass it, pass it, pass it.” No, the Senate should not pass it, and Biden should not sign it.

“So here’s what I’m asking you to do:
Go to this page on EFF’s website.

“Click the “Take Action” box, and fill in your address information. This is so it can find your members of Congress.

“It’ll ask for your first name, last name, phone number, and email address. Leave the boxes in the “Contact these representatives” section checked.

“Edit the message on the next page so it matches what you want to say to your representative and senators, and click “Submit.”

“Share the EFF site (or this newsletter) on social media.

“Fight for the Future director Evan Greer wrote the following in a May Twitter thread in response to changes to the bill meant to limit the potential for Republicans to use the bill to target LGBTQ and abortion-related content:

“Even with the new changes, this bill will allow extreme right wing attorneys general (the same ones that are banning gender affirming care, targeting abortion providers, and investigating trans kids’ families) to dictate what content platforms can recommend to younger users.

“Narrowing the duty of care to specific mental health disorders does nothing to prevent an attorney general from arguing that, for example, platforms recommending LGBTQ content to kids is causing them to become depressed, anxious, or suicidal.

“The phrase “consistent with evidence-informed medical information” does nothing to prevent that, because AGs can always find cherry-picked studies to support their wild claims. They’re doing this right now. In his “emergency” order attempting to ban gender-affirming care, Missouri’s attorney general cited a Swedish study that claims there is a lack of evidence to support the efficacy and safety of gender-affirming care.

“There is no legal definition of “evidence-based.” Those are just words. This bill will absolutely allow AGs to go after platforms for recommending speech they don’t like to younger users. Tying the duty of care to specific mental health outcomes is also problematic because it will lead to suppression of all discussion around those important but controversial topics.

“Platforms are not going to distinguish at scale between, for example, content promoting substance abuse and content where teenagers talk about their experiences with substance abuse and how they got help. There’s no way a platform like Instagram or YouTube would take on the liability to make such a determination — they’ll just suppress content across the board if it contains certain keywords or appears to be about a topic that might be covered by the duty of care.

“Recommended reading:
The Kids Online Safety Act Would Harm LGBTQ Youth, Restrict Access to Information and Community (Sarah Philips, Teen Vogue, 7/27/23)

‘Pass It, Pass It, Pass It, Pass It, Pass It,’ The President Says About A Bill The GOP Says Will Be Useful To Silence LGBTQ Voices (Mike Masnick, TechDirt, 7/26/23)

Influencers Starting To Realize How The Kids Online Safety Act (KOSA) Will Do Real Damage (Mike Masnick, TechDirt, 7/25/23)

The Kids Online Safety Act is Still A Huge Danger to Our Rights Online (Jason Kelley, Electronic Frontier Foundation, 5/2/23)

How KOSA’s ‘Parental Tools’ Mandate Will Almost Certainly Lead To Abuse (Matthew Lane, TechDirt, 12/6/22)

1
Additional context added 7/27 4:04 pm ET: a de-facto mandate. Kelley’s May EFF piece goes into more detail about why this is.”

LikeLiked by 1 person

1. Scotties Playtime says:
  
  July 28, 2023 at 8:37 am
  
  Hello Ali. Thank you. Like many things congress does, what they claim and what the laws do is very different. Reminds me of Stop Enabling Sex Traffickers Act (SESTA), which was touted as the way to protect children and young people from sexual exploitation. They pushed hard that it would save all young girls. See girl child victims draw far more sympathy and attention. But it did the opposite, it made sex traffickers harder to catch and drove sex workers to even more unsafe risky actions. For example sex workers use to be able to place discrete adverts in Craig’s list and other places like that, agreeing to meet clients in public places to judge the safety of the situation. Now that is gone. It did not stop sex work nor stop sex trafficking. It did not stop older teens from trying to meet adults for sex or selling themselves for sex, it just made it far more risky.
  
  Not only that, but it is moral pushing by people in charge. It is people who have a fundamentalist view of sex and people who engage in it outside of a male / female marriage. Notice these same people screaming we must protect kids / young teens from sex, these people support young girl children not even teens yet being married to adult men. What do they think happens on the honeymoon? The wedding night? Yes that girl gets raped! So it is all a farce designed to push one set of morals, to virtue signal while not really helping anyone but big business who wants your private information. Hugs
  
  LikeLiked by 1 person