Well said.

I've long learned at this point that people claiming to want stuff dealt with/gone always use the 'think of the children' argument to enforce their stance. But in truth, they themselves are often the ones failing to think of the children, and are often treating said children horribly in the process. After all, there is no respect or consideration of humanity for both their targets OR the children they address; the children are merely ammo for their goals, a resource to be used and discarded when it's not useful anymore. It's sick.

I wish people would ACTUALLY think of the children, and mean it. Not to meet their own selfish goals, but to actually help the youth of today in positive and productive ways.

Thanks for reading.

Actually helping children can boil down to just helping people. A lot of children are in bad situations because their families aren't well off; and that's a symptom of the overall issues facing poverty, careers, food, the relationship between the people and media, government, power systems etc.

Anyone claiming that their single action can "save children", let alone save anyone, is a fool. These are all complex issues - if they were solvable through single actions people would have done those things already.

That's a good point! Yeah, just, like. Being interested in helping people, regardless of age or anything else, is ultimately the best way forward. And you're right; assistance tends to trickle down and make a positive impact on multiple people, including kids.

Wish more people would try some of this positive influence rather than invest their time in negatively tearing things and people down...

Guarantee its a puritan power hungry mod that's taking their power too seriously

Its more likely than not a move to appease advertisers.

Some people have said that this is coming from feedback from the user base; I feel that is just as likely as it is an excuse to appease advertisers.

Considering advertise companies ARE power hungry puritans, you've basically nailed it on the head anyway heh

It's a real chicken and the egg situation. It's true that advertisers steer what content is considered acceptable; they have a lot of sway because money talks. But at the same time, the advertisers are only concerned about what their image is, what the general public thinks of them, and that influences their decisions. So the general public's opinions/reactions have an impact on advertisers, which then pressure sites/etc into conforming in certain ways, which forces users - which do largely consist of the general public - to abide by the new policies.

So the general public is both the cause and the victim of these flexes by advertisers, weirdly.

A lot of these "save the kids!" type of people are demented, or simply false, at best.
Remember when the BATHROOM debate came up ? How afraid people were of "the kids" being molested in bathrooms?
What was their "solution" in the end?
Oh yeah.
To check if those scary people were really what they said they were, to "protect the kids" they were okay with HAVING SOMEONE FONDLE KIDS GENITALS TO VERIFY THEIR PARANOIA.
Screaming, obvious hypocrisy.