Hacker News Reader

> I could have easily replaced "breasts" with "intercourse" and the message conveyed would be the same.

The message becomes incredibly different. The very fact that you talk about "sexually charged content" while saying that the message would be the same with "breasts" vs "intercourse" is a demonstration of the cultural differences scrollaway mentioned. A lot of places "breasts" does not automatically imply anything sexually charged.

View on HN

Given the context of the conversation you'd have to intententionally misinterpret the message to assume I was talking abut breasts in a non-sexual context. The core takeaway is very much still the same: A child in 2022 will likely be exposed to extreme amounts of sexual content online, far more than most humans in history have had the ability to see their entire lives.

It's not at all clear that you see the distinction, was the point that scrollaway was making, and I agree.

It matters, given that it is far less obvious to me whether or not your "updated" statement is true, depending on which specific age range we're talking about when you say "child" and how large a proportion of that age group needs to have seen any to justify generalising, and what "extreme amounts" are.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com