The 14 year old’s mother left an old laptop in a closet and now alleges it’s adult sites’ problem that he watched porn.
A Kansas mother who left an old laptop in a closet is suing multiple porn sites because her teenage son visited them on that computer.
The complaints, filed last week in the U.S. District Court for Kansas, allege that the teen had “unfettered access” to a variety of adult streaming sites, and accuses the sites of providing inadequate age verification as required by Kansas law.
A press release from the National Center for Sexual Exploitation, which is acting as co-counsel in this lawsuit, names Chaturbate, Jerkmate, Techpump Solutions (Superporn.com), and Titan Websites (Hentai City) as defendants in four different lawsuits.
As a parent, this trend in offloading all parental responsibilities onto the people around us is infuriating. Guns, cars, drugs, porn, why is any of this an issue, just fucking parent.
As a non parent, I agree.
30 times… those are ROKKIE numbers!
Gooning go brrr.
So if it weren’t a web site… would she be able to sue 7-11 if the kid found a playboy someone else in her house bought?
Could she sue them if the employee was doing their duty, but a kid broke 7-11’s rule, snuck around and stole one?
The site was illegally breached (accessed in violation of their terms) and the kid accessed content not appropriate for them.
How is the site liable? Doesn’t dmca precedent here say the kid is at fault for bypassing access controls?
Imagine watching porn like everybody else and now your mom sues multiple billion dollar porn companies and everyone around you will know about her idea to do so…
“As you can see from these logs, my son viewed ChixWithDix_69 three times on Tuesday, once on Wednesday and two more times on Thursday, and I can see from my smart home lightbulb logs from the bathroom that he viewed them to completion.”
When I was in 5th grade my mom tried to have a teacher fired for something and I was teased about it every day until I went to high school in a different town years later. This poor kid will never hear the end of it.
At the schoolyard:
So my mom commented on my tiktok dance, cringe!
You think that’s cringe, I borrowed the laptop and now my mom is suing a bunch of porn companies.
Her logic is, “I was a bad neglectful parent so now you must pay.” Nonsense.
Who shit myself
If only there was a person that’s supposed to care for and watch over this kid.
Uncle Sam, right?
/s
Nope, this child is already born, should have stayed in the womb, that ungrate.
SOCIALISM REEEEEE
The right wings infatuation with the government needing to parent for them. Tucker opening to an audience with “Daddy’s coming home” and talking about how the left thinks of the government as being the nanny state (how much protection??)
Eminem had it right, “shouldn’t you have been watching him? Apparently you ain’t parents”
Admin already wanna ban porn, I’d be surprised if they didn’t use this to push that agenda
Well, they want to ban LGBTQIA+ people. This is just the infrastructure they intend to use.
Once it’s in place, they’ll simply declare any media about people they hate “obscene”.
The porn ban is more focused on banning trans people. They have been systematically redefining LGBTQ+ people as pornographic, especially trans people. So if they manage to ban porn, they can use that to wipe any and all LGBTQ+ representation. Gay romance novel? Banned cuz it’s porn. Two female characters happened to hold hands? Banned cuz it’s porn. Trans people existing in public? Banned cuz it’s porn.
It’s always projection.
Man imagine having your goon receipts be public court record at 14.
Also the National Center on Sexual Exploitation is exactly what you’d expect: a bunch of Catholic loons trying to legislate their moral dysfunction upon the country.
I’d genuinely die if the amount of times I got off to femboys while pretending to be straight got out when I was 14 .
The more I think about it the less funny it is.
A particularly vulnerable teen would consider suicide, from the bullying if not the embarrassment.
Let’s not get it twisted. If he was just watching videos on RedTube or something, I don’t think that would have been a huge issue. But what you don’t want is a minor in a chat app actively talking to groomers and what not. I feel like a lot of you would be way less judgy here if it had been a 14-year-old girl on a porn site with adult men.
No. The models on those sites don’t know the age of the people they’re talking to. It’s just another anonymous user watching or grey username saying stupid shit to them in the main chat. The vast majority of performers will not speak to users privately unless they pay. I don’t give a shit if a 14 year old girl is watching porn. That’s her business.
Doesn’t change the fact that the parent wasn’t parenting their child.
You’re right, kids should grow up in a highly observed police state experience with constant observation so nothing is ever the fault of corporations. Turns out Mom has to work when kid is off school and trying to keep someone offline now is nearly impossible. There’s a myriad of endpoints. I think the parenting aspect here is the mom should be explaining to the son why sites like Chaturbate are extremely dangerous. It’s not parenting to constantly police your child. I find it hilarious that a generation that grew up just disappearing into the night until the lights came on for dinner advocates that anytime a parent isn’t directly looking at their child, they’re wildly irresponsible.
I grew up with completely unfettered access to the internet. I first had sex with a married woman that I met on a site when I was 15. I think I largely turned out okay, but I can understand why someone may not want that to be possible for their child.
No, how about you just fucking talk to your kid? “Ew, no I could never talk to my kid about sex! How could I set boundaries in my home with the child I’m raising when I really really don’t wanna talk about the horizontal dance!”
If you can’t be an adult and be involved in your children’s online activities and day to day life, then maybe you shouldn’t have done the things those actors are doing on the porn site? “Oh but it’s your right to have sex and reproduce!” If that’s the case then it is your responsibility to raise that child in an environment that you believe is morally and ethically correct.
You don’t want porn in your house? Learn how to use parental controls on your home network. You don’t want your kid talking to strangers on the internet? Then you ought to make sure you know who they are talking to or stop them from talking at all.
This isn’t black and white and you are being disingenuous suggesting that is the case.
Some of us like porn and also privacy. This woman hates both. This woman wants her freedoms to supercede other’s freedoms.
Oh you mean like I explicitly suggested she do? I think you’re projecting things onto my comment that I didn’t suggest. I think people are just being way too savage on here without any moderate thought about what challenges might be there.
You are obviously not a parent.
Don’t change the gender, change the event. Teen shoots self on the foot while playing with parent’s unsecured revolver. Is Smith and Wesson responsible?
Morally? Maybe. Legally? Hardly.
If dems went on that basis to push gun laws Republicans would have a fit. That’s how you know the political attention and support around this event is an hypocritical act. This has nothing to do with protecting children, but all with exerting government control over citizen’s internet activity.
Grooming happens everywhere on the internet, and Kansas laws aren’t aimed at that at all. Xitter, Facebook, tiktok, Snapchat, Instagram are way bigger vectors of child grooming. We’ve known for a decade that social media is the biggest source of CSAM, usually with way less moderation than porn sites. But this isn’t about children, it is about pushing a purinatical agenda to get support for a party to acquire control of free speech online and ultimately squash dissent and independent thinking.
Lol okay let’s equate a computer and gun, this is a hilariously bad argument
Sexual abuse and grooming children are life altering events that put psychological development and life in danger. How are they not on the same level of severity as a gun inflicted wound? You brought up the subject, not me.
These type of sites required payment or at least a payment method to chat no? The kid could watch stuff but I really doubt they could chat with anyone.
Good point, I’m not up to date on what free offering gets you. If that’s true then that already acts as at least partial age assurance
We laugh, but that mom is the kind of person that wholeheartedly supports the ‘You must provide proof of age to access adult sites’ laws that’re poised to ruin the internet.
And all because she’s too lazy and / or too incompetent to properly parent her child. If you really think something is dangerous for your kid, you’re the number one person responsible to keep them away from it.
How could it be my fault my kid got hit by a car? The government built the street in front of my house!
I consider that analogy somewhat different. Being able to leave your home to travel safely is a basic human right. Cars on roads are inherently dangerous, even if you try to be defensive as a pedestrian. You can be sitting in your grassy front yard and vehicles can come crashing in to kill you. That happens on a regular basis in the US. You can be walking on the sidewalk and have a car run you down. The vision of kids running into the street to be hit isn’t the only risk, merely existing is. Hell, there’s plenty of people killed in their home by cars crashing into their houses!
Car crashes are the #2 reason for children’s deaths in the US (#1 is now guns, it was cars until about 3 years ago). It’s the #3 reason for adults to die after heart disease and cancer. Those stats are actually low balling it because we’re finding the noise and pollution from cars jacks up many of the other categories (including heart disease, cancer, dementia). Living by car roads is just inherently dangerous, regardless of how you try to teach your kids to avoid being run down in their own neighborhood.
The government building car only infrastructure, I feel, is an immoral and murderous act against the public. It’s categorically different from the parental preference of whether your 14 year old manages to see some porn using a computer you bought on an Internet connection you installed.
The government building car only infrastructure, I feel, is an immoral and murderous act against the public.
It ought to be considered malpractice on the part of the civil engineers.
The government should be paying millions of dollars to the family every time someone dies of car.
Or because a lawyer approached her about it…
laughing at her, not with her.
So they want us to use our ID card every time we use the Internet now?
The better to track us.
Maybe they can countersue for her negligence in leaving the laptop unsecured…
shes the one paying for the isp, and should be monitoring his internet usage. just shut it off at certain times of the day when your not home, or when hes not doing hw.
A victimless crime?
The victim is probably the porn industry in this case. An unsecured laptop on an unsecured network is a porn machine. They had a porn machine in their house the whole time. This makes about as much sense as suing Jack Daniels because your kid got drunk when you went away and didn’t lock up your booze.
Victimless? Every sperm is sacred!
Yeah but flip the gender and see how it sits
Like, a girl jaggin’ in the closet and daddy sues the porn company?
Sits the same for me?
What am I missing here?
I’m not getting your point. Why does it matter if it’s a girl enjoying porn?
This Karen probably won’t explain sex to her kids, so they have to get info in other ways.
“Oh no, my little girl found our unsecure laptop and used it to enjoy porn using Chaturbate.”
Yeah I still don’t see how it’s the platform’s problem that that mom failed to lock the laptop. And I feel really bad for her kid, for having such a Karen for a mom.
I didn’t say it was the platforms problem. The topic was how the boy wasn’t a victim. So you go on to say that the girl WOULD be a victim (to her mother) proving my point.
The boy would definitely also be his mom’s victim, but please note what I said: “I feel really bad for her kid for having a Karen for a mom.”
That you read that to only mean “girl” is not my problem. As far as I know, her kid is not a girl, but a boy.It’s funny because we don’t even disagree. Your first comment isn’t even related to the topic and your second is arguing a moot point. But go off I guess.
It depends on what you consider the crime to be. Is it the mom outing her kid’s porn habits or the kid using a platform in the way it’s meant to be used, but not by kids of his age?
If it’s the latter, I’d argue that is a victimless crime. If it’s the former, then yes, the kid (male or female) would be the victim.
Well I’d hate to assume what OP meant by “crime” but whatever it was certainly wasn’t victimless.
I don’t think either of your options for “crime” here make sense. The root problem isn’t the porn site. Or “outing” the kid. It’s that kids probably don’t need unrestricted access to the entire internet. All mom had to do was put a password on the laptop.
