@crotchner2 Obviously nobody should be forced but it makes me sad that some men will watch their wife go through pregnancy, birth and postpartum, and then expect HER to be the one to have to put her own body through more just to prevent more pregnancies.
@HildaMcevoy I've admitted i would have hated this as a kid, but overall a social media ban would have very positively impacted my life in the long run at that age π€·ββοΈ
@jambo__fett Exactly. If people want to talk about digital ID, that's a different conversation all together. But kids being banned from social media is a brilliant thing. I do agree that YouTube can be great for educational reasons though, but a lot of the stuff on there is not educational
@Gypsypup13 This! I'm convinced the majority of parents who are upset about this ban are upset because this means they actually have to talk to their kids, spend time with their kids and help educate their kids on real world issues without relying on social media.
@funkomi I personally think YouTube shouldn't be banned but instead should be heavily regulated for kids. Like keep all the educational videos, but make sure kids can't access pointless videos that serve them no educational benefit.
@Stuff_by_Aaron@SimonHarrisMBD The second people start to realise social media is extremely harmful, hopefully they will start to understand this ban. Social media needs to be banned for kids because it's dangerous, just like drinking and smoking is dangerous.
@SimonHarrisMBD Btw, a 16 year olds brain is much more developed and mentally ready for social media compared to an 11 year old child. I would much rather 16 year olds get sudden access to social media compared to 11 year olds getting sudden access to social media.
@SimonHarrisMBD Then spend the next 5 years teaching him how to be safe online without giving him social media? Everyone keeps saying "let parents parent." Okay. Then parent. When he's 16, heavily monitor social media use and teach him safety on the apps before giving him full access to the apps
@Bbmorg Obviously this law won't stop every single child from having access to social media, that's unrealistic. But the percentage of children using social media will go down drastically. Which is a brilliant thing
@Mennox3D@elliereeves I think things like YouTube could be an app where it needs tighter regulations, not an overall ban. Cause YouTube can be resourceful and educational. However, there is no reason a child needs tiktok or instagram π€·ββοΈ
@patrioticgenz9@elliereeves Cause social media is very harmful to kids. Just like we ban smoking and alcohol for under 18s, rightfully so, we should ban social media.
@MamaMoose_Be@elliereeves Cause no kids should have social media anyways? It's not good for them at all. There is always pros and cons but the pros don't have the harmful impact of the cons
@elliereeves People keep saying "let parents parent" but most parents don't parent social media use correctly. Kids shouldn't have free access to scroll social media, that's dangerous. Screen time limits don't change what damaging content will be seen within that screen time limit
@elliereeves It's scary how many people are against this ban. Social media is really bad for kids, especially during their secondary school years. Sure, social media has some positives but the negatives far outweigh the positives.
@shuushiotsuki@glindaupland Google is still free for revision. WhatsApp and messages exist you don't need social media to contact friends and family. Yes there is a few cons to this ban, but overall this is a very positive ban
@glindaupland As an almost 19 year old, I would have hated this ban when I was younger but now I wish I didn't have access to social media so early. Really ruined my mental health. And yes my mum did monitor my phone for years but I still firmly believe kids should not have social media
@eddiesnipples Considering the main post was about Buck, it's clearly a Buck post π€·ββοΈ If someone made this comment under an Eddie post I would react the same way.