“Mom” isn’t doing this unless she’s uber rich. Someone is bankrolling her to try to set precedent.
this post was submitted on 24 May 2025
532 points (97.3% liked)
Technology
70283 readers
3500 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related news or articles.
- Be excellent to each other!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
- Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.
Approved Bots
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
Ding Ding Ding! You Win!
Mom is joined in her lawsuit by the National Center on Sexual Exploitation (NCOSE).
https://endsexualexploitation.org/
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Center_on_Sexual_Exploitation
The National Center on Sexual Exploitation (NCOSE), previously known as Morality in Media and Operation Yorkville, is an American conservative anti-pornography organization.[2][3] The group has also campaigned against sex trafficking, same-sex marriage, sex shops and sex toys, decriminalization of sex work, comprehensive sex education, and various works of literature or visual arts the organization has deemed obscene, profane or indecent. Its current president is Marcel Van der Watt. The organization describes its goal as "exposing the links between all forms of sexual exploitation".[4]
I'm pretty sure NCOSE is a cover for a pedo ring. They probably frequented Epstein's parties.
They are a right-wing religious advocacy group. So it's practically a guarantee.
Pretty sure those NCOSE assholes are the ones who said school shootings and other mass murders are because of moral decline due to gay people.
load more comments
(1 replies)
Operation Yorkville
I have found my new masturbation euphemism.
I mean who doesn’t like opping their york in the shower after a long day
load more comments
(1 replies)
load more comments
(6 replies)
Anti-masturbation shaming and lawfare and the idea that you can blame all your problems on it is a mainstay of the religious right playbook.
They then hold the forever frustrated subject in a mental shame prison they can never escape but above which they can self righteously judge everyone else and feel they know the real reason why everything is messed up. A similar self sealing logic as the conspirationnists.
“Q.R., using his mother’s old laptop, had unfettered access to the internet and began searching for hardcore pornography,” says the court. His mom claims this led to “pain, suffering, disability, disfigurement, and mental anguish; psychological injury; past and future love of enjoyment and pleasure of living.”
It's not the internet making your son feel those things, it's you.
Why is the mom not responsible for giving her kid internet access.
Well she is, but also the law states she can get compensation if an adult site doesn't age restrict minors.
Negligent is the word you're looking for. And her child should be removed and put in a safe environment. At the least she should have to pay a fine and attend classes and child protection should make visits.
Disfigurement? Kid's doing something wrong.
Mom never supported any kind of sexual education and definitely refuses any kind of healthy and mature conversation with the poor kid.
load more comments
(1 replies)
His mom claims this led to “......; past and future love of enjoyment and pleasure of living.”
So the mom is suing Chaturbate, et al., because she thinks they're going to cause her son to enjoy life in the future? Is that the mental gymnastics going on here?
I think it's just poorly written pseudo-legalese, and it's intended to mean that he will be unable to enjoy life in the future because of the psychological damage that poor is doing to him (unrealistic expectations and mental harm, et cetera).
While porn addiction and unrealistic ideas of beauty and sex are genuinely real things that happen, the way to prevent that is with frank, open discussions about sex and pornography, not trying to prevent your 14 year old from masturbating. I was a 14 year old boy at one point, and lemme tell you, nothing could stop me from masturbating. Nothing. It's just not going to happen. Kids will find ways to find porn, and if somehow we completely do away with it entirely (again, won't happen), they'll find new ways, and they'll read and write erotica or get into hentai or whatever. This woman is insane, Kansas is insane, and so are all the other states imposing this bullshit
load more comments
(1 replies)
load more comments
(2 replies)
I have never heard of most of these and I’m a decent degenerate.
I have only heard of one of those ans im a furry. Im a professional degenerate
Never stop to discover new things.
Jeebus, I need backup plans for Friday nights.
Page 8 & 9 of the court filing (not the article):
Through this time, Q.R. was able to access chaturbate.com on thirty different instances: [...] seven instances on August 30, 2024 [...]
Bruh, make sure to hydrate.
Page 13, absolutely fascinating to me that "prays for judgement" is stated and whether that is at all common:
Plaintiff prays for judgment against Defendants in an amount in excess of $75,000.00 for: a. actual damages resulting from Q.R.’s access to material that is harmful to minors, including but not limited to past medical expenses, future medical expenses, past and future lost services and disability, past and future pain, suffering, and disability [...]
Page 15, looking for more details on alleged "disfigurement":
As a direct and proximate result of Defendants’ negligence, Plaintiff has suffered and will continue in the future to suffer the following damages: a. Pain, suffering, disability, disfigurement, and mental anguish [...]
It goes on to talk about pornography causing a shift in perspective on sex and possibly leading to addiction. Not finding anything specific on the alleged "disfigurement".
I'm left to assume poor Q.R. will have to deal the rest of his life with the friction burns caused by jerkin' it 7+ times on August 30, 2024.
His mom also demanded a jury trial, so Q.R. can rest easy knowing 12 strangers will hear about his friction burns and give it the serious attention due.
Page 13, absolutely fascinating to me that "prays for judgement" is stated
It's not a "prayer" in the religious sense.
"Prayer" in a court filing is what the plaintiff asks the court to do to resolve the case.
Ty! TIL. I've probably seen it many times before, but it only jumped out at me this time given the Olathe, KS setting and strong fundie Christian vibes.
This was so hilariously stated - and your comment is quite thought-provoking.
I can't imagine how this poor teenager will think of his mother over time.
I can't imagine how this poor teenager will think of his mother over time.
Not well, this much is certain.
Bet that kid is counting the days until he's legally an adult and can get away from her.
As a direct and proximate result of Defendants’ negligence, Plaintiff has suffered and will continue in the future to suffer the following damages: a. Pain, suffering, disability, disfigurement, and mental anguish […]
More likely a direct result of his mom being a fucking psycho.
Surely you cannot sue someone for future injuries where the future injuries are entirely unevidenced. There would have to be some kind of medical assessment that said that this kid is going to suffer ongoing injuries and I can't imagine they have such an assessment.
Maybe the counter argument should be that this kid's mom should attempt to get him on disability payments, and only if he's able to get on that, will they accept liability. There is zero chance of that happening.
Agreed. As a lawyer friend once told me, "you can sue someone for damn near anything. It doesn't mean you'll win".
I imagine the "disability and disfigurement" will get sussed out at some point and either backed up w some sort of evidence, or taked out from the rest of the complaint.
You mean he wasn't born on January 1st 1970?
Ah yeah, that's what sex on the first date means
"Hello maam, your son clicked the prompt stating he wasn't in Kansas. Our service is not offered in that state. Goodbye."