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.
A victimless crime?
Victimless? Every sperm is sacred!
Yeah but flip the gender and see how it sits
“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.
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.
Like, a girl jaggin’ in the closet and daddy sues the porn company?
Sits the same for me?
What am I missing here?
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.
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.
It’s been a thing since forever, too. People like this have been hounding TV and radio stations about their content since the very start. And that’s with FCC censorship in play, too.
As a non parent, I agree.
As a cat parent, I agree.
Pics or stfu!
I’ll start
Oh yeah? Well, here’s an extra cute pose just for you, cat-haver police!
He is Toby and he… Err… Loves sleeping belly up 🤷♂️
Fuck that cute, not so little shit!
It’s all related isn’t it? People are too busy and tired to parent, but society pushes/shames them into having kids. So the result is people having kids and pushing society to parent them, then getting upset that this kind of parenting doesn’t work.
All while the same time they cry about parental rights.
Yeah, that’s usually their “right” as a parent to enforce what does / doesn’t get taught in their school.
And their right as a parent always supersedes your right as a parent I’ve noticed.
Its not entirely new.
in the 80s parents wanted to offload parenting onto the TV.
in the 90s parents wanted to offload parenting onto teachers and babysitters.
aughts parents wanted to offload parenting onto computers and video games.
now parents want to offload parenting onto cellphones and tablets. Cant tell you how many kids, even super young kids, I see with their faces absolutely glued to a cellphone or tablet. Even in my own family. Kids as young as 5 had their own smart phones, with completely unsupervised use.
and the one common thread in all of that, is how the parents never take responsibility for the damage their unparented, unsupervised children do or suffer.
Its always everyone elses fault. Its never mommy and daddy, who cant be bothered to give little Timmy even 5 minutes of their day, who is at fault.
I just don’t understand why people have or keep their kids if they hate them and don’t want to be bothered by them. It’d be less traumatic for a child to be given up for adoption and end up with a loving family, than to be raised by these types of people.
Try being a teacher. I’m now a surrogate parent.
Oof. My heart goes out to you. Thank you for your service.
My mom was a teacher. I have an entire extended family of surrogate siblings.
My mom is pretty much Jill Biden in all honesty. If you could find it in you, could you not argue with people trying to purposely trying to entice into an argument?
I get it, and it was difficult for me to accept the same, but please! Accept& love yourself.
Folks are down voting you because you are stating inane bullshit that doesn’t pertain to anything anyone is talking about. Also bringing up Jill Biden for some fucking reason when she also has nothing to do with anything.
Piss off in the desert and use drugs cut with turpentine with the rest of the gormless hippies.
Fuck yeah! Love this!
Maybe they can countersue for her negligence in leaving the laptop unsecured…
If only there was a person that’s supposed to care for and watch over this kid.
deleted by creator
SOCIALISM REEEEEE
Nope, this child is already born, should have stayed in the womb, that ungrate.
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.
Or because a lawyer approached her about 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 should be paying millions of dollars to the family every time someone dies of car.
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.
laughing at her, not with her.
Next: “I’m suing only fans bc my son is a paid supporter of my channel”
It’s honestly cringey to me thinking how it’s possible that the gen Alphas of tomorrow are likely to be in a timeline where their parents could very likely have porn floating on the internet. It’s just so f’d up to think about but my god I don’t get why people have this fascination with publicizing their sex life. It’s so gross. Ew ew
gen alpha are obssesed with being influencers, im not kidding. and alot of reports of them using AI to do all thier essay writing or work.
The oldest gen alphas were born 15 years ago. What 14-year-old influencer do you know about?
I mean the fascination is with money. People are looking for ways to pay their rent.
If you don’t want to see people publicizing their sex life, then you can stay off OnlyFans and Fetlife. It’s not difficult.
That’s not the point, but ok…
Yup, it is. You think it’s gross. Then don’t seek it out.
No, it literally isn’t… but you can keep thinking that.
Cringey? Or just a generally more healthy and normalized societal view of sex and sex work?
Yeah because video recording equipment didn’t get invented until about 10 years ago.
Who has heard of VCRs, not me, they sound like a myth
Point taken, but not very likely the same magnitude as what’s coming or is potentially already out there. Smart phones make it too easy now. It’ll only get worse…
Reminded of that story of the mother who sent her (adult) son nudes to spread around his workplace and advertise her onlyfans for him.
Nothing is the parent’s fault. Blame the teachers. Blame the neighbors. Blame the corporations. Blame everyone but yourselves.
Remember when people took ownership of their responsibilities?
This generation of iPad-parenting is getting out of control. What do parents do nowadays anyway?
Remember when people took ownership of their responsibilities?
When was that, again?
Only when it suits them.
When you try to do good things for kids, like free school lunches and sex education, then it’s all about “hurr durr it’s the parents’ responsibility”
“That is fantastic”. How are these fucking idiots still falling for these traitors to the poeple?
Edit. I know it’s an old video, but it shows that they never even fucking tried to hide how much they hate the working class, and only view them as slavelabour.
I can’t believe current politics are making us forget what a shit stain dubya was.
Use Arch. By the time the WiFi drivers are compiled, the boy would have transitioned to femboy.
/s
One hates having to sound like a conspiracy theorist, but since the Cheeto government is working hard on prohibiting porn, one wonders about the timing for this. One wonders if this is just another paid asshole who happily uses their family to lie and cheat to get anti porn laws to pass
SCOTUS bait to progress Project 2025
Sort of a perversion of Public Interest Law.
Conservative political interests have become well-versed in the strategy of promoting and funding cases that can provoke rulings to achieve legislative consequences at the court level. Citizens United, Janus v. AFSCME, and Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization being classic recent examples.
Very possible we’ll see a “Porn is de facto illegal” court case inside the next four years.
We’ll watch it fail. That’s for sure. Just look at the case against Larry Flynt and Hustler magazine from a few decades ago. This isn’t the first time they’ve tried this shit. They lost miserably last time.
Just look at the case against Larry Flynt and Hustler magazine from a few decades ago.
That was under a very different composition of judges.
This isn’t the first time they’ve tried this shit. They lost miserably last time.
The Larry Flynt case was notable because it was a significant change in the federal standard. Historically, the puritan anti-sex sentiment has been actively enforced within US law.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_obscenity_law#Legal_issues_and_definitions
The sale and distribution of obscene materials had been prohibited in most American states since the early 19th century, and by federal law since 1873. Adoption of obscenity laws in the United States at the federal level in 1873 was largely due to the efforts of Anthony Comstock, who created and led the New York Society for the Suppression of Vice. Comstock’s intense efforts led to the passage of an anti-obscenity statute known as the Comstock Act which made it a crime to distribute “obscene” material through the post.
Anti-obscenity laws endured for nearly a century prior to Miller. And the current government seems to be fixated on a return to that Old Thyme Religion.
They are also still protected by the 1st amendment as far as I am aware.
They’re protected by court precedent citing the 1st amendment. Any five judges can change that, assuming they don’t simply wave through a decision from the circuit courts that amount to the same.
that’s effectively the same thing in the eyes of the court until something changes
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.
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
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.
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.
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.
All that was required to stop this entire situation was for her to put a password on the computer. I live alone and I have a password on my computer. If you’re too stupid to setup password protection then you’re too stupid to be operating a computer or raising children, this really is an issue of parenting.
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…
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 bunch of porn companies.
These are boiler plate lawsuits by the religious right. No rational person would blame the porn sites for being a shit parent.
“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.
high school in the early 90’s. (trade school, granted) was great. doom on pcs after school with big 80’s era speakers echoing the shots in the halls. teachers who let us experiment. (electronics was my trade) with things like booze and “what happens if we fill every outlet with 12v electrolytic caps and turn the power back on?”
learned a lot from that guy.
he died early 2000’s from alcoholism. sigh.
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
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.
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”.
It’s always projection.
30 times… those are ROKKIE numbers!
Gooning go brrr.
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.
I would have sued the laptop manufacturer for making a device that doesn’t have adequate parental controls.
If that doesn’t work I’m suing the person that made the table they put the laptop on for not providing a failsafe to where you can’t put a laptop that can access porn sites.
They should just countersue for poor parenting, she should have regulated her son’s access to the internet
