I can understand why all the other things would be listed here, and I would understand if sexuality in general was considered inappropriate for children, but why homosexuality in particular? This is strange to me.

<content_rating type="oars-1.1">
  <content_attribute id="violence-cartoon">none</content_attribute>
  <content_attribute id="violence-fantasy">none</content_attribute>
  <content_attribute id="violence-realistic">none</content_attribute>
  <content_attribute id="violence-bloodshed">none</content_attribute>
  <content_attribute id="violence-sexual">none</content_attribute>
  <content_attribute id="violence-desecration">none</content_attribute>
  <content_attribute id="violence-slavery">none</content_attribute>
  <content_attribute id="violence-worship">none</content_attribute>
  <content_attribute id="drugs-alcohol">none</content_attribute>
  <content_attribute id="drugs-narcotics">none</content_attribute>
  <content_attribute id="drugs-tobacco">none</content_attribute>
  <content_attribute id="sex-nudity">none</content_attribute>
  <content_attribute id="sex-themes">none</content_attribute>

  <!-- this line here -->
  <content_attribute id="sex-homosexuality">none</content_attribute>

  <content_attribute id="sex-prostitution">none</content_attribute>
  <content_attribute id="sex-adultery">none</content_attribute>
  <content_attribute id="sex-appearance">none</content_attribute>
  <content_attribute id="language-profanity">none</content_attribute>
  <content_attribute id="language-humor">none</content_attribute>
  <content_attribute id="language-discrimination">none</content_attribute>
  <content_attribute id="social-chat">none</content_attribute>
  <content_attribute id="social-info">none</content_attribute>
  <content_attribute id="social-audio">none</content_attribute>
  <content_attribute id="social-location">none</content_attribute>
  <content_attribute id="social-contacts">none</content_attribute>
  <content_attribute id="money-purchasing">none</content_attribute>
  <content_attribute id="money-gambling">none</content_attribute>
</content_rating>
  • jsomae@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    4 months ago

    All of these represent various social mores. I’d have no problem with my kids seeing content involving fantasy violence, but I respect that others might object. As a bisexual myself, I have less respect for those who object to their kids seeing homosexuality specifically, but I can tolerate their existence.

    For fairness’ sake, I wouldn’t mind it if heterosexuality were on the list too.

    • Nisaea@lemmy.sdf.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      4 months ago

      I think things got lost in translation here. We’re not talking about explicit/pornographic content here. There are other tags that cover that. This, however, indicates sexual orientation in general which covers any display of affection that characterizes same gender couples, including kissing, holding hands or be explicitly in a relationship, which is no less appropriate for kids than straight smooching.

      Hope that helps

      • jsomae@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        4 months ago

        Yes that was clear to me. I was saying that, while I don’t find same-sex content objectionable (indeed it makes me happy to see this kind of representation on screen), and I personally think it’s something children should be exposed to, many people would disagree. Just like other tags on here which I think children shouldn’t be exposed to at a young age but others wouldn’t mind. Relative morality.

        Politically speaking, I would be happier if those who oppose same-sex relationships were to change their minds. They pose a threat to my life. But FOSS is for everyone, even people I disagree with.

        • Nisaea@lemmy.sdf.org
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          4 months ago

          Oh yeah, absolutely. It, unfortunately, a reality.

          To mine as well, I’m with you on that one.