🇳🇱
My mom just got her phone hacked when she called a facebook "support" number to try to get help to fix the fact that her facebook was hacked... she literally got hacked trying to fix the fact that she was hacked.... old people really should not be allowed on the internet.
>"...old people really should not be allowed on the internet."
How about Jews? Black people? Asperger's?
@Pat Nah their fine, just old people :)
It's not funny.
@Pat Do you fight just as hard for young people to not be treated different for their age? Do you rally so 12 year olds can drive cars and get licenses or own guns? Chances are you are far more ageist than my comment, as are most people.
My dad let me drive a car when I was 12. And I had my own gun when I was eight years old. It’s up to the parents to raise their kids. If you ask children if they would rather be on their own or live under their parent's supervision, the vast majority will live with their parents. Those who don't want that, end up as runaways.
Once someone has reached emancipation, they are free and society should treat them equally whether they are old or young, black or white, Jew or gentile.
I understand that your OP was meant to be a joke, but what if you substituted another group in place of "old people" as I indicated in my toot. Would that be ok? Of course not. Then why do you think it is ok to discriminate against old people?
@Pat So you think 12 year olds shouldnt have the same rights as other individuals due to their age... that would be called ageist. If you can say someone should be denied rights because you assume all 12 year olds are not at their intellectual peak, then you are just as bad as someone who thinks a 90 year old should be denied rights because they arent at their intellectual peak.
Apparently you didn't read my toot.
@Pat seems like you're both privileging age unnecessarily, although @freemo is closer when he talks about "intellectual peaks". the real issue is cognitive function, which doesn't have a cutoff point on either side which is the same age for all people...
more importantly though, if we're considering a group response, restricting individual liberties should be less favored compared to providing aid to individuals and making society generally better navigable for people with cognitive deficits. doing so also makes things better for everyone
Agreed with this... if we dont want to be ageist, and children are the biggest victims of this, then the solution is simple... test to allow access rather than use age... Anyone who can demonstrate they are responsible enough to drive a car can, regardless of age.
But as long as we deny children almost all basic rights due to their age, based on some notion of mental capacity, then I expect old people to be treated the same... the logic is universal.
My objection is primarily about people feeling that it’s ok to make derogatory comments about old people, when they would never make the same type of comments about someone’s race or religion.
Regarding rights for young people, people acquire specific rights as they get older. Newborns have the right to life and to live without being harmed, for example. Some of those are determined by the parents and others are defined by law. In the US, this process of acquiring recognition of rights and privileges continues until a person reaches the age 35, when all of their rights and privileges are fully recognized.
> My objection is primarily about people feeling that it’s ok to make derogatory comments about old people, when they would never make the same type of comments about someone’s race or religion.
And my point is you and most people would make the exact same sort of comments about kids. Applying your logic of replacing the term with other groups and seeing if it is ok "Children should not be allowed on the internet", checks out as a perfectly acceptable term to use based on age, if we can say that about kids we can say it about old people. for the record I am actually with you that we shouldnt judge or take away rights from old people, but ONLY if that coincides with doing the same for children, which I also support.
> Regarding rights for young people, people acquire specific rights as they get older. Newborns have the right to life and to live without being harmed, for example. Some of those are determined by the parents and others are defined by law. In the US, this process of acquiring recognition of rights and privileges continues until a person reaches the age 35, when all of their rights and privileges are fully recognized.
Yes, society operates by being ageist against kids.. we deny them rights because of some claim of mental capacity (even if the individual does have the mental capacity) and say its ok.
So if we are to be fair the logic shoudl apply both ways, We shoudl slowly give a person rights up until they are 35, give them the right to drive at 16, right to smoke at 18, right to drink at 21, right to rent a car at 35.... then we do the same as they get older, at 65 we take away their right to drink, at 70 we take away their right to smoke, at 75 we take away their right to drive, at 80 they loose all rights to sign and their next of keen has compelte custodian rights,.
Afterall if we give a child rights as their mental capacity develops we shoudl therefore remove those rights as a persons mental capacity declines in old age, fair is fair.
(again I dont actually support this, I am point out that most old people accept and even enforce ageism on children so they should be treated the same in kind)
