Spectrotica 🏳️‍🌈⚣🔞

Big bro tryna dickmatize me again. Works every time. 😵‍💫
#TheGoonersHandbook

I write to you today to STRONGLY OPPOSE House Bill 2112 (2026) and urge you to vote against this measure in your assembly. While I appreciate the impetus behind the Bill, it will not accomplish its goals and will only serve to criminalize speech which is protected by the United States Constitution. Firstly, and foremost, it is the responsibility of parents to police the actions of their children, to prevent them from accessing objectionable content online, and protect them from harm. This is a PARENTING PROBLEM and nearly every internet enabled hardware device comes with built-in content controls ("Parental Controls") designed to accomplish this level of content filtering and control. The legislature should not be imposing regulation on private individuals—the adults legally accessing the "objectionable content" defined in HB2112—to address a parenting problem. Encourage parents to be more involved and engaged in their children's lives, to employ the tools available to them, and to restrict access to devices and internet access inappropriate for their children. Secondly, imposing compliance with age verification software on all Internet sites that display images defined within the Bill is a fundamental invasion of privacy. While Section 2.2 states that identifying information may not be retained, that simply isn't practical and, if audited by the State, presents logistical challenges for said verifiers. The verification process would also create a "paper trail" through computer log data with which the State could potentially link verification queries with individuals and sites, building profiles on individuals, which is inappropriate and grotesque!

Thirdly, Section 1.7(c) of the Bill is ambiguous and subjective, without exception for amateur expression. Who is to say what works of art, by which artists, is of merit? Who will be the arbiter of "serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value"? This is not a sufficient definition of acceptability. It's dangerous, McCarthy-esque language.  Look, I'm sure you're getting a lot of these messages right now, and I appreciate that your staff is busy and possibly overwhelmed with work. This is a bad bill that will not accomplish its objectives of making the internet safer for children. The reality is that the internet is not a safe place for children to spend time unsupervised and without content restrictions. Parents need to use the tools available to them—on their children's devices, laptops, home wifi routers, etc.—to make the content restrictions necessary to protect their children as they see fit. It is not the place of the Legislature to impose mass content restriction on everyone "for the children" when the solution is far simpler and already exists. I sincerely urge you to vote against this bill. Thank you for your service to your communities and the State of Washington.

Do you live in Washington State?

I need you to do two things:

1) Go here (app.leg.wa.gov/billsummary?...) & read HB 2112.
2) Go here (app.leg.wa.gov/pbc/bill/2112) & leave a comment urging your representatives to vote AGAINST the bill.

This is SERIOUS shit. Please!

My comment in the BLUE images.

I would like to think that this is patently unconstitutional - but unfortunately SCOTUS keeps showing that con law is “everything’s made up and the points don’t matter”

Text from Bill 4123 altering the Miller Test as applied to minors to remove "taken as a whole", exceptions for "literary, artistic, political value" and inclusion of "profane language," among other things.

South Carolina wants to rewrite obscenity law to criminalize "profane" language and gestures.

Bill 4123 would require age-verification to access Netflix, music videos, Judy Blume, Michelangelo's David and anything that might possibly be boner inducing.

www.scstatehouse.gov/sess126_2025...

Forgot to mention this a few days ago. My new AO3 story "Under the Sun" has now been uploaded. archiveofourown.org/works/777551...

How we Fight for the Future in 2026 How we Fight for the Future in 2026 Top

Most people who follow me probably know @fightforthefuture.org but i wonder how many people know like...what we actually do?

Right now we're laser focused on fighting censorship and surveillance so that frontline social movements have a chance to fight fascism and win.

fightforthefuture.org/2026

The support for killing #Section230 is getting worse! I’m sick of seeing corrupt politicians and so many other people being okay with having our freedom on the internet taken away and having us forced to suffer in an authoritarian state because of their “social media harms children” BS lie!

Going to remind y'all that the internet? Art? Youtube? Your communities?

All of it likely gonna be dead and gone and censored off the web if section 230 dies.
Call your representatives.

#section230 #savespeech #protectsection230

Meat 🥩 my bator primo Braulio.
#TheGoonersHandbook

Wrong, wrong, totally wrong. #Section230 is what allows the Internet to exist and for us people to have free speech on the Internet.

@fightforthefuture.org @evangreer.bsky.social Ugh...I'm really fucking sick of these organizations spreading their blatantly incorrect bullshit.

This censorship movement is not aiming to protect the children, it’s aiming to protect bigots and their close-minded ideology while forcing queer kids to be isolated in the dark! Don’t believe me? Look up whatissection230.com by @fightforthefuture.org, who, unlike the lawmakers, want to protect kids

They do not care about child safety, they do not care about the suicide rate, and they sure as hell DO NOT CARE that ending #Section230 will lead to websites being forced to remove any content that supports LGBTQ+ kids and would cause them to take their own lives, especially in hostile households!

Meet-Cute

Vote NO on KOSMA Text SIGN PPBSXB to 50409 to send this to your officials.

Resistbot Petition: Vote NO on KOSMA
KOSA is being rebranded. Stay active. Stay vigilant. Don’t let your reps go unbothered about literally everything that’s going on.

resist.bot/petitions/PP...

Reminder: KOSA doesn't just need to be stopped, it needs to be destroyed. They must be deterred from ever again trying to force us to comply with ID submission to use public websites.

There are too many vulnerable groups they'd love to target with this, for us to stop caring or talking about it.

x.com/triceramonst...

#savespeech #stopKOSA #ProtectSection230

Some things to clarify on repealing section 230 or passing any of these bills:

- Its misleading & unconstitutional
- The usage of AI tools to generate nonconsentual deepfakes is NOT covered under section 230.
- Kids & adults can bypass the AV bills.

It's not to "protect the kids". It's to destroy our free speech and privacy, while putting our own data at risk. Call your reps and tell them:

-Protect Section 230

-OPPOSE KOSA, SCREEN Act + any other censorship/age verification bills.
#SaveSpeech #StopKOSA #Protect230

5calls.org/issue/kids-o...

HB 2900 Introduced by Representative Powell AN ACT AMENDING TITLE 44, CHAPTER 9, ARIZONA REVISED STATUTES, BY ADDING ARTICLE 27; RELATING TO TRADE PRACTICES. (TEXT OF BILL BEGINS ON NEXT PAGE) Be it enacted by the Legislature of the State of Arizona: Section 1. Title 44, chapter 9, Arizona Revised Statutes, is amended by adding article 27, to read: ARTICLE 27. PORNOGRAPHY 44-1383. Commercial entity; pornography distribution and sale prohibition; definitions A. A COMMERCIAL ENTITY MAY NOT KNOWINGLY AND INTENTIONALLY PRODUCE, PUBLISH, SELL OR OFFER FOR SALE PORNOGRAPHY OR COMMERCIALLY DISTRIBUTE PORNOGRAPHY IN THIS STATE. B. FOR THE PURPOSES OF SUBSECTION A OF THIS SECTION, A COMMERCIAL ENTITY ACTS IN THIS STATE IF THE COMMERCIAL ENTITY DOES ANY OF THE FOLLOWING: 1. PRODUCES PORNOGRAPHY IN THIS STATE. 2. SELLS, OFFERS FOR SALE OR COMMERCIALLY DISTRIBUTES PORNOGRAPHY IN THIS STATE. 3. PUBLISHES OR COMMERCIALLY DISTRIBUTES PORNOGRAPHY THROUGH AN INTERNET WEBSITE OR DIGITAL SERVICE THAT IS ACCESSIBLE IN THIS STATE AND IS INTENDED TO REACH OR IS DIRECTED TO INDIVIDUALS IN THIS STATE.

A Republican in Arizona has introduced HB 2900, a bill that would ban the production or distribution of "pornography" in the state.

The AG could fine anyone caught sharing a picture of boobs $10K per photo per day.

I'd normally give this a 0% chance of passing, but hey, its AZ. And 2026.

Even if you were to take the right's penny dreadfuls about porn at face value ...

Imagine wanting the state to decide what images are too sexy and what types of novels are too frank and what types of sexual activities are disapproved for representation.

Like, I know thanks to concerted effort by the church and SWERFs, people have, um, complicated relationships with porn and sex work.

But what mostly goes unspoken is the proposed alternative: state-mandated sexual repression.

Sexual expression is better than sexual repression.

@fightforthefuture.org
@fsc.bsky.social
@eff.org
@netchoice.bsky.social

*notification sound*

Persuasion #nsfw

Recent wordy pieces. Enjoy some sexy words!

The touchpad of the first laptop I had for almost 5 years since 2021 is no longer working… now I can’t log in and get my old tabs back! 😭

My dad is my hero.
#TheGoonersHandbook

Pink everything 👀💗💝

Also, a kid in the UK got arrested because of their own #KOSA law giving the government power to track minors on Discord and arrested them for crude messaging. Just one out of 12,000.

This is why government surveillance should really terrify you. This has NEVER been about protecting kids online!