LGBTQ+ “Activist” Calls for More Government Surveillance and Censorship of the LGBTQ+ Community

The LGBTQ+ community has frequently been the target of government censorship. For one “activist”, apparently they need more of that.

When lawmakers push internet censorship or other forms of thought control legislation, the underlying reason is often to suppress the LGBTQ+ community. In the last few years, it’s all wrapped up in a loosely defined term like “pornographic” or “harmful” terms. In fact, supporters of these internet censorship laws are so obvious about their intention, they straight up admit that this is the desired outcome. Similar thought control efforts frequently play out as well. For example, when book bans are pushed, it’s often sold as a way to prevent children from reading about sexual content. Then, when book bans get enforced, it becomes a very blatant operation to suppress LGBTQ+ material.

The same sort of thing is playing out with age verification laws. They are frequently sold by supporters as a way of protecting children from viewing “pornographic” or “harmful” content. Yet, the obvious underlying push is to suppress communities like the LGBTQ+ community. After all, these efforts are frequently backed by radical religious organizations who have long been going after these communities with guns blazing. So, it’s pretty obvious what at least one of the key objectives for these government surveillance and censorship legislative efforts really are. You would think that people who consider themselves as “professional organizers” would be well-versed about these sorts of things.

Apparently, not all of them got the hint.

For context, Republicans have been pushing to expand age verification onto app stores. This in an effort to control even more infrastructure that requires the forking over of all of your personal information just to use the darned thing. Meta similarly pushed for this in hopes that their services won’t be the ones requiring to implement such obviously flawed technology. After all, they don’t want the liability that comes with this sort of thing when everything inevitably goes belly up (i.e. one of these systems gets hacked). Like so many other age verification ideas, it’s a horrible idea that invites government surveillance and internet censorship – and Republican’s have no qualms of directing such technology to suppress minority communities in general.

Apparently, one self-described LGBTQ+ “activist” thinks all this suppression and surveillance is a fantastic idea. In a column published in the Duluth News Tribune, Manilan Houle is calling for app store age verification in Minnesota:

Community relationships are critical for young people living in hostile places or with families which fail to understand their identity. For many, the internet is not just a place to socialize; it’s a lifeline. It’s where they find understanding, support, resources, and a sense of belonging that may be absent in their immediate surroundings.

This is why discussions about online safety for children are so important. We need to protect young people, but we must do so in a way that doesn’t inadvertently cut off access to vital support networks for our most vulnerable.

According to a 2024 survey by LGBT TECH, nearly two-thirds of LGBTQ+ adults joined online platforms before age 18, with more than half seeking LGBTQ+ resources, information, and community support. Any solution must safeguard these benefits.

Just last year, Minnesota state legislators attempted to piece together complicated solutions that failed to gain enough support due to challenges with practicality, enforcement, and implementation. This is where federal action on app-store age verification and parental consent makes compelling sense. App-store accountability offers a straightforward, uniform solution that would empower parents without placing undue burdens on them or jeopardizing their teens’ access to essential online communities.

We would not ask a beer company to check IDs; that responsibility falls to the seller. Similarly, it doesn’t make sense to burden individual social-media platforms with verifying every user’s age. The app stores, as central hubs for digital content, are uniquely positioned to handle this. They already possess the technical infrastructure with existing age-verification tools and family account linking systems. This is not a radical new demand; it’s leveraging existing infrastructure to create a safer digital environment.

I think I speak for a lot of people when I respond to this snippet with the comment, “what the hell is wrong with you???”

In a nutshell, what this idiot is saying is that online communities have proven to be vital lifeline for their daily lives. This includes people who are under the age of 18. Therefore, it is important to sever those connections with age verification laws at the app store level – you know, to protect the children and all that stuff. I mean, the level of cluelessness is off the charts with this one.

Houle tries to dress this argument up by arguing that all of this must be done in a way that protects these communities as well. This is a bit like saying that you want to let the foxes roam free on the farm, but to do so in a way that allows the foxes to guard the hen house – you know, for safety reasons. You can’t eye roll big enough over that kind of logic.

Already, the concept of age verification is a flawed one. There is no such thing as technology that accurately checks people’s ages while still reasonably maintaining their privacy. This was true when these stupid age verification laws were first cropping up in different governments and it remains true today. No amount of throwing around buzz words like “AI” and “facial recognition” changes that. Yet, this moron thinks that we can throw in the added complexity of finding ways to protect the LGBTQ+ communities on top of it all. Tell me you don’t understand how technology works without telling me you don’t understand how technology works.

Efforts like age verification are frequently driven by technological ignorance. Either it is pushed by people who have no clue how technology works or it preys on people’s inability to understand how technology works. The above example is a pretty good case in point of this.

Drew Wilson on Mastodon, Twitter and Facebook.