Tag Archive for: sex abuse

Myth vs. Fact: The EARN IT Act

Countering Myths About the EARN IT Act.

Contact your Members of Congress and urge them to COSPONSOR and support the EARN IT Act!

Why Tech Companies Should Support the EARN IT Act

Living in a world that is so heavily fixated on technology comes with its own consequences. Recent generations have grown up in the digital realm and most children are now immersed in it from a very early age. As it stands right now, children face an ever-increasing risk of being groomed and exploited online as perpetrators use social media platforms—among other digital mediums—to target and groom children. This and other factors have played a significant role in the exponential growth of the amount of child sexual abuse material (CSAM) circulating online.

Common misunderstandings and myths about the EARN IT Act are explained below, but the simplest way to understand the EARN IT Act is to note what it actually does:

  • The EARN IT Act allows survivors of child sexual abuse material to restore the privacy they have lost because their abuse was uploaded to the Internet.
  • The EARN IT Act clarifies that there is not now—nor has there ever has been—immunity for digital platforms that knowingly disseminate child sexual abuse material.
  • The EARN IT Act changes the term “child pornography” in federal statue to “child sexual abuse material” to ensure that it is treated as evidence of a crime.
  • The EARN IT Act creates a new online child exploitation prevention committee with oversight from Congress.
  • The EARN IT Act clarifies the right of consumers in regard to holding technology companies accountable for knowingly disseminating child sexual abuse material.

Understanding the Scope of the Problem the EARN IT Act is Addressing

In 2008, there were over 600,000 reports of CSAM made to the National Center on Missing and Exploited Children (NCMEC). These numbers were significant enough for the organization to call the problem what it was: an epidemic. Horrifically, the number of reports of CSAM received by NCMEC has multiplied exponentially in the decade since and the organization reported receiving over 70,000,000 reports of CSAM in 2019 alone.

Some of the most popular social media platforms—such as Instagram and Twitter—are furthering the problem by not reporting abuse found on their websites, and technology companies have long attempted to use Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act (CDA 230) to hide from accountability. CDA 230, which was implemented in 1996, was intended to help foster growth in the early stages of the Internet but has since been wrongly interpreted by Interactive Computer Services (ICS) as an excuse to not work proactively to prevent exploitation found on and/or perpetrated via their online products. CDA 230 was never intended to protect sex traffickers or child predators online nor was it meant to allow CSAM (sometimes inaccurately referred to as “child pornography”) to run rampant in online spaces.

The EARN IT Act Means Clarity for Tech Companies and a Path to Justice for Survivors

Since its introduction, lobbyists representing portions of the technology industry have attempted to make misleading claims about the intent and impact of the EARN IT Act with hopes of preserving profit margins for tech behemoths that don’t want to spend money to make their online products safer. The claims they make are alarmist red herrings and do not actually address the structure or contents that make up the EARN IT Act. Below are several of the most common false claims/myths about the EARN IT Act and the reality behind them that show why the EARN IT Act is actually a good thing for consumers and the technology industry itself.

Myth #1: The EARN IT Act is an attack on end-to-end encryption and user privacy

Truth #1: Many tech companies are pushing back on the EARN IT act, claiming that it is an invasion to user privacy and will bring on more trouble involving mass surveillance.  However, this is not the case. The EARN IT act would implement new ways to combat CSAM on their platforms as technology continues to advance. Furthermore, tech companies are already capable of acquiring information on what is said and done on their programs, so why not implement the same technology to recognize and report CSAM when detected? Many of the safety features on these platforms would be directed toward helping children without infringing upon any freedoms of adults. It would hold these companies accountable for what is being shared even if the content came from a third-party user. This bill will incentivize tech companies to report and eliminate any CSAM they come across it on their platforms and is not an attack on end-to-end encryption and user privacy.

Myth #2: The EARN IT Act will eradicate Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act (CDA 230)

Truth #2: Far from harming CDA 230, the EARN IT Act actually helps clarify its original intent. CDA 230 does not give technology companies immunity from accountability for participating in and/or profiting from crimes such as sex trafficking and CSAM. CDA 230 was created at a time when the internet was still in its developing stages and Congress was attempting to foster its growth, but it never gave technology companies the right to knowingly ignore or facilitate crimes such as sex trafficking and CSAM as they have tried to claim.

Mary Leary, professor of law at the Catholic University of America put it this way in a virtual Congressional Briefing: “The EARN IT act, I would argue, actually restores CDA 230 to the original intent of Congress as a component of an ecosystem that will better protect children.”

Today, there is widespread access to the internet and children are facing the consequences of online spaces which have not been built as adequately secured and protected environments. The EARN IT Act is not a threat towards CDA 230 but is, instead, a measure which will clarify the law and allow CDA 230 to operate as it was originally designed to do.

Myth #3: The EARN IT Act is an undemocratic way for the government to control the technology industry via burdensome regulations

Truth #3: The EARN IT Act is being introduced and vetted—and is built to be implemented—via established Constitutional processes. If passed, it includes the building of an Online Child Exploitation Prevention Commission made up of a diverse group of survivors of CSAM, technology industry representatives, law enforcement officials, privacy experts, and more. Because technology is always growing and morphing, the Commission will help guide and direct businesses and corporations in terms of policy. The Commission’s goal is to develop recommended best practices that interactive computer service providers can use to prevent, reduce, and respond to online child sexual exploitation, such as enticement, grooming, sex-trafficking, and sexual abuse, as well as the proliferation of online child sexual abuse material.

These best practices are recommendations, not mandates, and will be vetted and voted upon using established democratic processes in Congress. Technology companies would have the option to adopt those practices, but there is not punishment prescribed if they choose not to do so. In this regard, the EARN IT Act just clarifies that survivors do in fact have a path to justice available to them.

Myth #4: The EARN IT Act will threaten online speech and privacy rights for LGBTQ people and other marginalized communities

Truth #4: First things first, sex trafficking and child sexual abuse material never have been, are not now, and never should be protected categories of free speech. Secondly, the EARN IT Act does not contain—and is actually designed to prevent—any development of measures that would identify or target or collect data about users or groups of users. As noted previously, the EARN IT Act establishes a diverse commission which will develop recommended (again, not mandated) best practices that will then have to be democratically vetted and voted on before they are made official as recommended best practices. This design is intentional for, among other things, preventing the EARN IT Act from being quietly co-opted to target any person or group. In fact, because they are disproportionately affected by online sexual abuse and exploitation, the EARN IT Act will make the Internet a safer space for LGBTQ people and other marginalized communities.

Myth #5: The court’s decision to allow Doe v MindGeek to progress past the motion to dismiss shows that the EARN IT Act isn’t necessary

Truth #5: The judge’s ruling in Doe v MindGeek was important and precedent-setting, and the fact that it was precedent-setting is a case-in-point for why the EARN IT Act is still necessary. The judge ruled correctly that CDA 230 was never meant to protect technology companies from being held accountable for knowingly possessing and distributing child sexual abuse material, but there have been too many erroneous rulings on that matter in previous cases due to confusion in the courts. The EARN IT Act is designed to, among other things, address that confusion by clarifying the original intent of CDA 230 so that survivors are able to have a path to justice that has been closed on them incorrectly and unfairly in the past. The EARN IT Act is a democratic way that Congress can help ensure accurate and consistent application of existing laws moving forward.

The EARN IT Act Respects People, Incentivizes Technology Companies to Put Customers First, and Prioritizes Justice for Survivors     

We believe that technology companies and the tech industry at large should want to support the EARN IT Act if they truly have their customers’ best interests in mind. The EARN IT Act will help prevent the continued proliferation of CSAM, restore the intended protections of CDA 230, clarify the right to justice for survivors of CSAM, and empower consumers. These outcomes are beneficial to U.S. citizens and businesses alike. That is why the EARN IT Act is a bipartisan bill that should be easy to support.

Quote from Professor Hany Farid, University of California, Berkeley

Take Action

If you are moved to create an environment that protects children from sexual exploitation online, you can click here to send a message to your members of Congress to support the EARN IT Act. It only takes a little bit of your time to reach out and make a big difference for children.

Contact your Members of Congress and urge them to COSPONSOR and support the EARN IT Act!

EDITORS NOTE: This NCOSE column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

PODCAST: What It Will Take To End Sexploitation

In a follow up Dawn Hawkins, as the new CEO of NCOSE, wants to share more about HOW we can achieve a world free from sexual abuse and exploitation.

Hear about my vision:

Before any real problem solving can be done, it’s essential the problem is properly laid out and defined. That’s why NCOSE’s work to expose the interconnected web of sexual exploitation issues is so critical to achieving our vision—we cannot solve one problem while ignoring the influences and tangled nature of another.

Our nearly 60-year history has given us a unique, panoramic perspective which enables us to see that we cannot succeed in preserving human dignity if we approach the work from a narrow lens, such as a singular religious, political, or social perspective. It’s this wisdom that has allowed NCOSE to adapt and change over the past decade to unite and grow a movement and address current issues while utilizing myriad advocacy tools, cutting-edge tactics, and the latest research.

NCOSE has built a diverse team of top experts, broad coalition partners, and a deep grassroots network and it now leads the movement to end sexual abuse and exploitation through research, litigation, and corporate and legislative advocacy

This is what it will take to build a world free from sexual abuse and exploitation: 

  1. Destabilize the pornography industry and make pornography intolerable in society. Pornography does not have room to exist in a world that truly believes in human love, connection, and equality.
  2. Stop sex buying to end sex trafficking and all exploitation. The world should not allow and even celebrate the commodification of any human being, especially the most vulnerable, who are preyed upon by the commercial sex industry.
  3. Protect children online. The Internet should be a safe space for all, including the children who are now growing up with access to people and unlimited information.

Read About Our Tactics Here

With your help, the National Center on Sexual Exploitation has made significant progress on these three objectives and more in just the last few years. Best of all, there are more victories and accomplishments to come!

The light of human dignity will always burn brighter than the shadow of exploitation. By eschewing the boundaries of politics, religion, and other divisive backgrounds, NCOSE is in a unique position to ignite that light and continue to bring organizations and individuals from all walks of life out of the shadows of a world that allows and normalizes sexual exploitation to thrive.

All our work is dedicated to realizing the vision of a world free from sexual abuse and exploitation—a world I know is possible.

EDITORS NOTE: This NCOSE column with podcast is republished with permission. ©All right reserved.

MAINE: Democratic Senate Hopeful Repeatedly Killed ‘Racist’ Bills to Outlaw Female Genital Mutilation

My latest in PJ Media:

The most revolting news item of the week comes from Maine, where, according to the Washington Free Beacon, “Democratic Senate candidate Sara Gideon repeatedly killed bills to outlaw female genital mutilation during her tenure as the speaker of the Maine House of Representatives.” In amassing this shameful record, Sara Gideon has become Exhibit A of everything that is wrong about identity politics, the Democratic Party, and the Left in general.

The Free Beacon notes that Gideon’s determination to enable the barbaric practice of female genital mutilation (FGM) is abundantly established. She “leveraged her leadership position in the Democrat-controlled legislature to kill two separate bills that would have criminalized the practice of severing the clitoris of infant girls and sewing their vaginas shut.”

Why on earth would Gideon do something as heinous as this? The answer is simple and predictable: “Under Gideon’s leadership, Maine Democrats argued that the bill was racist toward the state’s large immigrant community from Somalia, a country where the practice is ‘nearly universal’ according to the United Nations.”

It’s racist to outlaw FGM? Well, of course it is, because Sara Gideon needs the votes of Maine’s rapidly growing Somali community, and that’s as far as her moral calculus goes. The Free Beacon notes that “Gideon’s efforts have helped make Maine one of only 12 states that have not banned female genital mutilation,” and that “such a legacy threatens to complicate her cultivated image as a champion of women’s rights, one built on her consistent support for abortion access and the #MeToo movement,” but Gideon has shown in opposing efforts to criminalize FGM that she doesn’t really care about women’s rights at all. She poses as a women’s rights advocate when seeking donations from well-heeled Leftists, but she likely knows that those same Leftist donors won’t be concerned in the least about her wanting to allow for the preservation of a time-hallowed Somali cultural practice. After all, any other course of action would be “ethnocentric” and “Islamophobic,” right?

There is much more. Read the rest here.


Turkey: Ruling party discussing annulment of law combating violence against women

Muslim cleric: When women obey Islamic law, ‘the Jews will be disappeared and Jerusalem be ready for a new conquest’

Delaware: Hamas-linked CAIR sues state detention center over safety-related hijab prohibition

EDITORS NOTE: This Jihad Watch column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

VIDEO: They’re mainstreaming pedophilia!

Alfred Kinsey’s ongoing sexual anarchy campaign has no end in sight.

Matt Barber, associate dean of the Liberty University School of Law, and I attended the “B4U-ACT” pedophile conference Aug. 17. To eliminate the “stigma” against pedophiles, this growing sexual anarchist lobby wants the American Psychiatric Association (APA) to redefine pedophilia as a normal sexual orientation of “Minor-Attracted Persons.”

Adhering to the Kinsey principle of lulling “straights” into a false sense of security, pedophile dress was largely conservative – short hair, jackets, some ties and few noticeable male ear piercings.

Matt Barber and I sat in the back of the meeting room among roughly 50 activists and their “mental health” attending female enablers. “Pedophilia, Minor-Attracted Persons, and the DSM: Issues and Controversies,” keynoted “Fred Berlin, M.D., Ph.D., as founder, National Institute for the Study, Prevention and Treatment of Sexual Trauma; Johns Hopkins Sexual Disorders Clinic.”

However, the sex clinic was initially founded by John Money, Ph.D., to give judges “leeway” to keep child molesters out of jail. Money (deceased), a pedophile advocate, also called for an end to all age-of-consent laws. Dr. Berlin was his disciple.

In 1973, our “post Kinsey era,” a small APA committee of psychiatrists, quite terrified by homosexist public harassment, agreed to rely on Kinsey’s fraudulent human sexuality “data” to redefine homosexuality as normal, removing it from the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual (DSM) of mental disorders.

The APA decision was hyped in college textbooks, law journal articles, judicial rulings, and by 1974 pitched as high-school sex education. Soon the homosexist lobby would sail into primary schools and kindergartens by agitating recurring AIDS “prevention,” “bullying” and “hate” panics.

To redefine homosexuality as a normal “orientation,” nature not nurture, researchers were told to ignore all data of early sex abuse or other trauma. This hoax was followed by the 1999 U.S. Department of Justice data that found 64 percent of forcible sodomy victims to be boys under age 12.

For after claiming 10 percent to 37 percent of men were sometime homosexual, Kinsey also said children are sexual from birth and so deserve to have sex with adults or youths (taught as a 1974 Planned Parenthood sex ed doctrine).

The APA path to pedophile norms follows the success of the homosexual anarchy campaign. Arguably, the pedophile media lobby directed the passionate boy-boy kisses on the TV series “Glee,” to enable fellow “Minor-Attracted Persons” to increasingly be seen as a boy’s sex “friend.”

B4U-ACT claims to “help mental health professionals learn more about attraction to minors and to consider the effects of stereotyping, stigma, and fear.” While the group claimed they want to teach pedophiles “how to live life fully and stay within the law,” no one suggested how to stop their child lust or molestation.

Barber asked what “age of consent” the group proposed and what role pornography plays as a causative factor in child sex abuse. No one would answer the first question, and all denied any harm from pornography.

Arguably, due to our presence, Dr. Berlin (who sat next to me during the entire event) admitted that occasionally pornography could trigger sexual acting out. He also expressed a personal belief that pre-pubescent children (that is, under about age 10) cannot consent, and that perhaps even teenagers might be sexually vulnerable.

All speakers focused on pedophiles as healthy, normal and unfairly victimized by stigma and mean words. Following repeated assertions that pedophiles never force children, are gentle and loving, one researcher did cite a child “victim” who was raped and sodomized.

One speaker laughingly compared doing an obscene act “on” a child to doing the same obscene act on a shoe. No one protested, and some chuckled. One young female suggested pedophiles might be helped by engaging in “sex play” using naked pictures of pseudo children, allied with some sadism, bridal gowns, etc. This Ph.D. social worker candidate proudly noted her objection to any “repression.”

For their attendance, the pedophile political activists could earn 6.0 units of continuing education credits by the “Maryland Board of Social Work Examiners.” These 12 board members credentialed this pedophile academic farce, giving higher education credits to allow felons and near-felons to advance their child sexual abuse agenda by using bogus and fraudulent research. I would encourage people to complain to the board at this link.


Committed to quietly monitoring this meeting, I offered a few unwelcome closing remarks. I noted the arrogance of this group’s conclusion that Americans’ fear for child safety is due to a puritanical “sex panic.” Since the Department of Justice found 58,200 children kidnapped by non-family members in 1999, such fear seems well-placed.

Before leaving the issue of stigma and hate speech, note a few excerpts from BOYCHAT April 15 by some of these “social worker” credentialed pedophiles:

“Judith Reisman” is “with the worst of them … dehumanizing hate speech … extreme christian [sic], right wing … alarmist … creating gross distrotions [sic] … no genuine integrity … a harlot. … Judith did, in fact, make [Kinsey’s sexual stimulation of infants and toddlers] sound like horrendously violent, child sexual assault … [she is a] horrible, wretched scumbag … pathetic, sorry excuse for a human being. … The world will become a less wretched place, the second Judith Reisman drops dead [from natural causes, of course, though I’d not complain if she got accidentally ran over by a semi]. … With Love, Stevie-D.”

Love? What was that about stigma and hate speech?

kinsey flow chart


Illegal Immigrant Arrested for Raping, Impregnating 12-Year-Old in TX

Charges for Man Disguised as Woman in Bathroom Filming

EASY MEAT: The Muslims are ‘raping our daughters’

Pedophiles in American Public Schools and Universities

Pedophile Jared Fogle and the Untold Story of his Visit to Sarasota, FL

Boys Beware: Classic Film warns against Homosexuals, Pedophiles and Pederasts

EXPOSED: The U.S. and British “Sex Industrial Complex”

EDITORS NOTE: This column originally appeared in World Net Daily.