Should governments take down or block pro-ana sites?

Asked by: Diqiucun_Cunmin
  • Freedom of speech has limits.

    France recently made it a crime to set up pro-ana websites. These websites promote anorexia as a lifestyle choice, which is an extremely unhealthy trend. It discourages body positivity and there are many instances of death from anorexia. It is sick that 21-century societies still embrace these blatantly sexist ideas to exist. In the name of common sense, we must ensure that the pro-ana movement has no place in society.

  • Freedom of speech should not have limits

    You should be able to say whatever you want and then people should also have the right to say what they want back, banning aspects of free speech is a step back for civil liberties. Once you ban one aspect someone may deem as 'wrong' where do you stop and also who decides what's 'wrong'.

    Posted by: hect
  • Hiding the problem doesn't fix it.

    Pro-Ana sites don't turn people into anorexics, they just attract them. This is a mental disorder that can't be fixed by taking down a website they visit, rather the websites offer information about their habits and reasoning, allowing more ways for us to contact them and find treatments that will be effective.

    We can not rely on the government to fix all of our issues anyway, this is not an issue that causes direct harm to someone. Rather, this is a case of poor choices, lack of mental care, and lack of intervention in the community. It's a social issue that we should be responsible for fixing at the core.

  • I don't think that it would change anything.

    We had anorexia a long time before we had the internet. The cause isn't people saying that anorexia is a good or bad idea at all. If people with the disorder were that easy to influence then we could just ask them to stop. The solution is to promote more body image positive thinking and make it better known to people that thin and beautiful aren't synonymous. As a society we have kind of propped up the idea that there is only one kind of beauty, and that is the problem.

  • The web should be completely uncensored

    Unless a website is directly harming a person without them choosing to be involved in that process (like a revenge porn site) then it should be allowed. People being negativley influenced by pro ana sites choose to go to them and choose to take theyre advice. Im not trying to blane them for their illness i think pro ana sites are revolting and thosr people need to be helped not blamed. A better option is to make opposition sites and campaigns to foght pro ana messages

  • Freedom of speech means freedom even for ideas I don't like

    I don't like the pro-ana movement, or the voluntary human extinction movement, or breatharianism. But people have the right to their views and to express them. They can't force anyone to follow their views. The best antidote for bad speech is good speech. The facts are not on the side of proana people.

    I support protecting their freedom of speech to protect my own. What if I believe in something that is unpopular and then they try to ban my freedom of speech?

  • Allowing government to block sites is a greater danger

    Government is not your friend, it is a necessary evil. And because of that one must be careful not to give it more power than is absolutely necessary, as government rarely stops growing once you've given it more power. Allowing government to block certain websites will inevitably lead to the government having the power to block more sites and putting more restrictions on our freedom.

Leave a comment...
(Maximum 900 words)
No comments yet.