I read both articles and nowhere does it say “stating that you are poly on social media” is banned. Pretty generic stuff. See for yourself. From the article -
Likewise, people should not post any text, audio, video or picture that spreads hatred against any gender, community, caste, religion, profession, or people from any particular group.
Also banned are actions like distorting a picture, taking photos of private affairs and publishing them without permission.
Similarly, posting vulgar words, pictures, videos, audios, animations, contents promoting paedophilia, sexual exploitation, prostitution, use and trade of narcotic substances, gambling, spreading fake news, distorted information, cyber bullying and terrorism-related contents are prohibited.
Don’t get me wrong, I think that “posting vulgar words” is purposefully vague and is most likely intended to be a catch all, but that’s not the point. The point is this is not some “overarching censorship” like you make it out to be. Most platforms and governments have policies similar to this. Unless… you have specific examples of Nepal banning people for being “poly on social media”.
In other news, Nepal fares better than Qatar, Greece, Singapore and the UAE according to the World Press Freedom Index.
The new rule also bars any post promoting wrong activities such as child labour, human trafficking, child marriage or polygamy.
so for nepal human trafficking and polygamy is in the same category of “wrong activities”.
What do you mean its not the point? its literally a crime to post “vulgar” language, like you said a catch all term that they can use to censor anything they deem “vulgar”. How is this not a law designed to censor?
For clarity, I am not the person you replied to, I wrote the comment above. Imo Usernames are a bit hard to see on some frontends!
so for nepal human trafficking and polygamy is in the same category of “wrong activities”.
There’s a substantive degree of overlap, particularly in parts of the world where young women are sold by desperate parents and criminal cartels for the pleasure of old perverts. This isn’t Sam Bankman Fried and three if his closest money launderers in a sex pile. This is cloaking sex trafficking under the cover of marriage.
The law did not ban polyamory, it is already illegal in nepal, so there is no “cover of marriage” there. It banned posting pro poly posts online. That is pretty harsh. Just because criminals use it does not mean stating your opinion had to be banned!
The only explanation I can come up with is that they just banned a bunch of stuff the legislators deemed immoral. I dont know enough about nepal to say that with any certainty, but my hunch is that pro-poly messaging may have been banned because of the muslim minority.
I read both articles and nowhere does it say “stating that you are poly on social media” is banned. Pretty generic stuff. See for yourself. From the article -
Don’t get me wrong, I think that “posting vulgar words” is purposefully vague and is most likely intended to be a catch all, but that’s not the point. The point is this is not some “overarching censorship” like you make it out to be. Most platforms and governments have policies similar to this. Unless… you have specific examples of Nepal banning people for being “poly on social media”.
In other news, Nepal fares better than Qatar, Greece, Singapore and the UAE according to the World Press Freedom Index.
I got my information from the article about the new social media rules within that article here:
https://kathmandupost.com/national/2023/11/10/cabinet-passes-rules-to-regulate-social-media
the relevant passage:
so for nepal human trafficking and polygamy is in the same category of “wrong activities”.
What do you mean its not the point? its literally a crime to post “vulgar” language, like you said a catch all term that they can use to censor anything they deem “vulgar”. How is this not a law designed to censor?
For clarity, I am not the person you replied to, I wrote the comment above. Imo Usernames are a bit hard to see on some frontends!
There’s a substantive degree of overlap, particularly in parts of the world where young women are sold by desperate parents and criminal cartels for the pleasure of old perverts. This isn’t Sam Bankman Fried and three if his closest money launderers in a sex pile. This is cloaking sex trafficking under the cover of marriage.
The law did not ban polyamory, it is already illegal in nepal, so there is no “cover of marriage” there. It banned posting pro poly posts online. That is pretty harsh. Just because criminals use it does not mean stating your opinion had to be banned!
The only explanation I can come up with is that they just banned a bunch of stuff the legislators deemed immoral. I dont know enough about nepal to say that with any certainty, but my hunch is that pro-poly messaging may have been banned because of the muslim minority.
https://www.girlsnotbrides.org/learning-resources/child-marriage-atlas/atlas/nepal/
:-/
Damn thats pretty dire. Apperently the nepali government is doing something about it, so good luck to them!
Anyway, this isnt relevant to the “cover of marriage” claim. That statistic is about marriage under 18, not polygamic marriage.