[1] https://www.forbes.com/sites/jamiewareham/2022/01/19/92-of-t...
A private company managed block list is very different in nature to requiring that adult content providers implement age verification, with a human regulatory process that kicks in if they refuse.
Indeed one could argue that by making this a requirement of the website, and making the web safe by default, it negates the need for these overly puritanical 3rd party blocklists and actually increases access to non-pornographic LGBT material. It's a weak argument, but two can play at that game...
https://www.pbs.org/newshour/arts/mississippi-mayor-withhold...
You might have heard of a queer-majority community stepping up to help raise funds to replace what he denied: https://www.vice.com/en/article/wxdpen/mississippi-furry-boo...
Given that similar systems have disproportionately affected LGBTQIA+ groups in the past (whether that's maliciously or not), I think it's a fair point to bring up in response to this new legislation (in addition to it being an expensive waste of time and resources)
> anti-sex work and anti-LGBTQIA+ legislative changes
Don't get me wrong. The laws are incredibly stupid and entirely pointless. Some silly age check won't stop a teen from accessing porn. Decloaking won't stop people being assholes online.
However, I find it hard to characterise the laws as anti-LGBTQIA+ without making questionable links and using suspicious statistics.
You could potentially link any legislative change to harming gay people if you look hard enough, but I really don't think that's the motivation of these dumb laws, nor does it seem like it particularly harms gay people over any other group in society.
The narrative running through the article is that this is something white men are pushing through. At least in the UK, most of the push for deanonymisation and against encryption has come about because of men, probably mostly white, saying incredibly disgusting and illegal things to women, gay and black people anonymously online. Consequently women's groups in particular (see https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/society/201...) have been pushing for ways to decloak users and punish them. I still think it's misguided, but this isn't some imperialist project to oppress minorities.
Maybe I'm being overly cynical, but I feel like there is a trend to invoke gay people, women and minorities any time someone wants to get their way. On both sides of the spectrum: the people trying to bring these laws in are doing the exact same thing.