+- clovenhooves (https://clovenhooves.org)
+-- Forum: The Personal Is Political (https://clovenhooves.org/forumdisplay.php?fid=3)
+--- Forum: General (https://clovenhooves.org/forumdisplay.php?fid=70)
+--- Thread: Article New Bill Could Ban Pornography Across US (/showthread.php?tid=1174)
Pages:
1
2
RE: New Bill Could Ban Pornography Across US - Wrongtoy - May 14 2025
Even under the ban proposed above, Deep Throat would be seen as an exemption due to its undeniable historical impact alone, let alone the political and social impacts. One cannot reasonably redact the scenes for which this movie was named nor the other sex scenes in it as all that contributed to said historical and other significance.
RE: New Bill Could Ban Pornography Across US - Wrongtoy - May 14 2025
One of the most powerful arguments against porn is to show performers how unprofitable it is.
Throughout the early 2010s, a female performer could make relatively decent money. A performer didn’t have to worry about makeup or set design or lighting herself. The product would frequently be filmed in mansions or in the case of one, within the field of the la colosseum itself completely permitted. There was one centralized facility named aim that single-handedly tested and quarantined those who had contracted hiv in 2004 and those around them. There were venues like porn star karaoke in which women could meet off the job. There was actually a journalism community that would whistleblow as per allegations of sexual assault or fake std tests. A regular on that circuit could regularly pay rent more often than not.
And you know why that no longer exists? Because it’s not profitable. Pornhub et al are streaming content that’s mostly decades old or cut ups of your typical extreme scene with of course lighting and set all prearranged. Performers these days go to onlyfans whereas men will not pay much let alone repeat to see them do toy play in their apartment. Which is why the average gross is 180 a month minus the of fee. And for that you risk your boss or ex or etc discovering your identity or maybe exposing it years later. Plus you are already underwater on all the hair and makeup expenses.
RE: New Bill Could Ban Pornography Across US - YesYourNigel - May 15 2025
(May 14 2025, 4:22 PM)skunkYeah I'm also wondering about that. Porn has such massive problems, first with production where women are consistently abused to the point where it's just an open secret and second with the very patriarchal nature of the content itself that fuels violent male supremacist fantasies (which also makes "WhAt AbOuT DrAwN PoRn" such a moot point). And in live-action porn you really can't separate the two. The abuse is part of the appeal and if women had boundaries or wanted to enact their libidos, they simply couldn't because of how inherently tied porn is to recreating and fueling male violence over women. Now, just being tied to supremacist violence isn't necessarily cause for censorship but to what degree does the damage need to so consistently happen that we do something about it?(May 13 2025, 7:26 PM)VerdantHorizon(May 13 2025, 9:54 AM)Wrongtoy I support age limits, however. I think porn streaming sites should be legally required to digitally card the audience. Bonus if they feel they have to charge as a result as not only do you cut down on child but also adult viewership.
Quote:Clover
I think all pornographic content needs to somehow be "catalogued" so that the "actresses/actors" in the film are verified to be of legal age and "consent" to being in the footage.
+1 on both of these points... very strongly opposed to anything limiting free speech laws unless the speech causes an immediate, direct harm. For all the evil of the pornography industry (which is countless) I don't think the harm is direct enough to justify completely banning it, and I don't know that a blanket ban would actually do anything. Reasonable age limit ID laws and somehow tracing the performers to verify their age and "consent" make much more sense.
How direct does it have to be then? Most of the women in porn are harassed, assaulted and abused. Porn has also clearly contributed directly to violence during sex for so many women who arent involved in porn at all. Take, for example, how common it is for men to just strangle women they're hooking up with as if thats completely normal. I dont necessarily think an outright ban would work either but its definitely directly harmful.
This isn't related to direct harm necessarily but I personally struggle to see how society will ever move past misogyny if the overwhelming vast majority of men watch women get sexually degraded on the daily. There's literally no way someone can consume content like that regularly and simultaneously view their female counterparts as whole people. Porn directly contributes to our dehumanization.
Porn as an industry is inherently going to have these problems because its whole point is to recreate sexual violence for patriarchal audiences, so most of its content is going to be unethically produced and used to fuel real life misogyny. It's like if we had a massive mainstream industry dedicated to "play-pretend" racial abuse and torture for the enjoyment of a white audience that then continuously turned out to abuse their "performers" for real, and also was posted alongside real footage of actual violence. Of course the producers/consumers involved are inherently going to be abusive and racist and the performers desperate. The nature of the content leads to unethical production. And then imagine if people claimed, after a constant slew of irl cases of this violence recreated from this form of "entertainment" itself, that you can't in any way limit this content without also limiting documentaries on Jim Crowe or Nazi atrocities.
I do agree that, under this government, this is just going to be used as a stepping point to mass censorship. It's not unusual for patriarchal governments to limit porn or prostitution much like how it isn't unusual for them to entertain trans ideas, but this is obviously not done for the sake of women, it's a power play between men.
RE: New Bill Could Ban Pornography Across US - Clover - May 15 2025
(May 14 2025, 4:22 PM)skunk(May 13 2025, 7:26 PM)VerdantHorizon(May 13 2025, 9:54 AM)Wrongtoy I support age limits, however. I think porn streaming sites should be legally required to digitally card the audience. Bonus if they feel they have to charge as a result as not only do you cut down on child but also adult viewership.
Quote:Clover
I think all pornographic content needs to somehow be "catalogued" so that the "actresses/actors" in the film are verified to be of legal age and "consent" to being in the footage.
+1 on both of these points... very strongly opposed to anything limiting free speech laws unless the speech causes an immediate, direct harm. For all the evil of the pornography industry (which is countless) I don't think the harm is direct enough to justify completely banning it, and I don't know that a blanket ban would actually do anything. Reasonable age limit ID laws and somehow tracing the performers to verify their age and "consent" make much more sense.
How direct does it have to be then? Most of the women in porn are harassed, assaulted and abused. Porn has also clearly contributed directly to violence during sex for so many women who arent involved in porn at all. Take, for example, how common it is for men to just strangle women they're hooking up with as if thats completely normal. I dont necessarily think an outright ban would work either but its definitely directly harmful.
This isn't related to direct harm necessarily but I personally struggle to see how society will ever move past misogyny if the overwhelming vast majority of men watch women get sexually degraded on the daily. There's literally no way someone can consume content like that regularly and simultaneously view their female counterparts as whole people. Porn directly contributes to our dehumanization.
I definitely agree that the harm from pornography is direct, both to the women being raped on camera and to the people who watch it: the boys and men who then think that's how women deserve to be treated, and the girls and women witnessing what the patriarchal world thinks of them.
If I wanted to go some steps further beyond having pornography be properly and stringently age-restricted and "actresses" verified for legal age and "consent", I was thinking about something like the Nordic Model for pornography; in this sense, pornography would be illegal akin to prostitution, as it's basically prostitution that is being filmed. The "actresses" would be protected in the same way prostituted women are under the Nordic Model, they are not held liable for the pornographic footage they are in, it is instead everyone else who is involved with producing and consuming the pornographic footage that is held liable. Though I think pornography is a more complicated case to apply the Nordic Model to than prostitution. I'm actually curious, what are the legalities on "snuff films"? As in, is it illegal to watch a "snuff film"? Is it illegal to purchase footage of a "snuff film"? Production of snuff films is obviously illegal, as snuff films commonly feature murder, rape, torture, that are obviously all crimes being committed on camera. I think pornography would fall under the same category as "snuff films," since porn is rape on tape.