How much effort and resources would you want the government to put into catching porn users? What would the punishment be for someone viewing, possessing or distributing porn?
Does the anti-porn position consider fetish art to be equivalent to porn? How would it be dealt with under a porn ban?
Fetish art is too obscure to really target in a broad-strokes approach; it wouldn't be worth the effort.
you're dealing with religious nutcases; they're too retarded to have even thought up answers to the questions you have. most just want to ban the word Porn and think thats a done deal. look at Texas or the UK or Virginia or Florida. if you use a vpn in any of those locations and try logging into pornhub you can't. but every fetish art site and AO3 and imagefap and Onlyfans and Twitch and Tiktok are all perfectly fine.
now you'll see users on here say they want all porn ban but by the time it trickles up to the lawmakers literally all that happens is sites with the word "porn" on them get banned, which means now your kids first porn experience will be with hentai or a netflix show.
That's why i'm so against these laws. they're fucking retarded and chances are they'll lead to this site being fucked more than any degenerate coomer's favorite fapping material.
No, you're just being too narrow and pedantic in your interpretation of what the ban would be trying to accomplish.
All you need to do is shut down the major studios and websites, kick porn off major platforms, then kick artists off of payment processors and websites like Patreon.
If there are resources left, we can go after the small stuff. It's about broad strokes—about solving 90% of the problem. Like every law.
All you have to do is take what's already been done to the online right in the past decade, and do that to porn. Cut them from platforms and payment processors and make them unemployable. Will they be gone entirely? No, but that's not the point.
Most people won't go on 4chan because they think they'll get a virus on their iPhone. These are the people we're talking about. They're not opening up Tor or finding some obscure little website that enforcement missed.
"B-but where's the line—"
You have to draw an arbitrary line with almost literally every law. You could ask the exact same question about age of consent, but you know what? Eighteen works. If you want to split hairs about that, you can do a backflip into a woodchipper.
If it's an edge case, you know what happens? A judge looks at it and says "yep, that's porn". That's what judges are for, because laws aren't magic spells or computer programs. We have a way to deal with edge cases—judges, and the precedents they set.
"B-but the political will doesn't exist—"
- You don't know what the political will is or isn't going to look like in the near future.
- "Should we" and "can it be done" are obviously different questions than "can we do it at right this exact second, under a hostile regime".
- We should.
- We can.
- Obviously we can't "right now"; nobody thinks that. That's not the discussion we're having.
