We'll know it when we see it.
Jokes aside, that's the difficult part about porn and the law, there's a lot of subjectivity. There ultimately has to be a punishment for sites allowing kids to see this but realistically "kids" (teenage boys) are going to find a way. The current solutions to prevent this are technical or require censorship at the ISP level which are each non-answers in the US. This isn't something I've put a lot of thought into so I don't know a "good" way to do it that doesn't require ID verification which itself opens up another can of worms as far as data management and potential implications down the road with the inevitable data breach.
Yup. And the two things this whole thing is about is a combination of "we will define obscenity" -- which is fucking impossible, but we'll see -- and we'll force ID checks.
Obscenity is relative. At my worst, when I was surfing 4chan and posting regular threads on /e/, it would take shitting dicknipples, futa, and just about any mid-tier furry shit to make me flinch. But if I asked my family members what obscene was? They'd have a VASTLY different take on things -- spread legs or a hard dick would probably do it. I don't trust any official definition to be able to be nailed down... BUT at the same time, I now recognize this as the same demoralization that made me a fedora wearing retard about religion for decades. "We can't define obscenity because we simply can't" is a symptom of demoralization. Of indoctrination programming.
I think instead of Obscene content, we could and should legally define sexual content. That's doable. Content that is intended to cause sexual arousal in normal people without a paraphilia. (This is to counteract the smug idiots who will say "what about FEET, some people find THEM hot, are you banning FEET PICS?" or the like.) Naked people in suggestive poses. Sexually aroused people. Sexual costumes like lingerie or the like.
Also, what we CAN do is make sure this shit isn't seen in "public."
Booze is a vice. It's a vice people enjoy, and some people have problems with -- but we'd never make a legal mandate for how much you're allowed to have. But we CAN do restrictions on behavior with the vice. You can't drive a car drunk. Children shouldn't be able to get booze, and we should punish kids who get booze and adults who give it to them. And if you're drunk in public or worse, drunk in public around kids, the police are going to do something about it.
Porn is a vice. We can regulate it in similar ways. Maybe I shouldn't walk down the mall and see blown out prolapsed anuses in store windows. Maybe some dude fucking his fist should be told to leave the food court. And maybe places where kids are at should especially not have porn around them. Childhood is too short already, why speedrun through it? Other than the fact that it helps the LGBTQP recruit, of course.
The problem is right now that every big tech company out there just has given up on the idea of even considering regulating shit -- partially cause the left doesn't want it regulated. Yes, there's safesearch, but it can be turned off. It's 2025 and LLMs are ascendant. You're telling me Google/Bing/etc couldn't create a LLM to scan content for age appropriateness and block underage users from accessing it? They already can detect if you're LGBT by how you touch your phone, we're going to pretend they don't use digital phrenology to detect that users are underage?
PornHub had a complete fucking autistic meltdown because a few states required ID for accessing porn sites. Why? Yes, there's a privacy concern, but I believe exactly 0% that Pornhub cares about that. No, I sure as shit don't trust the government to handle ID checks and I trust everyone else less. But what the hell else can you do? You're not going to tell Jonny Cum Lately the Furfag to stop posting his degenerate shit everywhere, he considers things that cause him sexual arousal to be a holy virtue he must share with the world. The only way out I can see is to segrigate the kids from accessing content. Personally, I think we should just block anyone from under 18 from the internet, but, that would require parents actually take responsibility and good luck with that. Plus they're prime advertisement demographic so there's no way the techbros will want to do it, so...
