Sure, there is a debate to be had whether the government is overreaching here.
But literally not a single one of the coomers and camwhores who've been melting down over this drama give the slightest bit of a shit about that. I can tell because when Pornhub first introduced the super-strict measures and nuked all unverified videos, they were elated. They figured that only allowing verified uploaders would cut down on the white noise on the platform and make it easier for them to get discovered, AND that it would make it harder for pirates to reupload their content.
Turns out that backfired, because people are jumping ship now that like 60-70% of their favorite videos got dumped, and the people who came for Pornhub have now set their sights on the internet as a whole.
It's all self interest. You won't see Ana here talk about the girl who was violently raped and begged Pornhub to remove videos of her assault for years and only succeeded when she pretended to be a lawyer, or the Girls Do Porn shit where the women didn't get to keep their own contracts and were sometimes physically prevented from leaving the studio.
A bill that would require the consent of every person in the uploaded video!?
"What about sEx WoRkErS REEEE!!!" is the only criticism you will hear from these bottomfeeders
It's almost like when sweeping reforms are made, you have to try and balance the potential pros and cons, and most people are going to look at how it affects them personally because humans are self-interested creatures. You watch enough election cycles, you learn this.
It's not just that the bill is requiring the consent of every person in the video, which sounds really good and boy I hope that doesn't get exploited somehow, but also the dubious language of what "computer generated images" means. Does that only apply to Deepfakes, or could artwork fall under that umbrella, and how will that work out in court? What are the first amendment ramifications of all this? Is it worth it to stomp on the freedoms of artists who aren't hurting anybody in the name of protecting people who are legitimately being exploited when there should already be legal protections for them, but big corporations are just gonna do the kind of shit big corporations do and not give a shit unless somebody threatens them with legal action?
It's no secret that as the internet becomes more homogenized in terms of the number of platforms available, there's been a crackdown on pornographic content, regardless of whether or not it depicts sex crimes or is itself illegal. SESTA already made things difficult for sex workers (and sending many of them back on the streets where it's far more dangerous and they're more likely to be trafficked) in the name of preventing human trafficking, and while I'm glad that the government wanted to fight human trafficking, it just sucks that they don't give a shit about the collateral damage done by a lot of these laws, and that those working in the industry don't really have anybody to advocate for them.
Although you are definitely right, Ana's concern over this is entirely coom-based, the same way a lot of white stoners are going to argue for complete decriminalization of marijuana. But that doesn't mean that the laws are good because a bunch of people who have selfish motivations are supporting something that affects the civil liberties of millions of people, and disproportionately affects a marginalized population.
Which reminds me, I think I’ve been out of the loop here, but when did Ana self-style himself as a “sex worker?” Has he ever made a cent off porn or prostitution? One would think he would suffer chronic unemployment in that field. Is this just another cause hijacked and appropriated by troons, akin to BLM and the Border Crisis with Mexico?
No, because Ana is not attractive and has bitched about how rigged OnlyFans is because nobody wants to see her nudes, let alone pay for them.
She'll still call herself a "sex worker" though, even though she's chosen the least risky version of it. It's not like she's selling her ass on the street.
