Porn Ban Debate Thread

  • ⚙️ Performance issue identified and being addressed.
  • Want to keep track of this thread?
    Accounts can bookmark posts, watch threads for updates, and jump back to where you stopped reading.
    Create account
Breadbassket

Breadbassket

True & Honest Fan
kiwifarms.net
Joined
Nov 22, 2021
A thread to discuss the merits of banning or not banning the access of pornography in some way.
 
banning porn would be good for the health of society, but the precedent and channels of censorship the government would create to enforce a ban would be used to ban other forms of speech. plus people would just use hidden services or VPNs to countries where it's legal.
i think it would be more trouble than its worth to try to enforce a ban on porn in the US.
holocausting the jews would be significantly more effective
 
If you don't like looking at titties, you're gay, in which case your opinion doesn't matter. Or you're a woman, in which case your opinion doesn't matter.

Okay, but seriously. Having the government play morality police is stupid and will only act as a back door for surveillance. Don't let porn be easily accessible by ACCIDENT, but trying to keep people from finding it on purpose is impossible and also retarded. Raise your Goddamn kids.
 
Rather than banning porn, treat it like cigarettes. By that I mean have it so that porn sites display a waring on the potential addictiveness of the content. You could run an entire antiporn campaign with commercials or infographics, too. And if that doesn't work, make it so that pornography consumption becomes synonymous with uncool. Make it known that watching porn makes you look like a creep and loser—associate porn usuage with antisocial and shameful behavior.
 
I do not believe that porn should be banned by law. Muh freeze peach. However, I do believe that parents should be educated on what their children will have access to, make the time to harshly audit their internet history, and have tools at their disposal to lock down their child’s access to the internet. The government should not be substituting itself for parents in terms of protecting children because it will do a piss-poor job.

What’s more, I could make pornography starring myself and your mother right now and distribute it on the black market that would crop up. The mere existence of VPNs and the fiction the government cannot breach them is another reason enforcement is borderline impossible without admitting to massive Fifth Amendment breaches, at least in America.
 
Porn isn't free speech. That means it can be regulated. If you believe porn is free speech, that also means you think lolicon is free speech, in which case I know an incinerator that would love to meet you.
 
MooNiE das Magnif'cent said:
Rather than banning porn, treat it like cigarettes. By that I mean have it so that porn sites display a waring on the potential addictiveness of the content. You could run an entire antiporn campaign with commercials or infographics, too. And if that doesn't work, make it so that pornography consumption becomes synonymous with uncool. Make it known that watching porn makes you look like a creep and loser—associate porn usuage with antisocial and shameful behavior.
Click to expand...
nigga smokers still smoke
 
Hey Johnny Bravo said:
Porn isn't free speech. That means it can be regulated. If you believe porn is free speech, that also means you think lolicon is free speech, in which case I know an incinerator that would love to meet you.
Click to expand...

Pornography as a commercial product can be regulated by what the market will bear; anyone admitting to partaking lolicon, etc. are much easier to put on a list when it’s out in the open. Homegrown “porn” drawn by people making commissions for gooners is much harder to regulate and once driven underground, it will be even harder to identify its users.

In a perfect world, there is no market for pornography and so no need to even think about it.
 
Lord of the Large Pants said:
If you don't like looking at titties, you're gay, in which case your opinion doesn't matter. Or you're a woman, in which case your opinion doesn't matter.

Okay, but seriously. Having the government play morality police is stupid and will only act as a back door for surveillance. Don't let porn be easily accessible by ACCIDENT, but trying to keep people from finding it on purpose is impossible and also retarded. Raise your Goddamn kids.
Click to expand...
pornbrained post
 
Staticness said:
Pornography as a commercial product can be regulated by what the market will bear
Click to expand...
No it won't. It took legislation to ban child porn in the US, not the free market. I know that this is anathema to many users on this site, but sometimes government does the right thing.
gagabobo1997 said:
In the United States it objectively is free speech unless a court considers it 'obscene', which almost never happens.
Click to expand...
"It's free speech until it isn't."

Listen, man, I'm just tired of all the lolbertarians making a huge stink about porn, never making a peep about publicly traded companies suppressing basic political speech, and then patting themselves on the back for it. If people want to make a stand about free speech and all that jazz, go for it, but at least be consistent before you start soapboxing. I wouldn't even be that annoyed if people said regular penis-in-vagina porn with consenting adults is fine and more extreme shit deserves to be limited, but they never do that. It's always "everyone who disagrees with me on free speech is a bootlicker and government is bad" until CSAM comes up and, at that point, moderating their position is seen as a defeat, they start sperging out, and someone gets banned.

"Obscenity" and what it means is the rabbit hole.
 
It's certainly undeniable that porn is a moral evil that can lead to numerous of amounts of situations where the effects inflicted on the consumer from continued usage are genuinely dangerous. Porn addiction is a serious matter and often enough it'll take years for a former addict to fully recover from the effects.
I think it's a relatively complicated matter that has a great amount of different approaches depending on the political context + scenario of the country/state/region/etc. that it's being addressed in. Obviously for authoritarian dictatorships the solution is quite simple, they just outright ban any type of pornography from being sold/distributed/shared. But for more democratic countries like the United States, there isn't so much of a simple solution for this. You'll get wildly different responses depending on who you ask about this issue, varying from something like "not applying any restrictions to any type of pornography at all", to "immediate outlawing of every piece of media that could be considered pornographic".
Often enough you'll see people try to push a type of middle-ground compromise - I've heard many times before of the approach of demanding the user to provide their ID (to prove that they're 18+) on the Internet before they can access porn sites. To me these types of compromises are absolutely useless and, more often than not, they typically generate more discussions/arguments instead of settling them, especially in this "potential solution" I've mentioned just now. That type of system serves no purpose other than to further government datamining + spying on their citizens.
Personally I do not believe pornography should be banned at all, but there should be a moral common collective to push/promote info on the dangers of excessive porn consumption and the (potentially) life-ruining consequences it can bring, but there's also effort that needs to be done on a personal part - it's YOUR conscious decision to consume porn. Nobody is forcing you to do it. You are the one who controls what type of content you want to consume, along with your desires.
 
MooNiE das Magnif'cent said:
Ok and? The point is not to eliminate all porn addiction but to hinder it. To stop new people, young people, from developing it in the first place. Who fucking cares if sturbon addicts are taking their addiction to their grave if at least the chances of some one else developing porn addiction diminishes.
Click to expand...
how are you even going to do a campaign like cigarettes but for porn when the effects are mostly mental? are you gonna put a fat ugly troon on the side as a warning? that'll go down well
 
Hey Johnny Bravo said:
"It's free speech until it isn't."

Listen, man, I'm just tired of all the lolbertarians making a huge stink about porn, never making a peep about publicly traded companies suppressing basic political speech, and then patting themselves on the back for it. If people want to make a stand about free speech and all that jazz, go for it, but at least be consistent before you start soapboxing. I wouldn't even be that annoyed if people said regular penis-in-vagina porn with consenting adults is fine and more extreme shit deserves to be limited, but they never do that. It's always "everyone who disagrees with me on free speech is a bootlicker and government is bad" until CSAM comes up and, at that point, moderating their position is seen as a defeat, they start sperging out, and someone gets banned.
Click to expand...
I 100% agree that public companies are a bigger threat to freeze peach than the government (right now), and I'm not entirely a lolbert when it comes to speech, but I think that an attempt at a porn ban would set off many 1st Amendment suits because there is definitely porn that can pass the miller obscenity test and is as such protected speech under the constitution.
All speech is "free speech until it isn't". The miller test for obscenity is just one of many doctrines to differentiate between protected and non protected speech. If you want to ban porn that isn't technically obscene under the miller test, you could also ban words like nigger that aren't technically fighting words under chaplinsky doctrine through the same logic. It's a bad precedent to set.
 
gagabobo1997 said:
I 100% agree that public companies are a bigger threat to freeze peach than the government (right now), and I'm not entirely a lolbert when it comes to speech, but I think that an attempt at a porn ban would set off many 1st Amendment suits because there is definitely porn that can pass the miller obscenity test and is as such protected speech under the constitution.
All speech is "free speech until it isn't". The miller test for obscenity is just one of many doctrines to differentiate between protected and non protected speech. If you want to ban porn that isn't technically obscene under the miller test, you could also ban words like nigger that aren't technically fighting words under chaplinsky doctrine through the same logic. It's a bad precedent to set.
Click to expand...
Fair enough, I credit you for being reasonable. My issue isn't necessarily with porn, but the pearl clutching gooners who only scream from the peanut gallery about free speech when porn comes up.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom