Future of porn (and this site) is really uncertain right now…

[RobertBottomSlut]

Just back from visiting Texas and was really surprised to see the block screen actually come up. 

[BenniDover]

On 12/16/2022 at 9:06 AM, rawTOP said:

As I mentioned in my thread about blocking the state of Louisiana - Utah has been blocked for a while now because they've been aggressively anti-porn. Well, one of the Senators from Utah just introduced legislation that will do two things…

1. Require sites with porn to verify the age of visitors.
2. Redefine "obscenity" to include 99% of porn.

You can read about it here: [think before following links] https://www.xbiz.com/news/270761/utah-republican-senator-mike-lee-introduces-bill-to-outlaw-all-porn-nationwide

Age verification (#1) has a whole host of problems. The UK has been trying to figure out how to do it for YEARS and they keep failing. In their case their idea is to have ISPs ban sites that don't comply, but that's becoming more and more impossible technically. Once "Encrypted Hello" matures and is widely deployed it will be almost impossible.

The issue for a site like this one (and my other porn sites) is expense. I'd either have to pay a service to vet every visitor to the site, or I'd have to do it myself. Both are cost prohibitive and the number of visitors who'd jump through the hoops is miniscule so the drop in traffic means less revenue - which makes it even more cost prohibitive. There's no way this site or my porn sites could continue in anything close to their current form if that happened.

But the real problem is that the guy wants to redefine what's "obscene" (#2). Right now only things like scat and blood are clearly obscene. Most porn is just a form of free speech / sexual expression. But his new definition of "obscene" is basically anything that has the primary purpose of giving you a hardon - which means pretty much all porn. If his bill passes it means all porn will need to have some aspect of "artistic merit" or other form of legitimacy. If you ever watched Paul Morris' original "What I Can't See" it's weird because he juxtaposes the blindfolded cumdump with a guy alone in a room jacking off. The compare and contrast between those two extremes made "What I Can't See" somewhat of a documentary - or a kind of editorial on male sexuality. That approach gets around the new definition. The problem is we have decades of content that don't meet the new definition. And distribution of those older videos will become a felony.

As you can see this is FAR beyond the silly, amateurish game of whack-a-mole that UK conservatives are trying to play. This is full-on "American Taliban" or the US version of Iran's Morality Police. It's actually criminalizing porn.

The problem is that the bill is likely to get a lot of Democratic support. Take a moment and read the article in Deseret News about the bills (Deseret News is a well-respected, Mormon-affiliated newspaper) - it's all about "protecting the children". What Democrat is going to pick pornography over protecting children? I mean Kamala Harris co-sponsored FOSTA/SESTA which was a disaster for sexual freedoms and has made the lives of sex workers far more dangerous. The Democrats are better than the Republicans on sexual freedom, but they're not great. So it's actually likely that this bill will get a fair amount of Democratic support.

As a result I won't be surprised if it passes. Then there will be lawsuits. But those will end up at a stridently conservative Supreme Court. This entire thing started because Clarence Thomas asked Congress to redefine obscenity back in 2020. He knew that with a different definition of obscenity he could outlaw porn. So the legal challenges are doomed to failure - all they'll do is delay the inevitable. As stupid and trite as it sounds, outlawing porn will be to men what Dobbs was to women. In some ways it may be worse since porn is part of the daily life of most men - so the effect will be felt constantly.

 

So what happens if it passes? Well, we're all kinda fucked. Presumably the idea of a paysite could still survive. They'd just have PG-13 pics and videos on the tour. BUT will Visa & Mastercard want to process the transactions now that the content has been legally declared "obscene"? Even certain types of piss play can cause sites to lose Visa/Mastercard right now because they might be obscene. If the credit card companies pull out of adult, then you're left with crypto - but it's against the terms of service at places like Coinbase to use their service for porn. Zelle won't be an option since that's organized by banks that don't want to be involved in porn either (even when it's not legally obscene).

Assuming some sort of payment service is available a company like MindGeek (which owns most of the major tube sites including PornHub as well as many paysites including Sean Cody) could possibly survive. They would have their own age check service (they already built it when they thought the UK was going to mandate it), and there would be enough content on their free and paid sites to make it worth the hassle for guys to get verified. But I don't see a viable solution for all the little sites (like mine).

Move to another country? Maybe - but we're talking felony-level offenses and most countries have extradition agreements with the US.

 

This kind of existential threat is why I've come down really hard on right wing comments on this site the last few years. This was sadly predictable and if you voted Republican over the past ~decade you brought us to this point. When Trump got elected I said at the time that the danger was what he would do the courts. Well, it's happened. All I can say is "fuck you if you voted for Trump!" (or you didn't bother to vote).

🤞

I hope it works out for sex workers. It just simply needs to. 

[Cumfilledbottomboi]

Starting January 1, 2025, TENNESSEE will now require the same requirements as Louisiana and Idaho. In fact, Tennessee makes it a felony on websites if they don’t follow age verification rules. They ALSO are including ALL “LGBT” websites in this law. Their intent? To have publishers just BLOCK access to their content so as to remove any access to such content in Tennessee. It’s so draconian for ANY of these laws and especially as the state continues to go after anyone LGBT assuming they’re “grooming” a minor by simply being who they are.

[JamesL100]

Coming a bit late to this topic (and from the UK) surely the verification applies to all sex sites not just LGBT?

[ellentonboy]

I don't know how many of our posters have access to advertisements being put out by Floridian Rick Scott.   Interesting, (and scary) is that every year (or almost) he has tried to promote agendas that would eliminate Social Security and Medicare.   A few years back that ideology  was quickly squashed, and I have heard Trump say he would never eliminate Social Security.

What fascinates me is that Scott is using this "prevent socialism" being taught in our schools, as if teachers saying there are dangers with programs that assist millions of Floridians.   You can almost read the writing on the wall.  Scott has said he wants to eventually moonlight (is that the term?)  these programs, though I wonder if his constituents understand exactly what that means.  This is Florida, "heaven's waiting room". But many wait quite along time before their number is called.  Both my parents lived to be in their 90s, that is a long time to receive Social Security and Medicare.  I just hope people wake the hell up and realize what Scott is trying to do here.

[viking8x6]

7 hours ago, JamesL100 said:

Coming a bit late to this topic (and from the UK) surely the verification applies to all sex sites not just LGBT?

The point was that Tennessee, for the purposes of this law, is classifying ALL web sites with LGBT content as "sex sites"/age verification required.

But presumably sites about marrying your first cousin at age 11 are just fine.

[PozBearWI]

7 hours ago, ellentonboy said:

I don't know how many of our posters have access to advertisements being put out by Floridian Rick Scott.   Interesting, (and scary) is that every year (or almost) he has tried to promote agendas that would eliminate Social Security and Medicare.   A few years back that ideology  was quickly squashed, and I have heard Trump say he would never eliminate Social Security.

What fascinates me is that Scott is using this "prevent socialism" being taught in our schools, as if teachers saying there are dangers with programs that assist millions of Floridians.   You can almost read the writing on the wall.  Scott has said he wants to eventually moonlight (is that the term?)  these programs, though I wonder if his constituents understand exactly what that means.  This is Florida, "heaven's waiting room". But many wait quite along time before their number is called.  Both my parents lived to be in their 90s, that is a long time to receive Social Security and Medicare.  I just hope people wake the hell up and realize what Scott is trying to do here.

The term is likely "sunset".  

[ellentonboy]

12 hours ago, PozBearWI said:

The term is likely "sunset".  

That was the word - thanks !

[blkoraltm]

Just a question.  I saw a video last night of #DoreAlley and click on the hashtag and there "are no tweets ". I was like I just saw one!  And then I noticed that the filter for hide adult content magically turned on!  has anyone else noticed this?!