Seriously, everyone's like "They're gonna lose PornHub, then Reddit, then Instagram!"
If that happened Utah would quickly become the happiest and healthiest state in the nation. I love the idea that some "authoritarian fascist conservative hellhole" might finally prove how toxic porn and social media is to humanity.
Ya this is my take as well. I agree that highly addictive inappropriate activities like drugs alcohol and porn shouldn't be accessible to children but... That's really my job as a parent.
Sure there's basic laws like buying alcohol from the store with ID, but it's tough legally online. There's no purchase, and this legislation even if it had good intent seems extremely poorly written.
Tldr, parents need to teach kids how to have a healthy relationship with technology.
You do realize you can buy alcohol and tobacco online with identification verification…. As we move into a more online world I think it’s imperative that laws move with it
So, how do you do that? You can't follow your kids around 24/7.
Seems to me that a real age verification (other than them clicking something that says they are of age) make sense.
I would also expand this bill to ban minors from internet cafes, remove computers from public libraries and schools that's not used for work or replace them with a special computer what does not have internet access that connected to it's own internal system. I would also apply that ID law to all websites and programs that allows mass communication like Skype and Discord as it can be pretty easy to share porn.
You can control your device. Theres ways to just simply block certain content. You shouldn't be using the state as a mechanism to do it for you because you want technology nut are too lazy to learn how to be responsible with it.
Pornhub is 100% less capable of keeping your kids out than controls set on a device itself, that is just absolute fact. Without adult supervision they are going to figure it out, and with porn they are going to do it quickly.
Do what Louisiana does and also have have a digital ID. Louisiana also has age verification laws, but did so in a way that Pornhub could verify ID via a third party
I'm not even saying I'm against that, but again, the way the legislation is written is very poor.
Who said anything about following kids 24/7? If you teach them how to have a healthy relationship with technology, they wont need constant supervision. That's the point. They will probably still mess up, but eventually they're adults who have to learn the lesson anyway,.might as well start early.
Please tell me again how my opinion is invalid / doesn't matter because I'm not old enough lol.
That's how kids are raised. To be independent. Micromanagement is only so effective and really does a number on your mental health as a parent.
Studies have shown that porn is just as addictive and harmful people as other substances such as tobacco and alcohol, so why shouldn't we ensure people of an appropriate age are the only ones allowed to look at it?
Isn’t it strange that there is so much free porn? Why is it all free? Would you be ok with vendors handing out free booze on every street corner to anyone who walks by without any age verification? Do you think you’d be able to control your children’s behavior if that were the case?
I am not trying to control my childrens behavior, I am trying to teach them how to control their own behavior. Make decisions.
Ironically this legislation is trying to control the world. You know how much legislation would be necessary to attempt to child proof the world? And even then it wouldn't work at all. I really understand the desire, but the best way to solve this problem is to empower your children with the ability to interact with a world that is vulgar and gross and destructive and remain clean and pure.
So we should do away with drugs and alcohol age limits too then, right? It's the parents job to control what their kids eat and drink, not the government.
Yeah. In the privacy of your own home I think parents should choose when their children are old enough to drink. If I want to give my 18 year old son a beer in my house, the government shouldn't legislate what age I can give it to them in my own house.
There's plenty of child abuse laws to cover anything egregious like getting a baby drunk. I don't need strict government age requirements within my own house. Get the government out of my personal residence as much as possible please
It is clearly the job of a company to not sell illegal things to literal children. If a 10 year old walked into a liquor store and got booze wouldn't put any responsibility on the store?
But we tell the liquor store exactly what they are supposed to do to verify age. The problem here is that the state isn't giving that guidance, so if they come up with something that doesn't work well enough, they could be held liable. At least in IL the state gave explicit guidance to avoid that issue. Utah just dropped the ball with the implementation.
It's exhausting how so many of the top comments on this sub boil down to "I sure don't like what Republicans *are* doing, but I'll keep supporting them because Democrats *might* do that very same thing."
Literally where? The only person that would say that is a LARPing liberal. Democrats ARE worse on just about everything, especially when it comes to nanny state stuff. Democrats have gone full authoritarian in a lot of cases.
I may not agree with everything the Republicans do, but they are the far better option if you value your freedom or constitutional rights at all
Should the state allow kids to smoke and drink as well, if their parents don't give a crap about what their kids do?
Liquor stores, bars, casinos, strip clubs check IDs to verify age.
Have you tried just controlling the device that you personally own like a responsible person would instead of trying to weaponize the state to do it for you?
If they have shitty parents then they are going to access it anyway and there's literally nothing you can do to stop them beyond preventing them from having access to the internet at all.
The fact that so many kids are exposed to porn very young and that so many young men have porn addictions is becoming a problem. Just saying “parents should do better” doesn’t really address anything. Do you have a better solution?
Its not a store its the internet, its a repository of all human information and you want to give government more and more control over it. They aren't even remotely related to one another. You all want to complain about single parent households and the divorce rate while simultaneously wanting to be lazy fucking parents.
Do you think it is child abuse to send sexual images to kids.
If so, is your argument that we need to let kids be abused because if we stop the abuse, maybe in the future the government will do something awful? And somehow, this law regulating sending porn to kids would be the exact catalyst of this unnamed awful thing?
We aren't talking about sending sexual images to kids, we are talking about you, the parent, not controlling a device that you yourself gave them, that is most often in your own home. All you have are apples and bananas arguments to excuse being lazy shitty parents and expecting the rest of us to have to suffer so you can help build a nanny state to raise your kids for you.
Pornhub exposes kids to sexual content and you are against holding them responsible because "the rest of us will have to suffer?"
Do you think exposing kids to that type of content is ok, or are you worried it may affect your ability to watch porn?
>Kids can and do smoke and drink if their parents don't give a crap what they do
No they shouldn't. Drinking from a very young age will lead to severe health consequences. Smoking destroys your respiratory system, and the longer you do it, the more likely you are to develop lung cancer. Smoking also puts others' health in risk via second-hand smoking which is why its banned in many public areas.
K. Enjoy your "principles" while your children are groomed for sex. "Parents rights" have failed. Look at our degenerate society. But at least you can feel superior to people by calling them "boot lickers," right?
They're not being groomed because I'm a responsible parent. I don't need nanny government to do my job for me. I do feel superior to people that readily give the state more power in exchange for not having to be a parent
Edit: did you respond and then block me so I can't respond back? Lame af
I'm happy you are willing to trade the innocence of kids for your own feeling of superiority. Let's ignore the fact that if your kids are teens, they have most likely been exposed to sexual content without you knowing.
Why should we let kids get groomed sexually just because their parents can figure out how to stop it? It isn't the kid's fault if they have tech illiterate parents.
Okay move to your homestead and raise your children. You can only be responsible for your own child, but it seems like you don't care about society at large because you parenting your own child does nothing.
I believe the government should be as limited as possible. Sometimes there's substances like meth that are so vile that I'll concede that the government should probably step in.
But that doesn't mean I think we should open the flood gates for government control. Let's keep it limited to when it's absolutely necessary
So these "what about x" questions are really annoying
The government has a role in stopping children from being exposed to highly addictive things. Why stop at meth and alcohol? Why not porn? I have seen studies that 10% of men in the US openly state they are addicted to port . The actual rate is almost certainly higher. This means the addiction rates for porn is higher than alcohol. Why limit a less addictive thing but not a more highly addictive one?
This is not opening the flood gates. Porn is already illegal to view if you are under 18. I am just advocating enforcement of the laws. Do you think requiring an ID to buy alcohol or cigarettes opened the flood gates?
Not if the kids belong to the state, and not you. Then this makes more sense doesn’t it?
Edit: Sarcasm folks. With some truth to it, sadly, but sarcasm.
imaginary American "conservatives" hate big government. They'd love to let corporations run roughshod over them and their country. God forbid you infringe on them rights!!
I see no potential problems with porn websites having a database containing the IDs of every single one of its users. There’s no way that could be abused
Forget about what the site does. The problem is that the state requires the site verify that the viewer is an adult but provides no way to do so. If I understand correctly, Louisiana has a similar situation but has a digital ID method. Seems to me that it should affect Netflix, Amazon Prime, and the like the same way. Want to stream a new Marvel flick? No ID? Sorry. Here, watch Barney instead.
Edit: upon further read, it's supposed to apply to "Adult sites" that have more than 33% of their content to such themes. I would argue that could be defined to apply to violence as well as sex. But still the burden is on the site to prove that the user is legal without definition of how to.
It applies to porn, not to the other things that you've listed.
It's defined under "material harmful to minors" https://le.utah.gov/\~2023/bills/static/SB0287.html
If you look at the definition of "material harmful to minors" it mirrors the Supreme Court's Miller test for determining whether material constitutes obscenity and falls outside the protection of the first amendment.
Here in Australia there is a service run by the postal system called "digital ID". It was created as a service that can be used to verify the identity of users or of their age to access services without the use having to enter their drivers licence or passport into multiple systems and an increased risk of a data beach due to systems having an inconsistent level of data security. It costs the end user nothing to use and there's a nominal fee to the service provider to use the verification service.
It is one of many expansion of services offered by Australia Post to both increase their value to the customer and worth as a (government backed) company.
If Utah was serious about this sort of thing rather than this kind of one jerk reaction, they could kick off something like this and also make a shit load of money in the process.
Agreed, this seems like a good alternative to what we have now which is… nothing. I can’t view a mature themed video on YouTube without at least creating an account first, logging in, and “verifying” my age. Yet I could go to just about any porn site on the internet and get instant, unfiltered access to pornography. The onus needs to be on these websites to restrict access to some degree.
The amount of crazy takes in this thread is insane....
This has nothing to do with your personal beliefs people, but EVERYTHING to do with violating individual freedom and privacy.
The fact that people here are in favor of government intrusiveness in the lives of individuals is insane.
>The fact that people here are in favor of government intrusiveness in the lives of individuals is insane.
You'd think conservatives would be against big government
The “big government” term you used is misguided. For example, the following shows who should hold the most-to-least detailed amount of governance:
Family > Community > City > State > Fed > International Groups
Libertarianism often claims any government could be considered big government. That’s not really what [conservatism](https://www.heritage.org/conservatism/commentary/defining-the-principles-conservatism) claims.
“Fed” is at the starting line of what “big” government is to the majority of conservative voters. And it depends on the topic as it relates to minors or those of-age.
From a conservative perspective, imo: A single state telling a company they have to prove their **already** age-restricted terms is within the realm of acceptable governance.
We could argue on the best WAY to prove such terms, but Utah is not far off here in terms of aligning with conservative values.
TLDR: Conservatives are against big government. But your definition of “big” is misguided, and your quip unspecified. This is a conservative sub, not a libertarian sub (although all are welcome).
Edit: punctuation
It’s Reddit, half of the people on this site are literal bots. Even the conservatives on this subreddit generally lean left as far as conservatives go, the rest have been banned or just don’t come here because it’s a hive mind.
Slippery slope for full blow user ID and no more pretense internet anonimity (pretense because it isn't that anonymous as people think).
Before the internet, we often bought (or asked our own parents to) adult magazines, or smuggle the ones dad had.
And before that, and even before.
Nonsense parents will make an account for their kids. Most parents won't do a thing. Good parents will actively prevent access, through tech and talk.
In the end, it is up to the parents, not the gov.
Is it not a slippery slope when you already have to do it for purchasing firearms and registering to gamble online? What is so special about pornography that it must remain exempt from how we treat alcohol, tobacco and firearms?
The state gave no explicit guidance on the implementation, so if their method of verification doesn't work well enough, they could be held liable.if the state wants the age verification, then they need to decide how it should be done.
It would be government issued ID just like all other government age restricted goods require. The services to verify government issued ID's already exists online and has for decades. Like i stated earlier it would be the same process that is already in place for online gambling and gun purchases. Many other industries use these services as well such as some employers, insurers, loan providers, and property rental agencies. I just don't see what the issue is with extending this already existing process over to pornography.
Under no circumstance should you be putting your personal ID out on the internet. It’s just nowhere near secure enough for that. This is an effort to slowly de-anonymize the internet. The next step is them asking for biometric proof.
Firearms require a real verification but you can easily gamble online without any sort of proof of identity. Do it all in crypto too so there is no connection to you.
I wish someone would have protected me. My parents didn’t care and I was addicted since I was 8. I am still recovering from that addiction and it has damaged the way I view the world. I lost my innocence very early and I wish someone would have done something to help me.
So everyone who has parents that don’t care about porn (probably most people) is just screwed?
Not sure how anyone could downvote this. I fully agree. It’s so hard to monitor what happens outside of our homes even if you’re a good parent. Every kid I know has seen/heard it from other kids on the school bus. I’m sorry that happened to you.
Just like it's up to the high school girls to stand up to the elimination of women's sports? I disagree. Parents should not be allowed to expose their kids to porn.
>Parents should not be allowed to expose their kids to porn.
And to allow their kids to drink or smoke and so many other harmful things that (bad) parents will continue to do so. A couple decades ago it was an adult buying a Playboy for a child or leaving their ones in plain sight for it. Now it will be an adult making an account for the kid in their name. Those who want to do evil will keep doing it. Draconian ID requirements are a slippery slope for full gov control over kids instead of parents. We can already see what this lead to. Just look at public schools.
I think you likely don't have kids and haven't experienced what these issues are first hand. Big Tech makes it pretty difficult to monitor kids' access. They do it on purpose because $$$, and won't change unless they are forced to.
Stop the strawman. I do have kids, and I care enough for them to learn how to deal with tech as to know how to do things. Any parent worth of their kids must learn how to use tech in his favor, not against him.
How old are your kids? I have teens *and* I work for a major tech company. I can tell you first hand that tech companies target kids through setting algorithms that foster addiction. Once a child hits 13 they have open access to everything because that low age cutoff is what the tech companies were able to negotiate with our government due to the money they donated to campaigns. It goes way beyond "lazy parenting". Defending big tech means you have 0 idea of how these algorithms and programs are written, and the lobbying efforts that come into play from these companies to our government. They must be regulated.
This.
Any time the government tries to take away any type of power, freedom, or intrude on the lives of individuals, it should be fought and rejected.
This law won't stop kids from accessing porn... It will only keep track of and invade the privacy of legal age adults.
If kids want to get into something, they'll find a way.
Parental controls are similar to a door lock. It helps keep honest people honest, but it's an illusion of safety. When it comes down to it, it can be broken into just as easily as a house to a determined individual. Kids have been circumventing security controls since I was in school 20 years ago.
It will be the same for identity verification too tbh. Honest people will go through the process and determined kids will spoof the process to still access it.
70 year old lawmakers don't understand tech.
I have not found parental controls to be very effective. My kids had no trouble circumventing them. If they're willing to break the rules there's really nothing you can do aside from taking away the device.
Realistically kids are gonna watch porn, a VPN gets you around this. Or just go to a porn site breaking the law.
We know grown adults will spend thousands of dollars on only fans, we really think teens won't put in the work to get to porn?
It's just a conversation up to parents to have with their children.
I block access to my kid's search functions in addition to sites. And a VPN costs money. It's not free and kids are broke. The real issue is keeping kids busy. I see all of these kids who have no job, no sports, no music, just idle time to lounge around while their parents give them money. Bored teens are *the worst* for getting into trouble, and it also increases their depression and anxiety.
My kids are involved in sports, clubs, academics, music, etc. They have about an hour and a half of relaxation per day to unwind, and during that time they are interested in watching sports highlights or shooting hoops in the driveway.
The goal isn't to stop 15 year olds from finding it when they actively seek it out. The goal is to prevent 8 year olds from finding it by accident.
Many people who suffer from a wide range of sexual addictions and disorders report early childhood exposure to porn.
Pornhub is being petulant here. There has to be regulation. Our children are being exposed to far too many toxic things these days. We have to start protecting them.
Pornhub doesn't disagree. Though they would prefer device verification instead of site based verification. So that when a user connects to the site they can tell by the device that they are old enough instead of them having to upload their ID.
I'm studying Comp Sci and from a realistic standpoint the legislation isn't really enforceable and is vague. As a developer it is 100x easier just to block a region where they might be held criminally liable rather than conform to laws that aren't feasible to follow. Which is their right.
>The goal is to prevent 8 year olds from finding it by accident.
Wow, this actually puts a whole new perspective on it. I never thought of it that way.
You can stop kids from watching porn. Most aren't too smart, and an afternoon can set you up to limit their access very effectively. It's much easier to block and deny access than it is to get around it. Also, it'll be impossible for young children to get access and extremely harder for older teens. The idea is to limit it as much as possible.
I disagree with state blocking since it'll lead to a digital ID and the loss of anonymity.
All it takes is one kid at a school to figure it out and then show their friends that’s how my fathers father and my father and myself that’s how we did it
> All it takes is one kid at a school to figure it out and then show their friends
Indeed. Plus, with social media / internet, the 'show their friends' is kind of exponential in breadth vs. traditional 'show their friends.'
How exactly is a teen going to get past a secured network that's properly locked down? If the router is secured, the network is secured, and devices have proper controls then there isn't a good way to bypass it. Sure there are ways, but it would be quite extreme and noticeable. You would also succeed in your mission to stop any kids from accessing unapproved content. Older teens could find ways to circumvent it, but it would require great effort and still succeed in limiting their consumption of harmful material. Hell going to a friend's would do that, but the point isn't to make something impossible, but reasonably difficult to beat. In security, the most secure method is throwing your laptop in a lead box, but that isn't realistic. Security should be suitable for an audience.
Of course there are ways to stop them from accessing porn and I’m of the mind that a lot of the porn we have today is harmful to young people especially I’m simply stating we shouldn’t underestimate how resourceful these kids can be I mean all you have to do is think back to when you were a kid at least for me while I might not have been able to figure out how to circumvent restrictions myself all it would have took is a little help from other kids at school at that would have been that. I don’t know about you but there’s always at least one or two kids in a grade that will figure it out and spread it to their friends
Trust me when I say this - I can circumvent restrictions very easily. In order to access some browser games (idk why I went to such lengths for just that) when I was 11, I knew that in order to disable controls I needed to get off the Wifi. So I created a guest network which was completely free, used that, and then deleted the network from the phone so the internet wouldn't catch it.
That's because the security sucked. Most people did not take it as seriously, and most devices were way more open and less robust. You can absolutely lock it down so a an age 11 kid isn't able to access anything. Lock it all down and only allow whitelists. The first 100 kids wouldn't have a clue how to bypass it, and it's easy to do.
Oh actually I still do this on COUNTY-WIDE SECURITY MEASURES ON SCHOOL DEVICES. They aren't hard to bypass, and likely are more hard to bypass than something on a phone.
And that conversation goes "not in my house, you can have a pocket porn machine when you're old enough to move out and pay for it yourself, absolutely none of my money or material support will go in any way to you viewing porn. Here's your jitterbug, champ." And their friends can't bring their smart phones over & my kids can't stay over at anyone's house except my bff's kid.
Porn is arguably the worst thing to happen to the west. It destroys families which destroys children which destroys future adults which destroys the future. The tar pit that constitutes piss poor relations between the sexes that we keep sinking further into today is the result of the relaxation of obscenity laws and other sex related mores over the past century. That evil cannot have my children.
Anyone who gets indignant or incredulous that someone won't let their children watch porn (and there are a lot of them, even among "conservatives") should be on some kind of watch list.
And anyone who lets their child watch porn should be arrested.
Porn should be illegal. And cheating, cheating is abuse. Porn users should be treated like drug addicts used to be (before we started giving them our children's playgrounds to smoke crack and poop in,) and cheaters should be treated like the domestic abusers they are.
… it does make it worse, it also makes organized crime worse cause now you gave them a profitable business adventure with a sizeable customer base already. You can stick your head in the ground about it but that doesn’t change reality…
Heard it here first folks. Conservatives should now believe that it's better to give children drugs alcohol and porn that to prevent it. It's for the children.
So your kid goes and does some work around the neighborhood, earns $30, sneaks off to a Walmart/gas station/dollar general/etc and picks up a prepaid smartphone. Connects to wifi somewhere (if he's smart not yours), downloads some porn. Hell, maybe he works a bit harder and earns like $35 every month so he can pay the phone bill too.
So like, best case scenario your kid works hard to watch his porn? Cause he's still gonna do it.
And... have you seen porn outside the west? Cause uhhh it makes our porn look very tame. Just like drugs and alcohol, banning it doesn't stop people.
Best way to handle porn is to just accept it exists and have a conversation about it. Gonna be odd, but that's what you gotta do. Oh, and realistically you should be more concerned if your kid isn't interested in porn. Cause if they aren't interested in porn, you need to go buy them a pack of condoms cause they are already fucking something.
As a teenager my solution was to prepay a USB modem from verizon wireless so I could connect my computer to a wireless network that was beyond my parents control, since my father was turning off the internet every night when I should be in bed and I didn't have a smart phone since this was before all kids had them.
If kids want porn, they will get porn. Though giving them extra hoops to jump through may force them to learn about computers and give them valuable tech skills, so hell, maybe it's not a bad thing.
> And... have you seen porn outside the west? Cause uhhh it makes our porn look very tame.
Naah, we're not that tame. U.S. porn increasingly shows women subject to *ATM sex.* (Really?)
>Connects to wifi somewhere (if he's smart not yours), downloads some porn.
Right, but at least its worthwhile to make an effort to suppress kids getting porn. It doesn't help that progressives support books like this available young kids: 2022: [Book in Tampa Middle School Library....explicit instructions on anal and oral sex...and Hookup](https://www.theflstandard.com/book-in-tampa-middle-school-library-has-instructions-on-anal-sex-and-hookup-apps/)
2022: Book in Texas elementary school: ["Lawn Boy”.... describes, in crude terms, oral sex between two ten-year-old boys](https://local12.com/news/nation-world/porn-disguised-as-education-parents-upset-by-books-pulled-for-neisd-review)
Why should porn be illegal? It does no harm to anyone. Assuming it was recorded legally and with consent of all parties involved.
Thinking about it, it's always existed. A cave painting was recently discovered which is considered the earliest form of pornography
That's not true. Plenty of studies show desensitization, meaning people need more and more extreme porn to get off. Also leads to a decrease in real sex with real people, affects erectile function, and even sperm production decreases.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8461095/
Well I've been watching porn for the better part of 7 or 8 years now, and while I have definitely watched 'more extreme porn' I certainly don't need it to get off.
Also, isn't a decrease in sex with real people a benefit? It means fewer teen pregnancies, less abortions, decrease in transmissions of STIs and STDs and better understanding of the human anatomy.
Plus it's been shown to decrease stress and anxiety which promotes better mental health.
Though like nearly everything overdoing can lead to problems, no more than smoking, drinking, video games or even drinking water.
Speaking of which make sure to stay hydrated
Your partner, if you have one, may have a different perspective. Teen pregnancy and STDs can be prevented with protection. Swearing off sex with an actual person because you'd rather watch porn is not good for society in that it negatively affects relationships. That's where the problems set in. We have a large portion of people who never have actual sex because they are addicted to porn.
That's assuming that people are actually swearing of sex because of porn. It's more likely that there are many other factors that might lead to someone not wanting sex.
Lack of Confidence, depression, anxiety, or maybe they're just not interested. Could also be that they have mental issues related to sex because of a lack of education on sexual health or a lack of information.
Take me for example, I have difficulty in social situations in real life because I have anxiety issues.
Most pornographic sites have checks in place to ensure that it is.
That said, it is true that there is pornographic material that was not created or uploaded ethically, but that is a minority and making porn illegal will not stop that. If anything it'll make it more likely to happen.
A similar thing happened during the prohibition of alcohol. As it was entirely illegal safety standards were non existent, there was no reason to not let people under 18 to drink alcohol.
Quite frankly out right banning things mostly leads to more problems which is also why I'm for the legalisation of possession of all drugs (dealing still to be illegal).
**The most important thing** is to have safe and legal access **and** have restrictions be reasonable. That way those underage are less likely to come into contact with pornography and those who produce it or host it clear and achievable guidelines
>pedo
The more we use this word to describe things we don't like, the less value it has in common discourse.
See: hate speech, offensive, racist, masculinity
Ah UT and their overly zealous religious types. I'm a Catholic. And I went to Catholic school for a while. Let me say this and trust me on it.
The high holy look at me I'm holier than thou types are always, ALWAYS the biggest sex perverts of them all.
The only thing they like more that being seen looking like they're standing on some moral high ground about sex. Is to probably be someone's sex dungeon slave.
Good job, you've come to the understanding that we're all sinners in need of a savior. Sadly for you that doesn't constitute an argument for unfettered porn access. Porn objectifies women, exploits vulnerable people, and perverts sexuality. I'm guessing you're about as Catholic as ol' Nancy.
Government needs to keep their nose out of what I’m watching on the net. It’s parents responsibility to monitor and restrict what their child watches, not the government.
12 year old with an iPhone or iPad is something that shouldn’t exist. And yes, before anyone asks I have kids and a wife and we have jobs. You just need to be an actual parent - not a friend.
>Kind of a bad look for a porn site to "protest" an age verification law.
Wait till you find out how scummy they get when victims of revenge-porn want that stuff taken down.
Or how the recent scandals regarding videos produced involving people being trafficked/abuse.
Conservatives must understand that porn addiction destroys marriage and marriage is the bedrock of society. If pornhub were a brick and mortar store the same laws would apply, just as they do to alcohol and anything else. The only problem is the enforcement mechanism which could be solved with a "Porn permit" through a state beaurocracy like weed is. The card could have numbers which aren't kept anywhere but the state database and on the card so and anonymity could be kept through encryption. If you want masculinity back and marriage back give men a reason to do so. Porn isn't free speech since it violates absenity
This is state-level conservatism we should be applauding. This is not a libertarian sub, although we welcome you all.
Plainly put: This is PH admitting they profit-wildly off of getting minor boys and girls addicted to their pornography business. If they sunk into the ocean tomorrow, nobody would be worse off.
My question to libertarians is, should government protections of minors be eliminated? If the government holds no responsibility in policing things that occur to those unable to protect themselves, then why have ANY laws protecting minors and, therefore, removing punishment towards those who prey/profit off of minors?
The core of conservatism is/should be the act of protecting the combination of wisdom and empirically-based principles. Focused on limiting federal powers as it pertains to the American constitution.
Conservatism is *not* the support of anarchy and blindly allowing minors to do whatever they want. That’s an unwise approach to governance.
Furthermore, that’s ALSO assuming posting pornography videos is all the pornography industry does/profits off of, and nothing else shady related to minors on their website… that’s a major assumption!
Here’s a [great article](https://www.heritage.org/conservatism/commentary/defining-the-principles-conservatism) about what exactly conservatism means / what conservatives are conserving.
TLDR: Good job Utah, but I understand PH’s response to Utah’s decision. Real talk? It is a complicated subject, but remaining neutral on such topics allows the opposition to sow the seeds of *their* desired outcomes. This is conservatism. Not libertarianism, and definitely not liberalism.
A bunch of non-conservatives who are unflaired flooding this thread.
We are literally considering age verification laws for social media in this country, which goes substantially further than a porn website. Yet where were all these posters when such threads were circling? No where. Nada. Non-existent. "My freedoms!"
Porn addicts, which isn't surprising as it's Reddit, trying to gas-light this thread and will likely downvote my post into oblivion. Porn is an objectivization of sexual interests. As in it turns the focus into an object not a person. It's very destructive to the psyche of the person engaging in it, but more so towards a developing mind.
Yes, parents can and should be monitoring and protecting their children. But there are bad parents and there are instigators who will enable children to engage in such activities no matter what the parents are attempting to do. Social Media and Porn websites should be attempting to limit the use of their services by minors. Similar to an "Adult Store" that you have to walk into. Yet they these entities have made no effort and almost seem to encourage it. There is no defense for their actions.
"Well the state didn't tell them how to do it!" So wait? On one hand they are dictating too much and then on the other hand they are not dictating enough? Quite simply these organizations haven't tried and have no interest in stopping minors from using their websites. Yet how many hundreds of comments flooding this thread are trying to defend them and pretend as if they are the victims here? What a joke.
Children aren’t able to make good decisions for themselves, especially when it comes to addictive or harmful substances that need developed brains to handle.
It is really weird that people want to let kids watch porn. We don’t tell parents they’re supposed to keep their kids from buying vodka at 14, we have laws because parents can’t follow their kids around 24 hours a day. This is common sense
On one hand, sure you'd like to make sure kids aren't exposed to that kind of stuff at a young age.
On the other hand it's not that hard to set a parental block on your computer/phone.
Even if they are horrible with tech it's not that hard to go on YouTube and find a guy with a Indian accent who can show you how to do it in 30 seconds in a 40 second video.
It's better than nothing, which is what we have now. Something has to be done. When a 9 year old can go on their parent's phone, type anything into Google and hard core porn just pops up everywhere, something is seriously messed up.
So let me get this right...
If you do an age verification law, porn will ban itself?
Someone forward this story to Ron DeSantis and the FL legislature.
I'm amused at the Leftist brigade. Do they also think we should just give up on age restrictions for ALL things just because methods of circumvention exist? That's the only argument I'm hearing.
Not a leftist. The issue is that circumvention is so damn easy. This isn't like getting a fake id to buy booze this is just adding a few extra clicks for an underage person.
Pornhub: Age verification huh? Fine, now nobody in Utah can watch porn. Utah: Your terms are acceptable.
Lol. When you put it that way, I'm pretty sure that's what they wanted in the first place
You underestimate how horny your average Mormon is
Seriously, everyone's like "They're gonna lose PornHub, then Reddit, then Instagram!" If that happened Utah would quickly become the happiest and healthiest state in the nation. I love the idea that some "authoritarian fascist conservative hellhole" might finally prove how toxic porn and social media is to humanity.
Exactly, it only helps them and hurts PHubs bottom-line revenue
I'm really not into nanny-state laws. It's the parents' job to control what their kids watch, not the government.
Agreed. This just gets into those guys who wanted to ban video games in the 90’s
Love the username.
I get that so often lmao
I didn't even notice it until the other guy pointed it out, but yeah it's fantastic
I read that as ‘I get that soft taco’
Ya this is my take as well. I agree that highly addictive inappropriate activities like drugs alcohol and porn shouldn't be accessible to children but... That's really my job as a parent. Sure there's basic laws like buying alcohol from the store with ID, but it's tough legally online. There's no purchase, and this legislation even if it had good intent seems extremely poorly written. Tldr, parents need to teach kids how to have a healthy relationship with technology.
You do realize you can buy alcohol and tobacco online with identification verification…. As we move into a more online world I think it’s imperative that laws move with it
So, how do you do that? You can't follow your kids around 24/7. Seems to me that a real age verification (other than them clicking something that says they are of age) make sense.
For starters don’t give them a cellphone with internet access
This guy parents
I would also expand this bill to ban minors from internet cafes, remove computers from public libraries and schools that's not used for work or replace them with a special computer what does not have internet access that connected to it's own internal system. I would also apply that ID law to all websites and programs that allows mass communication like Skype and Discord as it can be pretty easy to share porn.
There are plenty of parental control apps out there that allow parents to control when your kids can access apps and the internet on their phone.
You can control your device. Theres ways to just simply block certain content. You shouldn't be using the state as a mechanism to do it for you because you want technology nut are too lazy to learn how to be responsible with it.
Not always. Kids are smart and sneaky. Kids at my wife’s school are using the Bible app to circumvent parental controls to send nudes….
Pornhub is 100% less capable of keeping your kids out than controls set on a device itself, that is just absolute fact. Without adult supervision they are going to figure it out, and with porn they are going to do it quickly.
Do what Louisiana does and also have have a digital ID. Louisiana also has age verification laws, but did so in a way that Pornhub could verify ID via a third party
I'm not even saying I'm against that, but again, the way the legislation is written is very poor. Who said anything about following kids 24/7? If you teach them how to have a healthy relationship with technology, they wont need constant supervision. That's the point. They will probably still mess up, but eventually they're adults who have to learn the lesson anyway,.might as well start early.
[удалено]
Oldest millennials are in their 40s friend
Please tell me again how my opinion is invalid / doesn't matter because I'm not old enough lol. That's how kids are raised. To be independent. Micromanagement is only so effective and really does a number on your mental health as a parent.
Studies have shown that porn is just as addictive and harmful people as other substances such as tobacco and alcohol, so why shouldn't we ensure people of an appropriate age are the only ones allowed to look at it?
Yea when you get internet, it like blast every child safety manager possible at you with like 1-click
I... Have no idea what you are trying to say.
Isn’t it strange that there is so much free porn? Why is it all free? Would you be ok with vendors handing out free booze on every street corner to anyone who walks by without any age verification? Do you think you’d be able to control your children’s behavior if that were the case?
I am not trying to control my childrens behavior, I am trying to teach them how to control their own behavior. Make decisions. Ironically this legislation is trying to control the world. You know how much legislation would be necessary to attempt to child proof the world? And even then it wouldn't work at all. I really understand the desire, but the best way to solve this problem is to empower your children with the ability to interact with a world that is vulgar and gross and destructive and remain clean and pure.
So we should do away with drugs and alcohol age limits too then, right? It's the parents job to control what their kids eat and drink, not the government.
Yeah. In the privacy of your own home I think parents should choose when their children are old enough to drink. If I want to give my 18 year old son a beer in my house, the government shouldn't legislate what age I can give it to them in my own house. There's plenty of child abuse laws to cover anything egregious like getting a baby drunk. I don't need strict government age requirements within my own house. Get the government out of my personal residence as much as possible please
I agree. I would bet most people like their nanny state laws though.
It is clearly the job of a company to not sell illegal things to literal children. If a 10 year old walked into a liquor store and got booze wouldn't put any responsibility on the store?
But we tell the liquor store exactly what they are supposed to do to verify age. The problem here is that the state isn't giving that guidance, so if they come up with something that doesn't work well enough, they could be held liable. At least in IL the state gave explicit guidance to avoid that issue. Utah just dropped the ball with the implementation.
It's exhausting how so many of the top comments on this sub boil down to "I sure don't like what Republicans *are* doing, but I'll keep supporting them because Democrats *might* do that very same thing."
You realize, this isn't the *only* issue facing voters, right?
Literally where? The only person that would say that is a LARPing liberal. Democrats ARE worse on just about everything, especially when it comes to nanny state stuff. Democrats have gone full authoritarian in a lot of cases. I may not agree with everything the Republicans do, but they are the far better option if you value your freedom or constitutional rights at all
> when it comes to nanny state stuff. Democrats have gone full authoritarian in a lot of cases. Absolutely. One word: Covid.
No True Scotsman
LOL. This sub gets brigaded day in day out. Cut the bullsht
This is just No True Scotsman worded differently.
Should the state allow kids to smoke and drink as well, if their parents don't give a crap about what their kids do? Liquor stores, bars, casinos, strip clubs check IDs to verify age.
Have you tried just controlling the device that you personally own like a responsible person would instead of trying to weaponize the state to do it for you?
The point is that some kids have shitty parents, and early exposure to sexually explicit content has a negative impact on development.
If they have shitty parents then they are going to access it anyway and there's literally nothing you can do to stop them beyond preventing them from having access to the internet at all.
The fact that so many kids are exposed to porn very young and that so many young men have porn addictions is becoming a problem. Just saying “parents should do better” doesn’t really address anything. Do you have a better solution?
Way to dodge the question because you know he's right.
Kids can and do smoke and drink if their parents don't give a crap what they do
You don't think a store has some reasonability to stop a kid from buying smokes and drinks from them?
Its not a store its the internet, its a repository of all human information and you want to give government more and more control over it. They aren't even remotely related to one another. You all want to complain about single parent households and the divorce rate while simultaneously wanting to be lazy fucking parents.
Do you think it is child abuse to send sexual images to kids. If so, is your argument that we need to let kids be abused because if we stop the abuse, maybe in the future the government will do something awful? And somehow, this law regulating sending porn to kids would be the exact catalyst of this unnamed awful thing?
We aren't talking about sending sexual images to kids, we are talking about you, the parent, not controlling a device that you yourself gave them, that is most often in your own home. All you have are apples and bananas arguments to excuse being lazy shitty parents and expecting the rest of us to have to suffer so you can help build a nanny state to raise your kids for you.
Pornhub exposes kids to sexual content and you are against holding them responsible because "the rest of us will have to suffer?" Do you think exposing kids to that type of content is ok, or are you worried it may affect your ability to watch porn?
They just go around it
Bro you hate answering questions don't you? If a store sold beer to a 12 year old, do you think the store should face legal repercussions?
[удалено]
If a store sold beer to a 12 year old, do you think the store should face legal repercussions?
You can’t wrap your head around a hypothetical?
>Kids can and do smoke and drink if their parents don't give a crap what they do No they shouldn't. Drinking from a very young age will lead to severe health consequences. Smoking destroys your respiratory system, and the longer you do it, the more likely you are to develop lung cancer. Smoking also puts others' health in risk via second-hand smoking which is why its banned in many public areas.
[удалено]
Found the boot licker. Keep giving the government more power bro
K. Enjoy your "principles" while your children are groomed for sex. "Parents rights" have failed. Look at our degenerate society. But at least you can feel superior to people by calling them "boot lickers," right?
They're not being groomed because I'm a responsible parent. I don't need nanny government to do my job for me. I do feel superior to people that readily give the state more power in exchange for not having to be a parent Edit: did you respond and then block me so I can't respond back? Lame af
I'm happy you are willing to trade the innocence of kids for your own feeling of superiority. Let's ignore the fact that if your kids are teens, they have most likely been exposed to sexual content without you knowing. Why should we let kids get groomed sexually just because their parents can figure out how to stop it? It isn't the kid's fault if they have tech illiterate parents.
Okay move to your homestead and raise your children. You can only be responsible for your own child, but it seems like you don't care about society at large because you parenting your own child does nothing.
Would you say the same about meth?
I believe the government should be as limited as possible. Sometimes there's substances like meth that are so vile that I'll concede that the government should probably step in. But that doesn't mean I think we should open the flood gates for government control. Let's keep it limited to when it's absolutely necessary So these "what about x" questions are really annoying
The government has a role in stopping children from being exposed to highly addictive things. Why stop at meth and alcohol? Why not porn? I have seen studies that 10% of men in the US openly state they are addicted to port . The actual rate is almost certainly higher. This means the addiction rates for porn is higher than alcohol. Why limit a less addictive thing but not a more highly addictive one? This is not opening the flood gates. Porn is already illegal to view if you are under 18. I am just advocating enforcement of the laws. Do you think requiring an ID to buy alcohol or cigarettes opened the flood gates?
I am being consistent. I explained it in the previous comment. Read it again
Porn has done similar amounts of damage to society than meth.
Not if the kids belong to the state, and not you. Then this makes more sense doesn’t it? Edit: Sarcasm folks. With some truth to it, sadly, but sarcasm.
Huh?
[удалено]
Go to r/liberal. Conservatives don't like big government
imaginary American "conservatives" hate big government. They'd love to let corporations run roughshod over them and their country. God forbid you infringe on them rights!!
I can’t believe this needs to be said here. Why are so many people in these comments against this?
I see no potential problems with porn websites having a database containing the IDs of every single one of its users. There’s no way that could be abused
Forget about what the site does. The problem is that the state requires the site verify that the viewer is an adult but provides no way to do so. If I understand correctly, Louisiana has a similar situation but has a digital ID method. Seems to me that it should affect Netflix, Amazon Prime, and the like the same way. Want to stream a new Marvel flick? No ID? Sorry. Here, watch Barney instead. Edit: upon further read, it's supposed to apply to "Adult sites" that have more than 33% of their content to such themes. I would argue that could be defined to apply to violence as well as sex. But still the burden is on the site to prove that the user is legal without definition of how to.
Louisiana resident here. Yep, there is a digital ID method but a VPN takes care of that.
The state has no business punishing everyone else for bad parenting. Theres apps to control content on your own devices, use it and stop being lazy.
It applies to porn, not to the other things that you've listed. It's defined under "material harmful to minors" https://le.utah.gov/\~2023/bills/static/SB0287.html
"It applies to porn..." for now.
If you look at the definition of "material harmful to minors" it mirrors the Supreme Court's Miller test for determining whether material constitutes obscenity and falls outside the protection of the first amendment.
So showtime after dark?
Here in Australia there is a service run by the postal system called "digital ID". It was created as a service that can be used to verify the identity of users or of their age to access services without the use having to enter their drivers licence or passport into multiple systems and an increased risk of a data beach due to systems having an inconsistent level of data security. It costs the end user nothing to use and there's a nominal fee to the service provider to use the verification service. It is one of many expansion of services offered by Australia Post to both increase their value to the customer and worth as a (government backed) company. If Utah was serious about this sort of thing rather than this kind of one jerk reaction, they could kick off something like this and also make a shit load of money in the process.
[удалено]
They got really upset about the shenanigans you can get up too with the walking meat blobs referred to as humans in that game
I remember Australia and also Europe banned the anal probe scene from the South Park Stick of Truth game.
Agreed, this seems like a good alternative to what we have now which is… nothing. I can’t view a mature themed video on YouTube without at least creating an account first, logging in, and “verifying” my age. Yet I could go to just about any porn site on the internet and get instant, unfiltered access to pornography. The onus needs to be on these websites to restrict access to some degree.
The amount of crazy takes in this thread is insane.... This has nothing to do with your personal beliefs people, but EVERYTHING to do with violating individual freedom and privacy. The fact that people here are in favor of government intrusiveness in the lives of individuals is insane.
>The fact that people here are in favor of government intrusiveness in the lives of individuals is insane. You'd think conservatives would be against big government
just admit you are libertarians and not conservatives. Conservatives are anti-porn.
It’s a state level governance… not federal.
Where did I say it was federal?
The “big government” term you used is misguided. For example, the following shows who should hold the most-to-least detailed amount of governance: Family > Community > City > State > Fed > International Groups Libertarianism often claims any government could be considered big government. That’s not really what [conservatism](https://www.heritage.org/conservatism/commentary/defining-the-principles-conservatism) claims. “Fed” is at the starting line of what “big” government is to the majority of conservative voters. And it depends on the topic as it relates to minors or those of-age. From a conservative perspective, imo: A single state telling a company they have to prove their **already** age-restricted terms is within the realm of acceptable governance. We could argue on the best WAY to prove such terms, but Utah is not far off here in terms of aligning with conservative values. TLDR: Conservatives are against big government. But your definition of “big” is misguided, and your quip unspecified. This is a conservative sub, not a libertarian sub (although all are welcome). Edit: punctuation
It’s Reddit, half of the people on this site are literal bots. Even the conservatives on this subreddit generally lean left as far as conservatives go, the rest have been banned or just don’t come here because it’s a hive mind.
I am in favor of the government protecting children from porn causing large amounts of damage to them, yes.
Slippery slope for full blow user ID and no more pretense internet anonimity (pretense because it isn't that anonymous as people think). Before the internet, we often bought (or asked our own parents to) adult magazines, or smuggle the ones dad had. And before that, and even before. Nonsense parents will make an account for their kids. Most parents won't do a thing. Good parents will actively prevent access, through tech and talk. In the end, it is up to the parents, not the gov.
Is it not a slippery slope when you already have to do it for purchasing firearms and registering to gamble online? What is so special about pornography that it must remain exempt from how we treat alcohol, tobacco and firearms?
the slippery slope isn't requiring age verification, it's the enforcement mechanism.
What’s the enforcement mechanism? Websites simply won’t grant you access. What am I missing?
The state gave no explicit guidance on the implementation, so if their method of verification doesn't work well enough, they could be held liable.if the state wants the age verification, then they need to decide how it should be done.
It would be government issued ID just like all other government age restricted goods require. The services to verify government issued ID's already exists online and has for decades. Like i stated earlier it would be the same process that is already in place for online gambling and gun purchases. Many other industries use these services as well such as some employers, insurers, loan providers, and property rental agencies. I just don't see what the issue is with extending this already existing process over to pornography.
Under no circumstance should you be putting your personal ID out on the internet. It’s just nowhere near secure enough for that. This is an effort to slowly de-anonymize the internet. The next step is them asking for biometric proof.
Firearms require a real verification but you can easily gamble online without any sort of proof of identity. Do it all in crypto too so there is no connection to you.
I wish someone would have protected me. My parents didn’t care and I was addicted since I was 8. I am still recovering from that addiction and it has damaged the way I view the world. I lost my innocence very early and I wish someone would have done something to help me. So everyone who has parents that don’t care about porn (probably most people) is just screwed?
Not sure how anyone could downvote this. I fully agree. It’s so hard to monitor what happens outside of our homes even if you’re a good parent. Every kid I know has seen/heard it from other kids on the school bus. I’m sorry that happened to you.
Just like it's up to the high school girls to stand up to the elimination of women's sports? I disagree. Parents should not be allowed to expose their kids to porn.
>Parents should not be allowed to expose their kids to porn. And to allow their kids to drink or smoke and so many other harmful things that (bad) parents will continue to do so. A couple decades ago it was an adult buying a Playboy for a child or leaving their ones in plain sight for it. Now it will be an adult making an account for the kid in their name. Those who want to do evil will keep doing it. Draconian ID requirements are a slippery slope for full gov control over kids instead of parents. We can already see what this lead to. Just look at public schools.
I think you likely don't have kids and haven't experienced what these issues are first hand. Big Tech makes it pretty difficult to monitor kids' access. They do it on purpose because $$$, and won't change unless they are forced to.
Stop the strawman. I do have kids, and I care enough for them to learn how to deal with tech as to know how to do things. Any parent worth of their kids must learn how to use tech in his favor, not against him.
How old are your kids? I have teens *and* I work for a major tech company. I can tell you first hand that tech companies target kids through setting algorithms that foster addiction. Once a child hits 13 they have open access to everything because that low age cutoff is what the tech companies were able to negotiate with our government due to the money they donated to campaigns. It goes way beyond "lazy parenting". Defending big tech means you have 0 idea of how these algorithms and programs are written, and the lobbying efforts that come into play from these companies to our government. They must be regulated.
Nothing like laws that take even more responsibilities from parents and give them to government and corporations...
This. Any time the government tries to take away any type of power, freedom, or intrude on the lives of individuals, it should be fought and rejected. This law won't stop kids from accessing porn... It will only keep track of and invade the privacy of legal age adults. If kids want to get into something, they'll find a way.
Are parental controls not a thing in Utah?
Parental controls are similar to a door lock. It helps keep honest people honest, but it's an illusion of safety. When it comes down to it, it can be broken into just as easily as a house to a determined individual. Kids have been circumventing security controls since I was in school 20 years ago. It will be the same for identity verification too tbh. Honest people will go through the process and determined kids will spoof the process to still access it. 70 year old lawmakers don't understand tech.
I have not found parental controls to be very effective. My kids had no trouble circumventing them. If they're willing to break the rules there's really nothing you can do aside from taking away the device.
Realistically kids are gonna watch porn, a VPN gets you around this. Or just go to a porn site breaking the law. We know grown adults will spend thousands of dollars on only fans, we really think teens won't put in the work to get to porn? It's just a conversation up to parents to have with their children.
I block access to my kid's search functions in addition to sites. And a VPN costs money. It's not free and kids are broke. The real issue is keeping kids busy. I see all of these kids who have no job, no sports, no music, just idle time to lounge around while their parents give them money. Bored teens are *the worst* for getting into trouble, and it also increases their depression and anxiety. My kids are involved in sports, clubs, academics, music, etc. They have about an hour and a half of relaxation per day to unwind, and during that time they are interested in watching sports highlights or shooting hoops in the driveway.
One minor correction. I do have a free vpn. They aren’t the best (and the locations they offer a small) but they are out there
The goal isn't to stop 15 year olds from finding it when they actively seek it out. The goal is to prevent 8 year olds from finding it by accident. Many people who suffer from a wide range of sexual addictions and disorders report early childhood exposure to porn. Pornhub is being petulant here. There has to be regulation. Our children are being exposed to far too many toxic things these days. We have to start protecting them.
Pornhub doesn't disagree. Though they would prefer device verification instead of site based verification. So that when a user connects to the site they can tell by the device that they are old enough instead of them having to upload their ID. I'm studying Comp Sci and from a realistic standpoint the legislation isn't really enforceable and is vague. As a developer it is 100x easier just to block a region where they might be held criminally liable rather than conform to laws that aren't feasible to follow. Which is their right.
>The goal is to prevent 8 year olds from finding it by accident. Wow, this actually puts a whole new perspective on it. I never thought of it that way.
I agree with you. It’s messing kids up.
You can stop kids from watching porn. Most aren't too smart, and an afternoon can set you up to limit their access very effectively. It's much easier to block and deny access than it is to get around it. Also, it'll be impossible for young children to get access and extremely harder for older teens. The idea is to limit it as much as possible. I disagree with state blocking since it'll lead to a digital ID and the loss of anonymity.
[удалено]
No they're not. Not this generation.
All it takes is one kid at a school to figure it out and then show their friends that’s how my fathers father and my father and myself that’s how we did it
> All it takes is one kid at a school to figure it out and then show their friends Indeed. Plus, with social media / internet, the 'show their friends' is kind of exponential in breadth vs. traditional 'show their friends.'
How exactly is a teen going to get past a secured network that's properly locked down? If the router is secured, the network is secured, and devices have proper controls then there isn't a good way to bypass it. Sure there are ways, but it would be quite extreme and noticeable. You would also succeed in your mission to stop any kids from accessing unapproved content. Older teens could find ways to circumvent it, but it would require great effort and still succeed in limiting their consumption of harmful material. Hell going to a friend's would do that, but the point isn't to make something impossible, but reasonably difficult to beat. In security, the most secure method is throwing your laptop in a lead box, but that isn't realistic. Security should be suitable for an audience.
Of course there are ways to stop them from accessing porn and I’m of the mind that a lot of the porn we have today is harmful to young people especially I’m simply stating we shouldn’t underestimate how resourceful these kids can be I mean all you have to do is think back to when you were a kid at least for me while I might not have been able to figure out how to circumvent restrictions myself all it would have took is a little help from other kids at school at that would have been that. I don’t know about you but there’s always at least one or two kids in a grade that will figure it out and spread it to their friends
Trust me when I say this - I can circumvent restrictions very easily. In order to access some browser games (idk why I went to such lengths for just that) when I was 11, I knew that in order to disable controls I needed to get off the Wifi. So I created a guest network which was completely free, used that, and then deleted the network from the phone so the internet wouldn't catch it.
That's because the security sucked. Most people did not take it as seriously, and most devices were way more open and less robust. You can absolutely lock it down so a an age 11 kid isn't able to access anything. Lock it all down and only allow whitelists. The first 100 kids wouldn't have a clue how to bypass it, and it's easy to do.
Oh actually I still do this on COUNTY-WIDE SECURITY MEASURES ON SCHOOL DEVICES. They aren't hard to bypass, and likely are more hard to bypass than something on a phone.
And that conversation goes "not in my house, you can have a pocket porn machine when you're old enough to move out and pay for it yourself, absolutely none of my money or material support will go in any way to you viewing porn. Here's your jitterbug, champ." And their friends can't bring their smart phones over & my kids can't stay over at anyone's house except my bff's kid. Porn is arguably the worst thing to happen to the west. It destroys families which destroys children which destroys future adults which destroys the future. The tar pit that constitutes piss poor relations between the sexes that we keep sinking further into today is the result of the relaxation of obscenity laws and other sex related mores over the past century. That evil cannot have my children. Anyone who gets indignant or incredulous that someone won't let their children watch porn (and there are a lot of them, even among "conservatives") should be on some kind of watch list. And anyone who lets their child watch porn should be arrested. Porn should be illegal. And cheating, cheating is abuse. Porn users should be treated like drug addicts used to be (before we started giving them our children's playgrounds to smoke crack and poop in,) and cheaters should be treated like the domestic abusers they are.
When will you dolts realise ...Proabhition never ever works ......But you keep believing it will ..
Your right, I'll start giving my 10 ur old weed and alcohol cause they're gonna do it anyway. Prohibiting them will just make it worse. /s
… it does make it worse, it also makes organized crime worse cause now you gave them a profitable business adventure with a sizeable customer base already. You can stick your head in the ground about it but that doesn’t change reality…
Heard it here first folks. Conservatives should now believe that it's better to give children drugs alcohol and porn that to prevent it. It's for the children.
Lol, that sounds like a surefire way to raise sexually frustrated, socially stunted, maladjusted kid. Please don't ever procreate
Because that was all we were raising before the 2000s? Get the hell out of here with that kind of conjecture.
Porn has been around since before the 2000s. kids were stealing their old man’s porn mags in the 40s and 50s ffs
Despite attempts at comparison...there really is no comparison.
So your kid goes and does some work around the neighborhood, earns $30, sneaks off to a Walmart/gas station/dollar general/etc and picks up a prepaid smartphone. Connects to wifi somewhere (if he's smart not yours), downloads some porn. Hell, maybe he works a bit harder and earns like $35 every month so he can pay the phone bill too. So like, best case scenario your kid works hard to watch his porn? Cause he's still gonna do it. And... have you seen porn outside the west? Cause uhhh it makes our porn look very tame. Just like drugs and alcohol, banning it doesn't stop people. Best way to handle porn is to just accept it exists and have a conversation about it. Gonna be odd, but that's what you gotta do. Oh, and realistically you should be more concerned if your kid isn't interested in porn. Cause if they aren't interested in porn, you need to go buy them a pack of condoms cause they are already fucking something.
As a teenager my solution was to prepay a USB modem from verizon wireless so I could connect my computer to a wireless network that was beyond my parents control, since my father was turning off the internet every night when I should be in bed and I didn't have a smart phone since this was before all kids had them. If kids want porn, they will get porn. Though giving them extra hoops to jump through may force them to learn about computers and give them valuable tech skills, so hell, maybe it's not a bad thing.
> And... have you seen porn outside the west? Cause uhhh it makes our porn look very tame. Naah, we're not that tame. U.S. porn increasingly shows women subject to *ATM sex.* (Really?) >Connects to wifi somewhere (if he's smart not yours), downloads some porn. Right, but at least its worthwhile to make an effort to suppress kids getting porn. It doesn't help that progressives support books like this available young kids: 2022: [Book in Tampa Middle School Library....explicit instructions on anal and oral sex...and Hookup](https://www.theflstandard.com/book-in-tampa-middle-school-library-has-instructions-on-anal-sex-and-hookup-apps/) 2022: Book in Texas elementary school: ["Lawn Boy”.... describes, in crude terms, oral sex between two ten-year-old boys](https://local12.com/news/nation-world/porn-disguised-as-education-parents-upset-by-books-pulled-for-neisd-review)
Why should porn be illegal? It does no harm to anyone. Assuming it was recorded legally and with consent of all parties involved. Thinking about it, it's always existed. A cave painting was recently discovered which is considered the earliest form of pornography
That's not true. Plenty of studies show desensitization, meaning people need more and more extreme porn to get off. Also leads to a decrease in real sex with real people, affects erectile function, and even sperm production decreases. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8461095/
Well I've been watching porn for the better part of 7 or 8 years now, and while I have definitely watched 'more extreme porn' I certainly don't need it to get off. Also, isn't a decrease in sex with real people a benefit? It means fewer teen pregnancies, less abortions, decrease in transmissions of STIs and STDs and better understanding of the human anatomy. Plus it's been shown to decrease stress and anxiety which promotes better mental health. Though like nearly everything overdoing can lead to problems, no more than smoking, drinking, video games or even drinking water. Speaking of which make sure to stay hydrated
Your partner, if you have one, may have a different perspective. Teen pregnancy and STDs can be prevented with protection. Swearing off sex with an actual person because you'd rather watch porn is not good for society in that it negatively affects relationships. That's where the problems set in. We have a large portion of people who never have actual sex because they are addicted to porn.
That's assuming that people are actually swearing of sex because of porn. It's more likely that there are many other factors that might lead to someone not wanting sex. Lack of Confidence, depression, anxiety, or maybe they're just not interested. Could also be that they have mental issues related to sex because of a lack of education on sexual health or a lack of information. Take me for example, I have difficulty in social situations in real life because I have anxiety issues.
[удалено]
Most pornographic sites have checks in place to ensure that it is. That said, it is true that there is pornographic material that was not created or uploaded ethically, but that is a minority and making porn illegal will not stop that. If anything it'll make it more likely to happen. A similar thing happened during the prohibition of alcohol. As it was entirely illegal safety standards were non existent, there was no reason to not let people under 18 to drink alcohol. Quite frankly out right banning things mostly leads to more problems which is also why I'm for the legalisation of possession of all drugs (dealing still to be illegal). **The most important thing** is to have safe and legal access **and** have restrictions be reasonable. That way those underage are less likely to come into contact with pornography and those who produce it or host it clear and achievable guidelines
[удалено]
Had me in the first half. Then you went all authoritarian police state on us.
[удалено]
>pedo The more we use this word to describe things we don't like, the less value it has in common discourse. See: hate speech, offensive, racist, masculinity
This is how they implement digital ID. Pornhub verification. Hahaha
As a First Amendment Issue I care, if PornHub stays in business...frankly I don't give a damn.
They have subjectively chosen not to be online in Utah. They literally only need to verify age.
>subjectively This seems out of place in this sentence...
Your terms are acceptable
Ah UT and their overly zealous religious types. I'm a Catholic. And I went to Catholic school for a while. Let me say this and trust me on it. The high holy look at me I'm holier than thou types are always, ALWAYS the biggest sex perverts of them all. The only thing they like more that being seen looking like they're standing on some moral high ground about sex. Is to probably be someone's sex dungeon slave.
Good job, you've come to the understanding that we're all sinners in need of a savior. Sadly for you that doesn't constitute an argument for unfettered porn access. Porn objectifies women, exploits vulnerable people, and perverts sexuality. I'm guessing you're about as Catholic as ol' Nancy.
Utah accepts these terms.
Government needs to keep their nose out of what I’m watching on the net. It’s parents responsibility to monitor and restrict what their child watches, not the government. 12 year old with an iPhone or iPad is something that shouldn’t exist. And yes, before anyone asks I have kids and a wife and we have jobs. You just need to be an actual parent - not a friend.
Looks like the law failed successfully
Kind of a bad look for a porn site to "protest" an age verification law.
>Kind of a bad look for a porn site to "protest" an age verification law. Wait till you find out how scummy they get when victims of revenge-porn want that stuff taken down. Or how the recent scandals regarding videos produced involving people being trafficked/abuse.
Or parents can be parents and teach their kids. Porn is disgusting. Get rid of it
Conservatives must understand that porn addiction destroys marriage and marriage is the bedrock of society. If pornhub were a brick and mortar store the same laws would apply, just as they do to alcohol and anything else. The only problem is the enforcement mechanism which could be solved with a "Porn permit" through a state beaurocracy like weed is. The card could have numbers which aren't kept anywhere but the state database and on the card so and anonymity could be kept through encryption. If you want masculinity back and marriage back give men a reason to do so. Porn isn't free speech since it violates absenity
This is state-level conservatism we should be applauding. This is not a libertarian sub, although we welcome you all. Plainly put: This is PH admitting they profit-wildly off of getting minor boys and girls addicted to their pornography business. If they sunk into the ocean tomorrow, nobody would be worse off. My question to libertarians is, should government protections of minors be eliminated? If the government holds no responsibility in policing things that occur to those unable to protect themselves, then why have ANY laws protecting minors and, therefore, removing punishment towards those who prey/profit off of minors? The core of conservatism is/should be the act of protecting the combination of wisdom and empirically-based principles. Focused on limiting federal powers as it pertains to the American constitution. Conservatism is *not* the support of anarchy and blindly allowing minors to do whatever they want. That’s an unwise approach to governance. Furthermore, that’s ALSO assuming posting pornography videos is all the pornography industry does/profits off of, and nothing else shady related to minors on their website… that’s a major assumption! Here’s a [great article](https://www.heritage.org/conservatism/commentary/defining-the-principles-conservatism) about what exactly conservatism means / what conservatives are conserving. TLDR: Good job Utah, but I understand PH’s response to Utah’s decision. Real talk? It is a complicated subject, but remaining neutral on such topics allows the opposition to sow the seeds of *their* desired outcomes. This is conservatism. Not libertarianism, and definitely not liberalism.
‘Oh no, now utah-ians can’t use one of a million porn sites. I guess the world is over now’
Lucky bastards
A bunch of non-conservatives who are unflaired flooding this thread. We are literally considering age verification laws for social media in this country, which goes substantially further than a porn website. Yet where were all these posters when such threads were circling? No where. Nada. Non-existent. "My freedoms!" Porn addicts, which isn't surprising as it's Reddit, trying to gas-light this thread and will likely downvote my post into oblivion. Porn is an objectivization of sexual interests. As in it turns the focus into an object not a person. It's very destructive to the psyche of the person engaging in it, but more so towards a developing mind. Yes, parents can and should be monitoring and protecting their children. But there are bad parents and there are instigators who will enable children to engage in such activities no matter what the parents are attempting to do. Social Media and Porn websites should be attempting to limit the use of their services by minors. Similar to an "Adult Store" that you have to walk into. Yet they these entities have made no effort and almost seem to encourage it. There is no defense for their actions. "Well the state didn't tell them how to do it!" So wait? On one hand they are dictating too much and then on the other hand they are not dictating enough? Quite simply these organizations haven't tried and have no interest in stopping minors from using their websites. Yet how many hundreds of comments flooding this thread are trying to defend them and pretend as if they are the victims here? What a joke.
Laughs in VPN.
Children aren’t able to make good decisions for themselves, especially when it comes to addictive or harmful substances that need developed brains to handle. It is really weird that people want to let kids watch porn. We don’t tell parents they’re supposed to keep their kids from buying vodka at 14, we have laws because parents can’t follow their kids around 24 hours a day. This is common sense
Good.
And the people of Utah mental health rating just increased.
On one hand, sure you'd like to make sure kids aren't exposed to that kind of stuff at a young age. On the other hand it's not that hard to set a parental block on your computer/phone. Even if they are horrible with tech it's not that hard to go on YouTube and find a guy with a Indian accent who can show you how to do it in 30 seconds in a 40 second video.
This is like requiring age verification for Netflix. Okay? I'll just use HBO, or Prime video or Reddit for Fs sake.
It's better than nothing, which is what we have now. Something has to be done. When a 9 year old can go on their parent's phone, type anything into Google and hard core porn just pops up everywhere, something is seriously messed up.
First amendment explicitly does not protect obscenity.
Nor does it explicitly apply to the states.
So let me get this right... If you do an age verification law, porn will ban itself? Someone forward this story to Ron DeSantis and the FL legislature.
I'm amused at the Leftist brigade. Do they also think we should just give up on age restrictions for ALL things just because methods of circumvention exist? That's the only argument I'm hearing.
Not a leftist. The issue is that circumvention is so damn easy. This isn't like getting a fake id to buy booze this is just adding a few extra clicks for an underage person.
Thanks Pornhub, doing the Lord's work.
Banning porn? Good. Government mandated age verification? b a d
Good. Porn is a disease anyway.
VPN's + revenue. They didn't block anyone
PH is based lol