Pornhub Blocked in Texas

https://variety.com/2024/digital/news/pornhub-texas-blocked-age-verification-law-1235942280/

by coloneltcb • 2 years ago

111 236 2 years ago

variety.com

whythre• 2 years ago

Not a fan of pornhub or the industry in general, but the continued factionalization of the internet sucks.

jMyles• 2 years ago

Really takes the "inter" out of it, doesn't it?

some_furry• 2 years ago

"Internet" or "Intercourse"?

ranger_danger4• 2 years ago

How is this enforceable if a company does not physically operate in any capacity in that state? The worst I thought could happen is local ISPs might block the site, but otherwise why shut it off yourselves?

I didn't think one state could compel a business in another state to do anything whatsoever.

nerdjon• 2 years ago

I have been curious about this myself, I am wondering if it could have something to do with collecting money in the state?

Maybe they could still just be sued in Texas regardless of whether or not they are there.

krapp2• 2 years ago

As mentioned in the article, Pornhub isn't literally blocked, rather they're serving a page containing a statement protesting Texas' law along with a request for users to contact their representatives, to any Texas IP.

throw_m2393394• 2 years ago

How is this enforceable if a company does not physically operate in any capacity in that state?

Enforce what? Texas took no step to block them.

Pornhub Disables Website in Texas Over Age-Verification Law

Pornhub blocked themselves in Texas. It's like all these US sites preventing EU users from visiting them, just because they don't want to be GDPR compliant.

alex_lav• 2 years ago

Enforce what? Texas took no step to block them.

The government takes no steps to prevent lots of law infractions, that doesn't mean they won't punish you for not adhering. As is the nature of laws.

Pornhub blocked themselves in Texas. It's like all these US sites preventing EU users from visiting them, just because they don't want to be GDPR compliant.

Yes, preventing yourself from breaking a law is generally wise. What point do you believe you're making in these comments?

ranger_danger4• 2 years ago

Enforce what?

Age verification for site visitors...

KineticLensman• 2 years ago

Online gambling is an example of an industry with state-specific bans [0], [1]. Not sure how well these work in practice though.

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gambling_in_the_United_States#...

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unlawful_Internet_Gambling_Enf...

bas• 2 years ago

It works quite well in practice, as KYC (know your customer) is in order for every state that has legalized it. Typically, a government-issued id#, SSN (last 4), and perhaps a license photo or selfie are required to open an account.

bdw5204• 2 years ago

It may not be enforceable but it probably isn't worth the legal risk especially if any of your employees might ever want to travel to that state. Same reason why you wouldn't want to be running a web site that's openly defying European law if you might want to visit the EU someday.

darth_avocado4• 2 years ago

The rules for online businesses usually do not need you to operate physically in a state. For example, CCPA in California, is enforceable if you buy/sell/share personal information of California residents and generate revenue from it, even if your business is not in California physically. You can be sued and the state will pursue fines if you are in violation of the law.

Similarly, even if Pornhub doesn't operate physically in Texas, if they make money off of users residing in Texas, you are "conducting business" in Texas and therefore the laws are applicable to you as any other business.

The concept is known as "minimum contacts".

ranger_danger4• 2 years ago

Wouldn't it be better to just stop accepting payments from Texas instead of blocking the site for them entirely?

ranger_danger4• 2 years ago

You can be sued

Not if your business isn't registered in that state. Just because you acquired personal information from CA residents doesn't mean they gave it to you directly.

rysertio• 2 years ago

The bigger question is can they catch you.

swatcoder3• 2 years ago

Pornhub tries to keep their brand positioned inside the law and away from politics so that they can retain dominance of any legal market for online porn and serve porn consumers of all political stripes. They're relatively risk-averse, avoiding insult and heated political confrontation over stuff like this.

Even if there wasn't a sure enforcement method, they're not the company that would risk court drama to find out.

paulddraper8• 2 years ago

In terms of jurisdiction: Texas would have specific jurisdiction due to business activities in the state. (See also "minimum contacts" and "long arm judgement.")

As far as enforceability:

* There is extradition for criminal offenses. (In practice, usually only for felonies.)

* Texas can prohibit its residents/businesses from doing business with companies with judgments render against them.

* Texas can issue warrants and then arrest violators if they step into the state.

---

States very often restrict goods/services sold in their state. Like, you can't sell a gun to a buyer in California, without going through a 10-day waiting period, even if you do not live in California and comply with federal regulations.

ipaddr• 2 years ago

They can't prevent buying outside of California to someone who lives in California if their state/country laws allow it. California could setup roadblocks and search everyone to contraband.

garrettgarcia2• 2 years ago

Here is the full text on pornhub.com if accessed from within Texas:

"Dear user,

As you may know, your elected officials in Texas are requiring us to verify your age before allowing you access to our website. Not only does this impinge on the rights of adults to access protected speech, it fails strict scrutiny by employing the least effective and yet also most restrictive means of accomplishing Texas’s stated purpose of allegedly protecting minors.

While safety and compliance are at the forefront of our mission, providing identification every time you want to visit an adult platform is not an effective solution for protecting users online, and in fact, will put minors and your privacy at risk.

Attempting to mandate age verification without any means to enforce at scale gives platforms the choice to comply or not, leaving thousands of platforms open and accessible. As we've seen in other states, such bills have failed to protect minors, by driving users from those few websites which comply, to the thousands of websites, with far fewer safety measures in place, which do not comply. Very few sites are able to compare to the robust Trust and Safety measures we currently have in place. To protect minors and user privacy, any legislation must be enforced against all platforms offering adult content.

Unfortunately, the Texas law for age verification is ineffective, haphazard, and dangerous. Not only will it not actually protect children, but it will also inevitably reduce content creators’ ability to post and distribute legal adult content and directly impact their ability to share the artistic messages they want to convey with it.

The safety of our users is one of our biggest concerns. We believe that the only effective solution for protecting minors and adults alike is to verify users’ age on their device and to either deny or allow access to age-restricted materials and websites based on that verification.

We call on all adult sites to comply with the law. Until the real solution is offered, we have made the difficult decision to completely disable access to our website in Texas. In doing so, we are complying with the law, as we always do, but hope that governments around the world will implement laws that actually protect the safety and security of users.

We encourage you to:

Learn more about device-based age verification* solutions that make the internet safer while also respecting your privacy. Contact your representatives and demand device-based verification solutions that make the internet safer while also respecting your privacy. *Device-Based Age Verification refers to any approach to age verification where the personal information that is used to verify the user’s age is either shared in-person at an authorized retailer, inputted locally into the user’s device, or stored on a network controlled by the device manufacturer or the supplier of the device’s operating system. Whether through pre-installed content blocking and filtering software, the disabling of web-browsing permissions, or other means, the user will then be prevented from accessing age-restricted content over the internet unless they are age-verified. To come to fruition, such an approach requires the cooperation of manufacturers and operating-system providers."

EvanAnderson• 2 years ago

"Device-Based Age Verification" raises my software freedom hackles. I could imagine public perception for things like Google's Web Environment Integrity being bolstered by this kind of call to action.

The power of "think of the children" arguments for "normies" is already strong when it comes to encryption and privacy. I can't imagine standing up for software freedom if it runs counter to "think of the children" will fare well.

rany_• 2 years ago

Well, if implemented properly I think it's OK. Back in the Internet Explorer days, Microsoft used to block adult sites on device based on the RTA header adult sites added themselves. I think if adult sites were required to use the RTA header and device manufacturers/OS/browser makers forced to obey it; it's an OK compromise.

All the well known adult sites are already using it, it's just up to the browser makers to support it again... and besides, with on-device AI they don't even need to only rely on the RTA header if they want to make their implementation more advanced.

More info: https://davidwalsh.name/rta-label

anon-sre-srm5• 2 years ago

Use a pastebin rather than making my eyes bleed. You didn't even capture the whole thing.

garrettgarcia2• 2 years ago

https://pastebin.com/2rLErUak

root_axis• 2 years ago

The headline seems misleading. "Pornhub blocked in Texas" suggests Texas did the blocking, a better headline would be "Pornhub blocks users with Texas IPs"

segasaturn3• 2 years ago

The Texas legislation is effectively a block - there's no way for PH to verify the age of users entering the site in the way the legislation demands, but they face fines and legal action for not doing so. Catch-22, the only solution is to turn off access.

greggsy2• 2 years ago

Credit card verification?

aaomidi4• 2 years ago

Yeah but I was like, ISPs have the ability to just start arbitrarily blocking websites that fast?

DPI? DNS? etc

etskinner• 2 years ago

Still, the article could say something like "Pornhub removes access to Texans after law requires stricter age verification"

tivert• 2 years ago

there's no way for PH to verify the age of users entering the site in the way the legislation demands

What exactly are those requirements, and how is there "no way" for Pornhub to satisfy what "the legislation demands"?

I ask because I'm tired of seeing (in general, not just PornHub) deceptive rephrasing of "we don't want to" as "it's impossible for us to." Companies too often take the attitude that they're entitled to their business model or being able to push externalities onto others, but that's obnoxious BS propaganda.

Edit: So according to the OP, the law "requires [PornHub] to verify the age of all visitors using a government-issued ID or 'public or private transactional data.'" I'm pretty sure they've already implemented that to verify the identify of performers (https://help.pornhub.com/hc/en-us/articles/19159382668435-Tr...), after much kicking and screaming, in the wake of that Nicholas Kristof article a few years ago. So a pretty straightforward implementation would be to require user accounts to view (at least for Texas), push users through PornHub's existing age verification flow, then give them access.

javawizard2• 2 years ago

This is interesting. What about the Texas law makes it impossible for PH to comply if they were to otherwise decide that that they wanted to (which of course isn't likely)?

paulddraper8• 2 years ago

there's no way for PH to verify the age of users entering the site in the way the legislation demands

That's not true.

It's onerous, inconvenient, whatever.

xjay• 2 years ago

Maybe one hack would be to have a binary "restricted" flag communicated through the ISP's reverse IP lookup (probably very slow). It wouldn't put any personal information at risk, but it would probably open Pandora's box, except that Pandora's box had hope inside of it.

1) IP address from "Restricted Region" connects to website.

2) Server attempts a reverse IP lookup and waits for reply from ISP's DNS.

3) If DNS reply contains "restricted" (on behalf of the subscriber), server has to restrict access, etc.

neovialogistics• 2 years ago

Looking at the article, the statement they display to blocked users could do with either a change in tone to be more legally formal or a change in tone to be more approachable to less-literate users - bullet points, multiple headings etc. Right now that message is the worst of both worlds and will get a very low conversion rate.

I've been away from this line of work for over a year, though. Does anybody here who has current experience in effective messaging, legal communication or marketing want to read the message Mindgeek put up and give their two cents on it for our entertainment?

greggsy2• 2 years ago

GDPR banners are ubiquitous now, and while many are trivial to click-through, it’s still possible to insert a meaningful agreement and checkbox.

presidentender• 2 years ago

More Texans will buy NordVPN subscriptions and the world will keep turning. It's a waste of legislation.

ipsum2• 2 years ago

The kids that are accessing pornhub are unlikely to be buying VPN subscriptions so maybe it's actually a win?

SketchySeaBeast7• 2 years ago

Yeah, they'll find dodgier sites composed of even more illicit material hosted in places Texas can't reach. It's not like it's hard to find other sites by going to google and searching "porn".

hbn• 2 years ago

Or they go to Google images and type in “boobs”

mtlmtlmtlmtl• 2 years ago

They'll just go to to one of the million other sites that don't enforce this at all. Which may actually be worse, since many of those sites are far less scrupulous about sharing data and spreading malware.

0x4573• 2 years ago

You assume that kids today know as much about technology than when you were their age. I can assure you - it's not the case. They might know what is VPN and how it works, but they do know how it install it from app store and avoid geo-restrictions.

tinktank• 2 years ago

Need to look into connections between NordVPN and legislators methinks.

082349872349872• 2 years ago

If wars are God's way of teaching Americans geography, could it be that Texas legislators are simply God's way of teaching Texans about VPNs?

SketchySeaBeast7• 2 years ago

Now I'm interested in how many legislators bought stock in NordVPN.

throw_m2393394• 2 years ago

More Texans will buy NordVPN subscriptions and the world will keep turning. It's a waste of legislation.

Yes, them 13 yo buying NordVPN subscriptions massively...

whalesalad5• 2 years ago

For a state that is hell bent on "freedom" they sure do love to remove them.

mjburgess6• 2 years ago

I've often wondered if the american hatred of what we europeans love is born out of a real lived experience of vastly more gov. oppression than we have.

We have no HSAs, no three or four layer tax systems, no governments trying to legislate really bizarre religious issues, no paranoid militarised police, no busy-body suburban sprawl of interfering no-bodies.

Here, the prices in our stores are what we pay; our taxex are handled for us; the "invasion" of the government, eg., in healthcare, is to unburden us from concern.

it seems "society and government" in the US is preoccupied with burdening people, and "micro-oppressions" of bureaucracy and interference

throw_m2393394• 2 years ago

I've often wondered if the american hatred of what we europeans love is born out of a real lived experience of vastly more gov. oppression than we have.

What is it that "Europeans" love that Americans "hate"?

whalesalad5• 2 years ago

American issues are deeply rooted in christianity. Separation of church and state is unfortunately not really a thing here, despite it being inshrined in our constitution.

sharkweek• 2 years ago

I'm (drastically) oversimplifying, but there's a whole strategy here to starve the government and then point at it showing how ineffective it is.

nozzlegear2• 2 years ago

[e] A lot of it is deeply rooted in American culture, the founding of the country, and a culture of individual independence/reliance on the self. In regard to this pornography thing, it's really not related to any of that; it's more of an evangelicals versus... I guess everyone who's less-than-evangelical thing, which largely splits along red versus blue party lines in the south.

nonameiguess• 2 years ago

Originally, it was plain old-fashioned colonialism, having to pay tribute to an overseas king that wasn't doing anything for you to fund wars between France and England that didn't involve you.

But that was a long time ago. Uncharitably, US southern states got up in arms (quite literally) about the federal government forcing them to end slavery and then later forcing them to integrate schools and serve blacks and whites at the same businesses. Charitably, there is a fair amount of legitimately bad stuff the federal government has done, i.e. Ruby Ridge, Waco, assassinating Fred Hampton, the red scare, interning of the Japanese, everything that was ever done to natives, trampling all over Hawaii.

I don't think you can just say universally one way or the other works better. The US system is designed for it to be damn near impossible to ever have true tyranny, at the cost of an ineffective government. European governments tend to take the opposite approach. Right now, that is arguably working largely in Europe's favor. In the past, well, Europe had fascism and started multiple world wars and colonized over half the world. The US has certainly done some bad stuff, but not really anything quite like that, so the "avoid descent into outright autocracy" has largely worked out so far.

There is, of course, no guarantee this will continue to work out in the future, either. Up until now, the basic idea has been the only organizations out there with the power to do things like fascism and world wars are states. As multinational private corporations become increasingly large and powerful, that may not remain the case, and the US does very little to tame them compared to what it does to tame the government.

philwelch2• 2 years ago

Europe is passing age verification laws too: https://apnews.com/article/porn-websites-age-verification-di...

The UK was in the process of requiring age verification for online pornography in 2018. One of the reasons the law fell through is because MindGeek’s age verification system (which news reports claimed to already be in use in Germany) was going to end up becoming a de facto monopoly, with all the privacy concerns that implies.

rayiner7• 2 years ago

We have no HSAs

Health savings accounts?

no three or four layer tax systems

Many European countries, like Spain, have multi-level tax systems, but have a single tax return. In the US, you have two tax returns.

no governments trying to legislate really bizarre religious issues

Many European countries still have official churches! The UK is constantly trying to ban porn. Italy enacted a law similar to Texas’s last year: https://cne.news/article/3884-italy-blocks-porn-access-for-m...

no paranoid militarised police

Let’s see if that remains true after a century of immigration from the Middle East.

reaperman3• 2 years ago

The ~~conservative~~ libertarian Cato institute recently ranked[0] Texas dead last for personal freedoms among all 50 US states.

0: https://www.freedominthe50states.org/personal

gglitch• 2 years ago

Interesting read, thanks for the link. Puzzling how differently people across the political spectrum interpret the concept of "freedom."

pandemicsyn• 2 years ago

Cato's a pretty well-known libertarian think tank. Not saying they are right or wrong or that your choice of words was intentional, but calling them "The conservative Cato Institute" feels a little iffy.

"Libertarian think tank says Texas sucks for personal freedom" has very different vibe than "Conservative think tank says Texas sucks for personal freedom"

but also, never trust Cato - https://www.currentaffairs.org/2018/10/never-trust-the-cato-...

rayiner7• 2 years ago

Everyone has a conception of “freedom” that excludes conduct that’s “wrong.” Nobody thinks you should be “free” to engage in wrongdoing. You just disagree with Texans about what’s wrong or harmful.

whalesalad5• 2 years ago

Absolutely nothing is “wrong” about porn

verticalscaler• 2 years ago

Ah, I see they know their judo well.

  Very few sites are able to compare to the robust Trust and Safety measures we currently have in place.

What are the age-verification measures to ensure only children 13(?) and older are able to access social media?

Will somebody think of the children?

And never mind porn what if Adults aged 18+ read misinformation on the news? Or post hateful memes?

You need Trust and Safety! And only we can provide it properly.

These salami tactics have been tried repeatedly and increasingly successfully around the world. And now apparently the US is next.

chiefalchemist• 2 years ago

Not exactly exciting, but I found this to be worth reading:

"Freedom for the Thought That We Hate: A Biography of the First Amendment"

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedom_for_the_Thought_That_W...

TaurenHunter• 2 years ago

Aylo is owned by Canadian private-equity firm Ethical Capital Partners

elif• 2 years ago

congratulations you blocked 0.001% of porn

throwaway2016a2• 2 years ago

As a technologist the most interesting part to me is they bring up "Device based age verification" and I am very curious what the current state of that is. Some initial research shows that it is only at the exploratory stage (according to my 10 whole seconds of searching) but it definitely seems interesting.

johnnyanmac10• 2 years ago

Sounds interesting from a technological POV.

From a logistics one, devices can be shared and it is very easy to share to a minor (which is what theses laws supposedly target). Or have multiple accounts on one device.it seems like a lot of work for less results..

throwaway2016a2• 2 years ago

I assume it would be something like WebAuthN where it could be tied to some sort of USB key, fingerprint, or something similar.

hollander• 2 years ago

In NL we have IDIN. A website can use it to verify age or address information. I don't think that any porn-websites are using it, but technically this should do the job.

IDIN is set up by all the Dutch banks. You check in via your own bank using an IDIN link. IDIN will do an age-check to verify that you're 18 or older. IDIN can verify age, name, address and contact info. You need a bank account, and the bank has checked your identity and age, so this is guaranteed to work.

Maybe you don't want that the bank knows that you visit a porn website, but that's another question.

PurpleRamen• 2 years ago

Time to milk those juicy VPN-codes that are thrown around like drops. I hope we will see some statistic in some week, about the Texas-centric growth, this could be really insightful, for ah...political reasons.

neilv2• 2 years ago

Can someone who understands Texas well help characterize the values and political behavior of it?

As an outsider, I only have incomplete impressions:

* Personal liberty is highly valued.

* Pro individual ownership of guns, as well as self-defense.

* Oil is a big part of the economy.

* Socially conservative overall, with exception of some enclaves of more liberal or progressive values.

* Large percentage of people identifying as Christian.

* Centralized editorial influence over school textbooks, for not just Texas but the nation.

* Aggressive anti-abortion push.

Apropos of this post, I'm interested in whether there are conventions over how conflicting values are reconciled (e.g., if anti-porn is driven by social conservative values, how does that override personal liberty values).

lotsofpulp2• 2 years ago

I'm interested in whether there are conventions over how conflicting values are reconciled (e.g., if anti-porn is driven by social conservative values, how does that override personal liberty values).

The convention is if it helps my (perceived) tribe, good, and if it hurts the other tribe, good.

neilv2• 2 years ago

I thought that was fairly recent US politics, of the last decade or so. Is that longer-term Texas values?

quesera4• 2 years ago

The state legislature will vigorously defend the right to be demographically similar to legislators!

collinmcnulty• 2 years ago

The "personal liberty" is a rhetorical shield for protecting a certain kind of person and the things that person wants to do. If you don't fit that mold, your personal liberty is of little importance to the state of Texas.

johnnyanmac10• 2 years ago

Large percentage of people identifying as Christian.

This is likely a large driving factor of this ban. Despite the mantra of "separation of church and state", US as a whole has so much religion built into government and its people (our pledge has the line "one nation, under God". Our currency has "in God we trust) that it very much influences policy.

if anti-porn is driven by social conservative values, how does that override personal liberty values

If we wanna be frank: sexism. If the adult industry were mostly male escorts and the abortion laws involved vasectomies, these laws would never even be put to the floor.

Women in US congress are at an all time high, but is still only 28%. So issues involving women's right still don't have representation proportional to its population. Doublethink isnt the biggest issue here, sadly.

Finnucane• 2 years ago

Because it's not 'Texas' in aggregate but Abbot and the christofascist wing of the Republican party that want to turn the state into the Republic of Gilead. He's in a pissing contest with Ron DeSantis to see who can be crueler to anyone who doesn't fit his mold.

NikkiA• 2 years ago

Yet Texas, in aggregate, continues to vote him and the christofascists into office.

Rapzid• 2 years ago

Hi yes I can help; your perception of Texas sounds like it's based on a caricature.

conventions over how conflicting values are reconciled

We have a functioning government with a legislature.

krapp2• 2 years ago

To be fair - and I say this as a lifelong Texan - a lot of Texans lean hard into the caricature, especially in politics.

steveklabnik• 2 years ago

(I've lived in Texas for uhhhh five years now, in Austin.)

You have to understand that Texas is a big place. Like any big place, there is significant diversity. The stuff you've said is what the government likes to project, but isn't really representative of the population as a whole.

(Furthermore, this is confounded by certain issues playing out very differently in Texas than elsewhere: the left is more likely to like guns, for example.)

For example:

* Personal liberty is highly valued.

This is what they say, but not what they do. The state is constantly passing laws that restrict the freedoms of individuals.

Pro individual ownership of guns, as well as self-defense.

This one is complicated. Certainly more people are pro-ownership of guns, but that doesn't actually mean they have them. Texas has the most guns in the county, but adjusted for population, it's 37th in the nation.

* Oil is a big part of the economy.

It surely is, especially historically, but Texas has also generated more green energy than other states for a long time. Solar is huge, wind as well.

* Socially conservative overall, with exception of some enclaves of more liberal or progressive values.

You're right in a certain sense: if you look at a map, it's mostly red. But a lot of that land has basically nobody living there, and the "enclaves" are large cities.

It's tough to track political affiliation, but most reports show it to be very evenly split. "When will Texas turn blue?" is a question people have been asking for a long time, and the details of why it has not are complicated. But winning elections is different than sentiment, and the sentiment is at least very closely tied.

* Large percentage of people identifying as Christian.

This is true; it's about 75%.

* Centralized editorial influence over school textbooks, for not just Texas but the nation.

Not just textbooks, but see also the fights over vouchers and trying to privatize the school system.

* Aggressive anti-abortion push.

This is true from the state, but that doesn't mean it's popular: a 2022 survey said that 78% of Texas voters think abortion should be allowed in some form, and only 15% think it should be completely outlawed.

I'm interested in whether there are conventions over how conflicting values are reconciled

To be blunt about it, the current conservative movement in America isn't really interested in ideological consistency. They just don't see it as a problem.

Meekro• 2 years ago

I'm a Texan, a Christian, and a conservative; maybe I can help? Your impressions of Texas are all true, in my experience (though keep in mind that it's a big place and Austin is barely distinguishable from a California city). You're right that the dominant values come into conflict sometimes, with libertarians wanting to protect porn and social conservatives wanting to ban it. The reasons for wanting to ban porn go something like this:

1. Unmarried men will consume it in lieu of putting their sexual frustration to good use by looking for a wife -- or if necessary, working on self-improvement until they're worthy of the kind of wife they want.

2. Married men will consume it while depriving their wives of sexual contact. If necessary, those men should be confronting whatever marital problems are preventing sex from happening often enough to satisfy them.

3. A huge amount of porn production is downstream of major personal and societal tragedies; the actors being threatened in some way is eerily common (just ask Andrew Tate), and even the "consenting" ones often have histories of sexual abuse and unresolved trauma that are tainting their "consent." A hypothetical society where every daughter grows up in a two-parent household, is known and loved by her father, and is never raped, is going to have a major shortage of porn stars.

Jordan Peterson has talked a lot about the downsides of porn, you can find plenty of snippets on YouTube. I'd recommend this if you want to know more about why conservatives oppose it.

We have to keep in mind that half the population has below-average conscientiousness, and will find it very difficult to resist temptations (such as porn) that are daily put in front of them. Christian societies have generally believed that it's good to work together and structure things to minimize the number of such stumbling blocks (to the extent that it's feasible). Banning porn is considered a step towards that goal.

BUT, you're also right that personal liberty is important and might cut against this. My guess is, this bill was framed in terms of age verification to try and work around this; the authors of it are clearly anti-porn, but if anyone asks, they could say "we're not banning porn, just preventing minors from accessing it."

I've noticed some other commenters claiming things like "conservatives are lying about believing X, it's really an excuse to do Y" so let me address that: all of the viewpoints I've described here are very sincerely held, as I know well from many different conversations with people in the community.

quesera4• 2 years ago

...and male, obviously!

consume it in lieu of putting their sexual frustration to good use by looking for a wife
consume it while depriving their wives of sexual contact

These are astounding ideas which, empirically, evoke laughter and/or revulsion in honest women.

A huge amount of porn production is downstream of major personal and societal tragedies;

This clause sounds reasonable. But Texas has shown zero appetite for addressing the personal and social tragedies that lead some people to the porn industry. So, I am very skeptical that caring for the common (wo)man is part of the true motivation.

all of the viewpoints I've described here are very sincerely held

It would be naive to believe that people cannot sincerely hold beliefs which are simply perpetuating of a self-serving narrative. In fact I'd say it's the norm.

Sincerely held, but bonkers, is still bonkers.

jstarfish• 2 years ago

even the "consenting" ones often have histories of sexual abuse and unresolved trauma that are tainting their "consent." A hypothetical society where every daughter grows up in a two-parent household, is known and loved by her father, and is never raped, is going to have a major shortage of porn stars.

Your heart's in the right place but your logic here is flawed. By framing it this way you muddy the entire concept of consent by declaring an entire class mentally unsound on account of unsubstantiated past events. Exceptions for intoxication are arbitrary enough. Now past "trauma" invalidates consent?

Don't get complacent. It's easier than you think to recruit the next generation of porn stars from stable families; it's been happening in front of us all along. Just expose kids to sexual topics early and often, nudge them in the direction of alternative religions with euphemistic masturbation rituals, promote the idea that promiscuity and "sex work" is normal and empowering, get them used to posing for cameras for validation, offer them more attention than their parents, get them to reblog excerpts of erotic literature with strangers, persuade them to run away, and coerce them into prostitution/child porn. It's the "fuck you mom and dad please help me" pipeline. The sexual abuse starts under your own roof and the rape only begins at the end. It's the parents who assume their family is immune that end up blindsided. Everything throughout is engineered coercion.

Once grooming became a taboo topic, we stopped talking about it long enough to forget what it even looked like. Anyone interested can trawl /r/runaway or Roblox/Discord looking for fresh faces to add to the NCMEC posters. The FBI has been warning about this for years...but fuck those morons, we're "protecting kids" by banning Backpage, TikTok and PornHub. Porn stars don't all start as junkies from broken homes but they often end that way.

If you and your community care as much as you claim, please advocate for effective mandatory parental controls, especially within multiplayer game environments that allow communication. The action against PornHub is an empty stunt that will likely not stand and achieves nothing.

UberFly• 2 years ago

Whole lot of commenters haven't read the article. Here's the first line:

"Pornhub and other affiliated adult websites have blocked access to users in Texas, amid a legal battle with the Lone Star State’s attorney general over an age-verification law."

9erdelta• 2 years ago

"Houston we have a problem" has a new meaning...

timetraveller26• 2 years ago

they should provide a state approved site

Jleagle• 2 years ago

What would a version without adult content contain?

observationist2• 2 years ago

Pornhub should purchase and publish the search history and browsing habits of Texas government officials in lieu of the usual content. Name and shame the hypocritical bastards.

maipen• 2 years ago

I saw somewhere that it was Porn that made the internet popular.

I wonder what kind of consequences would emerge from imposing a world wide ban on the online porn industry.

I see some comments here saying that people would still find a way. But would it be the majority? I don't think so.

The internet without it's common access points like google, youtube, social media, becomes extremely unusable and unpleasent for the majority of the population.

Banning search engines from showing porn would be a quick way to achieve this.

bee_rider2• 2 years ago

I think if we ban porn sites, people will try to find ways to sneak porn onto on-porn sites. Personally, I prefer having an internet where I can use non-porn sites and not worry that I might stumble across some porn.

friedtofu• 2 years ago

A little throwback from the Broadway act 'Avenue Q' would agree: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LTJvdGcb7Fs

johnnyanmac10• 2 years ago

I see some comments here saying that people would still find a way. But would it be the majority? I don't think so

The majority of creators? No. Many would quit, many others would tease and lose money, most adult sites would collapse while a few adapt to said teasing, pushing the line.

The majority of consumers? Yes. Especially in a world where dating is more of a roulette than ever in the US and social spaces are collapsing. Even if it just means taking and consuming the past 50 years of porn underground, people would find a way to relive their primal urge

Banning search engines from showing porn would be a quick way to achieve this.

Porn is the one exception that has very high demand and extremely effective word of mouth. By default (and even more so with parental controls), search engines try to avoid showing you adult content as is. Banning it outright will, again, just make people search and curate underground.

philwelch2• 2 years ago

When the UK was going to implement a similar measure a few years ago, MindGeek had a compliance mechanism all ready to go: https://www.express.co.uk/life-style/science-technology/9278...

I don’t know if MG changed their approach to the issue or if Texas is under less regulatory capture than the UK but the difference in approach is interesting.

mbgerring4• 2 years ago

Leaving aside free speech and spurious moral panic concerns for a moment — isn’t digital ID verification a solved problem? Getaround has to verify my ID before I can drive, and I’ve had to do digital ID verification for a number of other apps. This doesn’t really seem like a question of whether ID verification is possible or practical. AFAICT it definitely is.

ceejayoz6• 2 years ago

I'd suspect a large percentage of people would prefer their porn browsing history not be concretely connected to their real-life identity.

Especially in this era of data breaches.

Izkata2• 2 years ago

Likewise I'd bet Pornhub doesn't want to risk that scandal if it leaks from them.

quesera4• 2 years ago

Privacy?

mbgerring4• 2 years ago

Then check the ID and then throw the PII away. All I’m saying is that there are absolutely ways to do this, and I keep hearing that these companies “can’t” accomplish this, but it just isn’t true.

If you want to buy a copy of Playboy from a newsstand, in general, you’re going to get asked for ID at the counter. It’s been like that for a very long time and nobody seems to have a real problem with it. It’s unclear why people think this kind of requirement just goes away if it’s on the Internet.

anon-sre-srm5• 2 years ago

Nope. Hell no.

renegade-otter3• 2 years ago

I will verify my identity for unemployment benefits, but not for this. It's only a matter of time before a breach happens, especially since I am not verifying with a local government but rather a private entity, who do not have strict mandated security measures (or at least are likely to violate them).

paxys2• 2 years ago

Politics/nationalism is always a great cover to erode rights of the population. If you object, you are on the "other team" and will be shunned.

No one in Texas wants porn bans, abortion bans, IVF bans, restrictive marijuana laws and everything else going on down there, but they will still enthusiastically vote for it to show party allegiance.

scoofy• 2 years ago

No one in Texas wants porn bans, abortion bans, IVF bans, restrictive marijuana laws

I grew up extremely religious in Texas... I can assure you that there are plenty of people who want these things.

The good news is things are changing. Some members of my family who effectively spent their entire lives trying to overturn Roe, are now totally overwhelmed and distraught by the after effects, and what an awful person Donald Trump is. Truly a dog-that-caught-the-car situation.

Izkata2• 2 years ago

The abortion ban in particular has me confused: A huge amount of people believe abortion means killing a baby and absolutely are for banning it entirely.

13 states (Texas included) had trigger laws already on the books to ban abortion if Roe v. Wade was ever overturned, and are now in effect. This was a big thing all over the place when it happened.

swatcoder3• 2 years ago

No one in Texas wants porn bans, abortion bans, IVF bans, restrictive marijuana laws and everything else going on down there

You sound ripe for some travel! It's not a bad place to visit!

You may want to believe what you wrote because it helps those of us with contrary preferences to pretend that we're just better aligned to some rational truth or something, but no: there are many people in Texas and elsewhere who sincerely believe that each of those things is good and something that they want for their community.

The number or loudness of those people change when stirred up by politicians, and sometimes ideas that weren't widely considered previously are wholly seeded as part of a political strategy, but that doesn't really change that most people are fully sincere in their beliefs and that their beliefs can sometimes be radically different than your own.

paxys2• 2 years ago

"No one" was a figure of speech. Yes there are always some people who want all of these things, but there have been countless polls done in all these states on topics like abortion and there is always a clear majority that is in favor of more sensible laws. One example is for exceptions for rape, incest and mother's health etc., which upwards of 85%+ of Republicans support. Yet the laws they enact don't reflect this, because these same people will not vote for moderates.

godelski• 2 years ago

I've lived in the deep south for a number of years. Problem is you're both right. Problem is there's a diverse set of opinions and it depends who you're going to come into contact with.

I'll say that I know quite a number of people who claim to be stout libertarians (a very common stance in the south and especially in Texas) and even be much more supportive of legalizing all drugs because "government bad, personal choice good" and "government shouldn't be a babysitter." YET I've seen those same people vote for those politicians. I've seen those politicians run on those platforms and then push such agendas and then people not really care about it. Not too different from the old "I didn't speak out because I wasn't x, but then there was no one left to speak for me" quote.

Truth is humans are full of hypocrisy, for better or worse. Some of this is so we can handle nuance in an approximate way without having to invest in the computation/effort to resolve those. It is a real thing though and we need to be nuanced to deal with it, including how we discuss it.

BUT there's also a clear and measurable phenomena where politicians are not acting as good representatives. You can find many polls on things like Marijuana laws, government provided health coverage, government pension plans (cough social security cough), paid family leave, corporations not paying their fair share of taxes, wealthy not paying their fair share, complexity of taxes, return free filing, and many other things. You can find Pew and Gallup polls on this stuff running back for years, showing majority approvals. The issue, is we quibble over nuance AND oversimplify the nuance. We often pretend that the optimization functions are the same or identically conditioned. Often the difference is coming down to a focus on positive rights vs negative rights in the conditioning of the linear program. Abortion might be a good example. Liberals try to minimize the harm while conditioning on the liberty of the mother while conservatives tend to have the inverse approach. Essentially liberals will give up liberty of the unborn in favor of the currently living while conservatives are willing to give up liberty of the currently living for the unborn. You cannot maximize both liberties of the living and the unborn at the same time, there has to be a trade-off. Both want surprisingly similar things, but we frame them as extreme opposites because we are not discussing the nuance and we're arguing while we work from a different set of base assumptions assuming that the other persons are operating under the same assumptions. Which makes it quite difficult to actually understand the other person's goals and intentions.

Thing is, people are happy to prey upon this complexity and difficulties in communicating. Knowingly or unknowingly. We are often unwitting players in this as it is so easy to get trapped into the mindset that others operate under the same premise that we do. Until we understand this, we are going to have extreme difficulties in communicating. Even if we want the same things and even if we want extremely similar outcomes. I'm sure many people here have had a "stupid argument" where you realize that you and the person you're passionately arguing with are on the exact same side, just expressing your views in different ways. It's often embarrassing and we laugh about it because we __are__ fucking idiots. Yes, this includes (especially) me. Don't listen to me, I'm a fucking idiot.

apatheticonion4• 2 years ago

Not an American - from what I understand (and I could be wrong), isn't the voting system rigged to overrepresent conservative voters?

Like one rural vote is worth 10x what one urban vote is worth? Or is that just for federal elections?

seoulmetro• 2 years ago

Texas sounds more and more like a great place to live in the US. Shame about the guns though.

apatheticonion4• 2 years ago

Are guns a country-wide problem? I was offered a job in San Francisco but am scared of moving to the US because of stats like there being like 1.5 mass shootings per day.

anon-sre-srm5• 2 years ago

1st a. will be the least of our concerns when Ruth Bader Biden loses to orangeman who will change the flag, make a new loyalty test salute, and require documentation checkpoints every few miles.

rKarpinski• 2 years ago

Is it also unreasonable that brick and mortar stores can't sell pornography to children? Should they be allowed to let children view porn for free as long as they look at some ads first?

paulddraper8• 2 years ago

And verifying age is hard/impossible.

So we should serve alcohol to minors.

hk1337• 2 years ago

Nothing really lost here. I might actually be able to get some work done.

bitcharmer2• 2 years ago

Texas speed running the Gilead play through. USA is such a bizarre country.

verdverm• 2 years ago

Is this a Handmaid's Tale reference?

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Handmaid%27s_Tale#Settin...

I haven't read the book so had to look it up, this seems the most plausible reference

bitcharmer2• 2 years ago

Yes, it is. I haven't read the books but highly recommend the tv show.

anon-sre-srm5• 2 years ago

Content of message. https://pastebin.com/TGuVBpst

Pornhub is low-quality crap, haven't visited it in years.

FYI: delta-9 THC is legal in Texas when derived from hemp, so actual weed is sold alongside the legal stuff in many cities.

renegade-otter3• 2 years ago

More of this before THE election, please!

FrustratedMonky5• 2 years ago

I thought Texas was Republican, and Republicans are all for 'Freeeddooom'.

Free Speech, Free to Do What I want, etc...

Free to pick and choose what freedoms other people get.

Pornhub Blocked in Texas

Related Stories