Porn depicting sex between step-relatives set to be banned in the UK

https://www.lbc.co.uk/article/pornography-sexual-relationships-step-relatives-5HjdTkd_2/

by GaryBluto • 5 months ago

79 175 5 months ago

lbc.co.uk

There must be a line somewhere, and it is reasonable to debate where exactly that line should be.

In this case, it feels natural to me that the line for images should be aligned with the line for the act itself.

Banning images of things that are not themselves illegal makes little sense to me and feels a bit like someone trying to legislate away otherwise legal behavior just because they personally find it distasteful.

usrnm• 5 months ago

it feels natural to me that the line for images should be aligned with the line for the act itself

So, no more crime on TV?

josefritzishere2• 5 months ago

Salient point.

benj11116• 5 months ago

This.

Why is it I can watch James Bond murder a couple of dozen people on the big screen and that's fine, but watching a perfectly normal consensual act is taboo.

Christ, I don't get the step relative thing, but if you do, but don't want to do anything to your step child. Go for it.

It wasn't long ago that homosexuality was conflated with pedophilia. This is coming from exactly the same place.

And then there's the intellectual honesty. Are these people not into anything sexual? I get the school girl thing. I'm not a pedo, I'm sure a psychologist could break it down, but I don't get it, when I break it down. Do the politicians have these fantasies and are in denial? Think they can 'control their urges' but others can't?

Why can't it be that I like the idea of a grown adult female in school uniform sexy, and that I'm honest about that and I'm honest about the fact I don't want to sleep with a 15 year old.

NoGravitas• 5 months ago

The Comics Code Authority kind of took that line. "Realistic" crime could not be depicted in comic books, which is a big part of why Silver Age comic book villains are so surreal.

anon84873628• 5 months ago

But no one is talking about banning crime TV.

(And there is a line for broadcast TV that was largely drawn decades ago.)

therealpygon• 5 months ago

There are limits to what crime can be shown “on TV” (broadcast), yes? There is also a pretty big difference between a public “on TV” broadcast, and a private interaction in your own home with a privately owned website depicting things that others may disagree with.

I think it’s unhealthy, I think it influences young minds in adverse ways, and I think the parents should be responsible for allowing that to happen. But hey, I don’t really have a dog in this fight either way.

maratc3• 5 months ago

This all seems to be a theatre, because most actors participating in "step sister" kind of porn aren't actually step-relatives. The same with "teacher-student" porn: the actors mostly are neither teachers nor students. I suspect it's the same with "husband and wife" videos, too.

The idea of this, as far as I understand, is to make some fantasies illegal.

nephihaha13• 5 months ago

It's simulating incest since they can't do it without the step- prefix.

beaker523• 5 months ago

it feels natural to me that the line for images should be aligned with the line for the act itself

Not before we get GTA 6 please.

eesmith• 5 months ago

the line for images should be aligned with the line for the act itself.

Ergo you think the judge in the Facebook case was wrong to chastise Meta employees for wearing Ray Ban-Meta AI glasses, under threat of concept should they take pictures at a public trial?

Recording devices and cameras are generally banned in Los Angeles County Superior Court.

tbrownaw2• 5 months ago

In this case, it feels natural to me that the line for images should be aligned with the line for the act itself.

Why? Things are made illegal because someone involved is (presumed to be) harmed. That assumption doesn't hold if everyone involved was hired to pretend for the camera, or at least not in the same way. Maybe ban the movie industry as a whole over it's reputation for chewing people up?

ponector• 5 months ago

Contrary to not banning images of violence. It's ok to show extremely violent murder but not a sex with step mother (especially with happy ending)!

manarth8• 5 months ago

    > "the line for images should be aligned with the line for the act itself"

The headline from the LBC article is slightly at odds with their first paragraph:

    > "Peers agreed by a majority of one to ban videos and images depicting relationships that would not be allowed in real life."

KumaBear• 5 months ago

Not judging anyone’s kinks but when there are so many major issues to solve this is what is being focused on? Maybe that’s the point

kotaKat• 5 months ago

This is just the tip of the slippery slope of starting to ban ‘nonconforming’ adult content and a later pivot to starting to attempt to ban LGBTQ+ pornography under similar bullshit morality clauses.

mrexcess• 5 months ago

There seem to be two sides to politics:

1) Deciding the really important issues. This occurs with minimal public involvement, and that always to the overt reticence of the ruling class. "Expert" voices are projected downward to the masses, pronouncing authoritatively both about objective truth and characterizing the subjective preferences of the masses.

2) What are often called "wedge issues", or more recently "culture war" issues. These issues are often sensational by nature, and further sensationalized by the media to evidently encourage public participation in the discourse. Expert voices continue to guide the conversation along an established Overton window, but without making the public feel unqualified to give their opinion, just the opposite.

Is this what democracy is supposed to resemble? The hoi polloi fighting amongst themselves over what genres of pornography are acceptable, while the leaders run off to back rooms to make global-reach decisions about war, macroeconomics, and the shape of our society to come?

I just can't imagine a functional democracy where the main discussion or topic of focus for any serious person, at this time, is incest porn.

delfinom• 5 months ago

while the leaders run off to back rooms to make global-reach decisions about war, macroeconomics, and the shape of our society to come?

Don't forget abusing children

wavemode3• 5 months ago

Political debate suffers from Sayre's law: "In any dispute the intensity of feeling is inversely proportional to the value of the issues at stake." Most people simply aren't knowledgeable enough to have an informed opinion on truly important issues.

This is, by the way, a fundamental limitation of democracies, and why we tend to establish republics instead. It's not realistic to expect people to become informed about geopolitics, and economics, and education, and ciminal justice, and 100 other things, before casting a vote. So rather than vote on these things directly, we elect people whose job it is to know about these things and/or consult with experts who do.

mamonster• 5 months ago

I agree. More and more of day to day politics is devolving into "anime filler arc" episodes as real issues seem to be decided elsewhere.

That said the last time British people voted on a serious issue they voted for Brexit so maybe these diversions are justified.

nephihaha13• 5 months ago

Incest is not cool for a variety of reasons, not just genetic.

DaedalusII3• 5 months ago

there is no biological incest between step relatives

this lack of biological relation is what facilitates the desire in the first place, and then comes the taboo

paganel2• 5 months ago

Is step-siblings sex incest? It may be disgraceful but I personally don’t see it as such, i.e. not as incest.

benj11116• 5 months ago

We aren't talking incest, we are talking depictions of incest in the same way as your favourite shows probably depict murder or violence.

amiga3862• 5 months ago

This is the Lords to coming up with stuff to justify the OSA and further tighten the screws on the internet. It's open season. What it will result in is all porn being watched via VPN, and us turning into Russia/China, where the State bans any source of information outwith its absolute control.

Amendment 297: "Pornographic images of sex between relatives"

Amendment 298: "Pornographic content: online harmful content"

Amendment 299: "Amendment of possession of extreme pornographic images provision to cover incest"

Amendment 300: "Pornographic content: duty to verify age"

https://bills.parliament.uk/publications/65033/documents/790...

Who moved these amendments?

BARONESS LEVITT: principal legal advisor to the director of public prosecutions from 2009 to 2014, working under Keir Starmer

BARONESS BERTIN: commissioned by the Government to lead an independent review into the regulation of online pornography

BARONESS KIDRON: an advocate for children's rights in the digital world

BARONESS BENJAMIN: WTF it's Floella Benjamin from my childhood. So this is what she's doing nowadays?

beaker523• 5 months ago

Next, they'll be banning porn depicting sex between ministers and farm animals.

incognito124• 5 months ago

Basically the plot of Black Mirror pilot

beaker523• 5 months ago

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

postepowanieadm2• 5 months ago

More like Father Ted.

awakeasleep• 5 months ago

Good. Our society will surely suffer some sort of degradation from the way incest porn has become the most promoted and “normal” type of porn

It went from being the most taboo type imaginable to the first things kids will see when they get a phone and look for adult content.

sieep• 5 months ago

Often among some of the first things they'll see period

reedf1• 5 months ago

moral panic

nephihaha13• 5 months ago

I'm old fashioned, I draw the line at dead people, incest (even "stepincest"), children and animals.

bill_joy_fanboy2• 5 months ago

the word you're looking for isn't "panic"; it's "indignation" ;)

RGamma3• 5 months ago

The step-relationship is completely unbelievable in these productions. I wondered why they ever started doing that. Are people so gullible?

manarth8• 5 months ago

I'm not sure _many_ consumers of any porn are particular attentive to the believability (nor to the dialogue or plotline)

mrweasel• 5 months ago

Honestly I think it's a flaw in the algorithms of the various tube sites. There is no way in hell that having your step-sister stuck in a washing machine is the number one kink/fantasy on the planet.

Somehow the sites a providing incorrect feedback to the uploaders and creators, which skews HEAVILY towards adding stepmom/stepsister into the title and plot. Someone pointed out that it's a convenient "plot" for having two people in the same room, but apparently the adult industry never figured out that having the actors pretend to be a couple is an equally convenient plot.

rudhdb773b• 5 months ago

My money is on the porn sites being right.

Incest fantasies are far more common than the number of people who would admit to them suggest.

Just like almost no one will admit to finding a girl a day under 18 sexually attractive, yet somehow "barely legal" porn is extremely popular.

ryanackley• 5 months ago

Ok, but the real issue with kids looking up porn is how it warps general expectations around sex. Singling out specific fetishes and taboos that involve consenting adults seems a little bit like misdirected moral panic.

To be more specific, the idea that step-cest warps children's minds is laughable when the larger issue is that 95% of porn portrays women as submissive sex dolls that exist for male pleasure. Don't forget the unrealistic expectations around body and beauty standards

47282847• 5 months ago

I tend to agree with the perspective that this is a display of a desire to “reenact” and process personal and collective/intergenerational traumatic experiences (similar to violence in movies) on the one end, and the desire to repress and deny them on the other hand (position to ban; protection of perpetrator by silencing the victim). It reminds me of a psychology paper about whether BDSM practices are useful to process traumatic experiences or if the downsides prevail.

https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/0092623X.2024.2...

The question is, if we ban such “phantasies”, are we not merely strengthening repression and silencing of trauma, and by that perpetuating it. Or how do we go about sprinkling in a conscious awareness of why the urges exist to go deeper with them without the shame/blame to protect the original pain and misdeeds, rather than just continually repeating them, both as fantasy/role play and in real abuse.

I want to additionally mention but not link to the subreddits full of incest fantasy stories (or are they), and a reminder that abuse leads to abuse fantasies in the victim until it is properly processed and integrated. As long as we shame victims additionally for this healthy mechanism of the psyche we will be doomed to repeat it.

b450• 5 months ago

I really don't know anything about it, but I'd speculate that the fantasy is plain old 'misattribution of arousal'. The heart gets pounding at the idea of violating the taboo against incest, and that bodily state is interpreted as sexual arousal. Not that I'm suggesting that there is just one explanation of something as complicated as this.

DaedalusII3• 5 months ago

you are both correct, but what if there is no trauma?

two teenagers move into the same house because their parents started a relationship. they see each other little because both step-parents have shared custody arrangements. they have no biological connections whatsoever. four years later they are both 19, alone together a lot, et cetera. but simultaneously, this is a huge taboo, a betrayal of the parents, a great psychodrama

i knew one guy in college whose girlfriend cheated on him, with his biological father. a great betrayal, a great freudian cuckolding. what kind of strange fantasy will this man have now?

Retr0id• 5 months ago

It's time more people learnt YKINMKBYKIOK

Xmd5a• 5 months ago

NOT stepdaughter

checkmate

nephihaha13• 5 months ago

A stopped clock is right once a day. This is one thing I agree with for once. This stuff is obviously meant to be a backdoor for online ID though.

pixl972• 5 months ago

Why do you give a damn on what other people are doing in this case?

bill_joy_fanboy2• 5 months ago

Yeah, like how does the collective mental health and well-being of society affect you in any way, bro? Mind your own biz... /s

FrustratedMonky• 5 months ago

LOL. The UK, you doth protest too much.

andy_ppp3• 5 months ago

It's funny that it's still presumably legal to marry your step sister, not in pretend videos but in real life. And we honestly shouldn't have a problem with that given the disgust around incest presumably comes from the likelihood of genetic defects.

masfuerte• 5 months ago

It's also legal for a step-father to marry his step-son and for a father to marry his son. Similarly for mothers and daughters. But it may become illegal to depict this. Parliament is full of idiots.

kitd• 5 months ago

You can only marry a step-sibling in the UK if the 2 parties first met as adults. If one or both was under 18 when they first met, then no.

Edit: I believe the same applies for step-parent/child.

tzs• 5 months ago

That seems overly restrictive. Consider this scenario:

1. Romeo and Juliet meet when they are teens. They are not step-relatives. They develop a romantic relationship, which their parents disapprove of.

2. The maintain their relationship, which grows deeper with age, and plan to marry as soon as the are 18.

3. Before they turn 18 both of them lose a parent (maybe to divorce, maybe to death). Their remaining parents get married in order to make Romeo and Juliet step siblings and thus block them from marrying.

manarth8• 5 months ago

    "If one or both was under 18 when they first met"

The age of 18 relates to the age of consent for step- relationships.

The age of consent in the UK for most relationships is 16. It's raised to 18 in the case of many step- relationships.

The age at which they met is irrelevant; the age at the moment of the activity – marriage/sexual congress – is the relevant matter in law. Once both parties are older than 18 there is no legal impediment.

alva• 5 months ago

Wonder how they will classify 'cousins' given its unfortunate prevalence in the UK

jimnotgym2• 5 months ago

It will be decided on by rank. Cousin sex ok if you both hold a hereditary title of Baron/Baronette or above.

TheOtherHobbes• 5 months ago

Strange how often the upper classes need to feel reassured the peasants are even more immoral than they are.

benj11116• 5 months ago

It's a reference to the tendency of Muslims to marry cousins.

Where I'm guessing it will simultaneously be decided that it would be racist to target them/ good Muslims never watch porn/ carry on ignoring the problem to the point where most people aren't aware. I only know about it because an ex was a medical professional

Hizonner4• 5 months ago

Baronet: a sort of lesser baron.

Baroness: a female of rank equivalent to a baron.

Baronette: what the fuck?

manarth8• 5 months ago

Cousin marriage and sexual activity is not prohibited in the UK.

beeforpork2• 5 months ago

And step relative sexual activity is prohibited?

This is about forbidding the depiction of such activity, so I don't think logic will help.

Anthony-G• 5 months ago

I’m still waiting for Netflix to start streaming Les Cousins Dangereux, the classic (2003?) and critically lauded masterpiece of French eroticism: https://www.netflix.com/title/70261973

If only Nestflix was available in my region: https://nestflix.fun/les-cousins-dangereux/

owenboswarva• 5 months ago

This coverage relates to anti-porn amendments supported by peers in the UK House of Lords. That does not mean the amendments have support from the Government or any real chance of making it into law.

superkuh• 5 months ago

This is not a pipe.

arewethereyeta2• 5 months ago

I do 't think porn has anything to do with inbreeding in uk

edgyquant2• 5 months ago

There’s a clear link between consuming pornography and it programming the brain to want things. I don’t think any honest person could argue otherwise.

Sex is THE biggest reward function for mammals.

arewethereyeta2• 5 months ago

it was sarcasm but, on the same note, Muhammad was the most popular name in uk for 2025 at 5674 births whereas Olivia, the second on the list, was encountered 2600 times

benj11116• 5 months ago

To want what though?

Is dressing as a baby wanting to be a baby? If you indulge someone doing that, are you treating them as a baby and therefore at risk of becoming a pedo? If my girlfriend likes it a bit rough in bed, am I more likely to be abusive to her? To abuse my next partner?

If you play dungeons and dragons are you more likely to go to your school and start slaying students?

fragmede• 5 months ago

And then we invented drugs. Looking at scenes of fentanyl zombies, I think that's a higher reward function than sex.

Hizonner4• 5 months ago

You can cite that bullshit, right?

"Programming the brain". FFS.

mcphage• 5 months ago

clear link between consuming pornography and it programming the brain to want things

So by consuming lesbian pornography, what am I programming my brain to want?

lores2• 5 months ago

Please provide a source for that claim. An honest person would rather doubt than resort to logical fallacies.

seydor• 5 months ago

What about daddy porn

fiftyacorn• 5 months ago

And yet your not allowed to discuss the implications of marriage between cousins in case people become upset

josefritzishere2• 5 months ago

It is also interested that this topic is less likely to be flagged on HN than posts about Microslop or Voldemort.

RedNifre• 5 months ago

Is there some philosophical/ethics work done on the question which fictional crimes, taboo breaks or unethical behavior are okay and which aren't? Iirc Japan takes the extreme position of legalizing all fictional wrongdoings, whereas the west is okay with fictional violence (e.g. murder mysteries), but not okay with some other things. Where to draw the line?

benj11116• 5 months ago

Isn't it illegal to show the pubic region in Japanese porn??

Aboutplants• 5 months ago

new Porn Category is about to drop… “cousin twice removed”

baggachipz• 5 months ago

"Step-cousin twice removed, what are you doing?!"

stopbulying2• 5 months ago

Royal intermarriage > Inbreeding: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Royal_intermarriage#Inbreeding

"What if they're cousins instead"

Why hasn't God controls for ignorance of blood relation and conception?

In its first chapter, the Christian Bible suggests that we are all incestuous descendents of Adam and Eve and their children.

"You are all inferior"

Is God benevolent if there is accidental conception by incest, and it genetically damns the sinless child and multiple generations of their progeny by design?

Anything closer than first cousins risks the health of the child.

stopbulying2• 5 months ago

And thus an institution like a church or a state must track family trees.

But isn't it unjust to by design persecute by genetically damning the lineage of the victims of

DaedalusII3• 5 months ago

this is one of the most popular themes in pornography for whatever reason. incest titles increase click through rates to any porn video, even if they contain no incest content or even reference to incest

why this is so huge is fascinating. i suspect it is not really about the age gap, but rather the emotional trauma and sexual confusion so many people experience living in the same house hold as non biological "family members". the tension between "it is taboo to be attracted to my family" and "I am sexually attracted to a physically attractive person of no biological relation who lives in my house"

a male and female 19 year old of no biological relation, who only met each other 4 years earlier when their parents started dating, would very naturally feel sexual attraction to each other. indeed, they would share many of the social and biological traits of their parents. yet, this would be a massive taboo. consider the huge trauma of the mother being betrayed by her daughter sleeping with her step-sibling, or even her step-parent, fear of this, jealousy, fantasy.

of course the combination of taboo with sexual attraction will result in an entire genre of erotic fantasy much like adultery, cheating, professor-college student, or any other relationship of power and betrayal

the real question is, at what point does expressing the human condition become illegal? especially when as others have noted, it is legal to do the thing in real life but apparently not photograph it

and if this content is harmful to the consumer, why is other pornography apparently not? Should we ban also onlyfans?

hoherd• 5 months ago

In a similar vein, imagine the step parents aren't married, they're just platonic friends. They would probably be overjoyed if their children connected romantically.

Also, I can just see the industry changing from "stepbrother" to "my mom's boyfriend's son." Suddenly if the parents aren't married then it's not illegal. What about if the parents are divorced? Does ex-step-sibling count? The whole thing seems absurd. These are works of fiction that have not "graduated", as Preet Bharara would say.

RGamma3• 5 months ago

Interestingly, third degree cousins seem to maximize reproductive success, at least retrospectively: https://www.decode.com/decode-links-closer-kinship-with-repr...

tbrownaw2• 5 months ago

why this is so huge is fascinating. i suspect it is not really about the age gap, but rather

Alternate theory: it's a genre tag that implies a whole pile of arbitrary features. Kind of along similar lines as how calling a movie a "space western" tells you quite a lot about it, despite making absolutely no sense if you try to take it strictly literally.

IAmGraydon• 5 months ago

It's just because it's taboo, which turns people on. People always want to do what they're told not to do.

p0pularopinion• 5 months ago

I don‘t hold a strong opinion on this, but I still find it a bit weird that they are set to ban something in porn that is - as far as I understand - perfectly fine irl?

What I find weirdest is how incredibly prevalent this „genre“ (?) is? Not only is it popular, it is literally everywhere

oldandboring• 5 months ago

The article addresses this, but doesn't really clear it up. First it says:

But justice minister Baroness Levitt warned that cracking down on pornography depicting sex between step-relatives was complicated, because not all > relationships between step-relatives are illegal.

and then later:

Lady Bertin said she was "mystified why it does not include step-incest", as she moved her proposal, which peers backed 144 votes to 143.
She added: "Nearly all step-relations between step-parents and step-siblings is illegal.
"This is because Parliament recognised the clear power imbalance in step family relationships within households, and also Parliament acted because step-relations are the most likely relationships in which child sexual abuse takes place.

I guess there must be some limited definition of these interactions which are legal.

DeathArrow2• 5 months ago

Tom and Jerry should be banned since it promotes violence.

yomismoaqui• 5 months ago

"Doing X with NOT my stepsister"

There you go, fixed. Who should I send the invoice to?

ProllyInfamous• 5 months ago

"Doing X with my union brother(s)"

—bad IBEW joke

beeforpork2• 5 months ago

So, what, I need to search for 'sister's friend' instead of 'hermanastra'? 'hot' OK?

face palm

PowerElectronix• 5 months ago

It's funny how the people accused of running a child sex trafficking ring get to be morallity police for what adults can produce and watch.

DeathArrow2• 5 months ago

Judging by this, some legislators parents must have been close relatives.

cedws• 5 months ago

Generating as much political distraction as possible so people don’t talk about MP corruption, Michelle Mone, youth unemployment, or immigration. Anything the state finds problematic for us to talk about.

throwaway46782• 5 months ago

My initial instinct to this headline was: Why would you ban that? After reading the article, I might agree this is a reasonable option.

From my perspective this type of porn was basically just porn with a bit of story attached to it, which imo elevates it slightly. Though I was mainly thinking about the step-sibling variety. From a male perspective the stepfather variety always gave me the ick, with the stepson dynamic lying somewhere in between. But I was looking at it as someone without any step-relationships in real life.

Now, after also looking up the prevalence of step-relationships lying between 10 and 40% depending on what you count, I am a lot more vary of this trend in pornography from a societal perspective. Even besides the more insidious possible effects mentioned in the article, I can see how this type of fantasy can give the (presumably majority male) porn audience wrong ideas. Like considering every woman a possible partner instead of just peer, even in the wider context of family.

In theory I agree with these kind initiatives to try and at least steer things in the right way but I also realise how often they fail. And who knows the trend following such a ban could be worse.

Ultimately, you are only treating symptoms here and ignoring the societal problems that lead to this being a thing in the first place (loneliness, fewer human connections, rise of individualism, etc.)

benj11116• 5 months ago

Apply you logic to James Bond or Call of Duty? Do they make young men believe they can go round killing each other?

I suspect the operative part here is "ick" and I get it. But why do you think homosexuality was illegal for so long? What about the trans debate? What about your own personal kink?

Your personal ick isn't a reason to stop someone doing something that doesn't harm someone else.

haritha-j• 5 months ago

Woody Allen would like a word.

manarth8• 5 months ago

I wonder where the line for "porn" will be drawn on this topic.

Will this make a number of Game of Thrones episodes illegal? Should they already be illegal, as Cersei and Jamie are full, not step-siblings?

keernan• 5 months ago

"around half of all sexual abuse cases against children were perpetrated by step-parents"

I understand most commenters are reacting to their masturbatory fantasy aspects of pornography, but I am more concerned about the real life sexual molestation of children. In particular, I am a bit concerned about the statement I quoted above.

First, I want to emphatically state that it is not my intent to minimize the risk of sexual abuse committed by step parents.

I learned 25+ years ago that my wife's grandfather, who lived with them, started raping her when she was 7 years old until he died when she was 14. She never told a soul until she revealed this secret to me when she was 44. I have read an extensive amount about sexual abuse over the ensuing years. What I learned stunned me.

Studies dating back to the early 1900s until when I was researching were consistent: 1 in 3 women reported they had suffered serious ongoing sexual abuse when they were children. These studies were almost all anonymous with most women survivors still keeping the secret.

By definition, this would appear to indicate widespread sexual abuse that was almost certainly not related to step parents ( I did a quick GoogleAI check while writing this which indicates 9-10% of American children live in households with a step-parent ).

My purpose behind this comment is to note that the 50% figure mentioned in the article is based upon actual cases reported by the children - and everything I have learned is that the overwhelming majority of cases are never reported and, indeed, never mentioned to anyone and kept a total secret forever by the abused women.

And it is easy for me to see that reporting of a step-parent is much more likely than the reporting of a parent or grandparent or other close family relative. Indeed, I suspect the a high percentage of the non-step parent cases in England are likely non-family members (again, because of the likely fear and shame felt by the child when the abuse is by a close blood relation).

I felt the need to address the misleading nature of the quote. I am sure it is factually accurate, but misleading for the reasons I've outlined.

Lastly, please remember to look at the next high school graduating class in May/June this year and think to yourself that one in three of the girls receiving their diplomas are likely hiding a terrible life changing secret. It angers me this information is kept so quiet. I urge everyone to take the time to look into this subject. Please educate yourself for the sake of your children - male and female.

Edit: After writing this, I did a quick GoogeAI search and GoogleAI indicated studies show 86% of women never reveal the abuse. It also indicates that the percentage of woman suffering sexual abuse before 18 is one in four, not one in three. It would appear that the information has changed slightly with AI compared to my pre-Ai reading - but it doesn't really change the substance of concern for what is happening behind closed doors.

benj11116• 5 months ago

Question

How is this going to work in practice, if I watch a vid that's tagged 'step relative' am I going off the jail and on the register?

Does it have to be in the description?

What if it's just been tagged every which way and does actually appear to portray anything illegal?

What if the tags and titles are removed, and I watch exactly the same videos. Am I committing an offense because in someone's head canon the characters are related?

drcongo• 5 months ago

I reckon someone in government is just annoyed that basically all porn is incest porn these days.

blargthorwars• 5 months ago

The weird bit is that the UK is the inbreed/incest hot zone of Europe:

"It is estimated that approximately 55% of marriages within the Pakistani community in the United Kingdom are between first cousins. This practice, often referred to as consanguineous marriage, is culturally favored within certain communities, leading to higher rates of inbreeding coefficients, which can be comparable to those found in other regions with high rates of cousin marriage, such as in the Middle East."

The UK refuses to make it illegal. That would be racist. The worst crime ever.

hirvi742• 5 months ago

I once read the dating life in Iceland can be kind of difficult. The total population is around 400k after being settled for almost 1150 years. Thus, it's quite common on first dates for both individuals to go through their family trees. Not to see if they are related, but to make sure they aren't too related.

It turns out that Icelandic people even have an app for it now.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/business/kissing-cousins-icelandic-a...

karakoram• 4 months ago

I am not sure about the stats in the UK particularly but the "consanguinity rate" per capita wise is a lot higher in the middle east.

"The consanguinity rate in the UAE has increased from 39% to 50.5% in one generation."

From what I have learned, it has a lot to do with "wealth preservation". Something important I guess if you are a millionaire sheikh and get regular allowances from the ruling royal family according to your family title/name.

tsoukase• 5 months ago

This feels more like a joke. Off course the step- word was meant to be omitted in order to challenge pervert instincts, so this ban is justified. I can imagine the embarrassment in many UK homes. But, banning a legal relation while allowing rape, animals or extreme age and size differences is odd. I suppose cousin and unkle/aunt relationships will increase. How is it supposed to be enforced? Will there be a word filter?

manarth8• 5 months ago

There's a helpful introduction paragraph:

    Peers agreed by a majority of one to ban videos and images
    depicting relationships that would not be allowed in real life.

    They also agreed to bring intimate pictures and videos of adults
    pretending to be children in line with similar images of real children.

The title might be better summarised as:

Porn depicting a specific set of unlawful sexual activity is set to be banned.

guilhas• 5 months ago

Sex in hospitals, in schools, public places, public transport, in prision, violence, desperation, power relation, aliens?, most Japanese/animated porn is about non-consensual sex. A lot of this is illegal and most of it could be misinterpreted and lead to real life misunderstandings. At this level 80% of porn could be banned.

Two consensual adults or cartoons acting something illegal. And in UK porn is banned for underage already... So it seems problematic that they could just as easily justify to ban any book or video that depict illegal things

thrownaway561• 5 months ago

The UK is going over board on so many things lately, can they even call themselves a FREE country anymore? First SPEECH, then VPNs and now PORN.

afroboy• 5 months ago

I know people love science here, so can someone tell me what's exactly the difference here between gay porn and incest porn? Isn't love is love? And both will not produce kids here so what's wrong scientifically?

Porn depicting sex between step-relatives set to be banned in the UK

Related Stories