I'm actually kind of upset at exactly how bone-headed this report is. Their definition of violence is so broad that it's actually laughable. Verbal violence? If someone calls me a whore am I a...
I'm actually kind of upset at exactly how bone-headed this report is. Their definition of violence is so broad that it's actually laughable. Verbal violence? If someone calls me a whore am I a victim now?
This one really gets me:
The report also points to "gangbang" videos in which several men simultaneously penetrate a woman through multiple orifices.
How in the hell is group sex violence? It's something that a lot of people really like; I've honestly never heard of anyone who has expressed being disgusted by the idea. I've done it before, and I really enjoyed it! I'm certainly not a victim of violence because I experienced it. People actively go out trying to create that exact situation because they enjoy it. Do you know what you call a gangbang with a participant who doesn't want to do it? Rape. That's the line where you can start calling it violence.
Sexual violence in pornography is a problem that exists and has real consequences, but this report - or at least this coverage of the report - makes it seem like the people who made it are puritans who are against sex in general, and only serves to reduce the credibility of the problem it is trying to address. And that just makes me angry.
I can't read the actual study since I don't speak French but the quotes in the article make it seem like puritan nonsense. As long as the above is being done consensually with the safety of the...
"There are 1.4 million videos of sadistic practices: "Suffocation, bukkake (as many as dozens of men ejaculating on one woman), gangbang, gagging (deep fellatio suffocation), torture, electrocution" it continues.
I can't read the actual study since I don't speak French but the quotes in the article make it seem like puritan nonsense. As long as the above is being done consensually with the safety of the actors being a priority then I see no issue with the acts themselves.
They say there are about 1.3 million child-themed videos on these sites that "trivialise and eroticise incest and child criminality".
This, to me, also seems like deceptive wording. Are we including videos where two obvious adults are calling each other step mom & step son? If so, then it seems like the numbers are going to be fluffed up quite a bit.
"It is not possible to "consent to an act of violence against yourself," it added.
This doesn't even deserve a real response so I'll just say, "lol".
The worst part is I've definitely read articles that make me question the ethics of porn production (apologies for the Daily Mail link, just went with the first result). But defenders can easily point to non-sense like this article to try and write off their critics.
Laura Llach //Caution// Online article contains graphic descriptions - NSFW //Caution// "Criminally reprehensible" The committee's experts have proposed a number of measures for the government to take
"Our aim is to shake people's consciences," said the president of the French High Council for Equality.
The French High Council for Equality has laid bare violence and brutality in the porn industry, classifying pornography as an "illegal act of torture".
"Criminally reprehensible"
Entitled "Pornocrime", its shocking report (in French), which called on the authorities to combat a "system that massacres women for profit", was presented on Wednesday to Bérangère Couillard, France's Minister for Gender Equality.
The independent public institution carried out a study of the internet's four main pornographic platforms. After analysing hundreds of videos, the organisation concluded 90% of pornographic content available online contains physical or verbal violence and is "criminally reprehensible".
"Our aim is to shake people's consciences by crudely describing the torture practices that are commonplace in the porn industry. We call it 'pornocrime' because these practices are illegal and fall under the penal code," Sylvie Pierre-Brossolette, president of the council, told AFP.
The report goes further, pointing out that some of these videos – which sometimes count 14 million views a month – "fall within the legal definition of acts of torture and barbarism".
It singles out women as the main victims, saying that "these acts are not simulated, the violence is real, it is not cinema".
"The contracts that these companies force women to sign are illegal," explains the president of the Council, insisting that production companies and platforms "have no right to profit from the exploitation of the human body".
"It is not possible to "consent to an act of violence against yourself," it added.
The report's authors point out that it is not only women who are victims of the pornography industry, children are affected too. They say there are about 1.3 million child-themed videos on these sites that "trivialise and eroticise incest and child criminality".
The committee's experts have proposed a number of measures for the government to take
These include giving the French regulator for audiovisual and digital communications the power to "block pornographic websites that do not apply effective age controls".
Although the country passed a law introducing such a requirement in 2020, the porn industry is reluctant to implement it properly, citing technical difficulties.
Another of the measures they propose is to establish a right to remove content of a sexual nature at the request of any person featured in a given recording.
The report also stresses the importance of sex education in schools to combat the risk of young people being educated primarily by watching porn.
The committee wants at least three sex education lessons in schools to include a critique of pornography.
I wonder if they consider the kink.com videos "criminally reprehensible" as well. Because I do understand where they're coming from, but to me it always seems like the kink stars are at least...
I wonder if they consider the kink.com videos "criminally reprehensible" as well. Because I do understand where they're coming from, but to me it always seems like the kink stars are at least treated right with safe words, aftercare, and the like. Technically this would also fall under criminal violence, right?
Is it high time to ban porn industry altogether? or do you consider banning outright would be useless? or would be against freedom of expression? Do you think the measures proposed here are strong...
Is it high time to ban porn industry altogether? or do you consider banning outright would be useless? or would be against freedom of expression?
Do you think the measures proposed here are strong enough to contain the serious issues pointed out in the report?
Banning things just creates a grey or black market that will lead to far worse abuses. If people want something, there will always be a market for it regardless. There are already laws on the...
Banning things just creates a grey or black market that will lead to far worse abuses. If people want something, there will always be a market for it regardless. There are already laws on the books for the kinds of things they are describing. I also take umbrage with their assumption that "It is not possible to "consent to an act of violence against yourself". I've been in S/M relationships before where yes, adults DO consent to things that might be considered violent or reprehensible to other people. As someone who has been part of various NSFW communities over the years, and known many people who had weird fetishes but were also perfectly sane and certainly not criminals. I've never done anything with a partner that we didn't both consent to. It's just common sense. Nobody should have anything done to them against their will, but the cynic in me kind of feels as though this is a puritan take on what they consider 'sexual deviants'. Where are all these millions of videos they claim exist? I just don't know.
I found that line to be peculiar. Is it illegal to partake in certain sports in France? Fighting sports in particular are basically consenting to an act of violence against yourself, but some...
I also take umbrage with their assumption that "It is not possible to "consent to an act of violence against yourself".
I found that line to be peculiar. Is it illegal to partake in certain sports in France? Fighting sports in particular are basically consenting to an act of violence against yourself, but some other sports could also be labeled as that. Arguably, signing up for military duty is consenting to an act of violence against yourself, though it's more like a small possibility in some cases so it's not quite the same I know.
As someone who wears the uniform I can confirm this is indeed the case. It's referred to as "unlimited liability" in our regulations; basically that you consent to the fact you may be ordered into...
As someone who wears the uniform I can confirm this is indeed the case. It's referred to as "unlimited liability" in our regulations; basically that you consent to the fact you may be ordered into a situation where you could be seriously harmed or killed.
That part of the article/study really struck me as odd, its such a blanket statement that really almost immediately......discredits itself? In my eyes at least. Like: Are they aware that many...
Exemplary
I also take umbrage with their assumption that "It is not possible to "consent to an act of violence against yourself". I've been in S/M relationships before where yes, adults DO consent to things that might be considered violent or reprehensible to other people. As someone who has been part of various NSFW communities over the years, and known many people who had weird fetishes but were also perfectly sane and certainly not criminals.
That part of the article/study really struck me as odd, its such a blanket statement that really almost immediately......discredits itself? In my eyes at least. Like:
It singles out women as the main victims, saying that "these acts are not simulated, the violence is real, it is not cinema".
"There are 1.4 million videos of sadistic practices: "Suffocation, bukkake (as many as dozens of men ejaculating on one woman), gangbang, gagging (deep fellatio suffocation), torture, electrocution" it continues.
Are they aware that many people......do that at home? Outside of the context of the porn industries? Breath play doesn't even seem to be that uncommon of one for perfectly consenting adults to do in their private sex life. "Electrocution" is left in vague detail, but they probably mean electrical stimulation, using zaps of harmless low levels of volts/amps to deliver a shock. It gets rolled under the broader umbrella of "torture" and "violence" in this report, but its also.........not uncommon at all?
This whole study strikes me as if it was written by a few people never introduced to the concept of sex, watching a few videos on porn sites, and misunderstanding the context. I had to google the institute's name just to be sure it wasn't one of the religious ones funded by Mormons, because it reads just like publications put out by them.
On this thread/post's broader question of banning, I personally think that's pretty dumb, but also misguided. There is no "the" porn industry, there's separate industries in every country, plus a global semi-regulated global one, and then also just individuals creating their own content and putting it out there -- either for profit or just for fun.
Every article about the "porn industry" paints it as large evil companies with all the power, calling all the shots, no one can escape from the black hole that is the evil pornographic industry. There are many issues to take to the broader corporate pornographic industries, but these articles never really touch on something we've seen the rise of under the internet: people making this content themselves. All these acts described in this study, there are people doing at home, and filming, and putting up for consumption, half the time not even selling it through something like OnlyFans. You can go on pornhub and find many videos of people doing "gagging", "electrocution", "Suffocation", "bukkake" (simulated, for what i'm about to say next), "triple anal","prolapse", and other "degrading" acts to themselves, with no partner, put out on unmonetized channels, building a fanbase and seeming to do it just for the pleasure in it. Are these people committing violence against themselves? Are they committing "acts of torture and barbarism" against themselves and are just too dumb to see it? No, I don't think that, I think its a bizarre conclusion for them to draw overall.
Banning isn't solving anything, and I don't trust the people behind this study if thats what they recommend. Better regulation for pornographic industries is definitely something that progress should be made on, empowering performers to create content they want to create, in their own terms, controlling their works, etc.
If you (the general you, anyone) want to hear a performer inside the industry's perspective on the "BDSM" style of pornography, here's a few episodes from a good podcast hosted by two long-time performers in the industry, who IIRC mostly work on independent and smaller scale, some even self-produced, productions:
They bring up good issues they've encountered in the industry, but they also, for as long as they've spent in it, don't seem like they're desperate to get out of it and stop making that content. They both seem to be, in their personal lives, involved in the shibari (rope bondage) scene outside of work, and just work in a hobby they also do in their private lives.
(The podcast itself isn't usually about porn, they mostly talk about other topics, these two just have some topics relevant. Also it's a great podcast, check it out!)
Breath play was something I indulged in with previous partners because it was something they enjoyed. It was consented to by both of us because we're adults and know the dangers involved. We had...
Breath play was something I indulged in with previous partners because it was something they enjoyed. It was consented to by both of us because we're adults and know the dangers involved. We had safe words (well, more of an "I've had enough" grip that we agreed on since, you know, choking) and would stop when either of us wasn't feeling it anymore. The article strikes me as, like you said, somebody who's never had sex or at the very least, is wholly unaware of the BDSM community at large.
There is always a concern that banning something will lead to a black market and create greater crimes as unscrupulous people monopolize that market. However I want to point out that normalizing...
There is always a concern that banning something will lead to a black market and create greater crimes as unscrupulous people monopolize that market.
However I want to point out that normalizing breath play among young people is dangerous. People die from being strangled. Receiving that from someone who is sexually excited is certainly nothing I would ever consent to. On the women's advice subreddits I have read and responded to posts from younger women whose partners would just start to choke them during sex, without ever checking whether they were into that.
Erotic asphyxiation is one of the riskiest sexual activities a person can try. The only thing riskier is autoerotic asphyxiation. That is more dangerous because you’re alone, and no one is around to help you if something goes wrong. Experts say somewhere between 250-1,000 people die each year from autoerotic asphyxiation.
Death from erotic and autoerotic asphyxiation usually happens because of pressure on the carotid arteries (two large blood vessels in your neck that supply your brain with blood). This pressure causes you to pass out, making your body go limp.
Depending on the asphyxiation method used, going limp can tighten a ligature around the neck, causing death. It can also prevent removal of a barrier around the mouth and nose in time to avoid death.
I would expect banning porn, although unpopular, would be a net positive. However there could be more issues if done unilaterally and quickly. We had a user on this site say they would get violent...
I would expect banning porn, although unpopular, would be a net positive. However there could be more issues if done unilaterally and quickly. We had a user on this site say they would get violent sexual urges were they not sedated by pornography. I don’t know how much that was just colorful language but I believe it earned them a ban.
Would people experience some kind of whiplash with a sudden loss of availability? The measure could backfire as the only porn left online would be on sites explicitly operating outside of the law.
This all being said, there is still a lot of pornography online that is more healthy for the consumer. It’s still impossible to know if it is ethically produced. But the fairly mundane stuff probably isn’t warping anyone’s mind.
I'm not French so you can feel free to ignore my post. I also fully admit to having watched porn back in the day. There are a few things from the summary that stick out: Can anyone elaborate on...
I'm not French so you can feel free to ignore my post. I also fully admit to having watched porn back in the day.
There are a few things from the summary that stick out:
"It is not possible to "consent to an act of violence against yourself," it added.
Can anyone elaborate on this? Is this encompassing things like BDSM, choking/slapping, play rape? Is there a concern of slippery-slope? If these are illegal to tape will they become illegal to do between 2 consenting adults?
Another of the measures they propose is to establish a right to remove content of a sexual nature at the request of any person featured in a given recording.
Would this allow someone who is paid to perform a scene then later change their mind and keep their pay? At the very least they would need to give back their pay + costs?
The report also stresses the importance of sex education in schools to combat the risk of young people being educated primarily by watching porn.
The committee wants at least three sex education lessons in schools to include a critique of pornography.
I personally think this is the best way forward--education.
Banning things don't work on the internet, especially if they're legal in other countries. Besides sex work being one of the oldest professions on the planet, porn is big enough of an industry that it is a massive driver in adoption of technology (from VHS to home internet).
Once again, I don't know the ins and outs of laws in France but I do consider porn a freedom of expression issue thing here in the US. If you are truly into freedom of speech/expression that means defending speech/expression that you may not like or find personaly distasteful (which, ironically, also leads to the "Paradox of Tolerance".
This also stuck out to me. Is it saying that BDSM etc. is fundamentally nonconsensual even if the proper procedures are followed? Or is it saying that if you consent to it, it's no longer an act...
"It is not possible to "consent to an act of violence against yourself," it added.
This also stuck out to me. Is it saying that BDSM etc. is fundamentally nonconsensual even if the proper procedures are followed? Or is it saying that if you consent to it, it's no longer an act of violence? I don't see much reason to interpret it as the latter except for possibly esoteric legal reasons.
I'm hesitant to comment on what is a sensitive topic - especially since there are very real problems with the porn industry and violence against women. Perhaps its simply that the english article...
I'm hesitant to comment on what is potentially a sensitive topic - especially since there are very real problems with the porn industry and violence against women. Perhaps its simply that the english article doesn't cover the french report well - I can't verify since I don't speak french.
But this seems like poor methodology and poor definitions to make a predisposed point.
After analysing hundreds of videos, the organisation concluded 90% of pornographic content available online contains physical or verbal violence and is "criminally reprehensible".
The independent public institution carried out a study of the internet's four main pornographic platforms – Pornhub, XVideos, Xnxx and Xhamster.
"these acts are not simulated, the violence is real, it is not cinema".
So it sounds like they simply reviewed the end-product videos? Its my understanding that a lot of the violence against women in the porn industry is going to be behind the scenes - human trafficking, forcing women into contracts, pushing for harder stuff while already on set, etc. Simply watching the end result is a poor way to tell if it is a scene where the actors/actresses are simply acting or if there are more sinister things going on. Is that someone's hand lightly around someone's throat to look like choking - or are they actually being choked?
It found multiple videos entitled "triple anal" or "prolapse", which refers to the dropping of internal organs as a result of brutal penetration.
The report also points to "gangbang" videos in which several men simultaneously penetrate a woman through multiple orifices.
"There are 1.4 million videos of sadistic practices: "Suffocation, bukkake (as many as dozens of men ejaculating on one woman), gangbang, gagging (deep fellatio suffocation), torture, electrocution" it continues.
Some of these things are not like the others. Some of these seem relatively tame and not dangerous/violent (bukkake and non-rape gangbang for example). Others like suffocation/gagging/electro play can be done safely with preparation and consent. Torture isn't defined in the english article - but could range from light S&M to more extreme BDSM stuff or consensual non-consent. Tricky, but still can be done with proper understanding, preparation, and consent.
I'll note that one of the conclusions of the article "stresses the importance of sex education in schools to combat the risk of young people being educated primarily by watching porn." - which is definitely a great response to this. Better sex education might also cover the dangers and consequences of some of the more extreme acts, as well as the proper ways to communicate, prepare, and consent for tricky things - both of which are usually absent in typical porn videos.
insisting that production companies and platforms "have no right to profit from the exploitation of the human body".
Perhaps this is simply a translation error - but wouldn't the "exploitation of the human body" apply to basically all work? We're exploiting the physical labor of the human body for many blue collar jobs. We're exploiting the creativity and mental labor for many white collar jobs. Again, perhaps its the translation...maybe its referring to something more specific - for example focusing on exploitation via human trafficking or conditions forcing people to sign contracts that don't want to sign just to put food on the table.
"It is not possible to "consent to an act of violence against yourself," it added.
Others have pointed out the oddness of this line, so I won't rehash it.
The report's authors point out that it is not only women who are victims of the pornography industry, children are affected too.
They say there are about 1.3 million child-themed videos on these sites that "trivialise and eroticise incest and child criminality".
This is another tricky one. There is definitely a big concern with child pornography. Children should never be involved or harmed by the making of porn. However it sounds like they are talking about "step-sibling" videos - which is a different can of worms. Is an over-the-top silly porn scenario really encouraging incest? Perhaps they are referring to other videos or worse videos, but the majority of "step-sibling" porn is simply regular porn with a thin veneer of plot thrown in. My guess is that it is popular because people who don't care about step-siblings can simply watch the sex act and ignore the "plot" - and they can add on the taboo for those interested in something more.
That said, the conclusions and recommendations seem to be fairly reasonable.
These include giving the French regulator for audiovisual and digital communications the power to "block pornographic websites that do not apply effective age controls".
There are probably some privacy concerns, technical difficulties, and other discussions to be had here - especially when it comes to implementation details. But overall a reasonable goal.
Another of the measures they propose is to establish a right to remove content of a sexual nature at the request of any person featured in a given recording.
This is probably aimed at "revenge porn" or other videos where the the victim did not consent to videos/pictures of them being made public. As mentioned elsewhere - this gets tricky with contracts and "professional" porn. There plenty of discussion to be had on exploitation, trafficking, unwilling participants. But also whether or not a completely professional/consensual porn video could be pulled based on this. Having porn videos out there could certainly impact career or dating prospects...but it also would mean a valid production stops making money and could affect the income of other actors/actresses/assistants/etc - definitely a bit of a tricky topic.
The report also stresses the importance of sex education in schools to combat the risk of young people being educated primarily by watching porn.
The committee wants at least three sex education lessons in schools to include a critique of pornography.
As stated earlier - education is almost always a good thing, and a good way to help differentiate "real" sex from "porn" sex.
To me, this feels like when a bunch of older politicians are attempting to make laws on technology they don't understand. There are real problems and concerns there - but it doesn't feel like they did the background research or involved experts.
I'm actually kind of upset at exactly how bone-headed this report is. Their definition of violence is so broad that it's actually laughable. Verbal violence? If someone calls me a whore am I a victim now?
This one really gets me:
How in the hell is group sex violence? It's something that a lot of people really like; I've honestly never heard of anyone who has expressed being disgusted by the idea. I've done it before, and I really enjoyed it! I'm certainly not a victim of violence because I experienced it. People actively go out trying to create that exact situation because they enjoy it. Do you know what you call a gangbang with a participant who doesn't want to do it? Rape. That's the line where you can start calling it violence.
Sexual violence in pornography is a problem that exists and has real consequences, but this report - or at least this coverage of the report - makes it seem like the people who made it are puritans who are against sex in general, and only serves to reduce the credibility of the problem it is trying to address. And that just makes me angry.
This is my favorite comment of yours that I have ever read.
I can't read the actual study since I don't speak French but the quotes in the article make it seem like puritan nonsense. As long as the above is being done consensually with the safety of the actors being a priority then I see no issue with the acts themselves.
This, to me, also seems like deceptive wording. Are we including videos where two obvious adults are calling each other step mom & step son? If so, then it seems like the numbers are going to be fluffed up quite a bit.
This doesn't even deserve a real response so I'll just say, "lol".
The worst part is I've definitely read articles that make me question the ethics of porn production (apologies for the Daily Mail link, just went with the first result). But defenders can easily point to non-sense like this article to try and write off their critics.
Laura Llach
//Caution// Online article contains graphic descriptions - NSFW //Caution//
"Criminally reprehensible"
The committee's experts have proposed a number of measures for the government to take
I wonder if they consider the kink.com videos "criminally reprehensible" as well. Because I do understand where they're coming from, but to me it always seems like the kink stars are at least treated right with safe words, aftercare, and the like. Technically this would also fall under criminal violence, right?
Is it high time to ban porn industry altogether? or do you consider banning outright would be useless? or would be against freedom of expression?
Do you think the measures proposed here are strong enough to contain the serious issues pointed out in the report?
Banning things just creates a grey or black market that will lead to far worse abuses. If people want something, there will always be a market for it regardless. There are already laws on the books for the kinds of things they are describing. I also take umbrage with their assumption that "It is not possible to "consent to an act of violence against yourself". I've been in S/M relationships before where yes, adults DO consent to things that might be considered violent or reprehensible to other people. As someone who has been part of various NSFW communities over the years, and known many people who had weird fetishes but were also perfectly sane and certainly not criminals. I've never done anything with a partner that we didn't both consent to. It's just common sense. Nobody should have anything done to them against their will, but the cynic in me kind of feels as though this is a puritan take on what they consider 'sexual deviants'. Where are all these millions of videos they claim exist? I just don't know.
I found that line to be peculiar. Is it illegal to partake in certain sports in France? Fighting sports in particular are basically consenting to an act of violence against yourself, but some other sports could also be labeled as that. Arguably, signing up for military duty is consenting to an act of violence against yourself, though it's more like a small possibility in some cases so it's not quite the same I know.
As someone who wears the uniform I can confirm this is indeed the case. It's referred to as "unlimited liability" in our regulations; basically that you consent to the fact you may be ordered into a situation where you could be seriously harmed or killed.
If this would result in a worldwide ban on military duty, I'd be willing to give up porn for that.
When human beings stop finding reasons to kill each other, there won't be a need for a military.
That part of the article/study really struck me as odd, its such a blanket statement that really almost immediately......discredits itself? In my eyes at least. Like:
Are they aware that many people......do that at home? Outside of the context of the porn industries? Breath play doesn't even seem to be that uncommon of one for perfectly consenting adults to do in their private sex life. "Electrocution" is left in vague detail, but they probably mean electrical stimulation, using zaps of harmless low levels of volts/amps to deliver a shock. It gets rolled under the broader umbrella of "torture" and "violence" in this report, but its also.........not uncommon at all?
This whole study strikes me as if it was written by a few people never introduced to the concept of sex, watching a few videos on porn sites, and misunderstanding the context. I had to google the institute's name just to be sure it wasn't one of the religious ones funded by Mormons, because it reads just like publications put out by them.
On this thread/post's broader question of banning, I personally think that's pretty dumb, but also misguided. There is no "the" porn industry, there's separate industries in every country, plus a global semi-regulated global one, and then also just individuals creating their own content and putting it out there -- either for profit or just for fun.
Every article about the "porn industry" paints it as large evil companies with all the power, calling all the shots, no one can escape from the black hole that is the evil pornographic industry. There are many issues to take to the broader corporate pornographic industries, but these articles never really touch on something we've seen the rise of under the internet: people making this content themselves. All these acts described in this study, there are people doing at home, and filming, and putting up for consumption, half the time not even selling it through something like OnlyFans. You can go on pornhub and find many videos of people doing "gagging", "electrocution", "Suffocation", "bukkake" (simulated, for what i'm about to say next), "triple anal","prolapse", and other "degrading" acts to themselves, with no partner, put out on unmonetized channels, building a fanbase and seeming to do it just for the pleasure in it. Are these people committing violence against themselves? Are they committing "acts of torture and barbarism" against themselves and are just too dumb to see it? No, I don't think that, I think its a bizarre conclusion for them to draw overall.
Banning isn't solving anything, and I don't trust the people behind this study if thats what they recommend. Better regulation for pornographic industries is definitely something that progress should be made on, empowering performers to create content they want to create, in their own terms, controlling their works, etc.
If you (the general you, anyone) want to hear a performer inside the industry's perspective on the "BDSM" style of pornography, here's a few episodes from a good podcast hosted by two long-time performers in the industry, who IIRC mostly work on independent and smaller scale, some even self-produced, productions:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sdsYCz3BFbg
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BChzdn1mMQw
They bring up good issues they've encountered in the industry, but they also, for as long as they've spent in it, don't seem like they're desperate to get out of it and stop making that content. They both seem to be, in their personal lives, involved in the shibari (rope bondage) scene outside of work, and just work in a hobby they also do in their private lives.
(The podcast itself isn't usually about porn, they mostly talk about other topics, these two just have some topics relevant. Also it's a great podcast, check it out!)
Breath play was something I indulged in with previous partners because it was something they enjoyed. It was consented to by both of us because we're adults and know the dangers involved. We had safe words (well, more of an "I've had enough" grip that we agreed on since, you know, choking) and would stop when either of us wasn't feeling it anymore. The article strikes me as, like you said, somebody who's never had sex or at the very least, is wholly unaware of the BDSM community at large.
There is always a concern that banning something will lead to a black market and create greater crimes as unscrupulous people monopolize that market.
However I want to point out that normalizing breath play among young people is dangerous. People die from being strangled. Receiving that from someone who is sexually excited is certainly nothing I would ever consent to. On the women's advice subreddits I have read and responded to posts from younger women whose partners would just start to choke them during sex, without ever checking whether they were into that.
https://www.theguardian.com/society/2019/jul/25/fatal-hateful-rise-of-choking-during-sex
https://www.fox10phoenix.com/news/harris-county-woman-killed-after-being-choked-during-sex-with-boyfriend
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2021/sep/07/darlington-man-jailed-for-four-years-for-choking-woman-during-sex
https://abc13.com/woman-killed-strangling-death-girlfriend-manslaughter-charge/12998043/
https://www.elle.com.au/culture/sexual-choking-strangulation-dangers-26953
https://www.webmd.com/sex/what-is-sexual-asphyxiation
Just sex, hence why I felt it was based solely on judging people for their preferences. Also, I guess by their metric my tattoos are illegal. Welp.
I would expect banning porn, although unpopular, would be a net positive. However there could be more issues if done unilaterally and quickly. We had a user on this site say they would get violent sexual urges were they not sedated by pornography. I don’t know how much that was just colorful language but I believe it earned them a ban.
Would people experience some kind of whiplash with a sudden loss of availability? The measure could backfire as the only porn left online would be on sites explicitly operating outside of the law.
This all being said, there is still a lot of pornography online that is more healthy for the consumer. It’s still impossible to know if it is ethically produced. But the fairly mundane stuff probably isn’t warping anyone’s mind.
I'm not French so you can feel free to ignore my post. I also fully admit to having watched porn back in the day.
There are a few things from the summary that stick out:
Can anyone elaborate on this? Is this encompassing things like BDSM, choking/slapping, play rape? Is there a concern of slippery-slope? If these are illegal to tape will they become illegal to do between 2 consenting adults?
Would this allow someone who is paid to perform a scene then later change their mind and keep their pay? At the very least they would need to give back their pay + costs?
I personally think this is the best way forward--education.
Banning things don't work on the internet, especially if they're legal in other countries. Besides sex work being one of the oldest professions on the planet, porn is big enough of an industry that it is a massive driver in adoption of technology (from VHS to home internet).
Once again, I don't know the ins and outs of laws in France but I do consider porn a freedom of expression issue thing here in the US. If you are truly into freedom of speech/expression that means defending speech/expression that you may not like or find personaly distasteful (which, ironically, also leads to the "Paradox of Tolerance".
This also stuck out to me. Is it saying that BDSM etc. is fundamentally nonconsensual even if the proper procedures are followed? Or is it saying that if you consent to it, it's no longer an act of violence? I don't see much reason to interpret it as the latter except for possibly esoteric legal reasons.
I'm hesitant to comment on what is
potentiallya sensitive topic - especially since there are very real problems with the porn industry and violence against women. Perhaps its simply that the english article doesn't cover the french report well - I can't verify since I don't speak french.But this seems like poor methodology and poor definitions to make a predisposed point.
So it sounds like they simply reviewed the end-product videos? Its my understanding that a lot of the violence against women in the porn industry is going to be behind the scenes - human trafficking, forcing women into contracts, pushing for harder stuff while already on set, etc. Simply watching the end result is a poor way to tell if it is a scene where the actors/actresses are simply acting or if there are more sinister things going on. Is that someone's hand lightly around someone's throat to look like choking - or are they actually being choked?
Some of these things are not like the others. Some of these seem relatively tame and not dangerous/violent (bukkake and non-rape gangbang for example). Others like suffocation/gagging/electro play can be done safely with preparation and consent. Torture isn't defined in the english article - but could range from light S&M to more extreme BDSM stuff or consensual non-consent. Tricky, but still can be done with proper understanding, preparation, and consent.
I'll note that one of the conclusions of the article "stresses the importance of sex education in schools to combat the risk of young people being educated primarily by watching porn." - which is definitely a great response to this. Better sex education might also cover the dangers and consequences of some of the more extreme acts, as well as the proper ways to communicate, prepare, and consent for tricky things - both of which are usually absent in typical porn videos.
Perhaps this is simply a translation error - but wouldn't the "exploitation of the human body" apply to basically all work? We're exploiting the physical labor of the human body for many blue collar jobs. We're exploiting the creativity and mental labor for many white collar jobs. Again, perhaps its the translation...maybe its referring to something more specific - for example focusing on exploitation via human trafficking or conditions forcing people to sign contracts that don't want to sign just to put food on the table.
Others have pointed out the oddness of this line, so I won't rehash it.
This is another tricky one. There is definitely a big concern with child pornography. Children should never be involved or harmed by the making of porn. However it sounds like they are talking about "step-sibling" videos - which is a different can of worms. Is an over-the-top silly porn scenario really encouraging incest? Perhaps they are referring to other videos or worse videos, but the majority of "step-sibling" porn is simply regular porn with a thin veneer of plot thrown in. My guess is that it is popular because people who don't care about step-siblings can simply watch the sex act and ignore the "plot" - and they can add on the taboo for those interested in something more.
That said, the conclusions and recommendations seem to be fairly reasonable.
There are probably some privacy concerns, technical difficulties, and other discussions to be had here - especially when it comes to implementation details. But overall a reasonable goal.
This is probably aimed at "revenge porn" or other videos where the the victim did not consent to videos/pictures of them being made public. As mentioned elsewhere - this gets tricky with contracts and "professional" porn. There plenty of discussion to be had on exploitation, trafficking, unwilling participants. But also whether or not a completely professional/consensual porn video could be pulled based on this. Having porn videos out there could certainly impact career or dating prospects...but it also would mean a valid production stops making money and could affect the income of other actors/actresses/assistants/etc - definitely a bit of a tricky topic.
As stated earlier - education is almost always a good thing, and a good way to help differentiate "real" sex from "porn" sex.
To me, this feels like when a bunch of older politicians are attempting to make laws on technology they don't understand. There are real problems and concerns there - but it doesn't feel like they did the background research or involved experts.
I know the mods made the decision that this is fine in movies but shouldn’t this be in health or misc or tech or news.