Just an open question since we keep getting situations like this where the industry effectively admits it is incapable and unwilling to act to stop the worst elements of the industry (child exploitation, human trafficking, forced involvement, rape etc) that it's probably best to just ban the industry together.
Notice though I said using real people, with AI slowly getting better and CGI improving, why do we need real people to make porn? Just have something animated to be realistic enough as I don't give a fuck about pixels or a drawing. Have whatever kink you want, have entire porn snuff films whatever as no REAL people are getting harmed in the making if it. The worst that can happen is stressed artists trying to meet deadlines.
This might also affect adult streamers which is just a bonus as it'll be like a re-run of Projekt Melody when she became more popular since she did more than just strip and stare blankly at the camera till donations came in. A lot of porn or porn in all but name streaming (which I include Twitch on that) get money off just simply being pretty and that's it, denying that as an easy route will probably cause a shift in a lot of media.
I wouldn't advocate a FULL ban as no matter your feeling on it generally, it is a release so going full puritan invites a backlash and probably just forces more men to deal with insufferable feminist women. But just making that release fully fictional based than support an industry that sweeps horrific practices under the rug for money is probably for the best.
Lol uh... what? You're way off the reservation arguing for the utility of porn consumption.
I'm not arguing for the utility of it. I'm arguing against the utility of corruptible institutions.
Man is virtuous or damned by his own choices, but groups are never virtuous.
You just talked about the masses of blueballed young men if we succeeded in driving porn underground. That's a utility conversation.
Porn/twitch thots/OF/IG is an existential problem, but not only that, it is a top down problem fostered by elites. Top down problems require top down solutions.
The difference between you and me is that you believe you would be a virtuous leader. I think you wouldn't. I think I wouldn't. I don't think anyone is a virtuous leader. I think the very phrase is a contradiction.
An elite composed of you might be less bad than the elite we have, but that's not enough for me to rally to your banner. It merely means I'll complain less about your reign than theirs should you triumph.
The stuff about elites in my original post was mostly wargaming what would happen if elite orientation suddenly flipped to conservative. It's not practical or even possible to suddenly replace elites, but there are more options for top down action. Mostly, a groundswell of people need to realize that we aren't going to solve the problem by placing responsibility on parents or "raising awareness."
This has recently played out in Canada.
Suicide is a personal moral decision if ever there was one. For a long time government inserted itself and made suicide "illegal", for all the enforcement that's possible.
Recently they reversed the law and now offer assisted suicide. Within months, it became apparent that they're actually encouraging suicide, because they're completely unable to male moral decisions, only to enforce man made laws.
It's not that either decision was better than the other, rather the government has no business taking either position.
No business taking either position? Lol, it's either/or. If you just remove the laws about suicide then you get everything you have now in Canada and then some.