Tucker posed this hypothetical: "What if there was a candidate who wanted to put the owners of Mindgeek [Pornhub's parent company] in prison? Would younger Americans support that?" Nick's answer was yes.
Almost everyone here has agreed at this point that age verification laws are meant to be an attack on the freedom of the internet, and that any effect on porn is beside the point. But for people who actually support the stated intent of the laws, it seems like legislating against the porn suppliers may be a way to effectively attack the industry without opening up another avenue of control.
What would this look like? In my opinion, fines and jail time for producers in the US and foreign websites that allow access to the US. As we've seen with social media in Europe, government pressure is enough to make companies change course.
The natural objection is that a VPN is really easy to use. That's true, but it's a barrier that would most likely severely curtail the usage of porn in pubescent children. The effect still might be substantial on adults as well. Also, it would effectively destroy the Onlyfans market since only a few determined women are going to jump through hoops to do illegal amateur porn for some company in Bulgaria.
Another objection I've seen is that women are the root cause of the breakdown of relationships, and that men need an outlet in porn to cope with that. The first part is obviously true but I don't think the second part follows. If massive numbers of young men are coping with the feminization of society through porn, that means it's a control mechanism to prevent them from getting angry enough to revolt. If we're going to make any progress against women's rights, men need to feel an acute sense of what they are missing.
There is also the possibility of knock-on effects on anime, movies, TV, etc. The only thing I really care about there is anime, but I think the collateral damage could be effectively controlled.
That's a pretty funny thought, but it's kind of what's happening already, and it sucks. I could see a scenario where it might even be favorable for Onlyfans to be a majority Chinese/Korean/Israeli operation (it's already fundamentally Israeli). The 80/20 rule is also for the most desirable men, not the most damaged women.
It is an absurd idea, and to be very clear about what I mean, the problem is not male expectations. Almost 100% of the current situation is that men can't fulfill female expectations to be both stable providers and roguish werewolf rapists at the same time, or compete with hundreds of guaranteed matches on dating apps. Or that the current dating app culture is basically the same thing as a job interview, complete with sterile HR language, and has explicitly been compared as such by women who have convinced themselves they are the new masters of the universe because the government mandated that they get useless high-paying jobs to accomplish basically nothing.
Basically women have irrational standards that men cannot meet, but they're women so they won't understand that without an intervention.
Banning porn is not to recalibrate male expectations. It's to take away the substitute for getting a woman, which is porn. With no women and no porn there will be a large class of angry, seething men that will want to overthrow the system. Pretty chaotic, but historically speaking the actions of angry young men is the consequence for society treating them like garbage, and the longer that is prevented with basically free heroin (porn) the worse it will get.