6 ms·

Another win for the extremist anti-porn group Exodus Cry. They are just using a small handful of cases slipping through the cracks to make it look like PH is do

Another win for the extremist anti-porn group Exodus Cry. They are just using a small handful of cases slipping through the cracks to make it look like PH is doing nothing to moderate this content. Their end goal was never to protect children, their goal is to eliminate all pornography from the internet.

sashenka 4y ago
- ravenstine 4y ago
  Maybe Visa should also suspend card payments for the theaters and streaming platforms that enable major Hollywood studios to sweep the jailable crimes of their producers under the rug. But muh Marvel movies! /s
- malfist 4y ago
  You know if porn bothers you....you could just not browse it. Leave it for the rest of us. It doesn't impact you.
  - throwfh80h82 4y ago
    That's really not true. We live in a society and interact with each other, we're not isolated, atomized robots (despite Silicon Valley's best efforts).
    - knaik94 4y ago
      You can put up a internet porn filter for yourself.
      - deleted 4y ago
        [deleted]
    - nerdjon 4y ago
      How does legal consenting porn, sex work, or similar impact you if you are not consuming it yourself? It has no more of an impact on you than if someone else spends their nights playing video games. If you have a problem with it existing that is your fault and not the fault of other people. But that is an internalized problem for you.
      - throwfh80h82 4y ago
        I didn't say I have a problem with it existing personally, but rather that the statement isn't true. It's not personal. All the things you're asserting are also not true, you're just stating your opinion as fact. It's unclear to me how you'd think the norms and cultural practices of a society don't affect someone living in that society, unless you believe everyone is completely atomized. If everyone is a junkie, and I'm sober, my life is still markedly different living amongst junkies. Just like if a devout Muslim moves from Saudi Arabia to San Francisco their life will be different, even if they maintain their Muslim practices. If everyone spends their nights playing video games, they'll be tired all day, talking about video games all the time, and I may have difficulty making friends since I'm not into video games and prefer to spend my nights sleeping.
  - Dma54rhs 4y ago
    You live in a society with other people. Unless you're full libertarian it's common sense that we make laws to protect the society from harm like public vaccination programs against diseases etc.
- GekkePrutser 4y ago
  I understand you may not like porn but why not let other people enjoy it?
  - donkarma 4y ago
    - tedunangst 4y ago
      Other people already are allowed to enjoy cigarettes?
      - missedthecue 4y ago
        It is made more difficult to enjoy a cigarette every year. Taxes go up and up, smoking permissible places become fewer ans fewer, fines get higher and higher...
        csomar 4y ago
        I mean if you want to smoke, smoke. Smoking and hand-smoking other people is not a good idea, however. The higher taxes, I agree. But that's affecting everything and it's everywhere (inflation is also a tax). There should be special tax on smoking where the proceeds go to smoking-related healthcare; however.
        missedthecue 4y ago
        At least in my country, there is a smoking specific tax with proceeds that go to smoking related research and healthcare
    - oarsinsync 4y ago
      I’d like it more if people were welcome to enjoy cigarettes in the same way that they’re welcome to enjoy pornography: not in public places. Alas, smoking in public places is still permitted, despite the fact that it has negative impact on others in those public places.
- NHQ 4y ago
  im having trouble viewing this comment
- donkarma 4y ago
  Agreed, awful for the mind
  - AlexandrB 4y ago
    So is religion, but I wouldn't advocate for banning it.
    - LatteLazy 4y ago
      Perhaps it's time to start regulating it though...
    - jmprspret 4y ago
      I see this retort far too often without any actual knowledge whether the person is religious. To be against porn one does not have to be religious.
      - amanaplanacanal 4y ago
        I think the point stands regardless of whether the person is religious or not.
        tomuli38 4y ago
        jmprspret 4y ago
        Yes that's fair
      - tomuli38 4y ago
- npteljes 4y ago
  Why is that?
VictorPath 4y ago
In 1910, Emma Goldman wrote "The Traffic in Women" about how the supposed efforts against sex traffic in the day had nothing to do with helping women, and were all done for other purposes. 112 years later nothing has changed from what she described - fundamentalist churches in supposed campaigns against sex trafficking, yellow journalists printing sensationalist stories - 112 years and nothing has changed whatsoever.
- BasilPH 4y ago
  Totally agree. SESTA-FOSTA is just the current instalment of this pattern.
atlasunshrugged 4y ago
I think this time it was a win for activist investment given Bill Ackman's investment and tweet thread https://twitter.com/billackman/status/1553510104200351746?s=21&t=u4HydDiKAUlxi8NqEuM7hg https://twitter.com/billackman/status/1553510104200351746?s=...
sandworm101 4y ago
>> goal is to eliminate all pornography from the internet. Funny story: Pre-9/11 the Bush administration was talking about cracking down on internet pornography. The Christian right was saying the same things they had about magazines in decades past. So some industry people got together and founded websites dedicated to the most horrible pornography possible, in full expectation that they would be attacked. They were going to be champions of the first amendment in the same was that Hustler magazine had been a generation previously. But then 9/11. The expected crackdown didn't materialize. Those websites are still around, having evolved into some of the biggest names in the biz.
- albany2 4y ago
- error54 4y ago
  source?
  - sandworm101 4y ago
    https://www.wired.com/2001/01/bush-to-porn-run-for-cover/ https://www.wired.com/2001/01/bush-to-porn-run-for-cover/ 06-Jan, 2001. "The conservative queen of syndicated outrage, who happens to be George W. Bush's pick to head the Department of Labor, has repeatedly warned of what she describes as the perils of sexually explicit material online and urged government action against it. If the Senate gives her the nod, Chavez will not have any day-to-day responsibilities dealing with online speech. But her nomination signals the approach that a Bush presidency is likely to take toward sexually explicit material online." For the rest of the story, you will have to dig into the history of certain websites that I shall not link to here on HN.
- Dma54rhs 4y ago
  Right now a lot of socialist parties in Europe want to shut down porn and sex work under the name of feminism as well. As an example Spain where they are also in power. Thinking only about American Christians is short sighted, there's a lot of pressure from people who want nothing to do with Christianity but see the industry as exploitive and anti woman.
iso1631 4y ago
> Their end goal was never to protect children, their goal is to eliminate all pornography from the internet. That's never going to happen. All it would do is drive regular porn to the same corners of the internet where snuff films and child porn live, and nobody wants that as that drives more people to those areas.
- techdragon 4y ago
  They probably know they can’t realistically drive it off the net, so they are likely well aware that it would end up in those corners… and with my cynicism hat firmly on I think that the organised puritanical groups know this and are hoping they can then use the association with more unpleasant things in those corners of the internet to push even harder on their puritanical agendas.
atlanta4 4y ago
nerdjon 4y ago
I am very worried about where this is going. We already have enough issues with puritanical people pushing their views on everyone else, but I always felt at least some mild level of safety that I could still mostly do what I want if I was in certain states/cities. I do realize that Visa was in a really hard place at this point and they likely had to make this decision, so I don't exactly blame Visa here. But it worries me that it could even get to this point that Visa is somehow responsible and I see they are not trying to go over Discover.

sashenka 4y ago

ravenstine 4y ago
Maybe Visa should also suspend card payments for the theaters and streaming platforms that enable major Hollywood studios to sweep the jailable crimes of their producers under the rug. But muh Marvel movies! /s
malfist 4y ago
You know if porn bothers you....you could just not browse it. Leave it for the rest of us. It doesn't impact you.
- throwfh80h82 4y ago
  That's really not true. We live in a society and interact with each other, we're not isolated, atomized robots (despite Silicon Valley's best efforts).
  - knaik94 4y ago
    You can put up a internet porn filter for yourself.
    - deleted 4y ago
      [deleted]
  - nerdjon 4y ago
    How does legal consenting porn, sex work, or similar impact you if you are not consuming it yourself? It has no more of an impact on you than if someone else spends their nights playing video games. If you have a problem with it existing that is your fault and not the fault of other people. But that is an internalized problem for you.
    - throwfh80h82 4y ago
      I didn't say I have a problem with it existing personally, but rather that the statement isn't true. It's not personal. All the things you're asserting are also not true, you're just stating your opinion as fact. It's unclear to me how you'd think the norms and cultural practices of a society don't affect someone living in that society, unless you believe everyone is completely atomized. If everyone is a junkie, and I'm sober, my life is still markedly different living amongst junkies. Just like if a devout Muslim moves from Saudi Arabia to San Francisco their life will be different, even if they maintain their Muslim practices. If everyone spends their nights playing video games, they'll be tired all day, talking about video games all the time, and I may have difficulty making friends since I'm not into video games and prefer to spend my nights sleeping.
- Dma54rhs 4y ago
  You live in a society with other people. Unless you're full libertarian it's common sense that we make laws to protect the society from harm like public vaccination programs against diseases etc.
GekkePrutser 4y ago
I understand you may not like porn but why not let other people enjoy it?
- donkarma 4y ago
  - tedunangst 4y ago
    Other people already are allowed to enjoy cigarettes?
    - missedthecue 4y ago
      It is made more difficult to enjoy a cigarette every year. Taxes go up and up, smoking permissible places become fewer ans fewer, fines get higher and higher...
      - csomar 4y ago
        I mean if you want to smoke, smoke. Smoking and hand-smoking other people is not a good idea, however. The higher taxes, I agree. But that's affecting everything and it's everywhere (inflation is also a tax). There should be special tax on smoking where the proceeds go to smoking-related healthcare; however.
        missedthecue 4y ago
        At least in my country, there is a smoking specific tax with proceeds that go to smoking related research and healthcare
  - oarsinsync 4y ago
    I’d like it more if people were welcome to enjoy cigarettes in the same way that they’re welcome to enjoy pornography: not in public places. Alas, smoking in public places is still permitted, despite the fact that it has negative impact on others in those public places.
NHQ 4y ago
im having trouble viewing this comment
donkarma 4y ago
Agreed, awful for the mind
- AlexandrB 4y ago
  So is religion, but I wouldn't advocate for banning it.
  - LatteLazy 4y ago
    Perhaps it's time to start regulating it though...
  - jmprspret 4y ago
    I see this retort far too often without any actual knowledge whether the person is religious. To be against porn one does not have to be religious.
    - amanaplanacanal 4y ago
      I think the point stands regardless of whether the person is religious or not.
      - tomuli38 4y ago
      - jmprspret 4y ago
        Yes that's fair
    - tomuli38 4y ago
npteljes 4y ago
Why is that?

VictorPath 4y ago

In 1910, Emma Goldman wrote "The Traffic in Women" about how the supposed efforts against sex traffic in the day had nothing to do with helping women, and were all done for other purposes. 112 years later nothing has changed from what she described - fundamentalist churches in supposed campaigns against sex trafficking, yellow journalists printing sensationalist stories - 112 years and nothing has changed whatsoever.

BasilPH 4y ago
Totally agree. SESTA-FOSTA is just the current instalment of this pattern.

atlasunshrugged 4y ago

I think this time it was a win for activist investment given Bill Ackman's investment and tweet thread https://twitter.com/billackman/status/1553510104200351746?s=21&t=u4HydDiKAUlxi8NqEuM7hg https://twitter.com/billackman/status/1553510104200351746?s=...

sandworm101 4y ago

>> goal is to eliminate all pornography from the internet. Funny story: Pre-9/11 the Bush administration was talking about cracking down on internet pornography. The Christian right was saying the same things they had about magazines in decades past. So some industry people got together and founded websites dedicated to the most horrible pornography possible, in full expectation that they would be attacked. They were going to be champions of the first amendment in the same was that Hustler magazine had been a generation previously. But then 9/11. The expected crackdown didn't materialize. Those websites are still around, having evolved into some of the biggest names in the biz.

albany2 4y ago
error54 4y ago
source?
- sandworm101 4y ago
  https://www.wired.com/2001/01/bush-to-porn-run-for-cover/ https://www.wired.com/2001/01/bush-to-porn-run-for-cover/ 06-Jan, 2001. "The conservative queen of syndicated outrage, who happens to be George W. Bush's pick to head the Department of Labor, has repeatedly warned of what she describes as the perils of sexually explicit material online and urged government action against it. If the Senate gives her the nod, Chavez will not have any day-to-day responsibilities dealing with online speech. But her nomination signals the approach that a Bush presidency is likely to take toward sexually explicit material online." For the rest of the story, you will have to dig into the history of certain websites that I shall not link to here on HN.
Dma54rhs 4y ago
Right now a lot of socialist parties in Europe want to shut down porn and sex work under the name of feminism as well. As an example Spain where they are also in power. Thinking only about American Christians is short sighted, there's a lot of pressure from people who want nothing to do with Christianity but see the industry as exploitive and anti woman.

iso1631 4y ago

> Their end goal was never to protect children, their goal is to eliminate all pornography from the internet. That's never going to happen. All it would do is drive regular porn to the same corners of the internet where snuff films and child porn live, and nobody wants that as that drives more people to those areas.

techdragon 4y ago
They probably know they can’t realistically drive it off the net, so they are likely well aware that it would end up in those corners… and with my cynicism hat firmly on I think that the organised puritanical groups know this and are hoping they can then use the association with more unpleasant things in those corners of the internet to push even harder on their puritanical agendas.

atlanta4 4y ago

nerdjon 4y ago

I am very worried about where this is going. We already have enough issues with puritanical people pushing their views on everyone else, but I always felt at least some mild level of safety that I could still mostly do what I want if I was in certain states/cities. I do realize that Visa was in a really hard place at this point and they likely had to make this decision, so I don't exactly blame Visa here. But it worries me that it could even get to this point that Visa is somehow responsible and I see they are not trying to go over Discover.