Texas Age Verification Bill Would Plaster Health Warnings On Porn Sites
from the bull-shit-pseudoscience dept
Just when we didn’t think the state of Texas could get any more wacko on tech policy, this latest bill really suggests otherwise. House Bill 1181 is an age verification measure that is similar to what we’ve seen in the state legislatures across other red U.S. states.
You have an age verification proposal that is similar to Louisiana Act 440 and Utah’s Senate Bill 287 – all porn sites with users from these states must have a government ID or a credit card in order to verify age in order to watch age-restricted content. But, the bill itself takes an extreme turn in the guise of protecting the general public’s health.
House Bill 1181, introduced by a team of anti-porn legislators, would require porn sites to post public health warnings from the Texas Health and Human Services Commission as if it were a pack of cigarettes or a bottle of wine. I briefly reviewed the bill and found it presented as if it were a measure to counter youth electronic cigarette usage through punitive means or to add a public health tinge to a crisis that isn’t necessarily related to public health or even a crisis in some circles. In fact, Texas – among other states – has always been at the center of the movement to make porn consumption a health crisis.
HB 1181 would issue public health warnings including claims that porn use “increases the demand for prostitution, child exploitation, and child pornography.” Claims that are included in the health warnings laid out by the bill suggest that porn use is “potentially biologically addictive, is proven to harm human brain development, desensitizes brain reward circuits, increases conditioned responses, and weakens brain function.” Or, that exposure to porn “is associated with low self-esteem and body image eating disorders, impaired brain development, and other emotional and mental illnesses.” Note how they use the term “exposure” as if a person watching porn was exposed to a real disease.
Such warnings follow talking points laid out by resolutions passed by state legislatures classifying pornography as a public health crisis. In 2019, Governing interviewed GOP Utah state Sen. Todd Weiler – the first state lawmaker in the union to introduce model legislation recognizing pornography as a risk to public health. The model legislation is the brainchild of an anti-porn group, the National Center on Sexual Exploitation, and is by no means an original campaign to try and prohibit otherwise protected forms of speech.
In this report, Weiler lauded the center despite the fact that he was essentially signing onto a right-wing movement that’s been debunked legally and, importantly, scientifically.
There is no such thing as porn addiction. The American Psychiatric Association and the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fifth Edition (DSM-V) point out that pornography addiction isn’t an official diagnosis recognized by the major medical and scientific communities at large. Rather, any problem with pornography consumption can be attributed to compulsive sexual behavior or something similar to that. There is a clear difference between compulsion and addiction as determined by urge versus need.
Neuroscientists Nicole Prause and Vaughn Steele have produced peer-reviewed studies on porn addiction. A study published in the journal Biological Psychology several years ago reaffirmed previous findings that porn and sex addiction are not real by any means.
“The statements on science effects are just false, they have never been shown,” said Prause in an email to me. She elaborated that the “science” referred to in House Bill 1181 is “completely fabricated.” “APA and WHO both rejected sex and pornography as addictions because they are not. The bill flies in the face of scientific consensus.”
Michael McGrady is a journalist and commentator focusing on the tech side of the online porn business, among other things
Filed Under: hb 1181, health warnings, moral panic, porn, porn addiction, texas
Comments on “Texas Age Verification Bill Would Plaster Health Warnings On Porn Sites”
But those statements on cigarette/alcohol packages are, to my knowledge, generally true. And I imagine that’s important when the companies challenge those laws.
Is that true? And if so, is it more harmful than sexual intercourse? That statement seems dubious. As do the others, but at least they don’t claim “proof”.
A quote here says “The statements on science effects are just false”, but that appears to relate only to the statements regarding addiction.
Re:
The final three paragraphs answer all the questions you’re raising.
Re: Re:
I’m not seeing it. They appear to, but on closer reading, they’re only talking about the “addiction” claim. Not, for example, “associated with low self-esteem”; nor “increases conditioned responses” (that claim very likely being true).
Re: Re: Re:
Porn in associated with low self-esteem in so much that people with low self-esteem escape to porn regularly as they don’t feel good enough about themselves to pursue a real world mate.
Porn increases conditioned responses in much the same way as walking increases conditioned responses. If you do something over and over again it eases the neuron pathways in the brain, makes it easier to think about. Much in the same way as the “Gaming leads to violence” scare, this is just words used to scare people who don’t understand the science.
Excessive porn use only leads to more things if the reason behind the excessive porn use isn’t addressed. It’s a symptom, not a cause.
Those campaigners do not enjoy sex, so they are trying to ensure that nobody else will either.
Re:
Nice deflection coomer
This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.
When did we last see this?
Oh, yes, now I remember…1939, Nazi Germany
Re:
Oh, really? Could you provide a citation?
Or are you just exercising your “fascism” fixation?
Re: Re:
Lebensborn homes of the Nazi Germany 1930’s and 1940’s should do, don’t you think? Or we can add a side of abortions in the concentration camps – when they bothered. Mostly they simply killed them all at once. Going forward, there was Idi Amin DaDa’s policies, and Muammar Gaddafi’s was, perhaps, strange enough to revolt Caligula.
Re: Re: Re:
Quite ironic, c9nsidering it’s Valis we’re talking about.
Oh, and Valis, if you are reading this, how’s shilling for an ACTUAL TOTALITARIAN STATE IN THE FORM OF MODERN CHINA?
Re: Not even close.
The last time we saw this was last month in Utah, if you don’t want to go all the way back to the 1996 Communications Decency Act (all of which was struck down except for §230 in Reno v. ACLU).
Get a clue.
… I would imagine watching porn would be (very very roughtly) like vicariously engaging in sex (or sexual acts).
Pretty sure that’s almost the definition. If they are saying that is problematic, then its also problematical to engage in it directly[1]. Thus[2] I’m pretty sure the people proposing the bill are in dire need of assistance. Maybe psychological. However I’m not a doctor in any medical/health field. It’s easy to see there’s probably, but someone else will have to help them with it.
[1] Also being a voyager would probably be approximately as problematic as watching porn.
[2] I hope nobody actually needs me to explain how I reached the conclusion. If you do then there’s probably a gulf in experiences between us that communication is impossible.
Surgeon Generals Warning: The viewing of porn may lead to happiness, relaxation, sticky hands, and better sleep. Please view responsibly and consult your physician if you are not experiencing these reactions.
The most prominent warning needs to be; Warning, living in Texas causes severe brain damage.
When will mandatory warning labels be required for politicians.
Good heavens!
If simply watching pornography increases the demand for child porn and prostitution, imagine what actually having s. e. x. does? Why haven’t they put restrictions on that, I wonder?
Re:
Having sex creates children. If we outlawed sex, there would be no more children and child porn would be solved. Outlaw sex!
Re: Re:
But if we outlawed sex and there were no more children, then there would be no children to protect, and we must protect the children!
Such a dilemma!
Sure, you see blind guys with hairy palms every day. Well, unless you ARE one, that is.
Most entertaining thing in the past porn sites.
Was the adverts for Booze and Condom’s. SOMETHING that is forbidden on TV and cable.
I can remember when they were on TV.
Love people that dont want to see REAL life, or is that REAL humans? Dick Van dyke never slept with his wife. Never saw 2 Adults in a bed, unless you went to Adult movies, AT THE THEATER.
If that's the game they want to play...
Warning: Not watching porn has been scientifically proven to lead to serious mental conditions including but not limited to paranoid delusions, heightened stress, delusions of grandeur, obsessing over the genitals of complete strangers and what they do with them, extreme fixation on what people do in the comfort of their own bedrooms and wanting to drop kick a puppy really badly on a regular basis.
Just Say No to drop kicking puppies and load up your favorite porn of choice today.
This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.
Porn addiction not real?
Porn addiction not real? Hogwash! I’m living proof that porn addiction is real. Addiction is a compulsive behavior and the urge I feel every day to view pornography is compulsive. How is that not addiction? Frankly, the fucking psychologists who wrote the DSM V don’t know what the hell they’re talking about. That’s okay. Fifty years ago, they classified homosexuality as being a psychologically deviant behavior. No more. They’ll eventually come to their senses in time.
Furthermore, pornography is the most horrible thing the mind of man has ever produced. It’s worse than the creation of nuclear weapons in terms of destructiveness to humanity.
Having said all this, I do not support these crazy bills being sponsored in legislatures all over the country. To be forced by the government to identify yourself, even with the smallest piece of information such as your age, in order to engage in protected First Amendment speech is unconstitutional any way you slice it. I am not a lawyer but I once forced myself to study First Amendment case law when I felt it necessary to take the California government to task regarding its restrictions on my First Amendment rights and go to court “per se”. I doubt this legislation will survive Supreme Court scrutiny, even a court as conservative as this one. (BTW, I won my case handily.)
Re:
what in the blood-soaked hell…
Re:
… honestly can’t tell if Poe or not, enjoy your funny vote either way I guess?
Re:
It’s one thing to say that pathways to addiction are complex, NoFapper. It’s another to claim that the entire field have no idea what they’re doing, and by extension, the sciences.
Besides, the real threats to the DSMV are insurance companies and China, in that fucking order.
Granted, porn has its issues (contracts not being honored, the spectre of human trafficking, the obvious issues, it possibly being a front for organized crime, worker safety…), but for some of them, pornstar unions exist.
Holy fucking shit. Unions for the people who work in porn. Might wanna actually read up on those issues before you talk about porn.
r/Malicious_Complance?
“WARNING: THE STATE OF TEXAS MAY BE HAZARDOUS TO YOUR PERSONAL INFORMATION. PLEASE FILL OUT THE FORM BELOW. THIS INFORMATION WILL BE SENT TO THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF TEXAS FOR NANNY-STATE RECORD KEEPING.
THIS FORM REQUIRED BY THE STATE ATTORNEY GENERAL TO COLLECT INFORMATION ABOUT ALL USERS BECAUSE TEXAS DOES NOT TRUST THAT YOU ARE A LAW ABIDING CITIZEN.
PLEASE TYPE IN A CREDIT CARD NUMBER BELOW SO THE ATTORNEY GENERAL AND GOVERNOR OF TEXAS UNDERSTAND YOU ARE OLD ENOUGH TO ACCESS THIS MATERIAL.
HERE IS A LINK TO A TX VOTER REGISTRATION PAGE IF YOU BELIEVE YOU HAVE REACHED THIS PAGE IN ERROR.”
Porn is obviously dangerous, because it can lead to watching videos of dancing.
I don’t see how they’d have jurisdiction
Cigarettes are physically located in the state they’re sold in. A porn site without any servers or CDN nodes physically located in Texas doesn’t have that physical nexus.
Imagine a blue state passing similar laws about gun advertisements, and expecting Texas companies to comply – how would Texas react?
Backwards much?
Wow: porn is the most inclusive of all media.
Every body type and gender projection is well represented. For better and worse, every age is represented. No other form of media can spotlight and starlight the way porn does.
I could see porn sites relocating outside of the United States
US law cannot be enforced on foreign web sites
I did hearof one of the porn sites using an .onion address where your activities cannot be traced
When I ran my online radio station I had an onion address as well as the main address
This was so people could tune in from.woek and be undetected
There are Tor entry proxies which let you use Tor with having to install the software. You just change the proxy settings to that and you can jump onto Tor
Contrary to what some in the computer security newsgroups used to say I was not committing any crime offering the ability to come in via a dark web onion address and neither were the users coming in from work via the .onion address I offered
It was not a criminal offence to use Tor in the office to use the dark web option to bypass filtering to tune in my oibe radio station in any of Canada’s 14 provinces, America’s 50 states or Mexico’s 31 states.
The people whining about children not being able to view pornography trying to act like they care about the safety of children. Cope coomer