Reversing The Catastrophic Social Experiment With On-Demand Pornography

Alex Coppen - 19 Sep 2024

Pornography isn't just a social menace, it is a biological weapon which short-circuits the brain's reward system. Freedom is only virtuous if it enables human flourishing, and it is now beyond doubt from the West's three-decade, wide-scale experiment with this former backroom titillation it is responsible for a metastasizing disease which even cripples children. If 95% of the population compulsively gambled, binged psychoactives, or engaged in savagery five days a week, - or were provided free unlimited alcohol, weapons, or heroin on-demand -, the existential threat could be never be tolerated for simple reasons of survival. Even our enemies know this.

The average age of exposure to hardcore pornography is twelve years old. A quarter of those children are under ten years old. The BBFC says this is at age seven. The data is absolutely staggering and horrific: https://www.barna.com/the-porn-phenomenon/ .

Porn production is a trillion-dollar North American disease serving an intractable global human problem, which is distributed by companies in England and Canada. To reverse it, a Herculean political effort is required to overturn the domestic legal framework enabling its spread, with a continental treaty, mandatory payment, law enforcement, and advertiser sanctions. We do far more about tobacco without banning it. There is no plausible argument the Founding Fathers of the US would have accepted the Bill of Rights being misused to protect prostitution or obscenity in the name of liberal ideals.

An Old Problem With A Specific Name

Before the 20th century - perhaps even the Sexual Revolution of the Sixties - the fire of sexuality was voluntarily secured within the fireplace of marriage. Sex outside it (i.e. fornication) was stigmatised as taboo for multiple reasons: the spread of serious disease; the community-wide responsibility of unexpected pregnancy in an age of high maternal childbirth mortality; the confusion and conflict of unknown paternity; the trauma to children of divorce through adultery; to name but a few. Put simply, the consequences were unbelievably severe, and these safety guardrails served a perilously important role in helping us function successfully.

The concept of sexual activity outside marriage was foreign and alien. "Sexual immorality" almost exclusively referred to the promiscuity associated with prostitution. Sex within marriage was moral; sex outside was not. Only prostitutes and their customers engaged in an acceptable behaviour in unacceptable ways.

Sexual behaviours such as sodomy, tribadism, incest, beastiality, paedophilia, bodily fluid fetish, and so on, were considered to be outside the realm of any sexual morality at all, as a form of mental illness.

The word "pornography" has its origins in ancient Greek. It is derived from two Greek words:

"pornē" (πόρνη), which means "prostitute" or "female captive"
"graphein" (γράφειν), which means "to write" or "to record"

When combined, these form "pornographos" (πορνογράφος), which literally translates to "writing about prostitutes." The word entered the English language around the 1840s but initially referred to written descriptions of prostitutes and their activities.

In the technological 21st century, it now refers to still/motion imagery of prostitutes and their activities.

Can We Reliably Categorise What Is Art?

So much has been said on this subject and its moving goalposts, but the answer has always been known. It doesn't matter what "changing cultural attitudes" evolve, we all know what pornography is. Yes, they might have had a different view in the 1950s, but the data doesn't lie: everyone knows where the line is.

That said, human sexuality is normal, healthy, and beautiful. Art depicts ordinary life, and sexuality is a part of life. The question is what is art and what is obscene?

We can answer this easily with music: it consists of a) rhythm, b) melody, and c) harmony. If it lacks any of these components, it is noise. We don't ask the question of whether it consists of an acceptable "message" or whether it is popular.

Can we define different depictions of sexuality?

Educational

Information on topics like sexual anatomy, contraception, safe sex practices, and healthy sexual relationships containing depictions of sexuality where the purpose is to inform or educate, not to arouse; devoid of emotional or erotic framing, presented factually and clinically, often with a neutral tone. Documentaries, instructional videos, sex education courses (e.g., The Joy of Sex, educational films in health classes).

Suggestive

Media that alludes to or hints at sexual themes without showing explicit sexual acts, such as sexual innuendos, provocative clothing, flirtation, and sexual tension between characters, often used to increase viewer engagement or add depth to character relationships,;to build tension or intrigue without crossing into explicit territory. TV shows (e.g., Game of Thrones before its more explicit scenes), mainstream films (e.g., Fatal Attraction), music videos, and advertising.

Explicit

Depictions of sexual activity within a broader story or artistic context which are not the sole focus of the work, but used to deepen character development, advance the plot, or explore themes like intimacy, power, or emotional vulnerability. Mainstream or arthouse films (e.g., Blue Is the Warmest Color, Eyes Wide Shut), some literature, and certain high-budget TV series.

Erotic

Artistic or literary representations of sexuality that focus on sensuality, emotional intimacy, or the beauty of the human body to evoke an emotional response or engage the audience’s imagination; the aesthetic or emotional aspects of sexuality (desire, passion, and beauty), rather than explicit or graphic depictions of sex itself. Literature (e.g., Lady Chatterley's Lover), art (e.g., classical nudes), and film (e.g., In the Realm of the Senses).

Avant-Garde

Artistic depictions of explicit sexual acts aiming to push the boundaries of conventional norms in both form and content, where the purpose is artistic experimentation or social critique; challenging societal perceptions of sex and sexuality, often using explicit imagery to provoke thought, explore taboos, serving to critique or question norms surrounding sexuality. Experimental films, visual art installations, performance art (e.g., works by Marina Abramović or Andy Warhol’s Blue Movie).

Soft Pornography

Highly-suggestive material which usually avoids showing genitalia, penetration, or other explicit sexual acts while still depicting sexual themes, nudity, and sexualised behaviour with implied acts; seeking to arouse or titillate viewers while staying within more restricted boundaries. Films (e.g., Emmanuelle), magazines, and strip bars.

<--------------------------- (This is the line and we all know it) --------------------------->

Hardcore Pornography

The most explicit and graphic depictions of sexual acts, focusing on close-ups of genitalia and penetrative sex or extreme forms of sexual activity, designed only to elicit sexual arousal; close-up shots of sexual acts, with an emphasis on penetrative sex, ejaculation, and other explicit bodily secretions, for physical gratification, with little to no dramatic or editorial context.

Fetish/Obscenity

Depiction of activities or objects that are not part of mainstream sexual practices, or are considered "alternative" sexuality; from mildly suggestive to extremely explicit or illegal, focusing on power, fetish objects, bodily secretions, taboos, or niche sexual practices.

Sexual depictions in art are definable as an objective standard by:

Who the audience is;
What its purpose is, and;
The effect it has;
What a reasonable person would consider obscene.

Does it defile, or does it edify?

In other words, we have a perfectly valid and workable system for determining whether something is artistically legitimate or a form of exploring/engaging the reality of human sexuality.

Where Has It Come From?

Sweden was an early producer in the 1960s, known for more sexually liberal attitudes. Denmark, particularly Copenhagen, was a major centre in the 1960s and 1970s after it became the first country to legalise pornography in 1969. Germany became a significant producer from the 1970s onward. New York City was also significant, especially in the 1970s and early 1980s.

A valuable reference set is:

Williams, L. (1999). Hard Core: Power, Pleasure, and the "Frenzy of the Visible". University of California Press: https://www.ucpress.edu/books/hard-core/paper
Schaefer, E. (2014). "Dirty Little Secrets: Scholars, Archivists, and Dirty Movies". The Moving Image, 14(2), 44-57: https://muse.jhu.edu/pub/23/article/190409/pdf
Tarrant, S. (2016). The Pornography Industry: What Everyone Needs to Know. Oxford University Press: https://global.oup.com/academic/product/the-pornography-industry-9780190205126

By the late 1990s, it was estimated that 80-90% of pornographic films worldwide were produced in the Los Angeles area. In 2006, 200 production companies employed about 1,200 performers. Particularly the San Fernando Valley, became known as the "Porn Valley" starting in the 1970s. Recent legislation in California, such as mandatory condom use laws, led some production companies to relocate. Nevada, particularly Las Vegas, is also becoming a prominent location for filming due to fewer regulations.

By the early 2000s, Hungary was estimated to be producing up to 300 films per month and the Japanese adult video industry was estimated to produce about 30,000 titles annually. In the mid-2000s, Germany was reported to have around 60-80 production companies, and the global pornography industry was estimated to be worth around $97 billion, with the industry producing approximately 13,000 adult videos per year. In the U.S. alone, estimates suggest that pornography generates between $10-$12 billion annually (according to IBISWorld, the US industry has grown from about $600 million in revenue in 2018 to over $1.1 billion in revenue in 2023, which is substantially lower). It is estimated that Pornhub alone generates over $100 million per year in advertising revenue with 115 million daily visits in 2021.

The porn industry’s annual revenue is more than the NFL, NBA, and MLB combined. It is also more than the combined revenues of ABC, CBS, and NBC.

Hungary, Romania, and the Czech Republic have emerged as significant players. Countries like Brazil and Colombia also have burgeoning pornography industries, catering both to domestic and international markets. These locations offer lower production costs and access to performers who work for smaller fees than in Western countries.

Now, the producers use AirBnB: https://www.nbclosangeles.com/news/local/porn-industry-uses-airbnb-rental-houses-for-filming/2086679/

Who Controls The Distribution Of The Disease?

Two companies are massively dominant in online pornography. These two corporations control almost all online pornography you've ever heard of, and they are so massive they close to dwarfing Hollywood's reach. Much of the information has only been discovered through lawsuit paperwork.

95% of all online pornography has its head offices at 7777 Décarie Blvd. Montréal and 107 Cheapside, London. 1000 employees work in this former building, and 2000+ work for the latter, 80% in censoring content.

They both use a bewildering laundering structure of front companies and opaque corporate structuring to obscure their ownership. And almost all of them are the repetitive subjects of rumour they are simply loss-leading fronts for money laundering by organised crime gangs. Streaming only loses money.

Aylo (Manwin, Mindgeek)

The beginnings of Mindgeek lie in 2006, around the same time as the smartphone. Stephane Manos (Quebecois), Ouissam Youssef (Quebecois), Matt Keezer (Canadian?), and Fabian Thylmann (German) started to consolidate different online video sites, of which one was Pornhub. After 4 years, they were bought under the umbrella company "Manwin".

In 2011, the company raised US$362 million in financing from 125 secret investors, including Fortress Investment Group, JPMorgan Chase, and Cornell University.

After three years of endless acquisitions, two Syrian brothers from Quebec, Feras and Mark Antoon, had joined as directors, as well as David Marmorstein Tassillo. Thylmann was charged with tax evasion and the company was rebranded as "Mindgeek" in 2013.

By 2020, the beneficial owner was revealed in the Financial Times as Austrian businessman Bernard Bergemar, most probably due to its corporate inversion in Canadian tax treaty state, Luxembourg.

Several of the group's offices are located in tax-friendly jurisdictions, as can be seen on the group's website, such as Luxembourg, Ireland and Cyprus, while the bulk of its workforce is in Quebec. The enterprise also profits from several tens of millions of a subsidiary located in Curacao. The headquarters of its subsidiary MindGeek USA is in Delaware, a state recognized for the’opacity of its financial system. MindGeek has registered a series of companies in Luxembourg between 2010 and 2013, demonstrate documents of the Register of Commerce and companies of this small European country. According to a recent article in the Irish newspaper Sunday Business Post, based on official figures, MG Billing Ireland Ltd. recorded revenues of 353 million euros (521 million CAN) (LA PRESSE+)

In other words, the organisation which controls this network of sites is heavily indebted and essentially operates as a massive global tax avoidance system.

In 2020, the New York Times published an article titled "The Children of Pornhub". Just afterwards, Visa and Mastercard banned the company's the advertising arm. In 2023, Netflix released a documentary, and it was taken over Canadian private equity firm Ethical Capital Partners for rebranding as "Aylo".

OnlyFans (Fenix International)

The story of this online prostitution disaster is thankfully shorter, and can be traced back to 2016. An English family from Essex: Barclays banker father (Guy Stokely) gave a £10,000 loan to his two sons (Tim, 37 and Thomas Stokely) who were running websites where perverts could order custom videos from glamour models ("Customs4U"), similar to Babestation or Cameo. They had an utterly unoriginal idea: let's provide a subscription platform for models ("influencers") to use to funnel people across from their hot Instagram pics. And become prostitutes.

Prostitutes took them up on it. And they did rather well.

Within two years, they met an investor in Florida. A 39 year-old porn baron who had graduated in economics from Northwestern University, Leonid Radvinsky, who bought 75% of a new parent company Fenix International Limited he co-owned with dad. There's little way to describe Radvinsky other than... scum. In the 90s, he ran a network of ad affiliate sites under his company "Cybertania" selling lists of hacked password for porn sites. He went on to launch "MyFreeCams" while being sued by Amazon and Microsoft for spamming.

As Rolling Stone put it:

In the wake of the coronavirus epidemic, the content-sharing platform has exploded in popularity, seeing a 75 percent increase in sign-ups in recent weeks and garnering 170,000 new users per day. It was the subject of a shoutout from none other than Beyoncé in her remix of Megan thee Stallion’s “Savage,” and influencers like Caroline Calloway have flocked to the platform as a way to monetize their content by selling directly to their fan base. (May 18, 2020)

In other words, women on Instagram and TikTok who lost their human-facing jobs during Covid took to online prostitution to pay the bills.

Obviously, this company was also charged with tax evasion in 2020. Tim stepped down in 2021 to be replaced by LA-born Indian businesswoman Amrapali Gan for two years, before she was then replaced by female Irish lawyer, Keily Blair.

According to The TechReport, 98% of the content is porn. 70% of 120M users are 29 year-old straight white men, 90% are married, on a $42k average salary. Of the 2M "creators" (prostitutes), 40% are female and earn $180/month ($2k/year) from an average $17 subscription price. The top 1% of them earn 33% of the platform's total revenue, while the top 10% earn 73%. The most popular account, "gem101", makes over $29.4 million annually from 102,800 subscribers paying $29 per month.

How Bad The Problem Really Is

There are endless breakdowns of pornography usage, everywhere. It's hard to get a broad picture because statistics aren't published on a subject so taboo. However, the news isn't just bad, it's horrendous.

As just a small section of the general negative effects of pornography usage:

Relationship unhappiness: A study in Archives of Sexual Behavior (2017) found that higher levels of pornography consumption were correlated with lower levels of satisfaction in committed relationships.
Brain changes: A 2014 study published in JAMA Psychiatry found that frequent pornography users exhibited less activation in the reward system when viewing sexual images, suggesting that tolerance to explicit content may develop over time.
Relationship breakdown: A study published in Journal of Social and Personal Relationships (2019) showed that increased pornography use by one partner is often linked to decreased relationship quality and emotional intimacy. Partners of individuals who consume large amounts of pornography often report feelings of betrayal, mistrust, or emotional neglect .
Body dysmorphia: According to a study in Sex Roles (2018), women who regularly consumed pornography were more likely to experience body dissatisfaction. They were also more prone to comparing themselves with the actors they viewed, which could negatively affect their self-esteem,
Escalation: A 2016 study in Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking highlighted this pattern, finding that frequent users often reported seeking out more extreme content after repeated exposure.

And in terms of the statistics, take a big, deep breath. Let's start with factoids.

84% of men and 54% of women aged 18-30 reported having used pornography within the past year (Journal of Sexual Medicine, 2020).
The median frequency of use for men in their twenties is about 3-5 times per week, while women in the same age range tend to use it far less frequently, often less than once a week (various).
Younger single individuals were more likely to consume pornography regularly than those in long-term relationships (Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking, 2020).
Boys often encounter pornography for the first time at around age 12, often unintentionally, while girls tend to be exposed around age 13-14 (Addiction Research & Theory, 2018).
Individuals exposed to pornography before age 14 were more likely to report compulsive use and higher levels of sexual risk-taking in adulthood (Journal of Adolescence, 2016).
70% and 90% of young men report using pornography, compared to 30%-60% of young women. Men not only consume pornography more often but are also more likely to use it alone, while women are more likely to view it in a relational or educational context (The Journal of Sex Research, 2019).
Men often report using pornography for arousal, stress relief, and as a regular part of their sexual routine, while women are more likely to use it for curiosity, relationship enhancement, or sexual education (Sexualities, 2020).
University-educated women were less likely to report regular pornography use compared to those with less formal education (Sexual Addiction & Compulsivity, 2017).
Religiosity was inversely correlated with frequency of pornography use, but religious users were more likely to feel distressed about their consumption (Archives of Sexual Behavior, 2013).
Individuals from lower-income households reported higher frequencies of pornography consumption (Journal of Sex Research, 2015).
In more urbanised areas, pornography use tends to be higher, potentially due to greater access to the internet and different social norms. Conversely, rural areas, especially those with stronger religious or cultural taboos surrounding pornography, report lower levels of use (various).

And now, the real horror. All of these are fact-checked.

15% of teen teenagers said they first saw online pornography at age 10 or younger.
1% of youth pastors and 14% of pastors admit they currently struggle with using porn. 87% of pastors who use porn feel a great sense of shame about it. 55% of pastors who use porn say they live in constant fear of being discovered. (Barna)
12% of youth pastors and 5% of pastors say they are addicted to porn.
70% of Christian youth pastors report that they have had at least one teen come to them for help in dealing with pornography in the past 12 months. 59% of pastors said that married men seek their help for porn use.
68% of church-going men and over 50% of pastors view porn on a regular basis. Of young Christian adults 18-24 years old, 76% actively search for porn.
34% of internet users have been exposed to unwanted pornographic content through ads, pop-up ads, misdirected links, or emails.
71% of adults, 85% of teens and young adults who have viewed pornography did so using online videos.
62% of all porn use happens on cell phones & smartphones.
84% of American adults believe child pornography use is morally wrong and should be deemed illegal. 16% don't.
In a 2022 survey, 60% of US adults reported having a habit of watching pornography. NIH 2020: "91.5% of men and 60.2% of women herein reported having consumed pornography in the past month".
1% of men and 3% of women in the US are addicted to pornography.
60% of children 11-13 who had seen pornography said their viewing of pornography was unintentional. Children described feeling “grossed out” and “confused”, particularly those who had seen pornography when they were under the age of 10.
57% of young adults ages 18-25 use porn monthly or more often.
Teenage girls and young women are significantly more likely to actively seek out porn than women over age 25.
More than half of women 25 and under ever seek out porn (56% versus 27% among women 25-plus) and one-third seek it out at least monthly (33% versus just 12% among older men).
Men are four times more likely than women to report having watched pornography in the past month (44 percent vs. 11 percent).
Men in their 30s and 40s report the most frequent use of pornography.
People who were exposed to pornography at a younger age are more likely to need longer stimulation and more sexual stimuli to reach orgasm.
41% of young people who knew about pornography agreed that watching it made people less respectful of the opposite sex.
62% of teens and young adults have received a sexually explicit image and 41% have sent one.
A significant relationship also exists among teens between frequent pornography use and feelings of loneliness, including major depression.
47% of families in the United States reported that pornography is a problem in their home.
Men who report having watched pornography recently—that is, in the past 24 hours—report the highest rates of loneliness. 60% of men who watched pornography in the past 24 hours say they have felt lonely or isolated or felt unhappy about their appearance at least once in the past week.
55% of married men and 25% of married women say they watch porn at least once a month.
Pornography use increases adultery by more than 300%.
40 percent of people identified as “sex addicts” lose their spouses, 58 percent suffer considerable financial losses, and about 33% lose their jobs.
56% of divorce cases involve one party having an “obsessive interest” in pornographic websites.
Only 13% of self-identified Christian women say they never watch porn—87% of Christian women have watched porn.
There were 69,425 cases of child pornography offenders in the U.S. in 2018.
There are around 42 million porn websites, which totals around 370 million pages of porn.

Breaking The Reward System

Possibly the most authoritative resource on how pornography affects the brain is "Your Brain On Porn": https://www.yourbrainonporn.com/miscellaneous-resources/start-here-evolution-has-not-prepared-your-brain-for-todays-porn/

Pornography is a superstimulus: an exaggerated version of a stimulus to which there is an existing response tendency which elicits a response more strongly than for which it evolved.

A strawberry is a natural stimulus for sweetness. A candy with artificial strawberry flavour and added sugar is a superstimulus - it's sweeter and more intense than what's found in nature. Real-life stories are natural stimuli for our brains. Movies and video games, with their heightened drama and non-stop action, act as superstimuli for them. Face-to-face interaction is a natural stimulus for social connection. Social media, with its constant notifications and likes, acts as a superstimulus for social approval.

A full list of superstimuli:

Processed foods: High in sugar, salt, and fat, often more appealing than natural foods
Pornography: Exaggerated and readily available sexual content
Social media: Constant social validation and information flow
Video games: Provide rapid, intense rewards and stimulation
Slot machines and gambling: Offer intermittent rewards more intensely than natural risk-taking
Reality TV shows: Heightened drama and conflict compared to everyday life
Fast-paced action movies: More intense and frequent thrills than real-life excitement
Alcohol and drugs: Produce stronger rewards than natural pleasures
Highly caffeinated energy drinks: More stimulating than natural sources of caffeine
Artificial sweeteners: Often sweeter than natural sugars
Excessive shopping/materialism: Exploits acquisition instincts more than necessary for survival
Bright, flashing lights and loud sounds in advertisements: More attention-grabbing than natural stimuli
Photoshopped images: Present idealized versions of human appearance
Virtual reality experiences: Can be more immersive than real-world experiences
Refined carbohydrates: Provide quicker, more intense energy hit than complex carbs
Sensationalized news: Often more dramatic and attention-grabbing than typical events
Hyper-realistic video game graphics: More visually striking than real-world scenes
Intensely flavored snacks: Stronger taste than natural foods
Endless streaming content: More engrossing than traditional storytelling
Extreme sports or thrill rides: Produce stronger adrenaline rushes than natural dangers

With that in mind, the mating instinct is the strongest:

Men do a lot of things to obtain sex as a reward. Historically, men have engaged in various behaviours and endeavours (e.g., displaying resources, social status, or desirable traits) to attract mates. These efforts often required significant investment of time and energy.
Pornography short-circuits this by providing the reward without the effort. It provides sexual stimulation and release without the need for courtship, relationship-building, or other effortful behaviours typically associated with obtaining sex. There's no reason to build a skyscraper to get laid when you can have the same effect in two mins via your laptop.
Pornography triggers a dopamine ("novelty") release similar to actual sexual encounters, providing a "shortcut" to sexual gratification (or rejection). This instant reward could reduces motivation for pursuing real-world sexual relationships.
Watching pornography can cause a short-term increase in testosterone levels (Oyegbile & Marler, 2005) but long-term baseline levels are reduced (Landripet & Štulhofer, 2015). Ejaculation has been shown to cause a temporary decrease in testosterone levels.
Frequent uses interferes with normal vasopressin function in social and romantic contexts (Pfaus et al., 2012).
Desensitization of the oxytocin system affects bonding in real-world relationships (Love et al., 2015) as its release occurs without actual social interaction (Young, 2009).

Let's break it down into simple steps, with accompanying science.

Pornography consumption triggers the release of dopamine - the "novelty" and "desire to seek" neurotransmitter - in the brain's reward circuit, particularly in the nucleus accumbens. This dopamine release is similar to that seen in other rewarding behaviours and substances. Over time, this can lead to neuroplastic changes in the brain.

Hilton, D. L. (2013). Pornography addiction – a supranormal stimulus considered in the context of neuroplasticity. Socioaffective Neuroscience & Psychology, 3(1), 20767.

Regular use leads to desensitisation, where one requires more intense or novel (extreme) stimuli to achieve the same level of arousal or satisfaction. This phenomenon is similar to tolerance observed in alcohol and drug addiction.

Love, T., Laier, C., Brand, M., Hatch, L., & Hajela, R. (2015). Neuroscience of Internet Pornography Addiction: A Review and Update. Behavioral Sciences, 5(3), 388-433.

Individuals with problematic pornography use exhibit structural and functional brain differences compared to controls. These changes are particularly evident in regions associated with reward processing and executive function.

Kühn, S., & Gallinat, J. (2014). Brain Structure and Functional Connectivity Associated With Pornography Consumption: The Brain on Porn. JAMA Psychiatry, 71(7), 827-834.

This then interferes with romantic relationships and pair bonding due to altered expectations or reduced satisfaction with real-world partners.

Zimbardo, P., & Wilson, G. (2017). Man Disconnected: How technology has sabotaged what it means to be male. Rider.

YBOP describes it in more colloquial terms:

What happens when you drop a male rat into a cage with a receptive female rat? First, you see a frenzy of copulation. Then, progressively, the male tires of that particular female. Even if she wants more, he has had enough. However, replace the original female with a fresh one, and the male immediately revives and gallantly struggles to fertilize her. You can repeat this process with fresh females until he is completely wiped out.

This is called the Coolidge effect—the automatic response to novel mates. Interestingly, men ejaculate more motile sperm and they do it more quickly when they view a novel porn star.

And to define the Coolidge Effect (1958) from Leftipedia:

The Coolidge effect is a biological phenomenon seen in animals, whereby males exhibit renewed sexual interest whenever a new female is introduced, even after sex with prior but still available sexual partners. It can be attributed to an increase in sexual responsiveness, and a shortening of the sexual refractory period. The evolutionary benefit to this phenomenon is that a male can fertilize multiple females. The male may be reinvigorated repeatedly for successful insemination of multiple females. This type of mating system can be referred to as polygyny, where one male has multiple female mates, but each female mates with only one or a few males. It has been demonstrated to occur in humans across cultures and in both sexes.

In essence, this sexual superstimulus triggers and overpowers biological mating instincts and their reward systems in a way we are not evolved to handle, at all. And as a result, it disrupts our ability to initiate or maintain pair-bonding to the point it no longer functions at all. Which is quite beneficial if you want an enemy's population to collapse.

Or as YBOP puts it:

A teen’s brain is at its peak of dopamine production and neuroplasticity, making it highly vulnerable to addiction and sexual conditioning. With multiple tabs open and clicking for hours, you can experience more novel sex partners every ten minutes than our hunter-gatherer ancestors experienced in a lifetime.

Prostitute Performers: A Death Sentence

If one imagines it's bad among viewers, the picture is far worse for the actresses or "performers". The dark secret to this industry is so quietly stuffed under stigma, it's hard to even quantify the damage.

There is no plausible argument whatsoever for the feminist idea prostitution or pornography is any form of "empowerment". Neither is there any excuse for insanely stupid ideas like this: https://cashmeremag.com/intimacy-coordinator-porn-safety-516/

The link between them was clearly outlined by the world's most infamous porn star, Linda Lovelace, in her 1990 autobiography "Ordeal" about her experience filming "Deep Throat":

My initiation into prostitution was a gang rape by five men, arranged by Mr. Traynor. It was the turning point in my life. He threatened to shoot me with the pistol if I didn’t go through with it. [Remainder omitted on account of how harrowing it is].

MacKinnon, Catherine A. (2006). Are Women Human?: And Other International Dialogues. Cambridge, MA.

70-80% of performers in adult content are women (CDC, SAMHSA).
About 20-30% of performers report entering the industry before age 20 (Ibid).
Roughly 50-60% of performers leave the industry within one year (Ibid).
Financial need was one of the most commonly reported reasons for entering the adult industry. Performers view pornography as a way to quickly earn significant income, especially when compared to other low-wage jobs (Journal of Sex Research, 2011).
Performers often have lower levels of formal education compared to the general population and reported a slightly higher dropout rate from high school and college (Griffith et al. 2012).
A significant number reported coming from households with divorced parents or unstable family environments. This may have contributed to early exposure to sex, a lack of parental supervision, or a desire for financial independence at a young age (Archives of Sexual Behavior 2013).
Higher rates of childhood trauma or abuse (sexual, emotional, or physical) among women in the adult film industry (2017 meta-analysis).
Performers were more likely to report symptoms of anxiety and depression than women in the general population (Psychology of Women Quarterly, 2016).
50-75% of performers reporting the use of alcohol or drugs to cope with the stress of the industry, or to manage the stigma and emotional impact of their work (NIMH, Journal of Substance Use, 2015).
Despite regular STI testing, performers in the adult film industry face higher annual STI rates, ranging from 15-25%, significantly above the general population (CDC).
Only 10-15% of performers in the industry report earning a stable, livable income solely from adult film work. 60-70% take on additional jobs (Ibid).
40-60% of performers report difficulties in maintaining long-term relationships and 0-30% report experiencing coercion or exploitation (SAMHSA).

Suicide and drug overdose plagues this demographic more than rock n' roll stars. Seven died in five months: https://nypost.com/2018/01/23/why-porn-stars-are-dying-at-an-alarming-rate/ .

Jon Dough: hanged himself at 43 after being sexually abused as a kid.
Kelly Jean Van Dyke: hanged herself after resuming her porn career.
Megan Leigh: shot herself in the head at 26.
Shauna Grant: shot herself in the head at 20.
Shannon Michelle Wilsey: shot herself at 23 after being facially deformed in a car accident.
Mary Millington: killed herself at 33 with booze and pills after succumbing to depression.
August Ames (Mercedes Grabowski): killed herself in December 2017 after facing intense online harassment over a tweet in which she expressed concern about working with male performers who had previously done gay porn.
Yuri Luv: Died from a suspected drug overdose a week after Ames's death.
Amber Rayne (Meghan Wren): died in April 2016 from an accidental drug overdose.
Yurizan Beltran: died aged 31 of an accidental drug overdose.
Olivia Lua: found dead in a West Hollywood rehab centre in January 2018 after battling an addiction to prescription drugs.
Shyla Stylez (Amanda Friedland): died in November 2017 at the age of 35. While the exact cause of her death was not disclosed, it was widely believed to be related to substance abuse or health issues exacerbated by her work in the industry.
Felicia Tang: killed by her boyfriend in a domestic violence incident in 2009.
Dakota Skye (Lauren Scott): found dead in 2021 at the age of 27 after a history of substance abuse and mental health issues.
Olivia Nova: lay dead in her bedroom for 12 hours before being was discovered, after doctors warned her to quit a serious drinking addiction.
Anastasia Knight: killed herself in August 2020 at the age of 20 after struggling with depression and anxiety.
Jessi Gold: killed herself in 2008 at the age of 25 after struggling with depression and substance abuse.
Bradford Thomas Wagner: hanged himself at 37 in a police after being charged with raping five women.
Karen Lancaume: dead at 32 from pills.
Tera Wray: dead at 33 after quitting drugs and being widowed.
Sophia Leone: Found unresponsive in her Miami apartment on March 1, 2024, at the age of 26.
Emily Willis: Died from an overdose at the age of 25.
Dahlia Sky: found with a fatal gunshot wound to her head at 31.
Sophie Anderson: died of a GHB overdose in 2023 aged 36.
Jesse Jane: died of an accidental fentanyl and cocaine overdose at 43.
Thaina Fields: found dead at her home in Trujillo at 24 after she made allegations about abuse in the sex industry. Her cause of death has not been revealed.
Kagney Linn Karter: dead at 36 from shooting herself in the mouth with a shotgun.

Then there is the rape problem.

Adult film star Ron Jeremy has been indicted on more than 30 sexual assault counts involving 21 victims dating back more than two decades. James Deen was arrested over 9 allegations of abuse and unnecessarily rough sex during scenes.

The list is staggeringly long. There is no established regulation or methodology or recourse for any actress who is raped.

If you're feeling brave, read what these prostitutes have to say (warning: if you're female, take a second to think about where you are and whether you want to read this right now as it is deeply upsetting): https://www.collectiveshout.org/porn_stars_speak_out .

This, from Presley and Read, brings the list above into clearer focus:

Jenna Presley: “It was torture for seven years. I was miserable, I was lonely. I eventually turned to drugs and alcohol…to numb my pain and get me through…and attempted suicide. I knew I wanted out, but I didn’t know how to get out.”

Next time someone tells you she is an adult performer, take a second and think before you rush in. You have no idea how many days away she is from being discovered in a hotel room.

Multiple studies highlight that a significant number of women in prostitution have been sexually exploited in their youth, with 68% to 80% of women in prostitution reporting histories of sexual abuse.

A Bureau of Justice Statistics report from 2016 found that 86% of incarcerated women reported a history of sexual violence, including childhood sexual abuse and rape as adults.

Maybe you, the viewer, are the same kind of person as them, the producer.

The Jewish Issue

Unfortunately, you simply can't get around a difficult, ugly fact with this business, and it was popularised by Jewish convert Luke Ford in his 2004 book "XXX-Communicated: A Rebel Without a Shul" which investigated the production of porn in San Fernando Valley.

In 2016, the Israeli Knesset passed a bill that forces the Internet Service Providers to remove porn websites throughout the country.

Jewish law, particularly Orthodox Halakha, places a strong emphasis on tzniut, or modesty, especially in matters of sexuality and public behaviour. This opposes the creation and consumption of pornography, as it is seen as a violation of modesty and public decency. The display of nudity and explicit sexual acts is blatantly contrary to Jewish laws governing sexual ethics, such as the prohibition on exposing private sexual conduct publicly.

Many rabbinic authorities have explicitly stated that pornography is forbidden under Jewish law because it leads to inappropriate thoughts (referred to as hirhurim, or improper sexual thoughts) and violates standards of modesty.It regulates sexual behaviour within the confines of marriage, with a focus on the sanctity of sex for purposes of intimacy and procreation. Public depictions of sex, as seen in pornography, are seen as a violation of the sacredness of these acts.

One of the six Constant Mitzvos is "do not stray after your heart and after your eyes" (Bamidbar-Numbers 15:39). It includes not viewing pornography. Also the commandment against prostitution is clear: Do not defile your daughter by making her a prostitute, or the land will be filled with prostitution and wickedness (Vayikra-Leviticus 19:29).

Three facts are extremely difficult to process:

The early movie industry (1910s) was a seedy business, and was dominated by Eastern European Jews on the US east coast who were excluded from other business areas.
The Western pornography industry - and its legal framework - in traditionally Christian countries has developed from the jurisprudence involving multiple Jewish defendants, such as Roth, Sturman, Freeman, Goldstein, Hirsch. In the UK, Richard Desmond.
The most famous names in porn are Jewish (Ron Jeremy, James Deen, Nina Hartley, Seymore Butts, Harry Reems, Jamie Gillis, Herschel Savage, Mark Stevens, Ed Powers, Joanna Angel, Jennifer White, Sarah Vandella, etc), see: https://www.timesofisrael.com/7-of-the-most-famous-jews-in-porn/

In 2004, Jewish professor Nathan Abrams described his idea of "Triple Exthnics" in The
Jewish Quarterly:

A story little told is that of Jews in Hollywood's seedier cousin, the adult film industry. Perhaps we'd prefer that the 'triple exthnics' didn't exist, but there's no getting away from the fact that secular Jews played (and still continue to play) a disproportionate role throughout the adult film industry in America. Jewish involvement in pornography has a long history in the United States, as Jews have helped transform a fringe subculture into what has become a primary constituent of Americana. These are the 'true blue' Jews. Jewish activity in the porn industry divides into two (sometimes overlapping) groups: pornographers and performers. Though Jews make up only two per cent of the American population, they have been prominent in pornography. In the postwar era, America's most notorious pornographer was Reuben Sturman, the 'Walt Disney of Porn'. According to the US Department of Justice, throughout the 1970s Sturman controlled most of the pornography circulating in the country. . It was said that Sturman did not simply control the adult-entertainment industry; he was the industry. Many are entirely secular, Jews in name only. Sturman, however, identified as a Jew - he was a generous donator to Jewish charities.
https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/pdf/10.1080/0449010X.2004.10706874

The Founder of "Screw", Alvin Goldstein, America's most notorious pornographic magazine founded in 1968, gave a much more graphic account of his own ideological motivations. He personally saw pornography as a way to challenge or "defile" traditional Christian culture in America, as a form of anti-Establishment rebellion:

The only reason that Jews are in pornography is that we think that Christ sucks. Catholicism sucks. We don't believe in authoritarianism. Pornography thus becomes a way of defiling Christian culture and, as it penetrates to the very heart of the American mainstream (and is no doubt consumed by those very same WASPs), its subversive character becomes more charged.

(As written to Luke Ford, who made a lot of people very angry so it needs to be taken with a pinch of salt).

Goldstein was clearly a grandiose narcissist, and a malicious one, aiming to provoke and offend by claiming he was speaking for all Jews.

He was a nasty piece of work: he offered a reward for assassinating Iran's leader, genuinely hated women, was criminally convicted of harassment and shoplifting; then lost it all to live out his days homeless or on the generosity of others.

However, as the Jewish journals assert and the Jewish producers and performers agree, you won't find many Muslims, Hindus, or Han Chinese in pornography. There are plenty of Japanese and Christians involved in its distribution (Mindgeek and OnlyFans are Canadian and British, respectively). However, despite it being prohibited and stigmatised in Jewish communities, a noticeable and significant proportion of the industry has developed from secular Jewish involvement in its production. All of this is food for anti-Semitism, again despite Orthodox and State opposition.

Can The US De-Legalise Hardcore Pornography?

It's a long and complex road, related to the 1st and 4th Amendments. Obscenity is not speech protected under the 1st Amendment, but the definition of it is what has transformed over the years.

Pornographers and distributors of hardcore pornography rely on the "serious artistic or literary value" defense, arguing their material is not solely intended for prurient interests. Pornography producers frame their works as "adult entertainment" or "art," emphasizing freedom of expression and often winning cases or avoiding prosecution altogether.

Another legal strategy involves portraying sexually explicit material as educational or instructional. For example, during the 1970s, pornographic films like Deep Throat and The Devil in Miss Jones were marketed as having "artistic" value.

Roth v. United States (1957)

Samuel Roth, an adult bookseller in New York City, was convicted under a federal statute criminalising the sending of "obscene, lewd, lascivious or filthy" materials through the mail for advertising and selling a publication called American Aphrodite containing literary erotica and nude photography.

The US Supreme Court ruled that obscene material was not protected under the First Amendment. The decision established the first test for determining whether material was obscene:

1. Appeals to prurient interests (excessive interest in sexual matters),
2. Is patently offensive by community standards,
3. Lacks redeeming social value.

While this case confirmed that obscenity was not protected, it also laid the groundwork for a debate over what exactly constitutes obscenity. The "redeeming social value" clause allowed for some leeway in how sexually explicit material was judged.

See also: United States v. One Book Called "Ulysses" (1933) and Memoirs v. Massachusetts (1966)

Case: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roth_v._United_States

Stanley v. Georgia (1969)

The home of Robert Eli Stanley, a suspected bookmaker, was searched by police with a federal warrant to seize betting paraphernalia. They instead seized three reels of pornographic material from a desk drawer in an upstairs bedroom, and charged him with the possession of obscene materials.

The Supreme Court ruled that private possession of obscene material could not be criminalised. This landmark case made it clear that while distributing obscenity might be illegal, individuals had a "constitutional right" to possess such material in the privacy of their own homes. The case established an implied right to pornography, but not an absolute right.

Case: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stanley_v._Georgia

United States v. Reidel (1971)

In 1970, Norman Reidel advertised, sold, and mailed copies of his $1 booklet, The True Facts about Imported Pornography, to adult-identified customers. He was prosecuted under three counts of violating §1461.

The Supreme Court ruled that the distribution of obscene material between consenting adults could not be banned outright, as this would infringe on First Amendment rights. The Court held that, while obscenity was not protected speech, the government could not prevent adults from accessing it.

See also: United States v. Thirty-seven Photographs, 402 U.S. 363 (1971

Case: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Reidel

Miller v. California (1973)

In 1971, Marvin Miller, owner of a California mail-order business specialising in pornographic films and books, mass-mailed a brochure advertising products that graphically depicted sexual activity between men and women. The owner of a restaurant in Newport Beach opened the envelope and called the police. He was arrested and charged with violating California Penal Code 311.2(a).

This case established a three-part test, known as the Miller Test, that is still used today:

Whether the average person, applying contemporary community standards, would find that the work appeals to the prurient interest.
Whether the work depicts or describes, in a patently offensive way, sexual conduct specifically defined by state law.
Whether the work, taken as a whole, lacks serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value (SLAPS test).

The Miller ruling gave local communities the ability to set their own standards for what was considered obscene, leading to varied interpretations across the country. Hardcore pornography, as a result, was often found to have some form of "artistic" or "entertainment" value, especially when judged by the more lenient standards of larger urban areas. The SLAPS test has been particularly crucial, as it provides a way for pornographic content to argue it has artistic or educational merit.

Case: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Miller_v._California

People v. Freeman (1989)

Harold Freeman, a veteran film director owner of Hollywood Video Production Company (Hollywood Video), was charged with pandering (promoting prostitution, aka "pimping" or procurement of persons "for the purpose of prostitution") under a revised California law for paying actors to engage in sexual acts during the production of a pornographic film ("Caught from Behind, Part II") in Rancho Palos Verdes, a suburb south of Los Angeles. Prosecutors argued, as part of an attempt by California to shut down the secretive pornographic film industry, that paying individuals to have sex on camera was illegal. Freeman’s defense contended that the actors were performing scripted roles and were not engaging in prostitution, as the acts were consensual and part of a legitimate film production. He was convicted and sentenced to probation for each of the five women performers.

The California Supreme Court ruled in favour of Freeman's appeal, differentiating between prostitution (which involves payment for sexual acts in private) and performing sexual acts in the context of a film production, which was protected as a form of artistic expression under the First Amendment. The court reasoned Freeman could only have been lawfully convicted of pandering if he had paid the actors for the purpose of sexually gratifying himself or the actors, and viewed Freeman's conviction as "a somewhat transparent attempt at an 'end run' around the First Amendment and the state obscenity laws."

The ruling was made by Justice Sandra Day O'Connor, the first woman to serve as a U.S. Supreme Court justice.

This ruling essentially legalised the production of hardcore pornography in California.

Under the protection of that court decision, which is only binding in the State of California, the adult film industry began to flourish, particularly in the San Fernando Valley area and Los Angeles. After the Freeman case, adult films could be created by producers there without fear of the "knock at the door" by the local cop, armed with a copy of California’s pandering law, which appeared to prohibit paid sex on camera. Hal Freeman did not live to enjoy the fruits of his case, as he perished from cancer shortly after winning his case.
https://web.archive.org/web/20090217223227/http://firstamendment.com/content_outside_ca.php3

As written on an infamous pornography dealer's FAQ:

State Law: The statutory definition of "pandering" contains the word "prostitution". The statutory definition of "prostitution" contains the word "lewd". The common law definition of "lewd" requires, in relevant part, that the sex act be engaged in "for the purpose of sexual arousal or gratification of the customer or of the prostitute."

The performers testified at trial that they were not having sex for pleasure, they were doing it for the money. Ditto Freeman. Moving up the chain of definition, Freeman -- and all producers -- are not guilty of pandering, and all performers are not guilty of prostitution.

Even if Freeman's actions fell within the definition of "pandering," he could not be prosecuted because his actions would be legal outside of the context of the adult video industry. In other words, a murder on film is illegal because murder is illegal _independent_ of the act of filming and paying the participants; the sex acts filmed by Freeman were considered illegal solely because he filmed and paid the actors. (In oral arguments, the deputy attorney general admitted that charges could not have been brought had the performers not been paid for their sex acts.)

Today, the Freeman case is still good law in California. Pornography production in California has been so normalized that Ron Jeremy picks up his production permits at the same government office that certifies shoots for Disney.

Case: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/People_v._Freeman
Ruling: https://caselaw.findlaw.com/court/us-supreme-court/488/1311.html

See also: New Hampshire v Robert Theriault: https://law.justia.com/cases/new-hampshire/supreme-court/2008/theri131.html

Ashcroft v. Free Speech Coalition (2002)

The Supreme Court struck down portions of the Child Pornography Prevention Act (!!!!!!) that prohibited the distribution of "virtual" child pornography, arguing that these provisions were overly broad and violated free speech.

Case: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ashcroft_v._Free_Speech_Coalition

To ban hardcore pornography in the U.S., several legal challenges would have to be overcome:

Roth could be challenged on the basis the societal harm of pornography outweighs its expressive value.
The Miller decision is the backbone of modern obscenity law. A ban on hardcore pornography would require either a broader definition of obscenity or a reinterpretation of the Miller Test to classify most forms of hardcore pornography as obscene. Specifically, the third prong of the Miller Test (whether the material has serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value) would need to be narrowed or removed. This could involve pushing for a broader interpretation of what appeals to "prurient interest" or what's considered "patently offensive." The goal would be to make it easier to classify pornographic material as legally obscene.
Even if hardcore pornography is banned from public distribution, Stanley v. Georgia would protect individuals' rights to possess such material in their private homes. This ruling would have to be overturned or limited for a complete ban on pornography, including private consumption.
In California, the People v. Freeman decision allows for the legal production of pornography under the First Amendment as long as it is part of a film production. Overturning this case would require challenging the notion that pornography is a form of protected speech under U.S. law. A new case in a different state could argue that paying performers for pornographic acts should be considered prostitution or pandering, potentially making production illegal.
A case could be brought to reconsider the protection of virtual pornography, arguing that it contributes to the sexualisation of minors or encourages harmful behaviour.

The order (Miller, Ashcroft, Freeman, Roth) is important because each case could build on the previous ones, gradually narrowing protections. Starting with Miller v. California is crucial as it sets the current standard for defining obscenity. Each subsequent challenge would aim to further restrict the legal space in which pornography can exist.

The most direct route would be amending the First Amendment to explicitly exclude pornography from free speech protections. This is an extremely high bar, requiring 2/3 approval in both houses of Congress and ratification by 3/4 of state legislatures.

Mexico: The Hidden Problem

If the US and Canada banned pornography outright tomorrow morning, the entire industry would move across the border to Mexico. Probably under the trafficking gangs. It's unlikely it would move further in Central America or the Caribbean (e.g. Bermuda, Bahamian islands, etc) due to the increased cost of transporting performers from the US or Canada. Colombia, Eastern Europe are possible, but the distribution requires the support of the US internet providers and 1st Amendment protections.

If a film makes X and costs Y, the Z (delta, or net) has to be negative. The only way of doing that is to make it impractical enough. Too much time and too much money for too little. This industry is about money, so it needs to cost too much to operate in. The easy solution needs to be cut away for any kind of ban to work.

Pornography is legal in Mexico - an insanely corrupt country -, and its production is not heavily regulated. It has historically been more permissive when it comes to sexually explicit material, and many adult films are already produced there for both local and international markets. This would make it the most attractive destination for production companies looking to avoid a ban. Proximity is often the key factor, with corruption a close second.

Age of consent: The age of consent in Mexico varies by state, ranging from 14 to 18 years old. However, for pornography production, performers must be at least 18 years old nationwide.
Obscenity laws: Mexico does have laws against obscenity, but they are not typically applied to mainstream adult content involving consenting adults.
Child pornography: Production, distribution, and possession of child pornography are strictly illegal and severely punished.
Public decency: There are laws against publicly displaying pornographic material where minors might see it.
Labour laws: Pornography production falls under general labour laws, but there's no specific regulatory framework for the adult industry.
Health and safety: Unlike some countries, Mexico doesn't have specific health and safety regulations for adult film production.
Distribution: While production is legal, there may be restrictions on how and where pornographic material can be sold or distributed.
Organised crime: There are concerns about potential links between pornography production and organized crime, which could fall under broader criminal statutes.
Exploitation and trafficking: Laws against human trafficking and sexual exploitation apply to the adult industry.

The simplest way around a US/Canada ban is a move two miles over the border to Tijuana. It's a simple, practical solution. Performers can take the bus, and launder their cash in the local banks.

To prevent a migration, the USMCA treaty (formerly NAFTA) would likely need to be renegotiated to include provisions regarding the production and distribution of hardcore pornography. It regulates trade and commerce between the three North American countries, and any attempt to regulate or ban a particular industry would need to be addressed under the agreement's trade in services provisions.

Hardcore pornography is considered part of the entertainment industry, and it is currently treated as a legal commodity under the trade agreements between the U.S., Canada, and Mexico. It would need to include specific provisions banning or restricting the trade of sexually explicit content between member states. Such a ban could be included under the "moral rights" clauses, which allow countries to impose restrictions on trade in areas that are considered to be harmful to public morals or safety.

Any discussion of pornography reform has to include Mexico and put them in chapter 1, article 1.

What Is To Be Done?

Pornography is like the drug problem: it's not going away because the sexual drive is endogenous to human beings. Now the industry is established and so insanely profitable, any attempt to remove the incumbents will result in a market void where someone else will take their place. In the US, the obscenity legal argument is a mountain which could take decades to climb. Ban them, and they'll move somewhere else. Block them, and viewers will start using VPNs.

But we simply cannot carry on like this. We cannot afford a century of on-demand brain collapse or pair-bonding handicap.

California managed to reduce their domestic problem by requiring condom use. It was a well-meaning measure which became punitive. Which leaves only one solution while the legal hill is being climbed: clamp the fire hose.

State-wide won't work. It needs to be Federal in scope. And any or all measures need to be designed to resist and survive a slew of inevitable 1A challenges.

Performers On Drugs = Rape

You cannot consent to sexual activity if you're high on heroin to get through it. There are plenty of laws on the books which make intoxication a clear threshold for not being able to presume consent. A few drinks is not the same as ketamine or morphine.

Sexual activity with a severely intoxicated person is rape. As simple as that.

Rape on a porn set needs to be an aggravated crime with an increased sentence. And performers need a neutral, non-industry-funded organisation where they can report abuse without fear of retribution.

They'll claim they cannot monitor performers' personal lives, insist on pre-shoot waivers (signed while sober), and say being open about drug use allows help for the performer instead of driving into secrecy. Mandatory blood testing will fix that. Any other employer can figure out whether someone in the office is sober or not.

Raise The Participation Age

In the US you need to be 21 to drink alcohol. Same for participating in the production of a pornographic film. Your so-called 1A rights aren't violated with an age threshold. If you knowingly hire someone under 21 to perform in a pornographic film, you're off to jail.

Amend Prostitution Laws: "Lewd"

Any road to dealing with hardcore pornography production has to address the Freeman ruling from 1989 and the loophole it created - from within another state possibly, on its journey to the Supreme Court. The appeal was granted on the basis the producer wasn't pandering because he wasn't hiring prostitutes for his own gratification and his actions would otherwise be legal outside the adult industry.

Update the law to include:

a clarification of "lewd" with modern language;
paying for or hiring for the sexual or prurient gratification of a public or private audience, as well as an individual;
making money from the sexual gratification of that audience as well as one's self;
clauses and clarification to ensure the same actions would not be legal outside the production of a film.

This, of course, would raise hell because it would threaten strip clubs, and states like Nevada have legal prostitution. There is a difference between erotic dancing with security nearby, and bodily fluids spraying everywhere.

The producers would go the Uber route and require performers to legal indemnify themselves as "independent contractors" they hire on a B2B basis (which happens already on 1099 NEC as they're not employees), and/or label films "not for public use" (as drug suppliers do). Before moving to Mexico. Good.

The goal here is not to be fair. It is to be effective in inhibiting production.

Force Them To Paywall

Companies like Pornhub endlessly dance around the "age verification" issue on technical grounds, which every software engineer knows is a straw man nonsense. The issue is free access, not verifying the audience.

Force them to require payment to access their sites. It doesn't matter what kind.

They will immediately sue on the basis it's a restriction of their 1st Amendment rights, but to coin an old leftist phrase (finally they said something of use): freedom of speech is not freedom of reach. There is no interruption to their 1A ability to offer filth to customers. They just have to pay $1.00. Good luck when Visa and Mastercard won't help.

Re-post it on Reddit? Oh dear. Now you have to pay for Reddit.

Force Them To Encrypt With DRM

If you paywall, the first thing which will happen is a proliferation of fake credit card logins, and paid-up users sharing/re-posting downloaded content onto Torrent sites and the Dark Web. They'll download it on Pornhub, and re-upload it to Telegram or Pirate Bay.

Next step, make it much harder to re-post. And that means digital rights management on the video streams.

Of course you can get around it (decoding, screen-recording etc), but it's not simple. And it's tedious. Ripping off 100 videos with a screen-recorder or headless browser takes time. It'll increase the value of the goods, but 10 year-old children are rarely going to be found hunting Pirate Bay for video content they have to pay for with Bitcoin.

Go After The Bandwidth Providers

Online porn companies are the largest buyers of internet bandwidth in the world, on aggregate. They cannot survive without it. Their claim to be neutral utility suppliers is a flimsy one, and they know it. Pornhub alone served 4403 petabytes (4,403,000 TB) of data in 2018, which is an insane amount. It's their Achilles Heel. That can't sit in a data centre; it needs Tier 1 backbone. All large global cloud and CDN networks have a policy against hosting porn content already.

Ban the providers from selling network bandwidth to companies planning to use it for hardcore pornography. If you can't ban them, tax it at insane rates.

They'll sue. Naturally, they'll claim they can't filter out specific types of traffic, which again all engineers know is bullshit. It does cost, though. So make it simple: no accepting payments from porn companies or their front organisations, partners etc. Next will be the "we're a utility provider who can't police dirty phone calls" argument. Then it will be "symbolic speech" to provide bandwidth or respecting 1A. All of the objections need baking in.

Want to serve porn? You'll need to do your own peering, lay your own fiber, and build your own CDN.

Subject Them To Import/Export Tariffs

Tobacco, encryption, guns, and dozens of other products are subject to restrictions across borders. The data centres and international peering points serving this content are entirely identifiable. Pornhub is based in Canada, with US (Delaware) and Irish (billing) subsidiaries.

Every MB of pornographic video traffic imported from a Canadian/Mexican data centre or CDN point must be accounted and incur a 1c tariff. Every MB exported to another country through the digital border incurs one.

Impractical? Yes. Difficult to monitor? Yes. Prejudicial? Yes. All of these increase the regulatory weight which makes it harder to do business without infringing on 1A rights. Your ability to produce starts to cost you.

Go After the Advertising

Pornhub can't accept payments from Visa or Mastercard anymore, so they are an ad-supported company like YouTube: 50% of their revenue comes from advertising. Advertising is a 1A activity (corporate speech) which comes with freedom of association, making it hard to restrict. However, adult advertisers are not allowed to place ads in family magazines, and the type of people placing their ads against hardcore pornography aren't exactly reputable.

First, paywall them strictly. No ads featuring pornographic content, or soliciting prurient interest, outside the domain of adult websites where children can access them "accidentally". At all. If you've got an adult product, you're confined to adult sites.

Second, tax them. Make providers of advertising space displaying adult material subject to a 35% sales/value tax on their revenue. Bookmakers and gambling have taxes too.

It's not fair, and no, we don't care.

Criminalise Allowing Access To Children Under 16

Lastly, it shouldn't need to be said, and existing laws should cover it, but there's only one real way outside the First Amendment to deal with, as there is the case with firearms. Allowing a child to access pornography needs to be severely punishable. There isn't a 1A issue here at all; it's a public safety issue. This is the nuclear weapon.

Anyone who negligently allows a child under 16 access to hardcore pornography - even inadvertently - commits an offence.

That means parents, siblings, friends, caregivers, supervisors with a duty of care, teachers, internet service providers, bus drivers, anyone. If you have children in your care and you fail to prevent them from accessing this material - for example, not using parental software or leaving your own computer on - you should be punished for it. What you do on your own time is your business, but if you are responsible for children, it's a different story.