Thursday, February 15, 2024

Social Conservatives' War on Porn Shows the Far Right Can Be As Puritanical as the Woke Left (Part II)

Disclaimer: This blog entry does not contain any pornographic images or links to pornographic websites. This blog entry functions as a criticism of pornography bans. 

It would not be American politics if the culture wars ceased to exist. Last week, I wrote about how social conservatives are reigniting the war on pornography. First, I went in how one defines pornography and obscenity. Second, I pointed out how pornography does not increase sexual assault. Third, I listed studies that show neutral or positive effects of watching pornography, which undermines the public health argument against pornography. Now I continue with other arguments as to why a ban on pornography is not wise. 

4) Whether someone views pornography is no one else's business. There can be a myriad of decisions that other individuals make that you find disagreeable: voting for a candidate of an opposing political party, practicing a religion that is not yours, owning a gun, having different political beliefs, having children before getting married, burning a Quran or the U.S. flag, having sex with or marrying someone of the same sexnot getting a COVID vaccine, or how a business owner manages their business. There are other life decisions that are unhealthy, such as smoking cigarettes, drinking too much alcohol, eating foods with a ton of sugar and trans fats, not getting enough exercise, or spending too much time on social media. 

Part of living in a free society means being surrounded by people who think, believe, and act differently than you do. As long as adults are not directly harming others, it does not matter what decisions they make, even if it causes self-harm. An adult who decides to view pornography in the privacy of his or her own home is not harming anyone else. A ban would turn viewing pornography into a victimless crime, which comes with its own costs.  

5) Enforcement would be messy, not to mention a violation the Constitution. Forget for a moment that pornography has First Amendment protection. First, you would need to shut down the production of pornography. Then you would need to stop millions of smartphone users from creating amateur pornography and distributing it anonymously. That is on the production end. To stop people from consuming pornography, the government would need to have unfettered access to monitor citizens' computers. This would mean violating the privacy rights of all internet users and undermining data encryption tools. 

6) Underground market. Pornography is popular because the vast majority of human beings are sexual creatures and pornography is more accessible than ever since the advent of the internet. 91.5 percent of men and 60.2 percent of women have used pornography in the past month. Banning pornography is not going to make those sexual desires dissipate. Banning pornography would create a black market in pornographic goods. 

As I brought up last year when discussing a potential TikTok ban, a blanket ban comes with a litany of negative unintended consequences. Likely outcomes of forcing pornography production underground is less safe working conditions, mistreatment of workers, and financial exploitation. As for consumers, those who are looking for porn will either find print publications or go to the dark web, both of which can expose consumers to even more illicit and problematic activities. These consequences are parallel to the unintended consequences of a similar policy alternative: a partial prostitution ban

Conclusion: Let's recap the effects of a pornography ban. It would be expensive to enforce while violating privacy rights. Law enforcement would be punishing something that a vast majority of Americans do in the privacy of their homes. Given the intractable nature of such a ban, it would mean that enforcement would be arbitrary at best and discriminatory at worst. It would make conditions worse for the porn industry and open consumers to the black market. Meanwhile, pornography does not increase sex crimes while having mixed effects on personal health. All of this headache would be endured for a victimless crime.  

This is not an isolated incident of the U.S. political Right. There was a time in recent years where the Right was starting to become a beacon of freedom since the woke Left was being ridiculously puritanical.  However, the American Right has become increasingly enthused about banning or imposing severe limitations, whether that is immigrationrestricting free tradesurrogacycontraception, or marijuana. The woke Left's puritanical impulses do not exclude social conservatives from attempting to thrust its authoritarian desires on the rest of us. Regardless of the side of the political aisle, we should remember that puritanism is not a winning political strategy. If the political Right wants to have lasting, positive change, it will acknowledge this reality and harness it into political change moving forward.

No comments:

Post a Comment