←back to thread

US Supreme Court Upholds Texas Porn ID Law

(www.wired.com)
94 points mikece | 3 comments | 27 Jun 25 15:55 UTC | HN request time: 0.001s | source
Show context
Workaccount2 ◴[27 Jun 25 16:24 UTC] No.44398082[source]▶
I'm more interested in the downsides of not having ID verification. We have an entire generation of humans raised with effectively no verification going back 30 years now. So what is the data? Why is a high barrier so important that every adult has to annoyingly climb over it with all sorts of friction?
replies(4): >>44398266 #>>44398275 #>>44398556 #>>44398580 #
SpicyLemonZest ◴[27 Jun 25 16:47 UTC] No.44398275[source]▶
One consequence that concerns me greatly is that men in the generation you're describing routinely choke their sexual partners. I remember a decade or two ago, when I thought it was ridiculous that porn might teach people to be abusive - I regret to admit that I was catastrophically wrong. (https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/article/2024/sep/02...)
replies(3): >>44398340 #>>44398350 #>>44398478 #
surgical_fire ◴[27 Jun 25 17:11 UTC] No.44398478[source]▶
I don't particularly enjoy it, nor does the wife.

But if erotic choking is consensual amongst two adults, what exactly is the issue?

Are we to start policing how people enjoy fucking?

replies(2): >>44398564 #>>44398698 #
SpicyLemonZest ◴[27 Jun 25 17:36 UTC] No.44398698{3}[source]▶
I don't follow the argument. In the sphere of gender roles, for example, I absolutely believe that adults should be allowed to set up whatever arrangements are best for them. I would never walk up to a traditionalist couple and demand that they set up their relationship how I'd prefer. But I would still find it very concerning to hear that most young men expect their wives to not work or not make male friends, even if young women accepted it.
replies(1): >>44399433 #
1. surgical_fire ◴[27 Jun 25 19:12 UTC] No.44399433{4}[source]▶
> But I would still find it very concerning to hear that most young men expect their wives to not work or not make male friends, even if young women accepted it.

How is this in anyway related to what I said?

Were you attempting to reply to someone else?

replies(1): >>44400149 #
2. SpicyLemonZest ◴[27 Jun 25 20:55 UTC] No.44400149[source]▶
I think that choking your partner is presumptively physical abuse, in the same way that controlling who your partner can talk to is presumptively emotional abuse. It’s possible to consent to these things, sure, and if some individual tells me they’ve thought it over and genuinely want it it’s not my place to contradict them. But it’s also quite easy to not consent, or to frame mere acquiescence as consent in response to social pressure. I’m intensely skeptical that this is the one kind of gendered violence against women that’s pursued primarily for benign, consent-respecting reasons.
replies(1): >>44401507 #
3. surgical_fire ◴[28 Jun 25 00:36 UTC] No.44401507[source]▶
> It’s possible to consent to these things

Some people have odd kinks. While it may weird you out (and in many ways it weirds me out too) I am far less judgemental about it. If people want to be choked while fucking, well, by all means, as long as I am not involved. Most kinks I hear about are things I have no desire to experiment myself.

> I’m intensely skeptical that this is the one kind of gendered violence against women

Why do you presume that women are the only ones being choked?

And also why do you presume that a consenting adult is actually not consenting to something they are actively engaging in? Why infantilize people like that?