To think that porn should be illegal unless you specifically opt in

[Balloonatastic]

I am 40 and I think I’ve been deeply damaged by porn. Now I’m ‘sober’ as it were, but have come round to the view that its prevalence is so harmful for relationships and young people.

I’m not against it per se. If people like it and can use it healthily then perhaps that’s OK.
Pre-internet, people’s access to it was much less and involved them actively going to a shop or newsagent or whatever. The embarrassment must have put most people off and limited demand.

Now demand is huge. The industry is massive, and ever more participants in it are harmed as producers chase customers and performers need to do more extreme things.

So AIBU to think that we should go back to a situation where people have to actively opt in to be able to access adult websites? Bring back an embarrassment factor. I sometimes wonder whether this would have the knock on impact of reducing the demand for nude selfies etc that teenagers get into because there would just be less nakedness generally on peoples screens, if you know what I mean.

Age verification is all well and good but I wonder whether we should make it much harder for people to access porn.

I know that my life would have been better without it.

So...lesbian porn isn't porn?

I mean, that's great news for me, but I'm not sure it's what you're intending.

What about solo women on OnlyFans? Are they exempt?

I do no such thing. Ladies only in my porn, thank you very much.

But thanks for the strawman argument (unless you genuinely believe that the only females in porn are 16yrs old).

Starter for 10

Your definition is clear and grounded in observable criteria — specifically identifying acts typically considered "hardcore" pornography. However, even such definitions encounter complications in legal, cultural, and artistic contexts. For example:

• Legal systems often must differentiate between pornography and art (e.g. in photography or film), where the same acts might appear.
• Intent and context matter — a medical textbook might depict genitalia or penetration without being pornographic.
• Cultural variation: What counts as pornography in one country may not in another (e.g. nudity norms differ widely).
• Regulatory ambiguity: Laws often rely on subjective terms like “obscene” or “intended to arouse,” which courts must interpret.

Hence, while your operational definition is helpful, broader social and legal systems still wrestle with more nuanced or borderline cases — which is why “I know it when I see it” (Justice Potter Stewart, 1964) remains historically resonant.