Oh, you are talking about that kind of teenager ... yeah, I can imagine that telling them how porn harms women won't help.
Though perhaps the girls won't be so envious of female porn stars anymore if you give them a list of exactly what damage those acts of violence do, physically. Pretty sure anal prolaps and incontinence are somewhere on the list. Not very glamorous.
Or give them a link to AO3 and hope they'll be exposed to some different ideas of what is erotic and what is not ... though I suppose they already equate sex with violence and won't even read anything vanilla.
I just have a real problem with people speaking in confrontational statements " I will not tolerate this". It's cos if I spoke like that at work I would get thumped.
Work is work, private life is private life. Confrontational statements have served me very well in deciding which kind of behaviour I tolerate in men and which I don't. Sure, they won't change, but in my experience, adult people hardly ever change, anyway,
You equate a zero tolerance politic on porn with abstinence only sex ed. These things are not equivalents. Porn inherently harms women. Sex does not (though it could be argued that PiV inherently harms all women who do not want to get pregnant at the moment), so safe sex is not a less unethical alternative to unsafe sex, it is ethically neutral.
Besides, I very much doubt that those boys you work with can be persuaded to watch violence-free porn wherein at least there is no violence against women visible any easier than they can be persuaded to stop porn use, period. They have already learnt to eroticise violence, and are probably more likely to turn to erotic literature with those elements than switch to porn where the violence is not visible on screen. The girls to whom I talked about their preference for rape-as-romance certainly weren't open to reading vanilla erotica, but probably also watched rape-porn.