It's your resistance to wider measures and a wider campaign as well as laws that the problem here. Legislation without education doesn't work. Legislation with education tends to, eg seatbelts, drink driving, smoking etc etc.
I have no resistance to educational measures to change attitudes at all. Where have I suggested otherwise? But without legislation it will not be effective. We bring up our kids to believe it's wrong to mug people, but that education would of limited efficacy if they were allowed to do it by law.
Though saying that, we don't really EDUCATE people about the wrongs of mugging people; it's just a given that results from a child’s moral socialisation concerning how we should treat people decently, underscored by legal prohibitions. Unlike smoking or wearing a seatbelt, porn is a squarely moral issue, not just a public health one. We don't hold classes on why it's bad to kill people or commit arson or that one should be polite and kindly. So, while I'm in no sense resistant to education (knock yourselves out) I don't quite get it. I mean, you can explain to children that lots of porn ‘actresses’ are refugees and fugitives from abusive backgrounds and the porn industry destroys lives, but that would take all of one lesson. Once you’ve said that there’s really not a lot else to say. I can’t explain to you exactly why mugging old ladies is bad, it’s just the sort of thing that in a functional, civilized society you come to know - and it being something for which you are punished by law is a big part of that. And there’s no reason they would necessarily care. This fetish for ‘education’, particularly concerning sexual ethics, just absolves everyone from the responsibility of addressing the core problem - which is a deregulated internet capitalism that is warping our sexual culture. Though I think making things clear to children like 'if you send a sexual video of yourself that is child pornography and you could get into trouble, as well as having your reputation ruined for ever more' is very valuable. They do need to understand that.
Thinking about it, you’ve got the argument the wrong way round. Boys should be educated to believe that women are not sexual objects, right? What is one of the key origins of their view that women are sexual objects? Porn. So if you limit their access to porn from day one, you won’t have as much re-education to do. If they can’t access it then they can’t be influenced by it in the first place. Banning it decreases the need for education.
To put it very bluntly, if you don’t want boys growing up believing women are sexual objects, then prohibit media which promotes that view. By law.
How you do that when it’s all over chat sites, Tumblr, dating sites, video tubes, Twitter etc etc I don’t know. But something will have to be done. Assuming it’s just not realistic to eliminate internet porn, I’d suggest some sort of licensing system. Just as you need a license to purvey alcohol, you would need a licence to set up a porn website. To qualify for that license you would have have to prove that all the participants in your material were of legal age, consenting, checked for STD’s etc. You would then get a certificate. Anyone wishing to access this material would have to authenticate their identity. Any pornographic material that was not so licensed would by default be illegal - and that would include things like sexts.
This isn’t perfect, and I’m aware it would be a bit like a legalised brothel system, but at least porn would be regulated and demarcated to its own space on the internet, like cigarettes stored out of sight and covered in health warnings. In addition to that you could run all the anti-porn campaigns.
If this does not happen then porn will become - if it hasn’t already - a public health epidemic that will destroy lives and do incalculable damage to children.