For many years the pro-porn campaigners fought to prevent age verification on dedicated pornography sites.
On the 16th of October, in which the secretary of state for digital, culture, media and sport Nicky Morgan made a statement that the government will not be commencing part 3 of the Digital Economy Act in regards to age-verification for online pornography.
In 2017, the UK became the first country to pass a law containing a legal mandate on the provision of an internet 'Age verification' system. Under this act, commercial pornography websites would have to implement a robust age verification system to prevent minors from accessing their sites.
After a series of setbacks and delays, owing to various technical problems and failing to inform the EU (European union) etc. Many 'concerns' arose regarding the 'possibility' that online age verification providers could collect excessive 'personally identifiable information' and process it for other 'purposes'
Also 'concerns' that porn sites could sell or even 'Hackers' could steal personal information of consumers 'porn habits' who could then be 'blackmailed' or 'exposed' resulting in 'job losses' 'family break-ups' 'naming and shaming' which could possibly result in possible suicides.
There were also 'concerns' over the fact that 'Mindgeek' offered a service called 'AgeID' which was a 'one time' log-in for porn viewers, which could enhance it's market position (although it already owns and operates most commercial porn sites) Leaving smaller, niche UK porn sites at a disadvantage.
Also mindgeek states that AV will be free for UK independent studios and pornographers!
Incidentally, AV for pornography sites has been available in Germany in 2015.
'A FREE one time login AV' announced at the European summit - for all UK porn producers'
In-fact, gambling sites not only legally require age verification, but With age, identity, and payment verification, there now seems to be a perfect storm of factors to prevent the unlawful participation of underage players in online gambling activities.
Also, gambling sites check your finances!
*Strangely enough, I couldn't find any 'concerns' or backlash over Age verification on gambling sites.
Government abandons Age verification.
On the 16th of October 2019, the culture secretary Nicky Morgan stated that the Government had abandoned the mandate altogether, in favour of replacing it with a wider scheme of 'internet regulation' based on the principles stated in the forth coming (OHWP) 'online harms white paper' which will include other harms such as bullying, self harm, suicide, gang promotion and hate crimes. It will also focus on social media. Unfortunately, answers to parliamentary questions have made it plain that the protections provided by the Online Harms Bill from commercial pornography sites will be far more limited than those afforded by Part 3 of the Digital Economy Act.
'Online safety bill' Draft May 2021 [link]
In January 2020, a group of AV companies started legal action against the government on it's decision to suspend the AV scheme. They contended that the 'Digital economy act 2017' gave the government the power to delay implementation, but not to abandon it.
So why did the government really abandon the UK age verification on pornography?
The fact remains that the government AV systems were ready to be implemented on dedicated pornography sites, and could of been put in place whilst sorting out the other online harms and social media. It would of been a monumental 'first step' in protecting children.
The pro-porn campaigners strike again..
Considering the fact that in 2019, pro-pornography campaigners managed to pressure the (CPS) Crown prosecution service into relaxing it's guidelines about what constitutes 'obscene pornography' so that people can no longer be prosecuted for possessing or distributing extreme material such as fisting, sadomasochism, torture with instruments and activities involving perversions such as urinating or defecating on or into a body. Please see my post on this subject - [link]
There's no reason to think that these campaigners didn't put pressure on the UK government to abandon the AV scheme, or as they liked to put it 'Repeal the porn laws'
Here's a celebratory tweet from 'Matthew Lesh' who is 'head of research' at the 'Adam Smith Institute' who was part of the 'Repeal the porn laws' campaign and 'John Johnston who is a politics reporter for 'politicshome.com' stating -
'The 'porn block' has been ditched. Re-drafted, delayed and picked apart by 'Privacy campaigners' it's "objectives" will now be punted over to a "online harms regulator". John Johnston
Firstly, I'm going to list their primary 'concerns' followed by examples of their 'campaigns' and finally a list of the main players, who along with many others, pressurised the government to abandon a mandate which would of protected children years ago.
'The right to basic freedom and privacy'
In other words - 'We don't want the government to come into our bedrooms, monitoring our pornography habits, especially our deviant proclivities such as bestiality, scat, torture, sadomasochism and other dodgy interests'
Because anyone with a smartphone, gave up their freedom and privacy anyway..so it's not about 'the right to basic freedom and privacy'
including a diary of your every movement - [link]
The Privacy Risks of Your Smartphone [link]
'Age verification' will hurt competition (referring to mindgeek's 'AgeID) in the UK adult industry, especially reducing access to porn produced by 'sexual minorities' because they won't be able to afford such AV fees'
This is untrue. As posted earlier, a 'one time log-in age verification' was free to UK pornographers and a flat fee for non UK based providers on their UK only traffic.
'Age verification systems could expose porn consumers to be exposed by data breaches or victims of blackmail by 'Hackers' of personal information by having to provide bank details etc. Which could result in 'shaming and naming' 'loss of jobs' 'family break-ups' and even 'suicides'
Many pornography websites already have one landing page where no one cannot browse adult material unless they become members and produce bank/credit card details in order to purchase membership. I could not find any reports of any 'Hacking' of these, but then I'm guessing that they only contain normative heterosexual sex acts. And because 'porn' is so acceptable 'everyone looks at porn' Why would it really matter if a person was 'exposed' Would he lose his job, his family and maybe commit 'suicide'?
So, what could be their problem? when the (cps) already relaxed the obscene pornography laws in 2019, why are these campaigners concerned that their 'viewing habits' could be exposed?
Okay, so 'legally' they can now view pornography that includes genres such as 'torture' 'fisting' and 'scat' without any fear of being prosecuted.
But... They are still 'concerned' that in particular 'prominent' people could be 'outed' for viewing this and other material. I mean it's not going to look good if your local MP, doctor, teacher or lawyer has been viewing thousands of videos [taken from pornhub] with titles such as 'anal fisting young teen till she screams' 'school girl gang bang' 'black cunt gets humiliated, degraded and abused' 'burning her nipples with a cigarette' 'punch fisting her ruined teen twat' ' or 'step-father fucks her during sleep-over' or a prominent married father who is viewing 'gay porn' every night.
This is the real reason that these campaigners are scared of age-verification. They don't care about children being traumatised by violent pornography. These men want to watch the most violent and deviant pornography in absolute secret and privacy in order to feel safe masturbating to such material, without worrying as to whether they could be 'outed'
Let's not forget how many MP's view pornography at their 'work-place'
And in 2018..
Let's take a look at who these prominent pro-porn campaigners are and how they put pressure on the government to abandon 'Age verification' altogether. (all names involved in campaigning against age verification are highlighted in blue)
'The usual suspects'
1) Myles Jackman (obscenity lawyer)
Apart from defending clients charged with possessing/distributing obscene pornography. Jackman is the 'open rights' organisations legal director and a legal adviser on 'Backlash' an organisation that defends freedom of sexual expression, who provide legal, academic and campaigning advise. He is a BDSM enthusiast and is a prominent and prolific pro-porn and 'sex-work' campaigner.
In 2016, Backlash campaigned to protest the obscene pornography laws and 'Age-verification' in front of parliament.
Amongst the speakers were- Myles Jackman, Pandora Blake (pornographer) Justin Hancock (child sex educator) and Dr.Chris Ashford (professor of law)
Here's Jackson with pornographer Pandora Blake asking people to finance their campaign to oppose 'Age-verification.
Myles Jackman appearing on BBC newsnight discussing 'Age-verification' Notice the media constantly refer to age-verification as 'porn ban' No-one is 'banning porn' This term is used to derail 'children watching porn' and spread the fear that 'The government want's to ban your porn'
And here's Jackson and Blake discussing how age-verification won't work, disputing the amount of children that watch pornography and how their private data will be stolen for malicious purposes. Also the open rights group have drafted an amendment which will be introduced to the data protection act which would include a duty to protect privacy and security.
He retweeted 'pornographer' Pandora Blake's celebratory tweet about the government cancelling 'age-verification'
'Sky news has obtained a copy of a confidential note sent by the 'Digital Policy Alliance' a lobby group representing many online pornographers, to the (BBFC)'
Then the congratulations started (thanking the pro-porn campaigners)
Misha Mayfair - pornhub nominee, known as the 'UK piss princess' friends with Myles Jackman and Pandora
And this tweet from the 'Adam Smith Institute' derailing age-verification, referring to it as 'puritanical porn laws' and the absolute nonsense that children will be pushed into the 'dangerous dark web' I'm pretty sure that very young children don't know about the dark web, or how to find it. Besides, mainstream porn like pornhub is full of violent, deviant pornography, torture and child abuse imagery.
2) Pandora Blake (pornographer/performer)
Pandora Blake describes 'themselves' as a gender non-binary, queer polyamorous switch' who's fascination with spanking started when they were five or six years old. 'they' own a website called 'Dream of spanking' and is a staunch pro-porn campaigner who opposes age-verification.
Alongside Myles Jackman, Blake has been countlessly interviewed in the press and the media, who enthusiastically support their pro-porn campaigns, that include age-verification. One of the concerns Blake talks about is the fact that 'if porn consumers have to 'self ID' by entering their email addresses and bank details on porn websites, then they could be hacked. Yet on her website, if you want to become a member and pay for scenes, you have to enter your email and credit card details..
After you fill in this form, you are directed to 'consumer support' in which you enter this information.
Blake even wrote an article in Taylor Francis online, as a 'porn scholar' who had 'no conflict or interest'
Here Blake is interviewed (at great length) in the Guardian, in which she states 'Porn laws criminalise sites that are a lifeline to 'marginalised sexualities' (aligning themselves with marginalised groups such as LGBT, racial and religious minorities in order to gain sympathy and inclusion)
*Blake and others pressurised the cps to relax obscene porn laws after this article was published.
Blake also states here that 'they' cannot afford age-verification (WHEN IT'S ACTUALLY FREE) and that there could be a 'data breach' by entering personal information like emails and credit card details.
There are countless interviews with Blake all over the media, but I'm not going to post them here.
So, let's take a look at the kind of material on Blake's website.
There are many scenes depicting 'age-play' teachers spanking naughty children. This is sexualising real school-girls who are already subjected to daily acts of sexual harassment and assaults by boys and men. [link]
This is just one of many trailers of spanking shown on YouTube (which now has over 15,000 views)
Here are some screen-shots from Blake's site.
Also, 'The evacuees'
The most disturbing subject I found on Blake's website were fantasies about 'spanking children' and a link to a site called 'Corpun' which hosts real life images and videos of children being severely abused ie. Caned until bleeding.
Blake provides a link to 'corpun'
The following contains links to real images and videos of children being abused.
I wonder just how much the government knows about this 'marginalised and targeted sexual minority' Would they have reconsidered abandoning age-verification if they knew that one of the campaigners who fought against it, was aroused by and provided links to child abuse images and videos.
3) Jerry Barnett (pornographer and pro-porn campaigner)
Barnett was a porn peddler who made a fortune from exploiting young women.
His pornographic website was called 'Strictly broadband' which he had to shut down, because in 2012 Ofcom fined him £60,000 for not providing any age-verification measures. [link]
'Jerry goes to the BBFC'
Barnett wrote a magnificent book called 'porn panic' He is also the founder at 'Sex and censorship' and is a prolific pro-porn campaigner alongside his aforementioned colleagues.
you can read more about Jeremy on my other blog post [link]
Some of Barnett's tweets/re-tweets about age-verification
They had also campaigned and argued against the 'extreme pornography laws' which resulted in the crown prosecution service relaxing them.
This website 'Respect yourself' (which was endorsed by Warwickshire council) Contained an A-Z of sexual acts such as 'felching' 'fisting' 'coprophilia' and 'bukakee'