Lousiana, USA Is Requiring Its Citizens To Upload ID Card To See Adult Movies

[RAMROD 117,116]

On websites showcasing adult-only content, verifying your age by typing your birthdate and clicking "Go" is deemed a simple process. But in Louisiana, that's no longer the case.

As of Jan. 1, 2023, people in Louisiana will need to present proof of their age, such as a government-issued ID, to visit and view ****ographic websites like Pr0nHub, YouPr0n and Redtube.

The controversial law, known as Act 440, requires adult websites to screen their visitors using "reasonable age verification." The new law applies to any websites whose content is at least 33.3% pr0nographic material that is "harmful to minors," according to the bill signed last June. The law doesn't specify how the 33.3% would be calculated.

"Any commercial entity that knowingly and intentionally publishes or distributes material harmful to minors on the internet from a website that contains a substantial portion of such material shall be held liable if the entity fails to perform reasonable age verification methods to verify the age of individuals attempting to access the material," the bill states.

On websites showcasing adult-only content, verifying your age by typing your birthdate and clicking "Go" is deemed a simple process. But in Louisiana, that's no longer the case.

As of Jan. 1, 2023, people in Louisiana will need to present proof of their age, such as a government-issued ID, to visit and view ****ographic websites like Pr0nHub, YouPr0n and Redtube.

The controversial law, known as Act 440, requires adult websites to screen their visitors using "reasonable age verification." The new law applies to any websites whose content is at least 33.3% ****ographic material that is "harmful to minors," according to the bill signed last June. The law doesn't specify how the 33.3% would be calculated.

"Any commercial entity that knowingly and intentionally publishes or distributes material harmful to minors on the internet from a website that contains a substantial portion of such material shall be held liable if the entity fails to perform reasonable age verification methods to verify the age of individuals attempting to access the material," the bill states.

Louisiana Gov. John Bel Edwards' office did not immediately respond to NPR's request for comment on how those without a valid driver's license or other government-issued ID can access online pr0n in Louisiana.

 

https://www.npr.org/2023/01/05/1146933317/louisiana-new-****-law-government-id-restriction-privacy#:~:text=As of Jan.,like ****hub%2C You**** and Redtube.

 

 

nnnnn, United Emirates of Lousiana exactly

[Mindblown 6,745]

-

[Railing 2,799]

3 minutes ago, RAMROD said:

any websites whose content is at least 33.3% ****ographic material that is "harmful to minors,"

Any underage person that is going on those websites has probably also watched South Park or read smut and are of an age where looking at **** is a pretty average thing to do  It's not harmful, it's life, boomers need to chill

[RAMROD 117,116]

3 minutes ago, Mindblown said:

You mean I'd have to show ID to see my favorite twink get nutted on?

Yup, this is breach of privacy at best. And every single fruity folks will be able to be identified

[RAMROD 117,116]

3 minutes ago, Railing said:

Any underage person that is going on those websites has probably also watched South Park or read smut and are of an age where looking at **** is a pretty average thing to do  It's not harmful, it's life, boomers need to chill

That place also part of Bible Belt, alongside with large conservatism and boomers, an unattractive combo. 

[nATAH 57,035]

4 minutes ago, Railing said:

 It's not harmful

not strictly true, ****ography addictions can be harmful like other addictions and an underdeveloped brain can form a twisted reality of intimacy and sex as a result of prolonged exposure to these unrealistic scenarios (adults aren't immune obviously)

it's part of the reason why incels exist

[The Fame 4,288]

I get vibes that this is some weird scheme to harvest personal data tbh.

Big clue is the vague 33.3% rule that isn't even defined. 

[ScreamQueen007 415]

2 hours ago, RAMROD said:

Yup, this is breach of privacy at best. And every single fruity folks will be able to be identified

That’s probably the plan. To identify members of the LGBTQIA community, collect their data and then do Nazi KKK style stuff. 

[ScreamQueen007 415]

2 hours ago, RAMROD said:

On websites showcasing adult-only content, verifying your age by typing your birthdate and clicking "Go" is deemed a simple process. But in Louisiana, that's no longer the case.

As of Jan. 1, 2023, people in Louisiana will need to present proof of their age, such as a government-issued ID, to visit and view ****ographic websites like Pr0nHub, YouPr0n and Redtube.

The controversial law, known as Act 440, requires adult websites to screen their visitors using "reasonable age verification." The new law applies to any websites whose content is at least 33.3% pr0nographic material that is "harmful to minors," according to the bill signed last June. The law doesn't specify how the 33.3% would be calculated.

"Any commercial entity that knowingly and intentionally publishes or distributes material harmful to minors on the internet from a website that contains a substantial portion of such material shall be held liable if the entity fails to perform reasonable age verification methods to verify the age of individuals attempting to access the material," the bill states.

On websites showcasing adult-only content, verifying your age by typing your birthdate and clicking "Go" is deemed a simple process. But in Louisiana, that's no longer the case.

As of Jan. 1, 2023, people in Louisiana will need to present proof of their age, such as a government-issued ID, to visit and view ****ographic websites like Pr0nHub, YouPr0n and Redtube.

The controversial law, known as Act 440, requires adult websites to screen their visitors using "reasonable age verification." The new law applies to any websites whose content is at least 33.3% ****ographic material that is "harmful to minors," according to the bill signed last June. The law doesn't specify how the 33.3% would be calculated.

"Any commercial entity that knowingly and intentionally publishes or distributes material harmful to minors on the internet from a website that contains a substantial portion of such material shall be held liable if the entity fails to perform reasonable age verification methods to verify the age of individuals attempting to access the material," the bill states.

Louisiana Gov. John Bel Edwards' office did not immediately respond to NPR's request for comment on how those without a valid driver's license or other government-issued ID can access online pr0n in Louisiana.

 

https://www.npr.org/2023/01/05/1146933317/louisiana-new-****-law-government-id-restriction-privacy#:~:text=As of Jan.,like ****hub%2C You**** and Redtube.

 

 

nnnnn, United Emirates of Lousiana exactly

Would changing VPN work to evade the whole thing? 
 

Is this “law” being put in place by the same people who were whining over providing proof of vaccination? This is much more of an invasion of privacy than POV. 

[ScreamQueen007 415]

2 hours ago, NATAH said:

not strictly true, ****ography addictions can be harmful like other addictions and an underdeveloped brain can form a twisted reality of intimacy and sex as a result of prolonged exposure to these unrealistic scenarios (adults aren't immune obviously)

it's part of the reason why incels exist

You think that’s why they’re doing this? Don’t be naive. 
 

[TheBannedShadow 3,424]

2 hours ago, Railing said:

Any underage person that is going on those websites has probably also watched South Park or read smut and are of an age where looking at **** is a pretty average thing to do  It's not harmful, it's life, boomers need to chill

Excuse me, no! The effects that watching **** has on the young brain are no joke or something to take lightly. 

[Future Lovers 7,615]

I…understand the thought process but minors are going to find **** on Twitter and elsewhere regardless of this age verification thing. It is only going to delay, not stop them. 

Perhaps instead of trying to restrict access to ****, we should instead just focus more on actually educating teens about sex and sexuality beyond abstinence and how a girl gets pregnant? Part of seeking out **** as a minor is curiosity in regards to how it works and explorations of sexuality. If you don’t want your kids taking those lessons from ****, then educate them about it. 

[Dennis 8,391]

I personally think **** is harmful for children. But having to upload your ID is another privacy concern.

[Economy 52,861]

4 hours ago, NATAH said:

not strictly true, ****ography addictions can be harmful like other addictions and an underdeveloped brain can form a twisted reality of intimacy and sex as a result of prolonged exposure to these unrealistic scenarios (adults aren't immune obviously)

it's part of the reason why incels exist

Tbh. If not proven u can at the very least say there's enough intruiging evidence that ****ographic content especially when exposed to at a young age can twist ppls perception of sexuality. Even tho u know it's not real, in subtle ways it can affect ppl especially heavy viewers

 

There's been connections made to men for example not getting as excited anymore with real connections and contributing to erectile dysfunction even tho there's no biological issue with them because the brain gets accustomed and wired to be turned on by what they frequently view (that's a theory not proven but it is highly by some brain scientists hypothesized)

 

Then there's the fact they put unrealistic models that do not represent what a typical person looks like and it can affect ppls perception of themselves. Besides ur overall physical look things like "your size" can suddenly seem inadequate

 

I don't think this content should be banned as it's people's choice to view it if they wish and in controlled non addictive amounts the stuff I mentioned may not be a big issue

 

But I don't see trying to restrict young impressionable minds as necessarily bad. It probably makes more sense than restricting alcohol

 

 Just because it's a conservative take by a conservative state doesn't automatically mean they can't once in a blue moon make a decision that actually makes sense. Or at the very least have enough grounds to respect the decision by the government even if you don't agree with it 100%

 

That being said it's inevitable some kids will manage to get thru anyways cuz it's the frikken internet

[Charmz 4,348]

1 minute ago, Economy said:

Tbh. If not proven u can at the very least say there's enough intruiging evidence that ****ographic content especially when exposed to at a young age can twist ppls perception of sexuality. Even tho u know it's not real, in subtle ways it can affect ppl especially heavy viewers

 

There's been connections made to men for example not getting as excited anymore with real connections and contributing to erectile dysfunction even tho there's no biological issue with them

 

Then there's the fact they put unrealistic models that do not represent what a typical person looks like and it can affect ppls perception of themselves. Besides ur overall physical look things like "your size" can suddenly seem inadequate

 

I don't think this content should be banned as it's people's choice to view it if they wish and in controlled non addictive amounts the stuff I mentioned may not be a big issue

 

But I don't see trying to restrict young impressionable minds as necessarily bad. It probably makes more sense than restricting alcohol

 

 Just because it's a conservative take by a conservative state doesn't automatically mean they can't once in a blue moon make a decision that actually makes sense. Or at the very least have enough grounds to respect the decision by the government even if you don't agree with it 100%

 

That being said it's inevitable some kids will manage to get thru anyways cuz it's the frikken internet

It’s the invasion of privacy and the keeping of records for me.

I understand the argument about children, but historically that’s been left up to parents to monitor and enforce their child’s internet usage. Why does the government now have to be involved? I used to peak at my dad’s dirty magazines and VHS tapes. They will find a way, and Louisiana knows this.

It’s very very suspicious and giving 1984/Big Brother vibes. I feel bad for adults who just want to masterbate to legally produced ****ography who are now going to have to identify themselves each time. It’s a shame/scare tactic.

What if a married straight man enjoys gay ****? It’s now on file and part of a record. How can this information be used? Can people request this information?

It really isn’t about children. It’s about control.