I think this thread is laboring under a misconception of what a societal "ban" on porn would entail. It's impossible to completely eradicate pornography, but officially "banning" it would still be useful in creating a stigma against it and suppressing it to some extent. It raises the cost to peel off marginal consumers. This is, when you think about it, the way we treat other crimes. We have set the cost of murder as high as we can, but some people still “consume” that solution to their problems.
I for one think it would be better (but still not good) for prostitution to be legal and pornography illegal than the other way around. But we should consider why that would be true, and why we don't live in a world like that. Simply put: the porn industry is more useful to our overlords than legalized prostitution ever would or could be.
By "our overlords," I'm referring to the totalitarian techno-oligarchy hiding behind a facade of woke leftism that, if it needed a name, we might call Liberal-Consumerism. There’s not even a competition, there’s no ideology, there’s nothing else.
In strict usurious terms “Companies” are entities for "creating" money, as much money as possible and preferably using resources owned by other people. Out of 100 biggest Multinational Companies, 52 are American, 20 Chinese, 5 British etc.
The other is target/the enemy they want dead (the dead don’t compete for natural resources, markets etc) but also to buy products and relinquish as much resources as possible before they keel over through poison, stress, debt, infertility etc. But why kill the consumer? Because there’s more where that came from, so many global millions clamoring to become middle class. The current middle class is too pushy in the eyes of globalists and is slated for dilution and eradication— once as much profit as possible is extracted, of course. So the social goal of these totalitarian Consumerists is to create a better, more pliable consumer. Someone along the lines of
this guy.
Pornography is the perfect vice for keeping the uppity middle class subservient. It's passive, it distracts and humiliates the consumer, nobody likes talking about it so it can go unremarked upon for long periods of time, it’s easy to reproduce and disseminate, it creates addiction, and it’s a revenue stream easy to stack into large centralized systems with way less people involved.
Prostitution, by contrast, is counter-productive for the Consumerist's aims. It creates small-scale competition, it involves more people and more independent systems, it’s a superior product (in the same way that eating a cookie is superior to eating a drawing of a cookie), it can’t be reproduced, it doesn’t stack, it doesn’t centralize, doesn’t integrate vertically, doesn’t streamline well, etc.
Where’s that Feminism to argue for the latter? You see there’s no ideology on the other side, there’s just the GloboHomoCorp and Usury. Big Tech, the power-multiplier of the few, will compound that problem going forward. The loyalty of the Boomers was bought with the short-term fruits of Consumerism, but now with AI on the horizon, the Consumerist technocrats are looking at us normal people like horses due for the glue factory.
