13
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 19 Apr 2026
13 points (84.2% liked)
Ask Lemmygrad
1328 readers
124 users here now
A place to ask questions of Lemmygrad's best and brightest
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
what, in your view, does this entail? what are some examples, real or hypothetical?
can you elaborate more on this? in what way do you believe it is a method of control (control over whom and via what means)? we live under capitalism, so what role do you see the profit motive and material interest playing in the production of adult content?
I would say someone who posts explicit pictures or videos of themselves on a platform like a public 18+ Discord server and rejects any offer of money or any other material compensation
I believe it is a method of control over women because the market for adult content still denies women control over their own bodies. This is why women as I described in point 1 are still looked down upon inside of patriarchy because they are expressing purely their own sexuality and can stop at any moment with no consequence. And as capitalism commodifies everything, it has also commodified human sexuality. There is a material interest under capitalism for monetizing your sexual expression, as there is for monetizing everything. That's why I'm explicitly for banning monetized 18+ content rather than 18+ content in general, to draw a much clearer line distinguishing expressing your own sexuality purely for fun and doing it to satisfy material interests.
but, my issue is that while the commodity form still exists, the material interest to get compensated for your labor power will also exist, inherently. you can't just legislate it away. the more labor power and surplus value that is spent on the production of explicit content (and the greater need of the producers), the stronger the material interest to get compensated for it. this is why, no matter what legislation was introduced, a black market for this content will almost certainly exist. the goal should make it as difficult and as unprofitable to enter and distribute within this black market. i believe a full ban on public explicit content best satisfies this goal without restricting the activities of private citizens. of course this should be done en tandem with providing people trapped in the industry opportunities to leave it as well.
furthermore, capitalism doesn't just provide a material interest to monetize your body, but to commodify it, i.e. to exchange it. exchange and compensation does not require the exchange of money, money is just the most liquid and mutually agreed upon form of crystallized labor power. but, it is exceptionally more difficult to write and enforce a ban on an exchange of labor power or goods than money. it also requires more invasion of privacy as well. consequently i think it's much more efficient and effective to enforce a full ban on the public distribution of explicit content.
lastly, i think sexual expression is great and important. i also agree that patriarchy looks down upon sexual expression (while it simultaneously materially encourages it). however, i think it is orders of magnitude more important that women and queer folk don't get trapped in the sex industry. i would gladly sacrifice the public sexual expression of the few for the liberation of the many any day of the week. this of course wouldn't affect private sexual expression whatsoever, and so frankly i don't think it's a very big cost. of course there's also the aspect of how capitalism affects our understanding of sexuality itself and what a socialist sexuality would look like, but i think that's too deep a rabbit hole for me to go down right now.
Furthermore, this line between "private" and "public" is completely arbitrary. What if someone DMed someone else and through that arranged a transaction involving explicit pictures? This is "private" but neither of us would support it being legal. I do not think that running a Discord server where consenting adults upload explicit pictures on should be illegal. If people are guaranteed living standards, them selling their bodies will naturally wither away, no blanket bans required.
I disagree with the idea that providing resources for exploited people to leave the sex industry and making it not profitable would require a full blanket ban on public explicit material. What this ban will do, however, is demonize people who want to express their sexuality publicly by telling them that their way of expression is incompatible with socialist ideals when it really isn't. Such a ban will not stop at the few but inevitably seep its way into general culture, perpetuating ideas that sexuality is shameful.
that's fine, we clearly disagree on this point and it doesn't seem like a resolution here is possible.
i feel like you're really extrapolating a lot from very little, here. what gives you this impression? after all, this wouldn't be a ban on all public mentions of sex or sexuality at all, just explicit materials shared publicly. sex education would obviously be super important as well, in terms of teaching about consent, healthy relationships, etc. furthermore, i do in fact think that loveless sex is a product of capitalist patriarchy, rather than a product of proletarian ideology and ideals.
i don't think the line between private and public is arbitrary just because there are instances where it can be challenging to define one or the other, in fact i think claiming the line is arbitrary is strictly undialectical. i already made clear the high probability of a black market existing, and my reasoning despite that fact. in the hypothetical example you mentioned, if someone has a material interest in doing it once they have a material interest in doing it many times, and they have a material interest in broadcasting their intent to as many as possible. this makes it easier to notice and enforce, and it makes shutting down public explicit materials that much more effective.
the point here is that you cannot completely remove the material interest in producing and distributing explicit materials until the commodity form no longer exists. until then, we should be as strict as possible in trying to ensure that the fewest number of people have a material interest in selling their bodies. if i'm wrong, then people are essentially upset for being censured. if you're wrong, then more people than would otherwise be necessary would have sufficient material interest to commodify their bodies. i think my potential error is much more preferable.
but, is this going to happen day 1 post-revolution? or year 1? or year 100? how long will it take for capital and the bourgeoisie to wither away until communism, and are you okay with not stemming the tide of sexual exploitation as much as possible until, well, we reach communism?
i also fully accept that a blanket ban on day 1 post-revolution is also not feasible or possible, and so i would obviously take a gradual approach towards that blanket ban. however, in the gradual approach towards that blanket ban, if it so happens that no one has a material interest in commodifying their bodies despite the existence of the commodity form, i would be more than happy to settle with a partial ban. however, i do not see this as likely for the reasons i have already explained to you.
After experiencing #love & reading #Kollontai I am inclined to agree