Who and whom did the pornography site hurt?

Last week, on December 11th, British credit card giants Visa and Mastercard announced that they would not allow their owners to conduct transactions with Pornhubi, the pornography giant, which is also one of the most visited websites. The company's decision came only days after The New York Times He published a long article by columnist Nicholas Christoff on December 4th, where he found that a large number of videos on that platform represented violence, harassment and child abuse, violent sexual abuse of women, and other nonconsensual content.

Like other distributional social platforms, such as YouTube, Pornohubi historically allowed every user to upload any video you want on the site. But unlike other platforms, Pornhubi has also allowed users to trigger the material and re-load it elsewhere on the Internet. The Times investigation found that “the company” had ignored and left the content mode division unpublished, which slowed the removal of content or the inability to re-charge it on other pages. This combination of factors had made it the site of videos of violence, images of sexual abuse of children, revenge porn (when one partner is betrayed by the other), published to videos or sex photos) and videos with éspycam.

Almost immediately after the Times report was published, Pornhubi and its owned company announced changes on the platform. Users will have to verify in order to upload videos, making it easier for those publishing on the site to be held responsible for the way videos are taken and produced. The button “dload” was also removed, making it more difficult for children's abuse and migration videos to be reloaded and distributed.

These changes give little hope of relief from sexual abuse images with children who will no doubt still be loaded on the site. They will make it harder to load illegal content, and more difficult for it to be stolen and distributed. But the changes came a little late for the women Christo had interviewed for his journalistic investigation. These include Selena Fleitsey, who at the age of 14, had sent video funky videos to an older boy who liked him; this guy had distributed the videos to his friends, and they ended up in Pornhub. She asked the company to remove her images, but they would be re-charged; a video of her 14 years old had more than 400,000 views. The effects of this cause this woman to leave school and become addicted; she is now set on fire and lives in her car.

Another woman, known only as Taylor, was secretly registered by her boyfriend when she was performing a sexual act as 14 years old; he also sent the video to his friends, and that video ended up in Pornhub. Taylor has 18 now. Over the past four years, he has tried suicide twice.

A British teenager named Nicole said she was blackmailed by a boy who carried more and more sexual content when she was 15 years old; the videos were posted and forwarded to Pornhub. Now she has 19; she too had tried suicide several times. Like other survivors, Nicolaus was caught with the company. She can report her videos but they reload again. And again. And again. And in the meantime, Pornohubi takes advantage of the hurt and decay of the dignity of these women, who are not only abused but who have to live knowing that the images of that abuse are being enjoyed by foreigners as foreign entertainment that often knows or at least suspect that videos are without the approval of these women or that they're showing minors, and that they just attract more of it.

On a parallel train but less morally urgent, Pornhupi's historic policies involving loading unverified users and free downloads have also established a network of porn performers. These women are in the next grade, both morally and legally, of the sexually abused victims whose images are represented in Pornhub again and again. But these workers also benefit from these proposed changes in Pornhub. Sex workers will now find it easier to make money and control their images.

Pornography has been a sensitive subject for the left, despite this triggering the problem of gender justice and a number of topics for work. Sex workers do admirable work by aggravating themselves, but outside their movement, employee rights applicants and feminists have been reluctant to criticize the pornography industry. For this reason, pornography shames people.

Thus, it is the right one that has monopolized discussion about the need to adjust and reform the pornography industry.

Reactions on the exhibition of columniist Christopoff have been so rapid and dramatic Pornhubi has made the changes it has long resisted. What Pornhub, Visa, and Mastercard did all at once was done after a respected man commentator in a prestigious warehouse. /Periscope, Fetch from project The Guardian