Assuming what you’re saying about the harms of consuming pornography, is it the state’s responsibility?

In general, yeah. It’s quite literally what the government is supposed to be for. When there’s a widespread problem affecting a lot of people, it’s precisely the government’s job to step in, regulate and solve it.

Is it a top priority? Do we trust conservatives to implement a solution in good faith?

These two I can agree with the answer being ‘no’. The problem isn’t that it’s not an issue or that the government shouldn’t interfere. The two main problems I can identify here are:

• The current American government (and most of the previous ones) cannot be trusted to handle this in good faith,
• There are several more pressing matters that should be addressed first.

And a bonus issue. There’s currently no sufficient and reliable infrastructure to even implement restrictions on pornography, as we can plainly see from the results of recent attempts. But this ties in to the first problem. If they really wanted to solve the issue in any capacity, obviously they’d start by building the necessary digital infrastructure.

All in all, I think you brought up important points and I pretty much fully agree with you on them. However, to me it seems like they’re not exactly relevant to the discussion. Or at least that’s not what I was trying to address.

My main goal was to refute the previous guy’s theses that pornography has no confirmed negative effects on people, especially the part about children, since it literally takes seconds to find dozens of studies on this topic. I didn’t mean to speak about whether or not the government should do anything, let alone defend the current US efforts to regulate porn, if we can even call them that. In fact, one of the studies I quoted stated that the participants did not feel a government intervention is needed, which I felt was a crucial detail to highlight.