@DM1 Your logic does not make any sense!

Please put things in English not techno babble, so people can at least try and work out what the hell your on about?!?

Using alternative nameservers will not get round this because it's implemented by dedicated traffic-filtering devices that all the ISP's traffic passes through, these are the same systems that do things like traffic prioritisation (less bandwidth for P2P and torrents, more for VoIP with defined QoS, etc). They do deep level packet inspection and can block individual URLs all the way down to single file level. Cisco make dedicated kit for this market, they're called "Service Control Engines" or SCEs for short. WHAT THE ACTUAL! Ever thought about going into politics, they'd love your waffle?!?

Yes, correct, no site anywhere (not even ones hosted in the UK) actually has to do anything. But any site, regardless of where it's hosted, if it is a) deemed to require adult verification and b) doesn't implement it, will be blocked by all UK ISPs.

ALSO, where did I say they wouldn't? I didn't?!? So why start twittering on about it.

Everything you've gone on about can be resolved with a VPN, so what was the point of the huge essay?!? It makes no difference.

It appears from where I'm sat it won't matter what I bring to the table, you're all going to search for the negatives as that's what you want to have a feeding frenzy on... I'm out!

Short version:

Enforcing this will be very easy for the authorities. Add the relevant websites to the existing filter, all major UK ISPs block access to that site. The technology to do this already exists and is in current use. And (in response to soundguy's post) changing your local resolver to use alternative nameservers won't get round it, CleanFeed is implemented at a deeper level than that.

Doesn't matter where in the world a site or business is based, this will apply just as much to sites hosted in the USA or in Europe as ones hosted here in the UK. Whether any given site decides to do anything about it will depend on what percentage of their sales they will loose if UK customers are locked out.

Looking at your own sites Andy it looks like your stores are on Clips4Sale. Best check with them whether they will be implementing adult verification or not. If not, then you can expect to see most of your UK sales cease when the block list goes live. And if the UMD gets blocked, then UK consumers won't be able to see your promo posts and updates here either.

Yes, those of us tech-savvy enough can get round it via VPNs, though that's an extra business cost. That's probably fine for producers needing to be able to access sites' admin interfaces to manage our stores, do new releases, etc. But unless all your UK customers are also tech-savvy enough to know to use VPNs, many of them will lose access.

Bottom line: What percentage of your sales are to UK consumers? What will the effect on your business be if those UK consumers suddenly find themselves locked out of your sites, stores, and advertising platforms?

MindGeek have announced details of their AgeID system - seems it is already in use in Germany and has been for some time. Does the UMD have age verification for German users?

http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/pornhubs-ageid-age-verification-tool-unveiled-for-the-uk_uk_5a9d1efae4b0479c0254d931

https://ageverify.co/

I know I said I'm out, but, What do you think to this? Found it after accessing google Germany. It appears to be free? If it's legal then I have to ask why are the UK gov trying to sending people to Mind Geek to pay?!?

*Edit its US based and not free*

https://www.personalausweisportal.de/EN/Citizens/Electronic-Identification/Electronic-Identification_node.html

German ID system, works similar to our N.I. number system. Which I did say 5 years ago would be a good idea as the system is already online and run by our GOV, not some outside supplier. But the GOV didn't want to take responsibility.

Follow the money trail....and then you will probably find that a UK government politician has financial ties to Mindgeek. There must be kickbacks involved.

It's run by the US... Plus, I've just been to a site they've finished, you can add any date of birth, defeating the whole object!

The Gordons Gin site is even worse. That has the companys warning page, until you access their purchase page direct from google, were they happen to have forgotten to add it to?!? Allowing anybody with a card to purchase. Hmm? Gordon's wouldn't be trying to flout the law would they! Sure looks like it.

Simple answer is that the UK has consistently had approx 35% of all worldwide wam customers so a wam producer could find upwards of 35% of their customers affected.

I still say that it is misguided to go after PAY sites when the vast majority of porn on the internet comes from FREE sites like Twitter and the Google search engine....so if you age verify pay sites but do not age verify a child's access to Twitter and Google then what are you actually achieving. All you have achieved in doing is levying a TAX on adult media consumers, while letting kids get free porn on Twitter and Google.

MK

Given all of the above, it would be good to hear from MM on this - what, if anything, does the UMD plan to do in response to this? Will the site and stores be gaining UK-compliant age verification for connections from UK IP addresses, or are we all just going to lose a third of our incomes?

Likewise, does Vidown / The Mothership plan to add Age Verification, and does anyone know what Clips4Sale is planning to do?

As to why the UK government aren't implementing it themselves - standard Conservative doctrine, small state == let the market come up with its own solutions. The various sites say the expect there to be competing solutions, it's just that smaller ones are liable to have costs while the MG one will be free for small scale producers.

I've spoke to C4S on this matter twice, first time several months ago, second today. There stance hasn't changed.

If or when they are contacted by the UK Gov to put a filter in place they will deal with it and not before. The owner commented, he has consulted with his programmers and it could be easily done, but why spend money, time and labour unless you have to, valid point.

If anybody uses a VPN, please access C4S main page using a German server and let us know if it has a filter on, I asked C4S this question today as well. The owner replied, "If we have one, the German authorities have put it place not us."

*Edit* My contact who runs Chrimera Bondage has just come back to me, there are no filters in place for his site, my sites or C4S in Germany nor the Netherlands. So if the Germans are running it, a VPN doesn't show it. Plus, I can't find any screenshots on google. So that leads me to ask this, are the UK Gov in bed with Mind Geek and are looking to line their own pockets by charging UK website owners for the privilege of using MG software - for a law they've passed? But, have no intention of controlling, hence why no UK producers can get any guidelines. What did I say when I first answered the thread, MK has also said it. Why do you think the UK gov wants to out source the responsibility. There bent/corrupt. It's starting to read like a hedge fund!

Unfortunately a German VPN won't necessarily provide the same experience as a German consumer broadband connection. Generally a VPN will emerge on a server hosted on a segment of the ISP's network that is "above" the SCEs that filter their broadband users' traffic. A hosted server usually has a completely uncensored feed - amongst other things that means if there is anything on that server that should be censored the SCEs are between it and the broadband users and hence can do so. But it also means that a VPN emerging from such a server will also have an uncensored view. Assuming German ISPs offer the same facilities UK ones to to have a "family friendly" or "uncensored" connection, you'd need to be on the wi-fi of a broadband user who had opted for "uncensored". Then trying various adult sites would show if they were blocked or not and if not whether they had AgeID or similar in place for visitors.

c4s works fine on a German proxy that's hosted with LeaseWeb.

Cheers, now comes the harder part. Are there any German users on here who can confirm, or deny if AV is in place on German servers? This would answer DM1's question, which I get a sneaky feeling could well be right. But, I can't confirm that yet. As there are numerous quotes that Germany have been running a system since 2015.

regards

Andy and the team.

Climb down from the UK Gov for the time being, new timescale now end of 2018

https://t.co/T4I0LrVFqx


The Strategy also reflects the Government's ambition to make the internet safer for children by requiring age verification for access to commercial pornographic websites in the UK. In February, the British Board of Film Classification (BBFC) was formally designated as the age verification regulator.

Our priority is to make the internet safer for children and we believe this is best achieved by taking time to get the implementation of the policy right. We will therefore allow time for the BBFC as regulator to undertake a public consultation on its draft guidance which will be launched later this month.

For the public and the industry to prepare for and comply with age verification, the Government will also ensure a period of up to three months after the BBFC guidance has been cleared by Parliament before the law comes into force. It is anticipated age verification will be enforceable by the end of the year.

Key word "anticipated" which in lay mans terms means, "We don't know!"

Be interesting to see what the BBFC released late March/April as so far not a single adult producers has been approached. Time will tell.

I can also confirm that only SOME of the adult sites in Germany use AV not all of them. This was done by asking several German customers.

regards

Andy and the team.

Thanks for that update. So we all now have till the end of the year at least before it starts hitting revenues.

Like all "think of the children" laws everywhere, this is just more feel-good, 100% unworkable uselessness designed to make it look like politicians are actually doing something besides pocketing bribe money and jerking each other off in the back room. Age verification is absolutely impossible without a cyborg implant connected directly to the network. All other systems are easily manipulated. As others have mentioned, once someone logs in, anyone else might be using use their device, kids, dogs, hackers, etc. NOTHING is verified except that some pointless hoops have been jumped thru.

C4S is the 800 lb gorilla in the room on all this. If they aren't doing anything, there is little reason for any other fetish distributor to worry about it.

FYI, WAM in general is currently less than 50% of Vidown sales and the UK accounts for around 5% of that. In my experience, UK buyers tend to buy more from their countrymen first and foremost, so the stats reported by UK vendors may be accurate for them, but they are not necessarily representative of sales for non-UK producers and the wider fetish world.

Unlike the UMD, Vidown and its content servers are spread over hundreds of different IPs, any of which can be easily changed in 5 minutes and will resolve for most people within 4 hours. The last time I looked into it, there were upwards of 100,000 open proxies operating on the internet, and an untold number of private proxies, VPNs, and other such tools. We operate multiple proxies ourselves for the occasional customer with a connection problem. I suspect that 20% of the UK user base is already smart enough to circumvent the UKs simplistic direct-route blocking efforts. Another 20% will probably figure it out pretty quick when all their access to their preferred sites stops working. The rest? Well hopefully they get mad enough to go to the polls in the next election cycle and vote in some people who aren't idiots.

BTW, the Great Firewall of China is probably the most technically advanced filtering system on the planet (orders of magnitudes more powerful and encompassing than BT's efforts). It barely works at all for anyone who really wants outside access. It doesn't even slow down our hundreds of Chinese customers or the handful of vendors here.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-43370999

This just out from the BBC, here those asked to build the new AV systems openly admit they cannot get any guidance from the UK Gov. So, everything we've said so far is coming to pass.

What next, fire? The Wheel! Makes you wonder what else the UK cabinet cock up... Explains why Brexit (not even a real word!) is taking so long...

regards

Andy and the team.

The whole moral panic that led to this is being driven by the Daily Mail, which has an inordinate amount of power among the Tory faithful, and also has a financial interest in making proper porn harder to get to - their infamous "sidebar of shame" (lots and lots and lots of paparazzi shots of female celebrities, often in either skimpy or very sexy outfits) will rack them up even more ad revenue if more people turn to it for their casual wank-bank material. It was in response to a Mail (also known as the Wail or the Heil - it supported Hitler in the 1930s) campaign that David Cameron (our previous PM) set in train the process that led to this legislation.

The current climbdown is clearly a setback, but I wouldn't assume the problem is going to go away. Too many vested interests involved.

As for Brexit: I believe this is what the term "clusterfuck" was created for.

Then again, Roy Greenslade's column from last summer argues that we won't, in the long-term, have to worry about the right-wing press. They're utterly out of step with anyone who isn't a puritanical, middle-aged homeowner, which rules out most under 40 these days. Like the Tory party they so hysterically support, the Daily Hell (because that's where we're all going, in a handcart, if current moral trends aren't reversed etc) has an ageing fanbase which is gradually dying off and not being replaced by a younger generation.

https://www.theguardian.com/media/media-blog/2017/jul/30/reactionary-politics-play-their-part-in-the-demise-of-the-tabloids

Incidentally, a small piece in the Times today (print edition) said that these laws have been delayed. It didn't say for how long, but did say that the hold up is because no one's sure how it will all work...

Yes, as night follows day, an 'IT project' is delayed by the UK Government. Hardly surprising as the BBFC were only officially appointed to oversee this last month!


It is being pushed back to 'later this year'... http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-43370999

And Sky News win headline of the month for their take on it:

Government delays new pornography regulation as it works out kinks

Yeah.....that sounds like a comedy headline from The Two Ronnies tv show where they read the news headlines...ala "Authorities have discovered a large hole in the fence of a nudist camp - the police are looking into it".

Thanks people, I feel better now.

I'll just have to wait to see if i get contacted?

It's complete BS though, let's see how far they get with it?
Are they just waiting until the European Court Of Human Rights won't be able to kill the bill, fecking Brexit?

I still say the easiest way to stop my content being available to children is to block the tube sites and come down hard on Social Media that allows our content to be uploaded.
Problem solved.

Exactly...especially Google (which owns Youtube) and Twitter.....but that is never going to happen because Google has a networth of 600 Billion dollars and has hundreds of lawyers and lobbyists to grease the pockets of politicians to prevent any restraints applied to their company's global access to consumers. Just witness what has happened in the last 10 years to legislation attempts to update and tighten the old 1998 law for DMCA. i.e. when Google bought Youtube in 2006 as part of the sales agreement 100 million dollars was to be set aside in a trust fund for paying compensation for future copyright complaints against media being streamed illegally on Youtube. That never happened because Youtube simply used that money to hire more lawyers and lobbyists to grease the politicians to protect Youtube and ensure that the old DMCA law would NOT be updated and strengthened.

As you know, the old DMCA law has a "get out of jail free" clause.....called the "safe harbor" provision....that prevents Youtube and uploaders from being held financially liable for hosting other people's copyrighted media. The current DMCA law is like saying to a shoplifter....if you get caught, provided you put the items back on the shelf promptly then you are immune from civil or criminal consequences.....and if you steal something, until you get caught you can keep the item you stole. DMCA is the ultimate "Finders Keepers" law that has zero consequences for offenders. For the last 10 years there have been several attempts to update DMCA with a much stricter standard with UPFRONT consequences for hosters and uploaders....i.e. there would be financial consequences to hosting companies and their users.....no safe harbor clause to escape liability. Anyway.....an updated replacement to the DMCA law has failed several times to get passed into law....mainly because you have hundreds of Google/Youtube lawyers and lobbyists spending millions to preserve the old DMCA status quo in order to protect entities like Youtube and Pornhub from being held financially liable for what they host.

So if Google/Youtube are spending millions to preserve all the loopholes in the swiss cheese law known as DMCA, they are hardly likely to want to restrict their viewing audience via installing a meaningful parental control system on Youtube. The CEO of Twitter (which has more porn on it than any other paysite does) has already refused to filter it's media.....crying Censorship and The 1st Amendment (freedom of speech).

Therefore, what we are left with is a meaningless "feel good" approach and lip service paid by politicians by only going after pay sites and credit card users, while totally ignoring the elephants in the room where most kids can access adult media (Twitter and Google/Youtube),

Apple, Samsung and the other smartphone device makers, and the PC manufacturers could easily solve the problem by installing parental control technology in their electronic devices and letting parents set parental controls for the kids they let use these devices. The BBFC are in bed with the wrong people (Mindgeek/Pornub) when they should be talking to the major hosting companies like Google and Twitter and liaising with the major smartphone and computer manufacturers instead.

Another elephant in the room is the violence that gets constantly indoctrinated into children via violent 1st person shooter computer games and rap music that promotes misogyny and the killing of cops. Lordy lordy.....you let kids play violent computer games and listen to violent lyrics in music.....and you are worried about some kids who might see a few boobies. The governent wants to protect kids from boobies but not protect them from playing violent mass murder killing computer games and listening to violent music lyrics.....sheesh!

Exactly, so then this law is not serious about protecting children, it is merely a cash grab tax against consumers who use credit cards with a kickback scheme to/from Mindgeek/Pornhub. A feelgood lip service law where politicians can claim they have done something to protect kids, when what they have really done is is nothing meaningful at all, except to feel good and line their own pockets.

If they want get serious about parental controls over access to adult sites, then they would

a) require all domains registered to be imbedded with a ratngs code hard corded in their domain name (i.e. G rated, PG rated, R rated or X rated) and then

b) require all electronic device manufacturers to imbed parental control detection technology in their devices...and

c) Let the parents who buy these devices and give them to their kids, set the parental use codes on these devices. Government stay out - let parents parent their kids.

d) do likewise wih computer games and music mp3 downloads and cds and make sure kids do not have access to computer games and music that indoctrinate children to think that violence and misogyny are perfectly OK in the digital world.

Better still, send all children to a summer camp in North Korea where they can learn to sing praises to "the dear leader"....just kidding.

Nobody should take any courts or police or laws they don't like seriously.
According to conservatives, anything any government says is "globalist" or "communist" and therefore bad or is a lie, a myth, that parasitic freeloaders such as judges
and police and prison guards make just to get rich off welfare from taxpayers.

As long as conservatives are allowed to say that about hypothetical laws
that have not even been passed yet, then it applies to ANY law ANYONE doesn't like.

He's not an MP - he's a Member of the Lords (and there are over 780 of them!). The Lords can't overturn Laws passed by MPs.

But what he says is a fair point; ultimately this is where the law will break down unless the Government decides to stand firm and Twitter will have to change it's policy. I'm not sure which it will be at this point. We may see some attempts to more closely define what 'pornography' means first.

Therein lies the difference between the UK and it's enacted laws and the USA. Basically UK law is sovereign and nationwide and the main thing the Brits object to is EU laws created by unelected beauracrats in Brussels....hence the Brexit revolt. The USA has a Federal system whereby laws are created by each of the 50 states as well as Federal law. Federal law trumps State law (no pun intended). But today you have lawless states like California declaring that they are "Sanctuary States" and refuse to follow Federal immigration laws, and it is not conservatives who refuse to follow the laws they don't like, it is the liberals. Whether it be issues like immigration or smoking pot, many cities and States in the USA refuse to follow Federal law and act lawlessly.

In the UK the counties inside the UK do not have the option to ignore National Laws, but in the USA any city or entire States like California can declare themselves to be Sanctuary cities or states and refuse to follow Federal laws. If an Age Verification law was attempted to be created as Federal Law in the USA, then many cities or states would simply declare their intent to ignore that law and thus become lawless sanctuary societies. All the lawlessness in the USA comes from liberal politicians, certainly not conservatives.

If you live in one state in the USA that does not shelter illegal immigrants or does not allow recreational drug use or requires you to wear a crash helmet if you ride a bike, or does not allow radar detectors in your car then all you have to do is rent a UHaul truck and move to a nearby State that allows the things you like. If you live in the UK....you cannot move anywhere, except overseas, because UK laws are nationwide.

I am in Florida which follows Federal Law on immigration and outlaws recreational drug use. I could move to California, a "sanctuary state" if I needed to ignore Federal laws on those subjects....but I will not, because California has the highest TAX rates in the USA. Soundguy is in a better place (Seattle, WA) because they have zero State Income taxes, but the weather is Seattle is the same as the weather in the UK (mild, wet and dreary all year round)...and that is why I left the UK in the first place....to escape the dreary weather. Nevada is a good option though....which is another Zero income tax State....which is probably why Soundguy bought his 2nd home in Vegas.

MK

>But today you have lawless states like California declaring that they are "Sanctuary States" and refuse to follow Federal immigration laws, and it is not conservatives who refuse to follow the laws they don't like, it is the liberals.

Bullshit. All human law is worthless bullshit. Anyone can just make up anything they want and claim it to be "legal" or "illegal". That's what lawyers & judges & police do.
Just to get themselves rich off socialism/welfare from the government.

Nothing "illegal" about this website
http://www.yescalifornia.org/

After all, according to conservatives, ANYTHING anyone in the government says is a "lie". That is what they say about climate scientists, with absolutely NO proof whatsoever of any "fraud". Denying anthropogenic global warming (AGW) is treason.
See? Anyone can make up any thing they want.
Difference is, obstructing action on AGW SERIOUSLY PHYSICALLY QUANTIFIABLY threatens the USA.

So NOTHING you mention about any laws, UK or USA, wamtec, is important. It deserves as much action and respect as conservatives have shown to climate science
and climate scientist. Conservative hypocrites scream about how THEIR point of view about climate science & evolution (completely DEBUNKABLE excrement) deserves
equal "respect" and "power", how ANYTHING can be questioned.

Then I or anyone can do the SAME for ANY imaginary "statutes" or "regulations" or
state-federal nonsense that YOU bring up.

There exists absolutely NOTHING "illegal" about any state lobbying for any law it wants. Texans have clamored for independence from the USA since forever.

Conservatives violate the law by forcing "god" (their religion) onto our money and into our pledge of allegiance and they STILL continue to force it into our public school science classes.


>Whether it be issues like immigration or smoking pot, many cities and States in the USA refuse to follow Federal law and act lawlessly.

Conservatives are the ones who preach endlessly about how "socialism doesn't work" or "Marxism doesn't work" or "communism". They take the side of those protestors
in Venezuela who CLEARLY ACT ILLEGALLY - violently protesting - JUST because
the conservatives don't like Venezuelan laws. (I might not either. I'd need to know details. But no doubt not for some antiMarxist antisocialist bullshit) But NEVER ONCE do you EVER hear conservatives say:

"Just because I don't like this socialist/Marxist/communist law but
the protestors are hurting their cause and making themselves look bad
by violently protesting."

No - there's only PRAISE from conservatives for violent protests
when the protest is against a nation or a set of laws that either really are "Marxist"
or "communist" (whatever that means) or that the conservatives THINK they are.

Never once in the history of the world do you hear conservatives preach
how "the law must be upheld".

> If an Age Verification law was attempted to be created as Federal Law in the USA, then many cities or states would simply declare their intent to ignore that law and thus become lawless sanctuary societies. All the lawlessness in the USA comes from liberal politicians, certainly not conservatives.

"illegal" immigration is a myth. There exists no unbiased scientific proof for it.

Sorry, but ALL that exists is extreme anti-immigration hysteria and draconian fascist
bureaucratic laws.

>If you live in one state ... then all you have to do is rent a UHaul truck and move to a >nearby State that allows the things you like.

Which is EXACTLY like capitalism allows you to do,
since conservatives preach nonstop the religious cult of free market capitalism.

>I am in Florida which follows Federal Law on immigration and outlaws recreational >drug use.

Once again, sounds like conservatives are fascists.

You cannot preach the virtues of freedom and capitalism and ridicule communism or Marxism for being unfair... AND THEN RIDICULE LIBERALS FOR BREAKING LAWS THEY BELIEVE TO BE UNFAIR.

So, once again, do you want to analyze what is FAIR (anyone is free to put what drugs they want into their own bodies, but the MEAT INDUSTRY WOULD BE OUTLAWED)
or are ALL you going to do is defend upholding the law -
by which of course you REALLY only mean "the law as it is in my locale at the present time" - i.e. the status quo.

So, all conservatives do is defend the status quo, because THAT REQUIRES ZERO WORK ZERO BRAVERY, all while screaming nonstop about NON-EXISTENT
"oppression" from the government. In other words, they scream about
HYPOTHETICAL LAWS - such as a carbon tax or outlawing meat or outlawing people making babies - that we SHOULD have but don't have yet.

Because, if the latter, then animal rights activists SHOULD lobby to put you into prison for eating meat. And climate activists SHOULD lobby to outlaw the coal & gas industry, and take all the welfare money given to fossil fuels and give it to solar and wind instead.

Then you would HAVE to obey it - because then THAT would be the law.

But, once again, DIFFERENT points of view about THE LAW and WHAT'S LEGAL or ILLEGAL from ANYBODY should be heard and given equal respect,
JUST like conservatives demands anybody's bullshit anti-science views about climate science or evolution be given the same respect & power
as climate scientists'.

As nice as this discussion is, I have to suggest it's ever so slightly off topic. Can I suggest you two go off and battle this out in a paddling pool full of gunge, so we can keep this firmly on-topic? Thanks.

wamtec said [Therein lies the difference between the UK and it's enacted laws and the USA. Basically UK law is sovereign and nationwide and the main thing the Brits object to is EU laws created by unelected beauracrats in Brussels....hence the Brexit revolt.]

By DEFINITION ALL REVOLTS are ILLEGAL! By definition they VIOLATE THE LAW!
Brexiters BROKE THE LAW!
Which, to you, seems important - or at least only when those you label "liberals" do it or Marxists do it or whoever.

Once again, *I* don't give a shit about Brexiters breaking those unfair yet
still-the-law EU laws, EXCEPT when those particular Brexiters who turn around
and force unjust laws onto other individuals (nonhuman, human - whoever suffers)
and expect/demand/feel entitled that those individuals obey those laws
that they had no hand in creating, either because those laws were created before
the oppressed individual was too young to vote or because the oppressed individual
is in prison & denied voting.

I 100% agreed: the EU LAWS were UNFAIR and I always supported Brexit
and ANY independence movement, in spite of the fact that I am American
had no power or say in it. I have NO idea why idiots like Max Keiser,
who spoke out for years against EU banker fascist terrorism,
would side against Brexit, rather than for it, like all his guests did. That surprised me.

But, I ALSO agree with those that Brexit does not make much difference anyway to
Brits. Replacing ONE form of unelected fascism with another, which for all practical purposes acts unelected, unaccountable to the poor, doing anything private banks want, really does nothing. But, yes - obviously - getting rid of 1 fascist (the EU) is better than getting rid of none.

The fact that UK still showers tons of money to prop up an unnecessary unelected symbol (the Queen, the monarchy).

Nevertheless, antinatalists since time has begun,
including Karl Marx who famously said
"We are all born into a world not of our own making."
have realized the ENORMOUS injustice of the NONCONSENSUAL act of breeding:
new humans (and animals) did not give you their permission to be born.

So, ANYONE who defends breeding being legal has NO right to complain how ANYONE turns out, NO right to complain about the POLITICAL views of new humans.

If humans are allowed to force other humans into existence, and then the breeders
(parents) force their offspring off the parents' property when the kids turn 18,
then the 18-year-olds or older, who are childfree, SHOULD lobby to make ALL laws perfectly fair.

And you CAN'T just tell someone: "if you don't like this state/nation, just move to another"
1) how the FUCK is the childfree person with no money kicked out of their parents'
house supposed to AFFORD traveling to some other nation

2) the INFINITE HYPOCRISY of conservatives thinking they are entitled to IMPOSE NEW HUMANS onto earth, and to FORCE those humans to move to OTHER nations,
therefore forcing them to violate THOSE nations' anti-immigration laws,
while complaining about immigrants from other nations violating American conservatives' anti-immigration laws

What if there exists NO nation on earth that is anywhere CLOSE to what the childfree
person wants?

Just because a nation is called "Marxist" or "Communist" doesn't make it fair,
if it goes imposing laws against personal affairs (drugs, porn) that affect nobody else.