Having been following the UK's Crime and Policing Bill since my article for Mu last year, I've just finished writing a 3000-word essay about all the problems it raises. And I'm not going to publish that. Why? Because there are so many issues to discuss, and they can't really all be dealt with adequately without turning the essay into a 5000-word monstrosity that nobody will ever read. So instead, I'm going to deal with the issues one by one, starting with the ban on 'looks young' pornography.

The driving force behind the UK's criminalization of various forms of adult porn is Baroness Bertin, working with the Christian Institute. It's worth taking a look at just who those people are. Because there are some Christians who are genuinely nice people, who just want to help others, and try to implement the more pleasant parts of the Bible to make the world a better place. And then there are other Christians who use religion to provide a very questionable moral framework, having no morals of their own, and go on to use the nastier parts of the Bible to bully and subjugate others. The Christian Institute are very much in the latter category. They are wildly homophobic and transphobic, with a history of campaigning against gay marriage, against LGBT issues being taught in schools, and in favor of a higher Age of Consent for gay men. They have also endorsed restrictions on access to porn that eventually made their way into the deeply controversial Online Safety Act. They are successfully criminalizing expression of sexuality piecemeal, apparently believing it acceptable only when performed between a married man and woman. The fact that they are still influencing public policy, via evil puppets like Bertin, is a disgrace.

Among many other horrors, the Crime and Policing Bill will amend the scope of what is considered child porn under the UK's existing Protection of Children Act. Following the amendment, the subject of what is labeled an 'indecent image of a child' need not only be a child, but may also be someone who "appears to be or is implied to be a child”, even if verified as being over the age of 18. Many factors can contribute to the interpretation, including the title of the video or the setting. Two verified adults having sex in a fake school setting, with a title such as "High School Student Seduces Teacher", would likely be deemed child pornography.

What makes this particularly insidious is that upon conviction, a person who has merely viewed such a video on a site like Pornhub will become guilty of a child pornography offense. More specifically, one of making child pornography due to how viewing - or making a copy on a screen - is classified under UK law. Given how all underage erotica is now labeled 'CSAM' no matter how benign, a person who watched age-play adult porn online would, if arrested, no doubt be reported in the media as having made child sexual abuse material. As if that's not enough, the person would be forced to sign as a registered child sex offender, subject to all the requirements and prohibitions that entails. In fact, under the very same Crime and Policing Bill, that person would become subject to extreme restrictions on movement too, requiring them to notify police if entering premises where children might be present.

It goes without saying that most men, particularly those who would not identify as MAP, probably have at least some interest in teens. At the moment, they can scratch that itch with young-looking adults. But under the new law, where such material will constitute child porn de jure, what are they going to do? Prior to this law, eighteen was a firm line. Now it's incredibly blurry.