[gjsman-1000]

> India is the origin of kamasutra texts after all and isn’t that sex negative as you might think ( it has the highest population for a reason)

I think you’re making a mistake here. It is completely possible to be appreciative of sex, and hate pornography. Even in the US, “Feminists Fighting Pornography” was a powerful cultural force for almost 2 decades.

Only in the Western world is “pro sex” = “pro pornography” in most people’s minds. Everywhere else, these are separate issues, with pornography bans actually being from a pro-sex cultural position (I.e. it shouldn’t be commoditized online).

[teitoklien]

I know for a fact they don’t hate pornography, i’ve been around their culture. They banned it because the judges felt like it.

There were no major protests to ban it, no government ongoing policy, nothing. It was just done because the court felt like it.

People were indifferent after that too, gov didn’t even comment, praise or shun the court. Life just went on and people just used vpns, gov doesn’t even care and doesn’t even enforce the ban outside of the 100 major urls and domain the supreme court itself decided and never revisited it.

India’s supreme court is extremely unusual compared to other countries, it’s as powerful as the executive branch if not more, the legislative branch have no say in electing supreme court judges the previous judges elect the next ones.

it just uses its power very sparingly out of fear that the legislative branch might come after their powers if they use them too much.

banning a few major porn sites, banning electoral bonds (india’s version of superpac), creating new right to privacy laws without consulting the parliament (because the court feared gov isn’t taking digital privacy seriously enough), legalise lgbt rights without any parliament input as it felt it needed to protect those citizens freedoms and rights to self identify and form their own families with legal protection.

are some places where the court has used its ultimate powers

I personally like India’s supreme courts, they are partially the reason why india is relatively stable compared to other south asian nations. Overall they use their super powers extremely responsibly and sparingly. Accounting for both political environment and balancing it against the long term interest of the nation’s citizens

[AnthonyMouse]

> Only in the Western world is “pro sex” = “pro pornography” in most people’s minds. Everywhere else, these are separate issues, with pornography bans actually being from a pro-sex cultural position (I.e. it shouldn’t be commoditized online).

The general problem is that when pornography bans are passed, they're characterized as being against for-profit hardcore pornography, but then they're worded broadly enough to also cover everything from sex education to medical depictions of human anatomy to actual human beings flirting with each other on the public internet with no profit motive, and then enforced against any of those things according to the whims of government officials.

Or worse, the law is written in such a way that it puts liability on third parties who then aggressively ban those things to avoid potential liability whether or not the law should or would have been enforced against them.

[IAmBroom]

No, the general problem is the government interfering in a natural right of humans. If someone wishes to pursue happiness in some way that doesn't meaningfully harm others, they should be able to.

Moreover, there may be positive social benefits from it; more permissive pornography laws are associated with lower sexual violence in the population.

[IAmBroom]

Only in your mind is "pornography" not a part of "sex". "Pro sex" doesn't mean "only the plainest sex imaginable", any more than "human rights" mean "to those people whom I like".