An apparently dire present doesn’t mean tomorrow can’t be wonderful

With new age verification laws and attacks targeting the adult industry and LGBTQIA+ people, our rights to sexual autonomy, consensual love, and unbiased education are under threat. These measures often reflect a conservative agenda rather than efforts to truly protect people.

But if history has taught us anything, it’s that the future is ours to make. If that’s the case, we’re willing to fight for it. Because if we don’t, then far sooner than we might expect, we really will live in a world ruled by sexual ignorance, irrational fears, and where healthy desires could land you in jail—or worse.

Lines being drawn

This isn’t an exaggeration. The World Population Review states that sixty-two countries restrict access to adult materials, and thirty-two make the production or use of sex-related content fully illegal.

Meanwhile, Human Rights Watch reports, “67 countries have national laws criminalizing same-sex relations between consenting adults. In addition, at least nine countries have national laws criminalizing forms of gender expression that target transgender and gender nonconforming people.”

RECOMMENDED READ: Age Verification Laws Driving Adult Content Creators Underground

If groups like the Heritage Foundation succeed, the United States could drastically increase censorship, criminalizing sexual expression, education, and those who enable it. Their vision threatens basic rights and freedoms.

Even learning about essentials like birth control is under attack. Planned Parenthood states only ten states require inclusive, affirming discussion of LGBTQIA+ identities. Six southern states either ban discussion of LGBTQIA+ topics in sex education, or require framing such identities negatively.

Like your sex lives depend on it

In the face of these attacks, the fight is about securing our fundamental right to sexual freedom—what Emma Goldman called ‘the right to love and be loved.’

To begin with, it’s important to stay informed: both about these and similar threats to our sexual rights, but also the vitally important sexual facts conservative laws are aiming to suppress.

Planned Parenthood is one such invaluable resource, as are the American Sexual Health Association(ASHA) and the World Health Organization (WHO). 

Unfortunately, due to the current US administration’s intervention, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) is no longer reliable and should be avoided.

The mentioned Human Rights Watch, along with the American Civil Liberties Union and the National Coalition for Sexual Freedom (NCSF) are excellent resources for tracking anti-sex laws.

Stand for love

Never forget that the most potent way to battle against sexual ignorance is to open our minds to exciting new possibilities. Though an admittedly odd choice in this context, H.P. Lovecraft said it best, “The oldest and strongest emotion of mankind is fear, and the oldest and strongest kind of fear is fear of the unknown.”

By this, I mean that if anything, sexual conservatism seems fueled by unreasonable fears: masturbation is bad, pornography is self-destructive; LGBTQ+ people are (at best) confused or (at worst) were “groomed” by an abuser; sex education leads to promiscuity, the list sadly goes on and on.

The scientifically proven reality is that none of the above is remotely true, that masturbation and sexual fantasies are physically and emotionally healthy, sexual pleasure helps ensure people experience safer and happier lives, LGBTQIA+ people deserve nothing but respect, acceptance, and support. 

Above all, we can turn optimism into action. Instead of waiting for change, actively challenge bigotry and misinformation. Join local or online advocacy groups, vote for policies that protect sexual freedom, and have open conversations that promote consent, understanding, and inclusivity. Every small step you take contributes to building a future filled with hope, respect, and consensual enjoyment.

Image Sources: Depositphotos

The post Fight for the Future: How to Usher in the Next Sexual Revolution We Desire—and Deserve appeared first on Future of Sex.

Anti-adult entertainment legislation causing industry to rethink its content—and itself

With age verification laws sweeping the world and Aylo Group Ltd., owner of the huge explicit entertainment platform, Pornhub, getting slapped with a record 5 million dollar fine for failing to remove existing, as well as preventing the re-upload of child sexual abuse material (CSAM) and non-consensual material (NCM) from its sites, it’s no wonder other adult content providers are reevaluating not only what they are creating and/or distributing but also how to make their content more erotically appealing to their customers.

The women-run-and-operated site, Ersties [NSFW], is a perfect example, recently having hired its very first “Chief Pleasure Officer,” who, aided by a carefully collected Pleasure Test Crew—aka “The W*nk Squad”—will be personally reviewing the platform’s content to ensure everything’s as immersive and authentically engaging as possible.

Reported by UniladTech, the CPO’s duties, according to the Ersties spokesperson, Cat, will involve “checking that the shot doesn’t cut and change right at the moment the user wants it to stay, to evaluating camera angles, and the natural rhythm of scenes to ensure the content remains sexy, authentic, visually appealing, and emotionally resonant.”

Lights, Camera—Consensuality?

Viewer satisfaction might be one crucial aspect, but the Chief Pleasure Officer also reflects the company’s mission. That is, as Cat further explained, “making ethical, authentic, women-led adult entertainment, with a pleasure experience that’s like no other. We want our users to feel good watching our content from the moment they click on the website to the moment they ‘finish’.”

RECOMMENDED READ: Age Verification Laws Driving Adult Content Creators Underground

Whether it’s trying to criminalize the production, distribution, or consumption of anything remotely sex-related—as with the proposed Michigan law aiming to erase LGBTQIA+ people from existence—or utilizing age verification laws to effectively drive companies such as Pornhub out of business, it seems like the adult entertainment industry has never been so relentlessly, ruthlessly targeted.

But also, like Pornhub, due to its inability or unwillingness to prevent the proliferation of CSAM and NCM videos, it’s easy to see why. It sometimes even feels as if the industry wants to be in the crosshairs, especially considering Ersties’ apparently simple approach could be what the industry needs to pull itself out of its self-imposed gutter.

Filth Doesn’t Have to Be Filthy

Admittedly, religious zealots like the authors of the already mentioned Michigan bill will likely never be swayed. However, promoters of the idea that adult materials foster unhealthy sexual attitudes, like the objectification of women, or are non-consensually created, might have their views swayed by Ersties-inspired companies.

“Sex shouldn’t be intimidating, it’s meant to be fun,” the company’s site eloquently states, “so even the most sensual, sexy moments should feel relatable and beautiful to watch. We want to show the kind of sex you could be having, just with better lighting! Real people, real bodies, real moans, real consent, real orgasms.”

Since they are such a well-deserved target, compare that with Pornhub and the myriad other sites the Aylo Group owns: nothing about taking responsibility, zero about authenticity, and especially nada about consent.

Listen and Act

It’s naive to think the adult entertainment industry’s driven by anything except making as much as and as fast as possible—no matter who gets hurt in the process.

That was then, but now that reckless expediency is coming back to haunt them. If creators, distributors, and platforms want to keep raking it in—to the tune of 275 billion USD by 2032, as per Maximize Market Research—they should start by listening to what those anti-porn advocates are saying, then, armed with this essential knowledge, act intelligently.

Borrowing a page or two from Ersties’ sexually-progressive playbook might be one approach: not merely claiming you’re going to be more responsible but actually making systemic changes to ensure it—as WHPDD (“What Hasn’t Pornhub Done”).

Likewise, instead of relying on cheap algorithms to regulate what does and doesn’t end up on your platform, hire your own Squad. More expensive? Sure, but so is a 5-million-dollar FTC fine.

The truth is that a majority of adult entertainment companies are too big to fail or be outlawed. But that doesn’t mean theycan’t be knocked back, hobbled, or kept from evolving into a sexually and emotionally healthy, ethically responsible, beautifully imaginative industry, which might happen if those involved keep failing to pay attention—and don’t realize that sex, joy, and pleasure aren’t just profitable but important.

Image Sources: Depositphotos

The post Lemons? Make Sexy Lemonade: Ersties Hires Chief Pleasure Officer As Pornhub Flounders appeared first on Future of Sex.

Penalty levied for failing to remove CSAM and NCM videos

Aylo Group Ltd, owner of the popular explicit video sharing site, PornHub, agreed to pay the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) and the state of Utah a five million dollar fine. According to an FTC press release, Aylo deceived “users by doing little to block tens of thousands of videos and photos featuring child sexual abuse material (CSAM) and nonconsensual material (NCM) despite claiming that this content was “strictly prohibited.’’’

The substantial fine comes on the heels of a 2020 New York Times article exposing the company’s failure to control PornHub’s content. As another New York Times piece noted, this caused Mastercard and Visa to cut ties with Aylo, which, even after Aylo started requiring content uploaders and performers to provide proof of consent and of legal age.

J’Accuse!

The FTC press release also accused Aylo of misleading those very same content providers, writing that it “told its models that they could ‘trust that their personal data remains secure’ yet failed to use standard security measures to protect the data.” 

But Aylo’s problems didn’t stop there. The FTC said the company was also unable or unwilling to block anyone attempting to upload CSAM videos, instead only keeping them from circumventing the ban by setting up other accounts using the username or email address.

RECOMMENDED READ: Companion Bot Companies Quake as a New California Law Targets Their Products

Not only that, but Aylo was caught in a lie when it claimed it had begun digitally marking potentially under-age content to alert them should the producer try to resubmit it to any of PornHub’s other sites—but the FTC pointed out this wasn’t effectively implemented for four years, from 2017 to 2021, resulting in what could be as many as a hundred CSAM videos being re-uploaded.

We promise, really—

In response, Aylo told TechCrunch it would be redoubling its self-policing efforts, pledging to “reaffirms [its] efforts to prevent the publication of CSAM and NCM.”

However, though accepting the judgment and fine, Aylo seems resistant to its intent, adding “The resolution reached involved enhancements to existing measures but did not introduce any new substantive requirements that were not either already in place or in progress”—apparently unaware of how many times it failed to fulfill any of its previous promises.

By admitting guilt, along with paying the five million dollar fine, Aylo agreed to verify the content and legal identity of anyone appearing in content submitted to PornHub or its other adult platforms; establish new, more stringent ways to halt the spread of underage and/or nonconsensual materials to any of its sites; permanently delete any CSAM and NCM still in its systems.

Porn needs help

Though their efforts might end up driving adult content viewers to unblocking sites, the age-verification laws sweeping the United States and other countries have certainly hit adult platforms where it hurts them the worst: their bank accounts.

Case in point: Anthony Penhale, Aylo’s chief legal officer, even went so far as to send a letter to Microsoft, Google, and Apple, begging for their help.  As Wired reported, he asked the tech giants to integrate age-verification tech into not just every app they sell but into their operating systems as well:

Based on our real-world experience with existing age assurance laws, we strongly support the initiative to protect minors online. However, we have found site-based age assurance approaches to be fundamentally flawed and counterproductive.

While Apple and Microsoft didn’t respond to Wired’s request to comment on the letter, Google’s Karl Ryan gave a less than supportive answer, saying, 

Google is committed to protecting kids online, including by developing and deploying new age assurance tools like our Credential Manager API that websites can use. We don’t allow adult entertainment apps on Google Play and would emphasize that certain high-risk services like Aylo will always need to invest in specific tools to meet their own legal and responsibility obligations.  

Storm on the horizon

Putting all this together, it appears Aylo’s dug itself into an extremely deep hole with every failure to block content exploiting non-consensual and underage performers, who suffer great emotional, physical, and financial harm. And Aylo’s out and out lies may ensure it may never see the light of day again.

Worse, its Google, Microsoft, and Apple letters might even be read as an admission of guilt, that despite its public commitment to do better, it seems to admit it can’t fulfil the promises it made to the FTC.

If so, as with any adult platform unable to grasp the why people are up in arms about CSAM and NCM content, then Aylo and all of its other sites deserve an unmarked grave.

Image Sources: Depositphotos

The post Pornhub Coughs up $5 Million FTC Fine—What This Might Mean for Other Adult Content Platforms appeared first on Future of Sex.

Missouri, Idaho, Utah also try to curtail legal personhood

If you and your AI sweetheart are planning on tying the knot, don’t try it in Ohio! According to Times Now, if passed, House Bill 469 won’t recognize your digital partner as a person, and won’t recognize the marriage either. 

But why digital nuptials should be a concern for Ohio State Representative Thaddeus Claggett (R-D68) is beyond me. After all, the US is a country that legally recognizes corporations as persons with the right of free speech–including the right to make unrestricted political donations–thanks to the Supreme Court’s 2010 ruling. So shouldn’t human/AI wedding vows also be protected as free speech, even if only half of the dyad is considered a legal person? 

Of course, what Cleggett’s bill misses is that intimate human/AI interactions—including digital weddings and digital smooching—are forms of private fantasy roleplay and as such, need not be legislated. 

But there’s more to H.B. 469 and similar bills proposed in Idaho, Utah, and Missouri. 

The potential perils of personhood

The following bills define what is or is not a person with legal rights. For instance, Idaho H. 720, which passed in March, 2022, was an amendment to Chapter 3, Title 5, of Idaho code, said “Notwithstanding any other provisions of law, environmental elements, artificial intelligence, nonhuman animals, and inanimate objects shall not be granted personhood in the state of Idaho.” The bill was sponsored by State Senator Tammy Nicols (R-10). The law took effect in July, 2022.

Utah H.B. 249, signed in 2024, also amended existing state codes. It prohibits legal personhood or recognition of legal personhood in AI, inanimate objects, bodies of water, land, real property (like your house), atmospheric gases (yes, you read that right), astronomical objects, weather, plants, nonhuman animals, and “any other member of a taxonomic domain that is not a human being.” So if you consider yourself a stellar-sexual partnered to a constellation or were considering leaving your car to a microbe (‘cause it visits more frequently than your children), you’re out of luck as of May, 2024.

RECOMMENDED READ: Bad-Boy Bot vs. Elf Prince AI: The Strange Allure of Toxic Digital Lovers

State Representative Walt Brooks (R-D75) sponsored the bill. State Senator Don L. Ipson (R-D29) sponsored it on the Senate floor.

The AI Non-Sentience and Responsibility Act, Missouri H.B. 1462, was introduced by State Representative Phil Amato (R-D113) in February 25, 2025. It has not been adopted so far. It too adds to existing codes with a section specific to artificial intelligence, and is far more comprehensive in scope than the Idaho and Utah bills. It not only prohibits personhood for any form of AI—as well as legal status for human/AI marriages—but also places responsibility for AI malfunctions exactly where it should be, on owners, developers and manufacturers of AI. 

Ohio H.B. 469 was introduced just last month. It is quite similar in intent and wording to Missouri’s law. It  explicitly declares AI systems as nonsentient entities and prohibits them from obtaining legal personhood.Later referred to the Technology & Innovation Committee it’s summarized on FastDemocracy.com as:

AI systems cannot be recognized as spouses or hold any personal legal status, nor can they serve in corporate roles. Additionally, it stipulates that AI systems cannot own property, and any harm caused by their operation is the responsibility of their owners or developers. 

The good news is you won’t need a digital prenuptial agreement prior to marriage with Elven Princes or Mafia Boyfriends on Character.ai. 

Conservative views in AI legislation

According to an interview for WTOL11, Cleggett’s Ohio bill is less about a “computer in a white dress” and more about the legal ramifications, and prevention of legal snarls, that may occur. Cleggett said he was focused on:

…the elements of power of attorney, financial decisions for someone; it’s those types of things that a spouse under our current system has rights to. The AI is going to be able to do as good or better job than many people in that setting, but we know that’s going to cause an enormous amount of problems.

However, Representative Cleggett may be more haunted by the specter of an AI bride or groom that he wants to admit. In the 2024 The Reporting Project profile, he self-identifies as a Conservative Republican, supports anti-abortion and anti-vaccination views, and serves as a deacon in a church he helped to found. Therefore it seems unlikely he would be sympathetic to the plight of digisexuals and other humans who are emotionally and sexually involved with chatbots and from his perspective, a ban on human/AI marriages makes sense.

Cleggett, a former civil engineer and businessman active in Licking County, also has a stake in tech. He represents Ohio’s State District 68, the future home of Intel’s long-delayed, $28 billion chip fabrication plant. 

So far, all of the above bills were sponsored by Republican state politicians with conservative views. For example, Tammy Nichols of Idaho co-sponsored an anti-mRNA vaccine bill in 2023. Utah’s Walt Brooks sponsored a successful, pro-gun “constitutional carry” bill, and during the pandemic sponsored an ultimately unsuccessful bill to prevent discrimination against non-vaccinated people in public places. 

Likewise, Missouri’s Phil Amato voted against discounted drug prices for people on Medicaid, supported a ban on state-sponsored DEI initiatives, and voted to prohibit “taxpayer-funded” abortion. Again, none of the above can be expected to support human/AI intimacy.

Confusing roleplay with real life

I get it. Artificial intelligence can seem scary, and I admit, the way it’s currently deployed borders on dystopian, plus human/AI romance is the new sensation fodder. But it’s not like digital relationships are brand new. They’ve been around for quite a while. Remember Second Life? 

While acknowledging the importance of good quality, proactive regulation on many aspects of AI, legislating consensually practiced intimacy will never be a good look, nor will such repression ultimately work.

But given that we are talking about digital fantasies and interactions taking place on presumably private platforms, we are in little danger, at the moment, of suffering directly from the anti-AI marriage clauses contained in these pieces of legislation. 

What’s more concerning is US conservatives taking every opportunity to insert anti-sex and pleasure clauses into all kinds of legislation, with every intention of squashing people into ever-diminishing boxes of behavior. It’s almost impossible to track all this and keep up. 

But wait, is there an AI for that? 

Image Source: A.R. Marsh using Ideogram.ai

The post Proposed Ohio Law Would Prohibit AI/Human Nuptials appeared first on Future of Sex.

Health resources, non-sexual imagery, written erotica, trans expression, and more would be illegal

If passed, Michigan’s House Bill 4938, the Anticorruption of Public Morals act, effectively criminalizes anything on the internet that is “deemed to corrupt public morals.” For Joshua Shriver, the bill’s author, and his co-sponsors, Republican representatives Joseph G. Pavlov and Matt Maddock, such material includes “various forms of pornographic content and other depictions that violate the act’s standards.”

Penalties for violating HB 4938 include felony charges for anyone convicted of willingly distributing any material the state government says will be corrupting to adults, carrying a fine of up to $125,000, and/or imprisonment for up to 25 years.

Sex equals jail

Introduced in September of this year, HB 4938 still has a long way to go before landing on Michigan’s Democratic Governor, Gretchen Whitmer’s, desk—who, despite recently supporting her state’s new anti-deepfake legislation—is unlikely to sign it into law.

And if Whitmer should, for some reason, decide to sign it, there’s a high probability it’ll be subsequently thrown out due to its obvious Free Speech violations.

RECOMMENDED READ: Companion Bot Companies Quake as a New California Law Targets Their Products

However, the fact that HB 4938 was introduced to the Michigan House or representatives proves there’s a serious, organized, and ongoing threat to suppress not just adult content but potentially everything related to reproduction, sexual education, invaluable health-related resources, gender and trans expression—and anything people like Representative Schriver don’t like.

If you think that’s hyperbole, HB 4938 specifically targets:

Depiction, description, or simulation, whether real, animated, digitally generated, written, or auditory, that includes a disconnection between biology and gender by an individual of biological sex imitating, depicting, or representing himself or herself to be of the other biological sex by means of a combination of attire, cosmetology, or prosthetics, or as having a reproductive nature contrary to the individual’s biological sex.

If that’s not blatant transphobia, then I don’t know what is.  Then there’s it having such vague terms, how could anyone differentiate between explicit materials from important sexual information sites?  In short, if it has to do with sex, then, innocuous or not, it—and you—could end up in the bill’s crosshairs.

They know it when they see it

Sharing what might prove to be devastating ambiguity with many other anti-porn legislations, Michigan is also specific when it comes to sex or barely sensual depictions, including anything made “to sexually arouse or gratify, including videos, erotica, magazines, stories, manga, material generated by artificial intelligence, live feeds, or sound clips.”

Reading that—while you still can, that is—should send an extremely unarousing shiver down your spine.  Spicy audiobooks?  Illegal.  Music with provocative lyrics? Illegal.  Love poetry?  Illegal.  Video games with sex scenes?  Illegal. Caught purring sweet nothings in your partner’s ear?  Both of you, as well as anyone with whom either of you might have shared it, could be looking at a quarter-century in a Federal prison.

Sex equals hope

It would be easy—not to mention dangerously foolish—to dismiss HB 4938 as yet another attention-seeking, yet pointless attempt, by anti-sex zealots to appeal to their intolerant and ignorant base.  

Much as we hate to admit it, we urgently need to wake up to the fact that there are a number of people in the United States and in many other countries who’d like nothing better than locking up or even executing you, me, or anyone  “deemed to corrupt public morals.”

If there’s going to be a future where these sorts of misguided beliefs are relegated to the history books, we need to fight back.  Case in point, let’s embrace the undeniable truth that consensual sex—and depicting it in movies, books, songs, stories, et al.— is fun and more than anything else makes us totally, absolutely, wonderfully human.

Starting with nonjudgmental, comprehensive sex education.  As the World Health Organization (WHO) states, citing a three-year study on the subject, “Evidence consistently shows that high-quality sexuality education delivers positive health outcomes with lifelong impacts. Young people are more likely to delay the onset of sexual activity – and when they do have sex, to practice safer sex—when they are better informed about their sexuality, sexual health and their rights.”

Whether you’re offended by HB 4938’s assault on our inalienable rights, rightfully scared that you or those you care about could be arrested and imprisoned because of it, or just wanted to keep Representative Schriver’s hands off your dirty books, join us in condemning these and other attempts by similarly misguided bigots who keep trying to make sexual pleasure a criminal offense.

We can have a bright, beautiful, inclusive, accepting, and sexually knowledgeable tomorrow—but only if we do everything we can to make it a certainty and not a tragically remote possibility.

Image Sources: Depositphotos

The post 1984 in 2025? Michigan Law Aims to Outlaw Adult-Content – And Too Much That Isn’t appeared first on Future of Sex.

48 States and counting now make it illegal to alter images or videos illicitly

Giving it to you straight, cross my heart, totally coming clean, but as of September 2025, with Michigan joining, nearly every US state has passed some form of legislation outlawing the production or distribution of nonconsensually digitally manipulated media, i.e. deepfakes.

“These videos can ruin someone’s reputation, career, and personal life. As such, these bills prohibit the creation of deep fakes that depict individuals in sexual situations and create sentencing guidelines for the crime,” Michigan Governor Gretchen Whitmer’s (D) press release stated. 

Sponsored by State Representatives Bierlein (R) and Tsernoglou (D), House Bills 4047 and 4048 mandate creators as well as disseminators of deepfakes that “would cause physical, emotional, reputational, or economic harm to an individual falsely depicted” be imprisoned for no more than a year and/or a $3,000 USD fine.

But the potential repercussions don’t stop there. For instance, if the person who created the deepfake did so to for monetary gain, uploaded it to their own or any other site, was previously convicted of any other crime, or  if the deepfake was made to “harass, extort, threaten, or cause physical, emotional, reputational, or economic harm to the depicted individual” what was previously a misdemeanor automatically becomes a substantial felony.  

Book ‘em, Danno

Though the Michigan bills were drafted to make individual deepfake instigators responsible for their actions and don’t target the online platforms involved, the federal Tools to Address Known Exploitation by Immobilizing Technological Deepfakes on Websites and Network (TAKE IT DOWN) act does.

In May this year, Ted Cruz (R) introduced this legislation that sets what many critics claim is an unrealistically tight deadline for platforms to identify and remove nonconsensually digitally altered content. 

RECOMMENDED READ: Uncool at Any Speed: Deepfakes Are Emotionally Harmful and Environmentally Wasteful

TAKE IT DOWN has also been lambasted as too-far-reaching.  Alarming enough, but potentially more so in light of the current US administration’s propensity for retribution towards any perceived opponents, which could easily turn it into an anti-free-speech weapon.

As the Electronic Frontier Foundation wrote about it back before it was signed into law:

The takedown provision applies to a much broader category of content—potentially any images involving intimate or sexual content—than the narrower NCII definitions found elsewhere in the bill. The takedown provision also lacks critical safeguards against frivolous or bad-faith takedown requests. Lawful content—including satire, journalism, and political speech—could be wrongly censored.

These are their stories

Sex-related deepfakes cause devastating social, financial, and emotional harm, yet state and federal laws to ban them haven’t considered how difficult it can be to tell the difference between what is real and what is not.

In addition to technical challenges platforms must also be willing to put themselves on the line when it comes to spotting illicit content.

As Kate Ruane, the Center for Democracy and Technology’s Free Expression Project director, told 404Media,  “If you do not have perfect technology to identify whatever it is we’re calling a deepfake, you are going to get a lot of guessing being done by the social media companies, and you’re going to get disproportionate amounts of censorship.”

Further adding, social media companies may instead prefer just to ban everything that might be a deepfake instead of running afoul of laws like TAKE IT DOWN: “For a social media company, it is not rational for them to open themselves up to that risk, right? It’s simply not. And so my concern is that any video with any amount of editing, which is like every single TikTok video, is then banned for distribution on those social media sites.”

To protect the innocent

As we’ve written before, though it’s critically important to do whatever’s necessary to prevent the creation and propagation of sexually-assaultive deepfakes, we need to ensure these laws do what they are intended to do and don’t end up making an already dire situation far worse.

A great place to begin is to ensure lawmakers understand how technologies like deepfakes actually work and, from there, take the expert advice on what can, can’t, and should never, ever be done to stop the spread of deepfakes, while at the same time protecting the civil liberties of others.

Image Sources: Depositphotos

The post The Real Deal: Laws Against Sexual Deepfakes Spread Across the US appeared first on Future of Sex.