Michigan’s bill

In recent years, the legislation to restrict access to online porn sites has become more and more popular in conservative states, but in Michigan, legislators have just introduced a bill that would prohibit any online pornography, complete judgment.

The legislation, which offers a deeply draconian perspective on human sexuality, was introduced on September 11, and its main sponsor is the representative Josh Schriver (R-Oxford). The “Anticorruption of Public Morals Act”, which resembles a bill whose name (and content) came from the 1930s, prohibiting any “pornographic material”. What does that mean? According to the text of the bill, this means “the content, digital, distributed or otherwise distributed on the internet, whose main aim is to arouse or satisfy sexually, including videos, erotics, magazines, stories, manga, material generated by artificial intelligence, live flows or sound extracts.”

This, uh, sounds well like many. In addition, the bill would also define “any representation or description of trans persons as pornographic”, which means that such representations would also be prohibited, writes 404 media. Indeed, although the text of the bill does not include any specific mention of group people in group, it includes a stipulation which would prohibit the category of the following media: “A representation, a description or a simulation, whether real, animated, digital, written or auditory, which includes a disconnection between biology and gender by an individual of biological sex imitating, illustrating or representing himself held, cosmetology as having a reproductive nature unlike the biological sex of the individual. »»

The best sponsor of the bill, Schriver, says that it is a question of defending children. “These measures defend children, save our communities and put families first,” recently wrote Schriver on X. “Obscene and harmful online content threatens the families of Michigan, especially children.”

Pornography is obviously a complicated subject with a winding story, not entirely politically neat, and there are many nuanced conversations to have on this subject. One thing is certain: a pure and simple ban is not nuanced, nor does not allow conversation at all.

Gizmodo has contacted Schriver’s office to comment and update this story if he answers.

While, in previous times, the feminists of the third wave were those who argue for an abolition of the porn industry in recent times, the conservatives have led the charge, although for a set of fully different reasons. Earlier this year, the right-wing senator Mike Lee (Rutah) presented the law for the definition of interstate obscenity (IODA), which would have effectively criminalized all national pornography. It did not go much with the bill since it was presented and refers to a senatorial committee. The 2025 project of the Heritage Foundation, which, according to many, acted as a kind of right -wing policy bible for the Trump administration, also pleaded to criminalize any pornography.