Republican Representative Brady Brammer’s controversial “Warning Labels Amendments” bill, which could punish distributors for not putting warning labels on pornography, stirred up national attention overnight earlier this month. Even as anti-porn activists support this legislation, some voice concerns over First Amendment right violations and efficacy.

Brammer’s proposed warning label would read: “Exposing minors to pornography is known to the state of Utah to cause negative impacts on brain development, emotional development, and the ability to maintain intimate relationships. Such exposure may lead to harmful and addictive sexual behavior, low self-esteem, and the improper objectification of and sexual violence towards others, among numerous other harms.”

In 2016, Gov. Gary Herbert officially declared pornography to be a public health crisis. And in 2018, the Utah House “porn czar” legislation was officially repealed, no longer allowing the attorney general to appoint someone to review pornographic material for prosecution. Brammer’s bill allows Utah courts to sue distributors up to $2,500 per violation. A 2009 amendment to Utah laws governing pornography distribution clearly states that distribution is illegal. It imposes a fine for some offenses and identifies others as punishable by incarceration. Yet, this bill still implies that Utah has porn distributors.

The CDC recently established that compulsive sexual behavior disorder is an impulse control disorder (referred to by many as sexual addiction). In so doing, they acknowledge global concern for this issue. CSBD is a health concern that must be met with education and a federal health advisory requiring porn-content producers (not distributors) to post a warning.

Yet, Brammer’s bill ignores many actionable measures currently available to state lawmakers. The bill addresses a federal problem out of the jurisdiction of Utah’s State Legislature and contains language both too broad and vague to be effective. Instead of providing minors with protection, it neglects education and emphasizes shaming and punishing ideologies that may potentially inflict damage upon minors.

Instead of attempting to regulate the internet or fine vague “distributors,” lawmakers should create, or fund, school and community campaigns to educate parents and their children about safe technology use.

Legislators should also push for changes to Utah’s sex-ed program. While good changes were made during last year’s session, more are needed. Teaching students about CSBD in their middle and high school health courses is of the utmost importance. If lawmakers hope to protect Utah’s youth from potentially dangerous behaviors, they must provide them with a comprehensive sex-ed program — the current ignorance is just dangerous.

Lawmakers have also overlooked one unique, valuable resource. Although many Utahns struggle to gain 24 hours of sobriety from a life of compulsive sexual behavior, others are living anew, in recovery. Who is better suited to speak at school assemblies and share appropriate, compelling stories about the risks of developing CSBD through porn use than the responsible, recovering men and women living among us?

If we don’t replace the fear of talking about sexual health with confident conversations, members of younger generations will repeat the same mistakes. We must speak candidly with tomorrow’s leaders, today — before their curiosity leads them into a battle they are ill-equipped to fight, alone and afraid.

Of course, minors should not view porn. Sadly, many children face early exposure, with its accompanying negative effects. For far too many early viewings begin a vicious behavioral pattern of watching, hiding and lying. The cycle repeats, hindering both brain and emotional development, affecting one’s ability to develop close, intimate relationships later in life. Even so, one cannot empirically say that viewing porn is the biggest danger to a child in this equation. Adult responses to either discovery or disclosure from a child can badly damage a child’s psyche.

We cannot eliminate the threat of porn, so we must respond to it wisely. Lawmakers should remind parents and guardians that they (not the government) are usually a children’s first responder and primary gatekeeper. To help kids understand their feelings, caretakers must not only stay up with internet safety for phones, devices and computers, they must also initiate frequent, healthy communication with children about porn because “no one can learn everything at once.” Parents must plan early on how they will address pornography exposure.

Trusted adults must teach minors that porn often portrays unrealistic physical appearances and often shows unsafe sexual health practices, including violence. Children need a safe environment to ask questions about their health and sexuality or disclose a problematic behavior. Parents and guardians can directly affect this much-needed change. Brammer’s bill, however, cannot.

No amount of legislation can provide Utah’s children a shame-free environment where they can speak to a safe, responsible adult about their accidental or intentional porn viewing. While some may now have this, others lack such security in their home life. Protecting Utah’s youth from porn (and the damage many adults unwittingly inflict on them through unnecessary shaming) requires action that is intelligent, not emotional.

During one news interview, Brammer said, “I have parents reach out all the time that are saying this [porn] is really hurting our family, this is really hurting our children. Is there anything that can be done on this?” Clearly, there are substantial resources to help parents, so why are none mentioned in his bill? Perhaps Brammer and his colleagues are more interested in political optics than in meaningful solutions.

The bill offers no comprehensive help to minors who may view pornography. And, while “minors” appears only seven times in the 2700+ word bill, “violator” appears 20 times and “violation” appears 42 times. Based on these language choices, it’s clear Brammer is far more concerned with fining violators than with helping minors.

The bill is riddled with other problems, including the warning label, which ignores an adult’s right to view legal pornography and offers no help to compulsive users.

“Warning Labels Amendments” fails a basic transparency test. This bill only applies to porn, so why leave it out of the title? “Obscenity” or “porn” should be included so that the public can recognize the bill for what it is. Bills are confusing enough without lawmakers disguising their real intent.

Additionally, the potential confusion this bill creates about what pornography is cannot be overstated. In a state that already struggles to talk about sexual health, Utahns do not need the draconian censorship this bill could bring.

Finally, Brammer’s bill fails to acknowledge that pornography production is illegal in Utah, and pornography distribution laws are already tight. This bill represents extreme overreach as it grasps for power beyond Utah’s borders — where porn is legally produced and distributed. Lawmakers talk all the time about a simplified code that is more approachable for Utahns, so why add ineffective, overly complicated bills like this one?

Better language choices will acknowledge one’s first amendment rights, as they relate to porn, while also providing a warning and offering direction. I suggest, “CAUTION: PLEASE VIEW RESPONSIBLY, KEEP AWAY FROM MINORS. Be advised; for some, exposure leads to addictive, potentially harmful behaviors. Help is available. Please call 1-800-662-HELP.”

Utah’s leaders have the power to promote anti-shaming campaigns to encourage healthier discussions about pornography and sexual health issues. They will be remiss if they opt for political points over parental preparation. When constituents ask lawmakers, “What can be done about porn?” their responses must include “talk to them” and “be loving.” Sloppy, sue-happy legislation will not help parents hold regular, open conversations with their children.

[email protected]

@TheChrony