New UK Porn Laws - Advice Appreciated | Porn Fan Community Forum

Author	Post
Max80 Member 7 Posts 11/12	Posted - Oct 19 2026 : 9:40AM I'm looking for opinions on these new laws in the UK, particularly those relating to porn involving step relationships. They Seem bonkers to me, and ridiculous when you consider they still allow marriage between real cousins. New laws in the UK state that online pornography depicting strangulation or incestuous relationships will be banned from early November, the government has announced. The exact wording is as follows: From 6 November 2026, it will be a criminal offence in England and Wales to possess or publish pornographic images that explicitly and realistically depict: 1) Strangulation or suffocation 2) Penetrative sexual activity between people who a reasonable person would think are related, or pretending to be related, in a certain way. This includes depictions of close familial relatives such as father and daughter or brother and sister, and certain step and foster relationships where one person is, or is pretending to be, under 18 3) Sexual activity between at least 2 people where a reasonable person would think at least one person is, or is pretending to be, under 16 I think 1 and 3 are pretty clear, but I'm less sure about No 2. I'm a member of Nubiles and Teamskeet where a lot of videos involve pretend step relationships, do you think those sites will be banned in the UK from Nov 6th? Personally, I would have thought that neither site would be banned because it says 'certain step and foster relationships where one person is, or is pretending to be, under 18', and I don't think either site makes out their models are under 18. Am I right about that? What do you think? Also, it says it will be a criminal offence to possess or publish, so even if memberships to sites like Nubiles and Teamskeet were affected by this law, is it still okay to stream? or will the UK somehow block access to sites such as Nubiles and Teamskeet? I've no idea how they would do that, and I guess many would just use a VPN anyway if that was the case. Has anyone got any thoughts on these new laws and whether they will affect memberships to sites like Nubiles and Teamskeet for people in the UK? Any advice and opinions on this would be appreciated. Talk about bad timing, I only joined those sites a couple of weeks ago! Edited by - Max80 on Oct 19 2026 Edited by - Max80 on Oct 19 2026 Edited by - Max80 on Oct 19 2026 Edited by - Max80 on Oct 19 2026 Edited by - Max80 on Oct 19 2026 Edited by - Max80 on Oct 19 2026 Edited by - Max80 on Oct 19 2026 Edited by - Max80 on Oct 19 2026 Edited by - Max80 on Oct 19 2026 Edited by - Max80 on Oct 19 2026 Edited by - Max80 on Oct 19 2026 Edited by - Max80 on Oct 19 2026 Edited by - Max80 on Oct 19 2026 Edited by - Max80 on Oct 20 2026 [Link]
RelentlessOnanism Senior Member 2709 Posts 3/16	Posted - Oct 19 2026 : 4:03PM ^I'm a libertarian in these matters. As long as it's consensual and it doesn't involve animals or children, then anything goes. Sadly, the UK has become the Petri dish for these sort of censorious laws. The irony is, I'm not that interested in choking or underage scenes. I do like incest scenes a lot, but they're pretty rare (if you don't count step-incest, which I don't). I suppose that's why God invented VPNs. [Link]
Max80 Member 7 Posts 11/12	Posted - Oct 20 2026 : 4:35AM ^Tell me about it. To free up prison spaces, the UK are releasing thousands of prisoners early. These are people who committed real crimes having their sentence reduced by 50% to make way for those who watch a professional fictitious scene between to consensual adults who pretend to be step siblings. Bonkers! Does anyone have any thoughts on whether these laws will ban sites like Teamskeet, Family Strokes, and Nubiles? They all have many scenes featuring step relationships but the wording of the law says 'certain step and foster relationships where one person is, or is pretending to be, under 18', and I don't think those sites make out their models are under 18. Am I right about that? What do you think? [Link]
LezTrib Member 202 Posts 8/26	Posted - Oct 20 2026 : 6:21AM Can the industry really not function without incest-themed content? Is it necessary to include such material, even if it's fictional? Can these websites not be successful without showing this type of content? It's all about changing perspectives. These websites have already gone way too overboard with such material, and now they're even including absurd and nonsensical scenarios just to keep people hooked and addicted to their content. [Link]
jackdore Member 525 Posts 6/16	Posted - Oct 20 2026 : 11:59AM ^^ Have posted several times over the past decade how a small group of fanatical anti-porn campaigners in the UK are continually pushing for more and more controls using emotive propaganda usually involving dubious statistics about harm to children. I read they wanted all porn involving step-relations including step-moms to be banned but this proved too much for effective legislation at least for the moment. They will be back for more. AND if Ofcom, charged with enforcing the Online Safety Act, go after porn yet again, their priorities will become open to question as they have proved feeble when it comes down to their duties in getting platforms to take down fraudulent adverts for instance. [Link]

jackdore Member 525 Posts 6/16	Posted - Oct 20 2026 : 12:09PM LezTrib wrote: Can the industry really not function without incest-themed content? Is it necessary to include such material, even if it's fictional? Can these websites not be successful without showing this type of content? It's all about changing perspectives. These websites have already gone way too overboard with such material, and now they're even including absurd and nonsensical scenarios just to keep people hooked and addicted to their content. Click to expand Your last sentence is reflecting the mindset of the would be censors. I'm not a subscriber to any of these sites but give the censors an inch... They could be calling for a ban on something you are interested in next. [Link]
LezTrib Member 202 Posts 8/26	Posted - Oct 20 2026 : 12:59PM ^I feel that the content I'm interested in isn't even worth mentioning here anymore because its quality has declined so much and it has become increasingly nonsensical. So, I wouldn't be particularly disappointed if restrictions were imposed on that, too. But I think you're missing the point I'm trying to make. I read on a news website that restrictions on this type of content were being discussed, with several reasons given for why they were necessary. One example mentioned was an account belonging to an underage boy who had asked a teacher how to choke girls. Just wow! What's next? Will an underage boy come along and ask what he should do with his stepmother or stepsisters? Can you tell me? Every website seems to be jumping on the bandwagon and providing this kind of content, while viewers are gradually becoming desensitised to it. Someone needs to raise their voice and push for restrictions on how these relationships are portrayed to audiences. You can't keep excusing everything by saying, "It's fictional," or "What's the problem? It's just a storyline." A storyline can involve a doctor falling in love with a lawyer. It can also explore an isolated woman finding love with a man or another woman. So why does every website seem so obsessed with incest-themed content only? There are so many permutations and combinations of fictional storylines that writers could explore. I guess creativity shouldn't be this difficult! [Link]
whyalwaysbilly Senior Member "Many's the person missed the opportunity to say nothing, and lost much because of it." 2032 Posts 8/22	Posted - Oct 20 2026 : 1:26PM I blame the media a lot for this. There was recently a storyline in the soap opera Coronation Street where a kid inadvertently caused his girlfriend to have a stroke after consensual choking and I'm pretty sure Adolescence hasn't helped either. [Link]
LezTrib Member 202 Posts 8/26	Posted - Oct 20 2026 : 1:53PM That's why I mentioned "better late than never" In today's social media age, all these websites seem to be following the same pattern, but people tend to ignore it in the name of fiction. Somebody needs to raise their voice against this. A beautiful website like GFF has been ruined by this kind of content. Girlsway, which used to offer something different before 2020, has also changed its direction. The same goes for many other websites, whether BG or GG. When content is presented in a way that keeps you hooked, you can gradually become accustomed to it. Porn can become addictive, and some people may even try to imitate what they watch in their real lives. How long are we going to keep feeding viewers exaggerated, explicit material involving incest themes? Why is nobody at least questioning whether it is morally or ethically appropriate to keep producing this kind of content on every website? Can't this industry succeed without constantly relying on such material? I genuinely don't believe that restricting certain types of content would necessarily result in huge losses for the industry. There's room for creativity and variety without having to push the same explicit incest themes over and over again. [Link]
Max80 Member 7 Posts 11/12	Posted - Oct 21 2026 : 5:22AM Thanks for your replies, although nobody has really voiced an opinion on whether sites like Teamskeet, Family Strokes, and Nubiles will be impacted by these new laws. As I said in my OP, I would have thought that none of those sites will not be affected by these new laws because it says 'certain step and foster relationships where one person is, or is pretending to be, under 18', and I don't think any of those sites make out their models are under 18. Am I right about that? What do you think? Also, it says it will be a criminal offence to possess or publish, so even if memberships to sites like Nubiles and Teamskeet were affected by this law, is it still okay to stream? or will the UK somehow block access to sites such as Nubiles and Teamskeet? I've no idea how they would do that, and I guess many would just use a VPN anyway if that was the case. Has anyone got any thoughts on these new laws and whether they will affect memberships to sites like Nubiles and Teamskeet for people in the UK? I can't really see the logic for banning personally, not when you see far worse things on TV and in movies, rape, murder, extreme violence etc. Pretty much anything goes, including incest in shows like GOT. Why is porn any more real and damaging than what you see on TV and in movies? Edited by - Max80 on 10/21/2026 5:23:19 AM Edited by - Max80 on 10/21/2026 5:23:47 AM [Link]
LezTrib Member 202 Posts 8/26	Posted - Oct 21 2026 : 6:12AM ^Nobody supports rape, murder, or extreme violence in movies, all in the name of creative liberty. The million-dollar industries can show as much as they want without giving a second thought to the consequences these portrayals may have on people's mindsets. Anyway, these debates will never lead anywhere unless the industry stops believing that incest-related content is the only way to attract subscribers or generate traffic, especially when various websites offer such material to viewers for free. The harsh reality is that money talks. [Link]
rearadmiral All-Star Member 6674 Posts 12/11	Posted - Oct 21 2026 : 7:59AM Dumb question, but I assume the foundation for these laws, even if it is ostensibly "won't someone please think of the children!", is really a desire to impose religious control over what the religious people deem to be unacceptable. Is this correct? I'll confess that maybe I ascribe nefarious intent to religious folks too quickly in some cases, but thanks to the rise of white evangelical Christianity in the US and how they've seized so much power in that country, I have lost whatever little trust in religion that I may have once had. My guess is that seeing the US experience and success, others may be emboldened to try flexing muscle in other places. If this is a right-wing Christian thing, they are following a well used and successful playbook: attack the low hanging fruit. By going after "incest" porn, that then leaves them open to say that anyone who challenges them on freedom-of-expression grounds is just a dirty pervert who supports incest. I know I wouldn't be first in line to stand up to these groups because their counter-attack is effective. I recall 15 years ago or so when in Canada a political scientist/academic (who was on the political right) pointed out the absurdity of a new law around child pornography brought in by the hard-right federal government at the time. I can't recall the issue exactly, but I think it was something like making it a criminal offence for someone to make a drawing depicting a child or writing a story involving a child and never, ever sharing it. The commentator pointed out that this was akin to criminalizing thoughts. He was resoundingly attacked from the right who instead of counter-arguing, simply said that if he took this position, then he is clearly a pedophile. I've read that many commenters here say that they aren't personally into "step" porn, so I'll make a counterpoint. I do like it, but not because of the step aspect. The step aspect of it doesn't do anything for me. But in scenes where the setup is a stepfather and stepdaughter, if there is a big age difference, that works for me. I enjoy those age gap scenes. Many of these are shot as "step" scenes, but many aren't. Maybe it's a neighbour. I regularly subscribe to Lethal Hardcore to get the latest scenes with Mike Hunt aka Stoney Curtis. He's in his mid-60s and shoots scenes with the freshest talent in the business. Seeing a lovely 19-year-old sucking on a 65+ year-old's cock works for me. And I don't think Hunt/Curtis has ever once used the "step" setup. (As an aside and to further my point of why I like some "step" scenes, I have no interest in step-sibling scenes. I'll watch them if they feature a model I like, but I don't actively seek them out. For me, it's just another scene with a model I collect. In fact, in those scenes, I'd prefer another plot. Seducing a sister's boyfriend, pool cleaner, classmate, etc.) [Link]
Danielmayu33216 Member 716 Posts 5/25	Posted - Oct 21 2026 : 8:58AM Max80 wrote: Thanks for your replies, although nobody has really voiced an opinion on whether sites like Teamskeet, Family Strokes, and Nubiles will be impacted by these new laws. As I said in my OP, I would have thought that none of those sites will not be affected by these new laws because it says 'certain step and foster relationships where one person is, or is pretending to be, under 18', and I don't think any of those sites make out their models are under 18. Am I right about that? What do you think? Also, it says it will be a criminal offence to possess or publish, so even if memberships to sites like Nubiles and Teamskeet were affected by this law, is it still okay to stream? or will the UK somehow block access to sites such as Nubiles and Teamskeet? I've no idea how they would do that, and I guess many would just use a VPN anyway if that was the case. Has anyone got any thoughts on these new laws and whether they will affect memberships to sites like Nubiles and Teamskeet for people in the UK? I can't really see the logic for banning personally, not when you see far worse things on TV and in movies, rape, murder, extreme violence etc. Pretty much anything goes, including incest in shows like GOT. Why is porn any more real and damaging than what you see on TV and in movies? Click to expand What exactly will be banned in the UK from 6 November 2026? 1. Pornography depicting strangulation or suffocation will be criminalised, including possession and publication of covered material. 2. Porn depicting penetrative sexual activity between specified relatives will also be covered. This includes certain fictional family role-play scenarios, so performers do not necessarily have to be related in real life. 3.Porn depicting adults pretending to be children under 16 will be covered by a separate offence. 4.What about incest-themed content? 5. This does not mean every form of incest-themed fiction or fantasy is automatically banned. The specific content and statutory definitions matter. 6. If the websites you mentioned host this type of content, it will be illegal to possess or publish the covered material in England and Wales from 6 November 2026. This is not a worldwide ban, and the new law does not automatically apply in other countries. [Link]
Max80 Member 7 Posts 11/12	Posted - Oct 21 2026 : 10:31AM ^Thanks for your reply. Yes, those are the laws as I understand them, but with regards to step relationships it says 'certain step and foster relationships where one person is, or is pretending to be, under 18'. As US law mandates that all performers in sexually explicit content must be at least 18 and provide valid government-issued proof of age, you can be pretty sure there are no models under that age working for Teamskeet or Nubiles. So, I guess my question is therefore, do sites like Teamskeet, Family Strokes, and Nubiles portray the models involved in step-family scenes as under the age of 18? If they don't, then the new laws would not apply. I haven't watched that may scenes yet, but in those I have watched, there has never been an implication that the girl is under 18. Yes, they might be 18, 19, or early twenties, but I haven't watched a scene where they have said or done anything to suggest the model is under 18. Has anyone watched a scene on those sites where they have made out the model involved is under 18? Would they even be allowed to do that? Edited by - Max80 on 10/21/2026 10:33:13 AM Edited by - Max80 on 10/21/2026 10:34:33 AM Edited by - Max80 on 10/21/2026 10:41:31 AM [Link]
RelentlessOnanism Senior Member 2709 Posts 3/16	Posted - Oct 21 2026 : 4:58PM rearadmiral wrote: Dumb question, but I assume the foundation for these laws, even if it is ostensibly "won't someone please think of the children!", is really a desire to impose religious control over what the religious people deem to be unacceptable. Is this correct? I'll confess that maybe I ascribe nefarious intent to religious folks too quickly in some cases, but thanks to the rise of white evangelical Christianity in the US and how they've seized so much power in that country, I have lost whatever little trust in religion that I may have once had. My guess is that seeing the US experience and success, others may be emboldened to try flexing muscle in other places. If this is a right-wing Christian thing, they are following a well used and successful playbook: attack the low hanging fruit. By going after "incest" porn, that then leaves them open to say that anyone who challenges them on freedom-of-expression grounds is just a dirty pervert who supports incest. I know I wouldn't be first in line to stand up to these groups because their counter-attack is effective. I recall 15 years ago or so when in Canada a political scientist/academic (who was on the political right) pointed out the absurdity of a new law around child pornography brought in by the hard-right federal government at the time. I can't recall the issue exactly, but I think it was something like making it a criminal offence for someone to make a drawing depicting a child or writing a story involving a child and never, ever sharing it. The commentator pointed out that this was akin to criminalizing thoughts. He was resoundingly attacked from the right who instead of counter-arguing, simply said that if he took this position, then he is clearly a pedophile. I've read that many commenters here say that they aren't personally into "step" porn, so I'll make a counterpoint. I do like it, but not because of the step aspect. The step aspect of it doesn't do anything for me. But in scenes where the setup is a stepfather and stepdaughter, if there is a big age difference, that works for me. I enjoy those age gap scenes. Many of these are shot as "step" scenes, but many aren't. Maybe it's a neighbour. I regularly subscribe to Lethal Hardcore to get the latest scenes with Mike Hunt aka Stoney Curtis. He's in his mid-60s and shoots scenes with the freshest talent in the business. Seeing a lovely 19-year-old sucking on a 65+ year-old's cock works for me. And I don't think Hunt/Curtis has ever once used the "step" setup. (As an aside and to further my point of why I like some "step" scenes, I have no interest in step-sibling scenes. I'll watch them if they feature a model I like, but I don't actively seek them out. For me, it's just another scene with a model I collect. In fact, in those scenes, I'd prefer another plot. Seducing a sister's boyfriend, pool cleaner, classmate, etc.) Click to expand It's not religiously motivated. The UK is just about the most secular country on earth; religion plays very little role in politics and public life. It's not like the States, with all the born again Christians etc. I don't know the exact motivation but it won't be down to religion. [Link]

whakamaakuukuu Member Let's be careful out there! 451 Posts 4/26	Posted - Oct 22 2026 : 12:57AM By the way, the government site for the law Crime and Policing Act 2026: Offences relating to pornography ... recognises the harm that some forms of pornography can have in shaping real-world behaviour, including by normalising harmful or illegal sexual behaviour... These offences tackle pornography that risks normalising conduct that is harmful or illegal in real life, such as child sexual abuse. Click to expand and The maximum penalty for possession is: . 2 years' imprisonment for pornography that depicts strangulation or suffocation, or penetrative sexual activity between certain relatives; . 3 years' imprisonment for pornography depicting sexual activity involving a person who is, or is pretending to be, under 16 The maximum penalty for publication for all offences is 5 years' imprisonment. Click to expand Looking into this, it stems from a review on pornography. The usual stuff that porn is often accused of: misogynistic, violent and demeaning/degrading to women. Baroness Gabby Bertin was a strong proponent for regulations who authored this document about it: Creating a Safer World - the Challenge of Regulating Online Pornography (PDF) Yeah, I wouldn't imagine it's out of the same extreme religiosity. Perhaps just down to a specific high profile person, or group which had a strong voice. As if anyone would have publicly stated the counter argument, thus tarring themselves along with Epstein, Andrew, and Peter Mendelson. Edited by - whakamaakuukuu on 10/22/2026 1:03:58 AM [Link]
whakamaakuukuu Member Let's be careful out there! 451 Posts 4/26	Posted - Oct 22 2026 : 6:40AM The counter-argument would be that women couldn't be allowed to appreciate the physicality of gonzo or rough sex. That's a female performers choice, whether you believe it's true autonomy or free well or a society-forced/group subconscious (cf Carl Jung [yoong].) The rules seem contrary to the gender differences often that male is macho, female is meek. Haven't we seen this time and again that female performers are absolutely willing, or otherwise they wouldn't put themselves in that position. Aidra Fox for one in her introductory for New Sensations said she like rough, hard sex, the harder the better. So women don't have the freedom to be submissive and men must hide away from perhaps their very power. This world is very difference, of course, it's check "is this okay" at every moment. [Link]
Max80 Member 7 Posts 11/12	Posted - Oct 22 2026 : 11:32AM As I've said above, although they have a number of step relationship scenes, I don't personally think that sites like Teamskeet and Nubiles will be affected by this law. It clearly states 'certain step and foster relationships where one person is, or is pretending to be, under 18', and I'm pretty sure neither site makes out their models are under 18. I certainly haven't watched a scene where a model has claimed to be under 18. Even if they did, and they don't, the new law says it will be a criminal offence to possess or publish such material. Therefore, it would not be against the law to stream the scenes because you haven't published them yourself and you don't possess them either. It all seems a bit bonkers to me when you see far worse things on TV and in movies, rape, murder, extreme violence, child grooming, cannibalism etc. Pretty much anything goes, including incest in shows like GOT. They are likely to have a 15 or 18 certificate but they're not illegal. Why is porn any more real and damaging than what you see on TV and in movies? In fact, TV shows and movies are made to be as realistic as possible, whereas scenes on Teamskeet and Nubiles are unmistakably pure fantasy. It clearly says when you enter sites like Teamskeet 'Individuals featured in these films did so of their own free will, without harm, or force. All situations are only depictions and not reality. All performers are 18 or older. All activity is fully consensual.' As US law mandates that all performers in sexually explicit content must be at least 18 and provide valid government-issued proof of age, you can be pretty sure there are no models under that age working for Teamskeet or Nubiles. and I'm yet to watch a scene where the model claims to be under 18. Personally, I don't think much mainstream porn is going to be affected by the new laws. Edited by - Max80 on 10/22/2026 12:06:44 PM Edited by - Max80 on 10/22/2026 12:09:26 PM Edited by - Max80 on 10/22/2026 12:35:35 PM Edited by - Max80 on 10/22/2026 5:15:42 PM [Link]
jackdore Member 525 Posts 6/16	Posted - Oct 22 2026 : 5:31PM ^ The paragraph relating to step relations seems to me to be deliberately vague which has long typified how UK censorship legislation operates. I've heard of the claim that a teenager asked a teacher if it was OK to strangle his girlfriend, which has been repeated by campaigners who want increasing criminalisation of pornography, but is it true? The references to 'choking' are also vague. Yes, there's some really nasty stuff that no-one on this forum would defend including the involvement of animals and those under 18. And of course any kind of coercion or any case in which anyone is prevailed to do anything they're uncomfortable with. Otherwise there should no censorship of sexual activity by consenting adults. [Link]