Adult biz reform “in the works”

MFP-sponsored act to legalise sexual games

The Customs Department displays confiscated contraband goods including sex toys at a press briefing in Bangkok in 2015. (Photo: Pattarapong Chatpattarasill)
At a press presentation in Bangkok in 2015, the Customs Department presented confiscated illegal, including sex toys. ( Photo: Pattarapong Chatpattarasill )

In an effort to break the taboo surrounding the topic and better regulate the industry, the Move Forward Party ( MPP ) is pushing a proposal to amend the Criminal Code to legalize the adult entertainment industry and its related products, including pornographic materials and sex toys.

The costs will be discussed in the Lower House in “approximately a week or two,” according to MFP MP for Bangkok Taopiphop Limjittrakorn, who submitted the plan to the legislature last year.

Erotic photos and sex games are now prohibited from being used in any way in violation of Section 287 of the Criminal Code.

If the article is passed, only certain types of sexual materials will be banned, for example, videos and/or images depicting sexual violence, murder, and paedophilia, said Mr Taopiphop.

Additionally, the article will forbid people under the age of 20 from participating in the production of child information.

The article, according to Mr. Taopiphop, may also work to relax the regulations governing the sale of sex toys.

According to him, products that have been approved by the Thai Industrial Standards Institute ( TISI) and the Food and Drugs Administration ( FDA ) should be accessible to the general public for legal purchase.

The MFP MP for Bangkok asserted that while facing severe censure for the group’s efforts to pass the bill, he was doing it with the public interest in mind.

” I want people to stop pretending]that adult material is taboo]. Let’s talk]openly ] through parliamentary mechanisms”, he said.

” I wonder where Thai society’s social standards are.”

Mr. Taopiphop claimed that he wo n’t personally benefit from this bill, adding that he brought the subject up for discussion in parliament because he thought it would be a way to advance society.

He claimed,” I brought up the matter no because I want Thai boys to have easy access to sexual materials.” ” The real purpose here is to bring]the grownup content industry ] to the floor so it could be discussed openly and legitimately regulated”.

He claimed that legalizing the economy could reduce taxes and improve the safety of those who work in it. For instance, numerous sex workers claim that customers who are aware of their defiance of police brutality exploit them.

Rachada Dhnadirek, an executive of the criticism Democrat Party, had recently said the group will help MFP’s proposal to legalise sex toys in Thailand. According to a leading European market research firm, Technavio, she cited research that found legalizing sexual products could benefit the nation.

Since 2019, the global sex toys industry has grown by about 7 % annually, which is equivalent to an increase of about 300 billion baht, she said. When sex games are legalised, the government can impose levies on sex toy sellers, which may lead to more profits for the position, she said.

A common hearing on MFP’s proposal to amend Section 287 of the Criminal Code was now held last year, from August 25 through October 31.

While the reading was attended by 1, 072 people, only 22 expressed their opinions.

A number of consultations with state agencies have also been conducted, namely the Ministry of Justice ( MoJ), Ministry of Public Health ( MoPH), Ministry of Education, Royal Thai Police (RTP ) and Office of National Human Rights Commission.

The RTP, for example, was concerned by the bad effects of easy access to sexual supplies, which it believed may cause sex-related acts to rise.

Overall, the RTP believes that this bill may cause more harm than good to society if it were passed into law.

The MoPH argued that the bill should make a plan to stop people under the age of 20 from working in the adult industry, while the MoJ argued that the bill does n’t clearly distinguish between legal and illegal production, which could increase the likelihood of corrupt officials abusing the system.