It seems crazy to me but ive seen this concept floated on several different post. There seems to be a number of users here that think there is some way AI generated CSAM will reduce Real life child victims.

Like the comments on this post here.

https://sh.itjust.works/post/6220815

I find this argument crazy. I don’t even know where to begin to talk about how many ways this will go wrong.

My views ( which are apprently not based in fact) are that AI CSAM is not really that different than “Actual” CSAM. It will still cause harm when viewing. And is still based in the further victimization of the children involved.

Further the ( ridiculous) idea that making it legal will some how reduce the number of predators by giving predators an outlet that doesnt involve real living victims, completely ignores the reality of the how AI Content is created.

Some have compared pedophilia and child sexual assault to a drug addiction. Which is dubious at best. And pretty offensive imo.

Using drugs has no inherent victim. And it is not predatory.

I could go on but im not an expert or a social worker of any kind.

Can anyone link me articles talking about this?

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    51 year ago

    AI CSAM is not really that different than “Actual” CSAM

    How do you not see how fucking offensive this is. A drawing is not really different from a REAL LIFE KID being abused?

    It will still cause harm when viewing

    The same way killing someone in a video game will cause harm?

    And is still based in the further victimization of the children involved.

    The made up children? What the hell are you talking about?

    Some have compared pedophilia and child sexual assault to a drug addiction

    No one sane is saying actually abusing kids is like a drug addiction. But you’re conflating pedophilia and assault. When it’s said pedophilia is like a drug addiction, it’s non offending pedophiles that is being discussed. Literally no one thinks assaulting kids is like a drug addiction. That’s your own misunderstanding.

    Can anyone link me articles talking about this?

    About what exactly? There’s 0 evidence that drawings or fantasies cause people to assault children.

    • JackGreenEarth
      link
      fedilink
      01 year ago

      I don’t get it, it seems many people want to condemn all forms of child porn, seemingly to avoid downvotes, because for some reason the internet community can’t see that AI generated images don’t harm anyone.

        • JackGreenEarth
          link
          fedilink
          011 months ago

          I’m not sure what you mean by ‘defending’ pedophiles. They have a right to exist, and to feel validated in their attraction (which they do not control), but no right to have sex with children.

    • sour
      link
      fedilink
      -11 year ago

      because it doesn’t happen if there isn’t evidence

      ._.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        21 year ago

        Yeah. People are way too hung up on there being evidence of stuff. It just FEELS right to you, right?

    • @Earthwormjim91
      link
      -41 year ago

      How shocking. The furry defining pedophilia and cartoons of people fucking kids.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        41 year ago

        Lol ok. No actual response to legitimate points that were not “defending” pedophiles, and I will 100% defend all cartoons. But just “lol furry pedophile”. Typical