• @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    -23
    edit-2
    2 months ago

    The “kink” you are picking is drawn child porn. I don’t care if nobody was directly hurt by your consumption of drawn child porn you are consuming child porn. You are a pedophile. Somebody attracted to children sexually.

    I don’t care if studies showing pedophiles who watch drawn child porn aren’t likely to offend. They are pedophiles. I know it’s a wild thing to state but I don’t like pedophiles. The debate on legality due to harm reduction is another thing all-together but at no point did I bring that up. I only asked that we not support or make AI porn of fictional children.

    Your support of a subset of child porn, particularly AI and drawn is noted though. Thank you for stating as much.

    • They are pedophiles. I know it’s a wild thing to state but I don’t like pedophiles.

      This makes sense and all, but a pedophile who hasn’t harmed a child hasn’t caused any harm. These people have a disorder that should be treated, but this isn’t always easy. If this can give them some outlet that prevents any actual harm being done to children, then that can easily be argued to be a net positive.

      I prefer these people jack off to AI porn over real child porn or worse, them turning to actual sexual abuse of children. What’s wrong with preventing child abuse?

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        -7
        edit-2
        2 months ago

        I would agree if we see some meta-analysis suggesting this but the evidence is small towards the effect. The studies you state in other comments are inconclusive, are not the majority, and only show mild effects. This is not scientific fact yet and all evidence shows a mild effect at best.

        Even if it did though they are still a pedophile. They are masturbating to child porn. We should not accept that as a positive thing and we should not support people who make child porn. These are the people who need to seek help most. If part of that help is jacking it to drawn child porn so be it but be it so under the care of a professional.

        The fact that one doesn’t offend only stops one from being a monster. A child molester, or child rapist. A pedophile is still immoral.

        My issue is that child porn is inherently wrong. It is a fundamental negative whether drawn or generated. Some things are not about material harm they are about base morality. Sexualizing children is a fundamental wrong.

        If the only thing stopping you from raping, molesting, or otherwise harming a child is drawn child porn you are not a good person. That is terrifying, and disgusting.

        Lastly, our brains are neuroplastic. Anyone can develop a fetish through constant exposure to something in a positive sexual setting. Something may disgust you, say poop, but if you jack off to the thought long enough you will develop a fetish. This, unlike the claim that drawn child porn is helpful, is well known. Harm to children or not this creates more pedophiles. People who think of children in a sexual manner

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          132 months ago

          No sane person is denying what you’re saying. With a Children of my own, I want to do anything and everything possible to protect them.

          That said, there are research that people who consume cartoon csam that haven’t done real life abuse. They have a problem. Taking away something that doesn’t hurt anyone might not improve our protection of our children, but make things worse.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      122 months ago

      If a pedophile sexualizes fake AI children in his basement but is a productive human in society and never acts in real life. Do you think this person deserves to be in jail?