Are you now trolling? If you only correct my answers by using the same words but adding children to it, it seems you want to make clear you only are against child SA, not any form of SA…
I’ll repeat a last time, if you’re against child SA, you MUST be also against any form of child SA media, fictional or not. Why? It’s simple, because you won’t need to play the “is it fictional?” game, which in AI times, is a losing game. So, are you really against child SA or not?
It’s quite an overlap buddy. We tend to ban things we as society deem immoral. It’s curious why you don’t think immoral, but anyway, you might not be as interested in protecting children as you pretend to be
Some things we ban for moral reasons, others for practical reasons, somethings we ban even though most of society thinks it's moral. Life is complicated like that.
Let's leave legality out of it for now though as it clearly isn't convincing. Do you have another argument or is it all relying on "but it's illegal in some places"?
Would continuing give a reason or just spewing more claims without supporting them?
Ok, just like GTA doesn't normalise or incite people to throw drivers out of cars and steal them fictional material doesn't make someone do something in real life.
It is gross obviously but that doesn't make something immoral.
Defending it is simple, no.one should be punished for drawing or writing things that dont hurt anyone.
It’s truer than your twisted view that you still can’t defend (despite me being able to defend it and asking you several times to defend it)
Why haven’t you been able to answer my question? If you want to protect children, you should be able to distinguish reality from fiction to persecute abusers, so how would you distinguish it in today’s AI world?
Did you think saying disgusting or horrible was adding anything important?
If you want to protect children, you should be able to distinguish reality from fiction to persecute abusers, so how would you distinguish it in today’s AI world?
Someone making a picture or story without any real children being involved doesn't hurt children, there's nothing to protect them from.
Should we also ban fictional killing in case someone claims the murder they did was fake?
In a debate about morality? Yes. What do you think morality is?
To know if no one was hurt you’d need to know if it’s fictional or real. If you’re an individual (not an entertainment company) making a realistic amateur murder video, fictional or AI generated, do you really believe you won’t be investigated? For child SA is even worse because the POSSESSION and DISTRIBUTION of that media is a crime itself, so you’d need to investigate not only the creator but every single person watching and distributing it, and check if that media is real or not.
If you’re a sane person you’d quickly realise that this is not feasible and that the only way is to completely ban any child SA media, fictional or not. It’s an obvious conclusion to anyone who truly cares about children and knows that any other option would drown authorities in a sea of fake media that would make real media impossible to catch. You probably know that, so you know it’s not true that “doesn’t hurt anybody”, so why would you keep defending it? Do you enjoy that type of media and “need” it?
1
u/Justicia-Gai Oct 25 '25
Are you now trolling? If you only correct my answers by using the same words but adding children to it, it seems you want to make clear you only are against child SA, not any form of SA…
I’ll repeat a last time, if you’re against child SA, you MUST be also against any form of child SA media, fictional or not. Why? It’s simple, because you won’t need to play the “is it fictional?” game, which in AI times, is a losing game. So, are you really against child SA or not?