Schools and lawmakers are grappling with how to address a new form of peer-on-peer image-based sexual abuse that disproportionately targets girls.

  • FishFace@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    10 hours ago

    And youre still trying to equate imagination with physical tangible media. And to be clear, if several of my friends said they were collectively beating off to the idea of me naked, I would be horrified and disgusted […]

    So the fundamental reality is that imagination and physical tangible media are very similar in this regard. That’s what you just said.

    a whole group of boys, some who i might not even know, were sharing AI generated porn with my face

    And if they were just talking about a shared fantasy - with your face? You still have the “ring” aspect, the stranger aspect, the dehumanising aspect, etc.

    This is why there’s the connection that I keep getting at: there are many similarities, and you even say you’d feel similarly in both circumstances. So, the question is: do we go down the route of thought crime and criminalise the similar act? Or do we use this similarity to realise that it is not the act that is the problem, but the effects it can have on the victim?

    If I was a teenager it would probably fuck me up pretty bad to know that someone who I thought was my friend just saw me as a collection of sexual body parts with a face attached.

    Why do you think doing either thing (imagined or with pictures) means that someone just sees the person as a “collection of sexual body parts with a face attached”? Why can’t someone see you as an ordinary human being? While you might not believe that either thing is normal, I can assure you it is prevalent. I’m sure that you and I have both been the subject of masturbatory fantasies without our knowledge. I don’t say that to make you feel uncomfortable (and am sorry if it does) but to get you to think about how those acts have affected you, or not.

    You talk again about how an image can be shared - but so can a fantasy (by talking about it). You talk again about how it’s created without consent - but so is a fantasy.

    Another thought experiment: someone on the other side of the world draws an erotic image, and it happens by pure chance to resemble a real person. Has that person been victimised, and abused? Does that image need to be destroyed by the authorities? If not, why not? The circumstances of the image are the same as if it were created as fake porn. If it reached that person’s real circle of acquaintances, it could very well have the same effects - being shared, causing them shame, ridicule, abuse. It’s another example that shows how the problematic part is not the creation of an image, but the use of that image to abuse someone.

    But pedophilic thoughts are still wrong and are not something we tolerate people expressing.

    It’s my view that paedophilia, un-acted upon, is not wrong, as it harms no-one. A culture in which people are shamed, dehumanised and abused for the way their mind works is one in which those people won’t seek help before they act on those thoughts.

    Having thoughts like that is absolutely a sign of some obsessive tendencies and already forming devaluation of women and girls

    It’s kind of shocking to see you again erase male victims of (child) sexual abuse. For child abuse specifically, rates of victimisation are much closer than for adults.

    You all say youre feminists until someone comes after your fucked up sexualities and your porn addictions. Always the same.

    Luckily I know you’re not representative of all of any group of people.

    • LadyAutumn@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      9 hours ago

      Your thought experiment is moot as these are real people. Youre still not getting it. Youre still seemingly fundamentally confused about why having porn made of you without your consent is wrong.

      I dont think pedophilic thoughts should ever be tolerated outside a counselors office. If I found out one of my friends was a pedophile I would never speak with them again. End statement. You are in a very very very small minority of people if you disagree.

      You skipped over the section where I said that a group of boys collectively sharing in a fantasy of one of their female peers and using that fantasy to sexually gratify themselves would be severely psychologically traumatizing for the victim.

      Don’t make porn of people without their consent. You should face legal consequences for making porn of someone without their consent. The difference between fantasy and porn is that porn is media content, it is a real image or video and not an imagination in someone’s mind. If the fantasy is being written down and then shared then its kind of erotica isnt it, and I also think its extremely fucked up to write erotica about someone you know. Don’t do that either. Wild.

      • FishFace@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        6 hours ago

        Your thought experiment is moot as these are real people.

        That doesn’t make sense at all. That real people are affected means it is important to get this right, which means it is necessary to think carefully about it. We don’t disagree that real people are getting hurt but it seems to me that you take that to mean we should immediately jump to the first solution without regard for getting it right.

        The difference between fantasy and porn is that porn is media content, it is a real image or video and not an imagination in someone’s mind.

        You have again not taken the opportunity to say how that translates to differing harm and hence the necessity of a differing approach, even though when you talk about the harms you always talk about things that are the same between the two things.

        You are in a very very very small minority of people if you disagree.

        Yeah I know. I think the world is extremely backwards about paedophilia because the abhorrence of the crime of child sexual abuse gives them a blind-spot and makes them unable to separate the abhorrent act from the thought. I would have to guess that this is also what’s going on here (but this is less extreme). That is, I think, confirmed by your rejection of making thought experiments due to the situation involving “real people”, as if it is therefore impossible to think clearly about - maybe for you it is.

        I can only hope that people learn to do so, because the current situation causes abuse (in the case of paedophiles) and is likely to lead down the road of wrongly punishing people for things done in private without external repercussions (in other cases).

        • LadyAutumn@lemmy.blahaj.zone
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          5 hours ago

          Theres no other solution to this. Again, dont make porn of people without their consent. Its not hard. If thats hard for you, then you need to seek help.

          I talk about things that are the same to dismiss that the question of difference even matters. They are both harmful, should both be discouraged, and one results in the creation of non-consentual porn of the victim which is provable and should be illegal.

          We hate pedophiles because children cannot consent. Children do not have sexuality in the same way that adults do. Being attracted to children is an attraction to exploitation, to the desire to victimize someone. Thats abhorrent. It is not a sexual orientation that the pedophile has no choice in. They have protected and engaged with a sexual fantasy of being able to victimize a child. I would never speak to someone again if they told me they were a pedophile. Most people wouldn’t. Thats not a failure of society, it is socially necessary for such thoughts to be treated as unacceptable in all contexts. Pedophiles should be forcefully institutionalized and subject to extensive psychotherapy and monitoring.

          Its the difference between writing about genocide of a fictional race and writing about genocide of a real race. The line between fiction and reality is of extreme moral relevance. Incidentally drawing something that happens to look like someone you’ve never seen and drawing someone you have seen is entirely different. Even if the output is the same. Because we recognize intent. We recognize context. You also keep asking what the harm is in creating porn of people without their consent, and ive already pointed out that its dehumanizing it is invasive it is exploitative it devalues women and girls and reduces them to their bodies, yet you still seem to have trouble empathizing with women and girls in this situation.

          Do you like to make porn of people without their consent? Is that a passtime of yours? I can genuinely think of no other reason why you would be so incapable of empathizing with the victims in this situation. You sound like you need help, you might have a disorder that interferes with your ability to fully connect with and understand the emotional experiences of other people.

          • FishFace@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            5 hours ago

            They are both harmful, should both be discouraged, and one results in the creation of non-consentual porn of the victim which is provable and should be illegal.

            OK, so you only stop short of making a thought crime because you can’t prove it. That’s… consistent but extremely concerning. You have no business policing what people think about. Freedom of thought is a fundamental right and what goes on inside other people’s heads is no-one’s business but their own unless they choose otherwise.

            This ought to be the trigger to realise that you’ve got something wrong in this worldview. Even if not, it’s my trigger to know that I’m not going to get anywhere, so this will be my last reply. If someone thinks that the only issue with thought crimes is in gathering evidence, our views on morality and the limits of authority are diametrically opposed and there is no point trying, but at least I understand. If it’s the thought you really want to control, then you wouldn’t have any issue with the person who makes something harmful by accident.

            Pedophiles should be forcefully institutionalized

            Disturbing that you can’t recognise how disturbing this language is. But sure: threaten people with being locked up for unchangeable yet not harmful aspects of their selves, just to make sure that they never seek help to keep from causing harm. Morality aside this can’t have any negative consequences.

            Everything I have read suggests that paedophiles have no control over their attraction, only over their actions. Here’s a thought experiment which I doubt you’ll bother trying: could you decide to be attracted to children? I couldn’t. It seems to be exactly like a sexual orientation in that respect.

            Pedophiles should be forcefully institutionalized

            can genuinely think of no other reason why you would be so incapable of empathizing with the victims in this situation.

            Your inability to engage with points of view different from your own is problematic. The victims in your narratives are always female, the perpetrators always male. Those who disagree with you are always evil perpetrators. I only say this now that I’m disengaging because there’s no point in being drawn on provocative nonsense while trying to sustain a conversation.

            • LadyAutumn@lemmy.blahaj.zone
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              4 hours ago

              Yup extrapolate my opinions on other things based on this one conversation where you are hellbent on justifying people making nonconsentual pornography of women and girls.

              Yeah you’re right I do not empathize with pedophiles. Is that supposed to be a gotcha or something? It should be entirely socially intolerable to be a pedophile. It makes you a danger to some of the most vulnerable people in society. Some psychological conditions make you dangerous and require you to be institutionalized. Being attracted to the idea of victimizing children is one of them.

              As for the thought crime nonsequitor (since we are talking about creating AI porn), yeah I’m really not interested in the hypothetical reality where we can read thoughts. We cant, and thats not whats being discussed, you have from the outset been deadset on taking the conversation there despite its entire lack of relevance to making pornography of someone without their consent.

              I also did say I have no issue with someone making a drawing that happens to look like someone they dont know and have never seen. Its the context, random internet guy who is still somehow incapable of understanding the harm of making non-consenting porn of your classmates and friends but is capable of empathizing with and defending pedophiles, that matters. Its the fact that the porn is of a real person that’s relevant. A real human being who has had their likeness taken and converted into material for sexual gratification by the people in their life. That shouldn’t happen to anyone, no matter their gender. But men and boys are not out here having their bodies sexualized and policed by the state in the same way women and girls are. This whole subject affects women and girls many times more than it does men and boys. It is a systemic issue for women and girls. It connects with other things, like cat calling and body standards and sexualization of the female body. It becomes part of a system. And if the people doing it are teenage boys, it is the perfect introduction to the idea that women and girls bodies belong to them. They dont even have to ask or consider their feelings or emotions before turning them into sexual material for them to consume.

              Youre trying really hard to characterize me one way or another on subjects that aren’t related to this central theme. You are very defensive of the subject and seem to think its impossible for boys and men to simply not make non-consentual pornography of women and girls. Its as easy as that. Just don’t do that. I have not stated my intention to make thought crime a thing, read my past comments I explain that I would still be disgusted and horrified to discover a group of men had been sharing a group fantasy about committing sexual acts upon me. I see those thoughts as harmful in the first place, as I also stated before. But I have made no statements about making those thoughts illegal. Will I never speak with someone again if they told me I was their masturbation muse? Yup. Goodbye, never ever ever speaking to that person again. If it was a group of people? Yup, id definitely be psychologically traumatized by a group of people coming together and reducing me down to a sexual experience that they can masturbate about together. Yeah that’d fuck me up pretty bad, would never speak with any of them again and might consider restraining orders. But I never said anything about making those fantasies themselves illegal.

              Content is different from thoughts. Writing a book is different than considering a plot in your head. Making a movie is different than imagining a scene in your mind. Building a house is different than considering floor plans. Pornography is different than fantasy. It is tangible outside of your mind. Humans are visual creatures. Pornography exists even once the creator is gone. It isnt a thought, it is tangible, you can see it. The harms are worse, as porn is real. It can be shared. It can be given to others. Different from thoughts, in just a glance porn made of you also shows you exactly in what ways the creator sees you. A visual representation of your dehumanization thats been shared with others. It is different in every single way. Our bodies are policed so extensively in this society and culture. Now we have to compare ourselves with the fake bodies that AI gives our exploiters. Now our nudity can be taken from us with just an image online. Even an innocent totally normal image isnt safe in any sense of the word. Algorithms have been made to take even that away from us.

              You accuse me of being unempathetic to pedophiles, a charge I will accept. I am unempathetic to them. Its their fixation on abusing children to deal with, thats their burden to carry. Many who do get help abuse children later anyway. Because unlike a sexual orientation, pedophilia is being fixated on abuse itself. Like rapists or others who are fixated on inflicting sexual pain and torture on others. Sexual exploitation is among the most psychologically harmful things someone can go through. And pedophiles have an attraction to sexually exploiting children. It’s horrifying in every sense of the word, and yes I am entirely unempathetic of them.

              You, on the other hand, seemingly cannot understand how being sexually exploited actually harms someone. You’ve tried very hard to create alternate explanations for why creating porn of someone without their consent is okay. You’ve continuously denied the way that misogyny inflicts this extremely intensely on women and girls. You’ve deflected, and asked for continuous explanations about why being dehumanized itself is a bad thing. You’ve argued yourself into protecting pedophiles. And you are saying I need to assess my world view? You’re single handedly proving that feminism hasnt made any lasting progress in modernity. We are still barely even human to men.