/b/ - Random

.

..

We need to go back

Where was this and when did it start to take place?

>>229468
Women Against Pornography (WAP) was a radical feminist activist group based out of New York City that was influential in the anti-pornography movement of the late 1970s and the 1980s.

>>229454
How did we go from a point where "pornography degrades women" to "pornography and sex work are liberating, actually"

>>229511
what is your point

>>229474
>Women Against Pornography (WAP)
>WAP
My fucking sides

>>229553
Men have always profited from the suffering of women. Except now women are brainwashed to support this.

Has anyone else here run into the issue that young women today believe you are evil and or oppressive if you say 'pornography is bad'?

Mostly, either people don't care, or they conflate pornography with sexuality and masturbation and think I am advocating for no sex/masturbation altogether, or they suppose I am religious.

>>229584
no they hate you because its their source of income lol

So, is whoring oppressive or liberating? I don't get it.

>>229584
Porn? In my feminism?
It's more likely than you think

>>229590
maybe lurk moar tradthot

I like porn

>>229590
Libfems will tell you yes. Radfems will tell you no.
The answer however, should be obvious if you stop to think about it for more than 10 seconds.

>>229590
Selling your body and intimacy for the price of a happy meal to pathetic moids is the most liberating thing a barely adult woman can do.

>>229614
>>229597
>>229590
>>229586
>>229584
>>229579
>>229468
This is one of the most unwritten parts of feminist history - it started when feminism began. The first wave of feminism was predicated on the principle that societal virtues (education, welfare, equality) was their greatest weapon against oppression. Oppression stemmed from vices of men, like alcoholism, prostitution, domestic violence, labour exploitation, which women and society suffered from. In fact, the main effect of first wave feminists on society were influential social reforms. Things like laws against pedophilia, raising the age of consent, child labor, social welfare were all led by feminists. For example the Contagious Diseases Act, which de facto legalised prostitution and put the crime on women, was fought successfully by feminists at the time. For some reason, history is being rewritten that the only thing first wave feminists did was get voting rights.

But maybe this was to fit the history of second wave feminism. Feminism became Liberal feminism. On paper it's described as being against the male dominated, patriarchal system, but IMO the whole thing was infiltrated by moids to turn women against each other. Things like Playboy sold being scantily clad for men as "empowering" to millions of young women (BTW they turned out to be sex dungeons and women were routinely drugged and raped there). A lot of things like these were sold as feminist because they were going against what women were expected to do. Playboy's founder repeatedly claimed he was a feminist. Fundamentally you could say its because instead of principles, feminism became reactionary to what was expected of it.

What do you think likelihood of the social tide turning against porn is at this point?
Obviously I hate it and so do most women I know but the sex positivity campaign also seems to have gained pretty massive support. Sexpests like Hasan are fighting tooth and nail to make all antiporn advocates look like prudish Jesus freaks and he is massively popular. You also have onlyfans shills working round the clock to make it seem like a better way to receive an income.
It kind of seems like we aren't even part of the conversation at times.

>>229944
yea OF is very bad for the movement. of course every moid will support it because they are pornsick. and I notice OF is presented as an alternative to the the classic porn industry so immediately its cast in a good light.

But its still pornography, does no favors for beauty standards

>>229944
>What do you think likelihood of the social tide turning against porn is at this point?
I think it's pretty much bound to happen, but unfortunately not in a good way. Things will keep getting worse and worse until it reaches a supercritical point at which extreme right wing reactionaries will take control during widespread violence and chaos.
Damned if you do, damned if you don't.

>>229987
Meh. I highly doubt it.
The right wing in america, especially the theocratic side of it, is largely a joke.

I think a lot of people are against it, but the most vocal people are for it. A lot of men at my work are against the relatively new trend of young girls wanting to be on onlyfans when they turn 18. When the issue was raised, not a single male was happy with the fact; on the other hand, two women believed it was empowering ("if they want to do it, who are we to stop them?").

The difficulty is in explaining to people how it is inherently violent - most people roll their eyes at the idea because they can't immediately see how it's violent, and they're too lazy to try. Money is an abstraction from reality. It was created by kings and emperors so that they could spread their armies further (money is easier to carry than food, which rots). It was not created to facilitate trade (Adam Smith is a retarded bastard). Self-governed communities became peasant slums which were taxed yearly - i.e. some portion of all their food had to go to the king because… money? (also if you don't accept the soldiers' money you die lol). Over time, wealthy merchants became lords, and lords became crapitalists. Soon enough, fertile land was replaced with concrete - they've destroyed your land, and now you have to work for them if you want food. If they have no work, and you have no land, but you still need food, where do you go? You sell yourself of course. Prostitution and slavery was a natural consequence; with your soil completely ruined (by external forces) and no one else hiring (because there are too many people as is), you're forced to become a thief or sell yourself. It's not what humans are meant to do, it's not what we naturally want to do, but with communities broken and our reliance on them traded with a reliance on cold hard cash, there's no other option but death.

Most people argue that it's "empowering"; in reality, what is empowering is getting to explore and create and be a human being, not being a slab of meat, a dancing monkey, or stressed to make more money. We've now gotten to a point where very wealthy men are starting to "normalize" prostitution and the porn-industry. These same men had to first spend the 1900s really drilling into people the notion that money is truly a great thing, that it is somehow part of being human. The modern era thus takes it as objective fact that money is the answer to life, and through popular culture (rap music, movies, tv), social media, and casual propaganda, whoring yourself has become empowering. Nothing I create, nothing I say, nothing I do will ever be as valued (in the eyes of society) as showing the world my tits. I reject the narrative, because I know I'm right and society is wrong.

People will never meaningfully be against things which they find pleasurable. It was proven so with alcohol, and now so with drugs being increasingly legalized. I then think of the Netherlands and have to question if it's just a culture thing, given the open drug use and literal red light districts. Not that I agree or disagree, but I don't know what you'd meaningfully do about the observation. Not to sound depressive, but I'm often of the opinion things are too big or powerful to do anything about. Is erotic literature the same thing as performative erotic audio or even just video pornography or picture sets? I have no answers.

>>230483
>People will never meaningfully be against things which they find pleasurable.

It depends how you define "pleasure". The general masses will always be cajoled into seeking instant gratification; it's extremely profitable (e.g. fast food, porn, alcohol, drugs, sugar, video-games, five-second videos, gambling). There are some people who don't find these things "pleasurable"; they have either been burnt by the negative side of an addiction, or they find pleasure in more sustainable activities (e.g. studying, creative hobbies, and exercise/sport).

>I don't know what you'd meaningfully do about the observation.

No one does nona, this is what philosophers have argued over for millenia. If we force people not to engage in self-destructive practices (by banning substances), then they aren't really free and they won't truly be in control of their own happiness. On the other hand, if people are given the freedom to make the 'right' choice, ultimately many will not, especially if advertising and propaganda warps their perception of right and wrong. One could go so far as to say that if there is only one correct path, are we really ever free at all, or are we sentenced to always be a slave to either reason or passion?

>Is erotic literature the same thing as performative erotic audio or even just video pornography or picture sets

Surely not. The former requires some level of imagination, the latter is being spoonfed grotesque images. Reading is ostensibly 'healthier' than watching a recording, the former is processed as quickly as your brain allows it, the latter enters even after you've stopped comprehending every detail (it's not such a crackpot theory to say that tv is brainwashing). Ideally masturbation should just be imagination alone, but at least erotica is not harmful to others and it doesn't pose any great psychological harm, to my knowledge (I haven't heard of anyone being addicted to erotica, but I'm open to being proven wrong).

>>230499
>I haven't heard of anyone being addicted to erotica
Wattpad addiction is real and I suspect it plays a role in the TIF pipeline.

>>230195
your historiography is utter nonsense and that's not where money comes from. poor reasoning built on lies. money predates barter.

>>230525
>money predates barter
yeah but not mutual exchange, stop being stupid

Porn created a generation of boys who don't know how to treat women properly. They just see a sex object to fulfil their fetishes learned from porn.

Porn addiction leads to self destructive behaviors in men. Unhealthy fetishes, pedophilia and inability to have normal relationships. While women are degraded and reduced to sex objects. Only to be tossed and discarded by men afterwards.

I believe ASMR is probably more damaging. At least porn drives people to potentially make kids. ASMR removes any possibility of people forming intimate bonds.

I didn't care too much about it until I came across this speech. The only thing I don't agree with is her final statement where she does a 360 and seems to claim that humans have free will and can easily choose whether or not to consume it. That's obviously untrue. I think it should be banned. There was also this really good video by this girl who did onlyfans and regretted it, her photos were posted all over the internet and she struggled to find other work, it's actually gross how this shit is glorified as 'exploiting men' when the only one who suffers is women.

>>231006
I have never been able to take ASMR seriously, it seems like a more niche part of the internet to me. Whereas porn is literally everywhere.

>>231011
Most of the women in the early days of porn were byproducts of men coercing and manipulating them into the industry. The mass exposure of porn in today's society normalized a culture of promiscuity. Creating the "whores" you seem to blame for everything. If porn didn't exist we wouldn't have a culture that trivializes sex, objectifies women and promotes unhealthy relationships.

>>231015
stop watching it

>>231015
Porn has had a negative effect on society. Banning it would help undo the damage done by it. At the very least it would make it harder for kids to access it. At 12 years old a boy is already consuming porn on the regular. Imagine what effect that has on how they treat women growing up? We get boys who see women as nothing more than sex objects. While thinking they're entitled to sex because they saw it in porn. All the while women are exposed to a culture that puts whores on a pedestal. With music promoting a hyper sexualized culture of promiscuity. The worst part is women are expected to do the degrading things men see in porn.

>>231009
I feel that a community which gets potentially hundreds of millions of views a month is hardly niche. Not only the views, but retention of specific creators. I'd be more concerned with any potential other half of mine consuming ASMR than porn. Maybe because ASMR is new by comparison, but that's my take.

>>231006
you sound like a pornsick scrote. asmr is dumb but virtually harmless, its just a bunch of sounds that make some people sleepy.
porn causes a whole lot of problems socially and individually and its a sick industry.
also why is driving people to have kids a good thing in itself, and also are you aware it does literally the opposite anyways. lmfao

>>231022
No, it's literally not even remotely just stuff that "make some people sleepy". There's the whole other side of girlfriend / boyfriend roleplays where people replace intimacy for the illusion of it, many creators of which also do explicit porn audios, and that I'm not defending. Just because I recognize that one of these things is potentially more damaging does not mean I'm defending the other, but everytime I bring this up no one ever wants to address it. Someone who wants sex will often subsequent with porn when they can't get it until they can get it, whereas someone who tries to do that with love can hurt their entire perspective of what a relationship is by either being emotionally demanding, fragile, or otherwise abusive. To address your last point, kids are good because humans are good. It's one thing to say you may not want kids or are not in a position for them, but I'm not a nihilist like evidently you are. Taking such a hardline antinatalist position is extremely dark. I know the world has problems, but it's not the fault of children.

>>231023
>subsequent
substitute*
Mobile.

>>231023
Still feel like porn does more damage. Since it's addictive to young men and more wide spread. It even rewires the male brain and warps their views on sex. Porn addiction has also lead to self destructive tendencies. While girlfriend ASMR role play can be easily fixed with social interaction. Porn addiction can result in harmful behavior towards others and oneself.

The only thing in your post I disagree with is that ASMR is potentially worse specifically because it leads to complete isolation. I've seen documentaries where people in prison are asked about their previous porn consumption, and invariably they all started tame but got worse. How much of that porn consumption do you think though was kicked off by other more ingrained antisocial behavior? ASMR can potentially truly allow a person to disengage for social needs. Total dehumanization of other people.

>>231026
Whoops >>231027

>>231023
i'm not an antinatalist lol, not being a starry eyed "oh having kids is the best thing that can happen to one's life and humanity!" isn't being an antinatalist, and being an antinatalist isn't being necessarily nihilistic either.
i'm just not attributing good or bad qualities to something as mundane and personal as having children. having children just is, it's neither good or bad. but thinking porn isn't that bad just because it makes people want to make children (which again, it literally doesn't) seems like a concerning stance to have

>>231030
>but thinking porn isn't that bad just because it makes people want to make children (which again, it literally doesn't) seems like a concerning stance to have
Horny people fuck, fucking people bond, bonding people have relationships, but yes, ultimately, it's all for the sake of people reproducing. Without people there's no making things better. I agree it's not inherently good or bad, but it does have to be, and as people become more and more isolated it's ceasing to. Romance and love and magic are dying, and it's killing humanity. All around the world populations are crashing and it's not because people don't want intimacy, it's because people are lonely, scared, without hope.

>>231027
ASMR feels interchangeable with any other substitute for the relationship experience. Like romance novels, dating sim games or just an imaginary girlfriend. Even pets or inanimate objects could be a substitute for human companionship. It's mostly a byproduct of social isolation. I don't think ASMR is causing the social isolation itself. I think it's just a symptom of an atomized disconnected society.

>>231033
I hope you're right, because I no solution to give what to do about it. I understand people use things to cope, but after a point it seems like self harm.

>>231034
Go to church

of course the porn defendant was a scrote lmfao

>>231036
Ew fuck you and your disgusting pedophile infested church. Burn it to the ground more like.

>>231035
this kind of """humour""" sucks

>>229553
(((Men)))

>>230195
What the fuck did I just read?

Worrying about ASMR is like worrying about movies.

I.E. people watch movies instead of living the things themselves. Where is the society coming to.

you could compare asmr girlfriend with watching a romantic comedy. or reading a romantic book

the difference between asmr girlfriend, romantic movies, romantic books and pornography is in what they teach

asmr girlfriend, romantic movies, romantic books don't objectify women

pornography does

I listen to "French boyfriend kisses you in bed" ASMR and I am not ashamed of it

>>229454
r/pornismisogny

pornography is propaganda against women

>>229945
OF is worse bc it "democratizes" it. it's worse to sell yourself than to consume porn, although both are wrong

>>230195
money has always existed but
>>230525
is a bad criticism.

>>230195
is basically rehashing Marx's theory of commodity fetishism. Basically in the pre-modern world money was subservient to structures of domination, now it works to obscure them. I.e: in the feudal world everyone knew who the lord and master was and addressed them as such. But bourgeois ideology mystifies this. We are all "equal democratic citizens" even though one of us is a servant who has to whore her body out in the most violent and degrading exposure of herself and the other is a trust fund kid who won't ever have to work a day in his life.

>>232127
idk nona I should've read over it before hitting post

>>230525
It was Adam and Eve, not Adam and Eve and the cash register. The snake bartered with Eve; her soul for a bite of the forbidden fruit. But go off love…

[I'm being facetious because you should avoid correcting people if you don't understand what you're talking about.]

>>235745
OF isn't worse, but better when porn is inevitable. You're just an emotional moid who is mad that there's no direct "pimp" providing and trafficking those women or you're an insecure woman that cares what moids think. You sound like you spend too much time on Democrat Twitter, I don't know if you realize this, but those people are minority. Most scrotes all over the world hate OF more than anything, now there's this trend among them to be anti-OF, they basically unironically say that a woman having OF is an equivalent of a rapist.

>>235874
Not sure if pornsick moid or lesbian with impending bed death

>>235878
lmao my thoughts exactly

>>230195
Money is simply a means of exchange. No kings necessary.
People have used things like nails as money because they were valuable.

>>229630
boooooooh. Tho, serious question, why ?

>>236039
i think they were imagining a more elon musk 40k clone sex anti-woman world for incel perspective… obviously….

>>235862
>OF isn't worse, but better when porn is inevitable
It's better and it's worse.
It doesn't eliminate pimps for everyone. They still exist in the form of "managers" and "partner programs" and other grifts.

>>235893
I don't think she has a political answer I think she's just horny.

>>236071
True, saw that shit. What I'm saying is, scrotes would ruin your life even if you just posted drawings on OnlyFans because they don't know that it's another Patreon-like site and they're neurotic, they think that whatever makes them emotional and mad is literal Satan. Ultimately, it's only moids who want to paidrape or watch degraded women that should be punished and all those pimps.

Nah. Porn keeps men docile.

I don't think pornography is inherently harmful to women, as it's just another form of sex work. In a vacuum, there's nothing inherently harmful about trading in sex or fantasy for money. There is no moral hazard to pornography.

But like all things, it's impossible to decouple it from the world we live in; cishetero patriarchal capitalism. We are allowed to trade our bodies not for our own sake, but for someone else's. And increasingly we're expected to. I've been asked if I have an onlyfans, because someone felt entitled to being able to purchase my body. And I know that even for those that do, there are still moids who will find ways to get access without paying.

>>236141
I think it does more of the opposite. Because they get pornsick they can't form healthy relationships with women or have healthy normal sexuality. There is always a slippery slope with porn and it does lead to IRL actions.
Just look at the average tranny, they're porn sick freaks who want to bimbofy themselves or use transgenderism as a gateway to get into women's roles and spaces and abuse women and children.

>>236142
In a vacuum, there is no trading for money. In a vacuum, separated from crapitalism, people just form relationships and your word becomes the currency.
I've eaten more of my parents' food than I could ever repay them for and I have no intent of ever paying them for it. People do things for you and you do things for people. Money distracts people from reality and creates a meaningless contest out of trying to exist.
I don't think pornography would exist without money. People would form relationships and there would be no other currency.

>>236238
Scrotes can't have healthy relationships.

>>236242
Porn would be the third most valuable currency after real sex and bullets if money didn't exist

>>236242
I don't really think I can believe that. People are libidinal, even if we like to pretend we're not. I don't think that underlying libidinal desires that create a demand for pornography will vanish once money is taken out of the picture.

>NOOO I HATE MODERN DEGENRACY #antifeminist
>Pornography is a good thing
Why are scrotes like this

>>270350
Supply and demand. Women wouldn't do porn if it didn't pay from the exorbitant of money men spend on it.

>>270353
>onlyfans
>subscription services
>ad revenue
And also what the studios are paying actresses. It's an industry driven by its male consumers.
>I blame us women for doing it
>us women
LOL

>>270356
Retard

>>236142
>sex work
Which isn't real work, by the way. We should stigmatize whores like men stigmatize jiggalos. Saying that sex is something acceptable to trade in gives it a price, which then devalues it.

>>270358
>we
Nigga you are not a woman ;_;

>>270359
Because I look down on sex work? Get real, nona. Porn is just filmed prostitution. If porn degrades women so does prostitution.

>>270358
>like men stigmatize jiggalos.
I have never once seen a man "stigmatize" male prostitutes, or even acknowledge their existence for that matter. Your obvious "we should do thing men are doing" tactic is giving away your XY chromosomes. Most radfems are already against sex work but not because they hate the women doing it.

The idea that "First wave feminism" was suffragettes and "Second wave feminism" was the 70ies radfem stuff is almost entirely a fiction created by the 70ies radical feminists who wanted to see themselves compared to the suffragettes.

The actual first womens movement was the teetotaller movement of the 1800s, where women banded together to outlaw alcohol. They actually succeeded in many places to some degree, for example in my country of switzerland, they outlawed Absinthe as a particularly bad type of alcohol.

So this first womens movement was a decidedly conservative-christian one. Motivated by enforcing social order.

The second womens movement was a decidedly classically liberal one, that was the suffragettes. Motivated by empowering the individual.

The third womens movement was a decidedly marxist one, that is the 70ies radical feminists. Motivated by breaking society apart and causing revolution.

The modern womens movement is a decidedly capitalist one.

Now what do I mean "a capitalist one", because when leftoids talk about "capitalism" they typically use it as a slur meaning "The system that exists and is bad", but cannot actually define what exactly the problem is.

Therefore I am going to define capitalism thusly: It is the system where "capitalists" are in charge, that is, the ultra-rich influence/create policy through lobbying and media control. Now a naive person would think that "businessmen in charge" would mean "free markets", but the opposite is the case. When businessmen run politics, they shut down any allusions to a free market, because they are businessmen, they want to maximize profits, and free markets do not maximize profits, state-enforced monopolies do. So capitalists in charge of politics enforce all kinds of nonsensical regulations to maximize their personal profits. This opposition to the free market is where capitalists and communists ironically overlap and cooperate in the modern left.

In the sexual marketplace this means, policy is manipulated in such a way that rich businessmen skim the most money off the people. You can't make money with dating apps if people are happily married. Credit card companies can't make money off regular prostitution, but they can when men instead simp for whores on onlyfans. Living alone instead of living together means nobody has time to go to the store so Amazon with its home delivery makes more money. And of course you're constantly bombarded by images of surgically altered and photoshopped/filtered images because otherwise you wouldn't spend money on paralyzing your face with botox and chopping up your body. And of course you need to have a real job, highly paid, in the city, you can't just be a farmer in a rural area.

Capitalist feminism means the sexual arena is changed constantly to make more money for a few rich people. So Onlyfans is pushed as the more empowering version of prostitution, and chopping up your body is empowering, and spending money on sex vacations overseas is empowering, and living alone and ordering everything through amazon is empowering, and having soulless meaningless "casual sex" with strangers on dating apps is empowering. And most empowering of all is being a mindless consoomer zombie who only lives to consoom.

This modern "capitalist feminism" could also be characterized as "consoomer feminism" where you are the more feminist, the more you consoom.

And of course porn is empowering because men have a seemingly unending need consoom porn.

>>270361
>I have never once seen a man "stigmatize" male prostitutes, or even acknowledge their existence for that matter.
Yes, refusal to acknowledge the existence of something is stigmatization.

>>270362
>Therefore I am going to define capitalism thusly: It is the system where "capitalists" are in charge, that is, the ultra-rich influence/create policy through lobbying and media control.
That's an oligarchy. I'm not arguing with you, your post is 100% on correct, I'm just letting you know there's a word for that.

>>270364
Oligarchy just means "multiple people in charge", that's not as specific. I am defining Capitalism that way, because that makes sense to me.

>>270365
That's fair, makes sense to me too

>>270364
>>270365
To make an example why that difference matters, the most prominent example of an oligarchy would be modern russia. However, modern russia isn't capitalist in the same way the US or other western countries are. In the US, you had a small number of people becoming insanely rich, so rich that they can influence policy to become even richer, which is more economically efficient than actually investing in improving your business, but over time this degrades the country as a free market economy.

In russia, russia was run by the secret service, the KGB. When the soviet union collapsed, what happened was that individuals from the KGB simply took control of various state industries - not business men, but basically gangsters. They did this by for example auctioning off things in an unannounced auction at 3AM in the wilderness. So only the people who knew about it - were part of this KGB clique - would be able to "buy" it at this auction for the price of a loaf of bread.

That is an oligarchy. Not businessmen with too much money, but essentially gangsters who use even more underhanded tactics to retain control.

>>270368
(cont'd)
Sorry for being off topic.

The tl;dr: of >>270362 is, the reason you see this weird nonsensical "Prostitution is bad" and "Onlyfans/porn is good" seeming contradiction is because the very rich people aren't making money off regular prostitution (which happens with cash) while they do skim money off the top with onlyfans. In the billions. Every credit card transaction you do diverts about 2% to the credit card companies, you can imagine how much influence in media and politics that amount can buy.

I don't know how much the guy who runs onlyfans makes, but you can bet he's hired several online PR companies to promote "onlyfans sexwork" as the most feminist thing ever, and empowering.

I'm not saying "porn is bad" or "prostitution is good" or "onlyfans is bad", I am 100% neutral on the topic, I don't care, I don't interact with either. I am saying that the reason you see this apparent contradiction in feminist discourse is because modern feminism is completely ran by capitalist interests. (And I don't like the marxist radfems either, but they certainly make more sense than modern intersectional trooner feminism)

>>270617
Working, lol

I remember seeing a pic from one of these old protests again porn and in front of the women protesting there were pro porn people standing and it looked like they were taunting them with their signs

Sex work is work and work is shit.

Welp, it finally happened: someone has been charged under CP laws for AI-generated imagery.

https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2024/05/csam-generated-by-ai-is-still-csam-doj-says-after-rare-arrest/

>The US Department of Justice has started cracking down on the use of AI image generators to produce child sexual abuse materials (CSAM).

>On Monday, the DOJ arrested Steven Anderegg, a 42-year-old "extremely technologically savvy" Wisconsin man who allegedly used Stable Diffusion to create "thousands of realistic images of prepubescent minors," which were then distributed on Instagram and Telegram.

>The cops were tipped off to Anderegg's alleged activities after Instagram flagged direct messages that were sent on Anderegg's Instagram account to a 15-year-old boy. Instagram reported the messages to the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children (NCMEC), which subsequently alerted law enforcement.

>During the Instagram exchange, the DOJ found that Anderegg sent sexually explicit AI images of minors soon after the teen made his age known, alleging that "the only reasonable explanation for sending these images was to sexually entice the child."

>According to the DOJ's indictment, Anderegg is a software engineer with "professional experience working with AI." Because of his "special skill" in generative AI (GenAI), he was allegedly able to generate the CSAM using a version of Stable Diffusion, "along with a graphical user interface and special add-ons created by other Stable Diffusion users that specialized in producing genitalia."

So far, this is the only op-ed that I could find on this, and it basically argues that this guy's AI material shouldn't be criminal, only his grooming of the teenage boy:

https://medium.com/@MoonMetropolis/how-should-law-enforcement-handle-fake-ai-generated-child-pornography-2ceb8f1ded20

Thoughts, nonas?

>>271938
Public opinion on AIfags was already shifting unfavorably and this accelerates that by a lot. I imagine he trained it on a local image set but if it turned out the company behind stable diffusion trained it on CP themselves that would be the end.
Hope the guy dies in prison.

>>271938
It's really hard because when it comes to AI generated content you can't really draw a line at how young looking is too young looking. If he used pictures of adult women for training but all of them looked younger with childlike features and faces technically the outcome would be one of an "adult" woman too (assuming the data fed to the AI was really solely 18+ y/o women) despite not looking like it. I think that one is kind of a grey area but it just feels so disgusting to think about.
But yeah using any material of real children (sexual or not) to generate images that are of sexual or provocative nature should be illegal or maybe hopefully it already is idk
I can already see the same old lolifag argument of "no real children are being harmed" and while I think people are capable of seperating reality from content they consume, it still normalizes an inappropriate kind of sexuality not only for the pedos attracted to it but also it gets normalized for little kids thinking it's normal for older men to desire them.
Absolutely gross.

>>271940
There is no company behind stable diffusion, it's just a procedure that anyone with the right skills can implement on their own computer. The cat is out of the bag, and even if most people find it abhorrent there will still be people using this in the future.

All for a ban on porn but if you're one of these women who think your bf/husband is watching fucked up porn because of "porn addiction" you're just dumb

>>271997 porn addiction is real. men are addicted to the dopamine release they get when seeing women experience pain and discomfort

>>272017
>>272017
It isn't and "porn addiction" narrative is the stupidest things ever. That's just male sexuality. For most people it is hard to accept men are naturally fucked so they create all kinds of mental gymnastics to blame something in the environment.

>>272067
you are severly mentally ill

>>272069
yea but im having fun. now you all have to look at the cringe post

Just a reminder: more than 90% of the nonas on here watch porn on a regular basis, whether they will admit to it or not.

>>272073
I watch porn, it's why I'm not a feminist.

>>272073
90% of nonas here are also indian men who browse baraag.net

>>272073

i watch porn but like don't support the industry and watch it like once in a blue moon which like i really shouldn't, i watch it from more "ethical" sources if that helps, but porn addiction is real so honestly im not against removing porn all together but like ideally the industry and men need to be fixed, getting rid of one pimple doesnt clear the acne

the porn isn't the problem, it is a problem that does more harm then good, but thats also a result of the real issue, Men

and just society all together [instert joker laugh here]

>>272076
I don't watch porn and I'm not a feminist. I read. Porn is a thing men use to relieve themselves when they don't have a girlfriend. I don't care about the "industry", it exists, and before there was porn, there was hookers, and guys would use those to relieve themselves instead.

If a guy "can't stop using porn", then he is so weak-willed and a slave to his base desires, that he will also jump at the opportunity when your best "friend" decides to mack on him just because she can. Weak faggots with no self-control must go extinct.

>>272073
nah porn is degenerate but nice projection tho

>>272073
ngl i never saw the issue with porn and used to be a libfem until some scrote showed me pornography and it disgusted me to my core. I had never even seen porn until then and i dont understand how people can watch that shit and not barf

>>272096
peoples brains are rotten to the core and i will always look down on anyone who watches it. male or female

>>272073

I like looking at nudes and I like lesbian porn, but I don't like hardcore porn at all. I honestly find most hardcore porn to be downright repulsive.

>>272204

Same. I'm bi and I very much enjoy watching other women pleasuring each other, but most other kinds of porn are ick.