This AI generated image looks like a kid, is this morally wrong?

submitted by Musky from (midi.moe)

all 31 comments
sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun

[–]iamonlyoneman 9 insightful - 2 fun9 insightful - 1 fun10 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

I've seen lots of chilren and I've seen lots of not-chilren and this looks like a babyface grownass woman. Which are creepy, but they exist IRL

[–]Alphix 9 insightful - 1 fun9 insightful - 0 fun10 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

Yes it is morally wrong because it is sexualizing minors, even if only conceptually

[–]iDontShift 8 insightful - 1 fun8 insightful - 0 fun9 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

imagination is one step from creation, and this is a dangerous line

no minors harmed in its creation, but possibly in the desire driven

[–]Although 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

What about the common fantasy costume/roleplay schoolgirl uniform? Is that also morally wrong because it is sexualizing minors, even if only conceptually?

[–]Musky[S] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

This is what came up when I was searching for Lucy Liu pics btw, not sure why.

[–]BobOki 8 insightful - 1 fun8 insightful - 0 fun9 insightful - 1 fun -  (9 children)

Agree with the top three, and while no one is being harmed here, CP does not have to directly harm anyone to both be illegal and morally wrong.

[–]LordBeetusRises 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (8 children)

CP harms the victim every time it's viewed. Fake CP is immoral, but doesn't have an actual victim, so there's a reasonable debate to be had about the legality of it. My take would be that we need studies to determine if it reduce child sex crimes or increases them. Typically, porn reduces actual sexual activity, but CP may not do the same thing since it's a psychological illness and could lead to increasing real world needs, the way drug addiction do. But if fake CP led to a measurable decrease in actual offending, it may need to be something we stomach, just to protect actual kids.

[–]Ehhhhhh 6 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 0 fun7 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

Pedos unable to control themselves should be imprisoned or chemically castrated; not their sick desires catered to.

[–]LordBeetusRises 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

Cool, so if that stance caused more children to be molested, would you stand behind that? That would make you a pedo as well. And complicit in the sexual abuse of children. It's not about our feelings, it's about reality and about protecting actual people. Fuck your feelings. And fuck everyone else's. Protecting kids is 1,000x more important.

That's not to say that I don't FEEL the same way as you. But my feelings can go fuck themselves too. Especially with what's at stake.

[–]Ehhhhhh 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

If you think sexualizing kids is the best way to protect them, then you're just fucked up.

[–]BobOki 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I don't disagree with that. If it helps those who do suffer from this and could be done without a victim.... then you are right, much like some drugs monitored and approved usage might be useful. Very much grey area.

[–]jet199 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

Lol, yeah let's do research and see how many kids paedos rape if they look at child rape porn.

How about, no.

[–]rki 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

There is some tangentially related research, though - Gail Dines studied men in prison for child rape (Pornland, everyone should read it). They all claimed they weren't pedophiles, but all acknowledged they got there through porn escalation. Porn doesn't reduce sexual activity like beetus is claiming. Masterbating IS sexual activity. It may reduce sexual activity with others for some, but for others it turns up the boundary violation to 100.

[–]rki 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

The victim in viewing fake CP is the viewer.

Porn increases sexual activity. You are masterbating every time you watch it. That is sexual activity. You are confusing sexual activity with another person, which it reduces for some, but not all, and we could argue that some of that later group, it escalates exponentially. There are studies of men who are in prison for rape of children who detail how it escalated through porn.

If you're thinking there is a reasonable debate to be had about pavlovian-training yourself (the most powerful release of endorphins to a stimulus) to sexual consumption of minors, because they are drawn or AI, then I question your porn use and intelligence.

[–]LordBeetusRises 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I'm obviously referring to actual sex with a human. But you knew that. And if your stance is that more kids being molested is acceptable as long as basement dwelling faggots aren't beating off fake kiddie porn, I'd question your entire existence. Think about that for a second. You would prefer human beings. Little kids. To be sexually abused as opposed to someone jerking off. That's literally what you are saying.

Keep in mind that studies would be necessary to prove either direction. But if you're closed off to finding you, then you, as an admitted fact, support having more kids being molested.

[–]Clown_Chan 6 insightful - 2 fun6 insightful - 1 fun7 insightful - 2 fun -  (2 children)

Well, that'a actually a difficult question. I don't really know myself. Firstly, her body definitely isn't the one of a child but a teenage girl, just her face is childish looking. I don't really see teenagers as an innoncent children that need to be protected. Secondly , it's just a computer generated picture of some human who don't even exists in real life, no need to be upset over some digital pixels unless you are some ultra religious freak or extremall prude.

[–]jet199 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

Yours is the same argument as saying flashing is no big deal because people can just look away so there's no need to be a victim.

But then most rapists and serial killers have flashing offences before they escalate to attacking people.

If you don't stop the minor crime, you get an increase in the serious crimes.

[–]TitsAndWhiskey 6 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 0 fun7 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Kinda looks like Haley Dunphy from Modern Family.

That being said, I agree with Alphix. This falls under the same umbrella as cartoons or erotic fiction portraying immoral acts, and by extension encouraging it.

[–]twolanterns 5 insightful - 2 fun5 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

the face is only marginally jail-baitish

the other attributes less so

[–]IMissPorn 4 insightful - 3 fun4 insightful - 2 fun5 insightful - 3 fun -  (1 child)

Applying morality to an AI is a strange concept.

It complies with Asimov's Three Laws of Robotics though. Is that close enough?

[–]iamonlyoneman 4 insightful - 4 fun4 insightful - 3 fun5 insightful - 4 fun -  (0 children)

People who moralfag over literally cartoons all should be reminded of this very important philosophical concept:

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Fu_fpTHXsAMo4HV?format=jpg&name=900x900

[–]outra_pessoa 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

All kinds of porn are morally wrong, once you accept "normal" porn you open the door to all other grotesque degeneracies.

[–]g0ldfish 2 insightful - 3 fun2 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 3 fun -  (0 children)

If you have to ask, you're already on a pedo list

[–]IkeConn 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I'll bet there are fuck videos out there with this kind of stuff.

[–]ActuallyNot 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I don't know if we know enough about how paedophilia develops to know.

Probably it matters on specific aspects of the person looking at it.

The bottom line should be that if it increases the risk of child abuse it's wrong, and if it decreases it, it's not.

[–]Tums_is_Smut_bkwrds 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Related question: Was Hit-Girl in the original Kick Ass movie sexualized? If "yes", was it wrong or was it within the bounds of decency?

[–]Gravi 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

Either that's the depiction the AI gets because of how many people try to sexualize minors with it or since the left, with the use of LGBTQ+whateverthefuckelse, is sexualizing kids and the right, with their pageant shows, the AI depicts this way due to the sexualization from both sides of the spectrum.

[–]Tums_is_Smut_bkwrds 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

Sin starts in the heart. Ask yourself what's in your heart and you'll have your answer, OP.

[–]sneako 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

dis is some real white people shit nigga

[–]rki 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

Socks is garbage, but he is right about how you view, treat and consume women.

[–]Musky[S] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Nope, he's wrong about everything.