LOL WUTJust when you thought that progressives had scraped the bottom of the degeneracy barrel, they lean in just a bit further - Men should be able to pay women to be drugged for sex to satisfy their “Cosby” kink.

submitted by ClassroomPast6178 from twitter.com

sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun
you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

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

Well, drugging people for sex (even with their permission) does sound awful risky. I can think of good arguments against that one aside from—what shall we call it?—"escalation theory". But I would put a sex toy in the same category as media, no real people are harmed. So...yeah this is a tangent, I'm really only objecting to your analogy rather than your conclusion on to the topic at hand.

I'm still curious if you'd like to share your reasoning though. How about lolicon (erotic drawings of children)? While obviously disturbing, I would still apply the same standard unless there's evidence it increases the chance of people getting hurt in real life. But I haven't really thought about the doll issue a lot. A doll is different from a cartoon in some ways, but I can't really think of a reason why that difference would be significant.

[–]ClassroomPast6178[S] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

With the child doll, I think that there is no real upside to allowing it and that the potential risk great enough that we should probably just keep that one illegal.

It’s purely a risk/reward calculation from where I stand. It may be entirely harmless, but the harm that would be done if it isn’t, means that we should just keep that door closed.

I’m also opposed to AI generated CSA images/videos, even though no child would be harmed in their creation, I just see no upside to having those be allowed.