Press Release: Mu Condemns the IWF and Susie Hargreaves for Their Incendiary Comments and Deception
Posted: Tue Jul 23, 2024 5:48 am
Discussion forums for Minor-Attracted People and allies
http://forum.map-union.org/
To be honest, I don't see how they could realistically do this without banning the technology altogether.The IWF is pushing for law changes that will criminalise making guides to generate AI-made CSAM as well as making “fine-tuned” AI models that can produce such material.
The cross-bench peer and child safety campaigner Baroness Kidron tabled an amendment to the proposed data protection and digital information bill this year that would have criminalised creating and distributing such models. The bill fell by the wayside after Rishi Sunak called the general election in May.
Ah.Our understanding is that AI 'models' created by MAPs to produce AI images are not intended to make deepfakes of real minors, as claimed by the IWF. Instead, they are used to make recreations of a young person's body more realistic, because standard AI models are not trained on nude images of under-18s. While these models are trained on nude images of young people that could be illegal under the UK's extremely broad laws, the AI images generated would not represent a likeness of a real person's face unless specifically intended. Making AI images this way discourages producers from making more images with real people, which helps to protect young people.
Sounds like a bit like a threat.Mu believes that MAPs are not inherently dangerous. However, when regular adult-attracted people are treated the same way as MAPs, they eventually resort to violence and other harmful behaviors. If the trend continues, it is unfortunately only a matter of time before we see more harmful behavior and violent retaliations. Susie Hargreaves and the IWF should be condemned for their hateful and misleading comments that only increase the risk of harm to the public.
It's technically true under UK law. Consensual sex with a child under the age of 13 is prosecuted as "rape of a child under 13".
It's not intended as a threat.WandersGlade wrote: ↑Tue Jul 23, 2024 11:48 pmSounds like a bit like a threat.Mu believes that MAPs are not inherently dangerous. However, when regular adult-attracted people are treated the same way as MAPs, they eventually resort to violence and other harmful behaviors. If the trend continues, it is unfortunately only a matter of time before we see more harmful behavior and violent retaliations. Susie Hargreaves and the IWF should be condemned for their hateful and misleading comments that only increase the risk of harm to the public.
I understand, however, it is using the possibility of danger as an attempt to pressure people into changing their mind. If you were trying to express a threat towards someone without getting into legal trouble, this is how you would do it. Even if there were examples of violence occurring, wouldn't the natural reaction of antis be to want to fight back, rather than recognize our rights? From an outsider perspective, we don't have that "underdog" characteristic that makes people sympathetic to LGBT people and sometimes Muslims.BLueRibbon wrote: ↑Wed Jul 24, 2024 2:28 am It's not intended as a threat.
I will not be endorsing violence as an individual, and Mu will not be endorsing it as an organization.
has been replaced withMu believes that MAPs are not inherently dangerous. However, when regular adult-attracted people are treated the same way as MAPs, they eventually resort to violence and other harmful behaviors. If the trend continues, it is unfortunately only a matter of time before we see more harmful behavior and violent retaliations. Susie Hargreaves and the IWF should be condemned for their hateful and misleading comments that only increase the risk of harm to the public.
Mu believes that MAPs are in no way inherently dangerous. However, when people's options are restricted, they become desperate and there is a risk of violence and other harmful behaviors. Mu worries that such a trend could lead some MAPs to engage in dangerous, or event violent reaction as a result of their feeling of helplessness. Susie Hargreaves and the IWF should be condemned for their hateful and misleading comments that only increase the risk of harm to MAPs, but to the wider public.
We'll edit it to make it sound less threatening. It really wasn't my intention to post threats.WandersGlade wrote: ↑Wed Jul 24, 2024 12:28 pmI understand, however, it is using the possibility of danger as an attempt to pressure people into changing their mind. If you were trying to express a threat towards someone without getting into legal trouble, this is how you would do it. Even if there were examples of violence occurring, wouldn't the natural reaction of antis be to want to fight back, rather than recognize our rights? From an outsider perspective, we don't have that "underdog" characteristic that makes people sympathetic to LGBT people and sometimes Muslims.BLueRibbon wrote: ↑Wed Jul 24, 2024 2:28 am It's not intended as a threat.
I will not be endorsing violence as an individual, and Mu will not be endorsing it as an organization.