John_Doe wrote: Sat Jan 10, 2026 10:08 pm
-I don't necessarily oppose prohibiting the distribution of images or videos depicting murder, rape, violence, gore, etc. from a privacy standpoint (because it can be demoralizing to victims or their loved ones to have that material available to the general public. My concern is with the experienced frustration of a desire for privacy, though. I can admire Emmit Till's mother for releasing those photos of her son's body to the public in the understanding that seeing those images could make it viscerally more obvious to caring people how racist and broken southern culture at the time was, and to validate what happened to her son, but considering how unsympathetic many people are and their love for dark humor and knowing how some people might treat those images of her son you can appreciate how hard it must have been for her to make that decision, she was putting herself in a very vulnerable position. It bothers me that you can find autopsy pics/pics of dead bodies online). I don't support free expression/free speech/freedom as an end in itself so I don't think I'm being inconsistent.
-I don't think that sadists should be discriminated against (as in, 'ironically,' I don't think that their suffering and happiness should be given less consideration just because they're sadists) but I think that sadism itself, sexual or otherwise, should be heavily stigmatized. My argument for de-stigmatizing pedophilia and rejecting the idea that AMSC is intrinsically wrong on principle is that sexual happiness as happiness is inherently good and if something causes no emotional distress it is harmless (whether or not AMSC does is circumstantial), so there can't be a slippery slope from accepting pedophilia to accepting sadism for me (or something like necrophilia; if that means the fetishization of death and not just a physical attraction to bodies that happen to be dead, because it inherently devalues happiness).
I believe I have a genuinely different point of view.
I am not against privacy, in the sense that I can agree if a person does not want images of themselves circulating on the internet, but I don’t believe the problem should be what people do with those images, nor do I think people should worry about what others do with their images. That is, this is not a claim about how people should feel, but rather about considering it one’s own responsibility to judge how certain things make us feel, and about the fact that it should not be taken for granted that people necessarily have a problem with this. Because in the end one adapts, and if everyone has a problem with something, we end up convincing ourselves that we too have a problem with that same thing.
Pushed to the extreme, it can even be considered paranoid to feel uncomfortable about how people relate to a representation of one’s own person. And the moment such paranoia is considered normal, we all behave like paranoids. I don’t know if I’m managing to express my point of view well.
This view is further reinforced by the fact that I consider only the will of the individual to be valid: the feelings of a deceased person’s family have no value over the deceased, and the deceased, being dead, does not have… I think I have very unpopular opinions at the moment.
I am also not a fan of discussions about happiness, let alone goodness.
I think good and evil are social and personal constructs, not objective ones, just like individual happiness. It cannot be imposed, and it is not even “pure.” Happiness can also be painful; it can also harm oneself and others. I see it as a feeling without a real, defined form, since everyone interprets it however they like. I am also a relativist on certain things, in the sense that… considering necrophilia to diminish happiness because death is something negative for me is an interpretation, one that is as valid as its opposite. Since death is the conclusion of life, having a negative attitude toward death brings anxiety to the living person, which could, if one wished, be considered something negative. Someone else might interpret it as positive, since it is an anxiety that pushes people to act during life in order to settle their affairs before the inevitable death.
Now, this is not so much to argue back, or to defend necrophilia; rather, it is a discussion about how I find this point of view too subjective to be extended to other people as if it were something obvious and natural. I do not see a clear logical consequence, but rather a series of interpretations that are gradually created as issues arise—interpretations that can be anything and its opposite, depending on one’s interests.
But this is something I would say in general whenever people talk about what is “good” and what is “evil”.
I don’t see anything intrinsic in these concepts—quite the opposite. But here it is really my point of view that follows completely different tracks.
-I don't think that there is an intrinsic relationship between zoophilia (as much as it might personally bother me) and sadism just because they might correlate (maybe people who are 'deviant' in one way are more likely to be open to other culturally taboo deviancy for reasons that have nothing to do with the nature of those sexual interests).
For me, this can be an environmental and community-related issue.
Perhaps, for reasons unknown to us, certain elements came together and a group formed that includes very different fetishes within it. I mean, I am sadistic, I frequent the furry community (which is, in a sense, close to that of zoophilia, even though it seems to me that they don’t particularly appreciate each other). What kind of imagery unites us? All that fetishism connected to the natural, as explained, to the animal (in this case humanoid) as a violent creature that bites, an imagery centered on instinct, and so on… I don’t know whether it’s the same with zoophilia. Also because, thinking about it, there is the whole issue of animal training, which can have violent connotations; there are specific fetishes in which animals are included, even if I have never framed them as zoophilia.
If there are any confusing parts, I apologize—I’m not very good at expressing myself.