MAP Forum

https://www.breitbart.com/tech/2026/04/ ... aoJhrTf1Kg

I saw that on a social media post and many of the comments on said post were along the lines of "herp derp isnt ai supposed to PREVENT you from doing such things????"

Do THIS MANY FUCKING MORONS FUCKING STUPID FUCKING SHEEP, NOT realize you can run shit like stable diffusion, comfy ui (a variant of stable diffusion) on your own hardware?????? Not a SINGLE person seemed to have understood this HOW THE FUCK are people this god damn stupid.....

Also being jailed and convicted for no one even being harmed? 100 percent computer generated images what a fucking joke.....

What are your guys thoughts about this?

Me personally I feel like 98 plus percent of people have no idea at all how computers work or that things can be installed locally and do not always have to be related to cloud computing.....

EDIT: ALSO on a LOT of comments people are saying how this should still be illegal because "well what happens when he decides AI isnt enough" DOES THAT APPLY TO EVERY OTHER FETISH???????? someone that say....for instance likes feet, and looks up pictures of feet to get off to, does that mean they are gonna idk...go rape someones feet? or someone that has a normal heterosexual fetish and likes women....does that mean they are gonna go and...god forbid rape women????? No so why is that different with MAPS?????? Most MAPS do NOT harm anyone in fact a vast majority don't.....

I kinda see what a lot of you folks are getting at now the absurdities of normies is unfounded and based on pure fear and propaganda.....OKAY, think im done now...damn that kinda got me heated.

It is always sad to hear when families report their own loved ones. Stories like this make me think of the Red Scare hysteria under McCarthyism, when family members turned in their own spouses as 'suspected communists.' Society was conditioned to be so afraid of communists hiding everywhere, that people would report their own family members. The current anti-MAP climate is a very similar social hysteria. People are not thinking logically, as we will see below...

Theendoftheline wrote: Wed Apr 08, 2026 5:23 pm Also being jailed and convicted for no one even being harmed? 100 percent computer generated images what a fucking joke.....

Yeah, the article said he could face up to 20 years in prison... that's longer than most murderers... just for fictional pictures with no real victim.

Theendoftheline wrote: Wed Apr 08, 2026 5:23 pm ALSO on a LOT of comments people are saying how this should still be illegal because "well what happens when he decides AI isnt enough"

This is a perfect example of the Slippery Slope Fallacy. It's a logical fallacy where people assume that a small first step will inevitably lead to a more extreme outcome, following a chain of exaggerated 'causal links,' based purely on speculation.

So yeah... in a free country, you don't throw people in prison because of crimes that they 'maybe probably might' commit in the future. Do people really want to go down that path of forecast-based prosecution?

OnionPetal wrote: Wed Apr 08, 2026 7:14 pm It is always sad to hear when families report their own loved ones. Stories like this make me think of the Red Scare hysteria under McCarthyism, when family members turned in their own spouses as 'suspected communists.' Society was conditioned to be so afraid of communists hiding everywhere, that people would report their own family members. The current anti-MAP climate is a very similar social hysteria. People are not thinking logically, as we will see below...

Theendoftheline wrote: Wed Apr 08, 2026 5:23 pm Also being jailed and convicted for no one even being harmed? 100 percent computer generated images what a fucking joke.....

Yeah, the article said he could face up to 20 years in prison... that's longer than most murderers... just for fictional pictures with no real victim.

Theendoftheline wrote: Wed Apr 08, 2026 5:23 pm ALSO on a LOT of comments people are saying how this should still be illegal because "well what happens when he decides AI isnt enough"

This is a perfect example of the Slippery Slope Fallacy. It's a logical fallacy where people assume that a small first step will inevitably lead to a more extreme outcome, following a chain of exaggerated 'causal links,' based purely on speculation.

So yeah... in a free country, you don't throw people in prison because of crimes that they 'maybe probably might' commit in the future. Do people really want to go down that path of forecast-based prosecution?

HIs life is just over, socially hes ruined, financially hes ruined, his family will forever view him as a "pedo freak that deserves to die"....and...for what, for ai generated images that hurt not a single soul on this planet except all mighty government that wishes to set an example. I cannot even finish reading shit like that it makes my blood just boil. You'd think that such content would fall under the same category as loli/shota, but I guess if its "too real" all that goes out the window, pathetic man. And those morons in the comments are just treating him like a monster, a rabid animal that at any minute will gout out and abuse their kids sexually at the drop of a hat. I hate how almost all humans think and just fall in line with whatever group think tells them to, their are certain topics that even the most traditionally intelligent individuals IQ wise will just turn into pure sheep and follow because that is the ONLY acceptable response, any other and you are a "pedo supporter" or "need to have your harddrive checked", FUCK man.......

And those morons in the comments are just treating him like a monster, a rabid animal that at any minute will gout out and abuse their kids sexually at the drop of a hat. I hate how almost all humans think and just fall in line with whatever group think tells them to, their are certain topics that even the most traditionally intelligent individuals IQ wise will just turn into pure sheep and follow because that is the ONLY acceptable response, any other and you are a "pedo supporter" or "need to have your harddrive checked", FUCK man.......

This is the exact problem that we know is blatantly false/extremely rare for AI image generation to escalate to violent abuse, and I say with pride that this moral freak out is an evolutionary mismatch. Antis have extreme irrational thoughts about the dude generating AI images because they are tapping into the exact part of their brain that deals with protecting children from danger in a prehistoric world. They mismatch peaceful pedos for an extreme threat.

This extreme conformity, legal pressure and social pressure doesn't make me flinch. This is a total victimless crime regardless of what all those three letter government agencies, interpol and NCMEC say, and this man is 100% NOT A DANGER to anyone, and it is pathetic the general public thinks that way because its clearly wron, misguided and not supported by data.


As I wrote a on another girl lover site in quotes


its so fucking stupid to hear CSAM arrest break the news across America subburbs, turning a peaceful neighborhood into a paranoia club. After it happens local channel news reporters come in with their vans with satellites and knock on all the doors interviewing neighbors who shake in fear after their local retard neighbor was arrested for torrenting (that popular video from japan of a maid girl name laura) , but they don't know that and assume he is looking at pictures of men aggressively raping kids. The news reporters proceed to talk to the neighbors who immediately get grossed out and talk about how he is a dangerous to society, assuming the worst.

The news report will then show a mugshot of the special needs adult who has developmental disability with facial deformities and the public will think

"""that's what predators look like, that guy would molest my 11 year old daughter """

when in reality this guy is a internet exclusive dweeb minding his own business but in the public view he is a psycho rapist waiting to break into a house and attack kids.

They then proceed to check their local cities sex offender registry and see a bunch of similar looking special needs adults with facial deformitees arrested for CSAM and a few normies with chad jawlines and advance social skills arrested for real manipulative rape-sex with 10 year olds and normal dudes who had sex with consenting 17 year olds all on the same webpage not knowing the difference thinking all of these people are scum of the earth deserving of the worst.

The news reporter will then mention the local schools and parks where the CSAM arrestee lived as if its connected, """Living a few blocks from a city school""" sometimes briefely filming the school and playground then the house of the arrestee.

Common themes the neighbors always end up saying to the newscaster

1. "keep the little ones ones safe"
2. "its terrifying as a parent"
3. "disgusting.exe"
4. "I'm glad he got caught"
5. "take these predators off the streets"
6. "my kids are in danger"

In some extreme cases the neighbors are so paranoid that they are afraid to send their kids and teens to school the next day or don't allow them to walk alone if the school is walking distance. The special needs man with an iq of 70 clicking buttons on his computer of laura in a maid dress indirectly unintentionally triggers real moral hysteria in a neighborhood. Just like that SpongeBob episode where everyone freaked out over the butterfly in a bubble named wormy until Sandy got back


One thing I'll add to this is how news Channels like Law and Crime news keep saying "its every parents worst nightmare, they over use that phrase that 1) violent kidnapping 2) 17 24 dating and 3) peaceful individual downloading bikini pics of kids is also every parents worst nightmare. Its so tiresome I agree antis are extremely uninformed on this topic because of NCMEC's propaganda.

I hate how almost all humans think and just fall in line with whatever group think tells them to, their are certain topics that even the most traditionally intelligent individuals IQ wise will just turn into pure sheep and follow because that is the ONLY acceptable response, any other and you are a "pedo supporter" or "need to have your harddrive checked", FUCK man.......

It is group think and social contagion but its also child protection instincts kicking in saying "THREAT THREAT THREAT PREDATORY ANIMAL WANTS TO EAT KIDS" and that system is playing a huge role but its still not recognized. Its so powerful that is why qanon is so addicting and why it fuels conspiracies like pizzagate, qanon, satanic panic and epstein cannibalism craziness.

This is what animal like instincts look like in humans, this is why rational people behave otherwise irrational when it comes to child protection

zarkle wrote: Fri Apr 10, 2026 7:45 am

I hate how almost all humans think and just fall in line with whatever group think tells them to, their are certain topics that even the most traditionally intelligent individuals IQ wise will just turn into pure sheep and follow because that is the ONLY acceptable response, any other and you are a "pedo supporter" or "need to have your harddrive checked", FUCK man.......

It is group think and social contagion but its also child protection instincts kicking in saying "THREAT THREAT THREAT PREDATORY ANIMAL WANTS TO EAT KIDS" and that system is playing a huge role but its still not recognized. Its so powerful that is why qanon is so addicting and why it fuels conspiracies like pizzagate, qanon, satanic panic and epstein cannibalism craziness.

This is what animal like instincts look like in humans, this is why rational people behave otherwise irrational when it comes to child protection

Exactly, and no matter what those people cannot be reasoned with at all. You try to debate them they shut down real quick and resort to monkey brain insults etc.

Sadly its even extending to 16 to 17 year olds now about "protecting" them from porn, groomers etc as the under 18 category anymore is automatically framed as "under 18 = helpless child needs protection". Instead of teaching adolescents how to have common sense, trust them with "adult topics" through education and lowering the legal adult age society has decided to clamp down. let alone kids under 12.

Its to the point now where as others have said anyone that's 16 or 17 and decides to date a little older entire servers attack the teen and call the guy a pedo. Its all gotten so so dumb to the point I do not wish to live on this planet anymore at times....

Hell just the other day a whole server was going fucking ape shit and a half because a 15 yo was exposed for dating a 19 yo, once exposed the guy got banned, death threats, banned from the server, the 15 yo turned on him and claimed he was "manipulated and groomed" and everyone counted him as a horrible victim of online grooming while i'm over here like....WHAT DO YOU MEAN they were having fun together and perfectly happy until the whole server white knighted them....

Theendoftheline wrote: Fri Apr 10, 2026 4:52 pm

zarkle wrote: Fri Apr 10, 2026 7:45 am [...] It is group think and social contagion but its also child protection instincts kicking in saying "THREAT THREAT THREAT PREDATORY ANIMAL WANTS TO EAT KIDS" and that system is playing a huge role but its still not recognized. [...]

This is what animal like instincts look like in humans, this is why rational people behave otherwise irrational when it comes to child protection

[...] Sadly its even extending to 16 to 17 year olds now about "protecting" them from porn, groomers etc as the under 18 category anymore is automatically framed as "under 18 = helpless child needs protection". [...]

I don't buy it. I mean, if it were only about 'protecting children,' then would governments be able to so easily get away with bombing girls' schools in Iran? Where were all of those 'child protection instincts' as civilian kids got slaughtered by the thousands in Palestine? The kids that politicians called 'human shields' and made no effort to save. And while people condemn any pleasurable contact with minors, corporal punishment (i.e., literal beatings) of children is still legal in many jurisdictions. A kiss below the belt may land someone in prison for longer than a murderer. But people are happy to buy clothes made with forced child labour, if they can save a dollar.

Some people pretend to care about 'child protection' (e.g., legislators who want to spy on your online activities). And some people (especially members here) genuinely do care about the well being of children. But 'child protection instincts' are not a prerequisite for irrationality and hysteria. See: the European Witch Hunts and the Red Scare for irrational social hysteria that were predicated on other motives.

Fox 2 Detroit reports that Austin McCarty of South Lyon, Michigan, faces serious criminal charges including three counts of aggravated possession of child sexually abusive material and three counts of using a computer to commit a crime. The case originated from a report made by McCarty’s wife, who discovered a sexual image of a young girl on her husband’s computer on January 20, 2025.

When confronted about the disturbing discovery, McCarty allegedly told his wife that he had used an AI tool to generate sexually explicit deepfake images of children. This claim, however, did not prevent law enforcement from pursuing charges against him.

To be fair, if she reported the crime before knowing it was AI, it's not as bad. Even pro-contact MAPs can be against PIM involving real children.

To me, the really infuriating part is this:

“Even as technology changes, the laws against child sexually abusive material remain constant,” McDonald said. “It doesn’t matter if images are created with AI or a camera; they represent the abuse of children. We will hold accountable anyone who would harm and sexually exploit children, regardless of the technology they use.”

Complete equivocation. The representation of the abuse of children is equal to the abuse of children? Does that mean any film which covers the topic of child abuse should be illegal? And how is it that he was harming or sexually exploiting children? So much reaching, it's people like these which destroy legal systems.

Same kind of thinking as strict constructionism.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strict_constructionism

PorcelainLark wrote: Sat Apr 11, 2026 12:05 am To me, the really infuriating part is this:

“Even as technology changes, the laws against child sexually abusive material remain constant,” McDonald said. “It doesn’t matter if images are created with AI or a camera; they represent the abuse of children. We will hold accountable anyone who would harm and sexually exploit children, regardless of the technology they use.”

Complete equivocation. The representation of the abuse of children is equal to the abuse of children? Does that mean any film which covers the topic of child abuse should be illegal?

Given the normie response to Cuties, which was made by an anti, I'd be willing to bet they do think any film covering the topic should be illegal.

PorcelainLark wrote: Sat Apr 11, 2026 12:05 am
To me, the really infuriating part is this:

“Even as technology changes, the laws against child sexually abusive material remain constant,” McDonald said. “It doesn’t matter if images are created with AI or a camera; they represent the abuse of children. We will hold accountable anyone who would harm and sexually exploit children, regardless of the technology they use.”

Complete equivocation. The representation of the abuse of children is equal to the abuse of children? Does that mean any film which covers the topic of child abuse should be illegal? And how is it that he was harming or sexually exploiting children? So much reaching, it's people like these which destroy legal systems.

Same kind of thinking as strict constructionism.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strict_constructionism

It is shocking. It's an 'emotional position,' it makes me think that any attempt to reason with most people on the subject will be futile. I don't know how widespread cultural change occurs but I don't think pro-MAP/pro-sexual pleasure and affection/sex positive people will be successful in persuading people through logically dissecting positions that people are this emotionally invested in, because I have to assume that without extreme bias it would be obviously absurd and monstrous to virtually everyone to imprison people for looking at sexualized computer-generated images of children who don't exist. This does nothing to protect children from pain (or an abstract thwarting of their desires; which I assume the consent argument is disengenuously concerned with but people might be separating the absence of 'true consent' from 'desire-frustration' and I'm just wrongly assuming that it's obvious to everyone that 'desire-frustration' is required for autonomy violation or some wrongful disregard for consent), it's about validating the idea that sexual desire for children is inherently inappropriate.

Are fictional depictions of child murder legal?

OnionPetal,

This is a perfect example of the Slippery Slope Fallacy. It's a logical fallacy where people assume that a small first step will inevitably lead to a more extreme outcome, following a chain of exaggerated 'causal links,' based purely on speculation.

I don't know what the definition of the slippery slope fallacy is exactly (whatever the consensus agreement is, I don't recognize any centralized philosophical authority; which isn't to say that what is considered fallacious isn't a reasonable assessment, only that I don't think we should respond to appeals to authority or existing tradition/consensus per se) but I don't think it's necessarily unreasonable to assume that a first step will probably or might lead to an extreme outcome in terms of practical policy. What I think is unreasonable is rejecting a value or principle per se because the adoption of it or some real life policy it implies might lead to a more extreme outcome in terms of practical policy or the adoption of other principles that aren't logically implied by it (e.g. first we set the slaves free, then we end up with black supremacy and the domination of whites etc. Even if that happened, the principle of racial egalitarianism doesn't justify the supremacy of or preferential treatment for the traditionally marginalized group, and we could have the abolition of slavery; which would be desirable, without that, at the very least you can't not accept the principle of racial egalitarianism, or equal consideration in general, just because abolishing slavery might have negative consequences).

So yeah... in a free country, you don't throw people in prison because of crimes that they 'maybe probably might' commit in the future. Do people really want to go down that path of forecast-based prosecution?

I agree. I think prison should ultimately be about deterrence but imprisoning the innocent is more damaging than imprisoning the guilty, all other factors being equal, because the guilty understand that they have some agency over their fate; they could have avoided it or can avoid it in future through the choices that they make, and if the laws are just and they understand that then there won't be the frustration of having been wronged. I guess that point doesn't apply entirely if viewing AI porn is the basis for this prediction since you could avoid doing that but it's still completely backwards (sexual interest in children precedes viewing material to satisfy that preexisting desire, if viewing child porn can generate an interest in children that was previously non-existent there's still no specific reason to think that it will cause one to act on their interest. I can't rule out the possibility that watching Superman will cause psychologically normal people to try and fly, as contrary to common sense as that belief is, but I think there's an inconsistency in standards that I don't really want to delve into right now. People generally differentiate between fantasy and real life. Even if there's an argument to be made that violent video games desensitize people to real-life violence, as far as I know there is NO evidence that an interest in violent video games correlates with real-world violence; and those games are legal even though they involve fictional depictions of behavior that is often illegal or morally reprehensible. You could just as well argue that daydreaming could cause real-life sexual interactions with children. I cannot understand how someone could believe that having no outlet for one's sexuality; via fantasy aids that include some visual element, would make them LESS likely to act on their sexual interest in children in the real world. I don't understand how it could be the case that I'm LESS likely to pursue this dangerous super-desirable thing if I DON'T have a less-desirable-but-still-interesting substitute. If we're either giving people the ultimatum of risking jail and social death by pursuing some ideally satisfying experience or suffering the frustration of their desires or giving them the ultimatum of risking jail and social death by pursuing that ideally satisfying experience or pursuing a semi-satisfying alternative that comes with no risk instead; how could it be the case that they are more likely to risk jail and social death in the second scenario?).

I haven't clicked on any of the links in this thread.