The article we are talking about wants to be about CSAM stories. That alone is a topic that most people have a strong opinion about. A strong enough opinion to

The article we are talking about wants to be about CSAM stories. That alone is a topic that most people have a strong opinion about. A strong enough opinion to say that anything even adjacent to the topic is not worth even a little consideration. CSAM is the penultimate taboo subject, and for good reason. But this article isn't really about CSAM. It's about the taboo itself. This article taunts the reader: if CSAM truly deserves to be taboo, then it logically follows that anything resembling CSAM should be censored, and its creators punished. If we take this argument seriously, then we must actually consider what it means to resemble CSAM. That's a path that no one is interested in exploring, so the argument itself just vanishes. -- The real argument is about the threat of story. Every writer has the power to write any story that they can imagine. There is nothing new about this: it's been true since prehistory, since language itself.