3 ms·
> Fictional erotica portraying fictional children is not CSAM. There is no child abuse taking place as there is no child in the first place. That’s your defini
by skissane 3mo ago
> Fictional erotica portraying fictional children is not CSAM. There is no child abuse taking place as there is no child in the first place.
That’s your definition, but it isn’t the definition many authorities/activists/etc use.
And I’m not defending their definition, merely pointing out it is a real live definition in active use
- basilikum 3mo agoTo clarify, I am aware you are objectively describing the legal situation. I am not making a legal, but an ethical argument. We seem to be agreeing. There is even a Wikipedia article about the legality. It's quite complicated in a lot of places because people really like to ban it but it very much is free speech or protected artistic expression in countries that have these concepts: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legal_status_of_fictional_pornography_depicting_minors#Jurisdictions_where_fictional_pornography_depicting_minors_is_illegal https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legal_status_of_fictional_porn... To be clear fictional pornography about real children has to be distinguished from fictional characters. Even when the depiction is purely fictional. Sexualizing real children is unacceptable.