While Grok has introduced belated safeguards to prevent sexualised AI imagery, other tools have far fewer limits
“Since discovering Grok AI, regular porn doesn’t do it for me anymore, it just sounds absurd now,” one enthusiast for the Elon Musk-owned AI chatbot wrote on Reddit. Another agreed: “If I want a really specific person, yes.”
If those who have been horrified by the distribution of sexualised imagery on Grok hoped that last week’s belated safeguards could put the genie back in the bottle, there are many such posts on Reddit and elsewhere that tell a different story.
And while Grok has undoubtedly transformed public understanding of the power of artificial intelligence, it has also pointed to a much wider problem: the growing availability of tools, and means of distribution, that present worldwide regulators with what many view as an impossible task. Even as the UK announces that creating nonconsensual sexual and intimate images will soon be a criminal offence, experts say that the use of AI to harm women has only just begun.
No,i did not read it, I just threw in the very first thing to find. Obviously, that was not very helpful in my argument.
I don’t know why this distinction is so important to you. I hope it’s just scientific obsession with data and facts.
Anyhow, I’d argue that the majority of rapists are from the spectrum of personality disorders in the range of NPD and the classical ASPDs. All those need to be in control. By definition. So even if one say “I just wanted to fuck her”, doesn’t really mean it’s just for sexual gratification. If you had ever worked with victims you’d know that sex is the byproduct of control for those.
And anyone who JUST needs instant sexual gratification right now, and hence rapes ONLY for the sole reason because the woman doesn’t want to (and would have the exact same.“fun” with clear consent) is clearly antisocial anyway (and/or of some archaicly weird (religious) belief, like women were not people but property). Which then circles back to the aforementioned.
absolutely ridiculous
Is it my job to educate? I don’t like work, Do your own research.
The broader topic is important and emotive, but I also generally find it fascinating when people consider something that I find completely counter-intuitive to be taken as read, and so clearly true as to not even require argument (see other replies). I assume I find it interesting and important for the same reason as the author of the article you linked.
Clearly anyone who commits rape is anti-social on some level. (Perhaps via a repressive culture which normalises marital rape - it’s anti-social on some level even though the culture in question finds it normal). But I don’t think from that you can “circle back” to personality disorders and thereby declare that sex is merely a byproduct of control. I’m not sure if that’s what you meant by “circle back” though.
I do wonder if there is is something going on here though, where on some level people feel that if you allow that rapists partly or wholly rape out of sexual motives, then that brings rape within a more normal scope than if you insist that almost all rape is entirely the product of deviant motives for power or anger. And I wonder if that is why you ask “why this distinction is so important to you” - because you’re worried that my position is an attempt (maybe subconscious, maybe only on a small scale) to normalise rape and therefore to excuse it.
Certainly that’s not the case; rape for mainly sexual motives is not in any way excusable. I’d be interested to know if that was where your question was aimed, and how you think that links back to your understanding of rape motives; do you feel any push to believe what you do because to believe otherwise might in some way diminish the crime’s severity?
I’d say, that’s anti-social on every level. Just because everyone does it and it was always “normal” before (culture…), doesn’t make it any less anti-social or wrong. At least in my book. And yes, that is indeed the circle-back. As in that all of those personality disorders show a serious obsession with control. Besides that the act itself is pure control by force. Sure, there will be many examples where sheer animal lust ranks higher than the lust for control, but it’s a spectrum and rarely just on the “just horny!”-side but probably often far to the control-side.
That seems to be the case indeed. The notion that it seems so, not that it actually is.
As a misanthropist dealing daily with victims of abuse, how could I not? (besides it being anecdotal evidence: 100% of every of those stories resolves around control, sex is just ONE of the things)
Totally not. Doesn’t even matter how I see it or not, even my motivation would not matter in the end. It’s simply wrong/evil in an absolute way without any added layers of society/religion/belief/group-dynamics/whatever. In my worldview at least, which is usually not the same as most people’s. The layers explain, but not excuse. I can understand/empathise with sociopaths or religious nutjobs. I see how they could end up with such a conclusion. But not excuse. In the end, we’re all capable of reflection. Some more, some less. We don’t just do, we rationalize.