For the same reason as has already been cited on this thread, that is the same argument as videogames violence etc.
Do you not have any kinks?
I have a fair amount and the ones I like in porn, I don’t like in real life. The ones I like in real life I don’t really like in porn.
So, specifically concerning your first sentence, which in my opinion is intended as an argument, even though it’s just a question and doesn’t offer any backing, the answer is no.
(and she's now slightly over 14, and I do mean slightly. Long way to her 15th birthday)
https://www.youtube.com/shorts/2_5AZjAoMi0 (you might want to watch this one in incognito mode. I mean it's youtube, so it's "not sexual", but calling it SFW is lunacy. you'll see what I mean)
At least she looks like she might be 16 ...
In short: I feel like this society is long past the idea of sexualizing kids being perfectly OK.
Obviously, I have kids, I'd like this guy to stop. But I do think, uh, could this whole young girls KPOP thing stop too, the whole thing? Obviously it is creating guys like this. In fact the guy is at least not using, and not hurting, real girls.
Because yes, KPOP has lead to suicides by the "artist" girls, whereas this guy (correct me if I'm wrong) so far has not hurt a fly.
Police should just execute the plan they already had prepared and planned (I think it was a US federal agency) of releasing massive amounts of CGI CP to the dark web, absolutely flooding the market to such an extent that consumers can’t realize which is which. Which, at the same tine, makes it pointless for someone to pay for it when the “fake” one is equal and legal, and more in quantity. Also even if your fetish is so grotesquely immense that it has affected you to the extent that you need the REAL REAL one, the seller will probably just resell you one of the police fake ones for 0 risk and profit off of you being a dumbass.
There’d be 0 reason to produce or share real one anymore or even sell it.
Important thing, you can generate CGI or AI images without them being trained specifically by the thing you want.
Like you need banana cake just train them with bananas and also cakes. The equivalence of what “bananas” and “cakes” are for this argument, are left to the reader of this comment, who I assume intelligent, as I think it’s gross and unnecessary to make it explicit.
"Lifetime pornography use was reported by most respondents. After adjusting for age, age at first porn exposure, and current relationship status, the associations between pornography use and sexual behaviors was statistically significant"
Since you like copying and pasting the same irrelevant drivel…
No causation, only correlation.
Hey here’s one for you: Every porn addict, pedophile, and rapist drinks water.
If you drink water then you’re a rapist!!!
See how ludicrous your statements are… all over this thread. You keep repeating the same correlative results as causative and the causation has been debunked by the entire world’s scientists.
Doom didn’t make kids shoot up a school. Mission impossible didn’t create an entire generation of super spies. And porn didn’t create rapists.
Do you not have any kinks?
I have a fair amount and the ones I like in porn, I don’t like in real life. The ones I like in real life I don’t really like in porn.
So, specifically concerning your first sentence, which in my opinion is intended as an argument, even though it’s just a question and doesn’t offer any backing, the answer is no.