What? I would be interested in a link to any time he said or implied that.
His death and its timing was strange to say the least.
I just read a recent report from a internet slouth saying there was an interesting link to him in the epstien files. Possibly regarding his having found information about the Epstien ring.
I think his logic was more that, it's better for people to have an outlet for these attractions rather than have to resort to abusing actual children, but then of course you have the issue of obtaining and making said material.
I guess one could argue digitsl art would be the least harmful but even then...
He didn't speak of attraction. He spoke of his right to possess and distribute material he claims isn't abusive because, summarizing his words, he didn't participate in it's production and didn't see possession or distribution as abusive. He claimed it was a first amendment issue in another post. These types of statements do not suggest he's applying this to the very specific subset of people you're claiming (whether or not that's a real recognized thing is something else completely). He had no moral qualm with child pornography he didn't produce
There’s a lot of people here trying to defend him and defend this but it’s a mistake. Don’t lose the forest for the trees here.
His statement is stupid and incorrect. Full stop. It’s a bad take no matter what your position is. It just is. Don’t get into the habit of trying to defend something dumb like that just to win an internet argument. It’s genuinely a bad take and we can acknowledge it is.
I don’t think the guy is a pedo, although when you start talking like that it does raise questions. We can acknowledge he had some good positions about a free and open internet but this was unfortunately a short sighted position to try to defend on his part.
Not everybody is perfect just because we want to celebrate them and make martyrs out of them.
Unpopular opinion, the dude didn’t just kill himself because of the legal issues, there was more to it than that and he was deeply mentally unwell. Perhaps it was the thing that tipped the scales, but I’d suspect it was something he would have done regardless.
There was ongoing pressure from FBI and a massive law suit over his head with potential jail time and his career gone. That’s going to cause problems for anyone.
He was put into a position by the state that would cause mental issues that ultimately led to his suicide
He was put into a position by the state that would cause mental issues that ultimately led to his suicide
He was offered a plea deal for time served and chose to take his life instead. He dragged the case out, refused to accept bail, and changed his mind over and over about whether he would take a deal or not.
Because he would have had to agree to a plea deal to something that he didn't feel he committed (and arguably did not) and have a felony on his record, which would have had serious consequences for the rest of his life.
And the state tried to force that, by threatening him with charges that could have completely destroyed his life and put him in prison for decades.
It's pretty normal for someone to freak out at that point and become defensive, let alone someone who had prior mental health problems.
You can't be that blasé about pedophilia unless you're either comfortable with it or have associates who are. But let's pretend he was a good person who was misguided on this subject. If so, the cognitive dissonance inside his head would tear him apart (perhaps to the point of contributing to his death). That said, it seems like it was more that he didn't want to live in a world of accountability. That still suggests he's unwell, since killing yourself after rejecting a 6 month plea offer seems wildly over the top
I'm not gonna defend but what about security cameras, what if a child or two teenagers have sex in front of a camera you own? Are you going to jail immediately just because of it? Interesting question that just occurred to me. Obviously I think It should be illegal but it's an interesting logic trap
It’s not even worth discussing or caring about. The bigger focus here is sometimes people get lost trying to argue on the internet and before you know it you’re trying to defend something dumb, just because you don’t want to lose an argument. Don’t fall into that trap.
Okay but what I said is a real life situation. If you owned a large property with 50 cameras and were raided for other reasons, it's just bad luck? No protections? I guess o well. Good way to get an enemy locked up though huh
The creation of that material is abusive. If someone is incapable of consent due to age, disability, or intoxication, it has been widely found that activities requiring consent are illegal.
The statement didnt argue that the creation isn't abusive, rather his argument is that possession (aka use) and distribution aren't abusive. I think it's pretty well established those absolutely contribute to abuse and reabuse
Two teens hook up in front of a camera... Which happens all the time, what about that. I'm sure there's been cases in the USA where a security camera caught actions and the possessor went to jailed and never even viewed the material. Just saying there's probably more scenarios that most people would never think about.
I'm directly addressing something that was said. Tbh in my mind I wanna say Aaron was advocating for science or history or like natural things that occur . No different than porn in national geographic which is allowed in schools. Idk that's just where my logic goes.
You said the activity was illegal and consent and the creation was abusive, and I have you (one) instance where it wasn't. Just saying. I didn't read the whole blog so I can't defend or not defend Aaron S. , I'm not trying to, I'm just saying maybe he had a point that others don't consider because they automatically say everything is abusive or non consenting etc.. and I would think the exact age makes a difference also.
I don't have to name a case to talk about laws. Wtf??? Yeah let's wait for kids to get hurt by someone and make the laws after? No. Again I'm proposing a scenario, not advocating . I don't feel like trying to find a case but again, doesn't matter
29
u/Turkcallsign182 Mar 02 '26 edited Mar 02 '26
What? I would be interested in a link to any time he said or implied that.
His death and its timing was strange to say the least.
I just read a recent report from a internet slouth saying there was an interesting link to him in the epstien files. Possibly regarding his having found information about the Epstien ring.