• maegul (he/they)
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    25
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    1 year ago

    To push back your attempt to minimalise what’s going on here …

    Yes, they’re not actually photos of the girls. But, nor is a photo of a naked person actually the same as that person standing in front of you naked.

    If being seen naked is unwanted and embarrassing etc, why should a photo of you naked be embarrassing, and, to make my point, what difference would it make if the photo is more or less realistic? An actual photo can be processed or taken under certain lighting or with a certain lens or have been taken some time in the past … all factors that lessen how close it is to the current naked appearance of the subject. How unrealistic can a photo be before it’s no longer embarrassing?

    Psychologically, I’d say it’s pretty obvious that the embarrassment of a naked image is that someone else now has a relatively concrete image in their minds of what the subject looks like naked. It is a way of being seen naked by proxy. A drawn or painted image could probably have the same effect.

    There’s probably some range of realism within which there’s an embarrassing effect, and I’d bet AI is very capable of getting in that range pretty easily these days.

    While the technology is out there now … it doesn’t mean that our behaviours with it are automatically acceptable. Society adapts to the uses and abuses new technology has and it seems pretty obvious that we’re yet to culturally curb the abuses of this technology.