Robyn Adele Anderson

[Spindrift]

Wow, I've been gone for a while and seems like a lot is going on.

Let me just post my 2 cents worth.

The spirit of the AI deepfake law was mostly promulgated to combat 3 things.

1. Reputational and social damage from deeply humiliating AI generated images leading to severe mental and social strain, in some cases resulting in extreme acts such as self-deletion.
2. Digital image manipulation of persons of note who's income and career prospects depend on certain types of curated media standards, the non-concensual AI manipulation of which would severely and negatively affect that person's income stream through, again, reputational damage.
3. Use of AI generated images of any non-consensual nature used to intimidate, coerce or blackmail another individual for purposes that the said individual does not otherewise agree to.

In other words, AI generated images so realistic and lifelike that could cause serious social, reputational or monetary harm to existing persons is the predominant reason the law was made. Images that could easily cause other people to look at the persons in question in a derogatory or socially detrimental light. Non-consensual images so realistic they could destroy a person's life.

Now note where we are here, we are on the "Shrunken Women Board". This is basically a forum for a fantasy subculture. Everything here on this site, whether photoshop collages, media screen grabs, videos, stories and yes, AI images are all posted as a contribution to this fantasy subculture we all enjoy. Now look at or read any of the material here, is there anything at all that screams to you "ultra realistic media that would destroy so-and-so's reputation/career because nothing about that person's public persona implied that they were secretly involved in such perverse actions"? The answer is a resounding NO, since any and everybody with eyes and a brain would see it as it truely is, a fantasy. Nothing on this forum is real, nor is it truely intended to be real. There is no intent to destroy anyone's repution, no intent to curtail anyone's career, no intent to bully or blackmail anyone for illicit purposes. Nobody is here on this forum to make money at someone else's expense. No one perusing this forum in their right mind would look at an image of a known celebrity thats been AI manipulated to appear 8 inches tall and think that it was actually real, to the point that such images could be used for nefarious purposes. ITS ALL FANTASY!

Of course a judge or jury may completely disagree with me on this. I'm no legal expert. But the law is still new and court cases are decided on precedents. Where there are none, especially when the images in question are of a shrunken tiny version of a real person made strictly for the purposes of fantasy fulfillment and not for say, blackmail or illicit gain, who knows? Such cases could go on for years. Multiple cases may end up with multiple different verdicts in multiple jurisdictions. In time, some cases may be overturned on appeal, resulting in further precedents. And that's if the person who generated the image is a current resident of the USA. I can tell, just by their style of writing that many people on this forum are not residents of the USA. I know many are in fact logging in through VPNs.

So,,,yeah. That's my position. I could be wrong. I could be right. Make of it what you will.

[Trunkmonkey]

Spindrift! That is most eloquently put and I suppose it would depend upon which jurisdiction that you fall under as to which laws applied to you, but yes, you've completely nailed it. I completely agree with your dissertation here. Although unfortunately, some people seem to have neither eyes or two brain cells to rub together to form a spark of reason at times. Nice to see you back again, by the way. Toodles for now!

[Little Sally]

Yes I'd agree with most of what you say regarding AI stuff posted on here (mimicking celebrities), it's largely harmless enough and wouldn't be regarded as offensive. But there have been exceptions, and portraying some of these women as being naked or semi naked and in lewd situations, isn't very fair. Regardless of what size they are shown to be.

It's about having some respect at the end of the day I think.

That's my own take on it anyway.

[Spindrift]

Spindrift! That is most eloquently put and I suppose it would depend upon which jurisdiction that you fall under as to which laws applied to you, but yes, you've completely nailed it. I completely agree with your dissertation here. Although unfortunately, some people seem to have neither eyes or two brain cells to rub together to form a spark of reason at times. Nice to see you back again, by the way. Toodles for now!

Thanks. I've bearing a lot of slings and arrows of outrageous fortune lately and really can't be my regular posting self for quite some time, but I'll still look in once in a while.

[Spindrift]

Yes I'd agree with most of what you say regarding AI stuff posted on here (mimicking celebrities), it's largely harmless enough and wouldn't be regarded as offensive. But there have been exceptions, and portraying some of these women as being naked or semi naked and in lewd situations, isn't very fair. Regardless of what size they are shown to be.

It's about having some respect at the end of the day I think.

That's my own take on it anyway.

I understand what you are getting at with having respect. That's why I would never ever generate AI images of people I know, especially those who are close to me unless they specifically request it.

But as for portraying some celebrities in a lewd and explicit manner through AI manipulation being disrespectul, here's what I think. First of all, they are celebrities with a public presence. They've put their own faces out in the public for all to see. The internet is filled with their videos and images, sometimes by their own volition thu SNS, and they encourage the dissemination of their persona. They can't really complain when people use software tools such as Photoshop or AI generation tools to manipulate their very public images.

What's more relevant for us forum members is that from the perspective of such a celebrity (with no shrinking proclivities), they see in this forum images, videos and stories of sexual fantasy with highly pronounced undertones of nonconsensual activity. Sometimes downright illegal/violent actions being performed on women (and men). Illegal acts such as the very act of nonconcensual shrinking, unlawful restraint ie. handhelds, taping and tying down, false imprisonment ie. locked in hamster/bird cages, trapped in glass jars, even just being kept in doll houses so high up they can't escape. Other illegal acts include assault and battery ie. forcefully undressing or tearing off clothes, chasing down corridors, forcefully bathing and other acts of violence and humiliation. And this is all before the most serious illegal activity of outright sexual assault in the form of unwanted ejaculation on their physical person, unwanted physical contact of genitalia, uninvited sexual/penetrative activity under threat of violence or under restraint, etc, etc.

What I'm trying to say is that this celebrity who has found their likeness posted as an AI manipulated image or video on this forum will likely not really care whether they appear clothed or not in light of all the (in their mind) perverted and illegal acts being shown perpetrated in the images of shrunken woman on this forum. To them, the very fact that their image has been posted here on this perverted deviant sexual fantasy subculture forum would be the epitome of disrespect, whether that image showed them as clothed or not. So,,,,why bother?

TL:DR Any self respecting celebrity is going to be pissed about having their image posted in our sex fantasy subculture forum, clothed or unclothed anyway so why bother worrying?

Again, my position. Could be right, could be wrong.

[Trunkmonkey]

Spindrift! That is most eloquently put and I suppose it would depend upon which jurisdiction that you fall under as to which laws applied to you, but yes, you've completely nailed it. I completely agree with your dissertation here. Although unfortunately, some people seem to have neither eyes or two brain cells to rub together to form a spark of reason at times. Nice to see you back again, by the way. Toodles for now!

Thanks. I've bearing a lot of slings and arrows of outrageous fortune lately and really can't be my regular posting self for quite some time, but I'll still look in once in a while.

Well I hope that it all works out for you. In the meantime, toodles and good luck!

[Little Sally]

I understand what you are getting at with having respect. That's why I would never ever generate AI images of people I know, especially those who are close to me unless they specifically request it.

But as for portraying some celebrities in a lewd and explicit manner through AI manipulation being disrespectul, here's what I think. First of all, they are celebrities with a public presence. They've put their own faces out in the public for all to see. The internet is filled with their videos and images, sometimes by their own volition thu SNS, and they encourage the dissemination of their persona. They can't really complain when people use software tools such as Photoshop or AI generation tools to manipulate their very public images.

What's more relevant for us forum members is that from the perspective of such a celebrity (with no shrinking proclivities), they see in this forum images, videos and stories of sexual fantasy with highly pronounced undertones of nonconsensual activity. Sometimes downright illegal/violent actions being performed on women (and men). Illegal acts such as the very act of nonconcensual shrinking, unlawful restraint ie. handhelds, taping and tying down, false imprisonment ie. locked in hamster/bird cages, trapped in glass jars, even just being kept in doll houses so high up they can't escape. Other illegal acts include assault and battery ie. forcefully undressing or tearing off clothes, chasing down corridors, forcefully bathing and other acts of violence and humiliation. And this is all before the most serious illegal activity of outright sexual assault in the form of unwanted ejaculation on their physical person, unwanted physical contact of genitalia, uninvited sexual/penetrative activity under threat of violence or under restraint, etc, etc.

What I'm trying to say is that this celebrity who has found their likeness posted as an AI manipulated image or video on this forum will likely not really care whether they appear clothed or not in light of all the (in their mind) perverted and illegal acts being shown perpetrated in the images of shrunken woman on this forum. To them, the very fact that their image has been posted here on this perverted deviant sexual fantasy subculture forum would be the epitome of disrespect, whether that image showed them as clothed or not. So,,,,why bother?

TL:DR Any self respecting celebrity is going to be pissed about having their image posted in our sex fantasy subculture forum, clothed or unclothed anyway so why bother worrying?

Again, my position. Could be right, could be wrong.

First off, thanks for taking the time to express yourself so clearly, and in so much detail. It's quite a rare experience, especially on here.

We're probably both of a different mindset regarding celebs, who I mostly regard as deserving of some respect. But as you say, they do put themselves out there to be shot at so to speak, so I guess most are thick skinned enough to cope with things like image manipulation. And some may even be flattered with their imagery being tampered with, on the basis of any publicity being good publicity. Others might object of course. But the chances of them seeing anything that's posted on here would be pretty slim I suppose, unless someone is silly enough to bring it to their attention.

And you're right in what you say about the general tone of stuff that gets posted on places like this, especially imagery. It's by nature of the subject usually sexual in nature, and about subjugation of small female subjects and exploiting them. I think everyone accepts that, even women. And you described in some detail many of the ways this is carried out, which are fantasies popular with men in particular of course. Which I also 'get' and understand. I think it's largely a male dominated fantasy at the end of the day in any case, so I don't let that bother me.

Myself, I've always preferred a more subtle approach to the subject, so I steer away from things like crude imagery and graphic depictions (and stories) that involve sexual exploitation. Particularly involving male genitalia and bodily fluids lol! Those fantasies are for the boys as far as I'm concerned. Though if I was a 'celeb' which thankfully I'm not, I might not take kindly to being the subject of such attention.

I think it's fair to say that the horse has well and truly bolted since AI imagery became available, and it's unlikely things will change now. Though of course none of us condone the sort of abuse that private individuals have suffered on social media platforms, but thankfully laws are now in place to curb that. So let's hope it does.

In the meantime, I'll enjoy looking at some of the 'Val and Betty' portrayals that you guys do so well (being a bit of a nostalgia freak), but will likely pass on much of the other AI offerings available.

Good luck. It's been nice to talk.