Watch the documentary "Feels Good Man" about the fight of Pepe's creator (a sweet, unassuming, not-online dude) to "rescue" his character from the FBI's hate symbols list.
It's very well made, moving, and a fascinating look into how 4chan "memeified" politics and why it worked.
It's not, and don't let nazis take it from you. Pepe was made to be a chill stoner and he got co-opted by 4chan. The creator still reviles what Pepe has been used for and tries to market him as a chill stoner still.
Pepe is the Schrodinger's cat of malicious intentions.
Horrible people have used it as a mascot, but Pepe did not start that way, and surrendering the early Internet's mascot because of some bad people feels like surrendering to them
After Hilary Clinton's team called Pepe an alt-right symbol in 2016 during the Presidential election campaign, the alt right decided to really triple down to make Pepe an alt right symbol just to prove the woke leftis wrong! So yeah on the one hand, funny meme frog. On the other hand, there was definitely an effort to associate him with the alt right that many of us won't forget
It was. Used mostly by 4chan users, it did end up finding alot of use as a meme outside of 4chan on all social media platforms, namely Twitch, YouTube and Reddit. However in the ever changing social media landscape of 2016 there were chuds out there prowling for something to 'troll' people with and after the Hilary Clinton campaign team came out with something so ill conceived as Pepe is an Alt Right Symbol tons of chuds immediatly jumped on it. The heat died down on that over the next 3 odd years or so as Pepe really had cemented itself as an icon that had been around long enough to lose its origin in the public conscious. It's a Meme. It's a Twitch Emote. It's Alt Right tone just lost by the wayside.
But if you have a friend who's a bit tooooo into Pepe The Frog, listen closely to what he and she means. You will find a breadcrumb trail of unhinged ideology.
Pepe is not a nazi dogwhistle. Just hop on any Twitch stream and you'll see everyone use pepe and pepe adjacent emotes all the time. Even the most normie streams.
Their communities are made out of conservatives, neo-nazis and who knows what kinds of other people. There's also no need to guess what kind of other toxic groups those people might belong to.
So it's not surprising to see such a depiction of anyone who might be trans. I mean someone in their community posted the millionth soyjak/Gigachad prompt, this time prompting the AI bro with what looked to be like underaged girls.
I'm not of course saying every single person in pro-AI community are such people, but the number is definitely not a zero.
Agreed, we should hold onto Pepe, surrendering him because bigots touched him is not something that should become normal. It starts with our frog memes, then it's literally any character
Pepe is not a nazi dogwhistle. Just hop on any Twitch stream and you'll see everyone use pepe and pepe adjacent emotes all the time. Even the most normie streams.
Exactly, it's conservatives who would be most in favour of axing jobs and pushing tech to do that. Whilst those toward the left are more worried about workers rights and job security. I consider myself hard left , pro worker, ai obviously is something I see as a threat to workers. And surprise surprise the ai tech is developed by right wing oligarchs.
Yep. The end goal is surely to replace us all with AI and leave us without jobs or money. It would be better to get fairer working conditions, fair wages, fair amount of hours and workdays, more laborers. Also putting money back in society to allow for economic growth to create even more jobs.
Instead of doing all that, these people use their gullible supporters to make some other group the scapegoat.
All that while pumping money into AI to try and make a world where every job is now doable with AI.
And still the AI bros are willing to push the conspiracy theory that we will all get UBI while AI does everyone's work.
They also recently cheered for Trump for his AI executive orders. Now obviously not every pro AI is a Trumper but the fact that they cheer for him says something.
Yep. No one should be cheering for Trump, but pparently his declaration of lifting AI restriction using EO was enough for some of the pro-AI people to cheer him on.
They could have banned those people and changed the rules to disallow posts that are linked to toxic individuals harboring toxic ideologies. They didn't.
They could easily do stuff to mitigate all of the issues they claim by having an automod that works but they're like the only sub I've seen where automod is inconsistent and lags. I've seen u \ and r \ there and automod take 3 hours to take it down. Or automod say it was removed and leave stuff up.
There are conservatives on each side, there are horrible people on each sides, doesn't make them relevant. And how are you gonna tell me to go back to my cave when you've been arguing on reddit all day? lmao
Actually, you know what? I'll explain the difference. Toxic behavior gets called out and condemned in anti spaces.
That is not the case in Pro-AI spaces. So those who do not belong to these groups are silently enabling it.
So now the question that remains is that which one are you? a conservative, neo-nazi or an enabler who says nothing when such people show up in pro-AI spaces?
Based on your earlier response, I'll guess that you are a conservative. I could be wrong of course, but the fallacy you used is something conservatives like to use when they get countered with logic.
Actually, you know what? I'll explain the difference. Toxic behavior gets called out and condemned in anti spaces.
It gets called out in any community that isn't toxic. And it would be very selfish to call anti communities not toxic when they're the only ones actively harassing the other and even calling them nazis, while also falling for every single ragebait posts to make their points.
So now the question that remains is that which one are you? a conservative, neo-nazi or an enabler who says nothing when such people show up in pro-AI spaces?
I'm the evil elon musl boot licker magakirk neo conservative, faced by a pure leftist angel who does a ton of self reflection. Is that the answer you expect? Enough for you to pull out stereotypes?
Based on your earlier response, I'll guess that you are a conservative. I could be wrong of course, but the fallacy you used is something conservatives like to use when they get countered with logic.
What logic? You're saying the majority of people in pro ai communities are neo nazi conservatives, that in itself makes no sense
Yes, because someone simply wishing to have their gender identity respected in public is equal to some jerk creating slop with a highly unethical tech and calling themselves a master artist.
They love AI because they want and desire the products artists and creators produce, but hate the creatives that produce those works and their creative freedom.
Yeah. My personal view is that this kind of thought-pattern is inextricable with fascism and colonialism. How exactly that manifests may change, but the mechanism remains the same.
Prompters keep complaining about being called out for reposting comics made by nazis, pro ai videos by alt-right freaks, and generating blatantly transphobic caricatures to try and make a point. They throw around accusations of bigotry because they have no other way to demonize normal people for being anti ai.
I will say, *some* prompters can be semi-normal people, but you are the company you keep.
they're not always, they were nothing more than a meme a while ago, but they have been co-opted by alt light/alt right for a few years now. she could be using them innocently because he is just a funny frog at the end of the day but yeah, unfortunately a funny frog sometimes (often) used by shitty people to push shitty agendas.
The “funny” part is debatable, but makes sense otherwise. She (and I, no shade) can be a bit oblivious, she probably just doesn’t know about the correlation. Which makes me feel a lot better
It's the strength of dogwhistle: not being understood by the majority of people. The whole purpose of those things is to be understood by the "community" but not by people outside of it. So don't feel bad about not knowing all the dogwhistles :).
i mean when pepe was a fresh meem like 10-13~ years ago (or before that i don't really remember i'm 24 lol) there were some pretty funny ones, though i would not be suprised if since being co-opted they are all incredibly unfunny and uncreative now - i'm not that side of the pond so i don't really see pepe memes anymore but like they are still used as originally intended, albeit way more niche than the nazi-type dogwhistles they are more often used for.
same with the chad meme and shit, they're co-opting that too, they can't make anything good by themselves, the right can't meme, etc :^(
Pepe is not a nazi dogwhistle. Just hop on any Twitch stream and you'll see everyone use pepe and pepe adjacent emotes all the time. Even the most normie streams.
It is na alt right symbol used by Richard Spencer. It originally was not, and many do not know this, but from the context of this image I'm guessing it is meant to be a dogwhistle
you dont have to put any work or effort to have the gender identity you wish to have. however, you must actually put a ton of work and effort to be labeled an artist of any kind. nobody will call you an artist if all of your art is shit, and especially so if you dont actually do anything to make the art. personally i dont qualify people who mindlessly throw paint onto a canvas as talented artists (MINDLESSLY, there are very talented artists that actually do put some thinking behind the colors and the shapes n whatnot). if they think less than minimal effort makes them an artist worth paying any form of money or attention to then quite literally everyone including old man steve and little 1 second old Matthew are talented artists this making the cogsuckers even less talented and important than ever. words have meaning, youd think people whos whole "creative identity" is writing words would understand that.
You make a good point but trans people and sometimes cis people alike (more so trans people obvi) do have to put in a lot of work to be seen as the gender they want to be seen as by society because society sucks
oh absolutely i meant in terms of validity, a trans woman not doing any work (be it to hide or experimenting identities) is no less valid than a cis woman doing everything in her power to be as feminine as possible!
Oh wait no I get you mean trans women are just... women. No matter what they do.
It's funny when ai bros compare themselves to marginalised groups cause most often those groups are born that way which is implying the ai bros are born writing prompts and wrecking the environment.
I mean the overlap between "white nationalist america" that hates trans people, people of color, and any non-fundamentalist christian and "people that like AI" isn't a circle but it's a pretty short oval.
Such a poor analogy. I am OK calling generative ai images art in the most liberal interpretation of the term, but if that's the case the generative ai is the artist.
Prompting an ai is the no different than asking an artist for a commission. In both you explain what you want and get it.
To me art is valued by effort and skill so generative art is basically valueless. It is also not praise worthy as the ai is not using skill.
i completely agree. i havent heard an absolute argument yet for why ai art isnt art. but theres a million for why ai art can’t be the prompter’s, so it’s still lying, art theft, intellectual theft, and fraud to publish it without first disclosing it’s ai, not their own. functionally the exact same as commissioning an artist; it’s yours to keep but you didn’t make it, even if you asked them to do it. furthermore it’s sleazy to profit off it and take advantage of an intelligence (that was developed with human intelligence) you don’t have to pay for or credit because it’s not a person (but was made with people).
Maybe this doesn't qualify as an absolute argument either, but this is how I see it. In order for something to be art it has to be a piece of communication between humans. It is created by the artist with the goal of expressing something to others, be that a thought, a feeling or their perspective on something. What makes it art is the intention when it is made, and how that intention is realized through the artists personal style.
To me, art only makes sense as something that can be made by humans, as it's not only about the end product but also about the intention and the process of creation. That can only be the case when the artist has actually been alive and has emotions or a perspective. Ai can make images, but in no way are they representing an aspect of the AIs personal life (because it has none). Neither is the prompter creating art since the expression of their feelings/perspective is outsourced and their personal insertion into the art is minimised.
"Rigid social definitions" like needing to put any thought or effort into your 'work' whatsoever.
Know what? I agree, that standard should apply to gender. If you're a cis man and you've never questioned or put any thought into your gender, can you really be sure you're a man? I worked for my gender, sounds like a skill issue.
Isn’t it the other way around though? Like, AI bros are falling over themselves to convince people ai art is art and get so offended when they aren’t validated?
Apart from the bizarre transphobia, the cartoon is riddled with the kind of cognitive dissonance one might acquire from building up a relationship with a chatbot.
Y'know, it's funny. Normally when these people make comics like this by hand, they make trans people look as grotesque as possible. But because AI is so bad at reflecting creative intentions, I feel like I rarely ever see that in transphobic AI posts. It's kinda refreshing honestly.
They're literally saying "if we're not artists, then trans people aren't women", which they clearly think is supposed to be some kind of checkmate "gotcha!" moment when in reality they're just implying being trans is to women/men what using AI is to art, which is a really fucked up statement.
The comic is definitely transphobic but i wouldn’t say that’s a stereotypical depiction of a trans woman. Like if remove her from the comic and put her anywhere else… honestly just looks like a woman to me. The anti tho is very stereotypical “blue hair SJW”.
I think you might be right and I may have been being hyper-sensitive to some of the facial features and things cos of works I've seen before.
You're probably right.
1) We are against rigidity regarding human identity, but are in favor of it regarding art, and this is wrong. Human identity should be rigid, and art should not be. The logic is applied to one place where it shouldn't be, and is not applied to one place where it should be. The roles need to be reversed.
2) We are against rigidity regarding human identity, but are in favor of it regarding art, and this is wrong. Neither should be treated ridgidly, and the logic that supports one supports the other. The two things should be supported by the notion of discarding rigidity in all forms.
I have no idea which of these two the "creator" is trying to suggest, but both have their flaws.
For example, rigidity isn't inherently bad. We are rigid about many things, and we are less rigid about many things. Some of these things make no sense to be less rigid about, for example, we are pretty rigid on not letting convincted murders live among law abiding citizens. This is intuitive and desireable; that isn't called "rigidity", but it is, in a literal or technical way. It isn't highlighted as rigid because that would suggest a lack of reason, but that isn't true, as rigidity is neutral, not inherently wrong. It fits the definition for rigidity, proving it can be ethical to be rigid. It makes sense, then, that something which can be bad, or good, is inherently neither. This is what neutrality is. Rigidity is neutral.
So to be rigid about art is not inherently unethical. Being less rigid about societal standards and identity, but being more rigid about other things, is not a contradiction. You could describe this as awareness of context; not all things are equal, not all rigidity is bad, these are two different use cases.
That is assuming this is being rigid and not simply having a case of prohibiting something as an exception to the rule of "art is not rigid". So we have to talk about what constitutes rigidity. Art isn't typically rigid, and not many artists wants that, but if you are suggesting that it is rigid to prohibit use of AI for "art", then you first have to prove that AI usage is equal to established art tools in such a way that prohibiting it is rigid in a way that it shouldn't be. This logic skips that part and assumes that it is already true, which tells me the major target audience for this is no one but pro-AI individuals. This viewpoint contains nothing but masturbation.
I don't see anything in trans rights which supports less rigidity in other areas specifically, I see it as quite specific to gender and adjacent causes. I have no idea how anything else could be true. Perhaps we should be less rigid about everything because we pointed out rigidity as a flaw in one case? I don't think that would end well.. instead I think anti-AI individuals should focus more on arguments which don't start with already believing that AI generation is the same as other art tools, and should instead focus on proving that idea then making the argument. Probably not using minorities as an example.
Simply: The exclusion of something not percieved as art is hardly rigid inside the context of art. If you can debunk this idea then you could have a starting point. Don't skip the logic.
Anyway, if it is the first one, then this would obviously be a shitty thing to believe. I would be interested to see what text these people used to generate these images, so we could know if the AI is just trained that way, or if the person specifically called for that depiction of a trans person. That would be interesting. Either way, the two are not equivalent. I have always associated usage of AI with questionable politics, it seems to me that it's uncaring about humanity and the merit of people in certain recognizable patterns.
Great, so now the ai "artists" are trying to use trans people as an excuse, great, add them to the pile of other people that blame trans people for their problems
Ngl if trans women had to download my boobs to make their own id probably be concerned but due to the fact they mind their own business I don’t see why I should give a shit?
Honestly I'm just surprised the trans woman on the right looks like a woman. People like this would have normally made her look like the generic fat, balding male that they use to make fun of anti's but wearing a dress and makeup with a wig.
When will they learn that there is a difference is criticism of things that are choseb actions, and criticism of someone's unchosen identity.
It's giving: So you say you're that the gay lifestyle is fine but you're against family bloggers???? Don't you think it's hypocritical to support one lifestyle but not the other?? (And then ignores that the gay "lifestyle" isn't chosen nor harmful, while family bloggers make profit off of their children while putting them in a position where they will be cyberstalked, bullied and even if these things don't happen because idk, guardian angels are real, and they work overtime on them, they still stole the privacy of their children... And they choose to do that. Gay people don't choose to be gay.)
I mean, the argument is in favor of accepting AI, not rejecting trans people. I get the gut reaction, but honestly if it's supposed to be a caricature it's a pretty damn affirming one. Clean-shaven, good makeup, adorable outfit with matching accessories. I'm a trans woman who dresses like that and don't feel insulted at all.
I mean kinda true comsidering how left leaning antis are it's surprising how intolerant they are towards the definition of an artist. If someone wants to call themselves an artist, why not?
I don't bother myself thinking if that does actually make you a writer, but since I am an inclusive person I think if you want to believe youself a writer then sure why not, especially considering that there are probably arguments to be made in favor of AI "writers" actually being justified to be called writers
Idk I'm too lazy to think lol.
Well the first argument... just call them ai writers? And everyone understand that they write by using ai? And use it because it's convenient instead of coming up with new words for people who write with ai. Same with ai artists
But a lot of them aren’t writing “with” AI. They’re putting in a prompt and having the AI write for them, the same way AI artists are just promoting the AI to make them an image.
I don’t like the idea that it’s not “inclusive” to say that someone who doesn’t do the things associated with the label of a hobby or profession cannot correctly call themselves a part of that hobby or profession. Someone making images with AI is not making the art themselves, so they are not an artist. Someone making a story with AI is not writing the story themselves, so they are not a writer. That’s not exclusionary, it’s just true.
when I say "ai artist" I do imply that I understand that they are of course not like real artists, I understand the distinction, but i still think that the term fits pretty well, like theres no dissonance in my head, I completelly understand that real artists and ai "artist" are very different, but I still think that the term is fine, because you can just make the distinction in your head, but I think that antis don't like it because they are salty lol
No you're 100% right. Theres HEAVY undertones of mocking the Anti artist on the left for treating people like human beings.
And, y'know, the Nazi dogwhistle that is pepe
Woah wait pepe Is a dogwhistle?!
More like “Can be” over “Is”
It’s fortunately and unfortunately not Black and White :P
Can be, but not a clear-and-cut "dog whistle"
It's like the right wing making AI Franklin book covers, we KNOW it's them puppeteering him around to push their agenda
Watch the documentary "Feels Good Man" about the fight of Pepe's creator (a sweet, unassuming, not-online dude) to "rescue" his character from the FBI's hate symbols list.
It's very well made, moving, and a fascinating look into how 4chan "memeified" politics and why it worked.
I've been trying to reclaim Pepe from the Nazis, personally. I'm a trans guy, so I use Pepe to piss them off. Have him waving a trans flag
It's not, and don't let nazis take it from you. Pepe was made to be a chill stoner and he got co-opted by 4chan. The creator still reviles what Pepe has been used for and tries to market him as a chill stoner still.
Only in context but officially he is a hate symbol. Makes me big peeposad honestly.
Kinda like how they commandeered "don't tread on me" as well
nope, people on the internet are just batshit insane
To specify- the ARTIST hates that it’s used as a nazi dogwhistle. They had been fighting it for years. It’s still used by nazis unfortunately
Wrong. Pepe wasn’t designed to be a dog whistle but he was co-opted by bigots.
The number 88 also wasn't designed to be a dogwhistle, and yet...
yes
No one is saying otherwise lol
There’s a difference between something being a dog whistle and being designed to be a dog whistle. I swear reading comprehension is nonexistent now.
Yes and that’s the exact point I made bud. Reading comprehension? Sweet irony.
Well, Pepe was used as a dog whistle by alt-right
Pepe is the Schrodinger's cat of malicious intentions.
Horrible people have used it as a mascot, but Pepe did not start that way, and surrendering the early Internet's mascot because of some bad people feels like surrendering to them
Pepe is not a nazi dog whistle he is just a funny frog man. Sadly he got used as one by nazis
After Hilary Clinton's team called Pepe an alt-right symbol in 2016 during the Presidential election campaign, the alt right decided to really triple down to make Pepe an alt right symbol just to prove the woke leftis wrong! So yeah on the one hand, funny meme frog. On the other hand, there was definitely an effort to associate him with the alt right that many of us won't forget
I thought it was a symbol on internet freedom
Im pretty sure Pepe started out in a webcomic them it blew up as a symbol for internet freedom until it got used by not so nice people
It was. Used mostly by 4chan users, it did end up finding alot of use as a meme outside of 4chan on all social media platforms, namely Twitch, YouTube and Reddit. However in the ever changing social media landscape of 2016 there were chuds out there prowling for something to 'troll' people with and after the Hilary Clinton campaign team came out with something so ill conceived as Pepe is an Alt Right Symbol tons of chuds immediatly jumped on it. The heat died down on that over the next 3 odd years or so as Pepe really had cemented itself as an icon that had been around long enough to lose its origin in the public conscious. It's a Meme. It's a Twitch Emote. It's Alt Right tone just lost by the wayside.
But if you have a friend who's a bit tooooo into Pepe The Frog, listen closely to what he and she means. You will find a breadcrumb trail of unhinged ideology.
Pepe is not a nazi dogwhistle. Just hop on any Twitch stream and you'll see everyone use pepe and pepe adjacent emotes all the time. Even the most normie streams.
Their communities are made out of conservatives, neo-nazis and who knows what kinds of other people. There's also no need to guess what kind of other toxic groups those people might belong to.
So it's not surprising to see such a depiction of anyone who might be trans. I mean someone in their community posted the millionth soyjak/Gigachad prompt, this time prompting the AI bro with what looked to be like underaged girls.
I'm not of course saying every single person in pro-AI community are such people, but the number is definitely not a zero.
That frog looks awfully familiar...
It's that pepe meme that has been adopted by right wingers and incels.
Or something like that.
I used to watch 2000 memes so I saw it before it became just that.
Yeah we can’t let them take over everything. Pepe was just a meme
True.
Look Pepe is great but it was also co-opted by bigots. It’s ok for things to be two different things at once.
Agreed, we should hold onto Pepe, surrendering him because bigots touched him is not something that should become normal. It starts with our frog memes, then it's literally any character
Remember that little phase where people were trying to convince others that the 👌 symbol was a “white supremacist dog whistle?”
Pepe is not a nazi dogwhistle. Just hop on any Twitch stream and you'll see everyone use pepe and pepe adjacent emotes all the time. Even the most normie streams.
Exactly, it's conservatives who would be most in favour of axing jobs and pushing tech to do that. Whilst those toward the left are more worried about workers rights and job security. I consider myself hard left , pro worker, ai obviously is something I see as a threat to workers. And surprise surprise the ai tech is developed by right wing oligarchs.
Yep. The end goal is surely to replace us all with AI and leave us without jobs or money. It would be better to get fairer working conditions, fair wages, fair amount of hours and workdays, more laborers. Also putting money back in society to allow for economic growth to create even more jobs.
Instead of doing all that, these people use their gullible supporters to make some other group the scapegoat.
All that while pumping money into AI to try and make a world where every job is now doable with AI.
And still the AI bros are willing to push the conspiracy theory that we will all get UBI while AI does everyone's work.
The ai bros will be very hated in the not so near future for pushing this. Ppl get real upset with no job n no money, danger time
They also recently cheered for Trump for his AI executive orders. Now obviously not every pro AI is a Trumper but the fact that they cheer for him says something.
Yep. No one should be cheering for Trump, but pparently his declaration of lifting AI restriction using EO was enough for some of the pro-AI people to cheer him on.
They could have banned those people and changed the rules to disallow posts that are linked to toxic individuals harboring toxic ideologies. They didn't.
They could easily do stuff to mitigate all of the issues they claim by having an automod that works but they're like the only sub I've seen where automod is inconsistent and lags. I've seen u \ and r \ there and automod take 3 hours to take it down. Or automod say it was removed and leave stuff up.
There's a reason Trump loves AI
And they're all pedophiles too
everyone i don't like is a nazi
Oh look. That's a common talking point used by conservatives. You just couldn't help, but incriminate yourself, huh?
There's plenty of evidence to support claims of such people existing within these groups. Even the picture OP posted here proves it.
I could bother explaining why, but you're a troll who ignores all reason and logic, so instead I'll ask you to go back to your cave.
There are conservatives on each side, there are horrible people on each sides, doesn't make them relevant. And how are you gonna tell me to go back to my cave when you've been arguing on reddit all day? lmao
Actually, you know what? I'll explain the difference. Toxic behavior gets called out and condemned in anti spaces.
That is not the case in Pro-AI spaces. So those who do not belong to these groups are silently enabling it.
So now the question that remains is that which one are you? a conservative, neo-nazi or an enabler who says nothing when such people show up in pro-AI spaces?
Based on your earlier response, I'll guess that you are a conservative. I could be wrong of course, but the fallacy you used is something conservatives like to use when they get countered with logic.
It gets called out in any community that isn't toxic. And it would be very selfish to call anti communities not toxic when they're the only ones actively harassing the other and even calling them nazis, while also falling for every single ragebait posts to make their points.
I'm the evil elon musl boot licker magakirk neo conservative, faced by a pure leftist angel who does a ton of self reflection. Is that the answer you expect? Enough for you to pull out stereotypes?
What logic? You're saying the majority of people in pro ai communities are neo nazi conservatives, that in itself makes no sense
You're right. The 99% of AI defenders are destroying the reputation of the 1% of AI defenders that are good people.
Quit reading after the 2nd paragraph or something?
spot on
Sometimes that’s closer to reality than we want the joke to be.
Yes, because someone simply wishing to have their gender identity respected in public is equal to some jerk creating slop with a highly unethical tech and calling themselves a master artist.
/s
You wanna steal my art? Well I got your gender!
runs away with a cloth sack full of stolen genders
https://preview.redd.it/3xx1hs14mu7g1.jpeg?width=720&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=e3cc0e9d68afdeb8e7429af37e5ccd2ff8c108ea
I have to put in work to become the woman i wanna be. All they have to do is type a prompt. We are not the same
I wish I could fully transition with just a prompt
"Hey ChatGPT, please make me non binary"
"ChatGPT, it's time... get the chainsaw. I'm ready."
You know what? Fair and funny clap back
Lots of MAGAs over there.
Edit: Also, the energy on that side is reeeeeeeeeeally reminiscent of gamergate.
They love AI because they want and desire the products artists and creators produce, but hate the creatives that produce those works and their creative freedom.
Heyyyyy, that kinda sounds like how chud dudes feels about women and minorities. Surely this is totally unrelated tho.
(Not insinuating this is what you're saying, btw lol)
That's an interesting way of looking at it, especially regarding women and Elon Musk-style natalism.
Yeah. My personal view is that this kind of thought-pattern is inextricable with fascism and colonialism. How exactly that manifests may change, but the mechanism remains the same.
They are the same group just shifted in time and identity
Ah so I didn't imagine that
? The magas are on your side lol
False, antis typically lean left
Edit: Also, the only time I tend to see slop in the wild is from conservative family members on fb
The art world and artists heavily leans left, hence why maga love an app that let's them generate images without needing an artist to make them.
Ha, ha. That is a good joke.
You literally have Musk, Trump, Altman and Stonetoss on your side.
They fucking love to use trans people as a shield from criticism.
Right? They only use selective groups when they need them as shields. When its over its fair game for the next shitty comic
Trans and disabled. Same with the transhumanist subs that a lot of them cross with.
Prompters keep complaining about being called out for reposting comics made by nazis, pro ai videos by alt-right freaks, and generating blatantly transphobic caricatures to try and make a point. They throw around accusations of bigotry because they have no other way to demonize normal people for being anti ai.
I will say, *some* prompters can be semi-normal people, but you are the company you keep.
Their other mistake was depicting us as a hot blue haired girl and themselves as a dumpy frog
The frog which is a neo Nazi dogwhistle btw
Oh. Well that’s not good, my sister uses Pepe emojis…
they're not always, they were nothing more than a meme a while ago, but they have been co-opted by alt light/alt right for a few years now. she could be using them innocently because he is just a funny frog at the end of the day but yeah, unfortunately a funny frog sometimes (often) used by shitty people to push shitty agendas.
The “funny” part is debatable, but makes sense otherwise. She (and I, no shade) can be a bit oblivious, she probably just doesn’t know about the correlation. Which makes me feel a lot better
It's the strength of dogwhistle: not being understood by the majority of people. The whole purpose of those things is to be understood by the "community" but not by people outside of it. So don't feel bad about not knowing all the dogwhistles :).
i mean when pepe was a fresh meem like 10-13~ years ago (or before that i don't really remember i'm 24 lol) there were some pretty funny ones, though i would not be suprised if since being co-opted they are all incredibly unfunny and uncreative now - i'm not that side of the pond so i don't really see pepe memes anymore but like they are still used as originally intended, albeit way more niche than the nazi-type dogwhistles they are more often used for.
same with the chad meme and shit, they're co-opting that too, they can't make anything good by themselves, the right can't meme, etc :^(
If it helps, the character’s creator (he’s from a comic called Boy’s Club) is absolutely disgusted by his character being co-opted by neo Nazis.
Pepe is not a nazi dogwhistle. Just hop on any Twitch stream and you'll see everyone use pepe and pepe adjacent emotes all the time. Even the most normie streams.
It is na alt right symbol used by Richard Spencer. It originally was not, and many do not know this, but from the context of this image I'm guessing it is meant to be a dogwhistle
Yeah, and if he decided to use Mickey Mouse, Mickey Mouse would be a hate symbol? This is so stupid.
It's not just used by him, it's commonly used as a hate symbol.
https://www.adl.org/resources/hate-symbol/pepe-frog
With the context of this post, it is absolutely being used as a dogwhistle.
ADL lmao. If one Nazi uses mickey mouse once, it becomes a hate symbol. Sure dude.
It wasn't once...
It wasn't once...
Seriously, why did the AI make both the women so attractive
Is it just me or The ai Made then two women characters way too conventionaly attractive for the type of comic this is ?
I mean they look way too good to have been Made by someone that hates them , that would make sense , an ai can’t feel anything joy even anomisity
even most ai bro comics have “the anti” just be an middle of the road anime character , its so lacking in imagination
you dont have to put any work or effort to have the gender identity you wish to have. however, you must actually put a ton of work and effort to be labeled an artist of any kind. nobody will call you an artist if all of your art is shit, and especially so if you dont actually do anything to make the art. personally i dont qualify people who mindlessly throw paint onto a canvas as talented artists (MINDLESSLY, there are very talented artists that actually do put some thinking behind the colors and the shapes n whatnot). if they think less than minimal effort makes them an artist worth paying any form of money or attention to then quite literally everyone including old man steve and little 1 second old Matthew are talented artists this making the cogsuckers even less talented and important than ever. words have meaning, youd think people whos whole "creative identity" is writing words would understand that.
You make a good point but trans people and sometimes cis people alike (more so trans people obvi) do have to put in a lot of work to be seen as the gender they want to be seen as by society because society sucks
oh absolutely i meant in terms of validity, a trans woman not doing any work (be it to hide or experimenting identities) is no less valid than a cis woman doing everything in her power to be as feminine as possible!
Oh wait no I get you mean trans women are just... women. No matter what they do.
It's funny when ai bros compare themselves to marginalised groups cause most often those groups are born that way which is implying the ai bros are born writing prompts and wrecking the environment.
That is just shitoverlord2020's brainrot
I mean the overlap between "white nationalist america" that hates trans people, people of color, and any non-fundamentalist christian and "people that like AI" isn't a circle but it's a pretty short oval.
Such a poor analogy. I am OK calling generative ai images art in the most liberal interpretation of the term, but if that's the case the generative ai is the artist.
Prompting an ai is the no different than asking an artist for a commission. In both you explain what you want and get it.
To me art is valued by effort and skill so generative art is basically valueless. It is also not praise worthy as the ai is not using skill.
i completely agree. i havent heard an absolute argument yet for why ai art isnt art. but theres a million for why ai art can’t be the prompter’s, so it’s still lying, art theft, intellectual theft, and fraud to publish it without first disclosing it’s ai, not their own. functionally the exact same as commissioning an artist; it’s yours to keep but you didn’t make it, even if you asked them to do it. furthermore it’s sleazy to profit off it and take advantage of an intelligence (that was developed with human intelligence) you don’t have to pay for or credit because it’s not a person (but was made with people).
Maybe this doesn't qualify as an absolute argument either, but this is how I see it. In order for something to be art it has to be a piece of communication between humans. It is created by the artist with the goal of expressing something to others, be that a thought, a feeling or their perspective on something. What makes it art is the intention when it is made, and how that intention is realized through the artists personal style.
To me, art only makes sense as something that can be made by humans, as it's not only about the end product but also about the intention and the process of creation. That can only be the case when the artist has actually been alive and has emotions or a perspective. Ai can make images, but in no way are they representing an aspect of the AIs personal life (because it has none). Neither is the prompter creating art since the expression of their feelings/perspective is outsourced and their personal insertion into the art is minimised.
why tf does pepe have a nose
They wanna pretend they are the progressive one but are using the blue haired liberal caricature…
"Rigid social definitions" like needing to put any thought or effort into your 'work' whatsoever.
Know what? I agree, that standard should apply to gender. If you're a cis man and you've never questioned or put any thought into your gender, can you really be sure you're a man? I worked for my gender, sounds like a skill issue.
Isn’t it the other way around though? Like, AI bros are falling over themselves to convince people ai art is art and get so offended when they aren’t validated?
Apart from the bizarre transphobia, the cartoon is riddled with the kind of cognitive dissonance one might acquire from building up a relationship with a chatbot.
Ma'am, somewhere there is a ceramic urinal on display as art. I assure you there are no "rigid social definitions" at play here.
Ah yes, the ever-present “screaming woke blue-haired liberal woman pro-trans” strawman that is in every conservative argument.
I seriously wonder if these people’s brains stopped developing in 2013-2014 when the “blue haired liberal women” became a central talking point.
Y'know, it's funny. Normally when these people make comics like this by hand, they make trans people look as grotesque as possible. But because AI is so bad at reflecting creative intentions, I feel like I rarely ever see that in transphobic AI posts. It's kinda refreshing honestly.
as a trans person. HELL NO.
At least the trans woman isn’t comically, inhumanly grotesque for once. I guess.
Really tired of my existence being a weapon.
This reminds me of a certain pro AI trans person...
Who?
You can't call it art. That implies you made it yourself, and if you use AI, you didn't do that. It's just an image
They're literally saying "if we're not artists, then trans people aren't women", which they clearly think is supposed to be some kind of checkmate "gotcha!" moment when in reality they're just implying being trans is to women/men what using AI is to art, which is a really fucked up statement.
The comic is definitely transphobic but i wouldn’t say that’s a stereotypical depiction of a trans woman. Like if remove her from the comic and put her anywhere else… honestly just looks like a woman to me. The anti tho is very stereotypical “blue hair SJW”.
I think you might be right and I may have been being hyper-sensitive to some of the facial features and things cos of works I've seen before. You're probably right.
Maybe, even so I think people are allowed to be a little sensitive these days. Bigots are getting a bit too comfortable…
100%! And there's always room for free and fair discussion to call this sorta stuff out!
I saw someone deadass saying anti ai perspective mirrors transphobia😭
https://preview.redd.it/8rh4qz96yw7g1.png?width=986&format=png&auto=webp&s=379e7e59c9cd7d4759a5bc6f17848c14f4c0d31d
Well..... I wouldn't call it subtle.
Good thing I don't either!
If they invested half of the time they use "defending" AI art in learning an art, they would be quite good at it.
I hate how I got gender envy from something made by a clanker.
Also, why is the girl on the right wearing her leftmost necklace bead as an earring, wtf...
Honestly soo soo real for that. I get ender envy from like anything lol
Oh and yea, usual slop being usual.
They're almost all the same kind of alt-right losers you know.
Also art/artist isn’t a “social definition”.
There’s a difference between a literal social construct and art which is something that any intelligent creature could make.
One bad actor. That's only one bad person out of the whole Defending AI clan. Not all of them are transphobic.
They are pretty consistently bad actors
...why is her necklace also her earrings smh
The venn diagram of pro ai people and people who possess anti-human views in general is a damn near circle. Who woulda thought.
So, this could read one of two ways:
1) We are against rigidity regarding human identity, but are in favor of it regarding art, and this is wrong. Human identity should be rigid, and art should not be. The logic is applied to one place where it shouldn't be, and is not applied to one place where it should be. The roles need to be reversed.
2) We are against rigidity regarding human identity, but are in favor of it regarding art, and this is wrong. Neither should be treated ridgidly, and the logic that supports one supports the other. The two things should be supported by the notion of discarding rigidity in all forms.
I have no idea which of these two the "creator" is trying to suggest, but both have their flaws.
For example, rigidity isn't inherently bad. We are rigid about many things, and we are less rigid about many things. Some of these things make no sense to be less rigid about, for example, we are pretty rigid on not letting convincted murders live among law abiding citizens. This is intuitive and desireable; that isn't called "rigidity", but it is, in a literal or technical way. It isn't highlighted as rigid because that would suggest a lack of reason, but that isn't true, as rigidity is neutral, not inherently wrong. It fits the definition for rigidity, proving it can be ethical to be rigid. It makes sense, then, that something which can be bad, or good, is inherently neither. This is what neutrality is. Rigidity is neutral.
So to be rigid about art is not inherently unethical. Being less rigid about societal standards and identity, but being more rigid about other things, is not a contradiction. You could describe this as awareness of context; not all things are equal, not all rigidity is bad, these are two different use cases.
That is assuming this is being rigid and not simply having a case of prohibiting something as an exception to the rule of "art is not rigid". So we have to talk about what constitutes rigidity. Art isn't typically rigid, and not many artists wants that, but if you are suggesting that it is rigid to prohibit use of AI for "art", then you first have to prove that AI usage is equal to established art tools in such a way that prohibiting it is rigid in a way that it shouldn't be. This logic skips that part and assumes that it is already true, which tells me the major target audience for this is no one but pro-AI individuals. This viewpoint contains nothing but masturbation.
I don't see anything in trans rights which supports less rigidity in other areas specifically, I see it as quite specific to gender and adjacent causes. I have no idea how anything else could be true. Perhaps we should be less rigid about everything because we pointed out rigidity as a flaw in one case? I don't think that would end well.. instead I think anti-AI individuals should focus more on arguments which don't start with already believing that AI generation is the same as other art tools, and should instead focus on proving that idea then making the argument. Probably not using minorities as an example.
Simply: The exclusion of something not percieved as art is hardly rigid inside the context of art. If you can debunk this idea then you could have a starting point. Don't skip the logic.
Anyway, if it is the first one, then this would obviously be a shitty thing to believe. I would be interested to see what text these people used to generate these images, so we could know if the AI is just trained that way, or if the person specifically called for that depiction of a trans person. That would be interesting. Either way, the two are not equivalent. I have always associated usage of AI with questionable politics, it seems to me that it's uncaring about humanity and the merit of people in certain recognizable patterns.
Pepe in the year of our lord 2025
Great, so now the ai "artists" are trying to use trans people as an excuse, great, add them to the pile of other people that blame trans people for their problems
First failed to beat the corporate bootlicker allegations and now not beating the bigot allegations
what's next? 2% of them are registered offenders?
I now want to make ship art of the blue haired person and the trans woman. Just for funsies.
And the fact that witty is a trans female...
You know whoever shit this out doesn’t give a fuck about trans people
Ngl if trans women had to download my boobs to make their own id probably be concerned but due to the fact they mind their own business I don’t see why I should give a shit?
Ah yes the very rigid social definition of "a person made it"
im a trans guy and i say hell no to ai prompters!!! why is it that transgender people are always used as a shield for ai bros?
the mod on that subreddit is a turboloser.
like seriously. he sucks lol
Honestly I'm just surprised the trans woman on the right looks like a woman. People like this would have normally made her look like the generic fat, balding male that they use to make fun of anti's but wearing a dress and makeup with a wig.
Not gonna lie, the trans woman in the first panel looks absolutely fabulous. Much better than the usual hate filled caricatures that get used
When will they learn that there is a difference is criticism of things that are choseb actions, and criticism of someone's unchosen identity.
It's giving: So you say you're that the gay lifestyle is fine but you're against family bloggers???? Don't you think it's hypocritical to support one lifestyle but not the other?? (And then ignores that the gay "lifestyle" isn't chosen nor harmful, while family bloggers make profit off of their children while putting them in a position where they will be cyberstalked, bullied and even if these things don't happen because idk, guardian angels are real, and they work overtime on them, they still stole the privacy of their children... And they choose to do that. Gay people don't choose to be gay.)
Dayum, this proves a thing I have seen in mind.
It’s funny how hateful this is yet the trans woman looks conventionally beautiful anyway lol
I mean, the argument is in favor of accepting AI, not rejecting trans people. I get the gut reaction, but honestly if it's supposed to be a caricature it's a pretty damn affirming one. Clean-shaven, good makeup, adorable outfit with matching accessories. I'm a trans woman who dresses like that and don't feel insulted at all.
This is the one person who posts on that sub. I don't know how well he represents clanker yankers in general.
gender is bullshit, art is serious.
The latest on comparing trans people to inanimate objects 🙄
The "very rigid social definitions" in question: you create.
Yeah scamming people with false vaginas is fine.
Man, you guys are so obsessed with trans people's junk. It's no wonder why transphobes are the biggest consumers of trans porn.
I mean… at least they didn’t make the trans woman some monster like they usually do..? But, then again, they didn’t make this so…
Not understanding point is just presenting delusions, support ai artist ❤️
I mean kinda true comsidering how left leaning antis are it's surprising how intolerant they are towards the definition of an artist. If someone wants to call themselves an artist, why not?
If I prompted AI to write me a story, would that make me a writer?
I don't bother myself thinking if that does actually make you a writer, but since I am an inclusive person I think if you want to believe youself a writer then sure why not, especially considering that there are probably arguments to be made in favor of AI "writers" actually being justified to be called writers
I’d love to hear what those arguments are.
Idk I'm too lazy to think lol. Well the first argument... just call them ai writers? And everyone understand that they write by using ai? And use it because it's convenient instead of coming up with new words for people who write with ai. Same with ai artists
But a lot of them aren’t writing “with” AI. They’re putting in a prompt and having the AI write for them, the same way AI artists are just promoting the AI to make them an image.
I don’t like the idea that it’s not “inclusive” to say that someone who doesn’t do the things associated with the label of a hobby or profession cannot correctly call themselves a part of that hobby or profession. Someone making images with AI is not making the art themselves, so they are not an artist. Someone making a story with AI is not writing the story themselves, so they are not a writer. That’s not exclusionary, it’s just true.
when I say "ai artist" I do imply that I understand that they are of course not like real artists, I understand the distinction, but i still think that the term fits pretty well, like theres no dissonance in my head, I completelly understand that real artists and ai "artist" are very different, but I still think that the term is fine, because you can just make the distinction in your head, but I think that antis don't like it because they are salty lol
Artists create. Prompters consume.
Lmao not to be that guy but I think you’re the blue hair girl. Considering you have the word “Moid” in your desc.
To be honest I hate both, they’re both like imitation food it can taste almost like real food look like it too, but it’ll never be the real thing