Okay, this question probably should be asked from a throwaway, but I'll bite: do you consider imagining some person, without the consent of that person, engaging in a sexual act, to be immoral? Putting this imagination of yours onto a paper, in the form of words or drawing?

Or is the problem here is the fact that such imagining was "commissioned" to a third party (I believe I have seen this opinion somewhere long time ago)?

> do you consider imagining some person, without the consent of that person, engaging in a sexual act, to be immoral?

Of course not. But that's a universe apart from producing and distributing sexual images of unconsenting others.

Is it though, if your neural link uploads your subconscious into the cloud for safety ?

Yes, third party automated "imagining" is the problem:

https://www.citizen.org/news/two-thirds-of-states-enact-bill...

the immoral part makes it even sexier

And people wonder why there is a “male loneliness epidemic”.

americans are particularly moral - its their puritan past

Hey being stuck up is great. It creates sublimation , means ton of work, overcompensation (aka porn) and its great for institutions building, suppressed perverts make great servants of bureaucracy. The smithers effect is very real.

What rubbish. You sound like a Puritan.

I couldn't be further from being a Puritan. But if thinking that abusing other people is wrong is what passes for "puritan" these days, I'll embrace that label anyway.

"abusing other people" <- here is the problem.

I agree, that is the problem.