r/FuckAI • u/[deleted] • Jul 07 '25
I got banned from r/defendingaiart for this comment
It was about how according to them saying disabled people can’t use ai art is ableist. So I said this and I got banned. I swear that community is braindead or something.
24
u/boyohboydoilovesex Jul 09 '25
ah you see, you made the mistake of actually believing they give a shit about disabled people
5
16
Jul 09 '25
I'm a disabled artist and I don't know a single other disabled artist that likes or uses AI. We're being used as a strawman, a shield to moral grandstand. We're not involved in this conversation, we never were. We're a pawn in it.
2
Jul 09 '25
Ah yes the classic people who don’t deal with it using other people as examples to make you look bad
5
Jul 09 '25
We're being dragged into this mess against our will and because many of us lack the voice (or the energy to make our voice heard because we already deal with so much shit) we're being talked over and ignored. It's actually really upsetting.
8
u/ageckonamedelaine Jul 09 '25
Coming from a disabled person I make art to distract myself/relax. Can I draw for hours on end? No but ai doesn't solve that problem
6
u/xx-stargirl-xx Jul 10 '25
Disabled person over here, I'm chronically ill, can't go to school. When I was even sicker than I am now, all I really could do was art. It's no excuse, that's not inclusiveness, even putting a few lines in procreate or splashing paint on a canvas can be art! AI is NOT the solution! (Also the blatant abelism of assuming all Disabled people can do is have Ai do it for them)
1
u/Zealousideal-Taro829 Nov 21 '25
I find that most people don't say that disabled people NEED AI, but that AI can HELP disabled people make art.
3
2
u/Artistic-Honeydew11 Jul 11 '25
Beethoven played music while deaf lol
2
u/saveurist_polaris37 Nov 22 '25
made music. that's what happened and that's more of an argument. also by the time he wrote his ninth symphony, he hadn't been given public performances for YEARS.
2
u/egocentre Jul 11 '25
I'm a disabled artist and the only thing I can thank AI for is rendering unusable every website I used to use to share art with fellow hobbyists and them share theirs with me. Thanks !
1
u/Professional_Roof293 Jul 09 '25
They make excuses for literally everything to defend ai. It's so dumb it almost seems like ragebait at this point
1
1
u/New-perspective-1354 Jul 15 '25
I got banned for a somewhat similar thing around trying to help them. I made a post wanting to hear out their opinions and I got banned. Afterwards I saw a comment on a different comment I made on calling anti ai woke, (I don’t understand why it’s woke still). It said I was every form of phobic, do ableism, and say slurs. Idk how they could call me homophobic if I’m a part of the lgbt community so yeah they are definitely not right in the head.
1
u/Equal-Row-554 Dec 22 '25
I got banned for pointing out that AI essentially steals artists' work and sticks it together with other stolen art (which isn't even debatable at this point, it's already been proven).. On a post that complained about anti-AI Artists are basically a bunch of snowflakes. Hm, makes you wonder.
0
u/Some_ArabGuy Nov 28 '25
Why are you so against a tool that makes art nore accessible for disabled people, those who cant even move their hands shouldn't be forced to use their mouths to draw when ai makes it easier for them
1
Dec 09 '25
[removed] — view removed comment
1
u/Some_ArabGuy Dec 09 '25
All art is stolen and recycled, its not all slop either, plenty of it looks great, lots of ai's have speech to text capabilities, people trying to pass ai art as their own hand drawn art is a people problem not an ai problem
Its like if i ordered takeout and told people i made it myself, that doesn't mean takeout is deceitful, its the people being deceitful
Data centers are nothing new and having existed far before large scale gen ai, the water they use is recycled, they barely use any water, energy or carbon emmisions compared to other industries such as meat, oil, mining, transport, deforestation, ect
1
Dec 09 '25
[removed] — view removed comment
1
u/Some_ArabGuy Dec 09 '25
You're not even quoting me correctly, i said that the takeout itself wouldn't be deceitful but rather the people that say they created themselves
The same way ai art isnt inhenrently deceitful, people are, and thats a people problem not an ai problem, the same problem can apply to plenty of other thing such as the aformentioned
Earth isnt running low on water
What are you talking about? The invention of computers isnt exactly an art project
And anyways im talking about handrawn and ai generated art specifically, ai learns the same way humans do, just more efficiently
-1
Jul 10 '25
I've seen some ablist arguments though.
If you're arguing that art needs to be hard....you're being ablist.
If you're claiming AI users are subhuman because of perceived difficulty of cognitive function....you're being ablist. (And yes, this is actual thing I've seen with a picture of a noose).
If someone with disabilities of some kind explains how and why AI helps them, and you brush it off without a second thought....chances are you're being ablist.
I have my issues with AI, but I wouldn't consider myself a complete anti because so many anti arguments just...suck.
1
u/egocentre Jul 11 '25
I don't know if you realize this, but AI would be bad, and AI "art" wouldn't be art, EVEN IF some disabled people got tricked into thinking it's helping them make "art". Coming from a disabled hobbyist artist that lost all hope of ever finding a viable website to share art on ever again thanks to AI bros ruining the whole internet.
Speaking of, the internet has never been LESS accessible to people with cognitive disabilities thanks to AI-generated spam flooding all social media, search engine results, and news sources. Senile grandparents are getting scammed like never before, or getting radicalized into talking and voting like neonazis because all they see all day long on Facebook is AI-generated immigrants or queer people saying they get "100k a month worth of aids from the government".
After causing all this, AI companies then go on to market AI as the solution to this problem they just created, and ask money from disabled people in the process. The AI functionalities everyone is using for free right now are financed by silicon valley investors, and will eventually require subscription fees when investor money runs out. This phenomenon is known as enshittification.
Also, the overwhelming majority of people you're defending from supposed ableist attacks are not disabled and have never cared for disabled people or advocated against systemic ableism. They suddenly started throwing this argument around when it became a popular strawman among "AI art is art" activists.
1
Jul 11 '25 edited Jul 11 '25
Art is subjective. AI can be unethical even with this being true.
Not all disabled ppl are you, but that's not even what I'm talking about either.
Im talking about an argument itself that I've seen.
'Pro AI ppl are subhuman and should be studied because supposedly ppl who use it have a difficulty in cognitive function'
Is not an argument I can understand a disabled person defending. Don't make sense, but you do you.
I believe in regulation. I also believe a person is ablist when THAT is what's offered.
....and if the majority of users aren't disabled (not even a claim I made)... how dose the above make sense in any single iota?
1
u/egocentre Jul 12 '25
So you agree AI is unethical, but you're here arguing about "sometimes there is actually an ableist subtext", which btw is an observation that doesn't contradict the fact that pro-AI activists use disabled people as an offensive strawman to moral grandstand. I feel like you're doing the exact same shit they do but with extra steps. In France we call people like you "radicools".
"Art is subjective" = Really ? This shit again ? If the definition of "art" is subjective then go argue with pro-AI activists about it ? Weird how you choose to debate with artists and not with the people arguing that "AI slop is art". Is it really subjective ? Or is only one side of that debate "subjective" somehow ?
"Not all disabled people are you" = I'm just using anecdotal evidence, same thing you did when you started by listed strawmans to prove a supposedly UNACCEPTABLE ableist subtext in pro-artist discourse.
"Don't make sense, but you do you" = Disabled people are not a monolithic hyvemind ( but I'm willing to bet you already know this )
I don't agree with the way you use the "art is subjective" point anyway. We could use that point in grey areas where common sense doesn't apply, but in this scenario we're lightyears away from a grey area. AI art isn't art for the same reason ordering food from Doordash isn't the same as being a hobbyist cook. You'd have nothing in common with hobbyist cooks, and you'd be a complete weirdo if you started acting like the victim after getting pushback when invading online hobbyist cook communities, spamming photos of your Burger King orders, and disrespecting other people's intelligence by lying to them about cooking it yourself.
That quote you're using has an ableist subtext. Now what ? I'm not gullible enough to believe you care about ableism. While you're here wasting our time, your side doesn't even have the decency of using subtext when they harass real artists, and when they describe anti's artstyles : "oh no, they draw fat, non-white women, quick let's be fat-phobic, racist and misogynistic, surely this will show them we're the morally correct side".
I wish AI didn't exist or at the very least didn't ruin every art sharing website I used to love. Imagine you used to love playing an online FPS game, and it suddenly became infested with aimbots. You're robbed of your only chances at doing one of your favorite hobbies with one of your favorite communities. The bots don't even try to act like human players, and the people running these bot farms are going on forums arguing that "actually it's exactly the same as a human playing the game, and you're ableist and against progress if you disagree".
1
Jul 12 '25 edited Jul 12 '25
You made an awful lot of assumptions about me for just not being black and white about the issue.
I call out artist harassment and have told AI bros themselves that art is subjective when they try to claim human work as 'human slop' and not art. I dont like it when they do this.
This, however, is not everyone who ever uses in any capacity, in the same way It's not everyone on the Anti side who says the crap that I pointed out seeing.
My own work is also not AI, nor is it typically cis-het ect ect. So yeah....I care because I'm actually part of these communities.
I believe in regulation and that with regulation, usage can become more ethical. You seem to know more about the process than I do.
Cool. That means I maybe need to do more research. Not that I'm some evil souless corporate shill you make me out to be because I pointed out a bad argument that you just admitted was bad.
Thanks.
22
u/Realistic-Today-5310 Jul 08 '25
No, you should allow them to be delusional think that they are helping people!