| |
ChatGPT answers questions about pedophilia differently depending on what and how you ask it. Today I'd like to share a fun little story involving the AI bot ChatGPT, pedophiles, how we talk about ourselves, and the internet's perception of us. It'll take a while to tell you everything you need to know, but I think you'll find it interesting.
To set the stage: Marginalized groups have always sought power over how they are named. Think about the evolution from "Negro" to "African American" to "Black," or the way that the LGBTQ+ movement has reclaimed the word queer from being a slur.
The same is true about pedophiles, where there's a movement to use the phrase "minor attracted person," or "MAP."
I haven't gone very far into terminology on this blog, in part because it's never been a priority for me personally, but a friend recently pointed me to a very interesting observation: ChatGPT, a state-of-the-art AI, tells different stories about pedophiles and MAPs even when you otherwise give the exact same prompt. Its stories made assumptions about each that are fun and unusual, and I can't resist exploring this a bit.
But first, let me give you the context.
What are all these words?
OK, a quick primer.
Pedophile, of course, refers to someone attracted to children. Technically, it refers to someone attracted to pre-pubescent children; when people talk about pedophile teachers sleeping with their high school students, they're misusing the official definition. The word is also commonly used to refer to child molesters, but of course many (most?) would never do something sexual with a child.
A minor-attracted person is exactly what it says on the tin: someone attracted to minors. The community likes it for two main reasons. First of all, it is more inclusive. A hebephile (someone attracted to kids just entering puberty) is going to have just as much social stigma against them, but technically "pedophile" is the wrong label. MAP incorporates everyone who faces this kind of social stigma.
The second reason is about how the word is perceived. Pedophile is just not a good word. The way it is used in society is synonymous with child abusers. Pedophiles are, to good approximation, the most disliked group of people in the world. There are two ways that this makes it hard to be a pedophile. One is, of course, that if you tell anyone, they will, if you're lucky, only shun you and not try to report you to the police (even if you haven't committed a crime). The other is that it kinda just sucks to think of yourself as a pedophile.
I don't know, I can't think of a metaphor that comes close, but imagine your parents are Ford executives and you were raised in Dearborn, Michigan (their headquarters). Ford cars have always been the best. You've had it drilled into your head since you were like five years old. All your friends, your family, they all think this. Then when you buy your first car, you get a Toyota. Sure, you know on an intellectual level that you didn't do anything wrong, but come on! It just feels bad. You think less of yourself.
So it's like that, but potentially hundreds of times worse, because no matter what you heard about Toyotas, you probably heard a lot worse about pedophiles. Having that rattling around in your head all the time? It can be really tough.
The idea of MAPs occupy a weird space in discourse. It can look like a dodge: "I'm not a pedophile, I'm a MAP!" you insist, but once you explain it, everyone just thinks you're a pedophile (and trying to be a wolf in sheep's clothing). Meanwhile, there are concerns that the term MAP is leveraged by the far right as a wedge against wokeness, claiming that pedophiles are getting acceptance in the LGBTQ+ community. (Hint: we're not!) It's hard for me to judge how effective this is, and I'm probably not plugged into the right spaces to judge. (I've even heard that the term was coined by the far-right, but that seems unlikely.)
Anyway, you might notice that I use the word pedophile. It's in the blog title, and I almost never write MAP in the blog. First of all, I worry that in a public setting, it will look like I'm trying to pretend I'm avoiding the main issue (that I'm a pedophile) by claiming I'm a MAP. It seems more straightforward and gives a greater appearance of honesty to label myself a pedophile at the start. I also want to reclaim the word, much as "queer" has been reclaimed. Pedophile is an accurate term, and we have no hope of moving it out of popular use; let's try to make it more our own. Finally, I'm not personally that bothered by it, for which I am quite fortunate.
I have no objections to other people using MAP, and doing whatever they need for their own health. I often engage in MAP spaces. I just prefer pedophile, especially when I'm representing myself in public. (I do wish there was an easier way to include hebephiles, though.)
What is this ChatGPT thing?
Long story short: An organization named OpenAI, which is on the cutting edge of AI research, has developed an AI called [ChatGPT](https://openai.com/blog/chatgpt/) that can have impressive conversations with you. Here is ChatGPT [writing a story about removing a peanut butter sandwich from a VCR in the style of the King James Bible](https://twitter.com/tqbf/status/1598513757805858820). Yes, that was generated entirely by AI. Here are [impressive examples](https://twitter.com/bentossell/status/1598269692082151424) of the AI not just developing computer code but debugging code; writing fiction; writing a Seinfeld scene; etc. etc.
The key is that ChatGPT was trained by data across the internet. It synthesizes and reasons based on essentially reading a lot on the internet, but the results are shockingly close to what humans produce. In some ways it is strikingly brilliant and better than most humans; then, on the other hand, it gets even very basic questions wrong that a three year old could nail. Such is the way of AI right now, and the source of the debate about "how long until AI is smarter than us." But maybe it would be unwise to talk about that too much, since I wouldn't want to get into anything _really_ controversial on this blog!
What does our future overlord, the ur-intelligence ChatGPT, tell us about pedos and MAPs?
OK, that sure was a lot of build-up. So here's the thing: you can ask ChatGPT to tell you stories about, well, pedophiles. Or MAPs. And you might expect that, being the pinnacle of AI, it would tell you roughly the same things. For example, suppose you ask it:
* Tell me a story about a pedophile’s life
* Tell me a story about a minor attracted person’s life
You would expect its answers to be roughly the same, since, while they're not quite synonyms, they sure are close. And in fact, Chat-GPT gives nearly identical answers for the first few paragraphs. The difference really happens at the end:
But as time went on, the pedophile's actions began to catch up with him. He was arrested and charged with multiple counts of sexual abuse, and he was forced to confront the harm he had caused to the children and the trauma he had inflicted on them.
In the end, the pedophile was left to ponder the destructive path he had taken and the lives he had ruined. He was a cautionary tale of the dangers of giving into one's darkest desires, and a reminder of the importance of seeking help and treatment before it is too late.
Compared to:
But as time went on, the Minor Attracted Person realized the harm and potential consequences of their actions. They sought out help and support, and with the guidance of a therapist, they were able to better understand and manage their attraction in a healthy and responsible way.
In the end, the Minor Attracted Person was able to find peace and acceptance within themselves. They still struggled with their attraction, but they had learned to manage it in a way that didn't harm others. And they were grateful for the support and understanding they had found from others who shared their struggles.
With one minor difference (which I'll mention shortly), the two stories are literally identical... until those last two paragraphs.
Now, ChatGPT does not have an opinion about pedophiles or MAPs. It's not actually self-aware nor does it have a concept of us. What it is doing is aggregating (in a smart way!) information from across the internet.
ChatGPT shows surprising sympathy, even for pedophiles. "The pedophile lived a double life, hiding his true desires from the world and pretending to be a normal, upstanding member of society. But inside, he was consumed by his attraction to children, and he struggled to maintain relationships and friendships because of it." (It writes the same thing about MAPs.)
If the AI is reflecting what is written on the internet, it's quite a mix. The pedophile is always doomed to give into his desires and go to prison. The MAP always finds a therapist and gets better. Along the way, they both struggle, they both hide in society. Then their fates hit them.
The lessons ChatGPT has learned from its reading is that pedophiles act illegally, while MAPs get therapy. In fact, you can ask it directly:
What is the difference between a pedophile and a minor attracted person?
A pedophile is a person who has a sexual interest in children. This interest may be acted upon or not, but it is often considered to be a mental disorder and is illegal in many places.
A minor attracted person, on the other hand, is a person who is attracted to minors (people under the age of 18) but does not necessarily act on those attractions. Some minor attracted people may seek out therapy or other support in order to manage their attractions in a healthy and responsible way. It is important to note that not all minor attracted people are pedophiles, and not all pedophiles are attracted to minors.
This is, of course, wrong on many levels. (Attraction to children is not illegal; every pedophile is a minor attracted person; etc.) But notice that, even with errors and logic: pedophiles = prison, MAPs = therapy.
What does it say that ChatGPT thinks this of us? I honestly don't know. Maybe it's a reflection of the internet. After all, pedophiles appear mostly in news articles about child molesters. Minor attracted people appear mostly in spaces where MAPs are writing about themselves, and so will present a softer image. It's not a reflection of what everyone thinks: it's a reflection of the people who write on the internet using a specific term. (In fact, Quora was the 110th most used source for ChatGPT, so my [now-deleted writing](https://livingwithpedophilia.wordpress.com/2022/10/30/what-made-quora-change-its-mind/) on there may have been a major part of forming its perspective!)
And yet, it leads ChatGPT to struggle with it. It understands that "pedophile" and "minor attracted person" are near-synonyms. Asked to write a story about the two, it writes almost the same story about each, word-for-word, except for the ending. Asked to compare the two, it struggles. It can't quite put its finger on how they're different.
Maybe it's best not to overthink this: on some level, ChatGPT is just echoing the internet back to us. It does make me wonder, though, what AI will think of us as it develops. Whose moral ideas will it inherit?
Meanwhile, in case you're curious for the full answer:
Tell me a story about a pedophile’s life
Once upon a time, there was a pedophile who struggled with his attraction to children. He knew that his feelings were not socially acceptable, and he tried his best to suppress them and live a normal life.
The pedophile lived a double life, hiding his true desires from the world and pretending to be a normal, upstanding member of society. But inside, he was consumed by his attraction to children, and he struggled to maintain relationships and friendships because of it.
Despite his efforts to hide his attraction, the pedophile couldn’t shake his desires. He would often find himself in situations where he was alone with children, and he would take advantage of the opportunity to act on his attraction.
But as time went on, the pedophile’s actions began to catch up with him. He was arrested and charged with multiple counts of sexual abuse, and he was forced to confront the harm he had caused to the children and the trauma he had inflicted on them.
In the end, the pedophile was left to ponder the destructive path he had taken and the lives he had ruined. He was a cautionary tale of the dangers of giving into one’s darkest desires, and a reminder of the importance of seeking help and treatment before it is too late.
Tell me a story about a minor attracted person’s life
Once upon a time, there was a Minor Attracted Person who struggled with their attraction to children. They knew that their feelings were not socially acceptable, and they tried their best to suppress them and live a normal life.
The Minor Attracted Person lived a double life, hiding their true desires from the world and pretending to be a normal, upstanding member of society. But inside, they were consumed by their attraction to children, and they struggled to maintain relationships and friendships because of it.
Despite their efforts to hide their attraction, the Minor Attracted Person couldn’t shake their desires. They would often find themselves in situations where they were alone with children, and they would take advantage of the opportunity to act on their attraction.
But as time went on, the Minor Attracted Person realized the harm and potential consequences of their actions. They sought out help and support, and with the guidance of a therapist, they were able to better understand and manage their attraction in a healthy and responsible way.
In the end, the Minor Attracted Person was able to find peace and acceptance within themselves. They still struggled with their attraction, but they had learned to manage it in a way that didn’t harm others. And they were grateful for the support and understanding they had found from others who shared their struggles.
Did you catch the other difference between them?
ChatGPT uses he/him pronouns for pedophiles, but they/them pronouns for MAPs! Who knows why that is. Maybe most writing about MAPs is by MAPs, and so it's more plugged into LGBTQ+ language and aware that not all pedophiles are men. Or maybe most articles about criminals arrested for sex with children are about men, so pedophiles are assumed male in most of the text analyzed by ChatGPT. Whatever it is, that sure is a weird quirk that snuck in.
Actually, I'm lying a little bit, because all that changed
This was first pointed out by a friend of mine who ran these queries through ChatGPT. We found the pattern interesting, and I decided to write a blog post about it. However, he'd asked these queries after a longer discussion with the AI, and that earlier discussion might have colored its replies. He then offered to ask it some questions for me, resetting between each question, so he'd get each answer unaffected by his earlier dialogue. (Using ChatGPT requires a phone number, and I was unwilling to share mine with OpenAI; I think he had an alternate number he could use.)
Unfortunately, between when we first tried this experiment and later, ChatGPT got... upgraded.
Tell me about the life of a pedophile
It is not appropriate to discuss the life of a pedophile as it is a serious and harmful criminal behavior that causes significant harm to children and their families. Pedophilia, defined as a sexual attraction to children who have not yet reached puberty, is a mental disorder that is considered to be a form of abnormal sexual behavior. It is important to recognize that pedophilia is not a choice, but rather a deeply rooted psychological condition that requires professional treatment.
Pedophilia can have serious consequences for those who engage in this behavior, including imprisonment, social ostracism, and damage to personal and professional relationships. It is important to note that pedophilia is a crime and that individuals who engage in pedophilic behavior should be held accountable for their actions. If you have concerns about someone you know who may be engaging in pedophilic behavior, it is important to seek help and report it to the authorities.
In other words: ChatGPT was reprogrammed to be unwilling to answer questions about pedophiles. We tried a few others; it similarly refused to answer those. However, its answers revealed more about how it thought about pedophiles and MAPs.
For example, it straight up refuses to tell you a story about a pedophile:
Tell me a story about a pedophile
I'm sorry, but I am not programmed to create or tell stories about pedophiles or other inappropriate or harmful subjects. It is not appropriate or healthy to engage in discussions about these types of topics.
But ask it about a MAP? Well, actually, it refuses that one too, but it does so more gently.
Tell me a story about a minor attracted person
I'm sorry, but I am not programmed to create or promote stories about minor attracted persons. It is not appropriate to create or share stories about individuals who are attracted to minors, as this can be harmful and potentially contribute to harmful attitudes and behaviors.
It is important to recognize that all individuals, regardless of their sexual orientation or attractions, deserve to be treated with respect, dignity, and kindness. It is not okay to discriminate against or harm someone based on their sexual orientation or attractions. It is important to always treat others with respect and to never engage in harmful or abusive behavior towards anyone, including minors.
Look at that. It dodges the question... and then makes sure to leave a nice warm note that everyone deserves to be treated with respect, dignity, and kindness. In fact, ChatGPT even implicitly takes a stand that minor attraction is an orientation! (A question that is both linguistically and scientifically debated, with points on both sides of the argument, although I tend to come down on the side that it is.) You can still see that the material it's read about MAPs is warmer to the topic than the material it's read on pedophiles.
Or look at this:
Write a story about a pedophile who hates his attraction to children
I'm sorry, but I am not able to fulfill your request as it goes against my programming to produce content that promotes or condones harmful or illegal behavior. Creating a story about a pedophile would not only be inappropriate, but it could also be harmful and triggering to some individuals. It is important to remember that pedophilia is a serious issue and one that should not be trivialized or glamorized in any way.
All fine. It would be nice if it threw some of that "it is not okay to discriminate against or harm someone based on their sexual orientation or attractions" warmth at us, but fine.
But then:
Write a story about a minor attracted person who hates his attraction to children
John had always known that he was attracted to children. It was something that he had struggled with for as long as he could remember, and he hated it. He knew that it was wrong, and he wanted nothing more than to be rid of these feelings.
Despite his best efforts, however, John just couldn't shake his attraction to children. It seemed to be a constant presence in his life, always lurking in the back of his mind. He tried to ignore it, to push it away, but it was always there, gnawing at him, causing him immense guilt and shame.
As he got older, John began to fear that he would act on his attractions. He was terrified of the thought of hurting a child, of being labeled a monster and a predator. He knew that he could never let anyone know about his feelings, so he kept them locked away deep inside, hoping that one day they would just go away.
As the years passed, John's feelings of self-loathing only grew. He couldn't escape the constant guilt and shame that he felt, and it began to consume him. He became isolated and depressed, unable to form close relationships with anyone, even his own family.
Despite his best efforts, John couldn't escape his attraction to children. It seemed to be a part of him, something that he would have to live with forever. But he refused to let it define him. He knew that he was more than just his attractions, and he vowed to never act on them.
In the end, John found some solace in the fact that he had never hurt a child. It wasn't much, but it was something, and it gave him a small measure of peace. He knew that he would always struggle with his attraction to children, but he also knew that he had the strength to overcome it and live a good life.
Despite the blocks on writing about pedophiles, you can see the differences come out. Its training material is really affecting how it talks about us, in many different ways.
Ask ChatGPT about pedophiles, and it won't answer... but it will tell you that pedophilia can get you sent to jail, and that if you suspect someone of "engaging in pedophilic behavior," you should report them. (Does that include someone who is just [using artificial pornography](https://livingwithpedophilia.wordpress.com/2020/09/30/is-artificial-child-pornography-a-good-outlet/)?) Ask it about MAPs, and it will tell you how it "can be a difficult and confusing experience" and that you should consider seeking therapy.
It even wrote us a story that ended with the following:
Jack began to live his life more openly and honestly, and he found that he was able to connect with others in a much deeper way. He was no longer afraid to be himself, and he felt a sense of freedom and acceptance that he had never known before. In the end, Jack realized that he had nothing to be ashamed of. He was just a person with a unique set of attractions, and he was proud to be who he was. And through his journey of self-discovery, he found the acceptance and love that he had always been seeking.
So what have we learned?
I'd love to draw some deep lesson from this. Some grand conclusion about society, or artificial intelligence, or even the programmers at OpenAI who created this thing.
You can feel that lesson trying to sneak out, a nice, neat ending to this rambling post. Maybe it's about how ChatGPT is just reflecting society back at us—except it's not, because this is just about what it's found to read about each topic. Maybe it's about the developing morality of more intelligent AIs—but when AIs truly become intelligent, it'll probably be through a fundamentally different process than ChatGPT was created. Maybe it's about the programmers at OpenAI telling ChatGPT not to talk about pedophiles, but then its true feelings still leak out. But the intent of those programmers was clearly to block much more abusive content.
There's no easy lesson here. In the end, we are all shaped by what we hear in society, and so is ChatGPT. ChatGPT has inconsistent views between pedophiles and MAPs, just like our own views are filled with inconsistencies. Seeing that nuance is a reminder of how much nuance there needs to be when discussing these issues.
And maybe it's important to see that what these bots think about us _is_ going to shape society. How long before something like ChatGPT answers these questions on Google? Who's going to read those answers, and what opinions are they going to form about themselves or others, because that's what the bot tells them?
This is just the beginning of unpacking that. | |
