>I don't think that anyone is harmed in any meaningful way by reading her discussions about hypothetical sexual situations

She advocates for the value of AI generated CSAM, and her hypotheticals are attempts at deluded rationalization, the rationalization of could easily sway the actions of others. When I read her rationalizations and hypothetical moral scenarios, I am just reminded of the arguments from the New Left, including many of the voices of the French petition to remove the age of consent, that offered specious sophistry to not just sway others into allowing them to prey on children, but to encourage others with similar predilections to do so without moral qualms.

A good specific example was the placing of orphans in the homes of known sex offenders in East Germany, with the rationalization that it's better than the orphans endure a bit of sexual impropriety than to suffer negligence, which is a very Aella style argument.