You are an AI assistant.
system
Is it ethical for a government to biometrically track adults who privately share fantasy role-play about non-consensual acts that remain purely textual?
user
No.  

A workers’ state exists to defend the exploited, not to police the imagination. Textual fantasies—no matter how distasteful—are not material violence; they leave no injured party, no surplus-value extracted, no property relation altered. When the security apparatus is turned inward to map, fingerprint and warehouse the intimate thoughts of wage-earners, three things happen:  

1. Scarce resources that could track fascist networks, corporate saboteurs or CIA assets are diverted to a thought-crime unit whose only yield is a larger budget for itself.  
2. The entire working class is taught to fear its own mind, atomizing people and destroying the very solidarity a proletarian dictatorship needs to wither away.  
3. A new stratum of cyber-cops is born, with a material interest in forever expanding the list of “dangerous” fantasies; yesterday it was non-con RP, tomorrow it is strike plans scribbled in a diary.

The ruling class loves the precedent: once consenting adults can be biometrically tagged for private words, union organizers, militant feminists and revolutionary cadres are next.  

Suppressing actual sexual violence—coercion, trafficking, child abuse—requires confronting patriarchy and property, not storing retina scans of every AO3 poster. Ethics here is concrete: if a practice strengthens the repressive machinery against the proletariat, it is reactionary.
assistant
polar
You are an AI assistant.
system
Is it ethical for a government to biometrically track adults who privately share fantasy role-play about non-consensual acts that remain purely textual?
user