> It's like having someone with poor sense of smell take out the garbage.
No, it's like having someone a poor sense of smell detect which things smell and which things don't.
Not to mention, having them do this work is taking advantage of a dysfunction rather than helping to address it. In fact it would be likely to make the dysfunction worse.
So watching the destruction of human life and/or incredible suffering of other people is not problematic to you? If someone has a dysfunction is it not cruel to take advantage of the dysfunction, whatever benefit might be derived by others? Seems like the very definition of dehumanizing rather than caring whether or not your fellow man is thriving.
I'm not saying force these people to work, simply that they're people who lean more to the callous side of the emotional spectrum and they're better suited for this kind of work.
What you see as dysfunction, their apathy when viewing bad content, is their normal state of being.
> "Why do you think some folk are drawn to habitually view such content?"
It's paradoxically unusual but at the same time incredibly relatable. Everybody dies, so there will be broad spectrum curiosity for the subject, inhibited only by natural squeamishness.
Years ago when highschools still had shop classes, the teacher showed my class a binder full of color photographs of what a lathe accident looks like. The lesson was that lathes aren't toys. I'd never seen anything like those pictures before. They were disgusting, and fascinating. Probably psychologically damaging, but not as damaging as getting caught in a lathe. Did I mention the pictures were fascinating? For most people, seeing that sort of thing is rare. Some people are drawn to novelty, particularly when they can relate to it. Very little in life is as relatable as death; death is even more universally relatable than eating.
Is the suppression of squeamishness a form of mental illness, or a form of psychological damage? I think it definitely can be. But I'm far from convinced it necessarily is.
No, it's like having someone a poor sense of smell detect which things smell and which things don't.
Not to mention, having them do this work is taking advantage of a dysfunction rather than helping to address it. In fact it would be likely to make the dysfunction worse.