I would because it affects me. The lolicon ban does not affect me in any way because I and many others simply do not goon to pictures of little girls. This is specifically for that and that only
What I'm trying to tell you is that it literally does not affect you. A picture of a naked little girl is not free speech, it's a pedophilic image. Preventing people from saying nigger is not only unconstitutional and they have no grounds for doing it
The speech coming from far-right extremists has done far more tangible harm than pro-pedophilia speech has, yet both are still protected by the First Amendment because the First Amendment is all or nothing. We recognize that giving the government the power to censor any speech - no matter how vile that speech is - is far more dangerous than the speech itself.
Neil Gaiman, in
his article about the First Amendment and lolicon, made the exact same argument: "The Law is a blunt instrument. It's not a scalpel. It's a club. If there is something you consider indefensible, and there is something you consider defensible, and the same laws can take them both out, you are going to find yourself defending the indefensible." There has never been a single censorship law in history that has not been abused. The last time that something like this was successfully prosecuted in the US, it was underground comic artist Mike Diana in the '90s, whose work (which often included crude and graphic drawings of pedophilia) relied on over-the-top shock value, but was certainly not pornography. There's even an entire documentary about it:
https://www.imdb.com/title/tt7401070/
Also, you equating cartoons with genuine CSAM is a complete trivialization of what CSAM actually is. And numerous experts and organizations in the field of preventing CSAM have advised against criminalizing lolicon. In fact, most CSA agencies would rebuff what you're saying, so I guess that they all must be pedophiles too. Time and resources spent going after cartoons is time and resources taken away from going after actual CSA.
Unlike you, I actually fight genuine CSA. And no, I would not allow lolicon on any site that I had anything to do with either. If I see lolicon on a website that I janny, I remove it and ban the person who posted it. But, when I see genuine CSAM on a site that I janny, I not only remove it and ban the poster, but I also report it to law enforcement. And I can assure you that law enforcement tasked with taking down CSAM do not want to have to waste their time and resources going after cartoons.
Never happened. Take your meds, Goldberg
Right. I can tell, at this point, that you're just trying to gaslight and bait me, so I really see no point in even responding further.
just lying to yourself now lol, I posted it after you started talking about how much you love soylita.
I didn't say that I "loved" Soylita. I said the exact same thing about Soylita that
@Stephen,
@Plajer Sojdżekowski, and numerous other posters on here have said: that it's a cute character in and of itself, but that pedophiles have ruined it and that the pedophilic name of the character essentially doomed it from the start. You just didn't accuse
them of being pedophiles because they didn't have a history of hurting your feelings.
![[banana]](/data/assets/smilies/fejs.png "Banana Pepe [banana]")
