Is "It's just a drawing bro" a valid excuse?

I often see lolicons claim that lolis are okay because they're drawings, but then proceed to explain why fucking underage girls is okay because reasons. I'm not so sure they're as good at separating fiction from reality as they claim to be. Has anyone else noticed this trend?

Attached: Doge lolicon.jpg (725x500, 104.9K)

Yes. Being attracted to kids is not itself a crime. It becomes a crime when a pedo fulfills his sexual urges and therefore makes a victim of a child. Jacking off to drawings of kids is gross but not evil.

loliconfags are pedophiles, their desires for animated CP will always lead to desires towards children, even if many will never actually follow through on their desires thankfully. Anime in general outside of hyper-popular Shonen attracts perverts and pedophiles because for one reason or another Japanese animation companies often pander to them.

yeah. they do be mentally impaired. the only good reasoning is as follows:
>is a drawing of an underage character different from a real person?
yes.
>is it a valid excuse?
no
>do I support sfw drawings of underage characters?
yes because they're ussually in really cute situations and it fuels my unfulfilled desire to be a dad.
>do I support lewd/sexualized drawings of underage characters?
hell no
>do I feel anything about lolicons/pedo?
yes. they should be executed by acid bath

>is it a valid excuse
>no
This is where your logic derails. I implore you to go back and reconsider this point.

if a straight guy jerks off to cartoon dicks, does that make him gay?

Not if the penis is attached to a feminine person.

If you jack of to homosexual drawings you are gay. Just as jacking off to drawings of kids makes you a pedo. But being a pedo in itself is not evil, victimising children is.

Yes it does, he's turned on by the visual appearance of a penis.

No it's not. It's a hard cope and all lolicons that defend themselves in any way shape or form deserve the rope. Own it like a man.

Attached: 1648803673954.gif (498x373, 439.77K)

By my theory, most lolicons are secondarily attracted to children, but are in denial about it since it's so easy (and think) that it's just a drawing. And for the record, being secondarily attracted to children seems to be very common among males, as common as 1/4 of the whole population. Some lolicons are probably actual pedos/hebes, but usually they're open about it and don't necessarily even want to be mixed with other lolicons

I don't know if there are actually lolicons who are only aroused by 2D material, probably the most that claim not to haven't even tried, and find the idea disgusting

T. lolicon

easy to say*, haven't even tried CP*

don't care moralfag

that shit looks pathetic when its not 3D models.

Imho:
Children
>loud
>obnoxious
>look like some mutants
>basically retarded
Drawing
>a minituarized sexualized female
>horny af
>often cunning or even dominant
Also no harm to anyone. While this can be bunched to guro/zoo/scat and other questionable fetishes, I just don't care if this is what a person enjoys while he is alone.

Ill add if I didn't make myself clear - if it is a drawing they don't need an excuse cause it is noones business what he faps to. If it is a real underage - they don't need an excuse cause it is a crime and they will go to jail anyway. So ultimately this excuse is bullshit as it is simply not needed.

>>is it a valid excuse?
excuse for what? people dont need an excuse for jerkin off to specific things so long as no one else was harmed in the process. if someone rubs one out to lolis (= fiction) in his own bedroom, that is absolutely none of my business

>lolicons claim that lolis are okay because they're drawings, but then proceed to explain why fucking underage girls is okay because reasons
These are complete different issues

We don't outlaw the production and consumption of child pronography because the people in them look young. We outlaw it because children are harmed in the production of it.

It's always the same two arguments and the first two posts summarise them well.
>it's normal biology to find 11-14 y/o hot
>I jack it to drawings to satisfy my urges
vs.
>it's a slippery slope!

I would love to see the topic scientifically explored. If it's correct that lolicons are less likely to abuse kids, it's kinda good. If lolicons are more likely to abuse kids eventually, it's bad. The problem is that afaik nobody has every seriously researched this, so we can only speculate.

>I would love to see the topic scientifically explored.
I think Amy Adler at NYU has written a few articles in that area, at least as far as the law is concerned.

I'll have a look when I find the time, thank you