Thread 941151484

Lolicons and Shotacons are not Human.

>>941151484 (OP)
>b-b-but drumph is da real ped-ACK!

>>941151484 (OP)
>Lolicons and Shotacons are not Human
I think this is the wrong take.
I think the point is that they're both real human beings, but one is in the process of becoming a Lolicon, and the other is in the process of becoming a Shotacon.

>>941153446
They're not humans because they're pedophiles

>>941151484 (OP)
lolis/shotas != children
lolicons/shotacons != pedophiles
fantasy art != real photographs
fictional lolicon art != CSAM

seethe accordingly

also btw you wanting to treat drawings as bad as the real thing is invalidating to victims of childhood sexual abuse. many lolicons will swear against pedophilia. you want to lump them together because your brain doesnt understand the difference between a kleenex and a tissue.

>>941151484 (OP)
They are creepy, but at least it's cartoon shit and not a dirtbag that actually fucked underage teenagers like Trump himself did

>>941152691
>people who fap to cartoons on the internet are worse than real-life sex traffickers and people who associate and rape children with them
Gee, I wonder who could possibly be behind this post.

>>941151484 (OP)
Why is one child in that south park family a nigger?

>>941154046
>lolicons/shotacons != pedophiles
That's wrong.

>>941154371

Then... I don't know... take them both out?

anyone have the "tight ass" t-shirt picture

>>941154046
lolis/shotas = drawings/toons of children
lolicons/shotacons = pedophiles because they are attracted/aroused by depictions of lolis/shotas.
The art ones I'll agree with.
The problem is that you're too autistic to understand it's not about "treating the drawings as bad as the real thing". The problem is the type of person who is aroused by such images should probably never be in the vicinity of a child.

But it's still way hotter when women do it.

>>941151484 (OP)
>>941152691
No but seriously, where's the Epstein files?