It doesn't matter that they are not photo-realistic
They are not just 'not photorealistic', they do not even have human proportions. You're screaming 'pedophile!' at people jacking off to something that looks NOTHING like a human child and has a facial structure literally closer to that of a kitten than a human being.
Your opinions on this are transparently those of an artistic illiterate who has never drawn anything in his life and has zero understanding of or care for how character design/proportion plays with people's brains to create pleasing illusions of things that are simply not there.
A pedo who masturbates to "unrealistic" lolis is still a pedo.
This statement is your entire position, sI'm going to succinctly break down how retarded this statement is by translating it into plain English:
'A person who masturbates to something that looks nothing like a human child is a person who is sexually attracted to human children'.
They are not just 'not photorealistic', they do not even have human proportions. You're screaming 'pedophile!' at people jacking off to something that looks NOTHING like a human child and has a facial structure literally closer to that of a kitten than a human being.
Your opinions on this are transparently those of an artistic illiterate who has never drawn anything in his life and has zero understanding of or care for how character design/proportion plays with people's brains to create pleasing illusions of things that are simply not there.
This statement is your entire position, sI'm going to succinctly break down how retarded this statement is by translating it into plain English:
'A person who masturbates to something that looks nothing like a human child is a person who is sexually attracted to human children'.
I think you literally just want to fuck lolis & you're taking this all very personally.
Even if that were true, which that user has consistently denied, it wouldn't change his systematic dissection of your retarded argument.
I'm not into loli art.