Needed to make this a main post for the sake of visibility, but in general, I think reset the clock did a lot more damage than help, because of the fact that people believe that the only reason you could ever be against a certain thing, is because you’re engaging in it yourself, when we know for a fact that isn’t the case.
To be specific, it is very much possible to be against loli/shota porn and not be an IRL predator. People like Ableist forget that, while I’m not against it existing per se, I understand why certain places would ban it altogether, and I would actually like for Ableist or anyone else to actually post the specific places where “governments ban loli/shota porn and waste police resources” where people have actually been arrested for the sole possession of that fictional content, because as much as you say that, I’ve never seen it. Unless that’s like a European thing, I’ve generally never heard of that before.
I just don’t get why some people don’t understand why the average person thinks that someone who jerks off to loli/shota porn isn’t right in the head.
There's a difference between being against something, being apathetic to something, and being an activist campaigning against something. There's also a difference between projection and protest. But overlap does exist.
If someone said "I hate spiders, they are creepy", they probably hate spiders. If they said "Spiders are awful, with how they sexually seduce all of us with their sexy spider legs!", and held a protest once a month against the concept of spider legs, I'd be a bit more inclined to question their worldview in terms of projection. Same protest, both against spiders, and neither supporting them in any way, but the second one is clearly off. Real-life examples aren't as obviously clear-cut, but you can often still distinguish the difference.
"I don't like stories featuring tweenage men because it does not appeal to me. I am not its market." is a face-value statement. "I don't like stories featuring tweenage men because it makes me think sexy thoughts, which disturbs me, the stories/images are disturbing" is a less face-value statement.
The statement of like or dislike is ultimately unimportant. The why is the core element. The "why" is what makes up the projection. I am generally against things that harm living (or recently-living) humans. I am generally apathetic towards things that do not harm living (or recently-living) humans. Others have very different worldviews than me, and might say the exact same line, but define "harm", "recently", or "human" in very different ways than I do.
In example, I do not consider a drawing to be a human, and do not consider exploding said drawing to be "harm". But someone else may think that viewing an explosion in a video game hurts real-life living humans. Neither are projection at that point. But if someone says they don't want violence in video games because (the "why") seeing someone get shot in a game makes the viewer want to shoot people in real life... They should probably seek mental health help.