Reading the comments of the people who want it suppressed and didn’t get mass downvoted, I ran into something common:
They want it banned because they believe that the society that they want is completely incompatible with that content existing, or that banning said content is completely consistent with 1A because the US existed for almost 200 years without such content (porn in general, lolisho really only got over here because of anime becoming a sensation) being mass distributed throughout the country.
Going back to lolisho specifically, there’s no way to get around the fact that sexual lolisho art depicts children in sexual situations, and I personally don’t believe that anime looking like it does matters, because that’s still a human out there, so the reaction to it is gonna be what it is regardless. The discussion tends to be a lot more…focused and less calling people authoritarians and pedos when we actually address the elephant in the room, so I might as well do it in the main post instead of a comment.
I’m just a college student that’s not that well informed on why this is being used as a canary in the coalmine, but I’ll let y’all have at it.
No, officer, I swear she said she was 900!
One thing I will say, if I'm getting your point correctly about the 'reaction' part, is that the same can be said for any "immoral" pursuit, so limiting principles and logical end points become a real issue.
Why should people be exposed to violence via video games, for example? Despite it being fictional, there are real people who will be reacting to it, after all. Same goes for any entertainment, really. Bread and circuses in many ways should be condemned. It depends on how purist someone wants to be. Music? Plenty of the stricter religious doctrines don't even like music or dancing. Short skirts? No, society should police that. Maybe we should go full burka.
To be clear, I'm not saying banning loli would lead to these things, I'm just saying the reasoning is the same, in trying to control what people can react to. It's, at the endpoint, about controlling people, not the media or content in question.
Alright, unpopular opinion from someone who comes down on the more "pro-loli" (I want to be clear I'm not a fan, but I defend its existence on freedom/speech grounds) side, but we do have some genuinely very questionable people here. Here's my hot take: Some of the people, even here, defending loli are at the very least pedo-adjacent, which is why they care about the issue. But it's not everyone, but it is certainly a contributing factor to the passion with which it often gets defended.
Other reasons it gets so much attention, though, is just because it's one of the things that are currently being banned in some places. So it's just a natural reaction if you apply freedom-related principles. In that respect it's sort of like why the leftist masses are so adamant about drag queen story hour and porn in schools. It's a little different since these are issues that they care about to begin with, and their masters were pushing it (the powers on the right aren't pushing loli, far from it, thankfully), but the kneejerk reaction from the masses is the same. They see something being attacked - rightly or wrongly - and want to defend it. So you have the more libertarian-right defending loli/porn on speech grounds because they see it being attacked by the more traditionalist right.
Also, I will say I don't think banning it is the way to go. But I admit I could be wrong. I've made slippery slope arguments in the past (mostly in regards to porn bans/internet ID verification) where I (I think correctly) point out that if the government is age-gating people - which by definition includes age-checking adults because you don't know the age pre-verification - from content deemed not suitable for certain ages, you very easily can see them starting to age gate legal adults from content like guns if they succeed in raising the purchase age to 21. So I think that's very dangerous.
Point is, and I realize this is utopian/unrealistic, it's more a thought experiment and not even something I'm advocating for, but I think it has to come from the culture, not the law. The culture is what needs fixing, and I don't think more authoritarian laws are the answer. As mentioned, I think it makes things worse. If you want to use the past as a guideline, one answer is to reform the churches, have them push more morals. A religious/Christian society is why there wasn't as much lewdness back in the day, arguably. I think a focus on culture, perhaps religion, is the answer, not directly attacking freedoms via the law. Also, retaking education is incredibly important, as the degenerate culture is stemming from how children are being raised, and we've ceded their upbringing to the government and modern teachers.
Again, I even admit I could be wrong, as laws can also create culture. Anything that discourages a behavior will natural shift perspectives, but I still think there are better ways to do it that don't - in my opinion - chip away at free expression. I would prefer it to be largely voluntary; again, take on culture and education.