"Yay!" say the closeted-pedos and man-children terrified of interactions with adult women. And they will say this is a defense of free speech and that loli-art is the high mark of a slippery slope and that it if isn't allowed soon hard porn, then soft porn then all free speech will be banned.

Go the other way and say that if you allow loli-art, then the next step is hardcore loli-porn, then clothed but still erotic photos of real children, then less clothed, then non-frontal nudes, then, etc. The slippery slope argument is a fallacy for a reason. Judge loli art on its worth and you end up realising you're simply catering to the fetishes of a group of deviants. When I speak of deviants I'm not talking about people who have looked at loli art, or who have been turned on by it, I'm talking about those who care enough about it to make it 'an issue'. People obsessed enough to make it their hill to die on are a worrying sort who shouldn't be left alone in the company of small children and I sincerely doubt that any of them are out there making posts about Assange's treatment.

"But this is just drawings, it's not real people so it's not harmful." Me making a long, well-constructed argument about why its okay to rape women or attack ethnic group X, and encouraging others to do so, would just be words on a screen but it would also count as incitement to violence. Loli-porn should also be viewed as incitement to paedophilic behaviour and not tolerated because it actively promotes the sexualization of children.

"Yay!" say the closeted-pedos and man-children terrified of interactions with adult women. And they will say this is a defense of free speech and that loli-art is the high mark of a slippery slope and that it if isn't allowed soon hard porn, then soft porn then all free speech will be banned.

Go the other way and say that if you allow loli-art, then the next step is hardcore loli-porn, then clothed but still erotic photos of real children, then less clothed, then non-frontal nudes, then, etc. The slippery slope argument is a fallacy for a reason. Judge loli art on its worth and you end up realising you're simply catering to the fetishes of a group of deviants. When I speak of deviants I'm not talking about people who have looked at loli art, or who have been turned on by it, I'm talking about those who care enough about it to make it 'an issue'. People obsessed enough to make it their hill to die on are a worrying sort who shouldn't be left alone in the company of small children and I sincerely doubt that any of them are out there making posts about Assange's tratement.

"But this is just drawings, it's not real people so it's not harmful." Me making a long, well-constructed argument about why its okay to rape women or attack ethnic group X would just be words on a screen but it would also count as incitement to violence. Loli-porn should also be viewed as incitement to paedophilic behaviour and not tolerated because it actively promotes the sexualization of children.