fchan

This makes no sense to me... it's a fantasy-based fetish. They're not actually raping children or even having sex with them. They're viewing pornographic artwork (not photos, as that requires one to put a child in a sexually comprimising situation) of fictional children. literally speaking, no children were harmed in the making of these pics, mentally, physically, or emotionally. Other than the questionable morality that comes with looking at ANY porn, there really doesn't seem to be a problem here, even if it's against the law. If it is, there's gotta be loopholes somewhere to properly affect this discussion, and if not, then it should be fought for. This is no worse (and no better, mind you) than necrophiliac, bestial, rape, and scat pornography. it's all fantasy; none of it is action, and therefore no action should be done in response. Only when there IS action should one respond with it. in other words, if someone rapes a child, corpse, or any other thing for that matter, THEN legal action should be taken. No one's getting hurt by porn, so there should be no worries.

I feel I need to mention that no, I do not generally enjoy cub porn, but I hate seeing things like fetishes and fantasies being treated unequally when they're all on the same level. People should be able to masturbate to whatever they want as long as what they're masturbating to did not harm someone in the process of making it. So all that shit they have on those other porn sites about animal sex and what not is what should be targeted, not harmless drawn pictures of fictional characters.