(Part 1 of 4)Hi, I'm Professor Tolaez (toe-less); you may know me from your local University in America. Today, I'm here to give you an education on CP. What is CP? Well, it's an acronym for "Child Porn", others prefer to label this material as CSAM or "Child Sexual Abuse Material". I'm also going to educate you about the genres "lolis" and "shotas". So, what are all these things I mentioned? Well stick around, because once we're done here, you'll have your questions answered! Here is the line drawn by your local authorities about the law, CP, and you!CP is defined as ANY visual depiction of sexually explicit conduct involving minors or underage people; it's most recommended to label this as CSAM due to the nature of such material. They are usually live footages of minors being sexually exploited or abused; with or without any child predators or adults present. The material is illegal; and it's wrong, because; A) Minors are not meant to have intercourse before reaching the legal age because; B) Doing so will bring physical harm to the minor regardless of bringing consent or not, especially when adults are involved; C) The concept of intercourse will emotionally harm the minor and even affect their life if not given help after the trauma, and; D) Adults are not meant to be attracted to minors, unless they've experienced some form of trauma in their earlier years; they would also become predators if they fail to develop any standards growing up.
(Part 2 of 4)As for CSAM, it's also illegal to produce, distribute, and have it in such possession; possession meaning carrying or storing the material in a device you own; being the only person having access to it, like having it in a storage cloud, etc; and most importantly: Simply searching for it online and viewing the material...apparently. To go further into depth of we consider CSAM, it's not limited to just filming children being sexually exploited in real life, but it also extends to handmade drawings and AI-generated images/videos as well. Despite the fact children are not present in these examples, they can still be used to target and sexually abuse the child the content focuses on. This is because if the content sexualizes a REAL kid, regardless if the artstyle is cartoonish or realistic, it will still result in sexual abuse and will scar them for life if they become aware. Speaking of realistic, if the artstyle is that way, it will also be considered CSAM regardless if the child sexualized is real or fictional. Why? Because if the artstyle is realistic enough, the "character" can be mistaken for the real thing. That's why it's wrong. So, how do we combat this in America? Obviously, the first step is to make the material illegal, especially when it comes to sexualizing underage fictional cartoon characters that are not only DISTINCT from what a real kid would look like, but would also unlikely to be mistaken for the real thing since they don't look fucking "realistic" enough.
(Part 3 of 4)Oh shit; I forgot to go over what "lolis" and "shotas" are. Lolis are described as underage or young-looking cartoon girl characters in fiction that are typically put in sexually suggestive or explicit situations in images/videos for erotic purposes; as for shotas, they are like lolis, but they are boys instead of girls; lolis and shotas can be either original characters or be sexualized versions of already existing characters; for example: Any underage or young-looking character from Sonic The Hedgehog, Teen Titans, Friday Night Funkin', My Life as a Teenage Robot, etc. See, ever since the 90s, the United States has expanded on laws banning child porn...I mean child sexual abuse material by illegalizing ANY visual depiction of sexually explicit conduct involving minors or underage people; despite lolis and shotas have shown no results of actual child sexual abuse in other countries like Japan or Denmark, America thinks they do because of how absurdly high CSA has occured in it; that's why they count lolis and shotas as CSAM. This way, not only will actual child predators targeting actual children for their material will be prosecuted, but also jerk-offs that target cartoon characters as well. Yes that's right, in America, drawing a picture of Sonic the Hedgehog having sex with Amy Rose is the equivalent of drawing a picture of REAL children having sex, even though it's not fucking true.
(Part 4 of 4)Oh, and to be more specific: Young-looking adults are underage characters too; it won't matter they're confirmed to be adults as long as they look young; they're underage, despite being NOT ACTUALLY underage, like Princess Peach in her "short" form in Super Mario Bros. 2 (or Super Mario 3D World), Midna from The Legend of Zelda: Twilight Princess, or Flippy from Happy Tree Friends; just like the equivalent of a young-looking adult can't buy himself a beer, regardless if they prove they're legal. Also, if a character is canonically underage, then depicting them as an adult means they're underage anyway, despite your ability to depict those cartoon characters in ANY way you want. How fucking fair. By the way, "Sonic Project XXX" and "2 Babies 1 Fox" are the exact same fucking thing, you pedos aren't looking at the bigger picture on how to tackle ACTUAL child sexual abuse. God, we're fucking stupid.
Ok, and? Do you have a point?
