Child sexual abuse is bad because it's traumatizing children (also sexual abuse is bad, duh). But "curing" pedophiles seems to be hard, similarly to how you can't "cure" homosexuals.
Child porn would supposedly be a safe outlet for pedophiles, at the cost of possibly eroding social taboos around child sexual abuse. But the tradeoff is irrelevant, because the production of child porn is usually exploiting and abusing children, making it morally bad.
Lolicon doesn't harm any children. The only potential harm left is eroding helpful social taboos. But that seems easy enough to fix: make lolicon legal, but semi-taboo. If it's not seen as normal, it doesn't normalize anything, and you have all the positives without the negatives.
So I will view you as weird if you enjoy lolicon, but I don't have a problem with it. I would even advocate for its existence.
Somewhat related, I also can't really justify the US standard for child porn. Nude pictures of 10 year olds are bad and should be illegal. But what is the harm in nudes of 17 year olds?
Child porn would supposedly be a safe outlet for pedophiles, at the cost of possibly eroding social taboos around child sexual abuse. But the tradeoff is irrelevant, because the production of child porn is usually exploiting and abusing children, making it morally bad.
Lolicon doesn't harm any children. The only potential harm left is eroding helpful social taboos. But that seems easy enough to fix: make lolicon legal, but semi-taboo. If it's not seen as normal, it doesn't normalize anything, and you have all the positives without the negatives.
So I will view you as weird if you enjoy lolicon, but I don't have a problem with it. I would even advocate for its existence.
Somewhat related, I also can't really justify the US standard for child porn. Nude pictures of 10 year olds are bad and should be illegal. But what is the harm in nudes of 17 year olds?