/ic/ - Artwork/Critique

>>6919850
I could attempt to make a pro-loli argument, but it seems impossible to do in any honest way.

I can understand liking "petite" women or women that aren't maximally endowed , but they usually have a degree of sexual maturity that it makes the difference from loli.

The urge to sexual arousal should have a basis with intent in procreation then it become reasonable.

As a man, wanting to stick your dick in what very much resembles a pre-pubescent child (i.e. that hasn't reached sexual maturity hence the intent becomes recreational), can only be reasoned as being a way of coping with a lack of masculinity because you have to sexually dominate the most vulnerable thing you can find, simply for mere carnal and psychological pleasure.


In more than a decade lurking in this shithole, i still have yet to read a single reasonable pro-loli argument without logical fallacies and bad faith arguments
>>6919875
No.
>biologically speaking, why do adult guys "suddenly" stop being attracted to young girls?
They were never physically attracted to young girls in the first place and because fertility is extremely crucial to the propagation of genes.
Teenage crushes are purely emotional.

>it's social stigma.
No.
>Any boy or girl is sexually mature the moment puberty hits.
No.