Tweet ||
Archive
Given the fact that I literally recorded an event on here where an Anti actually redistributed CSEM and thought it was fine because "hurr durr it's okay when I do it because I point out how wrong it is," I'm not really finding this amusing as I used to.
It's
wrong to redistribute CSEM under any circumstance because
it harms the child in it.
But drawings
do not exist, and thus
do not have the capacity to feel, and
can't be harmed.
The actual situation here isn't a crime, because the Anti has not posted CSEM like the previous one I had recorded did.
However, the fact that 1)
She considered the drawing to depict a child, and 2)
Had no problems reposting what she considered to be by definition
CSEM, suggests a huge problem.
By 'huge problem', I mean the fact that she's probably just a pedophile projecting and wants to use this excuse to redistribute any CSEM on her drive on the open web, of which Twitter is a great platform that groomers and child rapists use to distribute.
My source? The case where pedophiles used certain hashtags to covertly send each other CSEM via Mega, and the fact that Jack said CSEM isn't against TOS after many complaints.
Within the tactics and strategies criminals use, they're incredibly stupid and predictable, hence why I'll pull a Mycroft and simply claim as fact that Twitter is a great platform for groomers on simple inductions.
And within my experience dealing with Antis, they'll more than justify their grooming of kids on Twitter by bashing on the lolis.
Their thought process is such:
- If child rape isn't okay, then Lolicon shouldn't be okay.
- If Lolicon is okay, then child rape should be okay.
How many times have they been caught grooming kids? Unfortunately this forum wasn't created before many cases that have occurred and for me to archive here.