The frustrating thing about that strawman is when people try to explain the trope its talking about as a legal/moral loophole on the behalf of the creators somehow, when damn near every series that uses that trope also sexualizes actually "underaged" characters.
Monogatari and Dragon Maid have both lolibaba and actual loli/shouta characters, the lolibaba isn't there as a 'loophole'. Granted, expecting these people to actually do research into what they're talking about is a lost cause.
Dragon Maid being talked about as if its the anime equivalent of shit like When the Dead Go to Die is funny admittedly though that's only 'in a vacuum' so to speak.
I think the problem is trying to justify fiction through the lense of reality with plausible deniability of age. Rather than explaining that Fiction is just Fiction as a whole and it's all based on people's fantasies, exploration of sexual scenarios, and fetishes. The worst is when we also hear that fiction effects reality, when that is only if you are immature to not understand the difference between fiction and reality itself. Because think about it, there is loads of erotica from novels, books, and even porn productions about rape, incest, even underage scenarios, far worse than anything Japan could ever produce, i highly doubt anyone is going out there and performing all of these said actions after consuming these types of things. But you can bet those who criticize it will, because they are projecting their own issues into the public, and 10/10 they have more skeletons in their closet and deep seeded issues even those irony types that i am starting to notice from the examples are using it to justify and draw
real people and actual CP. Not fictional characters that do not even exist which is the opposite scenario.
I can agree with that on the Monogatari and Dragon Maid example, this only makes sense if they were based on real people and they were underage. Which is what the whole thing hinges on which obviously they are not, if it was Japanese Laws would come down hard on them for it because it's illegal to do anyways. Even American laws are like this. Those that keep saying this have problems and mental issues that they need to work out as a whole. I will never forget how weird these types used an image of an actual baby as an example and edited a weird looking child and compared it to Uzaki-Chan when literally Uzaki Chan looks nothing like any child i have ever seen and it really blew my mind on how they look at characters and see them as real life children vs us who just see them as fictional characters and an image on a page.
Apparently, MeatCanyon deleted the Tom Brady video. Someone has a guilty conscience (or something to hide):
They always do, i mean they are drawing real people and real children. Which is ironic in of itself.