Lolicon/Shotacon Defense Force - The people who jerk off to cartoon children and won't ever shut up about it

[Detractor Truck]

When Saberspark covered Kyle Carrozza's crimes for CP, he brought up how Ang Vondra (artcow) was drawing cartoon boys getting raped because "her therapist told her so", and when he rightfully pointed out how fucking weird and detrimental it sounded, people in the comments gave him shit and that "no you fucking ableist shitlips, gooning to cartoon 'p is actually very healthy and good for mentals, she's just expressing herself for her trauma you insensitive retard ((("
Really just further proves that cartoon autists are stunted, nonces themselves or both.
https://youtube.com/watch?v=0MpJWxqK3T0:1756

I agree with Saberspark that it no excuse, and anyone that try to justify it is disgusting.

 

[Diddledones]

When Saberspark covered Kyle Carrozza's crimes for CP, he brought up how Ang Vondra (artcow) was drawing cartoon boys getting raped because "her therapist told her so", and when he rightfully pointed out how fucking weird and detrimental it sounded, people in the comments gave him shit and that "no you fucking ableist shitlips, gooning to cartoon 'p is actually very healthy and good for mentals, she's just expressing herself for her trauma you insensitive retard ((("
Really just further proves that cartoon autists are stunted, nonces themselves or both.
https://youtube.com/watch?v=0MpJWxqK3T0:1756

I do not understand how in order to cope with trauma they have to draw gumball having sex with his mom to cope i just dont get it

 

[scatterbrain]

Do you have an archive of this tweet? As much as I do despise OMOCAT there has been times where people just edit her avatar and username over other people's posts, so I want it confirmed.

 

[Colon capital V]

Do you have an archive of this tweet? As much as I do despise OMOCAT there has been times where people just edit her avatar and username over other people's posts, so I want it confirmed.

Not these ones exactly, but they're all in similar vain in one another. I'm sure if I search IA long enough I could probably find it.

https://archive.ph/P0laG

https://archive.ph/gGkAJ

https://archive.ph/4SDDu

EDIT: Oh you were looking for that tweet in specific? Well it's archived here along with some other lovely things she'd said.

 

[Scavenger]

One defense I haven't seen as often but I'm sure it's still used is how gooning to lolisho is somehow a "coping mechanism" for those who were sexually abused when they were younger. You'll typically see this in leftist/foid spaces since using fiction for "muh mentals" is more common there, but damn does that not make it any more retarded in reasoning.

"Guys I got raped as a child, me gooning to little boys getting sodomized is actually healthy and a great outlet and if you disagree you're a bigot who should kill themselves <3".
Ver archivo adjunto 9253696
Ver archivo adjunto 9253700
(OMOCAT's not an example of this, I just wanted to post about a stupid foid post related to this)

 

[Frosted Snowflakes]

The fairly large Twitter user ShitpostRock made a tweet telling a story about how his 15-year-old sister was severely bullied by Pakistanis.
A

Speaking of Rock Solid / ShitpostRock, he wants to ask you why it's wrong to have sexual intercourse with a roadkill corpse.
(Archive)

 

[Most Wanted Banana]

Does anyone know what happened to the loli boards on 8chan? Both /loli/ and /delicious/ give a 404 error. Checking the meta board, it seems they weren't deleted, just hidden. Now you have to participate in one of the visible boards to "verify" your session and access the hidden stuff.

Years openly hosting that shit and now, suddenly, they hide it?

 

[Nicholas Gurrmann]

Speaking of Rock Solid / ShitpostRock, he wants to ask you why it's wrong to have sexual intercourse with a roadkill corpse.
(Archive)
Ver archivo adjunto 9260718

Poles are an utterly subhuman species that should've been exterminated by the Germans

 

[PHUCKERPRIME]

Speaking of Rock Solid / ShitpostRock, he wants to ask you why it's wrong to have sexual intercourse with a roadkill corpse.
(Archive)
Ver archivo adjunto 9260718

"If you ask a Christian or Buddhist why it's morally wrong, they will tell you it's because the body retains inherent dignity sperg sperg sperg"
No, they will tell you it's morally disgusting and you're morally a fucking degenerate who needs to be morally put in an institution if not down and even a leddit atheist will morally agree.

Dr. Witnesser level argument.

 

[meager]

Speaking of Rock Solid / ShitpostRock, he wants to ask you why it's wrong to have sexual intercourse with a roadkill corpse.
(Archive)
Ver archivo adjunto 9260718

Absurd hypocrisy. Every argument defending lolicon can be turned into one defending fucking roadkill.

>Actually, it’s just a really realistic fleshlight!
>It’s just a corpse bro, it’s not alive.
>It can’t feel pain, so it’s not hurting anyone. What’s the problem?
>You’re wasting police resources that could be used to imprison ACTUAL zoophiles!
>How dare you infringe on my Consitution given right to have sex with roadkill!
>You’re the real zoophile for thinking I’m sexually attracted to animals!
>Fucking animals is white women culture, bigot!
>If zoophiles have sex with roadkill, they won’t fuck living animals, so fucking roadkill actually saves animals!
>I have sex with roadkill to cope with trauma of my dad abusing animals in front of me!

 

[The Jerkmate Joker]

Absurd hypocrisy. Every argument defending lolicon can be turned into one defending fucking roadkill.

>Actually, it’s just a really realistic fleshlight!
>It’s just a corpse bro, it’s not alive.
>It can’t feel pain, so it’s not hurting anyone. What’s the problem?
>You’re wasting police resources that could be used to imprison ACTUAL zoophiles!
>How dare you infringe on my Consitution given right to have sex with roadkill!
>You’re the real zoophile for thinking I’m sexually attracted to animals!
>Fucking animals is white women culture, bigot!
>If zoophiles have sex with roadkill, they won’t fuck living animals, so fucking roadkill actually saves animals!
>I have sex with roadkill to cope with trauma of my dad abusing animals in front of me!

One of the most common lolifag defense tactics is to try to flip the script and make you the target of ridicule by saying that you "can't tell fiction from reality because you think the drawing I'm jerking off to is real." They of course know that this is false, but they don't care as long as it looks like they got the last word. Nobody thinks the drawings are real, and I highly doubt that anyone has been reported to the police for having loli hentai. The problem here is that they are jerking off to representations of prepubescent children, and they sincerely think that "it's just a drawing" is a valid loophole. I'm curious as to what they think of realistic AI-generated images of children, though.

Case in point, this dumbass tweet: https://xcancel.com/comdost_vtuber/status/2050389242606428414



I doubt this person actually thinks this is a valid comparison, they are probably just pretending not to understand things so that it becomes impossible to argue against them in good faith.

 

[MIU]

Speaking of Rock Solid / ShitpostRock, he wants to ask you why it's wrong to have sexual intercourse with a roadkill corpse.
(Archive)
Ver archivo adjunto 9260718

I think it's a fair argument worded really retardedly, he isn't saying that having sex with roadkill is good. He is trying to point out that a lot of people who identify as materialists will still make absolute moral statements which they cannot logically back up with their worldview. I just don't get why he thinks it's a good idea to go
>BRO WOULD U FUCK ROADKILL???????
In the middle of a theological debate. This just makes you look like a lunatic. It's better to wait to make this argument once that person makes an absolute moral statement and then make the claim that he cannot justify it.

 

[MIU]

Absurd hypocrisy. Every argument defending lolicon can be turned into one defending fucking roadkill.

>Actually, it’s just a really realistic fleshlight!
>It’s just a corpse bro, it’s not alive.
>It can’t feel pain, so it’s not hurting anyone. What’s the problem?
>You’re wasting police resources that could be used to imprison ACTUAL zoophiles!
>How dare you infringe on my Consitution given right to have sex with roadkill!
>You’re the real zoophile for thinking I’m sexually attracted to animals!
>Fucking animals is white women culture, bigot!
>If zoophiles have sex with roadkill, they won’t fuck living animals, so fucking roadkill actually saves animals!
>I have sex with roadkill to cope with trauma of my dad abusing animals in front of me!

One of the most common lolifag defense tactics is to try to flip the script and make you the target of ridicule by saying that you "can't tell fiction from reality because you think the drawing I'm jerking off to is real." They of course know that this is false, but they don't care as long as it looks like they got the last word. Nobody thinks the drawings are real, and I highly doubt that anyone has been reported to the police for having loli hentai. The problem here is that they are jerking off to representations of prepubescent children, and they sincerely think that "it's just a drawing" is a valid loophole. I'm curious as to what they think of realistic AI-generated images of children, though.

Case in point, this dumbass tweet: https://xcancel.com/comdost_vtuber/status/2050389242606428414

Ver archivo adjunto 9265410

I doubt this person actually thinks this is a valid comparison, they are probably just pretending not to understand things so that it becomes impossible to argue against them in good faith.

Uhhh, bros. Shitpost Rock was being targeted by a lolitroon who made fun of his sister being assaulted by a pakistani and that's why his screencap was featured. He wasn't making an argument about loli.

 

[Fag Alert Major Fag Alert]

That image is ai art, by the way.

 

[meager]

Uhhh, bros. Shitpost Rock was being targeted by a lolitroon who made fun of his sister being assaulted by a pakistani and that's why his screencap was featured. He wasn't making an argument about loli.

My apologies, I got confused as he had a history of defending loli himself.

I think it's a fair argument worded really retardedly, he isn't saying that having sex with roadkill is good. He is trying to point out that a lot of people who identify as materialists will still make absolute moral statements which they cannot logically back up with their worldview. I just don't get why he thinks it's a good idea to go
>BRO WOULD U FUCK ROADKILL???????
In the middle of a theological debate. This just makes you look like a lunatic. It's better to wait to make this argument once that person makes an absolute moral statement and then make the claim that he cannot justify it.

The thing is that he’s saying that fucking roadkill is still wrong, even if in his own words “it will not feel anything, nobody will know, and there is no victims.” I find it hypocritical to defend lolicon while believing that.

 

[Olive Branches]

My apologies, I got confused as he had a history of defending loli himself.

The thing is that he’s saying that fucking roadkill is still wrong, even if in his own words “it will not feel anything, nobody will know, and there is no victims.” I find it hypocritical to defend lolicon while believing that.

Rock Solid should sincerely consider turning himself into roadkill. This is the same thing that Vaush does. "Hypothetically...." followed by some obvious pedo shit. Eventually all of it leads to "Well can your morality system prove that child molestation is bad? No? Then you're the real child molester, you anti!" It's just bullshit games that midwit freaks play in order to feel better than others or to push an agenda. He isn't defending loli or any other freak shit here, but he's laying the groundwork.

Whenever someone is obsessed with systems of morality, they will try to force you to operate within the boundaries they draw. You are forced to justify your beliefs under their system. Deceptive debatebro tactics. If you break it down far enough, put everything under a certain set of rules, and toss around enough "what if" statements, you can justify or condemn any action.

 

[Hood-Blooded Gangster]

(Archive)

This is why you should use the transcendental argument and not some basic-bitch presupposition niggerbabble; basic presupposition arguments usually just lead to saying that your opponent CAN justify anything than proving that they CAN’T and should accept yours. Anyways, Total Lolifag Death.

 

[MIU]

even if in his own words “it will not feel anything, nobody will know, and there is no victims.” I find it hypocritical to defend lolicon while believing that.

Rock Solid should sincerely consider turning himself into roadkill. This is the same thing that Vaush does. "Hypothetically...." followed by some obvious pedo shit. Eventually all of it leads to "Well can your morality system prove that child molestation is bad? No? Then you're the real child molester, you anti!" It's just bullshit games that midwit freaks play in order to feel better than others or to push an agenda. He isn't defending loli or any other freak shit here, but he's laying the groundwork.

That's not what he was saying. His post is trying to say that he thinks these arguments are not legitimate and he thinks fucking roadkill is bad under any possible circumstance. His point is that a materialist would not have a clear moral justification for why it is bad because they do not believe in a higher authority, judgement or meaning, which he does, and because he does, he is able to make the absolute moral statement of it being bad without contradicting his worldview. He's not trying to accuse people of thinking that having sex with roadkill is good nor does he believe the justification of “it will not feel anything, nobody will know, and there is no victims.” He is using it as a point to illustrate the hypocrisy of a person who believes in no higher authority or meaning but still believes in absolute morality.

And cmon, don't say Rock Solid should be roadkill. Keep in mind he's a victim of lolifags, not a lolifag himself. And to my knowledge he has never actually defended or promoted lolicon at any point. Let's keep in mind his name was only in the thread because his sister got assaulted by a paki who got away with it and a lolitroon made fun of this event

 

[Olive Branches]

And cmon, don't say Rock Solid should be roadkill. Keep in mind he's a victim of lolifags, not a lolifag himself. And to my knowledge he has never actually defended or promoted lolicon at any point. Let's keep in mind his name was only in the thread because his sister got assaulted by a paki who got away with it and a lolitroon made fun of this event

No. Rock Solid is a lolicon defender and a lolicon himself. I have no qualms about saying things like that about him. He is a Pippa fan, and every single Pippa fan I've seen is a lolicon (pedophile). He has a history of using the "it's a body type" line and he opposed the Texas anti-pedo bill because it was "too vague" (same bullshit Chibi said). He has also run defense for lolicons beyond just that.

Also I don't believe the story about his sister. Considering how much Rock Solid seems to care about mentioning Buddhism as a major religion, when it's not at all major in the West, I am making an educated guess to say that Rock Solid is a dirty fucking jeet. Jeets love to blame Pakistanis for everything, while refusing to acknowledge that they're just as bad as the Pakis.

Spoiler: Spoilered to save space

That's not what he was saying. His post is trying to say that he thinks these arguments are not legitimate and he thinks fucking roadkill is bad under any possible circumstance. His point is that a materialist would not have a clear moral justification for why it is bad because they do not believe in a higher authority, judgement or meaning, which he does, and because he does, he is able to make the absolute moral statement of it being bad without contradicting his worldview. He's not trying to accuse people of thinking that having sex with roadkill is good nor does he believe the justification of “it will not feel anything, nobody will know, and there is no victims.” He is using it as a point to illustrate the hypocrisy of a person who believes in no higher authority or meaning but still believes in absolute morality.

Nowhere in there did I say that Rock Solid was justifying fucking roadkill. I read his post, I understand what he's saying, and I understand the intentions behind it. What Rock Solid is doing is a debatebro tactic that is used to lead into justifying freak shit. Here is how it works:

1. Invalidate the opposition by stating that their whole moral system is garbage, and your "objective morality" is the only true one.
2. Mispresent the opposition by bringing up an absurd example that no normal person considers. Usually it's something involving child rape or murder, but in the case of Rock Solid it's necro-beastiality. When the opposition obviously states that the example you brought up is morally wrong, tell them that they can't justify it because their moral system is invalid (not objective). "Well you can't prove child rape is bad because your moral system isn't objective" or something along those lines.
3. BINGO! You now have a license to justify and condemn whatever you please, all while hiding behind the claim that you're correct because your moral system is objective. Usually they justify murder, child murder, pedophilia, beastiality, etc.

A lot of no-name debatebros will do this. Muslims are doing this a lot, but in retard terms of "But it's in the Quran/Muhammad (Piss Be Upon Him) did it, that means it's morally good". A lot of freaks who pretend to be Orthodox Christian do this tactic too. Not saying all Orthodox guys, I'm specifically talking about freaks in the communities. Pedos and other similar types love to use manipulative tactics like the one above.

 

[TNF]

I am making an educated guess to say that Rock Solid is a dirty fucking jeet.

Rock Solid claims to be a polish person living in Norway.