[contumace]

We wouldn't know what "virtual child porn" could/would be based on (real children depicted in virtual fantasies, pictures of real child abuse etc.). I know virtual child porn is often a reference to unrealistically drawn lolicon material. But what causes much more controversy is realistic material (3D, photorealistic).

[Akemi_Mokoto]

The realistic, 3D stuff is a problem. A BIG problem. Not only because it could likely mean a real child was used in the creation but also because anybody who looks at THAT kind of shit is without a doubt, a pedophile.

[tyciol]

I don't agree with the assertion. Looking at something does not automatically determine that the observer holds some kind of specific psychological condition.

Or are you saying that anyone who dares to click the screwdriver link is a sadist who gets off on people being blinded by metal implements?

People can simply look at things out of curiosity, to see what it is, see how they react to it, to fathom why whoever made it made it. Then to wonder how others react to it, and why they might seek it.

Having trounced your latter argument, let's get to the first: the problem with 'omg a real child might've been inspired this!' is that could apply to ANYTHING. As in, I can't read a novel where someone gets murdered, because maybe it's based on a real murder.

People can just as easily chibi-style 2D art of a rape as they can make a 3D simultation of it. I believe there are actually certain doujin manga whose plot revolve around that concept. Heck you could make a lego depiction of rape, better outlaw looking at controversial lego sculptures too.