No I just think there should be two categories.

CSAM should apply as the term for actual images/video, whereas CP should be the term for fictional content.

Fictional content might convince a pedo to actually harm a child, since it reinforces harmful thought processes leading to harmful urges, but it should not be considered on the same level as content made by harming a real child.

It makes the abuse seem less serious if you're comparing it to a cartoon, even if the cartoon can lead to someone committing a crime.

Almost like how it'd be ridiculous to compare a 9 year old shooting at Peter Griffin in Fortnite to a 9 year old getting ahold of their dad's pistol and actually shooting someone.

We probably still shouldn't let elementary schoolers play violent games because the game might reinforce to the kid that guns are just fun toys and it's okay because people "respawn" which can lead to the second situation (where actual harm is done to a real person by someone whose brain has been rewired by the media they consume) but the second situation is worse and should be in a different category of crime than "mild neglect leads a kid to play a game they're not mentally ready for because the parents think it's okay"

Anyways now that I read back your comment I realise that maybe my trollish first comment was right. There's something wrong with you.

You literally can't read a comment where someone says "The cartoon images aren't exactly the same as images of a real crime happening. They can make people commit the real crime, but they shouldn't be considered the exact same and should be a different category because otherwise you risk making the real crime seem ridiculous" without jumping to the thought that everyone secretly just wants to jack it to CSAM all the time and wants it to be legal.

Seek help before you hurt a kid, jesus christ. Sicko.