Reading about something is not "literally saying you're okay" with whatever behavior is depicted in the fiction. (That's not really what the original poster was saying, I know, which is why I'm not using an auto-quote.)
When I made that statement, I wasn’t talking about the people saying they like this sort of lolicon stuff. I was referring to the people making comments like “if you don’t like this, you’re against yuri”, regarding the German (and likely US) decision to not publish this piece in the localized anthology. The decision to not openly publish even fictionalized loli is a pretty obvious one. Especially in countries where even fictional depictions of pedophilia are counted the same as real life pedophilia. Idiots going around insisting that loli should be as wildly accepted in the mainstream as yuri and that finding loli - and especially explicit loli like this - distasteful means you’re also against yuri are the ones that give the assholes lumping real life pedos in with LGBT+ ammo.
There are certain genres that naturally have more critics than others. Stuff involving children involved in sexual relationships is always going to be one of them. There’s just no getting around that.
I, personally, missed the tag because I wasn’t paying sufficient attention. Usually, I just skip anything tagged lolicon. That’s on me. Like I said, I’m not saying this should be taken down, just that I’m mentally making a note to give Itou Hachi a hard pass going forward. People can like whatever they want and if reading/writing/drawing/etc stuff like this quenches the urge to go out and do something to an actual child, then I’m all for it. I’m simply very opposed to people insisting you have to accept and like stuff like this in order to like yuri. Refusing to publish it and not wanting to read it doesn’t make you anti-yuri.