But he isn't enabling any of that. You're spinning a narrative that is fundamentally untrue.
> I don't think it is wrong to distribute "child porn" images, even when they [depict] children rather than adolescents. However, making them is wrong if it involves real sex with a child. For the sake of opposing sexual abuse of real children, I suggest that you boycott the images that involve real children. Imaginary children can't be hurt by drawing them.
In other words: pornography involving 14, 15, 16 year olds is all good according to Stallman. He is enabling all of the above by changing the definition of what child pornography is, responding to someone who emailed him asking for advice, and then posting about it publicly.
This distinction is also made by the law in the USA, so this quote merely reflects USA law.
You can disagree with this quote and even find it gross, but to claim this quote aims to normalize CSAM is a blatant lie.