We can't criticize material that is objectively harmful to women and children (pornography, romanticization of incest, pedophilia, rape, etc.) because "censorship is bad."
Ignoring the fact that criticism =/= censorship (otherwise their criticisms of us criticizing them would be censorship--hypocrites!), let's think for a second. Why is censorship a bad thing?
Historically, governments have used censorship to stop ideas from spreading around their civilians. We see this historically with the banning of books promoting "communist" ideals, books that have criticized the government, or books that speak out against injustices towards marginalized groups.
Thus, why do governments censor fiction? Because fiction has the power to change minds. Fiction has the power to spur people to action. Governments acknowledge this; and that's why books are banned. If fiction did not have the power to be seriously disruptive to what the government wants their civilians to believe and do, there would be no point in banning them.
So, acknowledging and worrying about censorship whatsoever forces one to accept that fiction does affect reality. Fiction does change minds and behavior. Fiction does normalize and justify ideas becoming reality.
And if this is the case, perhaps there are some things that should be censored. Even the bastion of free speech, the US, does not consider every type of "speech" protected, for this exact reason. Hate speech, on paper, is banned and not protected. CSAM, on paper, is banned and not protected. How effective/proactive their government is at actually enforcing this is up to debate, but these topics are banned specifically because it is acknowledged that their existence does cause harm--not only towards actual victims, but towards cultural ideas and norms.