My opinion is pretty close to the legal requirements. For me, it is all about intent: are you doing the act for the benefit of the child, or for teh benefit of your own sexuality.


For example, you are looking after a 3 year old girl who has been rolling in mud, and needs to be cleaned up for bed. Your age of attraction happens to include 3 year olds. As a 3 year old she needs help bathing, so you are touching her body to clean her. If you do not do so, cleanliness and hygiene are compromised. Thus, you touch her to the extent necessary to clean her; your physical actions are exactly the same as they would be if her parents or a policeman were watching over your shoulder. This is not molestation, this is taking care of a child's needs.

Where my ideas differ from some laws is that I would say it is unimportant whether or not I am aroused by my actions in this case. I'm performing necessary care for the girl, and whether I'm aroused beyond belief or bored out of my mind is immaterial; the only important issue is my actions, not my thoughts. In some places (and in the minds of most parents) my being aroused would make this molestation, even if my actions were identical to what the parent would have done.


In a different scenario, a person might decide to give a 3 year old a bath with the thought "I can touch her body and genitals without getting arrested!" If the motivation for giving the bath is an opportunity to touch rather than clean the child's body, that seems wrong. The touching is being done for the arousal of the adult, not for the benefit of the child. Likewise, if a person is giving a dirty 3 year old a bath but decides to spend 15 minutes cleaning her genitals, that's clearly molestation because it wouldn't normally take that long.

So for me it ultimately comes down to the question of whether the action is done for the benefit of the adult or for the benefit of the child. When it benefits the adult and not the child, it is molestation.


-----------
Paedestrian