'and' or 'or'?

"They both refer to adults who have a sexual and emotional PREFERENCE for adolescents"

Considering how we perceive things differently regarding if attractions are more predominantly sexual or emotional/romantic, are there no terms of distinction in regards to when they are more heavily weighted? Like is it an or, you call it that in terms of a mostly sexual or a mostly emotional attraction?

I've sort of been thinking, with the way a lotta guys say their attractions are more romanticy/emotiony, is it really right to call their attractions sexual or pedophilic? It's kind of like, they're being honest in saying that sexuality is indivisible from romantic love (is it really divisible for anyone?) but that isn't really enough to classify an attraction as sexual to me.

It's like... there is a sexual attraction... but the overally attraction isn't best described as sexual...

I don't think enough people are making that kind of distinction here. I think many (perhaps those who are predominantly sexually attracted, like probably most abusers who disregard emotions/persons are, and of course many negative demonizing 'antis') have reason to not want such a distinction made.

In that way, even if someone's sexuality is primarily geared in a certain direction (like to preferring neotenic characeristics as pedophilia is called) I'm not sure if it would be correct to describe someone as a pedophilia if their method of preferring people is not primarily on a sexual basis.

After all, a LOT of people have a preferential EMOTIONAL attraction to prepubescents (like nuns... well nice nuns anyway, like the ones who don't hit you with rulers and run an orphanage and bake you bread) and are characterized by that. Even if the sexuality they had was more geared towards younger people, it really doesn't characterize them as an individual considering they take a path of celibacy and general asexuality.

Like, if a nun were a 'boylover' who ran an orphanage (I watched December Boys last night, lol, nuns on the brain) and she happened to think her charges were hotter than her priest, I wouldn't call her a pedophile or anything. After all, she is predominantly not a sexual person, so it's wrong to characterize her by sexual characteristics.

If you think about it, it is only characterized as a disorder in the case where it becomes disruptive to your life and stuff. People who lead celibate/asexual lifestyles or who are generally not very sexual people, or who do not value or care about sex or sexuality very much, these kinds of people really just aren't going to be affected much (at least personally) by any weird sexual abnormalities they've got.