As I look at GC posts, I see a lot of people who think girls are great. And I see a lot of people who really hope society could change so they could have sex with girls. Some will go for youth rights if that helps them towards their goal.

I see a very few people like you and Dante who have a passionate commitment to youth rights generally. That's fine in principle. Of course you are a tiny drop in the bucket compared to all the other people who care deeply about the welfare of children. The correlation between those who think empowering youth to make their own decisions is the most important change and those who might like to have sex with children if they exercised that choice is rather stunning. And as I've suggested elsewhere, working for any social change with the label of "pedophile" hung around your neck is a good way to make it less likely -- except perhaps in the one area of life experience of pedophiles ourselves.

I'll assume you are sincere, but this whole idea of a grand plan to refocus societal attention just seems practically irrelevant.

The problem is that society at large doesn't evaluate major dangers from auto or swimming pool accidents, etc., in general, because they are overly concerned with the vastly overstated dangers stemming from our possible contact with kids

The idea that reduced concern for child sexuality would translate to greater concern for auto safety and swimming pool safety seems very questionable to me. Those freed up resources could go anywhere -- including simply into tax cuts.

That concern is so incredibly overstated that it's almost beyond belief, let alone an actual reason for legally prohibiting freedom of choice in the matter on both hypothetical participants.

There are all kinds of girls with all kinds of reactions. I also thought Going All the Way was a great book, and noted the chapter you cite with great interest. Viewed by most of uninformed society, you and I actually appear quite similar and nearly as heinous. I have suggested that when a sexual relationship between a young teens and an adult is discovered, the girl be allowed without pressure one way or the other to decide what she thought of the relationship, and as long as she maintains it was just fine, the man should not be prosecuted. However, if she decides it was under false pretenses, the guy is guilty -- not as a huge crime, maybe 3 months in prison? (and no sex offender registry for anyone ever.) But it's always wrong for him to allow the relationship to start. Prior parental consent is a large ameliorating factor. Just note: my views on the subject are really quite far from mainstream society's.

When we talk about the nature of girls, we are largely just citing competing anecdotes. Gregarious young teens do go from boy to boy. Among them all, many stop short of intercourse when they are young. When you say she will be devastated beyond description - also for the rest of her life that is a bar much higher than I feel needs to be met. I am against penalizing minors for their sexual activity, but when society puts limits on how adults can interact with them, I don't take that limitation on the minor's sexual expression as a very serious infringement. The people who may feel it as a serious infringement are pedophiles, not girls.

The fact is that society is full of women who feel they have been severely damaged by sexual experiences with adults when they were young. Is some of it exaggerated and stirred up by societal attitudes? Undoubtedly. But there's a lot left over. The idea that it is all just society's attitudes amounts to a humongous conspiracy theory. These women very often recognize that they consented at the time. Even if they are comparatively rare, these serious negative outcomes are enough to make the idea of men starting sexual relationships with young girls always wrong.