Her study is meaningless. She cherry-picked posts, and then she based her percentages on the number of posts she picked, as if that somehow translates to overall percentages.

Anyway, none of the quotes were from me either, which is understandable, since I theoretically agree with a good deal of her position, but like all Antis, she clearly sees this issue in simplistic black & white terms. There is no room for deviation from the Anti's 'perfectly innocent child' paradigm in her world.

Moreover, there is no way to know that she didn't register at GC herself (or have friends do so) and make posts that say exactly what she wanted them to say. Several of the posts she quoted seem very much 'by the book' pedo cliches.

Nevertheless, this is a good example that people here need to be careful about what they say. It should always be assumed that one or more Antis are closely monitoring this board.