It presumes that this "regret" issue you tout so strongly will not occur to the point that it's absolutely devastating to any girl (or boy) who may experience it, certainly not to the point where it obstructs their ability to function later in life.

I do agree that it is rarely absolutely devastating and obstructs their ability to function in life. That is one thing that the Rind meta-analyses demonstrated pretty clearly. But that is a much higher bar than saying it is harmful enough that it is wrong.

No, it presumes these things only: Children and young adolescents will have freedom of choice. That even if only a few had that desire, their rights and choices would be respected just as all minority choices and preferences are, and that a tyranny of the majority would be seen as every bit as undesirable as a tyranny of the few.

This pertains to the argument you personally (and Dante) put forth. But I maintain it is not what holds pro-choice communities together. The idea that it is very rare is not emotionally palatable.

the large number of sample subjects that reported positive liaisons with adults while in legal childhood when consent was involved in various studies

This is worth noting. "Legal childhood" includes those in (or through with) puberty. The vast majority of sexual experiences (positive and negative) of "legal children" are concentrated among them, while prepubescent experiences are rare. I fully understand that pubescents often have strong sex drives, and they may have drives focused on adults. (And whether it's good policy to allow the adults to engage in such relationships is a different question).

This discussion started with prepubescents, and that's where I'd like to keep it.

As for the rest, it's largely the same old ground, and we'll make about as much progress as a radical atheist and an evangelical Christian.