I noticed this too: I agree wholeheartedly with the first, say, 10 points. (I can't remember exactly), but at some point, Lensman starts talking about things I don't identify with quite so much.
2. Pedophiles who do not want to act on their attractions unless/until laws and societal attitudes change.
As outlined in various other posts, I belong to this group. However, I think there's an important distinction to made between "unless" and "until", within this group, (and it's a distinction I feel you often fail to make), because...
But you don't address how common that combination is or what happens if ideal conditions are not met or whether social policy should be based on the best case or the average or worst cases.
...As I've stated quite clearly, I don't believe social policy should change all that much. Attitudes, yes, because I'm a pretty good person who doesn't deserve 100% of the vicious hatred aimed at him for a harmless and mostly private aspect of his character. But not policy. I'm pro-AoC.
Adult-child sex, even if consensual, is a big "no-no" in today's society - we agree. Social attitudes towards pedosexuality need to be toned down - we agree. Social policy against adult-child sex needs to remain intact moving forward - we agree.
There are different nuances to our views, to be sure, but despite different reasonings, we largely reach the same conclusions.
I just don't understand how you can find any inherent harm in the act itself. I understand that social context is always a factor in the real world, but if that social context were to change to be accepting of adult-child relationships, and I'm not saying I think it's likely scenario, but if it were, then where exacty is the harm coming from?
I guess the crux here is that I just can't view my feelings, my desires, whatever, as unnatural, or inherently bad or wrong. I feel that to view my feelings in such a way, yet denounce those same views in the public, the med, would be extremely hypocritical of me.
Making adult-child relationships work would require a pretty drastic reworking of the society we live in, no question. Society has progressed in a way that makes such relationships difficult at best, seriously damaging at worst. We agree that moving forward, our main goals as a community should not lie in reworking society to make those relationships okay.
I know you think I over-emphasize iatrogenic harm versus other possible sources of harm. Other than that, could you explain exactly where you disagree with me? What is the little, but "vital little bit"?