Consent to 'play doctor?'

"There are arguments on this subject that it is easy to dismiss as being puritanical. The best ones lie within a reasonably sex-positive framework. For instance, in this framework there's nothing wrong with children masturbating or playing doctor with each other."

The only thing odder than arguing that harm is magically created by dissimilarity in age is arguing that harm is magically nullified by similarity in age.

How does peer-age sexual expression get different rules applied? And why shouldn't the harmless and harmful be distinguished in cases of adult/child sex as they are in child/child sex; whether the "children" are 16 or 6?

Of course all of this is rather straw-mannish insofar as society doesn't believe that children playing doctor is OK or a matter of consent. It is always and ever about parental ownership. And any consent to "playing doctor" by a child is nullified by any parent stepping forward to claim that their property was "devalued."

Please to show me a case where a judge dismissed a claim on the grounds that the children's mutual consent nullified the parent's preference.

* And cites Goethe for consistency in applying ownership for adult children too. *

Dante