Sexual freedom as an important part, but not exclusive part, of the liberation of both minor attracted people and minors themselves. Of course, the specific freedom of minors to have consensual sexual relations and relationships with adults means more to us than it does to them in a general sense. By definition, we are attracted to minors. By definition, they are simply minors and may or may not be attracted to any particular demographic or be attracted to anything at all. I understand that not every girl is like Fayla, i.e. primarily attracted to older adult men. I can accept that most adolescent girls might prefer to exercise their new found sexual freedom with boys and men much closer to their age than I am. I'm not hung up on the percentages, I'm hung up on the opportunity.

This post is aimed at those who think adult-child sexual activity is fundamentally OK.

I don't necessarily think adult-child sexual activity is fundamentally OK. I don't necessarily think it's fundamentally not OK like you proclaim. I take it on a case-by-case basis, although I understand the need in an organized society to "draw the line" somewhere. That's the complicated part. At the very least, I think we should recognize that what we're doing today isn't working and that we need effective change. I think what matters most is consent and age appropriateness. I don't think it's right how society sets a high arbitrary age and then deems that anything below that is rape and inappropriate. There's a difference between 5 and 15. There's a difference between her saying "yes" vs her saying "no", and there's a difference between penetrative sex acts and non penetrative sex acts, which isn't currently being accounted for. I think the vast majority of what those of us here would practice in a free society would be harmless or mildly harmful at most (it's virtually impossible to make it through life without suffering harm), and it's nowhere near the nightmare scenario that antis and much of society make it out to be.