GirlChat and Virtuous Pedophiles are both places for pedophiles, who are defined by our sexual interest in children. Naturally a child's sexual interest is going to come up often in discussions. When you post here you post far more about kids' sexuality than any other aspect of their liberation.

Because that is most on-topic here. Yet I still far from limit my discussions to that. And there are plenty of places where youth liberationists discuss the whole ball of wax. You, however, routinely dismiss any concerns raised about demonstrable harm on kids due to the policies and practices of this society. You instead near-obsessively focus on a bunch of assumptions related to intergeneralizationl sexual contact.

When I put on my "Ethan" hat as a pedophile, naturally I'm going to talk more about that than anything else, because the issue of expressing our sexuality with children is of enormous interest to society and to us.

Yet this is an all-purpose board dedicated to GL, not just to the political aspects of it, nor just to the aspects related to sexuality. Many of us discuss the contributions to popular culture by girls, the importance of girl characters in fiction, the accomplishments of girls both historically & in contemporary society, the inherent coolness of girls, etc. Moreover, we also often provide broad-based support for each other that is not directly connected to this issue. That doesn't usually come from you, however.

I am fully aware of (for instance) the Rind et al finding that physical and emotional abuse and neglect are more harmful to kids than sexual abuse. The others happen most often in the nuclear family and sexual abuse more often (comparatively) will involve someone outside.

The latter statement is most certainly not the case, and has even been acknowledged honestly by LEAs.

I don't share much of your analysis of what's wrong with children's lives and what can be done to improve them, but I'm not convinced I care any less about them than you do.

I am convinced of that because it's never an issue for you worth addressing here, yet it's frequently mentioned by us. And you also openly support the many institutions where the greatest degree of abuse of all kings happen to kids. And oppose anyone who opposes the natural of those institutions as the "best" one possible.

I've never said that. Here I said When we're making a cost-benefit trade-off, with huge benefits to prohibition and this is the worst cost we can come up with for a few girls...

You didn't say it in so many words. You rarely do. But prohibition invariably leads to draconian regulations. Ask anyone ever affected by the War on Drugs and the War on Prostitution. Two of the things that mainstream thinkers for many decades insisted could never possibly change, but are now beginning to in fairly rapid measure.

I am speaking of a huge benefit to girls in avoiding unwanted sexual advances, molestation and rape.

Which laws on the books would continue to combat in the absence of age of consent laws, since AOC laws are about prohibiting consensual liaisons, not unwanted advances. The type of unwanted advances that most easily and readily occur within the insular and heavily power-imbalanced nuclear family home which you support.

It was being willing to support measures if they only may HURT (I would argue "inconvenience" is a better word) a few girls.

Except they would hurt and inconvenience more than just a few, since thanks to recent research, including by Dr. Michael Seto, mesophilia is now an officially recognized attraction base that is known to start very early in a youth's life (Blanchard also acknowledged it, to his credit, though he didn't give it a name). We have no idea how many youths may be mesophiles, but it may very well be a substantial minority, certainly enough to give it an official designation and to increase study on it. You certainly see them making their presence known among youth liberationist and anarchist circles. And such laws inconvenience girls in general since it stifles their freedom of choice, including their ability to access objective scientific information that would enable them to make competent choices that were best for them as an individual, as opposed to having a single "choice" imposed on all of them in a standardized fashion.