...but I didn't want to start a new topic for an old, rehashed beef. Lately I've been thinking about a LG I knew long ago, possibly my most regretted impossible love interest in all my life. Everything was there between us to make a loving relationship a realty, "if only." We all know the tune, but she was special among all the special girls I've had the good fortune to encounter over the course of my life.
She brings me to a claim often made by those who not only hate child lovers, but deem themselves experts on defining their behaviors and even the thought processes which drive them. They claim that we often actively try to "single out" particular kids who are troubled or don't fit in with the other kids. Now I'm sure that just like for any "normal" group of adults, there are occasional sociopaths who only think of their own desires and calculate which kids are easiest to get what they want from them. On the other hand, doesn't it fall to simple reasoning that if an adult with an attraction to children, who also felt an emotional component for them and is pained by their suffering, would in some cases naturally be drawn to such a child? In return, wouldn't the child who has trouble making friends her own age often see it as a life saver that someone older with more wisdom and experience in life would come to her aid, and even tell her that she is actually very amazing/intelligent/beautiful etc.?
In simple reasonable terms, why wouldn't these two personalities often discover one another and connect and find mutual benefit and attraction to one another?
It's not exactly related to your post, but it's just one of those long-demonizing fallacies about us which bugs me, not simply because it is hateful, but so easily reasoned to be the general way of interpersonal relations, and not some cold, calculated methodical ruse for animalistic urges.
Those definitions of convenience which the professional world know to be largely untrue for most otherwise well-adjusted child lovers continue to bug me.