Help (i.e. expertise) needed

Heads up if you haven't noticed: our friendly libertarian ex-con has managed to provoke a... discussion around the Child sexual abuse‎‎ article. At the moment, several people have tried to do something, but I'm afraid that it is a demonstration of the "prepared crank vs laymen" effect. I have some ideas, but I'm not that well-read and it's bedtime in my time zone. :(

Sorry, I'm afraid I can't help all that much. I don't have any expertise in that, er, "area."

To me, it reads as standard "WHY DO YOU CALL IT RATIONAL WIKI" stuff, alongside the sort of shit you'd expect from NAMbLA. Basically the argument seems to run along the lines of "it's consensual so it's fine", neglecting the major aspect of informed consent. Basically, if you're taking advantage of someone under a level of maturity we deem incapable of making such an informed decision, it's abusive. It's not loaded terminology in that respect. No more so than saying "creationism is wrong" is loaded.

Interesting point you raise with reference to informed consent; I address it here. Please note that I will not be able to respond to any arguments you make on this wiki concerning this subject, other than to link off-wiki.

I have little interest in reading your pro-paedophile crap. Go remove yourself from the gene pool