>>2551
I'll drop the biology because I can't tell if you're bullshitting me or not.

>I'm defending non coersive sexual activity
How would you expect a sexual act on child be perpetrated if not as abuse?
It's not children walking around with booze and cigarettes trying to entice pedophiles to follow them.

You say children can experience "sexual" pleasure. I'll believe you on that.
Feel free to dismiss what I'm about to say but I remember I experienced some kind of "pleasure" (although vastly different from what I feel when rubbing one off nowadays) from where my dong was when I played with dinosaur figurines and the ones that got "eaten" I hid between my legs, years before I masturbated for the first time. I didn't understand what sex was. I didn't think about it in any kind of sexual manner. I had no idea why it happened, I didn't even analyze it until much later, because only function of dong was peeing.

You can't expect to gain consent to anything from someone that doesn't fucking understand the concept of what he/she is about to consent to for fuck's sake.

And there's a world of difference between being able to teach someone about something and someone actually comprehending the information. Did you know that children cannot comprehend the idea of death up to age of 5? Yea they can say grandpa has "died". They'll know he's no longer around but they cannot understand what occurred and what it entails the way adults do (that happens around the age of 10 in most cases).

>These abused children cannot be used as a evidence for serious research
Then you can basically reject all the data that psychopathology acquired to this day on the subject. I'm afraid you won't be able to get any data in the future either because consensual sexual act on a pre-puberty child cannot exist.