Eh, that may be true the vast majority of the time, but I don't know if that's the best argument. Like, could someone prove that sex acts with kids are harmful in EVERY case? Or if there are rare exceptions, how could someone prove to a pedophile that they in particular are incapable of identifying those exceptions? Not to mention that overly strong narratives about how bad sex acts with children are can themselves be harmful to children. "You didn't hate every part of your sexual experience? WTF is wrong with you, you little freak?"
Personally I like to lean towards other arguments. My favorite is that sex is supposed to mean something (why else would it be so enjoyable?) and since most children are infertile, jobless losers who never graduated high school and who still live with their parents, sex acts with any of those children would be completely disgraceful.
The best part about this argument is that if the kid IS genuinely competent, you can twist a classic pro-contact argument on its head. Adults are all used up. If there are kids who would make for genuinely good parents and sexual partners, why in the world should they be with some gross, used up pedophile? If they really are that competent then they deserve someone closer to their own age.
I don't think I have seen a single post from Dissident Sound that I particularly liked or agreed with. I replied to a single one of his posts and then he immediately muted me. People like Dissident Sound are why I set my Nostr client to never display media or profiles unless I click "show". Pretty wild, huh?
