[Tai_Chung]

What is considered a "child" in this article? Is it teenagers or are they talking about pre-teens?

[RLK]

What is considered a "child" in this article? Is it teenagers or are they talking about pre-teens?

-------------------------

At some point is there really that much difference? Hands off the kids.

[Wright is right!]

"What is considered a "child" in this article? Is it teenagers or are they talking about pre-teens?"

The so-called "journalistic community" has a tough time differentiating pedophilia (attraction to pre-pubescent kids) from the attraction to sexually-developed but legislatively-underaged adolescents. To lump them all together is erroneous.

There was a thread here at FR back a few weeks in which someone posted the correct term for people who are sexually attracted to the sexually ripe but legally underaged - a type of behaviour far, far removed from pedophilia. Anyone have a link or remember the proper terminology?

The Roman Catholic Church, of late, has had ITS problems with "pederasty," sex between an adult male and an underaged male. Once again, wholly different from pedophilia OR hetero-but-underaged sex. No one seems to be able to get the term right.

Michael

[GussiedUp]

What is considered a "child" in this article? Is it teenagers or are they talking about pre-teens?

Well the slogan of NAMBLA is "After 8 is too late" (That would be 8 years old) This country, indeed world, is going to hell in a handcart.