Re: Are we making progress ?

I think "paedophile" took over from the phrase "child molester" because the antis wanted it to be firmly established in everyones' heads that ANY sexual contact with a child (or so called) was to be reviled. The phrase "child molester" in itself denotes a person aggravating a child by coercion (as opposed to MUTUAL CONSENT), and also it does not necessarily imply that it is even SEXUAL. It just means 'molesting' which of course can be ANYTHING forcibly imposed on a child. But "paedophile" was a way of a more direct slander of a sexual proclivity in itself, and that whether there is actual 'molestation' involved is largely irrelevant. Perhaps the antis eventually felt a sense that "child molester" was not a particularly effective slander towards those whom simply indulged in mutually consenting relations. Maybe they thought some people only hated those who actually violated a child sexually but if there was no violation then they simply are not a 'child molester' at all, rendering such people exempt from being hated. So they re-targeted their hate goggles towards 'paedophiles' as that description is an all embracing term aimed towards molesters and non-molesters alike. I have had conversations with antis and it's quite surprising how many of them actually consider any coercive sexual attack as being of fairly peripheral importance. They think that an actual sexual encounter in itself constitutes 99.9 % of the 'harm'. Whether a child was actually raped and half strangled to death is of relatively small imporance in their eyes. Amazing mentality really.