Not really . . . (and ping: Kevin)

He's saying that, among the population of MAAs (which is probably somewhere around 4-5% of the population at large, or at least identifiable MAAs (identifies primarily through arrest, of course), 6.75 out of 1000 of them have had sexual contact with children. That translates to .675% of the known population of MAAs--which is much smaller than the hetero population, obviously--that have engaged in sexual contact with children, as opposed to the .15% of the hetero population, consisting of about 90% of men (gays would approximate another 4-5%) that have engaged in sexual contact with kids.

I'm not a mathematician by any means, but I believe if you work the numbers out, you'll arrive at basically the same conclusion: about 95% of those arrested for sexual contact with kids are heteros, and their crimes are usually of the incestuous variety.

Overall, amongst ourselves, MAAs appear to have a slightly higher rate of "offending," but is that because MAAs tend to only be identified after they've been arrested, or is that true in general? I think it's the former, because few "non-offending" MAAs have ever been identified. Kevin has to go by the numbers available to him, though, but if I were him, I would include something to the effect of what I just said--that, in fact, though the numbers show that MAAs tend to have sexual contact with kids at rates slightly higher than heteros, that in fact, if we were all identified, there would be little or no difference at all, or perhaps even LOWER numbers of offense among MAAs.