This is just the sort of unfounded and uncited opinion I'd expect from someone who can't be bothered to vette his sources by discipline or parse his criteria for definition.

Nope. The DSM criteria has nothing whatsoever to do with child abuse. You refer to it all the time, but maybe you should read it.

Again, please cite your sources if you're gonna claim otherwise. I'm not interested in your opinion, only in the facts. It been months and I'm still waiting for you to cite Canadian Civil Code as to where an AOC ( or Age of Protection ) is set at "18." Surely you've had enough time to back up your statement of fact with a citation thereof?

You've been here long enough. You've seen the sources ⚠️ ↗ which show that child-abuse is overwhelmingly perpetrated by parents and by other caretakers.

If you'd bother to look-up law-enforcement definitions you'd find FBI Special Agent Kenneth Lanning's work ( see below ) where he specifically says that "Pedophilia" is not a law-enforcement term, and distinguishes between the situational offender and the preferential offender. He focusses on the preferential offender because they are the easiest to profile and predict; while fully acknowledging that by their very nature the number of situational offenders is incalculable as is the number of Peds who will never be abusers. He sees the disconnect between the two, why can't you understand why the LEAs know that its not us.

Again, if you don't have the intellectual honesty to ground your opinion in facts; then please don't treat them as if the two carry the same weight, or try to tell those who can cite facts to stop using them here.

Note; Lanning doesn't dispute the utility of a dictionary definition of "Pedophilia;" and even recognizes the wrongness of the creeping usage that "Pedophilia"="Child Abuse."

Its getting tiresome to educate you when you can't be bothered to educate yourself.

Dante