It addresses the 'philosophy' of paedophilia rather than the 'practice'

I take it your overall goal is to better the lot of pedophiles. Any such list is going to be read by people where practice is very much in their minds, not just theory. That's why I think it's worth considering.

Anyway, we don't have to remind people of the worst that can be said of paedophilia because that's all the general public get to hear about : I'm interested in redressing the balance towards my experience of the truth.

One reaction to a distorted view on one side of an issue is to give a distorted view on the other. Another is to give an accurate view. It's my contention that especially for a group with very little support, accuracy would be better than exaggerations in the name of advocacy.

if something can be shown to be correct and ethical in an ideal case then that establishes that a prima facie case can be made for it philosophically and even in practice.

I have never argued that occasional good results don't happen from adult-child sex. My objections are at the level of social policy. For a parallel, consider a judge. A case comes before him to which his son is a party. There is no inherent reason he can't give a fair verdict in the case, but it is completely prohibited for him to hear it and he must recuse himself. He does not feel his integrity is insulted, but accepts it as part of the system.

Well, in my experience the huge majority of people are pretty deep-down decent, whether heterosexual, homosexual, paedophile or whatever. I recognise that there's a range in each group from psycho to saint – but when people talk about the average heterosexual relationship, the average homosexual relationship they don't have to bring in the rapists and the nut-jobs just to make sure they're covering the range of possible behaviours.

If you think about how men relate to women, there is a significant class of men who would never rape a woman but will lie or distort their position to get sex. Sex is a powerful motivator for everyone, and it's naive to think that there aren't a lot of pedophiles who wouldn't do that too. And whereas adult women often have the savvy to detect such men, children very often will not, so it is of greater practical significance.

who on earth has access to a representative sample?

No one, but I think it's only responsible to keep the bias of a sample firmly in mind.

one of the things that is striking about ["The Trauma Myth"] is that some of her conclusions really don't follow very convincingly from her premises – it reads as if there was pressure on her to tone her conculsions down to pre-empt a backlash of moral outrage,

I have good evidence via back channels that this is not correct and that she believes what the book says.