Please prove your conjectures!

Sorry, I tend to assume those participating here have a greater knowledge of history, science and logic than you seem to have, and that they are aware of expressions.

PVF is a delightful acronym from BC, standing for Plain Vanilla Fag.

>Culture, which consists of macro factors including institutions, concepts, and artifacts that bind people together in a given society, most certainly cannot be varied in a laboratory setting.

Under such assumptions, any statement based on culture become faith-based.
No amount of suffering, nor any amount of failed experiments could then persudade adherents of their error.

I don't recall you ever adressing the issue of pedophiles existing in a hostile culture in any depth. You seem to regard pedophilia as a mere fad, giving us neither history nor future, while also rendering communication between us virtually meaningless.

>Just because these individuals and groups self-identify as "progressive" does not mean their actions actually fulfill a progressive function.

Your conjectures does not prove the existence of such a function, much less its properties. I'd take a conservative GL, like Martial, over an apologist for any form of progressive anti-pedophilia any day of the week.

>The existence of a low US AoC (average 10 to 12, lowest 7) is also strong evidence against your claim of "oppressive, traditionalist, sex-negative norms."

Why? Compare society (1) permitting man/girl relationships with society (1*) denying their every possibly and promoting anti-pedophilia, misandry, ageism etc.

Is it necessarily the case that GLs and girls are happier in (1*)?
I think not.

Since your ethics seems extremely selective in which suffering you actually consider, whose suffering would necessarily increase by man/girl relationships in (1)? Sadistic haters of men and girls? Would-be genocidial psychologists?