With detailed replies from both parties, such discussions can easily balloon out of control. So I'll be quite selective in what I respond to. But I do disagree with just about every point you have made.
I suggest that the benefit of protecting underage girls from rape when evidence is weak is more important than deterring desired relationships.
But you are suggesting that increased importance regardless of AOC efficacy so that if many more desirable interactions are deterred compared to the degree to which underage girls are protected from rape, you would still assert that increased importance. That's literally ir-ratio-nal because it ignores the ratio of bad/good prevented.
I was incorporating my estimate of the frequency of events along with the harm or benefit from any individual event in making that statement. What's more important is overall benefit/harm, which in this case includes protecting from bad relationships that are not rape (ignoring "statutory rape"), and naturally in incorporating that harm my estimate would be stronger against legalization.
That's the level of detail that I'm going to mostly ignore in what follows.
As for the shiny dime, I'm not suggesting it would be a major source of trauma, but taken by itself, the child would likely feel wronged in part because the adult took advantage of the situation to gain a personal advantage of a kind that the child did not understand. People commonly feel that regarding adult-child sexual things, especially regarding younger prepubescents.
It doesn't make sense for the teleios to figure [AoC] out without the ones it concerns because they don't see how it benefits them.
If you are referring to the children, I don't believe pedophiles have one whit more concern for children than parents and other adults as a class, and perhaps warped judgment due to personal interest.
If you're referring to the benefit to the pedophiles of allowing adult-child sex, well, I don't see it as a significant factor at all. If society wanted to allow adult-child sex as a remedy to dire poverty in the child's family, it surely could do so, but there's surely no move in that direction, I share a "yuck" reaction at that idea, but mostly I'd leave it to the teleios.