Since you misunderstood my comment I'll state its core observation more clearly: the original article is a "straw-man" piece, fabricating a position to argue against that doesn't exist. You're correct that I didn't say that straightforwardly, as I probably should have. You're not correct in drawing any conclusions about my concerns or values around the sexual manipulation of minors or any type of age-based inappropriateness. My comment addresses the original article, not the "issue."