The best arguments against AMSC that you still disagree with

[John_Doe]

For me, I think one might be that children are asexual (I'm not saying this is true but if it were this might be among the least problematic arguments) so there's no possible advantage for them (maybe it could be play but no direct sexual advantage/pleasure) to compensate for risks and although they are still, for whatever reasons, emotionally neutral about it at that age they will become deeply disgusted by it later on in life when they become sexual (or maybe they'll just develop a stronger capacity for disgust. Small children seem, to me, to have a weak disgust response and also little to no body shame or self-consciousness, I could be wrong). The 'informed consent' argument almost makes sense if they don't understand the feelings they will come to have about the act or even those of their partner (I say 'almost' but, to be clear, I don't think it does. Even if regret for this reason is something to consider, it's not the same as someone intentionally deceiving you about a product that you would otherwise not buy when you are capable of making an informed choice about purchasing it. Fraud requires that a person is capable of making an informed choice but their ability to do so has been deterred).

It must ultimately come down to disgust or emotional distress for me. Even with the impressionability/intimidating adult social coercion angle (which doesn't consider personality differences within an age group, adults can exert peer pressure on other adults who might be more approval-seeking or conflict-avoidant and some children are very rebellious, defiant or strong-willed) you can only single out sex if there's a reason to think that it will be especially distressing. I hope everyone would oppose an adult coercing or intimidating a child into playing video games with them but you don't need to stigmatize or discourage adults playing video games with children per se in order to do so, the problem would be with the coercion and not the thing the child is coerced into doing itself.

It also makes sense, on paper, to assume that children who aren't yet capable of ovulation or sperm production are asexual and not 'ready' for sex (I guess in that they would find it disgusting, awkward or distressing in some way; because their bodies are not 'designed,' at this stage in their development, to sexually reproduce) even though most people can probably remember sexual feelings at a young age (say 6/7), babies have been observed masturbating in and out of the womb and not everyone is disgusted by the idea of sexual contact with at least some of the people they're not attracted to either. Even I will assume that libido isn't 'fully developed' until one has a menstrual cycle or is capable of ejaculating, if not with the start of puberty (which 'should' be two years prior to semarche/menarche), but reality seems more complicated (some testosterone and estrogen is present at small amounts from birth, maybe that explains child sexuality).

I do think that we should discourage child-adult sexual contact in practice out of risk aversion (the high likeliness of internalizing societal beliefs about the exploitativeness of child-adult erotic intimacy and later coming to regret at-the-time desired sexual encounters with older people in retrospect for that reason) so I specify 'the best arguments that you still disagree with' (and you can mention why you disagree with them or why you think they're less flawed than standard anti-AMSC on principle arguments are. I'm also open to critiques of my 'in practice/for now at this stage in history' anti-contact stance).

You can even mention anti-AMSC arguments that you agree with.

[bnkywuv]

Researching bonobos, one of humans' closest relatives, they have sex for social reasons, bonding and reducing tension and fights within groups, not primarily to reproduce. They use sex as a handshake of sorts, and to ease stress. From this perspective, childhood sexuality is more of a social thing to me. I was regularly getting off at age 3 to 4, and flirting with other kids and even adults at around 5 to 6. I'm incredibly social. I think there's a link here.

Thus the restriction of sex during childhood could be part of the reason we have such high rates of violence and stress in our modern world. I have some other theories too, but this is a big one.

[John_Doe]

Researching bonobos, one of humans' closest relatives, they have sex for social reasons, bonding and reducing tension and fights within groups, not primarily to reproduce. They use sex as a handshake of sorts, and to ease stress. From this perspective, childhood sexuality is more of a social thing to me. I was regularly getting off at age 3 to 4, and flirting with other kids and even adults at around 5 to 6. I'm incredibly social. I think there's a link here.

Thus the restriction of sex during childhood could be part of the reason we have such high rates of violence and stress in our modern world. I have some other theories too, but this is a big one.

I don't think that any non-human animal consciously mates for the sake of reproduction (I doubt the majority of non-human animals, if any, even realize that sex leads to reproduction or can even grasp the concept of 'reproduction' and shared DNA) but sex seems to be inherently tied to reproduction. Forgive me if I'm completely misinformed and ignorant about this, this is all second-hand info. for me, but apparently some women can tell where they are on their cycle based on their libido (estrogen, and testosterone, rises in the second half of the follicular phase and peaks on the day before ovulation. On day 14 of a standard 28-day menstrual cycle the egg is released but survives for only around 24 hours. Technically, women are only fertile for one day of the month but sperm can survive in the vagina for up to 5 days so there's an around one-week period when a man can impregnate a woman and this is apparently when, other factors considered, women tend to be at their most aroused, with the estrogen fluctuations and rise of progesterone that occurs in the luteal phase their libido tends to decline. Correct me if I'm wrong about anything, I'm not well-read on this and that becomes more obvious to me when I take some time to look into things). This isn't to deny that prepubescent children have sexual feelings, I remember having sexual feelings from maybe as young as 7 (crushes and fantasies in the second grade and humping an object at around maybe 7), but I didn't start masturbating regularly until 12 when I was capable of ejaculating semen, if that means anything. I think it's a matter of degree and if estrogen (particularly estradiol) and testosterone clearly play a role then those hormones obviously increase at puberty so I don't think we should expect prepubescent children to have the exact same level of sexual desire that adults do.

I can't sexualize a woman I don't feel emotionally connected to. There have been times in the past when my libido seemed to improve just by interacting with strangers I wasn't necessarily attracted to (maybe social isolation can cause low-empathy and it definitely seems to me that higher-'empathy,' more loving people enjoy sex more. Even though the stereotype is that straight men basically see women as sentient sex dolls and their being sentient isn't even required in order to enjoy their bodies, I remember a study from years ago suggesting that higher-empathy men enjoyed sex more). I remember feeling more loving and empathetic the day after a sexual encounter with someone I wasn't remotely attracted to, although I can't honestly say that I'm really grateful for that encounter in retrospect (I also remember having enjoyed kissing a girl I wasn't really attracted to because the emotional intimacy was pleasurable. The only one of the three women I had sexual contact/sex with that I was relatively attracted to was the only one who had a no-kissing policy, I've always regretted that). I can also remember being a young teen and not fantasizing about vaginal intercourse with certain girls I was attracted to because it seemed very emotionally intimate to me. Sex is social activity and can facilitate bonding but it seems directly reproductive to me, you can bond with or love someone without sex or sexual desire but no one naturally wants to have sex without a libido or sexual instincts. In the same way that you can bond over a shared meal but no one wants to eat if they have a very low appetite and appetite has nothing to do with that bonding. You can bond over video games but you still need to find the game itself enjoyable.

I can at least partly agree with you in that I think that sexual repression is responsible for a lot of emotional turmoil (leftists really harp on about the psychological damage caused by homophobia and people trying to suppress sexual/romantic feelings that they have for other men or other women but they perpetuate that same culture and sex-negative shaming through the age-gap stigma, incest shaming and generally critiquing people for being attracted to people they're not supposed to like; e.g. 'Nazis.' They only seem to have the 'sexual liberation' mindset when it comes to gays specifically, that's the only time when male sexual desire at least is 'natural and healthy.' I also think that monogamy contributes to this. In terms of fantasy, everyone should be promiscuous and I say this as someone with an extremely low libido, I just think that sexual suppression does a lot of psychological damage. I don't know what people expect middle-aged or elderly people who just aren't as attracted to people in their own age group as they are to people in their thirties, twenties, teens or even younger to do about that).

In regards to the thread, what I had in mind was moreso playing devil's advocate for positions that you still disagree with and appreciating their relative superiority in contrast with other positions (alongside maybe adding why you think that they still ultimately fail).

[FairBlueLove]

Thus the restriction of sex during childhood could be part of the reason we have such high rates of violence and stress in our modern world.

Agree, and I would like to see this mentioned more often. It is unfortunate that most people look at the natural world for negative examples only.