No I did not. I said that the articles assume that the gender of attacker and victim determine orientation, which it does not.You say that the sexual orientation of the child molesters in the study is "in question", when it's obvious that it isn't.
Except the boys where not molested by openly homosexual older males.All those boys molested by the openly homosexual older males validates the pedophiles' orientation by the fact that they molested .. wait for it .. .. exclusively boys. ..
No, it is not a subterfuge, it is understanding the topic, something you clearly do not do. Just to highlight the absurdity of your claims, in your world the orientation of any individual depends on who they last had sex with, which is obviously false.It is obvious subterfuge via obfuscation to ever seriously question the "orientation" of older males who molest younger males, as these older males clearly had a homosexual orientation for the boys they molested. Your excuse that "well, they hadn't had any 'adult' relationships so how do we know?" is ludicrously laughable, and, of course, would not at all be sufficiently convincing to the Boys Scouts of America when they saw for a fact that greatly higher percentage of pedophilia among males-on-boys, especially considering so many of these males admitted to their homosexuality.
And to highlight your failed understanding we have this perfect example. Adult sexuality would refer to the preference among adults. Pedophilia is a preference for pre-pubescent children.To say that those males who molested younger males weren't "clearly" homosexual simply because they didn't have a preference for adults is the height of erroneous thinking, as that would mean you could bury your head in the sand and never see the reality that these males are molesting exclusively boys and thus they are .. wait for it .. .. obviously homosexual.
Back to the birth defect bull****. Too bad you can niether show that gays are born that way, nor can you show that homosexuality is a defect. Nor have you shown in increased rate of pedophilia, while I have shown there is no such increased rate, using peer reviewed research, which somehow you ignored.Your seriously irrational thinking may allow you to bury your head in the sand and hide from the reality that the many, many studies show: that the birth defect of homosexuality is associated with a significant increase of pedophilia.
They do have a sexuality for those of their same age group, which tends to last throughout their lives.Homosexuality is evidenced at an early age, pre-teen/teen, and such accurate information revealed simply does not require having had an "adult" peer sexual relationship, obviously.
That is one way to dismiss anything that actually proves you wrong, even though you cannot do what I did and show any flaws in the studies.You can cite all the homo-apologist pre-conceived ideological misinformation damage-control sites and sites whose funding rises and falls with media acceptance and rejection respectively all you want, but common sense reasoning will accurately refute them every time.
I did not realize that truth was indefensible. I can see you are deathly allergic to it however.Nevertheless, your adamant insistance on defending the indefensible makes me seriously wonder what your personal motive is in the matter.