Sorry for reopening an old thread but I figured this would be less intrusive than starting a new topic.
After seeing this study I’m inclined to agree with OP at some level. Obviously I wouldn’t advocate for doxxing or harassment, but I think misrepresenting the suppression of libido as the elimination of attractions is intentionally misleading and could be read as an endorsement of conversion therapy by anyone who doesn’t take the time to understand what’s actually being accomplished, which is certainly not what the abstract claims (I can’t comment on the piece as a whole as it’s behind a paywall). There are numerous studies indicating that such treatments do not eliminate attractions and no reason to believe that they would work any differently among the population being researched here. At best, this is an incredibly unfortunate misrepresentation that carries the potential to be used to justify harm, and at worst, it’s a deliberate attempt to advocate for the use of conversion therapy on MAPs.
I also believe there are ethical considerations involved in such work that are being overlooked by whatever ethics review process these researchers are using. If you promoted such a libido-reducing treatment as a cure for homosexuality 40 years ago, you likely would have had no problem finding willing participants, whereas if you did that today, people would be advocating for the research to be shut down and the researchers to be investigated for ethical violations. Promoting a cure while perpetuating the stigma that drives the demand for that cure (by implying that pedophilia needs a cure and therefore is somehow bad or harmful) is manipulative and fraudulent. Of course I believe there should be research into the effects of these drugs, especially for the purposes of understanding whether it would be unethical to force them on those convicted of sexual offences or to promote them to highly stigmatized sexual minorities, but promoting such treatments as cures despite an abundance of research demonstrating that attractions cannot be changed or eliminated, but only suppressed, is a harmful way of characterizing this research.