Who are these clowns?

From here:

Moen details arguments for and against “adult-child sex” before ultimately coming to the conclusion that “adult-child sex is not categorically very harmful” but may result in “risks” of children being harmed. He offers a quick disapproval of penetrative adult-child sexual relations, but goes on to make statements that defend pedophilia as an innate sexual orientation, comparing the desire to sexually abuse children to homosexuality.

And homosexuality is an innate desire to sexually abuse the same sex?

Likewise i dont think they understand what “categorical” means.

Here is the study they are referencing: View of The ethics of pedophilia | Etikk i praksis - Nordic Journal of Applied Ethics