After a few messages related to sexual abuse, I'd like to generalize the issue.
There is nothing special in the sex stuff, is there? Or about physical stuff.
So here's the issue, in a general form:
Case 1:
Entity A makes a non-consensual impact on the entity B. For example, fills B's memory with something B doesn't want to have, or subtracts from its body or possession, without any rational justification for it, such as preventing harm to third parties.
This is clearly rape, evil, and should be illegal - right?
Case 2.
Entity A makes an impact on entity B that B is not in full capacity to assess consciously. Even if B likes the effects, it's statutory rape, if A can't reasonably prove that the action was guided by the rational expectation of B's benefit. Examples include circumcision (if it's illegal to touch child's genitals, it should definitely be illegal to cut them, right?), religious indoctrination (people should be able to understand, and consent to, sex, much earlier than they can estimate the impact of non-rational universal ontologies on the future evolution of their worldviews). The impact of priests on young children would be much less harmful if they limited it to the occasional abuse of their bodies, rather than persistent mutilation of their minds...