I see your argument, and it's a good one... but it's a little bit chicken and egg. Many gay people did not/do not want to be gay in a society that is or was intolerant and hostile towards it. That's hugely psychologically damaging and I imagine that being pedophile is psychologically damaging in a whole host of ways.

The logic still stands. If a pedophile were proud enough to claim it as a valid sexuality or part of what made them a person, then it would meet the criteria as an oppressed sexuality. The chances of that person rocking up are infintessimally small - but that shame is likely socially constructed. In places in the world where children are routinely married off, no such shame exists. Could a pedophile identify as a 'non practicing pedophile' for example? Would that be socially acceptable? There are also plenty of people who openly accept their own pedophilic tendencies, they just tend to exist in dark and dangerous online communities.

The article is an exercise in thinking beyond the simplistic arguments into the nuances. It's out of the polemic right/wrong black/white thinking that characterises much of the discourse. Comments like yours are helpful, because although I think you're wrong (and have tried to argue it) there will be people who read it and agree with you. It's already a far more intelligent discussion than 99% of the echo chamber crap that is thrown out into the Medium-sphere. Thanks for commenting and thanks for continuing the discussion. :o)