::::::::::::I don't understand that, James. Maybe I got your explanation confused. I don't think you are saying that pedophilia should not be defined as a sexual preference (as a primary sexual interest). That goes against your arguments for it being defined as a sexual preference. You have often made the distinction between it (a preference) and child molestation (the act). So are you saying that a person cannot be primarily sexualy interested in adults and prepubescent children? If so, this article is not saying that either. Or are you saying that the "exclusive" part is not needed, because "primary" takes care of it? My thing with "primary" taking care of it is that it makes it sound as though pedophiles often have some other sexual object choice (pubescents or post-pubescents). I don't always relate the "non-exclusive" offender to a "primary" offender, though it can mean that. I take "primary" to mean a pedophile who often sexually focuses on prepubescent children and can get a little sexually aroused by pubescents or post-pubescents. I take "exclusive" to mean pedophiles who have no chance whatsoever of becoming sexually aroused by pubescents or post-pubescents. But you feel this istinction is not important or needed?