The two movements are running into the same problem, which is that the system of free love is breaking down. Free love is based on the idea of, “What if the girl consents, tho?” Pedophilic free love is just a subset of that: “What if the LITTLE girl consents, tho?”
#MeToo is invalidating consent across the board, by allowing women to call into question whether they were truly able or willing to consent. And of course, anyone who doubts a rape allegation is a misogynist in the MeToo’ers view.
We have situations where the police are taking seriously allegations that a husband raped his wife, so that men can’t even use the argument, “What if the wife consents, tho” anymore. Already, of course, drunken sex has been categorized as rape, so that we can’t say, “What if the drunk girl consented, tho.”
So now we’re going to try to establish a legal principle based on the idea of, “What if the child consents, tho”? The politics are headed in the opposite direction, of considering everything victimization that used to be categorized as potentially consensual.
The only area in which the feminists have wanted to grant any wiggle room was in letting teen girls have sex with boys their own age. Since provisioning isn’t a factor in that situation, teen girls are mostly choosing sex partners based on looks, game, and other superficial qualities, which means it’s generally going to be Chad rather than the bottom 80% of teen boys who get sex.
But that’s pretty much how feminists want it, because their agenda is to keep girls in school, rather than setting them up with a older guy who’s going to provision for them. The feminists are not going to be cool with letting older men get with 3-year-old girls, because the two might fall in love and he might start provisioning for her, and encourage her to leave school.
The cornerstone of feminism is keeping girls in school so that they don’t end up in a situation where they’re financially dependent on a husband or boyfriend.