oh, drew, won't you ever cut the bs?
you take an "I was wrong, children need to be protected, but teens are not children" and leap from that to "teens don't need any protection whatsoever", which does not follow at all.
that's what my daughter calls neurotypism: making guesses about what's going on in a neurodivergent's mind as if the person were neurotypical. our minds are different and diverse even among ourselves, but you can't get that into your mind AFAICT because it would conflict with your determination to condemn an innocent person.
teens are not children, but they aren't adults either. their development requires progressive autonomy. your stance that they should have no say whatsoever as to their sexual development and experiences, because you say so and set out to destroy that who says otherwise, is the problem here. teens need increasing amounts of autonomy as they progress towards adulthood for the sake of their own development, and it's your push for infantilizing them is that is harmful.
moreover, development is not uniform, chronological ages are reference points but not determinant. there's diversity even there, and even more so among atypical people. your binary stance lacks the tolerance, inclusiveness, thoughtfulness and nuance that you'd see in RMS's speech if only you weren't so blinded by what you project onto him. why do you hate diversity of thought so much?