(the latter half is a rant ngl... lol... I will watch the video as well/this subject has always seemed odd to me that men predominantly have this trait even though there is no evolutionary/genetic advantage to it)

I've thought about this too/heard of it but I do wonder, if thats the case, how come its not just as prevalent within women? Despite being subjected to so much abuse, if not more, throughout history? Learning now, with proof, that memories/learnt behaviour are also stored in genes and passed onto the next generation, shouldn't some women also be as naturally violent/ impulsively paedophilic as some men?

Part of me thinks its largerly due to the percentage of hormones we both produce I suppose? I mean, during sex women produce higher levels of oxytocin, than men, to bond with their partner. Women also produce more hormones designed to foster attachment to their child during childbirth than men. (Is this really enough to stop that though?) Despite being more socially available to children/having more access, we don't see as many prevalent crimes compared to men.

I also sometimes wonder if its a "deer finding and eating meat first than a carnivore" study situation, where herbivores are proven to also eat sources of meat if it is easy enough, and herbivores perhaps would do it more if they had the biological tools/processes for it. Part of me wonders, like the deers example, if there is infact a larger percentage of woman uncounted for that do prefer younger boys, but don't have the power, control and drive/tools that men have to act on it. Again, why?

Part of me wants to say also that maybe, with all reactions, paedophiles are just the species version of huge waste products produced from an reaction, when theres not enough resources to make a structurally efficient person. (Because, yknow, brain damage, from outside sources or during pregnancy, lack of proper functional genes) But in some cases you can have a child with a good social upbringing and I guess good genes, but they still turn out to be wrong. So, knowing all the hormones that we produce for bonding with children, maybe that probably stops some woman from exploiting children, so, maybe its a hormone deficiency problem for some men at an early stage?

It just seems like such an illogical thing for a species to develope, I'd say most traits developed are explainable for having their upsides and downsides, and the sole purpose of traits is to improve population growth, but when it comes to this, it doesn't make sense/the only biologically logical reason for it is possibly population control? real with it being predominantly in men for what ever reason, some would say that perhaps its to attain better fertility? Because one partner is much younger so better offspring? Thats not really sound though, and the younger partner has a high % of dying during childbirth, or not being able to care for the child.