I might also add another premise that I think may be worth challenging, but which I fear the current moderator stance would preclude:
(c) that the only or even primary reason people should teach their children (or that anyone should be taught) about things like healthy boundaries and consent is for its efficacy in preventing child sexual abuse specifically (as opposed to, oh, I don’t know, ensuring children and even adults understand socially and/or legally important concepts like consent and healthy relationship boundaries???)
But in general, I agree with what I believe to be @Riemann’s main point: that sometimes people start threads that assume a lot just in how they are framed (both in the title and in the body of the OP itself), and that we should be allowed to unpack what may be some dubious assumptions in order to have a productive exchange, rather than being strictly limited to the implicit scope of the thread as framed when that framing is problematic.
See also my perhaps poorly named thread of two years past: