It doesn't matter how many medical professionals claim sex with children to be harmful. No matter how many people say something is true, if evidence and reason prove them to be wrong, then they are wrong. There is no evidence and reason to back up the claim that sexual activity with children causes emotional distress irrespective of cultural conditioning.You show me such evidence, and I'll change my beliefs. Can you even say what evidence would change your beliefs? If it were proven that the violence you are a supporter of is the reason why children experience trauma from harmless sexual activity and that sex acts themselves do not inherently cause any degree of emotional distress whatsoever by way of showing that when punishments are not present there is no psychological harm but that when punishments are present there is psychological harm, would you change your beliefs? If it were really true that you cared that children were harmed, you would not support punishments for having sex with children if it were proven that punishments were the only thing causing them harm.

Are you aware that many religions believe choosing the wrong faith can have permanently negative consequences lasting all of eternity? Can a child make an informed decision about that? In order to justify the claim that engaging in sexual activity requires informed consent and that children can't engage in sexual activity because of their inability to provide informed consent, it would need to be true that there is some feature to sexual activity that makes it importantly different from all the other things kids are brought to be involved in such that informed consent is a relevant requirement. There is no scientific investigation that can be performed to confirm or falsify the claim that sexual activity requires informed consent because the belief is a moral one; it's not a fact about the world that can be checked to see if it is true. Moral beliefs require consistency to be able to justify their application. You cannot apply a moral belief in one case and not in another for no reason. If children shouldn't be allowed to engage in sexual activity because they can't give informed consent, then explain what makes it different from all the other things they do for which you believe informed consent isn't needed. Don't just say it's different; explain yourself.

Are you aware there is a power imbalance in literally every conceivable way between children and adults, and yet that doesn't make all the other things adults do with children wrong? In order to argue that a power imbalance makes sexual activity with children wrong, it would need to be explained what makes sexual activity different from all the other things children are brought to be involved in.

Because all people, without exception, can recall being forced into doing various things as children against their will and not being traumatized from it, it is impossible to make the argument that I am wrong to claim that unless a child is forced into something to the point of unbearable anguish, they aren't traumatized for it. You don't need to be a psychologist in order to explain human psychology, and you especially don't need to be a psychologist in order to make this claim.
Approaching someone while armed with the intent to forcibly confine that person into a prison cell and shoot and kill them if they fight back absolutely is violence. You are a supporter of that for pedophile sexual activity. Sexual activity with minors is not violent. In fact it's undeniably beneficial to them. You are a supporter of violence for non-violent activities.
Don't unjustifiably punish kids and pedophiles, dude.