It's an analogy founded directly on history. In the past, it was common to not see a distinction between male homosexuality and pedophilia. I'm absolutely certain some people still see the world that way. In short, it doesn't have to make sense, because it's historical fact.

To see this in film, watch the Sid Davis classic "Boys Beware":

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boys_Beware

> The film equates homosexuals with child molesters and hebephiles, repeatedly describing homosexuality as a mental illness. True to the stereotypes of its time, the gay men in the film have mustaches, sunglasses and/or bow ties.

https://archive.org/details/boys_beware - Original

https://archive.org/details/BoysBewarecolorizedVersion - Colorized

https://archive.org/details/BoysAware - Remake

I do not get it. Because in antic Rome it was acceptable (or common) for men to have homosexual relations with young boys you are still making the link between these words today?

"heretic" and "science" or "monk" and "psychopathic torturer" are synonyms as well?

I'm just using the connection as an example.

And it doesn't have to make sense to you. It's historical fact.

What doesn't make sense is to take a 2000 years old cultural norm and apply it to today.

Would you call a black man "negro" today? It was a normal word back then. Good luck explaining the historical context.

There are plenty of historical facts which are just that :a historical fact with no connection to today.