It's quite possible you are right about the current eight old men who may have never personally touched a child (in an abusive way). It's my impression that they are also quite innocent of any such issues.
But I don't think you can ever say that anyone in such a position as in the GB cannot comprehend such wickedness in others. They have dealt with a lot in their lives and they have been forced to deal with the topic even if they didn't want to.
And not to deal in gossip, but I can speak almost positively about the following situation, at least I can speak for the trustworthiness of the brothers who gave me the information. What I heard about several years ago from a friend in Writing, were things I talked about before the ARC, and they came up again from another brother after I discussed the ongoing ARC with him.
It actually started with two members of the Governing Body, who seemed not to want to speak to each other. Both became GB members in 1974 and this issue was visible during the time I worked around them. One had previously been assigned to lead the Branch in Australia and the other had previously been assigned to work in Japan. The brother assigned to Australia was recalled suddenly and demoted to become a Circuit Overseer in the Midwest in the United States. After many years of rebuilding his reputation, through Circuit then District work, he finally was asked to join the Governing Body in New York. The explanation I was given was that the demotion was punishment for being involved in accusations of child sexual abuse. (I never knew if the accusations had been in Australia, the USA, or both, but a later separate rumor had tied him to a case in the United States through a Witness doctor.) At any rate, by 1974, this issue was considered to have been from long enough in his past for his appointment to the GB.
By 1991 one of the GB members was heading the Writing Dept, and the once-accused GB member was heading the Service Dept. You probably already know that the October 8 1991 Awake! had an article on Child Sexual Abuse that included "worldly" therapy as a possible solution for some victims, and this head of the Service Dept hated the article. (For that matter it's probably true that most members of the Governing Body apparently thought that worldly psychotherapy was little more than something worldly or even satanic.) But by now, there were Witness psychotherapists and psychiatrists, and they appreciated the article. Mostly the article was appreciated by CSA victims, and tons of letters of appreciation came in. For an April 1992 follow up, the head of Writing decided to print some excerpts from some of those letters of appreciation and the head of Service actually "stopped the presses" to have the article replaced while the head of Writing was out of the country. The head of Service didn't get his way; presses started up again, and you can read the article in the April 8 1992 Awake!.
But, as head of the Service Department, he sent out several of the most well known Circuit and District Overseers on a campaign in 1992 to speak with abuse victims to let them know they should never reveal anything about their abusers and their abuse, or they could be disfellowshipped.
One of those men in the intimidation campaign is now on the Governing Body.
You can take these are merely unsubstantiated rumors, and I admit that I have no evidence to substantiate them. I can only speak to the honesty and track record of the brothers who told me about them.
You may proceed.
The requirements are not high. You must simply make sure that you are not the most unpleasant person here. The mere fact that you raised the above two points guarantees that you will not be.
I have found in over 7000 posts that I can be rude, and belligerent, and insulting ... if the level of stupidity rises to the point where a "reasonable person" would conclude that it is a defense to previous insults and/or accusations, not based in fact.
And that insulting ideas and philosophies with provable facts is quite OK, here.
Ad Hominem attacks are never acceptable without a solid basis to do so.
...... and never invoke "Godwin's Law", unless you fully understand what it says and does not say.