Solace,
When speculating it is usually upon the balance of probabilities that most people will decide if something occurred or not.
The case you present for her not being sodomised would apply to the normal household, but we already know that the Ramsey household was atypical, and in fact dysfunctional, adding in JonBenet's pageant activity, her prior abuse, any current abuse, her soiled underwear then take on a different color, this is not conclusive, but swings the balance towards the theory that JonBenet was being actively abused. This household was different in that there were PAGEANTS. I agree this is dysfunctional. But I would ask you to please give me an example of a household that IS NOT dysfunctional. If a psychiatrist were to analyze 10 homes, believe 10 would be dysfunctional. Her soiled underwear were more than likely due to bad hygiene.
Sodomy is only an explanation for some of the evidence,(this is patently false - give me the evidence you are talking about and if it is the soiled underwear, there is no need to reply, but if you have some other evidence, I do want to hear it) the same evidence can also support other forms of abuse, and in light of the autopsy report regarding chronic sexual activity, (it is not evidence of chronic "sexual" activity. It is evidence of "chronic bleeding" - BIG DIFFERENCE) AND THE WORD CHRONIC MEANS SOMETHING DIFFERENT THAN WHAT MOST PEOPLE BELIEVE, AS IT IS INTENDED IN THE AUTOPSY REPORT. the other side of the argument which is difficult to escape is that JonBenet was the victim of long term sexual abuse.
Whilst it is not beyond the realms of possibility for JonBenet to have been killed as the result of some toileting incident, this as a motive pales into insignificance when placed beside that of a sexual assault, particularly when the forensic evidence supports the latter and contradicts the former!
.