What is meant here by Al-Soghadi and Imam Ahmad regarding intimacy with young female slaves?

I recently asked a similar question- my post was deleted and I got referred to a possible duplicate. This is not a duplicate. I don’t feel my question was answered. I am aware of what Islamweb’s fatwa has said regarding that intimacy with a young wife or concubine is not permissible if it causes her harm. However- keeping that in mind- I am still confused by these sources. I would like an explanation. I don’t have any scholars at the nearby Masjid to ask. “ واما اتيان الرِّجَال الْجَوَارِي الصغيرات اللواتي لَا يصلحن للاستمتاع فانه لَا يحرمهن الا ان يَطَأهَا فِي الْفرج فَأن وَطأهَا فِي الْفرج وَجب عَلَيْهِ الْعقر فان قَتلهَا الْوَطْء وَجَبت عَلَيْهِ الدِّيَة وَدخل الْعقر فِي الدِّيَة” “As for having intercourse with young female slaves who are not ready for sexual relations, it is not forbidden to have intercourse with them unless he penetrates her vagina; if he penetrates her vagina, he must pay the blood money. If the intercourse causes her death, he must pay the blood money, and the blood money includes the penalty for the act][1] ”. And the second source. In Kitab Al Mughni li Ibn Qudamah 8/149. وَلَا وَثَنِيَّةٍ، وَلَا مُحَرَّمَةٍ بِالرَّضَاعِ وَلَا الْمُصَاهَرَةِ،…. وَالْبَيْعُ يُرَادُ لِغَيْرِ ذَلِكَ، فَصَحَّ قَبْلَ الِاسْتِبْرَاءِ، وَلِهَذَا صَحَّ فِي هَذِهِ الْمُحَرَّمَاتِ، وَوَجَبَ الِاسْتِبْرَاءُ عَلَى الْمُشْتَرِي؛ لِمَا ذَكَرْنَاهُ. فَأَمَّا الصَّغِيرَةُ الَّتِي لَا يُوطَأُ مِثْلُهَا، فَظَاهِرُ كَلَامِ الْخِرَقِيِّ تَحْرِيمُ قُبْلَتِهَا وَمُبَاشَرَتِهَا لِشَهْوَةٍ قَبْلَ اسْتِبْرَائِهَا. وَهُوَ ظَاهِرُ كَلَامِ أَحْمَدَ، وَفِي أَكْثَرِ الرِّوَايَاتِ عَنْهُ، قَالَ: تُسْتَبْرَأُ، وَإِنْ كَانَتْ فِي الْمَهْدِ. وَرُوِيَ عَنْهُ أَنَّهُ قَالَ: إنْ كَانَتْ صَغِيرَةً بِأَيِّ شَيْءٍ تُسْتَبْرَأُ إذَا كَانَتْ رَضِيعَةً. وَقَالَ فِي رِوَايَةٍ أُخْرَى: تُسْتَبْرَأُ بِحَيْضَةٍ إذَا كَانَتْ مِمَّنْ تَحِيضُ، وَإِلَّا بِثَلَاثَةِ أَشْهُرٍ إنْ كَانَتْ مِمَّنْ تُوطَأُ وَتَحْبَلُ. فَظَاهِرُ هَذَا أَنَّهُ لَا يَجِبُ اسْتِبْرَاؤُهَا، وَلَا تَحْرُمُ مُبَاشَرَتُهَا. وَهَذَا اخْتِيَارُ ابْنِ أَبِي مُوسَى، وَقَوْلُ مَالِكٍ، وَهُوَ الصَّحِيحُ؛ لِأَنَّ سَبَبَ الْإِبَاحَةِ مُتَحَقِّقٌ. وَلَيْسَ عَلَى تَحْرِيمِهَا دَلِيلٌ، فَإِنَّهُ لَا نَصَّ فِيهِ، وَلَا مَعْنَى نَصٍّ؛ لِأَنَّ تَحْرِيمَ مُبَاشَرَةِ الْكَبِيرَةِ إنَّمَا كَانَ لِكَوْنِهِ دَاعِيًا إلَى الْوَطْءِ الْمُحَرَّمِ، أَوْ خَشْيَةَ أَنْ تَكُونَ أُمَّ وَلَدٍ لِغَيْرِهِ، وَلَا يُتَوَهَّمُ هَذَا فِي هَذِهِ، فَوَجَبَ الْعَمَلُ بِمُقْتَضَى الْإِبَاحَةِ. فَأَمَّا مَنْ يُمْكِنُ وَطْؤُهَا، فَلَا تَحِلُّ قُبْلَتُهَا، وَلَا الِاسْتِمْتَاعُ مِنْهَا بِمَا دُونَ الْفَرْجِ قَبْلَ الِاسْتِبْرَاءِ، إلَّا الْمَسْبِيَّةَ، عَلَى إحْدَى الرِّوَايَتَيْنِ. “ (I translated most of the following with Google Translate. I apologize for any mistakes). …nor an idolater, nor a woman forbidden by breastfeeding or marriage, and the sale is intended for something other than that, so it is valid before the waiting period, and for this reason it is valid in these forbidden things, and the waiting period is obligatory on the buyer, for what we mentioned. As for a young girl whom intercourse is not done with the likes of her, the apparent meaning of al-Khiraqi's statement is that kissing her or touching her with lustful intent before her purification is established is forbidden. This is also the apparent meaning of Ahmad's statement, and in most narrations from him, he said: She must be purified, even if she is still in the cradle. It is also narrated from him that he said: If she is young, how can she be purified if she is an infant? And in another narration, he said: She is to be considered free of pregnancy by one menstrual cycle if she is of menstruating age, otherwise by three months if she is whom intercourse can be done with the likes with and can become pregnant. The apparent meaning of this is that it is not obligatory to ensure her freedom from pregnancy, nor is it forbidden to have sexual relations with her. This is the opinion of Ibn Abi Musa and the statement of Malik, and it is the correct view because the reason for permissibility is established. There is no evidence for its prohibition, for there is no text on it, nor the meaning of a text, because the prohibition of having intercourse with a major sinner was only because it would lead to unlawful intercourse, or out of fear that she might be the mother of a child of someone else, and this is not imagined in this case, so it is obligatory to act according to the requirements of permissibility. As for a woman who is capable of having intercourse, kissing her is not permissible, nor is any form of intimacy with her short of sexual intercourse allowed before the waiting period (istibra'), except in the case of a captive woman, according to one of the two narrations. **My only question is: does this indicate that non-penetrative intimacy at any age is permissible? How should we interpret these passages?** —————— Note: again, this is **not** a duplicate. I am ruminating on these a lot. No fatwa site is answering me and I am deficient in Arabic (I live in Canada). I am a layman as well. Verifying these apparent claims alone is wishful thinking.