A wild ride towards self-acceptance

Ed Chambers, today’s guest blogger, bravely strode into the public arena three years ago when he outed himself as a non-offending paedophile on British television, via the Channel 4 documentary The Paedophile Next Door. Not long afterwards he would be invited to Canada to take part in I, Pedophile, a film being made for CBS doc series Firsthand, broadcast in 2016. After the earlier programme, when he was named only as “Eddie”, I said his appearance had been the one bright spot in an otherwise disappointing production. So I am very pleased he has decided to tell us about his long battle to come to terms with his orientation, a struggle that has seen him engage in both cooperation and combat with therapy providers and the Virtuous Pedophiles (Virped).
I pre-announced this blog as “the Big One” last time because I knew it would be breaking entirely new ground. As far as I am aware, this is the first time a prominent former member of Virped has gone public with a stinging critique of the organisation and repudiated its philosophy – not counting, of course, his own devastating comments here following Peter Herman’s recent blog.
 

WE MUST BE STRONG IN THESE DARK TIMES

Now a middle-aged man, I have struggled all my adult life with a preferential attraction to prepubescent girls. Without being able to openly express this at the earliest opportunity, and correspond with those who could relate to me, it has been the cause of a great many emotional and psychological issues. With my academic and sporting pursuits suffering as a result, mainly through the use of drugs as an aid to denial, only recently have I been forced to face the realities of who I am. I wish I had done it sooner.
Several times I have reached out to mental health professionals in the NHS, and on numerous occasions I have asked for chemical castration and psychodynamic therapy. My journey for the purposes of this contribution began in 2001, in my late twenties. This was the first time I thought I was ill, when I wanted to know that I wasn’t paedophilic, or if I was that it could be changed. This first encounter was a disaster. At the end of a 45-minute session with a consultant psychiatrist, I was offered very little, other than a pen in order to sign the notes that had been made. Both the psychiatrist, and subsequent community psychiatric nurse to whom I was referred, viewed me with a look of horror, recoil and a complete lack of understanding. It broke me in such a way that I moved from my home town of twenty five years, to the adjacent city to start a new life, with a new identity.
Roughly seven years later, after leading a virtuous life, I returned to my habits of old. I had used cannabis as a crutch in my denial of being paedophilic since the age of 16, and my use of relevant pornography stretched back as far as 1998. I was fooling myself to believe that I could be any different, the draw was too strong. I carried on in a sort of limbo, with no one to talk to about the nature of my libido.
In 2011, in what would be a defining moment in my life, I had the opportunity to resurrect my first love, the Lolita with whom I had been so besotted in my teenage years. It was a crazy idea, as she had morphed into an overweight whale of a woman for whom I had little interest. I quickly moved on, this time hitting the drugs and pornography with a vengeance. It was a damning confirmation of the very thing I had tried to deny. As a matter of course, I proceeded to slide myself as clumsily as I could into a lot of trouble. As I crashed and burned, I desperately tried to find support.
I found Virped in 2013. To the probable dismay of many here, I owe them my thanks for the support I have received. However, it is not quite as simple as that. The persecution and harassment I have been subject to in my life would scarcely be believed, so will remain undisclosed, at least for now. Nevertheless, to say I needed a crutch is akin to stating that Kim Jong-un is fond of nuclear weapons. I found what I needed to survive, but with the accompanying incompetence of the NHS in the UK, I was still without therapy and the libido-reducing medication I was asking for.
Cue Dr Sarah Goode and her book Understanding and Addressing Adult Sexual Attraction to Children: A Study of Paedophiles in Contemporary Society, recommended to me by none other than fellow Virped, Gary Gibson. Halfway through the book I emailed Dr Goode, discussing with her my experiences with StopItNow and the NHS. By the time I had finished her book, something I view in retrospect as a shallow and narrow-minded assessment of the realities of being a Minor Attracted Person in contemporary society, I had already met with her and Steve Humphries, director and presenter of The Paedophile Next Door, in the latter’s office in Bristol. In May 2014, the filming of my contribution was finished, and I began the patient wait for the release in late November.
In these dark days, I travelled to Berlin for therapy at the Prevention Projekt Dunkelfeld (PPD), which has 11 centres across Germany. Anyone with the correct diagnosis will be assisted by the most understanding and considerate people, providing they have health insurance, or can pay privately. I found the German bureaucracy a nightmare, and it caused me a great deal of stress and problems in trying to settle there. However, a MAP can tell the staff everything and not be criminalised, not made to feel like the antagonist of an Alien movie, or told they are mentally ill. They will bend over backwards to help and it is a gift to us, from the only government in the world that gives a shit, and a credit to our community. With each visit to this institution, I was proud that I had finally been given something.
At this time, the release of The Paedophile Next Door was a huge disappointment to me. There was no talk about the PPD. Simply stated, there was the sacrificial paedophile, the “expert” doctor trying to garnish sympathy for the bogeyman, all the while pitted against the other participants who professed their universal hatred against our kind. Subsequently, my UK address was visited three times in two days by the police, much to the dismay of my friend who subsequently disowned me. I had found Ground Zero and flatlined.
Here in Berlin I found the beginnings of a revelation. I had come to terms with all of the descriptions mental health professionals use to describe people who are sexually attracted to children. I had even started to use them myself. I identified as a paedophile now. I had accepted it, whereas before I had wasted so many years of my life in denial. Although I was treated very well here, I had to move on once more, without therapy or drugs. Despite the PPD, the seeds of doubt were now firmly planted in my mind. Was I really ill or subject to a conspiracy that both undermined the existence and behaviours of MAPs as well as children who were sexually active? As for Virped, and their manifesto for the non-offending MAP, the writing was already on the wall. I had already seen they were complicit in the war on paedophiles, in the insidious guise of trying to help them.
It’s fair to say I was on the run. Before our communication ceased, my friend in the UK had informed me of the considerable interest the English police had shown in me. On top of that, I had seen some of the tweets that had suggested people were aiming to lynch me for the greater good. Suitably, I found work in Northern Cyprus, ironically a country only recognised by Turkey, and I figured I would be safe for a while. It was here I made contact via Virped with Matt Campea, a bright, young director with an open mind and a drive to represent MAPs as the protagonist. Whilst in Toronto, at considerable expense to Matt, I contributed to his documentary I, Pedophile. At the release in March 2016, it turned out to be the Yin to The Paedophile Next Door’s Yang, and was everything I and the Virped community had hoped for.
On my return to the UK, after 30 months of exile and now devoid of finances, the biggest surprise for me was to make it through the airport at all. I had imagined I would be taken aside by the police for questioning about various things, not least my participation in The Paedophile Next Door. Step by step, I rebuilt my life, and on the recommendation once again of Gary Gibson, sought the help of Juliet Grayson and therapy at StopSO. It turns out, as the full name would suggest (Specialist Treatment Organisation for the Prevention of Sexual Offending) that involvement with any therapist here concentrates on prevention of offending, and in this respect therapy does not cater for the well-being of participants. They are not subject to mandatory reporting laws, but are subject to ethical reporting by the therapist to their governing body, and accordingly the governing body would report to the police. Simply, one cannot discuss the very things that one needs help with. It is a madness that I pointed out to Grayson in numerous emails, and something she ignored. In fact, ignorance appeared to be her style, as it was a treacherous betrayal of my trust that caused me to pull out of another documentary project that we had started working on with VICE, promoting StopSO as a ground-breaking development for the treatment of MAPs. Inevitably, VICE would’ve presented this as a new way of processing sex offenders. I had become used to the way media organisations dealt with people like me, and the topic as a whole. Once bitten, twice shy.
I now realise, as a 43-year-old, it is society, not me, that is sick. I was 13 when I began to realise that my preference was for a body-type indicative of being paedophilic. As I have grown older, I have realised that my paedophilia is far more than a sexual attraction. It has been a wild ride, from denying my true self through the use of drugs, to crawling through the depths of suicidal thoughts and behaviours, to my exaltation above the ignorance of the multitudes to understand and appreciate the true sexual beauty of prepubescent girls.
There have been several times when girls in the age range 6-15 have expressed a sexual interest in me, and this includes a general curiosity in what it’s all about. Whilst I have never engaged them, this has been through a fear of harming them in some way rather than a fear of how society will view or judge me for having had said intimate relationship. This is indeed a fear that was born out of the tall tales of the child-rapist, reported all too often in the tabloid press. Rather than being born out of a desire to protect children, society’s bent towards banning intergenerational relationships is born out of a desire to subjugate the child and deny them essential rights to express themselves in any way they choose. It is out of this perversity that Virped was born. It is a support group for MAPs, but only as long as one conforms to the idea that it is our kind who are mentally ill, perverse in nature for our appreciation of the beauty of children. And yet, no one cares to cure us, aid us in our struggles, offer us what we need in order to lead that all-important law-abiding lifestyle. Therapy, PPD to one side, does not exist. All you will find in the eyes of those that return your look is horror and hatred.
Civilisation has reached the point where control is ever more paramount. Through the use of television and social media, surveillance is at an all-time high and becoming ever more pervasive. The dogma of Virped encapsulates the need of this intrusive society to control the thoughts and actions of everyone so that it conforms to a narcissism that is born out of pseudo-religious rhetoric. Quite simply, humanity in general refuses to acknowledge that adult sexual attraction to children should exist at all, and these spurious attempts to remove it from existence revolve around how it might appear to a race of aliens visiting in their space ships, or indeed Almighty God as He reclines on His cumulonimbus.
We need to reach out to young MAPs, and others of our kind who need help, and steer them away from the perils of Virped, and the dogma that will warp them into believing they are ill. I believed in Virped, as I did mental health professionals. Now I see them as an extension of a sick world that denies the rights of anyone under a set age, a world that has found the eternal shadow monster in a demographic that means no harm. We must be strong and survive these dark times whence we exist as the sexual heretic.

0 0 votes
Article Rating
Subscribe
Notify of
guest
247 Comments
Newest
Oldest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

[…] For the newest of newbies, I should introduce Ed by reference to his guest blog at the start of this year: A wild ride towards self-acceptance. […]

Just A Sane Person

Thank you both for this. It is the truth.

sean

tomocarroll: “If you have an argument grounded in phenomenology than why not just use it? Tell me what it is!”
Inductive learning is a process that enables estimation of the probability of future events based on their past occurrence.
But this kind of learning says absolutely nothing about novel conditions and explains nothing about *why* predictions are correlated with observations.
In contrast, a scientific theory generates explanations linked to a broader system of knowledge. We know an apple falls, because we’ve seen objects fall a thousand times, but it’s only in theories of physics that we can predict how an apple might fall on the moon, or at the centre of a black hole.
Also, I’m very sorry if I seemed to be attempting to pull some kind of intellectual rank on you! It’s not my intention at all. For one thing, I’ve written precisely zero books!

Libertine

Just a quick question…Are there any ‘pro-contact’ MAPs left on Twitter. All I can see is the v types professing how they can’t help their attraction and would never ‘harm’ a child!

Nuck ROC

MY Twitter: @ALonelyStarEmon (I occassionally post my blog & other things, mostly game clips though.)

Libertine

Cool That makes one at least. I don’t have an account anymore, both were suspended by moderators. it seems they suspend accounts for eternity — You can join but you will never leave!

Explorer

Why “anti-contacts” are indeed sadly prevalent on Twitter, there are some notable pro-consent voices (or should I say “fingers” – after all, they print rather than speak? 😉 ) there as well.
_____________________________
Steve Diamond (Our Love Frontier):
https://twitter.com/EQFoundation
Octaevius Altair (Viamund The Rake):
https://twitter.com/Viamund
Samuel Zehdenick (Samuel Can Think for Himself):
https://twitter.com/SamuelZehdenick
GhandisKongGood (The Real OSC):
https://twitter.com/LutherKongGood1
David Kennerly (Sex Gulag):
https://twitter.com/DavidKennerly
Venus (Pro-Pedo Front):
https://twitter.com/@DonaldZuccerino/
Alain Manes:
https://twitter.com/Alain_Manes6
Eivind Berge:
https://twitter.com/EivindBerge
Eric Tazelaar (from still-existing NAMBLA):
https://twitter.com/EricTazelaar
Marthijn Uittenbogaard (from now-defunct Vereniging MARTIJN):
https://twitter.com/MHUittenbogaard
Cartograph:
https://twitter.com/MAP_Cartograph
Maptastic (former Antipedophobe Aktion):
https://twitter.com/AnarchieJetzt
Sham Sher:
https://twitter.com/GLCLSam
Kodomo:
https://twitter.com/Something5S
K Borgesius:
https://twitter.com/boredgesius
_______________________________

Explorer

A link to Venus / Pro-Paedo Front that havent’s worked in the previous comment:
https://twitter.com/DonaldZuccerino
And, of course, by “Why ‘anti-contacts’” I actually meant “While ‘anti-contacts'”.
Sad impossibility to edit on WordPress… Well, its adherence to the freedom of speech redeems that.

Explorer

Sorry, Tom, I didn’t expect that a small comment with links will look like THAT! Som automatic WordPress function, probably?

Peter Herman

Libertine, words are powerful things! They can be used as weapons against us. The term “pro-contact” has very bad connotations. “Pro-consent” does not carry that baggage. Let us not let the enemy define us with their misleading terminology.

Libertine

I can see where you are coming from, But I see ‘pro-contact’ as neutral at best. and sometimes when pejorative terms are used, It can be better to own them like people with AS on the autistic spectrum who see their ‘condition’ as more of a gift, Or when homosexuals reclaimed the word GAY.

Jonathan

yes, we can be pro-contact or, for better or worse, anti-contact.
or
we can be pro-consent, or, worse, anti-consent!

Edward Chambers

Detritus like Daywalker on Virped still refer to anyone who doesn’t have a Virped corn cob stuffed up their arse as pro-contact, yet he’s still frolicking about pretending he’s a NOMAP.
Ignorant and disingenuous man. If anyone did deserve to be doxxed it is him.

Jonathan

I do not mind the designation “pro-contact”.
And I could never join VirPed.

Edward Chambers

I understand the feeling you have Jonathan re Virped. There was little else for me at the time. I googled over and over for help etc and Virped, StopItNow (unbelievably shite), and PPD (had great hopes for, but ultimately dashed) were all I found.
My two tv appearances aside, which are for sure as a result of my membership of Virped, I regret it now, simply because they align with ‘experts’ who don’t have a real clue about what they are dealing with, simply because they are not MAP.
Seeing how anally virtuous the majority of these people are, not to mention how conceited, disingenuous and downright full of shit some of them are, is a vexation, but this will be resolved in time.
The only reason why I don’t dox Daywalker is because that would make me as bad as he is.
It has been interesting reading the response on Virped to my article here. Max(SuH) for example has ‘cut contact’ with me. Oh, woe is me. The daft twerp forgets that I ‘unfriended’ him and cut contact with him many months ago. On top of which, this is the man who published ‘The Shadows Project’, where paedophiles ‘Step out of the Shadows’ and yet he, like frauds Daywalker and ‘ender’, remain anonymous.
Daywalker has said how it is a shame how I’ve ‘gone pro-contact’. Fool. The responses there, apart from that of Gary Gibson, have been the usual shite that one could expect from a bunch of brainwashed fools.
To underline the ill conception of Virped in a nutshell, we see a website that encourages paedophiles to be ‘virtuous’ but this is advice coming from….who? Who are these people that say we should be ‘NOMAP’s?
One needs to analyse what the possibilities are in this respect.

A guy

What does NOMAP mean?

Jonathan

(reply to A guy, Feb. 2)
my conjecture: A NOMAP is a paedophile without a clue, without a map.
in other words, a VIRPED.
Is this too harsh?
maybe!

Nuck ROC

Hey tom,
I think you should talk red knightism in the media, and just that in general. If you don’t know what it is, look on my blog by clicking my name or searching up nucklearonline.
I also want to hear your take on issues like the Nassar case, and how men’s right groups should talk about legitimate paedophiles & child rights. (Paedophilia is being talked about more on MRA blogs I seen, and they take a positive outlook on it.)

Explorer

“red knightism…”
You mean BLUE knightism, don’t you… At least if you apparently want to use the Daily Antifeminist’s (DAF’s) lexicon.
Would anyone object if I bring DAF here one more time? He have just made a post about Tom, his blog and his “Radical Case” book:
https://dailyantifeminist.wordpress.com/2018/01/26/tom-ocarroll-may-not-support-me-but-i-support-him/
Since it directly mentions you, Tom, I think it is worth bringing it to your attention.
As well as this:
https://dailyantifeminist.wordpress.com/2018/01/23/if-edgy-left-wing-contrarians-still-existed-theyd-support-pedophilia-if-only-for-the-heck-of-it/
Well, DAF is definitely quite intelligent person – his obvious understanding that Alt-Right can hardly qualify as a genuinely radical, counter-cultural movement is quite pleasant for me. Yet his explicit misogyny – even if it is to some (or even very notable) degree just emotionally provocative trolling – is not what I can approve.
I’m sympathetic to the sex-positive and liberatory versions of feminism and maintain that, historically, feminism brought much more good than harm. Its current version did made many missteps and did produced a lot of excesses, so the rise of man’s rights movement is both understandable and justifiable. Someone was badly needed to expose the misguided and counterproductive nature of some (but not all!) deeds and views of modern feminists. Yet, as large part of the feminism itself earlier, it has a risk to produce a lot of excesses of its own, including turning into a cult of victimhood and vindiction.
I hope that among feminists themselves the reformers will rise, and will change the movement for the better. Feminist legacy deserve to live.

Explorer

“So far, it seems to be mainly the older general of feminists who are resisting the excesses.”
Unfortunately, yes – the internal critique of feminism are coming mostly from its old guard (that I respect) that still remember the times when it was a liberatory counter-culture.
Yet my hopes are connected to the further empowerment of the men’s rights movement. Sooner or later, the smarter ones of the younger feminists will understand that they are losing their positions largely because of their own faults. For their own good, I hope they will! Today, men’s and women’s movements are both needed to balance and check each other.

Nuck ROC

When DAF uses blue knightism, it’s usually towards teens and adults, at least on what I seen on his site. (It makes sense since attraction to teens is common, and people against it are likely attracted to underage teens. but it is unclear on prepubescents.)
Red knightism (I explained it on my blog nucklearonline) usage, as to what I have it seen being used for usually by some previous actives (Illegally involved paedophiles), is a term denoting to preteens and adults. (Since they turn red from anger or confusion and have this knightism in them. Or there hatred for cheese pizza since pizzagate)

dailyantifeminist

That is not so, actually. “Blue Knight” refers to people who feel the need to “defend” young people (children and teens) from sexuality, in the same way that White Knights try to defend women from various stuff. Blue Knightism doesn’t refer to adults. I chose the blue color as reference to “blue balls,” since that’s the result of Blue Knight policies; it’s also a reference to being “blue pilled,” meaning unaware of the actual situation. Anyway, I don’t want people to autistically over-use this term; I just wanted to create a simple-to-remember term connoting a mental equivalence between (the very familiar phenomenon of) irrational protection of women and irrational protection of kids/teens.

Nuck ROC

Well then, now I have two terms that are the same thing then… Thanks for the clarification DAF.

sean

tomocarroll: “But I am wary of the slippery slope into outright misogyny.”
Good to hear.
But something in this comment made me think, why are you so sensitive to this slippery slope and not the one between social acceptance of adult/child sexual conduct and adult sexual exploitation of children.
While ‘slippery slope’ arguments are de facto fallacious and primarily deployed by the socially conservative right, if the principle applies to misogyny and men’s rights it might also apply to sexual abuse and greater sexual liberty for children.
Most of the constraints on children’s liberty are, nominally at least, for their own protection. Is this one any different?
So, despite my lack of confidence in ‘slippery slope’ arguments, it is just such an argument that underlies my fairly consistent caveats around the ‘pro-contact’ stance.
I’m well educated and even I don’t understand the assertion that childhood sexual experiences with adults are intrinsically harmful. In the absence of coercion or injury, I don’t see any mechanism for harm. Yet my wish to care for children leads me to urge caution in removing any protective factor, however problematic the implications for liberty.
Clearly there is some intermediate position here. We need to focus on something that isn’t defined by ideology, but by material facts on the one hand and shared values on the other.
Wouldn’t you agree?

sean

tomocarroll: “On slippery slope arguments, could do please say why you feel they are weak? Are all such arguments equality dubious, in your view, or does it depend on the issue in question and how the argument is used?”
‘Slippery slope’ arguments are in a category of logical fallacy known as the ‘appeal to probablility’, ie:
Something can go wrong (premise).
Therefore, something will go wrong (invalid conclusion).
If I do not bring my umbrella (premise)
It will rain. (invalid conclusion).

sean

tomocarroll: “Science relies, does it not, largely on inductive logic rather than deductive?”
Hmmm. No, I’d say it’s learning that relies on induction. Science is theory driven and doesn’t admit much that can’t produce testable predictions. Science uses statistics to measure how closely observations correlate with predictions, not to generalize observations into ‘laws;.
Also, induction relies fundamentally on data, whereas slippery slope arguments seem to thrive where data is scarce and speculation rife.
It’s ok making predictions based on common sense, but it’s important not to elevate rules of thumb to facts. Murphy’s law may capture a common perception, but I don’t think it has any basis in physics, for example.

sean

Sorry Tom, I respect your opinion in almost every field of inquiry, but I’ve taken a special interest in phenomenology and the kind of reasoning you describe is exactly the grain of sand in the oyster that produced the scientific method.
It simply isn’t logical to posit laws of nature based on probability. That is how the black swan got its name.

jedson

Not really sure how relevant this is to our discussion, but the laws of physics are now entirely based on probability:
“The actual behaviour of any individual photon is therefore totally random and unpredictable, not just in practice but even in principle. Although the tossing of a coin, for example, is random in practice, if we knew precisely everything about the force, angle, shape, air currents, etc, we could, in principle, predict the outcome accurately. The behaviour of a sub-atomic particle, however, is random on a whole different level, and can never be predicted.”
http://www.physicsoftheuniverse.com/topics_quantum_probability.html

Peter Herman
Peter Herman

It is reassuring that there are moderating voices out there that balance the over the top coverage in the US media.

Explorer

I don’t know how much of the Daily Antifeminist’s writings are sheer trolling and how much of it is more serious. Yet, after reading his post (and subsequent comment) defending biological determinism and rejecting free will (and using this position as a philosophical basis of the sex / gender discrimination),
[TOC: Link for DAF post of 29 Jan deleted. I would not feel comfortable posting it without pre-reading DAF’s post for legality. I have enough work already moderating posts made here!]
I tend to think that his anti-feminist stance is basically serious, while some more inflammatory, explicitly misogynist stuff like your infamous “rape apology” is more like a creative troll-style provocation. So, what I will write below is based on such understanding of his ideas, which may be correct or not.
My stance, in direct contradiction to the Daily Antifeminist’s one, can be described as pro-sex-positive feminism, pro-gender-equality and most importantly, pro-consent. My views were substantially influenced by older, liberatory forms of feminism expressed by the authors like Judith Levine (whose “Harmful for Minors” introduced me into the pro-intergenerational sexuality milieu in the first place), Shulamith Firestone and Gayle Rubin (whose “Deviations” I consider to be one of the most brilliant works ever written on sexuality). Unlike you, I maintain that consensuality – this is, mutual voluntariness expressed by all participants of the sexual activity – is THE most fundamentally important precondition for the genuine sexual liberation. And by “genuine” I mean universal, equal and progressive, not benefiting ones (say, men) at the painful expense of others (say, women) and not requiring to destroy all the sociocultural achievements of the (post )modernity to be actualised. The change that intends to greatly empower one group of people by severely disempowering any other group (or several groups), or by reversing social history to some ancient pre-modern era, is not liberatory at all, even if the group being empowered so disproportionately is indeed harshly discriminated in society. It is reverse discrimination at best, reverse enslavement at worst. The only people who can and should be deprived of their excessive power are willing oppressors; and, even in their case, their status can only be lowered to the point of equality, not downgraded to slave-like one out of the lust for revenge.
I do understand that the liberatory current within feminism is nowadays largely marginalised and suppressed by sex-negative, misandrist types. Yet it does not change the fact that sexually liberatory, gender-egalitarian version of feminism was one of the best attempts to create the framework for joyous mutuality in sexual relations we ever had. So, a very small number of feminists who are still supportive of the intergenerational sexuality (and sexuality in general) can and should be the part of the Paedophile Liberation.
And as for the men’s rights movement, the number of child-adult sexuality advocates there is as miniscule as the one within feminism, so no one can say that men’s rights milieu is somehow more intrinsically acceptive to child (sexual) liberation notions than feminist one is. Let’s face it, the overwhelming majority of men’s advocates are as furiously anti-child-adult sex (as well as, it seems, generally anti-sex) as the vast majority of modern feminists. So, we can and should reach the very few friendly individuals in both movements.
At the same time, I should note that pro-paedosexuality views expressed today within men’s rights movement are, apparently, largely the ones of so-called “involuntary celibates” (“incels”), and they are as anti-consent, anti-equality and anti-(sociocultural-)progress as possible. It is not sexual freedom for everyone which “incels” desire; what they desire is sexual satisfaction for themselves first and foremost, followed by the same satisfaction for men in general, at the cruel expense of women (who are perceived as lower beings undeserving fully human status, and whose willingness, or lack of it, is dismissed as irrelevant) and society in general (which is intended to be “downgraded” to the point of being effectively medieval in all aspects except purely material and technological). As much as such stance is (at least partially) serious, I oppose it wholeheartedly.
The radical difference of the moral positions and intentions of the Daily Antifeminist and me appear to be based on our entirely incompatible intellectual understanding of mind and reality. Daily Antifeminist seems to be a hardcore materialist, and I’m an immaterialist – with my views being based not just on philosophical and spiritual reflections, but mostly on “fringe”, highly controversial, yet (in my assessment) genuinely scientific research of anomalous abilities and properties of mind, such as parapsychology, transpersonal psychology and near-death studies. The evidence gathered in this contested yet highly interesting areas strongly point to the possibility of genuine transcendence of the mind beyond the corporeal constraints, of the existence of non-physical yet objectively testable aspects of the psyche and the world. It seems to demonstrate that our spirit is not entirely determined by physical and biological causes; in fact, it apparently can violate the “laws” of physics and biology by the power of the will – the possibility which I accept without difficulty, since, as the famous scientific heretic Rupert Sheldrake rightfully noted, the notions of total immutability and absolute inviolability of the “laws of physics” are just debatable philosophical assumptions which were never proven.
With such evidential basis for the possibility of spiritual transcendence, I can fully accept, and support, the existence of unconditional freedom, dignity and equality, of selfhood and personhood that is neither reduced to nor determined by external factors, be they physical, social or cultural. This is the view that was at the root of the heretical and occult movements that provided the basis for the modern Libertarian and / or Left movements long before any movements were called so for the first time. Later, such ideas was taken by Libertarian and / or Left materialists as well, who paradoxically acted socially AS IF human minds were transcendent (and thus universal freedom, dignity and equality are possible) while simultaneously denied the transcendence of the mind on the intellectual level.
Well, I can easily accept the existence of such crypto-transcendent materialists, as well as I can easily accept even stronger disagreement and difference. In the case of the Daily Antifeminist, our disagreements are fundamental; I will not be able to persuade him to accept my views, and he will not be able to persuade me to accept his. So, we can just agree to disagree and go our different ways. I will not support him, yet I will not try to hinder his attempts as well.
And, if the Daily Antifeminist’s real goal is indeed to make humane pro-intergenerational sexuality ideas more publicly acceptable by falsely pretending to be as atrocious as possible, in order to draw off the flames of massive hatred to himself and to save other (pro )paedo-activists from them (and moving the Overton window in their favour in the process), he will definitely accept such neutral stance.

Libertine

They say your brainwaves can last as long as ten minutes after you have died!
you may find this article interesting about a guy that dies several times
https://www.express.co.uk/news/science/657412/What-is-it-like-to-be-dead-Patient-who-died-says-there-is-NOTHING-after-death

I like 17yo girls so I have a Chronophilia :(

The seeds of Dr. Cantor and Mr. Seto have borne fruits:
https://theconversation.com/what-are-chronophilias-88074
Fun facts: Roy Moore has a chronophilia named “ephebophilia” not that he is just a normal heterosexual male and likes 14-17 year old women as much as 99% of men, no, who I can think of that?

I like 17yo girls so I have a Chronophilia :(

“Being attracted to someone who is prepubertal, pubertal or post-menopausal would not lead to offspring. Scientists would expect the traits underlying these attractions to be less likely to appear in future generations since they wouldn’t be passed on.”
Yes, pubertal cannot reproduce, a 13yo cannot get pregnant. 2 + 2 = 5
And why aren’t there fewer and fewer homosexuals? who homosexual traits can passed on future gens too? is that homosexuals can reproduce and I didn’t know it? 🙁

sugarboy

The term was created by John Money, However, strictly speaking, if someone likes 25 yo women but not 17 yo girls, or if someone likes adults but not children, then he too has a chronophilia…

MAP Alert Broadcast

Ex-police chief wants to train a “citizen’s army” against pedophiles
Former police chief Jim Gamble said the law should be changed so only those with police permission or reasonable excuse could pose as an under-18 on the internet.
Appearing before the Independent Inquiry into Child Sexual Abuse (IICSA), he said the crude methods used by have-a-go detectives should be taught to a “citizen’s army” of volunteers under police guidance.
[…snap…]
He continued: “We know from the vigilante experience that you don’t need to be a rocket scientist to carry out some of the low-level work that captures a lot of the low-hanging fruit.”
“The police resist this and I don’t know why.
“Begin thinking about better ways that we can build a citizen’s army that creates a much greater likelihood of someone talking to your 13-year-old daughter, actually talking to a 30-year-old volunteer digital detective.
“I cannot, for the life of me, understand why that concept has not been embraced.”
Full article:
https://www.shropshirestar.com/news/uk-news/2018/01/23/ex-police-chief-wants-masquerading-as-a-child-online-made-an-offence/

Libertine

Maybe us boyLovers should be more like Tom Hardy and be straight to the point; No messing! but when he referred to ‘boys’ I think he was really referring to young men. I like the sentement though….’I prefer boys’.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pGh57mWtDd4

sean

At the risk of hogging the mic (why stop now?) and in the face of some suggestions that I belong with the VirPed crowd and may be adopting too much of an Uncle Tom position, I’d just like to point out that …
… I’m attracted to little girls. The ages I’m most attracted to are from four to six years old.
Sure, those little girls can be romantic and, frankly, in your face sexy, but they’re also complicated, vulnerable and delicate. They’re babies really, aren’t they?
So I don’t mind giving them some space. I’m extremely protective and I follow the precautionary principle in my dealings with them. My nightmare scenario is that, through some inadvertent stupidity, I should make one of them less confident and less comfortable with who she is.
In contrast to little girls, many of the comments here have been made in reference to teenage boys, who seem quite robust in comparison (not that they can’t also be complicated, vulnerable and delicate).
Are there fundamental differences in how we should think about these different categories of ‘child’?

Edward Chambers

I think it’s amazing sean, sincerely, that you are not a member of Virped. Maybe you are, but that is none of my business. What is so cool is that you live the life of a Virped, everyday, with your little friends. Many VPs talk the talk but don’t walk the walk, and you do both and with no anonymity, although you are for the sake of argument anonymous here.
It’s been very refreshing for me to read your posts, to know you are in contact with children everyday, and yet not to be offending. It’s a positive the world could learn much from if you made a song and dance about it. I would love to see that, although it could be hazardous to your life.
Although we tread very different paths, I want to thank you. I had been feeling quite out of sorts recently, directionless if you like. After reading through your posts, particularly as to how some people let their paedophilia manifest, whether it be through the use of child pornography and ‘preteen beaver shots’ as you described or how for example you lead your life, we are all child lovers, although the definition does indeed vary. It is ironic that I now feel empowered to take the direction that I will as a result of reading your posts. I feel invigorated.
I wanted to sign off here, by saying these few words. A big thank you to Tom for allowing me to guest blog. As I have already said to him in private, it’s been an honour and a privilege, and the same can be said for having the opportunity to read the posts of so many intelligent and eloquent paedophiles.

sean

Edward Chambers: “It’s been very refreshing for me to read your posts”
Thanks Edward. I’ve been feeling a bit self conscious about the sheer volume of my comments here, so I feel much better about that now!
I don’t have mobs of little girls climbing on me every day (altho that would be nice) but I have had very real friendships with girls and, increasingly, their adult selves.
I have one little girl friend at the moment. I haven’t seen her for a few weeks because she is overseas with her family, but her mum knows I’ll be missing her and will txt me to come for tea when they get back.
What really moves me is the understanding and support of a mother who knows my orientation and is fiercely protective of her daughter, yet allows and facilitates our friendship. It’s life enhancing and humbling.

americanrifleman09

Hey Sean, my argument is “that’s why children have guardians.” I do not expect a removal of the age of consent and then a free for all. A massage parlor can massage a five year old girl nearly anywhere for her pleasure (and yes sexual too as all humans have erogenous zones) and it is okay, because her guardians are there to make sure it remains okay, their daughter remains respected and safe and consenting.
Teens do not need such protection (though our society infantilizes them to almost require it).

Libertine

You sound like you’ve just come back from Thailand, if so, where is this place of forbidden pleasure LOL.

americanrifleman09

Lmao it’s in my fantasies. I was talking theoretically. Oh you mean the massages? I said “nearly” because I mean “most places except the genitals” lol

sean

Tom: “Hate to say it, but I used the swimming comparison in 1980, in my book Paedophilia: The Radical Case!”
I love the swimming analogy, I really do. It enables all kinds of extended metaphors, most of which have something to say about the topic in hand.
My problem with it (haha, inevitably) applies to all such comparisons.
Sex between two people involves desire for (usually) and use of (always) another person’s body. Nothing else really does, and this fact has far reaching implications.
In particular, it means that a high degree of mindfulness and empathy is necessary if one is to avoid ever hurting the other person. Even married couples who love one another routinely inflict terrible injuries in pursuit of their personal ends.
So, the difference between sex and water is that water isn’t a manifestation of desire.
Of course this isn’t implying that children can’t benefit from learning about sex, its just to say that the comparison with swimming fails to capture some important details.
Learning about friendship can also be a devastating experience, sometimes more than a child can bear, but that doesn’t mean we should protect children from friendship, it just means that we need to be aware of the dangers of friendship and alert to the pitfalls of being young.

Jim Hunter

Very poignant and instructive little vignette.

sean

Guess what, I have read your book. It had quite an influence on my understanding of myself as a minor attracted person. I must revisit it.
Ironically, it was your quote from T H White’s diary that had the greatest impact on me. You criticised his self loathing, while I responded powerfully to the authenticity of his love for Zed. I went on to read the Townsend Warner biography where the quote appeared (as well as White’s other works) and I felt a lot of kinship with him. White and I have had similar lives in some ways (except that I’m not gay and I’ve never practiced falconry).
I was very struck by the fact that White’s friends observed that he enjoyed the company of boys and suggested he teach at a boy’s school. It’s a shame we’ve regressed so far from that so uncomplicated insight, but it’s exactly that kind of normal response to my own feelings that I aspire to receive from my own friends one day. Actually, I’m not that far from it, except they would suggest a girl’s school. Or maybe a preschool, lol.
On traumatic interruptions in children’s intimate lives, when I was little boy I had a friendship with adolescent boy that was more or less abruptly terminated. I remember being very upset and, despite being told to have no contact with him, I remember hugging him passionately and kissing him goodbye.
It’s odd because I never had any sex play with him, but I did with other older boys who I didn’t care about half as much. I was a confident kid with a high IQ so I tended to gravitate toward an older age group, and I was curious about sex and its pleasures. The older boys generally tolerated me, but weren’t particularly interested in my body.
It was all this larking about that led to the abuse I mentioned, which lasted for two years and was quite nasty. Besides some significant physical injuries, the most despicable component was a concerted effort on the part of the adults involved to drive a wedge between me and the other kids and to make me a pariah. They tried to send me to ‘Coventry’ basically. All this was in an institutional setting, where our lives were easily interrupted on an adult whim. My whole family was there so, without them, I had no one.
So, on friendship, my friendships with the other boys in this environment were an absolute lifesaver. I’m still very close to some of them now, 50 years later.
The fact my friends stood by me is something I still think about with satisfaction and gratitude.

sean

” it wouldn’t be much good people trying to send me to Coventry. It’s where I was born and brought up”
Lol, yeah, I have nothing against Coventry! I have no idea of the origin of the expression. Do you?

sean

Tom: “sane and balanced”
Thank you!

sean

oh and…. for me, the starting point is liberty for all, but if there’s clear evidence that a liberty directly harms children, i will argue against it.

sean

here is an attempt to state my position succinctly.
1. i want to be accepted without prejudice as a person who is sexually/romantically attracted to children.
2. i want it recognized that i’m responsible for my actions and willing and able to conform to moral and legal norms around sexual conduct with children.
3. consequent to #2, want it recognized that meeting these responsibilities earns me certain rights, such as the right to work with or otherwise socialize with children, the right to explore and represent my sexuality in art and the right to question prevailing social attitudes to both paedophilia and child sexuality.
4. expanding on the last of these, i do not consider it a condition of my acceptance that i profess agreement with society’s blanket condemnation of adult/child sexual conduct.
thats it really. i was abused in my own childhood. it wasn’t sexual abuse but it had a massive impact on my life. i feel deeply for abused children, including those who suffer sexual abuse. it must be an utterly miserable experience.
by the same token, the abuse i suffered was triggered by my own childhood sexual behaviour, which was wholly consensual and driven by pleasure an curiosity.
so, i understand that children have a right to sexual self expression that is commonly denied them.
but the issues are quite separate to those that prevent me from being open about who i am.

Ethan Edwards

Sean, I have been skimming these discussions, but I start reading carefully when I get to your posts. I fully accept you do not feel aligned with the VP position, but I think we may have things to talk about. If you could write to me at ethane72@gmail.com I would greatly appreciate it.

sean

Tom: “So how do we get a more nuanced discussion?”
I think we separate issues around sexual conduct with children from all the other issues that minor attracted people face, and we desist from putting that one most contentious issue forward as if it defines us.
For one thing, it divides us.
It also takes attention and public sympathy away from the many other issues we all face, such as the stigma against us and the emotional toll it wreaks.
There’s no reason not to discuss sexual conduct with children, in context, but I think allowing it to become an ideological battle has paralysed discussion of our other shared concerns and has distorted public understanding of our nature and more practical needs.
I’ve always professed a strictly agnostic view on sexual conduct with minors, which is simply to say that I don’t know what the answer is. I can see why the prohibitions exist, but I’m also conscious that they reflect a legacy of sexual puritanism which has caused much human misery. My position is informed by my own childhood experiences but its mostly just an intellectual puzzle. The question has little practical impact on my own life because I’m happy living without sexual relationships with kids.
When I voice this agnosticism, most people disagree with me strongly, either because they think I’m being far too liberal, or because I’m not nearly liberal enough. The rare person who seeks to understand why I’m so undecided is initiating what I would call a “more nuanced discussion” of sexual conduct, open to arguments reflecting both points of view. They may not be convinced to take such a middle path as me, but at least some kind of dialectic is allowed.
More importantly, taking a less binary stance on this one, polarizing issue opens the door to more nuanced discussions of paedophilia in general. That’s what I’d really like to see. For example, we’re so busy rejecting the pathologizing of paedophilia by ‘experts’ that we become blind to the very real problems that many of us do actually face. There’s a kind of hysterical insistence that everything about our condition is a wonderful gift. Sure, some of it is, but other things are pretty hard, especially in the current social environment.
We need a more nuanced discussion of paedophilia to be happening out in society, and we can only have it there if we can have it here, among ourselves.

Edward Chambers

Generally in agreement with you here Sean, which is nice for a change. With that being said, your ‘middle’ stance is very much open to interpretation.
I’d like to underline that all opinions from ‘experts’ on this topic should be rejected with the contempt they deserve, particularly Queen Cantor and the likes of Old Mother Goode. Unless of course said experts are MAPs themselves, in which case they really do know what they are talking about, or at least should, and are more likely to listen to the ‘proletariat’ MAP like myself. Although there are a few, I am led to believe, that are worthwhile as non MAP on topic ‘experts’, most notably Mike Bailey of sexnet fame.
Which brings me on to the topic that attracts my interest the most, which is for us as a community to develop therapy organisations provided by MAPs for MAPs. If I am sounding like a scratched record, it is simply as a result of my own experiences in life and the difficulties I have faced obtaining help and coming to terms with my sexuality. I digress, but in responding to someone who is wanting therapy / support / help it would take a very learned / experienced MAP mind to avoid certain pitfalls in relation to this topic.

sean

Agreed. What’s urgently needed is an informed sexological perspective on paedophilia that is not primarily motivated by a child protection agenda, and also a clinical practice focused on the welfare of minor attracted people as ordinary people, rather than potential offenders.
There are some workers, such as Fred Berlin and Michael Seto, who have exhibited a genuine interest in the problems faced by minor attracted people, and who have expressed a need for more tolerance and support from the wider community. Ray Blanchard also seems to write on this subject with more curiosity than prejudice.
Therapists who feel equipped to help sexually abused clients, but are out of their depth when faced with minor attracted people, should maybe ask some questions about their understanding of the issue as a whole. This is not to imply that minor attracted people are abusers, but that sex is an aspect of human relationships that seldom fits into a neat package or conforms to social expectations.
As I’ve said, my experience with therapists has been generally very good. The one notable exception was a person who I now know to be deeply embedded in what I can only describe as a sexual abuse counseling racket. Apart from that one occasion, I’ve been treated with respect and kindness and have always emerged with my dignity intact.
On some of these occasions I’ve sought therapy for problems in my life unrelated to paedophilia, and on others my attraction to children has been the primary motivator. Regardless, I’ve eventually gotten around to a frank discussion of my sexuality.
Therapists are usually interested to know whether I’m engaging or planning to engage in any activities that could harm other people, children in particular. They may be fulfilling an obligation or simply being conscientious, but I’ve never felt threatened by this situation, because it as always been presented as a formal requirement of their role, not a judgment.
Beyond that, unfortunately, I’ve only met one therapist with any deep insight into minor attraction. The others have often been very thoughtful and perceptive and have had helpful things to say about it, but my sense has always been that I am the one doing the educating. The exception was a person who had seen a lot of clients who work with children, so the issue of sexual attraction to children had come up often in his practice. I regret that I didn’t explore that issue more at the time, but it wasn’t really our focus.
I’m sometimes treated by friends as if I’m obsessing over or preoccupied with children and that my attraction to them is merely a fancy. I worry about this myself. Have I just become so involved in the subject that I can’t go on and live an ordinary life? Should I just ‘not go there’ as one friend advised?
But my history belies that view. Ever since falling in love with a six year old girl in my preteens, I’ve been conscious of my attraction to little girls. Not only that, but when I’m lucky enough to have a little girl as a friend, and when I’m with her doing dumb stuff like painting starfish on rocks, I experience a kind of completeness that nothing else provides. I’m attracted to women as well, and I can see there are parallels and differences in these two kinds of attraction, and I can also be confident that whatever attracts me to girl children is at least as profound and integral to my nature as the more familiar varieties of sexual attraction. My attraction seems to be a sexual orientation because it can produce intense sexual arousal and strong romantic attachments. My attraction to children is also gendered. I don’t dislike boys, but I don’t notice them in the street or go out of my way to meet them.
So what do I do with this knowledge and these feelings? I’m cautious in the way I handle the stronger emotions. I masturbate in private and I never sexualize my real life friendships with children. If I do fall in love, I’m mindful that my beloved is her own person, and doesn’t need my romantic feelings. At most, all she needs is my friendship and commitment. Little girls are romantic creatures by nature, so they usually know how I feel. I don’t need to make it obvious.
Of course, it isn’t always sweetness and light. Some of my experiences over the years have been very sad and very traumatic, and I’ve not been able to share those feelings with anybody. These must be common experiences for minor attracted people. Things such as the utter loneliness and isolation that surrounds a person who has lost a loved one, who nobody knows he loved, who he is ashamed of loving.
So all of this remains a mystery and a puzzle. I’ve spent a lifetime figuring out how to make my attraction a source of happiness and not pain. I wish I could have talked to someone who could have guided me away from the worst of the mistakes I’ve made, or given me some idea of what would eventually give me some joy and some feeling of resolution and satisfaction (more lasting than a quick wank into a hanky).
So yeah, it would be really good if minor attracted people could have a genuine sense of community and help one another through difficult times and celebrate small victories. But the assumption is that any gathering of minor attracted people must be exchanging child porn or swapping tips on molesting children, because that’s the kind of people we are, right? Anonymous. Secretive. Invisible.
I can think of a lot of things that need to change before we start worrying about who’s allowed to have sex with who.

jedson

I have been following this blog, but have not had the time or energy to respond much. (Been a little under the weather). So forgive me for seeming to jump into the middle of things. I have met Fred Berlin and heard him speak. He is a very nice person. But he thinks there is something fundamentally wrong with us. We need therapy. The therapy that is currently being forced on many of us is brainwashing, pure and simple. That’s what the “cognitive” in cognitive behavioral therapy means. I really don’t know of any well defined approach other than this. Fred just thinks that the disabled should be treated with greater kindness. His position is really not much better than that. Just because a therapist is a kind person who does not want disabled people humiliated – on not as much so as they presently are – doesn’t put them on our side.
Society is profoundly wrong on the subject of intergenerational love. As profoundly and ridiculously and damagingly wrong as it was during the anti-masturbation panic, which I am sure everybody on the blog is familiar with. To take people engaged in harmless, desired and highly valued relationships such as were described, for example, in the Sandfort studies, and not only destroy those relationships, but destroy the participants as viable social beings, as well, is criminal. I have nothing against Fred Berlin. I use him as an example because others do. I am just saying that he is with the establishment when all is said and done, and that puts a watershed between him and me. The establishment is criminal on this issue. I’m as uncertain as anyone else here as to how we should proceed politically. We do need to support each other as best we can emotionally. First and foremost this means that we discourage people from seeing themselves as the mainstream sees them. Almost all therapist do, and they have nothing to offer us. It’s a no-brainer to me. If you go to a therapist for this issue they will report you to the state. Therapy cannot happen in that context. Before Stonewall homosexual groups invited friendly psychiatrists to their self-help groups to give them some guidance in understanding themselves. I say, beware the soft-sell. It’s all the same product.

Jonathan

but I can! vvvvv

Peter Herman

Same here. I could not agree more. I too have had exchanges with Fred Berlin and can confirm what Jedson is talking about. The best that can be said about Berlin is that he is not into messing with people’s brain matter, white, gray or otherwise.

sean

yes i totally agree about fred berlin and the pathologizing of our situation. i also have a lot of sympathy with your other comments. i’m lucky to live in a country where i can tell a therapist everything without risk. I’ve never come under the slightest pressure to attempt to change my orientation. ive sought therapy (in part) to help me manage th stresses and dilemmas of living with paedophilia. the people ive seen have not had any specialist knowledge of my condition but they have been interested and engaged and helpful. it seems tragic to me that maps cant seek such help without fear. i dont know where id be without it. son
me of the discussions ive had with therapists have been
as nuanced as any ive seen here, meaning that they have been open to all points of view, without prejudice.

sean

hi jedson, as an afterthought, i want to challenge you on something, and maybe this will help clarify my position you begin by rejecting the pathologizing of paedophilia by clinicians. i could not agree with you more on this. it is the bedrock of my sexual identity that my attraction to children is innate and benign. then you go on to say that “Society is profoundly wrong on the subject of intergenerational love.”.
i have no problem with this statement either, and i broadly agree with it. HOWEVER i do not think it is logical or helpful to conflate society’s attitude to paedophilia with society’s attitude to intergenerational love.
the conflation of these issues has made my project more difficult, despite the fact that my position, as i have expressed it to friends, family and therapists, is very similar to yours. i have never given in to pressure from any of these people to outright condemn intergenerational love. i just dont predicate society’s acceptance of me on society’s acceptance of what, to most, is unacceptable.

jedson

First, if the information you share in counseling really is confidential, then maybe the counseling could be useful. Certainly the reporting law is one of my main bones of contention with the mental health industry in this country (the US.) So I don’t intend for my comments to apply to more enlightened countries. (Would like to hear about them.)
Your other points require a more extended response, but I will try to be brief. The Reader’s Digest answer to your question about society accepting me is that I gave up on hoping for that, or striving for that, a long time ago. Life did not become easy when I gave that up, but it became manageable. This, incidentally, relates to the question of counseling. I see mental health workers as agents of the state. They, and their hired hands, do not accept me. The reality is, even if I change they will not accept me. (This carrot on a stick they hold out to people in counseling groups – “this will help you get re-integrated back into society” – is a scam – and a cruel one.) I will always be the one who was “that way” – who can’t really be trusted. The Fred Berlins of the profession may show some pity for me. But not real respect. I can manage quite well without that pity. Nor do I want their “restorative justice.” Nor do I want them to love the sinner but hate the sin. The most I hope for from the mainstream and their representatives is that they leave me alone. I don’t even need their assistance in order to conform to society’s rules. I choose to conform in order to avoid certain negative consequences, and I conform under my own power.
The truth is that I am an enemy of the mainstream. I try not to let this make me hate any person. But I do hate the core values and ways of understanding reality that mold my society. But that’s too much to go into here.
Perhaps the most central issue of all in relation to what is called “mental health” (a term I don’t much like – I would just say “personal wellbeing”) is balancing the need for individuated autonomy with belonging. It’s a struggle at best for everybody. To be yourself, and yet belong. I have always wanted to belong, and always found it difficult. Most often, when I approached a group where I thought I might belong, they asked that I check in my identity at the door. To some extent compromises may be possible, but groups tolerate only so much diversity. Not very much, really, as a rule.
I understand you wish to separate out the issue in intergenerational love from pedophilia. If we construct a meaning of pedophilia that excludes sexual feelings, I suppose this is logically possible. I guess I’d like to hear more about how you see the possibility of a “pedophilia” that does not include Eros – a pedophilia that is not in some way, or to some extent, grounded in sexual desire (whether acted on explicitly or not). Pedophilia is the love of children. Even Socrates, the first great puritan, did not believe that loving boys had nothing at all to do with sex.
Let me return to the analogy of the boys in the dorm wanting to masturbate. What are we to say to them? You can think dirty thoughts but don’t play with your dingle? Hmmm. I don’t think that’s going to fly. Most likely if boys have special friendships they are going to want to masturbate – either by themselves or with their friends. How exactly are we to keep sex and love separate? Perhaps we need to keep boys from seeing each other’s cute butts. Build them separate shower stalls. Have them wear baggy shorts. Send them to prison for sending illegal images of themselves to each other. Legislate strange ways of hugging so that the not-alright-places of little people never touch the not-all-right places of big people, even through clothes. Divide the body up into all-right and not-all-right places in the first place. What are we doing to ourselves, as a people? As a species?

sean

jedson: ” If we construct a meaning of pedophilia that excludes sexual feelings, I suppose this is logically possible.”
I’ve never argued for excluding eros. I’ve never argued that sexual feelings should be denied, only that there’s some choice in how they are expressed.
I’ve sought to express my feelings in a way that doesn’t transgress against current norms, and I’ve found that having genuine friendships with children meets my needs. My eros is very much involved, but not expressed as ‘erotic’ activity in the usual sense. If society were accepting of it, I might allow a more explicitly sexual dynamic to emerge, but it doesn’t, so I don’t.
If you look at the history of romanticism, you’ll see that eros permeates our connection to nature in all its forms. This kind of holistic, transcendental engagement can be profound and emotional and even erotic without needing to be be sexual. If you can pour your heart into a friendship with a child, without shame or secrecy, well that can be transformative. Spiritual even.
I would say that the very best of rewards to be had from a sexual relationship can be had from simple friendship. The common factor is love.
What I really seek is permission to love. Sex doesn’t have to come into it.

sean

jedson: “First, if the information you share in counseling really is confidential, then maybe the counseling could be useful. ”
Yes, I’m very lucky not to to live in a puritanical fascist plutocracy!
Lol. But seriously… I feel very lucky to have been able to talk about the things I have with a therapist.
I’ve seen three really good ones over the past 20 years, and I’ve been far more open with them than I am here. They don’t tell me what I should be doing to be a better person. They’re just an objective ear that can help put my thoughts in order and bring my attention back to the important stuff.
I don’t think MAPs need therapy because they’re MAPs, but in today’s environment, you’d need to be a strong person to soak up all that stigma and condemnation without reacting. Also, as Tom said, sometimes frustration leads people to make stupid decisions, so any support and coaching in self management and mindfulness is welcome, as far as I’m concerned.
Also, I once reached the point where I attempted suicide. That is NEVER going to happen again.

Edward Chambers

Jedson, thank you for commenting here. I think there will not be a person here who can not and will not empathise with you. As already stated by other Kameraden hier you have hit the nail on the head, precisely as to how I feel.
I did not choose my sexuality. At first I wanted help to be different, and did everything I could. I realise the main stream does not provide what we need, and couldn’t care less anyway. Unfortunately I find myself in a position whence my hatred is so very strong also, not just towards those who have thought to change me as you have described, to be ‘one of them…but reformed…but never to be trusted’. I now have contempt for these people, so much more so than their very concept of ‘helping’ has shown me, and a wholly contemptuous disdain towards society for allowing such ignorance to be perpetuated, for allowing us to be referred to in such derogatory terms, to be dehumanised and cast aside.
As Peter has stated, our priority should be how we see ourselves, namely positively, and for me that does not include Virped or any of the many mental health ‘professionals’ and ‘experts’ that they have capitulated to and aligned with. Therapy provided by those who Virped have sought to curry favour with is less than an insult. I wish it were not, but this is how deep the ignorance and mindless brainwashing runs in these circles.
For those who want to entertain the VP dogma, the poor fools who are members, let them be. If they have anything about them as people, they will understand soon enough it is society that is wrong, caught up in a fascinating but fallacious competition to see who can shout ‘I’m a good person’ the loudest.
Forget whatever whoever thinks about us. Unless of course you are one of us.

sean

jedson: “Perhaps the most central issue of all in relation to what is called “mental health” (a term I don’t much like – I would just say “personal wellbeing”) is balancing the need for individuated autonomy with belonging. It’s a struggle at best for everybody. To be yourself, and yet belong. I have always wanted to belong, and always found it difficult. ”
Yes!

Edward Chambers

You are right sean, so much that is written here I keep reading over and over again saying the same thing : yes.

Peter Herman

Hi Sean, Your concern about a more nuanced discussion seems to be a plea to have the wider public see MAPs as rounded individuals with many more dimensions to them. I doubt this will happen anytime soon. From my point of view, the more important issue is convincing the wider MAP community that there is nothing wrong with them. I believe that the achievement of a positive self image is the sin qua non for convincing others. Sadly, we still have a lot of work to do.

sean

totally agree. altho i think it is worth doing something to counter social prejudice. ive been open about my sexuallity with a select group of people an altho it has caused me some problems, it has been mostly very positive. whats surprised me is how quickly most have set aside their learned prejudice and sought to understand this aspect of me as an individual.

Jim Hunter

Sean
My apologies if I am sometimes too strident in my comments. I am afraid that my anger at the mainstream is always overflowing the boundaries to a degree. So I probably fail to make it clear to you that find your posts well-stated and thought-provoking.
Re: “more nuanced discussion.” I think I agree with you. I might call it a “in-depth” discussion. There is a lot of excellent stuff on this blog already, but its worth asking whether we might be able to develop the capacity for a discussion that is even more intellectually stimulating and perhaps emotionally supportive as well.
The first thing that comes to my mind is that how we want to present ourselves to the public and how we want to present ourselves to each other are separate issues.
A more in-depth discussion would mean, in large part, trying to see things in a larger context – both personally and philosophically. Here is our dilemma. A more in depth discussion would probably add interest to the discussion. But it would also add risk. We don’t all see the larger context in the same way. When issues pertaining to our core values and perceptions of reality begin to get debated the possibility of interpersonal conflict and alienation always emerges.
I think with regard to how we present ourselves to the larger public, a simple, single issue approach is probably best. But perhaps a more “nuanced” (or more in depth – broader) discussion would be possible here.

sean

Jim Hunter: “well-stated and thought-provoking.”
Thanks Jim. That’s nice to hear!
I heard this the other day. You might find it relevant:
“Dialogue And Exchange”
https://www.npr.org/programs/ted-radio-hour/558307433

feinmann0

I see Denmark is experiencing problems with its young people: http://nationalpost.com/news/1000-young-people-in-denmark-may-have-distributed-child-porn
One comment elsewhere, suitably paraphrased: “If the press and police had kept their mouths shut, the videos would only have circulated among youngster and pedophiles – each group on its own. But the press and police has not been able to refrain from doing so. The videos will therefore circulate more widely, which will break down the borders between youngsters, pedophiles, and common people, with the result that the videos will circulate in a transverse way.
Any deterrent against young people is useless. Young people, by definition are rebels. The press and police should not have advertised that fact.”
I would add too that young people are inherently sexual creatures. “News” such as this only reinforces that fact and weakens the insane laws designed to control and suppress natural, healthy, inquisitive, human behaviour.

TrueMAP

https://dailyantifeminist.wordpress.com/2018/01/16/rape-apologia-explainig-the-method-in-the-madness/
Here he makes it very clear that he is not a monster, he is a martyr who wants to give even his personal integrity for all of us.

Erich

Thanks, Tom, I think we have to shun these people like those who defend returning to dark times, we are the progress of humanity, these people are the horrible and barbaric past who want to return.
Pedophilia and attraction to minors is something respectable, and mostly good in essence, these people are evil even though they can be pedophiles or attracted to minors they have nothing to do with us like a Jewish heterosexual have nothing to do with Hitler just because they are both heterosexual.

E.

dailyantifeminist: “I consider writing something much less inflammatory and much more conciliatory specifically for the commentators at Heretic TOC who denounce me, because I support Tom O’Carroll regardless of whether or not he supports me, and I want him and like-minded individuals to know it.”
https://dailyantifeminist.wordpress.com/2018/01/20/i-understand-your-psychology-and-the-shitty-strategy-resulting-from-it-5-points-for-your-consideration/#comment-346

Libertine

There was speculation that Hitler was homosexual ,or, at least, had homosexual experience when you consider he was a street artist after WW1. He had no real problem with homos in the early days of the socialist workers party. As soon as Ernst Rohm got too powerful, his homosexuality was the scapegoat Hitler needed to remove him on the night of long knives.

Peter Herman

Tom, I strongly disagree with your intention of refusing to allow this particular link. The author’s purposeful shocking assertion made for effect may be crude, but his rationale, as you recognize, is not only articulate but also makes a lot of sense. I have long argued that well researched arguments may ultimately be useful but are of little value until they catch the attention of a wider public. Most people respond more readily to emotional arguments. No amount of scholarship will move the needle very far. We must find the emotional arguments that are less crude than the troll you cite but that are effective. If you are to refuse links or people who post, I would suggest those like VirPed apologists who do not link to cites or post opinions contrary to theirs.
You cite MLK, but I doubt very much that had he not been killed (a very emotional event indeed) his legacy would not have been celebrated nearly as well as had he lived. Kindness is fine for those who respect and appreciate it, but robust confrontation (very un-English I know) has a much better chance of getting attention and bringing results. As an example in point, I will give you Lyndon B. Johnson. He also did a lot for civil rights in the US, and he often did it by methods we would describe as very ungentlemanly.

Peter Herman

I do not think you understood my point!

warbling j turpitude

i would have to concur that, if not misunderstanding, Tom certainly seems to be largely missing your point, which I think you are very right PH in averring that the essential thrust of all ‘argument’ against paedophilia is emotional in nature before it is anything else, and, that being so, one has to think very carefully indeed about how those who were never argued into a position, could ever be argued out of it. Instead, it’s as if the ‘discourse’ surrounding the child simply (or not so simply) morphed into something no individual person could be accountable for, and the emotions of the world were carried along with that, wholesale or ‘willy-nilly’. So we have to be thinking in terms of exactly how language engages emotion, and how the language is in turn then fed by emotion. I think the wholly emotional basis of the ‘argument’ for childhood “innocence” (ignorance) revolves around the sentiment that a growing person must be protected from disappointment for as long as possible, and that sexual experience holds the most potential of all for disappointment. Or something like that! Therefore I think that the ‘rape apologist’ is overall very much on the right track in his ..shall we say, primitive methodology, because the sentiments that we are dealing with here are in themselves highly primitive in nature, and made even more so by being preserved in some ghastly pseudo-scientific aspic. I haven’t been much help here, no doubt, but I’d really, really like to see this profound divergence in their feel for the thing on the part of PH and TOC greatly expanded, if at all possible!
I also ‘happen to think’ that use of the term “troll” is on a direct functional continuum with the term “pedo”…

Peter Herman

Tom, you are way too sensitive. Your ethics and personal integrity are indeed admirable, but rigid hewing to a personal code can at times lead to bad outcomes.
To clear things up, I was not endorsing the over the top comments of DAF. I was objecting to your dismissing his otherwise quite perceptive points by threatening to no longer link to him or individuals like him.
I myself really do not know how to formulate good strategies with emotional bang that can be put into practice. I only know that such strategies could be more impactful than simply the use of well reasoned arguments. I did try searching “After the Fall…” but could not get the article. We need to continue examining strategies that will do what the title seems to promise. Not all such initiatives are guaranteed to work. Similarly not all conventional advertising campaigns succeed either. We need to have the determination to actually put into practice actions that may, by trial and error, work or not work building on the former and discarding the latter.

americanrifleman09

Welcome to the fold Ed!
I am grateful I accepted myself and realized that society was/is wrong about children and us and sexuality in my late teens. Around a decade or so ago.
It must feel like a mountain has been lifted from your shoulders, after battling for so long. Kudos to you!

sean

“I am grateful I accepted myself and realized that society was/is wrong”
are these events linked somehow?

americanrifleman09

To me they were. When I viewed society as correct, that I was sick and a potential monster, I was not truly accepting myself. I rejected my paedophilia which is an innate part of who I am.

sean

Sure, society IS wrong to attach stigma and prejudice to paedophilia, without regard to the way it is expressed. I guess what I’m wondering was whether your acceptance of yourself is predicated on the idea that the social taboo on adult/child sexual activity is wrong.
Why I ask is that I’ve tended to separate these two things in my own search for sexual identity. Despite Ed’s comments, I don’t flatly condemn all sexual activity between adults and children, but I’m a pragmatist, and I’m also conscious that society’s sensitivity on this subject has a kernel of genuine concern.
So I don’t demand that society revise it’s position on sexual activity with kids as a prerequisite to its acceptance of paedophilia. Paedophilia is a naturally occurring variant of sexual orientation which does not imply ANY particular sexual activity, or indeed any particular attitude to any particular sexual activity. It is a sexual and romantic attraction, not a belief system or a practice.
So I feel as if your conflating of orientation and sexual attitude confuses this issue somehow, and I wondered if you’d thought about that.

americanrifleman09

If society was right my acceptance of myself would be accepting I had a mental illness, not a normal sexual attraction that is just a variant in the spectrum of human sexuality.
So to accept myself as a normal healthy human I must also reject society’s views on my sexuality.
The kernel of genuine concern is akin to the kernel of genuine concern about a child swimming, Yes, there is reason to take precautions and be responsible and be respectful, but it does not warrant full blown bans and witch hunts.

Jonathan

Children Swimming.
To compound the issue(s) fear of water and inability to swim are learned responses. It is a known fact that babies thrown into a swimming pool make swimming movements, do not take in H2O, and open their eyes underwater.
Says something about adult-child transference of fears etc.
This applies to sexuality too.

Explorer

It seems that the sex-swimming comparison is going viral – I used it myself a few months ago on GirlChat… just to learn later that there were many people before me who used it as well. And now you’re putting it forward, again.
There really must be something in it. 🙂

sexraysean

I like the analogy with swimming. Jonathan’s as well.
I sometimes think of the ‘waters’ of sexuality being somewhat toxic and shark infested for children who enter them.
In a perfect world, those waters would be clear and sweet. Perhaps that was the vision at the outset of the ‘sexual revolution’ (a term coined by Wilhelm Reich). That’s a project worth pursuing, but it’s remained a somewhat Arcadian vision unfortunately.
So we’re left with the fact that, psychologically and emotionally, sex isn’t quite as straight forward as swimming. As you’ve both suggested, we’ve learned to make it complicated, and I totally agree.
I certainly remember my own childhood sexual experiences as fun and unproblematic until adult disapproval entered the picture. At that point they became shameful and embarrassing (which sounds exactly like the plot of the Adam and Eve story).
Given all of this, I think parents are justified in limiting their children’s sexual experiences to exploration with peers because, unfortunately, the waters are toxic and shark infested, for whatever reason.
That isn’t to say more can’t be done to reduce the fear and anxiety around this topic. I think a broader understanding and acceptance of paedophilia is an important step, because it includes the realization that a person can be sexually and romantically attracted to children, yet place the child’s welfare at the absolute pinnacle of their concern.
To some minor attracted people and to many in society at large, sexual conduct with children seems an inevitable and essential component of fully expressed paedophilia, but I dispute that. Paedophilia can motivate a selfless, nurturing, loving kindness toward children, and a total deferment of sexual feeling for them. What’s more, the opportunity to have this kind of love relationship can be more fulfilling than any sexual episode.
So, the idea that paedophilia _requires_ sexual expression is a major barrier to its acceptance in society. Concomitantly, greater understanding of paedophilia would go some way toward reducing society’s extreme anxiety around sexual victimization of children by adults.
For one thing, it would demonstrate that most child sexual abuse is not a consequence of paedophilia, but of adult presumption of power over children and adult lack of concern for children’s rights.
I think some social acceptance of the idea that children might be objects of erotic desire would be good for everybody. Paedophiles aren’t the only people who have this attraction, most people have it. Paedophilia is distinguished by attraction to children being the primary sexual orientation but, like same sex attraction, some degree of paedophilic affect is practically universal.
As with homophobia, paedophobia is driven by a person’s inability to acknowledge and accept their own deviant desires. Children are at most danger of abuse in an environment where they are both powerless and subconsciously desired. Minor attracted people who respect children’s autonomy and who understand and accept their own attraction are unlikely to treat children as unimportant, ie as objects to be used and discarded.
So I don’t think the issues of paedophilia and children’s sexual life are unrelated, but I do think that the more they are perceived to be inextricably and unavoidably linked, the more they will obstruct a more nuanced discussion of either topic.

americanrifleman09

I generally agree with your comment, but I just hold the opinion that paedophilia and the sexual life of children are unavoidably linked. I believe denying this makes it harder for pedophiles to resist a child’s advances or control their own actions and, to me, it seems dishonest to people from the outside. Their sexuality is unavoidably linked, but remember this does not mean sex is inevitable or that they can’t hold non-sexual relations. I just don’t think many outsiders are capable of nuanced discussion because of social conditioning. If they argue with someone of my views they say “see, sex starved monsters” and if they argue with someone of your views they say “dishonest liar just wants to have sex”.
However, besides that little disagreement, I really love your post.

sean

americanrifleman09: “I generally agree with your comment, but I just hold the opinion that paedophilia and the sexual life of children are unavoidably linked. I believe denying this makes it harder for pedophiles to resist a child’s advances or control their own actions and, to me, it seems dishonest to people from the outside. Their sexuality is unavoidably linked, but remember this does not mean sex is inevitable or that they can’t hold non-sexual relations. I just don’t think many outsiders are capable of nuanced discussion because of social conditioning. If they argue with someone of my views they say “see, sex starved monsters” and if they argue with someone of your views they say “dishonest liar just wants to have sex”.
However, besides that little disagreement, I really love your post.”
Thanks!
Yes I think you make a very good point here. I agree with you, and I guess that’s what I would call discussing child sexuality ‘in context’.
I also think you identify a weakness in my argument that I struggle to navigate. I think the weakness is mainly to do with my failure to communicate exactly what I mean.
I’m trying to capture the idea that paedophilia is a SEXUAL orientation, and that children have their own SEXUAL lives, and that these can compliment one another without a specifically sexual relationship occurring.
That seems really contradictory, but all I can do is point to my own experiences with child friends. To begin with, the facts around my sexuality were implicit. I was (secretly) motivated by my sexual orientation and children sometimes responded with their own tentative sexual initiatives. No sexual conduct ever resulted, but I found this situation very difficult to manage because it seemed to exist in a sort of obscuring fog where no clear line existed between a sexual and a nonsexual friendship. I also felt as if I was misleading people, because I was not being honest about my sexual feelings.
Now I’m honest about my sexuality with the caregivers of child friends and I better understand the dynamics that might encourage children to express their own sexual feelings. The result is still the same: no sexual relationship occurs. But the obscuring fog is gone. The other adults know that my sexual feelings are involved, so they understand that I am choosing not to express them. I know that children are sensitive to evidence that I might have a sexual interest in them, however unconsciously I reveal it, and that they might respond by testing out their own emerging sexuality.
So now I’m more mindful in my conduct around kids. I don’t flirt with them or otherwise romanticise my friendships.
I prefer it that children don’t put my friendship with them in a sexual or romantic context, even tho it can be very nice to be special to them in that way. A child’s love and affection is a wonderful gift in itself, and doesn’t demand sexual or romantic overtones. It’s much more enabling and less stressful to just leave that stuff at the door. I’m not convinced it adds much and I do think it introduces some risks.
So other people understand that I’m responding to an aspect of my sexuality. Also, I understand that children can express their own sexuality, and may respond to mine. But none of us are encouraging these sexual feelings. In fact, I am actively discouraging them, because its easier than dealing with the intensity and frustration of arousing sexual feelings I’m obligated to deny. I get the feeling that parents themselves have to moderate the intensity of their love for their children, simply to function as effective caregivers. Its not a unique skill.
It is a bit of fancy footwork, but I don’t thing it’s dishonest. It relies on honesty, sometimes quite brutal honesty. And sometimes it requires self denial. It even requires damping down a child’s feelings when that seems quite simply unfair and absolutely the wrong thing to do.
But it does allow genuine loving relationships, and that’s the reward for me.

Edward Chambers

Thank you arm09, it has taken a long time, perhaps longer than it ought to’ve done. It is a shame, but we can only try to educate others to avoid the mistakes I’ve made.
I am envious, benignly, that you realised this relatively early in your life, but very happy for you.
I have stumbled, with help from TOC, upon FUMA based in London. It is promising and I hope it is the beginnings of a MAP based therapy (by MAPs for MAPs). See comments below.

Nuck ROC

What made you change your thoughts AR09? (Or how some psychologists explain it, your ‘thinking errors’?)

americanrifleman09

Research online as well as reflection on my own experiences as a child, the experiences relatives have relayed to me about their own childhoods and the actions and requests of my little girl friends throughout my life (none of which I accepted because I knew breaking the law would never be worth it).

feinmann0

Thanks to Steve Diamond for highlighting the following: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vOy3Cdvjsp8
New 2018 Documentary Film! Youth Sexual Human Rights and The Age Of Consent! What Side Of History Will YOU Be On?
It is not common to question the age of consent, but a critical analysis of the situation brings to light the questions of how can it be right all the time if it’s different across countries and periods of world history? Is it possible that the age of consent does more harm than good? Are children and teenagers oppressed groups of people? Is the so called Paedophile a scapegoat, a persecuted minority? These highly controversial views are examined in this unique and daring documentary!

Dissident

I thank you for sharing this documentary here, Feinman! So, in other words, people, make a point to see and download this video BEFORE it gets removed from YouTube by getting flagged and accused of “violating their terms of service agreement.”

[…] again, and it’s already starting to cause a triggering even on pro-paedophilia (!) blogs like Heretic TOC (see the comments). More mainstream social communities, including the mainstream press, don’t […]

Just sayin'

Something is wrong when you can not differentiate satire from something real:
http://www.essexlive.news/news/uk-world-news/paedophiles-now-pretending-chicken-nuggets-501986
Psychiatry asserts that a mental illness can not be when it is found in thousands of people, i.e in a society, it ceases to be a disease and becomes “hysteria”, so if the entire population were paranoid schizophrenic it would no longer be a mental illness only mass hysteria.
In other words, the paedohysterics are really mentally ill people, they just are not “officialy” mentally ill because they are a whole society of dangerous deranged people, and of course supported by this supposed “science” of mental health.

warbling j turpitude

How are we to distinguish, would you say Tom, between what Reich here calls “apprehensiveness” – or that which intimidates and cows a child – and supposedly productive, even revolutionary, “anxiety”? These two terms would seem to converge on each other at some point, wouldn’t they? And what could it mean to “anchor anxiety”? I feel that Reich’s are not sufficient descriptions of real, individual events? Either way, I have to object to the notion (doubtless briefly asserted by you here in some haste) that “neurosis” is the product of “when we stopped being hunter-gatherers”. I think it helps no-one towards more careful thought if we subscribe to such ‘either/ors’ and fully fail to appreciate that it must surely have been the demands of very desire itself that led us beyond the strictly ritual distribution of hunting spoils and into a world now capable of confronting and dealing with an acquired surplus ..?
I would of course ‘much rather’ be trying to decide whether these gloriously unherdable cats presently comprising the MAPosphere are capable of say, staging concentrated assaults from time to (more frequent) time on the place where the the mob is most rabid and mobulous – let’s say the Daily Fail comments sector – but as long as we’re all still down here in the bunker trying to exert some degree of anthropological authority on one another etc etc, I think we need to be much, much clearer on what we imagine to have been a ‘non-neurotic’ society…. ie one in which we imagine desire – or irreducibly stated appetite mediated by the appearance of its object on a scene-of-representation – to have had ..had what – all the outlets it possibly neeeeded?

sean

tomocarroll” “I said, for instance, that modern life has left us more “neurotic”, a word that started as a medical term to describe psychological stress resulting in physical symptoms, such as nervous ticks, but has now passed into general language to describe chronic over-anxiety, along with associated features such as excessive suspicion of other people’s motives, and being quick to take and give offence.”
I understand that ‘neurosis’ can be described in terms of classical ethology as a disarticulation of a motive from it’s implicit goal. This can occur either as a motive producing no behaviour or an unrelated behaviour, or as a behaviour occurring despite the absence of a motive.
For example, sexual arousal would ‘normally’ produce an attempt at consummation in some kind of sexual activity. A sexual neurosis might result in sexual arousal producing no goal seeking behaviour (repression) or an unrelated behaviour (such as tic) or, alternatively, it might result in a behaviour occurring in the absence of any emotion (compulsion).
‘Sublimation’ occurs when a motive such as sexual arousal is repressed (ie, not acted on) but finds expression in an unrelated goal that nevertheless has a consummatory function and accomplishes some kind of resolution.
Freud might have us believe that civilization is such a sublimation.

Libertine

Your last point sums up some who work in ‘child protection’ or with offenders. I remember on the radio LBC I think, in the wake of yewtree, they had someone who worked with offenders and said lethal injection is the only answer, I got the sense that he was deeply troubled!

Jim Hunter

If you have 12 minutes to kill sometime, here is a video that I put up on Youtube that speaks to your concerns re: ethnopsychiatry. https://youtu.be/2PV_Wq2rolo
I’m not pushing Devereax, but his observations here are certainly of interest.

Edward Chambers

To be completely honest, I tried this a long time ago, before anyone else had though of it………but I didn’t get any bites…..

sean

@Edward Chambers “It is clear from your latest comment Sean that you believe that a pervasive, intrusive almost totalitarian oversight on all human behaviours is the direction in which you believe society should continue to move.”
No it isn’t. Nothing I said supports that interpretation to the remotest degree. And so on…

MAPAlert

I’m sorry all and specially TOC but it’s necessary ALTHOUGH this is extremely unpleasant,
This guy’s not a troll. He really supports the sexual slavery of children and women:
https://dailyantifeminist.wordpress.com/2018/01/09/rape-must-be-legal-heres-why/
“An 8-year-old woman ceases to be the property of her blood family; she can only belong to a husband. Otherwise, if there’s no husband to own her, she doesn’t legally belong to anyone – RAPE HER ALL YOU LIKE.”
Please publicly denounce this sociopathic monster, it is a horrible and evil being, who publicly places all of us who are attracted to minors as sick and monsters that we seek to rape, enslave and destroy little girls and women.
If we don’t denounce it publicly as an anathema to the attraction of minors, pedophilia etc. these evil people who only seek their egotistical desires over others will win.
I even encourage you to report it to the authorities, it is something unpleasant but this is a sexual and mental psychopath, who Advocate even of the violent rape of girls under the age of 8, who seeks to enslave women and is self-confessed potential rapist.

Christian

Someone using a fake email and the name “Please help” submitted a comment on Agapeta, urging me to “Denounce this blog to the authorities, please”, because of the posts supporting rape, the burning of widows and sacrifice of virgins. Of course, I never publish such comments.
The guy daily posts the weirdest possible misogynistic articles. Beside being a troll, I suspect that he must feel an intense sexual frustration, because I have never seen such a strong hate for the people you are sexually attracted to.
He got a few WP subscribers, you can see their number by viewing his blog in the WP reader.

Edward Chambers

I believe in the freedom of speech at all costs. With that being said, this guy is either an extreme reactionary / agent provocateur or has lost his happy pills.
No means no with regards to consensual sexual activity. However, the laws on the age of consent are a different matter….

feinmann0

Looks like Tom Grauer of TheDailyAntiFeminist fame has been promoted to leader of the men’s movement: eivindberge.blogspot.co.il/2018/01/the-mens-movement-has-new-leader-and.html by Eivind Berge himself.
Tom Grauer: “Rape Apologia: Explaining the Method in the Madness”:
‘And the focus here is really on young people. A blog that becomes popular with young people, where they are made to reconsider what they think about “rape,” is the perfect place to legitimize pedophilia. If I can convince people who are young, and thus have likely not made up their minds yet about these issues, to accept that “rape should be legal,” it then becomes infinitely easier for me to convince them to accept pedophilia. By using shock humor and trolling, I will make my readers accept pedophilia.’

feinmann0

I already saw it.

Frank Adamo Case

Hey, all of you that are posting here, have you seen the sad case of Frank Adamo? He is being accused of producing and storing “child porn”, which is quite absurd considering how mild and artistic all of his photographs are. It’s surprising to me that not more people here are commenting about it.
The most interesting aspect of this is that he is being persecuted by an Italian court, more specifically in the region of Palermo, so we should see how a southern europe jurisdiction will handle a case like this. I really hope he is cleared, from what he said the process itself was already excruciating with all the traditional witch hunt overtones.
More detailed information about the episode: https://vimeo.com/228621701

Frank Adamo Case

Sorry, but I don’t have any additional information. I also find strange that he hasn’t mentioned it in the January post, maybe he can’t comment on the case while it still ongoing? I guess we will have to wait to see what happens. If he has posted a video about the start of the process then I think he will probably make another one once the case is finished.

sean

I find it strange that I’m criticised for suggesting that progress is necessary and possible, even when it has nothing to do with sexual conduct. wouldn’t it be progress for legal protections of free speech to apply without bias against minor attracted people.
it could be argued that Adamo’s interest in little girls’ clitoral erections might be a bit dodgy, but I support his attempt to educate in this as well. Children are subject to constant pressure to attenuate their sexuality, and more power to anyone who challenges that.
actually their are two streams of medical research that bear on this directly.
the first is confusion of children’s self administered orgasms with ictal events, which demonstrates that something mundane has been made so unfamiliar as to be unrecognizeable.
the second is the idea that compulsive masturbation in children is a symptom of anorgasmia, and that without practical technique, a child is fated to experiment endlessly with masturbation, without achieving a satisfactory resolution.
I can certainly relate to #2. as a ten year old, my life would have been magically enhanced if only someone had taught me this simple trick. it would have saved me a lot of wasted hours spent playing inexpertly with myself, ignorant of even the concept of a goal, with the blood pounding in my temples and no clue how to bring things to a climax.

Edward Chambers

Young children should be encouraged to see the benefits to good sexual health, and educated accordingly, particularly with regards to masturbation, which should be encouraged. Of equal importance, scenarios like pregnancy at a young age and the right to say ‘yes’ or ‘no’.
This emancipation of children, with regards to their prerogative to express their sexuality, will mean a greater prevalence of people growing up without sexual complications or hang ups. Hand in hand with the protection of the rights of MAPs to express their sexuality in a consensual way, this will be progress.

sean

I can’t agree with you about pregnancy at a young age (<16). I think this is justifiably seen as a negative health outcome.

Edward Chambers

Hi Sean, neither did I condone or condemn pregnancy <16. I am not sure what you have disagreed with me on….however, as I have already stated, children should be educated on all things. Sex is a good thing if practiced correctly, in an informed and consensual manner. So if, for example, a 13 year old is having consensual penetrative sex, with whoever, one hopes that she would already know about the broad consequences of becoming pregnant. Indeed, it is the duty of society to both allow her to engage in penetrative sex if she should choose, as well as inform her as to how to avoid pregnancy and all of the associated issues.
As I have learned, any therapy offered to hebephiles and paedophiles should focus not on shaming people into disengaging with children, not on coercing people to believe sex with children is illegal for good reason, but on putting the child first. As a result, consent becomes paramount and things such as potentially dangerous pregnancy at a young age would be avoided, along with rape and other traumatic events.

sean

Hi Ed, yes I’m sorry, I was a bit bamboozled by your sentence: “Of equal importance, scenarios like pregnancy at a young age and the right to say ‘yes’ or ‘no’.” I wasn’t sure, but I thought you meant pregnancy at a young age was an important right.
I’m generally in agreement with your views here, but I would insist that caregivers have a right and a duty to override a child’s choices, in all sorts of areas, if they think those choices might be harmful.
Even if the adult is wrong, this right/obligation remains! The principle emerges from the adult’s belief, not from any objective truth. If the adult is wrong, the problem is to correct the error, not to cancel the right/obligation.
I know this view is unpopular here, but the corresponding arguments against it are weak to nonexistent. All I hear are flabby assertions of the child’s ‘rights’. As in the child’s right to blow himself to smithereens?
The singular point of debate that I would admit is around the specific kind of choice as it relates to the competence of the child to make it a good choice.
Denying a five year old the right to choose his clothing may be problematic, but it may be justified. A boy may want to wear a dress to school, and that is fine in principle, but a parent might be concerned that he will expose himself to bullying, and so seek an alternative. On the other hand, transphobia is not a valid concern and does not justify interference in the child’s choice. Similarly, a five year old might want to wear her tutu and a tank top to play in the snow. That isn’t safe, and she shouldn’t be left to do it without close supervision.
Similarly, a 13 yo might choose to have penetrative sex with a 12 yo girlfriend. I think she should be given space and privacy to do that, along with some frank advice on safe sex (which, these days, includes online privacy). But what if she wants to turn tricks in a crack house? Is that ok?
So the principle is absolute, but the application is contingent.
You seem to be seeking a middle path here Ed, from shame inspired self flagellation at the hands of paedophobic therapists to the Panglossian elevation of childhood sexual experience as an unmitigated good.
I’m more of a Candide . I try to see both sides with a critical eye. Children have a right to enjoy their emerging sexuality but, historically, for a lot of ignorant and sanctimonious reasons, they have been denied this right. On the other hand, bad sexual experiences, borne of well meant liberty, can be as damaging as the most bovine puritanism to a child’s sexual self. It can not be assumed that all sex, even all consensual sex, will be good, uncomplicated sex.
The child has a right to sexual expression, but she also has a right to some protection from sexual misadventure. This is so obvious to me that I can barely bring myself to type the words.

Edward Chambers

Hi Sean. I think it’s fair to say that we both have the interests of children at heart, however we appear to be approaching this issue from two very different positions. Your arguments are sincerely a joy to read, although I have seen similar far too often on Virped.
It is clear from your latest comment Sean that you believe that a pervasive, intrusive almost totalitarian oversight on all human behaviours is the direction in which you believe society should continue to move. The nanny state. Your insistence any or all adults should have a considerable subjective input as to the permissible behaviours of others, particularly those society infantilises, is perhaps a reflection of the therapy you have received. Whilst you may have had good luck in therapy, apart from one experience, I can only conclude that your experiences have been similar to mine. However, I would not submit to the idea of being shamed by either my attractions or the possibility of acting on them in the right scenario and in a consensual manner, whereas you appear to have arrived at the conclusion that all sexual activity with a child is potentially bad, and should never be acted upon. I can’t imagine any current therapist being an advocate, even for the sake of it, for anything other than complete abstinence. However, myself and others are working on this.
I prefer to see this as a case of glass half full, on the condition that said individuals are educated at the earliest opportunity and encouraged to see that open, shameless communication is the key to both emancipation and enlightenment. Education should be progressive and in depth, and provided by adults that are both attentive to the views and input of children into this bilateral scenario, and unashamed in any way whatsoever as to the subject matter. Shame and embarrassment to what and whom we are attracted to has led us to few positive societal outcomes, in particular regard to the oppression of child sexuality and MAPs.
We find ourselves, as a society, in regards to the issues surrounding adult sexual attraction to children, child sexuality, and freedom of expression, at a precipice on which we are dangerously perched, if we aren’t indeed already plummeting downwards. If humans are educated in depth as to the fragility of children and to the complications of any sexual contact with said demographic, then there would be far less errors, mistakes, harm etc. As I have found out, and admittedly most recently with regards to the PPD to my embarrassment, all ‘therapy’ for MAPs is devisive and accordingly focuses on the societal constructs of shame and other negative concepts. We see the media plough the furrow with the seeds of such disinformation in an, admittedly successful, attempt to curb the naturally positive and educational benefits of the emancipation of children in regards to so many issues. However this does depend on the susceptibility and trust of the general populous. Nothing is as quite foreboding or insidious as the threat to one’s progeny.
The right of a child to blow himself to bits? Lol, but this jest should be regarded with the contempt it deserves Sean. You mock a genuinely valid argument against the current polarised societal take on the situation, simply because you, like the Virpeds who walk among us, see capitulation as the easiest and most socially acceptable way to conspicuously observe said situation, particularly as it would allow for you to be in contact with a child with greater ease, despite being openly paedophilic. Countenance of the pro consent argument with a typically Virped stance makes sense now, and on HTOC too…..
If we as a society were to focus on positive thoughts and feelings revolving around the benefit and globally mutually symbiotic and reciprocal care for one another, this would raise humanity to a higher level whence policing is far less important due to the undermining of other, already tried (and failing) backwards philosophies. As things are, children are less regarded as human and more as possessions of their genetic parents and of society, an investment if you like that has to be protected at all costs, regardless of the damage that is caused to them by negative social constructs that are enforced by an ever more powerful totalitarian global intelligentsia bent on power for the sake of power.
Perhaps it is true Sean, that the view you have extrapolated here is unpopular. Perhaps it would be fair to say that it would be better to express such a view on Virped whence it would be heralded by those who are arguably equally unenlightened. Progress on this issue will only happen by thinking outside of the box, and I can not see anything in your arguments that sets you outside of the norm, whence people are brainwashed by an ever increasingly pervasive media that sanctions the behaviours of people in the name of protection.

sean

lol. good try! 😀

Edward Chambers

Thanks Sean! How are things over at Virped? 😉

Jonathan

@sean -I entirely agree with your point of view.

sean

thx!

Nada

If so, you have no reason to complain about caregivers “forcing” their children to have sex, marry or become pregnant, or even forcing liberal anti-pedophilia down their unwilling throats.

edchambers101

Indeed Nada
There are a number of fundamental flaws in Sean’s argument here, but merry go rounds make me feel ill and get you nowhere. There is little point discussing issues like this with people who have been therapeutised.
Makes me feel good about never being in receipt of therapy, which is rare.

In TOC we trust
Edward Chambers

There was a lot to disagree with, re :
https://dailyantifeminist.wordpress.com/2018/01/09/rape-must-be-legal-heres-why/
However, it appears said psychopath has rediscovered his sense of empathy in these two blogs respectively :
> in most countries the adolescent maternal mortality ratio is low compared with women older than 30 years……it should be a serious criminal offence to have sex with women over 30 for their own ‘protection’…..
Yes, I agree. However, they could always take the pill to avoid unwanted pregnancies….wait a minute….surely the same could be said for 12 year old girls…..?
> ….I recall a study that says that human sperm is at its best quality until age 16…..women grow up much faster than men: a 12-year-old female is like a 16-year-old male….Since we are programmed to have sex in our teenage years, to speak of “sexualization of teens” as an “issue” is like speaking about the “issue” of dogs growing fur (well, except those few breeds of dogs that don’t grow fur)
The truth is beautiful….
Indeed, in TOC we trust….

Libertine

Its a long shot….The thought of a realistic (and legal) child-sex-doll being available in most of our lifetimes is a long shot. To find out how near to the real thing they are today is risking prison.

Edward Chambers

Trottla dolls are apparently as near as one could wish for. In order to understand if they are real enough for one’s particular taste, one would have to visit Japan.

Explorer

I have contacted Frank Adamo and asked him about his situation. He responded. Here is his reply, between the lines:
_______________________________________
“Thanks for your interest. The first part of my trial was in October. The second part will be next week. I don’t know if the trial will end next week or not.
I think the prosecutor is desperate because she has a very weak case. I can’t imagine how the judge could convict me. But the world is hysterical right now, so anything is possible.”
_______________________________________
So, I wish Frank luck. He will need it – reason is on his side, but with the obvious lack of rationality in many “law enforcement” circles, we will need a lot of luck as well!

anon

It seems that now there are more and more people who dare to tell the truth! I also bring these two excellent post blog posts from the academician and historian Martin van Creveld.
One on the normality of relationships with young adolescents:
http://www.martin-van-creveld.com/yes-sometimes-can/
And another on the infantilization of young people:
http://www.martin-van-creveld.com/infantilization/

anon

A post blog that also speaks against paedohysteria and feminism anti-male sexuality but in a much better tone than the previous blog in my opinion:
https://redshambhala3.wordpress.com/2017/12/26/sex-rape-and-degeneracy/

Explorer

From the Red Shambala blog you mentioned:
“Hostility towards the erotic, towards enjoying sexuality apart of reproduction, is because a sexually satisfied person, having tasted the blood of self-determination, will be more motivated, encouraged and willing to fight for the extension of this area of self-determination into the political realm, while sexual misery is a breeding ground for neuroses, violent revenge fantasies and an appetite for authoritarian misery”.
Knowing that nearly all authoritarian and toltalitarian regimes are indeed extremely suppressive of voluntary and joyous sexuality – and, in the same time, tacitly encouraging (politically instrumentalised) sadism and masochism – I can put my signature under these words.
P.S. I didn’t read this blog in detail, so I will neither support nor reject author’s general position. My approval is only to the specific positions I mentioned above.
P.P.S. In general, one should familirise oneself with the whole range of views, especially the ones which go beyond “mainstream” and into the “fringe” and “radical” areas – there are the most well-informed and valid positions are to be found… unfortunately, together with (and sometimes even mixed with) wild nonsense. The real “fringe-walker” should combine the willingness to question “authority” (whether social or intellectual) with the high skills of critical analysis and discernment (so not to enter the ranks of Pizzagaters and David Icke’s fans) – as well as ethical sense and responsibility (so not to become friends with neo-Nazis and neo-Fascists). This is the only way to move forward beyond massively accepted misconceptions without going mad in the process.

sean

well, Reich certainly had his share of “well-informed and valid positions …. mixed with) wild nonsense”.
but his good ideas were brilliant.

sean

I’d be very interested to see information on mandatory reporting laws that apply in the absence of imminent risk. in particular, where might such law apply to admission of a past offense, ongoing commission of an offense such as child porn where no individual is directly at risk, or indeed simple admission of paedophilic attraction?
where i live, only a direct and specific intention to offend against a specific person attracts mandatory reporting, and to suprvising clinicans, not authorities. everything else is protected by strong privacy laws.
on the question of progress, surely the provision of a safe environment in which minor attracted people can discuss their actual behaviour with therapists would qualify. b4u-act are doing good work in this.

W.

https://dailyantifeminist.wordpress.com/2018/01/06/i-dont-mind-the-boylovers-but-they-should-let-us-do-the-propaganda/
Pretty provocative for all parties (that’s what it’s all about this blog) but someone wants to have a friendly debate or thougths? I think it’s a pretty important issue but rarely adressed.

Christian

This DAF blog is essentially troll-like provocation. Read the article about marriage, where he explains that men should own women as cattle, and the one about the “best” child porn (he claims to watch a lot of it), where he says that little girls engage on their own volition into the most perverse sex, such as scatology and zoophilia. In the “about” page, he says that he is pro-rape.

LOL

“where he says that little girls engage on their own volition into the most perverse sex, such as scatology and zoophilia.”
Disclaimer: I put it out of scientific curiosity only obviously none of us support or see any of this.
https://dailyantifeminist.wordpress.com/2018/01/03/the-best-child-porn-is-girls-masturbating-alone-to-an-orgasm/#comment-38
“Excellent question, anon. Generally, and these are merely my estimates based on memory: when it comes to toilet stuff (peepee, poopoo), ages 8 to 13. When it comes to “dog is man’s best friend” things, 10 to 14 or higher. And regular masturbation with fingers/objects, 9 to 17 – above that it’s not considered CP.”

Explorer

Well, this guy is actually claiming to be for “legalisation of rape” in the “About” section of the blog. I hope this is a kind of a provocative joke, put there for its sheer shock-value. Since, if it is dead serious, this is not the stance I, or (I hope!) anyone else on this blog, would support. Real rape is not the act that I want to be legal or socially acceptable! What I stand against are both false accusations of rape (which are far from being rare nowadays) and, most importantly, false interpretations of non-rape, such as consensual sexual activity between adults and children / adolescents as “(statutory) rape”.
Anyway, the extreme misogyny that fills this blog, as well as a few other pro-paedo “masculinist” blogs, is not what I can approve. Misogyny is not is answer to misandry – both are ethically wrong . As well as blaming feminism for all problems we have is intellectually misguided – feminists are very different. Some feminists did participated in the creation of the repressive regime we’re facing nowadays, for sure – but so are many traditionalists, as well as many power-and-control seekers from government and enforcement circles. And some feminists stood for the child sexual liberation – ones like Shulamith Firestone, Gayle Rubin and Judith Levine.
This is not to say that man’s rights movemement has nothing valuable to say – it has. Some of its critiques of feminism are valid… yet the rage against feminism in some of its participants comes to the level of demonisation of it, and rejection of the good ideas and practices that the feminism has brought. And, in the most extreme cases, it turnes into a kind of Andrea Dworkin’s man-hating, turned 180 degrees and transformed into woman-hating.
What we should seek is the union of the very few people from all views and stances who are willing to support pro-consent position on the intergenrational sexuality. In this activity, I’m fully willing to cooperate with people who, in other areas of life, would be my political or scientific opponents – pro-capitalists or paranormal / fringe science skeptics, for example. What unites us here is more important for me, here, than the differences in our worldviews.
Yet, the arguing for the normalisation of rape is something which is a bit hard even for me to digest – not only ethically, but also pragmatically (who will support people standing for real rape?). It reminds me of people who misunderstand anarchism as an amoral anything-goes nihilism…

Explorer

Well, this guy has just written a long post (almost a whole article) explaining why he employs “ballistic trolling” in his texts; so, he seems to be using Alt-Right communication tactics:
https://dailyantifeminist.wordpress.com/2018/01/07/in-order-to-influence-people-i-have-no-choice-but-to-employ-ballistic-trolling/
Yet, he also – now in an (apparently) fully serious tone – admits that he does intend to legalise rape.
It seems that this guy simply wants to inverse the standard paedo-hating propaganda and present himself as a kind of “willful monster”. As if he wants to become a living incarnation of baseless cultural myths of a “horrid paedophile”. Not a best tactic to argue for some real and meaningful change, I think.

rearview

I went over there and made a few comments on some of his posts. More benign of course. I’m thinking he’s trolling in such a manner as ‘What if we did this to you?’, how would you like it towards both the left and right.

The guy’s page states that he advocates for 3 things:
1. Paedophilia (Sex with children; Consensual ones of course!) = I totally agree with that position, I as well advocate for that. but it becomes a gray area for me once it hits under 4. (And under 7 for penetrative activities.)
2. Child Prostitution (Children receiving money for sex with someone) = I find this a gray area for me, not because it is weird & disgusting (far from that), but because of the nuclear family system being overprotective & uncharismatic parents.
3. Rape (Unconsensual sexual activity) = No, I am against this fully & I am not fond of rapists. Letting the anti out of me atm, I hate rapists. I want to see them die a slow & painful death. I have not seen anyone who “publicly advocated” for rape but a few, omnipolitics16 (In a video, which was satire as he admitted at the end but never stated he was against it.) & Roosh V., who was advocating for not prosecuting men for having sex with women who regretted it and filed for rape charges.
I hope this guy is being satirical, I am a open minded person & a very empathetic one but I hate rapists & rape; I take a clear stand against it, just like murder & child rape.

Libertine

I think Roosh was advocating rape as long as it was on private property, though, I think (or hope) he was being ironic!

rearview

Now that’s “Libertarian”! Just joking.

sean

wow. trump’s election suddenly makes sense!

sean

hi Edward, I just wanted to add, on rereading my previous comment, you might feel I’m having a go at you. that wasn’t my intention at all. I disagree with some things you said, but that doesn’t mean I think any less of you for saying them. I admire the effort you”ve put in to exploring ways to live with your paedophilia.
I tend to argue in quite a direct and uncompromising manner and I know I can come over sounding aggressive.
I’ve bedn fortunate with therapists and have only once felt judged by one. in the main I’ve come under zero pressure to attempt to change my orientation, or to revise my relatively libertarian attitude to childhood sexuality.
intellectually I’m much more supportive of some allowance for sexual expression in adult child friendships than my comments might suggest. my caveat is that it is a somewat arcadian vision, and I would not want to see it accepted at any cost to children’s welfare. I belive adults who are attracted to and love children can be a powerful force for good in their lives, but I also know that children are naive and easily manipulated, and are vulnerable to exploitation.
my positive experiences with therapists have influenced me ro favour direct engagement with my community and to be honest with certain people about my orientation. this wasn’t what I was advised to do, in fact I’ve been advised against it. it’s a response to the relief I felt in therapy of not having to hide my feelings.
so the strength of my commitment to put my sexual feelings aside in my friendships with kids does not come from beliefs associated with the sex abuse narrative, it comes from my respect for the values and beliefs of the community I’m learning to engage with.
I don’t think its a good strategy for MAPs to alienate themselves even more from the people whose confidence and trust they hope to win, so I’ve sought to find ways to be open and honest about my feelings. I’ve been honest about falling in love with and being turned on by my little girl friends, but I’ve also been clear that these sexual feelings do not play any role in the friendship.
my commitment to this quarantine of sexual feeling from friendships with kids runs very deep. I don’t romanticise little girl friends, I don’t peek up their frocks, I don’t look for excuses to cuddle and caress them, I just dedicate myself to their happiness, present and future.
I’m under some scrutiny in my friendships, but I am trusted and I treasure that trust. I also get enough hugs and affection from little friends to make me feel very lucky.
so thats the background to my comments. If I come across as direct it’s because:
1. I’m not very tolerant of ideas that seem to minimize the risks children face of being made very unhappy as a consequence of sexual exploitation an abuse.
2. I’ve waded through a lot of neck deep excrement on account of my paedophilia and I’m determined to move forward, so I get frustrated when I see MAPs persist in making arguments that do nothing but alienate us further.
We’re not going to wake tomorrow to find our situation was a bad dream, or that sex with kids is suddenly accepted. thats just dumb.
progress is going to be slow, one step at a time, and it will require discipline and compromise.
it isn’t a cop out to have a child in your life who loves you.

warbling j turpitude

“If I come across as direct it’s because:
1. I’m not very tolerant of ideas that seem to minimize the risks children face of being made very unhappy as a consequence of sexual exploitation and abuse.
2. I’ve waded through a lot of neck deep excrement on account of my paedophilia and I’m determined to move forward, so I get frustrated when I see MAPs persist in making arguments that do nothing but alienate us further.
We’re not going to wake tomorrow to find our situation was a bad dream, or that sex with kids is suddenly accepted. that’s just dumb.
Progress is going to be slow, one step at a time, and it will require discipline and compromise.”
I read this, and I wonder just how its conceptual content differs exactly, from that of the, you know, default narrative in general. I mean to say, where does it really depart from it, would you say? It invokes “progress”, but in what, precisely, does this alleged ‘progress’ consist? It is all very well to speak of “discipline and compromise”, but what are we pointing to when we speak of these? You are, after all, one who disdains to so much as peek up a girl’s dress, even at the ‘close range’ (if you will) you say that you enjoy, etc etc… but honestly, I don’t see anything “moving forward” here at all. I just don’t.
I do not wish to be uncharitable, Sean. But I can’t stand it when words appear to refer to nothing. When they just seem to refer to themselves and not much more.

sean

fair comment warbling. i wonder th same thing myself sometimes…
an example of the progress I’m speaking of is to be able to tell a mother I’ve just met that I’m attracted to children and then have her continued support of my friendship with her young daughter over five years. this isn’t a sexual relationship, but it is an affectionate one, and it makes me happy.
I’d also like to be able to train as a primary school teacher without having to hide my orientation. the mother I mentioned told me she would call the police immediately if she thuught I was molesting her daughter. I’d expect even less tolerance in a school.
so why not just keep my orientation a secret?
to start with, I’m not ashamed of it.
also, some people already know about it, and the information would arouse suspicion if it were suddenly intruduced where I was spending my time with children.
finally, I have an ’emotional congruence’ with children. I form friendships with particular children and go out of my way to spend time with them, give (small) gifts, etc etc. these are widely publicised ‘warning signs’ of paedophilia, and I guess they’re more or less accurate in my case.
so, for me, progress is to be able to express my paedophilia in a meaningful way with the full knowledge and understanding of the other adults involved. people make some allowances for my orientation, and for me thats significant.
maybe I’m not that interested in engaging with children sexually (despite my fantasies). whatever, I don’t have any diffiulty showing restraint in this aspect.
so this is progress for me, especially compared to compulsively masturbating or getting suicidal, which are other ways my paedophilia has found expression. sure, it may not satisfy every minor attracted person, but it satisfies me.
as a paedophile I have as much right to advance a vision of progress as you do, warbling. you can’t invalidate it on the basis that it doesn’t involve sexual activity.

Libertine

Interesting article criticising the NSPCC figures, showing physical abuse is far more prevalent: http://www.spiked-online.com/newsite/article/why-fearmongering-about-child-abuse-helps-no-one/20713#.Wk1uuSOcbVo

sean

Edward, to keep things simple, when I say ‘child’ I mean juvenile human, which meas prepubescent. my comments on paedophilia are framed in terms of iit being defined as a sexual attraction to children.
the philosophical issues are much plainer if discussing sexual attraction to a four year old than they are if the object of desire is 14. so I’m not much interested in arguments that hinge on the arbitrary character of legal age of consent.
nor do II see much merit in the idea of impregnating twelve year olds to save humanity. twelve is not a good age for childbearing, whatever a girl may think herself. sometimes people do not have the knowledge or experience to make good decisions, even about their own bodies.
I agree with you that personal attacks from Virped members are no better than personal attacks on Virped members.
It’s clear that many of them feel anxious about associating wirh people or groups who advocate sexual conduct with children. to be honest, so do I. I’ve been at the sharp end of the assumption that that is all us paedophiles are interested in, and it isn’t a perception I want to encourage.
but I don’t accept the dogma that children should be categorically excluded from sexual life. I have many good arguments to support that view, as well as my own chilhood experiences.
I now have quite a few friends and family who know I’m attracted to children, and I’ve been offered an amazing amount of support.
not sympathy, support. I’ve also been shown trust. I”ve discussed
the sexual ethics with some of them and my position there has been exactly as I”ve stated it here, that I think the risks are vastly overstated.
but I recognize that there ARE risks, and that people are not willing to expose children to those risks. so leaving aside the legality, I’m very clear with everybody, including myself, that children are not available as sexual partners or playmates. I don’r even sail close to or ine vicinity of the wind.
so I can understand the suspicion and anxiety that some celibate paedophiles feel toward MAPs who loudly condemn and ridicule the prevailing social concensus on this delicate, controversial and deeply personal issue.
sure, sex abuse dogma is riven with bigotry, moral panic and other half baked bullshit, but sexual abuse exists, and I see pplenty of half baked bullshit coming from all sides on this one, including here on Tom’s blog..
and, at the centre of it all, there are the children. won’t somebody please think of th children, lol. but seriously, they need adults to sort their shit out on this one. they aren’t even allowed to play in the fucking park any more, in case ‘paedophiles’ get them.
minor attracted people are not, in the main. cild molestors or abusers. the numbers are out and most of that misery is inflicted on childten by ‘normal’ people with ‘normal desires.
but we have a natural interest and insight into adult/child attraction, and a natural interest in introducing some sanity to the public discourse. some might see me as an uncle tom, but all I’ve done is compromise in the interests of my own overall happiness. some might see pro liberty arguments as self serving, and some are. it doesn’t matter. what matters is the whole conversation, inluding a diversity of opinion from MAPs an some respect and humilty shown to the wider community.
I love having a little girl friend in my life. if her mother makes a special effort so I can spend some time with her, well that feels pretty special. sexual conduct has no place in this picture, but I am in the picture, and so is my paedophilia, being expressed in a full, satisfying and interesting way.
its taken me a long time and some hardship to get to where I am, and maybe MAPs as a community of interest are still at the hardship stage. my hope is that eventually everyone involved will learn to see things from other points of view.

After finding out the password for my youtube channel, Nucklear Protostunt, I was greeted with great frustration. (My channel was a pro reform & pro contact channel, for anyone interested in what it was.)
Apparently I have been suspended from youtube for violating a terms of condition, and also for mass reporting. According to the very dubious team of Youtube (or now Fascist Tube) and the reports held against me from our ‘lovely’ youtube system of democratic reporting, after viewing the content on my youtube channel, I appear to violated one or more terms of conditions.
Now get what condition I violated, I have uploaded videos of sexually suggestive themes involving minors. And ‘predatory’ content like that isn’t allowed on Youtube. (or their little safe space)
Now here’s the problem(s) with that claim made by dead brain twats:
*I never uploaded a single video of a minor engaging, let alone a video of a minor! I never posted sexually suggestive comments, even to women I find absolutely sexy. The closest I even had to a depiction of a minor is a still picture of Omnipolitics16, who voiced over his viewpoint on Susan Clancy’s view on consent and is uploaded on another channel not even suspended! (Yet)
*Nothing even remotely sexual was on my channel.
*No faces or recordings of people were on my channel, only audio recordings.
The bullshit & nerve of these cunts to blatantly remove me on youtube because I offended their viewpoint of constant confusion & misinformation is one thing, but to make both a lie & a excuse to remove me is another! I can’t even make a damn appeal because I can’t access my channel link nor a google product, and my email with that account will get removed soon. All my memoirs, all my job opportunities, all my photos, all my messages & contacts, in jeopardy… All going to be erased, because of my offensive & ‘incorrect’ position on paedophiles… Tom, if only me & you can start activism right now, if only.

Christian

On WP, if you have the (paying) Premium of Business plans, you can upload on your site videos from your files, see https://en.support.wordpress.com/videopress/
Cases of Facebook and Google+ censorship of art images are regularly mentioned in the monthly “Maiden Voyages” posts on Pigtails in Paint.
I have looked at the “Celibate Pedophiles” blog of Ethan, and indeed he made a post replying to some comments (including one of mine) on your previous post. My general impression of this blog: first, it is drab, almost no science (only Cantor-type propaganda), no scholarship, no art, no poetry, only a rather boring ethical discourse about always the same subjects (paedophilia, inter-generational sex, anti-MAP hatred, …); second, it looks like this guy lives in a closet, he shares no general cultural or scientific passions, and he does not seem to live in a real world with real people, only internet contacts with his buddies of VP.
The “Not a Monster” blog of Todd is more lively, including photos, general discussions on politics, and a moving case of a 10-y-o girl who sacrificed her life to save two toddlers, but still not brillant, I don’t get any insight from it.

What I meant by activism is like collaborating a militant bunch of pro consent (Love that term, way better than pro contact.) individuals and doing what PIE & NAMBLA did back then.

sean

its a bigger issue Russell.
providers of cloud services are now an unaccountable, subjective and ad hoc censor of a giant slab of our cultural capital.
what you are seeing is democracy in its least attractive form: mob rule.
it isn’t the service providers who are to blame. (there only interest is monopolizing sticky eyeballs for profit.
what is to blame is the political disengagement of a gormless public, sleepwalking its way to a crowd sourced totalitarian dictatorship built on likes, tweets and terms of service violation reports.

I am sorry to hear about this, but I am not surprised. It is pretty much as Sean has stated. Social media has been developed as a method for self expression, but has quite quickly turned into a source of truth by majority vote.
Obviously we would all hope that TOC would carry on in his capacity as a leader in the area of keeping our voice alive, but as Tom has stated, we all must play our part in taking up the slack as time goes by.
If youtube and twitter have succumb, as they quite obviously have, to this malignant form of democracy (or mob rule), then it is our duty to find other media which allow true freedom of speech.
Peter Herman has some very good ideas in a comment on this blog.
We must organise and use resources and media wisely.

jedson

This raises a difficult issue. Most of us would see what is happening to our group as connected with larger political issues. The problem is that we would not all see the same connections. One could argue that we should leave the larger political issues alone for fear of fragmenting our solidarity. That we should remain a strictly one issue movement. On the other hand, it could be argued that without addressing the larger context of repression and exploitation we aren’t going to make much change. I’d be interested in what others think about this.

Edward Chambers

> One could argue that we should leave the larger political issues alone for fear of fragmenting our solidarity
This is very important and for me, the most important reason why Virped should be made aware of some of the negative impacts they have had on the community. Solidarity is paramount faced with a world that would wish to see us eradicated, without exception. Those Virpeds who have taken it upon themselves, albeit for the most part anonymously, to distance themselves from the rest of the community, should know by know that the world lumps them into the same category as all other MAPs : a flame that should be extinguished.

Peter Herman

Hi Russell, Rather than addressing your legitimate anger, I would like to caution readers of this blog against the use of the term “pro-contact”. Words are powerful instruments that need to be carefully chosen so as not to create false impressions. I am afraid that this expression does exactly that. Instead, would not the term “pro-consent” be a more accurate description of what we are about? The former implies the willy-nilly imposition of one’s self on another person while the other does the opposite. I would like to encourage everyone not to accept the term VerPed has been using to describe us.

Ethan Edwards

I try not to use pro-contact any more, and instead use pro-legalization, though it doesn’t seem to be catching on with anyone else. It is my bow to the reality that most or all of you are in today’s world also anti-contact due to iatrogenic harm, but would like to change the world so you could be pro-contact — for which “legalization” seems a reasonable shorthand. The problem with “pro-consent” (aside from bringing to mind #MeToo) is that the standard anti argument is that kids can’t consent, and your word doesn’t capture that your proposal is to change the understanding of the scope of consent.

Peter Herman

Hi Ethan, The objection you present had occurred to me, but extended explanations can hinder these blog exchanges. With consent by anyone below 18 being considered impossible (an idiocy on its face) , the world at large who buy into the nonsense should see pro-consent just as virtuous as VirPed. I joke of course, but stand my ground on pro-consent being a better term than pro-legalization.
You may be surprised that I am not for pro-legalization. There are many grounds for this. The better approach would appear to be a gradual system of de-crimininalization. Societies do not turn on a dime and need patient education.
That VirPed wants to bring peace of mind to many who suffer society’s opprobrium is commendable. But I vehemently disagree with the idea that MAPs in general suffer from a mental disorder. This approach is not only false as I have previously explained but undermines a person’s self-esteem and invites all kinds of intrusions including forced medicalization and continued support for civil commitment. Except for the false purveyors of science (e.g. the Finkelhors, Abels, Cantors etc.) who grasp for funding their Dr. Frankenstein-like projects, the VirPed approach has not mollified most of the hoi polloi. Standing our ground as healthy individuals with potentially valuable contribution to society may not mollify either but has the advantage of self-respect and eventually better regard by an increasing segment of society.

sean

what’s wrong with ‘libertarian’.
this term has become problematic due to its appropriation by neoliberal and alt-right crazies, and has come to connote economic and small government meanings rather than communitarian ones.
however, the left-libertarian meaning is the correct one. right-libertarianism is characterized by a winner takes all strategy; clearly not a vote for freedom for the ‘losers’. there’s nothing wrong with government so long as it respects individual freedoms. in fact, one of its core functions should be to guarantee these freedoms.
from wikipedia… “Libertarians have been advocates and activists of civil liberties, including free love and free thought. Advocates of free love viewed sexual freedom as a clear, direct expression of individual sovereignty and they particularly stressed women’s rights as most sexual laws discriminated against women: for example, marriage laws and anti-birth control measures.”
… “Austrian Freudo-Marxist Wilhelm Reich became a consistent propagandist for sexual freedom going as far as opening free sex-counselling clinics in Vienna for working-class patients[59] as well as coining the phrase “sexual revolution” in one of his books from the 1940s. During the early 1970s, the English anarchist and pacifist Alex Comfort achieved international celebrity for writing the sex manuals The Joy of Sex and More Joy of Sex.”

I think youtube and the PC brigade are really starting to piss off a lot of people. The James Damore fiasco was a key indicator of the sheer scale of the evil within Google.
It’s interesting Tom alluded to the question of technical solutions to this, well a quick solution might be to try one of the youtube alternatives:
https://beebom.com/youtube-alternatives/
I can’t vouch for them, and potentially they could be just as censorious, you’d just have to find out.
The other, longer term solution – and I wasn’t really sure whether I should mention it here or not as I don’t want to jeopardise the project – is a project called Maidsafe which aims to create a decentralised internet where no central servers own your data. Thus, someone could create a youtube “app” that runs on the Maidsafe network, you can then upload a video and no central authority could take it down. It’s a project that exists within the cryptocurrency ecosystem (though has actually been in development since before bitcoin) and as such it has its own cryptocurrency which currently has a market cap of $500 MILLION vs $250 BILLION for bitcoin. So, also as a personal benefit, if you invested now, even just a few hundred pounds, you could potentially become a millionaire if it became as big as bitcoin. The risk is that the project is challenging, they’ve taken a long time and some might wonder if they can pull it off, but they are persisting and seem to be starting to look more towards marketing which implies they have confidence that what they’re doing is going to come to fruition soon (perhaps the next year or two).

Galileo

To create a Youtube account you need a Google account, but to create a Google account you don’t have to use GMail.
When signing up for a Google account it offers you to create a GMail account by default, but you can reject this offer and use the email address you already have with another service provider (e.g. hotmail).
So if you you are going to use it for Youtube, don’t use GMail so your email is not at risk.

Libertine

“or leads to sexual abuse of children.”….well that is the crux of the issue isn’t it: what is considered ‘abuse’ and what defines it. As for the DSM 5, that has also been discussed at length. How can a sexual attraction only be seen as an illness is it causes distress, Yet why it may cause distress is another matter!

sean

actually, i think Ethan has a point. a great many MAPs live according to the principle that sex with children is not ok. I’m one of them.
I don’t claim that no children are interested in or enjoy ‘sex’ with adults, just that the problems associated with it are significant enough to make it an unwise activity for minor attracted people.
perhaps this is a temporary state of affairs, but it is the current state of affairs and I’m pretty gobsmacked by the arrogance and selfishness of the claim that to live by a commitment not seek the freedom to have ‘sex’ with children somehow makes certain MAPs less desrving of fellowship.
sure, there is an entire industry of haters out there, holding out offers of ‘help’ to paedophiles, many of whom are desparate for some kind of support.
but if those looking for numbers to boost their campaign to liberalise ‘sex’ with children can’t even find support among people who share that desire, how on earth do they expect to wash that argument with the broader public?
being celibate with children is not an ideology, its a choice (and typically a pragmatic one). arguing that sexual conduct with children is safe and ethical is also a choice, and one I defend.
If Ethan doesn’t allow these arguments on his site, that is also a choice. I don’t think Virped instructs its members not to make such arguments elswhere, then that would be wrong.
but I don’t think Virped does that. it’s Virped critics who assume that right by seeking to silence the organization rather than critique its argument.
this is akin to an ad hominem attack. I would have thought a diversity of views and a robust debate would strengthn the position of all MAPs, whatever their views on these dekicate an PERSONAL choices and I have to wonder at the motives of some who can’t see that.

Edward Chambers

Hi sean
> actually, i think Ethan has a point. a great many MAPs live according to the principle that sex with children is not ok. I’m one of them.
Ethan more often than not makes very good points. You are also entitled to your opinion regarding sex with children. As I expect you already have done, it is important to note the definition of a child. To keep things simple it is anyone under 18. For this considerable demographic to be denied a right to consent to sex with anyone they choose is simply prejudice in the disguise of protection.
> just that the problems associated with it are significant enough to make it an unwise activity for minor attracted people
The problems are born of a society prejudiced in ways I have already described in my contribution to Tom’s blog. I do not like to use hypothetical scenarios, but if some sort of global apocalypse were to take place tomorrow, god forbid (?), leaving 10,000 people left, such laws against children’s rights to sex with adults and vice versa would become defunct for many reasons, not least because all those who could reproduce (perhaps specifically females) would be needed to do so to repopulate as quickly as necessary. One only has to look back to England 150 years ago to note that the age of consent was then 12, and only changed through the actions of puritanical fanatics.
> I’m pretty gobsmacked by the arrogance and selfishness of the claim that to live by a commitment not seek the freedom to have ‘sex’ with children somehow makes certain MAPs less desrving of fellowship.
Indeed. To live by a belief that any MAP who engages with a consenting child deserves not said fellowship, is this not arrogant and selfish? It is certainly delusional, no? If one is aware of the activism, past or present, of notable Virpeds, now inactive or otherwise, such as Daywalker (himself a sex offender, albeit without conviction, through the use of child pornography), ender, and Todd Nickerson, one will know of the times they have referred to any MAP who differs in opinion to the all important Virped non contact narrative, as pro contact scum. As said people are quite obviously taking it upon themselves to do this in the name of Virped, Ethan and Nick should take these individuals to one side and put them in line.
> but if those looking for numbers to boost their campaign to liberalise ‘sex’ with children can’t even find support among people who share that desire, how on earth do they expect to wash that argument with the broader public?
This is very true, but it is not something I concern myself with. After my experiences with the great unwashed I am no longer interested in the dominant narrative. People are very much sheep like, and predictable in this sense. I would not care to find acceptance by the broader public. I am simply only concerned with the MAP community and the existence within said demographic of divisions that are both unhelpful and certainly not constructive. You would perhaps be surprised at the lengths I would go to in order to see a united MAP demographic I think.
> being celibate with children is not an ideology, its a choice (and typically a pragmatic one). arguing that sexual conduct with children is safe and ethical is also a choice, and one I defend
Respectively, if you prefer and as you should. The right for children to appropriate adults for sexual activity and vice versa concerns matters of freedom of choice, freedom of speech and is also ethical, when one considers the rights of all citizens to consent to such behaviour. This is one I defend.
> If Ethan doesn’t allow these arguments on his site, that is also a choice. I don’t think Virped instructs its members not to make such arguments elswhere, then that would be wrong.
Yes, a choice, right or wrong. In order to see the truth as any individual may wish, one needs to consider all aspects of any given circumstance. As I have stated before, Virped effectively saved my life over a certain period of time. However, after reading what I regard as worrying black and white statements from notable Virpeds such as ‘All sexual contact with a child is harmful’, one begins to wonder. Hence, the beginnings of my own ‘revelation’, faced with such dogma. One can only hope that others see this fault in Virped, or at least in the fault of the founders to not counter such statements.
> but I don’t think Virped does that. it’s Virped critics who assume that right by seeking to silence the organization rather than critique its argument.
I would not seek to silence Virped, or to see it’s activities cease. If one is to be a part of a community, one should not cause divisions within in it. As Ethan quite rightly says, although I was not aware of many of these until relatively recently, there have been other sites available for many years. To set up camp and do so by causing ripples means that there will always be consequences. Virped is no longer listed on Topic Links. Again, a choice. Is it the right choice? That depends on one’s point of view, but it is something I disagree with as it is a way of distancing from others that is not healthy or helpful to the community as a whole.
> this is akin to an ad hominem attack. I would have thought a diversity of views and a robust debate would strengthn the position of all MAPs, whatever their views on these dekicate an PERSONAL choices and I have to wonder at the motives of some who can’t see that
Yes, it is, in much the same way as I’ve seen Virpeds call other MAPs scum for a differing point of view. Attacks ad hominem indeed.
Yes, to wonder at the motives of one who seeks to make a contribution for the unification of a community in the face of such sociological circumstances…..

Stop Ageism

Biologically: Child is less than 9 years old (girls) and 10 years old (boys). A child is one who has not reached puberty.
Puberty is responsible for adult sexuality. The adulthood begins at puberty.

Edward Chambers

> I fully agree with your critique of how society does not provide mental health support for pedophiles, and how the Dunkelfeld project should be available everywhere.
Until very recently, I had believed that the PPD was the future. However, although I still believe that the framework the PPD has, including no mandatory reporting, government funding among other things, it has come to my attention that all is not as it seems here. Initiating a MAP into therapy that uses aversion techniques based on shame and fear are contrary to everything I believe in, as I have experienced this with StopItNow and StopSO. Accordingly, these therapy providers, and now the PPD it seems, offer therapy on the basis that all sexual contact between and adult and a child is inherently harmful. I am disappointed to say the least, and when I know how you and Virped have aligned yourselves with such organisations, this is where I come into conflict with views. This is damaging to MAPs and to recommend that the PPD is indeed the future of help, support and therapy for MAPs is something I now regret.
> From our website’s FAQ: “We support the DSM-5 in its conclusion that pedophilia is not a disorder unless it also causes marked distress to an individual or leads to sexual abuse of children.”
I would agree with the definition of Paedophillic disorder if one’s orientation causes distress, but the latter of the definitions in the DSM V is incorrect. As you have agreed with me that not all sexual interaction between an adult and a child is harmful, how can paedophillia in this respect be a disorder at sometimes and not on other occasions? It is an inconsistent nonsense. In this respect, what I have said is correct :
“We need to reach out to young MAPs, and others of our kind who need help, and steer them away from the perils of Virped”
> Nick and I (co-founders of VP) do not favor legalization (though we are willing to believe that most pro-legalization activists are people of good will and integrity).
If this is the case, perhaps you should reign in notable Virpeds like ender, Daywalker, and Todd, who have acted in the interests, and on behalf, of Virped on media such as twitter. These people and their anti ‘pro contact scum’ etc narrative make a mockery of your statement.

GordonK

Mr. Chambers realization that it it society that is sick is the correct one. When giving children pleasure is considered worse that committing violence upon them, something is very wrong. Here in the US, viewing child pornography will get you a longer prison sentence than killing a child. Actually giving a child pleasure can get you put away for life. We are killing children around the world with our various wars, yet not a peep out of the same advocates as the numbers of dead and maimed children add up.
The UN just said that about 200,000 kids are at risk of land mines in Ukraine, Over a million have cholera in Yemen, not to mention the thousands killed and injured by our constant bombing by drone in over a dozen countries and yet licking a child’s private parts is the greatest evil ever perpetrated on a minor. I don’t know how we get out of this sad situation, but calling pedophiles evil is not the answer. Somehow, we need to get back to the mid 1970’s attitude that sex is good and fun and to be enjoyed, but in the political climate we have now, we are going backwards, not forwards. Sadly, I don’t have any ideas on how to change that direction.

Peter Herman

>… we need to get back to the mid 1970’s attitude that sex is good…
That began to change by the end of that decade.
>Sadly, I don’t have any ideas on how to change that direction.
Though I have excoriated VirPed in my earlier guest blog, they have done what we have not. They have and are uniting a desperate segment of MAPs around an admittedly bad idea.
We need to do the same thing around a better idea. First among our own and then widen the circle. To do this we need a variety of talents that include those with leadership abilities, communications skills and who are strategic thinkers. I will admit that though I can recognize the needs, I am not particularly competent at most of these.
NAMBLA, at its beginning, had Tom Reeves and others who possessed some of these skills. For a better historical view see http://hubertkennedy.angelfire.com/BL-Reviews.pdf with special attention to the reviews of “The Boston Sex Scandal” and of “A Witch-hunt Foiled.”
Perhaps those reading this will share the anger that GordonK’s expresses and put themselves forward in thinking through a new strategy.

Libertine

There was also the Abergavenny gay Witch-hunt of the 1940s, where minors were prostituting themselves to homosexuals and pederasts alike. Its an interesting read and you get a sense that these boys were not so much ‘victims’ the way they’d be seen today. but back then the homosexual was the metiphorical bogyman.
https://www.wattpad.com/57872609-the-abergavenny-witch-hunt-the-abergavenny-gay

Edward Chambers

I am attentive to any ideas. By working together, we could achieve many things, not least in keeping the community alive and relatively healthy. I am not sure how we could start said communications, but perhaps if you emailed Tom and passed on your email, it would be a start. Unfortunately, this would add to the weight of an already heavy TOC inbox, but perhaps he wouldn’t mind.
We do need to make a start, to develop some momentum. All are welcome as far as I am concerned. What I am not bothered about is how sheep baa and herd themselves in their response to our community. How they see us is no longer important. How we see ourselves is, very much so.

Peter Herman

> How we see ourselves is, very much so.
Hi Edward, How well said! Until we unite around a positive self-image it will be very difficult to convince a wider world.

Filip

In this article is a lot of praise for the German “Prevention Projekt Dunkelfeld”. The chief of this brainwashing organization is Klaus Michael Beier and from him are these documented lies (my translations):
“No child wants to have sex with adults.”
“It is wishful thinking if a pedophilic man comes to the conclusion that children or juveniles exist that think his contingencies are ok.”
Answer to the statement of a journalist: “This is of course a typical sentence [of adults attracted by children, the author]: The children wanted it, they felt quite well thereby.” Klaus Michael Beier: “Yes, as I said this is an expression of such a distorted perception, because one wishes that they wanted it, because one adjusts it.”
(German original quotes and sources see https://www.ipce.info/library_3/files/schuster_perf_txt.htm)
The pseudoscientists of this organisation are (together with others) responsible for the repression and the suffering of the “pedophilic” and “hebephilic” persons in Germany. To believe as Ed wrote that these people are “the most understanding and considerate people” is naive. Although they often might be able to help.

Peter Herman

Thanks Filip for the clarification.My understanding of German is good enough to confirm that Klaus Michael Bier’s view are antithetical to our views. I have German friends, and they find Germany’s attitudes toward MAPs no different than those in the major English speaking countries.
Germany’s experience with Nazi atrocities has changed it into a more humane society, especially when it comes to incarcerations.
Mr. Bier may mean well in treating MAPs with apparent kindness, and his “patients” may enjoy greater safety than those subject to mandatory reporting. Nevertheless, his opinions are still extremely patronizing if not insulting to those of us who know much better. If it has escaped anyone’s attention, do realize that “Dunkelfeld” means dark field. Nuff said!

Edward Chambers

Thank you for this regarding the PPD. I am both interested and disappointed.
When I lived in Berlin, for the best part of 9 months, it was difficult for a number of reasons. I was finally able to make a solid application for therapy at the PPD in the early months of 2015. During this time, despite having no health insurance which would mean a straightforward ability to join therapy, I was assigned a therapist as a means to support, albeit limited, whilst I attempted to settle. I was also assigned a social worker with whom I spent considerable time as I tried to settle, as I have already pointed out the bureaucracy was a nightmare. I never actually attended therapy, but they did everything I could to help me reach that point when I could attend. As I have stated, they were friendly and treated me well, something I have never encountered anywhere else.
It is disappointing to read that therapy at the PPD would actually turn out to be oppressive and more shame inducing than what I have experienced with the NHS, and particularly StopSO. It is a great disappointment. I had such hopes for the PPD to be a world leading provider of therapy. However, if they are providing therapy on the basis that :
“No child wants to have sex with adults.”
“It is wishful thinking if a pedophilic man comes to the conclusion that children or juveniles exist that think his contingencies are ok.”
this is indeed worrying. As I stated before, I have had several experiences where a child has expressed an interest in sexual activity with me.
Damn. I really should’ve researched this more, so thanks for this link Filip. Nevertheless, it would’ve been an exciting and informative experience if I had managed to do actually attend therapy there, so I don’t regret trying.
Among many things I would like to do in the paedosphere, the most important would be to provide therapy for MAPs that at the moment is not available. My experiences with StopSO, StopItNow, NHS in the UK have shown this. Perhaps my view of the PPD was more rose tinted than I’d care to admit. True child lovers would never want to harm a child, and would always put the interests of the child first. If there is the slightest doubt that sexual activity with said child would cause harm, and by that not the harm inflicted by social justice warriors or morally vindictive mother superior types, therapy and support on this alternative criteria would be something I would invest considerable time and effort in. It is by helping our kind in these potentially tricky and difficult situations with children as they happen, that tragedies when children are harmed, or worse, will be avoided.
Combined with a circumnavigation of mandatory / ethical reporting laws, this would be an avenue that I believe would be wholly beneficial to MAPs, and something that I believe many would consider taking part in. I have even considered training to do this, and had discussed this with Grayson of StopSO. Her response : ‘conflict of interests’, purely because the basis she is working from is that all sexual activity with a person under the age of 18 is harmful, and implicitly I would be considered as an agent of enabling sex between adults and children.
This ignorance on their part is mind-numbing. No one will come forward if they are going to be reported.

Edward Chambers

Thanks Tom….I have requested an invite…..I will wait to see if they respond…..

stephen6000

FUMA (the ‘Forum for Understanding Minor Attraction’) is an initiative begun by Adam Powell and myself in 2012. Its two chief aims are to provide friendship and support to minor-attracted people and to try to educate those outside our community about the realities of minor attraction. There are face-to-face meetings that take place in London on a fairly regular basis..There is also a private blog in which members discuss issues of interest. My own involvement with the group will soon cease for personal reasons, but if you would like to get involved, please contact Adam at [MODERATOR: THIS OFFER OF CONTACT IS NO LONGER AVAILABLE SO THE EMAIL ADDRESS HAS BEEN DELETED]
Stephen James

Filip

Hello Edward,
there is just one evaluation-study about “PPD” which was done by Klaus Michael Beier himself and this study had the result that the group of people who got brainwashed there/got “therapies” there had a lower self-esteem after being there for one year (see Beier et al. (2014): The German Dunkelfeld Project: A Pilot Study to Prevent Child Sexual Abuse and the Use of Child Abusive Images).
Yes, the men and women who are working at “PPD” may seem friendly and partly they probably are indeed very friendly. But they see you and others because of your sexual preference as mentally distorted and this harms (what is not the job of the therapist, it is his job to heal). And they probably would not admit that Klaus Michael Beier lied often. This behavior (to lie and to cover such lies) is unnormal and mentally distorted. They are pedophobic-mad, otherwise these “therapists” would not cover lies.
“Nevertheless, it would’ve been an exciting and informative experience if I had managed to do actually attend therapy there”
Who knows. Getting brain washed is not so exiting from my point of view.
A recently published representative study from Finnland had the result that from all minors up to 11/12 years old who had sexual contacts with adults in their life 54 % liked these sexual contacts (see Fagerlund et al. (2016): “Children’s Experiences of Completing a Computer-Based Violence Survey: Finnish Child Victim Survey Revisited” and two additional emails from Monica Fagerlund from August 17th 2016). From all males (after spermarche) of the Kinsey study who had their first sexual intercourse as a 10 to 13 year old boy with an adult woman 70 % said they liked this sexual intercourse very much (see Rind et al. (2016): Reactions to First Postpubertal Coitus and First Male Postpubertal Same-Sex Experience in the Kinsey Sample: Examining Assumptions in German Law Concerning Sexual Self-Determination and Age Cutoffs”). I send an email to lots of leading German sexual “scientists”. Not one of them admitted that Klaus Michael Beier lied. Even Rüdiger Laurmann did not admit that. They have no respect for the truth. Don´t trust the mainstream in this issue. The mainstream is mad.
Filip

sean

as an afterthought, given your mention of “relevant pornography” and my hymn to masturbation, i’d like to say that porn in general makes me very uneasy.
it instrumentalizes the people involved, something that is already a potentally negative aspect of sexual life. in my experience, relationships with people are vastly more rewarding than relationships with objects.
perhaps this is why I get such profound pleasure from my friendships with kids, which are mutually affectionate without being sexual. I’m suspicious of any impulses that reveal desire or need for my young friends. I want to be the one giving, not the one taking.
I consider child pornography a serious problem for minor attracted people. the internet makes it a constant temptation and, given the closing off of any avenue for us to express our sexuality, regardless how benign, its appeal is obvious. with our sexual feelings condemned outright, there is no sense that one mode of expression is any more or less ethical than another. indeed, penalties for ‘making’ (ie, downloading) cp often exceed those for hands on offenses. whats more, at the pleasure of the state, ANYTHING can be prosecuted under this rubric, from undie ads and nudist holiday snaps to cartoons and private jottings.
child pornography has become a tool of the state, used to publicly condemn and officially victimize MAPs thru a byzantine, inquisitory system of registers, civil commitments and other punitive measures that clearly violate natural rights.
so, I think MAPs are best to consciously turn away from child porn, both as something that compromises their happiness and as somthing that makes them and their cause vulnerable. we should seek a guaranteed right to enjoy erotica that does not fit a narrow definition of child porn as an actual record of children engaging in sexual behaviour but, until we win that right, we need to understand that even the remotest margins of the genre can be used to attack us.
so, back to wanking… how do we enrich our fantasy lives without porn? from what I’ve been told, obsessive collecting of preteen beaver shots does not actially contribute to a richer fantasy life. it just becomes a compulsion, and compulsivity is characterized by its absence of nuance and complexity.
I love the brownies, and I have a collection of brownie annuals. I’ve also made a few paper dress up dolls, so I can dress and undress my brownies in the costumes suitable to their country of origin or in different historical periods. this probably seems daft, but its an activity that enriches my fantasies and can make masturbation a genuine pleasure rather than a sad alternative.
paper cut out nude brownies probably attract several life sentences in some jurisdictions, but i’m lucky enough to live somewhere with some residual sense of proportion. I still look forward to the day I don”t have to keep my brownie stuff out of site, but then, some things are just private, aren’t they?

sean

hi Ed, thanks for sharing your experiences.
if I may, you seem to embody the schizm between pro and anti contact MAPs in one stance, which must be difficult for you to sustain.
I”ve, been lucky to live in a country with good privacy laws, and protection of client confidentialiry in therapeutic relatiinships. consequentltly, i’ve had (mostly) very good experiences with therapists, where I’ve felt safe discussing all manner of embarrassing details. this has been literally a life saver fo me.
my only criticisms are:
– there is no subsidy (like you, I’ve spent a LOT of money on therapy).
– there is no formal training of mental health professioals in issues around minor attraction (despite the attention paid to the sequelae of sexual abuse).
– there is no reluable way of finding a sympathetic therapist (I had one crushing experience, and maybe I got off lightlly. if I weren’t so compromised already I would have made a formal complaint)
so what was the goal? initially I sought help after surviving a suicide attempt. some years later I came under pressure to ‘see somone’ after being outed to a wide circle of friends and family (by a friend I’d told in confidence about my attraction to children).
the goal in the latter case was never clear to me, but it really didnt matter. I soon discovered that what I was really seeking was some releif from the sense of isolation and shame that I’d carried my whole adult life.
what I’ve been able to to in therapy is clarify my own thoughts on paedophilia, on chilren, on sex, on society and on my own personal values. i’ve also been able to develop some confidence in my ability to live a life that actually aligns with my values. its no use believing that sexual conduct with children is harmful but engage in such conduct regardless.
so whatever posirion one takes on ‘contact’ (and mine is more or less agnostic) I think its important to interrogate that position and be clear about its bases.
even more important is to live in harmony with the conclusions
as things stand today, I think
adult sexual conduct with children puts both the child and the adult at significant risk. I agree with much that Tom (for example) has to say on sexual conduct with children but, in today’s world, its clear to me that sex has no part in my relationships with them.
this clarity has allowed me to take some charge of my orientation and choose how I express it.
the ultimate outcome is that I have some wonderful friendships with children whose parents know about my orientation and make some allowances for it. I wouldn”t have believed this possible if it weren’t happening.
Ed, you seem to have put yourself thru a lot, in the service of all minor attracted people, and I”m grateful. if I can presume to offer advice, I would say take a breath, relax and look after yourself for a
while. also, if you can manage it, find a sympathetic counselor. try a sex therapist, maybe. don”t say more than you want to until you find somone you trust.
also, if you get any pleasure from masturbating, work on that. learn to do it without guilt. have fun with fantasies. maybe try some toys. I’m of the opinion that an earth shattering orgasm beats chemical castration any day.
so we’re sexully attracted to children. that doesn’t mean we can’t have fun!

Yure

I realized my feelings at age 5. No joke. At age 10, I noticed that they weren’t growing with me and that the focus of my attraction continued to be boys aged 8 or less. At age 12, I thought “I may very well be a pedophile.” At age 14, I shrugged it off: “as long as I hurt no one, including myself, I’ll be fine.” And it never was a problem to my self-concept. It doesn’t seem to be something common.
I guess that what made me be okay with myself since the beginning, was the fact that, as a kid, I only watched cartoons, I hated news as a teen and, as an adult, I don’t watch television. I was mostly ignorant about the stigma. I only became aware of how bad it was at age 24, when I was talking about pedophilia with a friend and it made me want to look it up online. You see, before that talk, I never saw pedophilia as a problem, specially if not acted upon. It was a minor part of me that made no difference at all in my social trait with others or society. When I made that search, I became anxious for days, to the point of losing sleep. The news didn’t describe what I felt, however, and I didn’t feel like a ticking time bomb either, as I had managed to stay law-abiding for over two decades.
While looking the subject further, I found a christian right-wing conservative site which, for whatever reason, linked to Rind Report and Sandfort’s “Boys on Their Contacts with Men.” That’s how I found Ipce. Doing the research on scientific and philosophical ground made me see things more clearly and I quickly recovered the sanity that I lost. But, at same time, I wanted to share my findings. So I put them in my blog, quickly severing one friendship and worrying other friends. But I didn’t mind it much. I explained the issue to my real friends and didn’t bother about those who left me. I can no longer count in the fingers of one hand the number of people who know about my attraction to minors.
I came to the same conclusion as Ed, that we must reach young MAPs and soothe their minds about it. Hikari and I worked on the “MAP Starting Guide”, to cater to people who noticed their attraction, but feel that their self-esteem is harmed because of that realization. It’s focused on making the person realize that they are not ill, not to promote any contact ideology. The reader would be given a chance to choose if they should be favorable or against age of consent, for example, that’s entirely up to them.
I relate with some things that Ed shared. But I didn’t suffer as much. Putting things that way, if I managed to live an okay life because I was surprisingly ignorant of the hate towards us, then it’s society that makes us ill.

Edward Chambers

Hi yure
I think it’s fantastic you discovered your sexuality so early, and without suffering for the most part as a result. For sure, I am a little envious, but more happy for you.
My attraction is more than just sexual as I am sure most, if not all, MAPs fondness of children is. Little girls can be, and often are, the most beautiful thing on the planet, certainly from the human species anyhow. As a youngster, I can look back and see that my attraction was there, but it wasn’t sexual per se. That doesn’t mean to say I wasn’t sexual then, but I wasn’t quite aware of this until my early teens. I was quite repressed in many ways due to the nature of an overbearing father, and a mother who was caught up in it all. It could’ve been worse hey…..
> I came to the same conclusion as Ed, that we must reach young MAPs and soothe their minds about it.
I think you would be seen as a great role model for young MAPs with your experiences and how you have dealt with coming to terms with your attractions as you have done. Erm….by the way….what is the url for your blog (you have one, right?)….?

Yure

https://pedrapapeletesoura.wordpress.com/2017/09/14/map-starting-guide/
Attraction to minors only began to be discussed in May 2017 and only recently I began to write in Portuguese and English. Most of the content is unrelated to MAPs and is also in Portuguese. But more content on the issue, in English, is being prepared. The MAP Starting Guide is open to critics and suggestions. I also mentioned Hikari, who also has a blog.
https://hikarisblog.wordpress.com/2017/11/28/my-thoughts-on-csa-part-1-of-3-v0-5/