Deconstructing the lion and the lamb

I am pleased to introduce a new young guest blogger. “Max Woolf” is an independent researcher, anarchist, and BL (AoA roughly 12-17) whose work has been used by individuals and organisations. He aims eventually to archive his developing thoughts on MAP issues, political philosophy, literary criticism, etc., in a forthcoming personal blog on which he is “busily procrastinating” (!). Today, Max deconstructs the concepts of “paedophile” and “victim”, and maintains that the increasing visibility of MAPs will expose CSA dogma for what it is. Like the biblical prophesy of the lion and lamb who will lie down together in peace, he presents an inspirational vision that challenges the language of predator and prey.

Living Under the Shadow of Victims

Discrimination against MAPs bears many similarities to that of other oppressed groups throughout history. However, the struggle for MAP rights and dignity is unique in that MAPs are forced to contend with a powerful cultural image of victimhood attributed directly to their sexuality. Although minority groups have been blamed for all sorts of hardships in society, from crime to war to disease, the marginalisation of MAPs is justified on the grounds that it is said to derive from the actual suffering of individual people (rather than abstractions such as “the nation” or “the race”). This has ensured that attempts made by MAPs to resist their dehumanisation will be automatically interpreted as the heartless taunting of the already traumatised.

Unsurprisingly, increasing the acceptance of MAPs in society has been a difficult challenge. Despite efforts to destigmatise them by focusing on their mental health needs rather than their dangerousness, these efforts have often been met with ridicule [1]. Supporters of MAPs have faced personal and political consequences as their work is seen as undermining efforts to prevent “child sexual abuse” (CSA)[2]. This antagonism is unique in that it not only consists of the generic bigotry applied to sexual minorities (disgusting, perverted, sinful), but has the added rationale of protecting the emotional health of victims [3].

It is necessary, therefore, to challenge the dominant narrative of the CSA victim and expose the ways it is weaponised for the purposes of keeping MAPs in a subordinated position within society. This does not require that the personal experiences of self-identified CSA victims must be held with doubt, disdain, or disregard. However, MAPs and MAP-allies cannot hope to make any meaningful change while leaving undisturbed the social construction of CSA as the only possible interpretation of adult-minor sex (AMS) – intervening merely to distinguish between those who commit such “atrocities,” and those who merely desire to.

Rather, what is needed is the examination of the socio-political processes through which all AMS came to be conceptualised as a profoundly harmful act, specifically via the framing of MAP sexuality as innately pathological and exploitative. In this way, one may trace the developing image of the CSA victim in society and culture as both informing, and being informed by, a vision of sinister sexual degeneracy.

In simpler terms: MAPs are inhuman monsters because they commit CSA, and CSA is a violating and destructive act because it’s committed by MAPs. Only by understanding the evolution of CSA and MAPs in relation to one another, can MAPs and MAP-allies counteract attempts to delegitimise them through the deployment of victim imagery, while remaining sympathetic to individuals’ unique experiences of pain.

The lion and the lamb is a popular theme of religious iconography, the inspiration being Isaiah 11:6

 

To Make a Predator

CSA has no fixed definition. The World Health Organisation (1999, 2006) has gone so far as to state that CSA encompasses any involvement of a minor in a sexual activity that “violates the laws and social taboos of society” [4]. Studies have shown that the “effects” of CSA depend largely on the definition used [5], and that when recruiting participants from the general population and adjusting for minors’ personal perceptions of willingness (in addition to other factors), reactions to experiences labeled “child sexual abuse” are incredibly varied and very often positive [6]. It is generally acknowledged, even among researchers who work within the dominant, preventative framework, that CSA is a moral concept, inappropriately tacked on to social science methodologies which strive for clarity in cause and effect [7].

It does not seem clear, then, why AMS should be universally deplored in society, so much so that the United States Congress, in an unprecedented move, passed a resolution to condemn a peer-reviewed scientific paper on the sole basis that it challenged the view that AMS is “anything but abusive [and] destructive” [8]. Such a militant approach on this point appears even more odd when remembering that before the 1980s, there was no scientific consensus on the effects of AMS, and many clinicians believed that in most cases it had little impact on a young person’s later psychological outcomes [9].

To understand this shift, it is necessary to return to the modern origins of the concept of CSA, beginning in the 1970s with the feminist movement’s war against incest. Combining psychoanalytical theories of latent sexual trauma [10], the new pediatric diagnosis of child battery [11], and feminist interpretations of rape [12], feminists opposed the view that small girls were in a position to refuse sex from older men who wielded power over them. Feminists’ claims as to the frequency of incest were especially scandalising as they amounted to a direct challenge to the nuclear family and the unquestioned access men had to the bodies of women and children who were considered their “property” [13].

Feminist readings of incest as a product, not of a rare sexual disorder, but of male privilege guaranteed to them by a patriarchal society, was (strangely enough) not taken very well by many male commentators, and caused an enormous backlash against what was perceived as an anti-male conspiracy [14]. However, by that point, too many women had come forward with their experiences of childhood molestation for the issue to just “go away.” So, in order to relegitimise the role of masculinity and family in society, the solution was to portray the perpetrators of CSA as a unique type of deviant existing outside of the natural social order [15].

It should come as no surprise that around this time, police orchestrated highly publicised raids against communities of boy-lovers [16], and the gay community began facing intense pressure to rescind its earlier support for consensual AMS [17]. Homosexualising the attraction to minors worked wonders in garnering public support for aggressive policing and profoundly harsher sentencing for age of consent violations, and this trend continued long after the dominant LGB organisations washed their hands of cross-generational love and said to MAPs “I never knew you. Away from me, you evildoers!” [18].

Eventually, between the late 80s to the early 00s, the cultural figure of the “paedophile” emerged. Through novels by Andrew Vachss, films such as Sleepers (1996), television series such as To Catch a Predator (2004-2007), and the work of celebrities such as Oprah Winfrey, a lurid and titillating image of the minor-attracted person was produced. Psychiatrists suddenly “discovered” that the attraction to minors is a psychological deformity, claiming that such people lack the ability to connect with adults and that they compensate by dominating the weak and vulnerable [19]. Professionals maintained that the thought processes of MAPs cannot be comprehended by ordinary humans, and that, while many MAPs have mastered the ability to present as normal individuals, this is only their attempt to deceive and manipulate the people around them while they violate the purity of innocents.

Victims Needed – Apply Within

While many feminists were still – at least ostensibly – attempting to keep the focus on the patriarchal family and related systems of power [20], it soon became clear that they couldn’t very well declare war on their fathers. And perhaps, at the end of the day, few of them even wanted to in the first place – incest or not. So feminists settled by joining the choir of other concerned citizens, demanding that the police protect their families from the “pedophile next door,” dropping their radical critiques almost entirely. While originally a Marxian-like interrogation of the “everyday” and its hidden injustices, the discourse of CSA soon became a validation of normal society, now tasked with hunting down and expelling the sexual “other.”

Once the issue of CSA no longer threatened the status quo, it was quickly professionalised and coopted by the state. By the time this transformation was complete, it was universally acknowledged as a global emergency. As Lancaster (2017) argues, entire “victim industries” sprung up in response [21]. This includes recovery movements, books on healing, advocacy groups, and new therapeutic techniques that promised a cure for all of the problems “associated” with CSA, from asthma to poor dental hygiene [22]. Law firms, mental health practitioners, law enforcement agencies, academics, activists, news outlets, TV writers, and moral entrepreneurs of all stripes capitalised on this new frontier of social problem claims-making.

The only thing needed now was victims, and lots of them. Numerous scholars have already covered the ways in which academic research on CSA has been designed to generate as many victims as possible and to portray their suffering in the bleakest ways. Such methods run the gamut from sample bias to failure to adjust for third factors to inconsistent definitions of CSA [23]. However, this does not explain how the public image of AMS, outside of the research community, became invariably conceptualised as a horrifically traumatising experience nearly without parallel.

The enormous diversity of AMS had become simplified into the singular narrative of “child sexual abuse,” through the use of what I call “testimonial filters.” By testimonial filters, I mean how some specific stories (and specific ways of telling stories) are embraced, highlighted, and privileged over others, in order to develop a highly scripted narrative that nevertheless appears to have sprung up naturally without top-down guidance [24]. The recovered memory debacle alone contributed greatly to the skyrocketing number of people on TV “courageously” relaying their gut-wrenching ordeals to millions of viewers on the edge of their seats with mouth agape (experiences which in fact never occurred).

That aside, it is important to pay attention to some of the other mechanisms producing victim subjectivities. As has been argued, the status of the victim has become a stable source of political identity in a chaotic and fragmented world [25]. With such romanticised depictions of the CSA victim (now survivor) and the apparent solidarity amongst its communities’ members, it is controversial, though not out of bounds, to consider the reasons why people with even banal or mildly unpleasant sexual experiences as minors may later adopt the victim label, if only to gain some small reprieve in a world that demands constant fortitude of mind and soul [26].

What’s still more interesting than this, even, is the ways in which the voices of minors who self-identify as consenting subjects are structurally invalidated. As the definition of CSA expanded in the public mind to drastically inflate the number of people who fell into the victim category, professionals soon had to contend with the fact that these “victims” themselves so commonly departed from the script they were supposed to follow. The solution was to systematically discount all such testimonies as false consciousness, hiding deep and intensive trauma [27].

Therapists and police investigators have often described the slow and difficult (yet critically important) process of cajoling young people to accept the official view of themselves as victims [28]. Many professionals even consider the high rates of positive experiences as a problem in itself, on the grounds that (a), it reduces rates of disclosure [29], and (b) positive reactions indicate that minors are “learning from their abusers” that such experiences are healthy and enjoyable [30]. For reasons that should be clear, people with positive memories of AMS in their youth have few platforms to share their experiences, and even fewer incentives.

The Centre Cannot Hold

Originally, the MAP was needed to explain the presence of victims in society. Eventually, though, victims were needed to perpetuate the image of the MAP as a morally defective aberration, in need of constant surveillance, control, and cognitive restructuring. The entire typology of “cognitive distortions” of MAPs in sex offender treatment programs – such as the belief that minors can legitimately desire sex with an adult, and refuse sex when they don’t – demands the mass disqualification of youth subjectivities which might, inadvertently, make MAPs feel less ashamed of their sexuality.

Of course, there are many people who can legitimately recall negative sexual experiences with adults as minors. Often, this is the result of abusive behaviour on the part of the adult, or the leveraging of a close/familial relationship. On other occasions it might be due to societal condemnation, or simply to the inherent emotional pitfalls of intimate relationships at every age. In any case, people who have experienced abusive, coercive, or otherwise unpleasant sexual encounters should be heard and validated, obviously.

However, this does not prevent inquiry into broader mechanisms designed to allow only a few acceptable narratives of AMS to enter public view, while silencing or doctoring the rest. As already noted by numerous scholars, the way we think about pain cannot be disassociated from its political function in reinforcing certain hierarchies, sexual hierarchies included .

There is a reason why recent efforts by professionals to humanise MAPs in society – even while incessantly maintaining that their support for MAPs is largely for the purposes of helping them remain “offence free” – has been met with such hostility, with many MAP advocates told their activism constitutes a “slap in the face” to CSA victims. It is because the social construction of CSA as a heinous and violating act (irrespective of “small details” such as the minor’s consent) is fundamentally rooted in the conceptualisation of MAPs as nonpersons; to be represented only through TV crime drama, psychiatric textbooks, and mugshots.

The emergence of a MAP identity/movement, even one that is non-contact and committed to upholding the moral standards of society, is a transgressive and radical development. It is also one that the established discourse on CSA cannot tolerate, because the visibility of MAPs as living, breathing individuals rather than phantasmagoric abstractions of wickedness will inevitably demystify CSA and permit the excavation of the countless expressions of sexual diversity that have been stuffed within that single term used to silence all dissent.

[Further blog items continue below, after the notes.] 

Notes

[1] Naudé, A. (2022). A Case Study via Sociolinguistic Analysis of Covert Pro-Paedophilia Organisation Registered as a Child Protection Charity and its links to Paedophilia Enablers in Academia and Academic Propaganda. British Journal of Philosophy, Sociology and History, 2(1), 35-59; Farmer, C., Salter, M., & Woodlock, D. (2024). A Review of Academic Use of the Term “Minor Attracted Persons”. Trauma, Violence, & Abuse, 0(0).

[2] Some notable examples of professionals facing severe secondary stigma for their support for MAPs include Allyn Walker, Jacob Breslow, and Miranda Galbreath.

[3] Nematy, A., Flynn, S., & McCarthy-Jones, S. (2024). YouTube Commenters’ Discourse of Paedophilia: A Qualitative Social Media Analysis. Sexuality & Culture, 28(1), 71-95. p. 82. See also https://www.pennlive.com/news/2022/08/prison-sex-therapist-defends-pedophiles-as-minor-attracted-persons-outraging-victim-advocates.html; and https://www.adamhorowitzlaw.com/blog/2022/05/minor-attracted-persons-a-troubling-phrase/

[4] Cited in Mathews, B., & Collin-Vézina, D. (2019). Child sexual abuse: Toward a conceptual model and definition. Trauma, Violence, & Abuse, 20(2), 131-148. p. 136.

[5] Haugaard, J., & Emory, R. (1989). Methodological issues in child sexual abuse research. Child Abuse and Neglect, 13, 89-100.

[6] Kilpatrick, A. C. (1992). Long-range effects of child and adolescent sexual experiences: Myths, mores, and menaces. Routledge; Rind, B., Tromovitch, P., & Bauserman, R. (1998). A meta-analytic examination of assumed properties of child sexual abuse using college samples. Psychological bulletin, 124(1), 22; Okami, P. (1991). Self-reports of “positive” childhood and adolescent sexual contacts with older persons: An exploratory study. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 20, 437-457.

[7] Seto, M. (2008). Pedophilia and Sexual Offending Against Children. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association. pp. vii-viii, footnote; Jahnke, S., Schmidt, A. F., & Hoyer, J. (2023). Pedohebephilia and perceived non-coercive childhood sexual experiences: Two non-matched case-control studies. Sexual Abuse, 35(3), 340-374.

[8] Mirkin, H. (2000). Sex, science, and sin: The Rind report, sexual politics, and American scholarship. Sexuality & Culture, 4(2), 82-82.

[9] Finkelhor, D. (1979). Sexually victimized children. The Free Press; Malón, A. (2011). The “participating victim” in the study of erotic experiences between children and adults: An historical analysis. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 40, 169-188; Clancy, S. (2009). The trauma myth: The truth about the sexual abuse of children – And its aftermath. Basic Books.

[10] Bates, V. (2012). ‘Misery Loves Company’: Sexual Trauma, Psychoanalysis and the Market for Misery. Journal of Medical Humanities, 33, 61-81.

[11] Hacking, I. (1999). The social construction of what? Harvard University Review. pp. 138-39.

[12] Jenkins, P. (1998). Moral panic: Changing concepts of the child molester in modern America. Yale University Press.

[13] Worrell, M. L. (2001). The discursive construction of child sexual abuse. Open University (United Kingdom).

[14] Angelides, S. (2005). The emergence of the paedophile in the late twentieth century. Historical Studies, 36(126), 272-295.

[15] ibid; Chenier, E. (2012). The natural order of disorder: Pedophilia, stranger danger and the normalising family. Sexuality & Culture, 16, 172-186.

[16] Angelides, S. (2009). The homosexualization of pedophilia. In Homophobias: Lust and Loathing Across Time and Space, 63-82; De Orio, S. (2017). Punishing Queer Sexuality in the Age of LGBT Rights (Doctoral dissertation).

[17] Gamson, J. (1997). Messages of exclusion: Gender, movements, and symbolic boundaries. Gender & Society, 11(2), 178-199; Paternotte, D. (2014). The International (Lesbian and) Gay Association and the question of pedophilia: Tracking the demise of gay liberation ideals. Sexualities, 17(1-2), 121-138.

[18] Matthew 7:23. New International Version.

[19] ATSA. (2005). Facts About Adult Sex Offenders. https://ccoso.org/sites/default/files/import/ATSAfacts.htm; Sonenschein, D. (1998). Pedophiles on parade; Hunter, J. (2008). The political use and abuse of the “pedophile”. Journal of homosexuality, 55(3), 350-387.

[20] Gordon, L. (1988). The politics of child sexual abuse: Notes from American history. Feminist Review, 28(1), 56-64.

[21] Lancaster, R. N. (2017). The new pariahs: Sex, crime, and punishment in America. In The war on sex, 65-125.

[22] Levine, J. (2002). Harmful to minors: The perils of protecting children from sex. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press. p. 27.

[23] Okami, P. (1990). Sociopolitical biases in the contemporary scientific literature on adult human sexual behavior with children and adolescents. In Pedophilia: Biosocial dimensions (pp. 91-121). New York, NY: Springer; Kilpatrick, A. C. (1987). Childhood sexual experiences: Problems and issues in studying long‐range effects. Journal of Sex Research, 23(2), 173-196.

[24] I am drawing here from the “propaganda model” of communication developed by Herman and Chomsky (1988) in Manufacturing Consent: The Political Economy of the Mass Media. Pantheon Books.

[25] See, for example, Best, J. (1997). Victimization and the victim industry. Society, 34(4), 9-17; Brown, W. (1995). States of injury: Power and freedom in late modernity. Princeton University Press; Bumiller, K. (1992). The civil rights society: The social construction of victims. JHU Press.

[26] Davis, O., & Dean, T. (2022). Hatred of sex. U of Nebraska Press. pp. 95, 120.

[27] Angelides, S. (2019). The fear of child sexuality: Young people, sex, and agency. University of Chicago Press; Yuill, R. A. (2004). Male age-discrepant intergenerational sexualities and relationships (Doctoral dissertation, University of Glasgow); Grondin, A. M. (2011). Thinking outside specious boxes: Constructionist and post-structuralist readings of ‘child sexual abuse’. Sex Education, 11(3), 243-254.

[28] For numerous statements to this effect, see the Newgon page: List of conflicting statements by victimologists.

[29] Lahtinen, H. M., Laitila, A., Korkman, J., & Ellonen, N. (2018). Children’s disclosures of sexual abuse in a population-based sample. Child abuse & neglect, 76, 84-94.

[30] Haaken, J., & Lamb, S. (2000). The politics of child sexual abuse research. Society Vol. 37 No. 4; p. 7-14. http://www.just-well.dk/abusepol2.pdf

*******

Your host resumes:

FREE PLUG FOR KARL’S “CUTE BOYS” BOOK

Being featured in a sex-negative, transphobic, feminist attack-bitch online magazine may not be the ideal free plug for a MAP’s new book, but a lengthy recent article (well over 1100 words, with four photos, no less) in Reduxx is a tribute of sorts to Karl Andersson’s Impossibly Cute Boys: The Healing Power of Shota Comics in Japan.  

Such an extensive, detailed, treatment inevitably conveys the message that this is an important work, even though the Reduxx writer’s obvious intention is a scandal-mongering take-down. Not that obvious, though: the style is quite restrained, with a faux sophistication that could come from a credible review, including a few actual passages and quotes of which the author himself might almost approve.

YouTube: Karl indicates key features of his book

Shota, for instance, is helpfully explained as “a shortened version of shōtarō complex”, which “refers to comics, cartoons, and other forms of visual media which focus on young boys in erotic and sexualised situations.” So far, so good. We might argue with “sexualised” rather than “sexual”, but the next bit goes more carelessly wonky: “The boys are primarily depicted as prepubescent, often having hairless bodies and very small features.”

Small features? Really? One of the most distinctive aspects of “cute” depictions is that they exaggerate, not reduce, the size of the child’s eyes and head, making them look babylike – as may be seen on the cover illustration of Karl’s book. I suppose the writer might have button noses in mind but not little cocks. I doubt the book shows any of the latter (it wouldn’t be available through Amazon in that case), and any stiff boy dicks shown in illicit shota are surely never going to be depicted smaller than life-size.

That said, a peculiar feature of classical art (Greek and Roman) is that statues of naked young males, while they invariably look athletic and quite muscular when depicting teens or older figures, tend to be given tiny genitalia. How weird is that? The only males shown as well endowed (and with an erection) are the mythical satyrs, who were comically ugly and always horny as hell. But I digress.

Even where Reduxx insinuates that Karl is hiding something, they struggle to land a glove because he has always been strikingly (scandalously!) candid. Describing his promotional YouTube vid for the book, Reduxx claims he “neglects to mention” that Manchester University launched an inquiry into the circumstances of his PhD research. But this is fake news! Towards the end of the video he announces that his book includes an entire “bonus chapter” focused on the Manchester debacle.

More positively,  Karl also tells us his is the first book on shota in English, which not only goes into the history of the art but also expands into a “theory of play”, a “philosophy of boy worship”, and even a “theory of how humans work”.  Sounds fascinating.

The only reason I haven’t already read Impossibly Cute Boys myself is because I first want to clarify my own thoughts on “cuteness” independently, as far as I can, without being overly influenced by Karl’s undoubted expertise. I am working on it.

STRIPPING VICAR WAS A NIPPER

A child drag artist was featured on Heretic TOC a few years ago. Now I can report on a 10-year-old boy’s wildly risqué strip act. On ice, no less, which suggests frostbite might compete for the biggest risk involved, along with Mum and Dad being referred to Social Services.

But, hey, this was a while ago, when folks were more relaxed about the antics a sexy kid might get up to. This was back in the early 1990s, when the young ice-skate dancer in question came up with his imaginative “stripping vicar” act. He started the routine in a clerical cassock. When this came off, his “vicar” was wearing only black stockings and lacey underwear.

How many of these items were also whipped off and tossed into a whooping and hollering crowd was not laid bare, alas, when the act came to my attention last month thanks to straight-laced BBC Radio 4’s Desert Island Discs.

By this time the little vicar had gone on to fame and fortune not as a raunchy performer but as a prolific playwright. For this was James Graham, who gave us a string of  politically-themed plays and is more recently known for Dear England and the mega-hit Sherwood TV series.

As the celebrity guest on the venerable DID show, Graham refused to put a label on his sexuality, but did reveal his lovers had been both females and males. Had his vicar act given him a sexual buzz? Unsurprisingly, that question was kept firmly under wraps.

WHY ARE NIPPERS CALLED NIPPERS?

The word “nipper” in my previous cross-head has a nice ring in connection with “stripper”, which is why I used it. But I had my doubts. When we talk about nippers, don’t we usually mean toddlers rather than 10-year-olds? Isn’t it another word, like “rug rats” or “ankle biters”, best applied to ground-level little animals, who might gnaw or nip at below adult knee height?

Well, no. I checked it out, and the word turns out to have a historically revealing origin, one that reminds us of a bygone era when kids – not toddlers, but small kids nevertheless – were taken seriously enough to be given a responsible job.

It’s a seafaring term. It’s all to do with the surprisingly (for land-lubbers like me) complicated business of weighing anchor manually, using a capstan. Here’s the key bit of an online description.

The anchor cable was lashed to the messenger cable with bits of rope called nippers… As a nipper reached the cable hatch a small boy (called a Nipper) would untie the lashing and run up to the forward bulkhead to tie it onto the cable that was just coming through the hawse hole.

Midshipman Henry William Baynton aged 13 (in 1780). Portrait by Thomas Hickey

So the Nipper’s job was to “nip” a sailing ship’s anchor cable to the endless belt turned by the capstan when the anchor was being weighed. Now you know.

But the more interesting bit for most of us is that small boys (as young as eight or so) were taken on as sailors and entrusted with this crucially important task.

What’s more, in the Royal Navy in the 18th century, “young gentlemen” could even achieve the officer rank of midshipman as young as 13, as will be understood by the many BL fans who saw Max Pirkis play just such an early teenager in Master and Commander: The Far Side of the World (2003), a film based on the nautically accurate novel by Patrick O’Brian – a role in which Pirkis was praised for making us believe he could lead sailors into battle despite his young age.

 

 

 

5 4 votes
Article Rating
Subscribe
Notify of

234 Comments
Newest
Oldest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

Predator – Prey, flipped script in plain-sight.

Predatory young fans often underage AAMs by the million PREYED on HOT adult stars chased grabbed, groped groomed, fucked.

Many ex-AAM fans now grinning-grannies FONDLY recall their ILLEGAL FUN SEX with adult stars.

Over to desperate Dan & co antis for brain-sucking vampire interviews with ex-AAMs by the million.

“I’m gonna talk about young girls at the age of twelve, 13, & 14 being intimate with and having sex with Rock stars and men well in their 20s & 30s. Baby Groupies – they were known for being Young Fun and HOT. Sable Starr reportedly lost her virginity to Spirits guitarist Randy California at the age of only twelve years old.”

https://www.google.com/search?q=baby+groupies&oq=baby+groupies&aqs=chrome..

Last edited 7 days ago by HappyHumpingPup

Does anyone here enjoy teaching children academically? I know a pretty eight year old called ‘Sarah’ (not real name). I send Sarah fortnightly letters (electronically) with parental consent. She’s so beautiful and I want to give her a head start in life. I’m Oxbridge educated and can teach her quite a lot. It’s fun and fulfilling to give something back, and I feel an emotionally fulfilling ‘friendship’ connection with Sarah. I would do anything for children.

>I’m Oxbridge educated and can teach her quite a lot. It’s fun and fulfilling to give something back,

Like Zen & Tom, true MAPS are naturally good teachers. Until naZty Anglos find out and butt in.

Recalls 19Haties ‘Love Magnet’ Bold MAP videoed a HOT Blonde Loli 8, on a TV Show, then ‘Directory Enquiries’ (remember?) found her family name and distant town, and er, phoned around 4pm when SHE answered the call fresh from school Home Alone. Real fun chats ensued, until third call she said her Mom had Bold MAP’s number from their then new digi-fone ‘Caller Enquiry’. Quote HOT Loli, “No, pleeze don’t go. I like talking to you.”

Fuckin’ SeXphobe AngloVILE assholes!!!!

Last edited 11 days ago by HappyHumpingPup

Update: The growing influx of MAP and MAP ally accounts have been mass-banned. I’m sure some slipped through the cracks and many will just set up new accounts. MU MAP Union got hit, as did the anti-c identifying accounts and MU’s haters / political opponents. Once again, they don;t care about your professed “contact stance,” they care if you’re a MAP or sympathetic to MAPs. Or, more to the point, if your presence on the app could threaten the app’s existence due to legal fears about what you might post, and backlash from the public, advertisers, and financial backers.

According to a post by Bluesky moderation, they’re receiving around 3000 reports an hour.

thats me gone then, ok back to twitter,…. its time the first amendment was applied to social media..

It’s legal fears. The feminists have managed to write unlimited “child abuse protections” into law after #metoo, and if huge public square speech platforms don’t comply, they can be sued into oblivion. Culture change through lawfare, top down. And the government is only too happy to oblige.

This is fear manipulation. They force them to use total censorship. In fact, if the Supreme Court were to actually uphold the Constitution, it would find this to be a violation of the First Amendment. There was a precedent in judicial practice that entered the law textbooks and became fundamental in the protection of the First Amendment – this is the so-called case of “Brandenburg v. Ohio”.

Clarence Brandenburg, a Ku Klux Klan (KKK) leader in rural Ohio, contacted a reporter at a Cincinnati television station and invited him to cover a KKK rally that would take place in Hamilton County in the summer of 1964. Brandenburg was charged with advocating violence under Ohio’s criminal syndicalism statute for his participation in the rally and for the speech he made. Convicted in the Court of Common Pleas of Hamilton County, Brandenburg was fined $1,000 and sentenced to one to ten years in prison. The U.S. Supreme Court reversed Brandenburg’s conviction, holding that government cannot constitutionally punish abstract advocacy of force or law violation. The majority opinion was per curiam, issued from the Court as an institution, rather than as authored and signed by an individual justice.

Even though this group of people held xenophobic views, the First Amendment protected their right to free speech and public assembly. In turn, the MAPs Community has never had xenophobic views and has always categorically opposed any violence and advocated for voluntary and mutual inter-age relationships and for the Youth rights to privacy and the expression of their natural sexuality. However, everyone has already forgotten what true free speech and tolerance are, we are considered worse than the KKK and terrorists, and all this is thanks to the hypocritical and lying media that created a moral panic.

but a 16 year old dieing after drivign doesnt count? surely thats harmful? wrapping kids in cotton wool is gonan have bad implications

accounts have been mass-banned

by whom/what?

Moderation at Bluesky, the new alternative to Twitter / X that everyone’s flocking to. MAPs from across the political and ideological divide have been trying their luck setting up accounts there.

The massively influential Libsoftiktok spotlighted the rise of MAP friendly accounts on the new platform, screenshotting in horror how some posts actually received likes. (One had over 30 likes)!

Unsurprisingly, the moderation of Bluesky have now started banning accounts which speak positively of pedophilia, no matter their philosophy or political identification. They already have a terms of service (TOS) which wouldn’t allow this…

I did realize I didn’t specify on what app or website. Should’ve been clearer :p

They already have a terms of service (TOS) which wouldn’t allow this…

And which violate The First amendment and “The Brandenburg test”. Talking about your attitude towards Minor attraction cannot be prohibited and cannot be considered as a threat of “imminent lawless action“, because just talking about relationships and sexual activity doesn’t mean someone is imminent going to rape someone. This is exactly the same as the attempts to ban talk about homosexuality under the pretext of a law on “propaganda of homosexuality”, which were promoted by some politicians.

Last edited 8 days ago by Harlan

It doesn’t oblige, but what’s the difference between making statements in front of cameras in public (like Clarence Brandenburg) and making statements on social media ? Of course, we can complain to the court, but unfortunately it will be rejected simply because the authorities/lawyers consider what fits into their current agenda to be legal. If we were talking about discriminatory censorship against gays or blacks, the court would certainly recognize the violations in current time, but would not recognize it in the past, just as does not recognize MAP discrimination now. The previous scapegoats have become worthless and they have last one left.

people arent even protected for liking 19 year olds, they get called names too! but no thats perfectly legal…. in fact you can get caled names for even liking females at all! yes the n word gets thrown around a lot

I thought we were talking about gagging MAPs on Bluesky by blocking their accounts. That is a rather different issue to permitting/forbidding violent speech against MAPs, which is where Brandenburg v Ohio could be relevant.

They gagging us because they bigotry believe we are advocating violence (like the KKK or worse), but the Supreme Court did not see the threat in simple words of KKK speach at the time. Based on that, we too could be allowed to speak. The fact that people can say bullshit against MAP and demand reprisals is typical; any xenophobia was first “legal” before it became recognized discrimination.

Last edited 7 days ago by Harlan

In case anyone was under the illusion that Matt Gaetz, a republican who to my knowledge shows no signs of being even remotely sympathetic to MAPs, pedophiles, or anyone who’s “queer” or diverges from the norm in any way, would be some sort of secret radical on intergen issues: I hate to tell you, but fat chance lol! He and his political bedfellows would stand at the gallows and pull the lever for all the sexual and gender nonconformists, stream it online and produce TV programmes to make even more money for their capitalist overlord backers, if they thought they could get away with it! XD

Even so, I agree with a BC post that “Gaetz did nothing wrong”. Paying a prostitute who turns out to be 17 for sex is hardly “rape” in any meaningful sense, and she wasn’t a 7-year-old so he is in no way a “pedophile.” It’s always been a cheap and pathetic attack that most ordinary, not terminally-online people don’t care about anyway. The Left should be (at best) ridiculing him for his political beliefs, his actions in office, not for events that haven’t been proved or even gone to trial. But that might actually be effective and you might actually win, experiencing the kind of enormous popular support Jeremy Corbyn and Bernie Sanders had before the billionaire owned mainstream media kicked into high-gear and pulled out every trick they could to slander the real threats to poverty, war and corruption. Another version of the establishment is now in power with a bigger mandate and more political power than ever before, but that doesn’t mean everything will go smoothly…

Gaetz has now resigned from Congress, meaning that he will not be America’s next Attorney General. Who will the next pick be? Who knows. Potential worst case could be Ken Paxton, who in June 2022 said he would defend state laws prohibiting sodomy or same-sex sexual relationships if the Supreme Court precedent invalidating such laws, the Lawrence v. Texas decision, was overturned.

Either way, it’s looking like abortion could be a no-go in the U.S. fairly soon, and in the worst case the re-criminalization of adult male homosexuality if Paxton and those like him are able to act on their agenda. Poster Etenne thinks that Trans people will be treated like MAPs next, with their persecution being harder for them to avoid, since you can’t hide gender non-confrmity so easily unless you “pass” well enough that no one notices.

————————————

I will just add to my comments about Transness below, that the fear of men and male sexuality plays a big part in Anti-Trans discourse. The Left really needs to stop demonizing men (“men are trash”; “men should start in prison and work their way out”). Men can be wonderful, kind, sexy and cool, just as women can. They’re our mothers, fathers, sons and daughters. And as with all negative sex experiences, just because you had a bad experience, doesn’t mean “all men are trash” or “all women are cheating gold diggers.” Some people are gender non-conforming, some have penises; some people detransition, and that’s okay. Some people commit sex crime, or are accused of sex crime. None of this makes men, women or Trans people something to be terrified of or 100% beyond the pale; you might not want to believe it, but thankfully, the forceful rapists and child abusers are a tiny minority of people. It’s the definition of acts covered under “rape” and “sexual assault” that has expanded! (Scholars call it “concept creep.”) Most people just want to be loved, desired, and feel valued: to have a good life. And no, the penis is not a weapon! (It is, in fact, very delicate…) XD

One reason I like class politics is because it cuts across these divisions – you are either part of the working-class or a capitalist. You’ll know which one applies to you. 99.99% of people are working-class, even the highly paid ones, no matter your gender, sex, etc. The next 4 years may well see massive cuts to working people’s rights and protections, welfare provisions, medical care, and elderly care. Good luck surviving on your poverty wages whilst your living costs keep rising and rising, forcing you to into precarious conditions as you work longer and longer hours at companies coincidentally making record profits from your labor.

There’s a reason the Right stigmatize humanities education: they don’t want you to learn sociology, philosophy, literary criticism: to learn to think critically about society. They want you to be ignorant, good little worker bees who just see poverty and high prices, high rents, as a fact of life. Highly recommend channels like Gary Stevenson’s and others, which are helpful jumping off points for critical thinking on these issues.

Rant over

“you are either part of the working-class or a capitalist” … “99.99% of people are working-class”
No. Between the bourgeoisie (capitalist class) and proletariat (working class) there are intermediate layers. First the middle classes (or petty bourgeoisie) made of self-employed people like small shopkeepers, craftsmen and farmers; next some categories like managerial staff, university professors, journalists, students, policemen, the military, etc.

Fair point. I’m well aware of these distinctions and, in fact, the page linked in the line you quoted discusses this. It’s still true that the vast majority of people are not capitalists, even though, yes there are more petit-bourgeoisie for sure. There are many landlords and small businesses, etc. Most people can hope to amass a small fortune during their lives, alongside assets like property. Most are not people with a personal wealth of over 10 million pounds/dollars (using Gary Stevenson’s standard), and are not the CEOs of mega corporations which shape and ultimately control the collective destiny of masses of people. When Elon Musk acquired Twitter, as is common when acquisitions occur, he cut down on staff immediately. Because of 1 person (a capitalist), a lot of working people lost their jobs, their lives potentially thrown into disarray. His control of the means of communication is now extraordinary; his ability to shape the minds and politics of millions unprecedented.

I know you didn’t say it, but although the terminology of ‘capitalism’, ‘bourgeois’, etc. is unfashionable, that doesn’t make the underlying arguments incorrect. It may be a case of finding optically better language to express the same points, as is often done with the more vague term ‘elites’. It’s similar with CSA debates and MAP politics: if I had never learnt about past socialist societies or societies where age-gap relationships were normal and accepted (including our own not long ago!), if I never had access to alternative discourses, I’d just think that things are the way they are. They haven’t become that way, and therefore must have been different in the past; society just is the way it is. Nothing can change – that’s not “realistic” – whilst all around you change is constant. Living costs increase, people lose their right to protest, and now get arrested for social media posts.

FWIW I do agree w/ Youtuber Kidology, that Capitalism isn’t going away any time soon; not because it’s helpful or pleasant for the majority but because it’s comfortable. Video games, porn, fast food, constant social media – there’s a lot to pacify people and take up their headspace. Not a lot of political education content out there and a lot of it is too boring in comparison to sensationalist content about “Trans Groomers” coming for your kids, “Immigrants” coming to take over your country, the “fall of the West,” etc. Killing, arresting, or deporting visibly and ideologically different people who are de-personalized and tarred as a group (sound familiar to any Jews or MAPs out there?), is much easier than organizing contracts to build social housing. One doesn’t threaten the current social order and will make almost zero difference to your prospects across the life course, the other will… It’s obvious why mass media and social media, backed or now owned by capitalists like Elon Musk, increasingly supports the former, not the latter…

Economic inequality is measurable and empirical; we know it’s getting worse. It doesn’t matter how many older people you see who own their homes, or who (understandably) rent out at “standard” (that is “high”) prices and consequentially keep others poor. That looks like progress, but whenever that asset is given up – when homes are sold to pay for end-of-life care or after they’re inherited by someone’s kids – who do we think is going to buy their property at an inflated price looking to make a profit? Yes, that’s right, the super-rich! Typically those with wealth of over 10 million pounds/dollars! I’ve seen tons of people who had to sell their homes during Covid… The hollowing out of the middle-class continues before our very eyes…

Many political leaders of course benefit from this, since like Donald Trump or Rishi Sunak, they are multi-millionaires who inherited and married into wealth (very few people enter the 1% any other way), and have the capital to do the purchasing. Typically, they already own a significant amount of assets, and it’s against their interests to upset the system of private ownership. Instead, they focus on culture war issues…

>His control of the means of communication is now extraordinary; his ability to shape the minds and politics of millions unprecedented.

Brazilian Supreme Court Judge Alexandre de Moraes ruled Tuesday that X had met “all the necessary requirements” for its return after complying with his orders, Reuters reported.
X—suspended by Brazil on Aug. 31—reportedly met Moraes’ orders last month, including paying fines, naming a new representative in the country and blocking accounts accused of engaging in disinformation at the request of Brazil’s Supreme Court.

X did not immediately respond to Forbes’ request for comment, though the company’s global government affairs unit said in a statement last month the social media platform was: “committed to protecting free speech” as it recognizes and respects “the sovereignty of the countries in which we operate.”

https://www.forbes.com/sites/tylerroush/2024/10/08/brazil-ends-x-ban-after-elon-musk-backs-down/

Last edited 12 days ago by HappyHumpingPup

It’s still true that the vast majority of people are not capitalists, even though, yes there are more petit-bourgeoisie for sure. There are many landlords and small businesses, etc. Most people can hope to amass a small fortune during their lives, alongside assets like property. Most are not people with a personal wealth of over 10 million pounds/dollars, and are not the CEOs of mega corporations which shape and ultimately control the collective destiny of masses of people

When you have the necessary knowledge and skills, you can sell them and make money. This is capitalism. Any person who buys and sells something is a capitalist and does so thanks to capitalism. When you want to sell the products you grow on your farm, this is capitalism. When you want to sell your books, this is capitalism. When you order a repair service for something – this is capitalism.

Everyone has the opportunity to accumulate capital and create a big business and respect the constitution. But it is not capitalism that makes people abuse their influence and promote censorship, but their thirst for power and profit. This will happen in any system if the system does not protect fundamental rights and use prejudices.

Capitalism is an economic system characterized by production for profit, alongside private ownership of the means of production, distribution, communication and exchange. As you say, “buying and selling.”

That’s contrasted by pre-industrial societies, and other societies which operate without money and/or a state (not to say they have no organizational structure), such as gift giving societies and communes…

I am not up on my lore on this since I’m no Peter Gelderloos, but I’m sure Google can help. There’ve been many communes in post-industrial societies, for example. But most people won’t bother trying to establishing alternative spaces of freedom when they know they’ll be relentlessly mocked in capitalist press, subjected to crackdowns of state/police/military violence. The land space alone could be used to build more expensive private rental properties, don’t ya know! :p

So why take the risk? There’s even anti-union, anti-strike and anti-protest laws on the books in many countries…

I just wanted to point out that people can be relentlessly demonized or mocked in not only “capitalist” press. On the Mu forum someone wrote: “it’s not the fact that there is a huge gap in power between the younger person and older person that makes it bad, it’s the abuse of that power that makes it bad.” The same is true for capitalism. It’s not wealth and power that’s bad, but the abuse of them

Either way, it’s looking like abortion could be a no-go in the U.S. fairly soon, and in the worst case the re-criminalization of adult male homosexuality if Paxton and those like him are able to act on their agenda

Your fears are in vain. Perhaps abortions will be banned in some states for a while, but no one will criminalize homosexuality and “make America heterosexual again.” This is a turned page and can only happen if the US experiences an Islamic revolution like Iran. 🙂

The Left really needs to stop demonizing men (“men are trash”; “men should start in prison and work their way out”)

The left is doing what it has always done.
Most of these scandalous accusations were exclusively against wealthy men. The old image of the “terrible exploiter capitalist” doesn’t sell very well anymore, but he was always portrayed as a man, which fits in with the modern negative feminist agenda , who use the same terms “exploitation”, “objectification”, only projecting them onto new “oppressed victims” group/class.

I hope my fears will be in vain. I hope the Trump government doesn’t go full Project 2025. It may be all talk and no muster; just business as usual: cutting welfare provisions and taxes for the super rich. Of course that will happen too, just hoping they won’t ban all “queer education” across the board. Lots of hard-working and thoughtful university professors who’ve worked for years, sometimes a decade or more to secure their positions, will be out of a job. “Critical theory,” a standard part of many humanities degrees which teaches students the bedrock of influential philosophy from people like Foucault and Simone de Beauvoir – both of whom were sympathetic to pedophiles, could be cut. There’s certainly been enough fearmongering propaganda about “woke, postmodern neo-marxists” to make it happen. I really enjoyed Kathryn Bond Stockton’s book on the “Queer Child” (2009), where her 1st chapter bravely recounts the Rind et al. 1998 controversy and condemns the U.S. gov for insisting “that children must be harmed.”

“Most of these scandalous accusations were exclusively against wealthy men.”

> They still are. Though I get where you’re coming from, but the Left had more of a point in the past. Now women have embraced their role as workers and may be doing well (good for them), but most of the top 1% remain men. Not that I care about the sex/gender divide – I care about economic inequality. I don’t care about the gender or sex of a CEO – that’s liberal progressive ID-pol bullshit. Doesn’t matter if you’re Hillary Clinton and bombing brown people off the face of the earth only to turn round and wonder why people hate you, or if you’re Obama doing the same. Is it true that the richest woman in the world is Amazon CEO Jeff Bezos’s ex-wife, who got there though divorce?

I must admit I’ve never understood “objectification” as a criticism, except for the idea that sexual comments can make someone uncomfortable or upset, which is an interpersonal issue and a values and attitudes issue between two or more people. Similar with the term “sexualization,” arguably more problematic and thankfully criticized constantly by some of the more based and enlightened feminist writers like Feona Attwood, Emma Renold, Jessica Ringrose, Danielle Egan and Gail Hawkes.

It just seems like a way to veil a sex-negative attitude, or an attempt to legitimize disgust responses in academic jargon. Obviously, I find things disgusting too – it’s visceral and not rational – but if I’ve ever based my politics around it you’d find I’m more disgusted by poverty, inequality and violence than consensual sex. Like, adult diaper lovers are weird and funny to me, bordering on disgusting if I think about it, but do I want to stop them? No, not really. The same is true of many things which are illegal but generally harmless – weed and many illegal substances – sexual activity such as public sex and nudism. I’ve stumbled on people in public a few times and it wasn’t hurting anyone, far from it! Same could be said of nudity at pride parades. In all cases, it only seems to be when people disagree with the underlying politics they perceive as attached to nudity and sex – “free love”, BDSM and gender nonconformity – in a word, openness, do people come out to attack it.

I dont know if im allowed to say this.. but if they think 17 year olds are innocent… maybe they need to be attacked by one… they will soon change their tiny minds

They are so innocent that they would make your little bed shake…

True. Punk ass kids out robbing and thieving. Anyone who’s lived in the real world knows teens can be just as cruel, stupid, and sexually aggressive as legal adults.

I made a bluesky account.. someone said that saying kids capable of murder is a stupid argument…. i dont think bluesky gonna go well… one of my followers has been suspended already

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-54930488

A Dutch police chief has called for an end to “paedophile hunting” after a 73-year-old retired teacher was beaten up by teenagers and died of his injuries. (2020)

If we’re being honest, cops tend to be the most honest if they’re allowed to be about this issue, because they see the situation on the ground and understand that the vast majority of underage sex is completely normal and healthy, and they also see first hand how many false accusations are filed by females. Unfortunately, their job requires them to be hypocrites, like most jobs really.

A COP THAT ISNT A ROBOT…. ONE day in the future this activity will be seen as the witch hunts of old are today.

I recommend the stance taken by the World Socialist Web Site which has long derided identity politics of the left and right, #MeToo and the rush by feminists and the corporate media to condemn prominent people such as Keven Spacey or Russell Brand for supposed sexual offences – often close to trivial – without evidence or even criminal charges. I recently read Woody Allen’s beautifully-written, often hilarious autobiography ‘Apropos of Nothing’ and his account of how the media automatically believed the most absurd, evidence-free allegations by his former partner is moving and revealing.

Sounds based! Woody Allen is a G!!

There’s lots of legitimate debate to be had about “victims,” victim as social currency and a way to exert agency via public accusation, or its popularity and use a tool to attack your political and ideological opponents.

From everything I’ve seen, however, Woody Allen rightfully takes the title of victim. He’s been so unfairly maligned…

Fyi, “Love and Death” is a great film!

You ever have to double back? Wait, what??

“Taylor Swift’s history of dating underage boys”

>Turns out it’s one 17-year-old… when she was 22.

I am not kidding. I can’t see why you’d care except for being happy that someone out there is having a good time, potentially finding love. But no, people care about how apparently “inappropriate” the relationship is, not how they treated each other. Weird…

https://www.reddit.com/r/popculture/comments/16yqx8n/remember_when_taylor_swift_dated_a_17_yr_old_high/

Apparently, she also had a relationship at 19 with fellow singer John Mayer, who was 33 at the time. The real drama in all this is how people treat each other when relationships end, and perhaps that most of her relationships seem to be short-lived at this time in her life. But short relationships are hardly uncommon for someone at 17-19, especially someone with a busy schedule as a rising popstar, juggling competing priorities, traveling all the time, and having your personal life subject to public scrutiny.

I remember when her song “We Are Never Ever Getting Back Together” was released, shortly after her relationship with Harry Styles ended. It came out long before I stumbled into scholarship on intergen issues, or even realized that people cared about age gaps when it came to sex and relationships. And yet, I remember saying to a friend how “vindictive,” “divisive,” and “cruel” she seemed with this song. Why would you do that to someone?! Tear them down like that in public?! I’m more of a sad and miserable than resentful type, lost in longing and reminiscing when relationships end; so that’s another thing I don’t really “get.”

Turns out Taylor did some songs widely thought to rebuke her relationship with John Mayer. To his complete surprise, he stated:

“I never got an email. I never got a phone call. I was really caught off-guard, and it really humiliated me at a time when I’d already been dressed down. I mean, how would you feel if, at the lowest you’ve ever been, someone kicked you even lower?”

Taylor is doing fine, of course, stepping over the bodies of her past lovers in song, parroting popular discourse to the tune of millions of dollars. I can only hope her past lovers are doing fine as well…

Genius MAP Leonardo da Vinci liked AAM boys. Young boys were his weakness. He liked to draw them, paint them and have sex with them. He even got arrested twice for sodomy, which was punishable by death in Florence. Fortunately for us, one of his co-accused was tight with the Medici.

https://www.therenaissancetimes.com/2021/02/06/114-leonardo-da-vinci-part-7-young-boys/

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

Last edited 14 days ago by HappyHumpingPup

Genius LDV the first ‘Celeb’ MAP?

A whole 36 likes on this pro-MAP bluesky post. The Antis are quaking in their SS boots.

https://x.com/Libsofbluesky/status/1859078841257378047

They need to be shown a video of Larry King talking to a NAMBLA representative to make them think about what real freedom of speech and tolerance is.

NAMBLA spokesman Bill Andriette, who himself joined the organization when he was just 15. Andriette, who was interviewed by radio show host David Brudnoy in Boston, has appeared on the CNN’s Larry King Show defending NAMBLA during an earlier controversy.

https://kuci.org/~dtsang/subversity/pr971014.htm

MU MAP Union is on Bluesky, the alternative to Twitter…

https://bsky.app/profile/muhq.bsky.social

At 99 followers, it’s already been noted and posted about by Libsoftiktok on Twitter.

Dubai (craphole) – 18 year old faces 20 years in jail for seeing a – 17 year old….

Uk government wants to ban social media for under 16!! these tyrants cant do this ! youth rights are important!

These tyrants cant do this!

> Ohh they can! Kier Starmer, the UK’s current prime minister, was the Director of Public Prosecutions and Head of the Crown Prosecution Service for many years, taking on many child abuse cases. The last thing he, a moderate “red Tory” will do, is support anything that could be seen as harmful to young people. Social media is one thing, Trans kids is another.

No one cares about young people’s freedom when it opens them up to “P” accusations, or makes parents (and voters) anxious that the young could be having fun times that their parents don’t know about, whether with older people or peers. “Helicopter parenting” is a thing, and with constant accusations of “groomers” and “predators” hiding behind every corner, Discord username and Roblox chat, how could parents not be terrified?

It’s also important to note that adults are incentivized to support a social media ban for minors, since it protects them from being messaged by minors. At least, many will support the artifical seperation of generations which is already a thing on dating apps. When “messaging a minor” can be blown out of all proportion to have career and life ending consequences, as in the case of false allegations against 23YO Inquisitor (RIP), people want to protect themselves…

Remember the Mr Beast drama? The world’s biggest YouTube channel got hit with the Pedophile smear, targeting his very publicly Trans friend and employee Ava Kris Tyson. A huge blow for Trans people everywhere, it played in to the “Trans groomer” panic. But now the wave of hysteria has died down, it has emerged that the main source of the negative claims facing Ava and the company, were lies or misrepresentations. Provably so.

Check it out: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5JFzvL693lY&pp=ygUwc29nZ3kgY2VyZWFsIHRoZSB0cnV0aCBhYm91dCBtcmJlYXN0IGFuZCBkb2dwYWNr

You can probably watch 30 mins and get a good idea.

Amazingly enough, it seems that Ava, far from being a secret radical, was in fact very anti-MAP. Messages in her name from a work chat clearly show she bought in to the popular conspiratorial narrative around the death of Jeffrey Epstein. As well as how supposedly common the “sex trafficking” of minors is where “Hollywood elites” are concerned.

It appears that Dogpack404, the instigator of the MrBeast drama, is in fact a disgruntled ex-employee seeking revenge, as many people suspected. He only worked at MrBeast for 20 days, after trying desperately and obsessively for years to get a job there… It was his dream, and we know because of available audio that, when he was fired, he didn’t take it well…

There’s a reason Dogpack’s videos claim he’s “not a journalist,” and that his claims are for others to “investigate.” He won’t stand behind the factual accuracy of his claims because, in many cases, he knows he’s lying. Dogpack knowingly lied about MrBeast being okay with Ava sharing “CP” when, in reality, it was a photo of an 18-year-old Ivanka Trump posing as a model, shared publicly by Ava as part of an anti-MAP rant. This lie led to a lot of backlash for Dogpack because he claimed to have downloaded and reverse-image searched the image he declared to be “CP,” which as people pointed out, would be a crime. The real reason he felt safe to download and search the image was because he knew it wasn’t CP: he just censored and lied about it to his viewers, gaining millions of views in the process.

But – oopsie Dogpack! – you got millions upon millions of views and started a wave of mass media and mass hysteria. It’s probably not advisable to turn round and say “sorry guys, I made X and Y up.” If you admit to lying now, you could be indicted for defamation, subject to lawsuits and even criminal liability.

What is true in all this, is that Ava publicly liked lolicon artwork before they were a well known popular figure, had joked about jerking off to lolicon art on Twitter, and evidently enjoyed some of the edgy art produced by the artist “Shadman.” This hardly the end of the world, and doesn’t indicate a sexual preference for prepubescent children on Ava’s part.

It’s incredible how much interesting and relevant media keeps coming out to do with intergen issues; truly it’s the obsession of the 21st century. The Right does it with Trans, the Left are doing it currently with Church abuse scandals.

Now that everything has been resolved and calmed down, all these events will very quickly be forgotten. Unfortunately, no one will think about the harm of alarmists and hysteria, and people will continue to hate MAPs (for a long time).

The only strange thing about all these constant scandals is that CSA accusations or viewing and possessing CP have become some kind of trend of the new era. It seems that no one is interested anymore in accusations of taking and distributing drugs, as well as the fight against them. Is CP the new Marijuana ?

Events may well be forgotten. But every time there’s a massive freak out over nothing, destroying people’s lives left right and center, it’s an event that can be used as ammunition against the Antis. Ridicule them for their ridiculous, hysterical claims. Humiliate them for their stupidity, believing claims that are either provably false of so cartoonishly evil so as to strain credulity. How could you possibly believe that shit?! Criticize them as lying hypocrites for not giving a shit about free speech: they bully and silence anyone who questions allegations or even asks for proof. It’s cult behavior. Shameful and dangerous.

I think you (Tom) will love this video, and a reminder that Youtube let’s you speed up videos: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D4rs5DufOqU&pp=ygUOc29waGlhIG5hcndpdHo%3D

A Trans person who predicted very accurately what we’re seeing play out now. (Spoiler: You’ll have to excuse the very end where it’s evident they don’t find Desmond as hot and amazing as you did! :p ).

Forgot to post about it since it’s so ridiculous, but have people here seen the drama around Bonnie Blue? A model / OnlyFans gal who’s currently infamous for traveling to university campuses and shagging all the “barely legal teens.” The difference is that she’s seeking men, not women. The horror! The humanity!

The funniest thing is seeing videos of men lined up in a hallway, waiting for their turn. Damn how I wish this was a thing when I was at university! XD Good for her, anyone who joins in (including her mother, apparently), and the guys who’ll at least have 1 interesting sexual experience in their lives, and perhaps lose the stigma around being a virgin if it’s their first time…

It’s another version of what young males often did in the past to lose their virginity: straight to the whorehouse, the brothel. Bonnie makes OnlyFans content from these sessions; “Bonk me for free // Let me film it.”

You can just imagine the comments sections. The rage, the reees, the “western civilization is so cooked,” everyone larping concerned about “power imbalances” and “inappropriate” relationships. I’m happy to see there’s lots of enlightened comments too, or what I’ll call, “normal people,” who say “all I see is two consenting adults, what’s the problem?” There’s even people from Europe and elsewhere, saying they had positive sexy time under 18 where it was legal for them: brave souls the lot of ’em.

To people who say “what if the genders were reversed?” < Great! I’d much rather people have willing sex with people they want to and actually find attractive, instead of being forced to search for people within a narrow age window of usually 2-4 years. Kinda setting yourself up to struggle there, don’t ya think? I wonder why there’s a loneliness, virginity, sex and relationships crisis going on amongst young people!? Could it be that you’re being peddled misleading information and veiled disgust (jealousy) responses, from people who are themselves virtue signalling and don’t have the historical knowledge to realize they’ve been ideologically captured by the victim industry? No, I’m sure you came to your views after examining the scientific and philosophical literature over many years. I’m sure that raising the age of consent to 25 will help with these issues? Maybe then your kids will be able to afford to move out of the family home?? It’s definitely not a massive distraction that just so coincidentally emerged from largely conservative political pundits in the 70’s and 80s…

These people who feel so justified in shitting all over other people’s perfectly lawful, mutual relationships, disgust me… I’ve tried to understand for years now and still don’t “get” it… Put them all on an island and they can war amongst themselves about who’s more “problematic” till the Earth implodes into the Sun…

predatory? ill introduce them to dennis rader

via Maggie McNeill’s blog:

“The United States sexually ‘teased’ its troops in the First World War to make them fight harder, a new study reveals”
https://archive.ph/6YWaH

Incredible. The article notes the sexual frustration psychological programs developed by the Americans continued after the war and fused with modern society. I believe this explains the reason for the vast majority of our problems.

The Guardian newspaper is now no longer posting to Twitter / X, saying it’s too toxic. https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cvg48m5j4zjo In response, people on Twitter replied with this article https://www.theguardian.com/society/2003/jan/14/childprotection.rodliddle, implying the Guardian had something to hide…

Funny enough, I actually agree with the Guardian’s thinking, though I don’t think it will benefit them or society more broadly. Politically speaking, Twitter appears to be a minefield, and incentivizes negative and divisive posts to garner views. Academics like Rachel Hope Cleves have left to Mastodon, since it’s far less conspiracy-brained and toxic. As a space, Twitter appears to be absolutely captured by the political Right, now owned by Elon Musk who now has a position in Donald Trump’s burgeoning regime. There was a hilarious instance where Elon pays lip service to free speech one day, and the very next day he banned an account posting the MAP (or YAP) flag in response. This actually made news and got over 1 million impressions and 15 million from being shared. Unfortunately, I can’t find the image I remember, which had both posts next to each other. The point, however, is that Elon, like most ‘free speech’ advocates, really wants ‘free speech for me and not for thee!’

Self-ID’ing MAPs aren’t allowed on the platform; positive discussions are quite literally banned. MAPs aren’t permitted to claim that minor-attraction is a sexual orientation. The main perspective people will get is thus warped and highly negative, contrasting massively with academia and journalists who are more likely to take it upon themselves to examine reality, and thus come to more reasonable and less sensationalist conclusions.

No doomerism here, just observations!

Seems incredible that social media bans positive, even academic, MAP statements while allowing statements containing pure vitriol and division.

When you can’t even discuss a topic academically, something is seriously wrong.

The point, however, is that Elon, like most ‘free speech’ advocates, really wants ‘free speech for me and not for thee!’

Unfortunately, in today’s world there are hypocrite censors on both the left and the right. I hope the mass transition to decentralized Web 3.0 will be able to level out this flaw in the future.

I remember that guy i lost my account straight after!! musk needs to go to space.. and not return. i dotn suppose blue sky is better?

Twitter allows free speech for all sexually frustrated mental patients (MAGA) to threaten violence, but anything seen to go against sex hysteria is banned.

It’s pretty much the only thing that is banned with 100% consistency. It’s part of an intentional psychological program created and developed by the government over 100 years ago to direct sexual frustration into the service of feminists and tyrants, as reported by the Cambridge study posted above.

The only real free speech is on free speech tube, actually, for now.

After many years of silently lurking, I am moved to make some comments. Full applause to Tom and the many others who retain the resolve and belief in the value of reaffirming one’s resolve to state plain truths no matter the onslaught of calumny and outrage it provokes.

I must confess that I’m not fully up to speed on all of the acronyms that form much of the jargon here, but I can work most of them out well enough. I am old enough to have grown up in a part of the Anglosphere that would be unrecognisable to most people under forty years of age, and young enough to retain a sharp memory of the many changes of society’s perspectives and the way we interact with each other at large, MAPs and non-MAPs alike.

Much has been written about the cognitive biases and “anti-rational” behaviour patterns that recur in widespread groups, both highly educated and not, to wit: https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2017/02/27/why-facts-dont-change-our-minds or the rather interesting research of Mercier and Sperber mentioned in the article above.

I’ve probably spent thousands of hours in earnest discussions with other “paedotextuals” discussing Foucault, Paglia, Kinsey, Singer, et al. “We” have approached this problem from seemingly every vector: utilitarian, normative psycho-social mores, legalistically, and even as exercises of Aristotelian logic. Evolutionary psychology laced with brisk helpings of anthropology regularly make an appearance in these discussions. They’re eerily familiar.

But my concern here is that we are debating something without an opponent – they aren’t shackled with the burden of looking to understand something they do not or feel is abominable and should just “go away and die”. To be sure, some of it is a pinch of some self-loathing in their recognition of how and where they’ve felt something superficially similar as we towards a young person, but it seems to me to be a convenient ogre of the age: a boogeyman whom “everyone” can come together and truly despise, “Right Wing”, “Left Wing”, “Under Wing”, or “Over Wing”.

We’re bringing dialectical philosophy and hermeneutical analysis to a gun fight. Our “opponents” only envision infant rapists who leave behind devastated viscera and minds in their wake. The “evolution” of a man-boy relationship as I’ve experienced it (from both sides) would be either alien to them or simply the product of “Stockholm Syndrome” programming. Any alternative undermines their absolutist world-view.

What most if not all of you have probably noticed with some irony is that one of the biggest casualties of all of this hysteria has been the effective destruction of intergenerational relationships that have been the lifeblood of humanity for almost its entire existence. When sociologists decry the casualties of disconnected and feckless youth, especially young men, they will point vaguely at the lack of “role models” and foundational relationships with older people and then call it a day.

As I mentioned earlier, I have been very fortunate to have grown up when I did and to experience the things as a young MAP when I did. It was a time when babies were not thrown out with the bath water, and that when push came to shove, it was the boy’s state of mind and his perhaps reckless wishes and wants so clearly expressed that made the importance of his relationship entirely clear to even the most obtuse parents.

OF COURSE it’s an unequal relationship. The boy craves agency, knowledge, strength, and to be seen for who he is, not who he should be or should become. The erastes is awestruck by his younger friend’s inner and outer beauty, his vitality, his unbridled and free expression of what he WANTS, without seeming awareness of whether or not that is possible or even “done”. I’ve experienced it as recently as 15 years ago in a major city and I don’t think even the most aggressive social programming will eradicate it from humankind.

Perhaps it is a bit of the “it’s best not to glimpse too much of how sausages are made” – when it comes to the capacity, receptivity, and ability to connect with younger people for the wider public at large. Enriching intellectual and social connections are one thing, but heaven forbid there be even a tiny fraction of erotic desire that even partially fuels such imperatives, even it’s completely unexpressed.

The problem of course is even a completely scrupulous and properly behaved man can run afoul of suspicions and mistrust run amok.

As for how to address this gaping “image” and “perception” problem? I wish had better insight. Perhaps things need to get “really bad” where generations of young people grow up to become completely disaffected and apathetic adults, unable or unwilling to form any relationships of substance at all to force society at large to confront the many causes of that outcome.

I am encouraged at the emergence of academics who keep asking foundational questions that challenge the foregone conclusion that all intergenerational physically expressed acts are intrinsically harmful, never mind how in some cases, those acts can behave like curing cement to strengthen and intensify the other aspects of the relationship in life-long ways.

I’m grateful we can still discuss this in the 21st Century, and especially grateful to those who dare to do so with their own names.

=Morham=

the trans trick of leveraging our influence through powerful alliances

I’m British, trans and a MAP. The powerful alliances here seem to be much more on the anti-trans side, with billionaire JK Rowling, governments of both parties, almost the entire media, religious groups of several faiths and plenty of other sources of big money acting against trans existence.

Anti-trans are absolutely more powerful in terms of the British establishment, certainly the previous Conservative governments. The UK is popularly known as “TERF Island.”

But it is true as Tom says, “powerful alliances on both sides.” I suspect more pro-trans discourse come from America though, because their private healthcare and individualism/personal liberty ethos would incentivize it. In the UK, the NHS is bedeviled by a decade of austerity. There’s long waiting lists, and a reluctance to conduct anything but life saving, emergency surgeries if you’re not paying for it yourself. As a consequence, there appears to be far less financial incentive to support Transness. Since healthcare is subsidized by taxes, the UK public are always very, very concerned about where their tax money is going. They love nothing more than complaining when public money is spent on something they see as ridiculous, e.g. liberal arts degrees. Also applies ti Trans medication which, to the majority of non-Trans people, will seem strange and non-essential.

Given that Transgender people are held to be a minority, it stands to reason the majority do not persistently and consistently identify as a gender different than that assigned at birth. Ergo, you’ll have to convince people that it’s worth spending public money on in the same way that, say, respirator machines are. Definitely an upward struggle IMO, and if you add Trans children to the mix you’re truly struggling with the cynical British public.

British media is largely conservative and, following a lawsuit and much negative coverage, the UK’s one gender clinic got shutdown.

Don’t know what to say really: I feel sorry for the Trans people but it’s also predictable, what’s happening. It’s no coincidence that the founders of modern queer theory, and even feminist social constructionism a la Beauvior, were critical of the social construction of childhood and norms around age and sex. “Generational apartheid”, Gayle Rubin called it.

If you hold that Trans kids can know their own minds and have bodily autonomy, especially contra their parent’s views, then how can you seriously hold they can’t meaningfully consent to mutually willing sexual contact? To most people, who see young people as idiots who are easily manipulated, they’re not convinced.

All the same I’m glad that people have taken to gender non conformity in a big way: it’s exciting and interesting! You (probably) only live once(!), so try that skirt on! :p

> I find it ironic, though, that after Danny Whittaker interviewed me for his podcast (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J8SBM-yXULc&t=3955s), he complained ruefully that he had been too polite in his interviewing style, saying he had brought a knife to a gun fight!

Anglo Fake media mind-raped victim Whittaker still his own worst enemy. Wrongly expecting an Anglo adversarial fake media-style ‘fight’. Not a scholarly unbiased inquiry about millions of pro-active consenting AAMs from around age 4 in plain sight since year dot. All unseen by adversarial Anglo fake media in deep de-Nile, well away with the Anglo Fascist Pharaohs.

Re-quote Anglo Fascist Pharaoh MurDark’s top-selling SeX filled ‘family’ SUN, chief London reporter Tom Wells, 2014, “Kids aged six are teacher sex-abusers! Among a sharp rise in similar shocking cases, a six year old girl stood in front of a male teacher, raised her skirt and massaged herself through her underwear.” Hey, attractive Whittaker could have been that shocked teacher, taught all he needs to know by a pro-active AAM HOT Loli in plain sight?

Fascinating. So he’d geared up ready for the war path?

He did say that his chat with you ‘haunted’ him, lamenting that it’s the most popular vid on his channel…

Sounds like a wise decision on your part. Especially when he’s the one with the channel and thus has editorial control. He had the right ‘free speech’ / open mindset at the time of the original interview, and even good reasons explaining his choice to talk to you specifically. He was being very authentic.

The end of that vid is incredible. When he says he’d throw all his free speech, facts over feelings principles out the window, to stop people with your views from being prominently platformed. Transcribed and quoted at length at the end of this piece: https://wapercyfoundation.org/?p=1363

>What was totally different, though, was his attitude. It was clear from the outset that this time his questioning aimed to be very aggressive and accusatory, using such tactics as interrupting when I was trying to answer. I quickly decided that subjecting myself to that sort of abuse for an hour or more was never going to produce an interview that anyone would find enlightening, so I brought the proceedings to a halt.

Clearly, desperate Dan had been GROOMED by typical tabloidesque ignorant Anglo adversarial angry antis. Whose only angle is ATTACK – like cornered rats . Recalls Tom’s SeXy ’70s Conway Hall bad ole daze. Since then it’s all changed – it’s WORSE!

‘Enlightening’? Not in Anglo Tabloid Tsar Fake Media Monsta MurDark’s Age of Endarkenment. Straight from the Anglo Fascist Thatcherite fake playbook – talk OVER not to them Mag. Quote Grantham Hag Thatcher, “Too much ‘edjuckayshun’ is not good for this cuntry!” Recalls classic ‘Spitting Image’ arrogant Anglo Thatcher’s dummy asked by a waiter at a cabinet meal, “What about the vegetables Prime Minister?” “They’ll have what I’m having!” And, MurDark’s dummy told by his half-brained hacks, “But that makes no sense at all Mr Murdoch?” “THAT’S how I like it in my papers!!”

I can’t remember where I read this but I do remember him saying somewhere that when he armed himself with more information that he wanted to have another interview with you to see if he could do any better than what he did at the time, so has he contacted since the interview to do so Tom? 

>he complained ruefully that he had been too polite in his interviewing style

https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/1745-9125.12355

Transphobic discourse and moral panic convergence: A content analysis of my hate mail – Allyn Walker (2023)

Do you have a source for the entire document? It’s behind a paywall.

Unfortunately not atm…

No coincidence, no surprise, no democracy – much Hypocrisy.

New Zealand offers ‘unreserved’ apology to 200,000 survivors of ‘horrific’ abuse in care. Historic apology by PM Christopher Luxon comes after landmark report that exposed decades of abuse in state and faith-based care institutions.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2024/nov/12/new-zealand-apology-chrisopher-luxon-abuse-in-religious-care-institutions

John Jackson Smyth QC 27 June 1941 – 11 August 2018) was a Canadian-born British barrister and child abuser who was actively involved in Christian ministry for children within the Anglican Church, as chairman of the Iwerne Trust which raised funds for, and in practice ran, the influential conservative evangelicalIwerne camps. In July 1977, Smyth acted for Christian morality campaigner Mary Whitehouse in her successful private prosecution for blasphemy (Whitehouse v Lemon) at the Old Bailey against the newspaper Gay News and its editor, Denis Lemon, over the publication of James Kirkup‘s poem The Love that Dares to Speak its Name.

Anglican Bishop Andrew Watson disclosed that, as a young man, he was a victim. No criminal charges were brought against Smyth because he died while still under investigation. An independent review published in 2024 concluded that he subjected more than 100 boys and young men to “traumatic physical, sexual, psychological and spiritual attacks” over a period of four decades

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Smyth_(barrister)

Eighty-five million people in over 165 countries call themselves Anglicans. Between them Anglicans speak more than 2,000 languages. It’s a global family…MAFIA!!!

Quote, typical Anglo elite ex-brutal boarding schoolboy Jonathan King, ersatz ‘victim’, trauma-free high achiever, “This ghastly man Smyth who seems no worse than my head master in the 1950s who enjoyed beating me as often as possible should indeed have been kept away from children but he’s dead now…”

http://www.kingofhits.co.uk/component/option,com_kunena/Itemid,65/func,view/catid,2/id,251125/

Last edited 22 days ago by HappyHumpingPup

Okay, so you’re pointing out that this John Symth was a hypocrite? He worked against gay rights with Mary Whitehouse, who was known for equating homosexuality with minor attraction, yet was himself engaging sexually with male children? A self hating MAP, basically?

I think Newgon has a gallery of stories like this, called something like “famous self owns.” Sounds like he’d make a good addition…

>Okay, so you’re pointing out that this John Symth was a hypocrite?

Not just anti-Christ Smyth (sexual or not) a supposed ‘Christian’ hypocritically violating Christ’s ‘Love & Respect’ teachings.

But the whole 4-centuries ongoing on five continents post-Reformation (of convenience not conviction) anti-Christ phoney Anglophone via their Fake Media King James Bible ‘KJB’ (makes cum lately Commies KGB look like amateurs). Anglo-Scot MAP James’ courtiers all young boys with slim legs and pert butts.

History’s biggest hypocrites, psychopaths, liars, denyers, self-justifyers, thugs, thieves, mass murderers bar-none. The all time worst still perversely posing as ‘World best’.

From 1640s ‘victim’ Ireland, ongoing victims Worldwide, anti-Christ arrogant Anglo subtext, “We know best!” – WTF?

Last edited 20 days ago by HappyHumpingPup

Updated the page for https://wiki.yesmap.net/wiki/Gary_Dowsett

Discovered his book Practising Desire (1996), which is incredibly thoughtful, sympathetic and reasonable, particularly in the section ‘Understanding the Sexuality of Boys and Young Men’. Would highly recommend it to anyone, as the book is sympathetic to pederasty / age-gap sex, and shows very clearly to contemporary eyes how homosexuals were the MAPs of the past. Arrest, beatings, alienation from friends, hysterical parents, and even feeling distressed enough to seek therapy; that’s how bad it was for the homosexuals and it’s not long ago! Incredibly eye-opening and sobering, for the modern reader.

Any further reduction/elimination of the Anglo AOC is likely to cum from pro-contact Gay AAMs/ex-AAMs recalling their FUN SeX with GayMAPs in or out of Anglo elite brutal boarding schools??

Recalls SeXy 70s UniSeX ‘Love Magnet’ BoldMAP suddenly CROTCH-GROPED at a family-meal restaurant by a grinning pro-contact 8 yo GayBiAAM HOT Lad causing SHOCK to all adults – ‘cept SeXperienced Bold MAP natch.

In 1994 UK Conservative MP Edwina Currie introduced an amendment to lower the age of consent for homosexual acts, from 21 to 16 in line with that for heterosexual acts. Moving the amendment on 21 February 1994, Mrs Currie declared: ‘It is the first time in over a quarter of a century that the age of consent for homosexuals has been discussed by the House of Commons. The taboo of silence that has denied the sexuality of young gay men has been decisively broken.’ During this debate, Tony Blair, then Shadow Home Secretary, said: ‘a society that has learned, over time, racial and sexual equality can surely come to terms with equality of sexuality. That is the moral case for change tonight’. However, Edwina Currie’s amendment was defeated and the gay male age of consent was instead lowered to 18. The compromise did little to placate the thousands of angry gay rights demonstrators who had gathered outside Parliament. But, as Edwina Currie pointed out when looking back at this, ‘the atmosphere had been altered forever’.

https://blog.nationalarchives.gov.uk/equality-of-sexuality-the-age-of-consent/

https://www.thepinknews.com/2014/02/21/edwina-currie-campaigned-change-age-consent/

https://highlandsexualhealth.co.uk/services/sex-and-law

someone said i cant be a bigot im gay and proceeded to say i was disgusting !

Anyone can be a bigoted / hold bigoted views.

I agree with you pure, you can be gay and a bigot and you can also be straight and a bigot. Just like many straight men there are now many gay men (who are attracted to adults only) who are bigoted, because they have forgotten or don’t want to remember a time when bigotry was rife for them, like back in the day (about 40 to 50yrs ago) when homosexuality was just a illegal as Paedosexuality is today and many of them had to resort to illegal meet ups in order to feel like they belong, Actor Wilfred Brambell is a good example, in fact during the time he was filming Steptoe and Son with his co star Harry H Corbett there was a lot of tension between the two men but luckily they where still able to complete the series that many people enjoy watching today

Steptoe and Son is so sad! XD Funny, but sad…

Great actors, the both of them. If you’ve heard Brambell speak out-of-character, his acting becomes even more impressive. He’s nothing like the character he plays! Except one thing: his alcoholism. In his personal life, Brambell had a severe drinking problem which may well have had a lot to do with having homosexual feelings (dare we say “urges”) in a hostile society.

In 1962, he was arrested and accused of gay sex in a public toilet in Shepherd’s Bush, but was conditionally discharged. Decades after his death it was claimed that Brambell was homosexual, but had always denied it: “I’m not a homosexual … The very thought disgusts me.” He now appears to be widely considered a repressed homosexual.

Ken Williams from the Carry On series lived a lonely and isolated life, suffering from suicidal thoughts. Charles Hawtrey was widely known as utterly miserable; again, isolated and lonely. Compared to then, it truly is a different world.

As was once said here in reference to masturbation panic, known as Onanism: it must have been extremely difficult to see an end to this social regime as you were living through it. Many people needed to take the risk of being shunned, rejected, hated, scandalized, for questioning popular taboos. Luckily, masturbation is something virtually everyone does (“have you had your 5 a day?” :p ), so this taboo could hardly last long with enough people having harmless personal experience. The age taboo – age apartheid – is different. It’s much harder today, for people to have positive experiences and retain that self-perception around them.

That’s why it’s all the more remarkable when young people resist these popular discourses despite such a hostile environment (as in Rind 2022). If they speak about it openly, and god forbid online, many people will render your experience as ‘abuse’, that you were ‘groomed’, and are a ‘victim’. When so many forces are pushing people to think otherwise, these positive or neutral self-perceptions are a testament to just how non-harmful these mutually willing, non-violent sexual experiences can be, even if they are unlawful and inadvisable. That’s hardly surprising when sex and relationships involving post-pubescent adolescents and teenagers were normal / common throughout much of human history, even in the UK and US prior to the 1980s. From “rent boys” and teen hustlers, to older boyfriends picking their girlfriend’s up from school in their car, sex is not violence, simple as.

However, the age taboo is unique and exists in the digital age of easy and rapid censorship, mass media, mass surveillance, and mass panic. Identity and what you put online under your own name follows you ever more now than ever; in the past you could move and leave your past behind, now it’s certainly possible but not as easy. There are many reasons given for why the age taboo is hard to defeat despite abundant evidence contradicting it. In scholarship, elderly gay scholar David F. Greenberg gave his reasons in “Here’s To You, Mr. Robinson”: Men Who Have Sexual Relations with Male Minors”, a chapter in Censoring Sex Research (2013). It’d be a good project to explore and respond to some of these reasons, strategizing ways to get around them.

Alright enough from me! :p

Last edited 21 days ago by Prue

>in the past you could move and leave your past behind, 

We have social media to thank for that (or anti social media I like to call it due to personal experience lol) with the rise of modern technology you can’t go anywhere now without people finding out where you are people know people and share things on their accounts ect

well , mike tyson is convicted wraper but hes a hero still! but the erst of us, scum of course. ugh i hate society

Wow I didn’t know that about Mike Tyson. I suspect it’s not widely known.

Also, looks like he was 25 at time of conviction; quite young really. If he’s turned over a new leaf since then and isn’t beating / raging out on his partners, then surely that’s a good thing and we should celebrate his achievements, both professional and personal?

I totally get the frustration w/ hypocrisy though. The reality is that some public figures navigate controversy better. for all sorts of reasons…

“Steam trains”…! Methinks I detect sarcasm! :p

Everyone’s knowledge is limited, sadly (or perhaps thankfully)! At work I’ve had people shake their heads in shame, “howww have you not heard of X?!”, “Are you kidding, you’ve never seen Y?!”

My equivalent would be “OMG so you haven’t read Steven Angelides, have you even lived!!!???” XD

I’m not really into boxing! More of the bookish, BDSM type! :p (The old “the quiet ones are the worst” adage definitely applies; and to some people I would be considered the “worst” – someone who reads about the MAPs and doesn’t want to send them to the next Aushwitch – heaven forbid!) XD

En route to court Iron Mike was asked what happened with 18yo Beauty Queen Desiree Washington? Mike’s iron reply, “I licked her fanny!”
Got 6yrs in 1992 (served 3), and banned then allowed entry to Britain in Y2K on Labour Home Sec Straw’s intervention; but retro-banned again by predaTories in 2013.

Meanwhile GOAT/GreatestOfAllTime ‘Love Magnet’ MAP Ali (the black Elvis) had swarms of young chicks chasing him including AAMs HOT Lolis.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2521711/Mike-Tyson-barred-entering-Britain-rape-conviction.html

https://www.nzherald.co.nz/sport/boxing/new-book-claims-muhammad-ali-was-addicted-to-sex-had-sex-with-girls-as-young-as-12/7GWGB3N4DCVVEEFNFAYEE7VTXA/#google_vignette

Last edited 15 days ago by HappyHumpingPup

SeX AAMs Rock n Roll.

(Millions of pro-contact AAMs for unRockin Esther Rancid to innerview before and after dark?)

Proby shows me a cutting from the News Of The World circa 1965. In it he is pictured with a group of girls, none of whom are more than ten years old. “I also had my nymph-petits,” he boasts, “they were mine. My ‘special brew’.” But surely he wasn’t doing anything to these innocents?
“I wasn’t doing a damn thing! But you’d be surprised what they were doing. I’d go to bed at night on my own, then one by one they’d pitter patter up till there was four on each side of me and I’d have to put a pillow over my head to keep from laughing. They’d be playing, saying ‘Go on touch his thing. I dare you.’ Then you’d hear ‘Look it stretches!’ I was a human experiment for them…These were 6—8 year olds.”

Proby claims that young girls stayed overnight with their parents’ consent. He elaborates on triangles involving mothers and daughters. He says the woman he was living with at the time liked little girls too.

He’s unrepentant about this grotesque exploitation, playing up the image further still with the sleeve of his most recent single on which he’s photographed with a girl he describes as his ‘baby-wife’.

https://www.alamy.com/pjproby-american-singer-and-songwriter-in-the-portobello-market-london-in-1965-photo-tony-gale-image486746978.html?/

https://www.savoy.abel.co.uk/HTML/pjhot.html

Last edited 28 days ago by HappyHumpingPup

Now republiloons are in, theres gonna be one hell of a lot of suffering for maps. or anyone… even teens .. they havent got a clue… i feel sick !

Speaking of not having a clue, but in a recent post on here it has been suggested that Maps should form an alliance with Zoophiles and possible incels, speaking of Zoophiles I was wondering if there was any evidence of sexual preferences like Pedophilia and homosexuality actually exist in say cat or dogs?

I once did a post about this on the now defunct Freespeechtube. A book I was reading had some discussion and sources. The short answer is yes.

There’s TONS more pro-choice literature relating to age-gap sex contact among humans, but there’s also been occasional pro-zoo scholarship published.

See my review of Foucault, Feminism and Sex Crimes for these sources.

One that stands out to me is LGBTQ…Z?, by Kathy Rudy.
Most recently, see the open-access article Bensto, F. (2023). Zoophilia Is Morally Permissible. Journal of Controversial Ideas, 3(2), 5. Noted in the page I made for Peter Singer.
That should help your search :p

I am an incel… life really is cruel… not zoo though. but if people are that way inclined i wont judge. um i cant help you on that one… but people do say homosexuality exist in animals.. so thats one way they say it normal. But animals go with whoever is capable of reproducing.. if i say that about humans im evil??

I am also not a zoophile, however like you I am an incel, and I believe that many maps out there are also incels (due to the laws that stop us from having non coercive relationships with the age groups of our choice in a legal way) I also can’t have relationships with women of my own age either due to the fact that in the past I have openly come forward with my sexuality, its like they just completely reject you even if we don’t break any laws.

>I am an incel… life really is cruel… not zoo though

Misread this post and typed a reply super quick. You were asking about pedophilia / homosexuality in cats and dogs…

Well, not sure about those animals specifically, but a good starting point would be here https://wiki.yesmap.net/wiki/Research:_Intergenerational_Sexual_Behaviors_in_Animals

In short, yes both pedophilic and homosexual sexual behavior has been observed in non-human animals, including monkeys.

For the record, the reason various sexual activities are rendered illegal or stigmatized is because it upsets and disgusts people, not because it’s “unnatural.” Anything possible in the material world and not imaginary, is provided by “nature” and thus “natural.” The argument from nature was never a good argument in general…

Pedophilic sexual activity is “unnatural” like homosexual sexual activity, heterosexual sexual activity during non-fertile periods, and using an umbrella on rainy days. “Natural” is eating, sleeping, breathing, emptying the bowels and very little more – everything else is culture.

Voluntary and mutual sex between humans is natural, the division of sex into socially acceptable and unacceptable is a culture that can change.

MAP feelings are trapped in the (adult) body, just as Transgender feelings are trapped in the (other gender) body. MAPs are rejected by society in the same way that homosexuals were in the past. Due to social rejection, MAPs are unable to express these feelings, just like Incels. So yes, these groups are able to understand our feelings and become allies. But homosexuals have assimilated into the culture of “normativity” and, unfortunately, no longer remember their and our common history.

Last edited 26 days ago by Harlan

That’s right… in the USA, it’s going to be even more absolutely severe for any man who does not worship middle aged or older women. We’ll see what effect this causes on the rest of the world. It might be short-lived though as the US gets drawn into more wars it will lose.

Long election post incoming: :p

Well, the Left aren’t edgy enough, entertaining enough, and populist enough to offer a meaningful opposition. They also have far less corporate and big money backing, and tend to be more sectarian and divided amongst themselves.

We’d need an army of edgy debate bros like Vaush from 4 years ago (back when he had a sense of humor); people who’d push out daily content responding and even debating people in real time, utterly crushing and humiliating them for the world to see. And that’s just a start!

The Right have got the media ecosystem down: the Daily Wire, Ben Shapiro, Jordan Peterson, Lisbsofticktok, Tucker Carlson, and so on, making constant uploads every day. They don’t play fair or nice; it’s always scapegoating the newest Other – attacking people for their appearance – the nose rings and blue hair, etc.

The Left tries to play with decency and appeal to people’s brains with fully costed manifestos (in the UK) and actionable plans, but don’t have the populist rhetoric or enough support from their own party and certainly not the billionaire owned media, to get elected. The only time Leftist governments tend to get elected is in times of dire crisis, when the powers that be have pushed wealth inequality so far that people are poorer than ever and react against the established order. It’s a rare occurrence, and they’re not often popular. The new government is left to inherit the mess of their predecessors, making them easy targets for their opponents and the media.

The Left has given the Right the easiest go-to: Trans children. Think of the children. They can’t say gay men are pedos anymore, but trans… well, that’s new and scary and icky. Blue hair? Pronouns in bio. OK Groomer…

The Left shot themselves in the foot on Trans issues; why after all, can a child consent to puberty blockers and serious medical treatment, but not to sexual contact? If people believe that under 18s are “children”, and children are vulnerable, asexual, easily manipulated idiots, it’s a hard sell to start making exceptions with the case of gender identity.

And lo and behold, Trump’s already talking about banning queer education, using language like “sexualization” adopted from Liberals! They’ll use the child protection discourse to roll back as many rights as possible: “protecting” the unborn children by banning abortion, “protecting” children from seeing porn by instituting ID verification and ending privacy, “protecting” children from being “prematurely sexualized” by seeing drag artists and Trans people; “protecting” children from engaging with “predators” by banning them from social media (as Australia is planning to do).

I think most people agree that *some* level of protection / concern is reasonable, but a lot of popular rhetoric is OTT fear mongering.

The Left, if they want to get over their aversion to winning, need to turn to economic populism. Just hide your power level like the Right do; communes, automation, new publicly-owned infrastructure companies, legalizing sex work and making public spaces available Amsterdam-style: not every policy has to be said out loud. You can do your own Project 2025 and wait until after you’re in power :p

———‐——–
FYI: I thought Harris would win. Not because I like her or her party – they’re pathetic liberal PC cowards – I just can’t see how you’d vote for the alternative. But, I do acknowledge, that depending on what media you consume, what narratives you adopt, you’ll be living in a different reality to your fellow Americans. You see the same things as fundamentally different.

It’s tough, there are always winners and losers in politics and society. For some it’s life and death. The affordable care act being repealed could kill many… For some it’ll be best to work on leaving the U.S.

But, on the bright side, the next 4 years will bring entertaining TV and drama for all. There’ll be lots of tough decisions for those of you who want or need abortions, and a whole host of other things. I hope you’re ready for a brave new world!

Frankly, I’m excited to see just how crazy things can get! Truly, there’s never a dull moment!

I thought Harris would win. Not because I like her or her party – they’re pathetic liberal PC cowards – I just can’t see how you’d vote for the alternative

Today’s left has become a victim of its own out-of-control political correctness, which has materialized in the form of infantile and hysterical groups of Social Justice Warriors. These groups gave birth the “cancel culture” and the so-called “woke culture”. Instead of a democracy of the majority, they became like a dictatorship of the minority. When criticism of failure, error, or unprofessionalism by members of minorities is considered offensive and is seen as an attack of racists and misogynists. When frequent legal fines of non-white pedestrian offendersare suddenly seen as racist and lead to the abolition of pedestrian rules in New York. The problem is not in the hair color or facial piercings, and in how uncontrollably these people imposed a leftist agenda in the media, entertainment, etc. Instead of the voice of reason, the left always uses emotions and disagreements. Now the right will start to take it out on transgender people and abortions, in the same way, reaching the point of absurdity.

Instead of the voice of reason, the left always uses emotions

It seems you take the corporate media’s caricature of socialists instead of reality. The Democratic party is one of the wealthy elite; like the Republicans it is the enemy of the working class. Liberals who have become so attached to personal identity politics are no different than those on the Right who cling to national and racial identities.

It has always been the Right who rely on emotion and run away from evidence – as we saw in the Covid-19 pandemic when blatant lies about supposed harms from vaccines and public health measures were widely perpetrated by the right-wing media. Socialists love evidence and reason. Emotions are valuable and should not be rejected but they are widely abused such as creating fear over immigration, over trans people and – especially – over MAPs.

Always respect true, not fake, victims. Include millions of true victims of fake media.

Still awaiting ANY counter from Esther Rancid fake media-mugs and all negative victims, plus no-contact A thru Z thinkers. .

Any counter to decades of positive, proactive aMused not aBused non-victims MILLIONS of AAMs. Young fans (often underage) fancying, chasing, grabbing, groping, GROOMING, fucking adult stars? Many fans now grinning grannies recall their aMused not aBused illegal FUN SeX with adult stars.

Cum ohn counter cunts IF ya can? Your DEAFENING silence SPEAKS VOLUMES!!

Quote SeXy ’70s ‘Love Magnet’ (no star) Bold MAP’s two AAM HOT Lolis, 9 & 10, “We think of you at night in bed – all having kisses & cuddles!!” (No-contact natch.. WTF?!)

Last edited 29 days ago by HappyHumpingPup

Childhood Sexual Abuse by Women of Boys Who Go On to Sexually Offend: Review and Critical Analysis (2024)

Women who have sexually offended against children typically do so against older boys, use little or no forms of force or coercion during the abuse, and are unlikely to be prosecuted or sentenced following the abuse. Boys whom women have sexually abused are unlikely to report or disclose the abuse that they have experienced, perhaps because social structures surrounding sexual abuse of boys by women are designed to minimize, excuse, or even encourage such sexual contact. The intersection of these unique features may help understand the role of childhood sexual abuse perpetrated by women in subsequent sexual offending among adult men.

Maybe the ‘abuse’ label isn’t warranted then??

Is there a clearer example of the complete feminist attack against men? First they say this stuff seriously, to pretend like men and women have the same sexual desires and the laws are equal, while the overwhelming majority of victims of statutory sex laws are men for the obvious reason that heterosexual men desire young barely pubescent girls.

Then they finish with an attack on men, with a focus on trying to figure out the motivation for male “sexual offenders” who are criminalized by the very same feminist laws. They blame social conditioning instead of normal biology because men aren’t interested in 81 year old swimsuit models.

They say it’s perverted for men to desire young girls, but good for men to desire menopausal women who look like The Crypt Keeper. Literally.

What could possibly be their motivation, hmmmm?? Could it be jealous old women, could it be manipulative teen girls, could it be abuse industry tyrants want money and power, could it be simps backstabbing each other for approval from women to get laid?

Example: Let’s make a law saying it’s child sexual abuse to wear a push up bra in front of a “child” (under 18), then write articles pretending this law has nothing to do with gender – Men who offended against children under this law typically use no force during the abuse, and are unlikely to be prosecuted. Girls who men have sexually abused under this law are unlikely to report it, perhaps due to social conditioning designed to minimize such abuse. The intersection of these unique features may help understand the role of child sexual abuse perpetrated by men who wear push up bras in front of children in subsequent sexual abuse by adult women who wear push up bras in front of children.

Oh and by the way, 99.9% OF OFFENDERS ARE WOMEN FOR REASONS WE CAN’T UNDERSTAND LOL ANYWAY LET’S PLAY WITH TIKTOK!!!!!111

and, maybe the boys themselves just want this and they like it ? This is the essence of sexual pleasure.

Reputational crisis at a Chilean University, resulting from a post on social media X (Twitter) about the controversial theses in the School of Philosophy and Humanities (2024), in Frontiers in Education.
Dry and repetitive read imo, but cites Rind et al. 1998 and discusses two controversial thesis from Chile on paedophilia, which made national headlines in foreign press during 2023. I noted this event on Newgon’s MAPocalypse page, but didn’t realize quite how big a controversy it was until seeing this article. The image on page 6 gives a chronology…

Here’s Newgon’s summary:

In March 2023, two students associated with the University of Chile (Leonardo Arce Vidal and ”’Mauricio Quiroz Muñoz”’) whose respective MA and BA theses problematized the figure of the pedophile and the notion of intrinsic harm in relation to age-disparate sex, were (along with their supervisors) subject to university investigation. The familiar right-wing twitter storm had preceded and provoked these investigations, also leading to condemnation by university officials and organizations which speak on behalf of minors/youth. The university both condemned the works and pointed out the works were “purely theoretical nature, which do not report intervention on human populations, and which, even taking into account how debatable their content turns out to be, met the requirements of the academic evaluation process“.

The fallout from the MA thesis is the focus of the 2024 article. The student’s 2016 thesis was called Pedophiles and infants: folds and folds of desire. I made a page on the author and his supervisor here: https://wiki.yesmap.net/wiki/Leonardo_Arce_Vidal

Last edited 1 month ago by Prue

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=16W7R8fwYc0&pp=ygUcY2xpdmUgc3RhZmZvcmQgc21pdGggZ3Jlc2hhbQ%3D%3D

Nice to watch or listen to in the background. Clive Stafford Smith, to me at least, is a refreshing and inspirational figure to listen to amongst the currently burgeoning sea of far-right populism sweeping many nations. No fearmongering over “degeneracy,” no talk of apparently imminent civilizational collapse, no hate-preaching and talk of killing already demonized minorities. By contrast, working as an attorney he defends the persecuted, works to save inmates from being executed and, in the case of Guantanamo bay, tortured. What a cool guy.

In this video, at 12 mins he speaks about “criminals,” and at 13:10 speaks briefly about “paedophiles.” He even says that when he worked in New Orleans, upon receiving mandatory postcards notifying the neighborhood that a sex crime convict has moved there, he and his wife went round and offered them legal aid should they need it.

Not all heroes wear capes :p

I’ve not watched this yet, but will do so. Mr Stafford-Smith has long been an object of my utmost admiration for his work co-founding Reprieve “whose stated goal is to “fight for the victims of extreme human rights abuses with legal action and public education”. Their main focus is on the death penalty, indefinite detention without trial (such as in Guantanamo), extraordinary rendition and extrajudicial killing” (Wikipedia). He ranks with Julian Assange as a defender of justice.

Thanks for your comment. He is a based lad indeed 🙂

Holy shit! A new article by Bruce just dropped! What a way to mark halloween; scare some Antis with a dose of reality!

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/384936602_Older_Gay_Men's_Sexual_Experiences_as_Boys_with_Men_An_Empirical_and_Narrative_Analysis

From F.B.

Sex is said to be, next to eating and drinking, the strongest drive for all life on Earth.
Pornography for humans has been popular since men could draw on cave walls.
The Greeks gave it the title it bears today “porno” forbidden, and “grafia” drawings.
The uncontrolled Capitalist USA, has been appropriately named the ‘Pornhub of the World’.

We could make a serious splash if we were allowed to TALK !! is there anywhere??

Danny Whittaker MOWE/My Own Worst Enemy/Renegade Ape – 3h:22m:54s interview with a Pedophile (Tom O’Carroll) 14 Apr 2018. 3.37K subscribers 54,713 views. 14 Apr 2018:- 3h:22m:54s.

Tom O’Carroll is a self-confessed pedophile, pro-pedophilia advocate, and writer. In today’s episode we delve in to Tom’s early life, the experience of first realizing his sexual attraction to children, his failed attempts to lead a normal life, and his pro-pedophile advocacy efforts. We debate the nature of consent, whether or not adult-child sexual relationships are always harmful, if childhood sexual trauma is caused by the sexual acts themselves or subsequent societal judgement, and the likelihood of pro-pedophile advocacy ever resulting in a society which accepts adult-child sexual relationships.

With transcript: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J8SBM-yXULc&t=9759s

Australian Stinson Hunter 2m.7s. interview with Tom O’Carroll – Founder of Paedophile Information Exchange (PIE) 64.2K subscribers 44K views 9 years ago: 2m.7s
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-UcOMDT9hx0
“A Decent Life. The Dissenting Narrative of Tom O’Carroll”.. Playlist•10 videos•2,061 views.- 1 unavailable video is hidden

https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=Tom+O+Carroll+a+decent+life

“After Dark” currently unavailable online? Broadcast early-hours ‘live’ with no scheduled end time, the series, inspired by an Austrian programme called Club 2, “After Dark” March 2003 BBCTV debate with Tom O’Carroll, plus high profile child protection campaigner Esther Rantzen, lawyer Helena Kennedy QC, a former abuse victim, a criminologist, a solicitor, and two academics. Since its formation, the PIE organisation has called for the open discussion of paedophilia and the abolition of laws against consensual sexual acts between children and adults. And the “boy lover” – as he calls himself – has addressed international conferences across the globe and written a book justifying the behaviour of those who prey on children. Mr O’Carroll and five other members of the exchange were convicted for “conspiring to corrupt public morals” in the 1980s by publishing a magazine advocating sex with children. He joined the ‘After Dark’ panel for a discussion on paedophilia and child protection.
The BBC defended the decision to give a platform to Mr O’Carroll, saying he was invited on as part of a legitimate discussion about a topical issue. “Paedophilia, its policing and how society deals with it is one of the most important issues today,” said a spokeswoman for the corporation; The BBC feels it was a legitimate discussion to have. We should point out that Mr O’Carroll’s views were strenuously and repeatedly challenged by the participants throughout the discussion.” After Dark, which was relaunched earlier this year, was axed by Channel 4 in the early 1990s.During its tenure it became a hub of discussion for the chattering classes, frequently attracting controversy with its topics and format.The show was famously taken off air after a showdown between a drunken Oliver Reed and feminist Kate Millett. (Congratulations on being one of our top readers globally – you’ve read 73 articles in the last year)

https://www.theguardian.com/media/2003/mar/04/digitaltv.broadcasting

>Very hard to think straight and speak calmly when someone is blasting curses in your face with the implied threat of imminent physical attack. Tempting to shout back, but the last thing I wanted was to come across as a stereotypical male bully and victim silencer. Not that I could have talked over this woman: she could have drowned out a ghetto blaster!

2003 pre-Selfie Sexting proactively aMused not aBused from Age 4. Still, the polite Twin-Whammy Truth Nuke ATTACK would have calmly BLASTED ghetto-blasters back to the stone age from which they can never recover.

1) Centuries of Anglo elite high fees BRUTAL boarding schools ritually, serially abusing boys from age 8 creating NOT life-scarred low-income VICTIM-SURVIVORS needing lifelong HELP and BIG Cash Compo, but sneering trauma-FREE aMused not aBused high achievers. Including National & World Leaders then paying high-fees for their own young boys from age 8 sent to Anglo elite BRUTAL boarding schools to sustain their sneering cycle of the serially aMused not aBused. Esther Rancid’s ghetto blasters pleeze seXplain? Answer the question! Answer the Goddam question!!

2) Decades of Anglo/US/UK/Global MILLIONS of young fans (often underage) fancy, chase, grab, grope, GROOM, fuck, ADULT Pop-Rock Stars. Many fans now grinning grannies recall their ILLEGAL SeX FUN with ADULT Stars. Esther Rancid’s ghetto blasters pleeze seXplain? Answer the question! Answer the Goddam question!!

Two-counts – and out – antis OUT!!

Always respect true, not fake, victims. Include millions of true victims of fake media.

Translation into Russian:

Danny Whittaker MOWE/My Own Worst Enemy/Renegade Ape – 3h:22m:54s interview with a Pedophile (Tom O’Carroll) 14 Apr 2018.
https://fstube.net/w/hzSP3nrmGHw7nbvVZYUTYX

“A Decent Life. The Dissenting Narrative of Tom O’Carroll” 1 video – 1h:09m:14s
https://fstube.net/w/5QC6AY8M2HSNEQUDqz33ty

AGE RESTRICTED???? SERIOUSLY whoever runs you tube are dictators.

It never used to be. So i have watched it. Renegade ape? i only know of savannah ape and hes still there amazingly

Past the Dark Field, by Sheila van den Heuvel Collins (2019) – A collection of short fiction about non-offending, anti-contact minor-attracted persons (MAPs).

Book I’d never heard of before. May be of interest to some. Seems to be liked by Prostasia types, as they reviewed the book on Amazon.

Book discovered via a MAP blog: https://kindpeoplemykindapeople.site/past-the-dark-field-a-thought-provoking-collection-of-stories/

Born circa 1984, Sheila van den Heuvel-Collins is a Canadian author and tutor living in Mississauga, Ontario, who believes whole-heartedly in the adage, “The pen is mightier than the sword”. .

Interview transcript: https://s3.eu-central-1.amazonaws.com/www.prostasia.info/Documents/Unredacted/PreventionPodcast-Transcript.pdf

https://sheilavdh.com/about/

Last edited 1 month ago by HappyHumpingPup

Max’s article is one of the very best I have encountered on this website. I should state at the outset that I have a non-contact position, which agrees with my life philosophy and aesthetic preferences, but I hope that doesn’t invalidate my opinions in the eyes of users. I too am concerned that men attracted to children are grossly stigmatised, but the sad fact is that many amoral, low IQ and aggressive men do engage in acts of violence against children. This has muddied the waters and complicates the underlying issue of whether adult-child sexual relations can ever be philosophically justified. I made a mistake (at the lighter end of the scale) and now have a sex offender manager. But regardless of how I viscerally feel about whether, on a purely basal sexual level, I would want to for example engage in oral sex with a child, especially giving pleasure to a child, I instinctively hold back from this and consider that I have no right to inflict sexual knowledge on the innocence of a child’s mind, however we might see childhood innocence as a societal construct. For I believe childhood innocence is a real and objective quality, and furthermore a quality inherent in and inextricable from the nature of childhood, and this is why I have a non-contact philosophy. Furthermore, I write regular letters to a young child (with the parent’s acquiescence) and I am always especially careful with my language and focus on giving her moral and intellectual instruction. Nevertheless, I found Max’s article fascinating and note that many individuals attracted to children carry around an intolerable burden of shame and guilt.

I would want to for example engage in oral sex with a child, especially giving pleasure to a child, I instinctively hold back from this and consider that I have no right to inflict sexual knowledge on the innocence of a child’s mind, however we might see childhood innocence as a societal construct.

It’s ok. Although I think you understand perfectly well that puritanism and sexophobia impose shame, fear, stigma and barbarian laws in society. Children are also sexual beings (surprise) who have genitals, “dirty” fantasies, desires and ability to orgasm. Knowing our nature and our body cannot be a harmful burden if it is given appropriate and gradually just as they are taught to ride a bicycle, starting with small kid’s tricycle and traffic rules.

>I…note that many individuals attracted to children carry around an intolerable burden of shame and guilt.

Surely after all these years thinking Zen knows that benign LGBTQZ MAPs & AAMs since the post-WW2 counter culture ‘Love Generation’ have shed irrational unnatural body-Guilt & Shame. Ancient Biblical, Olde Victorian, and modern fake media abuses by mass deception deviously masked as ‘Public Protection’. Corrupt cultural abuses perversely causing far more harm than benign proactive sex which can never be stopped. Or, would mere self-masturbation by natural infants still be deemed ‘abusive’ by retarded fake virtue-wavers for corrupt careers, ratings, profit, power and control over the kept dumb shallow ignorant mob-rule masses? A new ‘fake patriotism’ last refuge of $COUNDRE£$ !!

Last edited 1 month ago by HappyHumpingPup

Can’t help but think ZT that being *genuinely* sexually aroused by our smallest beings and simultaneously imagining the defilement of their – shall we say ‘pristine condition’ ensuing from any “contact” (dreadful word that!) must produce a dreadfully schizoid sort of mind state, no? Are you sure that a man in such a state is capable of moral instruction? Heavens to Betsy!

Your take on “innocence” would appear to be a rather quaint one indeed. For how would you say that very quality, born in Blakean/Wordsworthian reaction to The Enlightenment, to relentless market spread and so on, can ever extricate itself from the vastly erotic potentiality that is born with it? With which it is coeval? And that has virtually underwritten the confusion and doublethink of our W E I R D, lolitafried culture ever since?.

In a word, does.not an enttity so alluring and lovely that you do not even wish to touch it for fear of despoiling, not constitute erotic paralysis in extremis?

Exactly. The fallacy of “childhood innocence” is conveniently believed by people who get off on breaking the rules or fantasizing about it.

Then the abuse industry takes these useful idiots and amplifies their beliefs for profit and tyranny. Enough!

Interesting point. I am genuinely sexually aroused by female children. I believe children have the capacity for sexual feelings and eroticism. But I do not believe I have any right to touch a child, discourse sexually with a child, or act irresponsibly and with unethical intent towards a child. However, I find pleasure in children and I invite children to find pleasure in me. That does not mean transgressing any ancient boundaries. Adult-child physical sexual intimacy is maximally damaging to the social fabric, because it upsets the careful order of society that has been set in sacred bounds throughout the history of civilisation, in ways you can’t possibly imagine. It is a naive and foolish wish to have physical sex with a child. On the other hand, a subtle psychological intimacy between adult and child is perfectly fine and can never be legislated against, and the irony is that the latter is more rewarding. Any physical sexual act upon a child is defilement, because the child is constituted psychologically and spiritually in a radically different way to the adult. The child has a more innate imaginative awareness, is more in tune with the ‘unfiltered brain’ whereas adulthood witnesses a radical narrowing of the imaginative perceptions, and the state of primeval connection and ‘eternity’s sunrise’ that we associate with childhood has been termed, perhaps poorly and inadequately termed, ‘innocence’. But when we introduce the existential violence of a physical sexual encounter into this world of the child, the end result is a deleterious ‘system shock’ that leads to a radical loss of primal imaginative cognition and a deep incision into moral development. Now let’s consider the moral alternative, for those who feel an attraction towards children. We open an existential space of love, understanding and mutual fulfilment through a degree of psychological tension, admittedly, but primarily through a refined, or even erotically charged, connection which focuses on genuine nurturing, joyful exchange of erotic energies safely and without the existential violence of a physical sexual act, and mutual joy and fulfilment in the being of the other through a deeper connection than could ever be achieved through penetration, digital or lingual (tongue) manipulation of a child’s body – an act that is rooted in a shocking level of manifest, tangible and experiential violence, even in a superficially ‘gentle’ mode of action. So, this deeper, ‘moral’ connection: certainly psycho-eroticism, finding more effective, joyful and clever ways in the mutual exchange of pleasure between adult and child. A physical sex act is the bluntest of instruments; and the sad irony is that all the enjoyment is in the anticipation, and the corruption of the unique childhood modal landscape, the crushing of their spirit through foreign adultified impositions like a physical sex act, will only blunt the enjoyment of the adult, especially over time, and become a soul-destroying exercise. In conclusion: focus on the infinite gradations of psychological mechanics in mutually pleasurable eroticism, but do not invite pain on both parties through the naive folly of thinking a physical sexual act is somehow preferable to this; it is not.

Apologies

Very unique perspective… 🙂

>I find pleasure in children and I invite children to find pleasure in me. That does not mean transgressing any ancient boundaries. Adult-child physical sexual intimacy is maximally damaging to the social fabric, because it upsets the careful order of society that has been set in sacred bounds throughout the history of civilisation, in ways you can’t possibly imagine.

Kinda Biblically backward (for non-Judeo/Christians) ULTRA CONservative, negative, near Fascist? Not least now with varying AOCs and no-guilt ‘Love Generation’ LGBTQZ POSITIVE norms Worldwide. Who can still possibly imagine so called ‘ancient boundaries’ throughout the Genocidal history of so called ‘civilisation’ being maximally damaging to the carefully ordered anti-social sacred disorder for CONservative/Fascist Power & Control, perversely masked as so called ‘protection’? All the usual suspects in the millenia ongoing fake virtue-waving Public-Protection RACKET generating hate! Last refuge of $COUNDREL$!!

While millions of ex-AAMs later grinning grannies and grandads recall their so called ‘illegal’ PRIVATE FUN sex with attractive adults – positively no one else’s effin’ business.

Parrotfaze a SeXy ’70s Mom to ‘Love Magnet’ Bold MAP, “My girls LUV you, and I knew a nice man like you when I was young. Our minds, our bodies know pleasure from pain – so FUCK the fake system!”

Mighty glad you said all this, ZT, for if i may briefly pop a cliché, it dearly, clearly needs to be said. Sadder than sad it is that no MAP will engage with it – aside from HHP that is dragging along his entire retinue of buzzword-dingleberries, which is really no engagement at all – leaving His Turpticles alone to rise to the occasion?

Can we formate on this chase plane right here?
“..and the sad irony is that all the enjoyment is in the anticipation” (will set aside the UCML = “unique chiildhood modal landscape” for the moment )
Yes. A preconceived outcome is what destoys the capacity to play, destroys the ability to fully imhabit the erotic wiilderness of an ever expanding moment, ‘uncontaminated’ by expectation of any kind..I fully agree that pitifully few adults (i think ‘large humans’ is better) could ever be capable of that..
But shouldn’t the question before us now be one of asking how many small children we reckon are capable of it? Keeping in mind all the while your very own (many) exultations on behalf of instagram rugrats doing their very darndest to chew some of that always looming ‘adult fat’? To participate in that which they surely must be said to be anticipating all the while? As surely as they do the smartphone which beams to them from clear across the universe?
Would they prefer that nothing’s gonna change their world (= UCML?)
It’s pretty clear to me that when we speak of what is erotic to us. we are invoking something already at many removes from the plainly sexual..
We are speaking instead now of the appearance of our most cherished figure on a scene-of-representation which we can have no certainty we still share with him, her or it. The mercurial elusiveness of intimacy itself is virtually predicated on such mutually alienated presences upon an always evanescent scene.
Who can even begin to say where a prepubescent person might’set about internally ‘situating’ herself on such a haphazard horizon?
This all comes crashing back to TO’C’s fight against the alleged.tyranny of a romantic/erotic ideal, doesn’t it? His attempt to redefine what “virtue” might be, in the context of, might one say, accountable vs non-accountable person ?

But do any two adults have any more idea of “what it is they’re doing”? And if so, how did they come by such…gnosis? 
I for one find myself re-reading from that paper quite often. At its hottest juncture it asks “So is erotic love a critically distinctive feature of human sexuality that demands its own ethics?”
My own answer to that is along the lines of asking if what is felt/imagined to be erotic can really be shared? Obviously all that precedes two bodies in a space they’ve never been before, ie the social elements of what is usually described as “romantic”, can be. But.
But I can’t help asking myself how hard MAPs present here have thought about just how they thiink they would handle themselves in even one such *close encounter of the third kind*.wiith a little one? Whose “ethics” exactly, will we then be f-f-following? Forgive me (readers) I’m trying to get inside this one ..
Maybe ZT, equipped with his starbelt of Zentronics, will be bold enough to tell us what he thinks might happen if the suckled breast was simply swapped out for a handy penis, in the course of an infant’s early career?
Woud that infant then get to see the world as one giant phallogocentric possibility? Would the fortunes of every paedo’s own custard-launcher thus be already in peril upon the sea?
If all else fails here ZT, then perhaps you could do us the great honour of recounting a misadventure or two with your sexy offender’s manager??

Sorry for the lack of spacing between my paragraphs above. Comes from c & p’ing to TO”C direct from my own kit!

Was using QuickMemo app. But you are probably right anyway, sir! .To atone for my error i offer this pic of Melania Trump as child with her sibs and chums growing up in Communist Slovenia. The waif at foreground left should get MAPs going in no time!

images-39
Last edited 28 days ago by Warbling J Turpitude

Dear Mr Turp, ok so you’re asking me what would be the psychological, moral or spiritual consequences on a young child if they engaged a male adult in act of fellatio. I should preface this by saying that isn’t my particular fantasy. Call me passively sexual or whatever you want but my fantasy is entirely to give pleasure to the child, and sometimes I burn with desire to give pleasure to a child; but this can be sublimated into normal acts of human kindness or everyday safe interactions rooted in kindness and nurturing.

So my particular fantasy is to give oral pleasure to a child. I imagine it would be fantastic; in fact I imagine it would be so overwhelming for me that I would scarcely be able to cope with it. And then I ask myself, what is the existential value of such an experience? Is it qualitatively superior to showing loving kindness to the child in an innocent and harmless, though greatly rewarding way? Is a direct act of sexual contact qualitatively superior to the eroticism of indirect mutual interdependency?

And finally, we come to the nub of the problem. If I was to engage in that existentially violent act of physically touching the child in a sexually intimate way, what would be the overall consequences? I’m sorry to say I strongly believe it would have a deleterious effect on both the child’s psychological faculties and her moral sense. In fact, it could be devastating.

Now let’s consider a young child performing an act of fellatio upon an adult male. This would be of a significant magnitude more psychologically devastating than oral sex upon the child. This is because fellatio is in effect oral penetration, and is therefore a penetrative act upon the young body of a child. This act upon the child, is for one thing, an act of utter selfishness on the adult’s part because the child is dehumanised as a passive tool of sexual fulfilment. It is even callous, because no regard is given to the child’s subjective experience or the psychological consequences for them. It is therefore, finally, an act rooted in psychopathology because it involves a radical dismissal of the needs, wants, wellbeing and psychological and physical welfare of the Other.

I certainly do not agree with any penetrative acts, including oral, upon a child, and I also do not agree with, as Tom suggests, focusing on the child’s body or their pleasure in a hypothetical adult-child sexual encounter, which while theoretically more kind, also has a devastating psychological impact (of a lower magnitude than penetration).

So what is this ‘devastating psychological impact’? The child’s brain is radically different from the adult’s, being in a continual state of vulnerable development and formation. Vulnerable, because it is especially sensitive to exogenous shocks, traumas and intensive experiences. Now introducing sexual contact with a child risks inflicting or embedding a trauma in their developing brain, but even if the experience does not reach the threshold of ‘trauma’, which is very possible as we hear about in some French underage sexual encounters, for example, it still creates new neural pathways reflecting a precocious sexual experience, which weaken the rational capacities of the Will and can create sexual difficulties, abnormalities, addictions and problems later in life, because the radically developing brain cannot safely handle the existentially violent dimension of the experience.

Hence setting an age of consent of 16 today in the UK, or 12 in the Middle Ages, was not a mean-spirited act of unfairness, a killjoy mentality or an oppression against both adults and children, but an act of wisdom rooted in the practical needs and realities of a healthily functioning society. The discrepancy between ‘12’ in the Middle Ages and early modernity, and ‘16’ in recent modernity, reflect the additional care given to the child, indicative of moral and civilisational progress.

I repeat: eroticism is on another plane altogether. The eroticism we feel in a state of mild psychological tension with other people is existentially gentle, and healthy, even if it occurs between adults and children. And hence adults can find pleasure in children, and children can find pleasure in adults, but this happens through the normal everyday realities of our lived experience, and certainly not through direct sexual contact.

Again, the law is not being cruel to minor attracted adults: the law is protecting on a macro level the healthy functioning of society, and on the micro level the psychological integrity and wholeness of the individual, against both traumas and difficulties.

I hope I have made this sufficiently lucid and clear.

Damn you ZT, i was just putting some finishing touches on my attenpt to ‘deconstruct’ Tom’s response to me way down yonder at base of this burgeoning comment stack, when you hit with this rather enormously overloaded thing, purporting as it does to have the last, universally applicable word on relationship between pleasure and a developing brain, all wilfully confused as it is with the assuned motivations of agents involved in any pleasure provision (gosh, did i really say all that in one coherent sentence?)

Cutting to the chase then. Most.MAPs (i ASSUME) have seen enough erm..old Russian movies by now to know, to see with their very own eyes, that an infant can be just as intrigued and delighted by the presencs of a oenis at its mouth as any other suckable.

Why are you here to bombard your text with words like devastating, vulnetable, shock, trauma and all the rest of them?

Verily it is as if you are trying to assimilate yourself, with everything you’ve got, to the standard, utterly reflex take on all these things, just to suppress your realest feelings? Just where do you think that is going to get you? Certainly in the good books of your SOM,

You’re in the process it seems of trying to UNDO years of work hereabouts trying to consider separately somehow, in their respective fullnesses, pleasurable interactions in themselves and subsequent interpretations of same made retrospectively way down the track …

Give me one bald reason that pleasure felt via the sexual apparatus of a snall being cannot be as potentially “innocent” as any other kind of felt pleasure! Give us even one clear demonsration that such pleasure has the automatic effect of befouling a small budding brain!

You also bypassed all my enquiry into the contradictios of your Instagram rugrat fanboyhood, and your present baroque sentiments…
..

Haha, Mr Turp, do not take me in the wrong way! Maybe children can experience bodily pleasure in an innocent fashion, I’m open to persuasion. As for Instagram, I love Instagram. I love the plump thighs and cute faces of young girls in bikini pictures. I love to masturbate to them on occasion. It gives me great pleasure and fulfilment. Do not assume that I am not on your side. I only hesitate to say whether a real sexual encounter with a child, were it hypothetically legal, might be a step too far. But I utterly sympathise!

Tom, I completely understand. I know you are far more competently versed in the evidence and the literature than me. Believe me, nothing would be more sweet or pleasant to me than a caring and gentle sexual encounter with a child, looking to her pleasure, her safety and her fulfilment. Such a thing could even be noble, I suppose. However, I am minded of the current legal reality, and the plain fact that many men are rough and brutal, and not gentle at all.

Hence setting an age of consent of 16 today in the UK, or 12 in the Middle Ages, was not a mean-spirited act of unfairness, a killjoy mentality or an oppression against both adults and children, but an act of wisdom rooted in the practical needs and realities of a healthily functioning society. The discrepancy between ‘12’ in the Middle Ages and early modernity, and ‘16’ in recent modernity, reflect the additional care given to the child, indicative of moral and civilisational progress

Are you saying that the young were more mentally stable in the past ? Or were they all deeply mentally traumatized ? No. The physiological aspects have not changed. It is this “additional care” that makes them infantile and psychologically vulnerable.

Modern society has all the necessary knowledge and resources to ensure sexual education and safety without unnecessary restrictions. Puberty has accelerated, instead of helping young people develop naturally, their sexuality is supressed, which leads to negative manifestations. The atmosphere of moral panic allows people to be intimidated and politicians to score points on “protecting children” using them to introduce restrictions on freedom

Interesting point. I only presented an alternative perspective in the interests of constructive argument. But you make valid points.

Addendum to comment below:

Tell you what: let’s first work on giving kids more rights and freedoms under the law until they are truly considered equal to adults.

Sorry for the CRAZY hot-take everyone. I know it’s horribly offensive to some people when I suggest maybe adults shouldn’t fuck kids

>No adult should be ‘fucking’ kids, if by that the poster means pre-pubescent children. Surely it is so extremely uncommon for pre-pubescents to have vaginal or anal intercourse with another human being short of being raped, that it’s hardly worth debating. The only case of this being normative that I’ve come across in research is among the Tiwi in aboriginal Australia, described here. And that’s in a society which had cultural beliefs justifying the practice, as “Sexual intercourse is considered by the Tiwi to be the direct and only cause of breast formation, growth of pubic and auxillary hair, menarche, and subsequent menstrual periods. It’s not impossible that a radically sex-positive and sex-educated future society could see very young people being open about and desiring of this kind of activity, but in our current reality where young people are increasingly monitored and kept from sexual information or experience at least until adolescence, it’s not an idea or discourse that very young people will have access to and thus have any strong desire to do, especially with another person. Young people do experiment of course, inserting objects into themselves, but much of this will be private and solitary and not involve other people, least of all legal adults. Again, rare and hardly worth debating. Add to that, it’s not what educated “pro-c’s” advocate for anyways, when arguing for legal reforms in a future, kinder world. The poster should read Paedophilia: The Radical Case (1980), and learn what pro-c’s are all about: a complaints system, an effective age of consent at 12 with no penetration permitted before that age, etc. etc…

On the kids being equal to adults: Again, refer to my comment below with a line from Gert Hekma. Inequality is the basis for social and sexual life. Inequality is the norm; trying to force equality in a fundamentally unequal world is the aberration. Whilst I agree that young people should be encouraged towards independence from an early age and given more rights and freedoms socially and under law – it eases the burden on parents and gets youngsters used to being agentic – I don’t think that adults and children will ever be considered “truly equal.” Or even that they should be or need to be. It’s simply not necessary.

We don’t need to be equal in law or in status, money, height, strength, or anything else, to have voluntary and positive sexy fun time together. Adults aren’t “truly equal” amongst themselves, so why would that ever be the case with younger people who, by their nature, will generally have smaller bodies, be physically weaker, and have less experience to draw on when making decisions? Our particular society is structured by inequality: we all come from different class backgrounds and have unequal access to resources. You might have more money and a car where your partner or date doesn’t – it’s unequal (oh no! :o) – but a positive and an asset to you both. You can pick your date up and take them out, how wonderful… You could abuse that power, driving them to somewhere secluded, locking the doors and beating and raping them/ But, thankfully, most people want to be liked by others, have fun times with them, and have a conscience (in addition to knowing that rape and violence are already illegal)!

In short, the goal is not equality, it’s kindness, understanding, openness. As many mutual positive experiences we can have before we die. The goal, is freedom… People aren’t “equal” and they never will be. That’s not the point…

Last edited 1 month ago by Prue

>an effective age of consent at 12 with no penetration permitted before that age, etc. etc…

Long before and much since the 19Haties, paediatricians have cases of horny preteens self-penetrating anal or vaginal with phallic objects. Including at least one bath-time HOT Loli who loved slipping warm wet soap-bars into her tight twat, and even gleefully CAME back (with mortified Mom) for repeat seXtractions of slippy-soaps by the gentle handy HOT Doc.

AngloVictorianAntis, cuNt to the chase? Mere consensual pre-legal, preteen, sex with a gentle kind MAP is FAR LESS harmful (de fuckto BENEFICIAL) than proven SERIOUS HEALTH-RISK commonplace smokes or vapes behind or beyond the primary/grade school bike-sheds, in plain-sight SUCKAS!!

Recalls a humorous postcard on open sale in SeXy ’70s Holland, A preteen blonde HOT Loli stares at the camera with a ciggy in her hand, while blowing smoke rings from her pert mouth, “Of course I smoke, but only after SeX.” Recalls another SeXy ’70s HOT quim, er quip, “Do I smoke after sex? I dunno, I never looked!”

Last edited 1 month ago by HappyHumpingPup

Plus, the profiteering ‘Menarche Industry’-encouraged/approved SELF-PENETRATING mini-tampons for preteen HOT Lolis . .

Adolescents usually get their first period between the ages of 10 and 15, but it can occur earlier or later. Twelve is considered an “average” age for menarche — the start of the menstrual cycle. Some individuals may find that they begin their period around the same time that other family members had theirs, but this is not always the case.

https://www.uchicagomedicine.org/forefront/pediatrics-articles/getting-your-period-normal-menstrual-cycle-teens-preteens

Last edited 1 month ago by HappyHumpingPup

AOC is weird. 16 , in UK , you can consent to gang bangs, but at 15 you cant consent to a kiss??? thats daft.

And what could be wrong with people meeting, being friends, hugging, kissing, masturbating. However, sex-negative agenda and criminalizing laws create opportunities for intimidation and blackmail. Openness would allow us to better control and prevent bad relationships and not destroy healthy ones.

https://forum.map-union.org/viewtopic.php?p=3049#p3049

Incredible post by Fragment. A bit like in Hikari’s video on Ole Martin Moen’s “The Ethics of Paedophilia”, Fragment looks into the reality of victimological research studies cited to justify the current social order. He finds, upon actually reading them, that they do not support blanket prohibition.

I may set up an account on MU to respond to this.

They write:

I don’t really care what specifically causes the damage. I don’t care if the damage is caused by the sexual activity itself, or if it is societal conditioning, or if it is the reactions from those around them – I DON’T CARE.

All I care about is the fact that there IS damage done. And I do not want people to suffer over something so easily preventable. Like it’s just not a big deal – I just don’t personally think it’s some fucking terrible hardship to MAPs to just not do sexual shit with children.

>Well, speaking as a Teilio non-MAP, I agree with Moen (2015) and Moen and Sterri (2018) that asking people to remain celibate their whole lives is actually a very big ask. It wouldn’t be such a big a deal if MAPs were able to live without fear, have their own law-abiding, open, positive community culture, supported by their family and friends; if they didn’t have the few legal outlets available to them (artwork and sex dolls) under constant scrutiny and threat of being banned or criminalized. Then, yes it wouldn’t be as big a deal.

I do not want people to suffer over something so easily preventable.
>Yes, it is preventable. How? By “dialing down” the panic, as past APA president Martin Seligman said. Distinguish, as we do (or should do) in lawful relationships, between voluntary and involuntary, forced or coerced experiences. We (the dreaded “pro-c’s”) recognize young people’s spectrum of experiences, from negative to positive and shades of gray in-between. All we ask is that other’s do the same. To not deny, erase, or overwrite young people’s positive self-perception; a remarkable and brave thing to express given widespread demonization of such perspectives. Imagine how confusing, how distressing it would (could) be, to have had a positive, or “meh” sexual experience as, say, a 15-year-old, with someone in their mid 20s, which was completely unremarkable to you until you start hearing narratives years later that your experience was “abuse,” the past partner is a “pedophile,” and everyone’s “so sorry you had to go through that…” It is, in fact, incredible that contemporary data like the Finnish victim survey, of 30,000 cases (mentioned in the linked post), shows what it shows. Despite intense moral panics, heavy legal and social penalties, reality continues unabated. It is only, and unfortunately, that many people have become detached from reality, since they only see sensationalist, attention-grabbing and therefore profitable negative messages and stories.

The poster talks about “expert consensus”, but as usual, couldn’t prove their claim. (They never can)… Trust me, I’d prefer they were right. It’d make my life a TON easier. Society would be justified (up to a point)…

Well I can tell you, as a non-MAP “expert” who has taken time to study this subject in-depth with no particular personal incentive – you don’t hear the positive side very often because researchers are afraid and don’t want to become the next Rind et al. or Allyn Walker controversy. I have it on good accord that many researchers are privately secret radicals, but know they can’t say so openly. After all, it’s no secret that there’s currently a widespread moral panic over “pedophilic elites”, QAnon, Trans groomers, etc., and online fearmongers regularly trawl the internet looking for proof that academia is secretly pro-pedophile. Why risk your job to report on positive experiences?

Like former young people who occasionally speak out online, researchers also don’t want to be bullied off the internet, shouted down, accused of justifying “child abuse,” or perhaps of being a “pedo” or “groomer” themselves. People want to keep their jobs and not alienate their family and friends. So, when it comes to researchers, they do find positive results if they bother to include voluntary relations, but they don’t loudly announce them to the world. With the advent of the digital age making research more accessible than ever before – even to those with a hostile agenda – researchers now tend to bury positive results in obscure statistics, or frame them as young people needing to be ‘better educated’ to adopt of a victim subject position. (Felson 2019 did this, I believe…)

Bruce Rind is an “expert,” Paul Okami is an “expert,” Allie Kilpatrick is an “expert”: Susan Clancy, Steven Angelides, Terry Leahy, Amanda Littauer, Mark Smith, and the list could go on and on. Will H.L. Ogrinc (2017) produced an 1,000+ page bibliography of sources on just the male youth alone, that’s how long the list can go… There are and have been tons of experts who come to “pro-c” conclusions, but stigma and fear of the mob prevents a less negative consensus from forming…

> “I just don’t personally think it’s some fucking terrible hardship to MAPs to just not do sexual shit with children.”

Another fake media misinformed mug on MU. No thought nor empathy for the millions of sex-keen proactive AAMs from around age 4. Ogling, chasing, grabbing, groping, grooming, fucking adults including Pop-Rock-Sport-Glamour stars, also ogled 24/7 near nude in hypocrite sex-filled ‘Family’ media.

Quote, a UK SOTP mind-raped victim Dad, who dumbly groped his 11 yo HOT Loli daughter, “I can see now that children can’t possibly find adults sexually attractive.”

Quote, ‘Love Magnet’ Bold MAP setting the bent-Brit record STRAIGHT, “So, the UK best selling SUN Page 3 adult models are NOT attractive sex-objects to horny young boys masturbating over them, and role models for horny young girls sexually imitating them?”

Parrotfaze, brainwashed UK SOTP faSILLYtator, half-trained traffic-warden to street-wise Bold MAP, “Er, that’s NOT helpful (to our mind-raping abusive agenda).”

Quote, SeXy ’70s grinning AAM HOT Loli, 4, lolling nude on the living room rug to TV-watching ‘Love Magnet’ Bold MAP, “Look at me! Look at me!!”

Quote HOT Loli’s jealous MAD Mom, “No one wants to look at you! Now get in that bath!!”

Last edited 1 month ago by HappyHumpingPup

Once more unto the breeches, er breach, er beach-head landing crafty Truth Nukes on TV masturdebates from which Anglo Victorian Antis/AVAs can never recover, in plain-sight?

1) Centuries of Anglo elite high-fees BRUTAL boarding schools ritually serially abusing young boys from age 8, create not life-scarred victims needing lifelong HELP and BIG Cash Compo, but trauma-free sneering high achievers, National and World leaders then paying high-fees for their own young.boys from age 8 sent to BRUTAL boarding schools. To sustain their cynical cycle of the ritually aMused not aBused. Truth Nuked Anglo Victorian Antis-AVAs pleeze SeXplain?

2) Decades of AAMs by the MILLION chasing, grabbing, groping, GROOMING, kissing, fucking adult celebs. Now, ex-AAMS many Grinning Grannes/Gee Gees recall their fun Trophy Sex with the Stars. Truth-Nuked Anglo Victorian Antis/AVAs pleeze SeXplain?

3) Worldwide modern MILLIONS of under age all-the-rage selfie-SeX-keen kids from Age 4 including AAMs MOCK Anglo Victorian SeX Laws beyond all control. Truth-nuked Anglo Victorian Antis/AVAs pleeze SeXplain?

This boring longform TV masturdebate shortened by HHP to THREE STRIKES and OUT, Antis OUT!!!

Thousands of children from age four have been investigated by police in England for sexting since 2017.
https://www.theguardian.com/society/2019/dec/30/thousands-of-children-under-14-have-been-investigated-by-police-for-sexting

the police are perverts doing this. (they loved looking through my collection too)

Tom, you do sterling work and I’ve been an admirer of yours for many years, after discovering “The Radical Case”. Despite the extraordinary constraints you have to deal with you attract some of the sharpest minds to your circle, and continue to advance the cause. We may sit in opposite sides of the gender divide in terms of our areas of attraction, but you continue to give me hope that this 21st century hysteria will eventually be dismantled.
May you remain blessed and strong.

Last edited 1 month ago by Chris

Tom, the police of Luxembourg confiscated my phone

MODERATOR: The fragment above is the beginning of a 200-word post from Cyril that I hesitate to publish in full because of its largely private nature. I would delete it entirely and reply to him solely by email but he says he is currently without access to the internet (although he must have had at least limited access in order to make his post to HTOC).

Directly to Cyril, I will say this: Cyril, you probably lost information on all your contacts along with your phone, so you no longer have my email address. If you wish to get in touch on a personal basis, here it is: tomocarr66@yahoo.co.uk .

What I can tell other heretics here is that this incident marks the latest chapter in a long history of misfortunes for Cyril that can be explained in large part by his exceptional openness as a MAP. If anyone feels in need of a cautionary story about the perils of coming out, Cyril is your man.

He was a guest blogger here in 2016 and HTOC ran a news feature about him three years later, after a spectacular confrontation he had with the police in his native Ukraine. After the start of the war with Russia he was deemed unsuitable for military service. He has lived in Luxembourg since then.

In 2019, I wrote:

Cyril Eugenovich Galaburda, the 32-year-old Ukrainian physics graduate who translated my book Paedophilia: The Radical Case into Russian, and who has been a guest blogger here, was arrested last month soon after he began an extraordinary one-man demonstration outside council buildings in his home city – a demo for which he had been given written permission a week earlier.

For this item in full, see here:
https://heretictoc.com/2019/07/07/are-we-making-useful-idiots-of-ourselves/

Cyril’s earlier guest blog is here:
https://heretictoc.com/2016/06/02/a-grim-dispatch-from-the-eastern-front/

Just wanted to express my appreciation and incredible respect for public sexual advocates like Tom and Cyril, your bravery is more than any Eastern European soldier, it an obvious service to truth and humanity that the Gods of the various intolerant religions would admire in spite of the opinions of their cult scum.

I arrived here through the right wing’s incredible feminist persecution and redefinition of teenage pubescent sex into pedophilia, a clear attack on male heterosexuality that is completely ignored by their own followers and encouraged somehow. I have since learned that the right wing is far more feminist, miserable, stupid, and dangerous than the left wing, as seen by Cyril’s posts about right wing Russia for example. Therefore, I no longer support the right wing.

As a consequence, I have become far more tolerant to pedophilia, even though it is not my attraction, as it is the decision of every person and family of any age how they wish to live their sexual lives, independent of feminists, tyrant governments, moralizers, and hypocrites. The evidence is also overwhelming that sex at any age can be positive, thus making completely unreasonable and suspicious any extreme stance against that statement; obviously, we also have evidence from our own sex lives as children.

A big problem now appears to be with the destruction of masculinity in the left wing through anti-sex feminism and the abuse industry. From Soviet Russia to Alan Ginsburg to Steven Tyler (and other sex, drugs, and rock and roll heterosexuals), these are lefties who are seen as toxic, evil men by the modern left wing. Without masculinity in the mainstream left to push back against the obvious feminist fascism of the mainstream right, anti-sex feminism spreads because it has no rival.

Also, closet homosexuals are the worst soldiers of the right wing. I am not sure I could anally rape a man even if threatened at gunpoint due to no attraction, let alone willingly take part. These right wing sex fascists are simply insanely frustrated homosexuals, and must be called out (from a safe distance if possible).

In terms of activism being a boomerang and causing negative results, you have to look at it like a football game – not every attempt to gain ground will work, so you try your best, then based on results, you update your strategy, alternating between consistent and novel plays, reinforcing the defense and offense, etc. In this way, even negative setbacks simply become information on how to play a better game and achieve your goals – the game is only lost if the team quits the field, since time alone cannot limit ideas 🙂

Anyone to the right of the far left is seen as far right in the MSM. I’d say the right is more pro freedom whether that is US or UK. The Labour Party plans to shut down Twitter/X, just like in Brazil. And it does annoy me when discussing MAPs in circles hostile, I always get accused of being in the LBGT crowd. I have never supported them beyond supporting homosexual rights, rights that they dare not return to ‘us’, last time they made the false LBGT connection I just replied with “Not me mate, I remember Christopher Biggins at Pantomimes, but that is about it.

New, lengthy page on The Right-wing and Minor Attraction. I didn’t write all of this btw. It was made using a document prepared by someone from PCMA, who did a wonderful job. It hadn’t been posted, presumably, because it’s a lot of effort to input all the references. But, I went ahead and did that as quickly as I could, which also gave me a chance to proofread it as I went. The resulting page is a pretty good primer on some interesting people, and I hope the original author will consider doing a version for Left-wing figures. There’s quite a lot in modern history, from Foucault and others in the French scene, to our dear own Tom O’Carroll… Earlier figures could include Andre Gide…
IMO, sexual politics are bipartisan issues. You can be Right or Left in your economic thinking, and still come to supportive conclusions on MAPs and consensual age-gap fun time.

IRL, I was once told that the political Right are far more supportive of MAPs and age gap sex contact than the Left, and was asked to defend / justify my Lefty perspective. Apparently, I did well, and he was impressed by the end of that convo. But it was a slog on my end; I had to go back to basics and set up some clear distinctions between myself and the kind of social progressive, liberal and social democrat perspectives that dominate the online landscape and give people a warped impression of the political Left. I.e. I’m about equality under the law, not literally about making everyone “equal” as in the same.

I like the line from the late great Gert Hekma: Inequality is the basis for social and sexual life. Inequality is, after all, embedded and recognized in the key phrase of Lefty politics, “to each according to his ability, to each according to his need.” Everyone has different abilities and different needs, so we are by our nature not equal and not the same.

For his part, Marx was an economist and mostly wrote extremely dry, complicated and verbose texts which debate the economic and popular idealist theories of his contemporaries. He didn’t care much for sexual politics and in fact, as MAP-sympathetic historian Hubert Kennedy has shown, Marx and Engles were homophobic… This wasn’t uncommon, of course, but the point is that the Left has traditionally been the economic sphere, the division between the working-class and the capitalist class. The people who own the companies we sell our Labor to and make a ton of money (profit) for, where the workers only receive part of that value, usually in the form of wages. The wealth gaps that emerge from that can of course be minimized, and social democracies with strong welfare states tend to do that well. (At least for a time until those rights and protections are chipped away at…)

What relevance does this have for the MAP struggle? Well, one of the reasons MAPs are so demonized is because it’s profitable. The amount of money that can be made being a vigilante is huge, and the amount that’s made in having slave labor in private prisons and mandatory therapy and lie-detector tests for those on the registry, is also huge. The amount you could lose in any industry, by contrast, if you are perceived as supportive of MAPs, is potentially enormous.

As I see it, the strategy of B4U-ACT has been so successful in part because it has material consequences and is not about ideas alone. It does not tell therapists that their jobs should be abolished and they’re all inherently evil, but gives them and out. You can keep your job and get access to a valuable client base who are often deeply disturbed by the society they live in, but only if you’re willing to drop the unjustified, stigmatizing beliefs of society at-large. If you’re safe to be around.

There’s a material incentive to change, for these therapists and researchers. Withholding your labor (participation in research and therapeutic services), the thing that makes these people money and provides them an excuse for a job, provides a material incentive to change. The ideas need to be there, sure, but if you’re talking about the non-MAP majority, many of whom work in professions where it would be seen as suspicious or concerning to talk without hostility about MAPs (think of teachers, for example) – these people have a vested interest in maintaining MAP-phobia.

How could the teaching profession be tackled? Well, here’s a thought: focus on MAP children. “Think of the children,” but MAP style. Adolescents who are discovering their sexual feelings and need support, not demonization. No one wants to treat children badly, or for kids to be bullied at school, and it is teachers who have a material incentive to change their attitude on this front. That’s their wedge issue. You will make progress in drumming the idea into people’s heads that your child could be an MAP, and your child isn’t some evil monster, so think before you speak… You’d want to target professional bodies who deal with teaching standards and regulations, and the researchers and professionals who inform them (or want to work with them in future). I am not saying this will happen. Just explaining how it could, and why it’s important that there’s increasing recognition that minor attraction starts in childhood – something that many B4U-ACT aligned researchers point out in their scholarship – and that this recognition can be used to great effect if targeting the people whose jobs depend on being supportive to youngsters. You could, for example, author (or make effort to influence the authorship of) a research paper or policy paper on best practice in the teaching profession when students disclose non-standard sexual interests or behaviors. What should the procedure be? What to do if a student is being bullied? What to do if a student seems at risk from other students?

This is just one example…

I do also think it’s no coincidence that openness and experimental thinking, including positive attitudes towards sexual diversity, were at their peak in the 1970s, which coincides with worker’s rights and benefits, including class consciousness and the power of work unions, being at its peak. Especially true of the UK when the GLF were active and PIE was formed. The 1980s of course saw the great conservative backlash, and we now live with its consequences in the alienated and fear-based “risk” and “victim” society it produced… Paraphrasing Gayle Rubin: “In times of great economic strife, people are liable to become dangerously crazy about sex.”

Thank you, Tom.

I should just point out that, reading some of this Newgon page again in its published form, there are many mistakes or points that could be made more concise.

Will improve this page soon (maybe tomorrow)…

I’ve just realized that a more concise version of this would be to say that B4U-ACT (and VirPed in its own way) have worked, or helped, to make MAP rights profitable.

If you can get paid for being nice about MAPs, spreading a positive message, then you’re far more likely to see people being openly positive.

If you can make supporting MAPs profitable, both financially and socially, then you’re opening up avenues for social change.

The key to a strategy to overcome victimology is for present and former AAMs to organize as a constituency protesting their victimization by the CSA ideology and its attendant institutions and practices. Flip the script.

Flipped Script since 2007- True Scholars Marshall Burns & Co.

Next an AAMU – AdultAttractedMinors(not miners)Union? For equal SeX not dough – DOH!

SOL Research conducts research on sex laws and their effects on people and society. Since we started posting our research results online in 2007, we have occasionally been approached by people who complain tearfully of being identified as victims of sex crimes when they don’t agree. Amber said, “I really don’t think that what was done was fair. Things were twisted around to make it look like he abused me.” Jennifer pleaded, “Please tell me what to do. He was nothing more than my friend.”
Spurred by such inquiries, we launched a project to investigate cases and collect first-hand accounts of juveniles who enjoyed physical intimacy with someone older and hold it as a positive experience in their lives. Many times, the older partner was not prosecuted, but the legal threat was a heavy burden. Kirk Read wrote about how angry he felt “every time I saw a girl wearing her boyfriend’s class ring, knowing my friend could go to jail because of me.”
This website presents the preliminary results of this research, which is ongoing.

Main Page | Consenting Juveniles™ Consenting Juveniles
https://www.consentingjuveniles.com

We launched a project to investigate cases and collect first-hand accounts of juveniles who enjoyed physical intimacy with someone older and hold it as a …

Cases in the Research Consenting Juveniles
https://www.consentingjuveniles.com › cases

Below is a list of over 50 cases studied in the Consenting Juveniles research, presented in three columns, as follows: Name. A single name, such as just …

https://www.consentingjuveniles.com/

Last edited 1 month ago by HappyHumpingPup

I’ve known about this project for a few years. I wrote Burns to suggest creating a forum for such people that could serve as a support group but potentially also a launching pad for a political/public messaging campaign. He said he plans to do that when it becomes feasible.

A question for anyone here in response to this quote:

What incentive or benefit would former AAMs get for speaking out?

Seriously. I only know of women who had sexual contact with people older than them as minors, and they’re positive experiences but tend to keep quiet about it. If people feel strongly about it they might post anonymously on some comments thread or something, but otherwise people stay quiet for fear of the backlash that making a TikTok or YT video could generate. Why risk starting an argument or being demonized yourself? Especially if you think that you’re the exception, and think it’s perfectly fine that such experiences are illegal? After all, the law didn’t stop you and you (thankfully) turned out fine. You’re the exception. The law’s fine the way it is, it only catches the real “bad” people; my experience is “different” (something I’ve heard said IRL).

I am not saying it’s impossible. You could after all, focus time and energy on bringing together people who’ve had positive experiences. But what are you advocating for that would keep these people together as a special interest group? For recognition of their experiences as valid?

People organize together to make TikToks? Once they see they’re not alone and other people feel similarly, if the backlash to any public story doesn’t put them off, what’s to keep them involved? If you in any way cross the boundary into arguing that such relationships should be legal, you’re endangering yourself and may even lose your job and be investigated by police. Many women are way too risk averse to speak truth to power on this issue. The base of potential support is simply not yet enough.

Though, I’ll raise you that a determined activist cell like PCMA could make it a mission to have its members send supportive messages and attempt to befriend anyone found to speak positively about their past experiences online. This could be done with any account depending on if you care about anonymity for something like that…

Diddy or did he not? that is the question…

This is an excellent guest post. I liked it very much. Congrats to Max Woolf, and deep thanks to Tom for continuing to bring this space open to other guests, and to keeping us up to date with interesting topics and news.

Indeed, CSA stories must be listened to, with great care and respect. But that should not prevent us from analyzing the discourses that come from those who narrate them (and, very especially, those who react to them). Whenever someone tells me that has been abused, I do not question the facts.

On other occasions it might be due to societal condemnation

I think this is the key point. It’s a shame it has not been developed further, but I understand that a post cannot cover everything. There are indeed people who have had a trauma in consensual fully-desired sex. But I don’t think that any study will be able to show (with a strong, tangible evidence) that in those cases the trauma comes from the societal views. Where would you take the control group from? In a globalized world, there isn’t any region these days where adult-minor sex is fully tolerated. And if so, I doubt that those instances are within reach of researchers. Maybe it’s time to leverage philosophy more, rather than relying only on science to save us… Just my thoughts.

Last edited 1 month ago by Marco Antonio

History provides the equivalent of a controlled experiment. Until the CSA ideology arose, no one ever said they’d been psychologically harmed by willing AMSC. There’s a handy pie chart on the Newgonwiki showing for what a tiny sliver of history the concept of childhood innocence has existed.

Thank you Marco, I’m glad you enjoyed my post, and thanks go to Tom as well for this opportunity.

Yes, societal reactions are an important element to discuss. However, most victimologists already understand the concept of secondary harm, and discuss ways to avoid it when helping young people deal with their (real or assumed) trauma. Demonstrating that society’s reaction to AMS can cause harm does not contradict the supposed need to prevent it at all costs.

Discussions of secondary harm are done best by referencing the words of minors themselves. Many have overtly stated that the need for secrecy, and the overeaction after discovery, were the only negative parts of their relationship. We are meant to believe the children, after all.

I did a meme on that theme which is on the wiki.

MAPs are inhuman monsters because they commit CSA, and CSA is a violating and destructive act because it’s committed by MAPs.

The anti-MAP narrative is full of circular arguments like that one. Like, legislators banning adult-minor sex because it is a disease. And psychologists labeling it as a disease because it is a misalignment with society. Or, adult-minor sex must be made illegal because it is an aberration. It is an aberration because they are doing something illegal.

Parallel to the circular arguments, the judicial system goes like in a spiral. Consensual adult-minor sex is viewed as something horrible by society, thereby it is made illegal. Yet there are many people who do it anyway. Those cases get published sensationalistically on the media, and people react: ‘we should make laws more stringent!‘. Then the laws (or their interpretation) are made more stringent, so the figures on ‘sex offenders’ inevitably increase. Which in turn justifies to make laws more stringent. And the game continues on and on. By the way, this is a perversion of the system, because since there are people who indeed abuse sexually, then the system takes out sexual freedom from children. In other words, the system lets actual abusers decide how much freedom can children have.

I never knew you. Away from me, you evildoers!

I loved that.

Thank you for this article, Max.

Some reading that may resonate with you:

https://wiki.yesmap.net/wiki/Essay:Pro-Reform:_The_Rational_Middle_Ground
https://www.map-union.org/blog/perspectives/16-12-pro-reforms-position-on-amsc

I urge you to adopt the term AMSC, which I, as one of the originators of the ‘minor-attracted person’ term*, hope will achieve widespread adoption.

*https://wiki.yesmap.net/wiki/Minor_Attracted_Person_(archive_research)

b.ribbon@map-union.org

Hopefully not overlooked?

But, courteously once more what’s missing is most telling, in yet another word-wanking one-eyed jackoff with no nude Emperor’s new clothes in plain-sight?

WHERE are the fake narrative-nuking MILLIONS of sexually aMused not aBused pro-active AAMs in plain sight? Ogling, chasing, grabbing, groping, GROOMING, fucking adults, and furiously wanking over near-nude adults seen 24/7 in Anglo sex-filled hypocrite so called ‘Family’ press/media before and since ‘Game of Thrones’ or Greco-Roman Emperors? E.G. UK tabloid SUN reader dire Dad, “My sex-mad young son’s bin at Page Free agin STUCK to Page Two!!”

Not for Capital punishment here, but surely such 1st Degree AngloVile HYPOCRISY in deep de-Nile well away wi’ the Pharaohs, should at least be a HANGING OFFENCE – just streeetch ’em a bit? “NO!” You say? OK then a lot!! Hang ’em High and then Streeeeeetch ’em – real Looowwwwww!!!

E.G. LARGELY straight/bi/try ‘Love Magnet’ Bold MAP peacefully pissing in a 1990s muddle-class suburban park Gents deserted bog, suddenly BOLDLY encouraged by a grinning pretty AAM boy, 14, fast wanking in plain-sight. And then beckoning Bold MAP into a closet. Quote wary Bold MAP, “Clear off, I’ll get 10 years just for being in there with you!” “Nah! No one will know, cum on Ur LUVLY!! On my family holiday in Torquay there were great bogs where married traveling salesmen paid me £20 for SeX!! But I like it for FREE. And if you see me outside with my mates say nothing cos they don’t know I’m gay – OK?”

Bold MAP, “OK, I’ll give you £20 to FUCK OFF!!”

Eat ya hearts out millionaire MAP ‘Love Magnets’ straight/gay/bi Bowie, Bolan, Bieber, et al Y’all…

Last edited 1 month ago by HappyHumpingPup

I remember someone on Sp!ked with that style of writing.

Id recognise that writing anywhere ! Probably how i found him on facebook…

Max’s guest blog is absolutely amazing.

It’s something I’ve been feeling recently and discussed with a few people. MAP acceptance can only come by, to some degree, challenging the narrative of AMS as absolutely harmful.

I don’t believe the “destigmatization model” of MAP acceptance as advanced by groups like VirPed through the 10s has legs. Such an approach accepts that there is a rivalry between MAP interests and victim interests. And in that battle MAP interests will always lose out.

(I wonder if Max would be interested in hosting this guest blog at Mu, too. That’s how much I enjoyed it.)

Also after getting familiar with Tom’s interview “Interview with a paedophile”, the interviewer didn’t want to chat with VERPED because there is always the argument that they just haven’t been caught etc and the conversation wouldn’t get very far.

MAP acceptance can only come by, to some degree, challenging the narrative of AMS as absolutely harmful.

I think that the narrative is already being challenged (and very well challenged in Max Woolf post). I agree that there is always room for refinement and we should always be open to revisit our discourse, as we do in the posts and the comments. But the actual limiting factor is the lack of pedophiles coming out. And, to be clear, I don’t blame anyone for not doing so (I am myself posting anonymously, for the moment being). People like Tom have gone a painful way of outing themselves, and the current state of things make it extreeeemely difficult for anyone to come out. It is a decision that cannot be taken lightly in any way. But, to be honest with ourselves, no narrative will ever be valued unless there is a visible face defending it.

To illustrate my point, I would like to quote the “La Palabra” song, by Nach.
No hay alma más mortífera que una palabra brotada de un corazón noble y un par de huevos que la respalden.
Translated: There is no soul more deadly than a word from a noble heart and a pair of balls to back it up.

I’m very glad you liked it.

I believed that, because so much of the discussion regarding MAPs was centered around the discourse of the CSA victim, the issue needed to be confronted directly. I felt that pro-contact MAPs needed news ways to approach the victim identity in a broader, more macrohistorical light which did not necessitate sorting CSA victims into “real” or “fake” categories.

At the same time, I felt that non-contact MAPs needed to understand that they can’t sidestep the victim rhetoric by confining their demands only to destigmatization and accessible therapy–for the purposes of “protecting minors” to boot. Merely by existing visibly as people in pain, who have been denied social justice, they are contradicting the “official story” of CSA, which is sustained by denying MAPs a voice in society and depicting them exclusively as predators.

I would be honored to see this blog at Mu. If it’s alright with Tom, be my guest.

I hope in the future Max might write about the ‘Children cannot consent’ commandment that antis always use.

This has already been done, with meticulous care, comprehensivity and penetrative power by Leonard Sisyphus Mann
https://heretictoc.com/2015/08/06/the-staircase-has-not-one-step-but-many/

The later abandonment of all known ‘MAP’ pursuits by LSM remains a profound mystery

Im still trying to work out if people are stupid or evil. I mean if people are uneducated, its not their fault really? But i do wish harm on bullies, who are generally uneducated… People who been University are apparently educated, but they like to attack people for age gap relations. So, i guess they are evil.

Learned ignorance. Unlike sexual preferences, people are not born racists, homophobes or anti-MAPists, they become so, absorbing delusions from society that breeds hatred and aggression.

I have been reading H-TOC since around 2013, though I haven’t commented much since 2020 pertaining to more immediate totalitarian concerns (Lockdown and vaccine fascism violation the Nuremberg Code) But I have kept up with every article up till now. There are various Psyops going on in the World, and the above blog mentions one: Manufacturing consent. We have Wars that entail the military-industrial-complex, climate propaganda (class 4-5 junk weather sites etc) and Big Pharma that RFK hopefully will expose if Trump wins.

But with Huw Edwards under the spotlight, the subject of paedophilia or minor attraction came back up (it always resurfaces) and as I have said before, if I was to hate all that hate MAPs, I would hate 99’9% of humanity, such is the universality of the stigma. Of course, after years of reading this blog, chatting to the late Oldfield on Twitter etc, I still can defend my position, but had got a bit rusty because my attention has been on what is mentioned above.

So I thought where can I get a good recap (I remembered Rind et al 1998 of course) I decided to watch the three hour interview ‘An Interview with a Paedophile with Danny W. One thing I got confused was the Rind study did not look at coercion separately, they just pooled the 59 meta samples but used neutral language to prevent bias. TOC could you remind me of the study you mentioned in the video where they DO study coercion/consent separately?

The other quick recap I’m after is the percentage of men that are minor attracted (including post puberty) hebephilia etc, some suggest maybe at least 50% or more considering the crossover into heterosexuality/homosexuality. That was a great interview Tom in 2018, there was an on going discussion after if I recall but not on video. Cheers Tom.

The vast crimes of the pharmaceutical industries have long since been exposed. RFK, Jr. has nothing to offer except conspiracy theories and lies about the alleged harms of one of the most successful and beneficial scientific discoveries in history: vaccines. For a science-based analysis, I suggest Ben Goldacre’s excellent books Bad Science (2008) and Bad Pharma (2012). But that you refer to ‘climate propaganda’ perhaps shows you’ve been entrapped by the science deniers [REMAINDER OF SENTENCE DELETED]

[MOD: Keep it courteous, please, Airlane. The deleted part was gratuitously offensive and only served to draw attention away from your strong factual points. Also, you were rebutting claims already made here, which is fine. That apart, I will remind everyone not to stray too far off topic.]

If you think the malign influence of big pharma is just a theory [MOD: Remainder deleted: off topic.]

Cheers….I thought by going through that video it would bring me up to date so to speak. I wasn’t sure how the study you mentioned in the video was spelt and there were no links. Also it was reading sites like this, and Sp!ked in their early days that prepared me to see through the groupthink on other matters in 2020. Hope you are still able to Ramble from time to time despite the toll time can take.

As long as it wasn’t Dead Man’s Hill:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Le_Mort_Homme

Rind comments, “conforms to the pubertal marriage arrangements that were normative throughout most of human history before modern complex societies”

It is also worth pointing out that several hundred years ago, when the English AOC was 12, due to less nutrition than today, puberty often started later?

Reference [31] is missing in the notes.
An important aspect of of CSA ideology is missing in the essay: the dogma of childhood innocence, viewed as a state of carefree bliss that is destroyed by any interference with adult interests; then ASM is viewed as “destroying childhood innocence” or “robbing children of their childhood”.
Concerning Tom’s appendix on shota: in Greek classical sculpture, muscular men are shown with small genitalia in order to stress the philosophy that bodily passions must be controlled by the mind.

234
0
Would love your thoughts, please comment.x
()
x
Scroll to Top