For advocating crimes against humanity and engaging in black research towards implementing crimes against humanity, rather than more humane methods. It may be worth:
Boycotting any organisation who promote them or offer up funds to them. And by any extension, any organisation who associates with those organisaitons.
Boycotting any individual who associates with them.
Lobbying the Swedish government to sanction them.
Lobbying the European Court of Human Rights to implement Article 3 of the European Convention on Human Rights. Sweden has legislation against more harmless methods for dealing with sexual impulses like 3DCG, therefore it may also be possible to apply Article 10. https://www.echr.coe.int/Documents/Convention_ENG.pdf
Lobbying individual researchers in regards to their contributions to crimes against humanity.
Lobbying the mass-media or the public gradually to strip their moral authority to advance crimes against humanity. It is very important to note to them that most people don’t commit “contact offenses” and many problems can be solved in far more innocuous ways. It may be worth weakening the “normalizing pedophilia” moral panic to facilitate this.
Interfering with their operations at all levels where ever it is humanly possible. Boycott all collaboration, boycott all requests for comment, boycott all research no matter how innocuous it may seem.
There is already one E.U. Member State who would be more happy to implement their research against someone’s will (not even for a contact offense) and they knew this very well when they engaged in this research. They need to be held accountable.
Since I have given my rationale for calling for cancellation, I’ll give rationale of when not to cancel someone.
Merely using aversion therapy, while generally backwards, is not sufficient grounds for a call for cancellation. Stop It Now! UK is said to do this. It is advised to educate them on how to handle therapy properly. Use of medication which has an effect on hormones is automatically use of harmful medication, which is a level above aversion therapy. In any case, Stop It Now! UK might be slowly waking to their practices being ineffective and harmful.
Merely advancing stigmatization is insufficient for a call for cancellation. Usage of certain bits of teminology may count as this. The existence of the term “Pedophillic disorder”, the escalating rhetoric regarding “CP” (individuals who enjoy “sexual torture”). As popularized as the idea may be by “cancel culture”, it isn’t worth trying to solve every problem by this method. It is not worth burning bridges for meager gain. It is important only to handle truly outrageous incidents with it. This is mainly a matter of education.
The Fay Brown incident. Soft cancellation. From what I can tell, it involved big misunderstandings and a level of naivette about how the world works. This is not a perfect world and we do not know all the facts about most cases. Sometimes, someone has to judge it by ear. And experts can sometimes have insights non-experts do not. I don’t hold out much hope for an expert to understand “MAPs”, but other areas are a bit more likely. Prevention motivations may conflict with purism, if false positives are an issue, more research may be needed. It did not interfere with human rights, cause excessive stigmatization, or risk poisoning therapeutic techniques. Fay Brown’s conjectures on what constitutes minor-attraction (the exclusion of some autopeds) are a useful addition to the field and ones which may be worth rigorously testing. The conjectures on some ways autopedophilia may form were also useful.
I think I heard about priotab. They actually do quite a lot of good.