Misinformation against MAPS

This isn’t Minority Report, dearie.

If you are anti-map, then why are you registered on this forum?

Just because he is “anti-map” doesn’t mean he doesn’t have the right to participate in discussions regarding the topic of child protection. He registered the account for that particular reason.

Also, stop pretending that you don’t understand the simple concept of miscommunication.

Most people like 47584839 understand term pedophilia through the definition of “a person who wants to rape a child”, and not the actual definition of “person who is sexually attracted to prepubescent children”. This is why he considers term Minor Attracted Person as “rebranding” of “a person who wants to rape a child” and finds it manipulative, instead of realizing, that this name has been simply used in research as an umbrella term for pedophilia, ephebophilia, hebephilia etc. to simply reduce the amount of required to write text.

Also, he has a point in saying that left-leaning individuals also tend to be disapproving od MAPs, once again, because they don’t have the actual knowledge about definitions of those words, and think that MAPs are people who want to sexually exploit children.

You can either learn the position of your opponents to be better able to fix their misconceptions and have a productive discussion with them or continue playing the tribal game of demonizing an attacking certain groups because you are angry at them.

And if you cannot learn about the position of other people, then simply stop, because your actions will only create a huge disservice to your cause, and spend time developing yourself first.

Im sure that before i register on this forum, a lot of people before me explained what “MAP” is… but obvisouly he still can’t understand that being MAP doesn’t necessary mean you are a pedophile. The term “MAP” includes all kinds of minor-attraction, not only pedophilia. But most people can’t make difference, and think that everyone who is minor-attracted is a pedophile, ignoring the fact that pedophilia has strict definition.

Also, this forum is not for anti-maps. As far as i know, the purpose of Prostasia is destigmatization and protection, rights? If he want to spread hate against MAPS, twitter is for him…

Do you expect all people to browse the entire forum searching for proper definitions of words? It doesn’t work like that. Most people after hearing the definition once, accept it as correct and don’t even consider the possibility of it being incorrect. It takes understanding and effort to explain to the person, why they have the wrong perception of a term.

Because no one has explained it to him. Most people on social media refer to MAPs the same way they would refer to child rapists. And they can’t be blamed for that, lot’s of people on social media pretend to be MAPs and say various horrendous things that make people repulsed and convinced, that their perception of MAPs is correct.

Most people don’t care about the topic of pedophilia. They have an emotional reaction when some drama happens, they shout a lot, signalize their virtue and continue living their lives as nothing happened. That is just how human psychology works.

You cannot really blame people for not being invested in the topic they have no reason to be invested in to know the correct terminology, correct facts about it etc.

You can only blame people who refuse to hear you out in good faith, when you correct their misconceptions, assuming your explanation was correct. But then again, blaming is pointless, some people will agree, some disagree, the goal isn’t to win a fight, the goal is to give interested people knowledge that they might seek.

This forum is for anyone who wants’s to talk about the topics related to the 10 categories you have on the left on the main page. How do you expect to convince people that your position is correct one if you won’t allow them to say their opinions first?

Once again, if you deplatform, silence, cancel, block, ban any person, for as long as they are still alive and free, they will continue having the same opinions, and will find ways to communicate with likeminded people creating echo chambers and reinforcing their misconceptions and misinformation. Also, how can you know you are really correct if you avoid having your opinions challenged?

Protasia is a child protection organization. Their goal is to be effective in protecting minors, nothing more. Whatever helps to achieve that goal, is being considered by them as the right course of action.

In a way, you can say that their goal is to destigmatize pedophilia, but for a different reason than that of your own. Your concern is that pedophiles are treated unjustly, it makes you understandably angry, and “you want to liberate them”.

Protasias concern is that stigma regarding pedophilia has caused a lot of harm to the mission of protecting children. Or put differently, Protasia, unlike many other child protection organizations that I’ve investigated, simply is open to any idea that could help this mission, while other organizations tend to prioritize their personal ideologies over that goal.

Protasia of course has some bias too, it’s more aligned with values of personal freedom and fight against censorship. Terminus definitely exhibits these values as well. But the same can be said about other child protection organizations, who for example, use their reputation to push ulterior goals that have more to do with their religious belief system, than the topic of child protection.

The difference is, that Protasia promotes their own values because it actually has a reason supported by empirical evidence, various research and professionals from the various fields of science to believe it will improve their efforts in making sure more minors will be protected, while the other organizations have no such reasons, and instead, use various manipulative techniques to push for things that will affect everything, except the mission they should be dealing with.

1 Like

By writing “minor-attracted person” on google, this is the first page that you will see: Minor-attracted person - Wikipedia

Saying they are not well informed, so we dont have to judge them, is not good excuse.

If people are evil, they should keep their evil negativism for themselves - they should never push negativism on other people.

When people show emotional reactions, they harm the emotions of MAPS by insulting them and hating them.

How do i expect to convice people my position is right? Well, im agruing from the position of logic, reason… science… while people argue from the position of emotions and superstitious beliefs.

If deplatformed, they wont be able to communicate. How can you communicate, if there are no telecommunication systems? There must be charges for harming MAPS, the same way there are charges for harming LGBT people. The problem is that LGBT people are included in the anti-discrimination law, while MAPS are not included in this law.

You don’t sound like pro-map. A person who doesn’t aggressively attack/DEBUNK the anti-map opinions, is not real MAP.

IMPORTANT NOTE: I DON’T SUPPORT CHILD ABUSE!

It’s not a good excuse because it’s not even an excuse. All I did was I tried to explain to you the perspective of the other side, but you instead try to completely misinterpret my words because that is the only option you are left with to even be able to counterargument my points.

People simply don’t have a need to question things they believe they have enough knowledge of. Do you wake up every morning asking yourself “Do I know the definition of milk?” or “Maybe I should check out the definition of cereal on google”. Of course not! And this is exactly the reason why many people have a misconception about what term “Minor Attracted Person” really means.

What is your strategy exactly? Does being mean to people for not questioning the knowledge they have when they are convinced they have all the correct information about the topic leads to any goals in your opinion?

Because truth is, the only way you can achieve “liberation of MAPs”, is by simply clearing misinformation. But so far, all you do is the opposite. You want to exclude people you are disagreeing with, silence them, avoid having any discussions with them and pursue some kind of twisted vendetta against what you perceive as evil “far-right evangelical groups”, by attacking institutions that you believe are connected to them. You are exactly the same as the people you fight against, the only difference is your polarization on this topic.

Wishful thinking doesn’t do anything. You might wish that “evil” people should keep their evil negativism for themselves and not push it onto others, but it will simply not happen, no matter how many times you will hope for it.

What does it have to do with anything I said? Your response is in no way connected to the quote of mine that you used and carries no point on its own. “People emotions are harmed when they are insulted” is your response to me explaining to you why people don’t know the correct definitions when it comes to this topic.

So far, you haven’t shown anything out of the things that you have mentioned. You don’t argue from the position of logic, most your responces are incoherent and unrelated to what I wrote. You haven’t cited any scientific literature either. And all the threads that you have created are based on emotional appeals, not any empirical data.

You are telling yourself that your position is coming from virtues you find as rational, but all of your actions so far proven the opposite.

Are you seriously so gullible, that you believe, you can actually silence people? Guess what, child predators all over the world are basically deplatformed from every place on earth. Yet the child pornography industry is one of the biggest in this world. They have found ways of communicating that aren’t visible to the mainstream, and they use it.

Even if you deplatform someone from sites like Twitter, they can always create their own platforms, they can communicate using phones, or word of mouth. They can meet in person to talk about stuff. People have been communicating with each other long before the internet was a thing.

Congratulations on discovering the simple truth of this organization: NO ONE IN HERE IS PRO MAP

This is a child protection organization not a MAP liberation club. People who have a pedophilic disorder will naturally be helped by the Protasia to deal with it, but that doesn’t mean they will accept the rhetoric that is used to legitimize any sexual interactions with minors.

Don’t believe me? Protasia supports initiative called MAP Support Club:

Which has rules on its very first page, rules like this:

  1. You must be committed to never engaging in sexual activity with a child.
  2. No talk about lowering Age of Consent (AoC), whatever it is where you live.
  3. No talk about adult-child sex being fundamentally OK and only harmful due to societal attitudes and reactions to its discovery, nor discussions of the topic. There are other places on the internet to have these discussions. This is not one of them.

The highlighted part is there for a reason, it’s because a lot of people tend to scream that they don’t support child abuse, but only because they redefine what they consider as abuse in such a way, that excludes “consensual” sexual intercourse with a child as not abusive, as long as it’s not violent, which is simply not correct.

No sexual activity of any kind, under no circumstances, regardless of reasons, regardless of how you call it, regardless of ideas or emotions, with anyone under the age of 18 will ever be accepted by Protasia. So if your idea of “liberation of MAPs” has anything to do with it, then It’s simply not a place you thought it to be.

And if you are wondering about my motivations to be on this site, I was investigating various child protection organizations during the past year, and Protasia has taken my interest, but also suspicion due to rather unique ideas they have been promoting. I’ve decided to make an account after I saw some individuals (antis, Qanon followers, whatever you want to call them) behaving in a very manipulative way, partially to learn about their position, and partially simply because I have found such dishonest behaviour as unjust and wanted to do something about it.

I was sexually exploited as a child, so this topic is quite important to me now that I’m an adult. So no, I’m not “pro MAP”, a “MAP”, a “MAP supporter” or anything like that. Neither I’m an enemy of MAPs unless they began spreading nonsense to rationalize “why it’s okay to sexually exploit underage people”. I have researched this topic to the best of my abilities, and while I can see that things like child sex dolls or artificial artistic productions carry no risk, and can actually be helpful, the idea that there are cases in which sexual interaction with children is something good or even neutral simply has no basis in reality.

1 Like

I believe that the first thing MAPs should do to gain support is to separate the concept of MAP from noMAP. After all, the majority of people who are averse to these group do it because they believe that every MAP wants support for the liberation of sex with prepubescent children.

In fact, I already talked to several people who had a very negative opinion about MAPs but were willing to listen to our arguments. And the main issue was just to separate MAPs that are seeking support to have sex with children, from noMAPs, who are against this and just want to be treated with respect. And anyway, when these two groups are separated many of them show interest in support the noMAPs.

1 Like

Prostasia is a child protection organisation, not a MAP rights organisation. Those goals are aligned in prostasia’s view, but if you are thinking this is a MAP rights organisation then you have misunderstood.

3 Likes

Non-offending should not need to be explicitly stated, same as heterosexuals don’t have to call themselves “non-raping heterosexuals”. Using NOMAP implies that offending is the default state for MAPs, and that shouldn’t be the case. People will also keep raising the bar for “non-offending” to continue demonising MAPs.

2 Likes

I believe that most people who sympathize with pedophiles know that there is a difference between rape and sex with vulnerable people. And don’t get me wrong, both should be banned, but one is far worse than the other.

I believe everyone is welcome in this forum as long as they are respectful.

I didn’t know that, but I like that idea :slight_smile: But I think that this would have to be handled with care, because it can lead to various kinds of misinterpretations.

Don’t generalize, but I believe it depends a lot on which SPECIFIC group you refer to with MAP

I disagree with you for practical reasons. Regardless of whether or not it is obvious that children should not be raped, the term MAP creates confusion among people, and turns away potential supporters of pedophiles who have no intention of breaking the law.

I would assume this was meant as “no one here is pro-contact”

I think you’re using “non-offending” to mean “anti-contact”. I understand the practical side of getting the point across and getting people to listen, but from a MAP liberation perspective it’s not really liberation. “You deserve rights as long as you adhere to standards that we’ll decide (which may very well be no contact with children at all)”, it just places conditions on our acceptance as human beings.

2 Likes

I’m not sure if we agree on the same things. So to be clear about my position, it is:

Sex with children (prepubertal) is always wrong
Pedophiles are not to blame for liking what they like.
So a pedophile who decides not to abuse children on his own is worthy of admiration instead of oppression. Because he’s doing something that even I probably wouldn’t do XD

In addition, I know that there are all kinds of MAPs out there. There are those who want support to practice pedophile acts, there are those who want support just not to be oppressed, there are those who want nothing, etc.

And finally, a MAP that wants support to abuse children, and another that just wants to be respected for being who he is, without wanting to break the law, are WELL different cases, and that is why they need to be differentiated. Furthermore, as I said, this mixture of the two in practice only causes confusion.

And here’s a controversial opinion from me. I personally am not in favor of supressing the speech of those who want contact with children. In my view, people can get together to ask for support for anything they want. That is, in my opinion they are allowed to exist, but that doesn’t mean that I support them.

My position is that beliefs on sexual contact with children are entirely irrelevant to MAP acceptance, it’s a youth rights issue rather than a MAP issue, I try to completely separate this from my MAP activism; this is one of the reasons why I don’t use NOMAP or contact labels. Whether or not you want to support someone’s positions on youth rights issues is completely valid, but the basic goals of MAP activism/liberation should apply to all MAPs. I think that the need to use “NOMAP” is fundamentally against those goals.

I confess that I find your logic a bit confusing, but regardless, I believe that your case would be a third group that would not fully fit into any of the two that I mentioned earlier. And honestly, and respectfully I have to say that I think you are wrong in the sense of “trying to force” a situation where all “MAPs” would have to be part of your group. Anyway, in my view your idea at minimum doesn’t work when put into practice.

You are wrong again. Knowing and believing are two different things. When you know what milk is, then you know what milk is and the definition.

When they (antis) hate MAPS, they DON’T KNOW what MAPS are. They have beliefs about pedophilia, not knowledge.

When you KNOW what pedophilia is, then you have seen the scientific details about pedohilia, so you KNOW the actual information and definition about pedophilia.

When you BELIEVE what pedophilia is, then you HAVE NOT seen any scientific details about pedophilia, so you DON’T know any scientific details about pedophilia, and actual information and definition about pedophilia.

BELIEF - an acceptance that something exists or is true, especially one WITHOUT proof.

KNOWING - facts, information, and skills acquired through experience or education; the theoretical or practical understanding of a subject. ALSO THIS - awareness or familiarity gained by experience of a fact or situation.

This is why they (antis) think pedophilia is attraction to anyone under the age of 18.
This is why I KNOW pedophilia is not any attraction to anyone under the age of 18, but attraction to prepubescent people.

This is what i said religion and politics dont have to be messed, and church and state must be separated. When lawmakes make laws, they have to FOCUS ON REAL SCIENCE, NOT ON BELIEFS, MYTHS, AND STEREOTYPES. When beliefs, and myths enter the law, human rights violation are 100% guaranteed.

The word “pedophilia” was invented in the early 20st century, after the puritans created the idea of women being sexless, devine creatures that dont need sex, because sex is bad, evil, dirty thing. They created this word to stigmatize innocent people. Over the years, the word was used as an excuse for dictatorship against group of people. The word was used as an excuse for murders in the name of Allah/God.

Don’t you realize that the only people who tweet “#SaveTheChildren” / “#SaveOurChildren”, are from evangelical groups? Everytie, when there is pedophilia scandal, the ONLY people who aggressively scream DEATH PENALTYYYYYYYYYYYY!!! on Twitter, are all religious?

They often use this:

“But whoso shall offend one of these little ones which believe in me, it were better for him that a millstone were hanged about his neck, and that he were drowned in the depth of the sea” (Matthew 18:6)”

This only fuels the stereotype of pedophilia, because there is “he”, but never “she”, which suports the lie that only males can be pedophiles.

Things such as xenophobial, homophobia, discrimination against disabled people, are caused be religion. Isn’t religion saying that being disabled mean you are punished by god or possessed by demons?

Isn’t religion allowing you to murder your kids, if they don’t listen to the religious dogma you listen to?

I not only support separation of church and state, and restricting religion, i also support criminalization of religion. Because religion is not rational pehomenon that leads to violation of all kinds of human rights. All religion can be defended only by logical fallacies and lies.

Religion is used as an excuse for violation of human rights, financial scams, and more. For more inforation, you ca visit my non-popular petition and see all proofs against religion and violation of human rights, and financial scams, etc…

You can watch these videos from the ex director of American Atheists.

Here he explain why THEISM IS NOT RATIONAL

And here: GOD OF THE GAPS which te is last reason for the existence of religion

Inform yourself. It’s never good idea to use religion as an excuse to justifie bad things. All bad laws are based on stereotypical religious beliefs. Before religion came into existence, these anti-human, restricting laws didn’t exist.

Check the statistics of human rights violations. And you will see that the more religious the country is, the more human rights violations there are. See Africa, Iran, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia… women killings, child killings, honor killings, tortures, etc…

If they dont know the correct definition, then they shouldn’t make any comments. Why would anyone comment topics he/she can’t understand?

Explain me what i have to show you.

I know about the MAP Support Club. It was suspended from twitter. Stigma surrounding MAPS is harmful, so DEstigmatization is needed.

I never said i support child abuse. I even use “IMPORTANT NOTE: I DON’T SUPPORT CHILD ABUSE” at the end of every post i make.

This is true.

IMPORTANT NOTE: I DON’T SUPPORT CHILD ABUSE!

Being pro-map and pro-contact is two different things. When you are pro-map, you are focused on the human rights of MAPS.

I don’t know why JustLurking said “NO ONE IN HERE IS PRO MAP”, as if being pro-map mean you support child abuse.

Im pro-map, but i don’t support child abuse.

IMPORTANT NOTE: I DON’T SUPPORT CHILD ABUSE!

I said that, because your definition of pro MAP, which is the word you describe yourself with, is exactly the same as the definition of pro contact MAP. And sorry, but no one in here is supporting anything that allows sexual interactions with minors. You, on the other hand, argue about things like Age of Consent, being a wrong concept, and arguments your criticism by claiming, that in the past it was lower and that in history it was non-existing, and it hasn’t resulted in any issues, implying that Age of Consent is wrong about its goal and that minors should have the right to have sexual intercourse with adults if they agree to it, or if they want to.

You redefine what you consider as child abuse to pretend that you are a pro MAP.

So no, no one in here is like you. No one in here actually promotes the ideas as yours. No one in here is pro MAP.

Also, your definition of pro MAP is flawed. What is the difference between just a MAP and a Pro MAP then? Because it implies that MAPs don’t care about human rights of MAPs. Also, what human rights are you talking about? Pedophiles have all human rights as regular people do. As long as they don’t have sexual relationships with minors or deal with child pornography, in which case they become criminals. But even non-pedophiles breaking these laws are getting the same penalty. No one is going to lock you in a prison for just being a pedophile. They might criticize you, shame you or send you threats, but it’s not a violation of your human rights, it’s them breaking the laws. So the only instance in which I could see “focus on human rights of MAPs” is if the human rights were defined as “the right to have sexual intercourse with minors” or “the right to use child pornography”. Which considering how often you play with definitions, wouldn’t be surprizing to me.

I’m not wrong, you are simply ridiculous. People who think that MAPs means “a person who wants to rape a child”, don’t just “believe” it’s a correct definition. They know that it’s a correct definition. Your counterargument is that “well, actually, people only believe they know the definition of milk”.

Belief is based on knowledge, they know informations they’ve got from various sources, and believe those informations are correct. I seriously don’t know why you keep arguing about my explanation about how other people see the world. What are you trying to proove? That people who are against MAPs actually know perfectly well that their knowledge about MAPs is incorrect? It’s an illogical assmuption.

Yes, the floor is made out of the floor. You are trying to explain exactly what I said in my point. People don’t spend their time reading scientific papers about pedophilia. Why would they waste their time on a topic that doesn’t concern them? You never spend 10 hours of reading about necrophilia either, you never had a need to do so, but you have some vague understanding, that necrophilia is an interest to corpses of people. But is that correct? Well, you will not question it, you will simply assume that it is, and you find it quite disgusting.

So imagine a person getting heated, after you expressed this opinion, over the fact that you didn’t spend many weeks getting knowledge about necrophilia before you expressed your disgust towards it. Because that is how you behave.

Pedophilia is a term. It depends on the definition it has in a situation where it’s used. This is why philosophers before any debate define the terms. The colloquial definition of pedophilia, and also a legal definition of pedophile, is that it’s a person who had sexual intercourse with someone under the age of 18 years old. The clinical definition of pedophilia, is that it’s a paraphilia, that is characterized by attraction to prepubecent children.

Both legal and clinical definitions are correct, and you can’t blame people to adapt the legal definition when most of their sources of information about pedophilia are criminal cases. Do you want to focus on real science? Then first gain that real knowledge about what you are talking about, instead of believing you already have all the correct knowledge. It’s unbeliveable how much hypocrisy you displayed in this post.

And once again, with your alternative human history timeline. The Puritans were English Protestants in the 16th and 17th centuries who sought to purify the Church of England of Roman Catholic practices. So already we have some inconsistency in your beliefs.

No one has created the idea of women being sexless, divine creatures that don’t need sex. Sex was demonized as a whole in the past because unrestricted it often leads to spread of many sexually transmittable diseased, many of which at some times in our history, has almost wiped out the human race. That is the reason why it’s so demonized, why sex has been limited by Christianity to the absolute minimum required for the furthering of the human race - a single partner, and first sexual intercourse after marriage binding you to that single partner.

And your theory, that the word pedophillia was designed as an excuse for dictatorship against pedophiles is simply irrational. DSM-5 approximates that pedophiles constitute 5% of our society. Do you seriously believe, that the only reason why pedophiles are called pedophiles, is because governments wanted to control 5% of the population? And where has pedophilia been used by religious people to kill others exactly? With all of them having a long history of sexually abusing children themselves? You are going into the levels of conspiracy theories akin to that of Q Anon followers.

But not only religious. Non-religious people also scream the death penalty when they hear about the rape of children. Almost all people do that. You seem to for some unfounded reason only target evangelical groups, in this blind belief that only they have some issue with pedophiles.

We live in a world where there is a moral panic about pedophilia. That is the only reason why there is so many fanatics abusing others under the disguise of fighting against pedophilia. But it has nothing to do with any group conspiracies, or with he historical past, or with the dictatorship, or any other concept that you used to construct these theories of yours. You see patterns where they are none in a strong desire to find yourself an enemy you can attack. Which paradoxically, is the exact same thing the people who you are referring do to you.

These things exist in non religious people as well as in other non-christian religions as well. They are a result of human tribalism, not religious attitudes.

Ah yes, the “I fight for freedom” but “I actually want to restrict other peoples freedom”. I can’t say I wasn’t expecting this from the very first moment I saw your petition. The funny thing is, you are exactly the same as the religious people you criticize. Religion is nothing more than a belief system. And you did create a belief system of your own, one that rationalizes doing evil acts, and that demonizes a group of people calling them unworthy of human rights. You are exactly the same as the religious people you hate.

Human abuse does exist and will exist regardless of the creations made by man. Your claim that religion has anything to do with the abuse it was used to perform, is exactly the same as claiming that child sex dolls will cause abuse of children. You are stripping the autonomy and accountability from people in order to attack an arbitrary concept you assume is the cause of the issue. I’m sorry, but this is not how humans work. If you go back in time to take away any religious items and words from a life of some religious zealot and go back, you won’t see a rational, logical and responsible adult. You will see a person who is still a zealot but simply towards different ideas. People believe in religions because they want to believe in something like a religion. It’s not the religion that makes them do bad things. If they do bad things, it’s on them.

Not all places in Africa are religious. And you also have China, who is atheistic and is one of the biggest criminals when it comes to human rights violations. There isn’t anything inherent to religion that causes such an effect.

Seriously, people who have such tendencies might gravitate towards some religion, because it appeals to their preexisting proclivities for authoritarian solutions. But it’s not the religions that cause such an effect, it’s them. And just because they use religion to rationalize them, doesn’t put the blame on the religion, because you have millions of other religious people who don’t behave in such a way.

You still miss the point, that those people simply don’t know that they don’t know the correct definitions. You expect impossible from them and prefer to have wishful thinking instead of adjusting your own actions to better communicate with such people.

This response doesn’t make any sense in the context of what I said. I stated, that your activity on this forum has proven, that you don’t follow the values you think you do-follow. So what exactly I have to explain to you to show to me? Maybe start actually using values of rationality, instead of rationalization. And understand that all of your opinions are dictated by emotional biases, and not any evidence, as proven by you multiple times in the redefinitions, inability and unwillingness to understand your opponents, manipulation of the historical context of the events in the past and using fallacies instead of admitting you made an error.

That wasn’t the core of my argument. I didn’t inform you about MAP Support Club to say to you it exists, I pointed it out to show to you that they don’t accept the rhetoric that you are using, and by this merit and the fact of Protasia having cooperation with them, to prove to you that no, you are not the person you claim to be, you manipulate definitions, pretend to oppose child abuse, but all of it is simply a lie you are keep repeating to others believing they will trust you, despite the contents of your opinion proving otherwise. And I can’t help but find the fact, that you completely missed my entire point, focused on the unimportant aspect of it, to make any response whatsoever, and avoid addressing what was conveyed, as a sign of your extremely manipulative tendencies that you have been displaying since you created your account over and over again, as extremely disturbing.

Im angry, because people are misusing words, which creates stigma. For example, on social media they (antis) will use “MAP” to describe “rapist”, “child fucker”, which states that MAPS are “child fuckers” and “rapists”, when this is not true. MAP simply mean minor-attracted person.

This is what fighting against. Im fighting against stigma. Stigma is what is causing the problems when it comes to minor-attracted people.

Stigma causes loss of jobs, friends, social support, etc…

MAP = minor-attracted person
ProMAP = map rights activist. This map rights activist can be MAP or not MAP. Im not MAP, but im pro-MAP

You can be pro-LGBT, without being lesbian, or gay, or bi, or trans. When you are “pro” (proponent), you simply support them without the need to be like them

ECHR says otherwise. ECHR refused to help PNVD. Members of PNVD were prosecuted and the doors of their houses were destroyed (by police) for no reason. I will repeat it again: “FOR NO REASON!”
Last year and half, the Spec Ops of the Netherlands targeted members of PNVD, not because there is evidence against them, but because they were candidates. This means the ruling party used anti-pedophilia stereotypes to target another party, without any evidence, for no reason.

Also, the fouder of PNVD has his own organization, but this organization was dissolved by the court, for no reason, without any evidence.

I have no idea for what “evidence” officials are looking for. But obviously they were trying (and stll are) to find “evidence”. But no one can explain what “evidence” they want to find.

Pedophiles don’t have equal rights. This is why we have discrimination against them.
This is why pedophiles can’t open themselves to the society.
This is why if you harm a pedophile, you will be prosecuted for crime, not for HATE criem.

There is differrent between crime and hate crime. Hate crimes have stronger charges.

Also, the governments allow “pedo-hunt”, and ignore the fact police i calling the “pedo-hunt” to stop.

Can you prove that his is the correct definition?

Believing and knowing are two completely different things Go check the definition on google.

People are against MAPS, because people believe in stereotypes and myths surrounding pedophilia. All these stereotypes are debunked.

If you want to hear concrete information, tell me which stereotype you want to see debunked, so i can show you information.

It’s not the same. You can’t understand that when people argue, they should not use stereotypes and myths as arguments. All stereotypes surroinding pedophilia are debunked. In fact, anti-pedophilia stereotypes are leading to further stigmatization.

Criminal cases are ISOLATED cases. You can’t make working statistic by using isolated cases.

In fact, most people who abuse children, are not pedophiles. Pedophiles don’t abuse children. According to statistics, in most cases the abuser is someone the child already knows, for example, someone from the family. So, the stereotype that a pedophile is someone that must be a male who is fat, ugly, hairy and lurks around schools to give surgar to kids, so kids can follow him, is no longer valid.

If you are a 50 years old male, and you rape 8 years old kid, this doesn’t make you a pedophile, but a rapist.

Rape is about control. Pedophiles don’t do that, according to official statistcs. LEARN THE MEANING OF THE WORDS AND STOP MISUSING THEM, because you are causing people to be stigmatized and to suffer!

See this: Firsthand

All pedophiles i know told me they don’t want to rape children. All cases of pedophiles i have checked, turned out that pedophiles DIDN’T have the intention to cause harm to someone.

Don’t say pedophiles are rapists, because they are not. This is myth. Go check some actual data.

If these 4 misconception are not enough for you, i will show you more.

I didn’t understand your statement about me being hypocritical. Give me more details about why do you think so.

No. Only women having sex was demonized. Men having sex was ok.

Politicians often use one problem, exaggerate it, and present themselves as solution to this problem, so they can boost their political campaigns.

Politicians will use even ONLY ONE CASE of something bad, to make it to look like it’s happening all over the world, so they can gain points for their political campaign.

Learn how politics work. It’s not about you, but about resources, power, etc…

“QAnon isn’t in favor of official narratives, therefore it is fake news and conspiracy theory.”
“QAnon is against what media & fact-checkers are telling me, therefore it isn’t true.”

By the way, why did you mention QAnon? Because you are trying to discredit what im saying. What im talking about has nothing to do with QAnon. Actually, the followers of QAnon would kill me for what im saying.

The death of pedophiles is MANDATED by the Bible. Other people just repeat what loud voices say. Loud voices in this case are the religious, so people will repeat what religious people are saying, ignoring the truth. I will repeat it again, you dont need to be religion is order to act on religious ideology.

In most cases hate crimes are motivated by religion and the idea that when you harm people, you are doing what God wants.

Im learning from leftists.

People can believe in what they want to believe, but they should NOT mess with the truth. If people want to deny truth, and to live in their Fantasy Land that is inconsistent with everything we observe in nature, that’s fine, as long as they DON’T make other people to accept the ideology of the Fantasy Land.

If you keep your faith in your head, then everything will be ok. Everything is ok as long as you dont psh your faith on onther people. Faith is all about logical fallacies.

Just because these places are not religious, it doesnt mean their ideologies are not based on religion. Killing wife if she cheats, for example, is totally a religious thing. Killing wife if she don’t want to be with you anymore, is totally religious thing. The ideology of Natural Morals is against such kind of murders. These murders ARE MOTIVATED BY RELIGIOUS IDEOLOGY, EVEN IF THE KILLER IS NOT RELIGIOUS. THE IDEA THAT YOU MUST KILL, IS COMING FROM RELIGIOUS IDEOLOGIES.

They are still wrong. When i explain what MAPs are, they ignore what i say and continue to say what they think MAP is.

I wont comment all you said, because i realized that you don’t know for what you are actually talking about.

IMPORTANT NOTE: I DON’T SUPPORT CHILD ABUSE!

So in the response to people misusing words, you decided, to misuse the words yourself. This is not a solution to any problem, it’s hypocisy.

Doesn’t change the fact, that you called yourself a Pro MAP, while in reality, you are Pro Contact MAP. So I used Pro MAP while referring to you, to inform you, that no one in here is Pro Contact.

You don’t fight for the destigmatization of MAPs, you reinforce the stigma MAPs have by proving with your own example, proving to antis why allowing people like you to discuss their ideas is dangerous. Because it leads to reinforcement of cognitive disruptions that rationalize sexual relationships with minors.

What you describing is an abuse of power, not discrimination based on law. This is why they were seaking “evidence”, they needed it to be able to do anything. Because laws don’t allow them to do anything to pedophiles for being pedophiles, unless they break the law.

The same situation can happen to any person. If you say something improper about the US in the US, the DHS can visit your home suspecting you of spreading anti-American Sentiment.

If someone notifies authorities that you are a terrorist, SWAT team can enter your possession.

This is an abuse of power, but to say that it’s discrimination is inaccurate. In all those instances, law enforcement abuses the powers that they have to investigate their suspicions. And by your words, they have found none.

So to say, that it’s proof that pedophiles don’t have human rights because they can be suspected of a sexual offence, is like saying that regular people have no human rights because they can be suspected of being a terrorist.

I don’t try to prove to you that this is the correct definition, I try to explain to you what is the reason why others have the attitude that they have, and why your constant offence to the fact that people don’t have the same exact knowledge as you is irrational.

Seriously, how old are you that you haven’t yet developed the theory of mind?

Nothing that you wrote in any way addresses the quote of mine you used. Yes, knowledge is different from belief. congratulations on discovering this simple fact, you must be proud of yourself.

This is exactly what my point was about, it’s different, but it’s still connected.

Also, I don’t need any “misinformation” debunked from you. You aren’t even capable to make simple responses without manipulating, misinterpreting and using fallacies. You certainly haven’t displayed any knowledge so far, only unfounded fantasies about the reality that you created to better suit your beliefs.

No one cares that there are myths and whenever they were debunked. What you need to understand is that it’s your duty to adjusts your way of speaking to the person you are talking to, if you really want to convince them of something and explain misinformation, and not behave like an arrogant snark that expects stupid people to simply know things. You should become the source of information, not expect people who aren’t knowledgeable about the topic to become such sources magically.

I do understand that they shouldn’t use stereotyp[es and myths as arguments. But I also understand that people aren’t omniscient. And it’s hypocritical coming from you when you use myths about “things being better back in the past”, and stereotypes about religious people “being all anti-sex and wanting dictatorship over people”.

Again, the floor is made out of the floor, you keep making statements that are oblivious to everyone, pretending you have some kind of super knowledge, and you make the case about something completely off-topic.

Once again, I was explaining to you how other people think. But you take my examples, take things out of context and then create a speech about a completely unrelated topic, that doesn’t address my response in any way, and call it a day, believing yourself to completely cover any doubts.

So far, you haven’t addressed even a single one of my arguments against you, not even one. You keep avoiding the main topic and expect me to become convinced that you are correct

You haven’t said anything I wouldn’t already know. Once again, what do you try to prove? That you completly lack ability to understand other people?

Said the person, who doesn’t know the proper definitions of words he is using, he purposefully misuses terms in the discussion, manipulates with the responses of the people who disagree with them to continue pretending his position is the correct one, constantly creates a strawman of his opponent and then has the audacity to claim that it’s them, that do all the tactics that he’s been using constantly throughout the entire discussion.

That is seriously rich. And you know what, the emotional appeal doesn’t work. Because at the end of the day, it’s you who with his own example causes people to be stigmatized. You with your child exploitation apologetics is the one that makes MAPs be considered child rapists. You are responsible for the very thing you accuse me of. Let that sink in.

If they are any similar to you, then, of course, they didn’t say that they want to rape children. They said to you that they want to have consensual sexual intercourse with children, but hey, because they have been repeating that they “don’t support child abuse” on every post, that must mean it’s not rape, right?

And it keeps baffling me that you assume, that I must be some “uneducated MAP hater”, who doesn’t know the information’s you try to educate me with, (which I do, not only all things you said are exactly the same things Protasia has wrote in their articles, but I actually were reading the papers the informations are from long before Protasia was even a thing) because it’s the assumption that is necessary for you to lie to yourself that my arguments carry no validity and that you can safely dismiss them.

Also, seeing all the manipulation you have used against me, the word of your mouth has absolutely no credibility. You didn’t argue in good faith from the very beginning, you displayed psychopathic traits during our discussion, and you keep playing with words to justify your twisted world view.

Instead of “keeping me educated” with the knowledge I already have, start actually responding to my arguments. Because you won’t convince me if the only thing you do is attacking a strawman of me.

And who has the males had sex with? With men? In times where homosexuality was a sin, you got stoned to death? Once again, your beliefs about how the past was looking like are ridiculous.

“Look at me, I’m so smart, I say things that he already knows about politics, so I must be right about the thing he was answering to, whatever that thing was”.

Sure, politicians use sensationalism to push for laws that wouldn’t be otherwise possible. But this wasn’t your initial argument. Your initial argument was that powers purposefully have been targeting pedophiles for authoritarian reasons.

So once again, you try to explain common knowledge in hopes of looking smart, as a means of avoiding addressing the counterarguments that I’ve made. I seriously don’t know what you consider yourself as, but not a single information that you have been using is anything new to me, and I doubt it would be anything new to anyone on this forum, considering Protasia has been basing their articles on the same data that you refer to.

Because, as I said before, you displayed a level of ridiculous conspiratorial thinking akin to the ideas created by QAnon followers. It’s clearly stated in the quote you cited. But you ignored it as a whole, noticed the word “QAnon” and decided to ask me a question that the quote you used response to. Once again…

It wasn’t an effort to discredit what you are saying (mainly because you don’t say anything of substance). It was an analogy to show you how ridiculous the theory you created sounds like, one that you should understand considering you are the polar opposite to Q Anon.

Okay, show me where in the bible it’s mandated exactly then because it’s the only piece of information that you shared, that is not known to me.

And how exactly does that debunk my claim that non-religious people also hate pedophiles?
I will answer it for you, it doesn’t. You just keep spewing your word salad in an effort to make any response whatsoever.

It doesn’t address my point, that human divisions are caused by our tribal tendencies, and not the religion itself. Non-religious people also tend to be racist or homophobic, which is enough to debunk your claim.

No, you don’t learn anything from anyone. You are simply a totalitarian hypocrite, prioritizing his own pleasures, freedoms and rights over the others, by generalizing an entire group of distinct people into a single category that is easy to hate. Just like many people generalizing all pedophiles as a child rapist, creating an easy target to let their sadistic urges on. You are no different, but sure, keep blaming others.

This quote applies to you perfectly. You keep living in a fantasy land where no child has ever been hurt by the sexual exploitation of adults, messing with the truth of the reality being, that most of such children upon growing up regret it and are negatively affected by such experiences, trying to make others accept your ideology of the fantasy land that you created.

Yes, especially with your faith, in the rightfulness of your own beliefs and opinions, to which you consistently were responding with logical fallacies, once you got challenged.

Now you are just making things up, what religious-based ideologies are there in non-religious places of Africa exactly? I doubt you have such knwoledge, seriously.

Yeah, especially performed by all those atheistic people, who have killed their partners, after they have learned that they cheated on them.

Oh, it doesn’t happen that often? Well, most likely, because we live in civilization, and people don’t kill their wives anymore. You want to make this about religion, but it’s just a common human morality that determies such actions, not the religion.

Ah yes, the “child sex doll will cause rape” type of argument. No, sorry, your fantasy land isn’t even close to reality. Ideologies can be used to rationalize evil acts (you are doing a pretty good job at it yourself), but whenever a person decided to do such an act, is a completely different thing. For example, Christianity assumes that women are males property. But if you ask an average Christian, if they think that women are their property, they will refuse and say no. Simply because most Christians, don’t really read into their religion, and adopt a vague idea of what they should believe in, instead of the actual doctrine.

You try to convince me very hard that religions are the source of all evil, which reminds me of religions efforts to demonize things that they didn’t like. Which only serves to prove, that you don’t need a religion to be a horrible human being, with you being a perfect example of that being the case, since your mentality is exactly that of a strawman of religious person that you created.

Doesn’t matter, if you want them not to be wrong, you have to adjust your own actions to change that fact, instead of complaining that they are wrong.

You won’t comment all that I have said, because you lost an argument a long time ago. You never had any position to the cognitive distortions that you created to begin with, and the only way you can justify leaving this conversation is by you pretending, that “you are just stupid”, with nothing that could actually make you believe that this is the case.

All of your answers try to avoid addressing my counterarguments, by creating the strawman of my position, to which you respond with offtopic, trying to bring the conversation away from the things I criticized, hoping you will not have to defend your initial ideas, and gradually crafting this idea that I simply must not be educated, so you can refuse the further discussion under the pretence of me being uneducated about the topic, which is simply not true, to avoid admitting that you were wrong in your beliefs, because all of your beliefs are a foundation that keeps your fragile ego in check, and allows you to feel good about your own desire to sexually exploit minors.

You claim to fight for the rights of MAPs and destigmatization of pedophlia, but to achieve that, you kept manipulating my words, twisting definitions, playing word games, avoiding addressing my arguments, using fallacies in response, insulting me and lying about your position of the topic, in an effort to make yourself look good and smart. While your arguments aren’t based in anything, other than your own emotional biases, are highly irrational and extremely disturbing since they showed you have a complete disregard for the wellbeing of children in your analysis, you rationalize sexual exploitation of minors as inherently not abusive, to manipulate with the claim that you don’t support child abuse, while you do, which is clear in your argument, that children should be forced to work and study 15 hours a day, just so some adults can have sex with them in a less unethical way. And with your behaviour, you showed that you don’t care about freedom, that you follow the concept of rules for thee but not for me, that you have other people in complete disregard since you pretend to fight for the destigmatization of pedophilia, but all your beliefs reinforce what antipedophiles think pedophiles are really like, you criticize the existing concepts, by cherry-picking instances of panicked zealots, and pretending that their irrational opinions are in any way connected to laws and ideas established long before they even were born, which is a manipulate effort to discredit the validity of those rules with avoiding to address the real reasons why they were established in the first place, you displayed a lot of psychopathic traits, disregard for laws, inability to distinguish the right from wrong, sadistic and aggressive tendencies, especially towards an imaginary group of people you deem unworthy of human rights, in pursuit of imaginary vendetta, and all of that with a huge display of hypocrisy in what you preach, what you accuse others of, and what you yourself display.

And yes, I know you will not read it, “because it’s too long”. You barely were reading the very quotes that you cited, even though they had only 10 words. I know it must be hard for you to read things you know are true, so I’m genuinely not surprised by your reaction to my posts.

Once again, your mission to destigmatize MAPs brought you the opposite effect. If a person like me, who was already quite positive about the position of pedophiles, and was open to provide them with the support that is necessary for their well being, in order to help them restain themselves from sexual relationships with minors, became convinced with your behaviour that maybe the stigma and opposition pedophiles have isn’t entirely undeserved, then I honestly doubt you will do anything positive in your mission with people who already hate pedophiles. If it wasn’t for examples of good MAPs like Dean, who actually have addressed the flaws of your arguments, instead of buying it up because it’s convenient for people like you to believe in such rationalizations, I would completely reverse my opinion of MAPs. I wouldn’t join the “antis”, since they are no better than you, in some cases, they are even worse, but you definitely are a stain on others identifying themselves with the acronym MAP