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.