Prostasia promotes blacklisted group Priotab

Are you itching for cancellation that bad?

As you are all aware, this blacklisted group is guilty of crimes against humanity. They promote conversion therapy and conduct deeply immoral and ethical experiments on individuals who are coerced and otherwise cannot consent. They attempt to hook them to potentially addictive substance which may induce mania and cycles of suicidal depression.

In a short span of a few weeks, one individual already attempted suicide and another fled from the experiment for their life. Imagine if this horror flick was carried out for any longer. Truly disgusting.

Two countries. Poland and Ukraine have lready followed their lead in torturing innocent people. One for minor sex crimes which are not contact in nature.

By giving them further attention, Prostasia Foundation too is complicit in crimes against humanity. Block and report anyone you see promoting Priotab. Block and report Priotab for crimes against humanity and promotion of such. If someone neds support, point them to B4UAct, Prevention Project even, MSC, but not Priotab. They’re pure evil and need to be disbarred immediately.

Anything they do is obsessive in the extreme and they will stop at anothing to achieve their goals of “prevention” no matter the human cost, even for lesser crimes like looking at ilegal images, was looking at an image worth almost costing someone their life in that vile experiment? Imagine how that ccould have gone, they could have died! Do not trust any project they run. No matter how innocuous it may seem.

1 Like

Consider also reporting Christopher Rahm to the Swedish Authorities so that he can face justice.

If enough people mass-report Prostasia’s tweet, it should get their attention that associating with criminals against humanity and normalizing their conduct is NEVER okay. Delete the vile tweet and write a blog post with a formal apology for associating with criminals against humanity with the utmost humility for the crimes you have committed.

Not only this, but every single time one of their apologetics for Priotab is read, all the maps of the world are restigmatized and irreversibly harmed. Every single fucking time.

LoliShadow, if Prostasia is going to be “cancelled” then it’s more likely to be because of claims that we are too sympathetic towards MAPs, rather than the reverse. I’ve had to remind people a few times that we are not a MAP rights organization, we are a child protection organization. If there is going to be a MAP rights organization, it should be run by MAPs.

Anyway, I’ve responded to your broader point in this other thread here: Cancel Prevent It.

No, Jeremy Malcolm. We is clear is that you are clearly trying to play both sides, particularly to get funding for your organization. You are also not a real child protection organization, I will cover this shortly, however it is extremely rare you will cover a child protection initiative, and not simply talk about your Silicon Valley agenda.

We have never seen a dime from Silicon Valley, big tech companies have already chosen their side, and they aren’t too happy about us calling them and their partners out. If funding was really our priority, we would have chosen to side with groups that blame child abuse on sex traffickers, pornographers, and online pedophiles. Those groups are doing extremely well for themselves.

A new organization which has appeared out of nowhere competing against established groups? Why not leverage your status as a former Senior Analyst for the Eletronic Frontier Foundation and your membership in the Internet Governance Forum to get a group bootstrapped? Breaking into an area without credentials or a specific argument would be very difficult.

There is no other organization anything like Prostasia Foundation! There are no competing groups that have our approach and that include the stakeholders that we do. My initial approach was to do at least the advocacy side of this work through EFF, but it was not possible. EFF does not have any experts in CSA prevention and this gives them no credibility to talk about prevention-first solutions. The IGF’s work on child protection has been captured by sex-negative abolitionist groups (more on that in next month’s newsletter). You can be sure that we put a lot of thought into this before deciding to start up a new organization…

I have to point something out to you, as you have fundamentally missed a point.

No one has ever asked you to seriously push for destigmatization or make arguments to that effect. Arguing for it even has pushed Prostasia into disrepute and alienated supporters. I have serious doubts about whether it has made a difference at all, compared to random people arguing on Twitter, or mental health experts writing a letter. There is a big difference between saying something semi-publically on a forum and shouting into the open that destigmatization (nebulous term) needs to happen. Do you think a libertarian or someone who just wants drawings not to be banned cares?

No one has ever asked you to talk to controversial figures or about controversial treatments. It doesn’t make the slightest difference to the bulk of Prostasia’s supporters (they don’t want to read about these things at all because it is not relevant to them), and it outrages others. The main reason you have done so is at the behest of special interest groups within the foundation who wanted to get their viewpoints advanced. Guess what, had you asked more stakeholders, you wouldn’t have embarassed yourself.

Unfortunately, you have painted yourself into a corner, where your supporters are not actually the ones you wanted, but the ones you ended up getting. You fashioned yourself as a child protection agency, but you actually became the lolicon defense front. You also do not recognize the principle of restraint.

Once again, I personally think it is better to push for more punitive punishments, to lock someone up in a mental hospital until they’re mentally fit to enter society (if they’re actually insane and likely to go attack someone), or to execute them, than to pointlessly make people suffer to push a faux progressive agenda (and it won’t actually handle their problem of being insane). It is fine to say a serial child rapist + killer should be executed, although we have to recognize they may be killing them to stop them testifying against them. I also happen to be a proponent of euthanasia, which shouldn’t come as a surprise for people who have lost their four limbs and are effectively finished.

As for someone being uncomfortable for a bit until they get better (which is the real problem, rather than someone actually offending). Well, that’s life. They’re going to have to get used to their problems sooner or later and hiding them away (and replacing them with a new ones, at best) is only teaching them to avoid problems, rather than solving them. Good therapists even recognize this.

Vice media smeared a therapist who would rather take the road of solving a problem, rather than following the world of Hollywood therapy, which most often will make someone suffer and give them false hope. Good people get shat on by people who only care about more academic fame and a journalist who wants to publish a piece of clickbait. What this actually does it make the media outlet (and associated scientists) look out-of-touch to anyone who might want therapy and dissuade 95% of them from getting it as it clearly does not fit their needs (or concerns they actually have). Someone who had their parents force them into therapy was screaming and begging as if they would be killed prior to it.

What I have personally argued, and which is less relevant here (ignore it if you so wish it), is that violent crimes should not be treated the same as non-violent ones, direct treated the same as indirect, and to weigh the cost of locking someone up against not doing so, but this isn’t even necessarily relevant to you. We live in an absurd world where viewing images which if you argue harms someone (by virtue of it’s existence) does so at a far smaller proportion than someone directly molesting someone, but that carries the longer sentence.

It is disappointing prevention initiatives in schools or the community get little to no attention, because it makes the government look busy to pretend to be little girls online (at great expense to catch a tiny fraction of brain damaged criminals), or to rack up convictions for the sake of having more convictions. All in all, the priorities are fucked up. Society can visit what to do with lesser crimes, when it figures out what to do about the serious ones, and the vast majority of it rather than what appears on TCAP.

Priotab is advancing the science necessary to make the world safer for children. No one is making the argument that the trials are risk free. Some will be seriously harmed by this, it’s the price you pay for progress and it’s more than worth the cost. Some need to be sacrificed for the greater cause.

2/3ds have a conviction of CSAM you say? I’m not sure why that’s relevant. Unless you think they are getting their fines or whatever criminal sanction suspended on condition to take part in this study? Even if that were the case, they did so on their own accord. They consenting to the risk, and for two people it didn’t resolve the problem.

I’d rather give out medication proven to give maps better control over their urges than allow them to go out and commit a hands on offense. As far as I’m concerned, MAPs who have not committed a hands on offense are still human, but when they rape or molest children, they need to be put down or locked away indefinitely.