What the fuck? is this serious

WTF is a child protection organization defending PEDOS??? You’ve gotta be fucking kidding me WHAT THE FUCK

You should take the time to learn what the word “paedophile” actually means, and the people that term applies to.

Paedophile =/= child abuser
Paedophile =/= monster
Paedophile =/= predator
Paedophile =/= threat to children

Peadophile means someone with an unchosen, unchangeable attraction to children, nothing more.

I am a paedophile, and I am as strongly opposed to child sexual abuse as you are. I am a human being, I have thoughts and feelings, people who care about me, people I care about, and importantly I am entitled to all the same rights as you are, including privacy.

Prostasia defends my rights as a person with an attraction to children that I never got to choose, when other child protection organisations will happily throw me under the bus to appeal to the public. They defend my right to exist, because I am a human being.

Prostasia defends the rights of everyone. Destroying the privacy of one undesirable group opens the floodgates to destroying everyone’s privacy, including yours.

2 Likes

The point of the tweet is that using the epithet “pedophile” to refer to those that you want to harm is easy, and doesn’t require any proof. As a QAnon member, you know this very well: your peers use “pedophile” to smear all sorts of people that they don’t like, such as Democrats. As such, the word “pedophile” has become completely meaningless except as a smear, when used by groups like QAnon. We focus instead on preventing abuse, not on fighting people who are (mostly falsely) accused of being) “pedophiles” by outraged mobs. About 75% of child sexual abuse is committed by people who don’t have pedophilia, so your fixation on pedophilia is misplaced, and just an excuse for performative outrage against people you don’t like.

Read more here: https://prostasia.org/blog/the-truth-behind-qanon/

3 Likes

Some of our members are calling you out for banning them over rape advocacy against pedophilic predators. The funny thing is that we post our views that child rapists should themselves be raped in many other child charities and our posts are pretty much never removed.

There is something fishy about this charity than simply pedophile as a word being missued…

We will never apologize for not supporting rape. #sorrynotsorry

5 Likes

@terminus

I couldn’t have said it better myself.

3 Likes

Some of them are.

Almost every person on this planet thinks they are. The only people who don’t are probably child predators.

Some of them are.

Pedophiles absolutely can be a threat to children.

You say pedophiles are people who are attracted to children. That’s true. You also claim drawings, child dolls, etc. are not children. I completely agree with that.

So that means lolis and child dolls cannot possibly reduce child abuse, because pedophiles are sexually interested in children. If lolis and child dolls are not children, and they obviously aren’t, then pedophiles aren’t going to give a heck about them. How the heck do you expect sexualized things that aren’t children to satisfy the urges of people who are attracted to children?

You might as well say that giving cheeseburgers to pedophiles can reduce child abuse. Neither cheeseburgers nor child dolls are children, after all.

1 Like

Some non-paedophiles are, in fact around 3/4 of CSA is committed by non-paedophiles. There are bad people within every group. What’s your point?

Almost everyone on the planet has been led to believe that through constant misuse of the term. Most people have never been given another perspective.

See my first response

See my first response

Facepalms

Many adults who are attracted to adults like sex dolls, hentai, and other things which depict adults but are obviously not adults. Just because something is a simulation of a child, doesn’t mean someone attracted to children can’t enjoy it.

When you can’t have the real thing because it goes against your morals, simulations are pretty damn great.

Damn I thought this conversation couldn’t get any worse, now you’re comparing cheeseburgers to masturbatory aids designed to look like children.

Cheeseburgers are clearly much more harmful, obesity is a serious issue.

2 Likes

Paedophile =/= threat to children

I hate to be the barrier of bad news. But yes, you ARE a threat to children.

Paedophile =/= monster

As long as you don’t lay your hands on children, but that does not negate the absolute FACT that you are a danger to children.

I am a paedophile, and I am as strongly opposed to child sexual abuse as you are.

And you will take steps to keep yourself from acting I hope?

Prostasia defends the rights of everyone. Destroying the privacy of one undesirable group opens the floodgates to destroying everyone’s privacy, including yours.

I don’t see why treating pedos with suspicion will suddenly lead to other groups being repressed. CHILDREN. CANNOT. CONSENT. LGBTQI people can CONSENT with each other.

Pornophy and Sex Crimes in the Czech Republic

Pornography and Sex Crimes in Japan

2 Likes

Honestly, this is one of the most fucked up examples of a “charity” I have ever seen. I wish I could unsee this.

Pornophy and Sex Crimes in the Czech Republic

Conflation between correlation and causation.

Anybody can be a threat to children, and if statistics are to be believed, a child is more likely to be sexually assaulted by someone in their immediate or extended family who does not fit the diagnostic requirements for pedophilic disorder or pedophilic sexual orientation.

The DSM-5 delineates pedophilia into pedophilic disorder, which is related to child sexual abuse, and pedophilic sexual interest, which is more of a fetish or sexual interest in minors characterized by little to no risk of committing hands-on offenses.
(See my attached image)

Basically, dolls, virtual imagery, etc are harmless and have no risk of increasing or inciting abuse.

Just for the record: I’m not a pedophile, nor do I have a sexual interest in minors. I just believe in common sense policy and science and evidence-based approaches to actual issues. I don’t think using “but they’re pedophiles” is a valid excuse to weaken security technologies for us all.
Such tech cannot be applied retroactively for select groups of individuals, and, even if it were possible, it wouldn’t be a good thing for society as a whole.

1 Like

Anybody can be a threat to children, and if statistics are to be believed, a child is more likely to be sexually assaulted by someone in their immediate or extended family who does not fit the diagnostic requirements for pedophilic disorder or pedophilic sexual orientation.

Maybe those family members ARE THE PEDOPHILES

Basically, dolls, virtual imagery, etc are harmless and have no risk of increasing or inciting abuse.

Prove that it doesn’t. I want to see studies.

Maybe they are, maybe they aren’t. Studies have shown that one doesn’t need to be a pedophile to commit sexual acts against minors, as the two are not related.

It’s damn near impossible, if not difficult, to prove a negative via the scientific method, as such conclusions would have to be ruled out by establishing positives and how they fit with relevant criteria.

And I just linked two studies.
The likelihood for someone to commit a contact offense against a minor is governed by variables not related to the sexual interest itself, and have been observed to be related to or identical to those found in adult rapists.

1 Like

I would consider the person voicing violent revenge fantasies and who is part of a group making terrorist threats to be far more of a threat to children than me.

I don’t know what steps you think I need to take. I don’t know about you but I don’t have to take any measures to avoid sexually abusing people.

That’s nice. Not sure why you’re screaming that at me, I haven’t given you any indication that I believe otherwise.

2 Likes

No one is obligated to prove negatives. So unless you can prove that it does “beyond a reasonable doubt”, you can shove your petty insults back into your own rectum where it came from.

It is SICK that Prostasia exists. Where can I report them to?

Report us? For what? For doing the right thing and advocating for child sexual abuse prevention and personal freedom? It would be nice if you took a look at our literature and scientific evidence and data before jumping the gun this way.

Besides, isn’t it a little late in Australia to be posting on American websites?

1 Like

It’s 9:39 AM dipshit.

I am considering reporting them to the Australian Classification Board because this site is actively normalizing pedophilia by trying to legalize child sex abuse dolls and fictional cp. These ideas are incredibly dangerous and should be criminalized.

Not sure why you’re mentioning this here. You’re not going to listen to us anyway.

2 Likes