AoC is not the priority

[Fragment]

Age of consent laws are controversial, even within the MAP community. Many pro-incarceration (anti-c) MAPs agree that decade long prison terms are appropriate for sex with an underage person regardless of the circumstances, regardless of agreement, regardless of harmlessness. Given the life destroying nature of prison and sex offense registries, though, I believe it is the most important issue facing our community. Especially given there are many cases where the "victim"'s voice is ignored and they are harmed by the very system claiming to protect them.

That said, although it's the most important issue, it's also not a priority. Why? Because any argument for reform requires a lot of discussion, presenting of data and convincing of facts. And MAPs don't have a voice right now to be able to do that. We're not listened to. We're seen as deviant, with a vested interest in sex and nothing but sex. We will only ever be given a platform to speak on issues concerning us if we are respected as humans and acknowledged as a legitimate sexual minority.

I don't agree with the approach taken by anti-c activists in the 2010s. They implicitly accepted our role as "less" than human. They appeared as grovelling for acceptance, rather than proud of who they are. That activism did play a role, though. But now it's time for more high energy, proud MAP activism. Our focus still needs to be on civil liberties, dignity, visibility and acceptance. But in a way that rejects the social narratives about us. We shouldn't be bowing our heads and apologizing for who we are.

Once we are able to look society in the eye acknowledging ourselves for who we are, then we might be in a position to discuss legal reform, and be listened to. But for now, while it's important, and not something we should forget, it needs to come after other issues.

[BLueRibbon]

I think normalizing AMSC is crucial, even for anti-c types.

Many of our detractors believe that, without treatment, we will all eventually act on our feelings, and that we will cause harm by doing so, either through the use of PIM or by engaging in AMSC. While it is not correct that PIM always depict AMSC, and the argument that every instance of viewing AMSC contributes to the abuse of a child is incredibly illogical in itself, all arguments against PIM (except for religious nonsense) have absolutely no basis if we can successfully argue that AMSC is not inherently harmful. Of more importance, if AMSC were accepted as a potentially positive experience, much like AASC and MMSC, the argument that non-offenders are nothing better than ticking time bombs would be of no use either. In fact, the 'ticking time bomb' argument could only be used to support my argument that MAPs should not be pushed into dangerous behavior by unnecessarily harsh social and legal structures.

Every argument against non-contact MAPs is predicated on the belief that 'pro-contact' MAPs are fighting against: the idea that AMSC is harmful. And with their staunch position against AMSC, NOMAPs are now at a point where the inflexibility of their position is shooting themselves in the foot. The anti-contact lobby needs to adopt a more moderate position.

From the Pro-Reform essay.

[Fragment]

if AMSC were accepted as a potentially positive experience

Pretty big if. What are the things we need to do first in order to have those conversations? And to change people's minds in those conversations?

Having the most rational, moderate policy in the world does nothing if no-one listens to it. Before we start talking about youth sexuality we need people to listen to us. The NOMAP approach taken until now has had individuals listened to, but not MAPs as a movement. So we are still seen as "mentally ill people in need of treatment". No-one will listen to the opinions of the deranged on AMSC.

I am very fond of your reform proposals. But if only MAPs read them and listen to them, they are absolutely useless in terms of reform. Abolition and reform are both equally good if they're both ignored. Insular CL communities have achieved nothing in terms of reform over the last 2 decades despite arguing constantly about the right way to love boys/ girls. We need something more than that or in two decades we'll be having the exact same debates.

[PorcelainLark]

I think it's part of a broader problem, namely the spread of the ideal of retributive justice. The culture war has made this preoccupation with revenge worse. Until we can recover a humanistic outlook, where people care about human dignity for it's own sake, I think cruelty will still be considered socially acceptable. Polarization and extremism have been bad for MAPs, in my opinion.

[BLueRibbon]

if AMSC were accepted as a potentially positive experience

Pretty big if. What are the things we need to do first in order to have those conversations? And to change people's minds in those conversations?

Having the most rational, moderate policy in the world does nothing if no-one listens to it. Before we start talking about youth sexuality we need people to listen to us. The NOMAP approach taken until now has had individuals listened to, but not MAPs as a movement. So we are still seen as "mentally ill people in need of treatment". No-one will listen to the opinions of the deranged on AMSC.

I am very fond of your reform proposals. But if only MAPs read them and listen to them, they are absolutely useless in terms of reform. Abolition and reform are both equally good if they're both ignored. Insular CL communities have achieved nothing in terms of reform over the last 2 decades despite arguing constantly about the right way to love boys/ girls. We need something more than that or in two decades we'll be having the exact same debates.

There's no reason why we can't have people doing VirPed stuff, Pro-Reform, and pro-c all at the same time.