One Thing

[Bo_map]

I would do no age of consent and legalize incest.

[Strato]

If there is one change you would like to see in the world for MAPs, what would it be?

A universal declaration of human rights that guarantees: equal social inclusion, equal opportunities, equal protection under the law, and the right to freedom of expression, for minor-attracted adults and adult-attracted minors.

The declaration would, for example, outlaw the following:
• Diagnosis of paedosexuality as a mental illness.
• Discrimination or persecution of individuals on the basis of their paedosexuality.
• Vigilantism directed towards paedosexuals.
• Prosecution of online or public contact between a child and an adult.
• Prosecution of a consensual act between a child and any other person.
• Prosecution of any person found to have “created” or “distributed” child erotica.
• Prosecution of a public display of affection between an adult and child couple.
• Prosecution of a public display of nudity regarding an adult and child couple.
• Age of consent laws.

The declaration would, for example, promote the following:
• Inclusion and equality for paedosexuals within the diverse rainbow of human sexuality.
• Legal protection for paedosexuals against any form of discrimination or persecution.
• The right of paedosexuals to openly meet and discuss their sexuality without fear of retribution.
• The right of assembly for both child and adult.
• The enrichment of the child's knowledge and life experience courtesy of the adult.
• The right for a child to engage in a consensual act with any other individual.
• The right of any individual to create, possess, or transmit, child erotica.
• The right of an adult-child couple to engage in a public display of affection.
• The right of an adult-child couple to engage in a public display of nudity.

[Joanne7315]

I would do no age of consent and legalize incest.

The ultimate optimist LOL

[Red Rodent]

What would you propose as alternatives to incarceration?

I think that's part of a wider question. In my view, the use of incarceration is only justified (in a civilised, free society) where a person presents an unmanageable risk to others or themselves.

Aside from the civil rights and liberty issues, prison is at best ineffective (look up the recidivism rates for ex-prisoners versus those who receive community sentences for yourself) and arguably counter productive (jail is the finishing school for delinquents). It is also expensive. Prisons have to be built, administered, maintained and staffed. It varies from country to country but anywhere that aims to treat its offenders humanely will see costs per capita of the of the prison population manyfold higher that that for offenders given community sentences like probation, unpaid community work and other forms of supervision within the community (curfews, electronic tagging etc.)

Of course someone who forces or coerces a minor into sexual activity could be seen as a danger to others and a custodial sentence may well be justified. But if someone commits an offence by virtue only of their partner's age, then that, to me, can not justify incarceration. And, of course, if it is not a hands-on offence (viewing prohibited material, for example) then imprisonment is a gross over-reaction that serves only to express society's disgust at his (or her) fantasies.

[John_Doe]

-The de-stigmatization of pedophilia (the physical attraction to prepubescent children) and adult attraction to minors (and even much younger adults).

-The widespread rejection of the idea that child-adult sex is intrinsically bad, bad for any other reason than ultimately causing emotional harm.

-I'm probably just repeating myself, I could pair this with the first point, but the development of a culture that celebrates sexual pleasure qua happiness and sacrifices it for no other reason than suffering reduction or the promotion of a culture that emphasizes the idea that all beings deserve happiness.

-The legalization of animated/computer generated child pornography.

-The abolition of the age of consent but more so because I don't think that the harm caused by government coercion compensates for the possibly mostly sociogenic harm caused by consensual/not-unwanted-by-the-child child-adult sex, when it is harmful, than because I'm pro-contact in practice/the world as it actually is today. If this sounds wishy washy, I do think that child-adult sex should be discouraged in practice until we develop a society where there is no more of a stigma for children to internalize, although I'm not 100% certain that there would be no age-related reasons to discourage child-adult sexual/erotic intimacy even in my ideal society (I hope there wouldn't be because the default ideal would be allowing people to act on their attraction to or interest in one another). I am open to the possibility that using government coercion to discourage child-adult sex can be justified but if we are going to discourage it, with or without coercion, it should be in the understanding that child-adult sex is not intrinsically bad and we're only trying to avoid harm that isn't intrinsically implied by AMSC. When there's no reason to think that children will suffer as a result of sexual or erotic intimacy with an adult, there's no reason to discourage them from being intimate with adults in that way. This last point is the only one you have some practical chance of persuading me to re-consider (although I suppose there's some theoretical world where I would be justified in publicly rejecting the ideals that I hold in the privacy of my own head, the first 3 points, and I think even the 4th realistically, are implied by the all happiness is good/only suffering is inherently bad ethical standard so if I should work against them it would only be because I should flat-out lie to people about what I believe is good and bad), it is the only one that I don't really feel comfortable tying to the idea of 'MAP rights' or 'MAP liberation' or 'ending discrimination against MAPs' because someone's else's welfare (children's) is part of the equation.

-If an AOC is justified, punishment should at least be proportional. It's fine to consider how sex might contribute to greater psychological harm practically but no more fundamental sex exceptionalism. No more post-release sex offender registry for child molesters when murderers (or to be fair, people who have murdered but regret doing so now), at least on paper, get a second chance to not be judged or treated any differently than anyone else. Although this is a little vague (determining what counts), no more exaggerated prison sentences relative to other physical assault cases that we might presume cause comparable levels of long-term psychological harm.