They buy into the concept of “consent”. Newsflash, “consent” is just an arbritrary legal term that heavily varies from country to country, time period to time period, state to state. The age of consent has ranged from as low as 7 to as high as 21. Some modern day countries today dont even have an age of consent. “Consent” has absolutely no bearing on how willing a partcipant is or how safe their relationship is. A loving, safe, and mutually willing relationship between a child and an adult is automatically deemed less valid than a dangerous, toxic relationship between two adults or two children. It is a sex negative and pedophobic construction. You invent a magical and extremely vague property, you claim that any relationship you dont like lacks this magical and vague property, and then you label any relationship without this magical property to be a form of abuse/violence, even if there is absolutely no violence involved and both parties are willing partcipants. In a couple years, they could make homosexual and interacial relationships illegal, saying that men cant “consent” to other men, or that black people cant “consent” to white people. But ig that would be perfectly fine with you since your conception of moraility is based on arbritrary legal concepts and not actual inherent harm or violence. For the people who try to claim that consent is based on anything but the law, like “informed” consent or “enthuastic” consent, there are plenty of minors who have been informed, plenty of minors who are enthusastic, but their consent is still deemed invalid. Probably because it was never a valid concept in the first place, and the healthiness of relationships should be based on willingness and actual INHERENT harm, not arbritrary sociogenic or legal constructions. And if you argue that it is wrong because of the law, wouldnt the simple solution just be to abolish the law? Since we both acknowledge that it is the only real problem, it is not like you can get rid of pedophiles, AAM, or AMSC. Why does no one realize how fucking bullshit it is, that “csa” unlike any other form of actual abuse, has nothing to do with violence, but is solely based on the law? And yet somehow no one can draw the similarties between this and the way homosexuality or interacial relationships were also deemed “abusive” based on the law instead of any inherent violence.
Also, aoc reformists, people who want the aoc lowered to 12 or 14 or something. The ones who fully support the bs idea that there is a magical special number where any sexual pleasure or orgasm before that, no matter how willing, is abuisve and evil, and on midnight of your birthday, it magically becomes pleasurable and enjoyable. That sexual pleasure is an extra special, extra complicated, extra dangerous expeirence that needs to be regulated by the goverment, no matter how safe or pleasurable it was. That people deserve to be locked in prison over a handjob or a blowjob if it was given to a minor before this magical special number. No offense to people with this position, but I seriously disagree. Why are we supporting the myth of magical special numbers where anything before that is rape or abuse, despite a lack of violence or force, but on midnight of your birthday a a handjob goes from an “evil handjob” to a “good handjob”. Simple sex play, like blowjobs or handjobs or kissing or groping, are not inherently violent or abusive just because they happen before some magical number. An orgasm does not become an “evil orgasm” because it happens before some magical number. There is nothing, NOTHING inherently special or dangerous about sex compared to literally anything any kid of any age does.
Giving a willing participant sexual pleasure is not and SHOULD NOT be considered abusive just because you were, born before them?? What?? Thats ridiculous, that a pleasurable and willing act should be considered abusive, despite a lack of any violence, just because you were born before them, or because they are under some magical number. An orgasm is an orgasm, it does mot magically become “evil” under a certain age. And it is very, VERY suspicous that the new aoc people propose is right in the hebephillic or ephebophilic range. So what, hebephiles and ephebophiles get to fuck around with all the young girls they want while pedophiles still get their lives destroyed over loving relationships and mutally willing and pleasurable sexual contact? When you take a position like this, you are refusing to challenge antis on what makes sex, sex with an older partner, and youth sexuality, so espcially special, so espcially complicated, so espcially dangerous, that it even needa to be regulated outside of actual cases of force or violence? You are just agreeing with anti sex septionalism, but stretching it slightly so that you dont get wrapped up in it. What happens when you lower the age of consent to 12 or 14? The antis raise it, then they raise it again, then they raise it again, because you havent actually challegened the reason why it needs to exist in the first place(it doesnt, it is just to maintain the sexual status quo), or what makes sexual pleasure, compared to all other forms of bodily pleasure like hugs or play fighting, that certain age groups are deemed too “incompotent” or “delicate” to fully enjoy it, and that not only will they not enjoy it, oe that if they do, their enjoyment doesnt count, that people deserve to be punished for it. Ypu are refusing to challenge the anti myth that gets all MAPs persecuted in the first place, that sex is special, that willing orgasms are dangerous, that blowjobs and handjobs are complicated. You are still advocating for the bigoted and sex facist system that puts orgasms on a special pedestal, that gets people locked in prison, sometimes for decades or even indefinently, over blowjobs. That gets children labled as “victims” or “abuse survivors”, not because they were victims of violence or force, but because they got their dick sucked. Even of you support prison reform as well, the very fact that it would ever be morally ok to lock someone up in the first place, over sucking dick, is ridiculous. And not even forcefully or violently sucking dick, but sucking the dick of a willing partner. You are still supporting the anti myth that children under a magical number are asexual, who will be “ruined” by an orgasm. That an act can be abusive without violence. That simply being born before someone else is already an act of cruelty on its own. That even despite a lack of any negativity, hell, even if the you ger party was an active particpant who enjoyed it, it should still be shamed and punished, “because why not”? Either we ALL get liberated, or none of us get liberated, making special exceptions for the age group that you are into but still supporting the anti sex facist, puritan, MYTHS and HYSTERIA that got is into this mess in the first place is ridiculous.
Also, the people who acknowledge that AMSC isnt inherently bad, and only causes trauma in pedo hysteric, sex negative social context, but STILL blame pedos for the harm kids recieve, despite acknowleging that the harm is caused by societies negative reaction, not the orgasm. That is RIDICULOUS. Would you blame a gay man in a gay relarionship for the religous guilt society forces on his partner? Would you blame a black man in an interacial relationship for the racial guilt his society forces on their white partner? No? So why is magically differnece for AMSC?! So you openly acknowledge that the sex hysteria and pedophobia is what harms kids, not pedophiles sucking kiddie dick, and your response is…to play into the sex hysteria and pedophobia that harms kids in the first place?
Its like the book “the trauma myth”, where a researcher acknowledges that the “trauma” kids expiernce from AMSC is from the way society negatively percieves their relarionships, not the relationship itself. And after an ENTIRE BOOK of her proving this very point, she goes “but pedos still bad and society should still view their relationships negatively despite the fact that I just wrote an entire book on the fact that society are the only reasons these kids are harmed in the first place” but didnt-but didnt you just say?! So you are admitting that you WANT children to be traumatized, and that you would rather a child suffer than a pedo and a child be happy together? That maintaining pedophobia and sex hysteria is more important than the actual wellbeing of children?? That your disgust, and societys disgust, and hatred of pedophiles and pedophillia, is more important than the wellbeing of the children you claim to care about?!
Its like every century. Bigots need new fuel, if its not intergenerational relationships its homosexual ones. If its not homosexual relationships its intergenerational ones. No matter what, no one ever dares to challange why a sexual status quo needs to exist in the first place and why we cant let people love. I predict that after pedophillia gets normalized, interspecies relarionships will be the new hysteria. Unless I am wrong about pedophillia being normalized, and sex hysteria will grow so large and so unchallnged that the aoc will be 40 and making eye contact with an legally unconsenting partner will be considered a form of “sex abuse”
. Imagine how easy it would be if MAPs stood together and said “no, FUCK YOU, locking people up over handjobs or pictures on a screen is evil, and were fighting back”. Imagine how quickly the anti regime would collapse. But god forbid things are easy and simple