I'm exhausted and the replies are disappointing

[Cunny Defender]

I try to be active in the MAP space, but I'm not really getting anywhere. It feels like I'm fighting a battle by myself against the rest of the entire world. It's an impossible fight, and i have really tried and tried every single day. But if nobody else is going to step up soon, then I'll just have to give up

[RoosterDance]

I suggest you slow down. Sweeping social change doesn't happen overnight.

[PorcelainLark]

Well, if you pick fights with people you don't have to (what did nepis ever do to you?), and don't apologize when you get angry at people who you've misunderstood (not being familiar with Rind et al, and your recent reaction to BLueribbon), you will end up on your own. I recommend you don't make sweeping judgements of nepiophiles before you've even interacted with them, and you actually clarify what people mean before you dismiss it as "bullshit".

[Cunny Defender]

Well, if you pick fights with people you don't have to (what did nepis ever do to you?), and don't apologize when you get angry at people who you've misunderstood (not being familiar with Rind et al, and your recent reaction to BLueribbon), you will end up on your own. I recommend you don't make sweeping judgements of nepiophiles before you've even interacted with them, and you actually clarify what people mean before you dismiss it as "bullshit".

The one that needs clarifying is yourself; no wonder the MAP community is being sent into the dark ages, and i have every right to be uncomfortable with *coughing* nepos

[Not Forever]

and i have every right to be uncomfortable with *coughing* nepos

I don’t walk into a butcher shop if I feel uncomfortable seeing rabbit meat displayed on the counter, and if I do go in, I don’t spend the whole time pointing at it in disgust.

What I mean is that this is a MAP forum. The definition of MAP also includes ‘nepos’, and while no one can ever tell you not to feel uncomfortable about their presence, since you’ve decided to enter this forum, simply for the sake of civil coexistence, someone has every right to tell you to avoid keeping that disgusted look on your face while interacting with them.

For the sake of civil coexistence, you hold your nose and move on.

[Cunny Defender]

and i have every right to be uncomfortable with *coughing* nepos

I don’t walk into a butcher shop if I feel uncomfortable seeing rabbit meat displayed on the counter, and if I do go in, I don’t spend the whole time pointing at it in disgust.

What I mean is that this is a MAP forum. The definition of MAP also includes ‘nepos’, and while no one can ever tell you not to feel uncomfortable about their presence, since you’ve decided to enter this forum, simply for the sake of civil coexistence, someone has every right to tell you to avoid keeping that disgusted look on your face while interacting with them.

For the sake of civil coexistence, you hold your nose and move on.

Being attracted to babies is not valid; the MAP community will never be taken seriously in this way. Imagine a normie who has grown up in Denmark, where the age of consent is 15, and then they move to California, where it is 18, and this naturally confuses them, so they ask questions and inevitably come across the MAP forum, where they see people talking about and justifying their attractions to literal babies. "Are they the satanic rabies that suck baby penis?" they say to themselves, and soon enough, they are on Infowars

[PorcelainLark]

Being attracted to babies is not valid

People say the same thing about pedophiles, hebephiles, and ephebophiles. This is a community for MAPs, that includes nepiophiles and pedophiles.

...the MAP community will never be taken seriously in this way.

If the only thing you care about is changing the age of consent for your own interests, that's fine, but the scope of MAP rights is broader than how much you can realistically lower the age of consent. The mental health and freedom of expression of MAPs has nothing to do with whether "babies can consent".

...where they see people talking about and justifying their attractions to literal babies.

Which they are completely entitled to do. That's one of the main things which we're fighting for, MAPs being able to be honest about their desires without being assumed to be monsters.

[John_Doe]

and i have every right to be uncomfortable with *coughing* nepos

I don’t walk into a butcher shop if I feel uncomfortable seeing rabbit meat displayed on the counter, and if I do go in, I don’t spend the whole time pointing at it in disgust.

What I mean is that this is a MAP forum. The definition of MAP also includes ‘nepos’, and while no one can ever tell you not to feel uncomfortable about their presence, since you’ve decided to enter this forum, simply for the sake of civil coexistence, someone has every right to tell you to avoid keeping that disgusted look on your face while interacting with them.

For the sake of civil coexistence, you hold your nose and move on.

Being attracted to babies is not valid; the MAP community will never be taken seriously in this way. Imagine a normie who has grown up in Denmark, where the age of consent is 15, and then they move to California, where it is 18, and this naturally confuses them, so they ask questions and inevitably come across the MAP forum, where they see people talking about and justifying their attractions to literal babies. "Are they the satanic rabies that suck baby penis?" they say to themselves, and soon enough, they are on Infowars

I don't think there's anything necessarily inconsistent in drawing a line here or there depending on how exactly you justify sexual intimacy between young teens and adults or between, say, children 8 + and adults (and I think I've said this before, I think we do need to justify every stance we hold and every choice or attitude that we consider to be permissible, at least if we're critical of conflicting views and it's not just a 'personal preference' we hold as nihilists, which means referencing what would make something bad or immoral by comparison) but it's worth noting that the same can be said about age-gaps that do or eventually will exclude your interests. Some people who oppose middle-aged men dating women in their twenties might take my argument against their position more seriously if I condemned middle-aged men, or even 20+ men, dating young teens and some people who might be more open to considering the plausibility of adults being sexually intimate with teens might take me more seriously if I condemn adults being with 8-year-olds or show how the argument against adults being with 8-year-olds doesn't apply to adults being with teenagers.

If the line is rooted in an infant's inability to consent then that might make sense relative to your starting principles. The problem is that we have to make choices on behalf of infants precisely for that reason, so why is sex the one area in which we're now concerned with infants being able to properly consent (even small children, in practice, generally don't make an informed choice to eat birthday cake, they don't understand that the human digestive system isn't adapted to process carbohydrates without fiber or the long-term effects of that on their bodies and how this puts them at risk for various serious illnesses and medical conditions)? I think the answer more or less lies in the sex-negativity that is ultimately behind other age-gap taboos (if we're talking about the stigmatization of an attraction to infants itself, which could drive fantasies that wouldn't have any of the real-world negative consequences that might come with infant-adult sexual intimacy in practice, or opposing some kind of infant-adult sexual or erotic intimacy on principle. Infants already require certain contact with adults that could be erotic from the adult's perspective even if the infant is neutral about it, so the taboo seems to largely be about moderating privately felt sexual pleasure rather than the physical contact itself).

[Officerkrupke]

MAP is literally an umbrella term for “attracted to minors.” That includes kids as young as babies. Are you likewise insulted being lumped in with people who are attracted to 8 year olds as well?

Perhaps you merely consider yourself a hebephile/ephebophile instead of a MAP. A teen-lover so to speak.

[Cunny Defender]

MAP is literally an umbrella term for “attracted to minors.” That includes kids as young as babies. Are you likewise insulted being lumped in with people who are attracted to 8 year olds as well?

Perhaps you merely consider yourself a hebephile/ephebophile instead of a MAP. A teen-lover so to speak.

I do also like prepubescent girls, but we do need to put up some boundaries, and babies are just too far. I don't like how the term "predator" gets thrown around, but i would say that if you prey on babies with lust, you're most definitely the definition of what an actual predator is