What is everyone's stance on Epstein?

[PorcelainLark]

Anyway, working with victims is doomed to fail. MAP attractions will be seen as a result of trauma. Which is not a good idea.

I disagree with this. I don't think MA is the result of trauma, and I don't think non-coercive statutory rape is necessarily harmful, however, denying sexual abuse occurs and pitting yourself against victims is a bad idea. Put yourself in the position of a person sexually abused by a priest or uncle, your community/family doesn't want to know and would prefer to sweep it under the rug a lot of the time, because it makes them uncomfortable. That makes victims want to expose "pedophiles" (being equivocal about MAPs and sexual predators); we MAPs want to be able to live openly too. I'd argue if we could live more openly, we'd be more accountable to the communities and families we belong to, so there would be less sexual abuse. We don't necessarily have to be enemies with victims.

[bnkywuv]

I'm not a fan of the trafficking at all, but the people who are freaking out over the cannibalism and such sounds like highly neurotic and mentally unstable people desperate to "protect" children. Extreme antis like this are clearly unwell and very likely highly dangerous to children and MAPs alike.