Strategy by region

[Learning to undeny]

Multiple paths to a more sensible society with regards to youth sexuality and MAPs have been envisioned here. For simplicity, let's consider the following 3 types of path:

• Pro-c activism by MAPs and allies. This includes AoC reform as well as changes to CP laws. MAPs get visibility but that is not the main objective.
• Other forms of activism by MAPs and allies. Basically, other attempts to gain visibility and spread a more accurate view of MAPs without challenging the dominant narrative about AMSC. Fighting against the criminalization of the attraction, but not against the criniminalization of acts involving actual children.
• Activism by groups not directly related to MAPs. If a youth movement emerges challenging their general lack of freedoms, sooner or later they would, plausibly, add AoC reform to their objectives. An imminent, massive youth movement is the prerequisite for this otherwise ideal scenario. Groups other than young people and MAPs do not have a self-interest here, so their role would be secondary.
• Latency. Waiting with your arms crossed can be boring or exasperating. However, during a latency period like this there's a lot of work going on in the shadows. Community building, archiving, learning as much as possible and practising the skills that the impending movement will require.

It's wise to think about which path to choose because several paths may be in conflict with each other. For example, if it were a youth movement that paved the way to pro-c reforms, MAP visibility could actually be detrimental, at least in the early stages, given the negative image so many people have of MAPs. On the other hand, if a MAP rights movement without pro-c views were the only likely one, then pushing pro-c views too early might only make matters worse.

So, which is the right path? Well, I'm not saying there has to be a universally right path; perhaps different places require different strategies, as much as the world is globalised. Unfortunately, little attention has been paid to the differences between regions that should impact a choice of strategy.

This thread aims to foster the discussion of region-dependent strategies. Although I have little idea of how to group countries for this purpose, below is my best attempt at an overview, which hopefully others will improve. Keep in mind that I use the term "region" loosely, without implying geographical closeness.

• Anglo countries. These are the main drivers of anti-MAP prejudice in the world. While some countries might, perhaps, be less safe for MAPs, England is the winner when it comes to "culturally exporting" their prejudices. The US merits attention as a power in an imperialist mode, with a history of anti-MAP sentiment but ta the same time with some hebe or ephebophiles as leaders. Canada and Oceania would mostly fit here, but I'm not sure about India.
• Russia and other countries in Africa and the Middle East, especially Muslim ones, with their anti-LGBT culture, may not seem very welcoming. At the same time, they are likely to challenge Western cultural norms, including on certain forms of AMSC. See, for example, the thread on Somali men protesting against the rising of the AoC.
• Other European countries and Latin America. I believe those with more presence of first-wave activism tend to be worse off at present. MAPs may not be discussed that often, but without a balancing pro-MAP force the situation is bound to deteriorate.
• East and South-East Asia. This place includes many cultures, each with its own views on sexuality, and generally a bit more neutral towards MAPs, but there are a lot of complexities when looking at individual countries.

It's interesting to think about how each of these regions would evolve without any form of MAP activism. Unless some youth movement appeared, the situation seems unlikely to improve, in my opinion. But I don't know where such a youth movement could begin.

In anglo countries, any attempt at visibility will inevitably be associated with pro-c activism. That's why some anti-c try so hard to distance themselves from other MAPs, and yet they are silenced in the name of the "slippery slope". Maybe there is no better option than to bite the bullet and focus on pro-c activism... The only question is what to do different than in the past attempts...

In other parts of Europe, especially where MAPs have had little visibility so far, it could be easier to create a more accurate image of MAPs by an "identity" type of activism. Perhaps the "slippery slope" idea in the public would be less of a problem. Contact debate would inevitably come, but only once MAPs are known to the public in slightly more neutral terms. The strategy could also work in some Latin American and Asian countries, and would impact the conversation in anglo countries.

Muslim countries have been discussed before, too, in a thread where it was questioned whether Islam could be an ally for MAPs.

I'm very eager to hear your predictions on how things will naturally evolve in each region. Especially, what kind of strategy makes sense in each one.