Pro-Reform: Thoughts on 'The Push'

[BLueRibbon]

This article discusses a controversial pro-reform essay and concept titled The Push, introduced on YesMAP Wiki by BLueRibbon in May 2024.

https://www.map-union.org/perspectives/ ... n-the-push

[Fragment]

I'm glad I managed to help contribute to writing something again.

[RandomMAP123]

"Acting on illegal desires might, in the moment, feel like the most authentic way to live as a MAP. [...] it is rarely a decision that comes without lifelong regrets."

Are there statistics or other sources on which this statement is based? IIRC, there're some studies with more or less representative samples from Finland and Brazil suggesting that even in today's society such illegal relationships are mostly perceived as positive by teenagers and young adults who used to be in them back when they were below the age of consent not that long ago.

See e.g.

"Such was the Finnish Child Victim Survey published (in Finnish) in 2014, an enormous population-based sample of sixth and ninth grade schoolchildren (aged mainly 12 and 15) in Finland. [...] Starting with the boys, no fewer than 78% reacted positively at the time to their first “minor-older” sexual experience, a figure similar to that for boys sexually involved with peer-aged partners (77%). In retrospect, the rate of positive reactions to minor-older sex dropped somewhat to 69%, but so did the rate for boy-peer sex (67%)."

https://heretictoc.com/2022/02/21/stunn ... eat-champ/

and

"Ironically, scholars such as Scott de Orio, in his (2017) dissertation chapter The Crackdown on the Queer Subculture of Intergenerational Sex, have shown convincingly that the U.S. government mobilized expansive CP law to crack down on people like Thorstad because it was too difficult to catch and prove the guilt of persons in real-life who experienced positive and consensual intergenerational relationships. Conscious of the politics surrounding their love, younger partners too often refused to disavow their older counterpart, making it difficult for the criminal authorities to establish a prosecutable case."

http://wapercyfoundation.org/?page_id=1086

and

"This study assessed the prevalence of recalled childhood sexual experiences with an older partner among men who have sex with men (MSM) and/or male-to-female transgender persons recruited in Campinas, Brazil. [...] Of 575 participants (85% men and 15% transgender), 32% reported childhood sexual experiences with an older partner. Mean age at first experience was 9 years, partners being on average 19 years old, and mostly men. [...] Only 29% of the participants who had had such childhood sexual experiences considered it abuse; 57% reported liking, 29% being indifferent, and only 14% not liking the sexual experience at the time it happened. Transgender participants were significantly more likely to report such experiences and, compared with men, had less negative feelings about the experience at the time of the interview. [...] MSM and transgender people may experience childhood sexual experiences with older partners differently from other populations (e.g., heterosexuals), particularly in countries with different cultural norms concerning sexuality than those prevalent in Europe and the U.S."

https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC3600851/

If those relationships are usually remembered positively by the younger partner, then this seems to suggest they might also be remembered positively by the older partner. The fact that those relationships are remembered so often as positively also seems to suggest that most of those relationships weren't discovered by authorities and thus didn't cause any legal problems for the people involved. Which in turn would suggest a higher likelihood that the older partners remember such relationships as something positive as well, rather than having regrets about them.

Of course, even if the likelihood of such illegal relationships getting discovered is potentially quite small, that doesn't automatically imply that it'd be a good decision for a person to be in such a relationship. Even a relatively small risk of very severe negative consequences may after all lead a person to the conclusion that the risk isn't worth it. Or not. But that's something I assume the people themselves, knowing better than anyone else about their own individual circumstances, need to decide for themselves. It's not something MAP organizations or anyone else should decide for them I'd say.

In any case such illegal relationships exist even in current society and it'd probably not be helpful to portray them as more dangerous than they actually are. After all, if everyone believes such relationships are at a high risk of getting discovered, this may in the worst case become a self-fulfilling prophecy for some of the people involved, i.e. they get unreasonably nervous and start panicking so much that this then causes others in their lives to become suspicious. Or, alternatively, some MAPs in such relationships may become defeatist, turning themselves in since they feel it's only a matter of time until their relationship gets discovered anyways.

I think it's good for MAP organizations to be solidaric with people involved in such relationships. I'm not sure if saying that such relationships rarely come without lifelong regrets, as the quote above does, is helping with that. Obviously, encouraging the breaking of laws is illegal and would as far as I can see be unreasonable anyhow, since this seems to be something that highly depends on an individual's own situation. My own speculation is that for most MAPs its probably indeed a good idea to remain law-abiding, but that for the majority of young people and MAPs who make the decision to break age of consent laws (which is a relatively small number compared to the vast majority of MAPs who don't break these laws and are likely in a situation where doing so would be indeed quite risky) this decision seems to be one that turns out to be a good one (since the majority of them seems to remain undetected by authorities and are thus presumably happy in most cases despite the risk and secrecy).

This speculation is e.g. based on me vaguely remembering statistics that suggest most intergenerational relationships in current society happen within families. Which makes sense considering how family seems to be a place where such relationships can happen safer and more easily than in other social contexts. Which in turn would suggests that non-incestual intergenerational relationships may be at a higher risk of getting discovered.

I think it could be helpful if a MAP organization would collect, summarize, and analyze research and statistical data on this to help MAPs and people below the age of consent to gain a better understanding of the risks involved.

Perhaps there's some value in a blanket statement like "This is too dangerous, never start such a relationship" (which I'm not suggesting Mu has expressed anywhere, I'm just saying), but my feeling is it does more harm than good.

I think personally I'm more in favor of providing accurate information, stating (if such information is available): "This is what the statistics say on how often such relationships get discovered or remain undetected in which countries and why (e.g. secrecy causing too much psychological distress to the MAP or younger person, the older partner talking about it with the wrong person, the younger partner talking about it with the wrong person, parents discovering text messages, etc.). Here is how often discoveries lead to these or those negative consequences (e.g. the younger partner remembering the relationship negatively, the younger partner remembering the relationship positively but still facing a lot of problems due to society treating the older partner as evil and them as a victim, the older partner having regrets despite the younger person remembering the relationship positively, etc.). Here is what we know about illegal relationships discovered by law enforcement that were still remembered as positively by the younger person many years later (Was there e.g. a lot of communication between the partners about the risks, did how parents or peers reacted significantly influence the younger person's perception?)"

[PorcelainLark]

Sorry if I'm repeating myself too much here.

While, personally, I do believe social conditions can lead to people being more violent or breaking the law, I think the issue is this new kind of moralism that I see come up on social media that makes it hard to acknowledge this.

Here are a few examples: when mass shooters are discussed, even if subject to extreme bullying, among the top comments is often "I got bullied, and I didn't shoot a bunch of people," and with incels "I can't date but I don't hate or blame women." Any potential motivation or cause is dismissed this way. The classic example is a MAP attributing a sexual act to being depressed. "I'm depressed and I don't have sex with minors". As though depression wouldn't make you susceptible to risky or self-destructive vices that you were attracted to (gambling, drugs, alcohol).

Similarly, people completely ignore the concept of "perpetrator trauma." The line between morality and psychology is blurred, so that every criminal is a psychopath, and any expression of guilt is taken to be performative. Society has gotten much worse at accepting the concept of the banality of evil, people can't accept normal people can do evil things.

I think the issue comes from social media itself. Since you can edit how you appear to other, you can remove any flaw that a person can criticize about you. Therefore, whenever anybody does something terrible (or even just bad) there is a frenzy to show how much better you are than the person in the story. You can never empathize with flawed people.

So in addition to the general hatred towards MAPs, there's also this cultural shift toward refusing to accept people are usually flawed as well as strong support of retributive justice.

I don't know how you can solve this problem. It's bigger than people's response to MAPs. Can we have empathy for flawed people without being perceived as enabling bad behavior?

[Fragment]

"Acting on illegal desires might, in the moment, feel like the most authentic way to live as a MAP. [...] it is rarely a decision that comes without lifelong regrets."

Are there statistics or other sources on which this statement is based?

This article was more of a column than a research piece. Research is more likely to appear on the main site than in a perspectives article (though mileage may vary on that).

I don't think there are any statistics on how likely a MAP who is in an active sexual relationship is likely to have that relationship found out, resulting in decades in prison.

I doubt many MAPs in such relationships would be willing to out themselves as being in one unless they've already been caught. In fact we ban admissions of crimes that haven't already come before a court.

I don't think acting illegally with minors is the kind of thing we want to run a "risk analysis" on.

Being personally on the opposite side of a sexual relationship with a minor, I can say that even if there's only a 10% chance of being caught that the cost is way too high.

Even though I support legal reform, my relationship was pretty damn awesome before it had a sexual element. And introducing one damaged our relationship even before I was caught.

[Outis]

I do like this article and the article A Call for the Abolition of Apathy. I particularly like the idea of local groups meeting and working on local issues, supporting each other locally.

I also feel the draw of advocacy. Every day I wake up and see an ugly broken world where good people are treated terribly. Each day I see this and so I can't go for long without feeling I need to do something, even small changes to make it better.

So I am doing things, small things but things I know will yield some benefit. They won't change the world but they should make things a little better.

But I always want to do more. I know my strengths. If I can help with any projects then I will, you just have to ask and I'll say if it's something I can help with.