The concept of 'non-offending pedophile' goes back to the 00s, when various people including myself were working hard to differentiate attraction from action. This work spawned the likes of VirPed (which was not so extreme in its earlier days) and the NOMAP movement. The ATC blog was a very early example of this concept, perhaps even the first.
However, I agree completely with FairBlueLove's concerns, and I have had similar thoughts when writing articles for Mu. But what is a better option?* 'MAPs who have engaged in criminalized behavior' is the most accurate description, but it's a hell of a mouthful.
* Not a rhetorical question. Any ideas?
Is it possible to be a Pro-Contact MAP and still be a non-offending MAP?
-
- Posts: 670
- Joined: Sat Jun 29, 2024 12:03 pm
Re: Is it possible to be a Pro-Contact MAP and still be a non-offending MAP?
Brian Ribbon, Mu Co-Founder and Strategist
A Call for the Abolition of Apathy
The Push
Pro-Reform
16/12
A Call for the Abolition of Apathy
The Push
Pro-Reform
16/12
-
- Posts: 105
- Joined: Mon Feb 17, 2025 3:08 pm
Re: Is it possible to be a Pro-Contact MAP and still be a non-offending MAP?
Acting MAP and No Acting MAP?BLueRibbon wrote: Thu Feb 27, 2025 1:17 am The concept of 'non-offending pedophile' goes back to the 00s, when various people including myself were working hard to differentiate attraction from action. This work spawned the likes of VirPed (which was not so extreme in its earlier days) and the NOMAP movement. The ATC blog was a very early example of this concept, perhaps even the first.
However, I agree completely with FairBlueLove's concerns, and I have had similar thoughts when writing articles for Mu. But what is a better option?* 'MAPs who have engaged in criminalized behavior' is the most accurate description, but it's a hell of a mouthful.
* Not a rhetorical question. Any ideas?
Re: Is it possible to be a Pro-Contact MAP and still be a non-offending MAP?
TransgressingBLueRibbon wrote: Thu Feb 27, 2025 1:17 am The concept of 'non-offending pedophile' goes back to the 00s, when various people including myself were working hard to differentiate attraction from action. This work spawned the likes of VirPed (which was not so extreme in its earlier days) and the NOMAP movement. The ATC blog was a very early example of this concept, perhaps even the first.
However, I agree completely with FairBlueLove's concerns, and I have had similar thoughts when writing articles for Mu. But what is a better option?* 'MAPs who have engaged in criminalized behavior' is the most accurate description, but it's a hell of a mouthful.
* Not a rhetorical question. Any ideas?
transgression
A violation of a law, principle, or duty. synonym: breach.
Rebelling
rebel
to refuse to obey rules or people in authority
Defying
defy
to refuse to obey a person, decision, law, situation, etc.
Emotional support Alice 
IG: @mothappreciationclub
.:: Korephile ::.
IG: @mothappreciationclub
.:: Korephile ::.
Re: Is it possible to be a Pro-Contact MAP and still be a non-offending MAP?
Being pro-contact does not mean doing something offensive, although antis believe that even such views are offensive, and this is how they justify censorship, which blocks any arguments against their beliefs.Grunko wrote: Tue Feb 25, 2025 10:44 pm I wanted to know if it is possible to be a Pro-contact MAP and still be a non-offending MAP at the same time. Because what if you are a non-offending MAP who has no harmful intentions but you are more pro-contact stance particularly towards intergenerational friendships/relationships between teenagers and adults of all ages. Is it true that all non-offending MAP’s are anti contact or is that a misconception. I know a lot of MAP groups like Virped.org, MAP-support club etc. are all Anti Contact, but are there any that support Pro-contact MAPs.
I am pro-contact, but I have never had any relationships with minors (except when I was 5 years old, it was in kindergarten). I prefer the phrase "Pro-choice" because it doesn't seem selfish and emphasizes that the minor's decision and wishes are more important.
Men hate each other because they fear each other. They fear each other because they don’t know each other, and they don’t know each other because they don’t communicate with each other.
Martin Luther King, Jr.
Martin Luther King, Jr.
Re: Is it possible to be a Pro-Contact MAP and still be a non-offending MAP?
Attraction is not action. But action is not identity.
The problem with any "~ing MAP" is that it automatically makes the action into an attribute.
I don't know if there's an easy way around that, though. "Who" clauses are inevitably a mouthful.
On Sabbatical
My interview with Little Nicky:
Part 1: https://fstube.net/w/4bmc3B97iHsUA8rgyUv21S
Part 2: https://fstube.net/w/tTzRE29yrrA3xqXUaFuV9G
My interview with Little Nicky:
Part 1: https://fstube.net/w/4bmc3B97iHsUA8rgyUv21S
Part 2: https://fstube.net/w/tTzRE29yrrA3xqXUaFuV9G
- FairBlueLove
- Posts: 147
- Joined: Thu Jul 25, 2024 5:38 pm
Re: Is it possible to be a Pro-Contact MAP and still be a non-offending MAP?
This seems the most neutral and simple option in alternative to "offending". Also Julia's proposals make sense.Lightie Twinkle wrote: Thu Feb 27, 2025 1:35 amActing MAP and No Acting MAP?BLueRibbon wrote: Thu Feb 27, 2025 1:17 am The concept of 'non-offending pedophile' goes back to the 00s, when various people including myself were working hard to differentiate attraction from action. This work spawned the likes of VirPed (which was not so extreme in its earlier days) and the NOMAP movement. The ATC blog was a very early example of this concept, perhaps even the first.
However, I agree completely with FairBlueLove's concerns, and I have had similar thoughts when writing articles for Mu. But what is a better option?* 'MAPs who have engaged in criminalized behavior' is the most accurate description, but it's a hell of a mouthful.
* Not a rhetorical question. Any ideas?
I also agree with Fragment. The gerundive form itself is problematic. What if somebody only acted once in the past and will never do so in the future? Calling this person an "offending/acting MAP" is loaded with the biased assumption that this person is still acting and will do so in the future.Fragment wrote: Thu Feb 27, 2025 4:46 amAttraction is not action. But action is not identity.
The problem with any "~ing MAP" is that it automatically makes the action into an attribute.
I don't know if there's an easy way around that, though. "Who" clauses are inevitably a mouthful.
When society judges without understanding, it silences hearts that yearn for connection.
Re: Is it possible to be a Pro-Contact MAP and still be a non-offending MAP?
I think “MAPs with a record” works quite well. It’s simple.
It also recgonizes that some MAPs might be “offending but not caught” so they are still “MAPs without a record.”
It also takes the focus off what MAPs do and puts the focus on what the SYSTEM does. Which is where it should be.
“NOMAP” is still a fundamentally “defensive” position because you’re saying what you AREN’T, not what you ARE.
It also recgonizes that some MAPs might be “offending but not caught” so they are still “MAPs without a record.”
It also takes the focus off what MAPs do and puts the focus on what the SYSTEM does. Which is where it should be.
“NOMAP” is still a fundamentally “defensive” position because you’re saying what you AREN’T, not what you ARE.
On Sabbatical
My interview with Little Nicky:
Part 1: https://fstube.net/w/4bmc3B97iHsUA8rgyUv21S
Part 2: https://fstube.net/w/tTzRE29yrrA3xqXUaFuV9G
My interview with Little Nicky:
Part 1: https://fstube.net/w/4bmc3B97iHsUA8rgyUv21S
Part 2: https://fstube.net/w/tTzRE29yrrA3xqXUaFuV9G
Re: Is it possible to be a Pro-Contact MAP and still be a non-offending MAP?
NOMAP should be thrown in the trash.Fragment wrote: Thu Feb 27, 2025 9:26 am “NOMAP” is still a fundamentally “defensive” position because you’re saying what you AREN’T, not what you ARE.
If I'm pro-contact but don't act on it, it doesn't mean I'm being offensive. But "Pro-contact" sounds selfish; there is no expression of reciprocity in this term. Therefore, it would be much better to be "Pro-choice". This shows that the decision is made by the minor himself, because he has the right to choose, which is respected and accepted by the MAP. But current laws do NOT give minors the right to choose, and MAP advocate for the provision of these rights, not in order to satisfy their lust, as the antis believe, but because we respect minors and THEIR CHOICE.
I liked the proposed options "acting MAP" and "no acting MAP"
Last edited by Harlan on Fri Feb 28, 2025 9:25 am, edited 2 times in total.
Men hate each other because they fear each other. They fear each other because they don’t know each other, and they don’t know each other because they don’t communicate with each other.
Martin Luther King, Jr.
Martin Luther King, Jr.
Re: Is it possible to be a Pro-Contact MAP and still be a non-offending MAP?
I think what may need to be emphasised is “being attracted to someone is not the same as abusing them.”
I thought Non-offending MAP’s is meant to make it clear that MAP’s are good people with no harmful intentions and respects laws (even if they don’t agree or find them unreasonable)
I thought Non-offending MAP’s is meant to make it clear that MAP’s are good people with no harmful intentions and respects laws (even if they don’t agree or find them unreasonable)
-
- Posts: 105
- Joined: Mon Feb 17, 2025 3:08 pm
Re: Is it possible to be a Pro-Contact MAP and still be a non-offending MAP?
Right. I think the term "non-offender" for them sound like MAPs are bloody monsters that at the time aren't yet causing harm but could at any moment. I know some MAPS do think they were born the wrong way and their attractions are wrong but they don't want to offend.Grunko wrote: Fri Feb 28, 2025 8:56 am I think what may need to be emphasised is “being attracted to someone is not the same as abusing them.”
I thought Non-offending MAP’s is meant to make it clear that MAP’s are good people with no harmful intentions and respects laws (even if they don’t agree or find them unreasonable)
But for someone who believes that being different doesn't mean wrong, and doesn't want to act or wants to act but still don't want to do things the wrong way. The term of doing and not doing sounds better than offend and not offend.
Last edited by Lightie Twinkle on Fri Feb 28, 2025 9:42 pm, edited 2 times in total.