Should people meet in person more?

[Jim Burton]

NAMBLA began as a pederast wing within the gay movement, and traces its roots to a group of gay MAPs who were being targeted by the authorities within the Boston Metro area. In the criminological language, you could say the reasons for NAMBLA's existence owed more to "situational" factors.

As time went on, the organisation gained recognition on a national level, and started to swell it's membership on the basis of pedophile males - a quite different demographic. A criminologist would refer to them as fixated, rather than situationally criminalized. This was at the same time the gay movement hit a "fork in the road"; "acceptable" gays were forced to wash their hands of the "chicken hawks", and thus the less acceptable homosexuals were seen as no better than "pedophiles".

As the bulletin became more pedophile-catering (something NAMBLA's founders were not too happy about), so too did the statements of the organisation w/respect to youth rights. While early copies had emphasized youth liberation philosophy, applying it to adolescent boys and adult men, by the 1990s, NAMBLA's strained justifications for sexual contact between men and prepubescent boys were looking more and more disingenuous, as the org faded to insignificance.

[hugs]

There appears to be a number of distinct, actionable ideas floating around in this thread:

- A "MAP Clubhouse:" Similar to the gay bars of the pre-stonewall era. A private club that serves local maps and aams by providing a safe-space where they can talk, play, and organize. Although nothing at the club itself would be overtly illegal, the interaction between maps and aams could lead to police intervention. The private nature of the club could keep police unaware for a time, but the possibility nonetheless gives this option a medium risk rating.

- A Casual Support Group: Surely the prerequisite to the other ideas, the foundation on which they will have to be built. This is a simple gathering of local maps that hangs out regularly by going to the bar, going bowling or to the movies, or wherever else a group of maps might want to go. As a great way to meet maps locally without the fear of police involvement, this one gets a low risk rating.

- A Formal Support Group/Organization: An organization similar to B4U-ACT that offers in-person seminars to connect maps with each other and, perhaps, to local mental health and legal professionals. Unlike the previous ideas which only serve the map and aam communities, this one has limited involvement with members of the public. B4U-ACT has been very successful in facilitating a compassionate perspective towards maps among researchers. More, similar groups that serve their local area could never be a bad thing. B4U-ACT has never had any serious issues with public backlash or police involvement, so this gets a low risk rating.

- A MAP Activist Organization: I think we all agree that this option ought to be avoided for now. We all know what became of NAMBLA and PIE. With that said, there is certainly a lot that can be learned from their failures. How might a modern map activist organization take these teachings into account? What might that look like, I wonder? Either way, such a group would inevitably come into direct conflict with police and an angry populace, so this gets a high risk rating.

This has been a very productive discussion thus far. Hopefully we can keep adding to this list. I wonder if we might even see some of these groups popping up in cities around the world in the coming years. One can only dream. What I can say for certain though is that we ought to start forming our own casual, local support groups, and we should encourage other maps to do the same. This seems like the best way for us to organize.

[Outis]

It's a good idea to form a list with a risk factor since some of these do feel practical.

[Lennon72]

- A Casual Support Group: Surely the prerequisite to the other ideas, the foundation on which they will have to be built. This is a simple gathering of local maps that hangs out regularly by going to the bar, going bowling or to the movies, or wherever else a group of maps might want to go. As a great way to meet maps locally without the fear of police involvement, this one gets a low risk rating.

- A Formal Support Group/Organization: An organization similar to B4U-ACT that offers in-person seminars to connect maps with each other and, perhaps, to local mental health and legal professionals. Unlike the previous ideas which only serve the map and aam communities, this one has limited involvement with members of the public. B4U-ACT has been very successful in facilitating a compassionate perspective towards maps among researchers. More, similar groups that serve their local area could never be a bad thing. B4U-ACT has never had any serious issues with public backlash or police involvement, so this gets a low risk rating.

I think the two ideas quoted above is probably the best option as things currently stand.

[Concerned Coffee Mug]

My point was, we were once a single community thanks to the pioneering work of Karl Ulrichs with regard to sexual liberation, sexology, and ‘third sex’ theory which encompassed paederasts and paedophiles.

I'm not so sure about this. What little I've read about Karl Ulrichs implies he distinguished teleiophiles and pedophiles, and never really intended to include us in any of his sexological considerations. In any event, pedophiles in the LGBT movement had always been controversial. We were not universally accepted either in Ulrich's day, nor were we universally embraced in the 80s and 90s. We shouldn't pretend that we were somehow regular, respected members of the LGBT movement; our inclusion was always contested.

Each one of ‘us’ is not obligated to risk anything for others either. And therein lies the problem.

I agree. As you say, we need to come together and do what is best for our community, not just for ourselves. The absence of any community is a huge pitfall on our end.

[Strato]

I only met another MAP in person twice. It was the same guy and we met through a soacial media site called Experience Project. This gives me a bit if an idea but I do not know that it would work. I suppose a we could all set up a website for MAPS in our immediate area but it is pretty much hit or miss. The town that I live in isn't exactly large so I would probably have a more difficult tine with it then most.

Experience Project, you too? My 8 March post on this thread refers.

[Strato]

My point was, we were once a single community thanks to the pioneering work of Karl Ulrichs with regard to sexual liberation, sexology, and ‘third sex’ theory which encompassed paederasts and paedophiles.

I'm not so sure about this. What little I've read about Karl Ulrichs implies he distinguished teleiophiles and pedophiles, and never really intended to include us in any of his sexological considerations. In any event, pedophiles in the LGBT movement had always been controversial. We were not universally accepted either in Ulrich's day, nor were we universally embraced in the 80s and 90s. We shouldn't pretend that we were somehow regular, respected members of the LGBT movement; our inclusion was always contested.

Hubert Kennedy’s research on Karl Ulrichs’ life suggests Ulrichs’ "third sex" theory encompassed paederasts and paedophiles. Kennedy mentions that Hirschfeld subsequently elaborated on Ulrich’s theory to exclude paederasts and paedophiles. This omission appears to have been a political strategy involving the age of consent in Hirschfeld's hope of securing greater tolerance for 'androphile homosexuals'.

“We were not universally accepted either in Ulrich's day …” Nor were homosexuals, androphile or otherwise.

Ulrichs' quotes:
‘The Urning, too, is a person. … His sexual orientation is a right established by nature. Legislators have no right to veto nature … no right to torture living creatures who are subject to those drives nature gave them.’
‘The Urning … has civil rights; and according to these rights, the state has certain duties to fulfill as well.'

[Lennon72]

I only met another MAP in person twice. It was the same guy and we met through a soacial media site called Experience Project. This gives me a bit if an idea but I do not know that it would work. I suppose a we could all set up a website for MAPS in our immediate area but it is pretty much hit or miss. The town that I live in isn't exactly large so I would probably have a more difficult tine with it then most.

Experience Project, you too? My 8 March post on this thread refers.

I wonder if we had met irl. I did meet another guy form there and he had been in Thailand and you have been to Thailand. Could that have been you?

[Strato]

I only met another MAP in person twice. It was the same guy and we met through a soacial media site called Experience Project. This gives me a bit if an idea but I do not know that it would work. I suppose a we could all set up a website for MAPS in our immediate area but it is pretty much hit or miss. The town that I live in isn't exactly large so I would probably have a more difficult tine with it then most.

Experience Project, you too? My 8 March post on this thread refers.

I wonder if we had met irl. I did meet another guy form there and he had been in Thailand and you have been to Thailand. Could that have been you?

I am aware of this board's stringent Mu membership intra contact rule number 5. Having said that, yes, I am that very same person. I hope you are doing OK and that life is treating you well. Great to be in touch again after all this time, even though it is through Mu's rather restrictive filter.

[Jim Burton]

As per the rules, this isn't a problem re. established and trusted users, or users who have previously met. The problem is new accounts being set up to arrange off-site contact for purposes that might bring our forum and host into disrepute or endanger naive members.