MAP Forum

InfinityChild wrote: Sat Apr 12, 2025 6:56 am
That's fair, tho I think you would agree that the consent should be more enthusiastic than what it seems like one of ur cases implies (not that I'm saying you are a bad face for the movement).

I think it would’ve been legal with an adult. Maybe not under 16/12 as we propose. That, in some ways, makes it more honest, I think. I’m not trying to excuse what I did, I’m trying to find a better way so grey zones like that don’t happen as often.

Fragment wrote: Sat Apr 12, 2025 7:05 am

InfinityChild wrote: Sat Apr 12, 2025 6:56 am
That's fair, tho I think you would agree that the consent should be more enthusiastic than what it seems like one of ur cases implies (not that I'm saying you are a bad face for the movement).

I think it would’ve been legal with an adult. Maybe not under 16/12 as we propose. That, in some ways, makes it more honest, I think. I’m not trying to excuse what I did, I’m trying to find a better way so grey zones like that don’t happen as often.

Makes sense <3

I'm listening to this now. But hey Fragment. I'm curious. You mentioned to me that you had 2 other interviews that didn't go so well. Would you be okay telling us more about them?

RoosterDance wrote: Sat Apr 12, 2025 11:04 am You mentioned to me that you had 2 other interviews that didn't go so well. Would you be okay telling us more about them?

I did? The only other interviews I've completed so far are with Little Nicky and they went fine since he's a BL. I had a period where I was supposed to do some more interviews with him but couldn't due to my meds.

This was the first interview I've done with a non-MAP, though. It was definitely a "thrown in the deep end" kind of experience.

Did he reach out to you or you reach out to him for this interview?

gingedu wrote: Sat Apr 12, 2025 4:13 pm Did he reach out to you or you reach out to him for this interview?

I contacted him. He almost didn't go through with it because he was worried what it'd look like platforming me when he's soon to release his documentary.

That's why he had his conclusion worked out, though. So he could tie the narrative to his doc. I told him he could do that.

I'm sorry it was rough, I hope you're alright.

Anyway, I think it went about as well as it could have gone, given the kind of person Max is and the kind of person you are. What he said towards the end was cruel to you, in my opinion.

I think the point about recency bias was good. Also, I feel it's poisoning the well saying that it matters whether MAPtivism is motivated by self-interest.

I disagree with his view about rape, I do think there is moral panic about rape that needs to be dealt with.

I would like to see someone drill down into Max's claim that people aren't panicked enough about CSA. However I expect he would frame that as putting self-interest ahead of the well-being of youth. Maybe as a style of argument, pro-contact people should stop arguing based on the idea that a more liberal society would reduce CSA. Even if it was true, I agree it's doesn't really work rhetorically from a non-MAP perspective.

He was a compellingly challenging interviewer, even though my sympathy was you. In a way he's kind of the "final boss" of antis, because his form of anti ideology avoids all the easier challenges (e.g. preventing MAPs from seeking help, thought crimes). I guess he'll become the white whale for some of us.

If we mostly agree that Max is a serious challenge, then when the documentary comes out, all of us should brainstorm an in-depth critique of it. Coming up with an effective strategy is a good idea.

PorcelainLark wrote: Sat Apr 12, 2025 6:28 pm He was a compellingly challenging interviewer, even though my sympathy was you. In a way he's kind of the "final boss" of antis, because his form of anti ideology avoids all the easier challenges (e.g. preventing MAPs from seeking help, thought crimes). I guess he'll become the white whale for some of us.

It was definitely an experience that will only make me stronger. He did ask some good questions. He’s probably thought more about pedophilia than most antis. And tried to work out what motivates our feelings and actions. What makes him different to us. I think the truth that we’re not different scares him, which is why he needed the story about being attracted to non-consent.

Is it bad to say I'm a little scared to listen to it? I haven't offended myself or gotten in trouble with the law, but I feel it second-hand as if it was me and it's rather difficult.

I still haven't had the time to listen to it, but...

Fragment wrote: Sat Apr 12, 2025 11:42 pm I think the truth that we’re not different scares him, which is why he needed the story about being attracted to non-consent.

Being aroused by non-consent is essentially a fetish, not a sexual orientation or anything of the like. I do have that fetish. Being attracted to minors has nothing to do with it. My fetish for non-consent can be satisfied just as much with an adult as with (hypothetically) a minor, and by experience, my sexuality with adults is way more fetishistic than with minors because I make use of fetishes to compensate for the lower level of arousal I feel.

For everyone I've met who had it, myself included, the fetish for non-consent isn't about seeking ambiguity and grey areas. The kind of legal, symbolic, murky "non-consent" of adolescents doesn't satisfy a biastophile. The biastophile fetishizes unwillingness as traditionally understood, involving violent resistance which is then overcome by force.

I guess one could hypothesize the existence of a different sort of fetish altogether for that other sort of ambiguous "non-consent", but I definitely wouldn't have that one. In fact, that kind of murkiness turns me off. I need an extremely clear "yes", and long discussions to ascertain sexual compatibility, before proceeding with a partner. And I'd only engage in consensual non-consent with a partner I've been with for a while.

Fragment, something I think might give people the impression that you have that other hypothetical kind of non-consent fetish is that I get the impression you fetishize spontaneity in sex. Am I wrong?