MAP Forum

Tradcons and MGTOW dudes I believe.

But honestly, I don't think I would do this as I am HEAVILY pro free of speech. Even when I hate what these people are saying.

No one because, and I hope this doesn't sound 'pompous,' I think in terms of principles and not groups or allyship to specific groups (everyone should be an 'ally' to all individual sentient beings or striving toward becoming that kind of a person). It's one thing I don't really understand about the LGBTQ culture and I've sure I've mentioned this before; the preoccupation with gays seems shallow to me especially when it's held by people who will condemn incestuous relationships (as incestuous relationships, in all scenarios), age gap relationships between adults, even non-active pedophiles or any specific person's attraction to another person for whatever reasons (even demonizing the sexualization of women by straight men, depending on what exactly we're talking about; assuming no one's actually being harmed by it, by people who would insist that their sexuality is something that gays should embrace about themselves and nothing dirty or shameful).

Even when I'm biased against individuals I want to live in a society where the ideal we're striving for is equally applying principles across the board and the principle behind my support for at least some of the 'MAP movement' is that sexual pleasure qua happiness is intrinsically good; everyone deserves happiness, and it should never be sacrificed for any other reason than genuine harm reduction or promoting a culture where everyone values everyone else's happiness, because only suffering is inherently bad. Depending on what exactly someone thinks makes homosexuality tolerable or justifiable there might not be an inconsistency in their view (wanting to de-stigmatize homosexuality but not adult attraction to minors) but what besides happiness could the value of a homosexual relationship be (gays are gay precisely because they instinctively find the prospect of sexual intimacy with same-gender members pleasurable and exciting, they're not forcing themselves into same-sex relationships because they think that they have value upon reflection for some other reason or at least that's not what would make them gay, any other standard; for tolerating homosexuality I mean, is even more obviously arbitrary to me for that reason) so what would make gay, child-adult, adult age-gap, incestuous, etc. relationships bad (psychological harm caused) is what makes them desirable (being pleasurable, happiness and pain being two sides of the same coin). I support the de-stigmatization of pedophilia for the exact same reason that I have to support any other attraction and even the benign sexual interests (that don't deal with who one is attracted to, e.g. golden showers, role playing, etc.), sexual non-exclusivity, gender equality (i.e. men and women's happiness holding the same weight), anti-poverty initiatives and social welfare programs/a gift economy, anti-body shaming/the concept of intrinsic physical beauty, anti-bullying, anti-violence (maybe I should say 'needless violence' but even when necessary it's still bad, if we define 'violence' in a way that realistically always involves causing pain), veganism, etc. etc.

So it's not so much, "what can be done for MAPS per se," in my mind, as it is, "what can be done to maximize happiness for sentient beings."

More like, what groups WOULDNT throw us under the bus. We’re not in a place to do vice versa right now anyway.

The most detrimental groups in society I would say are particularly harmful are tradcons and feminists.

If we wanted to have a serious discussion about it, the category to throw under the bus should be one associated with a stereotype linked to MAPs. In the same way that some homosexuals started distancing themselves from MAPs to clean up their image, to stop being associated with pedophilia, only two categories come to mind to point the finger at: sadists and manipulators (according to the pop-psychology stereotype from TikTok).

This is in a context like today’s.
If we went further back and talked only about adolescents, then one could try to put the focus on all non-conventional sexuality, although there’s the risk that someone might lump MAPs in there as well.

But honestly I wouldn’t appreciate that, since for me the problem is at the very root. (Besides the fact that I’d be in a conflict of interest, given that I like the furry scene and I’m fairly sadistic in my fantasies and in the products I consume. Basically: I’d be the one ending up under the bus. Haha.)