MAP Forum

Something I've been thinking about, however impracticable it is, is this idea of a state specifically for a state for pedophiles. Leaving aside the practical aspects, I want to steel man the theoretical basis for it. Of course there are parallels in queer and feminist separatism, however I feel our situation is most similar to the situation of Jews prior to the foundation of Israel.

Even though, on paper, we have the same rights as any other citizen, there is an omnipresent threat of violence which isn't addressed. How frequently has a non-MAP pushed back against threats and violence towards MAPs? The social contract fails as far as we are concerned.

Consider a thirteen year old that realizes having a preference for children, they have to put up with a brutalizing experience of people openly calling for their death and no one in society to call it out or support them. There is a genocidal attitude towards MAPs that is completely normalized.

Under these conditions it makes sense why we need self-governance. MAPs can do everything in their power to stay on the right side of the law and non-MAPs still won't stand up for our right to exist against the overwhelming hate.

If a state fails to protect the rights of it's citizens, they aren't citizens in the true sense. Under such severe hatred, persecution, and indifference from society, it's completely understandable why MAPs might argue that we need our own state, our own "Israel". International law has been failing to protect us. If humans have the right to self-defense, surely we have a serious justification to seek self-governance in the face of such extreme hostility.

If the shoe was on the other foot, no one would accept the kind of treatment we're subjected to.

I hope for this sometimes too

I was just thinking about this.
I was thinking the most practical method would be to carve out a space in the least popular US state: Wyoming.
That or overthrow the government of an unstable country in Latin America or Africa.
That or find some barely inhabited island in the Pacific.

It would also require military might. Israel was pretty much under constant attack when it was first founded. I imagine any serious endeavor would go similarly today.

Ah, all that's just dreaming though.
I always wondered why I hear of people fleeing nations. Particularly in Latin America. I always thought "Why not just fix your own country?".
But I was foolish and naive and had seen nothing outside my cushioned lifestyle. Never would I have imagined that there are people who fight to keep a clearly broken system the way it is.

I come to this idea quite often as well. It makes perfect sense the way PorcelainLark puts it.

And sadly, this is what I think right afterwards:

RoosterDance wrote: Sun Jan 19, 2025 5:20 am It would also require military might. Israel was pretty much under constant attack when it was first founded. I imagine any serious endeavor would go similarly today.

It would be even tougher maybe, because we would have pretty much 80% of the world self-righteously thinking that a nation like that should not even exist. How could an issue like that be mitigated?

Here is another interesting thread on the matter:
New country (again)

I think that if MAP wants to try to establish an independent country, it would be better to do so with a grander reason (such as reviving an ancient civilization), and then incorporate MAP's demands into it, so that our persuasiveness will be stronger.

I think that a MAP country would be immediately destroyed. And I wouldn't be surprised if anyone who visited it even, afterwards would be persecuted in any other country they went to. I think that, in the short to medium term, until the mindset of a great part of the population completely changes, the most that one can hope for is what Hakim Bey called a "temporary autonomous zone", a commune or area small enough to not draw much attention.

I think some concessions are possible if libertarianism will gain political weight. It is the only political ideology in this historical period that allows for a lowering of the age of consent based on its own philosophy.

My hypothetical was to have a colony in Antarctica, specifically Marie Byrd land because it's claimed by no country under international law, and it's so far away that it could only be self-governed. However, my main point is more that we are justified in pursuing self-governance, rather than how practical it is.

There are plenty of examples of new states being designed and even created that are for specific groups or ideologies. It is perfectly possible to create a new state, I could reference a number of projects that have done this or are looking at doing this, some with constitutions that are protective of minority rights including map rights in theory.

Outis wrote: Mon Jan 20, 2025 9:47 pm There are plenty of examples of new states being designed and even created that are for specific groups or ideologies. It is perfectly possible to create a new state, I could reference a number of projects that have done this or are looking at doing this, some with constitutions that are protective of minority rights including map rights in theory.

I'd love to hear about it. I hope you will be up for emailing. Since Peace left, I haven't had any MAPs I've regularly been talking to.