A sensitive question/issue...

[Hockey Stick]

It's simply absurd and insane for any society to pretend as if adolescents aren't biologically young adults or that being attracted to them isn't completely natural and normal, hence the modern world and its tiny little speck of history is pretty much the only place where it happens, especially in the West and highly "developed" nations.

So... as a nepiophile or pedophile do you find yourself to be distrustful of hebephiles and ephebophiles deep down, suspecting that they'd probably persecute you just like the rest if they weren't irrationally lumped into the same category as you?

Same question for those who are nepiophiles in relation to pedophiles. I have a pedophile friend who was initially... uncomfortable... with nepiophilia until I eventually wore him down with undeniably appealing toddler lolis but he had that element of "it's crazy" to his words before "seeing the light".

The goal here isn't to cause division but I just think the general issue of how society's principle of "the younger the worse" even carries over into the community is worth a discussion.

[BLueRibbon]

It could happen in the future, as it did with gays.

[Keith]

I have always thought of myself as A pedophile. My AOA has always for BOYS between 5-9 years old. In recent months my attraction towards Boys has change to 3-5 years old not ruling out possibly 2 years old. So not only am I A pedophile but also A Nepiophile. The bottom line is this the world looks at all of use the same way we are all pedophiles. The thing is we all like boys who are under age.

[G@yWad43]

Yes 100%. I was even going to make a post on this, you read my mind. The map community is very young but im already noticing it become a hebephile-ephebophile alliance instead of a pedophile-hebephile-ehphebophile alliance. I have so many issues with the maps who want to reduce the age of consent to 12, and thats the only solution they have to the problem.

1.The sexphobia problem is still there. Just reduced by a couple of years. The underlying issue that made people panic so hard over maps hasnt gone away, it just only affects pedophiles and hebephiles and ephebphiles can live their lives freely.

2.It benefits pedophiles in absolutely zero way shape and form. We have zero incentive to fight for it. In fact, it may make our situation worse, because it provides an easy way for hebephiles and ephebphiles to throw us under the bus, which im already seeing starting to happen.

3.A lot of hebephiles are using the exact same arguments to justify an aoc of 12 that antis use to justify an aoc of 18+, and alot of it is just bashing/shaming pedophiles. Implying that we are sick and gross, and that a slightly lower aoc will convert us from our sick pervesion into being “normal”. I can tell whats happening. The hebephiles push that attraction to pubescence is normal because its “biologically valid” unlike us invalid pedos. They then cater to antis, saying that with a slightly lower aoc sick evil invalid pedos will compromise for the greater good of humanity and convert to hebephillia. Seriously, so many arguments made by hebes to justify a puberty based aoc is “those nasty little pedos will stop going after pre puberty kids and will only stick to valid healthy reproductively viable options, so you antis should support us or else those filthy pedos will keep going for pre puberty kids!” As a matter of fact, I refuse to support the lowering of the aoc to 12 because it will make life even WORSE for pedophiles. The antis will see it as “we already lowered the aoc, and you freaks are still into lower ages?! You guys are even worse than we thought!!”

4. They have given us absolutely zero reason to belive any further reform will be done for any other form of mapness once the age range they get a boner to is fully legal.

5. It doesnt get rid of the underlying issue that caused this panic in the first place. So this temporary “solution” not only only benefits hebephiles and ephebiphiles at the expense of pedophiles, but will only “work” short term. The aoc used to be around 12. And what did the antis do? They raised it, then they raised it again, then they raised it again, and now they want to raise it so more. The root problem (the view that children are asexual, that sex is a dirty corrupter, that ignorance and control is better than freedom and education) is still there. Lets say hebes actually manage to lower the aoc. Then what? The antis just raise it again, and again, and again, just like they did before and are doing right now. Because slightly lowering the problem doesnt get rid of the fundamental beliefs that made it such a huge issue in the first place. You can spray a can of raid at a group of ants all you want, but if the ant colony is still there, it will always come back, in fact, maybe even in larger swaths since you dared to challenge them. If the underlying problem of sexseptionalism and sexphobia is still there, then catering to antis while throwing pedos under the bus wont do shit. The very concept of an “aoc” in the first place is a problem. The belief that if you have sex before midnight on your birthday of some random arbitrary number you are scarred and ruined forever and better of dead and the disgusting monster who initiated it with you should be incarcerated, tortured, or even killed, but a couple hours later you turn that magical arbitrary random number and your perfectly fine because the government said so. Sex should be a fun bonding experience, not some governmental contract based on pseudo science. The very concept alone is bullshit and I refuse to support any “reform” that fundamentally adheres to it. Punishment should be based on the if the sex was forced/coerced, not on some magical arbitrary random number that was pulled out of your ass. If hebephiles were willing to create a reform based on things other than just making their age of attraction legal and nothing else, I would trust them, but the fact that they dont and only use anti talking points as a justification makes me against the aoc being lowered to 12.

[G@yWad43]

“I'll be honest, I do struggle with nepiophiles as an exclusive hebephile. Not that I think they should be judged, hated or condemned. But I struggle to wrap my head around what kind of sexual reciprocity could exist in such a relationship. Are they just objectifying the small kids in their fantasies? Using them as a tool to get off? Are they imagining a greater level of capacity than a child of such an age could actually possess?”

-I'll be honest, I do struggle with hebephiles as an exclusive teliophile. Not that I think they should be judged, hated or condemned. But I struggle to wrap my head around what kind of sexual reciprocity could exist in such a relationship. Are they just objectifying the young kids in their fantasies? Using them as a tool to get off? Are they imagining a greater level of capacity than a child of such an age could actually possess?”

-I think its more objectifying to view small children as blank and soulless with nothing to offer an adult other than sex. Small kids may have difficulty communicating, but they still possess their own thoughts, feelings, desires, and personalities, and like any another group of maps, the emotional appeal is the same, or even stronger, than any sexual appeal. Small kids are sentient and conscious, just like any other age group, obviously you cant have the same type of sexual relationship with a toddler as you could an older kid, at most just gentle petting, but being a map is about more than just sex. And theres nothing special about sex in the first place compared to any other form of physical affection that it has to be outright banned. You cant even use the argument that small kids dont have sexual feelings, as human fetuses have been showing masturbating in the womb and babies and toddlers have been documented masturbating.

-Adults show physical affection to toddlers all the time, and I dont see how physical affection instantly turns from an expression of love and bonding into “objectification” the minute anything sexual is involved. Unless you subscribe to sexseptionalism, where any expression of sexuality is inherently objectifying and problamatic if it doesnt personally give you a boner. Sex isnt inherently “objectfying” and its easy to treat small children as human beings if you dont have a personality disorder. So unless you are specifically treating them like objects during sex play, its not “oBjEctIfIcAtIoN”.(Side note, I am so sick and tired of buzz words like “objectification” and “normalization” and “sexualization”, people just use them blindly as a substitute for an actual argument, if something makes you uncomfortable, instead of just saying “I dislike it” you can just say “it sexualizes the objectification and normalization of the patriarchy and is problematic” or something like that, and most people will be satisfied with that answer, even it doesn't actually explain your position. Especially “objectification”, as most who use this argument see the the people they claim to be arguing in defense of as little more than objects themselves, and project their own inner feelings onto the person they see as toxic or abusive. If you see sex as inherently abusive and negative, and you dont think kids below a certain age have anything to offer adults but one sided sexual gratification, its easy to see how a nepio is just “objectfyingly sexualizing”, since you yourself dont see small kids as having anything of more value to add to a relationship, which to me, is more “problamatic” than sucking some kids dick). If you genuinely view nepiophile relationships as inherently “objectification” I would appreciate if you could go more in detail about what specifically the “objectifying” part of the relationship is, unless expressions of sexuality alone is supposed to be “objectification”, and if thats the case, my only question is, whats so inherently dirty and negative about sex compared to everything else in life? Whats so special about sex?)

-And of course there has to be differences for different age groups. Just like you wouldnt bear hug a fragile toddler to show affection, you shouldnt penetrate them either. That doesnt mean phyisical or sexual affections should be outright banned, just adjusted for the capacity of the age group. If you can understand the love a non map shows for their toddlers, you can understand the love a nepi shows for their toddlers, which is fundamentally the exact same but with sexual appeal. Of course theirs the argument that young kids are incapable of knowing what they want or saying no, but if youve ever interacted with a baby, or even a toddler, you will realize that pretty much the only thing they say to adults is no, wether verbally or non verbally. Wether its screaming at the top of their lungs for hours or crying or hitting and punching and kicking and throwing tantrums, young kids actually have an easier time expressing their dislike of a situation than say, preteens, as they arent bound by social niceities and are in their ““selfish”” stage.

“I think part of my struggle is that I support legal reform and giving MAPs as a way to live authentically (which includes a right to sexual expression). But I don't know if I could extend that to very young toddlers. I understand pro-c arguments about sexual play with even babies, but I don't think I can get there, myself, especially having had a kid.”

-I think part of my struggle is that I support legal reform and giving MAPs as a way to live authentically (which includes a right to sexual expression). But I don't know if I could extend that to very young teenagers. I understand pro-c arguments about sexual play with even middle school aged children, but I don't think I can get there, myself, especially having had a kid.”

-The exact same argument could be used regarding preteens. I dont think personal discomfort or having a kid yourself is a good justification for not supporting something, especially since that exact same logic is used to make relationships with preteens and hebephiles illegal. Any argument that puts sexual play and affection as fundamentally different from any other forms of play and affection can be easily used against hebephiles and preteens, not just nepis and young kids, so if you expect any type of legal reform from antis using this logic, dont be surprised when it doesnt work, or only works temporarily.

“So, I end up talking about a situation where all MAPs should be loved, accepted and respected, but the legal and social rights that I hope can be extended to hebephiles might never be extended to nepiophiles.”

-I find that extremely hard to believe, considering that for the majority of humanity there has been no aoc, and sexual play between all age groups(including nepiophillia) was common place. Only extremely recently, and mainly in the western world, has some form of an aoc, wether based on puberty or hard legal lines, even been a thing. I find it extremely disingenuous when someone argues that they wont support a thing because it will “never” be accepted, when said thing has been accepted for the majority human history. If humans can go from enslaving black people in chattel slavery to having a black president, why is it so hard to believe than nepiophiles can go from being imprisioned to having legal and social rights? In fact it seems even easier for nepios to get legal and social rights compared to other marginalized groups.

“The question I ask myself is how to properly show love for nepios (or pedosadists) despite that. I guess even for anti-c people the question is "how can we respect hebephiles even if they lack freedoms that GLB people have?"”

-I dont appreciate nepiophillia being lumped in with sadism. If you see a love of toddlers as being in the same class as literal sadism then im not sure I want your love.

“We have a two-tier class system wherever we draw the line, unless we abolish it altogether. That doesn't sit right with me, but I'm not sure what the solution is.”

-Until someone is creative enough to come up with something else, those are the options we have to work with.

[PorcelainLark]

It's simply absurd and insane for any society to pretend as if adolescents aren't biologically young adults or that being attracted to them isn't completely natural and normal, hence the modern world and its tiny little speck of history is pretty much the only place where it happens, especially in the West and highly "developed" nations. So... as a nepiophile or pedophile do you find yourself to be distrustful of hebephiles and ephebophiles deep down, suspecting that they'd probably persecute you just like the rest if they weren't irrationally lumped into the same category as you? Same question for those who are nepiophiles in relation to pedophiles. I have a pedophile friend who was initially... uncomfortable... with nepiophilia until I eventually wore him down with undeniably appealing toddler lolis but he had that element of "it's crazy" to his words before "seeing the light".

The goal here isn't to cause division but I just think the general issue of how society's principle of "the younger the worse" even carries over into the community is worth a discussion.

I do think hebephiles the distinction between hebephiles/ephebophiles and teleiophiles is really a cultural construct, and however I would be surprised if once they achieve their goals, they're no longer interested in helping pedophiles or nepiophiles. It's a moot point for the time being as we're in the same boat, and it makes sense to work together on certain goals. My hope is that given the suffering MAPs have been through, even if hebephiles and ephebophiles gain acceptance, they won't forget what it was like and some of them will use their position to help us.

Regarding nepiophiles:
My theory is that MA is the maternal instinct manifested in biological males. Just a mother has the instinct towards physical intimacy with the infant (e.g. breastfeeding), so does the pedophile/nepiophile. I think it's surprising that more MAPs lack that affection for infants.
As for female MAPs, I think it's related to homosexuality. The standard aspects of teleiophilic attraction toward men has to do with body hair, broad shoulders, and height, all of which are usually absent or exist to a lesser degree in boys, girls, and women. So, I'd speculate MA occurs in women and men for different reasons. A way to test it might be to see what proportion of female pedophiles prefer boys to girls; I'd expect most female MAPs to prefer girls.

[gingedu]

If you can understand the love a non map shows for their toddlers, you can understand the love a nepi shows for their toddlers, which is fundamentally the exact same but with sexual appeal.

That's assuming that they love them. Have you seen the way most straight men treat and talk about women? The ones that actually like women let alone love them are few and far in between.

I can understand the love only if I focus on a very specific kind of person with that attraction. But I don't know how common that is.

[Harlan]

The map community is very young but im already noticing it become a hebephile-ephebophile alliance instead of a pedophile-hebephile-ehphebophile alliance. I have so many issues with the maps who want to reduce the age of consent to 12, and thats the only solution they have to the problem.

This is not true.
You have to understand that a bigoted society that has no experience of accepting youth sexuality is not capable of immediately skipping a few steps and accepting the complete abolition of the age of consent.

It benefits pedophiles in absolutely zero way shape and form. We have zero incentive to fight for it. In fact, it may make our situation worse, because it provides an easy way for hebephiles and ephebphiles to throw us under the bus, which im already seeing starting to happen.

The choice is to achieve the beginning of positive change or to achieve nothing at all.

I refuse to support the lowering of the aoc to 12 because it will make life even WORSE for pedophiles. The antis will see it as “we already lowered the aoc, and you freaks are still into lower ages?! You guys are even worse than we thought!!”

There is no point in trying to continue the cycle of lowering the age of consent after 12, because that is the limit after which one can only abolish and replace the entire concept of the age of consent with something more reasonable.

The aoc used to be around 12. And what did the antis do? They raised it, then they raised it again, then they raised it again, and now they want to raise it so more. The root problem (the view that children are asexual, that sex is a dirty corrupter, that ignorance and control is better than freedom and education) is still there.

Until AoC returns to its original state, it will not be possible to propose its complete abolition. No one will listen.

Lets say hebes actually manage to lower the aoc. Then what? The antis just raise it again, and again, and again, just like they did before and are doing right now. Because slightly lowering the problem doesnt get rid of the fundamental beliefs that made it such a huge issue in the first place.

I have always proposed a compromise that the age of consent should only limit anal/vaginal intercourse. Friendship, cuddling, fondling, petting and masturbation should not be limited, just as there is no age limit for nudist camps now.

You can spray a can of raid at a group of ants all you want, but if the ant colony is still there, it will always come back, in fact, maybe even in larger swaths since you dared to challenge them. If

If you try to fill a bowl with water from a fire hose, you'll tip it over and spray everyone.

The belief that if you have sex before midnight on your birthday of some random arbitrary number you are scarred and ruined forever and better of dead and the disgusting monster who initiated it with you should be incarcerated, tortured, or even killed, but a couple hours later you turn that magical arbitrary random number and your perfectly fine because the government said so. Sex should be a fun bonding experience, not some governmental contract based on pseudo science. The very concept alone is bullshit and I refuse to support any “reform” that fundamentally adheres to it. Punishment should be based on the if the sex was forced/coerced, not on some magical arbitrary random number that was pulled out of your ass.

True. But any attempt to propose an immediate abolition of the age of consent will be presented to everyone as "legalization of child sexual abuse/rape" and it will be impossible to explain to people that this is not so

[OnionPetal]

I'll be honest, I do struggle with nepiophiles as an exclusive hebephile. Not that I think they should be judged, hated or condemned. But I struggle to wrap my head around what kind of sexual reciprocity could exist in such a relationship. Are they just objectifying the small kids in their fantasies? Using them as a tool to get off? Are they imagining a greater level of capacity than a child of such an age could actually possess? [...]

It was kind of shocking to read this, because knowing how long you've been involved in the MAP community, I would've expected you to have a better understanding of nepis. But I'm glad you highlighted some of your questions and gaps in understanding. Ultimately, that's how we learn about each other and grow.

I am guessing that you have predominantly spent your time in MAP circles socializing with teen-lovers. Because if you had more friends who were nepis, you probably wouldn't be so confused about those questions you posed. And to be honest, I don't think you're going to get many real answers in this thread. When you ask anybody if they view their most beloved as a sexual 'object,' or a 'tool,' you are going to get a defensive response. Instead, you ought to sit down beside them, play a game of cards with them. See them as humans who love with their hearts. Let them talk about what they like most about the toddlers they've interacted with in their lives. Ask them what their ideal date would be like. Would it look the same as a teen-lover's ideal date, or different? I suspect, once you find out how important the caring, nurturing, protecting components of relationships are for the paedo-nepi side of MAP spectrum, you will not have so much fear about the things you questioned above.

[...] but the legal and social rights that I hope can be extended to hebephiles might never be extended to nepiophiles.

I think part of the problem here, is assuming that the majority of paedos/nepis want the same thing(s) that teen-lovers want. From your own statement, it seems clear that that you don't fully understand the nepi orientation, let alone what activism interests nepis might share. So in a sense, they might be hearing, 'I'm not sure what nepis want, but they will probably never get it.' It feels dismissive of the subgroup of MAPs that is arguably the most marginalized and misunderstood.

I think nepis should be heard. I have yet to see a substantial discussion (even a brainstorm) soliciting nepis for their perspectives on activism goals or social reforms that might apply to younger children, as opposed to teens. I guarantee you would see some significant distinctions between what teen-lovers want, and what nepis want, which you had not thought of before when just dismissing the notion outright.

[...] I don't think I can get there, myself, especially having had a kid.

Your fears and concerns should absolutely be addressed, just like the parents of a teen boy or girl should have their fears/concerns addressed, when engaging in any discussion about potential reforms. Parents are always going to fear the worst regarding their child, even if that means imagining a class of boogeymen who want to harm your child behind your back without your knowledge. And certainly, any reform brainstorms should address and properly remedy those concerns. But that is fairly painless, since I do not think any nepi activist would want for that extreme example to ever play out. But there's so much more nuance to the discussion beyond those extreme examples that are often born of the fearful imaginations of rightfully protective parents. But those rightful fears shouldn't be justification to throw out the entire discussion around the topic with all of its nuance.

The map community is very young but im already noticing it become a hebephile-ephebophile alliance instead of a pedophile-hebephile-ehphebophile alliance. I have so many issues with the maps who want to reduce the age of consent to 12, and thats the only solution they have to the problem.

Yes, I can see that. There can be this sense of, 'Well, I got my own. As for the under-12s, tough luck. They can't consent to anything, and they'll just just have to submit to the rule of adults regarding what they can and cannot do with their body.' Like, wait what?! What was your actual activism goal here? To expand youth freedoms and autonomy... Or just to be able to stick it into your preferred AoA?? To be clear, I am not saying that activists here are primarily motivated by their own sexual interests. But to some people who aren't ephebs/hebes, it can come across that way.

When it comes to activism, the children's interests need to come first, NOT OUR OWN. And for people to even suggest that under-12s have zero interests that can be served by our activism is pretty shocking. HERE'S AN IDEA: How about a plan to increase the quality and availability of age-appropriate sex education designed specifically for younger age groups, including components on safety and risk mitigation? Or would teen-lovers also see such a programme designed for younger kids as 'objectionable'?

Again, to be fair, part of the issue is rooted in some teen-lovers' clear struggles to see outside of their own bubble of perception. Perhaps teen-lovers see their own sexuality as something more comparable to adult relationships, considering that post-pubescent teens are closer to biological adults than to young children. But MAPs are a collection of orientations that each have unique qualities and distinctions, including variances in the expression of sexual, romantic, and emotional attraction. Simply giving some acknowledgement that under-12s could benefit from our activism would go a long way. Not only would it help unite the many under-12 paedo/nepi activists who have so much to contribute, but it would also convey the message to our broader (non-MAP) audience that, 'Hey, our group is not just about sex for teens.'

[OnionPetal]

[...] many of them seem to have rode the "slippery slope of fetish" down to being nepis. For some people it seems to be primarily sexual and in that sense, just a means for them to get off. [...]

This very sentiment is what prompted me to write such a long response. And even though I'm not nepi myself, I almost cried reading this passage, for how much pain these kinds of mischaracterizations cause to some of my dearest friends.

It is painful for someone's orientation to be so misunderstood. Perhaps you know that feeling?