MAP Forum

I know society and many MAP communities believe anyone who has attractions towards minors should avoid social contact with them and should never be allowed anywhere where minors are present. But I disagree and believe it is allowing MAPs to interact with minors socially can be highly beneficial for the well-being of MAPs, can be highly benefiting for MAP communities and could potentially create a safer environment for everyone including the minors and I beleive MAPs would be better people as their minds would be in the right place.

Telling a MAP they should avoid social contact with minors or not be allowed anywhere where minors are present may not help the MAPs/MAP community because it feels like you are agreeing with society that MAPs are dangerous and unable to control themselves if they are around children which we know it is not true and MAPs pose no threat. If MAPs want to prove they are safe and able to control their urges, they should seek opportunities to be around minors and prove to society they are safe, pose no threat, are able to control their urges. We need to make sure we have more stories where people have friendships and interactions with minors that did not involve abuse and was legal and celebrate it and prove the antis wrong. People would always say how can you expect people to believe in you if you don’t believe in yourself- if you think you’re a dangerous person, other people will probably think you are dangerous. We need stories of MAPs being around minors but have been able to control themselves and not engage in illegal activities.

Also if you isolate MAPs from minors, it would likely have a negative impact on their mental health and they may not think straight and it could possibly put them in more vulnerable situation or may end up making bad decisions that puts themselves or others at risk.

Allowing MAPs to interact and form friendships with minors could be very therapeutic to their well being. Also there are no laws against non-sexual relationships between minors and adults. Also MAPs could demonstrate their protective instincts they have towards the minor they love.

Many people may say kids/teenagers would feel uncomfortable with adults/older people mixing with them but the reason they may feel it is because they are not used to it, they have a narrow perception of adults/older people, we stereotype and make a lot of assumptions about people based on age or they don’t know much about MAPs. Same arguments could be made for transgender people, people with autism, people of different racial groups etc. ageism is just as harmful as racism, sexism, transphobia, ableism etc.

Just because an adult/older person is hanging out with children or teenagers does not mean they are grooming them or have bad intentions. Some people just vibe or maybe they have lots in common or naturally click or like doing the same things. Some adults may feel more childlike or feel youthful. Some adults may like doing the same types of things younger age groups do. Maybe they want to have a water fight, build a snowman, have a pillow fight, build sandcastles, Nerf Wars, play board games, play on the playground, play tag, hide and seek, fly kids, build a den or sport or dodgeball etc. people may ask, they can do those activities with adults but what if many adults may not want to do those things hence why they do it with kids.
Just because something is not normal doesn’t mean it is bad or harmful. Adults are human being and not all of them want to be stereotyped as being an authoritative figure- some of us would treat kids/teenagers as equals and beleive they should be taken seriously and have the right to make their own decisions. So what if people do something that is not normal- it doesn’t it it is harmful or bad.

We need to help society to overcome their fear, negative attitudes or prejducie they have towards groups of people they are uncomfortable with. We need to provide opportunities for people to see the humanity of people they may be afraid of or uncomfortable with.

Grunko wrote: Thu Jun 19, 2025 1:54 pm We need to help society to overcome their fear, negative attitudes or prejducie they have towards groups of people they are uncomfortable with. We need to provide opportunities for people to see the humanity of people they may be afraid of or uncomfortable with.

I wonder if we can overcome that fear without overcoming the fear of AMSC itself? As long as AMSC is viewed as something unacceptable under any circumstance, it's understandable why people would want to prevent any chance of it happening.

I'd question whether AMSC warrants the level of panic we currently have, even if a person thinks it's bad.

One unfortunate example of people who think this way,

https://educateempowerkids.org/how-to-i ... or-online/

Term: Non-Offending

A NOP or “Non-Offending Pedophile” doesn’t interact with children at all or tries their best to avoid them. A non-offending pedophile does not consume child pornography or medias meant to mimic child pornography (example: Loli pornography, cartoon child porn, etc ).

A non-offending pedophile also doesn’t spread positivity about pedophilia or promotes pedophilia.

NOTE: A lot of pedophiles call themselves Non-Offending regardless of whether they offend or not in order to avoid backlash. They will also twist words and try to redefine what “offending” means. Keep in mind that an actual non-offending pedophile will do their best to AVOID all contact with children.

A pedophile who purposely interacts with children in ANY way is offending.

If fiction makes you an "offending" pedophile, then watching adult pornography makes you a rapist. Same logic, right? These people are insane.

No surprise whatsoever this is her:

https://empowerlatterdaysaintkids.org/

I want to hang around kids but everyone knows I’m a pedo.

Jim Burton wrote: Thu Jun 19, 2025 4:21 pm No surprise whatsoever this is her:

https://empowerlatterdaysaintkids.org/

Funnily enough the LDS church has had quite a few of its own problems similar to those of the Catholic Church. Without even the excuse of priests forced into celibacy.

The church leaders often cover up sexual misconduct rather than reporting it to the authorities. (I actually think that's the right approach, but it highlights a double standard.)

People often thing that EVERY adult should avoid being around kids/teenagers unless they have a professional reason to do so. Obviously, this stigma is worse around MAPs, but regardless, this has a detrimental effect on everyone. People (but especially men) gotta walk on eggshells around them to avoid any false accusations. Plus, not interacting with certain demographics makes it ever easier to see them as non-human and reinforce stereotypes. All this contributing to the general erosion of our communities we see today.

It's also very detrimental to the youth themselves. We have them more or less completely isolated from greater society. How do we ever expect them to eventually integrate with society if they are never allowed to interact with it? Naturally all this talk of social media bans makes things even worse.

Fragment wrote: Fri Jun 20, 2025 12:36 am

Jim Burton wrote: Thu Jun 19, 2025 4:21 pm No surprise whatsoever this is her:

https://empowerlatterdaysaintkids.org/

Funnily enough the LDS church has had quite a few of its own problems similar to those of the Catholic Church. Without even the excuse of priests forced into celibacy.

The church leaders often cover up sexual misconduct rather than reporting it to the authorities. (I actually think that's the right approach, but it highlights a double standard.)

In-house management of sexual abuse is a tool puritans make good use of when it suits them.

The problem is, whether there's contact or not, the expectation is that adults aren't supposed to interact in any way with kids not their own, unless they're in a job where it's required. In western society it's considered inappropriate for you to say a friendly hello to an unrelated child as you pass them on the street, even if they say hello first — the "appropriate" thing to do is ignore them, whether you're a MAP or not.

I think a noteworthy reason behind this isn't just the fear of AMSC — which is absolutely a factor — but an element of possessiveness from parents. For many people, I think the fear of MAPs is an excuse to effectively chain their kids up and control what content they consume; who they interact with; what they wear; what religious and political beliefs they're groomed into having, etc. Children are accessories of the parent, and when an unrelated and unauthorized adult has a real conversation with a child, it risks tarnishing the fabricated reality the parent has built for them and their kid.

This, I believe, is partially why it's such a challenge for us to make progress with our movements. We could find all the evidence in the world that AMSC is harmless, and that platonic adult/child relationships are beneficial, the issue at hand is that people at large just don't care. What they want is strict, unhindered control over their families in every aspect from how they speak to what sports they play; letting their kids have relationships with adults, both platonic and sexual, hurts that prospect for control.

Bookshelf wrote: Sat Jun 21, 2025 5:44 am The problem is, whether there's contact or not, the expectation is that adults aren't supposed to interact in any way with kids not their own, unless they're in a job where it's required. In western society it's considered inappropriate for you to say a friendly hello to an unrelated child as you pass them on the street, even if they say hello first — the "appropriate" thing to do is ignore them, whether you're a MAP or not.

I think a noteworthy reason behind this isn't just the fear of AMSC — which is absolutely a factor — but an element of possessiveness from parents. For many people, I think the fear of MAPs is an excuse to effectively chain their kids up and control what content they consume; who they interact with; what they wear; what religious and political beliefs they're groomed into having, etc. Children are accessories of the parent, and when an unrelated and unauthorized adult has a real conversation with a child, it risks tarnishing the fabricated reality the parent has built for them and their kid.

This, I believe, is partially why it's such a challenge for us to make progress with our movements. We could find all the evidence in the world that AMSC is harmless, and that platonic adult/child relationships are beneficial, the issue at hand is that people at large just don't care. What they want is strict, unhindered control over their families in every aspect from how they speak to what sports they play; letting their kids have relationships with adults, both platonic and sexual, hurts that prospect for control.

Doesn’t data show the vast majority of child abuse happens by someone a child knows and at home.
https://medlineplus.gov/ency/patientins ... 000771.htm
On this page- one of the signs of child sexual abuse is
“Have adults in their lives that keep them from having contact with other adults”