MAP Forum

Hello all,
I've been thinking a lot lately about the "debate" between pro and anti C MAPs. I find a lot of potential issues at the extreme ends of this spectrum. A couple of things I have read lately exemplify this. The first is [Removed: too explicit]. I am not sure that the book is "pro C" per se, but one of the characters sure is. I don't want to spoil too much in case you want to read it (it is a fine novel)....but the soldier is quite rough and, in my mind, not very considerate of the boy he desires. It kind of made me feel like "Ah, this is why people are afraid." On the other hand, I recently got a copy of "Past the Dark Field." Initially I was so happy to have a real physical book - two day shipping from amazon! - that depicted people with my identity. But gosh, it has SUCH an anti C bias, and in my mind is very negative. The author even puts a note in the acknowledgments at the end thanking her editors for dealing with the "ick factor." For me this comment was an ick factor.

Where is our middle ground? Isn't sexuality a construct anyway? For me, contact is about love, closeness, connection, and service. Hugs, kisses, eye contacts, cuddles, and all of that. "sex" could be amazing, but its probably not the most important thing in the world - then again, it IS very important to be able to fantasize about it and have supportive, non harmful art (like stories, artwork, maybe even stuff like nudist magazines or whatever. Not talking CP here).

Idk, maybe I am just rehashing old themes, but its what's been on my mind.

Middle ground would be decriminalization of viewing and possession of CP. Plus reducing age-restrictions on things like driving, voting, and drinking. Having a platonic YF would be a good middle ground as well, just obey the laws.

The Pro-Reform Framework is intended as a middle ground.

Pro-Reform articles on Mu

Most people’s actual views are fairly moderate.

The problem is that they are operating from different paradigms, especially emotionally.

Anti-cs want to continue throwing people in prison for looking at images or being intimate with minors. Pro-cs see this as unjustly punishing victimless crimes.

Pro-cs, to the anti-c, want to legalize and socially approve of rape.

When framed in those terms they are a big threat to each other.

Part of the problem, I think, is that consent is seen as a binary rather than a scale. That might be important in a legal sense, but it’s developmentally untrue.

Both sides should be able to agree to the following (but I’ll probably get hate from both for this):
18 year olds can consent more than 12 year olds.
12 year olds can consent more than 6 year olds.

“Can consent” is the wrong question, really. It should be “sufficient consent”.

Right, I get all of this. But consent can exist maybe in a ‘developmental’ way. “Is it ok if I pick you up? Can I give you a hug?” These are commonplace even with 3 year olds. And if you watch this age group, they are known to try to initiate sexual exploration with other kids and adults. Little girls will sit on adult legs straddle and try to jump. It sounds crazy but it’s pretty common. There are a lot of things like that I would say. No, a 5 year old can’t consent to an adult relationship.

And that’s my other possible issue, is even if we allow for a lot, kids are still there to be taken care of, to have their needs met. It’s not ever going to be a two way street, and I am very wary (in my imagination; or in my ideal of what the future could be) of kids being asked to satisfy adult needs.