MAP Forum

Just a thought I've been having. When you're reading discussions that where the topic of non-offending MAPs is brought up, you'll often see someone say something along the lines of "... as long as they don't offend and they seek help". Not super unusual and usually comes from a place of condescension, however it also comes from a place of ignorance. The implication that there exists productive resources that can offer help.

I was curious and decided to browse one of these help resources — the Lucy Faithful Foundation — to get a better idea of what sort of patronizing help is available (not that I'm interested in it myself) and found the so-called help to be very counterproductive. An example is that one of the self-help module guides talks about use of legal adult pornography, and discourages its use by implying it could be a slope towards consumption of illegal material.

In other words, if you're a MAP and you're looking for genuine help to cope, you could pull into one of these modules and be disparaged for using legal adult pornography. How is it productive in the slightest to try and discourage use of adult pornography? Surely that's an outlet for at least some MAPs that are trying not to offend.

Things like this just make it more clear that it isn't about protecting children, it's about the persistence of a puritan sex culture.

Bookshelf wrote: Wed Sep 03, 2025 9:41 am Things like this just make it more clear that it isn't about protecting children, it's about the persistence of a puritan sex culture.

Yes. Attacking MAPs is a safe and convenient outlet for many of society's nasty traits.

Many of our detractors would be lynching black people if they lived in another era.

There’s often a puritan undertone to anti-c positions. It should be surprising that one of the resources offered is anti-porn.

Bookshelf wrote: Wed Sep 03, 2025 9:41 am An example is that one of the self-help module guides talks about use of legal adult pornography, and discourages its use by implying it could be a slope towards consumption of illegal material.

In other words, if you're a MAP and you're looking for genuine help to cope, you could pull into one of these modules and be disparaged for using legal adult pornography. How is it productive in the slightest to try and discourage use of adult pornography? Surely that's an outlet for at least some MAPs that are trying not to offend.

Things like this just make it more clear that it isn't about protecting children, it's about the persistence of a puritan sex culture.

Yeah. Joe Public is just expressing their sense of ickiness at anything abnormal (little different from straight people being repulsed by gay sex), but the self-proclaimed "experts" are just social conservatives that hate sex and would like to go back to no sex before or outside of marriage and sex only for procreation.

This is why the public often deserves contempt; they're rationalizing their disgust using sources that they disagree with.