Nonetheless, when every platform in existence bans MAPs' rights to defend themselves publicly, the result is the same as if the state itself had banned their speech. In practice, MAPs have no right to speak.
I think people need to acknowledge social media does in practice function like a public space. Musk was a stopped clock when he talked about that, it a shame someone as emotionally stunted and egotistical as him was the one to push that idea. I don't know what the solution is; publicly owned social media, maybe?
For those who challenge the extreme views of social media communities - whether they be on Facebook, on Reddit, or wherever - a ban can be expected. Actual debates, or even polite discussions, are never had.
They actually rationalize it too. They call it "concern trolling".
In June, a major non-violent protest group called Palestine Action broke into a major British airbase, damaging two military aircraft that were used to support Israel's genocide of the Palestinian people.
The UK has definitely overreached in terms of censoring pro-Palestine protestors, but I don't know if I'd call that example straightforward censorship.
The inability to have healthy debates, and to be listened to, has historically resulted in violence.
Maybe, though social media gives a new option: getting further drawn into a solipsistic bubble detached from the rest of the world.
And yet violence toward them is fine, implicitly endorsed by social media platforms and even the government.
...
MAPs are state-sanctioned non-humans to be hunted with crossbows.
I think this has been getting worse. The younger generations have cavalier attitudes towards everything. Consider the example of Jack Teixeira, he leaked classified documents on his gaming Discord server. I don't know if young people believe in anything or even have moral codes anymore, and when we have people like Trump being one of the most powerful leaders in the world, can anyone really blame them? The best of humanity is sinking, there's only so much selfishness and irresponsibility that you can have before society collapses.
It will inevitably keep happening until the bullying of MAPs ceases, which is quite a pity because the vast majority of MAPs just want to be left alone to live peaceful lives. Indeed, Mu's survey of the MAP community in 2024 revealed that far from being sadistic predators, most MAPs are incredibly kind and gentle toward children, arguably less 'predatorial' than your average adult-attracted man.
I wonder about this. The overwhelming majority of violent criminals are male, and the number of female violent criminals is quite low. If pedophilia is the result of prenatal hormones, maybe lower aggression is hard-wired in pedophiles in a similar way that it seems to be in women? I say this because I feel like if anyone would have a strong motive to do an attack, it would be MAPs; but I can't really think of any examples. Even among the angriest MAPs I've seen online, I don't get the same vibe from them you get when learning about killers.
Officerkrupke wrote: Sat Oct 04, 2025 11:18 am
Ive often thought that we are denied the conditions necessary for free speech and debate: presumption of good faith.
But if you believe being a MAP is inherently dangerous, this leads not to listening openly but guarding against MAPs trying to “groom” you into their POV.
I don't know how you deal with that. Thinking of pedophilia as morally equivalent to cannibalism, torture, or euthanasia is very hard for me to understand. I can understand what it means when you hear something so repugnant that you can't even engage, but I don't see how pedophilia could fit that category; it can't sexuality since that's ubiquitous, so maybe it's denial that minors are interested in sex? Or maybe it really is that people never really got over their shame and guilt about sex; they practice unmarried sex for pleasure, but they feel guilty when minors are interested in the same things?