MAP Forum

Posted: **Wed Oct 22, 2025 8:50 pm**

I hear alot of antis say “oh children shouldnt have sexual contact with adults because of the power dynamic adults have over children, the kid will feel forced to say yes to things they dont want to do so it is inherently abusive”

And that argument is a red herring, complete BULLSHIT, and heres why.

The only way this argument would be valid is if we lived in a magical fantasy world where kids actually listened to adults. Antis apperantly live in a seperate plane of existance where children are blind obedient slaves to adults who always listen and obey. In this made up fantasy land, you tell a kid to jump and they say how high, no questions asked, no resitance or anything. Espcially when it comes to things the kid actively dislikes. Because as we all know, children always listen and always obey adults and are completely incapable of voicing their wishes and desires and speaking up when they dont like something. /j

Babies dont whine and cry, toddlers dont throw tantrums, elementary school kids dont throw fits and scream and yell, teenagers dont rebel and blindly obey authority figures with absolutely zero resitance whatsoever. Thats why we dont need juvinille detention facillities, because no teenager would ever go against any adults wishes. “No drugs or sex or alcohol.” “Yes ma’am whatever you say, I am the child and you are the adult so I will do whatever you say. We dont need things like timeouts or spankings or grounding either, because children under 13 always listen and would feel too scared and pressured to speak out against adults. “Do your homework, eat your vegetables wash the dishes, clean your room.” “Yes of course I will get to it straight away and eagerly at that, I am a child and you are the adult, so how could I ever say no to you, I am simply too scared of the power dynamic.” All those memories you have of your childhood and other kids in your life, of throwing tantrums, screaming at adults, yelling “NO NO NO NO!” when they try to get you to do the most basic of tasks, hitting, yelling, cussing, that clearly NEVER happned and are just false memories, as children are clearly to scared of the power dynamic adults hold to EVER even voice their disagreement, let alone actively disobey adult orders. Parenting is actually the easiest thing ever, because if you tell your kid to do literally anything, your kid will immediately drop what they are doing and do what you order without any disagreement because power dynamic.

I mean it makes sense really, parents, the adults who have the LARGEST power dynamic over kids, who basically legally own them in, have the EASIEST time getting kids to do what they want via power dynamic. Even getting your toddler to eat your vegetables or your teenager to stop drinking and do their algebra homework is the easiest thing ever and a complete walk in the park because a child will always do whatever you want because you are the adult. So of course, even a random ass adult with zero real legal or social authority over the child other than being over 18, who the child, if they so wanted, could easily lie and say “he abused me” and get the adult sentenced to decades in prison, life on the SO regristry, homeless, jobless, friend and familyless, and abandoned by society, will obviously be able to get the child to do whatever he wants. Because reason.

And of course, this “power dynamic” only matters when it comes to sexual matters. Children can medically transition, sky dive, go horseback riding, do contact sports, all with direct adult intervention and participation, despite the fact that all these actions could lead to death or permanent disabillity, because obviously, a kid getting their dick sucked and potentially not being a huge fan of blowjobs is WAAAAAAAY more serious than literal fucking death.

All those memories you have as a kid of talking back to your parents? According to antis, that never happned. All those memories of making fun of your teachers? Never happned. Of blatantly disobeying and disrespecting adults and their authority? Pedo implantanted propoganda, that clearly could not have happened because the power dynamic would make you too scared to resist adults. Espciially those with a huge power dyanmic over you like teachers and parents, who you NEVER EVER disrespected or disobeyed or talked back to right?

Seriously, what is this magical fantasy world that antis live in? Where children obey and respect adult authority are too scared to ever disobey, where pubsecent and post pubescent teenagers are asexual and have to be “groomed” into being sexual. Where looking at a nude selfie of a kid will telepathically abuse and traumatize the kid, even if she doesnt even know you fucking exist, even if she took the selfie herself, she will still telepathically sense that adult eyes are viewing her picture and traumatize herself accordingly(unless those adult eyes belong to the police or law enforecement, then she will be perfectly fine), where a boy getting his dick sucked will cause crippling life long permanent trauma, where an orgasm is more serious than death itself, where children under the aoc mutually “rape” each other (cocsa). Where finding a 17 and 364 day old teen makes you a fulthy inhuman predator but finding a girl on her 18th birthday hot makes you normal.

I mean, the very fact that antis who usually use this argument start of with “children are told to listen to adults” destroys their entire argument. Because adults wouldnt even HAVE to tell children to listen in the first place if children fucking listened ever. They would just do it. You dont have to tell a fish to swim or bird to peck because they just do. If kids ever fucking listened or respected or feared adult authority we wouldnt have to constantly tell kids over and over and over and over to stop talking and listen. Seriously, all you have to do is search up “bratty kid” or “parenting help, kid wont listen” or “disrespectful teen” or “kid throws tantrum” or “supernanny” to see this supposed “fear of authority and adult power” in action.

Not once in my life do I ever recall being too scared of adults and their “power dynamic”. My parents literally fucking beat me and even THEN I still never gaf and did what I wanted and spoke up when I didnt like something or want to do something an adult wanted me to do. And this is with a PARENT, the adults with the largest power dynamic over their child, BEATING CHILDREN, if even literally beating the fucking child wont make them blindly respect and obey your authority, then how the hell is being some random ass pedo who doesnt force or beat the kid and has no legal or social power over them supposed to do shit? Even the children who are literally fucking BEAT INTO SUBMISSION by the adults with THE MOST POWER still dont obey this “power dynamic” shit. In fact, kids that are forced into things by adults, even by things like beating, tend to act out against adults and be the most. disrespectful. But most pedos arent beating kids, pro Cs arent arguing for sexual contact that involves any type of force or beating and agree that that should stay illegal, and the vast majority of cases of AMSC dont even involve any force or beating, yet antis will say that the power dyanmic alone will make the kids blind obedient slaves?? You can literally beat the shit put of a kid and they will still speak put against you and voice their opinion and disobey your orders, so all this argument is is a red herring.

“Little Jimmy its time for your booster shot.”

“I have a crippling fear of needles and hate shots, but I am so scared of her adult authority and power that I will sit her like a good boy and take it, I wont thrash around and whine and scream or hit or yell or anything, because scary power dynamic” Fuck out my face

Its like the “grooming”. Antis claim that kids arent pleasured by sexual pleasure, espcially not from adults, and have to be “groomed” into enjoying a good dick sucking. That adulrs somehow possess this magical special power to make kids want to do things they dont want to do and dont enjoy. Yet for some reason, this magical grooming can only work for sexual pleasure, if you try to groom a kid into anything else they dont want to do, like their homework or chores or obeying the law, this magically doesnt work. Its almost like…kids…recieve pleasure…from sexual pleasure…and not pain…hmmm. Just something to think about.

Posted: **Wed Oct 22, 2025 9:19 pm**

This kind of argument always had smelled to me as some sort of "heteronormative kind of argument".
It not only ignores that all forms of relationships have power disparities, but it instead draws the line on AMSC in comparison to adult-adult relations (that are seemed as appropriate and "power balanced" ) in the same way heteronormativeness draws the line on homo relationships in comparison to hetero ones.
Adult, hetero and age-appropriate relationships are not free of flaws, have imbalances too and have so many problems as gay and pedo ones.
You end with a sort of regulatory regime.

In my view, this radical feminist conceptualization of a sexuality uncorrupted by inequalities and power differentials is not only a regulatory construction but also a construction that profoundly misunderstands the dynamics of human sexual and intersubjective relations. While I would certainly claim that children and adults do not share a relation of equivalence, this is not to say that children are universally positioned outside power. On the contrary, no non–physically forcible sexual relations (adult-adult or adult-child) and no parent-child relations can be disarticulated from power.

Feminism, child sexual abuse, and the erasure of child sexuality - Steven Angelides

We should also don't forget that parental relations are full of power imbalances, but people generally doesn't care to condemn them because they are deemed as "normal" or "natural"

Posted: **Wed Oct 22, 2025 9:21 pm**

100% with you. On top of that, power dynamics in a relationship in of themselves are not bad; it's the abuse of that power that makes it bad. Whether there is a knowledge gap, physical gap, or whatever, it does not make such relationship inherently abusive. That is why I don't believe in informed consent being necessary, while at the same time, I believe it is a good thing to have and kids of nearly any age could be easily informed about the consequences sexual interactions.

Posted: **Wed Oct 22, 2025 9:42 pm**

In 2021, approximately 172 children suffered injuries in a car accident as a passenger every single day in the USA. Around about 3-4 American children die every day in a car accident. Very few of these children gave their fully informed consent — as in, they were unlikely to really comprehend the risks or consequences of being in a moving vehicle. They did not have control over the situation — they were obviously not driving, relying entirely on whatever random adult they got assigned to be with that day; as well as the other adults in other cars.

Despite the real serious risks involved in driving, and the massive number of children that are injured or worse in road traffic accidents every day, for some reason they don't need to be able to give fully informed consent to get in a car. They don't even need to know what a car is (literal babies can be forced into these death machines). When they are in a car, it is seldom by choice — it is because a parent is making them go somewhere, or a parent doesn't trust them to walk from A to B themselves.

They are forced into a dangerous situation that they don't understand the dangers of, usually at the pleasure, comfort or convenience of a caregiver. Yet for some reason no one raises concerns about power dynamics, or consent issues.

This is because they don't actually care about any of that. It's all an excuse to oppress and control young people, and to vilify the contemporary deviant sexuality.

Posted: **Thu Oct 23, 2025 1:58 am**

Bookshelf wrote: Wed Oct 22, 2025 9:42 pm In 2021, approximately 172 children suffered injuries in a car accident as a passenger every single day in the USA. Around about 3-4 American children die every day in a car accident. Very few of these children gave their fully informed consent — as in, they were unlikely to really comprehend the risks or consequences of being in a moving vehicle. They did not have control over the situation — they were obviously not driving, relying entirely on whatever random adult they got assigned to be with that day; as well as the other adults in other cars.

Despite the real serious risks involved in driving, and the massive number of children that are injured or worse in road traffic accidents every day, for some reason they don't need to be able to give fully informed consent to get in a car. They don't even need to know what a car is (literal babies can be forced into these death machines). When they are in a car, it is seldom by choice — it is because a parent is making them go somewhere, or a parent doesn't trust them to walk from A to B themselves.

They are forced into a dangerous situation that they don't understand the dangers of, usually at the pleasure, comfort or convenience of a caregiver. Yet for some reason no one raises concerns about power dynamics, or consent issues.

This is because they don't actually care about any of that. It's all an excuse to oppress and control young people, and to vilify the contemporary deviant sexuality.

Yes. Yet despite being the leading cause of death in precious little innocent children, ive never heard antis fight for minors to be only allowed to use public transportation, since the “risk of harm” for cars is too great, and “if we can just save one kid”. Or that kids arent properly informed on cars.

10 year olds are mature and responsible enough to be tried as adults and locked behind bars for years or decades but arent mature enough to jack off with someone. A 16 year old is mature and responsible enough to drive a 4300 pound machine that can go 100+ miles an hour and is the leading cause of death for children his age but not mature and responisble enough for an adult to suck his peepee. A 17 year old is mature and responsible enough to enlist on the fucking MILLITARY. But of course is too stupid and brain dead to understand or handle the mature complex highly intelligent and mature complexity of getting his dick sucked by a hot MILF. Theres middle school aged children in fucking university but they are apperantly fucking brain dead comatose patients compared to 30 year old virgin highschool dropouts when it comes to the highly intelligent mature complex mature high iq task of sucking dick, a task so highly complex and mature and sophisticated and complicated that even a university educated child wont be even able to REMOTELY understand it till midnight of their 18th birthday when all the secret hidden blowjob knowledge and consentiness will be telepathically transplanted into them.

Posted: **Thu Oct 23, 2025 7:45 pm**

It's all an excuse to oppress and control young people

I mostly agree with all of the replies so far but, 'to be fair,' I don't think that's what the anti-child sexuality or child/minor-adult sexual intimacy taboo is rooted in. I think at the core is the attitude that sex is by default dirty and inappropriate until it can be justified (by marriage/a serious long-term relationship or 'love') and wanting to maintain an image of childhood that is romantic and appealing to adults (children are innocent and innocence implies asexuality). I'm never going to close myself off to some possible argument that even in a society without a preexisting anti-child sexuality or child-adult sexual intimacy taboo for children to internalize and suffer from as a result (viewing themselves in retrospect as having been basically raped) there would be a reason discourage child-adult sex out of risk aversion but the stigmatization of pedophilia itself and the idea that child-adult sex is inherently bad (I'm really interested in whether or not people think the latter realistically implies the former) has nothing to do with harm reduction. I'll also add that if sex outside of marriage or a committed long-term relationship (i.e. something to possibly build a family on) is fundamentally inappropriate then the taboo makes sense, if one is ok with casual recreational sex between adults then it's harder for me to see what the problem with child-adult sex would be (outside of possible stress to the child that it might circumstantially cause), which is to say that it's easier for me to understand the 'conservative' opposition to child-adult sex than the 'liberal' one, on the other hand 'liberalism' seems deeply concerned with power imbalances and 'exploitation' but some power imbalances are accepted and exploitation is only meaningful with a concept of harm, so it does seem to tie back to the attitude of sex as degrading or degenerate by default without justification.

I had two things I wanted to say and I've forgotten one of them. One was that I remember watching a clip of an experimental Australian school where children were allowed to run around freely without restriction or boundaries and the idea was that if they hurt themselves, that painful memory would help to strengthen their ability to consider the long-term consequences of their decisions. One child fell from a tree and broke his arm (he could have died). I vaguely remember their being glass on the ground that the children could cut themselves with. People might have disagreed but I imagine (I assume) that the man who ran the whole thing would have the same attitudes about child-adult sex that most people do and while the school was controversial, child-adult sex in the safest environment or under the safest conditions seems to be much more controversial. That says a lot.

Now I remember the other thing- I was basically agreeing with the OP. Power does not accumulate with age in a vacuum (when leftists talk about power imbalances, it's often really vague and unspecific; what specifically can straight white men do in any given scenario that gays, p.o.c and women can't? As it relates to child-adult interactions, what exactly can an adult who isn't a child's parent or teacher do to the child as a result of not stigmatizing consensual sexual relations between them? It's a stronger point to make when talking about relationships between older and younger adults because being cognitively more developed and physically stronger does come with some advantages, circumstantially, although there is individual variation within age groups when it comes to those things. I am definitely not the exact same as my 12-year-old self but that seems to be around the age when 'adult cognition' really starts to develop; according to some research, so I do think the differences between adults and children 12 and older tend to be exaggerated and much more so when we're talking about 16-18 year-olds in comparison to older adults. At 13 I was reading books intended for adults almost exclusively. I didn't start reading middle-grade fiction again until I was in my 20s. Anyway, an adult can physically kidnap a child or beat them but that's not legal and I don't see how statutory rape laws deter that). Some children have a higher need for approval or are more susceptible to peer pressure and I do care about that (I do think it can be wrong to pressure people into certain behavior even in the absence of physical coercion, although it's worth noting that this kind of 'social power' is given to people by other people, it's not like the kind of power that comes with the threat of violence or force or even negative consequences outside of the influencer's personal disapproval) but there's too much individual variation and the same is true for so many adults (children can pressure other children and I'm sure even adults sometimes and adults can pressure other adults).

Posted: **Fri Oct 24, 2025 11:38 am**

John_Doe wrote: Thu Oct 23, 2025 7:45 pm Stuff

At first you said you don't think it's rooted in the oppression/control of young people, but then you say you think it's in part rooted in "...and wanting to maintain an image of childhood that is romantic and appealing to adults".

These are the same thing.

Posted: **Fri Oct 24, 2025 5:08 pm**

Bookshelf wrote: Fri Oct 24, 2025 11:38 am
John_Doe wrote: Thu Oct 23, 2025 7:45 pm Stuff
At first you said you don't think it's rooted in the oppression/control of young people, but then you say you think it's in part rooted in "...and wanting to maintain an image of childhood that is romantic and appealing to adults".

These are the same thing.

It's possible I misinterpreted you (e.g. took you too literally) but you said that it (the risk and/or power dynamics argument, I assume) is an excuse to control and oppress young people which I took to mean that their ultimate motivation is to control and oppress young people just to control and oppress them, and to vilify whatever just so happens to be the contemporary deviant sexuality but I thought this ignored what makes the currently stigmatized sexuality stigmatized to begin with (they could control and oppress young people by forbidding them from reading comic books or eating junk food or in a number of ways as well and most people in modern Western culture have no problem with inter-racial relationships or homosexuality, not that anti-homosexuality is extremely rare but I assume the average Westerner is fine with it). I agree that a concern with power dynamics is not the only thing at play, if I assume people are sincere in claiming to oppose it for that reason on any level (even if they are, there has to be some matter-of-fact explanation as to why they care about power dynamics in regards to x but not y and that reason is a value other than wanting to minimize power imbalances per se) but I don't think it's motivated by some malevolent desire to keep young people down, or even an underclass like pedophiles/openly minor-attracted people just to be keeping someone down (not that I don't think the need for social hierarchy/to be above someone else or contempt for people who are different and unusual or vulnerable is part of 'human nature'). Wanting to maintain an idealized image of someone for your own benefit even if it requires controlling them in ways that might be harmful to them is not sadistic or rooted in actively wanting to harm that person, it's merely selfish. People very often hurt other people not because they want to hurt them, but because they don't care or enough whether or not they do. A guy who robs you doesn't necessarily hate your guts, he just cares about himself more than he cares about you (assuming he's not starving or desperate and believes he needs your money or property more than you do).

Furthermore, I think the reason why sexualizing children ruins most people's image of children is probably because they connect innocence and purity with asexuality and this ties back to my point about underlying attitudes about sex that ultimately have nothing to do with child-adult sex or pedophiles per se. Even when it comes to women in his own age group, a man is often considered a scumbag in pursuing casual sex with them (even if cares about her and feels affection for her and respects her and makes his intentions clear, although that might redeem him to some degree), it's ok to want a serious committed 'relationship' with them and sex in that context but sex per se should not be his goal, so you can imagine that he'd be considered 10 times more evil if he wants to have sex with the most innocent, pure and vulnerable among us. My point about wanting to maintain an idealized image of children probably doesn't apply to teens 16 or older, I assume that most people don't have a problem with 16-18 year-olds having sex as long as it's within their age group.

There's also the possibility that sex is seen as more risky than sitting in a moving vehicle (i.e. more likely to harm children, even if the worst consequences aren't necessarily greater than death or lifelong injury/disfiguration). I won't dismiss the possibility that harm reduction is a real concern for many people but I don't see how it applies to stigmatizing pedophilia itself, animated child porn or the idea that child-adult sex is intrinsically bad (or the idea that it's acceptable for 16-year-olds to have sex with other 16-year-olds but not older adults. A man selling heroin to a child can be considered especially unjust because he should know better but in terms of harm it makes no difference whether the child buys the heroin from an adult or another child).

Truth be told, I think that pedophiles and minor-attracted adults would be the primary beneficiaries of eliminating statutory rape laws or the anti-child-adult sex on principle/pedophilia stigma itself (the former won't necessarily lead to the latter; it's very taboo for 40-year-olds to date 18-year-olds, which is part of why I think pan-hedonism covers the latter better than any other position could although libertarianism is the single strongest basis for the former in every hypothetical world). Children, teenagers and even just relatively younger adults aren't viewed as scumbags, sociopaths or predators for being with or wanting to be with older people; they are not seen as having committed a moral error but rather as victims. If the relationship is discovered, they face no jail time.

Posted: **Fri Nov 07, 2025 3:19 pm**

G@yWad69 wrote: Wed Oct 22, 2025 8:50 pm I hear alot of antis say “oh children shouldnt have sexual contact with adults because of the power dynamic adults have over children, the kid will feel forced to say yes to things they dont want to do so it is inherently abusive”

And that argument is a red herring, complete BULLSHIT, and heres why.

The only way this argument would be valid is if we lived in a magical fantasy world where kids actually listened to adults. Antis apperantly live in a seperate plane of existance where children are blind obedient slaves to adults who always listen and obey. In this made up fantasy land, you tell a kid to jump and they say how high, no questions asked, no resitance or anything. Espcially when it comes to things the kid actively dislikes. Because as we all know, children always listen and always obey adults and are completely incapable of voicing their wishes and desires and speaking up when they dont like something. /j

Babies dont whine and cry, toddlers dont throw tantrums, elementary school kids dont throw fits and scream and yell, teenagers dont rebel and blindly obey authority figures with absolutely zero resitance whatsoever. Thats why we dont need juvinille detention facillities, because no teenager would ever go against any adults wishes. “No drugs or sex or alcohol.” “Yes ma’am whatever you say, I am the child and you are the adult so I will do whatever you say. We dont need things like timeouts or spankings or grounding either, because children under 13 always listen and would feel too scared and pressured to speak out against adults. “Do your homework, eat your vegetables wash the dishes, clean your room.” “Yes of course I will get to it straight away and eagerly at that, I am a child and you are the adult, so how could I ever say no to you, I am simply too scared of the power dynamic.” All those memories you have of your childhood and other kids in your life, of throwing tantrums, screaming at adults, yelling “NO NO NO NO!” when they try to get you to do the most basic of tasks, hitting, yelling, cussing, that clearly NEVER happned and are just false memories, as children are clearly to scared of the power dynamic adults hold to EVER even voice their disagreement, let alone actively disobey adult orders. Parenting is actually the easiest thing ever, because if you tell your kid to do literally anything, your kid will immediately drop what they are doing and do what you order without any disagreement because power dynamic.

I mean it makes sense really, parents, the adults who have the LARGEST power dynamic over kids, who basically legally own them in, have the EASIEST time getting kids to do what they want via power dynamic. Even getting your toddler to eat your vegetables or your teenager to stop drinking and do their algebra homework is the easiest thing ever and a complete walk in the park because a child will always do whatever you want because you are the adult. So of course, even a random ass adult with zero real legal or social authority over the child other than being over 18, who the child, if they so wanted, could easily lie and say “he abused me” and get the adult sentenced to decades in prison, life on the SO regristry, homeless, jobless, friend and familyless, and abandoned by society, will obviously be able to get the child to do whatever he wants. Because reason.

And of course, this “power dynamic” only matters when it comes to sexual matters. Children can medically transition, sky dive, go horseback riding, do contact sports, all with direct adult intervention and participation, despite the fact that all these actions could lead to death or permanent disabillity, because obviously, a kid getting their dick sucked and potentially not being a huge fan of blowjobs is WAAAAAAAY more serious than literal fucking death.

All those memories you have as a kid of talking back to your parents? According to antis, that never happned. All those memories of making fun of your teachers? Never happned. Of blatantly disobeying and disrespecting adults and their authority? Pedo implantanted propoganda, that clearly could not have happened because the power dynamic would make you too scared to resist adults. Espciially those with a huge power dyanmic over you like teachers and parents, who you NEVER EVER disrespected or disobeyed or talked back to right?

Seriously, what is this magical fantasy world that antis live in? Where children obey and respect adult authority are too scared to ever disobey, where pubsecent and post pubescent teenagers are asexual and have to be “groomed” into being sexual. Where looking at a nude selfie of a kid will telepathically abuse and traumatize the kid, even if she doesnt even know you fucking exist, even if she took the selfie herself, she will still telepathically sense that adult eyes are viewing her picture and traumatize herself accordingly(unless those adult eyes belong to the police or law enforecement, then she will be perfectly fine), where a boy getting his dick sucked will cause crippling life long permanent trauma, where an orgasm is more serious than death itself, where children under the aoc mutually “rape” each other (cocsa). Where finding a 17 and 364 day old teen makes you a fulthy inhuman predator but finding a girl on her 18th birthday hot makes you normal.

I mean, the very fact that antis who usually use this argument start of with “children are told to listen to adults” destroys their entire argument. Because adults wouldnt even HAVE to tell children to listen in the first place if children fucking listened ever. They would just do it. You dont have to tell a fish to swim or bird to peck because they just do. If kids ever fucking listened or respected or feared adult authority we wouldnt have to constantly tell kids over and over and over and over to stop talking and listen. Seriously, all you have to do is search up “bratty kid” or “parenting help, kid wont listen” or “disrespectful teen” or “kid throws tantrum” or “supernanny” to see this supposed “fear of authority and adult power” in action.

Not once in my life do I ever recall being too scared of adults and their “power dynamic”. My parents literally fucking beat me and even THEN I still never gaf and did what I wanted and spoke up when I didnt like something or want to do something an adult wanted me to do. And this is with a PARENT, the adults with the largest power dynamic over their child, BEATING CHILDREN, if even literally beating the fucking child wont make them blindly respect and obey your authority, then how the hell is being some random ass pedo who doesnt force or beat the kid and has no legal or social power over them supposed to do shit? Even the children who are literally fucking BEAT INTO SUBMISSION by the adults with THE MOST POWER still dont obey this “power dynamic” shit. In fact, kids that are forced into things by adults, even by things like beating, tend to act out against adults and be the most. disrespectful. But most pedos arent beating kids, pro Cs arent arguing for sexual contact that involves any type of force or beating and agree that that should stay illegal, and the vast majority of cases of AMSC dont even involve any force or beating, yet antis will say that the power dyanmic alone will make the kids blind obedient slaves?? You can literally beat the shit put of a kid and they will still speak put against you and voice their opinion and disobey your orders, so all this argument is is a red herring.

“Little Jimmy its time for your booster shot.”

“I have a crippling fear of needles and hate shots, but I am so scared of her adult authority and power that I will sit her like a good boy and take it, I wont thrash around and whine and scream or hit or yell or anything, because scary power dynamic” Fuck out my face

Its like the “grooming”. Antis claim that kids arent pleasured by sexual pleasure, espcially not from adults, and have to be “groomed” into enjoying a good dick sucking. That adulrs somehow possess this magical special power to make kids want to do things they dont want to do and dont enjoy. Yet for some reason, this magical grooming can only work for sexual pleasure, if you try to groom a kid into anything else they dont want to do, like their homework or chores or obeying the law, this magically doesnt work. Its almost like…kids…recieve pleasure…from sexual pleasure…and not pain…hmmm. Just something to think about.

An "order" should never be given without a vocalised reason.

MAP Forum

The “power dynamic” argument and why it is disingenuous bullshit

The “power dynamic” argument and why it is disingenuous bullshit

Re: The “power dynamic” argument and why it is disingenuous bullshit

Re: The “power dynamic” argument and why it is disingenuous bullshit

Re: The “power dynamic” argument and why it is disingenuous bullshit

Re: The “power dynamic” argument and why it is disingenuous bullshit

Re: The “power dynamic” argument and why it is disingenuous bullshit

Re: The “power dynamic” argument and why it is disingenuous bullshit

Re: The “power dynamic” argument and why it is disingenuous bullshit

Re: The “power dynamic” argument and why it is disingenuous bullshit