Arguments, Communities and Limitations
Posted: Thu Feb 12, 2026 4:20 am
Has it ever struck you as peculiar how Mu's Communtity page 'MAP Information' section starts with 'B4U-ACT'.
Before you act. Quite the discouraging words these are, don't you think? Or take, for example, that interview with a friendly CP site admin and how he uses antis 'CSAM' newspeak. Totally not a LEA running a honeypot for bears.
It's also peculiar how Newgon's arguments' list is structured like Against:ANTI TALKING POINT. It's not in capsbold, sure, but it is underlined and is highlighted.
Imagine if the Sun were to post 'against: RUSSIAN ECONOMY IS STRONGER THAT WE THOUGHT' instead of 'RUSSIAN ECONOMY IS RUINED FOREVER' on Youtube.
Or take a look at the arguments themselves. 'Pedophilia is unnatural'. Pedophilia is natural, but so is cerebral paralysis. While the 'not natural' argument can be found in the wild, a stronger and more common version of anti's argument is more like 'pedophilia is a disorder, a pathology, a dangerous illness'. 'You're mentally ill and should seek help rather than try to validate your horrific desires'.
Not at all horrific, you'd reply? Would you support your reply by saying that 'a 13-year-old is not the same as a 3-year-old' or by saying that 'it doesn't have to be fucking a 3-year-old in the ass'. (Although, even if you do restrain yourself to not hurt an unwilling 3-year-old by fucking them, you're not denying that you really, really want to fuck the small child[ren].)
It seems especially common with hebephilies to run away from the edge cases, whereas I think that it's in our common interest to push the 'edge' as far as possible and to really put the limits to the test. If we manage to find and make acceptable a way to do sexual stuff with 3-year-olds, the sexual capacity of 13-year-olds is far less likely to be put to doubt.
The problem is, to make it acceptable to the general public, the way will have to be a safe one. Children are being deprived of internet access because they can kill themselves (I think, UK's PM replied something like this to Trump on UK's Truth Social ban). Kinder Surprise eggs are banned in some countries because children can choke on the toy inside and die. Do you remember how small age gap exemptions from AoC laws in some states are called 'Rome and Juliet' amendments (I wonder if remember it right) ? In the book, both died because of love. How can we allow something this dangerous to our children? Clearly, we must castrate the childhood, like how we chop off beaks of baby chickens so that they don't injure themselves and don't peck each other to death.
Even if it's only going to be acceptable to us, there still are problems.
Clearly, something is wrong with thinking of some pro-c people. Fragment had thought that he had a good relationship with a boy he engaged in mutual masturbation with, but the boy betrayed him to the system full well realizing the consequences. Was that not the case?
Clearly, there is a need to develop a good protocol, an ethics. So that our loved ones love us back rather than hate us and so that they remember us fondly even if the antis consider such an outcome being 'murdered in soul'.
But what approach is going to be fair?
Is something like 'relax your ass, be a good boy to your father' completely unacceptable? Or is there a context in which such a phrase is not an evil tool of coercion; after all, a child who engages in sex with us is likely to be more dear to us, can we not relay that? Besides that simply relaxing is apparently not the best approach to anal penetration, whether of children or adults. But here, on this forum, is it possible to discuss such peculiarities?
To male lolicons, imagine a man who looks like JD Vance. Imagine him, without any warning or prior explanation, pressing his cock against the mouth or the spine of your 3-year-old self. Would you try to ask him what he's doing on or tell him to stop? Had he started doing this on regular basis, would you later hate him for what he did to you? Having read these few sentences, are you glad that that never happened and that society tries to protect you from such experience? (It's a common anti[-c] talking point that's not in Newgon's list, by the way.)
To discuss these issues, it would be good if we could invite people with experience, both good and bad, to participate.
Unfortunately, in that regard, the talk here is detached from reality. Take, for example, that topic where a minor who posted CP of him(her?) self somewhere and got bullied over it was mentioned. It would be good to provide him with our respect and support. To invite him here and hear what he has to say. Instead, his (online) name got censored. How well can we fare with such an approach?
Not even directing somebody to 2D erotica is allowed, even though the company which Mu forum's IP belongs to hosts a booru. I don't think it's a good idea to turn an activism/general discussion forum into a porn one, but it's not that hard to find what would otherwise be PIM as illustrations to scientific articles on medical problems. We could use such illustrations similarly. For example, in debate on if penetrative sex before 12 really is a no-no. Alas, we're on clearnet and we're not a scientific journal, and so we can't.
It could be a good idea to invite pedophiles free out of jail here so that they can share their experiences. US'es policy of making some of the sex offender's info public could help us in that.
Judging by how Mu got contacted by a sex offender advocacy organization (?), somebody else has also thought of this.
But these would be people who got caught. What about those who never got reported? And their loved ones. They are unable to properly contribute to discussions here; or at least the forum's rules don't allow that. Without discussing the real, lived experiences, what people loved in their relationships, what exactly they hated and how to fix that, an important part of the general MAP discussion ends up being a talk about mirages, fantasy unicorns, if you will.
If not a more permissive place, do you perhaps know a forum or a Matrix char or whatnot with a more radical pro-c stance. With many questions I have left without a good answer, it becomes increasingly more easy for me to argue from the antis' point of view. In trying to understand what the antis feel and how they think, I end up myself becoming an anti. Although, it's also possible that I'm too poisoned by all the hatred and can not think straight anymore. So, I wonder if somebody knows a place where MAPs have a lot of faith in themselves. A lot of faith and good logic to back it up.
Before you act. Quite the discouraging words these are, don't you think? Or take, for example, that interview with a friendly CP site admin and how he uses antis 'CSAM' newspeak. Totally not a LEA running a honeypot for bears.
It's also peculiar how Newgon's arguments' list is structured like Against:ANTI TALKING POINT. It's not in capsbold, sure, but it is underlined and is highlighted.
Imagine if the Sun were to post 'against: RUSSIAN ECONOMY IS STRONGER THAT WE THOUGHT' instead of 'RUSSIAN ECONOMY IS RUINED FOREVER' on Youtube.
Or take a look at the arguments themselves. 'Pedophilia is unnatural'. Pedophilia is natural, but so is cerebral paralysis. While the 'not natural' argument can be found in the wild, a stronger and more common version of anti's argument is more like 'pedophilia is a disorder, a pathology, a dangerous illness'. 'You're mentally ill and should seek help rather than try to validate your horrific desires'.
Not at all horrific, you'd reply? Would you support your reply by saying that 'a 13-year-old is not the same as a 3-year-old' or by saying that 'it doesn't have to be fucking a 3-year-old in the ass'. (Although, even if you do restrain yourself to not hurt an unwilling 3-year-old by fucking them, you're not denying that you really, really want to fuck the small child[ren].)
It seems especially common with hebephilies to run away from the edge cases, whereas I think that it's in our common interest to push the 'edge' as far as possible and to really put the limits to the test. If we manage to find and make acceptable a way to do sexual stuff with 3-year-olds, the sexual capacity of 13-year-olds is far less likely to be put to doubt.
The problem is, to make it acceptable to the general public, the way will have to be a safe one. Children are being deprived of internet access because they can kill themselves (I think, UK's PM replied something like this to Trump on UK's Truth Social ban). Kinder Surprise eggs are banned in some countries because children can choke on the toy inside and die. Do you remember how small age gap exemptions from AoC laws in some states are called 'Rome and Juliet' amendments (I wonder if remember it right) ? In the book, both died because of love. How can we allow something this dangerous to our children? Clearly, we must castrate the childhood, like how we chop off beaks of baby chickens so that they don't injure themselves and don't peck each other to death.
Even if it's only going to be acceptable to us, there still are problems.
Clearly, something is wrong with thinking of some pro-c people. Fragment had thought that he had a good relationship with a boy he engaged in mutual masturbation with, but the boy betrayed him to the system full well realizing the consequences. Was that not the case?
Clearly, there is a need to develop a good protocol, an ethics. So that our loved ones love us back rather than hate us and so that they remember us fondly even if the antis consider such an outcome being 'murdered in soul'.
But what approach is going to be fair?
Is something like 'relax your ass, be a good boy to your father' completely unacceptable? Or is there a context in which such a phrase is not an evil tool of coercion; after all, a child who engages in sex with us is likely to be more dear to us, can we not relay that? Besides that simply relaxing is apparently not the best approach to anal penetration, whether of children or adults. But here, on this forum, is it possible to discuss such peculiarities?
To male lolicons, imagine a man who looks like JD Vance. Imagine him, without any warning or prior explanation, pressing his cock against the mouth or the spine of your 3-year-old self. Would you try to ask him what he's doing on or tell him to stop? Had he started doing this on regular basis, would you later hate him for what he did to you? Having read these few sentences, are you glad that that never happened and that society tries to protect you from such experience? (It's a common anti[-c] talking point that's not in Newgon's list, by the way.)
To discuss these issues, it would be good if we could invite people with experience, both good and bad, to participate.
Unfortunately, in that regard, the talk here is detached from reality. Take, for example, that topic where a minor who posted CP of him(her?) self somewhere and got bullied over it was mentioned. It would be good to provide him with our respect and support. To invite him here and hear what he has to say. Instead, his (online) name got censored. How well can we fare with such an approach?
Not even directing somebody to 2D erotica is allowed, even though the company which Mu forum's IP belongs to hosts a booru. I don't think it's a good idea to turn an activism/general discussion forum into a porn one, but it's not that hard to find what would otherwise be PIM as illustrations to scientific articles on medical problems. We could use such illustrations similarly. For example, in debate on if penetrative sex before 12 really is a no-no. Alas, we're on clearnet and we're not a scientific journal, and so we can't.
It could be a good idea to invite pedophiles free out of jail here so that they can share their experiences. US'es policy of making some of the sex offender's info public could help us in that.
Judging by how Mu got contacted by a sex offender advocacy organization (?), somebody else has also thought of this.
But these would be people who got caught. What about those who never got reported? And their loved ones. They are unable to properly contribute to discussions here; or at least the forum's rules don't allow that. Without discussing the real, lived experiences, what people loved in their relationships, what exactly they hated and how to fix that, an important part of the general MAP discussion ends up being a talk about mirages, fantasy unicorns, if you will.
If not a more permissive place, do you perhaps know a forum or a Matrix char or whatnot with a more radical pro-c stance. With many questions I have left without a good answer, it becomes increasingly more easy for me to argue from the antis' point of view. In trying to understand what the antis feel and how they think, I end up myself becoming an anti. Although, it's also possible that I'm too poisoned by all the hatred and can not think straight anymore. So, I wonder if somebody knows a place where MAPs have a lot of faith in themselves. A lot of faith and good logic to back it up.