Would you be happy to accept MAP as a form of neurodiversity (that may be our only option)

[Grunko]

I wondered whether it would be AAM/MAP relationships would be accepted if being attracted to minors would be classed as a type of neurodiversity like autism or ADHD.

Neurodiversity is NOT a mental illness, it just means your brain works differently to others and you function differently to other people. I know James Cantor explains that MAP’s are different to normal people because of the way they think or function.

I only say it because I know some people have said age gaps relationships are wrong in the mainstream world, but are accepted in the neurodiverse world even if both people are above legal age of consent

Like some people have said age gap relationships (including between 16 yo and 32yo) would be accepted in the neurodiverse world but not in the mainstream world only because the neurodiverse 32yo may have the mental age of a teenager or their Brian’s are more complex and not like everyone else’s.

I don’t know what you think?

[BLueRibbon]

This is a very interesting idea.

[RocketRack]

Sure, add it to the pile that I already have I do think thought that this is maybe our only real option of being accepted... Though we would no doubt be subject to 'treatment' to resolve or 'help us' with our sexuality

[PorcelainLark]

I doubt it would be accepted, but if it did, fine by me.

[TheHamilplexOfficial]

i would say that this makes more sense than to say that MAP/AAM is LGBTQ. in fact, most of my paraphilias are caused by my neurodiversity (or are caused by things that were caused by my neurodiversity) so i dont see the issue

- Rusty | He/It/Vamp/Star/Pup | AAM | Main Main Host | "History Has Its Eyes On You"

[CantChainTheSpirit]

Maybe as a stepping stone but personally I wouldn't accept it forever. This idea that it's not normal, when apparently the governments and LEA's of this world go on about how it's a pandemic in society with maps everywhere you look. Well which is it? If there are so many maps among us then isn't that kind of what normal means?

[OnionPetal]

[...] I know some people have said age gaps relationships are wrong in the mainstream world, but are accepted in the neurodiverse world [...]

Well neuro-diverse people tend to be more open-minded and accepting of new ideas in general. They think differently, and consequently are probably more intelligent. By contrast, the conventional, median-IQ people do not always accept differences as easily.

Maybe as a stepping stone but personally I wouldn't accept it forever. This idea that it's not normal, when apparently the governments and LEA's of this world go on about how it's a pandemic in society with maps everywhere you look. Well which is it? If there are so many maps among us then isn't that kind of what normal means?

This is a good point.

Yeah, could be a stepping stone. But I take some issue with people who insist that orientation is all a 'brain' issue. Some people even seek to identify the part of the 'brain' responsible, to find a 'fix,' which horrifies me. Like Can'tChain said, it's clearly something to an extent normal and naturally occurring in nature.

I don't think love is just all in your head. Isn't it also in your heart and in your soul? It's probably in your genes, your spirit, and every fibre of your being.

[RoosterDance]

I would be very against this. Probably because I'm against the very concept of neuro-diversity as well.

[Learning to undeny]

I like the idea if it were possible, but I don't think MAP is like a form of neurodiversity, because the latter is something that shows through every little thing you think or do, it doesn't have a "trigger" such as seeing someone or a specific thought.

[John_Doe]

No. It's not clear to me whether or not you mean that the broader society would accept minor attraction in adults as an expression of some kind of neurodivergency or that it would be more commonly accepted within the neurodivergent community but I don't like the idea of neurodivergent people being exempted from a normal anti-age gap standard on the grounds that they're psychologically closer to younger people than neurotypical people of their age group are (it's possible I've completely misunderstood you). I also don't agree with the idea that being psychologically closer to younger people is implied by an attraction to or preference for them or that the latter would require the former and if it's just a matter of minor attraction in adults being a symptom of neurological abnormality broadly I don't care as much about that as an actual explanation for it as I do about the exemption (I can't see most people accepting minor attraction in adults simply because it's the result of some kind of brain abnormality, which might be their assumption already, although; on paper, they should accept a 30-something-year-old with the 'mind of a teenager' being attracted to teens). The only condition that justifies opposing what could be a source of happiness for both parties is unnecessary suffering, the risks and costs of that relationship. If we had reason to believe that those relationships would probably severely harm the younger party, the exemption would be a reason to assume that a relationship with some adults rather than others would be less harmful.

I also don't like the dishonesty around minor attraction in adults in presenting it as unusual or deviant/maladaptive in some way. A preference for prepubescent children is notable because it does contradict normal human sexuality (i.e. it is inherently maladaptive, regardless of our conscious intentions and goals sex, as a biological function, is reproductive by nature). It is normal for adults to be attracted to adolescents who look as though they could reproduce and it is normal for adolescents who have gone through menarche/semenarche to have a fully developed libido (again, I know I've said this often, natural doesn't mean good or conductive to long-term happiness but if your body produces sperm or has a menstrual cycle it is trying to get you to reproduce so I don't understand the idea of post-menarche/semenarche teens not being 'ready' for sex with anyone of any age or capable of grasping what it is or its consequences etc. for fundamentally age-related reasons). I feel the same way about 'adult-attracted minors,' as a teenager I don't remember ever having made a distinction between girls/women in their teens, twenties and thirties or even some middle-aged women (I never thought about having an age-preference but in retrospect I was attracted to girls/women who looked developed but probably not well into middle-age, if I had a crush on someone they probably looked as though they were in their early adulthood/'adolescence.' I don't remember thinking about age though. My friend and I were attracted to the mothers on Moesha and The Parent'Hood but both actresses were in their late 30s when the show started. I also liked the mother on That's So Raven, she was apparently in her 40s when the show came out, but I was probably a legal adult when I first saw it). I think the distinction between an attraction to developed-looking teens or preteens and legal adults is basically cultural, again; I think what's notable would be relationships that inherently lack reproductive viability (not because someone has a malfunctioning reproductive system but because one party lacks a reproductive system entirely or if we're talking about same-sex couples. I'm not saying that these relationships are inherently bad but I think they're matter-of-factly notable in a way that a preference for redheads or Asian women isn't. That's why gays are 'queer').

I can somewhat see how pedophilia being the result of brain abnormality should make people more sympathetic because it further cements, in most people's minds, that it's out of their control (although some kind of abnormal brain wiring shouldn't be required for that). Many people already accept this, they'll probably assume the abnormality is pathological (which modern psychology allows for through its obfuscation of the concept of 'illness' and largely removing it from testable biological dysfunction) but many people are deeply hateful to pedophiles even under that assumption and it still doesn't say anything about the propriety of age-gap relationships (having 'the mind of a teenager' is something else but people won't necessarily accept even that much just because it's logically consistent. People treat you primarily based on what you physically look like, what goes on inside you won't always be seriously considered or appreciated). There would be nothing wrong with homosexuality even if it were a choice, for example.

As a general point, 'exploitation' as most people understand it is just an 'abstract' idea to me. Suffering is concrete and real. A dog can understand the latter, even without being able to rationally ponder on it he has some meaningful understanding of the value of painful experiences (again, even without reflecting on the nature of suffering abstractly or meta-cognitively).

RoosterDance,

I would be very against this. Probably because I'm against the very concept of neuro-diversity as well.

I don't know how seriously I would take it either. I haven't looked into it. I don't know how much of it is based on hard biological evidence or an assumption based on perceived psychological deviancy (people can know what they experience but inter-subjective comparisons are inferred).