MAP Forum

This kind of discussion, whenever it arises or it becomes more fervent, it's completely meaningless.
The problem with this kind of perception is that we are not talking about sex science every time it arises. Pedophilia inside the social discourse it's a construction. The name, the figure, the way desire is shown, was endorsed for too much time to make it powerful. Talking about Hebephilia, Ephebophilia or MAPs sounds like minimization because it has less power and try to break the repressive ideology that uses the name pedophilia to exert some power.
Summarizing: Everytime some guy says that X is pedophilia and another one says it's actually hebephilia, the second one didn't understand the point.

My impression is that hebephiles might actually the main targets of pedo hate (simply because they are more numerous, I'm not saying pedophiles are less hated than hebephiles of course). That's why "pedophile" is the chosen word against hebephiles: it reduces consciousness among hebephiles because they might not fully take the hint. They are not technically pedophiles, after all. In fact, I'd bet if "hebephile" was used as an insult it would not be strong at all because the target could own it, and it would make people reconsider if hebephilia is really an abnormal thing...

Learning to undeny wrote: Fri May 15, 2026 11:24 pm My impression is that hebephiles might actually the main targets of pedo hate (simply because they are more numerous, I'm not saying pedophiles are less hated than hebephiles of course). That's why "pedophile" is the chosen word against hebephiles: it reduces consciousness among hebephiles because they might not fully take the hint. They are not technically pedophiles, after all. In fact, I'd bet if "hebephile" was used as an insult it would not be strong at all because the target could own it, and it would make people reconsider if hebephilia is really an abnormal thing...

I can attest to the fact that hebephiles are socialized to be unconscious of their own chronophilia, with "pedophile" the only word normal antis knowing and using pejoratively, it's all we think of whenever we have mental breakdowns or question ourselves. We so easily return to denial when someone in a position of authority or with a close relationship trys to comfort us by providing evidence that we aren't pedophiles, i.e. our disinterest in prepubescent kids, and some of us confuse our attraction for intrusive thoughts. I think a lot of bisexual people being told they're straight in the last century faced similar mental confusion and pressure.

Yeah.....anyone under 18 CANNOT consent and you are a monster if you find them attractive.....that's the view of most antis.

Summarizing: Everytime some guy says that X is pedophilia and another one says it's actually hebephilia, the second one didn't understand the point.

I'm not sure I understand. If the idea is that accusing people of being hebephiles, ephebophiles or 'MAPs' holds less weight than accusing them of being pedophiles (i.e. the way to bring hebephiles/ephebophiles down is by associating them with pedophiles) then I can see your point but I don't see the error in pointing out that an attraction to either relatively fertile young adolescents or adolescents who don't yet have a functioning reproductive system but are visibly pubescent and, by extension, share some fertility-indicators with adolescents who can reproduce, is not the same as an attraction to (or at the very least preference for) prepubescent children. The former is normal human sexuality, good or bad.

The concept of ephebophilia seems completely meaningless to me because, in terms of what is evolutionarily adaptive or in line with human biology, there's no meaningful distinction to be made between 'adolescents' who are at Tanner stage 5 and the people we recognize as legal adults. 'Hebephilia' only makes sense to me if it refers to a preference for pubescent people who are in the transition stage between pre-pubescent and being fully sexually mature. I can't see how most men could not be at least relatively attracted to developed-looking preteens or young teens. Preferring girls who appear to be at Tanner stage 5 makes more sense (if anyone can even tell the difference by eye. Some Tanner stage 4, and maybe even stage 3, girls look more developed or fertile than some Tanner stage 5 adults. The end result of puberty is different for different people which is why the idea of being 'fully developed' doesn't really capture an essentialist difference between age groups, although I do think the fully developed libido that comes with semenarche/menstruation might be qualitatively different in the sense of being cyclical. Maybe you could say the age at which Tanner stage 5 becomes the norm, or when it would be considered delayed) but Tanner stage 4 girls (or girls at the age when Tanner stage 4 is the norm) are as young as a girl can be while still being relatively fertile, natural selection doesn't always lead to consistent sensible outcomes; average people, men especially, are wired to be attracted by youth (I think a preference for pre-pubescent children, or even pubescent ones, is that taken to the extreme; to the point where it's 'counter productive') but they're also wired to be attracted to traits that indicate fertility (which relative youth itself does but I mean things that indicate puberty).

I can see what I think is some of your point, I think it's more obvious to me now after writing this out. If you were to draw a hard line in the sand between pedophiles and hebephiles it would be harder to stigmatize hebephilia without tying it to pedophilia, but that doesn't mean people won't try. In any event, they're not going to budge on the idea that older pre-teens and young teens (if not everyone under 18, or even 25, or even 30) are basically interchangeable with children in at least some ways.

it reduces consciousness among hebephiles because they might not fully take the hint. They are not technically pedophiles, after all. In fact, I'd bet if "hebephile" was used as an insult it would not be strong at all because the target could own it, and it would make people reconsider if hebephilia is really an abnormal thing...

You and Scorchingwilde seem to be reiterating some of what the OP is saying (correct me if I'm wrong), but I'm not entirely sure what you mean here. I don't think hebephiles generally think that they're pedophiles, even if they're more sensitive to what pedophiles deal with, I think they're likely to see the association as 'unfair' and dishonest (the latter doesn't imply any anti-pedo bias. The former does in the same way that if some guy attacks me because he thinks I'm Jamaican and I'm not and what I complain about is the fact that I was attacked when I'm not Jamaican I might be missing the point). People know full well that hebephilia is not abnormal, they just pretend otherwise because we're socialized to see young teens as 'children' or for whatever reasons that are mysterious to me because I honestly don't get the emotional response (maybe it's just a consequence of the modern Western cultural extension of childhood because I can see why an aversion to vaginal intercourse with prepubescent girls would be taboo, that is; I'm going to assume, inherently dangerous or medically risky).

Still, even if the stigma doesn't exist apart from hatred of pedophilia (whether it stems from it or they both fall under the same umbrella concept), people seem to take issue with men, and even women more commonly, being attracted to older teens when it's probably clear to them that they're not 'children' (not just privately clear to them but they might openly admit it. They'll often be the ones calling for some 16-year-old who's committed some heinous crime to be tried as an adult) and they don't have a problem with them having sex with each other. There's a line in some song by Kendrick Lamar (I don't keep up with modern rap) where he dunks on Drake for being attracted to "a minoooooooor." Everyone is very clear on true pedophilia being worse, an attraction to older minors or young adults is more of a 'transitional' sin or a sin between more extreme sin and an acceptable attraction. It's strange because if they were to concede that what I'm calling 'true' pedophilia is worse, what would their response be if you asked them why it's worse? They normally pretend that puberty isn't a thing or it has no meaningful implications when it comes to human sexuality, so why is being attracted to 5-year-olds worse than being attracted to 16/17-year-olds? Is it just that the latter are relatively older? Because they're more cognitively developed? Are there even degrees to being able or unable to consent to sex?

John_Doe wrote: Sat May 16, 2026 3:00 pm

it reduces consciousness among hebephiles because they might not fully take the hint. They are not technically pedophiles, after all. In fact, I'd bet if "hebephile" was used as an insult it would not be strong at all because the target could own it, and it would make people reconsider if hebephilia is really an abnormal thing...

You and Scorchingwilde seem to be reiterating some of what the OP is saying (correct me if I'm wrong), but I'm not entirely sure what you mean here. I don't think hebephiles generally think that they're pedophiles, even if they're more sensitive to what pedophiles deal with, I think they're likely to see the association as 'unfair' and dishonest (the latter doesn't imply any anti-pedo bias. The former does in the same way that if some guy attacks me because he thinks I'm Jamaican and I'm not and what I complain about is the fact that I was attacked when I'm not Jamaican I might be missing the point). People know full well that hebephilia is not abnormal, they just pretend otherwise because we're socialized to see young teens as 'children' or for whatever reasons that are mysterious to me because I honestly don't get the emotional response (maybe it's just a consequence of the modern Western cultural extension of childhood because I can see why an aversion to vaginal intercourse with prepubescent girls would be taboo, that is; I'm going to assume, inherently dangerous or medically risky).

I just gave my interpretation of what the OP said, I don't know if it's a reiteration. And yeah, hebephiles do not generally think they're pedophiles, but many would shrug it off entirely, thinking merely in negative terms ("I'm not a pedophile" rather than "I'm a MAP / hebephile"), when actually the most scandalous cases of "pedophilia" in present times (e.g. Epstein) apparently have nothing to do with actual pedophiles, which is why I'm saying public attention to those cases is perhaps targeted at hebephiles. And people may know hebephilia is not abnormal if they stop to think about it, but there are many conflations which make it hard to see reality as it is (they may simultaneously see Epstein as a pedophile, and then say you're not a pedophile if you're attracted to teens, but if you're attracted to pre-pubescent children then again you're a pedophile. I'm not sure if the same person would believe the three simultaneously, but publicly there's a conflation).

Learning to undeny wrote: Sat May 16, 2026 5:44 pm

John_Doe wrote: Sat May 16, 2026 3:00 pm

it reduces consciousness among hebephiles because they might not fully take the hint. They are not technically pedophiles, after all. In fact, I'd bet if "hebephile" was used as an insult it would not be strong at all because the target could own it, and it would make people reconsider if hebephilia is really an abnormal thing...

You and Scorchingwilde seem to be reiterating some of what the OP is saying (correct me if I'm wrong), but I'm not entirely sure what you mean here. I don't think hebephiles generally think that they're pedophiles, even if they're more sensitive to what pedophiles deal with, I think they're likely to see the association as 'unfair' and dishonest (the latter doesn't imply any anti-pedo bias. The former does in the same way that if some guy attacks me because he thinks I'm Jamaican and I'm not and what I complain about is the fact that I was attacked when I'm not Jamaican I might be missing the point). People know full well that hebephilia is not abnormal, they just pretend otherwise because we're socialized to see young teens as 'children' or for whatever reasons that are mysterious to me because I honestly don't get the emotional response (maybe it's just a consequence of the modern Western cultural extension of childhood because I can see why an aversion to vaginal intercourse with prepubescent girls would be taboo, that is; I'm going to assume, inherently dangerous or medically risky).

I just gave my interpretation of what the OP said, I don't know if it's a reiteration. And yeah, hebephiles do not generally think they're pedophiles, but many would shrug it off entirely, thinking merely in negative terms ("I'm not a pedophile" rather than "I'm a MAP / hebephile"), when actually the most scandalous cases of "pedophilia" in present times (e.g. Epstein) apparently have nothing to do with actual pedophiles, which is why I'm saying public attention to those cases is perhaps targeted at hebephiles. And people may know hebephilia is not abnormal if they stop to think about it, but there are many conflations which make it hard to see reality as it is (they may simultaneously see Epstein as a pedophile, and then say you're not a pedophile if you're attracted to teens, but if you're attracted to pre-pubescent children then again you're a pedophile. I'm not sure if the same person would believe the three simultaneously, but publicly there's a conflation).

I basically meant the same thing, with the addition of my own experience of similar conflations and how they've affected my self-understanding and consciousness over time.

I'm ambivalent. On the one hand it's true attraction to teens gets unfairly lumped in with prepubescents, but as a person whose main attraction is to prepubescents I'm torn between saying it's bullshit to call "hebephiles" pedophiles when they are usually just normal people and on the other hand questioning whether pedophilia itself is a big deal. I wouldn't really blame "hebephiles" for distancing themselves from pedophiles because hebephilia is a normal part of the average person's sexuality in my opinion. I don't want to descend into this crabs in a bucket mentality that just because my life as a pedophile continues to be treated irrationally, hebephiles should have to experience the same thing. If "hebephiles" can lower the age of consent to what they desire, that's a good thing, because fucking up people's lives over sex with 13 year olds is wrong. So even if I think the age of consent should be lower, I don't think there's good reason to undermine the possibility of "hebephiles" success just because it isn't the ideal age of consent. The perfect is the enemy of the good.

Note: I use scare quotes around "hebephiles" because I don't think they should be any different from teleiophiles, not because I don't think they have genuine issues. I want to normalize thinking of hebephiles as a normal part of sexuality and 12-14 year olds not being called "children".

I would go down rabbit holes of MAP information, including scientific studies. I can't remember the exact statistics, or the exact study, but there was one done where basically the majority of men had hebephilic attractions,and were more open to admit it when they didn't realize they were admitting it.

So the study would show men different body types and facial features, and sometimes use an imaging tool to merge photos, and say give an adult woman the mouth or eyes of 13 year old. What they found is that a majority of the men had the strongest attraction to features typically found on a 13-15 year old teen.

Also, they would show different groups the same image, but have a caption or tag with the picture showing age. Men were more likely to admit they found a 13 year old girl attractive if they were told she was above their countries AoC. So they'd show a 13 year, and say she was 13, men said they were unattracted. They'd show other men the same girl, and say she was 16+, and many of them men admitted she was attractive. This shows many of them were unwilling to admit the attraction due to social stigma.

There is a girl in my friend group, that is 21. She could easily pass off as a 12 year old girl. Short, skinny, barely budding breasts and youthful face. Plenty of guys say she's attractive and openly talk or make jokes about hooking up with her, despite her having practically the same physical features as a 12-13 year old. Heck, even her personality isn't that far off. But try and get any of those guys to admit to finding a girl they know is a preteen or young teen attractive, and they'll immediately get huffy and claim not to be a pedofile.

So, I think hebephilia is significantly more common than most people realize. Pedofilia not as much, but some studies theorize it's still probably around 20%.

MAPGL917 wrote: Wed May 20, 2026 10:51 am I would go down rabbit holes of MAP information, including scientific studies. I can't remember the exact statistics, or the exact study, but there was one done where basically the majority of men had hebephilic attractions,and were more open to admit it when they didn't realize they were admitting it.

So the study would show men different body types and facial features, and sometimes use an imaging tool to merge photos, and say give an adult woman the mouth or eyes of 13 year old. What they found is that a majority of the men had the strongest attraction to features typically found on a 13-15 year old teen.

Also, they would show different groups the same image, but have a caption or tag with the picture showing age. Men were more likely to admit they found a 13 year old girl attractive if they were told she was above their countries AoC. So they'd show a 13 year, and say she was 13, men said they were unattracted. They'd show other men the same girl, and say she was 16+, and many of them men admitted she was attractive. This shows many of them were unwilling to admit the attraction due to social stigma.

There is a girl in my friend group, that is 21. She could easily pass off as a 12 year old girl. Short, skinny, barely budding breasts and youthful face. Plenty of guys say she's attractive and openly talk or make jokes about hooking up with her, despite her having practically the same physical features as a 12-13 year old. Heck, even her personality isn't that far off. But try and get any of those guys to admit to finding a girl they know is a preteen or young teen attractive, and they'll immediately get huffy and claim not to be a pedofile.

So, I think hebephilia is significantly more common than most people realize. Pedofilia not as much, but some studies theorize it's still probably around 20%.

That sounds very interesting. Almost validating, in a way. It is truly sad that people have to lie about who they're attracted to because even a "I would never act on it" disclaimer wouldn't satisfy people who are deeply antagonistc to minor-attraction when felt by adults/AMSC on principle.

What's also interesting is that there's apparently blood work you can have done to determine your biological age and people can be significantly younger, biologically, than their actual age. The youtuber Brett Cooper, I believe she's in her 20s, is apparently 13 in terms of her biological age (or was when she posted the short about it that I watched) so if it's acceptable for people to be attracted to people in their 20s, and possibly even 30s, who are 'biologically in their teens' then the lines drawn when it comes to acceptable and inappropriate attraction seem all the more forced, artificial and internally incoherent. People only seem to insist that 'attraction isn't a choice,' 'you can't help who you love' (which is somewhat strange to me because even though I can understand how it would apply to 'romantic love' under some conditions I can't see myself ever having a crush on someone I disliked. I can be involuntarily sexually attracted to people whose personalities I don't like but I could never be infatuated with someone I didn't like or admire and wanted to not be infatuated with for that reason. To be fair, not liking someone is only one reason why people would not want to be madly in love with them) etc. when they can deal with the implications, e.g. when it comes to LGBT acceptance which is more or less a milquetoast stance in modern Western countries and not, in my possibly flawed view, this deeply counter-culture revolutionary stance that some people make it out to be. That goes beyond MAP issues though (e.g. assuming that someone who's attracted to serial killers or abusers necessarily lacks sympathy for their victims).

I also remember a study suggesting that female sexual attractiveness peaks at 14 and it might have been around 1/4th of the male population who could be thought of as 'pedophilic,' I can't remember the details, I mentioned it on here a long time ago but I think someone came along, cited the exact study and put some things into context about it so I don't know how much I can put into it.

I was going to elaborate on not being able to understand the outrage over adults being attracted to developed minors (or younger adults) because even though I don't find the idea that prepubescent child-adult sex is inherently bad anymore 'understandable' the arguments against it apply less to developed minors who can reproduce but I'm tired of writing so I'll spare you another one of my lengthy posts.