MAP Forum

Radqueers and other para activists. MAPs have their own circumstances and history that the pro-paraphilia movement on pedi can't address. As an example, foot fetishism doesn't have the same level of stigma and repression against it that MAPs have, so it would be illogical to group the two under the "paraphilia" label, which in itself is problematic given that pedophilia in itself isn't a disorder, and both hebephilia and ephebophilia have and are still normative parts of male sexuality.

So in short, even if it's just my opinion here, I don't mind throwing radqueers and pro-paraphiliacs under the bus if it means MAPs getting the societal acceptance that they need on the top of legal sanctions on their willing relationships with minors.

There are no such.
The minor attraction is last Taboo, which prevents people from living in harmony. Some people mistakenly think that the adoption of AoA 12 will leave behind all those whose AoA is lower, but this is not true. In order to move forward, you need to take a step. Acceptance of youth sexuality will reduce the overall level of tension and, as is often the case, can have a positive effect on the very young under 12.

The only groups that come to mind for this contrived hypothetical are groups that I hate, which are all chosen to some degree. Can I say pedo hunters?

Artaxerxes II wrote: Thu Oct 17, 2024 12:19 pm foot fetishism doesn't have the same level of stigma and repression against it that MAPs have, so it would be illogical to group the two under the "paraphilia" label, which in itself is problematic given that pedophilia in itself isn't a disorder

Of course foot fetishism doesn't have the same level of stigma and repression as minor attraction, "paraphilia" is a very wide umbrella term that encompasses a range of both stigmatized and normalized attractions. I think it's fair to say the umbrella is too wide, the communities and attractions that fall under it do indeed have very different needs and goals.

I don't know of anyone who uses "paraphilia" to refer exclusively to disorders. Even the DSM 5 distinguishes between paraphilias and paraphilic disorders.

That's tough, I genuinely can't think of a group I would actually throw under the bus.

How about politicians?

Why is this even being asked?

Fragment wrote: Thu Oct 17, 2024 2:41 am (Disclaimer: it's obviously better not to have to throw anyone under the bus. This is a hypothetical.)

If it meant achieving legal rights and social acceptance for MAPs, which group would you be willing to throw under the bus and demonize? It can either be a group that doesn't have widespread acceptance now, or one that does.

It can be a group based on any characteristic, but ideally, like MAP it should not be something chosen (so serial killers are out).

I know a lot of people don't want to throw anyone under the bus. We know the pain of being part of the demonized group. But just play along. I'm curious.

Who I'd throw under the bus:
-People who are into bondage or BDSM, particularly men who are into scenarios involving being dominated or subjugated by women.
-People who are into fantasy roleplay fetishes involving simulated workplace, professional or industry uniforms, hardhats, tools or equipment, situations or interactions; especially in themes of law enforcement or security, transportation, mining, logging, electrical, telecommunications, or construction.
-Mechanophiles.
-Zoophiles.
-Necrophiles.
-People who are into scat, vomit, or fart fetishes.
-Feet and shoe fetishists.

If we were to follow the trail of tears that LGB took in throwing founding MAP activists like NAMBLA and the Gay BDSM/Leather community under the bus to gain political favor, we could repeat history by turning on MAPS who identify as nepi, toddlercon, lbl, or lgl.

I think this is a horrible idea, and it's why I endorse broader MAP communities stay unified and resist dividing into cliques like is common on the bl/gl forums. We are more than the sum of our "AOA". Yes, the bus somewhat worked for LGB, but I think it was at extreme sacrifice of their most loyal and diverse adherents. I oppose throwing anyone under the bus, ever.

Xuxa Nuit wrote: Sun Nov 03, 2024 10:57 pm MalcomX, I can understand your perspective, it is reasonable & rational for the whole of the MAP community, to keep unified.
But from my own personal point of view, Girl Love and Boy Love are two very different things, that's just how I see it & it's okay if you don't understand me. Mister meef moffer, it may please you to know

Oh I agree with this 100%. But I always remind myself that my exclusive boylover view is extremely biased!

My first instinct is to say no one, my second is to say man-hating sex-negative feminists or "predator" hunters.

I think that fits with that line from the Merchant of Venice:
"How shalt thou hope for mercy, rendering none?"

However, even then, I think it's still important to give people a chance to redeem themselves.

I’ve put a lot of thought into this and there’s no other group we could throw under since we’re looked at as the lowest denominator. I’m pro contact but I think if No-Maps were to come together to bring a child trafficking ring then society would hear them out. No-Maps are hated just as much as the rest of us but if they were to pull off something like that then the world would have no choice but to hear them out.