The age-old tradition of scapegoating is now as alive as it has ever been. And we are IT, i.e. the scapegoat of choice.
The fear of real-life retribution keeps us from coming out and getting together to try to set things right.
It is, I think, the only way forward. Coming out, whether singly or in large or small groups, and standing up for what is true. And never ever making concessions.
There is absolutely nothing morally wrong with Paedophilia and in fact it can be shown to be a positive influence on children.
But there are many impostors everywhere who would drag us down. I believe that true Paedophilia is a real but alas not very common phenomenon.
For every Paedophile there are perhaps ten child fetishists who do not feel any love for children.
We have a lot to break through. But we must start somewhere, somehow.
Being brave in the face of overwhelming oppositions is the only way forward.
It is the only way. Only one of us can start things rolling.
And History is on our side, as well as Truth.
Leonard Sisyphus Mann
My hopes and fears for paedophiles and children are coupled to my hopes and fears for society, mankind and the planet. And in these troubled times, I find it hard to be optimistic.
But if there is any positive to be taken from this Winter’s extreme weather it is that it might hasten a realisation that we can’t continue with growth-based economics. I suspect that ‘paedophobia’ has its roots in those products of capitalism: the nuclear family and the disappearance of Community. These create relationships between parents and their children which the granting of sexual rights to children would undermine. In more communitarian societies, where they are not considered as the property of their parents, will children have the right to enjoy intimacy with whom they choose. For reasons I’ve written about here, a steady-state economy would foster a more community-based society.
But what do we do whilst we’re waiting for some better society to emerge from the flood-waters of capitalism?
As things stand we can’t, through our own efforts, change society. A more achievable goal is to get ourselves into a position where our ideas and experiences are accepted as part of the debate and, to that end, we need to advocate and defend our values and ideas wherever and whenever we can.
However, whilst it’s not in our hands to change society, we can change ourselves and, by doing so, improve the welfare of paedophiles and prepare ourselves for the challenges and opportunities the future may bring.
Whilst arguments amongst factions can sometimes be frustrating, diversity of philosophies probably makes for a stronger movement. Debating with an anti-choicer is more challenging than debating with more overt, but worse-informed, paedophobes. Such debates are as whetstones to a knife, testing and sharpening one’s arguments.
Moreover different factions can achieve different goals – whilst pro-choicers are more engaged with reason, research and radical thinking, anti-choicers – by, in their quest for ‘acceptance’, effectively telling their oppressors whatever they want to hear – have been allowed to tell the general public some truths and many half-truths that would have otherwise gone unheard. Diversity gives us flexibility of response and offers people a variety of ways of engaging with the Kind community.
Young paedophiles (and curious non-paedophiles, journalists, researchers &c) need to encounter, early on, persuasive, ethical visions of paedophilia. Legal (and presumably illegal) chans &c often enact a tug-of-war between ethical paedophilia and an objectification which may lead to worse than just disrespectful comments. This latter occurs, I suspect, when paedophiles adopt the only role society presents them with: that of a loveless ‘monster’ bent on imposing adult desires on children. Young paedophiles constructing an identity for themselves from such negative models desperately need exposure to ethical understandings of paedophilia: this would serve to reduce real abuse, create a stronger community, and eventually offer to the wider culture a counter-narrative to the ‘monster’ or ‘self-hating celibate’.
We must educate ourselves before we can educate others. We should develop our culture, art, literature, philosophy, history, biography, anthropology, vocabulary &c. A shared culture creates a community and self-respect, reduces isolation, and embodies knowledge and attitudes. It will give us a vocabulary of words and concepts with which to think and communicate, both with each other and the world.
We are like an acorn that has fallen on a concrete slab – we need to put out many roots and make the most of every opportunity we encounter. Most roots will fail to find soil but we don’t know in advance what will succeed and when. We need to keep struggling because fighting for the truth is a good thing in itself, even when one fails. But a diverse, well-informed and culturally-rich community will be in a better position to absorb its failures and respond to challenges, and the opportunities the future may bring.
What is our future right now? To be honest like many other kinds I believe our immediate future will be very negative with very few positives and the Kinds living today will have oppressive living conditions especially in the English speaking Countries.
What have we done wrong or right? Once upon a time I had serious criticisms but I have since mellowed realising the powerlessness of the situation, one of the big disasters is the losing and limiting of real life communities and organizations, where there could be focus in real life change. In the positive there is still people willing to communicate and express there opinions like this blog – any attempt to bring out our alternative ideas is always a good thing.
And Finally what can we do? Going back to the time I changed from a Self-Hating Paedo to the Kinder person I am today, took the influence of alternative ideas, from reading history books on ancient history, we live in a culture where brain-washing is in effect when it comes to MAPs. But reading up on brain-washing – it is very ineffective, especially when alternative ideas are expressed in the culture. In the age we are living in the best way is to create dialogue through as many media forms and websites: we must talk not just in monologue form but in dialogue amongst ourselves, as well as others willing to debate us; we must shine a light on the diversity of our community and if we create these discussion via video, audio, text we can at the very least create a Time capsule for future MAPs hearing that we were here.
Finally I believe there are two focuses: there is the freeing of the Paedophile and the freeing of the precarious Child, both based on the community obsession with separating the Child from the adult.
This may seem controversial but I believe in the focus of freeing the Paedophile first. I do not say this as a Virped which I’m not, but the voice of a politically powerless person is worth nothing. We must focus on the humanisation and empowering of MAPs with power; we can address other ideas such as children’s rights, consent laws, and other such issues from a position of a community with power.
How we humanize and empower MAPs I can only consider in abstract: paedophiles in general are used as a Negative Moral Anchor which anyone in the community can use to prove their moral superiority, consider this moral like a pure Clean Cloth (but when you look closely it is filled with holes and is paper thin). We should do anything in our power to shit and stain this pure Cloth so people realise what they are truly grasping is threadbare ideas, prejudice, and fantasy with only a dash of truth. Only by damaging the usefulness of the paedophile as moral anchor do I believe we can move forward.
I believe the best thing for minor-attracted persons and the children they love is to advocate for comprehensive sex education, including education about consent and relationships. It seems to me that the biggest obstacle to minor-attracted persons is the prevailing attitude that children are unable to give informed consent to sex, and I believe that comprehensive sex education (which, among other things, empowers children to give or not give said informed consent) is the best way to challenge that attitude.
Harder to challenge is the idea that children SHOULDN’T be able to give informed consent, but those who openly make such arguments thereby reveal, at best, that they have no interest in actually educating the next generation about their own physical health; at worst, that they actively oppose such education. If they pay lip service to comprehensive sex education rather than abstinence-only education, yet object to efforts to empower children to give or withhold informed consent, they must be called out on their hypocrisy.
Few would disagree with a child’s right to say no if they don’t want to have sex; and the more children know about sex, the better able they are to decide whether they want to have sex or not (and thus, the more meaning and force their “no” will have if they decide that they don’t want to). This alone should persuade those who truly have children’s best interests at heart; even if they disagree with the idea of children having sex, they should trust children to make the best choice for themselves; when given permission and/or encouragement to seek out whatever knowledge they desire, children know more about what’s good for them than adults give them credit for.
To that end, in addition to a more comprehensive education about sex in general, it would be best to encourage each child to explore their own sexuality for themselves, and figure out which of the many sexual activities they would like or dislike. No elementary school would assign students an essay about oral sex, of course, but teachers can encourage students to go to the library and read about sex on their own terms; and indeed, that is what my sixth-grade science teacher did for me (though the exact terms of that assignment were to summarize several resources about “adolescent growth and development”).
Until children are better informed about sex, those who love them cannot find true sexual fulfillment. Nonetheless, minor-attracted persons are not entirely powerless either; if nothing else, they can encourage the healthy sexual development of their loved ones in a way that those who oppose pedophiles cannot or dare not. Because adults generally know more about sex than children, adults who pursue sexual relationships with children owe them some of that knowledge and should treat them with a healthy measure of noblesse oblige.
I think the it’s difficult to say how the acceptance of society towards MAPs and intergenerational relationships will be in the near and distant future. I’m sure that they will eventually be seen as completely normal – like women and black people voting or gay people marrying. But being only 19 years old myself, I’ve often been told that my view is too optimistic regarding rapid changes in society, whether it’s about minor attraction or other social issues, so I wouldn’t say that it’s completely unlikely that in a hundred years MAPs will still be seen as “dangerous” in most countries by the majority of people.
However, I assume that a much more probable scenario will be that it won’t take so long and that, as with homosexuals, after a first apparent backlash there will be a sudden change in public opinion. In my view the years from 2000-2012 were the low-point, but in the last three years there have been many improvements (of course also alongside many things that have got worse) for the situation of MAPs.
From my perspective, in recent years, there have been more and more newspapers talking about MAPs as people instead of criminals, or even monsters. Not only are MAPs described as “people seeking help” but as “discriminated individuals” who need acceptance. In some cases – and that is perhaps the most important thing regarding the reduction of the stigmatisation of MAPs as evil – there are even stories about teenagers struggling with the acceptance of their feelings. I think in many cases people are afraid of MAPs because they fear for the well-being of children. But when they realize that there are many children who are MAPs themselves then they are likely start to think about how it must feel being hated merely for one’s own feelings.
For example I read in the comment section of a video (about a news story about an ‘anti’ trying to find out the identity of MAPs online) by one of the most famous German youtubers many people disagreeing with his view that MAPs must be ‘sick’. Although they always added that MAPs would have to learn how to restrain their feelings so they would not hurt anyone they compared minor attraction to homosexuality and said they don’t undertand why it isn’t seen as a sexual orientation.
When being a MAP becomes more accepted and society understands that having sexual feelings doesn’t mean one has to act on them, minor attracted teenagers will more and more come out of the toybox and discuss their feelings with their parents, teachers, and friends. I think maybe in 2-5 years there will already be some brave young people asking for acceptance.
From this point on it will become much more difficult I suppose to vilify MAPs. How do you tell a teenager or even a child that their feelings are an illness? How do you tell a young person that their love wasn’t really love but a harmful urge? Are you really going to say that? or will you first find out if your opinion is correct before destroying a person’s self-esteem and self-confidence?
I hope most people will then think before they simply adopt prejudices and instead listen to what the other side says.
Maybe this is what organizations like NAMBLA should have done more of in the past: emphasizing that current society’s views and laws are extremely harmful to young people too. Every time the media repeats prejudices against MAPs we should protest and ask them “Would you also say this to a 13 year old with these feelings?”