all 35 comments

[–]HouseplantWomen who disagree with QT are a different sex 8 insightful - 5 fun8 insightful - 4 fun9 insightful - 5 fun -  (0 children)

This is a roundabout way of asking “if a man has breast implants, long hair, and lip fillers, does he become a woman?”

It also scrapes up against “if lesbians are attracted to butch women they are actually attracted to men”

Same sex attraction is exactly what it says on the tin.

If I took an ape and waxed it, and very convincingly dressed it up as a blonde woman with huge breasts, would the ape be a woman?

Why would disguising anyone or an animal as a woman make them so?

[–]kwallio 8 insightful - 1 fun8 insightful - 0 fun9 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

I don't see how anyone can argue that men attracted to transwomen are anything but same sex attracted. Whether that means they are gay or bi I don't know but they are having MSM regardless of whatever they think their orientation is.

[–]cars[S] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

Yes, but straight men, and even some straight women, often have "gay phases" at some points in life. That doesn't make them any less straight. Also, lots of straight AGPs have meta-attraction that leads them into MSM, even though they're straight.

[–]kwallio 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Perhaps but the gay sex they were having makes them same sex attracted at the time they were having it. That they might be straight now doesn't make it less gay. We are talking about trans women chasers, so like I said its still homosexual sex they are having regardless of their own feelings about it.

This argument reminds me of Dan Savage's jokes about dating "straight" men, like their gayness ends at orgasm or something. "What do you mean you're straight, your dick is still in my ass" <-- Dan Savage quote.

[–]theory_of_thisan actual straight crossdresser 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Yes, but straight men, and even some straight women, often have "gay phases" at some points in life. That doesn't make them any less straight.

Why? What's wrong with saying they aren't entirely straight?

You're saying people should be able to identify as they wish?

[–]loveSloaneDebate King 8 insightful - 1 fun8 insightful - 0 fun9 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Seems like the attraction is mostly a fetish and the act is clearly homosexual. What that says about the GAMP’s sexuality- idk. Could be bisexual. Could be homosexual. Could be closeted homosexual. Could just be curious.

I’d say being a male who is sexually attracted to any type of male, no matter how specific,- not heterosexual.

[–]peakingatthemomentTranssexual (natal male), HSTS 6 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 0 fun7 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Straight, but with issues or a fetish. They don’t act like gay men. Like you say, many have AGP or other fetishes.

[–]worried19 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Men who are interested in other males are bisexual to some degree. They're obviously attracted to femininity too, but their attraction to male bodies and male genitals is homosexual in nature. I don't think it qualifies as straight.

I think a lot of homophobic men also see trans women as a "safe" way to explore homosexuality. They can suck another male person's cock and rationalize it in their minds as not really "gay." Same thing with the men who will have sex with other guys but not kiss them. Because romance or tenderness or intimacy would be too "gay" for them, while impersonal fucking apparently is not.

[–]theory_of_thisan actual straight crossdresser 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (7 children)

I think Blanchardianism, that's the Bailey auto sexuality stuff is flawed.

I think the "porn makes perverts" model is flawed. I don't think the science shows it. I don't think Blanchardianism supports it (it is about an innate desire). The attractions are real but I think they are something more innate. That's just how humans are. Mostly conforming but with a fuzzy consistent range of gender divergent people.

When you try to enforce the Blanchard models you end up with seriously odd ideas. Like pseudo bisexual autogynephilia by proxy, something like that. Where transwomen who are attracted to transwomen are interpreted as being attracted to a person who confirms their identity. I think at a basic level they just are attracted to transwomen, of different degrees.

There's a background idea here, that if it wasn't for the corruption of modern life, porn, the internet, decadence that men would be normal, straight conforming, good people. That they have been corrupted by culture.

Further still it's overlapping and adjacent to saying gay rights, the sexual revolution and feminism have corrupted the natural order of the sexes.

I should say I'm not justifying porn addiction, porn production or saying certain identities do not exist. I am pointing out errors in these models.

[–]peakingatthemomentTranssexual (natal male), HSTS 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

Like pseudo bisexual autogynephilia by proxy, something like that. Where transwomen who are attracted to transwomen are interpreted as being attracted to a person who confirms their identity.

I don’t understand this, but why wouldn’t it just be because many transwomen are GAMPs? GAMP and AGP overlap a bunch I feel like.

[–]theory_of_thisan actual straight crossdresser 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

I do think a good percentage of transwomen are attracted to transwomen.

But what is the Blanchardian explanation of GAMPs?

Don't Blanchardians claim it is "AGPs attracted to a transwoman because they are attracted to a man who is now a woman which confirms their desire to be a woman" or something.

I have issues then with the idea that "AGPs are attracted to transwomen is related to their AGP unless they aren't AGP then the attraction isn't AGP related."

Meaning the attraction can exist without "AGP." Meaning the attraction is a first order thing.

Seems very confused.

[–]adungitit 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

So I'm not familiar with GAMPs but based on what you're saying, I'm really not seeing the issue? Autogynephiles will get off to porn with sissies and male trans people. Just because they get off to the idea of themselves being women doesn't mean they can't project that onto other people. People with fetishes revolving around themselves being something or getting treated like something project onto porn and others all the time.

[–]adungitit 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

There's a background idea here, that if it wasn't for the corruption of modern life, porn, the internet, decadence that men would be normal, straight conforming, good people. That they have been corrupted by culture.

This interpretation only works if you assume there was ever a time when men were normal, good people. This has never in history been the case. They have always abused women and peddled delusional ideas about them, both in day to day life, and to get their rocks off. Men have never had a sexuality that treated women as anything other than inferior sex objects. That they continue this corruption into modern life, spill it into porn and the internet, where it gets divorced from reality even more than your regular traditional misogynistic ideas, does not mean that the internet has twisted "normal" men. Like most things, the corruption was there all along, and the internet just intensified it and mutated it, though not at all beyond recognition. It's an extension of traditional male beliefs that never went anywhere and were never challenged. Most men never had an attraction to women as human beings. That's why, out of all sexualities, they're the worst at and least interested in satisfying their partners, and they're the only ones pushing for widespread supremacist, abusive systems aiming to control and subjugate their partners. So male "attraction" towards women remains in the realm of male supremacism, out-of-touch beauty standards (that actual women are seen to be only a vague approximation of) and delusional sexist ideas, and the fact that the internet morphs this into comically bizarre fetishes is the least surprising thing of them all.

[–]Pinkliver 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

In all honesty, I feel as if sexual orientation is too broad of a way to describe a person’s preferences in sex partners, and this is because a person may not want to have sex with another because of their gender but because of other reasons.

I believe there is no one reason chasers are attracted to trans. Many trans people who are natal males are much more enthusiastic at catering to male fantasies than females. The trans are much more aroused all the time and display exaggerated performative femininity which is appealing to the males. These males don’t really care which hole they ejaculate in, so male or female does not matter to them in this regard.

There are also certain boys who want to be considered “saviors” and date the trans because other males do not. I have seen this in a lot of people who target specific minorities, mute or disabled, or chubby chasers that they aims to “save”. They may feel as if they receive much more appreciation or worship from this group they perceive as oppressed. The men will find an oppressed group that is most to their liking, many times what they believe is as close to flawed but still attractive to them as possible. Also, many males genuinely believe that natal trans are female, and just feel they are the saviors of a particularly oppressed female.

Many people are attracted to certain genitalia, but genitalia alone does not determine their attraction. For example, men who enjoy pegging like females but also like the feeling of being anally penetrated. Even if they are conditioned to liking certain porn, or genitalia, or have become desensitized to other types of genitalia, that would not be the only reason for a person to to like a specific niche. I also believe a man dating a trans woman is liberal enough to not be afraid of being bi, as the less liberal men would definitely tease and humiliate them for dating a trans.

The problem with sexual orientation is that a person does not like a person solely due to their sex. For example, I am not physically attracted to every guy in the world. “Straight” implies liking someone because they are male, but that does not mean a woman finds every man attractive. This gets worse for people who only like one gender and then switch to liking only another gender. They would be classified as bi but they clearly do not want to date those of the gender they previously liked. Some people will also predominantly date those of one gender but make exceptions for certain people of the other gender. In theory, if a person solely is attracted to natal males, they are technically gay, and if they also engage with the occasional woman, they are technically bi. However, these classifications make no difference in the end because those people will most probably never date a gay man who isn’t a trans identifying that was born male.

[–]GenderbenderShe/her/hers 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (7 children)

It's up to that man to decide what labels best describe his sexual orientation. Straight, gay, bi and pan are all possibilities.

[–]HouseplantWomen who disagree with QT are a different sex 5 insightful - 3 fun5 insightful - 2 fun6 insightful - 3 fun -  (6 children)

So this means gay, straight, bisexual, each have no distinct meaning whatsoever and no term exists to describe any healthy human sexual attraction whether it’s same sex, opposite sex, or both. No possible sexuality can be described by just one term by everyone, right? Cause someone might not like it if they don’t get to call themselves gay or whatever?

Let me ask you this, does this lack of definitions extend to dangerous paraphilias like pedophila? Why or why not?

I’m sure you’ll choose to not answer this like anything else I ask you because you may have to question your preferred assumptions but indulge me, please.

[–]GenderbenderShe/her/hers 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (5 children)

For cis people exclusively attracted to cis people, sexuality is pretty straightforward. Gay men are exclusively attracted to men and lesbians are exclusively attracted to women. Straight men are exclusively attracted to women and straight women are exclusively attracted to men. But in general sexuality isn't as straightforward. For instance, a gay cis man can be attracted to a trans man if that man presents as male or has masculine features. And although trans women are not men, if she presents masculine enough or has male features (such as a penis) I can see why a gay man might be attracted to her. Neither of those situations necessarily make the cis man bisexual, unless he personally identifies that way.

I'm straight. I have a friend who is a trans woman and I used to be attracted to her even when she openly identified as female. But after a year on estrogen her skin and face became feminized and since I am not attracted to woman I am not attracted to her, but a lesbian might be attracted to her. I am attracted to passing trans men. I am straight and dating trans people who identify with my sex doesn't change my sexuality. There are no "lack of definitions" it's just that sexuality isn't always straightforward.

[–]HouseplantWomen who disagree with QT are a different sex 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

This means yes, straight, gay, and bi all lack a commonly shared meaning, and can mean different things to different people. This makes the terms useless.

Please answer the question about pedophilia and whether it has one definition or not. This endless evasion is suggesting that you are less interested in discussion and more interested in proselytism.

[–]GenderbenderShe/her/hers 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (3 children)

That does not mean that sexual orientations lack a commonly shared meaning. A gay man is exclusively attracted to people with male features, while a lesbian is a woman exclusively attracted exclusively to people with feminine features, which can include cis women, trans women and trans men who don't pass.

Pedophilia is not a sexual orientation, but it doesn't have a commonly shared meaning either. The dictionary definition of pedophilia is to be attracted to pre-pubescent children. Attraction to pubescent children is called hebephilia and attracted to post-pubescent teens is called ephebophilia. Yet someone attracted to a 15 year old may be considered a pedophile even though that's not the official definition. Many people use the term pedophile to refer to people who have committed sexual abuse towards children and not necessarily those merely sexually attracted to children.

[–]HouseplantWomen who disagree with QT are a different sex 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

So the term lesbian cannot exclude males and exclusively refer to females attracted to females?

If an adult human female with a buzzcut, very small breasts, clothes from the mens section, a deep voice, and a few whiskers due to pcos, a fellow adult human female attracted to her would not be a lesbian because her features are not typically feminine?

If it means something else as well it is indeed meaningless. If I said penicillin refers to antibiotics and also pencils, the word does not have an effective meaning.

I didn’t say pedophilia is a sexual orientation. I called it a dangerous paraphilia. If there is not a distinct meaning, how can it be prosecuted?

[–]GenderbenderShe/her/hers 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (1 child)

Some words do have more than one meaning. The word "nail" refers both to fingernails and nails you use screws on. Although the word refers to two different things, it still has an effective meaning.

We have terms for people who aren't attracted to trans people, like super lesbian, super gay, super straight, etc.

If a woman (cis or trans) who identifies as a lesbian and is attracted to female features of a masculine presenting woman such as a vagina, then she can call herself lesbian. If she considered herself straight and was attracted to the other woman's beard or masculine features, that's fine too.

[–]HouseplantWomen who disagree with QT are a different sex 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Nails and screws are actually entirely different things. It’s why they have different names.

Fingernails or carpenters nails can at least be discerned from context. If someone says the words “I am a lesbian” according to the definitions you give, this could mean so many different things about who she is attracted to that it means literally nothing.

I’m fascinated by this argument, you say that the beard is masculine and the vagina is female but have denied these very same things as unimportant or even unrelated when asked what is a woman.

It feels as though you do not have a cohesive belief system, and are simply saying the contrary to anything you decide GC as a hivemind holds true. Do you see any validity to this criticism?

Please stop ignoring half my points to repeat your opinion that anyone can say anything as long as they feel nice inside about it. It’s nearly impossible to have a conversation with you when you evade so much of what is said.

[–]pollyesther 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

He's either gay or bisexual. A man who is attracted to another man is a gay man, regardless if one of those men calls himself a woman and takes hormones. Same with lesbians.

[–]ncosenational💊 sovereign 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (10 children)

did yall see the balenciaga campaign controversy? y Im a sovereign cit. ❤️ 2b their enemy.. my truest self NOT sci daily article they ambushed me w 1x 10yr ago.. only ppl who make campaigns like that think horrible beliefs like sci daily article makes me 🤮.. WANT THEM ALL 2C ME AS THEIR ENEMY/HOSTILE ONLY NEVER ANYTH ELSE. nevr thot Id have 2b explicitly anti pedo always been v against them!! but if I knew I had 2go out of my way Id hav learnt it all a long time ago tbh.. nvr open 2 ther bs

I think ther homosexual ✉️s. But maybe they can be a 3rd gender idk rly wut I think

eta: isnt baileys theory ab agps that theyre born not made &don’t agps say they do experience desire 2b the opposite sex from a young age? How can it be caused by porn* if chasers are more likely to have agp. Reading men trapped in mens bodies I saw that agps are never attracted directly 2 natal females &have to have agp fantasies to perform sexually w natal females but not w tw. I dont think agps are ever str8. I also think some “science” around orientation is “politics”, more like activism &what the political significance is is another ?. I think it doesnt even match up w Blanchards theory of transsexualism for ex (activism induced ideas of orientation). From what I’ve read ab orientation it isnt always known from early on. W dysphoric kids they can end up gay adults,& agps dk their orientation early in life either. But theres a push 2say orientation is known/knowable @puberty. ..c also looks like p3, 7, 11… ctrl f “middle age”.. seems like prior knowledg is bein pushed out by activism by groups like b4u act mentioned &linked elsewhere in this comment..

*in prostasia’s objection to the UN’s correct opposition to sexualization of kids in media, they argue orientation “science” means porn cant socialize individuals in2 a sexual proclivity.

/#42 specifically. I agree w the un loli ban. I dont agree w prostasia &I think all csam must b condemned, never normalized/uncriticized,& faux shud b criminalized, like it is in many country.

The dsm even used 2say some abuse justifying beliefs child rapists engage in 2rationalize their behavior are themes in csam. ( p9.. really important b4 u drink reismans koolaid.. lots of reasons not 2entirely agree w her tho I agree everyth she says is wrong Is rly rly bad & unacceptable pro pedosadism apologism… she advocates common law =no age of consent, legalizing child rape by Child marriage & also they dont expect girls 2remain virginal till college either so men already think they shud be able 2rape kids like nambla & Richard green think… 1. ctrl f “common law” sounds 2. like no age of consent in practice 3. ctrl f “common law” 4. 5. under common law women get their rights from the Bible @least in the west & thats wut these ppl mean when they say we need2 take back womens rights but I dont want kinseys/prostasias/porn industries idea of womens rights either) Idk exactly how the Blanchard led dsm changed that but it seems politicized by pro bdsm &pedo ppl &the the porn industry 10x the size of Hollywood. &also media industries &cyber libertarianism..

~2:50 min

pro Pedo groups like b4uact ( also say they lobbied the dsm 4 some sort of destigmatizing changes &got what they wanted but not enuf 4 them but still 2much 4me who is maximally anti pedo &thats my top priority above all else always always always. Also the psych who took homosexuality out of dsm said it was driven by activism not science, a sentiment cantor echos in the linked yt video above, instead of taking responsibility 4the dsms decisions as being “science” driven.

Anyway I dont like 2frame things either way. Both smell like shit 2me bc as some1 else noted alredy I dont believe lgbt activism/acceptance is the cause of issues bw the sexes but Im also not goin 2excuse abusive kink &porn or allow it 2b normalized as harmless &not a cause of problems or a cause of abuse or tolerance of it. I think the anti porn angle is valid too. I think its important 4 zero tolerance of abuse. But see theyre invalidating it w the “orientation science”.. dk how I feel ab that.. porn& media is a way to criticize &reject normalization of abuse but adult gender based orientations like lgbt arent abuse, pedosadism unambiguously is tho eternally. porn is so much exploitation &abuse esp of females &children that I don think its defensible in any way.

ANYWAY it seems their idea of “science” is whatever nambla tells them &porn industry, they are sex+ &call radfems idealogues 2 discredit them but they are sex pos seems ideological to me. And wrong. Their version of “science” is just to deny harm and normalize and decriminalize and destigmatize abuse. They do this w their pro porn gas lighting and w their pro pedosadist activism. This is not compatible w radical feminism really, other than born this way explanation for normalizing lgbt which I do agree w. Denying harm/abuse is a classic nambla tactic and justification for abuse. it’s even used in the bdsm defense which dahmer and John Wayne gacy used to get out of arrests when they had been caught sexually torturing minor boys. The sex scientists dsm etc represent those interests of denying harm they piss on everyone’s leg and tell us it’s raining so I don’t know if I believe them.

Re the subjective distress move Blanchard facilitated in his role as head of the dsm, which is the agenda of the pedo movement to copy the gay movement doing that.. I don’t think it’s appropriate to say pedos are the ones who suffer or are dysfunctional bc of pedosadism it’s their victims who suffer bc of their inherently abusive actions not pedos who suffer bc of pedosadism or in ther mind societys (rightful) pedophobia etc etc. that standard of distress is bc of the gay movmnt now applied 2all mental illness? Anyway theres sum weird issues goin on w psych. I DEMAND ZERO TOLERANCE NOT DESTIGMATIZATION OR ANTI PEDOPHOBIA. I demand a pedophobic society but im pro lgbt acceptance or even if ur pro lgbt acceptance u still hav2 oppose pedos so do straight only ppl. They need 2introduce an age of consent the womens movement fought 4 &so we departed from the common law. Queers have to introduce an age of consent.& they don have2bother w orientatn that pedos try 2coopt. They can just say ther gnc. But Idt that makes them preferable or lgb/lgbt untenable either. Its a coersive paraphilia not an orientatn deservin tolerance/rights. Children are the 1s w the inherent right not to be sexualized groomed abused by entitled adults i agree. Would never disagree. Ctrl f “tolerance” once again ~@2:50min there is no such thing as child lovers there are only child rapists. Fn7 who cares ab pedosadists feelings they objectively abuse. Theres no such thing as a child lover only child rapists. Theyre causing weird issues w this “scientific standard of subjective distress” or pathologization… and they give us the rind report boys for sale 1981… ~@40min

Anyway they do this w porn 2. They say porn is consensual & its only bad or “unhealthy” if the user feels distress or sumn like that. So I dont trust them.

I also 4got 2mention when prostasia denies subcultures or cultures cant socialize ppl into pedosadism bc its an orientation.. I 4got the science per Blanchard Bailey etc is actually that culture ** determines if the innate orientation will be expressed. In the case of trans it can be hsts being a gay male or agp transing. But then 4pedos it means it contributes 2if they act on their desires which is always inherently abuse of a defenseless kid. Thats another reason y zero tolerance is scientific csa prevention tho I wouldnt accept that any “science” could mean we somehow should pursue a policy of tolerance of pedosadism instead.

** ctrl f degen

[–]ncosenational💊 sovereign 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (9 children)

I ran out of space but I want to emphasize one other thing ab the asserted concept of “orientation” that is the basis of sex science typically discussed in forums like these.

From the pathologizing sexual deviance history article

Second, in the annotated listing of the differences between DSM-II and DSM-III (Appendix C), Spitzer did not cite any evi- dence to warrant the inclusion of the paraphilias in gen- eral (except for the new category of zoophilia), while he did so to warrant the exclusion of homosexuality. Third, he seemed to be doubtful about how to fit in the para- philias with the DSM’s definition of mental disorder. Given that ‘‘individuals with these disorders tend not to regard themselves as ill’’; that ‘‘frequently, these indi- viduals assert that the behaviour causes them no dis- tress’’ (APA, 1980, p. 267), and that at least some of them appeared to function well, both socially and pro- fessionally, it seemed that some paraphilias did not ful- fill the criteria set out in the introduction to the manual. Perhaps they could be considered as instances of social deviance, but deviance, as Spitzer stressed, ‘‘is not by itself a mental disorder’’ (APA, 1980, p. 6). So why did DSM-III continue to present sexual deviations as mental disorders?

First, DSM-III explicitly acknowledged that there may well be a continuum between sexual health and sex- ual deviance: ‘‘[I]n DSM-III there is no assumption that each mental disorder is a discrete entity with sharp boundaries between it . . . and No Mental Disorder’’ (APA, 1980, p. 6). The editors recognized that paraphi- lic fantasies or acts could be part of a normal sexual repertoire and a healthy sexual relationship. They recog- nized, for example, that ‘‘women’s undergarments and imagery of sexual coercion are sexually exciting for many men,’’ and that ‘‘masochistic fantasies of being bound, beaten, raped or otherwise humiliated may facilitate sexual excitement in some [normal] indivi- duals’’ (APA 1980, pp. 267, 273–274). Diagnostic cri- terion A stipulated that it is only when such imagery becomes ‘‘insistently and involuntarily repetitive,’’ ‘‘repeatedly preferred or exclusive,’’ and even ‘‘neces- sary’’ to achieve sexual gratification, or when such imagery is effectively acted upon (as in the case of maso- chism or sadism), that it is to be considered part of a proper paraphilia. In sum, what made an unusual sexual fantasy or urge a mental disorder, according to DSM-III, was its exclusivity and=or its repetitivity in arousing sexual excitement. Curiously, DSM-III seemed to follow Freud’s characterization of the paraphilias here, thereby ignoring its very own definition of mental disorder, which it did use to legitimize the removal of homosexuality (Primoratz, 1997; Silverstein, 1984). As noted previously, homosexuality was not deleted from DSM-II because it was somehow shown to involve occasional, as opposed to exclusive and=or repetitive, sexual acts or fantasies. Rather, it was deleted because many homosexuals were not in any way distressed or impaired by their sexual orientation.

In a paper published shortly after the publication of DSM-III, Spitzer (1981) provided an alternative account of the decision to keep the paraphilias listed as mental illnesses. His account focused on the importance of dis- ability or impairment, rather than distress. ‘‘After ago- nizing over whether or not these conditions should be considered disorders only if the person was distressed by the symptom (as many expected, given the 1973 decision), we decided that even in those cases where there was no distress, the behavior represented impair- ment in an important area of functioning. That is, the necessity for sexual arousal of the unusual or bizarre imagery or acts was regarded as impairment in the important area of sexual functioning’’ (Spitzer, 1981, p. 406; italics in original). Even if people with a paraphi- lia were living rewarding lives, and even if their behavior caused them no distress, the DSM-III would still con- sider them mentally ill. The reason was that their sexual behavior impaired them to engage in an affectionate and reciprocal relationship. Pedophiles, sadists, and voyeurs were considered mentally ill because they were unable to form a mutual, loving relationship with another human being.

The pedo activist copying gay movement move Blanchard supported in his role as head of dsm paraphilias was like to say the desire itself is acceptable and just an orientation so long as it’s not acted on and doesn’t cause the individual distress. Sex scientists advocate acceptance of the desire by the “non offending” (I say pre offending) individual if they experience distress. Like cantor advocates for like affinity groups for pedos and incl In the lgbt.

But like here’s an article by a radical feminist who says the desire must be eliminated to be considered treated.

“A person who truly does not want to harm a child would not be seeking community and acceptance, let alone want to have access to child-like sex dolls and child-representative pornography.”

No matter the academics and activists who lend their credence to fawn over the fee-fees of “minor attracted people,” pedophilia will never be “destigmatized,” thus relegating “stigma” to the status of an eternal bogeyman which can be used to diminish the accountability of the so-called stigmatized individual.

When faced with that reality, groups like Prostasia and B4U-Act (as well as the wider internet-based “minor attracted” community) will cry victim, and squawk about how individuals should not and cannot be prosecuted for thoughts that they have not acted upon. And while that is true, it is a wonder how the wealth of pseudo-quack academics and activists that have decided to die on the hill of defending pedophiles have never considered that the options are not between total societal acceptance and the immediate execution of anyone who has ever thought any bad thoughts. That is a completely false dichotomy. Never-offenders who recognize the emergence of sick thoughts towards children (perhaps as the result of a co-morbid mental illness, or their own trauma) must be treated with the end goal being the elimination of such desire.

I agree they shouldn’t be destigmatized but anyway I am just trying to put where Bailey etc type sex scientists stand in some context of like yes there are other opinions than the nambla promoted ones cantor and the dsm are calling science.

Furthermore tho I am more like anonymous and think it’s rape culture and we need to safeguard not give pedos treatment but I can talk ab rape culture bc I can talk ab rape unlike conservatives who support marital rape of children as the legal basis of sex and allowing adult male predators to force girl children in the position of defending that they didn’t consent in court if they rape a girl and she wants to assert it was rape like was the burden out on child rape victims of adult male predators in the time of common law

But if you put urself in a bind where you have to support treatment for pedos as the answer, apparently aversive conditioning does work to reduce inappropriate desire. Even if it’s temporary what do sex scientists advocate? Chemical castration requiring regular refills?

as for what spritzer said qualifies predator rapist paraphilias as pathological I am disgusted. First of all… idgaf if they can’t have satisfying relationships w others bc they want to abuse and hurt ppl as sex. They are abusers and predators and violate women and children and animals rights bodily autonomy they prey on defenseless ness… that’s why they’re criminal pos.. they aren’t entitled to sexual satisfaction and remember victims suffer bc of pedos abusive desires and actions and entitlement… victims are the ones we owe our sympathy and support to and children need our protection never pedos.

Second that standard normalizes relationships and pathologizes various cels for no reason and I am against that culture

now that i have brought up those various contradictions and treachery of sex science and orientation and that it is unacceptable… Back to the op q re agps and chasers… I think the chaser tw pairing can be considered straight

If it’s the only way it will work for both parties who clearly want it to be seen that way. In my eyes they are homosexual males and they even say they shouldn’t be in relationships w natal females in men trapped in mens bodies.. since they have agp too women in relationships w them risk them being “down low”…

From what I recall reading in men trapped in mens bodies and some other places is

  1. Agps report having a sense of being a female from a young age

  2. Need agp fantasies to function sexually w females and also always want to be them which I don’t think is same as being attracted to them.

  3. They can function wo agp fantasies in the straight male role w a tw but not w natal females they need their agp fantasies

  4. They advise against ltr w natal females bc it doesn’t work isn’t fair to the females.. they seem to prefer tw or being w a male as a tw.

Idk why agps/chasers have to pretend to be interested in natal females even when they know it’s just damaging and unfair to natal females who might be impacted just so entitled tw can find them acceptable bc they only want males who are attracted to females. They don’t have to be w chasers if they don’t want to. No one is entitled to sexual satisfaction or relationship satisfaction neither chasers nor tw who only want straight males. Ppl have a type I’m not opposed to this paring being seen as str8.

[–]ncosenational💊 sovereign 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (8 children)

I ran out of space in the last two replies. Michael Bailey also says the chaser tw pairing is the most common type of homosexuality across cultures etc and has always existed. So I don’t think it’s porn. And I don’t think it needs to be stigmatized as it’s not abuse like lgb &straight for adults aren’t unless you think it’s somehow abuse of women generally somehow.

Seems like neither one is attracted to gay men or sumn so whatever.

Also I don’t want to read thru what I wrote and edit but I don’t think any porn esp csam is good it is just an opportunity to criticize that desire and behavior, shouldn’t be celebrated or normalized. No pedosadism is ever acceptable. It’s not a right. Children are the ones w rights not to be sexualized and to be protected/safegaurded from predatory adults and a society that protects child rapists and predators instead of children.

anyway re pedos we don’t need anything but punitive social control - zero tolerance and adult responsibility institutions etc to safeguard kids against these monsters not a drop of sympathy to them and their inherently unacceptable desires/behavior. Agree or disagree? Bc I am horrified by what I learned “Ray Blanchard did”. He advanced the pedo acceptance and decrim agenda. He’s normalizing abuse. None of this is “science”, it’s just denying abuse.

Back to the previous comment of different perceptions of pathology or idk if slatz article thinks it’s a pathology that needs to be eliminated… the cantor prostasia view of the pathology of pedosadism or actually the one Blanchard advanced is that it’s pathological if they feel distress so it’s the distress they would treat for pre offenders. This is evident in the treatment for what they used to call distressed Pedo before dsm 5 which was pocd or someth. Slatz says they should treat the behavior. I am against the normalization of the behavior incl attraction it’s unacceptable idgaf ab pedos feelings. Pedos don’t feel distress bc of their abusive behavior they cause distress and dysfunction to the victims whose lives they ruin. No one should sympathize w pedos or let them get away w their behavior. I agree w anonymous they don’t need treatment they need persecution but if I had to advocate they get treatment before hands on offense it must be the one where they have to stop their inherently harmful desires and stay away from kids.

Janice Raymond said this ab trans does it apply to pedos and all this bs or what

My main point Is to show how so-called health values of therapy, hormonal treatment, and surgery have replaced ethical values of choice, freedom, and autonomy; how these same "health" values have diffused critical awareness about the social context in which the problem of transsexualism arises; how more and more moral problems have been reclassified as technical problems; and indeed how the very notion of health itself, as generated by this medical model, has made genuine transcendence of the transsexual problem almost impossible.

From pathologizing sexual deviance… it is a crime deserving of the death penalty or life lock up… zero tolerance is what I support and it seems they’re trying to decriminalize it even Engels said that’s what they’re doing even before they existed.

This instinctual view of the perversions coincided with a change in the relations between the legal and the medical professions with regard to sexual deviancy. During the 17th and 18th centuries, acts against nature (e.g., bestiality, anal sex, homosexuality) were severely punished. If the evidence was considered to be strong enough, men and women who had sex with their dogs or other domestic animals were sentenced to death, as were those men who had anal sex with other men (Peakman, 2009). This happened all over Europe, from Spain to Denmark, and from England to France (for an overview, see the papers collected in Gerard & Hekma, 1989). In general, the acts were considered illegal, not the underlying desires, but sometimes both were condemned. In 1818, for example, Johann Heinroth’s influential handbook on mental disorders treated the mental disorders as sins. According to Heinroth (1818), mental disorders were the result of a voluntary abandonment of freedom. Heinroth argued that this ‘‘insight’’ was particularly relevant for forensic psychiatry because it meant that mentally ill criminals, including sexual deviants, were criminals after all: they were culpable because their crimes were the consequence of a free decision (Gutmann, 2006). This view started to wane after 1860. More and more psychiatrists argued that perverse individuals should be cured rather than punished (see Ober’s 1984 paper on Kotswara’s death for one of the first uses of perversion as a defense to a charge of murder). Even psychiatrists such as Lombroso, who drew a parallel between sexual deviancy and crimi- nality, did not necessarily advocate the punishment of sexual perversions but rather wanted to draw attention to the biological underpinnings of both (Beccalossi, 2011).

From reismans paper on b4u act symposium… I feel that cantor etc want to say that paraphilias are caused by pre birth hormone conditions and it is like an unproven premise.

As a solution, Dr. Sadler proposed that scientists look for underlying dysfunctions or abnormalities that are not moral judgments.118 He argued that there are two options to deal with the issue of pedophilia diagnostic criteria.119 The first is that the concept of pedophilia or pedohebophilia could be rehabilitated scientifically by looking for non-moral validators of the conditions that make the evaluation of the condition non-moral: what is it about individuals with pedophilia that make them ill rather than involved in wrongful thought or conduct?120 Regarding this first option, he noted that it is entirely possible that there is nothing else there. The condition of intense recurrent fantasies is left and there are no other symptoms associated with it.121 The second option is that there are no non-moral problems associated with the condition and therefore removal of pedophilia as a diagnostic category should be considered.122

I don’t know what to make of it all yet tbh. The point anonymous and op make of the multi billion dollar porn industry and its impact on culture is evaded.

Also this I agree all these results are really bad unless it’s like lgbt acceptance or lgb acceptance stuff

They are decriminalizing they want to end mandatory reporting that is decriminalization and an attack on safeguarding. They call the psychs instead of the cops… the reisman article talks ab Berlin doing that.

They talk ab Germany and dunkenfeld and that we should copy them but they found 88% of subjects had reported offending. They should be reported and put in prison far away from kids where they can’t harm them. That’s child protection. These evil people want to protect pedos at the expense of children. They attack the sex offender registry. They promote or associate w groups and people who promote the disgusting lie that children can consent to he raped by predator adults.

anyway I didn’t know this is going on and am violently against it like I am violently against pedos. Everyone should know and have an aversion and response plan and also child safeguard both irl and online, to pedos and to their sympathizers unless they are one which I personally would rather die than ever be. I only sympathize w victims and protecting kids from those monsters and shaming and criminalizing them effectively. Keep pedos away from kids and everywhere else. I’m really not ok w pedos ever being framed as victims bc they’re not… ever. They’re monsters and criminals and dangers to society and children there is no excuse for their behavior ever incl attraction that’s a behavior.

At the same time if gb males can kick Pedos out of the lgbt which has historically harbored pedos to an extent some factions of it have incl radical feminists like Firestone who advocated for reMoving stigma and criminalization of pedosadism… search her name in zizek repeating Lenin … if Catholic Church can be reformed

Then so can lgbt I think

So can queers

also here is Alice dredger calling a real csam user a convicted csam user a non offending pedophile

🗣🗣🗣 I am and have always been against Pedos being an orientation I think that should be lgbt only and straight… but I didn’t know it can’t be a pathology either never normal..

Some Bihet lesbian w Münchausen syndrome got abusive against me citing the dsm calling it an orientation when I said someth like that … but dsm had to change it being called an orientation in 2013… anyway abuse is immoral and a crime that’s what Pedos are. And Engels said pathologization is them trying to get rights.. so is orientation obv. I’m sure she’s welcome to argue sex based attraction / orientation is pro pedosadism here. And everything I said is how I feel and only way I ever felt it has nothing to do w her abuse and sick fantasies but she’ll try to say ur pro pedo if you don’t get all this stuff perfect even tho she obv can’t herself if she’s citing the dsm calling it an orientation.

She was trying to say anyone who talks ab agp is pro pedo but it’s born this way orientation same as lg so really she’s attacking same sex attraction born this way too.

[–]ncosenational💊 sovereign 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (7 children)

I am very hateful of pedos any name or standard zero sympathy from me I support them killing selves before doin anything to a kid and being killed before too and death or life sentence for first offense and anti pedo everything no csam no lgbt like acceptance I’m Pro kink shaming def of pedos and I am anti ship. I don’t think pedosadism is free speech. I agree w radical feminists on that. Dworkin on Ginsberg and their other anti written porn stuff and anti porn stuff

She says don’t call her queer I guess she thinks mental illness means ppl have to coddle you excuse ur abusive behavior and be nice to you I never thought of it that way I don’t think much ab it but I guess there’s truth to that she’s big on her own “mental illness”

And I support safeguarding which includes monitoring police and institutions who should be catching pedos / predators and keeping them away from kids immediately. Some institutions are required in fact seems everyone’s required to avert and react and report predators and child rapists which duh.. but plenty of ppl and orgs go the extra mile like anonymous creep catchers various researchers.. social workers if the govt is well funded..

Ppl say the cause of what reisman is talking ab in the church is this (major tw)

Can’t add it… have a really good link on that tho I think it is called beyond the detroux affair and it says the reason for the decriminalization of child rape in the church is Opus Dei she’s saying we should return to the common law … there’s stuff ab how the US is involved towards the end so it contains most of whatever else I have read ab.

I would never oppose any of this chris Hansen ppl and researchers

Lenin is a safeguarder he says he wants to know ab all predators and remove them from access to kids immediately and he said they shoot theives on sight so why not pedos.

I didn’t know anyone is pro Pedo and sympathizes w them esp not sexology but anyone now I am on the lookout more but I think most ppl don’t. Most ppl have never heard of anything sexology says on this matter and might not recognize it as pro pedosadism Pedo sympathy etc bc they lie and say they’re science

But it took me a while to learn these things so I am putting them all here for ppl who dk them and dk it’s going on

This is another important fact, for the anti ship stance. Nambla agenda for decriminalization and anti safeguarding is to not be censured

Why can’t I copy paste anymore in these comments but this is important so maybe I’ll type it out

I am writing to you at present at the request of an organization that is not interested in advancing the cause of kiddie porn for the sake of the exploitation of children, but rather for the social recognition of children’s sexuality, for the acceptance of the sexual expression of adults that desire sexual relations of a loving and tender nature w children and ultimately for raising human beings without the typical sexual impediments that are so prevalent in our judeo Christian society. In other words, “if it’s good for us, it’s good for the nation”.

That Is about nambla

Anyway those are the responses to the scourge of pedosadism I agree w and I never had a different opinion some of this stuff I had to learn bc I didn’t know it’s going on but I always hate pedos want them to die be kept away from kids for life and not to be accepted like lgbt and agree w only hate to them all and deepest sympathy for survivors and support all existing criminalization would never question it and think it should be more … there’s no science which would ever change that and I don’t think they’re at all compatible to lgbt. Even t but some ppl will say lgb. I am pure criminalization and negativity… zero tolerance on this matter and consider anyone who knows all this.. really knows all of it … bc I know it takes a while to process it and comprehend like probably at least a year maybe three of learning about it … and still entertains the “we need science” when clearly no science would ever justify any other response … to be a wilfull sympathizer w pedos and their most evil cause and I wish bad things to them I def don’t want anything to do w them and think they should be kept away from kids and any position of influence.

Also Fredrich Engels is the science on the matter. He surpassed this kind of outdated “science” before sex science even existed.

And Lenin. He said sexual and material relations change after the proletarian revolution.. radical feminists allied w the Reagan conservative counter revolution and look where it got them.. read economies of violence by Jennifer suchland tho I think she goes too far w liberal apologism for the sex industry and Lenin doesn’t agree w her read Lenin on the womens question what he says ab “sex work isn’t work” and sex workers aren’t workers. I have even read that meese and Reagan admin are connected to the cause of these sex scientists like cantor who say violence is caused by abnormalities in the brain obv pedosadism is violence.

Radical feminists complain how much they have been marginalized since their collaboration w the Reagan admins counterrevolution well.. now they will usher in common law rape or girls and nambla bc that’s what we get actually after their conservative counter revolution. Again read economies of violence finally can add a link and this one too I can add that some links I can’t add

That’s the stuff I think is the “politics” of the matter that and cyber libertarianism Michael salter talks ab … what ppl here call politics is like activism. It’s like competing agendas zero tolerance vs tolerance and acceptance and sex positivity being called science for some reason… the sexual revolution I guess.. w no real Commentary on political causes. The political and economic base.

apparently the pedo pro child rape cause has sympathizers much more than I ever thought could be possible that’s crazy to me but I am very against that and would only ever be every moment of my life

Incl when I was sex pos for consenting adults bc I didn’t know you could be against that too but I have always been against pedos and pro gay acceptance mostly prob lgbt acceptance but have been more critical of t but not as much now but the fact many radfems will talk to trans ppl like here shows they don’t think they’re like pedos

Like I am maximally against Pedos anything that means or requires that’s what I’d say every moment of my life nothing else could ever be possible but I didn’t know anything else could ever be possible

Anyway this is another thing I didn’t know. Their agenda and their playbook and I would rather die than ever repeat any of it not like I ever got into convos ab those monsters besides wishing them death and life sentence every once in a while.

Again I can’t copy paste but this is important bc I didn’t know this and to look out for it … I guess I have to type it out again

bc what he’s really saying is an exact duplicate of the pedophile “Strategy for normalization”. From “the use of value neutral terminology” [not 100% negativity - my comment and my stated and intended principle] to “redefining the term child sexual abuse” [ig they call it adult child sex] all the way to “questioning the assumption of harm” [most subhuman death worthy views anyone could ever entertain I had heard of that as a liberal never been more disturbed by anything but thought only nambla thinks that] and every other technique in the middle - his language comes right out of the pedophile playbook. He is an activist for pedophiles.

I didn’t know ab that but that would never be me. I never got into convos ab pedos beyond kill them all stuff so that would never be me but I didn’t know of other convos and I wouldn’t have known how to reject them all tbh. I had to learn ab it and make sure I know the anti pedo side and I didn’t always get it right just like those who assaulted me w the dsm calling to an orientation didn’t always get it right. But I went in only open to the maximal anti Pedo side and I would only agree w the maximal anti pedo maximal criminalization option any moment of my life nothing else could ever be possible and I consider it severe gas lighting and abuse to suggest anything else is possible or to try to push my boundaries on it like cantor says is scientists job to do. Fuck off.

Another strategy for normalization is sex positivity defending csam or the desire at all or tolerance of it. Defending it instead of criticizing and condemning it and I support criminalizing it all. Really would never care to defend it I don’t think it’s free speech. Pro shipping is the same as their playbook too. I would rather die and be tortured than align w any pedo playbook in my life.

also very important bc of Bihet lesbian abusers who act in bad faith and want to make an ex out of you they wouldn’t of anyone else doing the same thing… and think that means they won their point that they assert homosexuality is bad and wrong… while they say don’t call them queer call them can’t say it’s alienation like I did in two tags as an after thought after saying pedos are individually responsible for their inherently wrong attraction and there’s no excuse and they need to avoid children follow rules of sor and die

Don’t say that.. what Engels said is ok blaming porn is ok but alienation isn’t I guess it’s excusing abusers … and I agree the only fact is It’s an individual moral failing and an industry and govt cover up and elite cover up affecting society… and individual moral failing and a crime of the pedos and failing of other adults to safeguard and oppose Pedo sympathizers and failure of institutions to safeguard and remove abusers from access to vulnerable which children inherently are and failure or police etc and failure of the public again to hold those institutions accountable

[–]ncosenational💊 sovereign 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (6 children)

o I always forget subcultures. It’s subcultures who tolerate or even encourage it and I’d rather die than be in one of those either

All the subcultures are obligated to not normalize it and to recognize react and report .. the opposite of the beliefs behind b4u act… they need to be immediately removed from access to kids… and avert… you need aversion bc I would rather die than have anything to do w anyone or anything or any group like that I would rather work a below min wage grueling job every day for the rest of my life no breaks w nobody in the world in my life for my whole natural life … but aversion is not enough you have to stop them and not allow it to be normalized can’t allow someone to call a convicted csam user non offending

that’s something prostasia is saying is unscientific in their remarks on the un loli ban.. #42… even tho sexology says it depends on the culture if and how paraphiles act on it

Their desire and behavior and being alive is entirely unacceptable that’s the only thing I was going for and they shouldn’t have affinity groups and subcultures based on being child rapists and predators and violators

Nambla is an org that conspires to abuse kids (fn2) and they were forced underground rightfully bc no one wants to see them other than dead and locked up or them congregating and spreading their evil … they were forced underground like they should be on conspiracy charges I think

dredger was doing propaganda to end mandatory reporting too. Why can’t they treat child rapists like the criminals they are why must they protect them In this current day no less … very strange tbh … I agree w the unscientific response of kill them and lock them up for life would never leave for anything not even science

from reisman b4u act symposium write up linked elsewhere

Another post observed that the removal of pedophilia from the DSM “is a priority” for B4U-Act and that they are now “asking for the small step of ‘better representation’ in the DSM.”22 The same post concludes that any pedophile “who works for B4U-Act will tell you that they’d prefer to not have it listed in the DSM at all,” but as they have “barely gotten a reaction just requesting for ‘better representation’” they are proceeding incrementally.23 In sum, observers, who view B4U-Act in a favorable light, encourage supporters to “read between the lines.”24

The name, B4U-Act, is brilliantly constructed to confuse and mislead the public. Who should think before you act? Should child molesters and pedophiles think before they act? Should judges, juries, and the public think before we act, so as to not convict pedophiles for their child sex crimes? Who is a minor attracted person? Is this a minor who is attracted to an adult, or is it some person attracted to a child? The B4U-Act website uses euphemisms such as “gay” for homosexual, and “sex toys” for sex implements.25 This sexual language is crafted to dissemble, to confuse, to win empathy, and to incrementally work away at what is left of traditional sexual values, morals, and laws.

This is an attempt at desensitization tho I don’t think it will ever make it past the dsm and Ray Blanchard apparently

btw my mistaken alienation comment was bc for many reasons at the time that’s just what I was doing and I know it’s fairly normal… but also I had just read an article by some nambla propagandist but I wasn’t familiar enough w nambla propaganda and gave everyone benefit of doubt they couldn’t be w sympathizer w that evil cause then so I genuinely didn’t assume they could be like that. They said the self objectification of labor in class society and they called the alienation.. causes objectification in all society and therefore sexual abuse… dworkin says objectification is the cause of violence… so they were saying class society causes that and I wasn’t even interested in Pedo discourse then I was just trying to learn it bc ppl were talking ab it I know i would only ever be maximally and violently anti Pedo even as a lib lib I hate Pedos like a normal person

Anyway that was two tags on a post that said pedos aren’t non offending if they don’t stop their inherently wrong attraction and avoid kids and die well I already said the die part and that pedos are capable and responsible for their unacceptable attraction and behavior but I had just read that alienation article and thought of it and mentioned it but I have regretted it almost immediately after for years not before doubling down for like a tiny little bit

Subcultures that aren’t pedosadism based have to kick them out and detect react report and eradicate and not normalize it and not allow pedosadism to go uncriticized and not protect pedos or pedosadism which is committed by ppl called pedos idc ab the scientific idea of that.

I don’t know what this came from it’s something about how complaceny in fandoms of pro shipping encourages and normalizes abuse… but I agree w this it’s nothing for me to oppose pedos like most people would. I have never been someone who wants to defend faux csam or ppl who defend it would rather die

Q: Do you think its normal for adults to draw/lewd children in fiction OR children in fiction engaging in sexual acts with adults in fiction?

A: It's totally not normal. But the issue with this, is that there's portions of society that have normalized it and wouldn't answer the question the same way. Lewd drawings and skits in movies or videos anywhere online are majorly accepted by tons of people. So, in open society, it's not normal. But in that sub-society - that a lot of people like to argue isn't real, it's been made "acceptable". In my opinion, the boost from celebrities and other important figures showing the interest in sexual acts in fiction with children in that sub-society is what wildly influenced everyone to be okay with it. As we covered earlier, this checks out. Behavior that receives positive feedback and reaffirmation is behavior that will stay. Just so you're aware, non-offending pedophiles are still pedophiles. And just what happens when there is a lack of accountability and self-awareness because the internet loves to normalize sexualizing kids? They offend. That's the pro, and con, about the internet. Identity is anonymous. There is no way to know what people do on their own time. Why would you rather subject children to possible endangerment to satiate your, and other sick adults', wants and fantasies of fictional children? You cannot protect children if you actively subject them to sexuality for adults to enjoy, even in fiction


There's been a lot to cover here, and I've been meaning to get this all of my chest for awhile. It is upsetting that there are a lot of popular artists who disagree with pro-shipping, and do not speak out. These people are just as bad; being a bystander, a silent watcher, is harmful all the same. As an adult and as a CSA survivor, there is no excuse for me to allow or condone how these other adults produce this kind of nasty shit. Because I know it's wrong, and I know how it translates to real life. It influences, it condones, it applauds, and it protects pedophiles from being criticized. Doesn't matter how you may see it, pro-shipping is entirely used as a scapegoat, and a guise for pedophiles and paraphiliacs. I do not think adult pro-shippers deserve respect, nor sympathy. They are fully aware of what they're doing, and their pride is inflated by the feedback and nonstop child-sexmongers piling up affections. Chill the fuck out. Children in fiction are given canon underage ages for a reason; they are not to be exploited, and it's unacceptable.

I don't care to take the punch for minors that are exploited through media and fandom basis. I'm a grown ass woman and Twitter, Tumblr, Instagram or whatever else is full of pussies. I've been blocked by plenty of popular pro-ship artists, and I do not care to go out of my way and express my discontent. Stop allowing these people to get away with this disgusting shit just because their manipulation skills are subpar. If someone tries to convince you pedophilia is okay IN ANY WAY SHAPE OR FORM, FICTIONAL OR NOT, it is a red flag, and you can trust immediately that it is wrong and they are severely fucked in the brain.

Thank you; and please, start calling these kinds of people out, protect children. Real or fictional.

There’s the lesbians vs pedophiles a recent history article I can’t link for some reason rn ab kicking pedosadism out of lgbt.

I would never be against anyone who’s against pedos in any way I would never oppose criticism of pedos or pedosadism in any way ever I don’t think ever in my life even when I wasn’t anti sex pos for consenting adults yet … that would never be me

I support stigma hate no decriminalization i want more criminalization… all criticism pedos kill selves,stay underground, away from kids,away from pedo groups before then.. I never said ppl should be nicer or pedos should be destigmatized I said I hate pedos &agree w a post telling them to die in ten different ways,not be a pedo culture or pos who wants to fuck kids &get treatment &I retracted that one line after realizing Idk wtf that is..that pedosadism is never normal nor an orientation is harmful dangerous to others &a crime&they should seek treatment b4 commiting hands on offense &stay away from kids &pedo community/identity &the treatment can’t be csa dolls/faux csam

But me callin it pathological when I didn’t know the subject at all copying other anti pedo ppl said its illness

[–]ncosenational💊 sovereign 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (5 children)

Alienation isn’t what I meant either I wasn’t interested in pedo discourse then and was thinking more ab gender abolition and agp being a paraphilia but Pedos are worse so then I clumsily applied the idea to them… and shouldn’t have. I see lots of leftists say something like that in this context but it’s wrong you have to be like Engels I guess to not be misconstrued. Also seen ppl associate that explanation of alienation w give them porn which is the opposite of what I would want and I never heard of cantor then and his bs ab they feel isolated - that’s what I want, them dead arrested stigmatized and forced underground not an above ground presence w identity politics. I didn’t even want to know ab this I just wanted to make sure what my stance is bc clearly there’s a lot of bs around. My stance is maximal criminalization and zero tolerance and non existence of Pedos safeguard on and offline detect react report eradicate. I beleive in the kill them on sight lock them up and throw away the key response. Nothing is wrong w it. Ppl who don’t agree w you want to insinuate ur unrelated views are pro pedo maybe I can do that too to others but I never wanted to go down that spiral but I know I hate pedos and would never be a sympathizer esp when these other ppl are pointing fingers at others for views they don’t think they have themselves well neither do I. I also am against whatever pedo phenom they’re against. Then I remembered I fell for one of their propaganda for five min before rejecting it wo understanding the issues really like ten or more years ago then forgot ab it… never had views like that it was the faux cp can serve as substitute for contact offense and real cp… now I have agreed w dworkin on Ginsberg for many years. I wouldn’t fall for any pro porn propaganda which was the larger context of the “science” article I fell for for five min on Reddit once so I knew I had issues w recognizing all the pro pedo propaganda bc even when i fell for that one once I felt disgusted bc I just hate pedos and want them to die but clearly it’s the worst crime ever so I wouldn’t want children to be raped or have their rape watched. So I was in shock and confused. For a second then I was like wtf is this why am I even paying attn and forgot ab it till I remembered in 2018 and wanted to die bc I would never have those kinds of views ever not even then when I wasn’t anti porn of adults yet. Defending any kind of pedosadism incl faux csam when I didn’t know it’s illegal then is never anything I want to do and I remember realizing that then but not really knowing why the article is wrong. Now I know why it’s bs by prostasia type lunatics. Not science it’s sex positivity.. scientific sex positivity is what sex science is… so that’s weird I didn’t know that before I decided to look into this issue in 2018 only. I agree w this response. We must show those who want to abuse kids we won’t have it. We won’t have namblas strategies for normalization.

I do not want them having affinity groups and Michael salter and the woman who attacked me for accidentally calling them an illness or something both oppose them being online unsupervised. I agree they should be banned from everywhere. That’s what I always intended w the principle I called 100% Pedo negativity like zero tolerance is better but I didn’t know this discourse yet and i had in mind sex negativity no csam no kink not even “legal” fiction etc and their existence being negated other ways like death jail hate stigma literally negativity from society and also them not being above ground in any way other than the criminalization of them.

I thought illness implied going to a doctor in private not having online support groups… I didn’t even hear of anyone claiming that’s treatment till after 4/21/19 I didn’t know of cantor before that.

Anyway I got attacked for not being carceral enough ig… but really I thought it was normal to say it’s never normal meaning pathological… as opposed to incl it w lgbt and straight as orientation which should be normalized… and then the alienation comment I was trying to say ppl who oppose sexual violence at the root should have solidarity w working class power but pedos need to stay away from all collectivism and solidarity I wouldn’t be a retard to the extent I would think they should go anywhere near anyone else and the post I said is my obligatory statement that called it an illness said they shouldn’t leave the house. That was the stupid alienation comment and trying to go beyond gender as an explanation for paraphilias and sexual violence and say alienation is like class society class analysis but I think it’s best to stick to carceralism only. Going beyond that I think is very tricky better not attempted and a socialist will attack you for not being only carceral which fuck them

The article I referenced I wish I didn’t bc now I’m more familiar w nambla strategy I recognize more nambla propaganda than just the one line that stuck out to me then which was something like fear of child sexuality means children are afraid to come forward and when I read the article then I said adults shouldn’t be calling children sexual. But it’s worse she says children need control over their lives, that’s nambla propaganda. kids don’t need control over their own lives they need adults to safeguard them from predators. And other things.

Anyway it was the article saying alienation is the cause of self objectification of labor in society and objectification thru all society which results in sexual abuse… is the root cause… I should have seen the awkwardness of it but I wasn’t being that tuned in… there will always be predators and we have to safeguard against them and criminalize them ofc it will never stop being a crime so there’s no reason to act like it can be abolished but I always meant that it will be a crime for all eternity and shouldn’t be normalized never normal for all eternity. I thought never normal means never normal not only if they feel subjective distress or act on it else they’re healthy orientation that should have tolerance by society and civil rights, ie be normalized and accepted. I assumed it’s never normal dangerous to others and a crime made Blanchard and sexology position more like that of odonohue not the pedo agenda copying the gay movement. I had no idea ab that until later in 2019 late 2019. Anyway it will always be a crime so never abolished. The only ? is why it’s not criminalized to the extent it should be and why criminalization isn’t enforced for all levels of society. Looks like plebe child rapists benefit from the protection of elite pedos. That’s what Engels said is the science.

The alienation is the root cause of sexual abuse article said this

Clearly, there are some instances of grave harm that require the segregation of offenders for the protection of society.

So clearly that’s always Pedos. But whatever it’s not worth making the mistakes and getting words put in ur mouth and it should be like Engels if anything clearly saying pedos aren’t part of the working class struggle which ofc I meant that I would never want to invite them anywhere not my life or anyone else’s I want them away from all life and dead. That’s always been my stance nothing I ever said was meant to go beyond that. I just didn’t know wtf is going on and didn’t know how to articulate that so I was trying to copy existing anti pedo responses but got it wrong on first try. I didn’t know any of this stuff I only learned way later.

The anonymous video wisely says don’t do the alienation causes abuse thing as well this book is ab anonymous. I used to be able to use one of those cites to post a copy of this book but it’s telling me someone is impersonating it rn… anyway that book applies to anonymous and also she makes some points but deviates from Lenin who says sex work isn’t work. And you should read Lenin on the woman ? before reading that book.

It’s never normal really means it’s normal if they don’t feel bad ab it and it’s lasted at least six months or they have raped at least 3 different children. I always assumed he meant it’s never normal he expects them to feel distress (bc we need to stigmatize it and not normalize it so we expect them to feel the same) and they are dangerous to others and a crime and need to come in before commiting a hands on offense turns out it’s a ploy to end mandatory reporting like dunkenfeld where 88% of subjects disclosed offense but aren’t reported bc Germany doesn’t have mandatory reporting but I guess it’s illegal to report child rapists to police that’s what they want to adopt here. If cantor got his way it would become a hate crime.

[–]ncosenational💊 sovereign 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

That’s what I always meant I agree w. We need to morally mandate Pedos out of existence, by what I called 100% negativity them not existing!!! No orientation identity like lgbt who say we’re gay not queer. No csam or anything but max criminalization &hate but it’s called zero tolerance… I just never read pedo discourse b4 so I made the word up to approximate that concept off top of my head before learning what other anti Pedo ppl already say. Then a Bihet lesbian w Münchausen decided to be a liar &put the opposite words in my mouth bc I somehow called it an illness bc I saw other anti pedo ppl do &saw in the hebephilia debate like ppl against Ray Blanchard were saying it’s not pathological it’s not an illness. Like I said same as Anna slatz… those who claim to be never offenders dedicated to staying such should stop reproducing the inherently wrong desire (thoughts &pre crime behaviors),,, else they’re not non offending &I already said kill selves.&I was upset I fell for some bs article once long ago that are not views I ever had in my life. And I was saying stuff like the reflexivity wiki page bc that’s how I thought of orientation& looks like many others do too… like the fandom thing quoted above or this treatment Bihet lesbian linked to. .. that ppl w orientations who beleive they are gay or trans or pedo that’s not an orientation but for someone to be out of closet as pedo they need to think they’re a pedo for some reason I don’t relate to bc I am attracted to adults only never had any other experience never would worry I could… i would never use any kind of csam real or faux… i was just talking ab how ppl say faux csam can be used as a substitute for crimes against real children by would be offenders. I never heard of pro pedosadism then it was just an article that came up and i guess I didn’t know any theory of it so i accepted the one in the science article which was also ab regular porn of adults not causing rape rates to increase. It started w that… 11 countries listed for adult porn that was normalized to me real csam would never be and I would never entertain decrim of real csam for any reason and I remember thinking that wouldn’t make it ok to legalize it bc watching real csam is just as bad abuse as commiting contact offense. I just didnt react in any thinking way I didn’t expect it it was shocking to me and I think and always have that csa is like the worst thing that could ever be done to a child so i just had a wrong reaction to this issue I never thought ab and didn’t know the politics of… i would never fall for any of that article not even the pro adult porn propaganda disguised as science today and I totally forgot ab that brief experience and it’s totally unacceptable to me for someth like that to happen so i wanted to set boundaries copy only anti pedo sources so I know for sure where i stand on these things when they come up… i asked a ? Ab the article i had just read to someone making fun of that logic of more porn less rape bc I just read that article saying that’s what they found… then i was disgusted to be on that side of the convo even tho I didn’t understand I didn’t want to bc they started answering ab csam and I was so disturbed by the whole topic I didn’t want to be talking ab it i remember thinking why tf am I talking ab this i just hate pedos and want them to die bc that’s the only i feel all my life that would never change and I don’t even want to know ab this… i deleted my comments and blocked it from memory… that is what gives me anxiety. I worried I can be tricked by pro pedosadism posing as science or csa prevention bc it happened once for five min before I snapped out of it wo resolving my confusion bc I didn’t know of pro pedo then I could never imagine that and I’d always Be against it… anyway someone who’s out of the closet has to have experiences which make them Think they’re that sexuality … they can stop that experience like pedos should like slatz said like what I thought demanding pedos be pocd not pedos was which is what I saw the anti pedo blog that was in my tl and I revlogged two posts from was doing it was second time I read ab pedos in my life, skimmed the anti pedo blog in my tl for five min. First time was a month before skimming anti map tags and a few posts on my tl for ten min. When I chose this post as my obligatory statement on pedos bc it’s the most negative violent one I saw in anti map tags skimming for ten min but removed the one line ab treatment bc it’s like neutral.. shortly after.. figuring stuff out not used to the topic at all… … it clearly goes against pedos having pedo groups and solidarity w anyone or being decriminalized. It says they shouldn’t leave house I already said kill selves… the anti pedo blog I skimmed for five min a month later said pocds stay away from Map communities avoid children at all costs silently and don’t try to normalize pedosadism and be like pride… I didn’t know anything it also said they’re a mental illness like the obligatory statement post so I thought it was the same thing like slatz said and what obligatory statement post said ab they need to seek help for their illness

I would only ever be maximally anti pedo all my life I’d only agree w the most anti pedo option always. It would never impact any other progressive values I ever had. And she also lied and said I support restorative justice for pedos when I just said what Anna slatz said only. Off top of my head w no experience thinking or reading ab this.

pedos need to be morally mandated out of existence so they don’t exist other than criminalization and stigma and hate etc … that’s what I was always getting at not whatever satisfies Bihet lesbians w Münchausen sick delusions and desires

I was only saying what slatz said but I also said they can’t be cured if sum1 experiences Pedo desires ther a threat to kids 4life should die asap& avoid kids at least follow rules of sor before that,not try to be a Pedo identity/orientation affinity group no map community but I went along w ppl saying they should get treatment

I can have sympathy w the prison issues in the us& be anti war on drugs while also max criminalization of pedos I would never be anyth else in my life than whatever is the most against pedos possible would rather die

AFTER SAYING ALL THAT OTHER STUFF OF PEDOS ATTRACTION IS INHERENTLY HARMFUL THEY SHOULDNT BE AN IDENTITY &DEEPEN THEIR BEHAVIOR THEY NEED TO STOP IT &ALL THAT OTHER STUFF I said that’s all my stance on the matter of them not being an orientation… I made an off handed comment in 2 tags after all that saying I think alienation causes paraphilias/breeds abuse too& I regret that I think every1 should follow carceralism only Re Pedos incl all that anti pedo research according to economies of violence that’s carceralism 2 or can they fixate on sex trafficking bc it’s a male dominated space but when feminists do it they’re the cause of all problems in the world and the cause of neoliberalism bc sex trafficking is a neoliberal construct … anyway I agree w the criticism that for pedos it’s important to emphasize personal responsibility incl the public &institutions to safeguard all carceralism all the time

Re morally mandating them out of existence w criminalization safeguarding etc … zero tolerance… an evo bio explanation of rape which all pedosadism inherently is given to be which I understand bp is evo bio… the implications are the evo bio stance on reducing or minimizing the crime is zero tolerance… more tolerance will encourage the rape ape behavior etc &this is independent of morality. The average rape ape will refrain if there is heavily enforced zero tolerance but there’s some who have more power to get away w it.. sounds like Engels says the plebe pedos/abusers look to the elites to gain rights/tolerance or for power I should say… see prostasia bragging ab all their huge anon donations almost taunting their righteous detractors… seems most plausible rather than saying they can be abolished … this is the primary contradiction obv which the whole you can’t stray a hairs width from carceralism reality I just described

Like this if I didn’t know better I wouldn’t know this is evil pro pedosadism… it’s all cantor bs written by someone who works at his org … I am against all of that…

When I didn’t know Pedo discoruse at all &only thought kill them all - someth I would never change& never have - I wouldn’t know what’s wrong w that article… but the stuff ab we need to talk ab it &they need to know they’re not alone &need destig env is justifying the pedo identity orientation when they just need to be killed on sight &afraid to go near kids bc of safeguarding by other adults

The Bihet lesbian who attacked me first of all always did so when I was talking ab agp saying I don’t think it’s like Pedos I think they’re like homosexual males … she says lgbt should have identities right? She was trying to say ppl who talk ab aro ace are pro pedo/pedo &she wanted to do same to me but a lot of lesbians talk ab agp to reject trans women when she said she would date them as a lesbian - she would date butch trans lesbians she was very enthused at the prospect as a lesbian … but 86% of those who seek srs are agps I bet none of the butch trans lesbians she dates even trans at all

She cited dsm entry on pedo calling it an orientation that had 2b changed bc of rightful anti pedo activism in 2013 to say if you say pedos a mental illness ur a pedo apologist& danger to kids. She also cited the paper by Blanchard cantor& seto in her post directed at kids where she told them to listen to sex workers like a child sex trafficker .. I support all anti pedo efforts so A 4effort but she shouldnt be nit pickin others yet she dk what shes talkin ab

[–]ncosenational💊 sovereign 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

I repeat that one link pretending to want to prevent csa

is just pedo agenda to

End mandatory reporting

Remember that’s decrim and also the nambla agenda

Make pedos an orientation w rights against discrimination etc

Their agenda is incremental

They want to have a convo… I never wanted anything to do w that convo I didn’t know was going on. I just reject them I said just say no unless it’s criminalization. But looks like everyone else has to have their opinion. I think it’s fair to want to know what mine is if I had to engage. I agree w most anti pedo option always I support maximal criminalization zero tolerance death or life sentence first offense and an agenda of harsher sentences and more safeguarding. They should be treated like cyber criminals re their online presence imo that’s what the anti pedo line is from what I have observed. Like zero tolerance online that’s what I agree w too and off too.

cantor etc advocate for unsupervised Pedo groups experts like salter and all kinds of detractors oppose. Here’s another example of someone other than Anna slatz maybe who says they don’t need online support groups or pedo dolls.

There’s a lot more

Me looking for the above link.. look how much anyone who falls into their trap bc they lie and try to force a convo but don’t say all the other options and that they’re pro pedo agenda has to walk it back

They keep pushing

Fred Engels correctly identified treatment for csa prevention as just a ploy to get rights two decades before sexology and the term pedophilia even existed

Someone should attack the Bihet lesbian for attacking me for saying pedosadism isn’t an identity/orientation/sexuality and citing the dsm at me that it is an orientation bc she demands they be included in the lgbt and get legal protections against discrimination I guess

Massive improvements to Twitter’s policy on child sexual exploitation. Now a breach of policy to:

  • share drawn/simulated abuse images

- promote paedophilia as an identity/orientation

I hate Pedos more than anything else that could ever exist always have always will I WOULD NEVER BE ON THOSE MONSTERS SIDE IN MY LIFE. EVER. Would never happen. I support criminalization and am therefore against pedosadism I don’t think it’s free speech

The only convo I’m ok w is 100% negativity criminalization and zero tolerance hate stigma safeguarding supporting survivors etc

And just so you know cantor Berlin etc and other pro pedosadism activists advocate chem castration as treatment and that’s the pro pedo agenda. The treatment if any that’s allowed seems aversive techniques and maybe ones like avoiding triggers… the treatment I guessed it would be when I first started looking into the issue in 2018… staying away from kids following rules of sor and stopping reproducing their inherently harmful desire that means all thoughts and precrime not non offending behaviors … and I said no collectivism/identity solidarity when I said all that the first time. I didn’t even know anyone says they need unsupervised online or other support groups till way later when I saw cantor advocating for it no earlier than later 2019. Chemical castration is part of the treatment reisman says there’s no proof of working while Berlin is releasing these monsters onto the street bc they got chemical castration and not reporting them to the cops when he knows they’re commiting ongoing offenses or even have in the past so he can give them this “treatment”. You probably dc to defend it you don’t need to know why. Just don’t. I wouldn’t ever even get into these convos to have to walk someth back but I decided to learn it bc abusive bihets and others can make endless posts on it I want to know my stance and there’s that one time I asked a dumb q when I was blindsided by soemth weird I didn’t know how to respond to, I just shouldn’t have. Then immediately felt gross even being in a convo like that and rejected it, that was like five min once ten or more years ago and I forgot ab it.

Idk why they need therapy to stop their pedo desires which are thoughts and pre crime behaviors and to avoid kids and follow rules of sor and die asap. If they have a mind to go to therapy why can’t they just do those things on their own

This is the article I fell for once for five min… I was still brainwashed that porn of adults is not harmful I had even been talked down to by a male feminist for expressing concern for the safety of women in the industry saying idk what I’m talking ab and harming them by what I’m saying before this. Also before this I had seen articles that pedos can be non offending and ppl saying they can’t in the comments and I didn’t fall for those. I left those thinking if they’re dedicated to never offending I hope they stay that way but they’re not really dedicated unless they follow rules of sor and don’t try to be like lgbt bc I would never want that and that’s what I was saying in 2018 and since too and the Bihet lesbian attacked me citing the dsm saying it is an orientation

But the science daily article I remember believing their assertion pedos use csam as a substitute for contact offense but that wouldn’t make legalizing it ok and the article also says they would never suggest that and think they can do soemthing w faux? I didn’t know what’s going on I had an emotional response and also for some reason believed the article assertion they use porn as a substitute idk I just never saw any convo like that and I had some eMotional reaction and also uncritical and the comments on Reddit were all like how can anyone be against preventing csa i didn’t even know the implications like they want faux cp to be legal and everywhere I wouldn’t want that either. then I was like idc ab this and forgot ab it … I just read that article and believed it stupidly I should see it says someth ab legalizing csam even tho it gives a throw away comment that they would never suggest that I should know to not entertain it. I never even had conscious pro adult porn views it is just legal and I was a liberal and believed the lies ab it it’s consent or whatever… adults can do what they want or whatever never thought of being critical of that. But I never thought porn is liberation or anything. And feminism I knew was pro porn of adults. I always thought csam real csam use is the worst crime just as bad as contact offense to watch a real victims child rape or any rape. So I would never entertain the disgusting notion consuming it is a victimless crime. I saw that before this article on Reddit and was disgusted but I thought most people would never think that. I never had those kinds of conscious pro porn beliefs like my values are tied up w defending it. So I am really disturbed someth like that could happen even when I was sex pos for consenting adults by default bc that’s how I was brainwashed by liberal society and media . Anyway when I remembered that, I had forgotten ppl even say porn prevents sex crimes, I decided that would never happen again. I wanted to learn the anti Pedo line from anti pedo side ONLY that’s why I copied anti pedo ppl ONLY anti pedo blogs and posts only bc I didn’t know any other sources I just saw those in my tl … I never had any kind of beliefs like that article like prostasia or cantor other than lgbt acceptance or lgb even so I would never want anything to do w their bs even when I was liberal sex pos for consenting adults by default not like some deep seated belief other than anti rape.

I didn’t expect the dedicated anti pedo blogs to be wrong, so I blindly copied them when I saw them bc I was trying to learn and I didn’t expect them to be spreading misinfo and pro pedosadism so I repeated some wrong info from them &corrected the mistake as soon as I saw I made one but it’s not good enough for Bihet lesbian abusers who make mistakes too &attack my correct statement it’s not an orientation identity or sexuality it’s abuse,society shouldn’t normalize it by citing the dsm that it’s an orientation to show I’m spreading lies &a danger to kids like the pro pedo ppl like cantor say and she tells children to listen to sex workers in this post like a child sex trafficker

Pedophilia has always been a mental illness. The word was coined and first introduced decades after Engels said this is all a ploy for pedo rights in psychopathia sexualis - means sexual mental illness, cantor says it was always medical term and it’s only not a mental illness in dsm 5 bc of pedo activism that they thought it made them look bad copying the gay movement move of subjective distress.

I’m not ok w any suggestion I could ever be sympathetic to any kind of pedo there’s nothing more despicable evil worst crime ever to me always every moment of my life. Apparently she can be against Pedos

[–]ncosenational💊 sovereign 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

The event w the science daily article I saw 1x on Reddit long ago &forgot ab it was very weird to me. The whole thing. I never thought ab the issue of if csam users go on to do contact offense bc of it. It wasn’t anything on my mind or in my awareness… that issue. So thats the 1st time I saw any1 say anything ab it &it was a science article so I just believed what it said bc I had no other reference to think ab? Anyway some1 was saying more porn less abuse is stupid logic somewhere else that same day not long after I guess it was a big post in a main subreddit… &I was like I just read this article that says they found sex crimes didnt increase or went down w more porn? Isnt it true? They said csam is abuse WHICH I AGREED but the article was ab porn2 &I freaked out like this was really weird 2me 2be in this convo &I was like the article says they can use fake images only? W the idea of they can prevent contact offense &real csam use - some of the worst if not worst crimes any1 could commit 2me then& now &always …. So ofc I don’t want kids to be raped or have their rape watched& I guess I thought fiction is different &not a crime however gross. I didn’t know any of the other opinions on it. It’s the first time I saw this discussion &I thought it was expert opinion not a debate. Bc it’s a science article.

&a person responded &said pedos start to think it’s ok to rape kids and I was so freaked out like wtf and deleted my comments so it looks like I defended csam use or didn’t know it’s abuse bc I didn’t say o sorry I don’t feel comfortable w this convo. Which I didn’t. So if someone wanted to be abusive they can twist it to something it wasn’t so that was just a weird thing to me and I freaked out ab it then and when I remembered it.

That masterpost… she cites Blanchard again w the article that says csam use is a diagnostic indicator 4what she calls the disorder!!

Also she always did this intimidation of me &gas lighting when I was talking ab agp too.. saying I don’t think it’s like pedos I think they’re like homosexuality but worse in some ways ofc. She always wanted to intimidate me not to talk ab Blanchard or agp or something or twist my words but these are the things I actually think not whatever satisfies her desires &fantasies or I think she Is ok w lying& intimidating just to bully me for talking ab agp &say I’m not welcome in the left which idc but I am… I would be in other circumstances.. it’s her Lenin denounces .. she who has no connection to communism other than the dick she’s taking he doesn’t vouche for her. He invites me prob if I was a bit different. But there are no leftist leaders today like him 2declare that… bc there is no1 capable of leading among them obv. I can’t imagine any1 w the fortitude to say what he did in his comments on the womens question. Lenin is talking to rad feminists obv. I think that comment denouncing leftist bullies of radical feminists from Lenin probably stands for eternity, regardless of if any leftist ever emerges who is capable of such leadership ever again. To me it doesn’t matter O AND HE SAYS RADICAL FEMINISTS GET A SEPARATE FACTION IN THE THING THAT MAO LINKS TO… fn2 on new democracy. But 2me thats not enough to make up 4leftist abuse &I dont think it should be 4 any1 other independent minded female.

anyway she said ppl who say its a mental illness intrusive thots etc are factually incorrect &cited the dsm entry on pedo calling it an orientation 2prove its not a mental illness. I don’t agree w any of this not her saying it’s factually incorrect or what the factually correct reality is… it’s always been a mental illness started in psychopathia sexualis… &it only became partially not a mental illness in dsm 5 bc of lobbying by what seems to be b4u act to copy the moves of gay movement to de pathologize and become orientation. And it’s the subjective distress thing… if it’s instrusive repetitive etc.. so it’s those things. I don’t agree w that if I had to agree w someth it would be odonohue or to disband the apa and remove paraphilias.

First, DSM-III explicitly acknowledged that there may well be a continuum between sexual health and sex- ual deviance: ‘‘[I]n DSM-III there is no assumption that each mental disorder is a discrete entity with sharp boundaries between it . . . and No Mental Disorder’’ (APA, 1980, p. 6). The editors recognized that paraphi- lic fantasies or acts could be part of a normal sexual repertoire and a healthy sexual relationship. They recog- nized, for example, that ‘‘women’s undergarments and imagery of sexual coercion are sexually exciting for many men,’’ and that ‘‘masochistic fantasies of being bound, beaten, raped or otherwise humiliated may facilitate sexual excitement in some [normal] indivi- duals’’ (APA 1980, pp. 267, 273–274). Diagnostic cri- terion A stipulated that it is only when such imagery becomes ‘‘insistently and involuntarily repetitive,’’ ‘‘repeatedly preferred or exclusive,’’ and even ‘‘neces- sary’’ to achieve sexual gratification, or when such imagery is effectively acted upon (as in the case of maso- chism or sadism), that it is to be considered part of a proper paraphilia. In sum, what made an unusual sexual fantasy or urge a mental disorder, according to DSM-III, was its exclusivity and=or its repetitivity in arousing sexual excitement. Curiously, DSM-III seemed to follow Freud’s characterization of the paraphilias here, thereby ignoring its very own definition of mental disorder, which it did use to legitimize the removal of homosexuality (Primoratz, 1997; Silverstein, 1984). As noted previously, homosexuality was not deleted from DSM-II because it was somehow shown to involve occasional, as opposed to exclusive and=or repetitive, sexual acts or fantasies. Rather, it was deleted because many homosexuals were not in any way distressed or impaired by their sexual orientation

also!!! This is like me falling for the science daily article I just didn’t know anything ab this subject or issue and never thought ab if pedos who use csam offend bc of it. Never crossed my mind and I believed what the article said such a ? Had never occurred to me so I didn’t know I shouldn’t beleive the science article by experts … even the psych who took pedo out of the dsm doesn’t think ab such things imagine how much he had to think ab related issues

The interviewer seems to have been shocked at this ‘‘confession,’’ but in a sense, Spitzer’s honesty should not really surprise us. Directly or indirectly, lobby groups often aim to transform societal norms and values, and if such norms and values play any role in defining mental illness, as Spitzer believes, then lobbying inevitably affects psychiatry’s diagnostic process. Immediately after the APA board’s decision to delete homosexuality from their manual, Irving Bieber publicly asked Spitzer whether he would consider deleting other sexual deviations from DSM, too. Spitzer answered: ‘‘I haven’t given much thought to [these problems] and per- haps that is because the voyeurs and the fetishists have not yet organized themselves and forced us to do that’’ (qtd. in Bayer, 1987, p. 397; see also Bieber, 1987, p. 433).

it was literally never important to me to call it an illness, I didn’t know there’s anything wrong w that and what was and remains important to me is it’s not an orientation. And it’s standard radical feminism to say abuse shouldn’t be normalized or legitimized as sex/sexuality. Even anon does it

I didn’t even realize I somehow compared it to intrusive thoughts I’m not the one w Münchausen I never even heard of intrusive thoughts.. I just thought pedo shouldn’t be an identity w affinity groups identity politics etc and they should stay away from kids& everyone else and die &not use csa dolls etc… that’s what I agree w

AND she didn’t find literally any of the bad stuff Blanchard did like what cantor says in that video or the debate regarding criteria wiki. I found that all myself. She cited him as the anti Pedo facts in the dsm and this article

clearly I didn’t know ab that. I, like she obviously did, assumed the dsm&psych were normal ppl &anti pedo basically not good enough still probably… they’re not feminist activists. But I thought they were basically anti pedo but more professional but the truth is they’re horrific… esp sexology. I had NO idea ab the treachery of sexology I thought they said pedosadism is never normal a danger to others& a crime.

She was citing the dsm like it is a legitimate source as 1 of her anti pedo sources so

Lenin personally invited what seems like radical feminists& he said their detractors are full of shit and these are the things that matter to him

Nowadays all the thoughts of Communist women, of working women, should be centered on the proletarian revolution, which will lay the foundation, among other things, for the necessary revision of material and sexual relations. [meese, incl James cantor, items 5&6] Just now we must really give priority to problems other than the forms of marriage prevalent among Australia’s aborigines, or marriage between brother and sister in ancient times. For the German proletariat, the problem of the Soviets, of the Versailles Treaty and its impact on the lives of women, the problem of unemployment, of falling wages, of taxes and many other things remain the order of the day. To be brief, I am still of the opinion that this sort of political and social education of working women is wrong, absolutely wrong. How could you keep quiet about it? You should have set your authority against it.

He said radfems should criticize not recommend like they did

[–]ncosenational💊 sovereign 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (1 child)

o I found one click 1 &dl

Can’t copy paste the soros empire replacing the soviet empire vid

Btw last time I paid attn to her at all like 2019 she said shes not a member of a party &clearly she was taking some communist girl dick 2think shes so superior 2 every1 else..who said he’s 2old 4her maybe who is lying to her she’s so great bc clearly she’s not… so yeah both of them are exactly who Lenin doesn’t vouche for &she’s a bully

anyway I think sex science &what the dsm did is nambla. I think b4u act is a similar group w similar aims& the sex scientists know it& I had no idea of any of this or that they dont report abuse I knew they had committed abuse some stories but most of them I didn’t know about& I am against that I think they should be prosecuted

I mean the stuff Judith reisman talks about & I agree w her saying the bishops should sue the sexologists who advised them

Idk how I feel ab pedos getting some form of treatment that isn’t like what James cantor advocates for but like Michael salter or some1 like that or idk what anti pedo ppl mean by treatment idk if I even wanted to think ab it to the extent to comment on that but other ppl do &then the pro pedo people try to push that convo &i thought the dsm was a lot better than it is so I just wanted to tell ppl who might not know that … Im against ending mandatory reporting &idk what the consequences should be4 that& Im against ending the sor I think it should be strengthened w more jail time harsh mandatory min sentences in a facility far away from the vulnerable which children inherently are for 1st offense & I’m very against destigmatization if they commit abuse they should get life or death sentence if they fail to report idk I’ll say same idk what is advocated for

like it’s not hard to be against nambla I def would only ever be &violently so. I dont want to ever be any pedo apologist just like she wouldnt be I would rather die than be pedo apologist either I have no beliefs which would ever require that &my beliefs are very against Pedos always have been always will be bc kids can’t consent& I have always been very supportive of the age of consent I think it should be high everywhere nothing else could ever be possible. I only have deepest sympathy 4victims &want kids 2be protected from them w age of consent & safeguarding& all support to survivors never pedos. I have literally never had a single drop of sympathy for any kind of pedo& nothing I ever said was that &I said that from day 1 the 1st time she tried to put those words in my mouth I said I don’t understand this discourse& I copied some other anti ppl saying pedo is an illness they need treatment& I never meant it as sympathetic or feel sorry for pedos don’t put those words in my mouth &the Bihet les abuser kept doing it even tho I told her the 1st time she did it immediately thats NOT WHAT I MEANT AT ALL& WOULD NEVER she doesn’t care she just wants to abuse me

If 1 Socialist woman can do to me what she did any 1 of them can do it to any independent minded female who should auto assume soc women are a threat to them not invite or engage them … if you know they are like that will completely lie not care put words in ur mouth you never said and would never mean and not take accountability ever even when you ask them did you even say that …you put urself in that situation of abuse &you put ur life in danger.. stay away from leftism bc they’ll treat u like that punish u 4stuff they wont punish ppl they think should be there or even lie to punish u for stuff they wanna punish some1 for even if ur very against whatev they’re pinning on u which I was w all she tried 2 put on me I was always only 4 zero tolerance& upset if I missed the mark ever then wished I never tried but why can she make endless posts ab it w mistakes &I can’t also wanna be able to comment on it in a way I agree w noth I don’t agree w,noth tolerance …my mental health is dependent on 1 Bihet abusive behavior she could answer 1 y n ? &end it but she won’t &she knows what’s at stake& it will be until she does right thing or I die … she’s the 1 responsible 4my mental health bc of her gaslight abuse not me& she’s the 1 responsible to fix it by taking accountability 4 her abusive behavior &lies… she said I said horrible things I never said& twisted my words when I did say things I shouldnt have bc I never read ab pedos& I was upset mental health now is a lot better than it was in that moment in 2018 when she decided it’s time to abuse me when I was so upset I couldn’t breathe literally couldn’t breathe or think a coherent thought but she was putting horrible words in my mouth I didn’t say &I managed to reject them I said I didn’t mean to say anything sympathetic I didn’t mean boo-hoo feel sorry for pedos they suffer bc I copied an anti Pedo blog calling it an illness & another 1 sayin same thing slatz said linked elsewhere …I dont relate to pedos any kind of p incl pocd at all I h8 them only ever hated them support all existing crim incl all real cp &support more criminalization stigma intolerance etc… this would never be a convo to me I didn’t know theres ppl like cantor& prostasia trying to say pedos are oppressed &discriminated against &then hold “treatment to prevent csa” over ppls heads to coerce them into listening to sumn they would never entertain …I think she knew I didn’t say or mean any of her lies but got off on bullying me& gas lightin me& saying everyth bad I never said like a power trip.. NOT INTERESTED 😒..I said it’s an Illness maybe &I blamed pedo apologist survivors 4making mistakes which she knows perfectly well they do… she made posts that survivors defend csam on social media herself& she linked to this in that masterpost that demands pedos be an orientation and incl in lgbt AND I AM SORRY I SAID THAT AND APOLOGISED MANY TIMES SINCE I WAS UPSET AT NOT UNDERSTANDING AND FALLIN FOR PRO PEDO CSA PREVENTION DISCOURSE FOR FIVE SEC ON FIRST EXPOSURE BC CSA INCL REAL CP IS WORST CRIME IN EXISTENCE N I DONT WANT IT TO HAPPEN TO ANY1… all I am asking her Is she lied and said I said ppl should be nicer to Pedos which I know I didn’t that’s against my stated principle of 100% negativity I already said before her abuse… I’m not askikg her to lie I am asking her to tell the truth did I say those literal words SHE is the only person in world who said I ever said. She said she takes screenshots of me saying these things so where Is it if answer is yes or did she put words in my mouth bc I called it an illness when I didn’t know anything and was copying anti pedo blogs like this obligatory statement post that I said is what I agree w everything in it a month before she started her abuse I also blamed this article I read before any of this was even on my mind in early 2018 I only remembered science daily article summer 2018 &freaked thot I had to figure out what zero tolerance is the only thing I’d ever agree w.. never thot of Pedos as non offending I hate them all want them dead think they’re worst evil predator abusers ALWAYS… all my life.. I never heard of other shit until other ppl say it n I didn’t get it if it’s not straight up decrim but stuff like it’s like they need treatment or some other csa prevention that stuff i was confused at first exposure when i has zero awareness of pro pedo agenda & propaganda & all that stuff is that which it is … I used to think or assume noth like that could ever happen n every1 h8s pedos as they should &no 1 wants decrim or them to be like lgbt I thot her story was sad n she wants them to get treatment bc we say kill them all she says we can do that but it won’t change her life I didn’t notice she said ppl should be nicer SUMN I NEVER REMOTELY THOT OR SAID IN MY LIFE EVER &I SAID I HATE PEDOS FOR DEMANDING TO BE CALLED GOOD PPL (virtuous) FOR USING CSA DOLLS &NOT RAPING KIDS that’s the closest thing I said to that &I still think they dont deserve praise or acceptance for not raping kids which is a requirement for every1… also she thinks she wins an argument I never asked for her input on bc she wants to say radical feminism excuses abuse by saying men are inherently violent so radfems can’t be against abuse stfu &lying isn’t winning an argument not that I care but sexology says it depends on if society tolerates it &I always meant to support lgbt or at least lgb acceptance but also think t is some adult orientation2 or maybe another gender idk.. I always meant that I demand zero tolerance for pedosadism.. cantor&nambla&Blanchard support tolerance thats not science that’s their pedo apologist beliefs … cantor admits its not science but namblas agenda &the scientists do the things they do bc they “listen to pedo acceptance activists” which is b4u act who are like nambla… the psych who took gay out of dsm said its not science but activism too

I used to ask her nicely but she keeps gas lighting

I was starting a difficult learning process obv many people don’t ever attempt bc it’s some weirdos like James cantor &nambla doing it &I made some mistakes w what I thought was correct I was trying to copy anti pedo sources when I didn’t know any of this is going on& thot it’s an anti lgbt stawman… I was trying to be anti pedo 2the max def exclusionary& I would never support Pedos having solidarity w any movement that’s not anyth I ever said I said that obligatory statement post is what I think &they called it an illness.. she wants 2take advantage of that confusion when I was reading ab pedos 4 1st time in my life …I was esp confused ab when they say it’s science or csa prevention &I had to process it &it took way more time than the 1st time I read an anti pedo blog that was in my tl