Twitter hosts paedophiles- AIBU to think this should change?

[SmileEachDay]

pedrapapeletesoura.wordpress.com/2017/09/14/map-starting-guide/

A growing number of MAP (minor attracted people) accounts are forming a network on Twitter. There is a push to normalise and legitimise being sexually attracted to children. The “guide” I have linked is chilling, as are the accounts with MAP tags - they often have AOA in their bio...their “age of attraction”. So AOA 6mnths-4 years is a sexual attraction to children of that age.

Twitter is a huge business, with enormous power - they could, if they chose, take a stand against this.

Agreed, Fatty - I also wouldn’t want to take any claims in the original blog re rates of abuse without checking sources!

I think the problem lies in the term ‘paedophile’- with phile meaning attraction.

Thing is, rape and other sexual abuse isn’t about attraction, it’s about power and control.

When an adult is convicted of rape, nobody would try to argue that there is a ‘rapist’ sexual orientation. Attraction doesn’t even really come into it. It’s a violent act and is treated as such.

The same is true of child abusers. They are committing acts of violence. The term ‘paedophile’ muddies the waters because it brings desire into it. Whether or not they are attracted to the child is neither here nor there in terms of the crime they committed, as in the case of adult rapists.

Think about adults who like viewing rape pornography. Are they twisted individuals? Absolutely. Are they a different orientation? No. They are just sadistic. And the same thing applies to those who watch child ‘porn’, because that is all rape and abuse. It is just not a matter of orientation.
So to me this word ‘philia’ is a red herring.

Having a preference is not an orientation, and doesn’t give you the right to act on it. Being attracted to old people isn’t an orientation. Being attracted to short people, or brunettes isn’t an orientation. So attraction to children isn’t an orientation, and rape is a crime. End of story.

I thought the Trans issue was mentioned here because you can be kicked off Twitter for being "transphobic" but you can't for promoting sexual abuse of children? So Twitter can and do ban people - and why aren't they banning these child rape apologists? That's the question.

Of course paedos want to start hanging out with trans kids. What better way to access an incredibly vulnerable group of young people who they can then groom?

Judas, groom and insist they have access to drugs which prevent puberty and full cognitive development. No agenda at all

Conflating trans people with paedophiles - have access to drugs and groom.
Transphobic towards transpeople

FFS, this thread is disgusting.

The trouble is there is a bit of a cross over with some trans people and paedophiles.

There is a bit of a crossover with some gay people and paedophiles.

There is a bit of a crossover with some straight people and paedophiles.

There is a bit of a crossover with some dads and paedophiles.

There is a bit of a crossover with some teachers and paedophiles.

There is a bit of a crossover with some priests and paedophiles.

There is a bit of a crossover with some imams and paedophiles.

Would you care to get equally exercised about them?

agree it’s not a new problem - I think what is “new” is the linking with LGBT - anyone remember PIE?

Ergo it’s not new.

Just to reiterate, this isn't about trans people. Men and women with gender dysphoria. It's about an ideology that allows safeguarding to disappear.

Nemo
I think that’s a really good point - I’m going to change my language as a result of your comment.

I hate “child pornography” and always term it child abuse.
I’ll do the same with this - child abusers and rapists rather than paedophiles

NonExistentFox

In terms of Twitter, the coat tailing of child abusers onto TRA ideology seems unique. I haven’t seen anything similar with any of the other groups you have mentioned.

Fatty- yeah that “born in the wrong culture” bit stuck out to me also.

I remember seeing an exchange on Twitter between Dr Christian Jesson and Adrian Harrop saying exactly this.

@DitaVonPeas

With you all the way.

1 Gender dysphoria is nothing to do with sexuality.
2 Gender dysphoria is not a perversion because of point 1.

So this account is new.

Look at the attempt to legitimise the sexual abuse of children.

Ugh. Is it because other platforms have just recently kicked the paedophiles off?

Why do they even need a public space?

Hiding in plain sight I think Datun

Networking. Legitimising. Little by little inching their agenda towards acceptable. And Twitter is helping them.

MorningsEleven

No one has said GD is a perversion OR anything to do with sexuality.

SmileEachDay - same old crap, ignoring completely the power imbalance and the child's inability to understand what they're consenting to.

What fucked with my head for years was the belief that I'd agreed to what happened, that I'd 'consented'. Except I was a child and had no idea what I was consenting to.

Koneko I’m sorry you were abused. That’s shit.

Conflating trans people with paedophiles - have access to drugs and groom.
Transphobic towards transpeople

You have misunderstood in your rush to yell “transphobic”. Hermione was suggesting that young trans identifying people were highly attractive potential victims of abuse.

Nobody is saying that trans sexuals with gender dysphoria are all paedophiles

We are saying that predatory men are seeking to take advantage of (or in the case of david challenor, actively campaigning for) reduced safeguarding. There are also a lot of adults arguing that children are capable of consent to life changing medical interventions which leave them permanently pre pubescent, sterile and with reduced cognitive capacity. The notion that children can consent and remain pre pubescent is clearly a boon for these men.

"you could consider moving to a place where the age of consent is lower or inexistent"

Where do they have in mind?

Does anywhere have no age of consent, any more?

Even UK is out of step with general global guidelines which set age of consent at 18.
There are plenty of countries where you can get round it by marriage but these tend to be v conservative and I don't think that's what these men are after either. eg in USA some states have no min or v low min age on marriage and it's used as a workaround to cover up / sanitise CSA.

Why do so many men feel that when it comes to sex they should be entitled to have what they want? Illegal here? Oh just move to somewhere you can have sex with children.

Around three or four years ago, I predicted this would happen and was called mad and paranoid, on this very site. I then wondered how they'd manage to normalise it and start to push the boundaries. They're playing the long game, but are making steady progress until we're no longer permitted to protect our children.

In terms of Twitter, the coat tailing of child abusers onto TRA ideology seems unique. I haven’t seen anything similar with any of the other groups you have mentioned.

Because they are the minority whose rights are in the public eye atm. Please don't kid yourself that 30 years ago you wouldn't have been terribly, terribly concerned about gays spreading AIDS, 16 year olds too young to decide they were homosexual, and children being groomed by their teachers but for the grace of Section 28.