How to report paedophiles on Twitter?

[timetostepup]

A bunch of people who claim to be "non offending" paedophiles have joined twitter recently. They're openly tweeting about being paedophiles. They call themselves MAPs (Minor Attracted Persons) or NOMAPS. Their bios contain info such as the age of children they're attracted to.

I've reported some of them using Twitter's link for reporting Child Sexual Exploitation but I'm not sure if that's the right place as there's no evidence of any child being involved, also I reported them 3 days ago but the accounts are still up and I haven't had anything more than a confirmation - and I don't have a lot faith in twitter at the moment tbh.

They're claiming they're not a threat because they control their urge to offend. But we've been here before haven't we - this is just like PIE.

What should we do? Who can we report this to? Would the police be interested? Are they breaking the law?

Should we mass report Twitter on this?

I've attached an example, to find the others use the hashtags MAP or NOMAP or search for "MAP community".

What's the best way to deal with this?

I know a number of gay men (in fact, all the gay men I know) who would be appalled and horrified at the conflation of gay men with 'paedophile' that's happening here.

As a lesbian who has for some time known the LGBT (blah blah) movement doesn't want me and has no room for me, I don't give a shit about what these twats now doing to their own reputations by aligning themselves with the lowest of the low in society. The repercussions (remember how poorly-read vigilantes went after a paediatrician a few years ago?) will be horrific.

Damn didn't mean to post the pic, I've reported my post. Doesn't look readable though.

Not so different from the NAMBLA crowd then (allegedly non offending paedophiles). I read some discussions on NAMBLA. To be fair, beside some who hinted, they did/had done stuff and others who said they didn’t only because it is criminalized, there were others who were adamant that acting on their urges would be traumatizing for the kids (I remember one saying he knew what it had done to him) and so they would never ever go down that path.

I am not sure people being open about this is necessarily always a bad thing ( one saw a portrait of a guy who said he outed himself to family and now national tv also as some kind of final commitment to never ever act on it).

Thoughts?

Thanks mn.

Basically there were interesting documents written by said campaigner on posie's fb page relating to a late 70s or early 80s PIE conference, when pie was still 'allowed'.

There is a difference between someone who has a history of offending being open with his own community in a bid to stop himself reoffending, and groups of men being open about being attracted to kids, building a network together and seeking to normalised paedophilia as just a type of sexual attraction. The first is laudable, the second is dangerous.

It should NOT be OK for men to publicly advertise their "age of attraction" to kids on social media for example. They're not doing that to help society keep them away from kids - they're doing it to meet likeminded people and form a network.

Even when they say they're no contact, does that mean they're still looking at and sharing CSE images?

These are the people who are customers for realistic child sex dolls. This is not OK.

One of the profiles linked above is for a man who openly admits he's been convicted (most probably of abusing a child) and is on the US equivalent of the sex offender register. But apparently that's in the past now. If his freedom depends on him denouncing his old ways, how can we trust he means what he says?

Convicted sex criminals and self confessed MAPs should not be afforded a platform to normalise their dangerous perversions.

The man in the documentary who outed himself never offended according to his word and his record.

Also, several NAMBLA voices were strong advocates of no contact and said they would never do that.

I obviously don‘t know what the deal with the nomap guys on Twitter is, but I had assumed they were strong no contact advocates based on the no in the acronym. It could be just ‚going through the motions‘ to protect themselves, obviously.

Does their content give anything away? (Fixating on age or looks of children they are attracted to would obviously be a red flag).

Yeah, whether nomap considers child porn or teleconference abuse (some families in Southeast Asia sell camera time with their kids) is fair game is obviously another relevant question.

It may be the authorities are already aware of these twitter accounts and it's easier to keep an eye on the persons involved if they're out in the open. Or am I just being horribly optimistic?

I don't believe for a single minute that these 'Nomap' people are innocent of involvement in some kind of abuse. At the very least they'll have looked at online child abuse.

A genuine paedophile who wanted not to offend would simply seek help. He would not put himself on to social media for the whole world to see - that's seeking validation, socialisation and acceptance.

Not sure it is so clear cut VickyEadie. I have randomly looked through twitter, and have repeatedly found the statement that nomaps believe that children cannot consent and it is therefore always abuse. One account (HappyFriendly4) says something about trying to change MAP minds, as she herself suffered CSA. That account is clearly positioned imo.

But then again, you get a lot of Tweets with hashtags for MAP and NOMAP and mappositivity (!), and of course ‚love is love‘ where it all seems to be considered ‚one‘. Hm.

Surely it's still normalising the idea? Hiding in plain sight is what springs to mind sadly.

Re: are they marketing childlike sex dolls?

www.coventrytelegraph.net/news/uk-world-news/charity-called-child-sex-dolls-13425324

www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/paedophiles-uk-arrests-child-sex-dolls-lifelike-border-officers-aids-silicone-amazon-ebay-online-nca-a7868686.html

PIE is definitely back. Tim O'Carroll has written an article for a journal, same old rationalisation.
www.christiantoday.com/amp/academic-journal-to-feature-convicted-paedophiles-case-for-relationships-with-children/131156.htm?__twitter_impression=true

Here's the link to the journal article itself, which the journal Sexuality & Culture published in April, not December as Christiantoday.com claims:

link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s12119-018-9519-1

I am also worried about the normalization of MAP. Looking at the profiles quite some overlap with furries, zoowhatever, also trans. That said, at least considering the MAP are already there, isn‘t it good there is strong NoMAP presence as a counter-point. Paedophilia is pervasive in Society (0.5%-3%), I imagine for those affected the presence of a well argued ‚virtuous‘ community with strict no-contact line will be helpful to choose the right path. Am I wrong?

From what I gather now, NoMAP means nothing whatsoever that abuses children, including no CP. However some seem to be pro-Loli (apparently drawn pornographic Anime stuff) and/or pro-Doll. I have previously read that therapists often work with drawn pictures with paedo clients to manage their sexuality without victims. Could dolls be the next step?
I think if it would reduce offence probability, I‘d be for that. But it could as easily go the other way, by lowering the barrier, specifically the (close to live experience) doll thing, no?

Its been speculated for years the paedophile activists would start appropriating the LGBT movement. Becoming more real than we could have imagined. Sick little f**ks.

The argument is that public acceptance etc will help these people to resist the temptation to offend.

So if you were, say, a recovered alcoholic, would it make you more or less likely to fall off the wagon if you spent lots of time hanging out (virtually or in RL) with other (possibly) recovered alcoholics discussing what kinds of alcoholic drink you would enjoy if you weren't recovered?

Fuck 4chan, trolling my arse. Years ago I heard about them via a different site, thought ok I'll have a wee browse. Within 1 minute I saw a dodgy (child porn) picture and noped the fuck out of there.

4chan can be amusing at times, but social justice trolling nah, they are the cesspool of the human race.

deepwatersolo I’m going to pull you up on “child porn” and “CP”. There is no child open, only child sexual abuse and exploitation. Whilst I understand your point, and can see that perhaps treating peadophiles who do not want to offend in a different manner might be helpful (I don’t know); I absolutely cannot countenance the sort of despicable creature who would advertise themselves on Twitter as a “MAP”.

I’m going to say, “No. FUCK OFF. All of them can fuck off to the far side of fuck until they can prove, beyond any reasonable doubt of course, that they have never and will never commit a disgusting crime against children. Innocent until proven guilty? Well, in my eyes you’ve proven yourself guilty because you admit you’re a peadophile. You’re just making a fake “promise” you won’t act on it. A cursory look at these profiles shows any number of links and creepy fetishes. Just no. Let’s just not. These disgusting fuckers shouldn’t have a platform to groom their victims. It should t be ok to post in your profile that you’re a MAP peadophile

This is genuinely concerning, the sudden appearance of all of these blokes trying to normalize this.

But not entirely unexpected. Pie revamped really. And I know that any mention of the two together is apparently a nono on here, but surely its time to start wondering if this transing children and 'MAP' stuff is linked. Its been in the back of my head for a very very long time now that this 'kids can consent to life changing drugs' stuff that they seem to have got a chunk of the population to believe (cheers to grooming in plain sight, with butterfly and the likes) is just a step away from 'kids can consent to sex'. I have to wonder if we are now approaching the end game. Many of the demands and expectations from a fair few TRAs and such have clearly not been about anything to do with wanting better rights for transsexual people. I hope I am wrong, but I don't think so. Watching this with sickened interest...

Also to stress, my post above is in no way saying actual trans people are pedophiles. No. But I do think a fair few have hopped onto the trans bandwagon after seeing an opening for themselves and their own sick reasons. Abusers of many kinds, including the paedophile ones.

The more I read on this the worse I feel

twitter.com/shoe0nhead/status/1072934665248489472

Twitter ban feminists by the dozen, yet allow these men free reign and they even seem to be picking up fucking supporters among the masses, which I assume was the entire point. No way this is just '4chan trolling'.

Holy shit. Can we not report this to the police somehow?

Badger I (apparently contrary to you) generally consider pornography - just as prostitution - sexual abuse, as I contest the notion that something you are compelled to do for money and for what you often have been ‚primed‘ by CSA is an expression of free will (the fact that women compelled to do are usually from shitpoor backgrounds, often from shitpoor countries, and grew up in homes where abuse, violence and addiction were rife speaks volumes).

I was not aware that using the term porn is incompatible with this position. Now I know.

Use of the term "porn" blurs the issue, because people reading it uncritically will think it to mean something sexual between consenting people, both of whom are alright with what's happening.

Images or videos of child abuse is simply a clearer and more accurate term. Also the term images or videos of sexual abuse against women works when talking about porn.