Prostasia Foundation - Child protection or dismantling Safeguarding?

[JustAnotherWoman]

Credit to Agilelass for flagging these people in the Dr Em Unicorns thread, I thought they warranted a thread of their own.

prostasia.org

They claim to be concerned about child protection but a look at what they are promoting and saying sounds to me far more like they are trying to dismantle safeguarding measures by saying they don't work.

They have/had a campaign in support of child sex dolls [anger]

Should we be worried about them? Anyone know anything more about the key players?

Good god.
A 5 minute browse is enough for me.

This is a dodgy org.

Not heard of them before but from their front page.

prostasia.org/blog/ageplay-is-for-adults/

Ageplay?

I read a sentence and felt sick.

They're not exactly hiding what they are all about.

I wish i hadn't clicked that TBH.

I opened the link and then closed it again as frankly it looks NSFW

I opened it and now I'll dream about it

Arrghhh

Shudder

They are out in plain site on twitter (which I appreciate doesn't mean much) this link should to their exec team which looks legit prostasia.org/our-team/

Their chief exec appears to attend child protection conferences

I had a look on twitter

twitter.com/ProstasiaInc

Yeah definitely one to watch.

It seems like rather a lot of word salad. Obfuscating rather than being clear.

Also, what does "Prostasia" mean anyway? It's one of those corporate, madey-uppey names that is supposed to invoke some kind of positive sentiment about the organisation, isn't it? It just makes me think of prostates. Yuk

Just looked at their Twitter feed. Double yuk.

It just makes me think of prostates. Yuk

Given that many of their tweets are pro sex work and pro MAP this may not be coincidence.

To me this looks like a kink/sex workers/internet freedom group, why on earth it's presenting itself as a child protection group is very, very odd. Unless it could potentially have some ulterior motive?

Mixing issues that should not and need not be mixed.

There’s a tweet on their about kids posting themselves on YouTube doing “ordinary things” that makes me very concerned.

What the fuck is this? I spot queer theory and it reminds me of a certain man who campaigned for changes to the law for what is considered porn.

JFC.

The post about cartoon CSA....

I think there are links to the stuff in Japan here. I believe it was till recently or still is legal to buy anime magazines with CSA in them.

I saw their page months ago. James Cantor (Blanchard's colleague who advocates for P in the alphabet soup) linked to it.

It was clearly sinister then, and it is even more so now they have more content. I remember I couldn't decide whether Cantor was naive/groomed by his pedophilic study subjects, or whether things are simpler than that.

The YouTube tweet Lang mentioned is very disturbing.

There's also this article which reveals a bit about their agenda and who their connections are: www.engadget.com/2019/05/31/sex-lies-and-surveillance-fosta-privacy/

Another case where I couldn't decide whether the author of the article, "Violet Blue", is VERY credulous, or somewhat worse..

prostasia.org/newsletter/?email_id=28 has a long list of child porn "edge cases" they want to talk about. Gosh, where have we all seen this tactic of focusing on edge cases to dismantle boundaries before?

That link also has this sentence which is where I fully lost any doubt to give this organisation the benefit of, their child protection figleaf isn't covering a damn thing.

The photos may originally have been meant to sexualize [underage child] (though this is a term we don't really like, because it implies that sexuality begins at 18),
the problem with that sentence is not the implication that underage children can be sexual. It's the fact that the person who wrote it is full on conflating the sexuality of the child/adolescent with the sexuality of a pedophile.

This is a very well-connected pedophile rights organisation, I don't have the tiniest doubt of it. Thankfully they seem to be getting some pushback. prostasia.org/newsletter/?email_id=37

Sorry to be confusing - it wasn't Lang who mentioned that Youtube tweet, it was Delirium. Dodgy AF no matter who pointed it out.

Very confused that an organisation which is supposed to be about child protection would have articles about age play and 'furry fandom'. Who on earth thought that was appropriate? They seem much more concerned with the rights of fetishists than they do with the protection of children.

The name Prostasia comes from the Greek word for “protection”, signifying that we are a child protection organization. Taking the shape of a torch, the trunk of the tree represents enlightenment and rights. The trunk of rights holds up many branches: child protection (the right to body integrity), sex worker rights, digital rights, due process rights, and so on. The tree itself represents growth—both the natural growth from childhood into adulthood, and the growth in understanding between diverse stakeholders we aim to promote

So, here's a conundrum. Why would a child protection organization need to be connected to sex worker rights and digital rights? Why would anyone put all those things in a basket together?

I mean, the fact that it's the kind of people who see nothing at all amiss in 'fantasy sexual roleplay' where one adult pretends to be a child, and another adult 'pretends' to sexually abuse them shouldn't give anyone pause, should it?

Oh... I assumed it was a contraction of "prostitute" and "Asia"

It's fucking rank though, is what it is. Ugh.

I'm bewildered, the exec director seems to be a professional in the data privacy policy space, why on earth would he publicly associate himself with these aims? It feels like the worlds gone mad

So, here's a conundrum. Why would a child protection organization need to be connected to sex worker rights and digital rights? Why would anyone put all those things in a basket together?

^ exactly! And I've read some of their news letter, and aims, and I'm still not sure how conflating positive age play, sex work, child sex dolls, etc. helps protect children.

I mean, the fact that it's the kind of people who see nothing at all amiss in 'fantasy sexual roleplay' where one adult pretends to be a child, and another adult 'pretends' to sexually abuse them shouldn't give anyone pause, should it?

Reading prostasia.org/blog/beyond-censorship-the-case-for-a-flexible-standard/ Beyond censorship: the case for a flexible standard - apparently depicting adult actors as children in 'porn' or hand drawn / computer generated child sexual images is fine as 'no real children' were harmed in the making of such images.

I think some of what they say looks ok on the surface, but it still makes me feel hinky.

Their board

depicting adult actors as children in 'porn' or hand drawn / computer generated child sexual images is fine as 'no real children' were harmed in the making of such images
Years ago, I would have agreed with that position - 'where's the harm if it's not a real child, only a blow up doll or a faked image?'
But of course, the harm comes from the desensitisation that prolonged exposure to pornographic fakery produces; it lowers your inhibitions and makes it easier to view children purely as objects.

It's interesting they've been able to register as a non profit in the US, that comes with tax exemptions, I thought the process of checking was thorough, I wonder how often their activities are reviewed

Their mission/expertise relates to human rights, publishing and free speech. Why do they call themselves a child protection org? Where's the child protection expertise? The board consists of three people - two lawyers and a fashion designer who has "first hand experience in communities of CSA survivors, sex workers, and kink practitioners".

Children cannot be "sex workers" Any child in prostitution is a victim of child sexual exploitation. That this organisation has "sex work" aka prostitution as a branch on their organisational tree is questionable at best and as pp have pointed out, a dogwhistle of the real advocacy aims of this group.

I cannot recall a single child safeguarding organisation anywhere that also supports prostitution as "sex work" ie gives it's full-blown support to pimps and punters under the guise of supporting prostitutes. Especially because a very large number of prostitutes started out when they were still underage and especially because this involves the exploitation of vulnerable and often already victimised children.