US professor wants to "rebrand" pedophilia

[andyoldlabour]

Allyn Walker, an assistant professor at Old Dominion University, wishes to see pedophiles "rebranded" as "Minor Attracted Persons" - MAP's.
I doubt this will come as a surprise for many of us on this board, having seen the Challenor case (and others) unfurl.

thefederalist.com/2021/11/15/transgender-professor-at-old-dominion-university-rebrands-pedophiles-as-minor-attracted-persons/

@Whateverfuckingnext

Could someone explain the PIE acronym please? I've googled but non the wiser. This thread is very interesting as I find myself agreeing with conflicting points made.

Peadophile Information Exchange.

Despute what that sounds like they werent set up to kep law enforcment appraised of the wehereabouts of child abusers. They were set up to lobby to reduce the age of sexual consent.

If you don't like Wiki try this

www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-26352378

You might see echoes of a current male movement that many women here are trying hard to fight back against. This might help explain why that is.

@Whateverfuckingnext

Could someone explain the PIE acronym please? I've googled but non the wiser. This thread is very interesting as I find myself agreeing with conflicting points made.

They were a pro peadophilia group in 70s (I think, maybe 80s)

Produced a magazine about how it was fine to be ‘attracted’ to children.

There were plenty similar groups same time. North American man boy love association for example (NAMBLA) who were very closely linked to false memory syndrome society (who are also well known to be a bunch of child abusers).

@Whateverfuckingnext

Could someone explain the PIE acronym please? I've googled but non the wiser. This thread is very interesting as I find myself agreeing with conflicting points made.

Paedophile information exchange

www.google.com/amp/s/www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-26352378.amp

If you find yourself sexually attracted to children and you don't wish to be, then there ought to be support for you. I don't think it should be destigmatized or made in any way acceptable. I think it's okay to have specialised therapy programmes where people are allowed to honestly confront this, but it should be clear to everyone involved that it is an entirely wrong and undesirable trait that should never be accepted by wider society and the purpose of therapy is to extinguish any and all urges towards abuse of any kind. I don't know if that is even possible, but I'm okay with society putting resources into that effort.

But I don't know. I don't think paedophilia is a sexual orientation as such, but maybe a deep-seated trait in some males? It is nothing to do with having been abused as a child, and there are vanishingly few female paedophiles compared with males. I think some countries have an institutionalised culture of child abuse, and even in the UK, there is widespread sexualisation of young girls in the culture. I suspect it is in some way 'hard-wired' into males, but I wonder if part of the problem is the fact that we already find it acceptable for men to be attracted to very young girls. It's already destigmatised?

Why do paedophiles need to be rebranded to help in controlling their urges anyway?

@beastlyslumber

If you find yourself sexually attracted to children and you don't wish to be, then there ought to be support for you. I don't think it should be destigmatized or made in any way acceptable. I think it's okay to have specialised therapy programmes where people are allowed to honestly confront this, but it should be clear to everyone involved that it is an entirely wrong and undesirable trait that should never be accepted by wider society and the purpose of therapy is to extinguish any and all urges towards abuse of any kind. I don't know if that is even possible, but I'm okay with society putting resources into that effort.

But I don't know. I don't think paedophilia is a sexual orientation as such, but maybe a deep-seated trait in some males? It is nothing to do with having been abused as a child, and there are vanishingly few female paedophiles compared with males. I think some countries have an institutionalised culture of child abuse, and even in the UK, there is widespread sexualisation of young girls in the culture. I suspect it is in some way 'hard-wired' into males, but I wonder if part of the problem is the fact that we already find it acceptable for men to be attracted to very young girls. It's already destigmatised?

Of course it’s not a sexual orientation.

Sexual orientation refers to the sex people are attracted to. Children are not a sex are they?

Maybe we could "rebrand" rape, if all it takes is for a name change to make the problem go away I'd be OK with that. Let's remove the stigma of being a rapist!

ImUninsultable Whether or not some people misunderstood your opening gambit, RedDog and Hoarder have been very clear that they object to what you did say - that, "People, mostly, dont choose to be sexually attracted to children. Most people who are [sexually attracted to children] were sexually abused as children themselves."

They say that that statement, while a common misconception, is false.

Assuming that is indeed false, does that change your thinking at all?

For me it throws more sharply into question whether paedophilia is actually a compulsion (born of abuse or anything else) as opposed to opportunistic abuse of the most vulnerable available victim. If the latter, (1) it seems far less likely to me that perpetrators will generally have any interest in seeking help, however freely available, and (2) it strikes me that these are exactly the sorts of people who would seek to take advantage of "destigmatising" paedophilia - it presents another opportunity to indulge in and explain away purely predatory behaviour.

Interested to know whether it would change your analysis at all.

And that @beastlyslumber is why it is hard to pick apart an offenders motiviations, to find what could possibly betreated etc. An offender's actions can often pretty close to that of 'most red blooded men' as seen via various telly programmes, magazines, fashion etc etc.

There is a lot of biological determination/imperative behind some of it - young women are more fertile etc etc. But, as we know, that isn't the whole of it and so should not be portayed as such.

And what is still considered a social necessity (based on maternity death rates and average lifespan of a society, etc etc) is a nice, convenient smoke screen to throw up for some men, in some countries. (And again didn't 2 internet famous doctors have precisely that discussion a while ago? )

@MrsPsmalls

God, I'mUnsuitable, you have the patience of a Saint! I have to hope you have left the thread now before you started banging your head against a wall! I also have to believe that some of these people are wilfully misunderstanding you. I have never seen such poor comprehension skills before on the feminist board.

Oh won't someone please think of the child rapists 😭

@Whatsnewpussyhat

Yep, they are already claiming it's just another sexual orientation. Like being gay etc. Can't help it blah blah, innate...

Next we will all be branded phobic and bigots and told children can consent to relationships with adults............

This is the reason for the rebrand in my opinion.

These people don't want help, they want access to children with no one daring to challenge them. If they wanted help they'd get it. A rebrand seems like a ploy to manipulate safe guarding.

Anyone supporting MAPs needs a serious looking at, let alone a fucking good head wobble.

@HoardingSamphireSaurus

I didnt miss type. Right on the first page, at least 2 people accused me of saying that most abused children grow up and abuse others. I asked them both to quote where I said that. RedDog then quoted me saying something completely different, because she cant read. And told me that I said most abused children grow up to be abusers.

The pile on continued with many more posters saying that I said most abused children grow up to be abused. I didnt. I'm still waiting for you to show me the quote where I said that, because that's what I've been accused of saying.

@Bordois

Maybe we could "rebrand" rape, if all it takes is for a name change to make the problem go away I'd be OK with that. Let's remove the stigma of being a rapist!

Exactly! No one would say we need to 'destigmatise' rape so that men who are fantasising about raping might get help? And any sex with a child is rape anyway, so why the need to 'destigmatise'?

Urgh, it sounds so dodgy.

[quote ImUninsultable]@HoardingSamphireSaurus

I didnt miss type. Right on the first page, at least 2 people accused me of saying that most abused children grow up and abuse others. I asked them both to quote where I said that. RedDog then quoted me saying something completely different, because she cant read. And told me that I said most abused children grow up to be abusers.

The pile on continued with many more posters saying that I said most abused children grow up to be abused. I didnt. I'm still waiting for you to show me the quote where I said that, because that's what I've been accused of saying.[/quote]
You accused me of saying this. I didn’t say this, you misread. Which I explained and you appear to ignore your miscomprehension.

ImUninsultable - you don’t seem to be living up to your screen name?

most abused children grow up to be abused

And I have, a few times now, been REALLY clear, that that is NOT what I am posting about.

You HAVE said that most abusers were themselves abused as children.

That was the 3rd or 4th response in this thread.

THAT is what I am posting about. And have clarified a few times. That is not true. The % of abusers who were themselves abused might be as low as 4%.

THAT is what I have been posting about.

I haven't sworn at you. I have been quite clear. And haven't 'piled on'. I've just repeated my point about 2 specific lines of text you did actually type.

I can read perfectly fine ImUninsultable it appears you are the one with reading problems, you have made an erroneous claim that MOST paedophiles were abused as children, that claim is false.

The vast majority of paedophiles are men. The vast majority of children who are raped and sexually abused are girls.

It has nothing to do with childhood trauma. It's a sick perversion. We don't need to rebrand it or rehabilitate men who want to abuse children.

@HoardingSamphireSaurus

An Australian study put it at 4.5%. A study in 2007 put it at 58%. A study in Cambridge put it at 35%.

That has been reported. Disgusting drivel!

@ImUninsultable don't take that to be what any here are saying or thinking. Because it REALLY IS NOT!

[quote ImUninsultable]@HoardingSamphireSaurus

An Australian study put it at 4.5%. A study in 2007 put it at 58%. A study in Cambridge put it at 35%.[/quote]
I'd looked at a few decades and the figures had gone from c75% down to as little as about 4%.

So somewhere in there will be a more realistic figure. Probably, as the majority of studies in the last 15 years have found, below 50%. Lower depending on the methodology - like not allowing simple self report or insisting on verifiable facts about child abuse (because we all know that issues with that)..

All this shite about poor "MAPs" only trying to find a cure is a complete rehash of the drivel spouted by the perverts of PIE in the 70s.

The reality was that they were an active abuse gang, who had zero intention of getting help. Men who want help go and seek counselling, and get help.

Here's a clue: anyone using minimising language like MAP isn't trying to stop being the thing they've created the minimising language to describe.

Only a few years back weren't they trying to rebrand themselves "KIND"? Oh, what a cuddly word, they must simply like kids, lovely.

They can fuck off.

@HoardingSamphireSaurus

Posed too soon.

And there are a hundred other studies in between. There is certainly a positive correlation between abusing children and having been an abused child.

Those people who do grow up and have those urges should receive medical treatment to prevent offending. Until the moment they actually commit a crime, they are not a criminal or a sex offender. So they shouldn't be labelled as such.

Treatment should be available and accessible. People coming forward saying they have these urges and want treatment shouldn't have to face the sorts of comments coming up on here. I believe one comment said they should get a bullet in the brain instead of access to treatment.

Its ab emotive topic. But the posts on here, like above, are absolutely disgusting.

Let's try not to let @ImUninsultable dominate this potentially interesting thread.

Dr Graham Hill thinks that their is no possibility of rehabilitation: Paedophiles: can they be rehabilitated? www.bbc.co.uk/news/newsbeat-39115842

The Lucy Faithfull Foundation disagrees but doesn't have any stats to back that up.

We know that persistent porn users become desensitised over time. They seek out ever more extreme porn and suffer from death grip. I cannot see how men who view child rape don't go the same way.