Scottish police use Minor Attracted Person instead of 'paedophile' in report

[pattihews]

Chief Constable Iain Livingstone has used the acronym MAP (minor attracted Person) in an annual assessment of the force's work with a European project.

We've all wondered what the + is in LGB and TQIA+ haven't we? Well perhaps now we know. As the Telegraph says:

The term MAP is contentious because child abusers are trying to escape the stigma attached to paedophilia and maintain they should be regarded as a niche group alongside the LGBT community.

As a member of the LGB community I object. Archived link from the Telegraph:
archive.today/e9DCa

The problem with MAP it's meaningless, the average Joe, seeing that won't know what the fuck it is describing.

but paedophile. EVERYONE knows what type of person is being talked about.

The argument can be had for the age range covered by various titles, but to split it you begin to minimise the effect it has on different ages of children, oh but he was a MAP and she was 11, that's not as bad as a paedophile with a 6 year old. Do we start sentencing them differently? The law already allows or that by the under 13 thing.

Any person who RAPES A CHILD (or would if he thought he could get away with it) does not Get to hide behind fluffy little meaningless MAP initials.

JUST NO

Maybe it is because some people will be interested in people below the age of consent but who are too old for the interested person to be considered a paedophile. Is paedophile something like being attracted to under 12 or 13 year olds but still vulnerable young people under 16?

Police Scotland have released a statement saying it was a quote.

Im always very wary of the fucking about with language to make things more confusing and harder to define

it makes me wonder why people feel the need to do it

I think the main difference here is that paedophile was an accepted technical word.

At the time PIE was active, it only meant sexual attraction to prepubescent children. The connotation of not just attraction but acting on it came in the backlash to PIE wherein paedophile became a synonym for pederast.

They are now trying to disassociate from that word and would very much like people to think about 16 year olds when they see MAP.. Yes, agree.

But the organizations that have adopted it in this instance haven't, IMO, done it for the reasons you think. They've adopted it because they are seeing it around a lot used by certain organizations and people, and they think this is now the word they are supposed to use. At best, they are being very naive. And they need to be aware of what these people are trying to do.

Not sure what their reasons are, but would not like to assume that the police are naive. After all, their sex crimes unit must deal with this constantly and be aware of the masking acronyms used by such criminal sex offenders.

The problem with MAP it's meaningless, the average Joe, seeing that won't know what the fuck it is describing.. This is true, but by not taking it up and adding what it should mean, we are letting these sex offending activists control its meaning- a meaning we know they want to keep purely benign and free of negative connotations.

but paedophile. EVERYONE knows what type of person is being talked about. Yes, so now by protesting against MAP and insisting on paedophile, many people will conclude MAPs are not paedophiles and the protest and removal of MAP was to dissociate it from paedophile.

Oh - and I’ll also gently tell you that I didn’t call you a paedophile or paedophile apologist and have reported your post.

I agree. It's much more accurate than incorrectly using paedophile willy-nilly.

And what age do you think it’s accurate up to - given that puberty can occur from 9 years old?

Many women here felt attracted to 12 year old boys? No?
Funny that. What with them being pubescent and therefore it apparently totally biologically normal although socially unacceptable.
What a crock!

If you believe it's dependent on puberty then I believe it would have to be on a case by case basis. That is why I feel that MAP is more accurate in a legal sense.

I don’t believe it’s dependent on puberty - which is why I believe paedophilia is more accurate in a legal sense, and thankfully PS agree.

Relieved that Police Scotland aren't actually in favour of using MAP & utterly depressed that I wouldn't have been that surprised if they were.

MAP is a disgusting attempt to stick themselves under the alphabet banner just call them aspiring child rapists if you need an acronym.

I can see the point in this approach but Minor Attracted People sounds almost like something that could be nice, possibly harmless. The implication is that they don’t act on their impulses. If paedophile is too difficult a word, or not wide-ranging enough then the new term needs to say in plain English what is meant.

It's a red flag because they are trying to identify with a term that sounds benign, and then getting the crime designated as such. The activists are not those people that struggle against their proclivities, they are people who believe their attraction to underage children is perfectly fine. This has been a long-standing campaign to make abuse of children into a kind of sexual preference rather than the crime it actually is.

And also agree.

Well with the utter backward nonsense that’s going on in Scotland right now, you can’t exactly blame people for jumping to conclusions about why the Police used that term…

I am glad they have clarified that they don’t agree with the term MAPS.

I personally don’t like the term and think child sec offender for those with offenders and peadophile/ hebophile for those without offences is more than adequate.

Using the word “attracted” to me suggests that it is on the same level as any other type of attraction.

Agreed - when our politicians have voted to give sex offenders special considerations, it's hardly a jump to think that our (captured) police force might use language like MAP's for unsavoury (or ridiculously naive) reasons.

I told you to fuck off for implying I was a paedophile or paedophile apologist in your initial response to me. You were being fucking offensive in a conversation solely about terminology.

You stated you were “not prepubescent” when it happened to you in the post that someone reported and has now been deleted, therefore you are by definition not the survivor of a paedophile. You were too old to be the victim of one.

As a survivor of a paedophile, I have the right to object to your pretensions of suffering what I did. You are de facto minimising paedophilia by trying to water down the definition to include pubescent and postpubescent older children. I see you are avidly at work pushing this agenda in the posts above.

I have no issue with you objecting to MAP, we can all have an opinion on what umbrella term is best. But I am unequivocally objecting to your opinion that “paedophile” is anyone who abuses a child up to age 16. It isn’t, never was, and never should be.

'Minor attracted' sounds like someone whose vaguely interested in something. If paedophile is commonly confused with paediatrician , you wouldn't necessarily realise that, in this context, 'minor' means 'child'.

After all it's so important, after a child has been abused, that we first establish the child's age, and next precisely what stage of puberty they are at. Wouldn't want to get the terminology wrong. Next thing you know people will be being all untoward about the perpetrator.

MAP ffs.

I did not imply anything of the sort - and your post has rightly been deleted for making that false accusation.

I will not discuss that age at which it started or stopped - but let me make it clear, since you seem to be participating in some sort of competition with yourself, that the paedophilia (which is precisely what it was because it spanned my childhood) went on for years.

You can object all you like, but a paedophile is precisely what it is. If you wish to use the word attraction to describe child sexual abuse, child rape, child predation, child sexual fantasies and so on then you go right ahead. PS disagree with you, obviously - as do the majority on here.