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

And for clarity - yea of course someone who looks at images is a sex offender and of course it is harmful and disgusting.

just to be clear.

Your second example could be someone who hasn't found the opportunity or hasn't been caught.

@Boiledbeetle and the others on this thread.

You point wasn;t obvious to me, dear. I asked a question. 'Devils advocate' is usually used when people are trying to justify or argue for the merits of something unpleasant.

Well, duh!

Given someone suggested I might think it’s ok for adults to letch at children I felt it necessary to be clear.
duh!

A child is a child. An abuser who finds sexual attraction there is a paedophile. Whether they've been through puberty is irrelevant. Minor attracted my arse.

We’ll then I misused the term.

its really ridiculous that people can’t talk about the language without being accused of thinking latching at children is ok.

start a thread specific to share rants about peados if that’s what you want to do. This was was about language so I engaged with it as such.

personally I think child sex offender, peadophile, hebophile and other existing terms are good enough.

How appropriate language is obviously depend on the context. I’d your chatting about someone you know being convicted and refer to them as a “nonce” that’s probably clear enough. In a clinic setting or legal nonce wouldn’t be, but peadophile would be an accurate term to use.

I won’t be replying anymore because I honestly don’t like being made out to be a sec abuser apologist simply for saying some language is more accurate than others or means different things.

All I did was ask you to clarify because I did not understand your point.

And explained why I had troubles with what I was understanding your point to be.

I said very clearly that I did not understand what you were trying to say.

It sounds like they are normalising a pathological interest in very young people.

All we need to know is that adults who abuse children are 100% wrong. Self indulgently musing on the rights and wrongs of language and enabling the attempts of predators to normalise their preferred language is offensive. Save that for the dodgy parts of the internet - there are plenty of them. Leave alone this place where women , mothers, parents, feminists gather.
It's new years eve. Do better next year.

DriftwoodOnTheShore · Today 18:07
Technically they aren't paedophiles, that's my point. Hence there will be confusion.

Could you or anyone here say where the definition of paedophile meaning attracted to children who have not yet reached puberty can be found?

I am not being sarcastic, just interested to know. I just looked it up in Oxford English Dictionary (the full one which is an on-line library resource) and couldn’t find this specific definition.

This makes me feel physically sick. How is child abuse being normalised like this?

Fucking hell. What??

I call him an Inmate of Hell.
Boiled xx

You do realise how young some girls are when they go through puberty?

This is vile.

Not sure what you mean. I said I could see a reason for an all-encompassing term as Paedophile isn't one.

No need for your reaction at all.

Oh if it exists he there.

And I'm the one who put him in prison!

I win!

I understand where you are coming from, and FWIW I think it's important to differentiate attraction to pre-pubescent children from what is really a biologically normal attraction to post-pubescent minors.

It's not "normal". It's fucking sick and if you'd been subjected to abuse at that age by one of these paedophiles you'd know that.

No need for your reaction at all.

Yes, there is. And if you can't comprehend it there's something seriously wrong with you.

Exactly. 😔

I couldn’t agree with you more, @DustAndAshes . Some of the cold, matter of fact posts here about terminology are beyond belief. I genuinely feel sickened by them.

💐 for all women affected by abuse by adults as children.

Thank you. We don't need it redefined and excused. It is abuse. It's vile. There is no excuse and no it's absolutely not "normal" for a grown man to be a predator to a teenage child.

Some of the cold, matter of fact posts here about terminology are beyond belief. I genuinely feel sickened by them.

Rather interesting looking at the posting history of those 'just' discussing the language. Support for a certain prince, unquestioning support of a teacher accused of sexual assault etc.

Not surprising.

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.

@Onnabugeisha how many people? Virtually no one has heard of "MAP".

I think that it would be easier if we just settled on a different word ("nonce"?). No one would be in any doubt just what sort of person it applied to.

And my final thoughts...

Even the thickest of twats, and I've met a few know what a "pedo" is. It's a nonce, a pervert, a kiddy fiddler. Whatever the local it's found your way. These people will also be the same group who mistake a paediatrician for a paedophile.

"Pedo" is very ingrained in our language. it is understand from the most intelligent to the least intelligent. If any name should be changed would it not make more fucking sense to change the name of paediatricians.

Green grass fluffy clouds green grass fluffy clouds. And breathe and relax.