Date: September 05, 2020
“[PLEASE TURN ON SUBTITLES]
This is my first time making a video like this, so I’m sorry if it’s not great. How is the audio? Should I remake this video adding in the other Hornor studies, or is it better the way I have it? I figured if people were really interested in the studies, they could just read them themselves, and I didn’t want the video to be too dry.
“[PLEASE TURN ON SUBTITLES]
As a homosexual BoyLover, I’ve taken strong issue with the way so many “research studies” have commonly tended to judge “pedophilia”, based upon the accounts of female rape victims…and act as though this is somehow applicable in any way to the more “boys being boys” experiences, which are far more in line with the man boy sexual experiences.
In addition…the way they commonly treat wanted, happy experiences as if they were the plague in these studies, is a straight up outrage.
These types of studies have generally always employed dishonest skewing…They are tantamount to lies.
|Sub-Blog Archive | M.A. Net
Date: July 25, 2020
“Zooier Than Thou is yet another monthly podcast covering the zoophile community and all things zooey and wonderful. Featuring current events, dating advice, and insider tips on rubbing shoulders with the Zooluminati elite, all with a great deal of silliness, Zooier Than Thou sets itself apart from the pack with an openly positive and joyful interpretation of what it is to be a zoophile.
Hosts Fausty and Toggle bring two lifetimes of animal activism and cross-species romance to the mic, with the help of a dedicated cast and crew of zooey talent. There may be hundreds of others out there doing the same thing, but ZooTT aims to do it the best!”
|– M.A. Net|
Many of the things expressed in this Sub-Blog, I’ve addressed any number of times over the years. I don’t wish to analyze every video, etc., but I do find it valuable to share these kinds of video, etc., even if I disagree substantially with any of it…It’s important to acknowledge and embrace, that there are people out there, who are engaged in levelheaded discussion about “pedophiles”. – Steve
Date: June 22, 2020
“A rant about suicide baiting and harassing people who have the clinical condition of pedophilia!”
Date: May 21, 2020
“The Valence Issue Episode 10: No Good P?d (deed) Goes Unpunished
Are you sure it’s ME you need to be worrying about?
Sublimation is basically laundering one’s own desires via one’s occupation. Pedophiles do this regularly (as they should, I might add). If I may conject, a significant portion of all teachers, pediatricians, coaches, youth leaders/pastors, or anyone who regularly works with kids are pedophiles sublimating their visceral calling (as most people strive to do). You can’t round them all up and get rid of them forever. Not only is that genocide, but who do you think replaces those positions? In addition, equating pedophiles with child rapists and then saying pedophiles should never work or be around children is like equating heterosexuals with rapists and saying heterosexuals should never work or be around the opposite sex. In the Big-Pharma sponsored media when we see the anecdotal teacher getting caught with images or a sting that catches several people who are lured into meeting up via some really nefarious method “justified” by hatred, fascism and greed, the media has their /story/ to tell regardless of the truth. Let me say that again. The media has their story to tell regardless of the truth; a narrative that builds a robust strawman that captures you with pathos enough to blind you from needing logos or ethos to eat it all up, no questions asked. Specifically, there are FAR more minor attracted people in society than the media wants to reflect. The story is a meme scapegoat; a controlled variable in their scheme. Could you imagine if the msm told the truth that a significant portion of society is pedophiles!? And when I say they’re pedophiles, I’m not talking strictly about the ones who know and accept their sexual orientation, I’m including anyone and everyone who loves children, particularly those in denial about their sexual facet of loving children. If I may conject again, perhaps things are changing, but it seems there are far more people in denial and repression about their pedosexual desires than there are people who are honest with themselves about it. Those who are honest with themselves about it become the ones with the targets on their backs as those who take aim do so as a projection of their self-hatred of their own sexually repressed inclination.
BTW, Big pharma sponsors the media so they’re obligated to create and maintain the problem (trauma from discovery and negative affective feedback from people’s chronospheres being masqueraded as trauma from positive or neutral adult/child sexual interactions via heavily biased newscasts and publications) for the psychiatrists to prescribe drugs that “treat” and “cure.” This is a manufactured cycle of corporatocracy at the expense of the public and an entire marginalized people.
‘You sure it’s ME you want to worry about?
When I talk in psychological terms those are the scriptures of the religion of scientism. Scientism is a modern metaphysical metaphor just like religions are anthropomorphized metaphysical metaphors. These are the words I learned in academics. If I desired to I could give this same metaphysical message using religious, spiritual, dogmatic and/or occult terminology.
Read a few of my undergrad research papers on Archive.org at the link below. READ THEM
|Sub-Blog Archive | M.A. Net
Date: May 19, 2020
“With the recent banning of MAPs from the largest asexual forum, the hosts and guest Robert use the podcast to carve out a space to discuss asexuality and minor attraction. Peace and Robert recount their experiences as ace MAPs and the unique viewpoints they have concerning attraction, sexuality, and community.”
It’s always struck me as completely counter intuitive that asexual people would identify as MAP…because sexual attraction [orientation] is fundamental to the very definition of MAP…and attraction is a fundamental part of sexuality.
If you don’t have a sexual attraction to minors [children and teens]…then by definition, you are not actually a MAP.
…If you do have this sexual attraction…then how on earth are you asexual?…That makes absolutely no sense.
The roots of this term, “Minor Attracted Person”, literally came from a pedophile…who was using the term explicitly to define himself, and discuss the social and personal issues going on in his life…It was also used by a few people who were sympathetic, and trying to raise awareness to the struggles and needs of people who cannot legally act on their own sexual orientation.
It was later adopted much wider, by a group consisting of pedophiles, hebephiles, ephebophiles and allies, again, explicitly with the understanding that it was representing people sexually oriented towards children and teens.
If you, by your own admission, do not even have those orientations…then how does this even square up?
It seems to me…the term MAP is being stretched and contorted by this new sort of faction, to include things which aren’t really germane to the literal definition of “what it means to be MAP”.
I mean…don’t get me wrong…Even I have acknowledged in the past, that if we take the simple term “Minor Attracted Person”, and fail to recognize that it represents a small variety of sexual minorities…then it could be said, that likely the majority of people on this planet are MAPs…After all, children/youth tend to be cute and attractive in a general sense…and if simple attraction is the standard, well then…there you go, right?…
…But that’s not really what it means…and there’s not anything that stigmatizes finding children and teens to be cute. The majority are not going to stigmatize themselves, for merely finding children and teens to be cute.
Maybe it’s just this broad, ethereal expansion on the definition of “sexuality”, that I’m not understanding…asexuality being one form of sexual orientation?…despite that not having a sexuality [which is what “asexual” means] means that you wont have a sexual orientation…as you’ve got no biological drive or interest in sex.
It’s not that I doubt there are people out there who are like this…but I’m very suspicious that a lot of people who identify as “asexual”, are confusing the fact that they have never engaged physically in a sexual act with another person [or no longer do so], with having no sexual interest…and hence, no inborn sexual orientation.
A heterosexual is still a heterosexual, whether or not they’ve had sex or are still having sex…
A homosexual is still a homosexual, whether or not they’ve had sex or are still having sex…
A pedophile is still a pedophile, whether or not they’ve had sex or are still having sex…
…etc, etc, etc…
…It’s because they are inclined to have sexual relations with certain types of people, that they are identified with their sexual orientation.
So…what even is an “asexual”…if they are still having sexual attractions [and arousal?] towards others?…
…Because that is an irreconcilable contradiction.
I think a lot of you are not actually asexual…You’re just sexually abstinent, where it comes to engaging in sex acts with others.
I think you believe the “sexuality” is hinged on commission of the act, as opposed to being about the involuntary biological attraction.
This is the only way I can see anyone reconciling this, in their own mind.
Obviously…I find “sexuality” to be hinged on the involuntary biological attraction, which cares nothing over whether the commission of the act has ever taken place…It’s still there, regardless…It can still be identified.
|Sub-Blog Archive | M.A. Net