Date: September 15, 2019
Correct me if I am wrong…but I think it was Dr. James Cantor who brought this up a few months back…
Many people mistakenly believe that because something is classified as a chronophilia, it somehow “cannot be a sexual orientation”…and they extrapolate that “pedophilia cannot be a sexual orientation”, based upon this assumption.
What they fail to realize, is that all human sexual orientations simultaneously exist, as a chronophilia.
Teleiophilia is, in fact, what most people think of as being the social norm.
It’s sexual attraction to “fully grown” adults, generally eighteen to late thirties.
Mesophilia is another category, which is commonly accepted as socially normal
It’s the sexual attraction to middle aged adults, in their forties and fifties.
Both of these refer to an aspect of a persons sexual orientation, which hinges on physical characteristics normally associated with recognized age groups.
Every single human being who has a sexual orientation, has some form of chronophilia.
Are people who like 18 to 39 year olds lacking a sexual orientation?…No.
…And the same holds true for nepiophiles, pedophiles, hebephiles and ephebophiles [as well as gerontophiles].
This is simply their sexual orientation.
|Sub-Blog Archive | MAP Educational Center
Date: October 04, 2018
“Anyone want to guess where do we see the acts of “ pedophilia “ in nature? Cmon idiots certainly you know the answer to this question as well as I do. It’s none. No where in nature do we see this “ sociopathic behavior “ of pedophilia. – Vendetta”
…Do you honestly want to make it this easy?…
…Because the most famous example of non-human pedophilia in nature, happens amongst a species very closely related to humans…
…It’s the Bonobo Ape.
…What?…You don’t know how to even just use Google?…
This Is No Secret. It Is Very Well Established.…
…It’s only you sorts who deny science, research and established knowledge, who make these kinds of grossly ignorant claims.
Why don’t you actually pick up a book, magazine, research paper…and expand your knowledge?…
…instead of dancing around on Twitter, endlessly celebrating your inflated egos?
The thing about people like you…is that you imagine you’re a lot more educated, capable and aware, than you ever honestly were…
…My experience with you sorts has shown me…that you are 99% ignorant mouth, and 100% ideological fanatic, lacking most [or all] practical knowledge of the real world.
You are another example of an individual, who should stay silent and listen…
…Learn from those of us, who know far more than you ever have.
Oh…and by the way…
…I’m not going to start listing off all the species of animal, where something that could be interpreted as “pedophilia” has been observed…Though I am aware that it’s been witnessed in a number of different species, I don’t have such a list readily at hand…
…I will deflate your ego one more time, however…
…by informing you that the human species is part of nature, every bit as much as any other species of life…and pedophilia has been recorded in our species, as far back as records go…
…What?…You didn’t know that?!…
So…”Vendetta”…line those dominos up.
In addition…pedophilia is not sociopathic.
Getting cocky over ones ignorance, usually proves to be painful.
Oh…and by the way, “Vendetta”…
…It never ceases to amaze me, just how many of you “anonymous” sorts take the very premise of “V”, along with everything the character stood for…and relentlessly wipe your behinds with it…all the while, feigning adherence…somehow, allegedly “championing” them…
I’ve got news for you…
…Just like Jesus Christ…if V were an actual living person…
…V would be standing with me…not with you.
|Sub-Blog Archive | MAP Educational Center
Date: July 18, 2018
Three things to keep in mind…
1) There is such a thing, as the situational rapist. This is someone, who is simply looking for another person to rape. They don’t care what age their victim is. Many ‘child rapists’ are situational, and not preferential to children between the ages of roughly five to twelve…which is, by definition, roughly the age range of attraction for pedophiles.
Pedophilia has distinct character traits to it, and it is it’s own classification…
…One has to be primarily interested in children, between five to twelve years in age, above or equally to their sexual attraction to adults [provided such attraction to adults exists for them].
People are not pedophiles, based upon the fact that they might have done something, which the general population presumes a pedophile would do by nature.
2) People often conflate teen rape, and infant rape, with pedophilia…They are not pedophilia.
Infants and toddlers are not developed enough, to where they would fall into the range of attraction known as pedophilia.
Attraction to infants and toddlers, is known as nepiophilia.
In addition…pubescent, and post pubescent people, are also not in the range of attraction known as pedophilia.
Attraction to people currently going through puberty, is called hebephilia.
Attraction to post pubertal people through the age of eighteen, is called ephebophilia.
Having these orientations does not make you a rapist…though people with these orientations can, potentially, rape.
3) Most ‘child rape’ is performed by children, and teens, themselves.
These are almost never people who get identified as pedophiles, because they cannot meet the clinical or legal definition of the term “pedophile”…as there is a requirement that they be at least eighteen years old, and at least five years above the age of their alleged victim.
The media will virtually never clarify either the specifics of individual cases, or how the statistics break down.
Because of this…most of the public has no clue, that a massive chunk of ‘Child Sexual Abuse’ cases, involve no pedophile at all.
To make things worse…the media virtually always fails to specify, that many of these cases are also “underage” kids, who got caught while being mutually frisky with each other…Which represents another layer of the “lie by omission”, which deceives the general public into believing there’s a “pedophile rape epidemic”.
No…it is not self evident that a person is a pedophile, based upon the grounds that someone under the age of eighteen got raped, or otherwise sexually assaulted [whether literal, or by legal technicality].
Also of interest here…is people’s misconceptions, and held stigmas, surrounding sexually identifying terms ending in “philia”…
Did you know, that being attracted to all of the legal ages, is also a “philia”?
If you are attracted to people nineteen to thirty four years in age…you are experiencing teleiophilia…
If you are attracted to people between thirty five to fifty nine…you are experiencing mesophilia…
And if you are attracted to people from sixty years of age onward…you are experiencing gerontophilia.
So long as you are attracted to other human beings…then we are all “philes” of one manner, or another.
There is no such thing as a human to human sexual attraction existing, without it being a “philia”.
|Sub-Blog Archive | MAP Educational Center
Date: June 04, 2018
A tiny bit of elaboration…based on my comments in this post.
My Original Comment:
Almost threw this post straight into the trash, after encountering the negative “pedophile” comment…
It’s the sort of thing I’ve talked about in the past…
…In the atheist community, “pedophilia” is a rather typical talking point…always used in a manner to slight and demean the target.
…It’s a cheap, bigoted, hysterical tactic…which exposes a gross shortcoming within the atheist community.
Way too often…I find myself listening to some type of atheist media, thinking “this is really good”…and simultaneously putting together the post…when deep, or late, into the production…somebody slides in a nasty, snarky comment about “pedophiles”…
…A few times, I’ve posted the media…without having had the chance to get to the end [which I might do, a day or two later]…just to find out there is this sort of “middle finger” included in the media, for no good or intelligent reason.
…Why the hell do so many atheists have to be hell bent, on this ignorance?
Pedophile phobia is damn near cliché, in the atheist community.
You can barely watch any atheist media, without anticipating at least one swipe at “pedophiles”.
…I’m not just tired of hearing it…
…I’m tired of always feeling like I’m obliged to comment, on just what a brain dead, a-hole thing that was to do [on the part of self proclaimed “intelligent, fair minded truth seekers”, at that].
There is the obvious elephant in the room, that I am a pedophile myself…and I’m just fed up with the self entitlement of people, to endlessly take swipes at “pedophiles”…
…But there is also the real world reality, I’m quite painfully aware of…that religious institutions are literally quite ruthless towards people like me, who are pedophiles…or who otherwise like young people in a sexual manner.
I grew up in this setting…as a homosexual pedophile…And the church didn’t promote a damn thing, that encouraged me in a positive way, while going through my situation…
…In fact…it was the source of deep, dark, fucked up psychological hell…
Yet…there is this smug tendency amongst atheists…to go on insinuating as though being a pedophile in the Christian church, is akin to being at Disneyland.
Reality about this toxic environment, for anybody who is sexually unaccepted…is that it commonly makes you suicidal…It is “soul” destroying…It is poison…It will leave you psychologically maimed, for life….
You atheists out there who imply such things, clearly never experienced this first hand…Because your arrogant asses don’t have the first fucking clue, what you are talking about.
Pedophiles, hebephiles and ephebophiles are found in every social group and demographic…A fraction of the religious community, is “pedophilic”…
…We also exist in the atheist community, Sherlock…
…Oh dear!…Shall the rest of the world start ignorantly railing against the atheist community, for being “a pedophile group”?…”a sanctuary for child rape”?…
…For once in your lives, would you actually think critically about an issue, currently trapped in the worst place of social ignorance and hysteria, as opposed to staying in your cozy, ultra easy, momentum riding, bashing religion and assorted social outcasts?!…
…Being both a pedophile and an atheist…I can tell you…
…being an atheist is pathetic easy, in comparison to being a pedophile in this world.
It’s time to put the identity politics away…and stop appealing to false stereotypes and strawmen.
Given the outcast and unjustly maligned nature of the atheist community…the people amongst it should know better, than to employ the same type of bigotries towards other minorities.
If the atheist community valued it’s integrity…it would stop doing this.
|Sub-Blog Archive | MAP Educational Center
Date: March 20, 2018
It seems the trendy thing to tell kids these days…is that if you have any social sex life at all, “you are being sexually assaulted” as result of your sex life.
…And we get the old misnomer…that “It’s okay to understand you own your own body”…and “have a right to say no”…But you don’t have the right to say yes…which negates the whole idea, that kids own their own bodies…Clearly, if they cannot have sexual relations for their own purposes…then they do not fully own their own bodies.
Being a sexual, human child…and living according to your own nature…is criminalized…And you’re only conditioned to say “the right things”, think “the right thoughts” and react “in the right ways”…meaning, obey the state.
It’s in this mess of a social framework, that we get the kinds of articles [or statements] like the one linked above.
I’m not up to discussing the finer points, which distinguish sex life from sex abuse [not today]…but I wanted to point out a thing or two…
These types of articles generally accept the state propaganda, and repeat it as fact…They rarely recognize any human right to sexuality, where it comes to young human beings…So, understand that any reality based discussion of human sexuality [including harmless, childhood sexuality], has already been debased and sidestepped, right from the start.
But even taking that into account…there is a massive elephant in the room, where it comes to this article…
The stated purpose of this article, is to explain “Why Kids Don’t Tell About Sexual Abuse”…
…Given that KeepKidsSafe” regards “inappropriate touching” [a terminology of state propaganda, tainting all sexual touch] as “sexual abuse”…it’s fairly safe to presume, that they are grouping even sexual touch that a child would seek out, in with “sexual abuse”…
If we are at all to be honest…we must acknowledge, that one of the reasons many children say nothing, is because they liked [or even loved] the experience, and wish to both protect it and repeat it.
Nowhere in that article, is this elephant in the room even hinted at.
Even if they don’t want children to think, act and long in that way…is it right of them to omit this basic fact of nature?
…Isn’t that dishonesty?
|Sub-Blog Archive | MAP Educational Center
Date: May 02, 2017
It is not my intent to defend Heart Progress, as should be obvious. It is my intent, to respond to a portion of the ignorance in this video. This is also a very unpolished post…I’m not even sure I finished it…It was time to do something with it, and get it out of the way.
The “facts” you quote are all very interesting, but there are a few dire problems with your list of “facts”…
Correlation does not equal causation.
Pedophilia does not exist in a vacuum.
There are commonly mitigating factors outside of the thing itself, which are more likely to be the cause of turmoil. Often, the conflict between the thing and that factor, are the formula which makes for turmoil, trauma and damage.
Simply pointing to something and implying “a lot of terrible things are because of that” does not work, when you are failing to take the entire social system into account. You’re doing nothing more than assigning the end result of conflict to that one thing, without being fair to the nature and impact of that thing, and without fairly weighing the nature and impact of outside factors.
The majority of people in this field, have established themselves to be anything but impartial…And the impartiality of their work [ie: studies] has been destroyed by this.
…people like David L. Finkelhor, a yes man who spent his career forcing research to bend around cultural and political bias.
I’d like to share with you a true story…
Almost twenty years ago, a university which was undisclosed due to the sensitive nature of its undertaking, began a broad research study on non-institutionalized “pedophiles”. This was kept so far under the radar, that the duty of traveling the country and collecting data was delegated to a small handful of individuals in the online “pedophile” community. The initial study had roughly 300 non-institutional participants. These were people who were not forced to participate, and who were not under pressure to skew their answers [to mirror whatever they believe the state wants them to say]. They represent a social demographic, previously thought impossible to study, due to extreme social hostility keeping them underground, far away from public attention.
The motives behind this research were varied…
…From the perspective of the researchers, this was groundbreaking research and an examination into the unknown, promising previously uncollected knowledge.
…From the perspective of some in the field, they wanted to know more about degrees of harm in “Child Sexual Abuse”, in hopes they could fine tune their practice in therapy.
…From the perspective of “pedophiles”, they could finally begin to have a scientifically valid, social model of themselves as a demographic…They could begin to know the statistical facts about themselves, as a group…A necessary asset, we continue to be denied, almost two decades later…
At roughly the same time…quite unfortunately…The APA commissioned Bruce Rind, Robert Bauserman, and Philip Tromovitch to conduct a meta analysis on “The Effects of Child Sexual Abuse”, based off of 59 research studies.
…Now, stick with me…I promise, I will get to my point soon…
“In 1997, psychology professor Bruce Rind from Temple University and doctoral student Philip Tromovitch from the University of Pennsylvania published a literature review in The Journal of Sex Research of seven studies regarding adjustment problems of victims of child sexual abuse (CSA). To avoid the sampling bias that, they argued, existed in most studies of CSA (which drew from samples mostly in the mental health or legal systems and thus were, as a sample, unlike the population as a whole), the 1997 study combined data from studies using only national samples of individuals expected to be more representative of the population of child sexual abuse victims. This study examined 10 independent samples designed to be nationally representative, based on data from more than 8,500 participants. Four of the studies came from the United States, and one each came from Great Britain, Canada, and Spain.
Based on the results, they concluded that the general consensus associating CSA with intense, pervasive harm and long-term maladjustment was incorrect. The following year, Rind, Tromovitch and Robert Bauserman (then a professor at the University of Michigan) published a meta-analysis in the Psychological Bulletin of 59 studies (36 published studies, 21 unpublished doctoral dissertations, and 2 unpublished master’s theses) with an aggregate sample size of 35,703 college students (13,704 men and 21,999 women). In most of the 59 studies, CSA was defined by the authors based on legal and moral criteria.
Integrating the sometimes disparate and conflicting definitions, CSA was defined as “a sexual interaction involving either physical contact or no contact (e.g., exhibitionism) between either a child or adolescent and someone significantly older, or between two peers who are children or adolescents when coercion is used.” “Child” was sometimes defined, not biologically, but as underaged or as a minor under the legal age of consent.
All these studies were included in the meta-analysis because many CSA researchers, as well as lay persons, view all types of socio-legally defined CSA as morally and/or psychologically harmful. When this research, the U.S. Congress, and the APA refer to CSA and “children” in the context of sexual relations with adults, they are not referring simply to biological (prepubescent) children but to adolescents under the age of consent as well, which varies between 16 and 18 years old in the U.S.
The results of the meta-analysis indicated that college students who had experienced CSA were slightly less well-adjusted compared to other students who had not experienced CSA, but that family environment was a significant confound that may be responsible for the association between CSA and harm. Intense, pervasive harm and long-term maladjustment were due to confounding variables in most studies rather than to the sexual abuse itself (though exceptions were noted for abuse accompanied by force or incest). Both studies addressed four “assumed properties” of CSA, identified by the authors: gender equivalence (both genders affected equally), causality (CSA causes harm), pervasiveness (most victims of CSA are harmed) and intensity (the harm is normally significant and long-term), concluding that all four “assumed properties” were questionable and had several potential confounds.
Based on the closely mirrored results of both studies, Rind, Tromovitch and Bauserman questioned the scientific validity of a single term “child sexual abuse” and suggested a variety of different labels for sexual contact between adults and non-adults based on age and the degree to which the child was forced or coerced into participating. They concluded with a discussion of the legal and moral implications of the article, stating that the “wrongfulness” and “harmfulness” of sexual acts are not inherently linked, and finished with the statement:
the findings of the current review do not imply that moral or legal definitions of or views on behaviors currently classified as CSA should be abandoned or even altered. The current findings are relevant to moral and legal positions only to the extent that these positions are based on the presumption of psychological harm.
— Rind et al. (1998) p. 47″
About “The Rind Report” Conclusions…
Given the extreme diversity in physical act, psychological state, individual setting, and various other factors in cases deemed “Child Sexual Abuse”…what they found, was unsurprising common sense…Or, it should have been.
You have to keep in mind, that we are living in a world where even relationships chosen and intensely desired by the child [or teen], are still deemed “Child Sexual Abuse”…even where the manifestation was factually wonderful, for the primary individuals involved.
Of course…some percentage of these kids are going to turn out just fine, in the aftermath of their experiences…an obscured truth, which has been known all along.
What sets off the alarm here…is the fact that research studies are not allowed to consider this clearly manifested conclusion, let alone acknowledge it as a valid part of the data collected.
This degree of interference, alone, displays that the integrity of “Child Sexual Abuse” research has been invalidated.
The sin of “The Rind Report” was not that it stated the obvious…It’s that it exposed the critical corruption in this field of research…and explained why this state of affairs needed to change.
…Getting back around to the point…
…The field of “Child Sexual Abuse” research, and related subjects like “pedophile” research, are terminally corrupt…They are little more than state propaganda, held back from the act of unfettered research, and forced to purport state sanctioned “conclusions”.
You can find and quote all the statistics from “research studies” you like…But your sources are corrupt…And your statistics are meaningless propaganda.
That is the reality of the matter.
Oh…And I know about the previously discussed research, because I was one of the non-institutionalized “pedophiles” involved in it.
…I personally witnessed the rabid fanatics attacking it, misrepresenting it, and doing everything within their power to run it into the ground…
…The fallout of the Meta Analysis saw to it, that not only was the University in question critically defunded of government grants…but the primary researcher was essentially run out of his own field of expertise…The research we took part in was shelved…and presumably has been collecting dust in a warehouse, for the past two decades…
The only thing we were ever promised as “the pedophile community”…is that we would be treated fairly, and the methodological integrity used would be consistent with that of any other sound study…The statistics would fall where they would, without researchers bias.
On a personal note…if I had never lived through this experience, I would have never imagined how corrupt, monopolized, zealously manipulated and viciously controlled this field is.
It blew my mind, coming to this realization…It ultimately angered, infuriated and radicalized me.
A closing note…
As a pedophile, living in the “lovely” United States of America…my entire life, as far back as I can remember, has been plagued with declarations from on high…from “experts” and activists, and lawmakers, and media entertainers…and laymen who need something to complain about…
…And those declarations have purported to be “what I am”, and “what I do”…and “how I live”…and “what tolerance of me leads to”…and “what must be done to me”…and “how I deserve the most nightmarish of assaults”…and “how I don’t deserve to live”…
Thing is…none of those things mirror who I am, or how I have factually lived my life…And I understand the absolute hellish abuse it is, for “your kind” to force people like me to live a terrorized existence like this…all of our lives…going well back into our own childhoods…inflicting upon us something, which affects us for a lifetime.
Even when we step forward to do objectively good things, which could benefit everyone in this world [ie: the previously mentioned research]…We merely face an endless onslaught of attack and malignment for it…
It is the rabid, foaming at the mouth fanatics who have taught me quite well…that some circumstances demand of you, to tell the world to “Go Fuck Yourself and Drop Dead!”…And it’s imperative, even if only for your own sanity, that you plot your own course in life.
|Sub-Blog Archive | MAP Educational Center