- Joined
- Dec 27, 2015
there are a lot of lolifags obsessed with feet so I'd say yes.
Prostasia Foundation - Tax-exempt paedophile advocacy charity with an open forum; wants an end to sex offender registries; has had several sex offenders working for them; finances a "MAP" support club kids are allowed to join; legalize child sex dolls you bigot
- Thread starter easy
- Start date
-
Want to keep track of this thread?
Accounts can bookmark posts, watch threads for updates, and jump back to where you stopped reading.
Create account
Space Police
kiwifarms.net
- Joined
- Dec 12, 2022
Foot fetishism is a paraphilia, and paraphilias tend to cluster, so I'd say yes.
- Joined
- Jul 23, 2021
critical support between podophiles and pedophiles. one struggle
- Joined
- Sep 1, 2022
Remember to kill your local pedo
- Joined
- Sep 1, 2022
- Joined
- Aug 23, 2020
I fell into reading some of The Last Psychiatrist a few nights ago, and he has a post on pedophilia that I found informative. (A, A14 - comments)
This is the most important part: most pedophiles aren't sexually attracted to kids.
Like most other terms used in psychiatry and politics, the meaning appears to be self-evident, but it's actually wrong. Other examples include "insane," "antisocial" (it means criminal), and "inflammable." ("Inflammable means flammable? What a country!")
Pedophile had originally been divided into two groups, fixated and regressed. Interestingly, even these terms don't mean what they look like they mean. They don't describe what kind of kid the pedophile likes; they describe why he is a pedophile.
Fixated pedophiles are fixed in a certain developmental stage, and are exclusively attracted to kids.
Regressed pedophiles, using the original definition, prefer adults but, if stressed, will regress to an earlier developmental stage; this regression leads them to prefer children. The regressed pedophile likes kids because he himself has "become" a kid (more technically: he regresses to a pregenital sexuality, which finds its satisfaction in oral (e.g. masturbation, fetishism) or anal impulses (e.g. sadomasochism) and its natural compatriot, the child.)
The terms homosexual and heterosexual apply to the primary object choice, not necessarily the sex of the victim (e.g. "heterosexual molester of boys.") Fixated pedophiles tend to be (i.e. think of themselves as) homosexual, and regressed (think of themselves as) heterosexual.
But the easiest way, and most forensically useful way, is to simply describe pedophiles according to their sexual object preference: Fixated pedophiles are true pedophiles, they are only sexually aroused by kids. Opportunistic (regressed) pedophiles would rather have a hot 25 year old, but will take the best offer. Regressed pedophiles don't think they are pedophiles.
Remember, whether they are homosexual or not isn't the differentiating factor (e.g. male homosexual regressed pedophiles prefer adult men but would settle for a kid. Heterosexual fixated pedophiles prefer kids.)
An example of the fantasy life of each is illustrative: the fixated pedophile might be married, but will take a feature of the adult and "see" it as child like. Maybe the slope of the calf, the hair style, etc. Fetishism is also important, and there is a clear (to the pedophile, not to anyone else) direct link to children (a type of cloth or pattern; sounds such as bells, crowds; language or words, etc.)
The regressed, or opportunistic, pedophile does the opposite: "I know she's only 13, but have you seen her ass?!"
So now you can see why all of our attempts at catching pedophiles before they offend are doomed to absolute failure: they're everywhere. I know no one will admit this, but remember how hot you thought Britney Spears was in the original video "Hit Me Baby One More Time?" Guess what. You're a pedophile. You say, "but I'd never act on it." Well, you say a lot of things.
But that's the crux, of course: desire and action are very different things, and, arguably are controlled by entirely different parts of the brain, or personality factors, or superego departments. Not a day goes by I don't want to plasma gun 50 people I meet. But, so far body count = 0. This is why we can only be judged on our behaviors, not our thoughts (though a person must judge himself on his thoughts.)
You don't know what a person is capable of until they are presented with the temptation, so I'm saying we shouldn't tempt them. The problem with opportunistic pedophilia is that it is opportunistic, not pedophilia. The goal isn't the child; it's ejaculation. And you simply don't know where a person's "line in the sand" for ejaculation is. At what point do they say, "this is probably not right?" Not: "this is wrong," that's usually easy to describe. Probablywrong. 16? 14 if they're famous? 12 if you're in Thailand?
The guy on the IM or chat who gets a 14 year old girl to meet him at the pier-- he's a "regressed pedophile." He would have liked her to have been a 25 year old NFL cheerleader; but, let's face it, a 25 year old NFL cheerleader would sooner swallow her own eye than hook up with this freak, and he knows it. So he bypasses her ("they're all sluts") and cons a 14 year old. It's no surprise that 75% of heterosexual pedophiles described their offenses as "compensation."
Fixated pedophiles are sometimes described as "child centered." In fact, they see themselves as the peers of the child, and prefer to interact with the child on its level (while regressed pedophiles try to elevate the interaction with the kid to adult level.) They're not in it "for the sex" but for the emotional connection. For the regressed, the sex is the whole point. And here's your forensic problem: a regressed pedophile kidnaps a kid to have sex with. Once done, well, anything can happen. If the kid "liked it," (maybe defined as "didn't put up too much of a fight") there's a good chance they'll meet again. But if the kid didn't like it... A fixated pedophile kidnaps a kid to-- live with. That fantasy rarely gets realized (kid likely doesn't want to move in) and violence can therefore occur. But appreciate the difference: for a regressed pedophile, the violence is part of the offense. For the fixated, violence is secondary or utilitarian.
I can already hear the screaming objections. Look, I'm not trying to defend anyone, I'm trying to explain the offenses, the thinking. In simple terms, your child is a billion times more at risk from "pedophilia" with an adult they know (30% of victims have known their attacker for a full year prior to the offense), who is already married with kids of his own that he has not molested, then they are from the registered pedophile who lives in your city who was hoarding child porn in his mom's basement. I know it sounds cooler and more self-righteous to rail against the pedophile than to worry about your (weak-minded) social contacts, because you think you know them, and especially since they outnumber you. By a lot.
You say, "but certainly not everyone is a pedophile, there must be something specifically different about them?" Or, if you work for the Supreme Court: "there must be some mental abnormality which is properly the domain of medicine?"
No. Not in a way that's useful. For example, a very recent MRI study of fixated pedophiles vs. controls found pedophiles had decreases in grey matter (smaller brains), especially in certain brain regions (orbitofrontal, ventral striatum, limbic regions), and generally decreased intelligence. But before you see this as proof that pedophilia finds its origins in brain biology, the physical brain changes didn't predict anything you might expect (number of offenses, psychopathy, etc)-- but it did predict obsessiveness. In other words, this study found biological evidence of OCD spectrum pathology, but not of pedophilia, per se. No, pedophilia isn't a disease with distinct physical pathology, and no, it isn't properly the domain of psychiatry.
I may write a "profile" of the pedophilic sex offender, and another post reviewing the developmental and biological studies so far. Or, I may just go have a drink (or 4.)
Like most other terms used in psychiatry and politics, the meaning appears to be self-evident, but it's actually wrong. Other examples include "insane," "antisocial" (it means criminal), and "inflammable." ("Inflammable means flammable? What a country!")
Pedophile had originally been divided into two groups, fixated and regressed. Interestingly, even these terms don't mean what they look like they mean. They don't describe what kind of kid the pedophile likes; they describe why he is a pedophile.
Fixated pedophiles are fixed in a certain developmental stage, and are exclusively attracted to kids.
Regressed pedophiles, using the original definition, prefer adults but, if stressed, will regress to an earlier developmental stage; this regression leads them to prefer children. The regressed pedophile likes kids because he himself has "become" a kid (more technically: he regresses to a pregenital sexuality, which finds its satisfaction in oral (e.g. masturbation, fetishism) or anal impulses (e.g. sadomasochism) and its natural compatriot, the child.)
The terms homosexual and heterosexual apply to the primary object choice, not necessarily the sex of the victim (e.g. "heterosexual molester of boys.") Fixated pedophiles tend to be (i.e. think of themselves as) homosexual, and regressed (think of themselves as) heterosexual.
But the easiest way, and most forensically useful way, is to simply describe pedophiles according to their sexual object preference: Fixated pedophiles are true pedophiles, they are only sexually aroused by kids. Opportunistic (regressed) pedophiles would rather have a hot 25 year old, but will take the best offer. Regressed pedophiles don't think they are pedophiles.
Remember, whether they are homosexual or not isn't the differentiating factor (e.g. male homosexual regressed pedophiles prefer adult men but would settle for a kid. Heterosexual fixated pedophiles prefer kids.)
An example of the fantasy life of each is illustrative: the fixated pedophile might be married, but will take a feature of the adult and "see" it as child like. Maybe the slope of the calf, the hair style, etc. Fetishism is also important, and there is a clear (to the pedophile, not to anyone else) direct link to children (a type of cloth or pattern; sounds such as bells, crowds; language or words, etc.)
The regressed, or opportunistic, pedophile does the opposite: "I know she's only 13, but have you seen her ass?!"
So now you can see why all of our attempts at catching pedophiles before they offend are doomed to absolute failure: they're everywhere. I know no one will admit this, but remember how hot you thought Britney Spears was in the original video "Hit Me Baby One More Time?" Guess what. You're a pedophile. You say, "but I'd never act on it." Well, you say a lot of things.
But that's the crux, of course: desire and action are very different things, and, arguably are controlled by entirely different parts of the brain, or personality factors, or superego departments. Not a day goes by I don't want to plasma gun 50 people I meet. But, so far body count = 0. This is why we can only be judged on our behaviors, not our thoughts (though a person must judge himself on his thoughts.)
You don't know what a person is capable of until they are presented with the temptation, so I'm saying we shouldn't tempt them. The problem with opportunistic pedophilia is that it is opportunistic, not pedophilia. The goal isn't the child; it's ejaculation. And you simply don't know where a person's "line in the sand" for ejaculation is. At what point do they say, "this is probably not right?" Not: "this is wrong," that's usually easy to describe. Probablywrong. 16? 14 if they're famous? 12 if you're in Thailand?
The guy on the IM or chat who gets a 14 year old girl to meet him at the pier-- he's a "regressed pedophile." He would have liked her to have been a 25 year old NFL cheerleader; but, let's face it, a 25 year old NFL cheerleader would sooner swallow her own eye than hook up with this freak, and he knows it. So he bypasses her ("they're all sluts") and cons a 14 year old. It's no surprise that 75% of heterosexual pedophiles described their offenses as "compensation."
Fixated pedophiles are sometimes described as "child centered." In fact, they see themselves as the peers of the child, and prefer to interact with the child on its level (while regressed pedophiles try to elevate the interaction with the kid to adult level.) They're not in it "for the sex" but for the emotional connection. For the regressed, the sex is the whole point. And here's your forensic problem: a regressed pedophile kidnaps a kid to have sex with. Once done, well, anything can happen. If the kid "liked it," (maybe defined as "didn't put up too much of a fight") there's a good chance they'll meet again. But if the kid didn't like it... A fixated pedophile kidnaps a kid to-- live with. That fantasy rarely gets realized (kid likely doesn't want to move in) and violence can therefore occur. But appreciate the difference: for a regressed pedophile, the violence is part of the offense. For the fixated, violence is secondary or utilitarian.
I can already hear the screaming objections. Look, I'm not trying to defend anyone, I'm trying to explain the offenses, the thinking. In simple terms, your child is a billion times more at risk from "pedophilia" with an adult they know (30% of victims have known their attacker for a full year prior to the offense), who is already married with kids of his own that he has not molested, then they are from the registered pedophile who lives in your city who was hoarding child porn in his mom's basement. I know it sounds cooler and more self-righteous to rail against the pedophile than to worry about your (weak-minded) social contacts, because you think you know them, and especially since they outnumber you. By a lot.
You say, "but certainly not everyone is a pedophile, there must be something specifically different about them?" Or, if you work for the Supreme Court: "there must be some mental abnormality which is properly the domain of medicine?"
No. Not in a way that's useful. For example, a very recent MRI study of fixated pedophiles vs. controls found pedophiles had decreases in grey matter (smaller brains), especially in certain brain regions (orbitofrontal, ventral striatum, limbic regions), and generally decreased intelligence. But before you see this as proof that pedophilia finds its origins in brain biology, the physical brain changes didn't predict anything you might expect (number of offenses, psychopathy, etc)-- but it did predict obsessiveness. In other words, this study found biological evidence of OCD spectrum pathology, but not of pedophilia, per se. No, pedophilia isn't a disease with distinct physical pathology, and no, it isn't properly the domain of psychiatry.
I may write a "profile" of the pedophilic sex offender, and another post reviewing the developmental and biological studies so far. Or, I may just go have a drink (or 4.)
A while ago I posted about how all pedos are liars, and the Prostasia guys especially are. I find it interesting that there’s two “archetypes”, and I do wonder which sort is more dangerous. My love of true crime media says it’s the fixated (which I’d consider to be most of Prostasia), but this psychiatrist asserts it’s the regressed. Huh.
- Joined
- Jul 23, 2021
i'd argue that while a lot of the people in Prostasia (for example the General Manager of Prostasia, Lawrence P. Bayern, who said he has to imagine his wife as a little boy while he fucks her so he can even get hard, and Jeffery Alan White, a researcher at Prostasia who raped a child under the age of 13) are the 'fixated' type. i think what is more insidious is that Prostasia continuously and categorically defends and tries to normalise the 'regressed' type of paedophile.
An example of this is their most famous article ever, written by Prostasia's “Childcare Specialist” and Program Director Meagan Ingerman (who goes by "Ruth Allison" (who weighs 600lbs and looks more sexually repulsive than any woman i have ever seen) about ageplay, wherein she talks about her fantasies of pretending to be a raped child. She talks freely about the idea of 'regressing in age', similar to the psychologist you quoted. now, while she's talking about fantasies, prostasia naturally goes one further, and published another article about ageplay, regarding safety tips, which includes this hot tip:
if this isn't a *wink wink nudge nudge* to the regressive style pedos, i don't know what is. if it's a fetish between consenting adults, how would it be possible to get caught in a sting, if one is not literally soliciting a child for sexual favours? and the one's who resort to trying to get kids online are the ones who cannot for the life of them strike up a conversation with a real adult.
it's through the lens of sex positive fetish outreach that prostasia tries to advocate for these types of pedos.
That is, when they aren't just advocating for them in a more brazen, 'mask off' kind of way.
On a related note, i agree with the psychologist that the regressed type is far more dangerous. I know several people who survived CSA, and the perpetrator was always known to them beforehand, be they a family member of a trusted adult, or older kid. it is the predator of opportunity who is the dangerous one. Everyone reading this knows people who had this happen to them, whether they've told you or not is another thing, but it happened nonetheless.
the fixated type are no less evil, but the idea that some child raping ogre of a man will snatch your kids is far less likely than it being your own uncle or cousin, someone you trust. a 'family man'.
And that's a lot of whom prostasia markets themselves towards.
- Joined
- Oct 28, 2017
Interestingly enough, the section of the article right above the one you quoted specifically warns against joining any ageplay communities that act as a cover for pedophilia:
And then they add this:
They don't give any direction for what to do when a forum is less discerning regarding minors. I guess they just expect people to use best judgment.
Since ageplay regards literally pretending to be a younger age, someone, theoretically could engage in ageplay in a community with someone they think is an adult who is regressing, who really is a 14 year old, thus find themselves in hot water over it. The article's solution to this is simply reminding people to confirm the ages of all participants before engaging in anything:
- Joined
- May 25, 2013
Yeah if you're trying to arrange kink shit with consenting adults, you'd think you'd do it on fetlife or something (a site you have to be 18+ to use). I know people in the kink community who do exactly that, and I've never heard about police doing pedo sting on fetlife or any other 18+ site.
Incredibly fucking suspicious.
- Joined
- Jul 23, 2021
a few months ago, i mentioned that James Cantor starred in a critically panned 'documentary' named 'I, Pedophile'.
I finally got around to tracking it down. It's a doozy:
to save you the trouble of watching it, here is my summary of the interesting parts.
the documentary opens up by presenting parents who don't want a pedo living in their neighbourhood as shrill and self righteous:
we are then introduced to one of the two pedos who opted to show up on film:
in addition to explaining how opressed he is, bob (who doesn't hesitate to mention he is a trained assassin) tells us this heartwaring tale:
later, he goes to prison, and bob who looks like patrick tomlinson, talks about how he choked out a fellow inmate
later in the documentary, bob damn near breaks down into tears when talking about how the child he [a convicted pedo] and his wife were fostering was taken away from them:
the law he broke, mind you, was the posession of child porn. I wonder why they'd take a kid away from his home, which was not his biological child to begin with??
the documentary closes on bob looking somber, and also resembling the fucking whale
oscar worthy!
other choice quotes, not taken from bob are:
[note, the quote above casually mentions hurtcore porn, the worst type of child sexual abuse material in existence, but brushes it off, and acts as if other CSAM is a 'happy thing']
We are also introduced to another pedo, who also ended up downloading CSAM and compulsively masturbating to it:
he then goes on to say:
maybe he never raped a kid but i would argue that jacking off in public to CP multiple times a day constitutes 'acting on it'. don't fucking try and act holier than thou when you're jerking it to a fucking 4 year old while sat in a public shitter, you slimy cunt.
Cantor mentions that pedos interact online because the best way to keep pedos from offending is to treat them like normal people, and cuz no one will do that, they have to form their own communities. he chooses interesting communities to highlight:
they even interview a guy from b4uact who says this:
this is Mike Melsheimer, who was a convicted, offending pedophile who was #proud of his sexuality. here's a quote by mike:
[source / a]
and this:
'your website states your goal as eliminating offending'
'it certainly does not'
[source / a]
very, very cool websites to cite, Mr. Cantor.
oh yeah, b4uact also fucking hates the documentary lmaooo [archive]
lmaoooooo, bruh their founding fucking member went to jail for fucking a kid. who are they trying to fool??
the documentary is poorly made, has an inconsistent tone, and fails to make me feel sympathy except for the one guy they interview who actually was a victim in his youth. i didn't mention him before, because frankly he's in the documentary for like 3 mins and adds nothing of note.
thank you!! <3
- Joined
- Aug 22, 2016
Re: @Sprate Header's post about the guy who goes by Timothy N. Frode.
It's interesting how often these guys invoke the "misunderstood monster" trope. See this example courtesy of Billy Labelle. For those unaware this is the transgender "Assigned Male" cartoonist who was caught using a picture of an actual baby as reference for drawing furry diaper porn. There's also the example of the Beast RPG. This is a tabletop RPG where you play a monster who must harm and abuse people to get the spiritual mojo you depend on to survive. It frames the beasts as actually being the good guys while their victims deserve to be preyed on. The author was revealed to have raped a teenager.
The misunderstood monster trope has been getting more and more common to the point where there's an idea that all monsters are misunderstood and actually better than humans, see Undertale. Naturally this mentality is a candy store for predators. It encourages people to ignore all their instinctive danger signals because anyone who seems weird or gross is an underdog deserving of sympathy.
It's interesting how often these guys invoke the "misunderstood monster" trope. See this example courtesy of Billy Labelle. For those unaware this is the transgender "Assigned Male" cartoonist who was caught using a picture of an actual baby as reference for drawing furry diaper porn. There's also the example of the Beast RPG. This is a tabletop RPG where you play a monster who must harm and abuse people to get the spiritual mojo you depend on to survive. It frames the beasts as actually being the good guys while their victims deserve to be preyed on. The author was revealed to have raped a teenager.
The misunderstood monster trope has been getting more and more common to the point where there's an idea that all monsters are misunderstood and actually better than humans, see Undertale. Naturally this mentality is a candy store for predators. It encourages people to ignore all their instinctive danger signals because anyone who seems weird or gross is an underdog deserving of sympathy.
- Joined
- May 25, 2013
A much better, more informative documentary on pedophilia will always be 1994's Chickenhawk
Warning that it features a bunch of pedos talking about abusing kids and other disturbing content. One important aspect is that it shows what the LGBTQ actually thought of NAMBLA trying to invade pride, which is that pride goers were horrified and wanted them to GTFO (with several talking about being CSA survivors, which I'm sure made it even worse for them).
- Joined
- Mar 13, 2022
Newgon hates Prostasia but they're basically the same so I'm sharing this fresh essay published on the Newgon Wiki titled "MAPs, Paraphiles and Fascists" (archive).
A lot of ink spilled just to say "I may be a pedophile, but at least I'm not a nazi bigot transphobe fascist!"
A lot of ink spilled just to say "I may be a pedophile, but at least I'm not a nazi bigot transphobe fascist!"
- Joined
- Apr 14, 2021
- Joined
- Oct 24, 2023
I know you're not supposed to A-log. But this thread really makes me MATI and wish horrible stuff to these people monsters.
- Joined
- Mar 29, 2014
I thought "PIEOS" in the OP screencaps said "PEDOS" for a moment.
(And endless Clown World is being endless Clown World yet again.)
(And endless Clown World is being endless Clown World yet again.)
- Joined
- Jul 3, 2023
Well I feel worse about the world in general for having read this thread. Thanks, I guess.
It strikes me as imperitive that these people are prevented from ever finding each other. They seem to readily delude themselves into believing their predilictions are 'normal', shared by the majority in secret, and allowing them to congregate (IRL or digital) leads rapidly to actual IRL harm as they normalize their deviance and egg each other on.
I had formerly held the position of not caring what people wank to in the privacy of their own homes, dolls, drawings, whatever: who cares? But then, you can't escape that in itself forms a kind of tacit endorsement, bringing us right back to the open door for these fuckers doing some damage in the real world to actual children.
So the only conclusion is don't give a fucking inch.
MAP pride? Get in the fucking oven.
It strikes me as imperitive that these people are prevented from ever finding each other. They seem to readily delude themselves into believing their predilictions are 'normal', shared by the majority in secret, and allowing them to congregate (IRL or digital) leads rapidly to actual IRL harm as they normalize their deviance and egg each other on.
I had formerly held the position of not caring what people wank to in the privacy of their own homes, dolls, drawings, whatever: who cares? But then, you can't escape that in itself forms a kind of tacit endorsement, bringing us right back to the open door for these fuckers doing some damage in the real world to actual children.
So the only conclusion is don't give a fucking inch.
MAP pride? Get in the fucking oven.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Apr 6, 2014
I don't really have anything productive to add to this thread except I hate these people and hope they die.