Child abusers are trying to escape the stigma
Police Scotland has used the term “minor-attracted people” to describe paedophiles in a major report despite warnings it normalises child abuse.
It is a literal translation, but the overtones are very different, which is surely the point. Why would it be necessary or useful to come up with a less judgey label for sexual abuse of children? There’s no push to euphemise the words for other crimes is there? No calls to rename murder “premature involuntary termination”? Why euphemise sexual abuse of children?
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.
The “LGBT community” has too many niche groups as it is, thanks very much. It has so many it’s no longer a “community” – the T and the LG are very prone to clash and argue and fight.
Kenny McAskill, Scotland’s former justice secretary, said using euphemisms for paedophiles simply “masks the reality and their danger”.
The argument is that attraction by itself isn’t abuse, but we all know from having been alive for more than five minutes that people’s ability to keep attraction separate from acting on the attraction is as feeble as dandelion fluff.
Maggie Mellon, an independent social work consultant, said the term MAP risked “the danger of normalising and therefore perhaps decriminalising a serious offence”.
She added: “There should be diagnostic and treatment options for those who present a risk to children but the police are not a therapeutic service – they should be devoting their resources to closing down porn sites that feature children and abuse of women and upping their detection and conviction rates for those promoting child abuse.”
Well put. Way too many institutions have decided they’re therapeutic services when that’s not their job at all. Some distinctions are necessary.
It’s true that there’s some usefulness in designating non-offending pedophiles who actively seek help and therapy or even medical treatment in controlling their destructive impulses. It’s equally true that the cops have no business being involved in such–referring to them as “non-offending pedophiles” would be sufficient for the few times they might need to speak about such things.
So, yeah, this is more Scottish police being twits, at best.
I think the public has a right to know who exactly thought this was worth implementing. Surely somebody must have signed their name to this, if they thought it was a good idea. Who’s signature is it? Who else agreed and passed this along to the comms office?
Seems to me there was a trial balloon launched a few years ago to try to include MAPs as part of the alphabet soup “community” : if necessary under the “+” part, but better stuill, under its own letter “M,” right out in the open. Seems to me this did not go well. Nice to see the police pick up on it, though, particularly as they don’t want people to be “untoward” towards paedophiles.
This leads to one of my pet peeves. Why is it pedophilia instead of pederotica? Philia is not sexual love.
Colin, I guess maybe I’ve been unfairly judging necrophiliacs, then.
Normalising paedophilia is a necessary part of The Great Queering of sexuality, of course. Necessary in that it’s an inevitable direct consequence of it in the same way that putting women at greater risk of predatory assault is an inevitable direct consequence of queering sex.
It’s an inevitable direct consequence of pretending that actual real, natural categories such as sex don’t exist or that it’s bigotry to observe them. Women and children are just collateral damage, as usual, in the Great Fight to achieve the glorious goal of letting men have and do whatever they want. If we’re to agree that consent is bigotry when it’s based on sex (and we’re constantly told that we must), we have also to agree that age is an arbitrary barrier to consent, equally bigoted. Otherwise…. well, we have an inconsistency, don’t we, and we mustn’t have that. Mustn’t have inconsistency when it becomes a barrier to to men sticking their dicks in whomever they want, that is; the other monumental, glaring inconsistencies in gender identity ideology are apparently just fine and can be handwaved away.
To all of our relief, I’m sure, Police Scotland says it doesn’t use the term “MAP”:
https://www.scotland.police.uk/what-s-happening/news/2022/december/statement-regarding-use-of-term-minor-attracted-person/
Happy New Year, everyone!