Why Paedophilia is Hard to Discuss

As a paedophile I tend to talk a lot about paedophilia on the Internet. No matter where I've gone I've noticed that it's nearly impossible to have level-headed discussion and rational arguments on the topic. I don't think that any single group of people is at fault with the current situation and we all have a lot to improve.

In my experience the best places for honest and rational discussions about it are imageboards. While some might be put of by the amount of ad hominems on imageboards I believe they benefit the discussion. On other forums such as Reddit and IRC ad hominems have a lot more power and people are ready to dismiss what you say based on an insult or two. On imageboards people see what gets replied to, which is usually the more thought provoking or controversial posts and thus ad hominems easily go unnoticed. Also the fact that there is no persistent identity there is very useful, this means people can speak their mind without fear and ad hominems are even less useful thanks to them being only connected to a post, not an identity.

Media and Governments

When a regular person hears the word paedophile the first thing that comes to their mind is a "child molester". This false equivalency is very unfortunate and prevents people from thinking or talking about the subject rationally. This along with fear of mandatory reporting laws also prevents paedophiles from seeking help. What I believe governments and the media should do is start a campaign to clear this confusion and to inform paedophiles in hiding about their options for safe places for getting help. I believe this would be the most effective way of preventing paedophiles from falling into despair to the point where they abuse a child, instead of preventing that it seems people want to cause more of it to happen.


There are number of people that I like to call anti-paedophiles, from here on just anti-pedos, they aren't just mildly opposed to paedophilia but they have very strong hatred towards it and they spend a lot of time going around and accusing people of paedophilia, stalking and harassing people they think are paedophiles and trying to ruin their lives. Because I'm so public about my opinions regarding this topic I experience this harassment often, for example on Reddit my account was followed around for months and on every one of my comments one of them would reply with lies about me. I also get a lot of death threats, cliche, I know.

The amount of very vehement anti-pedo might be small but they have dedication. However their strength is not their dedication but the fact that normal people often tend to join their side thanks to the media narrative.

After confronting some of the anti-pedos about why they harass us I've found out that they tend to have been raped as children and got trauma from it. I've heard some stories about the sick things that happened to them and tried to tell them that I would never do such things to a child but it seems to be impossible for them to dissociate their own rapist from the rest of paedophiles.

Logical Fallacies

To no one's surprise the most common tactics that these people like to use are logical fallacies, most commonly ad hominems, straw manning and kafkatraps. "Arguments" with anti-pedos are often nothing more than them spewing fallacies and the other side having to rebut those.

Ad hominems and straw men should be familiar to everyone so I'd like to focus on kafkatraps. Even though kafkatraps are not as well known people face them almost as much without even noticing. There are several "models" of kafkatraps and I mention a few of them in this blog post. The model of kafkatrap that I as a paedophile usually face is the model S. Following is Eric S. Raymond's definition of the model S kafkatrap.

Model S:

Your refusal to acknowledge that you are guilty of {sin,racism,sexism, homophobia,oppression…} confirms that you are guilty of {sin,racism,sexism, homophobia,oppression…}.

In my case the accusions are of hurting, abusing and raping children. Regardless of how often I tell people that I haven't done such things and I won't they are unable to think of me as a paedophile instead of a child rapist.


This might be the least important of my reasons for standing up to anti-pedos when you see them but it is the one that prompted me to write this rant. Anti-pedos like to pretend that they don't like talking about the subject and this is probably their biggest hypocrisy. They tend to bring it up when not relevant at all. Then the same people accuse us pedos, or at the very least me, of not talking about anything else. It's very hypocritical and dishonest.

-- nothing about this subject --
17:01:25 anon: Tsutsukakushi is a nasty pedo and will knever been unbanned
-- snip --
17:33:16 anon: Tsutsukakushi spends a lot of time talking about molesting children and trying to get people to accept him
-- snip --
17:33:33 anon: I did put him on ignore, as you see he never shuts the fuck about it


There is an apparent lack of neutral studies on paedophilia and children's sexuality. The lack of neutral studies on paedophilia can be blamed on us paedophiles but also in part on the scientists. Us paedophiles should do better job at participating in studies so the only sample they have won't be child rapists who also happen to be paedophiles. Also the scientists need to do better job at outreach for paedophiles, when I've looked for studies where I could participate I only found ones that were years old.

A lot of studies on child sexuality lack neutrality and instead of studying how sexuality affects them and instead study how sexual abuse affects them. Many people then use these intentionally negative and biased studies to make claims of all sexuality being harmful to children despite there being studies that show that it isn't the case. It is common for people to state that no child in the entire world would not get harmed by consensual, not in a legal sense, sexual experience or relationship with an adult. Some even go as far as saying that no child could ever want such experience yet people won't call them out.

Neutrals && Pro-Paedophiles

There is also a lack of neutral and pro-paedophiles who would be willing to discuss the subject openly. This is due to the fear of judgment by people around them and of repercussions. Non-paedophiles who stand up for us paedophiles often get attacked just as harshly as we do. Just mere accusations of paedophilia have been known to ruin lives and understandably they don't want to take such risks for the sake of some other group. The non-paedophiles standing up for paedophiles face kafkatraps of models L and M.

Model L:

Your insistence on applying rational skepticism in evaluating assertions of pervasive {sin,racism,sexism,homophobia, oppression…} itself demonstrates that you are {sinful,racist,sexist,homophobic,oppressive,…}.

Model M:

The act of arguing against the theory of anti- {sin,racism,sexism,homophobia,oppression} demonstrates that you are either {sinful,racist,sexist, homophobic, oppressive} or do not understand the theory of anti-{sin,racism,sexism,homophobia,oppression}, and your argument can therefore be dismissed as either corrupt or incompetent.

From time to time a brave individual who had neutral or sometimes even positive sexual experiences with adults come forward. Not nearly enough is done to encourage this even though it would be very good way of dispelling the myth that these experiences are always abusive and harmful. Usually those trying to uphold the current narrative will attack the individual with model T kafkatraps so be prepared to call them out on that.

Model T:

Designated victims of {sin,racism,sexism,homophobia,oppression} who question any part of the theory of {sin,racism,sexism,homophobia,oppression} demonstrate by doing so that they are not authentic members of the victim class, so their experience can be discounted and their thoughts dismissed as internalized {sin,racism,sexism,homophobia,oppression}.


Us paedophiles are not doing a very good job either. It's partly our fault that the media has had the chance to make a boogeyman out of us and to brainwash people into thinking that we are all child rapists. We need more paedophiles who have not touched a child to come out and show everyone that we exist. When they think that every paedophile rapes children they will support people who advocate for punishment of thoughtcrimes. It's a short way from paedophilic thoughtcrime to wrong political leaning being a thoughtcrime and we need to help people see this.

Whenever I hear people on TV clips saying that they have never heard of a "non-offending" paedophiles before a little bit of me dies inside. The same people would be completely furious if you said that you've never heard of a non-greedy jew, a non-violent black person or a non-extremistmmuslim.