Moral Responsibility Over Breaking Unjust Laws

  • Now this is a sensitive subject; nonetheless, a very common one except for when it’s about pedophilia, which is why I feel that is necessary for me to redact this piece.  I am not inciting any encouragement for the breaking of laws, rather discussing why such laws are flawed and should be broken to prove how petty they are.

Over the course of history, environments and cultures have developed themselves into what they are today, meaning that things have not always been how portrayed currently.  Human interactions are known to be not always peaceful, leading to many disagreements and establish and/or change many laws sometimes incorrectly thinking that such would protect a group of people.  Perhaps some laws might have been relevant over social development, but as time passes, they become but null in face of more updated circumstances.  Humanity has been known for breaking the accords they themselves reached at certain periods in time, just as for human rights and in cases of war, when they are pressed to do so.  This brings out the questions: Are laws really that just and constantly applicable as they were before?  Were such laws even considerate of the ones who they were applied over to?  What if certain laws become completely unnecessary and even unethical?

5n0uez5

When does it becomes justified then to go against a law?  Simply, I would say, when such laws restricts the liberty of one or more individuals who aren’t violating other people’s rights to live however they wish.  The problem with this is the perception in which some of these situations are seen, especially in our case.  Automatically, many individuals will assume that children cannot consent by default, therefore, already with a common generalized confused approach to what the occurrences actually are (not to mention completely ignoring the child’s input by deeming the “victim” as confused).  Age of consent has historically varied over time (Age of Consent in The West) and up-to this date the laws have shown to be nothing but a barrier against consenting adult-child relationships by considering them “immoral and illegal”.  Countless of individuals are arrested merely for possessing child pornography, which are but images and videos.  What harm have they done by just downloading such?

There are many examples of people breaking laws in order for the greater good.  Even if I sound far-fetched, I think this is something we need to see massively in our community in order to start moving towards real changes.  Allow me to clear up that I mean consensual relationships, since I am completely against actual violation of people’s individual rights.  (Examples of people who broke the law)  In this link, there are examples of individuals who broke the law because of merely trying to express themselves how the world was unfair of their causes.  They needed to go as far as breaking laws in order to bring attention to what they were trying to say, which led to them being relevant to public eyes and bring about persons to rationalize and have second-thoughts that maybe, just maybe they weren’t right all along.   Same would go for us, though the bias encompassing pedophilia is incredible, but it’s not impossible to eventually make our voices heard from our side (at least), rather than what the media chooses to portray.

Untitled-275-800x445.png

We have a lot of fake media incoherently representing and generalizing us on a daily basis, as well as active censorship when it comes to our community.  Even websites that say to advocate for freedom of speech end up banning us unreasonably only because we choose to express ourselves by words.  So maybe we have to show them evidence, real examples of situations (which I know there are some documented, but not that known to public exactly) and break the laws nobody dare to break because of fear propaganda and threats in order to show them that things aren’t how they are always told to be?  Humanity needs to know that our claims are as valid as any other group and we should be allowed to argue in favor of what we think it’s correct.  Censorship would only lead to people finding other mediums in which they would express themselves directly or indirectly, regardless.  So why not open ourselves to full discussion just because of meaningless fears and stereotypes?

  • Again, I must highlight that I am not encouraging blind criminal activity, only criticizing the legal relevancy of such laws and how people should rather defy them than fear them.

28 Replies to “Moral Responsibility Over Breaking Unjust Laws”

  1. Being an anarchist, I would never condemn anyone breaking obviously unjust, absurd and harmful laws. In fact, I would respect the courage of the people who dare to stand against the aggressive violence of the authorities and the majority, in defense of liberty and sanity.

    And, if no one, ever, broke the devastative and misguided laws prohibiting intergenerational sex, we would have no scientific and scholarly works to analyse, no case studies and reports to recall. All evidence of the existence of harmless and consensual sexual relationships between children and adults comes from the actions which were formally illegal. Well, except the historical evidence from the eras before the “age of consent”!

    1. Being myself AnCap, I also find myself agreeing with this comment of yours. If everyone chose to obey the law, no modern evidence would exist, therefore we would think that everything that comes from the mass media and sources replanting what is already a norm is completely true, we would only have history to back us up, as they would dismiss it, saying “It’s outdated”, which is a common mis-perception of what evidence is. A lot of examples from the past still holds validity to this date, people only seem to say something it’s outdated when it’s convenient to them.

  2. Child pornography is illegal because producing it means exporting children, per psychiatric consensus, and consuming it is wrong because it may re-victimize the children who learn that they are being watched (making them relive the event), and because it may very well create a psychological demand for more porn, which remember, supposedly victimizes children. Therefore, child pornography is illegal for the same exact reason having sexual intimacy with them is illegal: they cannot legally consent to the activity, and could be greatly harmed by it.

    You can dispute that, certainly, but that is the reasoning behind its illegality.

    Anyway, I don’t agree with the piece here: Like you said, there is an intense miasma surrounding pedophilia, one which cannot be broken simply by disobeying the law. In fact, disobeying the law and being in an intimate relationship with a child will likely aggravate public hatred for it, seeing that people believe adult-child sex is intrinsically harmful and psychologically damaging. When Gandhi or Parks broke the law, they did so with considerable support and manpower, which is something we do not posses. When Parks broke the law, there were already a good amount people in agreement with Civil Rights, so that when she was jailed for breaking the law, they sprang into action around her.

    We have no such sleeper movement right now, unfortunately. If we break the law, not only are we deemed monsters by the public, we’re also likely to be shunned by our family and friends. We have no support-in-waiting, so to speak. If the child developed trauma from the experience, for whatever reason, we’ll be blamed for that, too.

    The best we can do is attempt to change the pedophobic atmosphere around us with personal activism; a one-on-one style approach to change, if you will. Convince your loved ones that pedophilia is another variant of healthy human sexuality; and that maybe light contact will be fine, next. It’s a grassroots sort of thing, but I can see it working if a good number of MAPs go that route.

    1. Yes, that’s certainly true. We do need more support, and again, I am not justifying just plain breakage of laws, rather not letting laws limiting us because of propaganda and fear. It is indeed the case that thanks to current laws, adult-child relationships probably won’t go well, but we still have to go against them and prove them wrong. Yes, I do admit we need more backed support for that though. Personally, I wish I could find myself telling my parents I am a pedophile. I am certain they would not take such statement lightly as I have overheard them in the past talking about things they would do to pedos, heck, even gay people, in my father’s case.

      1. Actually, now that I think more of it, I do talk about adult-child relationships with just about everyone else, except for my family, for the reasons above stated.

      2. If you’re a financially independent adult then you could bring up the topic in passing conversation, knowing that you’ll be safe from eviction. You may be ostracized from your immediate family, but if you manage to convince them that you’re a good person with a good sexuality, then you could win big time.

    2. Wanna know what I think? How do pedophiles in particular, minor-attracted people in general, try to convince people that their attraction is not only statistically safe, but also beneficial? Science and philosophy, am I right?
      But those are things for thinkers. And, as Newgon points out, majority of the people either can not or is not willing to think. So, an argumentation must incorporate an element that speaks to the heart. Appealing to reason isn’t enough. What is missing?
      Art. I think we would have better chances to get our point accross if some MAPs were artists, writers or composers. Fiction is safe, but the concepts within it could be factual. I have been thinking about that a lot as of late… The use of art to reduce the miasma.

      1. >But those are things for thinkers. And, as Newgon points out, majority of the people either can not or is not willing to think.

        Yes, you’re right. The masses do not think, but they are easily manipulated through propaganda and/or news. They’re like an evil that keeps thriving and even more growing in a democratic society. So while you have this political system, you have a lot of dumb people, it’s an unavoidable evil in this system, unfortunately.

        >I think we would have better chances to get our point accross if some MAPs were artists, writers or composers. Fiction is safe, but the concepts within it could be factual. I have been thinking about that a lot as of late… The use of art to reduce the miasma.

        There are MAPs in those different areas, but they are disregarded by the masses, what we need is that and combine it with fierce propaganda to make ourselves heard, and even more artists in this current era, since it wouldn’t hurt.

        Fiction is good and including facts is also good, but we need more than that, to leave the people second-guessing what is truth and what is not? To question pedophilia itself, and how it is currently approached. For them to open their eyes to how there are a lot us being censored and in many times for no reason at all, as well as persecuted, among other things.

  3. Dumb people have always existed and they will always exist, unfortunately. I don’t think it’s a problem with politics, it’s just how humanity goes. Philosophers even before Sócrates agreed that, really, few people think. It’s a matter of manipulating the dummies. Propaganda may be a solution, but we are kind of short of money.
    As for the art thing, what if we weren’t openly MAPs? I mean, for my idea, I wanted to a do a comic, in which the age of the characters is ambiguous, but they do look like their age is 20 years apart. They are very close, friends, and all. I wanted to explore their relationship, which may grow more intimate. All the while, I would avoid touching the subject directly. Then, at the end of the comic, when the situation resolves, I do one last page with “references”. The references are links to some stuff we read and that bear resemblance to the comic’s themes.
    Silvio Gallo, Brazilian philosopher, said that a philosophical idea can be better taken by a class of high schoolers or even children if the crowd is sensibilized first. If you feel sensitive, you may as well hunger for more on the subject. In his words, one must take the problem as if it was theirs. And that’s why he suggests starting the lesson by exposing the class to a song, a picture or an anecdote. First, the emotions must be shaken.
    Makes me kind of think of how some branches of the left are publishing tear-jerkers about anti-contact pedophiles. And suddenly, few people here and there come as supportive.

    1. >As for the art thing, what if we weren’t openly MAPs? I mean, for my idea, I wanted to a do a comic, in which the age of the characters is ambiguous

      There were of these people in the past, and I actually believe it would be better to have more artists as open MAPs though, but that is a huge risk, but something that can be done, if smartly crafted.

      >Makes me kind of think of how some branches of the left are publishing tear-jerkers about anti-contact pedophiles. And suddenly, few people here and there come as supportive.

      Yes, I can agree with that. These things actually help, though going the Virped way isn’t really the way to go as last resolution. Pedophiles need to be proud of they are, I know they are proud too, some of them, but refusing to acknowledge that children can also love as us is not taking pride as a pedophile fully. We need to love ourselves more, because there is nothing wrong with us and we must not let society fuck us over like they continuously keep doing.

      Yes, perhaps appealing to their feelings would be a great way to open their minds at first. And also agree that what we are fighting against here is the majority of the dumb population, so sadly, manipulation of them is necessary to an extent, in order to make our message through.

      1. Sad, isn’t it? Søren Kierkegaard said that life would be a comedy if everyone acted philosophically, so… maybe a chunk of dummies is for the best.
        The simple existence of positive accounts on adult-child intimacy is what made me become pro-contact. Before, I thought that traumatic involvements were majority, but now I know that they struggle to sum 1%. I no longer feel shame over vocalizing my feelings or opinions, now that I have this information. I’m digging Ipce to bleeding and translating few stuff to Portuguese to put up in my blog, along with other works I have. I may become openly MAP in my blog or go the “don’t ask, don’t tell” path. But people probably already have a feeling that I’m a pedophile. I came out to my significant other and she said it’s fine as long as I do nothing in real life. She doesn’t mind letting me indulge in fantasy or even role-playing. Few other friends know as well. But very selected people. I’m building confidence still, rather than going all out.
        You should make a post about your beginnings, like how you noticed you had those feelings and how did you find a place to belong online. I really like the stuff you posted so far. Thanks for sharing and keep ’em coming.

        1. I will consider making a post like that, about myself. Actually, I will end up making one. I am glad you have liked my posts so far. My native language is Spanish, so I can partially understand written Portuguese. I wish you the best in your approach toward life as an open MAP. I have only told my closest friends, here on the Internet in general and coworkers at my job. Only people I wouldn’t tell of my feelings are my parents themselves, ironically enough.

    2. @Yure, excellent comic idea there and also you are very right about appealing to the readers’ emotions. Marketing practitioners already know this. And it’s because our brains are split into the primal ‘Low Brain’, the emotional ‘Mid Brain’ and the rational ‘High Brain. Unfortunately most people have little logical-analytical ability, and so can only be made “to buy” appealing to their emotions and base instincts.

      🙂 Great new blog site.

  4. The book-burning thing was a reference to Undertale’s genocide route. Hihih! Okay, enough yapping on my part. Comment sections aren’t a good place to have chatting. Your English is very good, by the way.

    1. Ayyyy, it’s been a while since I played the game, so pardon not recognizing that. xD Yes, I agree. Comments aren’t the most conventional of places, though in more than several occasions I have complete conversations with individuals in said sections while completely disregarding the chatting feature as a method to contact them.

      Thanks. Your English is also very good. Glad to have the pleasure of exchanging words with you. May it be not the last time. c:

  5. Thoreau went even further, to say that in some cases it’s not only permissible but mandatory to break unjust laws: “If the injustice is part of the necessary friction of the machine of government, let it go, let it go: perchance it will wear smooth,—certainly the machine will wear out. If the injustice has a spring, or a pulley, or a rope, or a crank, exclusively for itself, then perhaps you may consider whether the remedy will not be worse than the evil; but if it is of such a nature that it requires you to be the agent of injustice to another, then, I say, break the law. Let your life be a counter friction to stop the machine. What I have to do is to see, at any rate, that I do not lend myself to the wrong which I condemn.”

    1. Yes, I see it fit for individuals to break such laws when the situation demands of them to be placed in one of moral conflict over themselves. The thing with this approach is what has been mentioned to me earlier, which I quite agree with, in order to escalate to this type for these types of activities to not look like isolated incidents that nobody would care about is if we achieve ground-play and make such efforts en-masses.

  6. When my little girl friends were doing a little strip show for me and then began demanding (yes demanding) I kiss or lick their genitals my penis was telling me “do it for the pleasure!” my mind was saying “do it for the cause! They will always remember this as positive and fight for us in the future!”

    Thing is, if I had listened and we had begun a pleasure session they would have enjoyed it intensely in the moment. They would have likely asked to do it again and again each time we hung out. However, by now, as teens, they would have been crushed by a tsunami of self-doubt, guilt, shame, anxiety, depression, confusion etc.

    It doesn’t matter how amazing our sex adventures would have been. It doesn’t matter how much they enjoyed it, the fact that they initiated and would have wanted more. The reality is that the most likely thing that would have happened was they would have grown to regret it and hate me.

    When we break unjust laws, we just end up loosening a few pebbles that causes an avalanche that crushes our lives and the lives of our little lovers.

    My two lgfs are now teens and I am infinitely happy I redirected that preteen sexual energy and diffused it. It would have led to nothing but suffering.

    This is where we differ from the homosexuals.

    1. I absolutely agree, this is why we need to change the laws before having any kind of relationships, no matter how much it breaks our hearts of sorts in not being able to show our full affection to those we love in the ways we would like to… I am glad you genuinely loved your lgfs enough to know it was better to hold it in instead, hopefully that is not forever the case for us.

      1. I don’t think it will be forever, but we will likely be dead or very old by the time it happens. Sometimes I regret not doing it, but logically it was the right decision.

        I do think that changing perceptions will happen before the law changes. The government always lags behind societal views.

        1. Yes, I don’t think it will be forever either. Like yourself, I also do not have hope of being alive when such changes occur… I can’t deny I would also regret it for my entire life if such thing were to happen to me, but yes, you’re correct that given our unfortunate laws and the nonsense surrounding what these relationships are, made it for the best to practice abstention. It is sad that in spite of love, we choose not to love.

        1. With that attitude, and submitting to conformity under unfair and ineffective laws, of course nothing is going to change.

  7. LGBT use the rainbow flag as a symbol to denote lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender pride and social movements. The symbol is embraced (mostly) across Western societies, and underpinned by laws that guarantees prosecution of instances of discrimination on the basis of, for example, ones sexual orientation. Historical recap: any homosexual individual was determined (within the American Pschyatrists Association’s DSM) to have a mental disorder up to 1973. Roughly thirty years later, the American Pschyatrists Association and its allies were saying this: “There is no scientific basis for distinguishing between same-sex couples and heterosexual couples with respect to the legal rights, obligations, benefits, and burdens conferred by civil marriage.”

    https://wikileaks.org/wiki/FBI_pedophile_symbols includes an FBI intelligence bulletin that identifies a range of symbols that the FBI claim paedophiles use to recognise one another and to distinguish their sexual preferences, for example: the boy lover blue triangle and the child lover butterfly logos. Wikileaks adds that the information in the bulletin will be of assistance to parents and other care givers in recognizing pedophiles. The DSM essentially still includes paedosexuality in its list of mental disorders. The APA still have some way to go it seems before they announce: “There is no scientific basis for distinguishing between adult couples and intergenerational couples with respect to the legal rights, obligations, benefits, and burdens conferred by civil marriage.”

    Incidentally, is anyone here brave or foolish enough to proudly display a child lover logo in public?

    I was thinking of taking up Eivind Berge’s idea suggested in another place: “I am going to get a child sexualized image/text as a tattoo. I will then be a living crime with the superpower to incriminate all onlookers.”

    1. This goes back to the blog article I wrote about civil disobedience and what we mostly need is to have more support before anything else… While it is important to stand up against these prejudices, it is also imperative to have people to backup you up because of this being a democracy, so no matter how unfair it would be to given “minorities” at a certain point, as long as there is some kind of government, in this case, the one of majorities, there will always be a minority suffering. With more people then it is more possible to get some kind of message across, alas as having one soul telling their part of the story and being tagged as a psychopath. It is sad when I see this things happening and how this also once happened to homosexuals, until they also started to organize themselves better and, little by little, win the battle. As you said, we have a long way to go before we are recognized as not monsters, but as humans who are a minority, are not inherently evil and have something to say that it is worth paying attention to and that does not necessarily mean harm to anyone.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *