Licensed Sex Therapist, Counselor Advocates For “Minor Attracted Persons” As “Vilified” And “Marginalized”

First of all, do you know what “MAPs” are? It stands for “minor attracted persons.” People who are sexually attracted to minors. People who are sexually attracted to children. Pedophiles. PEDOPHILES. That’s LITERALLY what “pedophile” means. Prefix “pedo,” meaning “child,” and suffix “phile,” meaning “lover of” or “enthusiast of.”

So here’s Miranda, a self-proclaimed “licensed professional counselor and sex therapist” who works for the Pennsylvania government in the Department of Corrections, advocating for “minor attracted persons.” Miranda wants you to understand that MAPs are “probably the most vilified population of folks in our culture.” She’s really concerned that “most folks are making incorrect assumptions” about MAPs, which “create harm for an already marginalized population.”

Here’s the thing, though. “Minor attracted persons” is just radical woke leftist language manipulation of the term “pedophiles,” and pedophiles are dangerous. They target and victimize innocent children, which makes them perhaps one of the most dangerous and despicable populations of folks in our culture. So if they’re also the most vilified and marginalized population of folks in our culture, it’s with good reason. It’s for the protection of our children and our society.

But Miranda wants us to call them “minor attracted persons” because it’s less stigmatizing than calling them “pedophiles.” She says that the term “pedophile” has moved from being a “diagnostic label to being a judgmental, hurtful insult that we hurl at people in order to harm them or slander them.” Yes. Exactly. Calling them out for exactly what they are. Remember the language manipulation of “fiery but mostly peaceful protests?” That’s what Miranda is doing here. But “minor attracted persons” is easier to say than “depraved and dangerous but mostly innocent sexual orientation,” which is what she means.

Miranda is arguing that being sexually attracted to children does not encompass or represent the whole person because they are more than just a label about their sexuality, and so such a label is hurtful. To be blunt, I’m not interested in protecting pedophiles from hurt feelings. I bet she’d also argue that not all people who are sexually attracted to minors are actively perpetrating crimes against children. But the things is that most of them are. And if they aren’t physically victimizing a child with their own hands (or genitals), then there’s a very good chance they’re victimizing a child by collecting and possessing child pornography, which was produced in a way that necessarily victimized a child.

Responsible parents simply cannot risk the lives and emotional wellbeing of their children in order to protect the feelings of someone who not only likely wants to victimize children, but also likely sees nothing wrong with their desire to do so.

Check out this radical woke leftist take on victimizing children. New flash: it’s not the kids who “get paid” to make child porn. It’s the abusers.