#para discourse

[kiyos-den]

paramisia is unfortunately super common in society, so lots of people can accidentally hold beliefs that are paramisic without even realisin !! even paraphiles can accidentally be paramisic - let's unlearn paramisia together !!

[soft4brainz]

srry not srry, but if u claim to be pro-contact in ur pinned post with no explanation or clarification anywhere as to what u mean by that... ur getting an insta block !!

that label can mean anything and i am not willing to interact with userz who could possibly be accepting of abusive, nonconsentual actionz. nope! nuh uh.

[how-do-these-people-exist]

"if people against transandrophobia don't start accepting pedophiles i'm gonna go back to siding with transandrophobes."

(link for your blocklist needs)

Yeah don't worry I'm not taking this out of context there's more in the notes -_- I also really hate that they call it "transandrophobia community" instead of.. I dunno, anti-transandrophobes, anti-transandrophobia, or some other term to describe people advocating against transmasc discrimination. I mean, I don't think people like this would call feminists the "misogyny community" for being anti-misogyny, or the larger trans community speaking out about transphobia "transphobia community" it just feels like a weird subtle dig..

And also like? I dunno, if you don't want people to associate non-harmful paraphilias with pedophilia and other harmful paraphilias, then maybe don't be part of/tell people they should be part of a community that DOES lump in all paraphilias as societally acceptable, and talk about paraphilias as "the big 3" or "not the big 3." Like, no. I'm not gonna support dipshits that think we should normalize pedophiles and give them spaces where they can be open and proud of their attraction to children. The fact they put "pedophiles" in quotes means they clearly don't see it as a bad thing either.

Anyway onto the shitshow that is the comment section.

Very interesting these two comments were posted around the same time, and which one they chose to ignore.. (Had to look up what paramisia is, apparently it's discrimination against paraphilias/people with them. If someone has a harmful paraphilia and is trying to get therapy or help for it, I support that, but if your paraphilia is harmful and targetting any being who cannot consent, and you are proud of it, fuck off. I DO think we should discriminate against those people actually, because they're openly bragging about fantasizing about and wanting to abuse. As for non-harmful paraphilias, same thing as what I said above. If it's just like, a weird attraction comparable to a kink, no problem there, but god, you're probably better off calling it a kink. If it was me, I'd personally rather associate with kink, a community typically emphasizing consent and safety even in non-con kinks.. than the community who's known for "the big 3" and blurs the lines between "we should accept people with strange attractions" and "we should accept pedophiles and other people who get off on abusing others.") I also think the vague wording of "none of us have an issue with that" makes it?? very unclear if they don't have an issue with people who DO think this normalization of pro-contact paraphilias is a problem.. or that they don't have a problem with pro-contact paraphilias. I think I know which though, 'cause uh...

yeah this was their reply to a thread where someone told them to kys. "oooh you want me dead so bad because i support pedos" yeah i can see why??? I mean. I very much despise publicly telling anyone to kys (or even privately if you haven't established boundaries on saying it AS A JOKE.) when you're publicly being proud of being a piece of shit.. you can't be surprised when you get hate for it. Again, very notable what they choose to reply to and what to ignore here.

but yeah this was all.. very gross to read! I'm ashamed to say I came across this through a reblog of someone who liked one of my posts so uh: yeah no. I don't support this shit. You should know you're the type I'd post about if you reblog shit in support of posts like this.

[thediscoursebakery]

I’ve been seeing a lot of paraphillia based discourse lately, so I thought I’d share my two cents on the topic.

Now, I don’t explicitly present my stance as pro or anti harmful para — not because I want to avoid backlash, but because my stance is so complex in my eyes that I feel it cant be confined to the two boxes of “ pro “ and “ anti “. Also considering the fact that not everyone with a paraphillia has a paraphillic disorder; it can be confusing.

Moving onto my point ; I see many posts said by para supporters that these people are valid and that they aren’t horrible people because of their thoughts and feelings — and this isn’t entirely wrong. There is however some things I disagree with.

Is it wrong to have thoughts about it? No, of course not. Thought crimes don’t exist — it’s the way you respond and act on these thoughts that matter most.

Is it wrong to validate these thoughts and push the belief that these people should be accepted for this behavior? Yes. Yes it is.

I do not believe that harmful paras — ESPECIALLY zoos, pedophiles and necrophiles should have any kind of acceptance for their behaviour or their attraction. These people need help. You should be validating their journey to managing their thoughts and feelings and working towards recovery, not their desire to fuck a child, animal or corpse. If you encourage those with these Paras to show it off online and wave it around like it’s something to be proud of, that’s not going to help them. That sends them deeper into this rabbit hole of dealing with their forbidden desires.

If you have a harmful para — I do not believe you are queer in any form. Not because I don’t want you people to get better — but because the behaviour is not something that should be accepted in this society. Validation towards it will make it seem like this is okay to be doing. Which it isn’t.

[chaos-in-one]

Possibly hot take, but a lot of anti paraphile talking points are literally just repackaged anti OCD ableism.

"You're a dangerous/bad person who should be constantly monitored and/or outright locked up or killed if you have these thoughts or feelings that would be bad to act on in real life" will never be a belief that is safe for people for OCD.

It's not any less of an ableist talking point when directed at people with paraphilias than it is when people throw it at those with OCD.

And in general, reminder, that both when it comes to paraphilias and when it comes to OCD, thought crimes are not real. What someone internally thinks or feels does not make them 'evil', and it certainly does not make them a criminal. People should not be punished for what goes on inside their own head.

[opals-shipcourse]

i find it very telling you resort to attacking my character rather than defend your position. very telling indeed.

[philtrum]

it’s so hard and weird being pro para and anti transid because you’ll get lumped under “radqueer”

like how tf are “kinksters should be allowed to exist and people with paraphilic disorders should face less stigma so they can get the help they need” and “it’s okay to identify as another race” the same opinion 😭😭😭😭😭

[kiyos-den]

the way some beings act with MAPs specifically is so weird imo,,,

they claim that they're pro para, and inclusive to everyone - great !! - and then turn around and say that MAPs cannot interact, under any circumstances, because MAPs have got some secret evil agenda going on, which is obvious because they use the term MAP. they tried to be sneaky, but they, the humble "pro para" + "inclusive" blog with superior intellect, could easily see past their lies to their evil predatory nature,,,, all because they use the term MAP,,,,

"MAP" is an umbrella term btw. if you're "pro para but anti MAP", kitty's going to assume that you're uneducated or a liar (¬､¬)