Hi. Victim Of Childhood Sexual Abuse Here.

Hi. Victim of childhood sexual abuse here.

We were talking about pedophilia. Because that was the incoming accusation. Never once did I state all child rape is a crime of attraction, either.

I lost all respect for antis the day that one said outright said that I, a disabled, fully mature adult was 'basically a child' and any person who was attracted to me was basically a pedo. Because telling disabled people that others being attracted to them is inherently evil is a totally normal, non infantalizing thing to do, right? There's nothing ableist about saying disabled people are 'basically children' right??????

Antis and the media have watered down the meaning of pedophilia to basically nothing. Its a defunct term at this point. It just means anything and everything that anyone wants it to and it makes me so, so angry for the actual victims of true pedophilia and the actual people who are being victimised by the trend of using it as a battering ram.

Neurodivergency and disabilities being weaponised, too, is part of the problem, not a contribution toward a solution. The more you tell people that disabled and neurodivergent people are vulnerable and open to risk the more risk you actually expose them to.

And, frankly, the more you piss them off.

Would I be the asshole if I bought Harry Potter merch anyway or is it just antis or others shaming me? I'm not a fan of Harry Potter, I just want to buy what I want without being shamed into "supporting" bad things.

I don't want to be known as an Israeli supporter because I buy Starbucks.

The thing is, the issue with buying these things is that the money you give those companies then contributes to supporting something awful. Which means if you know that, and you're still willingly giving these companies money, you're either declaring you just don't care or you're declaring you support what they're doing.

Like I said; if you genuinely can't live without Harry Potter merch, buy it secondhand. Or buy fanmade merch where absolutely none of the money is being funnelled into anti-trans and anti-queer movements and goal corporations.

Here's a scenario for you:

I'm walking down the street and there are two stalls. Both are selling the same thing. One of the stalls has a notice saying all the money raised today will go into funding animal abuse. Dog fights, ect.

The other stall has a sign saying all the money raised today will go into funding the stall owner's ability to keep making products as an alternative to the other store, so you can get the same product without funding the horrific abuse of innocent animals.

Now again, remember: they sell the exact same thing. Exact same price.

So. Do you think I'm a bad person if I choose to buy from the stall that funds animal abuse? Even though I really, really love animals and have the option not even two feet away to make the same purchase knowing it means the other stall gets less money for their horrible goal?

Because that's what Starbucks and JK Rowling and Nestle and Chick-Fil-A do. When you buy their products, you're actually putting money in their pockets which then gives them the ability to fund things like anti-trans movements, conversation camps, child slavery and xenophobic wars.

JK Rowling can't donate 75k to anti-trans movements if she doesn't have 75k to donate.

You're not being "shamed into not supporting bad things." Frankly if you have to be shamed into not supporting those things I think that answers your question anyway. But you are being given facts to make choices with.

And you can't stop people from looking at the choice you made and deciding if that makes you a bad person or not.

Victims can be angry.

Victims can not want help for whatever reason.

Victims can be loud.

Victims can be aggressive.

Victims can be violent.

Victims can be emotional.

Victims can be stubborn.

This Hollywood perpetrated idea that victims can only be meek and silent and pitiful needs to be beaten to death with a hammer.

There is no such thing as the standard or typical victim. There is no such thing as a bad victim. Victimhood is not a one-size fits all.

If you believe victims shouldn't receive or are undeserving of compassion and help because they don't behave the way you think they should, you are no better than the person who made them a victim in the first place.

If you wish they died, or think they deserve what happened to them, or think they should have suffered more/should continue to suffer, you are no better than the person who made them a victim in the first place.

Me: Hey so actually maybe treating children like fragile stupid little things who need to be sheltered from even basic life concepts is doing more harm than good. Antis, bigots and religious nuts: So you wanna fuck them? You wanna fuck the kids? Pedo.

By the way, censorship won't stop at extreme smut and icky kinks and big bad gays.

Because, that's the problem in kicking a few rocks down the mountainside. Once you trigger a landslide, you can't stop it.

Since it is literally a fireable offence to attempt to coerce, force, bribe or bully your patient into adopting your own values and views beyond the scope of law and ethics. Which, most ethics are covered by law regardless.

And on the basis of 'normal' and corrections, again, that depends on scope and how you are defining both.

E.g; if my client is unhealthily fixated on, say, BDSM as a means of self harm, my goal is not to try to 'normalify' them by villainising BDSM and attempting to steer them away from it and toward vanilla sex only.

My goal is to harmonise their relationship with BDSM and steer them towards healthier ways of engaging with it and using it as a means of safe outlet and catharsis over self harm. My goal is to get them to understand how and why they were using BDSM to self-harm and help them fix the root problem.

You just read my post and immediately launched into a bad faith misinterpretation of it that completely disregards the actual purpose of therapy and my post.

You don't become a therapist to force your patients to have the same individual views as you do or the same values or the same beliefs. You don't become a therapist because you have a very specific approach to something that you believe is the Only/Right one and you want to force them to comply.

Also; antis getting into specific professions with the at least partial intent of such activity is not a new thing. I'll have to dig around for the post but one such anti did brag on Tumblr years ago about trying to convert her patients into adopting her views and mindset and she rightfully got ripped to shreds over it.

So I'll repeat. Anyone and especially antis who declare they are going into a profession specifically with the intent of causing harm to or manipulating people into adopting their views need a serious reality check and possibly also a prison cell.

It is unethical. It is dangerous.

Antis who proudly proclaim they're going to become a therapist so they can shut down and manipulate and unethically target all the 'nasty proshippers' make me laugh because they're going to get two months into any sort of qualifying course and be slapped in the face by the reality that therapists are obligated to remain objective and impartial and will lose their license if they're found to be using their position to be unfairly bias or negatively target clients based on their own personal beliefs and values.

"Objectivity helps counsellors avoid personal biases and allows them to focus on the client's needs without imposing their own beliefs or values." - American Counselling Association

"Therapy should feel like an inclusive and safe place for clients. Clients need to feel safe and supported in their work. And while all therapists have inherent biases and personal preferences, it is never appropriate for them to engage in discrimination, racism, sexism, or other forms of prejudice with clients." - Medcircle

You do not get into therapy to correct people. You get into therapy to help them. Therapy is not about the therapist.