Ultrablue Landscape

but , and this is rhetorical , why ? with so many tools of communication and language and advancements in human rights and education about oppression online , are people still so aggressive towards the idea of maybe taking the time to listen to nuanced conversations about the word pedophile ? (a person who experiences attraction towards children . someone who harms children is just called a child abuser) we know , its use as a word has devastated many communities , it has been used as a tool to destroy many lives ... and so , we also know that the danger is having a word that can bring on the image of the most sinful crime , and the danger is in oppressors using this perfect sinful label to point it at innocent oppressed peoples to ruin their lives . why can we not be receptive to the idea that this harms pedophiles too ? the idea (and truth) that not every pedophile is an offender or even dangerous in any capacity, just as not every gay or trans or racialized person accused of it as a tactic of violence is guilty ? can we really not even sit down and listen to the very real and valid points people are trying to share ?

the truth , whether u personally are comfortable with it or not* , is that pedophiles exist . maybe it's even innate (would that be so bad ?) , they are still people who have done nothing but reach out for understanding . if u want to criticize child abuse then just do that but to act as if they are more inclined to act on thoughts to harm children is nonsense and I know that most people trying to talk ab this know that too , deep down , because y'all are defending moral ocd havers with "thought crimes aren't real" !! fathers , preachers , teachers , cops , doctors , employers , I can think of a lot of traits that make people more prone to abusing kids . these are positions of power , not orientation. not every Greek aristocrat who abused young boys were gay because we Know it was about power , why can this not apply here ?

woaw i totally forgot to post this here whoops !!