Re: It makes sense: the only good PJer is a dead one.

The typical profile of a Victim that associates with MAA's due to a fascination with intergenerational love and sex that she (it's usually a "she") has as a result of being molested is as follows. The woman in question had a bad experience due to the actions of an adult who may not have even been an MAA and instead of studying situational molesters she comes to the conclusion that pedophiles and ephebophiles are the ones doing most of the molesting and she considers all mutually consensual intergenerational sexual activity to be "harmful" and "risky" simply because some adult molested her. She feels that she is supposed to be "fucked up" as a result of being molested so she makes sure that she has a huge chip on her shoulder towards the world and she develops a skewed attitude towards sexuality in general, seeing it as something vile. Such individuals are apt to be suicidal and are determined never to get better or to recover from their emotional problems, instead wearing their pain on their sleeve as sort of a badge of honor. They are truly a Victim rather than simply a victim (with a lower case "v"), because they build a whole social identity around their status as having been victimized. They develop a fascination with MAA's and intergenerational love though they maintain strong anti attitudes simply because they were molested and they equate all sexual interaction between adults and minors as abusive and "not actually consensual" even when both parties insist it was consensual. She will claim that she knew numerous people who were hurt by consensual relationships when in actuality these were most likely people who were forced into therapy (this is where she met them) and who were convinced by the social workers and police that they were a Victim and they then insist that a perfectly consensual relationship was "not actually consensual"...they only thought it was consensual, until the social workers showed them the truth (and we all know the cultural caveats that the social workers stand behind). She ignores the platform of youth liberation and does not believe that young people should have their civil rights, and they totally ignore the fact that the vast majority of genuine abuse that goes on comes from within the family, not by MAA's.

Does this describe Kyota in a nutshell? Because I have met MANY like that during my eight years in this community, and if that was truly what she was like, then she was indeed NOTHING special. Only an anti would see her as "special" and though she pretended to be friends with the MAA community she was, in actuality, no true friend but a political opponent who was "fighting" us and our attempt to gain civil rights for ourselves and the youths we love from the inside rather than outside the community.

On the other hand, I am willing to give Kiota the benefit of the doubt, because those guidelines she allegedly wrote sounded very open-minded and not at all like they were from someone who fit the typical Victim profile that I described up above. On the other hand, I'm not sure if these guidelines were honestly from her, or if she once felt that way but later repudiated those beliefs in favor of an anti stance. I didn't know her personally so I can't say one way or the other, but I trust Henny to give accurate details, so I believe him when he said he had that conversation with her.