Why You Should be Concerned about Prostasia

How this “child protection agency” is a mask for a much darker agenda

Feb 16, 2022

The Prostasia Foundation on its surface looks very nice and welcoming. After all, I know from personal experience that child sexual abuse is something that can affect a child for their entire life, well into adulthood. Who wouldn’t want to explore new ideas and new options to combat this horrific problem before it starts?

By solely reading the “About” page, this is absolutely an organization that needs our support.

Right?

This newfound research into pedophilia has even made it into popular news media outlets, with the USA Today Life Article titled “The Complicated Research Behind Pedophilia”

But scratch the surface a little, and you will find an organization built on junk science whose goals are much darker than they appear. Worse, they are using the same language of diversity and inclusion as the LGBTQ+ community to lull you into a false sense of security.

They believe that pedophilia is a Sexual Orientation

In Prostasia’s interview with Dr. Allyn Walker, he discusses the controversies surrounding his book titled "A Long Dark Shadow: Minor Attracted People and Their Pursuit of Dignity".

Even the term rebranded from “Pedophilia” to “Minor Attracted Person” (or MAPS) appears, to the naked eye, an attempt to label Pedophilia as a sexual orientation, and likewise this was of extreme concern to the LGBTQ+ community and other child sex abuse researchers.

Dr. Walker was asked about this concern, as well as why he uses the term in his book, to which he stated:

I use the term Minor-Attracted Person or MAP in the title and throughout the book for multiple reasons. First of all, because I think it’s important to use terminology for groups that members of that group want others to use for them.

He also states that it was not the MAPS intention to offend the LGBTQ+ community, and that his research does not address the “Sexual orientation question”, stating:

Whether or not attractions to minors are a type of sexual orientation is not the question that can be answered with my particular research. My research touched upon the labels that MAPs use to describe themselves though, and a lot of them have been really conscious about their choice of language, because they don’t want to slander lesbian, gay, and bisexual people.

Later in the interview, he revisits this idea of pedophilia being classified as a sexual orientation, stating:

If we did consider MAPs to have their own…sexual orientation, there would still be a huge difference between MAPs and lesbian, gay, bisexual people. And that difference is that MAPs have a sexual attraction that would result in a lot of harm if they acted on it…. My research study ended up including interviews with 42 minor-attracted people [Pedophiles]. And in those interviews, I asked participants about their experiences with coming to terms with their identity…

So, ‘MAPS’, according to Dr. Walker, is not a sexual orientation. “MAPS” is just an identity that labels an Adult Person who is sexually attracted to Minors.

Yet, I fail to see the difference between the two.

Dr. Walker continues, “Sexuality can be fluid, and there are many MAPs who have a range of attractions to both children and adults.” Once again conflating that “MAPS” is indeed a sexuality and sexual orientation.

However, this isn’t true. Pedophilia, according to the Diagnostic and Statistics Manual of Mental Disorders, “in order for pedophilic disorder to be diagnosed, the following criteria must be met:

Recurrent, intense sexual fantasies, urges, or behaviors involving sexual activity with a prepubescent child (generally age 13 years or younger) for a period of at least 6 months.
These sexual urges have been acted on or have caused significant distress or impairment in social, occupational, or other important areas of functioning.
The person is at least 16 years old, and at least 5 years older than the child in the first category. However, this does not include an individual in late adolescence involved in an ongoing sexual relationship with a 12- or 13-year-old.”

Pedophilia is a paraphilia, meaning that it is a psychological disorder, not a sexual orientation.

Additionally, sexual orientations (such as heterosexuality) are labeled distinctly different from paraphilias because the label affects how an illness is treated, or whether this difference (such as homosexuality being different from heterosexuality) is in fact an illness at all.

Psychologists do not treat homosexuality as an illness (thank God) because it is now recognized that this is simply a variation. The same cannot be said for pedophilia.

They believe that Stigma affects prevention efforts, and that “MAPS” don’t pose a threat to children

So why are these researchers working so hard to relabel pedophilia as “MAPS”? Well, for starters, they believe that the “stigma” negatively affects counseling efforts. Turning again to Prostasia’s interview with Dr. Allyn Walker, he states that stigma can affect the treatment they receive from therapists, stating:

If they end up in therapy with a counselor who mistakenly believes all MAPs have committed an offense or will do so at some point, their therapist might end up making a report against them that they shouldn’t be making.

He further states that in order to help MAPS they need to “[get] those MAPs who want it into some kind of affirming therapy where their provider understands that their attractions don’t make them a threat, and who can help them navigate strategies for non-offending, if it turns out that they need those.”

In another article titled “Stigma makes it more difficult to fight CSA” by Noah Berlatsky, he states

Many pedophiles never offend and never sexually abuse children. In fact, according to David Finkelhor, director of the Crimes Against Children Center at the University of New Hampshire, most people who sexually abuse children are not pedophiles. Instead, he says, most child abusers harm children, “because they don’t have other access to sources of sexual gratification…—or that child may be very readily accessible, so someone who is a member of their family.

In Psychology Today’s article “Pedophilia” they state: “Not all sex offenders who victimize children are pedophiles; only about 40 percent of convicted sex offenders meet the diagnostic criteria for the disorder.”

But the article also admits that there are challenges to the diagnosis, as “People who have this condition rarely seek help voluntarily—counseling and treatment are often the results of a court order.” Additionally, “Pedophilic disorder can be diagnosed in people who are willing to disclose this paraphilia, as well as in people who deny any sexual attraction to children but demonstrate objective evidence of pedophilia. For the condition to be diagnosed, an individual must either act on their sexual urges or experience significant distress or interpersonal difficulty as a result of their urges or fantasies.”

Although the researchers claim that not all child sexual abuse is committed by those who are “sexually attracted to children” is correct based on data, there are serious concerns that the numbers are not as accurate as they should be, due to issues obtaining a diagnosis.

From my own experience, I have observed that pedophiles rarely, if ever, admit to committing the crime, despite being convicted. Additionally, pedophiles are usually not convicted of every crime they do commit, due to a statute of limitations, as well as if a victim is unable to testify at trial.

So, if psychologists are using convictions (or other publicly accessible information) to determine whether someone is a pedophile or not, they are, unfortunately, extremely limited in the amount of information they receive.

They want to Reform the Sex Offender Registry

Throughout the entire website as well as one article titled “The intersection of civil rights and child protection by Guy-Hamilton Smith” they state the following statistic:

“95% Of all sex crimes reported to law enforcement are committed by first-time offenders”

Therefore, they believe that tax dollars spent on the sex offender registry not only violates individuals’ rights, but that the money could be better spent on prevention.

I had major doubts about his claims considering that he himself is listed on the Sex Offender Registry, but I decided to research the topic.

I found an interesting article published by the U.S. Department of Justice. They published a meta-analysis titled “Recidivism of Adult Sexual Offenders” by Roger Przbylski, in July 2015.

In a study by Langan and Colleagues (2003) involving 4,295 child molesters, the rate of recidivism (pedophiles committing another sex offense against a child after release) was 5% after 3 years of their release.

But that number climbs fast and climbs dramatically: In 5 years that number climbs to 23%. In 10 years, that number climbs to 27.8%. In 15 years, that number climbs to 35.4%.

The longest study ever conducted on recidivism rates of pedophiles was done by Prentky and his colleagues, who covered 115 child molesters who were discharged from civil commitment in Massachusetts between 1960 and 1984. The researchers found that after 25 years, the recidivism rate was 52%. However, the Department of Justice cautions that 52% could be due to sampling only those sex offenders who were civilly committed, and not the entire Sex Offender population.

With that being said, the Department of Justice does caution “Relatively low rates of recidivism-particularly sexual recidivism- are reported in studies using follow-up periods shorter than 5 years.”

Once again, statistics matter, and relying solely on convictions and short-lived studies to bolster your argument gives a false impression to the public. This false impression is dangerous, especially if parents are relying on the information you provide to protect their children.

They Want to Sexualize Children

In the article “Three simple steps that can reduce [Child Sexual Abuse]” by Megan Ingerman, she promotes the idea that children need comprehensive sexual education “that includes pleasure, consent, chronophilias, fetishes, etc.”

Under the comprehensive sex education header, Megan writes “Possibly the most obvious public health approach to preventing sexual harms, is comprehensive, intersectional sex education that includes a curriculum on consent, bodily autonomy, pleasure, chronophilias, fetishes, as well as supporting sexual and cultural identity.”

The definition of “Chronophilia” is as follows:

She further writes that sex education should be centered around “Sex Positivity”. Sex positivity, she defines as “the idea that whatever comes naturally to you sexually, is OK so long as you and any partners consent.” She states this is important because it “gives students a much better chance of leading ethical and satisfying sex lives.”

She further suggests that we should begin comprehensive sex education early, stating “current data suggests that sexual interest begins…around the time puberty starts – 13-14 years being about average. So it makes sense to lay the groundwork well before that and to continue reinforcing it well after.”

She writes that this is important for diversity, stating

What is less obvious but still incredibly important, is teaching kids that things like pleasure, fetishes/kinks, chronophilias, and sexual identities and attractions can fall outside straight and binary.

She further writes that:

When we do talk about chronophilias at all, we typically only talk about one of them: minor attraction, and specifically pedophilia (attraction to prepubescent minors). But the fact of the matter is that the best science we have on hand right now is that minor attraction is something you are born with and can’t change. It functions very much like other sexual attractions.

Chronophilia is not a sexual orientation, and quite frankly is not even listed in the DSM-5. Its origins are that of sex “researcher” (and I use that term loosely) John Money, who believed that pedophilia can in fact not be harmful, stating:

My opinion:

In my opinion, the Prostasia’s foundation ideas are not only false, but they are dangerous, and I find their endorsement of John Money to be repulsive.

However, of all their dangerous and perverse ideas, three of the most dangerous ones are: (1) most pedophiles don’t rape children, (2) removing stigma helps pedophiles get treatment, and (3) we must teach children in school comprehensive sex Ed (including of fetishes and pedophilia) in order to prevent Child Abuse.

Most Pedophiles Don’t Rape Children:

We have previously discussed the limitations of diagnosing pedophilia, particularly the fact that pedophilia diagnosis relies on convictions as well as self-admittance of the problem, both of which are hard to obtain.

But from my perspective, after working in Law Enforcement for 3 years, I have learned a lot about Sex Offenders and observed obvious patterns, and I got to tell you:

Take, for example, Serial Rapists: Serial Rapists have a mode of operation (how they commit the rape) and usually a type of person who they target (women, men, fat, skinny, race, ethnicity, age, etc.)

So, the idea that someone who sexually abuses a child doesn’t have a preference for children makes no sense to me on its face. While it’s true that rape and child sexual abuse are about power and control, to claim that there is no sexual element (or preference) for children when someone rapes a child makes no sense.

Rather, what makes more sense is that sexual preferences somehow become intertwined with violence, manipulation, power, control and/or emotional abuse.

Take, for instance, a fetish. A fetish’s definition is:

For most normal people, inanimate objects or clothing are not sex objects. But due to a wiring of the brain, things that are innocuous, even gross to “normal” people somehow become intertwined to take a special sexual meaning to one who has a fetish.

You would assume, for example, that someone who breaks into women’s houses and steals their dirty socks has a “foot fetish” or at the very least, a fetish for dirty socks.

Why would you assume that people who rape children don’t have a sexual preference for children?

Removing stigma from therapists helps MAPS get treatment before they offend

Child rape statistics are extremely clear: 93% of children who are molested are molested by someone they know, and 88% of the time this person is male (see link below)

So obviously if a pedophile (or MAP) is living with children whom they could be attracted to, a therapist would want either the pedophile or the children removed from the home.

This is not to “stigmatize” the individual, this is following correct statistics for the safety of the children. To suggest that a therapist should do otherwise would violate “mandated reporter” laws in many states.

While I agree that it’s important that pedophiles get help before they offend, they should understand that their removal from the home is not a “stigma” rather it’s giving them the best chance they can have to not hurt any children.

Sex Education in Schools

I can agree that learning about things such as trans, gay and lesbian is something that could be beneficial to children, but certainly not before high school.

But it would be a Cold Day in Hell where I could imagine myself allowing a teacher to teach my child about “pleasurable sex”, “fetishes” and “pedophilia”. None of those things have anything to do with safe sex, and in fact attempting to teach “consent” alongside “pedophilia” can only, in my view, lead to problems and confusion, especially at young ages.

As a Catholic (as well as with most religions) the morality surrounding sex is a lot more complex than just “consent and pleasure”, as different religions have different requirements (such as marriage) before the sexual act should take place.

Likewise, I think that it would be best to leave lessons of Morality and Emotions surrounding sex to the parents.

Teaching about Consent will Help Protect Children

I fully agree that we need to teach about consent and that teaching about consent and body autonomy is important to preventing child sexual abuse. However, many parents don’t know how to talk to their children about these complex issues, especially surrounding sex.

There are many books that teach children as young as 3 that if someone in their life is grooming them to report it to a parent, or a trusted adult. (See link below)

But the number one piece of advice I can give is to listen to your children. If your child expresses that they are uncomfortable around an adult or other child, ask them why that is, and ask follow-up questions. Make sure you let them know that you love them unconditionally and will always be there for them, no matter what.