How I would police VirPed

I am an anti-pedophile informant, meaning clinical informational pedophile. I am on your side, Virtuous Pedophiles, meaning the group itself and not every single member. I am not anti-pedophile, but anti-abuse period, meaning all abuse, meaning all abuse perceived by the individual.

Many at VirPed are worried about me retaliating against them because it has happened. Anti-contact pedophiles have disclosed to our community, and then hated other pedophiles, picking apart every detail of their past. I have found attraction to pedophiles, namely female adolescent ones as an ideal, but that only is a benefit on the victim end of things. 

I presume all pedophiles who identify at all, even to themselves, to be victims of abuse of some sort, either parental and/or societal, and I tend to presume both in one person, layer upon layer. Some pedophiles abuse children or survivors with their victimhood, as pedophilic trauma is ego-syntonic in the sense that anger expressed at one's abuser feels good, even while feeling trapped or scared. Pedophiles are the most likely to use their traumas against others...but are much more likely to use it against themselves.

I see the average pedophile as appearing normal, but depressed, quiet, introverted, with a technical personality, but then when they are honest about their attractions, they might make suicide threats or else threats to harm themselves, particularly when cornered due to the admission and not listened to. 

It says in John 7:24 KJV:

Judge not according to the appearance, but judge righteous judgment.

The Greek root word translated both "judge" and "judgment" is κρινο (Latin: krinó) and refers to circular courtroom reasoning, meaning the presumption of innocence, beyond a reasonable doubt, all around the earth, presuming everything innocent and none guilty until proven otherwise. Thus, across the board, every single tile, meaning account, at VirPed, is presumed innocent until it tells me otherwise beyond a reasonable doubt. Same with every pedophile that discloses to me. 

My policy starts with pro-social concern, presuming the pedophile to be on the victim side of things when disclosing to me. I presume them to be asking for support of some kind, that I may or may not be able to provide (and may send them to other agencies that favor their needs). I may give advice as to how to treat children with better respect, worded towards someone with a religious "abuse" trauma, and if they take it or take it after bouncing ("think about my reasons why sex with children is wrong"), all is good. If they refuse to take advice as to why sex with children is wrong, and say certain "sexual rights" exist, they are flamed out and shunned immediately, and shall not exist within the periphery of my perception. This means not just any defense, to be fair, but "rights" entitlement, which is how I would deal with any parent. Thus, equal responsibilities. Once I shun a pedophile, they are on their own, and have no right to plagiarize my self-diagnosis as a medical excuse. I am definitely willing to char myself to accentuate entitlement...I have never had to upbraid a pedophile, and I hope I never do.

A child is the key into an abusive situation, meaning the child's word unadulterated and not geared from a source or to a source. Every child's testimony is deemed to be 100% accurate, spotless, and with no flaws, and the adult guilty merely due to the fact that the child must have been afraid of the adult, with said adult imposing said menaces on the child. Pro-social fishpond. Pro-social report. Even if you are sorry, you should be willing to do time if the child and/or her family want that. Child testimony is the most accurate of any testimony in the legal system, as children's minds can see the world clearly. Sometimes, however, a child's view can be made murky by adult influences such as gaslighting, which I have seen harm the reputation of at least one pedophile.

I would not expect a description of abuse ever at VirPed, but if they did describe it, I'd expect the admins to remove the post, and then remove the account, and I'd be the one to flip the switch with the VP administration. Usually, I shun pedophiles for pro-spanking views, by way of pro-social disappearance, meaning they cease to exist, because I cease to be around my abuser, which they are despite being a pedophile, not because you are.

Children's rights wasn't supposed to be about hating pedophiles, anyway. It was supposed to be about giving children their rights, assuming we ALL hate children in some way, in some form. But, in this country, we blame one group of people for it all - pedophiles. No, ALL adults are responsible, merely for their existence as adults in relation to children. No adult truly means well.

We hate parents here more than anyone else in the galaxy. Let the sexually entitled parents burn at the stake after 40 lashes, and then burn once more in eternal Hell-fire. But, better yet, lock them up in prison for life, since putting a cap in their head for not admitting to being a pedophile and instead abusing a child, since the latter punishment is too humane. A pedophile is more likely to be a victim of abuse than a perpetrator, yet the misuse of medical terminology remains.