racyturtle

here for youth liberation & justice for MAPs

my core beliefs summarized as:
🧠: anti-censorship, anti-moralism, anti-western mainstream
❤️: anarchism, communism, agonistic egalitarianism
🧘: progressivism, spirituality, mindful life-affirmation

Public Key

npub1pdk7krr6pxag4r2mvsmmyu7ydad52ssxw46fq23gk5eq7ppgps3sl2sq6l

NIP-05 Address

racyturtle@mapsupport-de.mostr.pub

Profile Code

nprofile1qqsqkm0tp3aqnw5234dkgdajw0zx7k69ggr82ays9g5t2vs0qs5qcgcpz3mhxue69uhhyetvv9ujuerpd46hxtnfduqs6amnwvaz7tmwdaejumr0dsdx6hn2

Publishing to

relay.damus.io

nos.lol

Author Public Key

npub1pdk7krr6pxag4r2mvsmmyu7ydad52ssxw46fq23gk5eq7ppgps3sl2sq6l

Show more details

Last Notes

2026-07-17 12:28:18 UTC

- reply

@nprofile…9f0z Can you explain why "pediarchy" is an adult centric term that shows how adults don't like young people?

2026-07-16 20:41:52 UTC

The concept of the patriarchy should be reinterpreted in a youthlib way, because, ultimately, parental power over one's own children is the central issue in this matter.
The patriarchy is a matter of property and inheritance, not a matter of genders. This is why, to put it bluntly, the oppression of women is a by-product and of secondary importance, while the child is of central importance for passing on the property and inheritance. And that cannot happen without shaping, dominating, and controlling the child.
This is also why the concept of a matriarchy can theoretically exist, but never the concept of a "pediarchy". The central mechanism of oppression is the one exercised against children.

2026-07-01 19:30:07 UTC

Hot take, but I think therapy is useless or even harmful for most people, partly because most therapists have absolutely no competence in their field which should be common knowledge among MAPs, given that the vast majority of therapists would refuse to work with MAPs at all.

2026-06-27 19:20:02 UTC

they talk about "children's rights", but what they mean:
- less rights for more "security"
- more extensive parental control rights
- positive discrimination
- stricter integration into the system
- age segregation

2026-06-27 18:52:19 UTC

- reply

@nprofile…9f0z youth is too imprecise if you want to refer to the strict age limit for the age of majority. I like YAP more than MAP, but it's still imprecise.

2026-06-26 20:23:22 UTC

I think I will now use "U18" (or just people under 18) to refer to minors/underage persons, because I really don't like to use discriminatory language for those I care for.
I don't expect others to do the same, but it would be nice if more people would question what actually lies behind those terms.

2026-06-24 23:07:16 UTC

I've been so angry lately. I'm so mad. This world is full of shit and there is nothing to do about it. I'm trying to ignore it and live with it, at least that's the only thing left to do in this situation, but it's not possible, because the world won't ignore you. It punches you in the face every single day, every hour, every minute, every second... And it fucking hurts. The pain is unbearable. I hate society. All of it. Everyone is so hypocritical and embodies the ultimate double standard, just to show how great they are. Yet they are nothing more than egocentric, hateful and ignorant creatures. Maybe I'm like that too after all, so fuck me too. The world could blow up tomorrow and I wouldn't care. In fact, I would celebrate it. No more bullshit on planet earth going on. Maybe some other extraterrestrial life will figure it out without becoming such a shitty species like humans. Oh yeah, we invented so many "great things" and achieved so much "progress", but it's all facade for the fact that we remain the same stupid apes that took a wrong turn in their evolution. A miserable disgrace to the cosmic lottery of the creation of "intelligent" life. I know that complaining doesn't help, but why the fuck should I not be mad. What's the point? To become a "better person"? Fuck this shit. I'm done.

2026-06-24 02:32:53 UTC

When a significant portion of the media (including social media) is on your side, you are anything but an "activist" and you are certainly not drawing attention to any "problem".

2026-06-16 16:31:46 UTC

- reply

@nprofile…9f0z I say it's wrong to prioritize it above anything else, because harm is inevitable in life. Only death can eliminate all harm. There are other more important values than harm reduction.

2026-06-15 13:15:18 UTC

youth liberation runs the risk of falling into the same twisted territory as feminism: the prioritization of "protection" against harm over real emancipation.
it's important to dismantle the dogmatic narrative of "child protection" rather than appealing to it with the supposedly "correct" narratives.

2026-06-12 07:52:24 UTC

"no one talks about the Epstein files anymore, the media want to cover it up 😡😡"
bro, EVERY person on this damn planet already knows about those shitty meaningless documents, even my senile grandfather talked about it ffs, I hate the distorted perception of people

2026-06-08 19:09:52 UTC

They call themselves "anarchists", but want to make sure the local community somewhere beyond Timbuktu strictly adheres to the age of consent of 18 under all circumstances since this was definitively decided by the central global committee of anarchists. Silly sheep.

2026-06-07 21:21:56 UTC

- reply

@nprofile…9f0z I meant it in a positive way since left and right are useless concepts. If anything, they are better educated in this matter.

2026-06-07 19:45:05 UTC

- reply

@nprofile…9f0z you mean they don't exist in their traditional sense? since I'd say it's rather the opposite that most countries outside of the west don't even know what "left" or "right" means.

2026-06-07 17:51:49 UTC

A simple syllogism for understanding today's "politics":
The resistance is not moralistic.
Leftists are moralists.
Right-wingers are moralists.
Therefore, leftists and right-wingers are not the resistance.

2026-06-03 17:44:44 UTC

The average parent is actually no different in their approach to someone who completely isolates their children from the outside world in order to "protect" them from any "dangers" (e.g. "Genie", the feral child). The only difference lies in the intensity of the isolation, because the isolation itself is a fundemantal part of traditional parenting since it makes it easier to control and shape the child at one's own pleasure.
- Children are held hostage in their parents' home, as they are permitted to leave it only temporarily and with explicit permission.
- Children are subject to complete surveillance in their home and sometimes even outside of it.
- Children are unable to develop intellectually on their own, as they receive only the education and information approved by the parents (ideally).
- Children have little say in their own life decisions, and even when they do, they must first be approved by the parents.
- Children are socially isolated from the outside world, as they are mostly not able to befriend anyone who is older than them (other family members don't count). Most relationships with adults are kept formal and institutional, such that the child always remains in a subordinate position.

2026-06-03 16:50:42 UTC

- reply

@nprofile…9f0z you are somehow replying to all my posts with something that's mostly unrelated to the specific post and just negative without any reason, I don't know what you want to hear from me

2026-06-02 16:19:49 UTC

- reply

@nprofile…9f0z I meant both, people also love other children when they're children themselves, but lose the ability to love children when they're older

2026-06-02 16:17:07 UTC

- reply

@nprofile…9f0z why are you so mean bro, this post was literally about emphasizing love above sexual attraction

2026-06-01 15:30:26 UTC

“Be yourself” they preach this month–yet only in the way *they* want to see you as yourself, not in the truthful way that lands you in prison, exactly as happened to them decades ago.

2026-05-31 15:51:52 UTC

Disgust-based stigmatization is so cheap and silly, but at the same time so powerful.
Somehow, they made it possible that an intolerant initial reaction to something they barely even consider in their daily lives ends up setting entire moral guidelines and suppressing whole groups of people from living their lives as they wish.
What a joke.

2026-05-31 14:47:25 UTC

I love kids and I love loving kids.
And I also love the love of loving kids.

2026-05-30 18:38:43 UTC

In this story, I'd rather be the villain than the victim.

2026-05-30 18:08:08 UTC

Fact is that there are only two ways for MAPs to gain acceptance:
1. Become part of feminism
2. Get rid of the cultural dominance of feminism
And sadly, I feel like there is only one realistic option to consider.

2026-05-25 17:39:42 UTC

there should be a school where the teachers are children, and where adults learn how to have fun in life again without being so narrow-minded and ego-centered

2026-05-07 19:50:28 UTC

- reply

@nprofile…9f0z I have no interest in purging anyone. If anything, I want to give only love.
Also you kinda made an ageist claim that young people have no understanding of the world. Just because they are oppressed doesn't mean they are dumb. Their reaction, making fun of this topic, is way more healthier and meaningful than the hysteria that is fueled by adults especially.

2026-05-07 19:13:14 UTC

- reply

@nprofile…9f0z The only thing I see is how young people use Epstein as a meme, because they like to make fun of this topic.
How did my post represent harmful "patriarchal views"? Because I dismiss the satanic ritual narratives?

2026-05-07 19:01:58 UTC

- reply

@nprofile…9f0z Where did I defend Epstein?

2026-05-07 19:01:30 UTC

- reply

@nprofile…9f0z Where did I defend Epstein?

2026-05-07 16:57:06 UTC

I love how it's commonly agreed now that "the Epstein files are the biggest scandal of the 21th century".
So you either believe in all of this nonsensical satanic ritual crap which is apparently only the tip of the pedo elite iceberg that reveals how the whole world is controlled to serve Satan. All based on a few strange uninformative documents released by the same president who was apparently even involved in all of this (without ever asking why he would release it).
Or you say that in the past few decades the world has seen nothing worse, nothing more shocking and unexpected, than rich people being able to grope some girls, some of whom are minors, because they have... the money to do it.
Sex exceptionalism at its finest.

2026-05-06 16:31:31 UTC

The absurdity of the term "pedocriminal":
1. A person who slaughtered multiple children after torturing them but who might also have touched them at their genitals at one point (not confirmed)
2. A person who's caught having a loving relationship with a child
3. A person who physically abuses their own children for many years, generally treating them like shit, but who also creates hurtcore CP with their children to share it online (they are not even attracted to children themselves)
4. A person who shares fictional lolicon and AI content online
According to Germany, all these individuals would be labeled as "pedocriminals".

2026-05-05 21:15:16 UTC

There will never be free love under capitalism & patriarchy.
As long as there are groups of people who are bound to different economic conditions, "love" will primarily exist to secure capital and inheritance. In this system, economic dependencies are supposed to create bonds, not interpersonal connections.
The case of MAPs/AAMs is a good example to show how love is systemically denied as such relationships would directly attack the economic framework of this system. Minors are meant to be economically dependent on their parents (or legal guardians), because they can be better controlled this way.
What would happen if children are no longer captivated and subordinate inside their nuclear family order, but can choose to live differently in a relationship of equals? They become subversive elements of this system, because they naturally recognize the crap that the system is trying to indoctrinate them with.
When I say that there is no free love under capitalism & patriarchy, it's not because I reject "power dynamics" caused by economic differences. It's simply because the systemic framework doesn't allow certain forms of love to exist.

2026-05-02 16:22:42 UTC

I'm not exclusive and I wouldn't even say that my sexual attraction to little girls is that much stronger than to women, but I have to say that my love for little girls is so much more vivid and intense than for women.
It's such indescribable emotions I have when I'm confronted with little girls in any way. Whenever I see or even think of them, I simply feel *fulfilled*. And it doesn't even matter if they are just fictional lolis. It's really like the most beautiful feeling I can feel.
But It is all the more horrifying to imagine that there are people out there who label these feelings as wrong, pathological and dangerous. I wish they could feel the same feelings, at least for a moment, just to see whether they'll continue to believe in these labels or not.

2026-04-30 06:59:39 UTC

- reply

@nprofile…9f0z It's not "neutrality", it's just not believing in tribalism, group dynamics and herd mentality. No you don't have to pick a side and I even think that this behavior is one of the biggest problems that humanity faces.
As I said, being progressive has nothing to do with being woke. Most "progressives" nowadays are simply woke, but not progressive.
progressive means progress, empowerment and emancipation.
woke means stagnation, victimization and oppression.

2026-04-29 19:32:29 UTC

- reply

@nprofile…9f0z
Well, woke culture is definitely responsible for it, because woke culture is nothing but radically affirming the status quo in the facade of progressivism. Pedo hysteria is part of that status quo. The misconception is that people don't understand that right-wingers often also take part in woke culture.
But generally I'm not scared to use words that right-wingers use as I'm also using ideas that left-wingers claim for them. I have no intent to represent the left nor the right (both have no meaning anyway), so I have the freedom to use words and concepts I simply think to be true. Identifying woke as a problem is indeed a concept that's true, even if it's associated with right-wingers.

2026-04-29 14:35:03 UTC

- reply

@nprofile…9f0z Nietzsche would have never affirmed the eugenical views of Nazis. "The extermination of unworthy life" is basically everything Nietzsche argues against.
Wokeism has no truth, only resentment and system-affirmation. Wokeism is responsible for the peak in pedo hysteria now.

2026-04-29 02:11:57 UTC

What Wokeism has done to progressive ideas is best compared to what the Nazis did to Nietzsche.
A twisted, reinterpreted version that completely misses the point and permanently destroys the reputation of the original.

2026-04-23 16:51:25 UTC

- reply

@nprofile…9f0z I actually agree with some of the points you make here, but I still stand by what I say. I personally don't think seriously demonizing any group of people (other than for exaggerated or humorous depictions) is helpful for society, no matter in what position they are. We are all victims of our circumstances, even if these circumstances seem to be "privileges".
And I think it's actually often the opposite that it's okay for people if a young person gets in trouble for example by committing a crime or if they just "take the wrong path in life", and it's all because they are "just a child". Somehow it's different for adults where everyone is responsible for themselves and their past doesn't matter. And I don't support such kind of positive discrimination as it still conveys ageist/adultist messages.
Like I said it's better to strive for a better world by enabling people, not by trying to disable others, because I think the latter will always backfire. It's the same reason why I don't support (or at least I don't care) for "wealth taxes" for billionaires, as it would change nothing and probably make them even more greedy and treacherous to not give up their wealth and power.

2026-04-23 12:40:37 UTC

The concept of growing up while losing interest in those you were attracted to (other children) is still absurd to me.

2026-04-23 12:17:22 UTC

- reply

@nprofile…9f0z yes I agree MAPs should become brave about all the topics that concern youth and also themselves. speak out online and irl whenever they can, and also make youth brave too.
however I don't support the idea of shaming others and generally spreading more hate into the world. I don't think it will work, nor do I think it's something desirable.
I believe in empowerment as in enabling people to emancipate themselves and obtain competencies that will lift them from their inferior position. I don't think empowerment works by trying to oppress the oppressors.

2026-04-23 04:54:47 UTC

the problem is NOT that there are people who speak without being sufficiently informed or educated.
the problem is that there are honest, creative and intelligent people with unique thoughts who don't speak because they constantly fear of being wrong.
you don't cultivate open-minded and critically thinking people by culturally suppressing the expression of thoughts. you will achieve the opposite.
in a culture in which mistakes count more than the contribution itself, those who are aware about themselves and their surroundings won't dare to risk their own standing. they will play it safe and hold back instead.
the result is that we only have people in public who parrot the same few narratives over and over again, while those who don't care about any rules will continue expressing themselves regardless of how dumb it is.
the MAP analogy for this would be the age of consent. it's officially installed to prevent abuse. however in reality it won't stop abusers from acting, it will only rob those of their happiness who have no intention of abusing.
new ideas and thoughts don't arise from excessive knowledge in a particular subject. they arise from courage and creativity, with the level of knowledge merely serving as a catalyst, but not as a requirement, for this process.

2026-04-23 00:13:19 UTC

I feel like digital revolution is more important and currently much more realistic than any "physical revolution".
Information should be able to reach all people without hindrance. Controlling the information flow is an incredibly powerful tool. MAPs should know that especially.
Therefore: Free the internet. Make the internet anarchic again. Then we can see what should happen next.

2026-04-22 01:45:19 UTC

- reply

@nprofile…9f0z what do you mean by youth supremacists exactly?

2026-04-21 16:13:09 UTC

Being pro-contact is meaningless if you believe in narratives that facilitate the oppression of youth
Being anti-contact is meaningless if you believe in narratives that facilitate the abuse of youth

2026-04-11 21:34:16 UTC

- reply

@nprofile…5vcd I'm feeling honored and aroused.

2026-03-29 21:57:33 UTC

- reply

@nprofile…9f0z Yeah I think I understand your problem better, but it's just that I don't affirm some of the narratives you are referring to.
Vilifying and dehumanizing men as purely predatory subjects is part of the problem. Questionable behavior exists definitely, but what is made out of it doesn't differ from any other scapegoat method in order to gain political capital. That's why I also reject modern feminism, since it became nothing but a tool for power disguised as progressivism. The narrative of the predatory man is already cultural mainstream in the west, so it's not like some "taboo topic" that no one speaks about. It's rather a helpful tool for certain interest groups to implement repressive measures.
I just don't see how expressing one's own sexual interests, let it be by making blunt sexual comments, is automatically objectifying and reducing a person to solely their body. You can see someone as a person while also expressing your feelings in a way people find "disrespectful" (which is also culturally dependent btw). People often assume this can't be the case, *because* of sex exceptionalism since it is seen as some mythical topic that one can only approach in the "ritually correct manner".
We like to say that we should operate self-control which is technically true, but it's not the same as self-suppression that's mostly demanded from people. The suppression of one's own feelings can only backfire as we've seen it in many other examples. Also, modern culture tends to increasingly shift the border of what is considered to be "predatory" which leads to even more suppression. And what we see is not less objectification, but rather more of it since people can't live out their feelings in a human way, but come to the point where they let it out uncontrolled.
Also why should we hold onto resentment and shame people for doing certain things in hope for them not doing it anymore, even going so far as excluding them from society? They don't become better people by this method, it's rather the opposite. They will just feel oppressed and isolated, so they tend towards antisocial behavior (which I can't even blame tbh).
Of course, I generally agree that one should see a person for everything that defines them, rather than using them for their own needs. But the problem why people don't do is, is not because of men or sexualized culture, but because our system does everything to create this kind of behavior. Everything becomes a commodity, real relationships don't matter. It's not "sex" that's the problem, it's the political, cultural and economic construct we live in. Capitalism and patriarchy are definitely part of it, but I don't define patriarchy as the same as modern feminists do, reducing it to a plain "men reign over women" type of narrative. It's way more complex than that. For example, patriarchy also directly includes the oppression of children (even though it's not exclusive to it since matriarchy faces the same issue)

2026-03-28 13:53:51 UTC

- reply

@nprofile…9f0z I talk about their potential, not about their current forms. I believe people can change, so I don't try to vilify them. There are also way more problems with gooners than just what you have listed now.

2026-03-28 13:51:36 UTC

- reply

@nprofile…9f0z I never was.
I was always left-leaning and then radicalized to a commie, but only lately I came to realization that it's all the same dogmatic herd mentality crap. Leftists will never understand youth or MAP issues, just like right-wingers.

2026-03-28 13:46:45 UTC

- reply

@nprofile…9f0z You seem to miss my notion that I don't equate sexualization with objectification. No one deserves to be objectified, but simply expressing one's own interests or commenting on others in a sexual way does not objectify the counterpart.
If you compliment someone for their cooking skills very often, because you happen to regularly eat their dishes, do you objectify them and only see them for their food? I don't think so, at least in most cases. Why is this thinking applied to sex then?
Sure there are significantly more cases of "sexual objectification" than "cooking objectification", but it doesn't change the weighting of the evaluation criteria. One is not automatically worse than the other.
I honestly see sex exceptionalism, sex-negative culture and victim culture speaking here. All of these lead to today's "sex offender" culture in which every minor act is potentially seen as sexual violence which is simultaneously seen as the worst offense possible. This is by design and it's also the reason why firstly youth sexuality is so taboo and secondly why MAPs are demonized.
I would always encourage resilience and self-emancipation in order to defend oneself from objectification. I don't affirm resentment towards other people as a viable defense mechanism since it only encourages the same victim mentality that keeps people weak. I want people, especially youth, to be strong and not weak.

2026-03-27 22:12:49 UTC

- reply

@nprofile…9f0z I don't equate objectification with sexualization, I also don't like the latter term anyway since in my view you can't sexualize something that is inherently sexual (as every living being is). So I don't feel like it's fair to say that MAPs automatically don't care for youth if they make sexual comments or something.
I agree though that capitalism and patriarchy must be abolished for full youth liberation, as otherwise it would remain to be oppression under disguise.

2026-03-27 14:51:24 UTC

"To truly protect children, we must give parents back more responsibility and rights in raising their children."
I love how self-proclaimed "critical thinkers" always come to this conclusion regarding digital surveillance under the guise of child protection. They never think one step further, as they only care about preserving their own anonymity instead of really questioning narratives.
No, you can't expect parents to operate totalitarian surveillance on their children, that's exactly why these government measures are being introduced in the first place.
Never do they question the "protection" itself, and never do they consider one simple concept that would solve not only their own problems but also those of many others: youth liberation.

2026-03-25 16:41:16 UTC

I see centralization as one of the main problems for MAPs and youth in two different ways.
1. I don't believe in a centralized MAP or youthlib organization that's able to achieve meaningful progress. There is just no political or economic value for such an organization to exist within this system, apart from the fact that it would lack a technocratic foundation (which the system generally fetishizes) on which it can rely. That's why every attempt to grow as an organization would inevitably fail due to lack of resources and push-back from the masses.
2. Any attempt of youth liberation (especially the abolition of AoC laws) will fail due to the nature of centralized nation states, because their entire existence relies on the control and oppression of youth. This matter can also be expanded on the nuclear family (which the nation state heavily relies on), as its micro-centralized order is responsible for children to obey in the first place, because they are not given any option to abandon their family in order to liberate themselves.
That's why I see decentralized resistance (which shouldn't be confused with the liberal kind of decentralized protest that has no real effects on any political matter) as well as a decentralized society as the main solutions for MAP and youth issues.

2026-03-23 15:46:15 UTC

I begin to see gooners as the real revolutionary potential for MAPs and other radqueers.
The "left" is a trap for all who want justice in the world.
The "right" is a trap for all who want justice in the world, but see through the trap of the left.
The "alternative freethinkers" are a trap for all who want justice in the world and who see both through the traps of the left and the right.
All of them are united by their immense hatred for MAPs, because ultimately they are all not ready to question the decisive narratives in the world.
Only gooners aren't ashamed to throw all their preconceived notions overboard and accept completely new perspectives on certain social issues.