Nepiophiles, a subset of MAPs, are people attracted to babies and toddlers. Not only do these people face discrimination from the general public; they are also often looked down on by those attracted to older children and adolescents. To me, as a pedohebephile attracted to 8-14 year-old boys, this situation is intolerably hypocritical. As with any other sexual orientation, nepiophiles are wired to like who they like, and they no doubt mean well toward those whom they find attractive. In this article, I will interview two people attracted to this age group, illustrating how incredibly normal and human they are.

The interview

I performed a short text-based interview with two people. Person A is attracted to people aged 0-3 years old. Person B is attracted to people aged from 3 years old to early adolescence; he might not technically qualify as a nepiophile, but was eager to share his feelings on attraction to toddlers.

Unlike the 2024 Mu survey, which was essentially a study, this is intended as a casual advocacy article to support an underrepresented portion of the MAP community. It covers the opinions of two people only, in addition to my personal thoughts, but I feel the insights are nonetheless valuable. Let's now take a look at the questions and their answers.

Question 1: Can you describe your physical and emotional attraction to infants and toddlers?

Person A:

I feel is basically the same way that adults are attracted to other adults. When being with a baby or toddler I feel at warm home like being with I'm meant to be. I've also felt shy while me heart flutters when falling in love with some of them through my life. Psychically when seeing them, the way their bodies are, the little size, the shape, the way they move is what draws me towards them and having the desire to kiss them, touch them, etc. Emotionally the way they act, how they are curious to try new things without any misconceptions, the way they express emotions with simple gestures not needing complex terms and affections directly without wondering what is "socially acceptable" makes me feel a deep emotional connection unlike I don't have with most of older people. Both of those points then makes me want to spend time with them doing what they like to do, make them happy, have psychical and or sexual interactions with them, hug them, hold them, hold their little hands, take care of them, protect them when need, and help them with anything they'd need help with.

Person B:

About my emotional attraction: I just enjoy seeing toddlers having fun, being a bit wild (like getting messy and doing gross stuff) I think that kind of behavior is really cute and I feel that I want to play (also in a non-sexual way) and give them love and support as much as they allow me to, I also have some fantasies about comforting children when they feel sad or are having a tantrum

About my sexual attraction: I personally feel sex as another way to show love and affection, When I see a toddler acting cute (to my personal standards about it) I feel my chest getting warm and I get pretty nervous but is a really pleasurable feeling that no outlet like drawings can fullfill.

This is something that any MAP can relate to. As I discussed in previous articles, pedophiles and hebephiles have an extreme desire to mentor young people, and typically find their idiosyncrasies very charming. Respondents' talk of comforting children and protecting them also reflects the drive that good heterosexual men have toward women; the one that leads them to carry the heavy object for the lady. The two people here do not deny that their feelings have a sexual component, but it's clear that such feelings are only a part of the attraction.

Question 2: Do you have any personal theories on what made you attracted to such a young age group?

Person A:

I believe it has always been in me. Since i was below 8 years old I always felt curiosity when adults were talking about taking care of the babies, when I saw briefly where I was in the babies or toddlers felt deep emotions I couldn't recognize at the moment as they were confusing and really didn't know how to express those because I didn't know that romantic or psychical/sexual attraction was even possible toward them. I did understood about more common relationships but this felt different still more relatable to me. But was sure I wanted to interact with them. So when I turned 8, when I was around 8-9 years old, got the opportunity to be in a place where there were preschool children and almost magically got into a close friendship with an around 3 years old girl. Felt that as the best experience until then and I could relate to her more than had with anyone else before, the little body size she had and the shameless and open way she acted was very attractive to me. For brief time she was my only friend and while growing I did not have any attraction to my peers but always though not with close interactions due feeling wary as my peers were all expressing attraction to peers or a little younger people, I desired to interact with girls that were infants or toddlers.

Person B:

Honestly I think I was born this way, I remember feeling attracted to toddlers since I was one too but due to the lack of sex education I didn't know what these feelings where and I confused them with needing to pee (a fact that shaped my kinks since then)

Both people here describe having been attracted to infants or toddlers since they were children themselves, albeit not really 'understanding', no doubt due to the pathetic state of sex education in schools across the world. It reminds me somewhat of Mu's survey (linked above), where a lot of homosexual pedophiles such as myself thought they were simply 'gay' before realizing that it was a bit more complicated. In a utopian world, I'd like to see MAPness being taught more in schools, although that feels very much like a pipe dream while education boards in many countries are still fighting about whether or not to teach students about homosexuality and trans issues.

Question 3: Absent of public disgust, what do you think nepiophiles could offer to society?

Person A:

I firmly believe that people with attraction to each age group could feel stronger desire to protect and help the people they are attracted to. The same way nepiophiles could. Nepiophiles could be good to or help to take care of and support babies or toddlers. Being able to feel a deeper connection makes easier for us to understand them and picture the best way to handle situations while still making an enjoyable experience for both.

Person B:

I think nepios (and MAPs as whole) can be great friends of children and support them by giving them an adult POV about their problems without the conflict of being an authority to them and expanding the social circle of children (that in recent times has been really limited due to age segregation)

I argued in a recent article that all responsible MAPs need to work with children. We are really great at relating to them. I think it's in part a natural affinity, and in part that our sexual attraction represents a secondary motivation. However, that secondary motivation should not be interpreted as terribly cynically as it is by the wider public. Everyone likes being around people they find beautiful, even if a sexual relationship is off the table.

Question 4: What are some ways that society increases the risk of harm, perhaps from nepiophiles who are struggling with self-control?

Person A:

When a nepiophile needs to hide their attraction because of how people react without even caring to analyze and understand our feelings or if someone decides to disclose their feelings and people react with disgust or fear of the hypothetical actions that could be done, it can increase the risk of nepiophiles acting towards babies or toddlers without taking time to care about how they feel due the feeling that the feeling one has not decided to have are wrong. If even the simple attraction without the action can't be expressed it feels like a cage that can make us act in any way just to break free without pre-analyzing what could be hurtful.

Person B:

I think social stigma about friendships between adults and children (and also older children between younger ones) and criminalization of AMSC increases the risk of nepios (and MAPs as a whole) harming children as the current society makes impossible for them to meet any kid in a normal environment which pushes some of them (especially those with self-control problems) to try to meet them when the parents are not around, creating a situation where both MAP and kid feel uncomfortable for obvious reasons and fuels the potential child's fear of strangers

Also stigma pushes MAPs to ask their YFs to keep their relationship a secret, which causes stress to the kid and facilitates situations of real abuse, stigma also pushes MAPs to self-identify as abusers which can lead to some of them really acting as such as that's what they think they are.

In contrast, in a free stigma and legal environment MAPs and parents know each other and both support the child, this could also makes childcare cheaper and safer as the kid probably would have a MAP adult friend which the parents already knew and could take care of babysitting the kid

These responses may well sound shocking and terrifying. And honestly, they really should. But the point is not that nepiophiles or other subsets of the MAP community are sex-crazed sociopaths. As I discussed in my essay and clarification on The Push, relentlessly bullying anyone and criminalizing all avenues of release (including harmless ones, like cartoons) will lead to some pretty horrifying outcomes. So while nepiophiles and other MAPs are not inherently dangerous, politicians and their supporters are certainly doing their best to make monsters out of decent people. The public should be incredibly afraid of what they are creating.

Question 5: For some reason, most people assume nepiophiles want to horrifically assault a screaming baby. Obviously, that is ridiculous. What is the reality?

Person A:

I gotta recognize that there are people I've seen like that, the issue is when that is taken as a generalization for all. I personally and other nepiophiles I've met, when seeing a screaming baby going through a bad situation, would feel empathy, sadness and the desire to help them to feel better. Many of us want our interactions with them to happen while they feel happy and comfortable.

Person B:

That's just a myth, in fact most nepios (and MAPs as a whole) are attracted emotionally to the kid which makes us want to protect our YFs and ensure their well-being, the psychological profile of someone who wants to abuse a baby and a nepio MAP is absolutely different as some studies have proven.

There exist terrible people representing every sexual orientation, and Person A concedes that this is no different in the case of nepiophiles. Obviously, the thought of a morally bankrupt nepiophile brings up a horrific mental image. However, as both respondents explain, the monsters are very much a minority. People with nepiophilic feelings are no more 'baby rapists' than straight men are rapists of women. Detractors will say "but most straight men fuck women!", without considering the many reasons why a nepiophile is highly unlikely to do the same with an infant.

Question 6: Speaking hypothetically, are there any circumstances in which presently criminalized behavior might be inherently non-harmful?

Person A:

Maybe not just criminalized, also censored and treated as a criminal act, as there are things are not currently illegal but can't be done or expressed publicly without people reacting to it and taking actions as if it was a criminal act.

Having or expressing fantasies with infants, having real photographs or non-real representations of them even when they just depict nudism or eroticism and not contact, being able to work in places with or interact with infants while secretly being or publicly being a nepiophile, talking about sexual desires towards them with them and answer their curiosity questions (when they can understand words):

All of them are actions that not harmful based on current opinions that "harm comes with the contact" yet are criminalized or censored, people who do these acts are treated as criminals and that prevents us to live a life with dignity as any other human.

Further interactions with infants need more analysis and research but if just the expression is mistreated there can't be progress.

Person B:

I would say most sexual acts are non-harmful for toddlers and even babies, humans start playing with their genitals since they are babies and there's no difference if they do it by their own or with adult involvement

Of course there are also obvious exceptions such as penetrative sex and Edgeplay kinks such as Erotic asphyxiation or similar ones but in comparation with all the sex acts that don't mean harm it's a minority

For Person A, the major complaint seems to be the denial of freedom of conscience, not the prohibition of sexual contact. It's something I also find incredibly frustrating as a pedohebephilic MAP, and reason enough to engage in MAP activism. When reading anti-MAP comments, there will be some people who insist that MAPs just lie about everything, and those who ask why we make such a big deal of MAPness online. Well, the reason is that we don't want to hide or lie at all, but we are forced to express ourselves this way because the public is so insanely hysterical, hateful and intolerant. If the public could be trusted to act calmly and rationally, they'd know who a lot of these 'big scary monsters' are. I would be fully out and have photos of my face on this very site if it were not so incredibly dangerous.

For Person B, there is a distinction between adult forms of sex and essentially playing doctor. The latter, as he acknowledges, is something in which very young children engage, and likely not even registered as a big deal to the child. Does an adult being involved suddenly make it harmful? If so, what is the mechanism of harm? These are questions that might feel gross, but worth asking if you can approach the issue from an emotionally detached perspective.

Conclusion

Despite being shunned even by some members of the MAP community, nepiophiles are dealing with many of the same issues as other MAPs. There are a few pro-choice arguments that may be difficult to apply to infants and toddlers, but the conscience of nepiophiles must be respected and embraced.