For the record, this radqueer community allows (pro-c) MAPs to be in the same space as minors. It also has a community self-described as "for pro-c girllove discussion".
So i gotta ask what pro-c means
pro-contact.
That's, uh, kinda problematic wtf
I'm not sure to what extent pro-c people actually do any c-ing versus just believing that it should be legal. Does anyone know?
I don't agree with pro-c'ers, but I'm not sure to what extent the latter is problematic. I guess being "problematic" is subjective, so anything you strongly disagree with is then "problematic." From a more objective perspective, though, the latter does not cause any harm*, so I wouldn't call it that.
*There is a caveat here: perhaps being vocally pro-c would encourage others to actually c. I don't know. 
For the lazy, I guess this passage is why the page was linked:
It is believed that all or most pro-contact individuals are actively seeking CSAM/CSEM or sexual/romantic relationships with young people. In reality, many separate their ideology and what they believe to be a reasonable course of action for the present. Some pro-contacts refrain from predatory behavior because they do not want to risk legal or social repercussions, although they support decriminalization and destigmatization of such actions. Some refrain because they believe that in a society which criminalizes or stigmatizes such behavior, youth will likely be harassed and maltreated by authority figures or other members of their social circle if an older individual's sexual involvement with them is found out. Some pro-contacts believe that in a society which criminalizes or stigmatizes such behavior, disapproving outsiders will likely "gaslight" a youth into retroactively considering the relationship or interactions abusive and traumatic, or cause pressure which makes it difficult for the older party to carry out a healthy relationship, so they do not see it as "worth the trouble." Other pro-contacts are not personally interested in CSAM/CSEM or relationships with young people, but still believe other people should be permitted to carry out such behavior. Just because someone does not plan on sexually or romantically engaging with youth does not mean that they are necessarily anti-contact.
Their personal website is on "freak.university" is a haven for zoo and pedophiles. Also it's full of hardcore "transage, transrace, transautictic" LARPers.
There is every indication that individuals with these identities are being completely genuine about it, so it's pretty inappropriate (and I'd say offensive) to attempt to trivialize people's identities as a joke or intentional fantasy.
Exactly this. Regardless of how you think treatment for these identities should be addressed, there's no reason to assume they're LARPing. This is the same rhetoric used by trans(gender)phobes.
I appreciate the heads up. I checked out the communities and even posted in a couple but I am going to have to make sure to avoid anything that is pro-c.
Unliked your own comment, what a move
Roflmao
We had a !discussions@burggit.moe post a while ago about allowing a MAP community on burggit. I think ultimately it was decided that it would have to be too restrictive to be of interest to any of its potential users. Hopefully the interested parties see this post. Good luck!
Thanks! For anyone interested in the map community, it's at !map@rqd2.net
Did you know if the community it's still working? cos it just get stuck at loading..
Sounds like a problem with your client, cuz none of the members over here have said anything about it, and i just checked and it's loading
Yeah you right got it working already, it was my side problem.
I assume vaccines are used to transition.
Feel like you have something to post, but it's not really relevant to any of the current communities, and you don't feel like it's worth making an entirely new community just to post it? This is the place for that.
NSFW content is allowed in this community so long as you mark it as per site rules.