Post a response:
|
In my experience, B4U-ACT is exactly what it says it is: a venue where people with a variety of opinions on the contact issue can find common ground. There are some with strong anti-contact opinions, some with strong pro-contact opinions, and plenty with views in between. But they all keep that to themselves in the context of B4U-ACT to discuss the thing they can agree on: MAPs should have access to respectful humane mental health services. While the "offending" discussion comes up more than I would like, the organisation does in my experience try to downplay that talk. There is an emphasis that MAPs should have access to mental health for their own sake, not just to keep them from offending. Though I will say that the "offending" talk has an annoying way of slipping in anyways. As for the trans thing, I don't think it was 20% but yeah there where a lot of trans people there (including some non-MAP trans therapists). From discussions I had though, the trans MAPs are MAPs. I didn't personally see signs that they where just trying to be rebels or something like that. I've heard two theories on why there are so many trans MAPs. The one I always had is that being honest with yourself about being trans requires a level of introspection that makes it easier to see yourself as an MAP too. Several trans MAPs also suggested the opposite direction to me though: after you come to terms with being an MAP, coming out as trans is easy. |