but not all radqueers do xyz!

a common defense i hear is, "not all radqueers are pro-harm" or "not every radqueer supports predatory behavior." while that may be true, this response ignores a crucial point: by being part of this community, individuals—whether intentionally or not—are enabling the harm done by others. even if someone isn’t directly participating in abusive behavior, their membership in the radqueer movement supports a platform that allows these harmful ideologies to thrive.

complicity through silence

the first issue is that while not every radqueer actively promotes things like pedophilia or zoophilia, the community itself often creates an environment where these behaviors are normalized. those who remain in the community and say, "i'm not like that" are still participating in a space that protects and enables people who are. this tolerance of dangerous ideologies puts vulnerable people, especially minors, at risk. silence is complicity, and by choosing to stay in a movement that defends harmful behaviors, members indirectly endorse them. it's not enough to say, "i don't personally believe that," when you're helping create a space where others can safely advocate for exploitation.

one of the most dangerous aspects of the radqueer community is how many of its members turn a blind eye to the harm being done. even if some claim they don’t support pro-contact ideologies, they often allow space for those who do, whether through silence or outright indifference. it’s not uncommon for radqueers to say things like, "i don’t care," or to adopt labels like "neutral" or "contact complex," meaning they refuse to take a stance against people who openly support harmful paraphilias. worse, some will argue that it’s "discriminatory" to exclude or criticize people who are pro-contact with minors, zoophiles, or others promoting dangerous behaviors.

this "live and let live" attitude creates an environment where predatory individuals are allowed to thrive. many radqueers simply ignore the problem, choosing to focus on their own identities while claiming that it’s not their responsibility to police others. this is where the real harm comes in—by refusing to acknowledge the dangers of pro-contact rhetoric or the exploitation of vulnerable people, radqueers are complicit. ignoring the problem doesn’t make it go away; it just allows the abuse to continue unchecked.

there's a tendency within the community to dismiss or ignore the actions of individuals who engage in abusive or predatory behaviors, often under the guise of respecting diverse identities. for instance, some may argue that their personal trauma or coping mechanisms justify their behavior, while others might request not to be "discriminated" against for their pro-contact stances. this reluctance to hold individuals accountable can result in the perpetuation of harm and the silencing of victims. in some cases, members of the radqueer community will even defend those who support harmful behaviors by framing it as an issue of "inclusivity" or "acceptance." this willingness to include everyone, regardless of how dangerous their beliefs or actions are, fosters a space where abusers are not only tolerated but shielded from criticism. the refusal to draw boundaries, or to call out harmful behavior for what it is, puts countless individuals—especially minors—in real danger.

lack of safeguards

the community's emphasis on radical acceptance often comes at the expense of implementing safeguards to protect vulnerable members. without clear boundaries or a willingness to address harmful behaviors, the community can become a breeding ground for exploitation and abuse.

conclusion

while the radqueer community's intentions of inclusivity may be well-meaning, the lack of critical oversight and the normalization of harmful identities and behaviors pose significant risks. it's crucial for communities to actively address and prevent harm, ensuring the safety and well-being of all members, especially the most vulnerable. radqueer spaces not only permit this, but actively defend it, using arguments about "queer inclusion" to protect their harmful ideologies. the danger isn't just in one person being bad; it's in the system they've built that encourages others to follow.

This was written by a guest author originally. This page last edited on 10/22/2024. Go back to the main page?