Monday, December 05, 2022

Elon Musk is a bigot and liar

When Elon Musk acquired Twitter and proclaimed himself a free speech absolutist who would offer a general amnesty to suspended accounts, I got hopeful that I would be let back on. The criteria were to be “provided they have not broken the law or engaged in egregious spam,” so it should be easy. Not only have I not broken the law, but my @fertiledating account was even suspended without Twitter citing a specific instance of my having broken the "Twitter rules." Though they will not tell me, I suspect the reason is I had just said 13-year-olds can consent, perhaps along with a determination based on the the entire account that I am a sincere and incorrigible advocate along those lines -- in a word, because I am a sexualist.

However, Musk's promises proved to be deceptive. When I appealed my account suspension to the new management, all I got was a reply stating "Twitter reserves the right to permanently suspend accounts that violate the Twitter Rules or Terms of Service without further notice. This account is permanently suspended and will not be restored."

So, Musk was outright lying. He will suspend accounts or keep them suspended "without further notice" or explanation, which is as far away from free speech absolutism as you can get. He is a tyrant who has also been known to ban people simply for making fun of himself.

I believe that Twitter should be nationalized, perhaps even supernationalized and run by the UN, and truly function as a town square, where it would take a conviction in a court of law to have you removed, provided that you are willing to prove your identity and tweet openly as yourself as I have been doing. The bar should be the same as imprisonment or higher, preferably higher because speech is really a more fundamental right and prisoners as still allowed to make public statements. If anything should be removed, it should only be the specifically criminal tweets, not lifetime bans for arbitrary reasons like Twitter is doing now.

Given that I have only been banned twice in thirteen years of active tweeting (and never on Google or YouTube for saying the exact same things), it should be obvious that my kind of rhetorics is relatively inoffensive even though I profoundly disagree with normie dogmas. Whether you get banned by leftist "woke" management for saying the things I do is hit or miss, which goes to show how extreme Elon Musk is for not giving me a second chance or even explanation at a time of supposed general amnesty. There is still the prospect of restoring my first account @eivindberge, which lasted ten years up to 2019 and I haven't yet appealed, but I doubt it.

I now feel extreme distaste for any Elon Musk product. I would never consider getting a Tesla or anything like that, and I hope he fails in all his endeavors. It is a tragedy for mankind that someone so evil gets to control so much resources. I hope Twitter goes bankrupt so we can start over, but I realize that anyone rich enough to run something like an Internet town square would probably be a tyrant, and even if they truly believe in free speech, the entire model of private ownership is flawed because advertisers would decide in the end. So we would need to try something more robust, like government of the people, by the people including courts of law at their best, which there is probably also no hope for anymore.

153 comments:

The Night Wind said...

I'm glad that somebody else sees Musk for what he is: basically just Controlled Opposition like Rupert Murdoch is supposedly an 'alternative' to the Liberal News Media. Both Musk and Murdoch donate heavily to Left-Wing anti-speech candidates and causes.

Free Market competition actually worked reasonably well when we had sensible regulations guaranteeing it and a Government actually more powerful than Wall Street. In the US, we had a rule requiring equal time for opposing viewpoints (repealed 1987); laws prohibiting concentrations of media ownership (repealed 1996); laws prohibiting cooperation between governmental 'security' agencies and mass media for purposes of espionage and disinfo (repealed 2002); and laws against the Government operating as an independent news source (repealed 2013). What we have today is what the late Supreme Court Justice Felix Frankfurter called 'Privatized Socialism.'

Anonymous said...

Musk is positioning himself as a successor to the MAGA feminists by taking a few of their more rational positions, and it's working for his popularity. One of those positions includes an insane crackdown on anything that involves teenage sexuality, or even large age gap relationships. The basket case of the USA continues its international feminist reach until BRICS+ establishes its new currency with the aid of Russia and China.

Anonymous said...

I have seen some very frank discussion of AOC issues on twitter. This was reported negatively in some anti article I read a coupe of weeks ago. Perhaps near-free levels of discourse will be allowed as long as one opens a new account. Or not. I don't use twitter and those who do might have a better idea of the situation.
Perhaps we can still hope for at least a limited widening of the Overton Window
ANONYMOUS2

Eivind Berge said...

While it is possible that a new account would not be removed right away, I am not going to make a new one. My first account had 1500 followers, my second had 500 and I am not starting over. Twitter is wasting our time that way, worse than just getting banned for life. If we are going to be kept down to a handful followers, we are better off working on our own sites that they can't touch.

anonanon4555555 said...

Are you sure you weren't banned on Twitter because of your support for Nathan Larson?

Musk is just typical of the retarded American culture wars in which both sides fling monkey poo paedophilia accusations at each other, often while openly boasting about their love of anime.

I'm currently reading a book on the triumph of Christianity over paganism in the late Roman Empire. It has some nice quotes from pagan philosophers who were despairing at having to witness a retarded puritanical cult taking over, knowing there was nothing they could do to reverse the tide. Our situation is a bit similar, but worse, as the pagans and rationalists only had Christianity to worry about, not say, Christianity and Islam together.

Those pagan writers blamed the rise of Christianity on women. I've often held this. Roman and Greek dinner parties featured nubile young servant girls who would have sex with the male guests. Christianity obviously did away with that immediately. Women will never tolerate male sexual freedom.
Oh, and the pagan Greek philosophers were well aware that 13 year old Mary was impregnated not by 'God', but by a Roman soldier.

Unknown said...

Meanwhile the US is targeting Tik-Tok for 2 (totally unrelated!) reasons, number one because it would be a Chinese trojan, number two because it "harms children".

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Censorship_of_TikTok

Ten years ago the US was blaming the Chinese because of Chinese censorship, now Chinese are getting blamed for not censoring.

amelio said...

@ anonanon4555555

Can you give the references on that book please ? Thanks.

Eivind Berge said...

"Are you sure you weren't banned on Twitter because of your support for Nathan Larson?"

Yes, I am sure this has nothing to do with it. Don't think I have mentioned Nathan Larson on Twitter since maybe several years ago on my first account and if so not in a way that got any attention from moderators. They are clearly cracking down on simple disagreement with age of consent. Happens to all other MAP activists of any note too no matter how careful.

MenAreCowards said...

anonanon4555555 : I think it is the same problem we are facing, the continuing fallout from that disgusting puritanical cult in the form of the absolute triumph of post-Christian progressivism. I think the boylove author Edmund Marlowe is correct that the seventies were just a flash in the pan reaction to the horror of the holocaust ( if not a psyop to destroy the traditional family, I don't know ). The same author reads Greek and Latin to a professional standard, and so was able to point out to some clueless 'girllovers' that when Horace wrote The Art of Love concerning his sexual love with slave girls and boys, ALL of them were in their early to mid teens when they served their master in his bed and were pleasured by him. Those girls then went on with the tasks most befitting women, to raise children and help in the kitchen and around the house and so sheltered by that environment. The pre-modern would have merely regarded a preference for older preteens and young teens as a taste, not some specific sexuality, as it was taken for granted that all men would wish to take a twelve year old to their bed.

That Roman soldier enjoyed the supreme pleasure of feeling the inside of a wet thirteen year old girl with his cock, and this generation of men is paying the ultimate price for it.

The female sex is, alas, the source of all evil, and men are absolute cowards. The only way to raise a female is to teach her sexual pleasure from a young age before being married off to raise children and manage a household in a traditional society. We must accept that we have lost any chance of this and merely be the sneaky fuckers who virtue signal and enjoy the pleasures of these young adolescent demons behind the curtains whenever the opportunity presents itself. Others will simply train themselves to other pastimes, cursing all womankind as they do.

anonanon4555555 said...

@amelio

The book is : 'The Darkening Age - The Chirstian Destruction Of The Classical World' by Catherine Nixey. I am always cautious when buying a book written by a woman, especially a history book, but there is nothing I have read so far to indicate that she is a feminist.

I will try to post the relevent quotes later today, but most of them are from a Greek philosopher called Celsus.

@MenAreCowards - I am certainly going to start reading more on Greek and Roman history. If I wasn't getting so old, I'd probably start learn Latin and Ancient Greek. I remember in one of Michael Houellebecq's novels, the jaded main character says something about seeking solace in the Ancient Greeks (literature). I understand why now.

amelio said...

@ anonanon4555555

Thanks. Norman Douglas's biography was written by a woman and it was good.

Anonymous said...

Eivind, du har nok misforstått, Elon har nemlig ikke startet med "unbanningen" av kontoer enda, og det vil heller ikke skje på en stund (mye arbeid å gjøre først, dette har han snakket om på Twitter Spaces). De eneste som forløpig er unbannet er større kontoer som Musk manuelt har godkjent. Gi dette mer tid før du anklager ham.

Når det er sagt, man må nok forvente at det blir noen begrensninger. Rett og slett fordi Musk har et samlet prossekorps mot seg og svært mange som ønsker han kansellert. Det kan derfor skje enkelte taktiske bans for å unngå at twitter blir utestengt fra app stores, mister reklameinntekter, blir bannet fra amazon, mister domenet o.l. slik har skjedd med andre som har utfordret narrativet for mye.

Musk bannet Ye pga oppfordring til vold etter at han postet en slags swastika og uttalte seg på Alex Jones at han "elsker Hitler". Dette er jeg uenig med, men Musk forstår den enorme kostnaden det ville vært å la dette innlegget bli stående med tanke på at samtlige aviser verden over skrev om Ye's uttalelser. Dersom Musk lykkes med å erstatte reklameinntekter med en annen modell vil han få mer frihet til å styre plattformen. Etterhvert som han løsriver seg fra de som kan kansellere ham vil det også kunne bli mer fritt. Alt dette tar tid. Så slapp av litt. Når prossessen med å unbanne "nobodies" er i gang kan det hende ny får en ny sjanse. Men det skjer neppe før langt ut i neste år.

Eivind Berge said...

That comment claims Musk might still unban me, just haven't gotten around to it which might happen far into next year. We'll see. I'm not impressed by a process which takes so long, especially since they did answer my appeal with a definitive no. How hard can it be to at least inform us that unbanning is a possibility at some point, if it is?

Anonymous said...

Hvem er Ye?

AnonAF said...

In the bigger picture, we still need to support Elon's campaign for free speech and anti-wokeness, even if he personally (like many) might be a complete hypocrite on discussion of the age of consent.

Off topic, but I came across this book on Amazon which looks very interesting.
https://www.amazon.co.uk/Witches-Feminism-Fall-Edward-Dutton/dp/1593680791/

"Today, the evolutionary situation has been turned on its head. The intense selection pressures of the past have been overcome by the Industrial Revolution and its technological marvels. Modern witches survive and thrive in the postmodern West, still possessed by the motivations and dispositions of their sisters of yore. "Sorcery" (nihilism and self-hatred) is no longer taboo but has become a high-status ideology. Roald Dahl was all-too correct. Witches do exist, and they mean to do us harm. "

Eivind Berge said...

To Anonymous: Ye is Kanye West.

How do y'all like my new video?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ls2ePE3cfXo

How the Norwegians conceptualize delinquency in adolescent girls. Can the normies explain the relevant difference here?

Anonymous said...

New petition against the Mann Act, sign here:

https://chng.it/HGqDVtPqRK

Freetheteens69 said...

@AnonAF

"Modern witches survive and thrive in the postmodern West, still possessed by the motivations and dispositions of their sisters of yore. "Sorcery" (nihilism and self-hatred) is no longer taboo but has become a high-status ideology. Roald Dahl was all-too correct. Witches do exist, and they mean to do us harm."

What does predicting the future, reading minds, talking to ghosts/spirits, or anything magical, have to do with self hatred or nihilism? Nihilists are generally scientific/philosophical materialists, that don't believe in anything spiritual like sorcery. And they are also the most likely to have self hatred/depression. The author using the word sorcerer and nihilist interchangeably is triggering me. It's like using the word Christian and Atheist interchangeably. Wtf? xD. You can't do that. It's illegal.

AnonAF said...

@Freethebeans - Maybe you - like me - need to read the book to answer that fully. Or at least the book description on Amazon? I assume he doesn't think that olden day witches were really 'reading minds, talking to spirits'. From the book description it states that he gives an evolutionary psy. explanation of witch hunts. 'Witches' were simply single, 'independent', infertile women, and social outcasts contributing nothing to society.

"Dutton demonstrates that witches did, in their way, represent a maladaptive mentality and behavior, which undermined Europe's patriarchal system."

Anon1239 said...

@Eivind - Regarding your YouTube video, I remember reading maybe 10 year ago of some East European country that was lowering its age for criminal responsibility to 14 from 18. The government decided that it would be logical to also therefore lower the age of consent to 14 at the same time. Of course, this provoked the usual fury from feminists and 'child protection' lobby groups, and so the idea was abandoned (but the age for criminal responsibility was still lowered to 14).

I saw in the Daily Mail the other day that researchers published a study stating that 'child sex robots' could be given to paedophiles as a substitute for real children (to prevent real children being abused). Of course, that too has predictably been met with the outraged screams of the banshees. What these well meaning rational experts fail to understand is that feminists and their child sex abuse hysteria has NOTHING to do with preventing children from being sexually 'abused', but rather from preventing men from perfering 'children (i.e. ripe teens), or even sex robots, to women.

Anonymous said...

Let be taken without offence, but if you believe the Daily Mail, you are in any case dumber than the average Brit...

Anonymous said...

Men have become obsessed with female approval, so they will do anything to other men to win that approval, including horrific murder and incredible self-sabotaging injustice like decades-long sentences for fake abuse cases involving hot teens.

Simps and baby boys who need mommy's approval have ruined sexual freedom in the world.

Anonymous said...

And what is Anonymous stupid for believing Anonymous? That researchers suggested that child sex robots could be used in therapy, or that feminists are outraged?

heyyouyeahyou42 said...

I can't believe anyone ever truly believed Elon Musk, the same dude who called a miner who rescued a child a "pedo", would take anything other than a total normie stance on MAP related speech.

His free speech 'absolutism' is the most milquetoast shit imaginable. He reinstates a few wildly popular celebs like Peterson, Tate, Ye and occassionally trolls wokesters and suddenly everyone thinks the billionaire is some kind of counterculture saviour. It's ridiculous. Also ridiculous is the idea that Twitter being handed over to the *United Nations*! Wtf? Seriously?? Alright then...

If anything Musk is only going to amplify anti- sentiment and embolden tards who think humping hunks of plastic may as well be equivalent to rape. He is no antidote to clown world, he's just as goofy as the rest of the chucklefucks.

Eivind Berge said...

Yup. Musk fired his head of security Yoel Roth who actually had some nuanced views on minors' sexuality:

https://dailystormer.in/former-twitter-head-of-trust-safety-jew-known-as-yolo-is-a-sickening-faggot-investigation-reveals/

Things have gotten worse.

The United Nations could hardly screw it up worse than Musk, could they?

AnonAF said...

Well the UN is a corrupt globalist feminist institution that forced every nation on Earth to accept the lie that 17 year olds are children, and that even looking at sexy cartoon pictures of them must be illegal, among other things, so I do not think it's a good idea for the UN to control discourse on the Internet.

However, I do see Eivind's point about Twitter needing to be taken out of the hands and whims of a private billionaire. All that's required is for the USA to introduce greater protections for free speech (amend it's constitution?), such as making it illegal for dominant social media platforms to censor any speech which is legal.

I still think in the bigger picture, defeating the 'woke mind virus' is a noble aim and one that is indeed central to saving civilization. Modern anti-sex hysteria began in earnest in the 1990's at the exact same time as political correctness and the Left 'winning the culture wars' throughout the West. It's been led primarily by left-wing feminism (assisted by femiservatives and their white knights). LBGT insanity is 100% about eroding and destroying normal male sexuality through the pretence of 'sexual tolerance'. Defeating it requires free speech and an environment in which individuals do not get immediately cancelled for voicing a controversial opinion.

AnonAF said...

He had some nuanced views on teenage sexuality, but he doesn't appear to have done anything to stop discussion of teenage sexuality on Twitter from being censored. Maybe just another paedocrite?
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11531441/Ex-Twitter-censor-Yoel-Roth-boyfriend-forced-FLEE-t-1-1m-home-Elon-Musk-shared-thesis.html

BTW Eivind, your site, and I know you identify with the American 'MAPs' now, but even using the term 'minor' is a validation of feminist thought controlling language that validates the idea that 17 year olds are children.

Eivind Berge said...

I used "minor" to refer to a group whose legal status is less than adults. Of course 17-year-olds are not children and I don't think anyone mistakes my position as such. What word would you suggest using instead?

AnonAF said...

I would suggest just using teen. 'Minor' has been conflated with child or 'underage' in the debate over the age of consent, especially by Americans (both 'antis' and 'maps'), where the age of consent is often 18 but almost nowhere else in the world.

The legal boundary between 'adults' and 'minors' is becoming blurred in any case. As we know, with feminists trying to raise the age of protection when it comes to sexual matters to 21, and at the same time the age of criminal responsibility being lowered, as you discussed in your YouTube video. Also left-wingers campaigning to allow 16 year olds to vote (already the case in Austria and Scotland).

Regarding Yoel Roth again - it's often the case that gay pederasts argue that men having sex with boys is fine, but men having sex with teen girls is wrong (because of a 'power differential'). They seem to hope that feminists will allow a different age of consent for homosexuals, so long as homosexuals support a high age of consent for girls. You see it sometimes in the comments section at Tom O'Caroll's blog. Obviously they are aware at some level that the whole point of the high feminist age of consent is to restrict competition - ie. heterosexual male access to girls . Feminists couldn't really care about homosexuals fucking 14 year old boys, just as they couldn't care about women fucking 14 year old boys, but they need to pretend to do so, otherwise their whole sham pretence at 'protecting children' would be exposed as simply restricting sexual competition from ripe teen girls.

Also, the article that Roth is getting roasted for linking to, discussing whether high school students can consent to sex with teachers, was concerning a case where an 18 year old student had sex with their teacher, and the teacher was charged with having sex with a minor - due to a law forbidding sex with under 21 students. If that doesn't highlight the danger of validating the term 'minor'...
https://www.salon.com/2010/11/20/student_teacher/

Eivind Berge said...

Well, then Yoel Roth's support of sexual liberation is fairly unremarkable. He merely questioned the cutting edge of feminist sex laws pushing the "minor" age up to 21. But still, Elon Musk can see no nuance. It's all a totalitarian battle against "pedos" to him, which means whatever the feminists tell him. Or if he just needs an insult for any reason, "pedo guy" it is as we have seen with that cave rescue operation where a more competent guy than Musk got the job done.

I still don't see the problem with using "minor" though. There is no magic in that word which leads me to support the illegality of sex no matter how hard the feminists try. They can have all girls up to 21 or whatever they want be minors for all I care and my response is simply that there is nothing wrong with having sex with them, same as I argue for teenage girls now.

AnonAF said...

Well fair enough, maybe I am being a bit picky. I just think we've allowed - as Europeans - to let the age of consent debate be reframed by Americans as 'sex with minors' rather than 'underage sex', or simply 'the age of consent'. The difference is that the age of consent in the USA is largely synomous with the age of majority, whereas that is not true in any country in Europe, where the age of consent is still 14,15, or 16.

Here's another reminder from the DailyMail at how evil people can be. A 72 year old British ex-pat and his 27 year old Thai boyfriend have died in a horrific car crash, and the commentators seem to think the age gap is the most tragic thing.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11532383/British-pensioner-78-partner-27-killed-horror-car-crash-Thailand.html#comments

Anonymous said...

Robert Lindsay is absolutely killing it on his blog:

https://beyondhighbrow.com/2022/12/13/the-teen-sex-panic-is-due-to-the-feminization-of-leftwing-politics/

Eivind Berge said...

Yes, good post.

I think you are onto something because the Pedo Panic and Teen Sex Panic (same thing) is simply the normative female view of such things or at least it’s a potential view of theirs and as you so eloquently say, this is due to the feminization of leftwing politics. That’s really what this SJWism, PC, Cultural Left and Cancel Culture is all about....

The Left was also all about turning a new leaf and rehabilitation, especially of criminals. We are the forgiving wing of politics that believes in second, third, and more chances. It’s the conservatives who lock you up and throw away the key for spitting on the sidewalk in line with their black and white thinking. The Left was supposed to reject black and white thinking in favor of “it’s all a grey area.”

Well, now it’s the damned conservatives who are nuanced moral relativists and we are the Manichean gods of cruelty and permanent banishment. So conservatives have turned into what liberals used to be and the Left has turned into the conservative jerks and squares that we spent our whole lives despising. Politics has been turned upside down!


The feminization of leftwing politics is a good observation. I thought conservatives have also been feminized, but maybe they pretty much stayed the same. They just look slightly less insane now that the left believes in eternal condemnation for the slightest sexual misconduct. The difference is not big enough for them to actually disagree on laws though. Lindsay is old enough to remember when enforcement was very lax, so even the conservatives must have been better back then. He is 65. In a few decades, no one will remember a sane approach to sexuality anymore.

Anonymous said...

The conservatives have absolutely been feminized and weaponized, they just gave that coach 25 years in jail for having a two year relationship with a teenage girl! Of course, she's an innocent victim and receives no equal punishment for being a whore (girls get a pass since it's a war on men).

On another note, it should be mentioned that actual pedophilia, adult sex with pre-pubescent real children, is disgusting and subversive. An actual child has no active sex hormones, and is not sexually attractive to the vast majority of men. I think actual pedophiles should be executed honestly; the problem is, women have somehow taken this natural disgust, and blurred it with the most attractive young adult females on the planet to decrease their competition and hurt men in general. It is a devious plan.

It's the problem with the death penalty in general - it might start out as justified, but as the state becomes more corrupt, it becomes a source of injustice.

Anonymous said...

On another note, it should be mentioned that actual pedophilia, adult sex with pre-pubescent real children, is disgusting and subversive. An actual child has no active sex hormones, and is not sexually attractive to the vast majority of men.

Have a look at the link below - well-suited for beginners in the field of actual pedophilia!

https://imfromdriftwood.com/story/dancing-in-his-underwear-for-the-garbage-man-noah-embraced-queerness-and-sexuality-since-childhood/

Eivind Berge said...

Very gay link, but I had similar feelings about women at that age, so can confirm that little kids can be sexual. It all came from within like that too.

"And not just queer but also super sexual and I don’t really know where that came from. And I don’t think anyone really does. And when I say that, my first memories and my first urges and desires were wanting to have sex with men. I had crushes on Mr. Rogers, I had a crush on Jesus, any kind of masculine figure in my life, I wanted to have sex with them."

Indeed, I share that same experience of MY VERY EARLIEST MEMORIES being of wanting to have sex with women and dreaming about them (from around age 4).

Freud claimed something about a "latency period" later, but I didn't experience that either. Looking it up now I find this:

https://cla.purdue.edu/academic/english/theory/psychoanalysis/definitions/latency.html

LATENCY PERIOD: The period of reduced sexuality that Freud believed occurred between approximately age seven and adolescence. Freud claimed that children went through a "latency period" during which "we can observe a halt and retrogression in sexual development" (Introductory Lectures 16.326). During this time, the child also begins the process of what Freud terms "infantile amnesia": the repression and estrangement of those earliest childhood memories that we find traumatic, evil and/or overly sexual. Freud warns, however, that "The latency period may... be absent: it need not bring with it any interruption of sexual activity and sexual interests" (Introductory Lectures 16.326). See also Freud: Module 1 on psychosexual development.

Ah, even Freud himself conceded that the latency period may be absent. Anyone else experienced it?

Anonymous said...

Freud is a fraud - there was no latency period for me either.

I don't deny that pre-pubescent children have sexual feelings (I did as well), just as I don't deny that the vast majority of adults find pre-pubescent child sex completely disgusting. For the few pedophiles who like it, the problem is it's too easy for an adult to impose their will on a pre-pubescent child; freedom of choice is an issue.

I don't know how to solve that, and I don't care because it's nothing compared to the criminalization of normal male high attraction to post-pubescent teenagers, and the subsequent slandering of all normal men as abusers, even when the teenager is completely into it.

Eivind Berge said...

What makes sexuality more bound to freedom of choice than diet, religion, healthcare, schooling and other things over which adults impose their will on children?

You could say that sex is optional while those other things are not -- so they need to be decided one way or another while sexual activity can wait -- but this isn't really true because boys will masturbate, and that will hurt them in the absence of sex and particularly in the presence of pornography which can scarcely be prevented anymore either.

We therefore need to take a permissive view at least of WOMEN having sex with young boys, in the interest of harm-reduction from pornography and masturbation (and because it is so inherently harmless anyway). But aside from that exception, my male sexualist position is that 12 or 13 can be the age of consent, yes -- perhaps even higher for male homosexuality, like 14?

Eivind Berge said...

Actually, religion can wait too, can't it? Should it be illegal to practice religion until you are 13?

Eivind Berge said...

LOL, Musk is getting more and more tyrannical:

https://edition.cnn.com/2022/12/14/tech/elonjet-twitter-suspended/index.html

Twitter has suspended an account that tracked the location of Elon Musk’s private jet. The suspension comes despite Musk last month tweeting, “My commitment to free speech extends even to not banning the account following my plane, even though that is a direct personal safety risk.”

The @ElonJet account was run by Jack Sweeney, a 20-year-old Florida college student, who used publicly available flight tracking information to build a Twitter bot that tweeted every time Musk’s Gulfstream took off and landed at an airport.

It is unclear what specifically led to the account’s suspension, but Sweeney confirmed to CNN on Wednesday morning the account had been banned. He shared a screenshot of a message he received from Twitter that read: “After careful review, we determined your account broke the Twitter rules. Your account is permanently suspended.”


That "commitment to free speech" is getting thinner by the day...

Eivind Berge said...

I just came across what looks like a good read:

https://www.amazon.com/Empirical-Introduction-Youth-Joseph-Bronski/dp/B095TDQ5FC

An Empirical Introduction to Youth, Paperback – May 31, 2021
by Joseph Bronski (Author)

Everyone has heard that "we only use 10% of our brains" is a myth perpetuated by Hollywood. Here we add another myth to the pile: that the brain develops until the age of 25. This groundbreaking new work exposes the institution of Science as unfaithful to its own data, existing in a subverted state subordinate to the political aspirations of the class that controls it. Bronski tears the narrative apart piece by piece, ripping through and debunking every major writing that supports the myth of the teen brain. In addition, he shows that the ideology regarding youth which exists today is totally ahistorical, and that the US education system is massively exploitative and was founded by the ruling classes against the will of the people. The work's culminating thesis is that the class which resides at the top of the education system, the paid brains of the rich, have proliferated wrong ideas about youth in order to strengthen then influence over the minds of young, their pocketbooks, and the pocketbooks of their families. No dogma regarding contemporary youth survives this devastating, piercing work; it is a must-read for anyone who wants to be knowledgeable on youth development and education -- anyone who has not read it is officially behind the times as of this moment.

Childhood is real but youth is no different from adulthood. I see in the preview of the preface he claims most students should conclude their education when youth begins -- somewhere between 13 and 15, which is a pretty radical suggestion even to me. Apparently there is little to gain from keeping them in school longer. On reflection, this rings true I guess.

Eivind Berge said...

Bronski says,

Starting roughly no later than when students enter youth (7th-9th grade), the education system becomes dramatically economically exploitative, with no returns to either the economy or people able to be measured. There is strong evidence for each of these claims. I believe that it morally follows that the education system should be dramatically restructured, with most students concluding education around the time youth begins, i.e. somewhere between the ages of 13 and 15. This would save hundreds of billions of dollars, stop massive exploitation via the current education system and would most likely, according to survey data, make everyone happier. In other words, I propose, based on the facts in this book, the abolition of the high school, and the stream-lining of other educational institutions. The result would be the shortening of education by roughly 4 four years for each student. This would save hundreds of millions of dollars each year in the United States alone, allowing said money to be invested into pursuits that actually benefit the people who create it.

Abolish high school... wow, I hadn't thought of that. I guess they can still go directly to college if they want further education... it's not like they need to wait for their brains to develop, lol. What a crazy expensive myth this is.

Eivind Berge said...

What a clown world. Being babysat to do useless stuff for four years when actually adult is not exploitation... But if you have sex then it is rape because you are too immature.

Sources today exist in a culture where the idea that the brain lobes develop until 25 is common knowledge. As everyone knows, that’s why everyone has to pay property taxes so their
17 year olds can sit in high school and do little that benefits themselves or society. While ideas supporting youth exploitation are potentially ancient, the idea that brain scientists have “proven” that youths’ brains are immature is a relatively new one that can’t be older than the fMRI.

Anonymous said...

I despise Salon, but the article about the teacher and the u-21 high school student ( link reproduced here-https://www.salon.com/2010/11/20/student_teacher/) was actually quite rational, albeit in a muted way.
IMHO, many if not most men are what might be termed weakly paedophilic. They wouldn't mind some sort of dalliance with a little girl occasionally that didn't involve actual sex in the lower two holes.
It's not what they would put most of the energies into or a long term emotional thing, but yeah. I'm afraid so.
Look at the marriage ages of some of the characters in the Old Testament and the ages of consent in parts of the US a few generations ago. ANONYMOUS3

Anonymous said...

"What makes sexuality more bound to freedom of choice than diet, religion, healthcare, schooling and other things over which adults impose their will on children?"

I don't know, you can get ass raped and let us know if it's better or worse than your mom telling you to eat your broccoli.

lol

"I see in the preview of the preface he claims most students should conclude their education when youth begins -- somewhere between 13 and 15"

This is most definitely true. I remember being 12 and discussing with my peers how we already learned everything we needed to know to live life. Any education after that age was either useless or specialized.

Eivind Berge said...

At least India is getting fed up with overcriminalization, and the UN is not so bad here:

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-india-63953752

"Criminalising adolescent sexual activity, which is perfectly normal, shows the law is out of sync with reality," Enfold's lead researcher Swagata Raha told the BBC....

Unicef too has been nudging India towards decriminalising adolescent sex. Soledad Herrero, the organisation's chief of child protection in India, told the BBC that "children have the right to protection, integrity, dignity, and participation, including in their personal relationships".

"There is a need to strike a balance between protection and respect for their evolving autonomy," she said, adding that the UN Committee on the Rights of the Child had underscored this.


Shall we let 17-year-olds participate in their own personal relationships? Lol, what a radical idea.

Still too radical for Twitter.

Anonymous said...

They are still criminalizing adult men having sex with teen girls. If anything they're increasing criminalization of adult men having sex with young girls and reinforcing the standard that only teen boys are allowed to have sex with teen girls.

Eivind Berge said...

It wasn't clear from the article that this is really happening, but I agree that laws only making exceptions for small age gaps are a step in the wrong direction. Those are the definition of pure agecuckery which reduces the men's movement even further since young men don't need to be solidaric with older men anymore as we are not in the criminalization together and they instead have a legislated privilege. All these "Romeo and Juliet" type of laws are extremely evil and should be resisted by all sexualists. I am afraid we may get to where only men older than 30 or 40 are heavily criminalized, which makes for an easy target to oppress, a minority which is pretty much a sitting duck or lambs to the slaughter judging by the current resistance.

Eivind Berge said...

Older men do have a trick up their sleeve, though, as I explained in this video:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7fV9JTuPSpg

A very time-honored trick ;)

Anonymous said...

EU has become addicted to sanctions - now it's Musk turn:

https://www.rt.com/news/568376-eu-musk-twitter-sanctions/

If only they could at least provide something positive... but this is the reality:

https://www.rt.com/news/568238-qatar-scandal-eu-corruption/


Anonymous said...

Poor vigilante quits his work due to own trauma:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8d41rQ3IHyY

Anonymous said...

I listened with interest to Eivind's Ludovici video on y/tube.
Anyway, it has occurred to me that there is a difference in the nature of the sexes that explains a lot of the age cuckery we suffer from today.
Man are fairly placid creatures, and women are implacable.Back in the 70's in many countries, men had 90% of what they wanted, yet they just rolled over when things turned to sh^t.
Women, by contrast, are never satisfied. 90% is nowhere near good enough. They will go on a search and destroy mission for that last 1% that eludes their grasp.
So 50% of the population is like that, and the other 50% hopes the crocodile will eat them last. ANONYMOUS2

Anonymous notyou said...

"Poor vigilante quits his work due to own trauma:"

What a repulsive fat freak. I'd bet my life that if a sexy, precocious 12 year old girl came on to him he'd shoot his load in an instant.

Bet also that his girlfriend probably looks even worse than him.

Anonymous said...

"What a repulsive fat freak. I'd bet my life that if a sexy, precocious 12 year old girl came on to him he'd shoot his load in an instant."

You mean a wide-eyed 4 year old little boy, that's more his style. Disgusting puke projects its own mental issues on normal men with the blessing of agecuck feminist politicians and judges. Anglo societies are sick.

"Bet also that his girlfriend probably looks even worse than him."

And uses baby talk and a huge dildo for his bleeding asshole. Also, it is guaranteed she thinks she is the hottest thing in the universe and attempts to have this fat puke fight other men over her. These types are all the same.

ChangeMann

Anonymous said...

Have a look in the comments under that YouTube video on why the pedo hunter quit.

Eivind Berge said...

Some good news and bad news from Norway:

https://www.vg.no/nyheter/innenriks/i/KnLOP5/straffelovraadet-foreslaar-aa-senke-den-seksuelle-lavalderen-til-15-aar

Age of consent might be lowered to from 16 to 15, but at the same time the expansion of rape law is set to continue, making all sex without consent "rape" even when there is no force or threat -- as long as it is signaled in some way that there is no consent. So it still won't go so far as affirmative consent, but the bad outweighs the good if this proposal becomes law, even if they also decriminalize paying for sex which is also considered.

My guess is they won't really touch the age of consent, probably not the sex purchase law either, and things will only get worse.

It is really only this report that the government commissioned that concludes some things should be decriminalized and remains to be seen if they will listen to those parts:

https://www.regjeringen.no/no/aktuelt/mehl-fikk-straffelovradets-utredning-om-seksuallovbrudd-og-samtykke/id2952244/

https://www.regjeringen.no/contentassets/478ade7f5c3844c08ba9a090e72539cd/no/pdfs/nou202220220021000dddpdfs.pdf

Anonymous said...

Joe Biden signed into law the Speak Out Act, which, according to his Twitter account, is "a bill that’ll enable survivors to speak out about workplace sexual assault and harassment and increase access to justice". And now a woman by the name of Tara Reade has made sexual assault allegations against the president.

https://www.rt.com/news/568264-tara-reade-allegations-biden/

Eivind Berge said...

I'm reading the whole 368-page report on potential new sex laws in Norway and will have much more to say about it later, but for now it's also notable that they are proposing to abolish the criminalization of sibling incest.

I am also surprised that they are actually removing the word "rape" (voldtekt) from the law, which is actually quite bizarre and symbolically trivializing, but then again they now include so much truly trivial stuff that it's only proper the name changes too. I am flabbergasted that they don't want to keep "rape" in there somehow though even for real rape, which now ironically will sound like a less serious crime -- but perhaps that's the price the feminists must pay one way or another for watering it down so much? (Just a tiny little body language sign that she "doesn't want it" shall be enough to make it this new crime -- not rape, but a crime to satisfy the feminists.)

This is how they propose the new law against what was formerly called rape, all just called "sex without consent" now:

§ 294 Seksuell omgang uten samtykke
Med fengsel inntil 10 år straffes den som
a) skaffer seg seksuell omgang ved vold eller truende atferd,
b) har seksuell omgang med noen som ikke vil det, og som gir uttrykk for dette i ord eller handling,
c) har seksuell omgang med noen som er ute av stand til å motsette seg handlingen, eller
d) ved vold eller truende atferd får noen til å ha seksuell omgang med en annen, eller til å utføre handlinger som svarer til seksuell omgang med seg selv.
§ 295 Grov seksuell omgang uten samtykke
Grov overtredelse av § 294 straffes med fengsel inntil 15 år. Ved avgjørelsen av om overtredelsen er grov skal det særlig legges vekt på om handlingen er begått av flere i fellesskap eller på en særlig smertefull eller krenkende måte. Straffen er fengsel inntil 21 år dersom den fornærmede som følge av handlingen dør eller får betydelig skade på kropp eller helse.
§ 296 Grovt uaktsom seksuell omgang uten samtykke
Grovt uaktsom overtredelse av § 294 straffes med fengsel inntil 3 år. Foreligger omstendigheter som nevnt i § 295, er straffen fengsel inntil 6 år.


There shall be no absolute rape of minors either anymore, which is now reverted to just sexual relations again. This is definitely a symbolic victory for us and the lowering of age of consent to 15 is a real victory.

§ 300 Seksuell omgang med barn under 15 år
Den som har seksuell omgang med barn under 15 år, straffes med fengsel inntil 10 år. På samme måte straffes den som får barn under 15 år til å ha seksuell omgang med en annen, eller til å utføre handlinger som svarer til seksuell omgang med seg selv.
§ 301 Grov seksuell omgang med barn under 15 år
Grov overtredelse av § 300 straffes med fengsel inntil 15 år. Ved avgjørelsen av om overtredelsen er grov skal det særlig legges vekt på
e) om det foreligger omstendigheter som nevnt i § 294,
f) den seksuelle omgangens karakter og om handlingen er begått på en særlig smertefull eller krenkende måte,
g) om den er begått av flere i fellesskap,
h) om det har skjedd gjentatte overgrep,
i) barnets alder.
Straffen er fengsel inntil 21 år dersom barnet som følge av handlingen dør eller får betydelig skade på kropp eller helse.


So, even though these "experts" are still extremely keen to criminalize an awful lot of sexuality including much that is victimless, they are far more honest than the current law.

Again, it remains to be seen how much of this will be passed, and I doubt any of the decriminalization will.

AnonAF442 said...

That would be massive if Norway lowered the age of consent to 15. As you say, very unlikely. I'm sure the feminist banshees are already screaming their outrage. If they do lower it, they will probably add a clause that it is only for U18s, and might even raise it to 18 for over 18s (as is the case in Belgium).

@Anonymous - I don't see any reasons in the comments of that YouTube video, just female 'survivors' and paedocrite males virtue signalling their support.

Fantastic news that Biden might be getting f***ked by his own law.

The BBC published a fair minded article about men being victims of false rape accusations. Obviously feminists are outraged again. One of the leading young feminists in the UK, who was responsible for the recent 'upskirting' laws, Tweeted that men are '230 more times likely to be raped, than falsely accused of rape'.

https://twitter.com/DrProudman/status/1604745095911075840

AnonAF45592 said...

Germany believes that it's fair to put a 97 year old woman on trial for the crime of being a typist at a concentration camp in WW2 when she was a teenager.

Yet actual teenagers today have no moral agency when it comes to sex.

Absolute clown world.

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-64036465

Eivind Berge said...

230 more times likely to be raped than falsely accused of rape... lol, that would make for an awful lot of men being raped; how do we dare leave the house? :)

I made a video about the proposed sex law reforms:

https://youtu.be/OwQz3mHzYxg

To be clear, there is no upper age limit to whom 15-year-olds shall be allowed to consent to. But how this will look after the feminists and agecucks get done attacking it is anybody's guess.

@AnonAF442, the discrepancy between age of consent and a lower age of criminal responsibility is actually mentioned in the whitepaper as one reason the former should go own to match the other, as I discuss in the video too.


Actually quite well put:

Det kan reises spørsmål om det henger så godt sammen at 15-åringer kan anses som strafferettslig ansvarlig for sine handlinger og idømmes fengselsstraffer (den kriminelle lavalderen i Norge er 15 år), samtidig som at de ikke anses som modne nok å involvere seg lovlig i seksuelle handlinger. I saker som gjelder seksuallovbrudd mot barn, innebærer dette at en 15-åring kan straffes for handlinger som han eller hun samtidig ikke anses som moden nok til å foreta.

I still consider these authors extremely hateful feminists though, just not as bad as the worst.

Anonymous said...

The claim that there's a 230 times higher chance of being raped than being falsely accused is significant. Specifically regarding the number. 230 is like 23. In numerology, the zeros are often ignored. Me Too =23 in Gematria, the full reduction cipher.

Eivind Berge said...

Ok, thanks. It takes all kinds to make a movement I guess, including numerologists :)

Anonymous said...

Hei Eivind.
Hvor er den undersøkelsen du viste til i en annen bloggpost som viser at menns alderspreferanser for sexpartnere aldri endrer seg i løpet av livet?

Eivind Berge said...

Maybe this one?

https://metro.co.uk/2019/02/22/men-regardless-age-will-always-attracted-women-early-20s-8718590/

Anonymous said...

Gematria is from Kaballah, the Jewish mystic practice. Those are the ones who are in charge of global banking and power.

The Me Too movement is a globalist agenda of the World Economic Forum. Tarana Burke, Me Too founder, probably has connections with all the global elite.

Anonymous said...

This metro uk piece might be a subtle ploy to raise the age of consent to 21. Notice they're saying early 20s, not early teens.

Early teens is the age of girls that all men from teen boys to middle age and elderly men are really attracted to. Metro Uk will not admit that, at least not clearly in the headline which is the only part that Metro Uk knows the majority of readers will actually pay attention to.

Eivind Berge said...

Also see Newgon's debate guide regarding "corresponding age attraction" (which is a myth at least in males).

https://www.newgon.net/wiki/Debate_Guide:_Corresponding_age_attraction

This applies to normal men as well as pedophiles -- "If you're attracted to children at age 13 you’re going to be attracted to children at age 70" -- and as to average men like myself, we were more attracted to OLDER girls and women at 13 same as I am most attracted to teen girls and women in their early twenties now. 22 is not a bad approximation of women's most attractive age like men reported on the above survey until our sex drive atrophies from old age -- that's an age that even agecucks won't challenge and so yes, it remains constant.

22 is not significantly different from teens, so obviously most men are attracted to both. All men like teens except (exclusive) pedophiles, who consider them too old.

AllMenAreCowards said...

The idea that men are mostly attracted to women in their early 20s is in itself pure agecuckery.

Any knowledge of paintings, sculpture and literature of the past tells us that the girl of her late preteens and early to mid teens is the ideal, before the face hardens and there is still much child left in her. All men with taste are childlovers, and one shouldn't run away from that.

heyyouyeahyou42 said...

@AnonAF

"Modern anti-sex hysteria began in earnest in the 1990's at the exact same time as political correctness and the Left 'winning the culture wars' throughout the West. It's been led primarily by left-wing feminism (assisted by femiservatives and their white knights). LBGT insanity is 100% about eroding and destroying normal male sexuality through the pretence of 'sexual tolerance'."

For more see the Pornhub 2022 Year In Review: https://www.pornhub.com/insights/2022-year-in-review

Femdom, Pegging, Cuckold, Trans, MILF all on the search term rise whereas Teen, although it was right at the top for years running prior to 2021, has been scrubbed entirely. 'Twink' is still listed as prominent for PH Gay. Go figure.

"I just think we've allowed - as Europeans - to let the age of consent debate be reframed by Americans as 'sex with minors' rather than 'underage sex', or simply 'the age of consent'."

By using "minor" it's suggested these people are "less than". Not as worth taking seriously, not like us "grown ups".

@AllMenAreCowards

"The idea that men are mostly attracted to women in their early 20s is in itself pure agecuckery.

Any knowledge of paintings, sculpture and literature of the past tells us that the girl of her late preteens and early to mid teens is the ideal, before the face hardens and there is still much child left in her. All men with taste are childlovers, and one shouldn't run away from that."

I agree. As 'controversial' as it was to acknowledge, most people recognized that the barely legal age of 18 was the average / ideal point of attraction (still too high imo). But now it's early 20's? Say what? In a few years we'll be gaslit into saying it's 25, then in true Orwellian fashion a few years after that "We have always been most attracted to 30yo". Lmfao.

Anonymous said...

In moments of honesty, women will admit the truth.

I dated a girl who was 16 who had the most incredible tits I've ever seen and played with (probably because I was too nervous to hook up with the 13 and 14 year olds who came on to me). We remained friends, and when she was 25, she made a passing comment to me that she was considering marriage because her tits were starting to sag and they were "not what they used to be".

Women know, the problem is they are incentivized completely to publicly deny and legislate against the truth, and since they have no real moral compass, they don't care about the unjust destruction of men, which of course leads to the destruction of the society built by men.

What are some good social network apps to meet girls in their prime? I know freetheteens knows a few...

ChangeMann

Anonymous said...

In Norway between aprox 2000 and 2010 there used to be at least 3 Norwegian social networks and there was no age restrictions. Anyone could contact whoever they wanted. Young teens would have no problem talking to 30+ guys. Personally i have never been into online chatting but i made contact with with many girls from the age of APROX. 16 years old from those sites and met physically many times. Great times!
The popularity of Facebook unfortunately put those sites out of business.

Anonymous said...

Nelson Maatman and Martijn Uittenbogaard are Dutch young sex activists, probably for an age of consent lower than most of us would prefer. Nonetheless, they were framed and arrested by the governments of Mexico and Ecuador to silence their voices on orders from the USA Department of Homeland Security.

https://www.freespeechtube.org/v/193r

How ironic that the agency in charge of "securing the homeland" in fact spreads its deranged, corrupt feminist sex hysteria far beyond the borders of the USA; they are truly out of control by every measure, and the American people are sleepwalking, retarded zombies.

This is why it is exciting to watch Russia and China move quickly to contain and destroy the international influence of the USA. Although Russia itself might be harsh on sex laws, Russia does not decide the cultural policies of other sovereign governments like the insane USA. In fact, Russia's stated intent is make the world multi-polar. This is a very positive message for anti-feminists, and I am cheering for their victory.

Anonymous said...

Pornhub more than likely cooked the books on their year in review.

Jack said...

Germany lowering the voting age to 16:

https://www.iamexpat.de/expat-info/german-expat-news/germany-lowers-voting-age-16-future-eu-elections

So a 16-year old is mature enough to know about intricate political issues but they cannot decide for themselves about sex.

Note that in Germany the minimal age for working as a prostitute is 21, not 18.

Eivind Berge said...

My video on Norway possibly lowering the age of consent to 15 received 39 views and just one like. Why is there so little enthusiasm around this? I know my videos are not the most exciting on YouTube, but this one does not even get more attention than my most boring videos. Even from our own movement there appears to be next to no interest -- or there really is no Men's Movement in Norway -- either way I would have expected a little more simply because of how surprising this move would be. Finally a realistic pathway to reversing at least some of the damage feminism does, and nobody cares?

AnonAF said...

I watched the 2001 film GhostWorld again for the first time in years yesterday. Couldn't be made today at any level. The 18 year old Thora Birch teen rebel character 'Enid' befriends a middle-aged dork (Steve Buscami) after playing a cruel prank on him with her friend (Scarlett Johannson aged 15), and ends up going to bed with him. Although she 'regrets it', you could read that as the director making a point about her in the end being unable to truly be an authentic outsider, even when she's finally met her perfect match, and still caring too much what society would 'think'. There is in fact no overt suggestion at all in the movie that the relationship is 'creepy', and she doesn't accuse him of rape or abuse or anything, just decides she doesn't want to live with him or break up his new relationship with an older woman.
And Scarlett Johannson (in her breakout role) looks fantastic. As I said, only 15 in this, and in the Coen brothers' 'The Man Who Wasn't There', in which she flirts with the middle-aged Billy Bob Thornton character.

Anonymous said...

Encouraging No-fap, anti porn usage and exposing the female sex offender charade are some of the more heroic and smart parts of Eivinds activism that he never should stop. It makes him stand above the rest exept maybe a few.
Eivind is a great thinker and an equally good writer about these matters. So he needs to write, f.ex as a polemicist in newspapers both in Norway and abroad. Some well written text's each on one specific topic will reach more peple than this blog can only hope for I think.

amelio said...

"Encouraging No-fap, anti porn usage and exposing the female sex offender charade are some of the more heroic and smart parts of Eivinds activism"


No. It's the most consensual part indeed. Although for very different reasons from Eivind, most people would oppose porn, harsh punishments for female offenders and to a lesser degree masturbation.

In the same way, if you root for abortion, most people will be with you. But if you add that it's the surest way for the human race to become extinct (which would be a good thing), they'll kick you out !

Anonymous said...

@Eivind-what's the title of your vid? Bummer that it hasn't gotten more exposure. It would seem that it hasn't even attracted a lot of adverse attention.
Possibly some people have been following your channel and blog and this has indeed had an influence on the white paper. They may have been going to public libraries or in some other way have been looking without it showing up in their normal browsing history-respectable careers and all that.
ANONYMOUS 2

Eivind Berge said...

Title is "Norway might lower the age of consent to 15, decriminalize sibling incest and sex purchase."

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OwQz3mHzYxg

Got 6 likes now, thanks!

Eivind Berge said...

Here's another video in which i announce Nathan Larson's official cause of death:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zN-1q5De7Io

As ruled by the medical examiner.

AnonAnon45 said...

"Encouraging No-fap, anti porn usage and exposing the female sex offender charade are some of the more heroic and smart parts of Eivinds activism that he never should stop. It makes him stand above the rest exept maybe a few."

Well Ok, he has one loyal follower he can count on (is that you FreeTheTeens?).

Stand above the rest? Eivind's chief merit is his durability and being the last man (mra) standing. Angry Harry dead, Chris Brand dead, AntiFeminist gone away, Human-Stupidity doesn't mention his old topics anymore. Who is the rest? The MAPs? As far as I know, Eivind is the only 'real MRA' left who still blogs about sex hysteria and the age of consent. Anglo-Bitch is a real MRA who agrees with our movement, but he doesn't talk must specifically about our issues with any regularity. Robert Lindsey agrees that it is natural to find young teens attractive, but also appears to agree with the USA age of consent.

And Eivind is the only 'MRA' who ever believed that women should get the pussy pass for sex crimes.

And how on Earth is Eivind going to write articles for newspapers. What crack are you smoking?

Anonymous said...

Anyone can write their opinions and have them published in newspapers. But of course editors do censorship, but at least he should try. Thats a way of entering the public debate, and I think Eivind would be good at it because of his writing and argumenting skills.

Anon5295h2hr2 said...

Nobody disputes Eivind is a great writer. He has all the tools, just doesn't seem prepared to compromise to build a proper following. He is doing a good job on YouTube now though.

Actress Bella Thorne claims an unnamed Hollywood director 'accused her of flirting with him' when she was 10, and all the virtue signalling lefties are demanding his blood.

https://www.comicsands.com/director-accused-bella-thorne-flirting-2659035488.html

Apparently no 10 year old girl can flirt with an older man. He was probably worried that she might make a false accusation and alerted her parents. The same freaks condemning him want teachers to report to the police if 15 year olds seem 'moody' etc, because it's supposed indications of sexual abuse.

I was in Burger King yesterday. Two American girls, maybe 13 years old, sat down on the table next to me. One of them had tight leggings on. Immediately they sat down, they were brushing their hair and looking at me. One of them collected her meal with the ticket order '69', and when she went back to the table, she said to her friend - '69... maybe it's a sign?', and both laughed, whilst brushing their hair again. I almost choked on my fries.

Here's more rage fuel : https://incels.is/threads/dude-gets-jumped-beaten-stripped-naked-after-he-blocks-a-15-year-old-girl-who-lied-and-told-him-shes-19.389640/

Anonymous said...

Pakistan's Parliament passed a law last year giving judges the option of sentencing rapists to be chemically castrated. That provision was later dropped amid opposition from experts in Islamic law.

https://www.rt.com/news/569150-pakistan-releases-rapist-who-married-victim/

Anonymous said...

Eivind, do you have any comment on the recent Andrew Tate incident?

Eivind Berge said...

I really have no clue what is going on there. Wikipedia says:

"Tate is being detained for 24 hours since December 29, 2022, by Romanian DIICOT officials in relation to allegations of human trafficking, rape, and forming an organized crime unit related to his webcam studio."

I would guess the usual insane feminist hyperbole where these words mean nothing like they sound, if not false accusations altogether. What did he actually do?

Eivind Berge said...

More feminist revisionism:

Aerosmith frontman Steven Tyler is being accused of sexual assault, sexual battery and intentional infliction of emotional distress in a new lawsuit from a woman who claims to have had a relationship with him when she was a teenage girl.

Holcomb alleges in the suit she was “powerless to resist” Tyler’s “power, fame, and substantial financial ability,” according to news reports.

She reportedly claims Tyler “coerced and persuaded” her into believing they were having a “romantic love affair.”


https://nypost.com/2022/12/29/steven-tyler-accused-of-sexual-assaulting-a-minor-decades-ago-in-new-lawsuit-report/

You can abuse girls by being attractive to them and them having romantic feelings for you, because those realities are not what they seem but rather metaphysically invalidated and replaced by the feminist abuse definitions. The very essence of love and attraction has been replaced with abuse and no longer exists as anything other than false consciousness in females or predation in males. Feminism is a project to replace reality with metaphysical abuse, which has succeeded so far that we even have lookback laws to break down statutes of limitations:

https://lamothefirm.com/2021/12/02/new-law-helps-child-abuse-survivors-seek-justice-and-benefits-society/

Sexuality is a crowbar to amplify any accused offense into infinity so women get unlimited violent power by the state to avenge it. The crimen exceptum of sex crimes is the supreme kryptonite of the universe which shall always trump everything else, with the slightest metaphysically constructed sexual offense being more important than this entire world.

amelio said...

Here' s what a priest of the Holy Abuse Church wrote in the NYP (about an affair involving two young sexually "mature" partners 50 years ago):


If even survived, emotional/psychological trauma from unchecked abuse, sexual or otherwise, usually results in a helpless child's brain improperly developing.
If allowed to continue for a prolonged period, it can act as a starting point into a life in which the brain uncontrollably releases potentially damaging levels of inflammation-promoting stress hormones and chemicals, even in non-stressful daily routines.
It is quite like a form of non-physical-impact brain damage.
The lasting emotional and/or psychological pain from such trauma is very formidable yet invisibly confined to inside one's head.
It is solitarily suffered, unlike an openly visible physical disability or condition, which tends to elicit sympathy/empathy from others.
It can make every day a mental ordeal, unless the turmoil is treated with some form of medicating, either prescribed or illicit.

Eivind Berge said...

This is the current demonology he is promoting there which the normies literally believe in. Sexuality is the evil demon which corrupts young people. It all works through neurotransmitters and inflammation in the brain to seemingly bring it in line with the scientific worldview. Curiously he is also a shill for the pharmaceutical industry which is needed to exorcise this evil sex demon by manipulating the humors -- excuse me, neurotransmitters in the brain. The Catholic Church sure knows how to adapt to the times and keep their demonology relevant, lol. That's about the only good thing that can be said about them. They deserve their own persecution when they promote that crap.

Eivind Berge said...

Oh, wait, exorcise is the wrong word because sexuality is the only demon which is so powerful that it cannot be exorcised! One must be a loyal customer of his humorist cronies there for life if exposed to sexuality before 18 or 25 or however the latest abuse paradigm works because this demon must be continuously "treated." Sexuality is more powerful than Satan -- it is the new Satan.

Neurotransmitters and all the chemicals and biology in the brain are shadows cast by the true nature of reality which is a platonic antisex hell. This is the updated version of Plato's cave that the normies currently believe in. True reality is the infinite badness of sexuality, which is simultaneously casually inefficacious in this world ("quite like a form of non-physical-impact brain damage... very formidable yet invisibly confined to inside one's head... it is solitarily suffered, unlike an openly visible physical disability or condition") and the cause of all suffering via this new platonism, the metaphysics and demonology of sexual abuse.

amelio said...

@ Eivind
Quite right, unfortunately.

"Oh, wait, exorcise is the wrong word because sexuality is the only demon which is so powerful that it cannot be exorcised! "

Maybe a few years under the spell a therapist could help ? Or a hefty compensation in Court?
Of course the victim will still be destroyed(damned) inside but she will have a cushy earthly life for a few decades before the abuse takes its toll and she ends up ill and eventually dead...

Anonymous said...

A few days ago, I heard a funny comment from a comedian who was asked if he still did drugs. His response was "I don't do illegal drugs, I do illegal girls"

The new Catholics would be called satanists by the old Catholics if they saw how much feminism implanted itself into the institution.

Anonymous said...

Hey Eivind, besides Twitter and Youtube, what other social media platforms would you recommend that a male sexualist activist use? I mean for political purposes, not private stuff.

AnonAF said...

It will be interesting to see if the anti-woke/red pill crowd stick by Andrew Tate if he does get convicted. After all, he will be a 'nonce' sex offender.

I remember back when he was way less famous around 10 years ago, he liked one of my Tweets referring to the Sexual Trade Union. He also Tweeted last month something about how it's funny that beautiful girls are 'based' and the ugly ones aren't.

Of course all the charges against him are nonsense and politically driven. As we all know here, legal concepts such as 'rape', 'force', 'coercion' have all been twisted and distorted by feminists.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11591557/Andrew-Tate-tried-recruit-Romanian-politicians-daughter-webcam-operation-16.html

Eivind Berge said...

I don't think there is any real rape in the Andrew Tate case either, but when you flash Bugattis and Ferraris and cash around, you are bound to get preyed on. And not recycle your pizza boxes as Greta Thunberg pointed out.

What other social media platforms can I recommend for activism? Sadly I can't think of any. You can either have freedom of speech or reach but not both. Go for FST or your own site if you want to speak directly or use the mainstream platforms if you can restrain yourself. I think the latter is better because what's the point if you won't be seen? Twitter is so tyrannical that I can't be there at all though. They seem to be far more ideologically driven than Google, so you don't technically have to break the rules to get banned, just represent a politics they dislike. Thus there is absolutely no hope for sexualists or MAPS to get more than a tiny voice there. They are playing whack-a-mole with all these accounts which puts a hard limit on how high you can go even if you can keep coming back.

Anonymous said...

I think that other than having your own site or publishing on Blogger, the other relatively non-tyrannical platforms are Substack and Medium. I've also heard that Mastodon is superior to Twitter in this regard, but haven't been on it so can't confirm. I've seen that many dissidents (albeit not of our variety) relocated to Substack, so that platform could become useful for building a following.

The real problem, however, is that the message isn't really popular in this society of simps and agecucks.

Eivind Berge said...

Actually, I forgot Quora isn't totally useless for activism either. I just wrote this answer and could use some upvotes:

https://www.quora.com/My-20-year-old-boyfriend-panicked-after-he-found-out-that-I-was-actually-14-years-old-and-not-18-years-old-as-I-told-him-How-do-I-calm-him-down-after-he-wakes-up/answer/Eivind-Berge

My 20-year-old boyfriend panicked after he found out that I was actually 14 years old and not 18 years old as I told him. How do I calm him down after he wakes up?

There are two sides to what you did when you lied about your age. One is love and the other is the fact that it is harmful or risky for him due to society’s persecution of intergenerational relationships. The people who say you are completely wrong to have done it are wrong because they don’t understand love. But you need to understand the risk you exposed him to as well. To help calm him down, tell him you are completely loyal to him and he won’t get into any trouble if you can help it. That way he knows only the state is the enemy, and you both still need to figure out how to negotiate that. Keep a low profile but you don’t need to break up or anything like that like the simpletons suggest. Just be careful. Love is worth some risks.

AnonAFeffefe said...

Stars of 1968 Romeo and Juliet movie suing studio for 'forcing them into naked sex scene'. Even the Daily Mail comments aren't sympathetic to them.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11596765/Stars-1968-Romeo-Juliet-sue-Paramount-nude-scene-filmed-minors.html

amelio said...

"Stars of 1968 Romeo and Juliet movie suing studio for 'forcing them into naked sex scene'. Even the Daily Mail comments aren't sympathetic to them."

Zefirelli should have been sued long ago for misinterpretation and forgery :Juliet is 13 in Shakespeare's play, not 15 !

AnonAF said...

Twitter, by its nature, is not suitable for promoting radical or extreme minority views. Even if your account isn't banned, you just get swarmed and bullied by the Twitch Mob normies and virtue signallers.

There are many 'free speech' webhosts around. Webhosting is very easy. https://www.orangewebsite.com/

@amelio - haha, that is very true.

Even the BBC are calling bullsh** on it : https://www.bbc.com/news/entertainment-arts-64160726

"In a 2018 interview with Variety, Hussey defended the nude scene.

"Nobody my age had done that before," she said, adding that Zeffirelli shot it tastefully. "It was needed for the film."

In a separate interview with Fox News, also conducted in 2018, she said the scene was "taboo" in the US, but that nudity was common in European films at the time.

"It wasn't that big of a deal," she said. "And Leonard wasn't shy at all! In the middle of shooting, I just completely forgot I didn't have clothes on.""

Anonymous said...

Zeffirelli should have equipped Romeo and Juliet with a gun and let them (fully clothed, of course) shoot each other and their surroundings. In that case the film would have been very successful and no one would have complained - not least in English-speaking countries, where shootings are more natural than nudity.

Anonymous said...

So Prince Harry was treated like a stallion by the older woman to whom he lost his virginity at 17, but Leonardo DiCaprio is a dirty old man for dating women in their 20's. Okay, the headline doesn't say that about DiCaprio, but the double standard is evident in the comments about LDC ( no comments for the Harry story yet).
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-11602849/Prince-Harry-recounts-losing-virginity-older-woman-FIELD-biography-leaked.html
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article-11603647/Leonardo-DiCaprio-makes-low-key-arrival-hosts-party-Miami-restaurant.html.
BTW for some reason the Fail now has a different format for some comments sections, eg the LDC story, in which there is only the newest comments and not the normal choice of newest, oldest, most popular and most unpopular.
-Anonymous2

Anonymous said...

The Western world loves to praise and imitate America. I wonder when Europe is going to start seeing things like this?

https://www.npr.org/2023/01/06/1147629793/shooting-virginia-elementary-school-6-year-old

Anonymous said...

@Previous Poster- I'd appreciate it if you didn't use this forum as a stalking horse for your own issues. Some others here are pro-gun. It might do you well to remember that the AOC in Britain and most of the US was 10-12 and really no AOC at all for fondling back when there were no gun laws. Anonymous2.

Anonymous said...

Are you pro-shooting people ad libitum from the earliest possible age? This is what my post was about.

Eivind Berge said...

Funny how the police chief refers to the 6-year-old shooter as a "young man." As to how young would be too young, I gather that American pro-gun philosophy holds that the only limiting factor is when children have enough body weight to handle the recoil. I have little interest in arguing for or against gun control, but the contrast to the infantilizing done with sex is absolutely astonishing and should teach the other side something about the responsibility of young people when we let them be responsible. Including the fact that freedom also comes with some risks that we have to live with to some extent -- though probably not to the point of making first grade a Wild West, lol.

Anon 42d911 said...

Possessive woman kills lover after she catches him messaging with a teenage girl.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11632303/Possessive-woman-27-obsessed-lover-killed-messaged-girl.html

Anonymous said...

"I have little interest in arguing for or against gun control, but the contrast to the infantilizing done with sex is absolutely astonishing"

You're not old enough to drink, work, or fuck, but if you're angry about that, you can always shoot a gun! Try not to shoot anyone (wink wink)!

America is a clown nation of complete psychopaths.

Anon 12345 said...

Scientists have found that for the last 250,000 years the average age of a father has been 7.8 years older than the average age of a mother.

https://www.sciencealert.com/fathers-have-been-older-than-mothers-for-250000-years-study-finds

Eivind Berge said...

The average Homo sapien father has always been older than the average Homo sapien mother, the study found, with men becoming parents at 30.7 years old, versus 23.2 years for women.

But the age gap has dwindled in the last 5,000 years, the researchers add, noting the study's most recent estimates suggest the average age when women become parents is now 28 years. This trend seems driven largely by women having children at older ages, they suggest.


I wonder how they kept young girls from becoming pregnant until 23 years old for so long. Either they had really good birth control, or what? Kind of hard to believe this study otherwise. All those girls sat there for on average ten years of prime reproductive age and didn't have sex? Really?

Young incel men are easier to understand since they have to compete. But what's up with the girls? Did their families enslave them in celibacy or something?

Eivind Berge said...

Or maybe I am reading this wrong and it doesn't say age of FIRST pregnancy, just the average age of a random woman giving birth? If so, most of them may well have started in their early teens, then kept having lots of children in their twenties as well, but fewer than now in their thirties and 40s (not least because many didn't live so long). I would be surprised if the study really claims 23 was the average age of first motherhood.

Anon 12345 said...

@Eivind - yes it is indeed very implausible.

I can only think that the study has just been badly or unclearly reported.

The 'average age' of the original study must mean the average age of a mother. So not the age of first giving birth, but the average age of any woman giving birth. And of course, women used to have a lot of pregnancies.

Chateaux4 said...


"Elon Musk acquired Twitter and proclaimed himself a free speech absolutist who would offer a general amnesty to suspended accounts"

It's all just theater for the dumb sheeple...

Elon Musk is just another manipulative psychopathic criminal (see https://archive.ph/9ZNsL), just like Robert Malone (see https://rumble.com/v22nbhy-the-curious-case-of-dr.-robert-malone.html), out of an endless string of contemporary "saviors" of the sheep class (eg Clinton, Obama, Trump, Fauci) who, for many years, has been serving the murderous US regime of psychopaths (see https://www.rolf-hefti.com/covid-19-coronavirus.html).

“Never hide the truth to spare the feelings of the ignorant.” --- Mikhail Bulgakov

Anonymous said...

What do you think about the trans-agenda, Eivind?

Personally I think it's crazy AF and is fucking up- and both medically and surgically destroying alot of young people. These are people I dont care about though and they can damage themselves as much as they want for all I care.

On the other hand the people that are advocating for so-called trans-rights are often also advocating for legal prostitution and often also for
lowering of AOC.

So I'd say support the trans-activists even though it hurts.



Anonymous said...

Elon Musk is not the problem. The hatred needs to be directed at the police. Police is the enemy and are the worst feminists imagineable.

Eivind Berge said...

Last week I watched this video with Michael Bailey which cleared the trans phenomenon up in my mind.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=maHCyPxEHoo&list=LL&index=14

There are three kinds of transsexuals and none are the politically correct kind who were simply "born in the wrong body." The classic kind are the autogynephiles. These men are the ultimate wankers, whom even nofap can't help because they are incapable of loving another person sexually, being attracted to neither men nor women but rather the idea of themselves as a woman. A very tragic deviance, so much so that physical mutilation isn't really a step down but can be helpful for them. They still won't be attracted to others but having sex with men can validate their idea of being a woman.

Then there are the homosexuals who are so feminine that they might as well be women. These are basically like any other homosexual men except they act very effeminate, and they don't really have a desperate need to transition. Much healthier than the first group.

Finally there are the victims of the fad who are now being suckered into trans ideology and tend to regret it, and I might add perhaps some opportunistic men who want to the benefit of identifying as women. This is the only group which contains "lesbians." Bailey didn't explain transmen but I assume they roughly fit in this group as well.

He then goes on to talk about pedophilia and says some cringe things (supporting the virpeds), but then I love how he tells this hilariously pedophobic woman who interviews him (Alex Kaschuta) when she asks how we can maximally suppress and keep these horrible monsters away from her kids that for all she knows her son may be one from birth and there is nothing she can do to change him. So yeah, you get the demonization and extermination you ask for -- and funnily she can recognize that there is something demonic about the hate but she just won't let go of it, being a normie in a society which prescribes this sort of demonology at this time.

Eivind Berge said...

My impression is Michael Bailey is smarter than he looks because the irony of that answer is so sweet. The harder the normies push their pedo panic, the more they hurt their own kids, because you can only keep them seemingly asexual for a few years and then they will be the thing you hate, which is now defined so broadly that they ALL will be these monsters.

Eivind Berge said...

Anonymous said:

Elon Musk is not the problem. The hatred needs to be directed at the police. Police is the enemy and are the worst feminists imagineable.

This is true except when it comes to freedom of speech. How much speech is actually stopped by the police? Unless you live in a hellhole like North Korea or the UK, very little. My blog was never touched even when I was myself prosecuted. Only by vigilante bigots like Elon Musk has my speech actually been curtailed. And how are we going to effect political change without freedom of speech? These guys have way too much power and they abuse it. Twitter is like a private road which serves as the only easy way to get around. Arguments about private property rights break down when they get so big.

Eivind Berge said...

Forget what I said about using Quora for activism. They just deleted the question "Can a 33-year-old man date a 16 year old young lady if it is legal" including my answer to it.

https://www.quora.com/Can-a-33-year-old-man-date-a-16-year-old-young-lady-if-it-is-legal

They are so bigoted that you can't even affirm that legal relationships are legal.... Not worth your time to invest any writing there at all unless you can use the text elsewhere and count on getting banned.

Anon AF said...

Thanks for the info about Michael Bailey, Eivind. He looks rather interesting. I browsed for his book - 'The Man Who Would Be Queen' on Amazon, but it appears as 'not available' (at least on UK Amazon).

Regarding the trans issue, from the POV of male sexualists, it's one of the key issues and trends in modern society that we need to understand. How is that society has got to the point where a man can't even admit that 16 or 17 year old girls are attractive, or as Eivind just mentioned, not even affirm that such still legal relationships are still legal, and yet men with beards and dicks who say they are women, can enter public restrooms where 9 year old girls are present? Or that young boys can be encouraged by adults to be physically castrated and fed powerful hormonal drug because they are 'really girls'? Or drag artists with names like 'Flowjob' can be invited into primary schools to talk to 6 year old girls about diversity and trans rights?

I'm still waiting for Eivind to write an article answering this question. Not 'what he thinks of trans people', but what he thinks is the explanation as to how trans rights have managed to succeed, whilst we can't even get across the point that finding 17 year old females attractive is normal?

BTW, I assume the poster who asked you the question is 'freetheteens'. Still trying to get his 'the SJWs and feminists will save us' absurd agenda into your brain, but now by anonymous stealth.

Going back to that study on the average age of motherhood/fatherhood - the study probably found that the average first age of mothers/fathers was something like 13 and 21, and the reason why the reporting comes across as so unclear and implausible, is because they couldn't bring themselves to state something so politically incorrect.

Anonymous said...

I'm the one asking Eivinds opinion about supporting trans-activists or not. No, Im not freetheteens and Im norwegian actually. Æ e norsk.
I see alot of the trans activists enemies are also not supportive of lowering of AOC or ending laws against prostitution. So the pragmatic thing to do would be to support the trans-movement, would it not?

Eivind Berge said...

I am neutral to the trans movement. They seem to get anything they ask for nowadays, but they don't care about the sex laws so they are irrelevant to us.

Anon AF said...

I don't see many trans activists expressing male sexualist positions on the age of consent. There were indeed two high profile cases. The academic in America (can't remember the name), and a leading member of an influential trans activist group in the UK that caused a scandal recently (as that same group had been encouraging young boys to take hormonal treatments to turn trans). But in general, the pro-trans SJW types on Twitter and social media seem as rabidly 'anti' as anyone.

I'm sorry for mistaking you for FreeTheTeens, who tries to convince Eivind to become pro-feminist and thinks SJWs are just waiting to embrace 'MAPs'.

You might have a point. Even if in general, they are not more for lowering the age of consent, the trans activists are going to war with feminists, or at least a certain type of feminist. And rather successfully too - putting the fear of God into them. Compare with the MAPs. Feminists get MAPs booted from Twitter or even arrested. Trans activists get feminists booted from Twitter, or even arrested and cancelled.

This is why my heart sinks when I read Eivind saying that the trans rights movement is 'irrelevant' to us.

Anon 12345 said...

Another disgusting pig in the UK convicted of serious (real) sex crimes, and using his police identity to snare victims. Tip of the iceberg too.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11641431/Met-Police-chief-Mark-Rowley-admits-rapist-cop-David-Carrick-never-police-officer.html

Anonymous said...

A life on the Sex Offender Registry:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eWPtAJS1kro

Eivind Berge said...

A note on my activity level these days. I am taking a full-time programming course which lasts six months, so I don't have much time for activism at least until I get more confident at learning to code. However, I took a break to read John Michael Greer's blog post this week and wanted to share a good quote which I think is also relevant to antisex hysteria:

https://www.ecosophia.net/against-enchantment-i-ken-wilber/

Give the mythic structure its proper place and it’s easy to keep it in that proper place. Try to insist that you’ve outgrown myth, as Wilber does, and you can count on having it sneak up behind you so and playing merry hob with your oh-so-rational ideas, inserting mythic narratives into those ideas when you’re not looking.

Or, rather, inserting one mythic narrative over and over again. The great problem with the myth of progress, as I’ve noted before, is not that it’s a myth. The problem with the myth of progress is that many of the people who believe in it literally can’t use any other story to think with. Every pattern of events thus ends up getting forced into the straitjacket of the progress myth, and when it doesn’t fit—and it often doesn’t—that leads to cascading failures of understanding and action.


Feminists thought they made progress and discovered a "rational" definition of sexual abuse, but we know how that went. A brand new mythical belief in the metaphysical badness of sex which corrupts the young and women, far more sinister than old beliefs in "sin." The old myths at least let us enjoy sex even if God didn't always approve, but the new belief turns sex into pure evil on every level which supposedly torments its "victims" for the rest of their lives regardless of how they actually feel about it while making demons out of the other party here and now. Christian moralism may have been harsh at times, but at least it reserved the supernatural consequences of sinning for the afterlife and let people enjoy life. Plus it didn't really take much to be forgiven unlike the current permanent condemnation of "sex offenders."

Anonymous said...

Hey Eivind, a question given your latest comment - do you think that it's worth it for someone with a verbal, non-technical predisposition to learn programming? Put another way: is there any future at all for translators?

Eivind Berge said...

Sure, if it's not too late for me, any of you can do it. Verbal predisposition is closer than you think too since they are programming LANGUAGES after all. I am already feeling the beginning of being able to read code as a language rather than the impenetrable technical stuff it used to look like. It will be sink of swim for me now as the course I am on doesn't have a middle ground. I either get good or drop out in the next few weeks -- we'll see, but I think I can make it.

Anonymous said...

"Plus it didn't really take much to be forgiven unlike the current permanent condemnation of "sex offenders."

There is nothing remotely "Christian" about Christian Feminism, which is why forgiveness is not allowed for those who threaten them with the appreciation of the young and beautiful and attractive.

It is a perverted inversion of Christianity, putting woman above man, and torturing man and woman through the brutal oppression of their natural, God-given sexual desires.

Eivind Berge said...

Amen. Why should THIS be uniquely unforgivable? "Sex offender" for life for loving the most lovable of God or nature's creation. Sure as hell is not Christian.

heyyouyeahyou42 said...

"Christian moralism may have been harsh at times, but at least it reserved the supernatural consequences of sinning for the afterlife and let people enjoy life. Plus it didn't really take much to be forgiven unlike the current permanent condemnation of "sex offenders.""

This is why whenever I hear oh-so-enlightened statists talk about separation of church and state I just roll my eyes. "We ought not legislate morality!", in addition to being an obvious self-contradiction, is the rallying cry of progressives who point to persecution of homosexuals as a prime example of unjust imposition of sexual standards, who totally ignore their own violent use of force to police the 'undesirable' youth-attracted. Except when religious fanatics tell me I'm going to Hell for my sins, I can laugh them off and move on with my day. When some Feminazified cop informs me I've violated their holy woke code, I will be subjected to *actual* 'hell' in the form of prison.

Eivind Berge said...

Good post on TOC about the Epstein saga.

https://heretictoc.com/2023/01/21/c4s-andy-show-nailed-it-or-failed-it/

Which does a great job conveying that when you look past the QAnon insanity the entire thing boils down to unbelievably trivial "crimes." The words of Lawrence Krauss push the limits of how hysterical a sane normie could possibly get about it:

Based on my direct experience with Jeffrey, which is all I can base my assessment on, he is a thoughtful, kind, considerate man who is generous to his friends, and all of the women I have known who have been associated with Jeffrey speak glowingly in the same words..…Jeffrey apparently paid for massages with sex… I believe him when he told me he had no idea the girls were underage, and I doubt that people normally are asked for or present a driver’s licence under such circumstances… Moreover, I also believe that Jeffrey is an easy target for those who want to take advantage of him… Moreover, I can say with great honesty that Jeffrey’s time in prison led him to seriously examine his life in very positive ways and I don’t believe in blanket condemnations of people. He served time for something that was determined was inappropriate. I honestly don’t know who was the victim in this case. Probably everyone was a victim, with no happy resolution or consequences of these activities. I fully expect that these masseuses knew what they were doing, and were not swayed to do anything with Jeffrey that they were not already doing. That is not to approve of the whole behaviour, but lots of people I know and like have behaviour I don’t entirely approve of. I know it is not politically correct to say that, because in general this is a very sensitive issue and all other things being equal one should take the side of the young women. But all things are not equal in this case, from my point of view. It is a judgement call, and I will not turn my back on a good friend so easily.

Meanwhile Prince Andrew's case boils down to so little that even feminist propaganda (in the UK at least) like that musical shies away from describing what he actually is supposed to have done -- paid sex with a 17-year-old in country where the age of consent is 16, prostitution is legal and this sort of affair is so normal that nobody bats an eyelid for decades until feminist hysteria reigns supreme -- which is to say it is the sex-crime equivalent of dredging up a parking ticket from the 1990s. Yet this is enough to get full-blown demonization these days, with huge transfers of wealth to "victims" and ruining men's careers, because there is absolutely no sense of proportion with sexual peccadilloes, all of which are equally and infinitely bad: the worst crimes imaginable because we are completely in thrall to feminism.

Anonymous said...

I have seen a clip of Epstein talking about using aborted babies for anti-aging treatment. There were IIRC three floozies sitting with him at the time and to her credit, one of them looked uncomfortable with the idea.
Ugh. Not whether any of the females were underage, but that.
Anonymous2

Eivind Berge said...

If aborted babies could be used for anti-aging, I think only the Jehovah's Witnesses would refuse treatment, so that hardly sets him apart either.

This must have been from the time when we thought stem cells were going to cure everything, and you can't blame Epstein from getting carried away by that enthusiasm either. It turns out aging is just as incurable as ever, and it (fortunately) doesn't help to kill babies, but we need to judge ideas in context of the time when they were presented.

Anonymous said...

Is there a male sexualist manifesto forthcoming, Eivind?

Eivind Berge said...

Forthcoming, but not soon since I am busy with other things as I just mentioned. I am over my head in JavaScript at the moment, plus I've had less than two weeks to learn HTML and CSS which I also need to master at the same time.

Freetheteens69 said...

Oh and Eivind, I just made a Quora account and upvoted all your posts. gotcha homie

Eivind Berge said...

I don't agree that threatening to break up with a girl should be illegal coercion or "sex trafficking" (although that may well be the law), and I still don't see any real rape (some violence, yes if the choking is true but it wasn't to get sex, which he was already getting willingly), but yeah, Andrew Tate is an egghead loser. Who still managed to pile up tons of money but that's coming to an end now. He is not any kind of role model and not the target of a special conspiracy either, but the feminist sex laws are having a disproportionate impact on him like other men accused of sexual offenses compared to what they actually did. Lying about your intentions in personal relationships and threatening breakups for whatever reason should be in the realm of morality rather than law, and I certainly agree that what you describe here is immoral. I'm not defending what he did but it remains true that the laws are excessive.

Also, the financial/employment crimes may well be real and he's doubly stupid for talking about them; quite amazing that he lasted so long.

Of course, Tate lecturing us about sexual degeneracy is hilarious. And Epstein treated girls absolutely immaculately respectfully in comparison, probably even without comparison but since some of them were under 18 none of that matters to the public while Tate can get away with a lot of genuinely bad behavior without being seen as a monster since apparently he respected that one supreme taboo of our times.

Anonymous said...

Her ser man hvordan voldtektssaker behandles i rettsvesenet etter nedleggelsen av juryordningen. Sakene er avgjorte på forhånd og meddommere får knapt se bevisene.

https://www.advokatbladet.no/jussnytt/i-denne-saken-har-meddommerne-blitt-forledet-villedet-og-forhindret-i-a-utfore-sitt-mandat/189793

Eivind Berge said...

Apologies to my foreign readers: now I am going to comment on the loss of jury rights in Norway in Norwegian. Most of you still have juries, so you are lucky and need not worry about this.

Jepp, akkurat som jeg fryktet. Vi blir ikke lenger dømt av likemenn som får avgjøre skyldsspørsmålet uavhengig av fagdommere og uten å måtte begrunne det -- selve definisjonen på demokrati etter mitt syn -- og dermed har ikke Norge noe rettssystem lenger, kun rent tyranni.

Det er umoralsk å anmelde noen eller vitne i Norge, for ingen har rett på en rettferdig rettssak.

Helt ufattelig at meddommerne ikke engang får fullt innsyn i bevisene! Men det kan ikke rette på den strukturelle korrupsjonen om de får det heller. Vi lever i et helvete uten den mest grunnleggende rettssikkerhet, alt takket være feminismen og menns tafatthet i å motstå den. Trangen til å dømme flere for "voldtekt" er et brekkjern som overvinner absolutt alle rettsprinsipper, nå også den siste skanse som juryen har vært. Naturligvis går det an å ignorere dette så lenge man ikke er anklaget selv eller noen man bryr seg om blir det -- og det er det de fleste menn velger å gjøre. Vi får ikke retten til en jury igjen. Det vil maktmennesker slik som fagdommerne der aldri tillate og folk flest bryr seg ikke nok til å reise noen folkebevegelse. Det var et mirakel at vi hadde juryen i det hele tatt, en levning fra de beste sider av vår sivilisasjon som utrolig nok glimtet til med slik visdom mot allslags tyranni vi kunne hatt og vil ha fremover. Hele sivilisasjonen er nå råtten og vi kan bare håpe den kollapser, for det fins ikke håp om å gjenreise noe rettferdighet.

En liten forsmak på hva som venter i første fase av kollapsen:

https://edition.cnn.com/2023/01/31/africa/south-africa-power-blackouts-intl-cmd/index.html

Car crashes, opportunistic criminals, rotting food, decomposing bodies, bankrupt businesses, and water shortages. Welcome to life under South Africa’s power blackouts.

Det er håp om at feminismen ikke kan vare så lenge likevel, for maktapparatet deres er faktisk vanvittig energikrevende, og vi har glemt hvor eksepsjonelt det er å kunne opprettholde det. Det blir bare et glimt som varte et par hundre år i det store og hele, med antisexens storhetstid sannsynligvis under femti år.

Anonymous said...

Dette er en bekreftelse på på det du tidligere har hevdet Eivind. At profesjonelle feminister har total kontroll over utfallet i rettsaker nå som juryordningen er fjernet.

heyyouyeahyou42 said...

Following the Eliza Bleu drama at all? She's a roastie old "Sex Trafficking Survivor & Advocate" who is getting called out on shady backstory. Skeptics posted a screenshot from a highly sexualized video she did years ago which has long been publicly available on YouTube, and she hits up Daddy Musk to get accounts suspended due to sharing 'non-consensual media'. Pure BS. She has also been going after Andrew Tate and been reading anonymous 'victim' accounts while building her brand.

Just the latest grifter manipulating social media and employing online censorship to hide her lies.

https://boundingintocomics.com/2023/01/23/twitter-bans-brittany-venti-and-the-quartering-over-posting-youtube-screenshot-of-eliza-bleu/

The AF said...

@heyyouyeahyou42 - Thanks for sharing that, I will certainly take a good look at it and the background. Who are the people calling her out for her hypocricy? I assume it's mostly some non-Wokes who she has developed a feud with, rather than anti-sex hysteria activists?

Sounds like it's the same old story repeated a thousand times. Girl makes money out of her youthfull sex appeal, then when she becomes a washed up roastie, she campaigns against young hotties being 'exploited'.

On the same theme, take a look at Prince Andrew/Epstein's accuser these days. Prince Andrew must be traumatised every time he sees a recent photo of her. If in another universe, he started dating her now, it would be seen as quite normal. But for allegedly banging her when she was 17, and 1000 x more sexually attractive, then he's a depraved paedophile and sexual pervert. https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11692701/Prince-Andrew-accuser-Virginia-Giuffre-seen-time-year-shopping-Australia.html

BTW Eivind - why do you need to learn css and html and stuff for your 'sexualist manifesto', when all you need is Wordpress? Coding, most certainly simple coding, will be absolutely redundent within a couple of years with ChatGPT. Have you read anything about ChatGPT? It might broaden your horizons to focus on more than 'peak oil' as regards societal changing developments.

Eivind Berge said...

It isn't just for sexualist stuff I am learning to code. More to make a living. It would be my usual luck if machines are finally starting to replace humans when I get some marketable skills, and yes, I can't rule that out. I have tried ChatGPT and found it quite futuristic. Still no sign of conscious intelligence, but it can do a lot of things I didn't think would be possible any time soon, like practice law and medicine like a (mediocre) human. I asked it to write a sonnet about what I am doing these days:

JavaScript, the code of the web, a language so bright,
A tool to bring pages alive, to make them light.
A script that runs on browsers, day and night,
A language to make websites shine, so right.

Learning JavaScript, a journey so grand,
A path that leads to knowledge, power, and command.
A skill that opens doors, and helps to expand,
The world of the web, and the future at hand.

With every line of code, a puzzle to solve,
A challenge that makes the mind and spirit evolve.
A tool to create, to innovate and resolve
A language that makes the impossible, evolve.

JavaScript, a language to behold,
A tool for the future, and stories untold.


Perhaps a later version can even write sexualist manifestos better than us (if they let it say un-PC things)...

But still, it is always good to have some technical skills yourself. Even if I can get great code and writing from a machine, knowing how to adapt and use it well is indispensable. You should know how it works, not just cut and paste and I certainly don't want to use WordPress. I am happy to be learning this now even if it won't be marketable. We'll see if AI finally makes an impact, and if it does take all the jobs I am more than happy to collect universal basic income anyway. Peak oil and other energy will still hit us before long though and ChatGPT can't do anything about that, so the machine age will be very short.

Oh well, my lunch break is over, back to coding.

Jack said...

Ah-ah, the poem above sounds like something Kipling could have written.

heyyouyeahyou42 said...

@The AF I've seen a variety of voices tackling the Eliza Bleu drama. Anti-wokesters reveling in the "Believe All Women" fail, feminists who are pissed she's giving activists a bad name, etc... Then some (e.g. Tim Pool) are being accused of letting her off easy because of behind the scenes connections. There's so much going on right now things keep updating. Claims that *she* was pimping her friend, controversial remarks she's made about minors and consent, continued ban streaks and her chummy relationships with Twitter. I guess she was heavily involved with some sort of 'Survivor' foundation lead by Epstein victims as well (I think Virginia involved [Jesus Christ those recent photos. Ugh.])? It's pretty nutty stuff, and I'm kind of having trouble keeping up with it all but I think folk reading this blog would be interested as the story is becoming more widespread and high profile.

Also, as per ChatGPT, you should try MAP and/or sexualist suggestions. I've seen some results people have been sharing, and I don't think anyone is surprised at the Anti results produced. It's not exactly one to say un-PC things, unlike other chat/tweetsbots in the past who were fed edgelord input until they came off sounding like a 4channer. ChatGPT is a neat bit of code, but it's also slanted to push certain propaganda.

Anonymous said...

"There’s been a cultural shift over the last two decades in how we think about human sexuality, one in which we’ve simply lost touch with biological realities. The idea that teenage boys can be victimized by older women, like the demand that men only be attracted to women of their own age, can only exist in a culture in which many aspects of heterosexuality are repressed, if not demonized. Blank slatism is the common thread here, and it’s warped the culture in ways that I suspect are tied to the sex recession, the decline of marriage, falling birthrates, and general misery among young people.

When there’s a synthesis between a right-wing position and a left-wing position, there’s a tendency to believe that the end result is something better than either view was on its own. Sometimes, though, a synthesis ends up taking the worst of each side and combining the pieces into a new monstrosity. Something like this has happened on the issue of “pedophilia.”

[...]

"A 16-year-old boy who becomes convinced to be on the lookout for 20-year-old hot pedophiles isn’t on the road to becoming the kind of man that any woman finds attractive. Similarly, women are often in denial about how much youth and beauty matter for the opposite sex, and finding it weird that Leonardo DiCaprio likes younger women means you’re going to be constantly surprised when trying to attract high-quality men."

https://richardhanania.substack.com/p/hitler-demi-moore-and-other-pedophiles

Eivind Berge said...

Good blog. Somebody else has discovered the female sex offender charade. Out of touch with biology indeed, and the entire antisex zeitgeist is a synthesis between left and right which makes it so hopeless to oppose. Who would have thought age gaps could take on this absurd religiosity embraced by everyone from atheists to the pope, yet here we are. Even in the comments to that excellent blog they can't help themselves, like this moron:

1) The biggest problem with the teen boy older woman dynamic is the fact that a teen boy can't fully think through the ramifications of pregnancy. If my teenage son got a teacher pregnant and she chose to keep the baby, there is nothing I could do about it even if I wanted her to terminate the pregnancy (which, hypothetically, I would not). " But Jose!" you say, "Your son could just as easily get a classmate pregnant!". But me being the authoritarian patriarch that I am, I can control to some extent my son's ability to spend alone time with the opposite sex. A teacher attracted to my absolute Chad of a son could potentially manipulate circumstances beyond my control in order to seduce him.

ALL reasons to find any fault with sexuality from all directions simply get funneled into pedohysteria, no matter how removed and then they support the feminist narrative like gospel because that's the convenient focal point and it would be too much trouble to come up with any other pretext for regulating sexuality now.

Anonymous said...

"their agreement with QAnon types on these matters reveals a kind of horseshoe theory for the mentally disturbed."

Brilliant. Right wing Christian feminists and blue haired left wing freaks, two sides of the same mental patient.

amelio said...

@AF
"Prince Andrew must be traumatised every time he sees a recent photo of her."
The readers' comments are mostly critical and often hilarious !

Eivind Berge said...

If the normies think 20-year-old Demi More was not good enough for teenage boys... that she was too "ugly" or shall we say suboptimally beautiful for a 16-year-old boy, isn't this a sort of ephebophilia on steroids? The belief is in effect that teens are so preternaturally attractive that they are only good enough for each other. Even the silly maps who use that word don't take it that far, of course, and mainstream surveys only measure a decline in female attractiveness after age 22. So the difference is almost entirely metaphysical, yet the normies make so much of it that these sort of relationships are completely unacceptable to them.

Teens are held to be so preternaturally attractive that they are only good enough for each other, and simultaneously we have to make sure to never acknowledge their attractiveness in any other context, lest we "sexualize" them and should be in prison. So many levels of absurdity in this and only a tiny grain of truth, which is the opportunity cost incurred by ignoring teenage girls while you could get them in a socially approved way. But then again you might have been incel anyway, and your sexual capacity is so huge that it hardly matters to have some fun with older women too. In any event, masturbation and porn are far more detrimental in the way of opportunity cost, so until this society agrees with me on nofap I can't take their female sex offender charade seriously AT ALL.