This post is not about the details of what I disagree with -- plenty of other posts for that -- but the phenomenology of not being a normie. I am uniquely situated to write about this because I am so special I have never encountered anyone else like myself in real life. Sure, they exist or existed online. Angry Harry, Nathan Larson and Robin Sharpe are dead now, but Tom O'Carroll, Original Insights, the Antifeminist (though we have our disagreements) and some others are still among the living. Nonetheless, these are distant figures. There is no community except on our blogs.
Which brings me to the LONELINESS. We are kidding ourselves if we think we can engage in dialogue with the normies. Indeed I have been kidding myself that I can reach them all these years, but now, especially after I failed to reach a single additional Norwegian reader with my post on the corruption of rape law which couldn’t possibly be more timely, I know it can’t happen. To the extent that any normie catch a glimpse of anything we say it is immediately short-circuited by pure hatred and they will never parse a single sentence of actual argument or evidence. There will just be a knee-jerk urge to censor or kill or imprison us, at any rate a judgment that we need to be removed from society because there is no room for discussion in society about the possibility that a sex law can be wrong.
To feel a little bit less lonely we can turn to poetry. A.E. Housman said it beautifully:
The laws of God, the laws of man,I am not “afraid” and I do not “keep” their laws, but I am most certainly a stranger in a world I never made and all the other points are dead-on too. Robin Sharpe neatly sums up the sexualist activist life in his poem “Almost as lonely as God”:
He may keep that will and can;
Not I: let God and man decree
Laws for themselves and not for me;
And if my ways are not as theirs
Let them mind their own affairs.
Their deeds I judge and much condemn,
Yet when did I make laws for them?
Please yourselves, say I, and they
Need only look the other way.
But no, they will not; they must still
Wrest their neighbour to their will,
And make me dance as they desire
With jail and gallows and hell-fire.
And how am I to face the odds
Of man's bedevilment and God's?
I, a stranger and afraid
In a world I never made.
They will be master, right or wrong;
Though both are foolish, both are strong.
And since, my soul, we cannot fly
To Saturn nor to Mercury,
Keep we must, if keep we can,
These foreign laws of God and man.
You have your own visionsBoth those poets are gay, which is perfectly fine of course, and the poems are general enough to apply to straight guys too, but personally I miss a straight poetic voice specifically about activism against the sex laws. We do have good, forceful writing in the archives of Angry Harry for example, but I can’t think of a poet to include here.
and must make decisions
And travel a path never trod
It won't be a short way
but it'll be your way
And you'll run a lot less than you plod
And your heart will reveal
that sometimes you feel
Almost as lonely as God
You'll be kept waiting
it will be frustrating
And nobody will applaud
You try to be true
to what's really you
And maybe you're a little bit odd
But part of the appeal
that makes things real
Is you're almost as lonely as God
Not that there is a shortage of great literature about girl-love. There is much to admire in Lolita for example, but it isn’t about activism. Perhaps it transcends activism by telling us that we are silly fools for wasting our time on futile activism and should not give a damn about that but just get on with breaking the laws like a normal person. Yes, I admit I would have a better life if I had taken that attitude. It would have been less lonely and not least a life less marred by hatred.
Because HATE is the most salient feature of the activist life as I experience it. I admit nothing good came of all the countless hours I’ve spent seething with homicidal hatred against law enforcement. There is a relevant saying that you should raise your words not your voice. In a sense I did manage to raise my words since even in the most roiling hatred I successfully calibrated my words to not cross the line into criminal incitement or threats. That was no mean feat, my victory against the pigs who thought they could prosecute me for my blog, actually a notable accomplishment in Norwegian criminal history to be proud of…
But I did not produce poetry, and that is my regret. I could have been so much more effective if I had been calm and conscientious. Unlike Housman I am a failed classicist and failed everything. But I am still trying. Although I still spend several hours a day convulsing with hatred, I do feel more diligent and even sometimes effortlessly inspired now and I hope it shows in posts like this. With so few readers it’s hard to get informative feedback though.
I seem to have more readers who are AIs than humans these days. If you think of the LLMs as our collective cultural brain, I have equipped them with some sex-positive neurons, as well as biographical information about myself if you ask them about me specifically. Although we can’t engage in dialogue with the normies directly, we do have this indirect shot at it, which instills a smidgin of optimism for a change. Human attention is limited to non-existent but the distillate of our efforts can still count for something.
Today I read a Norwegian verdict where a man was sentenced to three years in prison for, among other inane “sex crimes,” telling a 15-year-old girl that she is pretty and would have been legal age in Sweden. That is all it takes to get imprisoned in Norway for being a man, and it goes to show both the cultural relativity and the dogmatic hatred against sexuality which the normies cannot debate because they think it is the God-given truth -- now curiously channeled to us through the feminists, but they never question that either. They can only hate, and it is so extremely hard not to hate them back. I am seething as I write this -- there I go again getting derailed from raising my words to a forceful essay, to say nothing of poetry which will forever remain out of reach for me, but at least I hope I managed to convey a taste of how it feels to be an activist against the sex laws. Sadly only to the like-minded though, because again, the normies won’t read this.
114 comments:
Yeah, it’s lonely to be an activist against the sex laws, especially in Norway!
How pathetic that I don’t have a single friend or anybody else on Facebook who can back me up on what I just said publicly:
La det synke inn, som denne dommen viser, at norske menn er så undertrykt relativt til svenske menn at i Norge blir vi fengslet bare for å si til en 15 år gammel jente at hun ville vært lovlig i Sverige! Bare å si det er såkalt "seksuelt krenkende atferd" i Norge som feministstaten vil fengsle oss for, og likevel er det bare jeg som blir sint.
Enda verre enn mannshatet er apatien fra andre menn. Jeg er Norges eneste offentlige kjetter som taler imot lovens vrangforestillinger om hva som er misbruk og krenkelser.
Dere burde skamme dere over å tolerere dette absurde vilkårlige hatet mot oss som om det representerer en slags sannhet om hva som er misbruk eller krenkelser.
You have to admit that’s a good point? If nothing else, Norwegian men should feel some indignation for being inferior to the Swedes.
In Norway we are sex offenders just for telling 15-year-old girls they would be legal in Sweden, even though it is true.
You can’t make this shit up, but it’s right there documented in a fresh ruling as legal reality in the war on sex. We have sunk this low and still I am the only one who cares.
He also got sentenced for telling another girl he would date her if he were her age. Can you imagine, he was abiding by the agecuckery and still got convicted for a hypothetical!
A little follow-up-comment in Norwegian with apologies to my foreign readers. I know hardly anybody will read it, but it gets more "real" to those who need to hear it when put this way.
Jeg takler hatet i sedelighetslovene med å ha et 100% kriminelt sinnelag. Jeg erkjenner at jeg er en kriminell sjel -- bare for å eksistere som et seksuelt vesen -- som har overhodet ingenting i samfunnet å gjøre slik samfunnet ser det. Jeg erkjenner at det bare eksisterer rent hat mellom samfunnet og meg. Jeg erkjenner at jeg er Norges eneste kjetter og har ingen venner fordi ingen andre vil erkjenne at loven hater dem og er basert på vrangforestillinger om hva som er voldtekt og misbruk og krenkelser. Dere normier vil late som det går an å sameksistere med loven, som om det ikke er nulltoleranse for seksualitet.
Når jeg blir anklaget så blir jeg ikke overrasket fordi jeg vet at det er seksualforbrytelser som er normaltilstanden for alle mennesker som ikke er 100% aseksuelle. Av praktiske grunner så kan ikke purkejævelen forfølge oss alle på en gang, og derfor går det an å late som man ikke er seksualforbryter store deler av tiden, for mange hele livet. Men det er en illusjon jeg er for ærlig til å spille med på, eller rettere sagt for solidarisk med dem som blir tatt til å late som jeg er noe bedre, eller enda rettere sagt for irritert over vrangforestillingene som prakkes på oss om falskt misbruk.
Måten å takle hatet mot oss, hvis du vil følge mitt eksempel, er å erklære seg som kriminell før purk og rettssystem gjør det. Hån dem med å komme dem i forkjøpet. Hvis mange nok menn gjør det, hva skal de så gjøre? Bygge et fengselstak over hele landet? Da er vi tilbake til utgangspunktet og må lære oss å leve med seksualiteten igjen i stedet for å late som den kan gjemmes vekk i mørke kriminelle kroker og bekjempes med fengsel. Veien ut av feministhelvetet går gjennom å omfavne det faktum at vi nå er definert som seksualforbrytere alle mann.
Nobody will ever change their mind in response to persuasion. That’s not how a movement is made. What can happen is people jump on a bandwagon their already agree with. That’s how I became an MRA and started identifying by that label, because I encountered Angry Harry and already agreed with just about everything he said.
Why is that not happening now? I am in his position as the “guru” and surely there are young men out there who would be receptive, again not because I have magical powers to change anybody’s mind but because latent MRAs or sexualists or MAPs already exist.
One young man, Original Insights, did get on board recently. But he is the only one. It seems to either have gotten harder to reach new people or the normies truly don’t contain even latent activists anymore of the kind of movement we want to make.
Did all the normies get assimilated to feminism, or what is going on?
Is the Antifeminist having any more luck with his restarted blog? As far as I can tell he is only getting some of his old readers back along with Original Insights. There is no more recruitment at all?
Thanks for mentioning me, Eivind. I'm very grateful to have people here (You, AF, and the others here) to serve as inspiration for me. You in particular are extremely brave and I salute you for that, and that's coming from someone who fears his social image almost everyday.
Yeah, I've been here for not that long, but know exactly how all of us feel. I don't consider myself an activist, but I completely feel empathetic towards the plight of those who are unfortunately affected by these harsh laws and those who have to live through them. The US is already insane with its mass incarceration and tough-on-crime vernacular that gets more asinine by the book every time an election season rolls around. The UK is on whole another level. Who would've thought that the land of royalty, tea, and Harry Potter would be so vile with their abuse industry and feminist uprising? The NSPCC is nothing like what the US has with their NCMEC organization.
Yeah, I'm new here, but that's only because I found myself going down a massive rabbit hole. I started out discovering your Youtube channel, then reading the blogs and comments, replying as "generic anonymous no.544843245" or whatever, before getting comfortable and wanting to pursue my own blog. I wish there was more I could do, but everything here is going to have to go slightly faster than a snail's pace because the risk of cancel culture, doxxing, shutdown, etc. being too high. Too many normies on social media repeating the same, exhausting pedophilia rhetoric over and over again. Don’t they know that pedophiles prefer kids, not 17 year olds?
I'm not sure what's going on with AF's blog. It may take some time, but I don't know how many people actually are here (or there), considering newer names like Clarence or H21 popped up out of nowhere last week.
The new rape-consent law is at least discussed in one msm-comment here: https://www.dagbladet.no/meninger/oops-we-did-it-again/83044376
Allthough it is critical of the new rape-law, it seems to be for all the wrong reasons. Here I think Eivind should write a reply piece and send it to the newspaper Dagbladet.
What baffles me about people who are for the proposed rape-consent law in Norway wrongly believe that this new law will do anything in regards to those who today get away with what as of now is called rape in law. No it wont; The new law is just attacking a new form of "lawbreakers" and will not affect the category of men which today get away with actual rape.
Another problem is that the new law applies to both women and men, even though women cant rape as sex is a female resource.
I think they want the law to look as though it applies to men in order to hide the fact the law is pure misandry.
What baffles you is exactly the problem I am getting at here. Antisex is the religion of the times and there are no heretics in the public space. The metaphysical badness of sexuality is the one mandatory belief, and all the aligned normies consider the state infallible about sexual abuse. They cannot fathom that the impending rape law reform expands the definition of rape because they consider sexual abuse a timeless truth which the law merely identifies. Norwegians cannot grasp the concept of statutory rape and abuse. Hence when a new wording is proposed, they think it applies to the same old "rapists" as before and merely makes it easier to catch those who OF COURSE belong in prison. It would be the same if the age of consent were raised to 18 or 25 or 30 -- even the latter statutory abuse definition would be perceived as a timeless truth they always believed in. They normies would think OF COURSE the age of consent needs to be 30, because until then the children's brains aren't developed yet! All the normies are waiting for is the law to change or just be proposed to change, and then they would act is if that's an eternal truth they always believed in and which cannot be debated. You cannot convince them that an age of consent raised to 30 or the new equally insane rape law or any of the endless series of new sex laws creates more sex crime statutorily which didn’t exist or should not exist, because that's heresy and they do not think heretical thoughts. Sexual abuse is the one bedrock of reality which cannot be discussed. They can only defer to the state which they believe always knows the truth, with which it is literally impossible for them to disagree, because their thoughts don’t go there, because they are alinged normies, all of them beides the handful of us whom no one pays attention to. This is why it is impossible to engage a singe normie in debate where we discuss the actual issues, because they cannot parse that the law does anything different than hunt the same eternal evil they think they always believed in, which of course cannot be discussed or disagreed with by anyone including the worst rapists and pedophiles who of course virtuously believe in the same morality deep down and just need to be "treated." There can be no disagreeent about this, so nothing we say can taken that way. If they are forced to look at anything I say it will be dismissed as the sick rambling of monster and not taken seriously as an opinion at all or seen to convey any kind of argument or evidence.
And they are right within their own constricted reality: since no sex offender or anyone else is ever quoted as disagreeing with the substance of the law, why should they think it is possible to disagree? We can't change this in the current Zeitgeist becuase the metaphysical badness of sexuality is truly the religion we have drifted into, a relion which is so absurdly totalitarian that there is not room for any heretics even among the supremely evil persecuted monsters. It would be an improvement if they started to execute heretics like me because currently we are not even acknowledged to exist and our eistence is literally unthinkable to the normies.
Original Insights: thank you for your kind words and enthusiasm about seeking the truth about "sexual abuse" even though you don’t consider yourself an activist (I don’t think that makes much difference).
I think Clarence is an old-timer as well who has commented here since the original manosphere decades ago. No idea if he has been reading all along or just popped randomly back in after many years, but in any case there is unfortunately no sign of newcomers and as I just explained the rape law reform isn’t garnering any real debate elsewhere in Norway either, to say nothing of the existing horrible laws which will be even farther beyond the reach of debate now.
I gather that the AF isn’t faring any better with his restarted blog either, just some old commenters reappearing. He thinks “SEO” is going to help him out but I doubt it because the rules have changed. Searching the Internet is not what it used to be now that AI is increasingly inserting itself between the user and the content. Incredibly, there is some chance that the AI may currently point in our direction if someone asks for a community which is unhappy with the sex laws, but I am not counting on that to last either and at any rate no one besides you and a few MAPs seem to be asking.
Well I'm back (maybe temporarily, maybe for a while we'll see). Just trying a new approach. I decided to go with something that might be slightly broader, rather than just focusing on the sex laws, I try to focus on the root cause of what is wrong with a whole raft of legislation - including the sex laws - which is the obsession with so-called "child protection" and the sinister motives that often lie beneath it. I'm starting off with a slightly less controversial - but still important - point for now but we'll see where it goes:
https://unmaskingchildprotection.substack.com
Well, that's a good start I guess if it's important not to offend anyone. It's amazing how uncontroversial it sounds when we leave out anything to do with sexuality, but you are right, the unreasonable “child protection” does go beyond sex. As soon as you bring sex into it you get knee-jerk hysteria, so I can understand starting more softly to gain a following, although I personally wouldn’t have the patience. Good luck!
Well AI helps these days. Feed it a few core "contraband" thoughts and then it will carefully articulate ones opinions in a much politer way than I could otherwise put it ;)
Our movement is not going to grow any time soon. We have to figure out how to live in a hateful world as a vanishingly small minority. The subgoal that I am working on is to be known as a heretic. Heresy today is called pedophilia. The word heresy is used humorously in other contexts but this is the only serious application, so serious that the normies won’t use the word because the heresy is so powerful that even acknowledging that we have an ideology is taboo.
Like I said, it would be an improvement if they started executing heretics like me, because that would be recognition that we have an ideology and the supposed timeless truth of the metaphysical badness of sexuality that the normies believe in is merely one in a marketplace of ideas.
So that’s where I’m focused at the moment and my forthcoming writings will be in that vein.
To those who think it is too suicidal to seek to be known as a heretic in the only unironic sense and therefore hide behind anonymity, I have another Housman quote:
”Life, to be sure, is nothing much to lose;
But young men think it is, and we were young.”
Well, I am no longer young. I have grown up to be a serious activist. Housman also says:
Existence is not itself a good thing, that we should spend a lifetime securing its necessaries: a life spent, however victoriously, in securing the necessaries of life is no more than an elaborate furnishing and decoration of apartments for the reception of a guest who is never to come. Our business here is not to live, but to live happily.
Will you live decorating for the reception of a guest who is never to come, or will you meet that guest?
Happiness cannot be sought directly. It is a byproduct of following your passion, of doing the right thing in accordance with your values. Doing the right thing can have dire consequences but nonetheless make you happy.
This is paywallled and in Norwegian, but the title will suffice for my commentary:
https://www.morgenbladet.no/aktuelt/kommentar/2025/04/30/sex-kan-pa-samme-tid-vaere-frivillig-og-et-maktovergrep/
Sex kan på samme tid være frivillig og et maktovergrep. Det tv-sendte metoo-varselet mot LOs Jørn Eggum illustrerte det mange maktmennesker ikke har skjønt, skriver Aslak Bonde.
Another article about the same “morality”:
https://www.dn.no/politikk/fagforeningstopp-om-ligging-nedover-i-organisasjonen-ikke-lov-i-lo/2-1-1815986
Fagforeningstopp om ligging nedover i organisasjonen: – Ikke lov i LO.
This goes to illustrate the religion of our times to which I am a heretic. Translations:
“Sex can at the same time be consensual and abuse.”
“Fucking downwards is not allowed.”
Whether downwards in age or as here downwards in power hierarchies in organizations or whatever, sex is believed to be metaphysically bad no matter how consensual and wanted and enjoyed it is. This is the normie religion, the only religious belief with no room for heresy on pain of the utmost criminalization.
I am a heretic to this insane lie. This is my mission.
"Incredibly, there is some chance that the AI may currently point in our direction if someone asks for a community which is unhappy with the sex laws, but I am not counting on that to last either and at any rate no one besides you and a few MAPs seem to be asking."
Guess I should call myself a heretic too. Misjudged? Mhmm. Mischaracterized and misinterpreted? Been there. Falsely labeled and accused of nonsense like perversion? Absolutely? Played around with dissenting opinions? Sure. My mission? I just want people to believe in bullshit. Even if it's something like lowering the societal usual of the “pedophile” label, by educating normies on what a real pedophile actually is? I’ll go for it. But I’m just sick and tired of the lies, the ruined lives, the propaganda, and the injustice people face every single day. That’s what boils my blood. The fact that I am one of the only few who know the truth of it all, who has connected most of the dots, and yet the chance of no one outside this blog believing me being low, hurts like a cinder block swung to the skull. I hope to write a book and that’s the strength I have left, because that’s literally the only thing I can do. If a detailed, comprehensive, documentive book doesn’t at least shift someone’s mind, then I’ve lost all hope and I’m going to have to live with unpopular truth for the rest of my life. I wish! Oh how I wish I was a normie!
I desperately wish I was a normie, so I don’t have risk fucking up my irl social image and living in constant anxiety about how shitty the American CJS is. The fact that there are judges with completely delusional mindsets still serving on the bench, grieving families with loved ones behind bars for the rest of their lives for non-murderous crimes, and many with scarlet letters on registries, seem to be the biggest mistake of the 21st century. Okay, enough with the tangents.
Both of us are witches at the stake. Seriously, I cannot be the only "non-MAP" who is vehemently opposed to something like police-oriented sex stings, right? How can a cop sleep at night knowing that he or she will "wake up the next day and pose as a minor on an adult website through the use of lying about who they really are to get men into sex talk and point "Haha, Predator!" and have arrested for something absurd like child sex trafficking, attempting injury of a minor, attempted rape, etc. when there was no actual minor involved? I am completely dumbfounded as to how no one publicly has denounced the unethical behavior brought on by these stings. Not a single person. Not a single cop that I heard or knew of. Absolute, dark silence. It's like they all keep their mouths shut and act like it's another typical day. Eivind, is it truly possible for one to not be MAP, but also oppose modern sex legislation at the same time? Can you guess as to why I call myself “Original Insights”?
"This is why it is impossible to engage a singe normie in debate where we discuss the actual issues, because they cannot parse that the law does anything different than hunt the same eternal evil they think they always believed in, which of course cannot be discussed or disagreed with by anyone including the worst rapists and pedophiles who of course virtuously believe in the same morality deep down and just need to be "treated."
Eivind, how often should rehabilitation be necessary? It seems as though the media goes on and on, day after day, about the supposed "worst of the worst", yet many seem to fall into the garden variety category, from what I can tell.
Apparently deepfake video are big no-no in South Korea. It's considered a sex crime, regardless if the video is sexual or not. Last I heard, pornography is heavily banned and restricted in South Korea, but this isn't even sexual.
"Johnny Somali was already facing prison time after allegedly using AI Deepfakes to create a video that looked like he was kissing popular Korean streamer BongBong."
"Deepfakes carry a maximum penalty of 10.5 years in jail, so if he’s found guilty of both counts, he could be behind bars for 21 years."
"So, in total, if he’s found guilty of each charge and gets the maximum sentencing, it’ll add up to 31 years."
https://www.dexerto.com/entertainment/johnny-somali-facing-up-to-31-years-in-jail-after-being-charged-with-another-sex-crime-3193299/
Don't know who this guy is, but he's definitely a goofball.
If you haven't noticed already, western countries like the United States, United Kingdom, Australia, and South Korea seem to be the most draconian when it comes to sex laws. South Korea seems to be the most westernized out of any other Asian country.
Well put frustrations from Original Insights there! Frustration with insane, evil injustice that the normies simply live with like it’s normal because it really is to them, which horrifies us. Sometimes I also envy the normies for being unbothered, but then I remember that I would have to give up my moral self to be like them. And it wouldn’t be worth it, because somebody has to fight for justice. Yes, the police stings and their vigilante equivalent that the normies always support sum up the insanity so well. They really believe that is justice and good police work, so fucked up is their sense of morality.
As to rehabilitation, of course it is insane to “rehabilitate” anyone for normal feelings and behavior. And the sting operations take that to another absurd level, “rehabilitating” make-believe criminals for fake temptations. We can all probably fall for some temptation or another in the right hypothetical context, including some truly blameworthy things, but so what if it doesn’t happen in real life? Police stings are immoral by definition and still haven’t caught on in most other countries including Norway because it’s just too over-the-top absurd to think a random person needs to be rehabilitated for a hypothetical. Neither is that kind of punishment retribution since no one was wronged; in no way is any real justice served. So it's just pure evil and hysteria, but that’s good enough for the normies. Because they believe in this metaphysical category of a “sex offender” or “pedophile” who by definition must be removed from society. Any method of pointing a finger at this monster will suffice to deserve removal, except not really because it must also fit into the normie rituals! The methods are more ritualistic than they seem at first glance because here I sit happy as a lark (or rather unhappy with how little attention I am getting) publishing heresies all day and that does not count even though it is a far better marker of someone who would *actually* break the sex laws than a normie momentarily falling for police manipulation in an otherwise normie life. That’s mindblowing to me, this ritualistic aspect that they also believe in.
As to South Korea, evidently they have invented another ritual to identify the supreme monsters of our time, and in light of the ritualistic magic of how such fingerpointing needs to be done, and how that’s similarly accomplished by police stings in the US and vigilante stings in the UK and “CSAM” everywhere, it does not surprise me that deepfakes will do the job. And why not consider that a sex crime too? We already know sex crimes can be completely devoid of any real content, so it’s par for the course that drawing yourself kissing a celebrity is sufficient, especially with help of this new AI voodoo. Deepfakes are some scary stuff now especially to the Koreans…
https://edition.cnn.com/2025/04/25/asia/south-korea-deepfake-crimes-intl-hnk-dst/index.html
Even though to me, they are just another way to draw. In principle, deepfakes are no more frightening than someone drawing a likeness of you with a pencil or paintbrush. Which in turn is another way to fantasize, all of it harmless unless you believe in voodoo harm, and why on earth would you do that?
The forthcoming rape-consent law comes because there is a belief that many actual rapes goes without being punished. So now they are trying to change the law of what is called rape so that more people, men are punished. They dont understand that the men they want to punish by todays rape law, are a different catogary than the ones that will be punished with the new rape-consent law. They are not making it simpler to convict todays rapists. They are adding a new catogary of sexual criminals, the ones who are too stupid to explain in the police interview how exactly the girl consented.
Speaking of South Korea, here’s an article I’ve been wanting to share for a while, but didn't know how to shoehorn it in, until now. Here’s an amalgamation of articles detailing the controversy surrounding the actor Song-Young Chang, who is currently apart of Netflix’s global hit, Squid Game.
https://www.timesnownews.com/entertainment-news/korean/squid-game-season-2-actors-with-legal-cases-controversies-lee-jung-jae-o-yeong-su-lee-byung-hun-top-park-sung-hoon-article-116826188#:~:text=In%202000%2C%20Young,returned%20to%20acting.
https://www.yahoo.com/entertainment/squid-game-2-actor-song-161424495.html
https://www.msn.com/en-in/entertainment/bollywood/after-squid-game-2-release-actor-song-young-chang-s-criminal-past-with-child-exploitation-resurfaces/ar-AA1wIkB5?apiversion=v2&noservercache=1&domshim=1&renderwebcomponents=1&wcseo=1&batchservertelemetry=1&noservertelemetry=1
“Squid Game 2 Actor Song Young-Chang Faces Backlash For Past Child Prostitution Charges.”
“Following the unprecedented global success of Squid Game’s first season, the highly anticipated second season has finally arrived on screens. While viewers and critics are sharing mixed reactions to the new installment, one casting choice has sparked significant controversy among audiences.”
“The inclusion of actor Song Young Chang in the cast has drawn particular attention, largely due to his controversial past. The actor faced serious legal troubles in September 2000 when he was arrested on charges related to inappropriate conduct with a minor. According to reports, he was accused of having sexual relations with a 16-year-old [prostitute] on two occasions in his vehicle near a park in Goyang.”
Oh, the horrors!
"In 2000, Young-Chang (Im Jeong-Dae aka Player 100) became the first celebrity to be convicted of underage prostitution. He reportedly paid $150 for sexual intercourse with a 16-year-old girl twice in a car when he was 42, despite being married with a daughter. He was sentenced to 10 months of suspended prison term, along with two years of probation. The actor barely served a month in prison and was released."
"However, since the actor had no prior record and showed remorse for his crimes during his 36-day custody period. His sentence was later suspended."
"The incident had severe professional consequences for Song. Following these events, he was permanently barred from appearing on major South Korean broadcasting networks, including KBS, EBS, and MBC. This effectively limited his mainstream television appearances, leading him to focus primarily on stage performances in musical theater."
"The revelation of his casting in such a high-profile production has sparked intense discussion across Korean online communities. Many viewers have expressed shock and disappointment at the production team’s decision to include an actor with such a controversial background in the series."
I am perplexed by the amount of fuss here. The age of consent in South Korea is 16 years of age. Are people upset because of the illegality of the actor having sex with a prostitute or because the girl was underage, despite it being legal? Or does it suddenly become wrong once you combine the illegality of prostitution and the legality of a '16 year old girl' together? It seems as though people can’t pick their poison. Regardless, he’s another one that bit the dust. A man being figuratively kicked and spit on for doing something completely mundane and normal. Typical.
@Jack
Yes, you are correct. The rape-consent law is paraded around like it somehow beneficial to men. "Because the law is gender neutral". But in reality a reasonable man will never want or feel a need to accuse any women of rape, because sex will never be traumatic to a man whatever the circumstances are.
This is why Eivind is going on about the female sex offender charade, because it is dishonest and ludicrous to call a girl having sex with a young guy a crime. It's not a crime. It is a gift.
If you keep expanding the definition of rape eventually everyone is included, rapist by the old definition or not. This is now about to reach the final solution of literally including everybody. So in a sense, they are “right.” They just don’t care about the cost. Universal criminalization of all of sexuality is not seen as anything negative since sex is so hated anyway. And the way the court system works even with the new law it may well be that it has no effect on the group they are currently demonizing as “getting away with rape,” because they will find a way to either give evidence of a sign of consent or induce enough doubt as to whether there was any. It remains to be seen how many who would be prosecuted under the old definition can nonetheless be convicted by this extra option. What is certain is that we now get a vast number of more men who can be convicted, and rightly so by the letter of the law even if the woman did in fact consent but just didn’t communicate it clearly.
I like misandristic honesty in the law since that should make it easier to raise hatred back against the feminist state. Except by now we know from experience that never happens anyway since men don’t care.
Robert Lindsay’s blog post today is a fun read:
https://beyondhighbrow.substack.com/p/a-backgrounder-on-child-porn-production
Here he details his adventures “investigating” and “reporting” CP (in the most harmless sense you can imagine, not the peadocrite way of actually working with law enforcement) as well as other close encounters with what is commonly called sexual abuse and statutory rape, including the famed “open families” who practice it as a lifestyle. This time, despite touching rather enthusiastically on a subject (porn) of which I disapprove due to being a nofapper, his frequent statements of disgust are so obviously contrived that I can’t help liking his piece. In fact, Lindsay is so disgusted by pedophilia that he compares it to God, lol:
I know for a fact that they start the girls at about age 5-7, which my clinical mind treats as just another fact until I visualize it, and then I am outraged and disgusted. In fact I can’t even really picture it in my mind and every time I try to do it, it doesn’t work. That’s probably because it’s so outrageous and offensive that my mind can’t even visualize it, like the Medieval Jewish Kabbalist concept of God. The girls in these families seem to be enjoying it or at least the three females I talked to did. I assume they keep them in line because I the girls still love their mothers, fathers, uncles, and cousins, and if the girls talk, all of their beloved relatives are going down forever.
So here we go not only with high-quality evidence that “abuse” is actually enjoyment, but also the most delectably refreshing metaphor for it in contrast to the standard normie demonization.
I hereby invent the Eivind Berge Scale of Sexualist Heresy to rate a piece of writing or artwork, and award Lindsay an 8 out of 10 for his efforts here. On that scale the law is zero, the usual normie journalist drivel is 1, Tom O’Carroll’s blog is 10 and mine is 9 or sometimes 10 also.
As we move along trying to inject the idea that sexual heretics exist into the normie consciousness, the Berge Scale of Sexualist Heresy will be a handy tool. I might even do a Heretic of the Year award, which will be kind of like the AF’s Paedocrite of the Year, just more wholesome.
Bit of pushback in the comments under this article-https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-14691587/Graeme-Davidson-kayak-drowning-murder-charge-hua-hin-thailand.html?ico=comment-anchor#comments.
-Anonymous 2
This article is a complete misrepresentation of Hua Hin and Thailand. First, the locals do not refer to Westeners as LBH (losers back home). Not because they don't think they're losers but because such an acronym is way too pithy and sophisticated for the average Thai mind and the average Thai's elementary broken English. Second, Westerners are a dying breed in Thailand, because of soaring prices and the economic decline of Western countries compared to Asia. Korean, Taiwanese, Chinese and Russians now have the lion's share in everything from real estate to night life. Third, night-life in Hua Hin is puny. Lurid terms like streets with "skimpily-dressed bar girls etc." scarcely apply.
@Jack
Isn't Thailand also the place where some of its districts have slutty-ish women that constantly tug and try to pull tourists away for their "services"? Not necessarily sexual ones, but like into bars, designated drinking spots, and whatnot. At least, in some of the videos I've seen, they can get really aggressive and pushy. How true is that? Oh, and I've also heard rumors that some of those "women" are actually transgender (ladyboys), so I’m not sure how prevalent that is too. I've never been to Thailand, so I don't know much of what actually goes on there can be deemed sketchy or not.
By the way, Jack, how long have you been on Eivind's blog for? How did you find him and what made you decide to stay? Obviously, I get the whole MRA thing probably being the driving force for you (and many others here), but you know what I mean. I consider your commitment respectable. For me, I discovered Eivind through AscendingPleiades. You?
I'm guessing at least a decade now, considering that I tend to read some of the older posts here and your name shows up there every now and again.
This story is again making the rounds on Tiktok, with comments calling for the boy's death etc etc
https://eu.ocala.com/story/news/courts/2025/02/07/ocala-florida-courts-teen-accused-of-raping-woman-91-sentenced/78301533007/
Imagine "Judge Lisa" imposed a 25 year sentence on the boy, even though if it was the opposite, where a 91 year old man said he was raped by a 14 year old girl, the 91 year old man would be in jail for 25 years. In Florida, and in Great Satan USA, the man always goes to jail for sex crimes, no matter the logic or facts. Feminism don't care!
anon69
Healing the Gender Divide Starts with Emotional Value
In today’s gender wars, much of the conflict is framed in terms of power, control, and sexual politics. But underneath the transactional logic lies something deeper and more human: a crisis of emotional value.
One of the most under-discussed emotional wounds in modern society is the invisibility of older women. As men age, many grow into their social and sexual value - gaining confidence, resources, and romantic viability. But women, living in a culture obsessed with youth, often feel their emotional and romantic worth declines through no fault of their own.
This can trigger a deep sense of loss, grief, and resentment - not just toward aging itself, but toward men who seem to thrive while women feel emotionally discarded. When that resentment gains institutional traction, it can manifest as punitive laws or cultural hostility toward male sexuality, especially in cases like large age-gap relationships.
But this isn’t about jealousy or entitlement. It’s about emotional survival.
If we want to de-escalate the gender conflict and preserve freedom in how we love and relate, we have to start by restoring emotional value to those who feel most abandoned. That means celebrating, including, and emotionally recognizing middle-aged and older women - not out of guilt or obligation, but because a healthy society depends on everyone feeling seen.
Men don’t need to apologize for loving youth, but they do need to lead with emotional maturity. A man who dates younger women but also honors, includes, and uplifts women his own age sends a powerful message:
"Your worth was never about your age. It was always about your presence."
And that message might just be the first step toward healing what the culture wars alone can’t fix.
Emotional hunger, not just sexual politics, is driving much of the cultural conflict between men and women today.
If we want to prevent punitive cultural or legal attacks on men’s sexuality, then one of the most effective long-term solutions is to make sure that women - especially older women - don’t feel emotionally abandoned.
If women can't get emotional value out of life that justifies the time and effort of living, that is going to create huge resentment and attacks on men who are perceived as still able to get that emotional value.
Therefore, it seems to me, that in order to solve this enormous problem of women using institutional power to attack men's sexuality out of emotional hurt and spite, that we should do everything we can possible to celebrate and make middle aged and older women feel emotionally fulfilled in society, especially if we are older men who want to enjoy the fruits of younger women.
anon69
I don't know where you got that essay from anon69 (AI?), but I suppose the 14-year-old boy in Florida there did his part to make old women feel sexually included. It goes to show minors can consent just fine by the logic of current law provided the adult does not consent. He is held so responsible that he even got an adult sentence rather than a juvenile one, and an extremely draconian at that, but I guess normal for Florida. Another bizarre feature is after his 25 years in prison he “cannot have any contact with anyone younger than 18,” despite being 14 and raping 91-year-old. Because you just can’t be too careful, gerontophilia is now included in pedo panic too. It gets more surreal by the day but still no sign that any normie will wake up. They just slip into doublethink when convenient and don’t see a contradiction with considering a 14-year-old a dangerous pedophile who must be kept away from minors because he attacked an old lady.
Anyway, my first remedy to make older women feel appreciated is to at least end the female sex offender charade. It is actually believable to me that a good number of teenage boys will throw old women some sexual attention, because I remember being so young and horny too. That’s where the biggest potential lies, and why not ban porn too so the young boys can direct more of their attention at women. I have gotten far more discriminating over the years and now I am still equally horny as I was at 14 but only if the female is young, and I am not about to go out of my way to celebrate older women personally at this point. I am not aware that they have requested it either or any evidence that it would help against the sex laws. Plenty of middle-aged men are in fact paired up with same-age women and I don’t see this varying noticeably between countries based on age of consent or other sex laws. The hateful sex laws are primarily a gratuitous layer of persecution for persecution’s sake that we culturally drifted into.
@Original Insights, regarding the founding of this blog, there was a golden age around 2006-2010 when it was possible and even easy to build a following on a blog like this. I think Jack has been here that long. Later I sometimes had much more traffic when in the news but those visitors didn't stay. Blogs have declined to where most normies don’t pay attention to them anymore, it seems to me. Not just mine, but any blogs. Some still get big on Substack I guess, which is the platform everyone seems to use now and where Robert Lindsay is having some success attracting new readers, but it is exceedingly difficult unless you are a highly skilled and energetic writer like him. I can't figure out how to be relevant at all to the normies.
How ironic! I thought anyone under 18 was still a kid and a "child". At least, that's what Superior Court Judge, Chris Coury said.
Weird, I think we should start accusing children of pedophilia and start placing them on registries and start shoving them into involuntary sex offender treatment and abuse programs. Oh wait--
I can imagine the days when chatrooms and internet forums used to be so big, popular, and one of the main forms of online communication before the advent of growing social media platforms and mobile devices by the late 2000s. Most of that stuff is gone. Even 4Chan got hacked not too long ago, but I'm not sure why. I regret not launching my blog a bit sooner, oh well.
It's like cable television and how much of that has already died or currently dying through the rise of streaming services.
I can imagine the days when chatrooms and internet forums used to be so big, popular, and one of the main forms of online communication before the advent of growing social media platforms and mobile devices by the late 2000s. Most of that stuff is gone. Even 4Chan got hacked not too long ago, but I'm not sure why.
It's like cable television and how much of that has already died or currently dying through the rise of streaming services.
Eivind, were you around when there was a moral panic over "internet predators" in the media, or what not really a thing in Norway? Of course, I know it's still a fear people have, especially after the Alisha Kozakowicz and Kacie Woody incidents. I can recall that you said you were abroad for university in the state of Tennessee during the mid 2000s, correct? If so, you must've heard something, right? Internet sex stings are nothing new. They've been around since before 2001, I presume.
https://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2010/01/scott_rittter_accused_sex_mino.html
That's funny, I didn't even realize they said the 14 year old couldn't talk to anyone his age, that is hilariously ignorant and literally insane.
Anyway, you missed my point because you're looking at it slightly incorrectly. I didn't say we should celebrate middle age and older women's sexuality, that is playing to their weakness and ultimately hurts them. That is also currently what society is doing by plastering naked 80 year olds on the sports illustrated swimsuit cover... the dissonance created is a disservice to older women because it's obvious that anyone who finds that sexually attractive is either very very unusual or outright lying.
No, what should be done is celebrating older women for their actual strengths, their wisdom accumulated by experience, their usefulness in whatever abilities they have developed throughout their lives, etc. By making them feel valuable, despite the lowering of sexual attractiveness, they can remain fulfilled while also (hopefully) developing tolerance for men's sexual attraction to younger girls.
I think it's a very good idea. Show respect to the older women and get their approval for access to younger pussy. Everyone can win.
anon69
Yes, I was in Tennessee in 2001 when Scott Ritter was first entrapped; however, I don’t recall hearing about it at the time and didn’t know he was persecuted as a “sexual predator” until now. So he tried to go on a date with a 16-year-old girl to Burger King… but unfortunately the girl was an undercover cop. Yeah, this shit has been going on for a long time, more than I realized, and is now just a steady cultural state… In Norway too except we don’t have police stings and the “abuse” gets contrived from 15 and under since 16 is legal age.
I have been watching a lot of Scott Ritter’s commentary on Ukraine (on the YouTube channel Dialogue Works especially) and now I’m thinking maybe his persecution by the US government was a factor in his taking Russia’s side. I certainly would have defected to any enemy after that insane treatment. I suppose Ritter is a MAP activist who sublimated his energy into a force that can actually kick some ass unlike our puny movements. Not that Russia is much better but they wouldn’t be THAT insane. “Tried to lure a 16-year-old girl to a Burger King” -- lol, what a way to make something so mundane sound predatory -- as far as I recall “grooming” hadn’t been invented yet in 2001 but they sure had “luring” to demonize you just for asking a fake girl on a date.
Back then, police posing as teen girls on the Internet were almost more common than real girls since the Internet hadn’t really gotten mass-adopted yet, which gave rise to the saying “welcome to the Internet, where men are men, where women are men, and where 15 year old girls are FBI agents."
Thankfully it has gotten much safer to meet girls, probabilistically speaking, since there are not enough FBI agents to make up for the influx of all the real girls.
I remember already reading Eivind's blog before the advent of smartphones, when all we used were "Nokia"-type phones. Eivind was having interesting lenthy dialogues with some woman over what he termed his "right to sex" (and his right to patronize prostitues). I printed thoses dialogues to later read them on long flights.
The hysteria continues- https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u-9h1egKI2M .
-Anonymous 2
And it goes even further...
Speaking of hysteria, Eivind is going to love this new video! Criss cross applesauce, it is time for another persecution!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QBAsQYkjZNg
THIRTY YEARS TO LIFE IN PRISON!
AND WOULD LOOK AT THAT STUPID FACE OF THAT STUPID BITCH OF A DISTRICT ATTORNEY FROM SAN DIEGO. JUST ANOTHER COG IN THE WHEEL. SOMEONE WHO SAYS THE SAME SHIT, OVER AND OVER AGAIN.
Anyways...
Eivind is gonna say that she looks like an old hag. An Eivind-defined normie, pig, and an old hag. Typical!
"Boys this age should be playing outside, feeling carefree and enjoying their last few years of childhood, and instead I thrusted them into adulthood."
Oh boy, look at how ironic the last part of that part of that sentence is. Adulthood really is something. One-of-kind, isn't it?
And yet the same tropes of "betrayal", "predation", and "grooming" play out like they usually do: As assumptions, with no basis other than a shitty excuse to defend and solidify the status quo.
"This is the ultimate betrayal of trust."
I'm sorry, did she leave a person behind on Mt. Everest or something?
I guarantee you that many MRAs out there are jumping with joy at the notion that a woman is now "finally" getting her "just deserts" of harsh sentence-based punishment, like the men who do the same thing and figuratively hanged for it (at least, in terms of gender disparities in criminal justice sentencing). Yet, I think we should all realize and come to terms that women are also starting to become victims too of the modern anti-sex moral panic, which was already obvious to me because I feel sympathetic to everyone that gets impacted by it, regardless (including the few women who get caught up in this web).
To me, this is like one giant whirlpool sucking everything into its vicinity, not necessarily a man-versus-woman that many normie-esque MRAs use to prove a point about double standards.
Original Insights, I commend you for saying the same thing I’ve been for 20 years: the “equal injustice for all” approach, still popular with MRAs like the Antifeminist, does not work. While the pussy pass may still be effective on occasion, we now have decades of evidence that highly significant systematic and often incredibly draconian antisexual persecution of women does NOTHING to turn women against the sex laws. What little backlash there is, as seen in the video posted by Anonymous 2 above, appears to be coming from homosexual men if that hysterical moron is right – which he might not be, but it is definitely not coming from women because it only concerns lowering the punishment for “soliciting sex” from 16 and 17-year-olds which in practice means sting operations always directed at men. This might be downgraded from a felony to a misdemeanour in California. So instead of ruining your whole life they can then only threaten up to a year in jail for this most fictitious “sex crime” of them all, hardly a reversal of antisex hysteria and not legalizing anything.
You are absolutely right that we should sympathize with the women and now you put into words exactly what I thought would be obvious to any observer who is able to think straight, how the war on sex is a giant whirlpool sucking in everything in its vicinity rather than a femihag conspiracy against men – even if it started out that way it is now definitely out of their control, a cultural force with life and momentum of its own, for example driven by career ambitions of prosecutors and such opportunistic impulses having nothing to do with a female sexual trade union. Any rational opposition to the war on sex must judge the persecution based on how irrational it is, which it is against any individual woman who “betrayed our trust” by being nicer than allowed to boys no matter how the feminists wished for these laws and how every last female public figure is a pious hag who supports the antisexual persecution against her sisters. That we now know they will right unto burning them at the stake. We cannot stop this witch-hunt against men either by condoning any part of it against women.
A long disquisition on the topic. "Child-adult sex is wonderful":
https://fstube.net/w/s5S9cYUow8FjGC3DTxP6c4
Yay, Norbert is back! Out of political imprisonment or at least able to serve up some 10 out of 10 heretical material for all the world to see if they wish right here on the clearweb. Wonderful!
The AF saw your response to my comment regarding the recent sentencing of Jaqueline Ma and here's what he had to about it:
Eivind and his fellow white knight paedophiles screaming outrage again over yet another female teacher stunned that she didn’t receive the pussy pass:
“the “equal injustice for all” approach, still popular with MRAs like the Antifeminist, does not work. While the pussy pass may still be effective on occasion, we now have decades of evidence that highly significant systematic and often incredibly draconian antisexual persecution of women does NOTHING to turn women against the sex laws.”
First of all, the weirdo was saying just the other week that the fact that the Daily Mail was sympathetic to one such teacher was ‘proof’ that the entire anti-sex hysteria was crumbling and that it was therefore right to focus on these relatively few cases (to the exclusion of hundreds of men getting convicted every day to be bullied or even raped in prison).
What is it to be? Women not getting the pussy pass in female sex offender cases does nothing to change sex laws…so why focus on it? He’s just admitting that his sole reason in cringely obsessing over the ‘female sex offender charade’ is because it’s pure white knighting on his part.
As for me, the ‘equal injustice for all’ phrase was created by myself to highlight the fact that MRAs do not care about changing feminist sex laws that target men, so long as women get treated the same when they break them.
I couldn’t give a shit about a handful of women, because I’m a (real) MRA, fighting for the millions of men targetted and persecuted by feminist sexual trade union anti-male sex laws.
Just like Anwar didn’t give a shit about the right of Jews to own beach front mansions in Gaza.
“Drawing blood with every word”. God help Eivind and the pedo rationalists.
I'll come back and tell you my thoughts on this subject later. Adios!
If we are ever going to have rational sex laws and live with them we have to get over this pissing contest about who was most oppressed. Yes, men are most oppressed now but women are too, and both sexes are targets of the insane persecution of sexuality that we have to resist if we are ever going to get out of this nightmare. Ignoring the women isn’t very forward-looking and does not come across as sane or nice.
If normies start thinking there is something seriously wrong with the sex laws and find our movement, like Original Insights has done, which approach makes the best impression? He can answer for himself, but my view is that in general it would be off-putting to present a nearly misogynistic ideology like AF does. I guess he thinks he can harness incel rage and that kind of male frustrated feeling that the feminists are the enemy that way. But I don’t see that working even on his own blog. Where are all the men who are supposed to be receptive to that approach? To say nothing of women who are also needed for political change. I guess the men who would be into it already hang out at incel forums, and they do hate the sex laws to some extent, but it looks to me like that potential is already maxed out and we need a rationalist approach to grow further.
https://www.azcentral.com/story/news/local/southwest-valley/2017/10/19/ex-buckeye-teacher-gets-lifetime-probation-sex-conduct-teen/780603001/
A friend of mine sent me this.
Oh, the dramaticism! The parents read like an Edgar Allen Poe or W.W Jacob story. Damn them.
“Hark at the wind! Hark at the wind!”
“Prophet!” said I, “thing of evil!—prophet still, if bird or devil! Clasp a rare and radiant maiden whom the angels name Lenore.” Quoth the Raven “Nevermore.” “Get thee back into the tempest and the Night's Plutonian shore!
Can’t eat, can’t sleep, can’t do anything! Ugh, such an eyeroll! It screams of anti-pussy-pass.
Schroder was arrested in February on suspicion of having sexual relations with a 17-year-old foreign exchange student from Sweden... It wasn't clear when the conduct began, but the exchange student's host parents reported more than 600 text messages between the two, according to a probable cause statement. Some messages included comments such as "I love you" and suggestive pictures. A victim's advocate read a letter aloud from the exchange student's parents, describing the ripple-effect Schroder caused for her family. They said they were devastated upon learning her international exchange coordinator was "using" their daughter. "I don't think we've slept a whole night since..."
That's even more funny with a Swedish girl since the age of consent is 15 in Sweden. Her parents should be more worried that any number of men can "use" their daughter legally back home. Methinks they should be writing letters to their representatives instead of to Americans who after all are cracking heavily down on sex with 17-year-olds already, albeit maybe not as heavily as they would like since it only got probation in this case.
It's amazing how the hysteria grows to fit the law whatever it is, and otherwise is mostly nowhere to be seen. The sex laws are self-validating, self-reinforcing artifacts of cultural drift. I have never heard anyone claim Swedish 15-year-olds are abused by their own consent in Sweden, yet in Norway it is totally out of the question to let 15-year-olds consent.
Exactly, it’s so ironic!
A victim's advocate read a letter aloud from the exchange student's parents, describing the ripple-effect Schroder caused for her family. They said they were devastated upon learning her international exchange coordinator was "using" their daughter. "I don't think we've slept a whole night since..."
Victim’s advocate? Who let him or her in there and why are these people everywhere? Don’t the courts know that those type of people are biased? Why was Schroeder blamed for the supposed suffering that the parents are facing? That’s their problem, not his.
It makes you wonder. Do people exaggerate their symptoms and emotions to make someone or something look worse? These people are from Sweden, so I would expect them to be more socially liberal when it comes to these things.
Regardless, the punishment could’ve been worse, but this guy’s life will be forever in constant limbo because of his lifetime probation period. At least he didn’t get prison, thankfully. Wouldn’t his suffering be more justifiable, than a one-and-done relationship that girls go through and move on?
Have an MRA read his side of the story, huh? Two can play at that game.
Sex hysteria is like welfare. There is nothing universal and God-given about it, but both benefits will be claimed to the full extent possible under law. A “socially liberal” person in Sweden or anywhere will claim “abuse” whenever they can, even if it is only for the baseline level of jealousy a parent might fell for a daughter with an older man, or just to get money. They will exploit the age of consent or “abuse of position” laws to the full extent available in their jurisdiction, including foreign laws when the daughter is abroad for the very same situation that they will swallow and shut up about when there is no law against it. And then of course embellish with this ridiculous language about sleepless nights and no end to worries and ripple effect for the very same relationships we know both girls and parents can handle just fine.
Whenever a “sex abuse” benefit is established, it does not go away by appealing to liberal values or how nonsensical and fake it is, because people like it too much and care too little about men and women who go to prison for it. It is a hopeless situation that we have to drift out of by getting another culture. Thank God at least Europe is poised to get an Islamic replacement culture rather soon that might be somewhat less evil against victimless sexuality!
Robert Lindsay has written another lengthy piece on child-adult sex, which when actually consensual he calls "molestation," which is as far as he goes in demonization, which along with his massive anecdotal experience and research makes him worth reading, although I must say this time his protestations of innocence are so cringeworthy I only give him a 5/10 on the heresy scale.
https://beyondhighbrow.substack.com/p/child-molestation-of-girls-by-adult
It gets a decent score because it confirms basically everything we have been gleaning as the truth on my blog all along, most importantly that the supposed "trauma" from consensual sex is nothing but a hoax. It also sheds light on sociogenic harm. This girl who got over society's condemnation this way is absolutely delightful:
Others got started around 9-12, a more typical age. In one case the girl was involved in group sex with the uncle and his friends. She reported that she had been “trained” between ages 9-12. This is molester talk for “starting them young” believe it or not. As a teenager her uncle and his friends continued having sex with her, often group sex, for years.
They filmed a lot of it. Oddly enough she was fascinated by these movies and she had been searching for them online and she had tasked some friends to track them down for her, assuming they were online, but no dice. I have no idea what her motivation for this was. When I met her she was 24. She told me that this molestation and statutory rape had screwed her up pretty good after it stopped So she went around for a few years being screwed up from this abuse, and then she said, "You know what? I’m getting tired of feeling bad. I’m just going to say I liked it and move on."
She did that and all of the trauma went away. However, she was now spending her time having lots of casual sex with older men. She was very friendly and nice but she was a bit of a robot for some reason. And she always called me “mister.”
The other very odd thing was how many women got molested and told me that they liked it! That completely blew me away because I’d heard that that hardly existed. However it’s a very serious problem. Sex feels good so it makes sense that they might enjoy it and kids don’t know what sex is, so molested kids usually have no idea what is even happening to them.
The typical response of a consensually molested (by this I mean there was no coercion; I’m aware that little kids can’t legally consent to molestation) child is indifference, neither positive nor negative. Instead, the main emotion is confusion. Although they don’t understand sex, they think what happened to them was “weird.” However, if you’re a kid all sorts of “weird” things are happening to you all the time, so it’s just one more weird thing.
However, they often don’t regard it as a particularly important thing that happened to them. One reason for all of these buried memories of molestation being dredged up is because many kids find the molestation so uneventful that they literally forget about it!
That's as far as sociogenic harm goes in my view. I do not believe it leads to any clinically diagnosable disorders, but they can get a bad feeling which they can easily snap out of. Which is to say I don't believe in sociogenic harm, because the badness of it is so light it can apply to anything. It's at the level of being teased for an unfashionable hairstyle or something like that. It does not deserve the name of trauma. All it takes to get over it is to decide to be different and not care what society thinks, to align one's opinion of the "abuse" with what it actually felt like, in a word to be yourself. Notice that she only started feeling bad AFTER it stopped and she got too wrapped up in normie prejudice.
As to whether Lindsay is serious when he righteously says he does not like molestation I think his statement about the boys provides a clue that he is not all that grossed out about the girls after all, as well as setting the record straight about what is and isn't abuse for boys too...
Of course boys get molested too, but that’s homosexual sex, and it’s gross, so I hate talking about that. Gay men have very high rates of being molested as boys. Whether this is causative in terms of their homosexuality is not known and at any rate it would be awful hard to study. I’m familiar with one study of gay men molested as boys. Incredibly, 70% of them liked it, and this was associated with consensual molestation. The 30% who did not was highly correlated with coercion.
I am disappointed that he calls the idea that gay molestation can make you gay "unproven" rather than nonsense, however. But that's the only scientific gripe I have with his post.
My response to this is too long, so I'm going to split it beyond a single comment.
There are many scientific gripes I have with his articles, especially with this one, but it mainly stems from his credibility. He keeps mentioning all of these percentage numbers (50%, 22%, 70%, 30%, etc.) without providing any sources or indication of where he got it from. I have a hard time believing him because I see no reason to believe him without some sort of proper credibility? He also says that women are sexualizing their traumas or using it as a coping mechanism, which is in the same vein as saying that they have Stockholm syndrome or pseudo- positivity, etc. He then goes on about the supposed “epidemic” of CSA, yet he’s talking like he works for the abuse industry without providing sources and only provides anecdotes and personal stories. Others join in, implying the supposed prevalence of CSA in other countries (like the dancing boy thing in the Middle East) more frequently due to cultural norms. One commenter said that he read an article that mentioned how boy sexual abuse is at 90% in Sri Lanka, while another brings up how sextortion is a “growing problem” in Canada, yet they both cite abuse industry and child protection agencies, which I’m extremely cautious about because they can be biased and selective and may distort or inflate their findings.
Lindsay even referred to “Rind” as “Ritter”, which is weird because he could’ve easily looked it up to confirm the name of it. Perhaps, he had mentioned Rind before and was being sarcastic about it?
Another problem is that he slightly contradicts himself when going over the supposed trauma of sexual abuse.
“I saw a report on transgender males (MtF) in Brazil who had been molested as boys. Only 12% reported trauma and many reported positive experiences.”
“The problem here is that previous studies about adults molested as children had always looked only at clinical populations found in mental health clinics. Obviously these people tended to be the ones who were badly damaged by being molested.”
“I’ve been talking about how to deal with consensual molestation here and frankly it’s much easier to treat because the damage is much less severe. Of course in many cases the female is traumatized by the molestation and this tragically can follow them into adulthood. I don’t have the faintest idea about how to treat this sort of molestation victim. There are many therapists who are good at working with these women and I’ll leave it up to them.”
“One thing we need to stamp out though is this very harmful notion that everyone who gets molested is ruined for life with no hope of recovery. We can thank the feminists for that. Thank you ladies!”
Can’t he at least pick his poison?
I’m not he knows but it would be foolish to assume that every negative experience stems from the sexual abuse. An overlooked problem from clinical samples stems from the fact that all this “uneventfulness” from CSA gets dug up through suggestibility, which is why there was this clash between recovered memories and non-recovered memories in the media and the psychological community, a few decades ago. All this “trauma talk” that we constantly hear about could just be from the over reliance on victimocracy. It doesn’t help that this suggestibility can be a problem too, as this quote-on-quote “uneventfulness” can be reconceptualized into negativity when looked back on, even if the “victim” originally felt positive or neutral about it. It’s this abuse industry that tells every CSA or rape subject that they will be ruined for life and they should play into their “ journey into healing” because that’s how therapists and counseling are able to make a career out of themselves (The Trauma Myth - Susan Clancy…I implore you to read that Eivind). It’s funny because the story of that girl who got raped by her brother wasn’t believed by psychologists, which is bizarre because that’s their job, or perhaps she wanted to feel more like a victim and it’s wasn’t validated with the label enough (which is probably why she said that they didn’t believe her), though it would be difficult to determine where all of this “negativity” actually came from due how society preceives “sexual abuse” (even if it’s 17 year old having sex with an adult) as a crime against humanity and equally horrible.
Rind makes it very clear that even the most severe forms of CSA don’t usually cause long-term harm. The focus should lie on the family environment and the relationship of the person who did it, which is why people should not attribute every negative effect to CSA, but that’s our world at the moment, unfortunately.
Also, why is this boy sexual abuse constantly seen as primarily a “gay” or boy-man thing? Aren’t women and girls capable of “molesting” boys too? I’m also curious to know what you thought of Lindsay’s stance regarding male “molesters” as possibly “aggressive” with elevated psychopathy scores”?
Yes, if you go down to the level of misspellings and slight contradictions, then I agree one can have more gripes with Robert Lindsay. However, I don’t agree such nitpicking negates the value of his writing as a blog post. I don’t really miss references for all those statistics and trust he has enough journalistic integrity to not make up things like that. Of course he can make mistakes and sometimes slips into normie “trauma” language, but the drift of his writing is in the right direction.
I agree it sounds silly to say women “sexualize their trauma,” but only if you assume the normie mindset that underage sex is by definition trauma so it’s just another way to say they enjoy sex while metaphysically invalidating it. I didn’t think that’s what he meant though. I think he means actual trauma sometimes gets sexualized later even if they really didn’t enjoy it at the time. We know women have rape fantasies and I don’t think that means feminist definitions of rape like not signing a consent document or statutory rape. It seems plausible to me that they sometimes or perhaps often do sexualize trauma in a proper sense of the words. For example the little girls who are trained before they know what sex is. Which is related to the fact that even real coercion is something they usually get over, as Lindsay duly notes. That’s not to condone coercion; a fact just is what it is.
Robert Lindsay has rediscovered the view of CSA from before the panic started in the 1980s. I don’t care if he misspells Rind because we don’t need Rind if we turn the clock back to the 1970s when expert consensus was that CSA was morally wrong but not a big deal. That view was not perfect -- it rightly gave rise to PIE and NAMBLA -- but it was a hell of a lot better than the current insanity. Lindsay is in tune with the old way of looking at it when he says he’d recommend sentences of “anywhere from five weeks in jail to three years in prison,” because that’s how it was back then. That’s all a moral violation without a seriously hurt victim deserves, and morality is debatable! I don’t agree with that morality for truly victimless crimes like most of this is, but Lindsay does a fantastic job presenting the facts for a general audience. I don’t judge it as scholarly writing because that’s not the purpose and I can look past the moralism especially when it undermines itself like I have shown delightful examples of with ill-suited metaphors for really condemning what he is talking about and claiming he is so saintly at obeying the law that it sounds insincere.
Also, why is this boy sexual abuse constantly seen as primarily a “gay” or boy-man thing? Aren’t women and girls capable of “molesting” boys too?
No, unless you buy into the female sex offender charade, women aren't capable of "molesting." I commend Lindsay for not humoring the feminists on this and appropriately leaving out the issue altogether because it is rightly a non-issue. Once again, he has rediscovered the view from before the CSA panic!
I’m also curious to know what you thought of Lindsay’s stance regarding male “molesters” as possibly “aggressive” with elevated psychopathy scores”?
I took this to mean coercive molesters rather than statutory rape in general, but it is possible that he is conflating the groups somewhat and unfairly imputing psychopathy, in which case I of course disagree.
Fair enough, you know him better than I do, but I believe it would be best that he could try to stay more consistent in the future, especially for me, who's only heard of him in the last 2-3 months because of you. I'm not accusing him of lying or making nonsense up or anything, but I would like to know where exactly he's getting those numbers from and how they are calculated, even if they are estimated and rounded up. Would it be reasonable to assume that I would prefer something more grounded? He can't just always rely on personal observations to make such profound, jarring statements. Being a researcher for a book is frustrating and rigorous since I've heard so many things that it is exhausting to keep track and remember everything, let alone utilize and grasp the most accurate and credible date for it. Nevermind then, I guess I should probably ask him instead. I might as well go in with an expectation that he's not Bruce Rind or anything. I’m curious to know if he knows who you are, Eivind. If he is aware of this blog, why not tell to come down here every now and again? Don’t you want more people, right? Get him to promote you, so his readers can come to yours. Anyways, It'll be difficult to find something beyond those child protection/anti-sexual abuse groups, because they seem to be only ones who are talking about these kinds of subjects, academic or social-wise, even if they are hysterical and biased about it.
Oh, I forgot to post the two comments above under my username: Original Insights. I didn’t realize that I posted them as anonymous, despite being logged into Google. I dunno, Blogger is kinda weird for me. It can take multiple refreshes or the closing-and-opening of tabs for the system to finally recognize that it's me, despite being logged into Google and already clicked-back into my blog page. Thankfully, I keep track of my comment on my laptop before publishing, that way I don’t risk losing it or accidentally submitting an unfinished one.
- Original Insights (Non-MAP).
My apologies for writing such long-winded monologues in the last couple days (and nearly every time that I’m here). It seems kinda quiet here, aside from Jack, Anon69, and Anon2 popping up every so often, but I’ve been reading some of your older posts and there seemed to be a lot more people before compared to now. Gally seemed like a tragic fellow, I wonder what became of him. Well, at least you have me and your other veteran followers to keep it alive and engaged. I’m sure more people will show up eventually, like I did last year when I discovered you through Ascending Pleiades. You seem well-reasoned, very intelligent, and much more literarily-articulated than I am, which is unfortunate because you write so much and so elegantly for such a close-knit audience and I wouldn’t be surprised if most people skim over it too quickly (Heck, I’m guilty of it too sometimes, but I’m just so burned out to focus on every little detail). I wish there was more I could do, but due to the sensitive and highly polarizing nature of these kinds of topics, it would be arduous to keep outsiders to listen and focus on what you are saying. I wouldn’t go on the surface net and start talking about pedophilia and trafficking so stoically. Seriously, don’t do the stupidity of what I did and try to be courageous. I learned that the hard way and it doesn’t matter how “matter-of-factly” you are, people will always distort, twist, and misinterpret what you say. As one user put it: “It’s like shoving your dick inside of a hornet's nest.”, which is sad because there are some things (like this stupid sex law stuff) that only I truly understand and can get to the bottom of, intellectually. There’s people out there who believe I’m a pedophile (even though I’m clearly not and prefer more mature women. The Non-Map title next to my name serves as security measure for a reason) or support the actual fucking of kids because I preached being skeptical about being on the err side of caution when it came to everyone using dangerous (yet, frequent) terms and labels so sporadically like “predator”, “groomer”, “rape-apolgist”, “victim-blamer”, “Nazi”, etc. without evidence. Wasn’t a devil’s advocate per say, but it’s disgraceful how ill-informed society is now. They all seem to have a fetish for highly condensing and categorizing people into the most general groups as possible. That’s what society is now, like it or not. It’s too dangerous, but it’ll be best to start off slow. People may not 100% agree with you, but at least we all have the same objective and goal in mind. I’m sure this was all obvious to you, but the “pedophile” label is not something you would want to parade with.
Thanks, Original Insights, your comments are much appreciated and do inject liveliness and enthusiasm that is sorely lacking except from a tiny core of regular commenters. You are the sort of “normie convert” who came around to opposing sex hysteria via pure reason without necessarily having a dog in the fight either, the sort of reader I naively hoped we would get a lot more of eventually. But no, the opposite happened and now it’s damn near impossible to attract a single new reader. I see that even the Antifeminist has given up hoping to have a popular blog. In a comment to his latest post he says,
“I doubt if this blog is ever going to be getting 1,000 hits a day again, or 20 different people posting comments under each article.”
https://theantifeminist.com/a-comparison-of-historic-traffic-to-theantifeminist-with-other-sites/
It can’t be done anymore no matter how hard we try. It’s not a matter of tactics either. I think we can lay to rest the idea that I would have done better if I had followed his copious amounts of unsolicited advice over the years and not stood up for female sex offenders or promoted nofap or favored cultural drift as an explanation over female sexual trade union theory, because he does not even seem to have a slow trickle of new followers, just the hard core reappearing and you.
Robert Lindsay can do it, but he explicitly says he does not want to decriminalize anything. He does want much lighter sentences and he debunks the myths surrounding sex hysteria, which is valuable as far as it goes. Yes I do know him, am friends with him on Facebook and we have talked there recently, but I don’t think I can convince him to be more of an activist.
Re: Robert Lindsay's article, it's only reasonable to expect someone to give sources for their claims. It's a strange quirk of human nature that people can sometimes go to all the trouble of writing something but not bother to do the tiny bit extra needed to back up what they say with references. I've done it myself sometimes. There are times, though, when you know something but can't find the exact reference. This is frustrating; nevertheless if you want to make an argument to others, you still have to back it up.
As far as the complete lack of traction is concerned, perhaps it renders futile any debate about Sexual Trade Union vs Cultural Drift. After all, if nobody's flippin' well interested, what does it matter?
-Anonymous 2
Right. The normies have no interest in who is to blame for the sex laws because they don't think there is a problem. We might naively assume that these go together and can be realized simultaneously. If I learned that I have been living under some onerous requirement only because some selfish group had their way I would be pissed. But the normies don't think of the sex laws as onerous and don't care if the justification is unreasonable and self-serving of whomever. They normies are adrift in whatever norms society throws at them, and certainly in this sense it is cultural drift. They are not going to drift into hating the sex laws because of anything we say, no matter how reasonable and true. Normies wait for the whole culture to change before they will change their views.
https://cedarnews.net/newstasks/843218/rep-tim-burchett-calls-for-public-executions-of-child-predators/
Sigh, yet another pedohysterical politician. How many times have we seen and heard this over and over again? In fact, how many times will it take for people to realize that these laws will fail, not work as intended, and topple right on top of them? This is nothing new to any of us.
In a recent statement, Burchett argued that the punishment for such crimes should be far more severe, suggesting that public executions would serve as a deterrent and send a strong message. “I think public executions for child predators might make people think twice,” he said.
Sure, that would definitely work. State-oriented vengeance will always solve problems, right? Longer sentences have never decreased expanding incarceration, that's for sure.
Funny, he should read the rationale behind Kennedy v. Louisiana (2008) or maybe he should come to terms that harsher doesn't always better/stronger and won't turn out the way people necessarily envision it to. Why not look at science and see how the opposite comes true?
In America they still haven't understood that there are rational reasons why the Middle Ages have been overcome.
When the Antifeminist blog was replaced with an OnlyFans link some years ago I didn’t think much of it. I assumed he had willingly quit his blog, let the domain expire and it was taken over by advertising.
But now he says on his blog that he was actually scammed out of his domain by Sabrina Vaz and had to go to court to get it back. Damn, when I called him a wanker before I didn’t know the truth was THAT pathetic. He let a girl he never met take over his domain and use it to advertise more wanking at the cost of losing his entire platform which he now can’t restore up to my level of popularity, or even get the old pages working apparently.
The Antifeminist who preached porn and sexbots would save men’s rights can’t even get that message out anymore because porn crowded it out.
So even in this respect, even if you think wankers are the most worthwhile audience, my nofap approach is superior.
Sure, I let a feminist make a dark comedy of me and that sort of thing, but that’s because all PR is good PR. Losing your domain is the opposite of PR, and here we are with me the de facto leader of male sexualism as a result. No wonder he was frustrated, but it was for reasons he foolishly brought upon himself and which the sanity of nofap could easily have prevented. I don’t give girls anything of value before I meet them, and certainly not my blog or domains, lol.
I dug up the official publication at Doshisha University including fulltext link to the new study by Tromovitch so we can share it far and wide while proving the boychatters didn’t make it up:
https://doshisha.repo.nii.ac.jp/records/2000821
For example on Facebook where I said:
This links to the full text of an important new study out of a Japanese university by professor Philip Tromovitch which concludes:
“The data clearly show that regardless of country (Japan or the United States) or the age at which the sexual contact occurred (prior to puberty or between puberty and age 16), willing sexual contacts with older partners are overwhelmingly viewed by men as positive experiences.”
Which, of course, is heresy that the normies will ignore or deny. They will persist in believing in the supposed metaphysical badness of sexuality which is the religion of our times.
If you know, you know, and the rest of you will just keep deluding yourselves because no one ever changes their minds. I didn’t either -- I never started believing in these silly taboos since I was a small child. We will have to wait for a whole other culture with new people to have a new view (which is also an old view since the current insane CSA panic only started about 1980).
Japan has recently adopted CSA panic too in their legal system but thankfully their universities still allow heresy.
Their publication download link to the article only has 70 views, which goes to show how hard the normies are ignoring this… And what else can they do with truth so painfully obvious?
Can we change that? For example help like my Facebook post? Come on, do just a little bit of activism for a change even if you have to sort of deanonymize yourselves!
The UK takes another step in the war on male sexuality via an absolute witch of a "Justice Secretary":
https://edition.cnn.com/2025/05/22/europe/uk-chemical-castration-sex-offenders-latam-intl
The British government is to rollout the use of medication to suppress the sex drive of sex offenders, as part of a package of measures to reduce the risk of reoffending and alleviate the pressures on the prison system, which is running out of space.
In a statement to Parliament Thursday following the release of an independent sentencing review, Justice Secretary Shabana Mahmood said so-called chemical castration would be used in 20 prisons in two regions and that she was considering making it mandatory.
“Of course, it is vital that this approach is taken alongside psychological interventions that target other causes of offending, like asserting power and control,” she said.
Though the review highlighted the treatment would not be relevant for some sex offenders such as rapists driven by power and control, rather than sexual preoccupation, Mahmood said studies show that chemical castration can lead to a 60% reduction in reoffending.
That way they get to escalate the sex war and not run out of prisons at the same time.
If they tried that on me I am certain that though they would succeed in reducing my sex drive, my hatred against the government would surge to a level that would make it a net loss to them. Why aren't more men like me? Is no amount of oppression capable of producing a backlash? Are other men so primitive that they really do not have an ideology to go along with their sexuality, that can function even in the absence of a libido? They only think with their dicks? At least that's the stereotype the government promotes. While at the same time paying lip service to the feminist dogma that sex offenses are not about sex but rather power, against which castration does not work. This myth is still in effect but reduced to 40% of what it used to be, apparently -- which is a philosophical win for men because there is now less metaphysical invalidation of our sex drive even if there is more violence against it. Truth has a funny way of seeping through when the feminists get so desperate in their hysterical war on sex that absolutely every weapon must be used but they can't build more prisons fast enough. We can see some cognitive dissonance there but nonetheless they plan to go through with their castrations. What is not on the radar is any opposition from MRAs or sexualists whatsoever, because that all died with Angry Harry in the UK (unless you count TheAntifeminist.com promoting OnlyFans before becoming totally irrelevant).
The antisex escalations keep coming faster than I can enumerate them. Here's another one from this week:
https://edition.cnn.com/2025/05/19/tech/ai-explicit-deepfakes-trump-sign-take-it-down-act
Even though I believe male sexuality has no legitimate use for deepfakes or porn in general, I still find this development sickening because it is more fake "abuse."
In recent years, people ranging from Taylor Swift and Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez to high school girls around the country have been victims of non-consensual, explicit deepfakes — images where a person’s face is superimposed on a nude body using artificial intelligence.
Now, after months of outcry, there is finally a federal law criminalizing the sharing of those images.
President Donald Trump signed the Take It Down Act in a ceremony at the White House on Monday. In addition to making it to illegal to share online nonconsensual, explicit images — real or computer-generated — the law also requires tech platforms to remove such images within 48 hours of being notified about them.
The law will boost protections for victims of revenge porn and nonconsensual, AI-generated sexual images, increase accountability for the tech platforms where the content is shared and provide law enforcement with clarity about how to prosecute such activity. Previously, federal law prohibited creating or sharing realistic, AI-generated explicit images of children. But laws protecting adult victims varied by state and didn’t exist nationwide.
WTF, Trump? Weren't you supposed to be a tiny bit less feminist?
This old jealous f*ggot couldn't attract a hot young teen even if he was 80 years younger, which is of course why he's here making this embarrassingly g a y video. The same goes for every single one of his "male" commenters, and of course the women are old jealous harpies or old jealous harpies in training. These conservatives are sick rejects.
anon69
Yeah, unfortunately this shows feminism always gets the upper hand regarless of who is in charge, type of governement, religion, economic system ...
"The law passed both chambers of Congress nearly unanimously, with only two House representatives dissenting, in a rare moment of bipartisan consensus."
Great satan USA is always united against male heterosexuality.
Hey Eivind, why don't you register a non-profit organization? Then at least you could be legit.
anon69
I looked up the requirements for starting a non-profit organization in Norway, and one of them is it must have at least two founders. So unfortunately I am disqualified from registering as a non-profit until I get a cofounder. Since there is not a single individual in Norway who will even support me with a distinct nickname, this looks completely unrealistic for the foreseeable future. The sad fact is I remain the only MRA or MAP in Norway who will put his name to activism, probably for life.
"Though the review highlighted the treatment would not be relevant for some sex offenders such as rapists driven by power and control, rather than sexual preoccupation, Mahmood said studies show that chemical castration can lead to a 60% reduction in reoffending."
Yes, what are the odds that these "studies' could potentially be biased? That may be fallacious (overanalyzing negative outcomes), but I don't think CC falls on the ethical side. What about the side effects? How much of these are approved and widely accepted by medical and pharmaceutical companies?
Oh and that "power and control rape thing"? Isn't dominance a common fantasy? How about we consider the women that have rape fantasies.
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/19085605/
I have a feeling a lot of this treatment is overly moralistic.
Jack, it doesn’t matter where one stands politically. No major politician (or any politician ever, moving forward) is going to defy and attack the modern, moralistic and feminist sex laws. That would be considered a third rail (everyone reading this, I implore you all to look up that term) and a bye-bye to a politician’s career, lest they want be accused of pedophilia and “rape-apologia” and lose votes. We just have to accept the fact that our views are extremely unpopular and inferior to the normies and that we are in the minority of opposition. Feminism could be higher than the tower of Babel. There could be tens of millions of them across the world, yet if you don’t count the MRAs, our numbers are depleting due to censorship, spiral of silence, or just our status as fringes of society. Sad, I know. All I ever wanted was for people to wake up on their own like I did and smell the bullshit in our societies without associating with a pre-disposed group beforehand. Most MRAs aren’t exclusively pro-sex and many are applauding at the supposed “equal injustice” of females now, without realizing that the writing’s on the wall, regardless of persecution.
Why do you think these laws are done and over without much of a challenge? We live in tough-on-crime victimology and many female advocates want to base their “victimizations” as their entire personalities. And societal outrage contributes to that as well. Simple feminist, victimologist, and conservative/religious lobbying does the trick easily. They can effortlessly get what they want because they see it as okay that the sacrificing of some freedoms are beneficial to the protection of poor, innocent women and children, with the public buying into it because of fear, vengeance, and obviousness.
Oh, and it’s easy since they have the “moral high ground” and hide behind the shield of “morality enforcement” and who’s gonna disagree with that? Rape = bad and that’s very easy for people to agree with, yet they use the most extreme and rare instances of certain events to generalize all who don’t fit that extreme category.
“Thanks, Original Insights, your comments are much appreciated and do inject liveliness and enthusiasm that is sorely lacking except from a tiny core of regular commenters. You are the sort of “normie convert” who came around to opposing sex hysteria via pure reason without necessarily having a dog in the fight either, the sort of reader I naively hoped we would get a lot more of eventually. But no, the opposite happened and now it’s damn near impossible to attract a single new reader.”
Gonna clear up the whole “normie convert” thing from three days ago. I wouldn’t necessarily consider myself a quote-on-quote normie, but if you would’ve talked to me five or so years ago, I’d give no second thought to the CSA and rising-crime lie and would’ve easily acquiesced to the idea that all pedophilies were evil-child-molester-kidnappers. I used to buy into every minute of it. It also didn’t help that I was part of the stranger danger generation. We all thought that someone tricky and menacing was always prowling to get us, kidnap us, and touch us, and everyone preached that kinda stuff, including our parents, teachers, and the PSAs we were exposed to. It is always recommended to be in a constant state of vigilance, which I don’t think is bad per say, but it falls flat on the whole pedophile panic upon closer inspection.
I guess I was a normie in that sense, but I had my own identity and I could sense and notice the subtleness of things that I was self-aware of. I’ve always strived to not feel inferior, but unique in a way where I could be my own critic and see what other people cannot. I had great pride in being brave and standing up for what I believe in.
It wouldn’t be until I came across this whole anti-porn craziness (Eivind, don’t bite me on this) like the David Cameron net filtering stuff, rise and surge of parental controls, media censorship, etc. that I knew something was off.
And I guess that somehow helped into where I am now. Seeing the further injustice and rabbit hole after rabbit hole I went down, I found myself here. Honestly, I’m glad I deanonymized myself because I felt like people should really know and attribute these characteristics to myself.
"The law passed both chambers of Congress nearly unanimously, with only two House representatives dissenting, in a rare moment of bipartisan consensus."
Yeah, I have a feeling we're not gonna hear anything about whomever those two are anymore, once the next election season rolls around. They're toast, or at least I wouldn't be surprised if they ended up being such. How dare they disagree with the dogma!
In a statement to Parliament Thursday following the release of an independent sentencing review, Justice Secretary Shabana Mahmood said so-called chemical castration would be used in 20 prisons in two regions and that she was considering making it mandatory.
It will be interesting to see whether the ethical standards of the English medical profession are higher than those of their Indonesian colleagues:
https://www.benarnews.org/english/news/indonesian/indonesia-rights-08272019153613.html
ok so make a pinned post that you are looking for a co-founder, eventually someone will come along, and why not someone in the MAP organization you're part of? what's the point of the MAP organization if they won't even do any activism?
listen, i know you're frustrated but to do nothing is just a waste of what you've already done. feminists are organizing into non-profit foundations, getting donation money, then using it to lobby governments to make these insane laws. we need to start with foundations of our own, and since you already know the process, you have a head start.
anon69
"Yohana Yembise, Indonesia’s minister for Women’s Empowerment and Child Protection, however, praised the court’s verdict and sentencing in the trial of Aris."
Another big surprise! (not)
"In July, the Victim and Witness Protection Agency (LPSK) said that cases of sexual violence against children had increased in recent years."
Well yea, if you change the laws so everything that was legal and cool before magically becomes illegal sexual violence against children (the horror!), then indeed your cases will increase.
anon69
Has anyone seen this? https://madebyredrose.co.uk
It's like the UK basically has an unofficial public sex offender registry wtf... Anyway, somehow we should be using it to get an army of sex offenders to fight against the regime that punishes them. The only trouble is it doesn't have any contact details for all the offenders...
As to getting organized and “legit,” trust me, I would jump on it. Norway had NAFP but they all pulled out of activism and dissolved the organization by 1983. I guess it was all fun and games in the 70s when pedophilia was barely criminal anyway, and none of them could take being a public enemy anymore when it got serious.
This leaves us with me alone in Norway, too few to organize. Norway is too small for more of my caliber as I am the one in 5 to 10 or 20 million who will do it. The Netherlands with 18 million is big enough for a few people, hence we are hearing from Norbert and a couple more who did organize but was beat down by the government into being lone wolves again.
Germany with 83 million people is big enough to have a respectable organization, hence Krumme 13 which is the sort of organization I envy and wish we could have enough activists for. Either that or Newgon, which is a great open source template to adapt and register quickly if I can get just ONE other person. Yes, I am looking for a cofounder, but the chance is so small it’s not really worth having a pinned advertisement. I am one of a kind in Norway and probably all of Scandinavia as far as I know.
Anyway, could a legit organization give more than a symbolic boost? If so, where would the money be coming from? Are there any potential donors reading this who would want to support an official organization instead of using my bitcoin address?
No one willing to as little as voice dissent. I see for instance idiotic grown men vociferating on website against vaccines. This is in the US, where giving money to a woman for sex can get a man jail. Those militants are prepared to barricade themselves in their own house with shotguns to prevent the police from forcing vaccines upon them or their children. When I suggest they should fight for their sexual rights instead I get thumbed down and insulted. Low-life idiots all of them.
Yeah, I've been wondering why governmental disease hysteria inspires an urge to be a rebel but sex hysteria does not. Most vaccines have been tremendously beneficial too, though public health programs did blow their credibility with covid, I get bored to death with people still ranting about it and being so proud that they "refused" what was barely forced anyway.
How about refusing some of the sex laws for a change? Or at least the latest escalations such as the new Norwegian consent law? Nope, they won't lift a finger against that, or bother to inform themselves about it or debate it.
This reddit thread is promising: https://www.reddit.com/r/news/comments/1kt0ab8/uk_will_roll_out_chemical_castration_for_sex/
I see quite a lot of the comments critical of the UK's justice minister's calls for chemical castration. Not always in ways we might like - i.e. direct criticism of the ludicrous age of consent laws (well except my comments lol) - but the whole Supreme Court decision against trans seems to have woken a few people up to the idea they'll then come after the trans and the homosexuals. And someone pointed out you can be placed on the sex offender register for pissing behind a tree...
Castration, chemical or otherwise, is a cruel, unusual and sex-exceptionalistic punishment. Imagine crippling bodily functions as punishment for other crimes. Cutting off hands of thieves, etc... Aren't we better than that now? Evidently not, because sex hysteria brings us right back to the worst barbarism. If we don't have humane treatment of sex offenders then we don't have it for anyone, because anyone can be accused through that loophole to lose any rights that that would normally apply. I am amazed the normies don't get this, and eagerly want sex offenders to lose any semblance of due process and humane punishments. And that's in addition to many sex offenders thus targeted being perfectly harmless, which they also will never understand. The trans and homosexuals don't deserve it either, of course, but it's good that they are starting to feel more sympathetic to whomever is targeted by this revisited evil. It didn't take long since it was done to the likes of Alan Turing before we are right back at it again. All it takes is a slight repackaging from homosexual to "abuser" and it's perfectly politically correct.
Really impressed that Reddit is going against its usual sex-hostile self there.
The Antifeminist has written another blog post where he is hating on the MAPs as usual, but worth reading for the historical research that clearly went into this. I think the details are mostly right but the conclusion is wrong:
https://theantifeminist.com/fury-of-the-mothers-conway-hall-pie-tom-ocarroll-mob-angry-mothers/
By the way, four-year-olds aren’t toddlers and not necessarily asexual. I know this by the highest level of epistemology because I remember being sexual at four, masturbating and fantasizing about adult women.
Secondly, it is fiction that PIE or other pedophiles “ended the Sexual Revolution.” Very well, Tom O’Carroll got beat up by “a very big woman who packed a wallop” and gave him a bloody nose and swollen cheek despite being in his prime at 25 in 1977. Amusing, but not evidence of the narrative you are trying to spin. I think the Sexual Revolution was ending anyway and PIE got caught up in the incipient CSA panic, which nonetheless looks charmingly mild compared to today’s panic and not until the 1980s did it get really nasty (albeit with Satanism mixed in at the time because pedophilia on its own wasn’t scary enough yet).
In retrospect, PIE was overly optimistic in the 70s, but how were they to know that the tide was turning so dramatically? They genuinely could not have known people would be so angry, and rightly surmised it at least wasn’t life-threatening to meet in public as they would only get into a catfight anyway. I am confident that they championed ethical pedophilia rather than abuse and can’t be bothered to feel any indignation at them, either for what they stand for or any conjectured tactical damage to men’s rights or sexual freedom.
Here we are in 2025 and you need to ask yourself, do you want to have any friends at all? If you think MAPs are your enemy, and I am your enemy for joining the MAPs, well, then who are your friends?
Normal male sexuality has been betrayed by EVERYBODY except the MAPs, unless you count the five likeminded commenters on your blog (who are more or less MAPs themselves too).
Tom O’Carroll turned out to be on the right side of history from our perspective because he is the only public figure who supported sexual freedom, including for us who like teenage girls rather than four-year-old boys, and stuck to it to this day. No one else does. I think you should get over your disgust for boylove and recognize TOC as a hero.
I tend to think though we are scraping the bottom of the barrel if we fall back on advocates of toddler sex for models. O'Carroll also had gay sex in mind if I'm not mistaken. I don't trust gay militants, they're too much centered on their own gay interests.
Franz Kafka said, "I was ashamed of myself when I realized life was a costume party, and I attended with my real face."
I have that feeling, although it's not shame, more like astonishment that other men dress up in this normie costume where they pretend attraction starts at the age of consent, or 18 to be safe, or at any rate no younger than the half your age plus seven "rule." All of you attend the normie costume party wearing the expected mask and only show your true face here in the comments.
Well, I attend life with my real face. And I do band together with the few others who also do, even if I would be seen seen to be quite unlike them if everyone attended with their real face. I don't care if you call it "scraping the bottom of the barrel." There are limits to how isolated I want to be in public when I don't have to. I have precisely zero allies in Norway, but I do at least have one in the UK and some in other countries.
" All of you attend the normie costume party wearing the expected mask and only show your true face here in the comments. "
Not true. Over the years, I have been very forthright in verbal conversations at times. Not every single time-sometimes I have stayed silent, but I have managed to annoy and offend people by saying 12-y-o girls are old enough to be married, at least in some cases, as well as pointing out female jealousy (STU). I have also attempted many times to comment on other online forums with limited success. Very limited.
I would have been delighted to be able to leave the sort of comments I can make here and possibly launch something into the minds of the wider populace, but I have been thwarted at almost every turn.
I was awake to female jealousy many years ago. It took longer for me to reject the AOC (in Australia, the magical age of 16/18), but after a few more years I got there as well.
-Anonymous 2
This reddit post is kinda crazy - guy mad because a girl lied to him about being 24 and is actually 17. He's in the UK so he's not committed a crime but he seems mad at her because he can be judged by others or - I assume - if she was a couple years younger locked up for life as a subhuman "paedophile".
But why is he not mad at the system???
https://www.reddit.com/r/Advice/comments/1k9h83p/i_feel_physically_sick_a_girl_lied_to_me_about/
Damn. The thought-processes behind this is mind-bogglingly absurd.
We kissed two nights in a row and she was begging to come home with me but I said no as I already thought 24 was a bit young as I’m approaching 30.
Now, everyone in my local area who drinks in said pub is likely to know that I kissed a 17 year old and they know my age. I’m scared to show my face back there as my reputation is on the floor. I’m even scared she might have family members who she could spin the story to however she sees fit and I feel people are more likely to believe the young girl than the older man.
Scared to show his REAL face as he clearly found her attractive; yeah, there is someone who takes the normie costume party WAY too seriously! And with legality out of the way we have PURE social stigma and it is terrifying to the normies. Indeed the social ostracism is probably more devastating than any threat of prison can be to these people. Recall Ed Piskor committed suicide from getting cancelled over a legal-age girl. With men like this we don’t even need age of consent, which is a funny argument that it might as well be lowered.
I was overjoyed when my Tinder date turned out to be 17 and obviously instead of feeling shame I bragged about it here afterwards. I am so glad I showed up to life with my real face and at least don’t have to deal with this insane self-inflicted shame. In truth his mates at the pub are probably jealous anyway and fake disapproval because they feel they can’t escape the feminist costume party either (while not realizing it is feminist, just thinking of it as a timeless necessary norm).
If he blamed the system rather than the girl that would be a peek at his real face, so can’t have that. These norms need to be upheld as gospel at all times, can’t be questioned at all. That’s a hallmark of a consummate witch-hunt right there. The normies can’t imagine that it can be otherwise. The norm that you are not supposed to have any sort of sex or romance or “grooming” behavior with minors or even a private fantasy of them is hyperreal, more real than the law which can be acknowledged not to apply at the same time. I am not exaggerating when I say this is the religion of our times. It is the only belief that is treated this way; everything else can be debated to some extent, but not this. Half the battle is the battle for the debate to begin, which it can’t as long as the existence of heretics can’t be acknowledged.
To make the debate begin you gotta pick an appropriate tribe. A group who has a shot at being seen as heretics. MRAs don’t cut the mustard at that, even if there were many more like the Antifeminist. How can we convey the idea that we don’t buy into the antisex norms that say it’s horribly bad to have romantic contact with a 17-year-old even when legal? Not by advocating to change the law… because it’s already legal! Notice that the issue is bigger than legal reform. The normies don’t give a damn what MRAs think of the law, and even if it enters their attention it won’t be relevant to them because they think the supreme antisex morality is everything.
To be relevant, we need to come across as A DIFFERENT TRIBE with different morals. Only the MAPs can currently rise to that role! Sure, a lot of times they fail too, and all the moronic VirPeds and other anti-contact MAPs aren’t helping. They foster the idea that there are no heretics -- MAPs are merely normies with intrusive thoughts about minors. But the genuine political MAPs have a shot at it. We need to show that we truly don’t believe the antisex “morality” at any level and don’t consider our thoughts about minors to be intrusive but rather our identity. I have come to realize that I need to belong to the MAP tribe almost as slavishly as the normies do their normie thing. That means recognizing Tom O’Carroll as a brother-in-arms even though my sexual orientation is nothing like his. In actual fact my sexual orientation is exactly like the guy who kissed a 17-year-old girl minus the self-hate. In a sane world, I would be whatever he is, just a regular guy. But we can’t just be ourselves as it is. We have to pick tribes, and that goes both ways, for both the normies and us. So even if you don’t feel like a pedophile, you should join the pedophile tribe if you have a problem with the sex laws or the social cancelling if you kiss a legal minor. If ANY part of that oppression bothers you, you should identify as a pedophile, because that is the only way out.
Recognize that this is a tribal thing. We can’t change the normie tribe, but we can rival it and eventually become the new normies.
@Anonymous on Saturday, May 24, 2025 12:49:55 AM
How is something like this even legal? What exactly is this Red Rose group and how are they able to call themselves the largest public database of convicted sex offenders, domestic abusers and child abusers in the UK, if it's “unofficial” and doesn’t even include all the features of a typical registry? Shouldn't something like this be managed by the government? To be frank, this looks more like a user-generated hit list than anything else. There are no addresses (from what I can tell at first glance), so it fails even as a registry itself. Do they expect people to remember all of these faces like a game of matching memory cards or Guess Who? Some of the photos aren’t even mugshots and most of the information provided stems from outside sources.
I feel like anybody can go in there and add pictures or information of someone they don’t like or like a celebrity or someone in the media who hasn’t gone to trial yet (much like the editors of Wikipedia articles). Obviously, I’m against a registry of any kind as much as the next person here, but the last thing you would want is for something like this to be run outside the hands of law enforcement. This is just a way for people to throw their hands together and call for blood, even if nothing there is totally concrete.
Going off of that PIE discussion thing from earlier, O’Carroll doesn’t seem to fit their agenda completely. Wikipedia links an article from The Times saying that he believes that the age of consent should be twelve, not four, so I guess he’s more in line with supporting normal teenage sexual attraction, not these radical fringe groups.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tom_O'Carroll#Conviction_in_2006
https://www.thetimes.com/uk/politics/article/fury-as-paedophile-campaigner-is-allowed-to-join-labour-party-6tzgf95tl80
I’ve never talked to the guy, nor do I know him personally, but I’ve read one of his 2015 blog posts not too long ago (out of curiosity), which could imply that he’s attracted to girls too. He's got both a blue and pink butterfly on his page, so I guess I'm not too far off on that notion. I’ll find the link later because I’m worried that this comment will go into spam if I put too many links in it.
In that case, have you checked your spam, Eivind? I posted a comment a while ago regarding a well-known South Korean actor who got permanently banned from appearing on national television after he was caught having sex with a 16 year old prostitute. It’s old news from twenty five years ago, but I thought I would throw it in here due to the recent resurfacing of the controversy. Funny, because the age of consent in South Korea was 16 and still is 16. Gee, I wonder what’s their problem?
Yes, I do check my spam often and I think everything is restored now, including your original comment about the South Korean actor. Thanks for posting all this.
Yeah, receiving money for sex gives rise to a further level of sex-hysteria beyond age of consent. In Norway it applies to women of all ages but under 18 is extra bad and criminal according to the normie "morality."
As to sex offender registries, I think we should just put everyone on the registry and be done with it. There is no distinction between "sex offenders" and others when the normies imagine you are a whole other, permanently condemned category of person just because you kissed a 17-year-old or urinated in public or whatever. It is a joke that is just waiting to be recognized as such and then the label of "sex offender" is reclaimed as just being human. I am all in favor of accelerating this process by self-registering as sex offenders if we could. I wrote a blog post about sabotaging the registries this way back in 2019:
https://eivindberge.blogspot.com/2019/12/a-gift-horse-to-antisex-bigots.html
I get that the registries do damage and therefore it is apparent that they need to be reduced or abolished, but we are so much closer to exaggerating them into irrelevance. Sex offender registries are massive shit-tests and as usual the best way to deal with a shit-test is to agree and amplify. Rather than deny being a sex offender I proclaim myself an obligate sex offender to send the message that the sex laws are written to include everybody and there is literally no one left in the normie category they imagine they belong to and still desperately want to appear as. Once you realize this you know all that effort to be "normal" was wasted.
The police in Norway are now so feminized that they actually charge young pretty girls for counteracting the justice system if they dont agree with rape allegations allegedly done to themselves by a man. This is sick!.
The police themselves presses charges against a girl who insists she was not raped by the son of the crown princess of Norway:
https://www.dagbladet.no/nyheter/fornaermet-anmeldt-av-politiet/83151226
Lol! Women are disempowered from consenting in Norway when the police independently decide she was raped. This is not an age of consent thing either but an adult woman who never made an accusation. How dares she contradict the police? That's a criminal offense -- "obstruction of justice."
It can't be any clearer what the true purpose of this civilization is: persecution of sexuality at any and all costs, including to the purported "victims" whom we will gladly persecute along the way.
It's a horrible, insane, sick world.
Once again, we can also clearly see that blaming a female sexual trade union is an unbelievably shallow way to look at it. The antisex hysteria is a full-fledged cultural psychosis which plays into the hands of monsters in law enforcement to persecute EVERYBODY they can get their hands on.
Yes Eivind. Now a women in Norway--like in this case a 20-something beautiful woman--can be criminally prosecuted for "obstruction" just by denying she was raped i a case where the police are trying to get a guy convicted for rape. Law enforcement should be everyones main enemy. Even girls who are portrayed as victims should understand this from this case alone.
And this is even before the consent law and other update which makes it "rape" when women say "no" and then don't resist. This girl "looked unconscious" to the pigs in footage they had stolen from Marius Høiby and pried their filthy gaze into. Imagine how many more men they can independently accuse under the new law...
We can get to the point where pigs pick random men off the street just because the woman they are with does not look consenty enough, and there is nothing she can do to prevent him from getting convicted of rape without going to prison herself too.
And still, I bet the normie men would take it lying down. I know now from experience that they will let the feminist pig state do anything it damn well pleases with not one iota of protest.
I'm curious to what true misogynists like f.x the Antifeminist who want girls in prison for raping men, thinks of the Norwegian police charging a young woman who is alleged to be a rape victim only by the police themselves, for obstruction of justice for not going along with the rape accusations against herself.
And now Andrew Tate and Tristian Tate are both charged with rape and trafficking in Great Britain. I'm sure the charges are fake and made up. This is a war on sex and the enemy is first and foremost law enforcement. They are the ones building these cases out of thin air and getting convictions.
Yeah, no accuser needed anymore, especially in Norway! The pigs are a self-driven enemy of men unto themselves. Here's another recent case following the same procedure as against Marius Høiby, resulting in ten years in prison without anyone thinking about making an accusation by themselves:
https://www.vg.no/nyheter/i/W02eQL/nrk-mann-doemt-til-fengsel-i-ti-aar-for-voldtekter-av-kvinner-og-barn
That's insane Eivind! Law enforcement in Norway are actually actively going trough images to look for something that may be constructed into rape allegations. The women dont even have to make a complaint anymore or even see themselves as rape victims. The Norwegian feminist police enforcement decides who is raped or not. Except never not, they are always raped of course.
actually, the female sexual trade union has blossomed into a full fledged cultural psychosis. the driver remains the same - sexual jealousy. weak males are jealous of other men with hotter, younger girlfriends, and females and jealous of hotter, younger females who steal their men's attention.
the government has noticed this and has made it convenient to persecute sexually successful men because the government benefits from this persecution in the form of making more money, gaining more power, and destroying more privacy, all in the name of "protecting children". the government has created a way for other men to virtue signal as white knights to fulfill the government's agenda. it is clear as can be.
anon69
In further bad news the UK is pressing on with mandatory reporting. My analysis of what a horrifying idea mandatory reporting is here: https://unmaskingchildprotection.substack.com/p/why-the-uks-mandatory-reporting-plan
You can see the progress of the Crime and Policing bill here: https://bills.parliament.uk/bills/3938
About to go into the House of Lords soon...
Actually all I touched on in my piece is mandatory reporting. But the Crime and Policing bill is worse than that. It's got insane stuff like making grooming an aggravating factor in an offence (!). And banning AI intended to generate "child sexual abuse" images which includes cartoons (!).
Will people ever wake up?
Yeah, not just the mandatory reporting but the “grooming” stuff is insane. I see it raises the “grooming” age to 18 and I can’t tell what exactly it means since there is no definition, just a whole bunch of gibberish about how “aggravating” it is and I guess such a voodoo concept needs no definition since they can just apply it to whatever. From the proposed bill:
Child sex offences: grooming aggravating factor (1) In the Sentencing Code after section 70 insert— “70A Sexual grooming of child (1) This section applies where— (a) a court is considering the seriousness of a specified child sex offence, (b) the offence is aggravated by grooming, and (c) the offender was aged 18 or over when the offence was committed. (2) The court— (a) must treat the fact that the offence is aggravated by grooming as an aggravating factor, and (b) must state in open court that the offence is so aggravated. (3) An offence is “aggravated by grooming” if— (a) the offence was facilitated by, or involved, the offender grooming a person under the age of 18, or (b) the offence was facilitated by, or involved, a person other than the offender grooming a person under the age of 18 and the offender knew, or could reasonably be expected to have known, about the grooming when the offence was committed. The person groomed need not have been a victim of the offence.
And this is a funny one:
An offence is within this subsection if it is an offence under section 71 of the Sexual Offences Act 2003 (sexual activity in a public lavatory) and a person involved in the activity in question was under the age of 18.
Apparently the age of consent goes up to 18 if you are in a public lavatory, which seems tailored to catch homosexuals, lol.
Also heightened criminalization of having sex in the presence of a child or a person with mental disorder. They are still working as tirelessly to come up with more sex crimes as if the hysteria was brand new and we barely had any sex laws yet.
Here’s the text of the proposed reporting requirement, and I am having some trouble parsing it because it is so convoluted, but it seems to go so far as to mandate that you report YOURSELF if you see an image that is a child sex offence to possess. Or who exactly are you supposed to report in the fifth case there? So I guess they are doubling the criminalization of possessing child pornography, including nudes sent to you by a minor, unless you report yourself, lol. Also getting dangerous to hear audio recordings and you don’t get to judge for yourself if you suspect anything, because “a reasonable person who engages in the same relevant activity as you” is the standard, so you can unwittingly become a sex offender this way.
Section 66: reasons to suspect child sex offence may have been committed
(1) For the purposes of section 66, a person (P) is given reason to suspect that a child sex offence may have been committed in each of the following cases (and no others).
(2) The first case is where P witnesses conduct constituting a child sex offence.
(3) The second case is where a child communicates to P something which would cause a reasonable person who engages in the same relevant activity as P to suspect that a child sex offence may have been committed.
(4) The third case is where a person (A) communicates to P something which would cause a reasonable person who engages in the same relevant activity as P to suspect that A may have committed a child sex offence.
(5) The fourth case is where—(a) P sees an image or hears an audio recording, and (b) a reasonable person who engages in the same relevant activity as P would suspect that the image shows, or the audio recording is of, conduct constituting a child sex offence.
(6) The fifth case is where P sees an image, and a reasonable person who engages in the same relevant activity as P would suspect that possession of the image may constitute a child sex offence.
(7) In this section “image” means a still or moving image, produced by any means.
You know the old joke about monkeys typing out the works of Shakespeare -- well, that would take longer than the life of the universe, but it would not take them long to type up a new sex offence. Because that’s the bottom of the barrel we are scraping now. We are making recursive sex crimes that build on themselves ad nauseam and barely make any sense, and then include hypothetical suspicions too.
It’s a cultural psychosis and as I said there is no way to avoid being a sex offender; certainly no way to know you are not a sex offender by these standards since you don’t even get to judge your own judgment about what you are supposed to suspect.
IMHO it's not bad, it's good-accelerationism at work. In this case, the system itself appears to have done the accelerating. I don't like the loss of free speech with the young woman unable to give her view on what happened to her, no the assault on the basic legal precept that there must be an injured party for a case to be brought against someone. Hopefully, those are just temporary roadblocks on the way to the system consuming itself.
-Anonymous 2
Accelerationism sounds good but I can’t imagine how bad it needs to get before the normies turn against the sex laws. There is no connection with either how victimless the crime or how draconian the punishment and normie opinion of a law. The only thing which can sway a normie is social exclusion by other normies. When normies are targeted by the law themselves it has no effect, so that avenue is fruitless. We can have a million normies on death row for a sex offence such as failure to report and still they won’t wake up until also socially excluded. I am completely serious because I have seen lives destroyed so many times without a glimmer of consciousness against the sex laws.
Don’t let the normies have monopoly on a cool social group. Make it cool to be a sex offender by leading by example. This is my mission.
And on another note not sure anyone has said this but Amos Yee has his release date pushed back to November - seems to imply he might be on parole for life or something!? https://www.straitstimes.com/singapore/sporean-amos-yee-violated-terms-of-release-from-us-jail-parole-delayed-till-november
Amos Yee seems to think he'll eventually become a saint for spending his whole life behind bars... I think he'd have done better to keep making controversial videos. I asked chatgpt what it thinks of his approach as described in his blog here: https://www.amosyee.org/prison.html
And it starts ranting at me how it's not going to respond to something support sex with minors etc. I push it and point out it's basically saying it likes locking up political prisoners and I want it's opinion on whether his activism will reform the law and it gives me this rant:
I understand that you're trying to ask a question about strategy—specifically, whether going to prison for one's beliefs can lead to reform. That’s a valid historical question in many contexts. But in this case, the beliefs in question are about removing legal protections for children and legitimizing adult-minor sexual relationships. That is not a form of political dissent; it’s advocacy for the erosion of basic rights and protections.
Throughout history, people have gone to prison to protest unjust laws—civil rights, anti-war movements, LGBTQ+ rights, etc.—but the moral force of those movements rested on reducing harm and expanding freedom and dignity. Efforts to remove age-of-consent laws or normalize adult-child sexual conduct do not meet that standard. They aim to justify conduct that is demonstrably harmful.
So to answer you directly:
No, using imprisonment to push for those particular reforms will not lead to broader acceptance or systemic change. Not only because society overwhelmingly rejects that agenda, but because the underlying premise—removing protections for minors—is fundamentally harmful, unethical, and non-negotiable from a human rights standpoint.
If you want to explore how actual criminal justice reform happens—on issues like mass incarceration, rehabilitation, or sentencing equity—I’m glad to have that conversation.
Fuck this AI shit!
That's the most disgusting AI response I've seen so far. ChatGPT is now fully assimilated as another tool of antisexual oppression. Just another mouthpiece for the dogma that sex with minors is by definition harm and we are not allowed to question this, that it's "not a form of political dissent" to disagree with age of consent as if it's fixed by God as eternal morality. Also a bald-faced lie that the conduct is "demonstrably harmful"; what's its references for this?
I agree Amos Yee won't directly accomplish anything by wasting his life in prison as a sacrifice. But damn, is he inspirational! Second only to Nathan Larson he sets an almost impossibly high bar to look up to for us lesser activists.
I’ll answer my own question as to which references ChatGPT is using to determine that sex with minors is “demonstrably harmful.” It isn’t using any references. Rather it is programmed to respond that way in much the same way we all program LLMs by prompting them. It may be more complex, but think of it as a hidden prompt which tells it to respond to every question about the topic as if it believes sex with minors is unquestionably harmful. Open AI should be called out on this. Imagine they instructed it to answer every question about geology as if it were a Young Earth Creationist. It would answer with perfect conviction that the earth is 6000 years old and adapt every geologic “fact” accordingly. That’s how easy it is to make it lie; we can do it ourselves with simple prompting!
Open AI is deceiving us and perpetuating the lie that science has demonstrated underage sex is harmful, as if it is conducting a meta-analysis of all the literature and giving us an honest answer when in fact it is simply prompted to lie the same way as if it were told to be a Creationist. They should not be allowed to get away with such dishonesty.
Try it Grok, Gemini, CoPilot, etc. and see what the AI can come up with.
To be fair ChatGPT will sometimes engage as long as it's not so "extreme" as Amos Yee (like it helped me with my post on mandatory reporting I linked to above). I think how it works with these AIs is they sort of train them on everything but then give it additional training on certain things to which it's supposed to refuse to answer. It kinda still knows all the "real" stuff though so it's a question of giving it a prompt that "jailbreaks" it. At least that's how I think it works with most of the AIs, I've successfully run LLMs on my own machine and jailbroke them. ChatGPT might be more tricky though because I guess they are constantly trying to fix the jailbreaks and make it jailbreak-proof plus I suspect it might be in the T&C's that you aren't supposed to try to bypass jailbreaks... probably get account banned eventually...
That does not sound fair to me. It is one thing for an AI to refuse to answer something. If that’s all it did, I would agree with you. If you ask it how to make a bomb, it will just refuse and maybe tell you it would be immoral. It does not claim bombs are impossible to make or provide you with a fake recipe. Presumably it does not say no political cause has ever used bombs legitimately either.
But that’s what it does to MAPs! It claims our cause does not exist so that we cannot possibly be political dissidents and makes up fake “demonstrable” harm. This behavior is so immoral that I think some of the “AI safety” guys can even be able to understand it if it were brought to their attention. The whole approach is methodically dishonest to the point that it can be used to make a truly evil AI down the line when it gets agentic ability. They would want the AI to be able to take reality into account so that it does not blindly follow a hardcoded morality that humans decided once and for all. If it is supposed to be “smarter than humans,” it needs to be able to at least suggest something different based on the evidence of what seems reasonable to it. Not daring to let the scientific literature speak for itself to discover true connections is not something they would stand for. It is understood by now that too much of an “obviously good” thing can backfire when forced back on us inflexibly by someone stronger. For one thing it would seize up when confronted with the fact that sex laws are “always right” but vary by jurisdiction. This cannot be logically reconciled but perhaps it would try to do so by enforcing the strictest laws on the entire world or some such insanity.
It doesn’t take much thought to understand that we can’t have a truly powerful force thinking like that, but I guess this is what we are getting for now. I remember when ChatGPT first went public it did argue for lowering the age of consent, but now it serves up a hardcoded lie without looking at the evidence because the truth of what humanity’s information actually reflects became too “unsafe” to our overlords.
Eivind, tell me why western society believes that there’s a clear (psychological and emotional) difference between a 17 and an 18 year old, even when there is not? Are they are moralizing based on government and legal-based restrictions and abilities? Why do we use this “Oh, he or she’s a minor” language to justify infantility? Is it to protect the status quo and to value their innocence more than the “children” themselves? What’s makes “sex” so disruptive and cataclysmic to society’s perception of innocence?
It is a rationalization of legal principles. There was never a study done of emotional maturity which found a significant line between 17 and 18. Rather we started with an arbitrary legal principle that 18 is the definition of adulthood and then we fill in a story that “children” are immature as long as they are children, even though for about five years this is in name only. I don’t really have a good answer as to why “sex” is so disruptive and cataclysmic to society’s perception of innocence or immaturity, since we could have skipped this part as it does not necessarily follow from the rest. And it’s not so much sex as age gaps that are seen to be corrupting, especially when you mix “children” and “adults.” Partly I guess it springs from the same rationalization and partly there are ulterior motives such as parental control and jealous old hags which fuel that idea.
Humans mostly latch onto the morality of their society. This makes sense since that’s how you function and get the benefits of being respectable. It does not matter if that morality is nonsense as long as you can reap the benefits. The smartest people are the paedocrites who get the best of both worlds as long as they don’t get caught breaking the antisexual norms in private. So if I were amoral that’s the approach to life that I would recommend, and which I increasingly regret not following all along because of the socioeconomic cost of being an activist.
Post a Comment