Is there a way out of the hedonic treadmill? Oh, yes there is! Most normies don’t take it, but there is. The way to get sublime pleasure is to seek what you are “not supposed to have.” 30 years ago, if I had gotten a girlfriend she would have been expected to be so young and beautiful and if I had also gotten used to her I am afraid I could have been that ungrateful bastard. As a rule the girls prefer the ungrateful bastards to a much older man who would worship them, to be sure, but this blog is about being the exception to the rule. If you are reading this, you don’t want to be a normie. To the normies I am a bottom feeder, but there is a fine line between being a bottom feeder and getting the most exquisite luxury beyond what billionaires usually have access to. You just need to think outside the box and flip those numbers like this beautiful Filipina explains:
Not that I would think about dating 48-64-year-old women, but I am almost the age where not much better would be realistic here. Even if I were to become “successful.” A weird thing about this culture is that while women use their success to avoid age gaps, men rarely use their success to seek out age gaps. Even at the very top with men like Jeff Bezos who just married a granny. Well, to each his own. To me it is the most gigantic no-brainer that if there is a way to change those numbers to 18-24, I must devote myself fully to attaining it.
The expats are the greatest sexualist geniuses -- if you define sexualism as not just opposing the sex laws but seeking the best possible sex life for themselves. At the educative track I am on now with becoming proficient at coding and getting a job in approximately one year I should be able to begin living that life two years from now, at least once a year as a tourist at first. So that’s what I shall do!
72 comments:
Great news Eivind.
"Women use their success to avoid age gaps"
To avoid the unhappy fate they suffered in the past of being married away to men they didn't choose and didn't love (who were indeed often older), sure... but there are many young women out there who are attracted to older men. I would put money on a middle-aged man still having a better chance of sex with a legal teen or young woman now under feminism, than in some conservative patriarchy with shotgun-toting dads hell-bent to protect their daughters' "purity"! It's like you've pointed out - interested parties can be found, if you just dare defy the social norms!
I wanted to ask you about the upcoming election in Norway. Every party is obviously horrible when it comes to sexuality. FrP wants no affirmative consent law, but on the other hand they want a sex offender registry, chemical castration, mandatory IP storage for ISPs, and much harsher punishments!
From what I can gather, Venstre appears to be the least bad among them. Despite the affirmative consent law, they are at least explicitly pro-online anonymity and against digital surveillance, against harsher punishments, and pro-legalizing prostitution. What are your thoughts here? Sure, they all suffer from the same blind spots when it comes to sexuality, but I figure it is best to vote for the least bad one than to not vote at all! Unless of course, you believe in accelerationism...
Obviously, this is not the only topic I'm basing my vote on. But some like FrP are so outright hateful and draconian when it comes to anti-sex hysteria (better to institute a surveillance state and to start mutilating "deviants" than to risk your poor, innocent little teenage babies sexting with an adult online!) that I could never vote for them no matter how much else of their platform I might agree with!
In the first couple of elections after I turned 18, I did actually vote FrP. Now I see they are completely fascist and sex-hostile of course, so I feel stupid but they were also not quite so bad back then (no one was). This was in Carl I. Hagen's heyday in the 1990s and he seemed like a decent guy, almost on par with Tor Erling Staff as a freedom-loving tolerant type.
I believe the right to a jury is more fundamental to democracy than voting, so that's the bare minimum of a platform I could vote for. I agree Venstre is least bad but it seems even they have given up juries now, so I feel extreme distaste to voting at all. Rationally just in terms of "least bad" I should vote for them, but it feels so wrong to participate in a system which has lost the plot completely. Everything rots and must eventually be replaced rather than fixed, and this is where I think we are with the Norwegian government now. Since we lost the jury in 2018 I have become an anarchist who does not lend any legitimacy to the courts at least, and that means I can't really support the rest of the government either unless they strive to restore the jury.
I guess the only battleground left which is not already decided in favor of fascism and extreme sex-hostility is whether we can be (relatively) free on the Internet or have age segregation and identification to access as much as a Wikipedia article. It's great that Venstre wants to preserve this freedom, but not enough to outweigh all the other acceptance of tyranny for me, so I probably won't vote at all.
A coding job can be done from anywhere so you could become a digital nomad working from abroad. However, beware of the "2 years from now" trap. If you can work a menial (crappy) job you should do so and start now. Your purpose (saving money for sex travel) would make it bearable as long as you stay focused. Of course not everyone can do any crappy job. As an example, I myself would never have been able to work as a waiter, but I could've drudged as a check-in employee at the airport.
A menial job is not an option with this program. It leads to a well-paid job or nothing. I probably won't be able to be a digital nomad right away, but will have good opportunity to save up for vacations as there is no reason to have a more expensive lifestyle here than I do now.
Not many comments lately. I guess my blog has gotten too boring, and discussion has somewhat moved to the Antifeminist. That's okay. I need to focus on improving my life as noted. Blogging is a dead end to that and I wasn't having any success at building a movement. I'm glad I tried the MAP priority approach too but it didn't make much difference from just calling myself an MRA and sexualist. I am not going away, but I am okay with less activity here and happy to devote myself more to potentially fruitful pursuits.
Though I might as well post these-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NNTyQbRU2nw
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k9K1G2X6Mxs .
These videos look at the evidence offered up from mainstream media and Epstein "victims" themselves and finds it laughable.
There's a lot more to them than this, and not everyone will be interested in what this is, but simply from an MRA perspective, it's a relief to see.
-Anonymous 2
Thanks, Anonymous 2. I don't have time to watch right now but that sounds promising. The whole Epstein circus is built on such a flimsy delusion that I will be more surprised if it endures than crumbles. The normies should realize that they have been duped not only by fake victimhood but extremely successful scams and deranged conspiracy theories.
I watched the videos that Anonymous 2 posted, and they are totally worthless and no one should waste their time watching such garbage. It is about Epstein(AGAIN!) and it dont have any interest whatsoever.
Epstein was an idiot for killing himself. He could have been the guy telling the world that he did absolutely nothing wrong and nothing that any other man would not want to do.
So, as I said I’m rather busy but now on the bus home I have time to collect some thoughts. Today the other students at coding class were discussing age gaps -- a conversation I, I think wisely, stayed out of. If one were to glean values from how the women were talking about it, anything more than two years would practically be the moral equivalent of genocide. I was not too shocked to hear this from a 35-year-old at this point, who was by far most vocal about it, but then the youngest girl present -- 22 years old -- couldn't agree more and weighed in that to her, 18 and 19-year-olds are children. She was referring especially to the girls, who “literally look like children” to her and are “awfully immature” and so on. And though it stopped just short of the teenage brain myth this time, I was amazed that there is something for everyone to virtue-signal about in this moral panic.
Personally I think 13-year-old girls look like adults. Some 12-year-olds do too. And I believe I am right in every relevant respect.
How did the “norm” get so mistaken? We as a society have come to mistake nubility for childhood and men have failed to protest. The explosion in attractiveness which is the flower of youth and arguably peaks in the mid teens is misclassified as childhood. By the time men are old enough to even appreciate nubility (as opposed to taking youth for granted because they are so young too as in my anecdote above), we are way “too old” for any nubile girl.
The other men present did not voice disagreement either, but they were at least not enthusiastic about denouncing age gaps. Perhaps they were thinking like me that there is no point in arguing this at the micro level, in small groups. That’s just pissing in the wind; social norms will be what they are. I do present my opinion here for anyone who cares to read it, but I am done arguing where it could get in the way of other things I am doing and most importantly I intend to buck the trend through action, which is what really matters of course.
A 22-year-old girl can be a nine out of 10, but the scale is exponential and she would have been 10 times hotter at 16 or 15 (I repeat, this is and used to be acknowledged as nubility rather than men being nonces for thinking so). A 35-year-old can be a 6/10 if she is lucky, and again the scale is exponential. I guess both of them screeching so loudly about the badness of hooking up with teens makes some sense from a STU perspective, but they genuinely believe these are self-evident norms rather than ulterior motives, which is to say we can’t explain it without cultural drift as well.
And then as if that’s not enough I’m sure most of you have seen this girl waving an axe and a knife against a “sex predator” who didn't even touch any girl:
https://www.facebook.com/photo?fbid=10233947012191968&set=a.10203459839151696
Little Miss Braveheart - the wee Scots lassie whose valiant defence of herself and her little sister from an immigrant sex predator both inspires and shames a nation…
Or as I would put it: a signpost of sexuality hysterically afraid of sexuality at the same time while all the native agecucked “men” cheer her on (I do understand their jealousy though, if they can’t have her then immigrants shouldn’t either). What an icon of our times. I don’t have to look for these examples of stunning sex-hostility. They find me while I’m just trying to concentrate on coding or whatever and couldn’t have been more illustrative if I had put my wildest imagination to it. The story of our times writes itself and there is nothing we can do about it, except hopefully geomaxing still works?
I can’t wait to get out of here. This place has nothing more to offer me now. But I am haunted by the thought that this is simply what an efficient mating market looks like, and that markets don’t stay inefficient for long. When everyone gets what they deserve, perhaps we converge on a norm of max two years age gap globally. The expats rely on arbitrage, and how long can that last until other forces have evened out the inefficiency? If not true efficiency then feminist taboos preventing us from buying a better deal than we “deserve,” which will be defined as sex crimes of course.
I know I am exaggerating because virtue signaling is different from what people do in private. Some young women and even teens might still like me here too but the hate we would get in public ensures she would turn around in shame before we reach the first date (literally happened on Tinder already; they first agree but then think about how it would look). So I need to go somewhere where a 20 to 30+ year age gap is considered acceptable, if such a place still exists by the time I have the money.
Here the only exceptions at this rate of age gap hysteria will be incest and teachers and sports coaches and youth pastors, since they are the only ones who get proximity to youth. And of course all of them face heightened criminalization as well to cancel out the benefits. Whenever there is an opportunity there are opposite forces to ensure you can’t win for long. When feminism rules no one shall have benefits, everything shall be efficient and max two years age gap is acceptable.
Which reminds me of the sexualist religion I am starting: in my church we can all be youth pastors, which shall the standard clergy designation :)
Another bus ride in very slow traffic out of Bergen today, another opportunity to jot down some philosophical thoughts about age gap.
Look around you. The mating market is frighteningly effective at pairing everyone up with someone of equal value or the lack of it. This is assortative mating, which is almost entirely about age, you realize when you get older. In theory men should have a significantly longer shelf-life, but you wouldn't guess so by lookig at the couples around here. By the time men are 45 or 50 the only option is an equally sexually worthless old hag. Old couples also use the language of romantic love to describe their relationship, but it's not the same thing. This is so obvious it used to be written in children's science books when I was in grade school. They stay together mostly out of inertia and other kinds of love which has little to do with sex. And even this is not an option if you are old and single, because how the hell are you supposed to FORM a bond with someone unattractive? Sticking together when you have no better option is one thing, but there won't be a spark to forge a relationship if you didn't meet when there was attraction. Of course, 50% of couples also split up in middle age even if they had that.
If there is an inefficiency in the market, well, you have to be truly exceptional to find it, at least statistically. The men who travel from here to find a loophole in the norm that unattractive "attracts" unattractive are not said to be particularly exceptional other than by choice. I hope this is true and am fully planning to join them, but it does look a bit too good to be true from this depressing vantage point.
I wonder how the normies avoid getting depressed about it?
If I had to guess, perhaps they don't really avoid getting depressed about never getting to make love to a beautiful girl for the last couple of decades of their vital life, but they "value" other things than sex much more highly than us sexualists, such as career and hobbies. And of course many of them do have families that they want to keep together as well even if their partner is unattractive, so when we don't have that it become much more of a no-brainer to seek a better deal by any resources we can throw at it. It's still perplexing that so relatively few men give it a try though.
I'm not so much worried mysefl about the dating market than I am about the whore-mongering market, but the same observations are valid. The market has become very efficient worldwide. Thirty years ago dozens of countries were genuine pussy havens, nowadays only countries with either poor flight connections or a poor safety and infrastructure offer good opportunities. Girls in black Africa now go online even if it means they eat only 3 days a week, and they fantasize about and chat with handsome males their age.
I'm not even talking about the market within the confines of a particular country. Such a national market has always been very efficient, with the price of sex being linked to minimal wage, standard of living and cost of accomodation.
I just took out a premium membership on a well-known dating app while in Europe, with a view to my fortcoming trips to Indonesia and Peru. I started getting hits from women in Europe straight away. Women over 50, not a single one doable. I can't blame them for trying. They don't understand my hobby consists in spending as much time as I can in countries where I can poke women half my age in exchange for money. Life (with a capital L) is a rotten deal for sure.
I can also write in the mornings on what is also a school bus and thus much more pleasant. Now I shall look on the bright side.
Anthony M. Ludovici's essay "Sexual jealousy and civilization" impressed me mightily the first time I read it, and it only gets more poignantly apt as I get older. It is preserved at the MRA Archive for new readers:
https://eivindbergesblog.mra-archive.com/Sexualjealousyandcivilization.html
I saw a YouTuber describe Ludovici as a galaxy-sized brain. That was in a different context and it doesn't exactly take a genius to realize that older men can't get young women. It's more like a fish-recognizing-water situation, but weirder because the old men have been young, yet they seem to adapt eerily well to their apartheid from attractive women now complete with agecucked CSA-hoaxed feminist "morality" and all.
Anyway, in Ludovici's mind the remedy for an efficient mating market is an efficient war. We almost got that with Ukraine, but they are doing it wrong since they spare young men under 25 and send men our age to die. I am unsure if this analogue to the agecucked norms is coincidental or another expression of feminism.
Ludovici pulls the rug out from under all attempts to shame us to get with the agecucked program up to and including demolishing Christianity as another expression of sexual jealousy which dumb normies took the wrong way.
"Indeed, if we closely scrutinize this myth of an omnipotent deity choosing the cruel death of his only son in order to effect an end susceptible of achievement by any number of other means, it is hardly possible not to infer that there must be high probability for any theory which postulates the existence, from the very dawn of human history and even before that, of a deep and shamefully repressed jealousy of the young, on the part of the older male, and that its root is sexual."
There is no salvation in the story of Jesus -- what there is that we can appreciate as sexualists is commiseration from a God who knows what sexual jealousy feels like. What an absolutely dreary state the Christian "heaven" would be anyway, to be old and asexual forever?
The Christian God cannot offer salvation. To find salvation, you must believe in reincarnation, and be young again. It was always thus, never anything beyond. Youth and renewal is the meaning of life and if the Buddhists are right then we already have it.
Yeah, there comes a point when you realize you are too old to be loved by anyone attractive and it has to be transactional from here. That does not mean female validation is zero, by the way. It depends on what kind of paid girl. With a street hooker it's virtually zero but a teenage sugar baby who isn't seeing many other men feels almost like having her as a girlfriend. And of course a wife and family can also be transactional so it's not out of reach.
As Jack is saying we have to be willing to go to unsafe and inaccessible places and there too most girls have higher expectations and the means to access them. But it's still a no-brainer to try when you have nothing left to lose.
Your mileage may vary when this point comes. Robert Lindsay claims teen girls are still falling in love with him in his 60s. I found my early 40s were great for dating teens, better than any age previously, but in my late 40s it's difficult to get any kind of interest from a young woman at all. That might partly be due to circumstances which I can still change, so I stay focused on that.
First of all, Jesus was never against heterosexual sex of any type, and his death was to wipe away sins, all this feminist sexual restriction in Christianity appeared after the church was invaded by homosexuals who implemented the "chastity" vow among priests. Before that, heterosexual priests regularly went to prostitutes, and they were obviously angry about the rule change.
Next, I can't believe I have to repeat this, but a man can be attractive to a girl at virtually any age because the nature of female attraction to a man is not the same as the nature of male attraction to a female. Females are attracted to dominance, whether that is shown through money, charisma, good looks, violence, confidence, wisdom, etc. If you are a 40+ year old man who is jealous of a pimple faced male teen, you are doing alot of things wrong. It is difficult to get interest from a young woman at all in the Anglosphere right now due to the extreme radical feminist pedohysteria and social norms being propagated through social media. A woman is predisposed to go with the flow, and anything anti-male heterosexuality is the flow right now.
anon69
Perhaps it takes a galaxy-sized intellect like Anthony M. Ludovici to admit that we middle-aged men indeed are jealous of the pimple-faced teenagers. His essay was the Manosphere of 1949 and we could have just skipped this latter pathetic attempt and gone straight back to the source of pure honesty. If it weren’t taboo to admit it, then perhaps we could start doing something about it, like ditching all the agecuckery which favors the teen boys for starters, if not sending them to the trenches in a WWI type of war like Ludovici dreams of.
Dude was a homo, a sadist who enjoyed banging people he was jealous of up the ass, his opinion is irrelevant here. It doesn't take a galaxy-sized brain to see that.
Again, why would you be jealous of a teen male if you are an accomplished man? He has nothing on you when it comes to getting women besides unnatural feminist sex laws preventing you from competition.
anon69
Don't you think there is a deficit of male sexual jealousy towards the young (at least expressed; they might still feel it inside) when the normie consensus is in favor of Romeo and Juliet clauses?
Given that the interests of teenage boys and feminist hags align in both theory and practice as the boys enjoy exemptions from some of the sex laws, older men's jealousy of the boys could be a gateway drug into antifeminism. This is why I am convinced there is too little of this kind of jealousy and it should be nurtured rather than denied (which is what the normies do all day long in their agecucked virtue signaling).
And why do you think Ludovici was a homo? That's irrelevant to the point he is making even if partially true, which I have never heard elsewhere.
John Michael Greer started blogging about the Situationist movement, which is a kind of Marxism (and art movement) which existed from 1957 to 1972:
https://www.ecosophia.net/situationism-a-voice-from-the-fringes/
It’s been a long time since I heard of a movement which resonates so much with me -- not since I heard about the MAPs I guess. This is how Wikipedia describes their ideology:
Essential to situationist theory was the concept of the spectacle, a unified critique of advanced capitalism of which a primary concern was the progressively increasing tendency towards the expression and mediation of social relations through images. The situationists believed that the shift from individual expression through directly lived experiences, or the first-hand fulfillment of authentic desires, to individual expression by proxy through the exchange or consumption of commodities, or passive second-hand alienation, inflicted significant and far-reaching damage to the quality of human life for both individuals and society. Another important concept of situationist theory was the primary means of counteracting the spectacle; the construction of situations, moments of life deliberately constructed for the purpose of reawakening and pursuing authentic desires, experiencing the feeling of life and adventure, and the liberation of everyday life.
Isn’t this exactly what we are about? I could not have written a better definition of nofap, and almost not of the entire MAP and sexualist movements. Damn right, the construction of situations, moments of life deliberately constructed for the purpose of reawakening and pursuing authentic desires is exactly what we need! Only the part about us resisting the sex laws is unstated here but that follows as well if we take it into our context. I never thought I would be a Marxist but if the Situationists were around today, I think I would join them.
They were almost as fringe as we are, but I think we can learn from them. Looking forward to the rest of JMG’s series of blog posts about the Situationists.
By the way, I am proud to be an alpha-sexualist and not a beta-sexualist in Greer’s terminology. (The beta-sexualists are people like the AF who swear they would never break a law.) Greer does label the Situationists as beta-Marxists, but what else could they do? Start a revolution with five people?
Even so, despite calling myself alpha and thus rubbing shoulders with the likes of Nathan Larson and Amos Yee, I think Greer also hit the nail on the head as to why most of us open and proud sexualists are not killed or imprisoned for very long by the government unless we literally ask for it like Nathan and Amos did:
Of course Marxism is far from the only ideology that fills some version of this same role. Every complex society has an assortment of dissident belief systems, and these form a penumbra of alternative options out on the fringes of the culture. Some complex societies object to this state of affairs and try to get rid of the dissident fringe through one means or another, with recurring bouts of mass murder a common option. Modern industrial society, having learned a few things from history, takes a different tack and tacitly permits the fringe ideologies to exist and even thrive while overtly discouraging membership in them.
There are good reasons for this tolerance. Partly, campaigns of extermination are costly in terms of resources, and they also give a glamor to dissident groups that their own beliefs and actions do not always deserve. What today’s beta-Marxists resentfully call “repressive tolerance”—that is, allowing fringe ideologies to flourish unmolested while using propaganda and other means of controlling popular opinion to limit public interest in them—is much more economical and even more effective as a means of repression.
I am currently being “repressively tolerated” and could use some more glamor, lol.
We need less pictures and more situations. That’s the gist of situationist philosophy. Count me in!
I have not yet read any Situationist books or articles. If they never said anything about porn being harmful, then that’s okay because porn was hardly a problem yet in 1972 when they disbanded.
After seeing the rise of home video, the Internet and now AI, a whole lot more real-life situations, sexual and otherwise, are replaced with images and other fakery since the Situationists threw in the towel. They would no doubt think their ideology is more relevant than ever in 2025 if they were still around. We need to get back to real situations! And why not construct them deliberately? And why not have a movement demanding real situations? What matters is that they be real situations! Situationism is practically a synonym for sexualism!
Situationists, structuralists, I remember Richard Dawkins lumping them under "francophonyism". I don't think they will have much to do with sexualism. Much to do with waffle. By the way, you are wrong in assuming a picture or a film of a woman being fucked (porn) is a fakery replacing the real thing. If there were no pic or film, you wouldn't be aware said woman exists. There would be no "real thing" as far as you were concerned. She would be non-existent for you. The filming and the circulation of the film gives you something you wouldn't get if the film hadn't been made, whether you're interested in it or not (obviously you aren't).
If you have no chance of getting a woman, you are better off paying no attention to her. Porn detracts from paying attention to the females you might have a shot at.
The concept of opportunity cost is apparently incredibly difficult to grasp in this context, but it is the main problem with porn and masturbation. Life is too short to waste on such non-situations, instead of the situations which count; hence Situationism is a genius movement expressing just what I have been trying to convey all these years.
'Jack' still fighting for his porn I see. 'Jack', 'The AF' and other notorious porn users should hit the gym, quit masturbation, earn some money and get some confidence. This is a no fap blog, and all I read here in the comments is about 'Jack' and others who just want to masturbate to porn like if their life is dependent on it. Djeeezus!
'Jack' should see a prostitute once a month or once every two months instead of being hellbent on using porn and masturbation as he obviously is now. The satisfaction will be much greater and it will grow him as a person. And to grow as a human seems to bee a dire necessity for him at this point. Not even trying to get laid(outside of dating apps) and now not even hoping to get laid is just not how people in the sexualist movement should behave.
I don’t want to sound rude, but aren’t you Akemidragonnix on AF’s blog or the guy that asked Eivind to try out Substack? Some of the wording is kinda familiar. If I’m wrong, let me know.
no, Akemi is me Feldmarschall, although it was only a temporary account, since I didn't know if he was going to publish my comments if he knew it's me, just now I was going to write to AF that how can one of his favorite movies be a garbage pro-abortion propaganda, but I guess if they put a 13 year old girl fucking like a whore to justify and present the "doctors" as heroes it is irresistible to AF, I don't blame him for clinging to that in this state of affairs, I'm just stating that that supposed sex positive filmmaker would not see you in a favorable light, he would to throw you into a mass grave for your attraction for 13 year old girls.
and I always comment with a name, Feldmarschall or something like that, I am not this other person, although I share his repulsion towards porn, as I have said these years I am completely against using prostitutes and in general sex or relationships with adult women except for very few exceptions.
Elivind, tell me more about the sexualist religion you are doing, I have been thinking about doing one for years but I have never been able to, there could be 2 religions at the same time, one that would be the Sexualist one, based on your sex positive ideas and structured like a Protestant or Lutheran church with pastors and an "Adolescentist" one based on my ideas of only love teenage girls, and structured like Catholicism with bishops and a council of cardinals, which is how I would do it, but the 2 religions would be in friendship and agree on some points: there is a supreme being and the existence of the soul, being a man and having male sexuality is good, and feminists and agecucks are the enemy of everything good and moral.
What a piece of hate AF has dedicated to me on his blog, totally vile and unnecessary, I do NOT insult Jack or anyone, much less from anonymity, don't you see it's someone else? I had just come to comment and visit here again because I saw by chance that AF had reopened his blog and I was excited to have him back since he is one of my references, another thing is that I criticize certain things in his opinions, I have not even said anything against him for doing things that seem wrong to me like being a consumer of porn and paid sex, on the other hand this is disgusting to receive this hatred and accusations of being an aberrant sick person because I have a different opinion about my sexual identity. It is very disgusting and I am disappointed. I do not want to be a normal "hetereosexual" man, problem?
Ok, not to mention their complacent attitude towards the Palestinian massacre and their ass-kissing of Israel just because Muslims and the leftists who denounce it are a bunch of puritanical retards, as if the two were mutually exclusive. Anyone who kills children and teenage girls is a son of a bitch, a mortal enemy of ours who deserves hell, no matter who does it. Besides, Israel is shit to us. These morons raised years ago the marriage age from 17 to 18 because "it was an aberration for children to get married." I don't know what's is the good thing about them.
Feldmarschall asked how my sexualist religion is coming along. To be honest I have been neglecting it except trying to learn some occultism from John Michael Greer. Looking back at past comments I see this is as far as I got:
Ordo Templi Sexualis is my working title. The Order of the Temple of Sexuality. I truly believe sex is a way to commune with the divine. I think if the divine is anything then it is consciousness, and the strongest way to experience consciousness is sexuality. Particularly with a young partner, especially if you are older yourself.
I was thinking organizing it more along the lines of a more or less secret fraternity like the Freemasons with independent local chapters than a unified structure with bishops and cardinals, I guess closer to a Lutheran church the way you describe it but with more of an occult flavor. I am thinking there should be secret rituals, lore and vows for the initiates and we shall cultivate networking with other sex-positive people and focus on jury-nullification of the sex laws as a first order of practical activism.
So, let's build on this or if you want to start a different sex-positive religion that's fine too; we can be allies.
No, I'm not Akemidragonnix.
BTW what is the address for AF's blog and the post where he shows hate?
Feldmarschall, why are you against using prostitutes?
The only thing I still agree 100% with AF is how disgusting paedohypocrite men are, look at this pathetic agecuck, be careful if you admit that a 17 year old woman is attractive an envious old hag will make a bad face in a tiktok video for you! haha
https://x.com/maddenifico/status/1964470984528052237
Hi anon, its because I only consider sex within a stable partner to be healthy and morally correct to one and society, and also I am against using prostitution because is only possible (legally, of course) with legal adults and having sex with adults out of obligation is a form of rape of the feminist system, but well I agree that feminists hate prostitution because it takes away their SMV and I am also totally against criminalizing men and women for having sex with teenagers even if it is just casual sex.
Here is the hateful comment by AF against Feldmarschall:
https://theantifeminist.com/september-2025-news/comment-page-1/#comment-642562
He says in part: "But Feldmarshal is an ‘ephebophibile’ who thinks they are the next sexual minority that the feminists and queers will adopt after trannies, so he can only blame American Conservatives.... ‘Ephebophiles’ are even more mentally ill than trannies. Poor things. And at least trannies can see that feminists who want them in mass graves are not their friends."
So, the AF is very fixated on the fact that ephebophiles are normal and not a sexual minority or disorder, which is true of course, but then he thinks they are mentally ill anyway for thinking they are special? Hmmm, doesn't that make them right to begin with?
Anyway, I have a better idea. Ephebophiles are not mentally ill but rather RELIGIOUS. They have seen the light and belong to the Ordo Templi Sexualis (OTS). If like me you've been with an ephebo girl (that is, aged 13-17) while being significantly older yourself (because otherwise you don't have a frame of reference to know how divine she is) then you can be forgiven for thinking you are special, but it's not a special sexual orientation but rather a religion in the making like I am working on.
What I have experienced is the AF gets mad when anyone blames men instead of girls. The AF hates women and girls. The worst pedocrites are men. Just look at the so called pedohunters; All of them are men.
Thank's Eivind. I will look at that now.
Oh now I see; The AF thinks I'm someone else because I "insult" 'Jack'. I'm only giving out health advise as in dont masturbate to porn and dont look at porn at all. Try your luck with a girl instead and if that dont one should visit someone from the "oldest profession". And no, I have never written anything on The AFs comments section or even read his blog before.
https://incels.is/threads/in-my-high-school-a-33-year-old-male-teacher-had-his-life-ruined-for-sleeping-with-a-17-year-old-12th-grader.788394/
If this injustice doesn't piss someone off, it's because they don't have blood in their veins. We live in the most insane and evil era in history. It doesn't matter that we have long treatises on human dignity and human rights and a very high life expectancy. No just this injustice.. even then a bunch of freaks with rainbow flags and progressives come out, spreading vile lies about a supposed sexual freedom !? and "love is love." No, this is a madhouse, and on top of that, they consider us sick for being free.
At least all the comments on the thread are good. The incels is the only rationale place on the internet it seems! I wonder when Ofcom (aka the UK government and their Online Safety Act) will try to go after them?
If men are no fool, they will be refraining from embarking on any teaching career. They may have been doing so already, judging by the moaning about the shortage of "male figures" in schools.
I'm an ephebophile. An ephebophile to the stratospheric level. Ephebophilia personified. And there's nothing wrong with that. Ephebophilia saves adult male and teen girl lives; it's natural, just another instinct. Why are you so afraid of that word AF?
Truth nuke: The entire human species, except for the ephebophiles (and MAP people) you hate so much, considers a 16-year-old a literal child, and you a child molester who only deserves hatred and punishment. Fuck normal straight men. Cope with that.
Well, I tried to provide a more sensible view of ephebophilia as religiosity rather than a separate sexual orientation. Everyone with the normative sexual orientation can appreciate ephebo girls. Psychiatrists agree too and don't want to diagnose you with anything. Ephebophilia is just heightened appreciation for what we all like. Unlike the AF I don't feel threatened by your identity politics, however. I just don't promote it that way.
I wouldn't say all of humanity considers 16-year-olds "literal children" who are "molested" when they have sex, but yeah, it is getting frighteningly close. The more opposition there is to this trend the better, whether they want to call themselves ephebophiles or whatever.
As for me, I prefer the term sexualist. And I want to start a religion where we do cultivate sexuality as the greatest pathway to religious experiences. I believe what you call ephebophilia comes with built-in religious experiences for so many of us that we just need to label it as religious to have a religion. And of course we don't want our religion to be criminalized. We need some kind of organization to further this interest, probably best built as a secret society given that so few want to commit publicly yet.
The AOA of so-called ephebophiles is well within normal.
If those with a more-than-usual attraction for the "ephebe" age range want to call themselves ephebophiles, then whatever. To me it makes no difference one way or another.
It's the same as if someone were attracted primarily to women in their 30's and called themselves a tridecophile.
Yeah, "well within normal" is an understatement. To me, a girl that age is the perfect heaven you spend the rest of your life trying to get back to, once you've had her. The ne plus ultra benchmark of the profoundest bliss. The obvious meaning of religion if you are going to have a religion.
If you're a normie and follow the new script where age gaps over two years are anathema, maybe if you were lucky you had a girlfriend that age when you were a teenager yourself. You didn't appreciate the religious aspect. And then you forget how wonderful she was. When the older normies see these couples they think they are just another relationship, nothing to see here, move on.
But there is really no comparison. So again, an "ephebophile" can be forgiven for thinking he is special against a backdrop of normies who live half-assed sexual lives and spout drivel like young teens are "abused" unless they stick with boys who are at the same supposed "mentally immature level of development."
Before he became an utter charlatan, French writer Michel Houellebecq wrote some pithy things about sexuality. Quoting from memory, I remember his explaining that when you have a relationship with a hot middle-age woman, you long for, and fantasize no end about, "her youth as a teenage slut".
Funny, I was just thinking about a passage in one of Houellebecq's books, where the narrator recounts his sexual experiences. He wonders if they stand out so much in his memory because he has had comparatively few. I think this might explain why so many men are cucked on the age-gap question. If sex has been a normal part of life since you were in your mid-teens, you've been in relationships for most of your life, and you're used to having sex about as frequently as you have a bowel movement, perhaps you simply stop being able to think about sex as anything other than mundane? It certainly would explain a lot about their priorities!
In a weird way, it's a reassuring silver lining for an oldcel like me! At least sexuality hasn't lost its "magic" to me. I am also very thankful that I have good friends (some of which are teenage girls and young women) who have no problem with me proudly stating that one of my goals is dating a 16 year old when I am 40! Experiencing a sort of mid-life adolescence with a young girl, having all the benefits of a mature mind to really understand how special she is sounds like a supreme experience... though probably not one to be recommended to young men! They would be forsaking a lot, and the chances that they will succeed may be slim! I am only confident in this since I am not an incel because I am ugly or unsociable. I've simply isolated myself since my late teens because of my attraction to youth... In my early 20s I had no shortage of interest from peer-aged women, but I thought of myself as "untouchable" because of my attractions. I was too conscientious, too afraid of what "people would say if they knew". However, I've found that people (even teen girls) really do not usually mind who you are attracted to if you aren't sneaky about it and don't act like a creep! Of course, public discourse is very different from private conversations because people constantly have to watch their asses, so you still have to screen people carefully...
I'm glad to hear that you had success with teen girls in your early 40s, Eivind! Gives me an extra push to stay strong and virile, to take care of myself physically and mentally, and to cultivate a loving and compassionate nature. I'm a sentimental and romantic fool (perhaps because I haven't had enough experiences to become jaded), so I have no interest in "grooming" someone into bed with me. I know it would be social suicide for a girl in highschool to openly date a man in his 30s/40s - but I still would want to offer her something real, something deep and healing, and to be a sort of refuge for her, even in the context of a brief fling.
I don’t think any of us need to worry that we are going to “groom” teenage girls into bed. Even by the feminist definition, because the last description I read of how such grooming was supposed to work was “insincere compliments” from the man. Well, it’s hard to think of a more sincere attitude than our feelings to teenage girls. If on the other hand I were to tell a 50-year-old woman that she is beautiful, that I think of her as a goddess and so on, then I’m struggling to see how it could possibly be sincere. So they got it completely backwards.
Sadly, most teenage girls don’t care how we feel anyway. It would take someone close to their age to “groom” them if you want to use such language, and then it really could be done that way. You can’t create attraction by manipulation; there has to be something to work with. Whoever is least interested has the most power to manipulate and “groom.” The girls could easily groom us, not the other way around. And old ladies get groomed in their sex tourist places I guess, which is the only times they are called beautiful.
Yes, if you called a 50-year old woman beautiful, you would be grooming her. You would not go to jail for it though, because groomed by a man would be just what she would want to be. All the crimes men commit against teenage girls, older women dream of having committed against themselves. That's the STU for you.
https://www.nrk.no/norge/amerikaner-domt-for-overgrep-mot-norsk-14-aring-1.17569338
Absolutely jaw-dropping. 30 years for having consensual sex with a young lover in a different country! You'd get less for murder...
Not yet sentenced, but could be up to 30 years. Norwegian police were also complicit and our public broadcaster NRK is fully onboard with this persecution even though our sentences are much lower. Make no mistake, we are enemies of both the state and society for being men.
I'm only attracted to teenagers, the world hates me for that, even most teens hate me (see r/teenagers in reddit is a sick and evil place ), every time I see a teenage girl on the street I think about her for weeks, if I were a normal heterosexual man I'd be on Tinder or some shit like that looking for an adult woman(inc legal adult teens like 18/19 years old), but not me, I agree most men are what AF and Jack says, but there is a minority of us who are only exclusively attracted to u18 teenagers , and also we don't have the "mind" like the rest that's why they call us immature and autistic, the truth is I'm tired of that shit, of how even people like AF see me as mentally handicapped aspie, that's fucked up.
Nothing strange about your attraction to under-18 teens or thinking about a girl like that for weeks after seeing her in the street, but the sharp cutoff at 18 is unusual. That would be a mirror image of what the most politically correct normies will have us believe when they claim attraction begins at 18 as if it's a binary thing which can't exist before. I have trouble taking this notion of ephebophilia seriously for the same reason. How can an arbitrary line be so significant? It sounds like a fetish for a number rather than much to do with how girls really are.
Indeed, the cutoff statement is quite unusual to wrap around. You would think that 17 and 18 year olds look no different from each other, so why should there be such a strict cutoff to avoid going slightly above? Teen girls are teen girls.
Psychiatric Times has just published a short history of the psychiatric concept of pedophilia:
https://www.psychiatrictimes.com/view/from-perversion-to-pathology-a-historical-perspective-on-pedophilia
Worth reading to get a time-lapse view of how the diagnosis has evolved since its invention in 1886. It vividly brings to light how socially constructed this “pathology” shit is, seeing how it goes through all these changes according to the fashion and beliefs of the times.
Initial conceptualizations of sexual deviance as perversions arose from the publication of Psychopathia Sexualis in 1886 by German psychiatrist Richard von Krafft Ebbing. Specifically, Krafft Ebbing classified any sexual activity not directly relating to procreation, including pedophilia, as a perversion of the sex drive. He believed that perversions stemmed from inherited flaws that disrupted the balance between sexual impulses and self-control. This view was supported by others in the field, including Sigmund Freud, who classified perversions as “aberrations according to the sexual aim” and “aberrations according to the sexual object,” characterizing pedophilia within the latter group. Freud himself developed a range of theories about deviant sexuality, including the belief that perversions stemmed from developmental disturbances in the integration of “component drives,” to the idea that all sexual perversions could be understood as defenses against castration anxiety...
There is zero explanation for why pedophilia is harmful in this article, however. Notice also that the DSM-III required a 10-year age gap to call it pedophilia but now DSM-5 has reduced this already arbitrary criterion to five years for no apparent reason and you can be diagnosed at 16.
I am surprised that the need for the pedophile himself to be distressed by his “disorder” (which is an absolutely necessary criterion calling it a disorder in my view) was actually absent until 1987 when it was introduced as one of two options: being distressed or having acted on the desires, then it was made an absolute requirement in 1994 before it was removed again in 2000 and is still absent in the current DSM-5. So there was curiously a flash of relative sanity there between 1994 and 2000, rather than an escalation of CSA hysteria in a straight line.
I also profoundly disagree with the criterion “The person has acted on these urges.” This is complete bullshit as a marker of “pathology” since two people with the same mentality can act differently based on their random position in life, their political views, tolerance to breaking the law and what kinds of opportunities they get. Again, it clearly shows how psychiatry is almost entirely composed of socially constructed bullshit.
The only thing they kept constant is that the “medical problem” strictly refers to prepubescent children. No word about potentially including the hebephiles and ephebophiles here, so I think they are safe from psychiatry’s clutches for the foreseeable future, even though the criminalization keeps escalating and everyone who even thinks about breaking the law is a “pedophile” colloquially.
YOU CAN'T GIVE UP A MILLIMETER TO THE FUCKING FEMINIST AND AGECUCKS! If you think differently, they'll annihilate you. That's the point. You can't give a feminist an inch, because if you give a inch, they'll take it and destroy you.
In other words, you can't negotiate with a feminist. You can't negotiate with a agecuck. You don't negotiate with that shit, because they'll take you down.
Every time you give a inch, they use you and advance againts you. And deep down, behind all of that, do you know what's there? Envy, hatred, resentment, UNEQUAL TREATMENT UNDER THE LAW, theft, and above all, murder against men. Because what we have to understand is that feminism, under this false pretext of women's and children's rights, is actually hiding all the misery of mediocre, gray, dark, useless beings who are good for nothing and who want to use the repressive apparatus of the State to achieve what they can't achieve on their own.”
Look at this disgusting freak site, it's full of retard agecucks:
https://neets.net/threads/bye-bye-cutiepie-mystic-b-is-a-sick-pedo.83879/
https://neets.net/threads/net-pedo-ring.83813/
"But srsly I didn't really read much of this post as I'm still sleepy but real shit any nigga that isn't some edgy 14yo that talks about "agecucks" is probably a pedo they give sites like this a bad name it's mainly them screaming for attention to be le quirky child rapist harming kids in any way let alone sexually is nothing short of disgusting I honestly believe anyone that posts about wanting to get w 16yos or 17yos should be banned for that shit the aoc here is 16 and I still feel like it's too low teens and preteens are underdeveloped idiots not sexual objects like older women... but yk if it's clearly a joke then I see no issue jokes are subjective n shit"
"im not pedo underaged girls look unattractive"
What a bunch of liars and pedocrites pieces of shit.
They don't kill us for being pedophiles. They call us pedophiles to kill us.
FM, what’s your experience with r/teenagers?
Indeed! This is the quote of the year!! The normies vilify people like us as pedophiles, as that’s only what their pea-sized brains are capable of conjuring of. They literally have no words of anything else, other than to label-slander someone, which shows they have no idea what the fuck they are even talking about in the first place. Ask them to conceptualize and articulate words like “grooming” and you’re gonna get furious keyboard warlords getting completely twisted and tongue-tied. To Eivind, normies are nothing more than zombies that follow society.
It's an exceedingly dumb reply to be sure. It's so dumb it could almost have been written to make anti's look bad, if that's not overthinking it.
However, I see the word "agecuck" is used. The genie is out of the bottle when anti's use this word rather than ignore it. IMHO this is a damned good sign and I am sure I'm not overthinking THIS.
-Anonymous 2
Eivind, what do you think of women purportedly struggling with porn addiction? I believe it is seldom real. It's probably just women realizing there's money in playing sex addiction. I've downloaded the books by these two women:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tCrKrIEhVmM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5KP47MMB2s8
Erica Garza and Jessica Harris
I have never seen any convincing evidence that porn is a significant negative issue for women. While it is possible that I could be convinced by more information, I don't currently take female porn addiction seriously, no. And I never under any circumstances take nonparaphilic "sex addiction" seriously. Porn is not sex (rather a paraphilia) and takes you farther away from sex, which is the problem with it for men (and why not for women too if it really does that, but I have never heard of it like that). I don't take the "addiction" model too seriously for men either, though it can meet some of the criteria. What I take seriously is the fact that wanking to porn is maladaptive behavior for men which gets in the way of having the most fulfilling sex life you can have.
Any theory which postulates that porn is bad because it is too much "sex" rather than too little is not something I believe in, so if that's what those books are arguing then they are obviously bullshittig and grifting off of the "sex addiction" racket, yeah. Especially if they bring religion into it that's a dead giveaway that must be it.
Jessica Harris brings religion into it. Garza doesn't. Note that in the case of women I don't see how their porn addiction can get in the way of having sex. It doesn't seem to be the case judging by what those women recount. They regard porn, masturbation and sex as being in a continuum with positive feedback.
I think porn only gets in the way of men having sex when they have no access to pussy to start with. It gets in the way of nothing: it fills a void.
I've just finished reading Amy Dresner's autobiography. She tells about having had a sex addiction (on top of her much more serious drug addictions) but she herself confesses she doesn't believe much in the sex addiction paradigm. She took part in sex-addicts anonymous sessions. She recounts how ugly the participants tended to be, lol. She also said 90% of members were men addicted to porn. Amy Dresner is anything but a charlatan, but her book "My Fair Junkie: A Memoir of Getting Dirty and Staying Clean" may be boring to readers with no interest in drug addiction.
People like Jack who are convinced porn can't get in the way of anything important are deluded about the finitude of life and man's capacity to seek and enjoy the important things if he wastes his time and libido. Mortals must make choices and discard worthless stuff if they want to make the best of life.
Here's the antidote to the wanker's delusion:
https://www.youtube.com/shorts/qoXjAoGvl0Y
The gods envy us because we are mortal. The Greek gods were wankers. They had infinite time, so no need to prioritize important things. Their life is imagined a lot like wanking, meaningless because it is inconsequential.
You will never be lovelier than you are today. This is true for every female over 15 and every male over 25. And by the way Brad Pitt's moment there would be more enviable if Wolfgang Petersen had made Briseis a teen rather than 25-year-old Rose Byrne. Briseis really needs to be a teen and preferably an ephebo girl for the story to make full psychological sense with her being bandied about by the greatest warriors as a prize. Even AI agrees Briseis should be a teen.
The gods envy us who can appreciate such beauty. Hebe and ephebo girls surprise me with their beauty every time I look at them. Twenty of them just walked past me and their beauty is literally beyond what I can imagine. As much as I try I cannot keep such beauty in memory (and photographs can't do them justice either), and when I put my glasses on and they come into focus of perfect vision and the closer they get they only become more beautiful (while middle-aged women do the reverse, even still fairly young Rose Byrne there can't compare). A teen girl's beauty never bottoms out under normal circumstances, not unless you look at her through a microscope :)
The custom of closing your eyes while kissing seems to be made for middle-aged women, lol. If I get a young girl I don't want to close my eyes unless she is uncomfortable with open eyes, because her beauty is bottomless and seeing more of her can only enhance the experience.
I am glad I am too poor to drive and so get to ride busses with all these scores of teen girls every day. If I ever get to make good money (in less than a year all goes to plan) I shall keep living like I am poor and spend all my money on girls. I realize I have to travel to a place like the Philippines and they probably won't be ephebo but 18-24 is close enough. I also realize I have to buy stuff for her whole extended family for her to want to be my girlfriend, and I am probably can't leave the airport without getting scammed in some way, but that's okay as long as I have the money; there is no better use for it.
Nofap brings clarity of seeing beauty where it really is and doing the right things to maximize one's chances, but Jack will never realize that.
Let me challenge you about porn again Eivind if you don't mind. In your promotion of NoFap you like to conflate porn with masturbation/wanking. They're related but not identical though, because you can have sex while watching porn but you can't have sex while wanking. Just an incidental point.
Now for your war-on-porn. It strikes me as suspiciously unrelenting. Are you sure it is not rooted in your inborn cheater-detection module? After all, when we watch porn someone is having sex. Whether they're having such a good time as they seem to have from an observer's point of view is beside the point here. Fact is, some guys are pounding those hot girls and it's not us (not "we" if you prefer grammaticality over usage). Even a regular porn-watcher as I needs to come to terms with the sad reality of it always being the other who's having fun. That is why to me these days, being an antinatalist takes precedence over being an antifeminist.
Cheater detection? Lol, no, that would be another aspect of the wanker's delusion that porn "is" sex. While it may be a record of it, there is no cheating going on there. Porn is an inanimate object with no sexual value, the very definition of a paraphilia if you pay sexual attention to it, except the writers of the paraphilia diagnoses are suffering from wanker's delusion themselves and therefore don't include regular wanking to porn as they should (surely porn is less sexually valuable than, say, a foot fetish, which IS included).
My module which is activated is rather the sympathy-to-self-harm module. You are self-harming with porn, which more or less prevents you from having sex. Except, as you note, you can have sex wile watching porn, in which case porn does not meet my definition of "whatever facilitates masturbation" and I don't consider it porn. See, my war on porn is not so unrelenting as you claim. It would still be inadvisable, however, because hopefully you can get a girl who is worth paying full attention to.
John Michael Greer has now published part two of his essays on Situationism:
https://www.ecosophia.net/situationism-understanding-the-spectacle/
This is food for thought for our situation as well. I think we should pay more attention to Marxism both for its virtues and mistakes. Sure, they were horribly misguided and it always goes wrong when their ideas are implemented. But with so many smart people devoted to it, they are bound to say some sensible things as well.
For one thing, I am inspired to think there is such a thing as intersectional pedophilia, from which I can benefit (but you anonymous commenters mostly cannot). That would be where the advantages of thus identifying align to give me privilege.
So power and privilege are always intersectional. They’re also always contextual. What this means is that the powers and privileges you have depend very much on where you are and who you’re interacting with. On American college campuses today, for example, white straight men are not a privileged class. Quite the contrary, they are expected to accept a permanent place in the back of the bus to atone for the sins committed by some white straight men in the past. (Again, the collective morality of the Left can be seen at work here.) Are there other contexts where white straight men have more privilege than members of other categories? You bet, and some of them have considerable power—but most white straight men aren’t US senators or corporate CEOs, you know, and so don’t have access to the contexts where their particular intersectional status might give them an advantage.
Thus power and privilege are always intersectional and contextual. That means that they’re always and irreducibly individual. Even in the same context, no two human beings have the same combination of intersectional factors defining their potentials for power and privilege, and the landscape of contexts through which each of us move varies just as widely. Success in life, in a very real way, consists of finding a context that makes it possible to use one’s specific powers and privileges to best advantage.
Also we can learn from the Marxist mistake of waiting for the Second Coming, as it were, which won't come for us either. There won't be a point when men are suddenly going to rise up against the sex laws. We have to learn to live with antisexual oppression. And try to find a context that makes it possible to use one’s specific powers and privileges to best advantage. Unlike Greer, writing is sadly not doing it for me, so I need to change gears as I am already in the process of.
I don’t know if new readers of the Antifeminist realize he insults their intelligence every time he writes about me, but those who are familiar with both of us surely do know by now that none of that can be taken in good faith. Everything he says about me is either a distortion, a lie, a false assumption from ignorance, or a mountain out of a molehill (such as having once used a chubby AI cat lady as illustration in a YouTube video becomes “generates BBW porn all day long” and having people in some street photos on Instagram becomes a constant preoccupation with “creep shots”). Now he says I “served time for threatening to stab police officers.” Actually all of this and more is constantly repeated like a broken record. The truth is I have never even been accused of threatening anybody, and the charges that were actually brought -- which were exclusively for incitement -- were struck down by the courts. One cannot “serve time” without a conviction, and one does not get the travel restrictions that he imagines will impede my geomaxing with a clean criminal record either. I don’t know if the AF is too stupid or demented to comprehend the difference between conviction and acquittal, or self-aware about his other endless distortions about me, but I am not going to bother here with more of his lies and bad-faith assumptions because if I did it would take up all my time. Let’s just address the few arguments whose rebuttal can make my position on nofap more clear. Let’s address this because it is an argument which sounds halfway intelligent on the face of it:
Eivind says that female porn addiction isn’t a problem. He claims to be leader of a movement that is open to women as much as men, and yet refuses to tell women to behave in ways that will ‘preserve their libido’. What about the millions of women who spend half their day reading female porn (oh, I’m sorry – erotic literature).
Surely, he should be against vibrators and dildos? As he’s all too aware, virtually any woman, even a fat hound could get a man (like him, for example), so any time a woman masturbates she is denying a sexual opportunity both for herself and a man.
Yeah, let’s take that seriously and consider if there is any truth to it. Does masturbation/porn/romance novels eat into women’s libido and prevent them from having as much sex with men as they otherwise would?
The standard take on this is, as Jack notes, to regard porn, masturbation and sex as being in a continuum with positive feedback. While I always keep an open mind to more evidence, it looks to me like this is true for women and false for men. The male libido is depleted after masturbation to where sex is less likely, while for women the opposite is at least generally true. I believe that a woman who is reading a romance novel or has recently used a dildo is statistically MORE RECEPTIVE to sexual advances. Women are turned on in complex ways, unlike men who just need to see an attractive body, and it helps to have those other things increase what PUAs refer to as her “buying temperature” if I recall the lingo correctly. Women also don’t have a problem with refractory period unlike men who become less confident that they can perform after masturbating and thus less likely to pursue sexual opportunities as well as less driven.
Thus I don’t see dildos or whatever women use as a “substitute” for men as a true substitute. I think the standard view of positive feedback between sex and sex toys is true for women and horribly wrong for men. When men believe so about their own porn and wanking habits they are flat-out delusional.
I invite more discussion and evidence if anybody still thinks I am wrong about female masturbation and should condemn that as well, but I don’t see a reason for it yet.
It would be interesting to know how many men with a sex life masturbate to porn without ejaculation in the run-up to having sex with women (or after having sex if they're still high on something). I do both. I know I can't bust a nutt more than once per day anymore, even with the Sildenafil. And even busting a single nutt is often difficult to achieve with a single girl. If I can and if prices are right where I happen to be, I do 2 or 3 girls, finishing only with number 3. But in the morning I will have wanked to porn (without ejaculating of course). A survey of men who do women regularly would be useful to determine how often those men use porn. When I am not where I am now (where barebacking an under thirty sets me back 38 euros), I have a regular 32 year-old visiting vwhom I pay 90 euros. I do her bareback too, with Sildenafil + cannabis. Still, often I can't finish. I remain high so I wank off to porn AFTER, sometimes ejaculating to the porn, sometimes not, it's just that I can't do anything else but watch porn while the high lasts. I'm sure I am not an exception in regularly watching porn on my own around my time with girls. And I'm sure men much more fortunate/wealthier than I use porn. Famous men even. Now you might say such men are statistically insignificant compared to the masses of males whose sole sexual life consists in masturbating to porn. Agreed, but then the problem boils down to said masses having no acess to women.
Regarding women watching porn versus men watching porn, it wouldn't be surprising for porn to always boost a woman's body count while it would seldom have a similar effect on men's body count. But this is because the availability of females, not of males, are the limiting factor in straight sex. If a man is in a situation where getting women is easy (where his limiting factor is age and/or sex-drive, not the number of women he has acess to), then porn can have the same effect on him than it has on women.
On an other note, in venues that are sex-positive per se like swinging clubs and German FKKs, porn movies and imagery are ubiquitous. They nurture an atmosphere of permissiveness and perversity. High-end love hotels have had porn in the room since porn exists.
Sure, more research would be welcome, if it could be done honestly instead of just expressing biases like so many “studies” on both porn and CSA. It is possible that there is a sizable group of men who use porn somewhat responsibly. There is still something weird about the practices Jack describes as positive though. It’s like you’re not even trying to bond with a girl. Where is the love and adoration? I don’t mean to judge since we do have different goals with him being an antinatalist and me an aspiring family man. I also don’t have extremely promiscuous goals anymore. At this point I mostly want to find a young fertile woman I can adore and be totally devoted to. It would in no way be helpful to that end to use porn before and after seeing her the way Jack describes. That would dilute my feelings for her.
Perhaps jack isn’t using porn maladaptively given his goals, but it does not generalize to anything I would be comfortable saying as a principled statement. My view on porn and nofap and advice to men in general remains what it is.
Another flaw in his thinking is one I became highly aware of thanks to reading about the Situationists. That’s the incel view that men are either sexually successful or not, and you can’t jump from one group to the other, so to the incels porn just fills a void and there is no damage done. This is madness in light of intersectionality. Power and privilege and sexual access are always contextual. An incel is just a man who has not interacted with the right people in the right contexts. I have experienced many such swings from total outcast to privileged that I now know to call intersectionality thanks to Marxist theory. This kind of thinking opens up radically new doors. For example it is not at all far-fetched that a public MAP activist, though he be hated by millions, is also for the same reasons trusted by small groups who offer immensely privileged and rewarding interactions.
Post a Comment