The first rule of the status game, according to Pinsof, is to pretend that one is not playing for status. For example if Chris Hansen had overtly indicated he was seeking status by putting all those other people down, he would just be gross and no hero to the normies despite upholding their ostensible “morality.”
Another key insight is that much of the time status games are played in a negative sense, to avoid losing status. The people who cancelled me from career prospects in software development were not doing it to gain status. They were very much playing the status game, but their actions were all about fear of taking a hit to their present status (which is also why it did not go beyond that into a human sacrifice ritual such as the “predator hunters” are conducting). Negative emotions are more powerful than positive ones and so it gets all that more frenetic when there is a perceived danger that one may get cancelled oneself, for example because of association with a known witch or “predator” or “pedo” as they are called now.
Another key insight is that much of the time when playing status games, people believe their own lies and there is even a selection effect bringing the best self-deceivers to the top because they are thereby better at deceiving others too. Witchcraft and predatorhood and pedophilia are prime candidates for believing your own lies because there is no immediate feedback from reality as long as you go on playing as a good normie. Why should you care that there is no validity to these concepts as long as you are not accused yourself? You fit better in by believing the lie, and even when accused yourself the best (or at least most common) strategy is typically to affirm the hysteria and double down on it. We see this constantly now in the Epstein panic where the current targets of the witch-hunt, such as Mette-Marit, squirm and scream to the effect that “Epstein was such a horrible witch that he out-witched me and made me a victim too even though I appeared to associate, so can you all please stop this witch-hunt against me and target the next best witch!”
Another insight I have reached on my own is that the so-called “female sexual trade union” (STU) which is such a popular villain in the other faction of the MRA movement led by the Antifeminist becomes an even more tenuous concept in light of status games. I used to call myself an antifeminist too but it made increasingly less sense as feminism just became synonymous with the Zeitgeist and at this point I do not care that feminism delivered the premises of the so-called “sexual abuse”-contrivance that society is currently witch-hunting because it is not about that anymore in any real sense, which is all status games. Status games are in fact most forcefully played by men and I can feel this fully myself as a public target where most of the hate (or just refusal to associate) I get is from men. This is a much darker reality than merely being up against feminism rather than all of society as is the case, but also a cause for optimism because another key insight is how unstable the status game is. The actual content of the status game is supplied by something I have no better word for than cultural drift since it varies so wildly between cultures and times. There is no external referee standing outside the game getting to decide what we are fighting for and against, such as the mythical “STU” would have to be if the Antifeminist’s rhetorics matched reality. And when men are told there is a STU behind the persecution of our sexuality, their honest response would anyway be “I don’t care about the STU, I care about status, and right now nothing could be more detrimental to my status than rising up against the STU.”
In light of everything this professional evolutionary biologist is saying about the status game, I can easily envision the next kind of witch being a sort of feminist old hag who believes in sexual abuse rather than the current practice of taking her at her word and hunting the “sexual abusers.” Because the overarching insight is that words can be arbitrary vehicles for the status game, especially when they denote a supposed extreme villain or hero. We do not need to take anybody at their word because everyone will always be claiming they are doing the “right thing” anyway and no matter how currently righteous and virtuous in the current configuration you can be the next target.
Of course, I myself am not exempt from playing the status game either. I would love to get status as a MAP activist. But with that so unlikely to happen in my lifetime I can with some credibility claim I am mostly playing the long game of getting at what is morally right regardless of how it is perceived in the moment.
Another key insight is that much of the time status games are played in a negative sense, to avoid losing status. The people who cancelled me from career prospects in software development were not doing it to gain status. They were very much playing the status game, but their actions were all about fear of taking a hit to their present status (which is also why it did not go beyond that into a human sacrifice ritual such as the “predator hunters” are conducting). Negative emotions are more powerful than positive ones and so it gets all that more frenetic when there is a perceived danger that one may get cancelled oneself, for example because of association with a known witch or “predator” or “pedo” as they are called now.
Another key insight is that much of the time when playing status games, people believe their own lies and there is even a selection effect bringing the best self-deceivers to the top because they are thereby better at deceiving others too. Witchcraft and predatorhood and pedophilia are prime candidates for believing your own lies because there is no immediate feedback from reality as long as you go on playing as a good normie. Why should you care that there is no validity to these concepts as long as you are not accused yourself? You fit better in by believing the lie, and even when accused yourself the best (or at least most common) strategy is typically to affirm the hysteria and double down on it. We see this constantly now in the Epstein panic where the current targets of the witch-hunt, such as Mette-Marit, squirm and scream to the effect that “Epstein was such a horrible witch that he out-witched me and made me a victim too even though I appeared to associate, so can you all please stop this witch-hunt against me and target the next best witch!”
Another insight I have reached on my own is that the so-called “female sexual trade union” (STU) which is such a popular villain in the other faction of the MRA movement led by the Antifeminist becomes an even more tenuous concept in light of status games. I used to call myself an antifeminist too but it made increasingly less sense as feminism just became synonymous with the Zeitgeist and at this point I do not care that feminism delivered the premises of the so-called “sexual abuse”-contrivance that society is currently witch-hunting because it is not about that anymore in any real sense, which is all status games. Status games are in fact most forcefully played by men and I can feel this fully myself as a public target where most of the hate (or just refusal to associate) I get is from men. This is a much darker reality than merely being up against feminism rather than all of society as is the case, but also a cause for optimism because another key insight is how unstable the status game is. The actual content of the status game is supplied by something I have no better word for than cultural drift since it varies so wildly between cultures and times. There is no external referee standing outside the game getting to decide what we are fighting for and against, such as the mythical “STU” would have to be if the Antifeminist’s rhetorics matched reality. And when men are told there is a STU behind the persecution of our sexuality, their honest response would anyway be “I don’t care about the STU, I care about status, and right now nothing could be more detrimental to my status than rising up against the STU.”
In light of everything this professional evolutionary biologist is saying about the status game, I can easily envision the next kind of witch being a sort of feminist old hag who believes in sexual abuse rather than the current practice of taking her at her word and hunting the “sexual abusers.” Because the overarching insight is that words can be arbitrary vehicles for the status game, especially when they denote a supposed extreme villain or hero. We do not need to take anybody at their word because everyone will always be claiming they are doing the “right thing” anyway and no matter how currently righteous and virtuous in the current configuration you can be the next target.
Of course, I myself am not exempt from playing the status game either. I would love to get status as a MAP activist. But with that so unlikely to happen in my lifetime I can with some credibility claim I am mostly playing the long game of getting at what is morally right regardless of how it is perceived in the moment.
96 comments:
What you are saying boils down to this: force matters. If you are powerful enough you can do what you want. Only violence/force pays in the end. If you are in a strong enough position, you can get away with whatever you want. I do not disagree with that at all. I think human culture is just a smoke screen. Fighting/war is the default.
Not just using force, but recursively so. Government is the art of using force recursively, getting everybody to force someone else to do the same thing. And people don’t just recursively impose force because they are forced, but because they are playing a status game where they need to do so in order to fit in.
The “sex abuse” hoax is in a special position without any public dissent whatsoever besides me in Norway and up to ten people globally. So it’s more like a murmuration of starlings. All the normies are synchronized with no leader except the laws on the books but they don’t account for such absurd coherence. Even the convicted sex offenders play the same status game of denouncing sex offenders because they value what remains of their social status despite being imprisoned or on the registries too much to speak against the norms.
The murmuration of antisex bigots must change direction at some point. This, too, will occur without a leader, with each normie just paying attention to the ones around him. Currently there is only me they can pay attention to going in a different direction, and I only touch a few people. Most other sex-positive “activists” play the same status game in public too, so they are not much help. But still, there are limits to how long a murmuration can fly in one direction.
The good news is that no hysteria is sustainable long term and it will eventually collapse on itself. The future generations, like Gen beta and their children and grandchildren will be the generation that, in my opinion, starts to rapidly pushback against the hysteria due to how untolerable the laws and stigma affects their day to day life.
For the general public to pushback, there has to be a tipping point where the drawbacks of the hysteria(a police state, mass surviliance, death penalty at the drop of a hat, constant mob violence) out weighs the benefits(having a scapegoat to blame all your problems on, victim payout money, attention and sympathy, easy target to make you look like a hero/good parent). It is getting close to that point but we will still need a couple more insane laws before the ball starts rolling.
And when the ball starts rolling I believe it will roll VERY fast and VERY hard since none of the arguments in support of the hysteria make any logical sense and are driven purely by shallow emotions like a desire for money or a desire to fit in or a desire for attention.
It is already becoming CLOSE to unbearable for normies of the younger generation, they are constantly complaining that they cant be friends or date anyone more than a couple months or a year ypunger than them because of “power dynamics”. Theres constant cancellation and paranoia surrounding relationships, even platonic ones, in school settings with children. Unfortunantly it is not unbearable enough since they respond to this by, like you said, doubling down and meat reading the csa industrial complex even harder, but when the anti csa future comes, the future where minors have to were anklets and be constantly survilled by cameras to and wear microphones to monitor for signs of “csa”. Where they have to wear burkas to prevent from “sexualized perception” they will wake up. It just sucks that MAPs have to pay the hardest
Call me paranoid but I am very worried that there will be a holcaust style genocide for MAPs. Normies in the gen pop constantly complain that the goverment isnt “hard enough” on child sex offenders(as if indefinite imprisonment, murder, bodily mutilation, being put on a shame list and prevented from integrating into society, and conversion therapy isnt hard enough?!)
But they constantly say garbage like “we should experiment and test on pedophiles and rapists instead of animals” or “kill your local pedo”. The only thing that makes me happy is that the normies have made the word “pedo” so broad and vague so it is only a matter of time before they themselves get accused of pedophillia or rape. And because of “believe all victims”(guilty until proven guilty), the “kill your local pedo” anti has two minutes before the local teenage girl accuses him of molestation for some easy money and attention.
Project Dunkfield and places like it makes me very uncomfortable because any pedo who thinks there full name and address isnt being kept on a regristry for the goverment to use at will or for a mob to “accidently” get their hands on is a naive retard. They did this with the jews, encouraging the Jews to out themselves to their names could be written down for future use. And now the goverment in all countries are trying to get the death penalty and “state hospitals” for child sex offenders and pedos in general. Why do pedos keep trusting therapists/health proffesionals??!
These are the same people who post on online “AMA I am a professional who works with pedophiles” about how much they hate and are disgusted by pedos and want the worst for us and actively sabotage our health for “justice”. These are the same quacks who have been peddling for decades that sucking dick before the governments legal age of majority gives people brain damage. These are the same people who make bank, whose entire careers are funded by the victim industry. Any time a MAP says they need therapy for being a MAP it baffles me.
1.You will always like kids, nothing will change. 2.You are putting your life in jeopardy for a quack who doesnt give a shit about you and sees you as a never ending bank account and is actively working with the people who want you dead or near dead. Have some self respect PLEASE.
Shotacon on Brian Ribbons site made a very good article on how the csa industrial complex is about money and money only. It is about milking the wallets parents of “victims” and “victims” dry by telling them that they are ruined for life and scarred forever by evil dick sucking, unless they pay up big bucks for never ending therapy and never ending treatment programs, but they still wont be fully cured of their dick sucking trauma, so the need to pay up the big bucks indefinently is 100% valid.
The state makes money off of pedo prisoners, even more so with “state hospitals” for pedos. Private companies make money selling “child protection” software.
They have recently realized that they can brainwash MAPs into thinking that they are mentally ill and in dire need of conversion therapy, so they are starting to rake in the big bucks offering “therapy” and castration “medicine” to low self esteem MAPs.
It is all just money for them. Money money money, MAPs and “victims” alike think these quacks care about them? No! Once your pockets are empty or your insurance stops paying you will magically be cured and they will kick you out the door. (And you will be “cured” because you were never fucking ill in the first place). Im of the opinion that unlike other sciences, psychology is 100% a psuedo science and is used to replace the priests and shamans of the old days with an updated, secular version.
I dont deny that there are people with fucked up brains(like schizophrenics), with a neurological issue akin to a physical disorder, but aside from things like that, the vast majority of psychology is subjective, entirely culturally dependent, has less to do with the individual health and wellness of a person and more to do with fitting in with current social norms, and has yet to be proven to objectively “help” the people they claim to, at least not in a way that cant be done FOR FREE, by having a community of friends and familys and not treating your so called “childhood trauma/trauma” as a fucking personality trait
Thanks for three insightful comments from Anonymous. I can tell from the quality of writing that you are probably my esteemed female pedophile commenter from earlier. I can also tell that you live in an even more insane place than here in Norway where it hasn’t gone quite that far yet though we are not far behind, so most likely some place like the USA which has completely lost the plot.
I like your term “csa industrial complex” which is an upgrade from the “abuse industry” as Angry Harry used to call it 25 years ago, befitting a hardened reality. Back then we had already, as you say, quacks peddling that sucking dick before the government’s legal age of majority gives people brain damage, and now it is so much worse. It boggles the mind that for every hour of all this shit “therapy” and “safeguarding” and so on there is a “professional” getting paid. I talked about believing your own lies, and well, that is extra easy when your paycheck depends on it, so we are unlikely to see sanity coming from the “professionals” themselves any time soon.
What are you smoking Eivind, assuming the above "anonymous" posts are from your female pedophile? They're more likely to be from someone like anon9.
On another note, I thought Angry Harry popularised the term "rescue industry" rather than "abuse industry", but this was not the case:
https://share.gemini.google/zZSEQLwcdCG1
Yeah, Jack, the “abuse industry” is very much an Angry Harry term and I don’t think he got it from someone else either, though Laura Agustín deserves honorable mention too for her work against the phony rescue industry. Much like Maggie McNeill she is very good at what she does but too narrowly focused on prostitution and the “trafficking” lie to be of general relevance to our movements.
I think I am right about my female pedophile too. Anon69 signs his messages but she never did. I am delighted to have her as a commenter, but she does bring forth sadness about what was missing from my life as well.
If I had access to a female pedophile as a child I would have been so well-adjusted that I probably would have been a normie on the surface, so that would ironically have been a loss to the MRA and MAP movements, lol. Then I would never have been an incel and even as a young teenager I would be having lots of sex with hebe and teen girls because I would have known how to handle them, exactly like Bruce Rind refers to as the need-to-learn (from older females) hypothesis about primate males.
There are many normies who are so well adjusted and happy due to illegal sexual experiences (as both “victim” and “abuser”), but of course they won’t talk about it because they don’t want to ruin their great lives or endanger their lovers.
Nah its me, the female pedo from earlier
Are you still the MAP outreach ambassador to the men's rights movement?
Yah, just like with what teliophiles want to do with the people they are attracted to, I would love(in a world where it was legal), to spoil a little boy. To buy him gifts and his favorite foods, to take him on dates to amusement parks and go on all the rides, to pack him special lunches to go to school, to watch movies with him snuggled up together in our pjs on weekend nights, to build forts with him and play pretend games with him. And of course, if it was legal, lots and lots of sex!(but only if he is down for it.) It is summer time where I live, I would love to be playing silly kids games and sports with little boys right now, but unfortunately I am not.
Its funny because I heard a boymom complain about how her preteen son was going through puberty and she was starting to find “crunchy socks” around his room, and my first thought was “what a waste of good semen”. Lol. I have also seen women my age complain that some of the men they were dating werent raised right and werent taught basic life skills or hygiene. If female pedophiles were allowed to date boys, we would cure that, I would NOT let my little boyfriend leave the house stinky and would be very thorough with teaching him any hygiene or life skills his mother didnt teach him, but I would make it fun of course! ;).
I would see it like being a second mom and a girlfriend all in one. I want to snuggle a boy and give him love and affection so bad(and I mean far more than just sexual love and affection). I also hear men complaining that boys are touch starved and often dont get enough love and affection, espicially from the opposite gender, espcially as they start reaching middle childhood. But here I am, all I want to do is play with a boy on the playground and play video games with him and take him on movie dates. Its really not fair.
Pedophiles in general want to spoil kids and give them all types of love and affection, far outside just sex but also including sex. Telios on the other hand, hate kids and want nothing to do with them and avoid them at all costs. Thats a huge, HUGE part of what makes kids like us so much, its not “grooming”, its that for the first time a in their short lives a kid is meeting an adult that genuinely enjoys their presence and doesnt see them as a snotty nosed brat that must be disciplined into submission.
Seriously, it is kind of sad, I have noticed throughout life whenever I give a boy the smallest bit of (non sexual and non romantic btw!) attention, he latches on to me like a baby duck and basically follows me around.I couldnt get rid of him even if I wanted to! As a matter of fact, boys run up to ME asking me to play dodgeball or tag with them, not the other way around, they are so desperate to bond with an adult female. I mean this.
Even when I am not in a talkative mood and im trying to mind my business if I am in a “kid” populated area theres a very high chance a boy, not a girl, will run up to me and ask me to play some type of game with him. And I can never say no and thankfully the moms are chill with it because I am less threatning and more maternal looking than a man I guess and they are grateful for a temporary babysitter. And we always have fun playing tag or hide and seek or whatever cute kids game together. Only once has a girl ran up to me asking to play a game, and she was with a boy.
No, I'm not a NEWGON ambassador anymore since we never bothered to renew it. Organizational work has almost no meaning anyway as long as there is so little interest in either joining the organizations or consulting the (pro-contact) MAP organizations about anything. If the media were interested in doing interviews or getting our opinion on issues it would be different, but nothing like that happens: we are completely under the radar and outside the Overton Window even when we make organizations and press releases about official roles.
To the female pedo, thanks for such an amazing reverie about what might have been! If not for the hysteria life could have been so much better both for boys and women like you. I vividly remember being starved for affection and sexual contact and instruction from women as a child and know how much better my life could have turned out with that. Though girls can also benefit from more stimulation it does not rise to that level of a hunger and need as for boys, which is why I always say there is an extra dimension of moral travesty to the female sex offender charade.
What do you think of this study Eivind? https://iro.uiowa.edu/esploro/outputs/journalArticle/The-effects-of-mother-son-incest/9984371074502771
Parsons has popularized the myth that mother-son incest is the most damaging form of incest. A review of sixteen cases casts doubts on this belief. It was found that responses to this type of incest are multi-dimensional, representing an extraordinary range of behavior not foreseen by Parsons. This leads to the conclusion that motherson incest does not trigger some innate biological response, but that the effects are more directly related to the symbolic meanings attributed to this act by the participants. © 1986 Human Sciences Press.
Yeah, I have zero reason to think mother-son incest is damaging unless it is accompanied by emotional or physical abuse, which Rind just confirmed are the truly harmful kinds of abuse. But it is really amusing that somebody claimed mother-son incest is the most damaging form of incest... Kind of like Rind also found the justice system is doubly hysteric about homosexual “abuse” of adolescent boys compared to how it views girls of the same ages with older men. A sort of perverse “patriarchy” at work singling out boys for special protections.
" Rind also found the justice system is doubly hysteric about homosexual “abuse” of adolescent boys compared to how it views girls of the same ages with older men"
I do not believe the above. NGOs and governments launch campaigns against sex-tourism and strong-arm sex-tourism tolerant countries to cracking-down on sex-tourism, but only insofar as male-on-female sex-tourism is concerned. Gay sex-tourism is very much immune and ignored, and it is big business worldwide, encompassing not only well-known sex-tourism countries like the Philippines and Thailand, but also less well-known countries in the Muslim world.
Sex tourism was beyond the scope of Rind’s study, but still an interesting finding as far as it goes.
I guess sex tourism along with the “trafficking” myth is where the war on sex is actually operating closest to the STU narrative, since this is where the overtly feminist NGOs really get to have their say as to which ideology gets applied. Indeed they are almost the only ones who have a say in the matter on sex tourism as opposed to your regular judges and juries who determine the fate of most convicts.
But that’s still insignificant compared to what goes on in your local courthouse every day, which more broadly reflects society’s war on sex.
Apply the POSIWID principle. The purpose of the system is what it does, and it does exhibit significant homophobic bias at least in the US. POSIWID also tells me that the system has a bizarre predilection to persecute wankers via the porn laws over men who actually have sex with girls, which is a good thing in my view because it leaves sexually serious men RELATIVELY undisturbed. This is also were we can probably observe a considerable selection effect where the more intimate and loving, the less likely prosecution. Straight men who are serious about having real, loving relationships with girls are thus least prosecuted, which is just about the only silver lining I can find in the CSA hoax. I don’t agree with the homophobia, but I concede there is a smidgin of sanity in the madness when men who seek porn, use fake identities, try to blackmail and that kind of shit are preferentially prosecuted over the genuine girl-lovers.
Of note in the news today it looks like Elliot Rodger has a Canadian successor named Seth Hatfield who emerged from the Incel Movement with guns blazing:
https://nationalpost.com/news/canada/what-we-know-about-seth-hatfield-the-suspect-in-montreal-shootings-that-killed-a-cop-and-a-civilian
Little is known about the 25-year-old suspect in a Montreal shooting that killed a civilian and left one police officer dead and another wounded.… The suspect, said to be from Lethbridge, Alberta, allegedly left behind a 104-page manifesto.
Okay, but where is this manifesto? Due to the lack of information at this time I don’t really know what to make of the incident beyond a visceral reaction of glee that a cop was killed and also for the same reason I feel like quoting this comment (although I can’t confirm if it is true):
One major aspect of this tragedy totally suppressed in all Canadian media is that a female police officer shot the innocent bystander point blank, and then when the real shooter appeared she ran away, leaving her mortally wounded partner behind. All of this was captured on video from at least two separate civilians who filmed the events.
If this was a one-off it would be unremarkable -- individuals make mistakes under extreme duress. But it's not a one-off. It's part of a long-term pattern that is suppressed for political reasons that have nothing to do with public safety and everything to do with "diversity at all costs".
I still haven’t found the manifesto, but someone who has read it sums it up like so:
After reading thru the manifesto, I'm left to think. Was the key motivation:
- envy of his fellow favored-men
- envy of women's disproportionate advantages in modern society
- wealth envy (ill gotten or otherwise)
- loneliness
- Or, disappointment in himself
At any rate, and in contrast to all the mindless mass-shooters who have nothing sensible to say, it looks like this one actually left behind something worth reading. It also looks like rage against hypergamous women and a tragedy that might have been prevented with proper training at a young age on how to seduce women from a female pedophile. Like I said they are sorely needed to make well-adjusted men out of potential misfits like this.
https://x.com/mtracey/status/2069419628028150196
Okay, according to Michael Tracey:
This guy recommends that his followers go on apps, pose as girls, and then kill the "pedophiles" who sexually solicit the girls. But it's a bit more of an ancillary thing for him. Not a typical Pedo Panic guy, but somewhere in the more cerebral vicinity of it, I guess.
So the CSA hoax got him before the female pedophiles or any kind of nice women could have lightened his disposition. I feel less glee for the dead cop now because Seth Hatfield was even worse, a more hateful enemy of MAPs than the pigs. This still does not rule out the possibility that a sufficiently early encounter with a female pedophile could have set him on the right track, however, but obviously he won’t go down as a hero of ours the way he turned out.
Speaking of true believers in the CSA hoax, well, this incel terrorist gave us a middle-brow example with footnoted instructions on how to kill the most pedophiles (conduct sting, set up multiple dates on one day and use a silencer, we are helpfully told), but that’s nothing to the high-brow lunatics who bring all their academic intelligence to bear in order to convince themselves and others of the CSA hoax.
There is such a spectacle ongoing at Heretic TOC. Behold the commenter “Condemned” in this thread who claims to be a psychiatrist and MAP and CSA-believer all in one package:
https://heretictoc.com/2026/04/25/the-non-trivial-legacy-of-robert-trivers/
He says things like,
At most, Sandfort can be used to show that some children, in a highly selected situation, may report positive feelings during an ongoing relationship with an adult.
That does not establish valid consent, absence of exploitation, absence of grooming, absence of delayed harm or any general principle about adult-child sexual contact. This is not the proof that kids are into sex. You know that, right? (...)
A selected boy reporting positive feelings does not disprove grooming.
An ongoing relationship does not disprove delayed harm.
A non representative group does not establish population level safety.
A retrospective self description does not establish valid informed consent.
CSA believers have oh so many “principles” and tenets of their faith that reality can NEVER falsify it. If you have disproved everything else, there may be “delayed harm” and even if the “victim” dies at 105 without that there is always another principle to make it wrong, like lack of established “population-level safety” by criteria that can never in a million years be met.
He also says:
A fifteen year old dating another fifteen year old does not have the same structure as a fifteen year old with a forty year old. The difference is not just sex. The difference is power, experience, authority, grooming capacity, social leverage, and adult responsibility.
Firstly I wonder how 15-year-olds can have this inherent vulnerability here in Norway where I live but not across the border in Sweden where they can consent, making the entire victimhood an obvious social construction. How is it possible to be so smart and so stupid at the same time as these “professionals”?
Secondly, as a man in my 40s I wonder where is my promised “grooming capacity”? I would like to use it on 16-year-old girls whom I can legally pick up. But what actually happens is they almost always reject me and it would be absurd to attribute what little charm I might have left for nubile girls to “grooming capacity” and then even claim it has INCREASED since I was young and not obviously decreased like I empirically observe. Furthermore, if there is anything better about me now that is not wholly negated by looking too old can’t that simply be me being a better, more considerate, more interesting person in some ways and not “grooming”?
The CSA believers believe in a whole edifice of bullshit, a whole theology of superstition on how minors are always “harmed” by sex, and the more educated, the worse it gets.
Thankfully, Heretic TOC has the most intelligent commentariat on these issues on the entire Internet, so the orthodoxy is well rebutted. But he is also pretty much the last one besides me as far as I can tell, the last blog or forum on the clearnet where reason will prevail on CSA.
When TOC is gone and I am gone there will only be someone like Michael Tracey left by the looks of it, who will speak out against Pedo Panic as it concerns older teenagers but not quite the CSA hoax itself.
Finally a sex crime that sex-positive people can get behind! Criminalization of "asexual acts":
https://archive.is/uw8sp#selection-607.0-607.289
“Niger’s military junta announced a new penal code that criminalizes homosexuality,” reports the Associated Press. Oddly, it punishes “asexual acts” as well:
The West African nation is the latest to criminalize homosexuality, following similar measures earlier this year in Senegal.
The new penal code punishes anyone who “commits or attempts to commit an immodest or unnatural act or practices lesbian, gay, bisexual, trans-gender, Queer, intersex, Asexual (LGBTQIA+) acts” with between five and 10 years in prison and a fine, according to the text of the new penal code.
I have no idea what it means, but it is a refreshing change because if asexual acts were put on the level of sexual acts it would mean the end to sex-exceptionalism.
"A selected boy reporting positive feelings does not disprove grooming"
Maybe, but it proves for sure that the entire concept of grooming is bullshit.
Yup, couldn’t ask for better evidence that “grooming” is bullshit. The CSA hoaxer purports to be a metaphysical referee who overrides people’s feelings and decides who is groomed and abused for reasons that HE decides and if the “victim” disagrees then he couldn’t care less. I don’t think “delayed harm” is a real thing either but even if he concedes that doesn’t happen there is the population-level “safety” that can never be satisfied. Well, if that’s our standard for safety then we can’t do anything because getting out of bed in the morning would feel too risky, let alone getting on a bicycle or any normal thing any number of which can’t be proven 100% safe for every person all the time.
In reality, “grooming” is post-hoc confabulation made up to justify criminalization, as proven by how all these supposed inherent vulnerabilities always match the sex laws but are then magically absent in jurisdictions where the same person can legally consent, such as Sweden and many other countries for 15-year-olds, without the slightest evidence that the inhabitants suffer from sex being too legal there.
Eivind, the concept grooming should also be prescribed as the fallacy where one constantly moves/shifts the goalposts.
The normies get to DECIDE what becomes malignant, therefore it essentially becomes subjective since they rely on interpreting what they see as a “socially-unacceptable” relationship through the external lens. At the end of the day, it will always be their opinion and their opinion only that will matter.
Self-explanatory.
Victimologists use this as their “stone wall” to crouch behind.
Anyways, you may (not) like this video.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=JCtpwMLq33I&pp=0gcJCUECo7VqN5tD&ra=m
The field of psychiatry became completely infested with feminists and women. They will create whatever bullshit to keep sex with younger females as illegal as possible. Debating these sewer people does nothing but waste your time, they will always create new bullshit. The question is, when will men stand up and say enough, get these people out of my sight, I refuse to participate in any culture that has zero consideration for men's sexuality.
anon69
Yes Eivind, you are one of the very few people that that speaks out against the CSA panic in a meaningful and competent way. You are obviously also the most intelligent person who have written on this subject the last 40 or so years.
That is why it's so annoyingly bad that you just refuse to go on Substack and publish one of your very intelligent and well written blog posts so that a wider audience can read what you have to say. You are also not trying to get published in any of our newspapers here in Norway. You are really wasting your talent and high IQ when all you want to do is write for me and a few others who see you as a genius, and some 2-3 others who just read your blog so they can fight you because you don't hate women like they themselves do.
I think psychiatrists are playing status games like the predator hunters except high-brow. Right now to gain status as psychiatrist (or probably to qualify at all) you need to act like you believe in the CSA hoax, and to excel and not be too conflicted to do your job you have to actually believe it too, like this insane commenter at TOC.
And no, a small group of feminists did not get to independently decree what the status game should be about right now, because they are part of the status game too and generally play less effectively than men. I blame a more or less random walk of the whole culture combined.
If it were just about keeping younger females illegal, why don't they ease off on the boy abuse which occupies so much of CSA hysteria? If not the homosexual part they could at least tone down the female sex offender charade, which only makes them look unbelievably stupid, but they won't do that because it's more a random superstition than a tactical program favoring any particular group.
I can't tell the difference between trolling and somebody who really believes Substack is the holy grail of publishing anymore, but either way this shall be the last time I let such a comment through. It is already answered and adds nothing useful to the discussion.
I am also less competent than TOC and many of his commenters, but in Norway I agree I am the most intelligent voice on CSA, if nothing else because I am the only one who speaks the truth publicly.
Being the only voice and not having any reach are two sides of the same coin. I can't change the level of interest in opposing the CSA hoax by being a better or more available voice, and once the culture decides to shrug off the panic I will suddenly not be the only voice anymore and far from the best one.
Are you still growing your beard Eivind? You should write to the editor of Aftenposten and say you are not going to stop growing your beard until they agree to publish an editorial written by you on the CSA hoax and the female sex offender charade.
Okay, now I'm 100% sure this is a troll and I only published it for context to announce that I will henceforth block trolling.
I am not seeking publication in a “better” venue or have any hope of anything I create going viral because I know it is futile at this time. I still have ambitions to write some more good stuff but I don’t expect to reach anybody beyond the handful regular readers I already have because writings don’t rise to fame on merit. People are attracted to people, not ideas, and if there is no important person behind the idea then it won’t matter regardless of quality. Nobody my age becomes an important person if they aren’t already.
Community also matters. I want this to be not only a sex-positive place but also a positive place for sex-positive people. It is enough that society hates us without admitting negativity from different factions of the tiny pro-sexuality movement, which is where I think this trolling originates. They can do their thing and I will block them so I can do mine in peace here.
But most of your followers don't want to understand the female sex offender charade. They want women to be punished in the most cruel way, which is the police and prison system. There is nothing that is more cruel and evil than confining a woman to a celll for years just because she gave sex to a boy!
Jeg er norsk og har fulgt deg i mange år. Jeg er overhodet ikke et troll. Jeg ønsker og håper at du kan få tankene dine ut til et bredere publikum.
This is true and could borderline not be a troll, but further repetition is unnecessary and won’t be allowed. Publishing is also a status game where publishers would feel they lose status by publishing me. If they could make up for it by making money in some way it still might be feasible, but my writings don’t have that potential either.
I would like to thank my female pedophile commenter again for providing the best contributions to this discussion. You alone are worth more to the good side of the sex war than the entire faction of the “antifeminist” movement who is trolling me, ironically as an antifeminist yourself because all the self-styled feminists are busy seeking to imprison women like you while you represent what should be a genuine women’s issue. Through all these years I’ve stuck up for female sex offenders I always imagined this is something a legitimate feminist would advocate herself, but never once did any woman pick up on it or appreciate it until you. Meanwhile besides me only Bruce Rind has articulated how the female sex offender charade provides a crowbar against the entire CSA hoax because when they are so obviously deranged with regard to women supposedly “abusing” lucky boys keen and eager to learn sex and even fully sexually mature teen boys as if they are identical to five-year-old girls just because they are all “children,” why should we trust the “professionals” with regard to pederasts and male pedophiles who are into little girls either? Clearly their “research” methods are so crude that they can’t be taken seriously at all.
I think you are the same person as “Datboi” who replied to “Condemned” at TOC and I would like to present some of that commentary here too because it is exactly what I have been saying all these years about the absurdity of the female sex offender charade plus even more delightfully put:
I may be a pedo, by I am also a woman. A teen boy could easily hold me down and force himself on me sexually. Are you going to say that the teen boy is the victim in that circumstance because he is just an innocent child who cant consent? Is he still a victim because of power dynamics? Is the teen boy traumatized because he wasnt fully informed? Did the adult woman groom the teenage boy into holding her down and penetrating her? Should we give teen boys a free pass to do whatever they want with women because they are just innocent children who dont know any better and are traumatized by anything sexual? If we arrest the boy and later find out the woman he raped was a pedo should we arrest the rape victim because she secretly enjoyed it?
If a woman claims that a teen boy has threatened to assault her should we arrest her for grooming? How do we know that that woman isnt secretly a pedo just grooming the boy with her adult power dynamics? If boys get to be victims and send women to prison on the basis of our age then us women get to be victims too and send them to prison on the basis of their gender. Lets both be victims together, two can play that game! Should both go to prison just to be safe? Should we have women and childrens prisons just like we have women and childrens hospitals and women and childrens shelters, or should we abolish the latter two because it encourages female pedos to groom innocent boys? Should we just let free whoever claims to be a victim first and cries the hardest? I am a pretty good crier and I have a pretty face, im sure I could outcry a teenboy with ease!
Do we let the boy rape as many women as he wants then arrest him on his 18th birthday once he is finally old enough to understand consent? If you arrest the boy for raping an adult woman then later find out that woman is a pedo do you free the boy and arrest the woman in his place? What if the female pedo really was assaulted by the boy? Should we give the boy a hug and tell him that its not his fault cuz he is just a child who doesn’t understand consent?
What if I want a boy to rape me because I think he is hot, and trust me, I think ALOT of boys are hot ;)? Because oBvIoUsLy I cant do something as ridiculous as just ASK him to have sex with me, or else I would then be the rapist. If the boy is holding me down and penetrating me and he senses that I am enjoying it will he suddenly become traumatized? What if I initiate the sexual contact and I get pregnant with his baby. Can he abort it as the victim? What about “my body my choice”, or does bodily autonomy no longer apply to women in favor of teenage boys? Should we have female pedophiles working with adolescent male sex offenders in juvie or would that just traumatize everyone?
Either we
A. Assess any woman who claims she was raped by a teen boy to see how much she enjoyed the rape to determine whether she is a victim or not or
B. Let boys rape women freely with no punishment and comfort them for their victimhood/ arrest the women who get raped because teen boys are just innocent underdeveloped children who cant consent and are by default victims of adult power dynamics. And since there are absolutely ZERO legal minors who are not victims of adults in any sexual encounters with adults, welp, yknow what that means! Not that I have a problem with it since I think boys are hot, lol, will be a BIG problem for the other women who dont enjoy being held down and forcibly penetrated by males though , haha! But since teen boys are just innocent, un informed, underdeveloped, asexual, un consenting, children then they are always the victim. Cant wait to see what those boys will be like when they become grown men and see the fun ways that they have learned they can treat women, but it wont be there fault, it will clearly be the woman’s fault because of her evil predatory adult power dynamics and grooming!
Teen boys have more testosterone than the average adult women. Which means they are, on average, physically stronger than us, taller than us, more durable than us, have stronger sexual desires and are more sexually satisfied after sexual encounters than us. But if legal minors, including male legal minors, MUST be victims of legal adults, including female legal adults, then I suppose basic human biology doesnt matter in the name of csa victimhood. I mean, its not like there are cruel and psychopathic adolescent males who dont care about the wellbeing or safety of females, including adult females, who would want to take advantage of us? Nope, they are just innocent asexual uninformed powerless children :(.
All I am saying is that you may be dead set on your “csa” mindset, but you are setting a VERY DANGEROUS precedent. Now I dont hate teen boys, but if you think this whole “underaged girls are csa victims of adult men” can be neatly and easily gender bent and applied to female pedos and underaged boys, good luck! Theres a reason that csa enthusiasts like to pretend that female pedos either dont exist or are a very small minority compared to male pedos, and pay as little attention as possible to male “victims” of female “predators”. This is the reason, the mere existence of female pedos and underaged boys severely contradicts the entire csa/victim narrative.
There we have the crux of the matter that I tried to explain all these year about female “sex offenders” in bold and I couldn’t have put it better myself; thank you so much for corroborating!
I would also like to collect here a pithy quote to the same effect that have mentioned before, namely in this thread:
https://eivindberge.blogspot.com/2023/11/the-most-tectonic-moral-shift-in-recent.html
From:
https://www.dppireland.ie/app/uploads/2019/03/THE_CRIMINAL_LAW_RELATING_TO_SEXUAL_OFFENCES_AGAINST_CHILDREN_PDF_260906.pdf
When the CSA hoax complete with the female sex offender charade was sweeping into Irish law there was a remnant of sanity saying this:
There is a further difficulty of principle with a completely gender neutral offence. Under the old law the actus reus the act constituting the offence of the offences of both rape and statutory rape is penetration of the female by the male. If the offence is gender neutral, is male penetration to remain the actus reus? If so, and as seems to be the case under the 2006 legislation, the act of the male triggers the commission of the offence by the female. This seems wrong in principle. If she has not consented to penetration how could the action of the male act make her guilty of an offence? Again, it is obvious that the issue of whether the woman consented to the act becomes a central issue once in principle she can be convicted of an offence.
If this should not be a women’s and feminist issue then I don’t think there are any real feminists anymore, but that’s the crazy CSA hoax-infested world we are living in!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lAA2dU8RmhA
Well, this is certainly an interesting video! I commend them on their courage, and they have some interesting points. They're obvious fundies though, so I doubt they'd support you very much, Eivind!
Also, did you know about Erwin Schroedinger?
https://web.archive.org/web/20220622073823/https://www.irishtimes.com/life-and-style/people/how-erwin-schrodinger-indulged-his-lolita-complex-in-ireland-1.4749204
https://wiki.yesmap.net/wiki/Erwin_Schrodinger
Came across it on TOC's blog today, at it was news to me at least!
No, I did not know that about Schrödinger... Interesting!
But what nauseating language in The Irish Times there to reframe his love affairs with teen girls as "grooming" and "serial abuser" and "sexual predator":
The evidence is hiding in plain sight: Schrödinger was a serial abuser whose behaviour fitted the profile of a paedophile in the widely understood sense of that term.
In the case of Junger, she was 14 when the 39-year-old Schrödinger took advantage of his role as her tutor to sexually abuse her. “As well as the maths, the lessons included ‘a fair amount of petting and cuddling’ and Schrödinger soon convinced himself that he was in love with Ithi,” John Gribbin wrote in his 2012 biography of the physicist.
Over Christmas 1927, Schrödinger “set out on a long campaign of what would now be described as grooming”. He continued to pursue the student, who he called “Ithy-bitty” and at 17 she became pregnant. She had a disastrous abortion that left her sterile, by which stage Schrödinger had abandoned her for his next conquest.
Note that this campaign of hatred against male sexuality which has consumed our culture does not just reframe the girls as “abused,” but also seeks to metaphysically invalidate the man’s feelings as unreal. Shrödinger did not love, he “convinced himself that he was in love” because only abuse can exist in such situations and that necessitates a pedophile monster who can only think evil thoughts categorically different form the normies, so it can’t be classed in the same category as love. What is the difference between being in love and merely “convincing yourself” that you are in love except this need to demonize? Maybe he “abandoned” her, but so do normies with their adult lovers all the time without a need to reframe the early stages of the relationship as some kind of imagined fake love.
This article once again underscores how utterly hated and detested I am by society for being a normal man who likes nubile girls which is now “a paedophile in the widely understood sense of that term.” I see no hope in my lifetime, because the entire culture hates in unison with if anything even more hate coming from other men such as the author Joe Humphreys there.
@Jack
"NGOs and governments launch campaigns against sex-tourism and strong-arm sex-tourism tolerant countries to cracking-down on sex-tourism, but only insofar as male-on-female sex-tourism is concerned.
This is not accurate and just a sign that you're biased as a straight sex-tourist.
It's a matter of age not of sex. Recently, in Columbia, there was an international turmoil about an American having sex (=raping) a presumably underage boy on a balcony.
There's even a possibility that this hype influenced the result of the presidential election ("Save our children").
I tried getting a reversed "pedo-hunting" thing going. But nothing happened.
The typical pedo hunter is the dumbest person out there. He will try to attack you for trying to meet up with a 19 year old even though it is perfectly legal.
There absolutely needs to be a reversed "pedo hunter" movement uprising.
Yes, Amelio, the fear of pederasts is definitely a feature not a byproduct of the pedo panic. Already in the 1970s there was hysteria around homosexuals supposedly “seducing” boys into becoming gay. This part has since been mostly dropped, but now the panic centers around being “underage” which by itself creates the “pedo” counterpart and is relatively gender-neutral except when it hits female pedos it is arguably still a byproduct where someone blindly following rules goes “oh shit, this is illegal, we have to prosecute it” after the fact even though it was just seen as cute until then, after which the machine picks up and grinds these women up sometimes for life in prisons and registries because the system also blindly follows rules. Whether there is any ACTUAL fear of female pedos? I never observed it and still don’t believe so, but I would change my mind if our resident female pedo says otherwise because she has her finger on the pulse of life today more than me.
Anyway, even if the female sex offender charade remains a byproduct of feminist gender-bending and “equal rights” coming back to bite them when this got applied to sex laws, the persecution of homosexuals, or that is to say the “underage” part which remains out of a much longer history of oppression, runs unbelievably deep. This is an actual, believed cultural superstition where the abuse industry expends tremendous resources investigating “abuse” and coddling the boy “victims” at a level equal to or perhaps exceeding the girls. Here we only need to mention someone like Michael Jackson to appreciate how strong this cultural oppressive current is; this shit is real and profoundly pervasive. I have a memory of when he was finally acquitted one of the jurors made fun of the whole accusations as “boohoo, Michael Jackson touched me” and that’s literally what it boils down to, the pathological fear of touch (from men) that has consumed our culture.
Regarding a reversed "pedo hunter" movement uprisingI think this is a troll speaking as well. The strategy seems to be to degrade my comment section by posting boring and repetitive, though polite and ideologically fitting comments that I might publish -- but no, I won't any longer because I am committed to quality.
Yes, Eivind. It's probably easier to make boys feel they're victims because of the homosexual stigma "I'm not gay, he made me do it".
To MRA-type readers who might be on the fence between following me or the other faction of the antifeminist movement which is all about the STU, consider this.
Even TOC says:
As for hope, the days are long gone when the age of consent concept could be seriously challenged, as it was in the Netherlands, where law reform succeeded for the last decade of the 20th century. I recognise that the gender revolution has tilted decisively, at least for the foreseeable future, towards acceptance of what we can broadly call feminist orthodoxy (a million miles from the far more freedom-oriented spirit of early Second Wave radical feminism).
Yes, it is feminist orthodoxy we are up against in this sense.
But we need to distinguish between the cultural entrenchment of a particularly nasty, sex-negative carcereal feminism and the existence of an ongoing process of jealous old hags who continuously oppress our sexuality in order to keep us away from nubile girls. The latter has little to do with reality, and hence hating such a supposed female sexual trade union back is misplaced. Women are as much a product of and enslaved by cultural beliefs as men and don’t dictate culture on an ongoing basis except to perpetuate what they are indoctrinated into like men do too in almost exactly the same way.
There is nothing more inevitable about the CSA hoax than, say, female circumcision which has also been argued to be female-driven cultural suppression of female sexuality much like the STU (see Baumeister’s paper “Cultural Suppression of Female Sexuality”).
Female circumcision is clearly not culturally inevitable and neither are our age of consent laws. They just happen to be a holy cow at the moment.
If you think the enemy is older women in general as opposed to a cultural holy cow you will be sidelined by more enlightened leaders such as TOC and me who at least were on the right track, and obviously so when the pedo panic eventually ends.
Here's a thought experiment.
Suppose we tell women in cultures which practice female genital mutilation that they can exchange it for pedo panic and every conceivable sex law their STU could ask for.
If women were independent thinkers rather than cultural artifacts of their particular socialization process this seems like a hell of good deal; who wouldn’t take it? Why hurt yourself and other women if you can get the same benefit some other way? Yet I bet none would consciously sign up for such an exchange and any advocate would be just as unpopular as my blog.
Because women are not independent thinkers and men are not either. All the normies are slaves to their culture and normies are 99.999% of the population. And so men in our culture don’t want to look for a way out of the sex laws either. This is the power of culture and it can’t be rationally influenced.
Right now the FGM cultures are picking up pedo panic and keeping FGM too because cultural drift is so much stronger than any rational considerations and this is how little any independent thinker has to do with it.
As to how effective my writing can be, or any writing unless it happens to be picked up by the Zeitgeist in which case you might as well not bother because you would just be another normie because it was already said a million times simultaneously, I think Gilles Deluze was right on:
A book is a small cog in a much more complex, external machinery. Writing is a flow among others; it enjoys no special privilege and enters into relationships of current and counter-current, of back-wash with other flows — the flows of shit, sperm, speech, action, eroticism, money, politics, etc. Like Bloom, writing on the sand with one hand and masturbating with the other — two flows in what relationship?
And now that text can be artificially extruded it is even less influential. I keep writing to a diminishing audience even as I get better at it and there is nothing I can do to get relevant to the culture as anything other than (at best) a target of punishment and destruction.
I am going to steal another piece of a comment from TOC’s blog, this time by Cyril Galaburda quoting the academic journals, because it exemplifies the same kind of metaphysical invalidation of the feelings of both MAPs and AAMs that was done to Schrödinger. This is what currently upsets me the most about the CSA hoax and something we should and can take back by upholding a clear narrative that our love is just as real as any. I have put some of the words serving to metaphysically degrade our love in bold here so you can see how pervasive it is, and note that they even redefine requited mutual love to a matter of “compensation” as if it were simply prostitution!:
“Iatrogenic harm” during “condoned consent” to CSA
the child perceives that they have been compensated with some form of gain or reward, whether material (e.g. drugs, money, shelter) or immaterial (e.g. protection, love and affection, status, social belonging). This form of abuse creates the perception among victims that the relationship is consensual, and they may even feel in control of the situation (Beckett, 2019; Hallett, 2017). However, CSE is fundamentally a power relationship involving adultism, commercialism, and patriarchal violence (Coy, 2019; Soirila, 2012).
⁝
romanticised exploitation, where forms of compensation may be symbolic or affective rather than strictly economic and directly provided to the victim (Inter-American Children’s Institute – Organization of American States, 2021).
⁝
institutional intervention can exacerbate rather than alleviate trauma (Costa et al., 2022), making children more vulnerable to self-inflicted or external violence (Westlake et al., 2025).
⁝
Once children are placed in foster care systems, Reid (2018) emphasises how this can enable child sexual abuse and trafficking, as unprepared caregivers make them vulnerable to peer recruitment for exploitation.
DOI 10.1016/j.chiabu.2026.108181
We could play this game with all human feelings, just change it into a “perception” or “belief” that you feel something rather than the actual feeling and redefine it to something fake and exploitative. Romance is just “romanticized exploitation,” love does not exist, just a transaction where fake affection is compensated for fake affection that you falsely believe you want from a complete monster, and so on for every positive feeling. Of course this game is only played with the bogeyman of our times, but we shouldn’t let them get away with this being a one-way street where we passively let them redefine us.
How do the normies know their partners are not just romanticizedly exploiting them? How do they know they weren’t “groomed” to think they experience love? That’s an awful lot of faith to put in a “correct” age gap when that’s the only thing distinguishing love from exploitation. According to this view the MAP is only looking to exploit and abuse. Any feeling of love or affection is merely an imaginary disguise for an evil drive to abuse, and it must be so regardless of appearances because the evil nature of the pedophile is bedrock reality that can never be questioned.
You might claim this is merely a little quibble over wording and I am overreacting. Some kind of microaggression against us and we should instead be focused on jealous old hags, which is definitely what the troll I am no longer feeding would say. The way I see it is if we can’t stand up to metaphysical insults then we can’t resist at all. I think starting to notice things like this is where sensibilities awaken for effective activism. The dominant narrative has erased our voice from politics, it has erased our existence in society and it has even erased the reality of our consciousness. The first thing to take back is the latter, and then we work our way up.
Schrödinger wasn’t just a great physicist and lover of teen girls; he also pondered the very metaphysical question that occupies my metaphysical interludes, and wrote a book about it called “My View of the World,” which I have read and made a video about back in 2022. Schrödinger didn’t pick the side I have argued for. He’s with Zuboff and Kolak and Watts on universalism aka open individualism. But you know what? It doesn’t matter which side you pick. First-person realism or antirealism, this is undecidable anyway. What matters is that you understand the question. This is what distinguishes a highly aware person. As Schrödinger puts it, the question is: “What is it that has called you so suddenly out of nothingness to enjoy for a brief while a spectacle which remains quite indifferent to you?... What was the necessary condition for making the thing conceived this time into you, just you and not someone else?... What justifies you in obstinately discovering this difference—the difference between you and someone else—when objectively what is there is the same?”
I think the ability to assert one’s metaphysical existence (again, not necessarily going further and “explaining” it which can’t decisively be done anyway) lends some credence to how he, as quoted by The Irish Times explained his predilection for teenage girls on the grounds that their innocence was the ideal match for his natural genius. He wrote: “Comparable in some way to the end of the spectrum, which in its deepest violet shows a tendency towards purple and red, it seems to be the usual thing that men of strong, genuine intellectuality are immensely attracted only by women who, forming the very beginning of the intellectual series, are as nearly connected to the preferred springs of nature as they themselves. Nothing intermediate will do, since no woman will ever approach nearer to genius by intellectual education than some unintellectuals do by birth so to speak.”
Still an odd thing to say that I can’t fully get behind, because liking nubile girls is just standard masculinity, but it certainly isn’t predatory either like the newspaper claims in what is possibly the most hateful article I have ever read on any subject!
And I feel that hate so fully because I, too, am metaphysically aware and my calling in life is to take back masculinity from its cultural metaphysical erasure.
"Women are as much a product of and enslaved by cultural beliefs as men and don’t dictate culture on an ongoing basis except to perpetuate what they are indoctrinated into like men do too in almost exactly the same way."
This is demonstrably false, we already have the statistics. The vast majority of women disprove of older men dating younger girls, while men are far more agreeable on the topic, and especially when it comes to female tyrone (sex) offenders.
"Right now the FGM cultures are picking up pedo panic and keeping FGM too because cultural drift is so much stronger than any rational considerations and this is how little any independent thinker has to do with it."
FGM aligns perfectly with pedohysteria, old women calm the sex drives of young women so the young don't compete for the older women's men, while the older women pedo shame their men for desiring younger women.
This is introductory knowledge, Eivind. I will agree that cultural drift exists as far as other women see on social media what has been accomplished by feminists across the world, and then adopt it themselves because they think it benefits them.
anon69
Sure, men and women want different things and now the culture upholds what women want more than men sexually, but that is not evidence that women are cultural masters and men are slaves. Both sexes are enslaved to this state of affairs. Male greater sex-positivity shows up on anonymous surveys and in sexual behavior but not politics. Just like men can’t independently find their way out of pedo panic, women couldn’t independently find their way into it. That’s not how we got here and the pedo panic is not being continuously upheld by women either while men are their puppets. Both sexes are puppets of the culture and insofar as we should blame individuals men are even worse. Look at this cancellation of Schrödinger where his relationships with teenage girls are put in scare quotes as “relationships” as if they are not real relationships. That’s a male journalist displaying the ultimate misandry and why is this not evidence but a hateful feminist is? I am not willing to launder the hate coming from men as somehow mind-controlled by women because I believe both sexes have equal responsibility for cultural acts even if they want different things.
I have a funny story from a few days ago that shows alot of what we are talking about. I went to the park and saw two hot young girls, probably 20 if I had to guess. I waited until the hotter one walked away from her friend for a moment, then made my approach. We hit it off almost from the beginning, she was engaged in my rambling and she was asking questions, excited to talk. She was a Polish girl visiting the city I'm in, staying with her friend who was from Ukraine.
After a bit of watching us, her relatively attractive friend came over, looking like a velociraptor, green with envy and a severe look on her face. The Polish girl immediately stepped back from me and changed her demeanor to cold, matching her friend's demeanor. I immediately introduced myself to the Ukrainian and started bantering with her, who was having none of it, but I kept going. As I did this, the Ukrainian started to crack and warm up a bit, which also started to put her Polish friend at ease.
When the Ukrainian noticed she herself was warming to me, and her friend was relaxing too, that really pissed her off (because she remembered her mission was to derail the conversation), and the Ukrainian hit me randomly with the statement "you know it's really weird how you're talking to us like this," to which I replied "what's weird about having a conversation?" That was the Polish girl's cue to tighten up again, and she asked my age immediately, to which I replied "now that is a weird question." She smirked a bit, then said I look old, to which I replied "yes I am extremely old," then she said I could be her father, to which I replied "oh really?"
Upon seeing she could not break me with her rudeness and shaming, the Ukrainian whisked away her Polish friend and said nice meeting you, to which I replied "good luck talking to people like that."
So, the "creepy" age gap hysteria is just another tool in the quiver for the jealous girls among us to disqualify their hot friends from male attention.
anon69
Yes, it functions as just another tool for jealous people, including teenage boys who now have a highly convenient word to scare off older men. Age gap hysteria is jealousy plus the current cultural baggage that it is abusive and weird and creepy and manipulative. Remove the superstition, which is to say get rid of the CSA hoax, and jealousy will have to find another excuse. Which it often will, such as racism or xenophobia or something, but the age gap voodoo is not itself inevitable.
A bad apple which is not going help the reputation of sex tourists seeking younger girls, unfortunately:
https://edition.cnn.com/2026/06/28/asia/thailand-teen-girl-suitcase-death-australian-arrested-intl-hnk
The family of a 17-year-old Thai girl whose body was found in a suitcase in Pattaya said they were devastated by her death, for which an Australian man has been arrested and charged with murder... The suspect, identified as Simon Peter Carman, faces charges of murder, concealment of a body, moving or destroying a body, and taking a minor for sexual purposes.
Charged with "taking a minor for sexual purposes" as if that is relevant here? Girls are still more likely to be killed by someone close to their own age.
Now back to some metaphysics and another thought which occurred to me today. If universalism is true, that is the view held by Schrödinger and Zuboff, that what one might call the metaphysical self is the same among persons, then it follows that it is also the same for the same person at different ages. There is therefore no such thing as a young innocent self and an older evil groomer of contemporary myth, since both are the same self. I think those of us who are starting to look old and wrinkly on the outside can attest that we still feel young inside, because it is the same self. Of course the content of experience changes through life, but there is no metaphysical innocent substance that can be corrupted like the CSA hoax holds, and neither is there any fundamentally older self that can do the corrupting.
Huw Edwards - the extremely high profile BBC news presenter who got convicted of child porn just started a blog a few days ago: https://thehuw.substack.com/
Come on everyone let's jump in the comments section and start a war against all the trolls attacking him. Unfortunately he has turned off comments now for most of his posts except 1 - presumably too many attacks - but we can at least jump into that one post with lots of positive comments about how he did nothing wrong and gang up on the trolls! Maybe then he'll open comments again at some point on other posts.
Edwards himself is not much better than the trolls. He believes in the CSA hoax and then the image-based "abuse" hoax on top of it and then he blames mental illness on top of that again:
So please let me be clear about one thing above all else: my deep regret and remorse for the crimes I committed were expressed in court, and then in the March statement, and I repeat them here without qualification. In pleading guilty at the earliest opportunity, I took full responsibility for my reprehensible actions. Indecent images of children represent innocent victims. I am repelled by such images, and my sincere and profound apologies to every person affected do not diminish with time.
That is the foundation. Nothing I say here, or anywhere, is designed to soften it.
Part of the reason for starting this blog is to address something I am often asked about: serious mental illness, and what it can do to a person.
I have been open about my struggle with persistent mental illness over twenty-five years. What is less well understood — including, until too late, by me — is the severity of that condition. For a long time it was managed. Then it wasn’t. The downward spiral that followed led to an appalling outcome, and the wreckage of that outcome is something I live with every day.
Haha you caught me! But yeah thats me. As I female pedo I was wondering why csa enthusiasts, despite being so hellbent on “spreading awareness” of csa, only seemed focused on adult men and underaged girls, and on very rare occasions, adult men and underaged boys. Then I realized that the usage of the word “pedophile” was created to be used against men. The hatred of pedophillia centers around adult men and young girls, not about ages specifically.
Seriously, I am a woman and I am in a lot of spaces with women, the amount of things I have heard women say about teenage and occasionally pre teen boys, if a man said something even REMOTELY close to that about a teen girl he would be jumped, no joke.
Its not that theres less women interested in kids then men, its that females and males are held to ENTIRELY different standards, the term “pedophille” is supposed to be weaponized against men, not women, and the hysteria simply isn't about us women, and only negatively affects us as a side affect, we arent the main targets. Female pedos having to deal with negative affects is like a city getting bombed and a nearby village getting affected, we suffer too but not nearly as much as the men because it wasnt built to affect us and we are only occasionally picked out and made into “examples” so they can pretend that its not heavily gender biased.
The very fact that there are pre teen and teen boys on the sex offender registry/in juvie for RAPING ADULT WOMEN proves that csa cunts dont actually believe their whole “children are innocent and victims of sexy adults blah blah blah” garbage. I wonder if a woman and a boy had sex, if they accused each other of “rape” at the same time it would cancel out? An unstoppable force vs an immovable object?
Not to mention, women are the primary caregivers of children, we are the “maternal” ones, so anything we do involving children will be seen, by default, as maternal and caregiving and sweet and less threatening then when its done by a man, which is all the more reason why csa enthusiasts have to try their hardest to ignore female pedos and only focus on male pedos.
I am not surprised by Edwards’ sycophancy to the dominant narrative because I have long since given up expecting the average sex offender to have anything sensible to say about the sex laws. With the honorable exceptions of TOC, Amos Yee and Nathan Larson (although I am not sure he qualifies as a sex offender since he died without conviction) and to some extent Epstein I can’t think of any sex offenders who said anything different than the normies (I am sure there are more that I forgot or don’t know about, but they are extremely few).
This is how special we the activists are. I don’t blame Edwards; I pity him because I know the CSA hoax is such a juggernaut brainwashing force that almost no one can resist.
Anyway, it is a good thing to believe porn is bad, even if he believes it for wrong reasons. I share this view but not for moral reasons; no children are “victimized” if you look at pictures. I believe porn is bad because it prevents us from fully appreciating girls and feeling as extreme sexual attraction to them in real life as we should. I have explained all about nofap so many times in the past that I guess I don’t need to repeat myself and elaborate on that here, especially since I don’t seem to be getting new readers anyway who need to be filled in.
“The act of the male triggers the commission of the offence by the female. This seems wrong in principle.” And there, right there, this is what collapses the entire “children are by default victims of sexy adults” nonsense. This proves that that there ARE cases of children not being “victims” or “traumatized” after fucking adults, which creates a giant but easily ignorable hole in the csa myth.
If adult women can be victims of boys, what about adult men and girls? What if a girl lies about her age? What if she lies about the “rape” even happening? What if she blackmails the man? What if she drugs the man? What if the man is physically disabled or elderly or has cognitive issues? What if the man was asleep? What if she simply catches him off guard?
If a teen girl runs up to a man and playfully and quickly grabs at his crotch before the man has time to stop her, the law says that she is a victim and the man is a predator even though the man quite literally did nothing whatsoever. It can easily be spun from a playful crotch grab on the teen girls part to “he groomed me into touching his genitals.” Why? If women can be victims of boys and the law can acknowledge this then why cant men be victims of girls? Physical strength isn't the only thing, especially when we have guns and roofies and the entirety of the court system and society as a whole on your side??
And if female pedos exist, that means that females, including teen girls, while not AS lustful or pervy as males, can still be lustful and pervy and actively seek out sex, not for “money” or “status” or “grooming”, but just for the physical pleasure, and aren't, in fact, asexual pure angels from heaven who possess zero lustful or “sinful” thoughts and are always either “groomed” by males or are only doing it for money and status.
(Seriously, I would be like Bonnie Blue if female pedos were legally allowed to get with boys, im not joking. But unlike Bonnie, it would not be for money or status, just the fucking love of the game. But since females are asexual and are only interested in sex, especially with males, for money or status or because of grooming trauma, csa enthusiast will ignore this, as they always do)
What if a female pedo gets attacked by a pedo hating male normie and she falsely accuses him of rape? Oh how the turn tables :D. Seriously, male normies/antis have to be VERY CAREFUL of how they approach female pedos because I will NOT HESITATE on calling him a rapist, not in the SLIGHTEST!
And if they let female pedos slide because of the perviness of teen boys, what if the female pedos start vouching for the male pedos?? What then? There are plenty of female pedos with a fetish for male pedos who co offend(have threesomes) with them, so it WILL happen. The entire csa industry falls apart thats what. And thats why female pedos either dont exist or are only a 1:1,000,000,000,000 ratio compared to male pedos. Not because there arent plenty of women sucking little boy dick at daycares, but because it doesnt count. We cant exist, at least not to the degree of men. Consider me an invisible ghost.
Thanks for updating me on the reality on the ground from a female pedophile perspective. I love how you display something so rare as logical thinking on the subject too, with all your thought experiments that show how CSA thinking knocks itself down if we hold it accountable to any of its claims (which normies sadly never do, but if they applied critical thinking the logic would so easily undermine itself).
Pedo panic against women is as I expected and have been saying for 25 years except you say it even better: “Female pedos having to deal with negative effects is like a city getting bombed and a nearby village getting affected.”
It is collateral damage in the big picture, but those women who do happen to be made examples of that we are officially so “gender-neutral” now are extremely poignant travesties worth every bit of attention that I have given them, both because they are personal tragedies in their own right and not least because they also undermine the entire CSA hoax because of the distilled madness on display. It is dogmatic to CSA believers that “abuse” is equal coming from a woman to a boy who is obviously lucky to any commonsense observer; therefore, “abuse” is reduced to an abstraction having nothing to do with reality and so according to their own dogmas that’s the “evidence” they have for girls too. The CSA believers thus call their own bullshit by accusing women.
I do agree that most of the hysteria from women around male sexuality is culturally ingrained. In my own prepubsence, there was little concern for me and sexual activity, but as I entered my preteen/teen years, all of a sudden I was no longer allowed to go to the mall by myself/with friends, have sleep overs, go to parties, because my parents feared I would be raped or kidnapped.
At 7 my parents let me play at random strangers houses with no worry whatsoever. At 17 I wasnt even allowed to go to a close friends house because my parents were worried I would be “molested”. As I got older my parents got more paranoid about older men, funnily enough.
I renember one time in 7th grade I went to a small school and signed up for a french class. For some strange reason I was the only one who chose that elective, and it was a VERY small school. The teacher was male. He was very nice and friendly, but when I told my parents they instantly freaked out that a man was teaching a single 12 year old girl and told me that it was dangerous and they didnt trust him while they contacted the school. He did nothing to me and I vouched for him but like a week later a couple boys were added to the class and my parents instantly calmed down and gave me “the talk”(the “dont let any spooky men touch your no no” talk).
My entire adolescent was filled with girls my age, my parents, and teachers complaining of how creepy men were and to stay away from them, no one did this when I was in elementary school. I was even very close friends with a male teacher in elementary school(it was platonic) and no one cared, not even my parents. It all changed when I turned 9-10.
I am an adult now. You would think this would make things better, no, everyone is even MORE paranoid. Any mention of me leaving my apartment, even with my roommates or friends, is met with a “be careful and be back by night and dont talk to any men”. Even my male friends have said the same things to me?!? I once asked one of my gay male friends if he could sneak me into the club and he said he was worried that an older man might prey on me and it was safer for me to stay home?? Later I told him I was visiting a nearby attraction(on a weekday in the middle of the day) and he told me to stay safe because theres men out there. Does he not realize he is a man?!? How does this benefit him?!?!
Any time I talk to a man or am close to a man they feel the need to virtue signal about all the awful men out there and how they vicuously protect their daughters and how they would never EVER in a million years find me attractive because they are good men who are only into older women.
Even though I am not all that into men, I honestly appreciate the men who are open about being into me and flirt with me, not because I want to date or have sex with them, but because they are far less annoying than the virtue signaling white knight men who would rather me get locked inside my apartment forever for “safety” and “protection”, then have sex.
The hysteria absolutely negatively affects females too. My entire adolescence was stripped from me for “protection” and I think it is what drives alot of teen girls to get with older men then later turn on them. We dont want to be locked in cages our whole lives for “protection”. It is MADDENING! Its LONELY! I actually lost some of my close friends because I was only allowed to see them at school and even my text messages were monitored because my parents were worried that my friends were “corrupting” me. They actually BROKE APART me and my best friend because they found her “too sexual” and thought she was inappropriate for her crude sex and drug jokes. They literally ruined some of my best friendships for “protection”. It makes me sick. Mind you, I wasnt even having sex or doing drugs, so my parents destroyed one of my closest female friendships of my life, for what?!? She made too many dick jokes?!?
It is funny when older adults say I should stick to dating college age men instead of older men because they are “safer”. When stastically colleged aged men commit the MOST amount of crimes and the most VIOLENT crime, including against women. So stastically, I am actually far safer with a middle aged “creep” than a college twink in his late teens or early 20s. Yet older women keep trying to set me up with their sons and warn me about older men? One time a coworker showed tried to set me up with her 14 year old son. I declined because I dont want to go to prison.
Mind you, this is the same woman who constantly complained of pedophiles and csa and vented to me about how she was “molested” by her teacher as a teenager and how gross it was when teen boys tried to flirt with her?!?? She was also married to a much older man?!?! Its so confusing and drives me mad! All this is more proof to me that this hysteria is less about “protection” and more about sexual control.
One time at 14 on a family outing, I wore a short skirt and a crop top, and it was surprising my parents let me leave the house in that. I noticed a lot of older men were staring at me and I found it uncomfortable and vowed to never wear short skirts again to stick it to “creeps”(I wear short skirts all the time currently lol). We were heading to starbucks and a young boy of 8-10 ran up to the door, held it for me, and took a good long look at my ass. I felt flattered and it made me super horny and I felt bad that it made me horny because he was so young. I would complain about older men to my friends then masturbate to legal photos of elementary schoolers when I got home. Everyone is a hypocrite, both the males AND females.
My adolescense was crazy. I was a teen girl attracted to prepusbcent little boys/girls and occasionally adult men who also hated pedophiles and complained when older men flirted with me but masturbated to 5 year olds and occasionally flirted with older men I found attractive. If your confused dont worry because I was also confused and im still confused.
Thats one thing I hate. Its one thing when they claim pedophiles are “grooming” kids into thinking they love them, its another thing when they claim that pedophiles are “grooming” OURSELVES into thinking that we love kids?!? What the fuck does that even mean? Do we have super natural mind control powers that even we ourselves arent immune to or something im so lost.
Its not shits and giggles for females either. I dont know about middle aged women, but for teen girls and young women, being locked in a metaphorical chastity cage/prison for “protection” is not fun and does not give me a sense of control. Being controlled by both adult men AND women for my “protection” did not give me control. The only control I had was to falsely accuse men of rape and send them to prison, which I did not do and never plan on doing, and there were plenty of men who had control over me, namely my dad, who dictated who I could and couldnt talk to, what clothes I could or couldnt wear, what places I could go to and what times I could leave and come back, and who I couldnt or couldnt go with.
So many men have told me they wont allow me to talk to certain people or go certain places or wear certain things or do certain activities, not because they want to control me, but for “protection”. To prove how “good” they are.
When I was a teen girl and my dad would forbid me from leaving the house and I would spend my entire summer scrolling on my phone doing nothing all day because he was worried I would get “raped” if I left the house without his “protection”, that was not me being in control. As an adult my dad has lost that legal control over me, but plenty of other men in my life try to make up for it. Literally every male coworker I have, espcially “girl dads”. Its like saying a woman forced into a chastity cage or into wearing a burka by the men in her life for “protection” is in control of the hysteria. No she isnt, she is just a victim in a different way. And despite how much men complain about false accusations and womens negative attitudes for male sexuality, men have always been the first ones in my life to “protect” me and accuse other men of being predators on my behalf.
I renember one time at 17. I was working at a fast food resturant. Two men, one women, and me. One of the older men said I was hot and he wanted my number. I was uncomfortable and told him no. My female coworker laughed and jokingly asked if I thought he was cute. My other male coworker overheard. Started screaming at him. Said he would kick the other mans ass and that I was just a child. He sent me out the store and told me not to go back in. I told my parents. My mom didnt care and my dad said that that man was a creep and that I shouldnt go back to work there.
I have heard alot of teenage boys says that they dislike male pedophiles because they take teenage girls away from them. I have heard alot of normie men say they dislike female pedophiles because they would rather sleep with a teen boy than a “real man”. There are also quite a lot of normie men who think female pedos are hot and wish they were the teen boy.
Yes. I have read plenty of articles that said that female pedos are extremely rare but when they offend they co offend with male pedos who coerce them into committing crimes and are only doing it for status or money or acting out childhood trauma not genuine sexual desire.
Which to me reads as “female pedos are extremely common and offend all the damn time and are doing it out of sexual desire but we only really arrest them or pay attention to them when they work alongside a man and even then we will still blame the man and want the woman to be asexual and a victim”.
Is it really that female pedophiles are rare but almost always work alongside male pedos, or is it that female pedophiles are extremely common but the ones that are caught and get media attention are the ones who work alongside male pedophiles?
Another reason I have a hard time believing men are “agreeable” when it comes to sex is that so many men will claim that sex with women is a need and that women are awful for not putting out for men. But the second a woman is sexual and has sex with men, it is men, not women, but men, who are the first to call her a slut, to say she is “used goods”, to say she is “daddys disapointment”, to say she is “useless stress relief”, to say she is “ran through” or “a gaping hole”.
So as a woman is very attracted to the male gender(young males), I have hard time believing men when they complain that women wont have sex with men or are too conservative around sex because when women DO have sex with men those same men will call her a ran through dirty slut whos disappointed her father.
When girls have sex with men those same men will beat up those men and call them predators. So alot of men will say one thing but act in a completely contradictory way, which makes me question how much males really want to have sex with females and how much of it is virtue signaling to look manly. Is the virtue signaling and fake manliness to impress the females to get sex?? I will never understand. I mean even incels, cant they just hire a prostitute?? But no, incels hate prostitutes because they are “dirty slutty whores”?!
So many straight normie men, espcially incels, want to live in a world were all men have sex with women but the women are all asexual and dont have sex with men because it makes them “whores” or “victims” not realizing that is a direct contradiction.
So many men hate Bonnie Blue for being promiscuous and say she should stop having sex with men, and those same men will complain about dead bedrooms or being virgins or about how women dont put out enough and are sexually starving men. I can see how this drives alot of women to the 4b movement. Men tell them that they should have sex with men because sex is a need for men and if they dont put out they are just using them for money, but if they have sex with men they are dirty sluts who have no self respect. If anything, men are more conservative around sex than women, who constantly get labeled as “sexually fluid”.
Take a look at this.
https://nypost.com/2026/06/29/us-news/10-year-old-missouri-boy-charged-with-murdering-baby-by-shooting-her-in-the-head/?
Thanks for all these great comments with a female perspective! Despite my increasing obscurity and trolling I think this is now my best thread yet. We spent so much time talking about what we think women are like, but here we have much better evidence because it is first-hand.
As to male agreeableness to sex, I think you are right about the social and political part that they are very much the opposite. Men will line up by the thousands to in private or semi-private to have sex with Bonnie Blue but none will defend her publicly. The only man I saw saying anything positive about Bonnie Blue was actually TOC; everything else was hate. And then there is the nauseating overprotection of female friends and relatives as you note, much or all of it hypocritical. I am surprised they didn’t overprotect you before you became pubescent though, not because I think it is a normal thing to do but it is weird that pedo panic does not extend to actual pedophilia. It does when that kind of pedo is explicitly exposed, but there is no preemptive panic about it? In a way it makes sense because serious sexual interest in prepubescent girls is so rare and inconsequential. I suppose the overprotection requires a projection of the protector’s own sexual desire, and at age 9 or 10 is when most men start seeing girls as sexual objects, so this is when they start sexually guarding and gatekeeping them too. Hence your father has no issue with your having a close friendship to a male teacher at 7, but he gets hysterical when you are alone with a teacher at 12 because now ALL straight men are intensely attracted and their “worry” is just their own desire talking.
I am glad you share my rage against the cultural metaphysical invalidation of sexuality. Yes, the “groomer” is even believed to groom himself into thinking that he feels love as opposed to harboring the real thing. There are two problems with this. Firstly it is plain bullshit since our feelings are as real as any and secondly even if you buy into it then then who the hell is doing the grooming? The person has been metaphysically abducted and replaced with a demon controlling his will. This is the erasure of egosyntonicity and one place we can forcefully strike back by standing up as egosyntonic about our sexuality like I am doing.
10-year-old charged with murder in Missouri and legally recognized as capable of such evil. The venerable legal doctrine of doli incapax which typically puts the criminal age of responsibility at 10 sure is a lot more reasonable than the upstart sexualis incapax standard which pretends children are sexual retards and zombies until 18.
Yeah I found it weird too. It was like a switch flipped once I hit puberty and I was forcefed csa garbage non stop and fiercely “protected” from quite literally everything and everyone, even other girls my age who my parents viewed as overly sexual and a bad influence. Its really disturbing how I had more autonomy at 7 than at 17.
I had actually never even heard of pedophillia until around 10. The closest thing was one time at 8 or 9 when my mom told me not to go in any strange mans car. And that was literally it. I dont even recall hearing the word until around 10, and if I did I had no idea what it meant because no one told me anything about it.
Maybe if they told me about pedophillia before 10 the adults would be concerned that they were exposing me to sex and wanted to “perserve my innocence” until puberty, idk.
By the time I was 10 I was already developing an intense sexual interest in younger boys any way which further complicated the adults attempts to scare me of pedophillia, it did work and I went through a pedo hating phase, but that only lasted for 4 years.
In many US states, doli incapax is either lower or has no statutorily defined minimum age at all.
For criminal intent or responsibility, age knows no bounds, yet for 17.9999 year olds, sexual absoluteness is off limits unless they themselves are convicted as sexual offenders.
You just gotta love Doublethink irony, huh?
There is a new MAP magazine called PAEDEROS which was linked at TOC. I checked out the first issue and must say I was disappointed, especially by this article which is indistinguishable from the normie Epstein hysteria:
https://paederos.com/2026/06/29/maps-stand-against-the-epstein-class/
When MAPs can’t even defend something so insipid as a man convicted of soliciting a 17-year-old while thinking she is 18, and further demonized over other teenage girls who also either lied about their ages or were adults and all of which were consensual, how the hell do they expect to make a dent in pedo panic?
I assume they are unfamiliar with Michael Tracey and taken in by conspiracy theories that Epstein did something far worse. But still it is disappointing, not least because MAPs have to look no further than to our greatest leader TOC to learn that Epstein was a good person.
What has TOC said in regards to Epstein?
For example:
https://heretictoc.com/2026/03/05/lies-damned-lies-and-the-epstein-files/
I would add that even within the so-called victim accounts we see another story struggling to get out. Epstein was quite possibly the nice guy many friends thought he was, and pleasant to his undoubtedly numerous young lady friends, as I wrote in Epstein: am I missing something? It is remarkable that one so-called “survivor”, Juliette Bryant was sending him chatty, affectionate emails years after her alleged “horrific” abuse as can be seen here on Jmail, where Epstein’s emails can be seen as he would have done.
Yet Bryant sensationally told Chris Hansen (of To Catch a Predator notoriety) in a YouTube interview about a month ago that this abuse had included medical experiments performed on her at Epstein’s ranch in New Mexico. Bullshit! Even her performative distress on this video clip looks fake.
But that hasn’t stopped other claims about goings on at the ranch – girls strangled and buried in the grounds, sulphuric acid used to dissolve bodies, babies sacrificed – being taken so seriously by the local authorities that a multi-million dollar enquiry has been launched. Bonkers!
One email from 2019 in the Epstein files offers to supply – for a price – video evidence of Epstein raping children. An obvious scam, it says you will get the evidence once you pay one Bitcoin for it, which on the date in question would have been worth around $7,500. Nice little earner, even then! As for the serial lies told by the most high-profile allegator, Virginia Roberts Giuffre, no need to reprise them here. Just check out Michael Tracey’s excellent take-down journalism.
Woman gets over 50 years. https://www.fox10phoenix.com/news/arizona-woman-gets-over-50-years-prison-sexual-assault-bestiality
I think we covered the persecution of Kelly Rae Smith back in April when she was sentenced, but I will say something more from a different angle.
Those who fear AI doom don’t realize it has already happened and this is the result. There is no lynch mob against female pedos and no moral panic in the population yet her life was taken, how? Because bureaucracy is an AI operating mindlessly using humans as cogs. AI has existed since writing was invented and the new kind won’t make it any worse, but it is plenty bad already.
The opposite happened to Harvey Weinstein. He DID face a lynch mob but the AI that is the justice system wasn't fully cooperative. After trying three times to convict him on the phony "rape" of Jessica Mann which was obviously just a normal relationship, prosecutors give up:
https://edition.cnn.com/2026/07/01/us/alvin-bragg-harvey-weinstein-survivors
Of course they frame it as a failure for "survivors," but what they should have said is it was their fault for prosecuting fake rape. Even with a legal system programmed to the hilt with bogus definition of sex crimes it still failed. Unfortunately some of those bogus sex crimes still put him in prison on other charges though.
Another little metaphysical interlude with Zuboff for those of my readers who are inclined to think about something other than sex crimes for 14 minutes:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5Qk4ImIMSXg
Universalism entails that the brain is a receiver of consciousness rather than creator. The laws of physics can be anything they like, you could be an artificial life form or even a simulation if they can be conscious; the “I” is teleported in from the same mysterious metaphysical place wherever and whenever consciousness exists.
Think past psychology. Think past spiritual entities. Think past souls. Think past platonic forms and ideas. Think past God(?). Only now are we down to what Zuboff is getting at. Does anyone else here feel it?
Here is the singer from the 1970's band The Runaways openly encouraging extreme violence by violent cucks against (black) men trying to meet with teen girls ("children"), characterizing the cucks as strong men, no different than women who define their slaves as "real men."
https://x.com/CherieCurrie3/status/2072444435548500382
Of course, as an underage teen herself, Cherie Currie and her female bandmates enjoyed copious amounts of sex and drugs with older men, as described in her book Neon Angel. Now in her late 50's, the hag renounces that life and is a "counselor" who "helps" other "troubled youth," aka she's a hardcore hagmaxxer. But curiously, she still posts pictures of herself as an underage singer when she's looking for attention, who would've thought?
https://x.com/CherieCurrie3/status/2072736562069311674
And by the way, Cherie reposted the original violent cuck video from a fan account for femiservative Karoline Leavitt, which called the man meeting with a 13 year old girl for sex "the worst stuff." Of course, these femiservatives are happy to say that man on man anal fisting and meth snorting is a constitutional right as long as they are "consenting adults."
The femiservative fan account's bio claims it drops politically incorrect truth bombs and triggers woke leftists. Which is the more politically incorrect statement: child marriage is a good thing and should be allowed along with copious legal prostitution, or "child marriage is stealing thousands of girls’ childhoods and lives"? I guess I'm a "woke leftist" then.
https://x.com/WHLeavitt/status/2072790260631658502
anon69
https://www.cbsnews.com/amp/news/glenn-sullivan-jr-louisiana-sentenced-rape-prison-castration/
It’s insane to me how pedohysteria is now starting to parallel those dystopian science- fiction novels.
I am hopeful that this man won’t live long enough to witness his own dick getting cut off.
Nevertheless, I am enraged that something like this is allowed when it’s clearly inhumane and violates the eighth amendment of the U.S. Constitution.
But…normies will be normies and no punishment is ever harsh enough for a “pedophile”, regardless of the status of the current western judiciary systems.
They don’t care! They’ll discard your body into the vacuum of space if they could and they will STILL complain about how said punishment ended up not being harsh enough. It’s the best of hatred and apathy.
Think of all the American states that are desperately trying to signal their virtues through implementing laws that will inevitably give “rapists” the death penalty? Doing so would be unconstitutional, but as long as they can circumvent Supreme Court rulings, it wouldn’t matter to them at all.
Glenn Sullivan Sr., 54, pled guilty to four counts of second-degree rape on April 17. Authorities began investigating Sullivan in July 2022, when a young woman told the Livingston Parish Sheriff's Office that Sullivan had assaulted her multiple times when she was 14. The assaults resulted in pregnancy, and a DNA test confirmed that Sullivan was the father of the child, the district attorney's office said. Sullivan had also groomed the victim and threatened her and her family to prevent her from coming forward.
This is the dysphemistic language commonly employed in this CSA-hoaxed moral panic for perfectly normal consensual relationships, possibly excluding the "threats" when he was about to be reported, but with this kind of punishment, who can blame him?
I am so used to "assault" and "grooming" used as synonyms for love that that's how I always read them by now, and when no other details are forthcoming it is doubly confirmed. Since the "threats" are also unspecified I have my doubts there too, could be nothing more than telling or begging her to keep it secret.
I wonder how the normies read a word like "assault" in this context. Do they imagine violence in their minds or are their minds warped to see sex as violence?
I honestly can't tell how the panic works at that level. Is the girl's participation in her own "assault" and "rape" and "grooming" mentally blocked out or redefined?
With all the “grooming” said and done, doesn’t anyone think to themselves on how the older man suddenly has the ability to become a “master manipulator”, as these articles tend to denote?
Like since they never specify what the “grooming” or “abuse” was, I’m just gonna assume it’s nothing more than logs thrown into the fireplace because everything or anything will always get twisted into the most malevolent thing possible.
Even if the so-called victim denies such a claim, the abuse industry will require them to concede because we are not allowed to have anything outside the sex-hateful status quo.
There is no such thing as a “normal” relationship with a minor. It must be grooming! It must be abuse! They need to impose these kinds of terminology because it is a given and they must, they can, and they will!!
There’s always gonna be a special kind of negativity bias whenever the public interprets sex crimes from the press.
They cannot fathom other than their rage, hatred, and validation for these laws so it’ll always be imagined as worst-case-scenarios, which will benefit the press since they work like a cyclical stimulus for emotional outrage.
I have been thinking about how the supposed increased “grooming capacity” of older men provides a way to falsify some of the CSA panic, since we can actually test this experimentally. I already have a firm impression that “grooming” is bullshit and I now have less power over young girls than ever, but let’s play devil’s advocate and approach the claim naively. This is one place evidence should count, so it can be treated as a scientific theory. Is it unreasonably easy for me to seduce minor girls?
But if the baseline level of interest I should get from minors is zero, and any interest whatsoever must be a result of “grooming,” then that can’t be falsified either. So I guess you are right, we are back to pure superstition. “Grooming” is a completely unscientific “theory” which is to say a dogma that is always right by definition.
From an evolutionary standpoint we should assume that sexuality is some of what humans are least susceptible to being manipulated at and least of all teenage girls since their value is highest. This is confirmed by my life experience and everything I know. Humans have had eons to hone our defenses against sexual manipulation and the result is exactly as we should expect, with a sad exception of porn which now fools men because digital porn was never part of our ancestral environment and so found a way to be unreasonably effective as a zero-day exploit of male sexuality. Even with AI there is still no zero-day exploit of nubile girls on the horizon. However much the “grooming” nonsense wants to convince us otherwise, it is just plain bullshit or else I would have had more teenage pussy than I know what to do with. The proof of the pudding is in the eating and this does raise the interesting meta-possibility that people CAN be manipulated into to thinking sexual manipulation works, but it cannot actually work because that requires a whole other level of effectiveness. This is similar to how people are endlessly gullible to “life extension” supplements and other snake oil which does not work. It is much easier to convince people that something works than make it work.
So there is such a thing as real manipulation, but only at a meta-level or level of abstraction far above raw attraction, such as financial or placebo. If attraction already exists, a manipulator can use that too in nefarious ways, but he cannot create attraction by deceptive means any more than an old woman could convince me that she is attractive by saying the right words because those words simply don’t exist. The real risk is nonsexual manipulation, to which people do seem endlessly susceptible. The CSA hoax is one staggering example and another one recently came to my attention by the name of Chase Hughes. If you are at risk of being taken in by master manipulator Chase Hughes or perhaps already thought he had something to teach you, here is your chance to be immunized!
https://behavior-podcast.com/who-is-chase-hughes-lies-of-fake-expert-in-behavior-influence/
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4t1DMxmqJOk
Chase Huhges grooms adults into following his bullshit teachings and even paying for it, so be warned.
So electrical signals in her primary cortex move towards her supplementary motor area (SMA) and then motor neurons travel down axon synapses towards muscle fibers in her arm, hand, and fingers. She "feels" she wants to pleasure the dog, but the initial electrical signals that initiated the movements of her hands BEGAN BEFORE HER FEELING (see the"Libet experiment"). Her hands therefore caress the dog's sexual organ, and electrical impulses travel in a similar way from it to the dog's brain, releasing a flood of oxytocin and a corresponding "feeling" of pleasure and contentment in the dog's mind.
And she gets 50 plus years for this?
Louisiana, another shithole, proving conservatives really are utter garbage slop subhumans. I think it's undeniable the world is swinging in the direction of right wing politics, which is highly misandrist. I always like to use the example of the conservative southern USA states in the 1960's arresting left wing celebrities like Jimi Hendrix and Chuck Berry, or telling young people to get haircuts, etc. The left wing celebrities now are mostly misandrist homosexuals. I believe Citycrusher is correct when he says feminism is a right wing hate movement larping as left wing, and the left wing itself is currently occupied by feminists instead of men.
I experienced an example of this recently. I was talking to some 14-17 year old girls I know, platonically. One of them freaked out when I simply was talking with her in a friendly way, the first time this has happened in over a decade of me talking with hot teenage girls consistently. One of her unique interests was the Russian language. As we know, Russia has swung far right, a necessary evil for mobilizing its male meat grinder, fully embracing pedohysteria Epstein panic to motivate its Christcuck idiot soldiers. Ukraine is exactly the same, larping as left wing while operating a far right ideology.
Make the left heterosexual again!
anon69
We could talk left or right if there were any tangible difference. We are up against a dominant culture so uniform there is no difference in politics.
Thankfully girls themselves are way more variable than the political parties. It is amazing how differently girls turn out in the same culture. Some are completely unaffected by the hysteria, some are completely brainwashed and many are somewhere in between. None can be “groomed” into sex, but you might get your natural chance with her as if the antisex bigotry had never existed, if you find the right girl. I guess these will be the most independent, least groomable girls since they didn't fall for the CSA hoax, and if she wants you she will know it within seconds already or else it will never happen.
Eivind, how do you feel regarding the way Erling Haaland played during Norway’s match against Brazil?
Getting so far in the World Cup is great for Norway, but I don't have an opinion beyond that because I didn't see it (don't have a TV) and am not interested in sports.
I watched it live and both teams were completely deadlocked for most of the game, until Haaland scored twice, ensuring victory against Brazil (who were only able to secure a single goal by the end).
I’m not a Norwegian, but I’m proud of the fact that they are advancing to the quarterfinals since they’ve never actually won a World Cup tournament before.
Brethren, today I say let us commune with and meditate upon a great slogan and adopt it for MAPs against the CSA hoax:
Magna est veritas et praevalebit!
The truth is great and will prevail!
Let us also recite Coventry Patmore's fine poem "Magna Est Veritas" and hope it won't take quite so long for the lie to rot:
Here, in this little Bay,
Full of tumultuous life and great repose,
Where, twice a day,
The purposeless, glad ocean comes and goes,
Under high cliffs, and far from the huge town,
I sit me down.
For want of me the world's course will not fail:
When all its work is done, the lie shall rot;
The truth is great, and shall prevail,
When none cares whether it prevail or not.
Post a Comment