Thursday, September 27, 2018

I am under attack by a criminal harasser

When I was investigated for incitement on my blog in 2012 and later cleared of all charges to the point of being compensated for wrongful imprisonment, the police pretty much stayed within the laws and norms governing their behavior and never even encouraged me to remove any content. If the police are going to arrest you, they will simply do it and not threaten you just because they don't like your blog or disagree with your opinions or whatever. They are capable of bringing ridiculous charges against you, but so far they have respected the courts when told it's not a criminal matter.

And I still don't think the police misbehaves that way. So when I received the following threat today:

"Du har 48 timer til å lukke bloggen din og din Twitter-konto. Hvis du ignorerer dette, vil jeg få en rettsordre for at politiet skal komme inn i huset ditt og ta dine elektroniske gjenstander. Ikke lek med meg."

Translation: "You have 48 hours to close your blog and your Twitter-account. If you ignore this, I will get a court order to have the police come into your house and seize your electronic equipment. Don't toy with me."

I can be sure it is not originating from the police or prosecutors or anyone with the authority to get a court order. What this is is criminal threats or harassment directed at me as a law-abiding citizen. As it happens, I think I know who is behind -- the character known as Gally here on my blog -- but I shall refrain from naming him publicly yet as I don't have proof. I initially thought he was a friend of our movement, but he turned out to be both crazy and evil, having now turned against me and set his mind to shut down my blog and Twitter account and who knows what else he is up to.

Yesterday he posted material which can be construed as child pornography in a comment and reported me for it. I promptly deleted the comment and Google administrators didn't buy into his scheme, thankfully. But this is an extremely serious situation for me as I am targeted by a vicious criminal who also has considerable expertise on computer security and is therefore very dangerous. I am putting this all out in the open so that if something does happen to me, you know the background. While I don't think he is violent, he has demonstrated that he is capable of manufacturing false evidence and make false accusations, which can turn really ugly by itself.

Of course, the appropriate response is to report him to the police myself for criminal harassment, and I am seriously considering this. I will not be harassed into silence, and still don't think the authorities use such methods against free speech in Norway. Of course, I must also look out for my own safety and any advice is welcome from my genuine commenters. I do ask all my commenters to keep it very clean and not give him anything that can be used to escalate this. I just want to forget him and move on with my political blogging, but as he has decided to make a nuisance of himself I am taking the precautionary step of this warning. He has also been impersonating other members of our movement in order to damage us, so any communication purporting to be from us must be treated with extreme suspicion. I even got a request yesterday from a supposed documentary filmmaker who wanted info about our movement, and I suspect he is behind that as well, but can't be sure. As you can see, such behavior is psychologically damaging and is criminal for a reason that I also support. This is threats against an individual, nothing like the political speech that I have been controversial for, and Gally will only be exposed as the common criminal that he is if he tries anything.


1 – 200 of 218   Newer›   Newest»
Caamib said...

Yes, it is indeed horrible. I have even become more afraid when I had seen this horrible menace being photographed

C'mon, Eivind, that idiot is a joke and you should not even be making this post. Somebody who actually wants to harm you doesn't use that kind of ridiculous tactics that wouldn't work in a kindergarten and wouldn't put any 48 hour "ultimatums". They'd just work behind the scenes to try and nail you. He's a toothless, retarded puppy who had been punched in the head too many times.

He's not doing that on my blog because he knows I am too smart for him and that we would get laughed out in second.

He's a tool, he's a loon, he's a convicted criminal and you should at least post his verdict when he starts doing time and keep it at least while he's there :D :D

I'm more interested in the filmmaker thing. That sounds a bit fishy since we're so tiny but if he's interested please give me his e-mail... Or if the guy is reading it, here's mine

I am much more interested in male sexualist than general incel problems these days, and see an average male sexualist as much better kind of a person.

Caamib said...

Messed up the image, shitty formatting. Here is Gally

Eivind Berge said...

Quite so, this is a kindergarten level of threat, and I really don't think anyone with the power to carry it out would make themselves look so foolish (as well as abusing their authority as police if it were them). However, at the rate this is escalating it is still disconcerting. This is by far the nastiest person I have ever encountered.

Anonymous said...

I received the same threat and just deleted it, haha. It's nothing to worry about, Eivind.

Caamib said...

Eivind, could you please send me some contact info for the (supposed?) film guy. Here or on my e-mail (, it doesn't matter.

Also, regarding impersonation, I remember somebody trying to impersonate you the very same day we started off with the now defunct Incelsandmalesexualists forum. Wrote a whole story somewhat similar to the Holocaust thing. That was in June. So who knows how many of these crazy fucks there's out there, it's not just Gally.

Eivind Berge said...

I agree, we don't really know that it is Gally, and for the record that was just speculation because of his other hostile comments recently, but who knows, maybe some of that could be impersonation too.

Fortunately, that other impostor appears even more harmless without any likely connections to the police.

john said...

and some people ask my why I don't have a blog.above all, NO ONE is listening anyway. this is the "year of the woman" "future is female".bad time to be anti feminist.i fully learned that after I received a visit from the cops regarding my alleged threat aimed at a particular nasty feminist aka "social justice warrior" aka garbage earlier this year.i do miss Twitter, but I'm not "allowed" as she doesn't feel "safe" while I'm on there.women run the show now, and for the foreseeable future.all it takes is an accusation, no evidence required.

The Night Wind said...

Caamib: Don't forget that a lot of mass-shooters like we've had in the US acted like toothless retards too before they went berserk. I've been reading this Gally's comments and he sounds like an obvious neurotic. The thing about neurotics are is that they are unpredictable---especially if they're taking psychiatric narcotics too.

john said...

ok, well I'M no psychiatrist but cammib sounds fairly insane.anyone giving advice to people like "you might want to consider rape" as an option if you're not getting any/incel,and desires to become a "successful" serial killer MIGHT have some issues ya think? eivind seems pretty 'normal'.myself? other than the ptsd,and anxiety(hey,a rogue cop(well,theyre all rogue) attacks you,you'll HAVE some difficulties) I don't see, or hear anything that ISN'T there(in other words,NO paranoid schizophrenia) i cant be bi- polar, no ups or down here, no 'hypermania'.i DO want revenge, but that's actually a normal response to NEVER getting even a whiff of justice.i won't pretend to try my hand at a 'diagnosis' on gally.i don't know the guy!

Caamib said...

John - here's a strong suggestion from me to you - stay the fuck away from me now. You're an archetype of a beaten down, pussified, scared middle aged American and you have no reading comprehension. Read what I told you in Eivind's previous post.

Which part of "I don't care about serial killers nor am I one" don't you understand?

As for rape, it's impossible for you to talk about it rationally either.

Stay the fuck away from me, revel in your paranoia, tell us how you've been banned from Twitter for the millionth time and stop trying to address me. You don't know how easy it is to rape in the States, you're obviously not aware of the vast spaces the country contains or anything else. You're not welcome on our upcoming forum and ignore me from now on.

Caamib said...

Night Wind - do you have some examples of mass shooters acting like that before they went berserk? I didn't follow it that much, so it could be interesting to see.

Anyway, the ratio between toothless retards and mass shooters is still wide enough not for me to worry. Besides, I am not against the death of Norwegians, since they're mostly Western scum , so if Gally shoots them, kudos to him ! The only two Norwegians whose death I'd oppose would be Eivind and Jo Nesbo, as he writes good novels.

But my point was more about how Gally is incapable of influencing the police or anybody else. If somebody thinks Gally, of all people, a convicted criminal (of course his "crime" was no crime but legally he is a criminal) has any connections with the cops then they're as crazy as he is. Gally is a sad, fat nobody.

john said...

haha,ok I'll ignore I better get a rapin! it's really that easy and you suggest it huh? and of course I'm not aware of it's vast spaces! I'm new! I just snuck over the border from Mexico! and don't be TOO terrified of're not even worth the price of a bullet. why would I go to your forum? I've already read the rambling nonsense.once is enough and crazy "mras" are always ignored, you know that.

Caamib said...

Are you done, John? You spewed even more nonsensical claims, like that 1. I am terrified of you, of all people 2. That I am an MRA 3. That I am also somehow a feminist.

Did you get it out of your system by now? Could you just ignore me from now on?

john said...

nah, I don't feel like it.but it is rather easy to see why the 'men's rights movement' has not and NEVER will even get so much as a toehold. wannabe child rapists, wannabe rapists,wannabe serial killers?! and feminists masquerading as "mras"? it's not too surprising when you consider that the vast majority of "mras" "anti feminists" are social outcasts, incels and some, like gally and caamib are downright nuts.'you can't talk about rape rationally'. good! I'll take that as a compliment.

Caamib said...

John, I thought to ignore you from now but I just can't resist pointing out these two gems in your brilliant post

"but it is rather easy to see why the 'men's rights movement' has not and NEVER will even get so much as a toehold."

Of course. And I, as one of the founders of AVFM and a prominent MRA, am to be blamed for this. Oh wait. Ooops, no. Paul Elam banned people like me from his site. Still didn't achieve anything. It's almost like it isn't the fault of people like me.

"and feminists masquerading as "mras"?"

Anybody calling me some secret feminist and then calling me crazy later is just breaking the irony meter in half. I've been a staunch, ardent anti-feminist calling for physical violence against feminists for years, even in my interviews. If you believe I am actually a feminist get some treatment.

There's a very weak link between incels and MRAs, you're just throwing out terms out there like a child. And regarding rape, do I need to tell you that the owner of this blog made a post about rape in 2009? Do you need a link? Wanna look it up yourself?

John, you're not cut out for this. Just drop it. Leave me alone, I'm telling you again.

john said...

'prominent mra' =an absolute nobody.i wouldn't brag about crap like that.doesnt mean anything.

Eivind Berge said...

No, John is not behind anything. He is a bona fide male sexualist. We should try to keep it more civil at least within our movement. No wonder it is not taking off when our tiny movement splits into so many factions. We do need to separate ourselves from the AVfM crowd since they are ideologically incompatible, as are most MGTOWs and self-styled MRAs these days, but can't at least the handful of core male sexualists agree?

Eivind Berge said...

I guess Caamib can start his own limited political pedophile movement, but as far as I can tell it would only have one member, so what's the point?

Male sexualism is focused on removing most of the legislation surrounding rape and pedophilia, but that's not the same thing as promoting real rape and other actually harmful practices. I have pointed out before that rape is equality, but that is also not quite the same thing since we don't really support equality. The point of that post was that IF we are going to have enforced equality of the sexes like feminists say they want, then it is only fair that it should also include equal sexual opportunities for men (and rape would be one way to achieve that, but not the only way).

Eivind Berge said...

There are limits to how antisocial a political movement can be. John is right on this. If you antagonize everyone else in the world, then you don't have a movement and never will; at best you have something fit for fiction or the memoirs of a rapist or serial killer. It may be protected speech, but it won't fly as a movement. I don't see how anyone could possibly stand for something like limited political pedophilia publicly, including Caamib. As I see it, even regardless of its merits, if a reasonable person can't sign his name to it, then an ideology is useless. That doesn't mean we all have to use our real names, but it should be possible for a reasonable person to stand up proudly for what we represent. My formulation of male sexualism will be such an ideology. And I am already under attack by unaccountable lunatics for the very reasonable politics that I promote, so let's not make it any worse.

john said...

yes, eivind I feel like I'M always under attack for MY moderate views/comments also.some of this stuff is out there like science fiction and I can't and won't get on board with of the reasons Peterson is doing so well is his common sense, centrist political philosophy and I'm a political centrist myself.I hate the radical right AND left.I consider feminism to be not only the greatest internal threat to America but it's only actual threat since N.korea, Iran are existential threats at worst.that should be our main focus, not rape as an option to being an incel,lol.maybe if one were in the Congo, where the real rape culture is.jumping on women in america?! that's just a death/prison wish.

Gally said...

To caamib:

You are never going to live in a fantasy world where nubile teenagers want to have sex with you at 30 or 40. In fact, I’d bet a huge amount of money that your entire effort here is based on your pornography viewing habits. Your obsession with teenage girls comes from the fact you don’t have relationships with actual women, of any age.

You are “pornsick” – just look at all the imagery of “anime” style cartoons of young girls, etc. You aren’t even reacting to actual human women, you are reacting to a media creation.

So you watch (legal) teen porn a lot, don’t have any interaction with real women of any age, so your sexuality had becomes fetishized.

You have nothing in common with teenage boys who have sex with teenage girls. I would suggest you have little in common with adult men who might have sex with teenage girls.

Your entire age of consent thing is based on pornography, not real life.

I’m glad you consider me a “feminist.”

Absolutely true, I do not consider myself “on your side” or “on the side of men” against women. I’m not a Marxist thus don’t believe that “men as a class” and “women as a class” are engaged in a class conflict.

I do not approve of underage drinking nor underage sex. Nevertheless I don’t think that teenagers drinking and messing around with each other sexually should be treated as some horrible crime – it’s for parents and civil society to handle.

And of course neither girls nor boys are sexually “mature” at 13 – or 10. Puberty is a process not a point.

Again, your entire output here has little to do with actual human women – or men – but is instead an extremely autistic misunderstanding of sexuality due to your obvious pornography habit.

You really need to stop watching porn, stop your chronic masturbation, and also – very importantly – avoid teenage girls. Instead, try interacting with real women your own age and you might experience some sexual healing.

Caamib said...

Eivind, I know your blog is free speech and everything, but in order for it to remain a place for normal, serious discussion I think you need to start moderating it a bit.

You have no idea whether this person above is actually Gally and they just wrote a bunch of insane claims that have zero to do with reality. If they are actually Gally I guess they saw me using porn in the same dream or hallucination where they lost money on Bitcoin because of you. None of that drivel is true-. I have already deceived a teenage girl into sex with me my pretending to be a teen, practiced NoFap for 3 years now, never watch anime and back when I did fap didn't do it on porn, they claim I believe that boys and girls are sexually mature at 10, diagnosing me etc etc. It's just a patchwork of increasingly insane mumbo jumbo. Trolly troll, I don't watch porn or masturbate, and I will definitely not avoid teenage girls because some nutjob told me so. And your insistence on older women is also quite silly - there is absolutely no difference in the maturity of a 16 year-old woman and a 35 year-old. Women are permanent teenagers, and there is nothing wrong with that unless we try to pretend otherwise and give them and political and sexual rights.

Caamib said...

Also, trolly troll, finally, remember that I know what you are. Your idea of the age of consent is zero, you just don't want whites to have sex. You want 850 million people killed, and even newborn children raped, based on one single criteria - that the ones doing killing and raping aren't white.

The reason for this, as I came to realize in the recent years, isn’t just some simplistic explanation that would involve a word “political correctness”, a word that would somehow have to explain everything. The actual reasons, once they’re actually explained in a manner that relates to actual people and events and not some phrase, are that liberals erroneously believe a certain incorrect picture of the history of the world (I was gonna write more on this when I do an article on liberals in general but am having trouble finishing it) which goes something like this – “Around 1500 AD the whole non-European world was free, happy, sane, prosperous and probably even liberal when these evil Europeans enslaved everybody. They’re the ones who caught blacks and brought them to Europe and America, they’re the ones who destroyed massive Indian populations and they should be punished as the scum they are for the rest of their existence.”

Now, as for more on the intellectual origins, I really don’t know. I’d check Roosh’s writings on Frankfurt school but you should take everything on such issues (from everybody, the problem is not Roosh himself) with a grain of salt. Intellectual history can be extremely complicated and by now it is quite irrelevant anyway.

The point that is relevant to this post is that liberals know nothing about things like Arab slave trade and its extremely high rates of mutilation and mortality, have no idea that Arab pirates captured European slaves up to 18th century, that most of North America in 1500 AD was huge patches of empty land, and, most importantly, can’t understand the idea that not a single acre of the world was liberal in 1500 AD and that these European “conquerors” were the first to become liberal.and spread this disease to some parts of the remaining world (basically just North America, Australia and some parts of South America), with huge areas of the world never ever becoming liberal. Amazingly, these areas that never became liberal are some that liberals tend to think about most fondly, at least in their writings. Of course, actually living there is usually a different story though, luckily, having strong convictions about this got a few of the more convinced liberals killed.

In the lieu of these misconceptions, liberals have no real problems with classes they see as underprivileged killing the privileged ones. What they do have a problem with is the underprivileged classes still being presented in what might be a bad light to some people. Now, if everybody became liberal tomorrow there wouldn’t be this problem and liberals could freely express what they really feel. But since the cultural mores change so slowly, and in some instances can be even set back (think of the strong backslash against feminism and liberalism in the recent years) liberals still need to maintain appearances.

Caamib said...

Eivind, I never said I want to create a limited political pedophile movement. Doing so would be impractical at best as you cannot base your movement around law breaking of that magnitude. Nobody would join and your movement would be considered a target from the authorities immediately. Limited political pedophilia is a concept I have, and I never wanted to make any movements out of it. In fact, I am currently writing 12 rules for limited political pedophilia and one of the specifically states that it's not a movement nor should it ever be. So that's it for that.

Now, regarding John.

First of all, John is no male sexualist, unless you think whining about being banned from Twitter and making barely coherent posts on politics counts as being that. Yes, I know he's been posting from 2010 and isn't a troll in the strictest meaning of the word but do you see what he did on the last two comment sections?

In his posts, John called me a self confessed baby rapist. I never raped a baby, and they're notoriously hard to come by, and even if I did rape one I know better than to say I did online.

He called me a wannabe serial killer even after I COPY-PASTED HIM A SENTENCE FROM THE PREVIOUS THREAD that I am not interested in that at all. I won't do it for the third time. Anybody can look it up.

Do you think this kind of conduct is fair? Making nonsensical accusations about things I'd never admit online (that I somehow rape babies) and even repeating accusations after I repeatedly told him they're all bunk? Is that the sign of a healthy, reasonable person interested in actual debate?

Caamib said...

To clarify further - I don't think one can't be a male sexualist if one isn't a limited political pedophile. Of course they can still be a male sexualist and not be a limited political pedophile. In fact, I'd wager that one can even be a limited political pedophile and not be a male sexualist, but let's leave such irrelevant theoretical discussions aside. It will be clearer when I finish up my 12 rules.

In any case, I don't have any plans for breakaway and my disagreements with John are not of ideological nature at all, as John doesn't seem to have an ideology anyway. All he does is throw out stupid, unfounded accusations at me.

Eivind Berge said...

No, I don't think John read that correctly. But I think that is how a lot of people would read it, and if they get the impression that we actually promote child rape and murder, we have a problem. The average reader in a general audience does not care about the distinction between an experimental non-movement and what we officially stand for -- if they read that you want to rape babies and kill Western females in any fashion, then that is the impression they get of you and you would also be reported non-stop to the authorities as a probable rapist and serial killer if you signed your name to such a philosophy. It's fine to speculate on how a serial killer could operate and how one can get in touch with teen girls and such, but the way you did it could easily lead to the impression that John expressed even if you didn't mean it that way. The combination of all that led a very sinister possible interpretation to careless readers that I don't stand for and do want to avoid.

Sara Ahmed said...

Nope caamib!

Just because something is technically legal, doesn't mean you should do it. I’m just gonna be blunt here, most 30 year old men who are going for such young girls do NOT have good intentions. I don't know if you're the man or the girl or a third party, but whichever it is, this is wrong. And it shouldn't be subjective. It’s just objectively wrong. A 30 year old man is done growing. He is at a COMPLETELY different stage in his life. A 16-19 year old girl is not done growing, physically, mentally or emotionally. There is so much potential for manipulation and abuse in a relationship like this. A 30 year old man going for a 16-19 year old girl is creepy as hell and wrong and I would never trust a man like that. Really, why does a grown ass man need to pursue someone who is, relative to him, basically a child? He's old enough to be her father. I really don't enjoy being a cruel or judgmental person, but I am not going to pretend these relationships are ever okay. Even if you think they’re working. You don't need to be 31 years older than your partner, you really don't. A 16-19 year old girl to a 30 year old man is a CHILD. This is an adult dating a child. It is messed up. It’s predatory and it's a horrible idea.

Eivind Berge said...

Now, there is someone (Sara Ahmed) expressing EXACTLY the kind of sentiment that male sexualism exists to oppose. Everything she says is utterly wrong and evil, and you don't need any rape or murder-promoting ideology to fight it. You don't even need to promote any lawbreaking, since it is legal to have sex with 16-19-year-old girls (but we do also want to lower the age of consent to 13).

Caamib, please don't ruin it for us by bringing in evil intentions. We have plenty of enemies just by promoting healthy teenage and male sexuality.

Caamib said...

Sara - I am completely aware by now that what you posted is just a lazy c/p from somewhere and that I will never get a reply. Which is great, you're not here for any discussion so I'll just demolish your nonsense easily.

"Just because something is technically legal, doesn't mean you should do it"

We agree. So just because it is technically legal to go to jail for sleeping with young girls in some places doesn't mean you shouldn't do it. See? Works both ways.

". I’m just gonna be blunt here, most 30 year old men who are going for such young girls do NOT have good intentions."

Yet your entire posts never states which these bad intentions are.

"I don't know if you're the man or the girl or a third party, but whichever it is, this is wrong."

You'd know I'm a man if you weren't posting lazy c/p feminist propaganda that doesn't even contain arguments. But when you post this c/p crap of course sentences like these slip by.

"It’s just objectively wrong. A 30 year old man is done growing. He is at a COMPLETELY different stage in his life. A 16-19 year old girl is not done growing, physically, mentally or emotionally. There is so much potential for manipulation and abuse in a relationship like this."

BUT WHY IS THERE POTENTIAL FOR ABUSE? You never state that. And in fact, that they're at different points in life is a good thing, as he give her more pleasure and experience when they have sex. So what is wrong there? Where is the abuse?

" A 30 year old man going for a 16-19 year old girl is creepy as hell and wrong and I would never trust a man like that."

And I'm supposed to care who a scum like you will trust? Scum like you is meant to be lied to anyway.

". Really, why does a grown ass man need to pursue someone who is, relative to him, basically a child? "

First off, something like "grown ass" is distasteful and showing that an American idiot wrote this. Americans can't write without cuss words and without showing their hatred of certain groups, like grown men. Men are attracted to girls a little before puberty, given the evolutionary advantage of securing a virgin bride. A virginal bride means more chances that a child will be yours. So of course you want a very young girl.

"He's old enough to be her father."


"I really don't enjoy being a cruel or judgmental person"

You're a first and foremost a brainwashed, idiotic person.

" but I am not going to pretend these relationships are ever okay. "

And I'm interested in your opinion like I'm interested in 1893 news.

"Even if you think they’re working."

What I think is of less importance. What I know is more important, and I know most are working.

" 16-19 year old girl to a 30 year old man is a CHILD."

Let's assume it is so, for the sake of argument, even if I don't agree. What is wrong with this? You never explain. You just state something is predatory and bad but never explain why.

" It is messed up. It’s predatory and it's a horrible idea."

You don't even try to explain why. If it's such a horrible idea why has it worked for so many couples? Why has it worked for me at some periods of my life? It works out pretty well for a "horrible idea".

Besides, I know you're writing this just about white men and have no problem with blacks or Hispanics raping even newborns. Don't forget - I know you :)

Eivind Berge said...

No, they can't explain why men having sex with teen girls is "abuse" or "predatory," and if they did it would be some mixture of jealousy, possessiveness towards their own children, misandry, sex-hostility or indoctrination with abuse-obsessed pseudoscience. Since the real reasons reflect so negatively upon them, all they resort to when pressed is the circular claim that a teen is a "child" and therefore can't consent, or the age gap, none of which lead to any of the conclusions they falsely call objective facts.

john said...

well now, I completely agree with this, of course.
I see NOTHING wrong with a 30 year old man being attracted to a 16-19 year old- "child" MY ass.
and actually, swearing has been shown to be a sign of high i.q!
you can 'google' it.

and no I didn't misread caamibs post(s) when I felt like I had to say something is when he asserted just how "easy" it is to be a serial killer because technology and America's "wide open spaces".

ha, obviously someone that doesn't live here and doesn't understand that when I say it's a feminist police/24/7 surveillance state, it's NOT hyperbole.

for instance, if I even slowed my car down simply to offer a ride to an "underage" girl, she would report me to the police and i'd be in jail, oh probably the next day.

and caamib suggesting setting up a Facebook page targeting underage girls, and texting with them? (maybe in YOUR country!) once again, that's ONLY going to lead to jail, but I say, go for it!
that includes your fantasies of becoming a serial killer.
btw,they NEVER decide they are going to BE that,they appear to be natural born killers, with no "control" aka known as no free will)

I despise western women, just a little less than I despise the police.recently,some high school chic was kidnapped and killed, I forgot her name but that was in bumfuck Iowa, which is IN the "wide open spaces" of America and her killer was caught shortly thereafter.

in nyc,another jogger was just randomly knifed to death, her killer picked up i think an hour after the murder,cameras- EVERYWHERE!

and nope it wasn't the boyfriend in either case)ok,let's see what else.
oh yes,I definetely have an ideolgy!

for the record AGAIN,I'm a 'classic liberal'

(not a leftist, there's actually a big difference) I'm anti America's imperialism, and its nasty game of economic sanctions for countries that simply won't obey. yep I'm a "traitor"!
I'm for police reform BIG time. I'm for Medicare for everyone."radical" aren't I?

how to pay for it? use half the trillions wasted on ""defence""

see how easy that is?
I'm a free thinker.
i don't belong to either party and understand voting is useless.dems, republicans stand for- forever war, fuck the poor and middle class, protect and serve the ruling class at all costs,and they're ALL feminists.
I'm for M.A.D.A not "maga"
-make America DEFIANT again.

the other day, Trump: 'I've always said, women are smarter than men" - quote.

we don't need feminism,if we ever did) anymore.
in fact it should be abolished, at the very least declared a hate group!

speaking of Trump,the feminist, he, of COURSE, bowed to women/feminists demand/pressure for the fbi to investigate kavanaughs "grope" of "Dr ford" from 36 YEAR'S ago.

as for this guy who was sentenced to 160 years for impregnating a ten year old? now THAT'S obscene.

obviously, me thinks they're trying to send a message: DON'T fuck with any girl, even if she's a 17 year old slut/prostitute or willingly has sex and or runs off with you.

once charged,you are NOT going to outrun these prick cops, I don't care WHERE you go in this country.

ok then, any more questions? and I pray this post is coherent.

john said...

oh yes, I wanted to expound a bit more on serial killers.

contrary to what caamib asserted, Ted Bundy left NO evidence behind at his dozens of murder sites, just bones.

DNA was non existent in the,why was he eventually caught? I wasn't joking when I said it was his bad driving.

after the chi omega murders,and after he killed his last victim, Kimberly leach, he almost made it out of Florida, but his speeding got him pulled over in Pensacola.

NONE of that could be done now.his face would be plastered on every tv, and online..ALL kinds of cctv now and it's on and in every campus, gas station, every airport,AND video is now on all our major highways and EVERY intersection with stoplights.

if he hadn't caught the eye of some cop(who had no idea who he was) he would've been out of Florida in a matter of minutes.

once again,Bundy could not control himself.a mad dog like that has to be put away, regardless of his lack of free will.

in Tallahassee, he was seen leaving the dorm, an eyeball witness, and left bite marks.even though the state had a decent case, they still offered him life, which, as I Said before was very generous.he loved the attention though, wanted to play lawyer,the rest is history.

in 1990 a new mad dog, Danny rolling had Gainesville in absolute panic and fear.HE was only able to commit his murders because this guy WALKED into Florida.

while 100s of cops combed the city, he was living in the woods.
they later found his 'campsite' where he left an audiotape with this chilling message left on it: "there's something I've gotta go do now". minutes later- murders.

I only mention it because once again, he was compelled to murder again, no free will there!

he later tried to rob a winn dixie, was caught right after, he was "found" by the cops, already in jail.

as I mentioned in an earlier post, serial killers are a dead breed.

'mass murderers" are the thing now.however, they are hardening every school, and businesses are also.thats why we're seeing ever smaller body counts.

the response time leaves you just a few minutes.gotta shoot quickly,and save that last bullet for yourself! prison for life? fuck that.

anyway, back to politics, which I've been forced into.i never used to talk politics.should be interesting this fbi investigating kavanaughs "grope" which feminist have turned into-- "rape".

and of course it's a huge problem.feminists expanding the parameters of ANYTHING remotely sexual into rape/sexual assault.. "groped" "upskirted" "evil male gaze" well,you know the rest.

Eivind Berge said...

I agree, John, it's hard to see how a serial killer could operate today. The surveillance is even worse than you would think because you are also compared to your own past behavior, as I was just reading on Reddit today:

"The way that works is that there is an automated large scale data collection, and you're getting scores which are being evaluated multidimensionally by a ML system.

There are aspects which can be collected passively, including reading out secrets remotely via baseband (shipping with remote debug enabled), low-impact volatile (RAM-only, don't survive reboot) patches and only then persistent malware.

Everybody is getting the passive data hoover treatment, inasmuch you (largely automatically) qualify for other measures is determined by your score, depending how your multidimensional parameter clustering for the particular view is.

The problem with people leaving fat data trails is that any minor deviation from the baseline pattern is automatic reason for more scrutiny. That gives you less degrees of freedom to change your behavior in the future, should you choose to."

You are less right about teenage girls, however, because a lot of them will not want to report you if you are friendly to them. The main immediate problem is the paranoia holding us back from even talking to them. If you think you would be arrested just for slowing down your car, then you are taking that too far.

john said...

oh yea, the data mining and profiling. haha, if you're in the West, you ARE being tracked 24/7. also, the police are ALL now using automatice license plate reading.

the cop pig driving doesn't have to manually call in a plate # anymore.and if you carry around a cellphone, you're telling them your every movement.

now, I'M considered a "creep"(of course) myself and millions of other men.I can't even walk onto any high school property. I'd be accosted by a cop pretty much immediately, and since I don't work there, it's off to jail! charge? 'trespassing' and or "criminal mischief".

no, simply slowing down wouldn't be a problem, but offering any underage girl a ride?!

she'll run home, tell her mother, she'll call the cops and that night, or next day, an artist's description of my face will appear on the local news,IF she didn't get my plate number.charge? attempted "kidnapping" I see this all the time on the local news!

the first thing the cops would ask me: "what's your INTENT here sir?"

imo,the only safe, sure way to have sex with someone under 18 is to go tourism is still alive and well I hear,for now anyway.

john said...

oops,I almost forgot.facial recognition! 1 of every 3 Americans has a prior record and almost everyone drives so has a license. they have virtually ALL Americans digital images in the sytem.

and some still insist this is a "free country" ha,these people don't even have freedom of speech. between the bannings and the censoring online, forget it.

the 60s,70s and 80s are gone.
there WAS a REAL anti war movement in the 60s.
and women would have sex back then, even with old fucks it seems.
they only got crazy picky since the early 90s.

so picky, if you want a decent woman that's not an addict, you have to use an online dating service and that game is heavily favored for women.

even "mister roosh" seems to ply his "trade" mainly in eastern Europe.i did read an article on his site that went something like 'it's now pretty much impossible for any average guy to get a woman now".i agree, and it's ONLY getting worse.the damn media!

kavanaughs a serial rapist! REALLY pathetic propaganda there.

on this "upskirting" thing.
to ME it's not EVEN a crime.
but these guys are consistently seen on video, usually at wal mart.then, if the cops don't immediately know him(or too lazy to bother) they put his mug up on local news: do you know this guy? if you do, contact the cops and he's picked up, you'll get a $1000 bucks for your trouble, and he's usually arrested the next day, surprise!

basically, the "terrorists" won(the terrorists america created)all this safety/security shit started after the government happily used 9/11 to turn this country into east Germany ×100.

now, I'm NO conspiracy theorist.but it is believable the govt knew of the attacks and allowed them to happen.and what's with the shanksville crash? no debris!.I'm supposed to believe the plane "buried itself"? okdoke,WHATever...

Anonymous said...

The white man is made to marry women 19-25, not before, not after.


Women are at their most beautiful from 19 to 24 for a reason. That is when they should marry. Women over 28 who are still not married are already made fun of and they know something’s wrong.

Maybe girls under 18 can be betrothed, which is like being engaged but no sex and can be broken off without dishonor and upgrading to marriage may be contingent on the man fulfilling some pledge like getting into an apprenticeship.

In this culture, 16-18, for various reasons. In previous ages, women stayed chaste until marriage at 19-25, during their years of compelling beauty. The very fact that White women are compellingly beautiful for those years indicates that that’s when they’re supposed to get married and furthermore indicates that they are capable of keeping their legs closed until then.

It’s not hard, it just takes not being taught by the government that there’s no consequences for sex but no woman can ever really expect a man to stick around.

Manorialism+monogamy drove up marriage age. Look up Western European marriage pattern past the Hajnal Line.

ALSO Feminists say statutory rape it's ok.

In reality, allowing a girl to have sex while underage her to make irresponsible sexual decisions when shes 13-18.

Polanski isn’t wrong that young girls are bursting with sexual energy. Normal adults politely ignore it and kill other adults who don’t with extreme violence. 70s America lets Polanski get away with statutory rape because of feminism.

john said...

haha! what feminist ever declared statutory rape is ok!?
and 70s America didn't allow Polanski to get away with rape because of feminism.
I do believe that was France, which had a non extradition policy for sexual crimes. don't know if they still do though.
the rest of your post is incoherent.

Eivind Berge said...

This is how most of the norms that say we can't have relationships with teen girls work:

These supposed rules are only real when we are actually locked up. Male sexualism is, in part, a self-help movement to make you see how flimsy and fake these limitations are. And a good 90% of them are even self-imposed (porn and masturbation) which comes with the added nonsensical indoctrination that girls have to be 18 to be "legal" even when it's not true in the real world.

Eivind Berge said...

That comment is obviously not from John but the same impostor who has been messing with us, or one of them. The threat to get the cops to search my home was obviously fake, so now they resort to what, posting incoherent drivel pretending I posted something violent when it was a cute picture of a dog illustrating a simple truth?

john said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
john said...

hey eivind, you can pull the plug on these posts right? go for it man!

Eivind Berge said...

Yeah, deleting.

john said...

I like the 'fuck pigs! segment of your post.the grooming of a 15 year old? not so much.thats like 160 years in prison +75 +another 456 years.i think that's what they gave that Olympic trainer, what was his name? he got like 786 years for allegedly molesting i think 356(as if) girls? yea thats some REALLY believable bullshit right there,lol!

john said...

yep.might as well

john said...

Larry Nassar was/is his name..i'll never get that.if I'm positively looking at life ++++ WHY take that plea "deal" especially where he was sentenced over and over and humiliated.I'd say to my lawyer, I'm 100% innocent and MAKE the state spend a fortune on a 100 trials to prove I'm not.

john said...

cops make me so mad that i am going right out in the back yard and eat worms

john said...

well then, you're just going to love the news! 2 coward cop pigs���� just got wasted yesterday morning in a town in good old southern Mississippi! I do a little jig in front of my tv every time a cop���� dies.what a great weekend!��

Anonymous said...

Eivind, har du nærmere kendskab til dette? :

Hvad er din mening om det?

Eivind Berge said...

I had heard of those accusations, but don't know more details than it says in that story, which sounds just like a normal man using his status like any one of us would do to get sex: "Jean-Claude Arnault har ifølge kvinderne udnyttet sin position til at chikanere og forgribe sig på kvinder i det kulturelle miljø. Flere af overgrebene skulle være foregået i lejligheder ejet af akademiet i både Stockholm og Paris." Yeah, there is nothing here to suggest anything other than willing participation by the women, which is to say he was practicing the holistic pickup arts that I preach, similar to the Weinstein allegations and par for the course of the Metoo movement. Of course, as a male sexualist I condemn the idea that any of this should be criminal, and if we ever get power he will be pardoned and the law changed to prevent any more such prosecutions.

Anonymous said...

That idea that 100% women are our enemy is blatantly false:

Eivind Berge said...

Yes, so reasonable and matter-of-factly stated, makes you forget the world is full of people who want to kill you just for having those opinions, or even a much milder version like I am espousing which holds all teenagers as perfectly capable of consent and denies that women can sexually abuse boys of any age.

Now back to the hysterical world we live in.

Anonymous said...

Hey guys Tom get defamed and attacked too:

john said...

SO glad I have no blog.i just got an email from Mr roosh. he's going on indefinite hiatus, citing being banned from PayPal, losing ad partners etc.

he also said, 'as many of you understand, we are in the beginning of a giant wave of censorship'.

and yep I also believe rape hysteria IS at an all time high. metoo+ kavanaugh= bad bad news,and women gaining in power because THEY have help,the shitty media full of manginas, "victims" of "rape" pouring out of the woodwork,with their bs stories and fake tears.

this is the reason I tried to actually meet other mra and network.i gave my phone # out many times, nobody called,it's very hard to contact mras,mgtow, on Twitter when you're not
even allowed on it.

I told these guys on Twitter, hey I'm not going to be on here forever, here's my contact info.nope,they didn't want it..only question left is,when do women officially run this govt.

i predict a female president no later than 2024.and a majority female Senate, congress? sadly it's GOING to happen, imo.

Eivind Berge said...

Yes, Roosh isn't even that offensive except in a joking manner, but humor isn't allowed anymore either at women's expense. Plus he gets laid a lot, and it's only a matter of time before his pickup tactics are redefined to rape if they aren't already.

john said...

yea,he'll eventually wind up doing life in some country,ha.tell ya,you gotta watch EVERY move now.I don't think you can be paranoid enough!

well,(women/feminists/sjws/man-gina trash)WFSJWMT-for short, are trying to get states to repeal their statute of limitations on well, any/everything in the(sexual harassement/abuse/grope dept)and they already have succeeded apparently in the state where kavanaugh resides.

so, he MIGHT get a criminal charge from all this! if I were him, and I even did "grope" that twit eons ago, I'd have to consider keeping my "regular" little job as a judge, probably making $300,000 a year,and tell Trump to find another candidate.

john said...

'new york times': 'in the last 2 years, six states have eliminated,or extended their statute of limitations on sexual assault.
activists are trying to get the same done in at least 3 other states.

in California, it used to be you had to report your rape within ten years.
and it's quite obvious do you, as a defendant prove you DIDN'T rape some woman decades ago?!

yea,women are, of COURSE,NEVER our enemy. now, back to reality!

john said...

some guy who has been paralyzed from the waist down since the mass shooting at Las Vegas is engaged.
yet I can't find a female.
just shows yet again, these women aren't nearly as interested in sex as men.

Anonymous said...

This is no longer the movement of normal male sexuality about natural and healthy attraction to teenage girls, it is now the far-right wing of the pedophile movement.

Look at holocaust21, Tom Grauer, caamib, Nathan Larson, etc. to name a few, then some like a guy named gallileo who is a Muslim who talks about marrying girls at the age of 6, these people are nothing but alt-righers and fascists obsessed with pedophilia.

You enter right now Tom Grauer's blog and the first post thing is a defense of sex with 10-year-old girls.

It's not that they occasionally talk about pedophilia like someone who occasionally talks about geopolitics or religion, this is 4 out of 5 are apologies for pedophilia, and some of them the most extreme, including child rape and child slavery.

Caamib speaks of systematic rape of any girl under 12, Nathan Larson of raping and impregnated his own daughter, Tom Grauer of... well, he has said so much, that to say that raping 8 year old girls if they are not married is the softest and most respectful of human rights he has ever said.

What the hell happened here? This is a fucking kidnapping of a movement.

The MRA has been taken by feminists, that's obvious, but we've been taken by pedophiles and the worst kind, authentic sexual maniacs.

You imagine the same thing but with sadomasochists, zoophiles and bestialists? this thing of male sexualism is really pedo sexualism.

Why do they come here? Well, they are far-right bordering on Nazism so the rest of pedophiles of liberal and leftist tendency do not tolerate them, they would not last 5 minutes in any pedophilic forum.

Imagine any man who comes to read our supposed movement, because he has realized its natural attraction to teenage girls and that feminism wants to destroy it, to find people passionately defending the penetration of the vagina of a 7 year old girl. Enough of this sick joke, man!

Eivind Berge said...

Norway also removed the statute of limitations on rape and sex with minors, which is one of the two greatest tragedies of recent years. The other is the abolition of the jury. I feel a mixture of grief, hate and rage at the loss of these indispensable principles of justice. That people can be so cruel and gullible just because of sex abuse hysteria gives me a profoundly negative view on the society I live in. They should be fighting a civil war over this, not passively accept it. People are so bad that they don't really deserve activists like us.

Removing the statute of limitations still can't be applied retroactively, but that's only because they haven't thought of it yet, as nothing is sacred to the scum consumed by feminist sex-hostility.

The Night Wind said...

Eivind & John:
How could a serial killer operate today? They could always join the police force like this guy did:

In most Western countries today, you can get away with anything if you have authority. I've long suspected that the Liberal politicians in North America and Europe who keep pushing for tougher rape laws and higher ages of consent are probably the ones involved in running the largest White-Slavery operations (both as suppliers and consumers).

Eivind Berge said...

I am still trying make this a movement for normal male sexuality and sound principles of justice, and I agree some other male sexualists have lost track of that mission lately. It's fine to joke around a bit about the things you mention, but when they appear to actually advocate child rape and slavery it's not the kind of movement that I am trying to build. I would still choose them over the feminists, however, and what other options do we have?

theantifeminist said...

Well I did warn you about Gally, Eivind.

When an 'ephebophile' who has just been sentenced to prison by a female judge, prosecuted by a female prosecutor, under laws passed by female politicians as well as male politicians looking to attract the female vote, and lobbied for by females on the basis of junk science made largely by female quacks, for looking at pictures of younger females, what I would have done is block the guy from commenting, not invite him to guest post an article in which he identifies as a 'strong female warrior' and goes on a 2000 word incoherent rant raging against the world without mentioning feminists once (who he sees at worst as a 'correlation' to his problems not the 'cause').

I have no fucking idea whatsoever what these people bring to 'our' movement, and I hope maybe you can see this too now.

The commentator above who complains that we've been taken over by real paedophiles just as the MRM was taken over by feminists, does have something of a point in my opinion. Eivind and myself, and a few others, are and were real MRAs who tried to keep male sexualilty, including the criminalization of the natural attraction to teenage girls, as part of the movement, just as it had been since the first MRA a century ago - Ernest Belfort Bax.

Recently, you (Eivind) seem to have given up on this fight and turned away from the men's movement completely, even seeking to embrace (real) paedophiles and 'epebophiles' like Gally (and you see were that has gotten you). Obviously this has been most welcomed by Holocaust21, whose activism and balls are to be respected, but who as far as I'm aware is a real paedophile activist who vainly tried to look to the MRM for 'help'.

At just this time, Tom Grauer appears like the coming of the Messiah. Even looking like a young Angry Harry. Immediately making outrageous statements such as calling for the legalization of child rape (ironically, mind) and immediately getting denounced by right-wing alt-right blogs. All this is taking place in the context of a very strange trolling campaign against us which does have indications of being more than just one or two lonely tumblr feminists with too much spare time on their hands. Whether or not Grauer is a malicious troll himself, or somebody genuinely trying to kickstart some change, I don't really see what he has succeeded in doing so far, apart from perhaps soon making it near impossible to even discuss the feminist criminalization of male sexuality rationally on a permanent blog.

You also ask why we can't be more civil with each other and at least agree upon a 'Male Sexualist' core. Then you prominently declare in your manifesto that Male Sexualists are against masturbation and pornography, just as feminists are. Again, that's like a self-proclaimed leader of the legalization of marijuana movement making it a core plank of the manifesto that marijuana is, in fact, harmful. It rightly enrages you that most MRAs can't see that there is something wrong with anti-feminists agreeing with feminists over the 'harm' caused by women having sex with teenage boys, yet you can't see why it upsets some of us that you agree with feminists that porn and masturbation are bad?? Even if it were true that porn is bad for men, I would suggest the current war on internet porn, which is the driving force of the whole feminist criminalization of male sexuality, is far worse, certainly for a 'male sexualist', and you have to choose which one you want to fight against.

I read elsewhere that 'somebody had impersonated me' making a comment here. I made one comment several weeks ago objecting to your putting nofap and monogamy into our Male Sexualist manifesto, and this is the first time I've commented since then.

theantifeminist said...

Oh, and just for old time's sake - 57 year old Carol Vorderman, who was one of the leading celeb campaiginers for paedohysteria in the UK in the early days of the internet, boasted recently of being asked to prove her age (i.e. over 18 in the UK) when buying wine.

Maybe even some of the 'ephebophiles' amongst your readership (maybe even Gally!) might dimly see some connection between this and the question as to whether it's natural to find teenage girls attractive, and the idea that it isn't, being an invention by older, bitter, jealous women who now have the power?

john said...

yes I mentioned that in one of my posts in this thread.the best way to be a serial killer/part time murderer is become a cop first.and, of course, try to target blacks.that kinda goes without saying.

john said...

same here obviously.thats no more jury trials huh? well, as you know, it's almost all plea deals here.IF everyone caught up in this "justice" system would just insist on a jury trial it would crash the sysyem.people would have to be released in droves.but it would take everyone, united.and we won't be seeing THAT maybe ever again.

john said...

NOT many.i guess we have to take in as many anti feminists no matter their own personal peccadillos.

Eivind Berge said...

I agree with these other points, but still don't see why you are so hung up about pornography when I don't support any laws against it. That alone indicates a serious problem since in my view it's not healthy to be so attached to something that at best works as a substitute for sex and I believe is much worse. I don't belive it's fair to pretend pornography is sex-positive when it actually has the opposite effect, so I will at least mention that in a movement called male sexualism.

I don't see the contradiction between wanting something to be legal and recognizing its harms. I do this with drugs too. Even marihuana has downsides that I am not afraid to admit even though I support legalization, mainly the potential harm of smoke to your lungs. Because prohibition doesn't work (and other, libertarian reasons), drugs should be legal despite the risks, and pornography too.

The state is the worst enemy you can have, to be sure, when it is determined to deprive you of your freedom, so fighting bad laws is definitely our first priority, but I also have compassion for men who engage in self-destructive behavior. I wish somebody had told me the honest truth about porn and masturbation when I was a child, and I might have listened and reaped the benefits. I am so sick of dishonest propaganda that I will take no part in it.

With porn and masturbation we have a religious and partly feminist view that manages to get the conclusion right for the wrong reasons. This is sickening in its own way because boys will not listen to that if they have any sense, and so they will be damaged. On the other hand you have the official view that masturbation is harmless, which purports to care about your best interests, but tells you a lie because it's not attuned to your values if they emphasize lots of real sex with women. Male sexualism rejects both these paradigms and tells the truth that masturbation as currently practiced is a maladaptive behavior, an evolutionary trap that boys and men should be warned against for their own good.

Male Sexualism Aggregator said...

Does theantifeminist think he's better than me?

Yeah, youre the "real" theantifeminist...

Impersonating someone else is one thing, but impersonating an impersonator who impersonates *yourself* is a form of art.

It’s like, “Yo Dawg, I heard you enjoy impersonations, so I put an impersonation within an impersonation directed against myself because I’m a fucking false flagger.”

YOLO, as they say.

Eivind Berge said...

So the factions we now have in the real Men's Rights Movement are:

Anti feminist sex laws (me, John and perhaps a few others)
Anti feminist sex laws, pro masturbation (The Antifeminist)
Anti feminist sex laws, pro masturbation and pro pedophilia (Tom, Holocaust21, Caamib, Nathan)

Like it or not, these are the only kinds of people who oppose feminist sex laws. I am hoping that the first faction will grow the most, but I see some value in the others as well and think they are better than nothing.

And yeah, there will be no more jury trials in Norway. The last one just concluded this year. This the sort of right that can only be restored through a bloody revolution or war, and so far I am the only one who would fight for it, so probably not in my lifetime. Things are not going to be all right; it's a profoundly sad country I live in. The damage of feminism includes not just hateful laws but so much destruction of due process that it's almost pointless to argue for reasonable laws anymore. And to add insult to injury, even most of the fools who are preyed on by the system such as Gally don't see the value of men's rights activism and side with feminism.

Anonymous said...

You have the head like a dick with sun glasses, have you seen your Wordpress picture?

Eivind Berge said...

It's hard to know who is behind all the impersonation and insults and worse that is going on here. It's a little suspicious that Gally hasn't denied it, but other than that I don't have proof and there could also be more than one impostor operating for different reasons. Anyway, I am not so obsessed with who are behind comments as long as they further our cause, and if anyone is impersonating theantifeminist right now, it is close enough to what he would be expected to say to be worth addressing.

theantifeminist said...

@Tom Grauer

People like you bring shame to the MRM and normal male sexuality cause – I, and many others, believe and want to show the world that the average Mens Right Activist and heterosexual male is an ethical person, who puts the children well-being and needs first. Your paedophile agenda has offered you a route by which you can legally fuck a child, but at the price of the child being treated as livestock, and you have not been able to resist that offer – you are eager to throw the well-being and rights of the child under the bus so that you can drain your spuds. You have not so much as lost your moral compass, as deliberately thrown it into the mud, stamped on it, pulled up your burnous and voided a copious flow of foul-smelling paedophiella all over the shards and fragments that remain of it.

I’ll be honest: I prefer modern ‘MRAs’ like Elam to you. At least they believe that they have children’s best interests at heart. All the real MRA's like Angry Harry, Ernest Belfort Bax and Elam in his first times were antipedophiles – all good people – none of them would fail to condemn the selling of little girls for sex, their rape within religious groups, their genitals being touched at and molested etc – all of them hate "Male Sexualism" and the way they treat innocent little girls. These modern MRA's are better people than you, indeed they are more child-lovers than you – the little girl for you is just some receptacle for your sperm – to be purchased from her parents, or slave-owners (see the Muslim religion), and stored at home, no better than a sex-doll made of flesh, that actually cries and bleeds.

Your sexual deviancy, or your interpretation of your deviancy, has lost the argument – so that all that is left for you is to falsely add to your cause those like me who have, through Reason and evidence, discredited your sick impulses. Your sexual predator apology and dishonesty is the sure sign that you have no defensible grounds for your position.

Unfortunately, it’s not within my power to stop you accessing or visiting my Wordpress blog. But if it were I’d exercise that power. I don’t want you visiting my Wordpress blog. You’re not welcome here. You’re not welcome in my world or my mind.

But what it is within my power to do is to set up my comment system so that any comments you make go straight into the trash. After posting this comment I will take the necessary step – I will only be aware of your existence during my very rare visits to my ‘trash can’ where your comments will lie amongst my veggie pork ribs and half-empty beer bottles.

Well, Tom Grauer – you’ve also gone and scored an own-goal for your ‘sexuality’: your dishonesty and baseness has made me decide to reopen my blog and make a research and write a series of essays that will come under the rubric of ‘the MRM under the paedophile agenda’. The need for other essays may also arise as I work on these.

These essays will be a two fingers, a bronx cheer, to any attempt by you, or anyone else, to try to police what I can research, what I can think or what I can write. They will be dedicated to all little children who are repressed and abused in the name of ‘pedosexuality’. Let not this dedication be a hollow verbal flourish: if any good comes from Tom Grauer’s and Eivind's dishonesty and agenda it is that it has motivated me to increase my standing payments to the CSA charity I contribute to.

Eivind Berge said...

That was a bit over the top for me, as I have a hard time imagining the real antifeminist contributing to a CSA charity... among other problems with that post. But we shall see if he reopens his blog and says more of the same there.

Anonymous said...

I like a lot of what you post...but i also dislike a lot of what you post. Some stuff here i really disagree with. I keep said disagreements to myself.

That said, if i can ever do anything to help you (keep in mind i am in america)... Just ask. We have emailed before.


Eivind Berge said...

Thanks, Rich. For those who don't know, Rich is the owner of the fine blog Men-Factor:

One of the longest running MRA blogs. In our time so many others have come and gone, and the latest efforts of the male sexualists other than me don't seem to last more than a few weeks per blog.

TheAntifeminist has even closed his blog and judging from the above comments (if it is him) either lost his mind or abandoned the pro-male-sexuality platform. No male sexualist can support a CSA charity without being insane, because all of them that I know of include consensual teenage sexuality in that concept. It is their business model to define as much as they can as "abuse" so they can get more money from fools who are too simple-minded to think critically about what words mean. Whatever political correctness tells them is on the side of good, they will support it, and they also support the war against the pornography that TheAntifeminist loves so much. But most likely that was an impersonator.

john said...

yea,that's like donating cash to RAINN.RAINN was founded by none other than Tori Amos, I still love her music and have attended many of her concerts. but HER "rape" story is shot full with even more holes that "dr" Ford's.

yet, she's managed to build a very loyal fan base, but has tried her best to alienate hetero men, so her fans hate me, surprise!

so, about ten years ago, I drove to Tampa to see her, and RAINN had a booth set up with some female spouting the "1 in 3" raped bullshit.i once again, interjected and simply said that star is propaganda at BEST.

so, I went to get something to eat, and came back hours later to see the concert.unbeknown to me, some man-gina had called the cops on me!!

can't make this shit up! so, next thing you know, I've got 2 pigs screaming in my face in a vain attempt to escalate me into doing SOMETHING.didnt work but I got TRESPASSED, not only from that concert but the next one in Orlando a couple days later!

so,I immediately called ticket master and informed them i wanted a damn refund because I didn't do anything "wrong" or against the venues "rules" etc.and I got MOST of my money back but I drove a LONG way to get TRESPASSED for doing nothing and have 2 pigs screaming in my face for no reason.

and people wonder why I'm no "patriot" and why, why are you so"paranoid"? and bitter? it's best not to walk in my shoes.

jordan Peterson: "if you don't tell the truth, and don't say what you feel you MUST say, you kill your unborn self" I'm paraphrasing of course, but yea, go around telling the truth,it, the outcome only SUCKS.

Trump has actually scored a few pints with me! I knew he would eventually say SOMETHING that would be true.i like his ridiculing ford and be really the first public persona to say what most men are thinking. 'ford had "only" one beer but doesnt remember time place,the house, etc

how drunk was Dr ford? probably wasted but women, as we're all well aware,are never questioned/held responsible. because that's the old "victim
blaming" shit.

I hope kavanaugh gets in.if only to piss a shitpile of female and magina scum all over this land.

as Trump correctly pointed out,these accusations can happen to any male, at any time.and yep believing women is the road to ruin.

john said...

it's seems Americans WANT to due away with due process.(what's a REAL police state with the presumption of innocence anyway?)

an 81 year old man was arrested here, in Florida(this is the MOTHER of all our police states) for attempting to "buy" an 8 year old girl from her mother for $200,000 inside a wal mart.
this guy was either drunk or has dementia.but he's in the system now.

charged with "false imprisonment" and battery for he allegedly kissed the kids wrist.crime of the century huh? but it's the usual comments to the Yahoo article that are worrisome.'just put him in prison for life,skip the trial. 'he should be hanged, "pervert" the usual.

imo, he did nothing illegal, but in Florida, you get charged for everything because-- the money.this guy will take the "deal" of course.they'll drop one of the charges, and be put on probation for a good while(free $$$ to the state)

Florida is also, not only one of the few states that see "upskirting" not only as a crime, but it's a damn
felony!? "upskirting" to me is a mere nuisance at worst.

john said...

wow.i can't get over this guy being arrested for having child sized sex dolls.complete insanity and once again, I see no crime committed here. i wouldnt make a very good prosecutor.

Eivind Berge said...

Men have been persecuted for playing with dolls for a few years in Europe already, but I thought Americans would be protected from that by the First Amendment. I guess I was wrong, and you now can be arrested for any "matter portraying a sexual performance by a minor" possibly still excepting speech and cartoons and the grey matter inside your head as long as that lasts. This is total war on our sexuality and men should treat it as such, but sadly there is still no reaction.

john said...

I guess "possession of anime" will be the next loony bin charge.and yep, it's the USUAL apathy/ignorance of what's happening.
americans just lay down for anything/everything.
endless war? great!
police state? cool!
surveillance state? sweet!
censorship? awesome!
war on men? go for it!

john said...

is that guy, after he does whatever time he's going to get? or probation?
going to have to register as a sex offender!? no way...

Eivind Berge said...

Yes, we must make sure the dolls are fully developed before they can exist. And not just their bodies, as they must have time to mature mentally as well. Also we must teach our kids that if they play the wrong game with their toys, they are going to jail. Adults don't have the ability to distinguish fact from fiction when it comes to sex, so if you play a sex criminal, then you are a sex criminal.

john said...

oh joy! well, years ago, the last time I visited an adult store, they had a blow up pig with 2 holes.
so,sex with that could be animal abuse! gotta keep up with these laws you never know what's illegal next!

john said...

oh,Connie Chung has joined the metoo gang! she says she was "assaulted" by her gynecologist, and, horror of horrors! was digitally brought to orgasm! back in the SIXTIES haha..
we're going further and further back in time. have we had an accusation or assault story from the 50s yet this year? stay tuned...

john said...

hey eivind, I've been reading that 2% of accusations are false bullshit all night long on the Yahoo message boards.

I've left quite a few choice comments to attempt to correct these feminist brainwashed idiots.thats my big night, yay.

did you see the new law that in California, all publicly held companies MUST have at least one woman on their boards by the end of 2019.

nothing like that forced equality to show that women are every bit as good as men at everything. if you don't comply, BIG fines await you.

in other news, scumbag feminists are happy as pigs in slop about roosh being deplatformed.ONE in particular naturally.turns out,Twitter has been "good" for one thing- advancing the feminist/metoo agenda.I'd love to see San Fran get firebombed.

in other news, I had an appt to see "my" doctor at 2 p.m yesterday.i showed up early and announced my presence and was informed I missed my appt,"it was at 1.30" said the female.

funny though, I still have the msg I got on Monday reminding me of my 2 p.m appt the next day.i called them right back to confirm it. I really wish I had brought my phone with me yesterday so i couldve shoved it in her face. being accused of lying,they took another guy in at 2 instead of can imagine I wasn't VERY thinking about just going in and playing the msg, but wimmin never admit theyre wrong or apologize, to me anyway, so fuck it I guess.

i won't ever be going back, and I want a male doctor ONLY in the future.

and I noticed this sign while waiting for the appt I was EARLY for:
'please refrain from talking about politics or religion in the waiting room' .there's that "freedom of speech" again! not online and not in public= a pretty big facet of a police state,in my opinion of course.

Eivind Berge said...

Finally a little bit of cheerful news, noteworthy for the number of casualties sustained by our enemies:

"ATLANTA — Seven law enforcement officers were shot — at least one of them fatally — in an extraordinary barrage of firepower after the authorities sought to serve a search warrant in South Carolina on Wednesday."

The cops thought it was a routine search warrant, but it turns out they were dealing with a real man this time :)

Just a tiny battle won in a losing war, and now back to the usual news of men losing more and more.

john said...

haha.yes I commented on that story on Yahoo also.most everyone was 'pray for "our" heroes' my comments were more like 'don't pray for pigs'.got some thumbs down. also, 2 other cops got themselves killed off the other day in Mississippi.some people shoot back!

Anonymous said...

That cop killer is a true hero!

john said...

the only actual, real heroes left are these rare cop's unfortunate they are rewarded for their heroism with a hail of bullets and or life in prison.

something even more rare is the first degree murder charge for the Chicago cop that murdered on video a black dude that was walking AWAY from him.I forgot his name, it's hard to keep up with the 100s of unarmed civilians wasted in the last ten years caught on many have been killed not on tape? it could EASILY be in the tens of thousands since just the hoping the jury finds this trash guilty.

mostly black of course but plenty of white guys.the other day in Orlando, the cops shot to death an unarmed guy in the emergency room! so,you're not even safe from the pigs in a hospital.

Eivind Berge said...

Yes, it's looking good for Kavanaugh and the best part is that this will teach women that it doesn't always help to cry rape to have their way in every situation. I am sure feminists will get busy making the necessary changes to make sure it works next time, but at least it's a nice setback for them.

john said...

sjws will be tearing their Orange and green hair out.can't wait!

Reactk said...

For an adult guy to date with 17-year-old girls isn't just statutory rape, it's directly pedophilia.

Let's see... Where do I start? In my town, going out with an girl 7/10 younger than you is "cradle robber". But well, you know... If it weighs more than a chicken,... I fuck her! But if we put 20/25 years of difference to the invention, that's called "corruption of minors" or in legal terminology: Statutory rape.

The justification of the people of this blog is delirious: the natural and the healthy male sexuality is a old ass to bang a minor. Far from the more than logical and vehement moral criticism, there is a maxim called common sense: not only is it ridiculous and pathetic to bang a minor, but it also represents a severe mental suicide. Going through the same goofy sillies of these just more grow children called "teens" is not worth a miserable bang and much less read a blog with similar justifications.

One thing is that the girl is 35/37 years old and the "old ass" is 50 years old, and another thing is that pedophilia is very different. For love there is no age, but for sex there is, and it is typified as crime.

If you want your underage daughters to study the bachelor's degree of "being a sexual victim" or if you want your sons to receive the message that when you reach forty the best thing is to climb into an amusement park with girls who could be your daughters, no doubt, this is your blog.

Anonymous said...

Needs are not controlled, they are satisfied.

Master them for what? so that male frustration will give more market value to vaginas and offer you more for gaining access to it?

Masturbation is your Achilles heel, long live masturbation!

Eivind Berge said...

I believe in free will. However, we don't have very much of it once you subtract all the influences controlling you to some degree, such as hormones and genetics and culture and advertising and sensory cues. Are you really willing to add pornography and masturbation to this list? Or du you want to exert more free will over the most important part of your life? Because you can by not masturbating! The choice is obvious once you think about it. Let your instincts work for YOUR values rather than be wasted on impulses that don't do you any good.

You can't directly control your libido, but you can indirectly control it and make it work for your values, assuming you are a male sexualist or just a normal man wanting to have a good sex life, by not masturbating. It is tremendously empowering even on the philosophical level because of the increased free will.

john said...

Americans have no right to moralize considering the millions of children killed by the u.s in Vietnam,Iraq, Afghanistan,Yemen, and dozens of other countries)

I see absolutely nothing wrong with an adult engaging in mutual sex with a 17 year old female.

the arguments that she's a brainless,undeveloped "child" even at that point are absurd.

if you MUST engage in moralizing,I suggest protesting America's murderous foreign policy,and economic extortion murder.

get on YouTube and force your self to watch the legacy of America's agent Orange--mutated, deformed kids.MAYBE then you'll see sex with a 17 year old isn't so bad.the rest of the world does it and no man goes to prison,as it SHOULD be.

john said...

the only possible scenario I could imagine where a woman rapes a man would be in a hospital or hospice where the dude is in a coma or semi conscious and the 'rapist' feeds him e.d drugs through an i.v so,basically science fiction.

'rape culture'does seem to to be a real thing in certain parts of Africa.
I'm all for sending every feminist there.

john said...

wow.even mister mangina himself, Bill Maher blasted "sjws" for going too far and helping to get kavanaugh nominated! is maher turning into a man?

john said...

trumps an absolute disaster on foreign policy, foreign relations and much more. but I'm LOVING what happened today and the last 2 years.and we have to thank Jordan Peterson.

I see a LOT of men waking up, FINALLY to the feminist/sjw threat. I'm still doing my part online and I get much more support now than I EVER have.

boy, women just get k-razy at the possibility of row v wade getting overturned.thats what all this shrieking and moaning is all about.

women love money first above all, attention second, and abortions third.

Eivind Berge said...

Yeah, finally some genuine good news for men. Congratulations to Kavanaugh and the Republicans for now controlling the Supreme Court. Those judges seem to sit forever, but Trump managed to get two appointments in the first two years of his presidency, which is really impressive. Things are moving in the right direction at the moment, and now we can definitely say that Trump is at least better than Hillary would have been, despite his other missteps such as FOSTA-SESTA.

john said...

yea,I still hate both parties. imperialism and the police state are here to stay..the next big event will be the mid terms.should be interesting to see how big the blowback is. all kinds of protests going on right now, the Orange hairs and a shit ton of those trusty manginas at the supreme court, cops moving in, party should be over soon..

Erich said...

To Antifeminist:

1. The idea of men accepting the attraction to teenage girls has failed. Failed miserably.
5% accept that "some" (the most growed, so their attraction is just adult type) teenage girls are "attractive" but that being "underage" is a barrier that should not be passed and ok with that, dude.
2% accept only the oldest, minimum late teens aged 16 or 15 years old.
0.1% accept pubescent 13 or 14 years old.
0.0000001% are you the "the last Emp... err MRA" you or "Male sexualism" the others.

99% of men hate this and it is not feminism at all. Feminism is what created the spark of "anti-pedophilia" and incites it when appropriate, but 99% of humans on Earth do not abhor you for any feminism, the most ultra-right, reactionary and conservative hates you equally.

That is to say, yes, it was the feminists who created this world whose official dogma is "you can't like young girls", which is based on shame, the shame of liking young girls, but now it is no longer driven only by feminism, even if you destroyed feminism, they would continue with that dogma in their heads, which is the cause of everything.

2. Opposition to feminism is futile. It is like confronting Nazism or Soviet communism while being a mere citizen of one of its conquered countries. Feminism can only be destroyed by a superpower that annihilates the West. And as I say destroy feminism that is no guarantee of anything.

3. To dedicate yourself to the fight against feminism and to give yourself the label of "anti-feminist" is an exercise of magnificent self-destruction, that is to say, it will declare you against the official ideology, besides being a sexual pariah you are a political pariah.
Every time someone defends pedophilia or sex with minors and calls it anti-feminism they have fuel for their cause, you only give reasons for people to embrace feminism as a remedy against "perverts" and "child abusers" like you.

There are three things you can do:

1. You do like the homosexuals do and try to turn your attraction into a new sexuality. You make identity politics, if 99% of men repudiate your attraction to teenagers then there is an "ephebophilia" even if it's political and artificial, as artificial as air conditioning, but if no man follows you with "it's normal male sexual attraction" you have to admit that.
Here you are either neutral and you actively ignore feminists (so when you are attacked you denounce them as "ephebophobes" or whatever pops into your head) or pro-feminist like all the other idiots in society, declaring yourself antifeminist is like declaring yourself a Nazi.

2. Pray for the extreme right to come to power, in which case they will either be 100% feminists or they will kill feminists and then kill you for "corruption of minors" because according to them that is what it is.
Well, Varg Vikernes says in his videos that men have to marry women from 16 to twenty-something, but how many are there like him? Besides, those nazi people hate vegetarianism so how long would we last there?

3. You accept pedophilia and that you like little girls, and that a pubescent is no more than a little girl a little bigger, and that crap about "from puberty are women and not children" you don't give a shit now, you are a girlover, a proud pedophile, and you want to join feminism and leftism as the new thriving sexuality, pedosexuality or girl love.

Well this last one is because I am a almost pedophile and I see well to date with 12 old girls, only I don't justify it because "they are already women" because they would laugh in my face, so they are children but I like children, it's not "normal male sexuality" and I don't give a shit I'm a misanthrope and a social pariah.

Eivind Berge said...

Yes, we have lost and no strategies can be immediately effective. I still don't support constructing "ephebophile" identity politics, however. Ephebophilia properly belongs with standard male sexuality and doesn't deserve special attention, as does hebephilia. Every man knows this inside, but many are good at denying it. Our job is to break down that stupidity and the hateful laws that go along with it. We just have to be patient.

Anonymous said...

What do most reactionary ultra-rightwing anti-feminists think about the age of consent? I just found this thread in 8chan:

"3. age of consent laws are a good thing in a society which has embraced promiscuity and where parents dont control their children."

Eivind Berge said...

Yes, right-wingers are not automatically our friends and can't be counted on to come around to our side. However, as feminists increasingly use sex accusations as a blunt weapon against everything and everyone they oppose like they did with Kavanaugh, the religious right will nonetheless tend to find themselves on our side. I think they would rather have sexual freedom than be defined as rapists themselves, which is the feminist alternative.

john said...

sadly ALL entertainment has also been infected with the diversity/sjw/feminist/grrrl power agenda.

movies SUCK far this year, I've attended just ONE movie, and I left in the middle of that after men were being portrayed as idiots, the wonen "smarter" "braver" etc the USUAL.

music? terdible."Ariana grande" lady gaga? Nicky minoj? = trash.

and now I see on YouTube marvel comics has been invaded by sjws!comic book stores are closing at a record rate.

"lady iron man" "black superman" haha. i grew up reading looks like the comics are DONE.

and television, like David Letterman, snl used to be about comedy! imagine that. now it's bash Trump, and bash some more. that shit gets old.

Anonymous said...

again? john, what a boring and obsessive guy you are, look for a hobby or a job, for God's sake...

john said...

I know it's early but I've got my new years wish. nope, it's not world peace.
I hope all feminists, Dr ford, swetnick, argento and rose McGowan all get vagina cancer, and thousands of cops get assassinated in 2019. have a "blessed" day to all 3 people that read this blog!

theantifeminist said...

Perhaps I didn't make myself very clear as regards identity politics and feminism in the above comment. The whole reason feminism came into existence in the 19th century was to raise the age of consent and ban prostitution. The whole reason we have Third Wave Feminism currently is because of the ever increasing ease men could look at pics of young girls online, contact girls, buy realistic teen sex dolls (and soon sex robots) etc (if it wasn't for feminist legislation). Things like 'equal pay', 'manspreading' and the like are just correlations of the real cause of feminism - stopping the decline in average female sexual market value that technology keeps lowering.

Feminists, who by your own admission control society and the entire social and moral narrative, will never, ever give 'ephebophiles' or 'paedophiles' their rights, because it would be like NAZIs giving Jews their rights. YOU ARE THE REASON FEMINSTS EXIST!! Hiding behind an artificial label that feminists themselves created to demonize and pathologize you wont change that.

Eivind Berge said...

No, it is you who needs another word for your support of pornography and virtual sex, because that is not male sexualism. We already have a word for it: freedom of speech, or you could call it freedom of information or computation, and I fully support that, but it's not what sexualism is about because it isn't sex.

Erich said...

To Theantifeminist

Feminism does not impose a very high age of consent to increase the sexual value of a particular woman but to prevent a mature man, with the possibility of supporting a family and in his right mind to court a fertile female in his teens and make a happy and healthy mother and wife, but she can now only become a public urinal with stupid children of the same age, to despise and use as shit, turning a good wife into a potential whore or single mother and a useless human waste as a wife for the rest of his life.

That is why the age of consent and marriage is being raised to 18, to achieve a double effect:
1. prevent any good woman under the age of 18 (her most critical years as this is the end of her development) from becoming a happy wife, but turning them into public urinals and moral degenerates.
2. after this, get every woman over 18 as a human waste that no man in his right mind would choose, except to fuck and throw to the wastebasket.

This can be achieved when they are under 18 but when they are over 18 can no longer prohibit them from doing this, then they resort to their tactic of brainwashing an entire society to repudiate that a man goes with young women, this coupled with 99% of women have become irresponsible whores for the above comments, along with incorporating women into the labor market so that neither marry nor have children minimum until 30 or more, create the great infectious shit in which we live. Feminism has managed to infect the heads of men so that they accept the supreme aberration of going with women of the same age and selling it as natural and normal, something repudiated by every civilization in history.

And it is not for any old pussy to increase its market value, but to destroy human civilization, to increase its sexual value is an additional value well received and encouraged but the reason why the police arrest you and throw you 20 years in jail is so that this 15 year old whore can become a public urinal with some degenerate of her age, and not your kind wife.

The trick to the age of consent is that it only alienates the older men from the underage girls, not those of their age, who are 100 times worse in every way, so the one who said this ("3. age of consent laws are a good thing in a society which has embraced promiscuity and where parents dont control their children.") is totally wrong and is an example of useful idiot of feminists.

That you do not understand and you do not see the big picture, because you do not understand or want the marriage and courtship, you only seek sex or a temporary girlfriend, in fact you do not even understand that a robot is never going to replace the affection of a person, nor will want you or really caress you, it will only be a realistic doll to ejaculate in it, something that is good as a TEMPORARY substitute if there is no alternative, but it is not good for the world that as an ideal of life, unless you want a blade runner or matrix or something like that. Nobody, not even the degenerates of this modern society are going to replace a real person with a doll, that's your personal fantasy.

Erich said...

However feminists do not need this to prevent men from dating underage girls, this works as a general repulsive to relationships with young women but for those under 18 the problem is that they are underage, and men do not go with minors.. well.. because they are minors, because men are as gregarious and social animal as women, and desperately seek that their ideas are aligned with that of society to provide some peace of mind. Enough a man receives mental stress by admitting that "some" teenagers (the older ones, not even by far with the younger ones) are hot and are sexually attractive to accept the great social scourge that even think about going to have a chocolate shake with them (I remind you that not even 16 years old can drink, which shows widespread discrimination not only in the sexual issue), so they think, and in the unnatural and twisted world in which they live they have a point of reason, a minor is a minor for something, if teenagers should be considered capables of date with a man, marrying, drinking, and all that, they would be adults according to the law (and therefore society), but as they are not, for various reasons (all counterproductive and wrong, there is no doubt), then minors are social children, and children must be left in peace, because is acepted that attraction for children is an aberration and let's not say sex with children.

That's why I talked about be a self-proclaimed pedophile and make pedophilia need to be accepted, and I think that's why, apart from they wanting to fuck prepubescent girls (I don't, although I like some I think it's immoral in the best case), now many here defend real pedophilia, it's because it's obvious that if you accept that it's ok to like and go out with children then the main reason for not going out with minors comes down, if it's ok that you like little girls then there's nothing wrong that you like "girls" and not women, you say with 14 is not a woman, it's a girl, ok and what? if it's okay that you like girls of 8!

About ephebophilia, it is a valid concept ONLY as an interest in itself by teenagers, but not when it is based on sexuality, as has already been said a thousand times a man seeks women when they are more fertile, more beautiful and in their fullness, and that's women in their late teens and many would be valid in their middle teens, so liking girls in his teens is not "ephebophilia", a deviation from normal sexuality, not even a particular attraction, that's heterosexual man, so it's junk science and theantifeminist is right.

Erich said...

Now there are people who are really ephebophile and are attracted to teenagers by the exclusive fact of being "teenagers", not only physical but mental, and I'm fine with that, I'm one of them, actually this is very difficult to say, and I think I would need dozens of comments to explain.

But with an example it will be understood, if you like some developed girls of 12 and a decent amount of 13 and 14 years old, that is not "hebephilia" is the natural male sexuality, what is hebephilia is to be explicitly attracted to them just for being them. Eivind for example does not care about pubescents girls and has said several times that he does not like them and that it is a slight deviation from male sexuality although totally acceptable, but you, on the other hand, like them in a primary way, you are crazy about barely pubescents girls, as if you liked a particular book you are not a bibliophile but if you have as a hobby devouring books and more books, then you are. That's not bad, it's called preferences and we have them everywhere and people are not copies and we don't have to like the same thing.

On the other hand Eivind likes equally and actively both the 16-17 and 19-23 but he is not "ephebophile", because he have not particular attraction for adolescence (but for the developed woman in general) although their attraction is obviolusly primary, but you, dude, you are, and that devotion for some teens in particular shows it, so you live for them.. and your neighbor, even if he gets horny with some video of Sabrina Vaz, he does not give a shit about she and can continue his life with any public urinal of their age. Even if you dont care a shit about "philias" is the truth.

theantifeminist said...

@Erich - I can't be arsed reading your first two rants, but I'll the reply to the third where you imply I'm a coward who can't accept I'm a 'hebophile' or whatever aspie quack term you want to force upon me. I have a strong attraction to teenage girls, I'm not ashamed of that at all. Is it more than the average male? I doubt if it is very much, and even then only because it's been suppressed in the average male, whereas I see no reason to attempt to suppress my attraction (that is, I'd rather die than become a fully fledged paedocrite and pretend that teens aren't attractive).

Your use of the word 'dude' implies you're American. Well until maybe 20 years ago at most, the only country in the entire world that pretended that young teen girls were not the height of sexual attractiveness. In the UK, which was then the most puritan in Europe, we had tabloids featuring 15 year old glamour models on their front pages publicly counting down the days they could legally show her topless (on her 16th birthday).

My last girlfriend was older than Eivind's. He has more reason as being public to deny any attraction to young girls. As far as I know he was an incel for many years, and he met his current long term girlfriend after she got to know him through his blog. Basically, she chose him.

I put up Sabrina Vaz videos more of an act of defiance than anything else. Again, not that I'm ashamed of being attracted to teenage girls at all, or saying that I'm more or less of a '-phile' than Eivind or anyone else (it's Eivind who appears to be flirting with the identity of 'paedo activist', and I think that's a big mistake). In the UK and USA and most Western countries, I would definitely say girls reach their most attractive at age 13 - 15. In Eastern Europe, I'd say it's a bit later, in fact some women are pretty much perfect even in their early to mid twenties. The only two females I've fallen in love with in the last 20 years were in their twenties. Of course, maybe that's partly being 'chosen' like Eivind was. If a sweet 16 year old girl had shown me some affection and dated me, of course I have no doubt I would have fallen head over heels in love with a girl that age too, but it doesn't happen very often to middle-aged men.

In short, I don't give a shit what you think, but aspergic 'ephebophiles' like you are the biggest reason I'm no longer interested in maintaining my site. I wouldn't piss on a creature like you, or Gally, or the ephebophile who is still raging at me for taking too long to approve one of his comments years ago, if you were burning in the street. And that's not because I'm ashamed of having a strong attraction to teenage girls, but because you really are pathetic, worthless scum.

theantifeminist said...

Eivind - well, maybe you're right, but I disagree strongly. 'Sexualism' implies 'sexuality' not a narrow definition of 'sex'. Masturbation is most certainly part of sexuality. Even feminists aren't explicitly against masturbation itself (or at least most have the sense to not be so frank about it). The 'real' end of sex is procreation, so maybe you should argue that sex without reproduction is not real, and most certainly be against condoms.

Eivind Berge said...

I disagree that masturbation is a part of sexuality. That is simply a wrong classification, a delusion. The proper way to see masturbation is as an evolutionary trap, a maladaptive behavior whereby our sexuality is hijacked and perverted into an asexual outlet. This is how we describe it with other species, the only difference being that we are all fooled to some extent by our simulacrum of sex. When jewel beetles attempt to mate with beer bottles, we don't call it a part of their courtship and mating practices, so why should humans be any different? And I certainly don't recommend sex with condoms either, which one scientific paper aptly describes as "mutual masturbation with the same latex device." Since it still involves a great deal of intimacy it is borderline and I wouldn't call it not sex, but less than the real thing and to be avoided if you can. Unlike masturbation to porn it is also not harmful to your erectile function, so there is no need to get hysterical about condoms, however.

john said...

haha! what? you seriously though you were even going to put a dent in feminism?!

john said...

I do believe I'm a 'real' mra. unlike Paul Elam, I would never align myself with any feminist.

well,maybe c.h sommers.I remember reading her book 'the war against boys' way back in the 90s.who knew it would get this bad?

however I have no delusions of grandeur some have displayed in this thread.just being anti feminist is "bad" enough without ever mentioning any pedo topics.

as I've only mentioned 100s of times, I got zero support, and still don't,from any other anti feminist. women organize obviously.they march,they lie, they cry the tears, they vote.and they have most of the media on their side.

oh well, should be interesting which party benefits from the kavanaugh "crises" in the midterms.

theantifeminist said...

@John - if you're referring to me, I've certainly never had any delusions of grandeur. I was actually somewhat mocking the idea of Tom, and it seems Eivind, that we've 'failed' and now we have to pretend to be paedophiles and join forces with these and other '-philes' who are so autistic and pathetic that they can't even recognize feminists as their enemy. I've certainly played my part, and I did it correctly. Normal male sexuality was always part of men's rights, a movement that has exploded over the last ten years and which myself and Eivind were certainly at the heart of the periphery, trying not to let the movement get hijacked by paedocrites like Elam and his 'honey badger' cunts. Perhaps we never had more than close to zero percent chance of success, but I'm proud we tried instead of just bitching in comments on other blogs that it's all futile.

I'm aware that political activism can't defeat feminism. We have to wait for the driving forces behind feminism to dissipate, which they will eventually, and then seize the moment (those of us who are still around or our 'successors').

As for Erich, yes you are a subhuman creature. It's good to know that Eivind's blog (the home of 'male sexualism') is not yet quite under a blanket of ephebophiles, and you're the same cretin who holds a grudge against myself for being rude to you years ago on my blog. You'd rather harm us for being anti-feminist, than the feminists who are responsible for your misery (and eventual ass rape in prison). Hopefully Eivind will have learnt from Gally and be able to see that you'll turn on him eventually. (I suspect this hebo guy (Erich, 'feldmarshall' etc) might be behind the trolling campaign).

BTW, there is not one normal male on Earth who wouldn't fuck Sabrina Vaz into tomorrow if it was legal, acceptable etc, at whatever age as a teen. In fact, the small percentage of men who wouldn't find her sexually attractive, are real perverts who deserve some kind of classification and pathalogization. You really are a clueless imbecile if you can't see that.

The only mistake I made running my site was I was too tolerant of ephebophiles. If I ran it all back again, the slightest hint of aspergers or 'ephebophilia' from a commentator should have brought down the ban hammer.

theantifeminist said...

how to do charity for poor childrend

1/stop playing video games

2/ dont buy DLC , pre order

3/save money and then buy foods for them

john said...

ha.that reminds me of our special superhero cop who was outside the parkland school when the shooting was occurring, and he heard the shots! but never went inside. he was subsequently dubbed the 'coward of broward'.
"protect and serve"!

Eivind Berge said...

There are some seriously evil people reading this blog, who keep reporting me. But whatever pretext you try to use, it isn't working. The Google administrators just keep dismissing your reports and I am sure by now all the baseless reports have built up a record and expectation that that's what they will get about this blog.

Because this is a serious blog with a serious political agenda. Namely to fight against false notions of sexual abuse and work to repeal the associated laws. One 100% false kind of sexual abuse is the statutory rape and abuse of teenagers, and no, we don't need any identity politics to point this out other than normal male sexuality.

I would not ban anybody just for being an Aspie or a self-proclaimed "ephebophile," though those are warning signs, I agree.

And yes, I have learned my lesson from the Gally incident, mainly never to trust anyone who identifies as a no-contact MAP. Those are prone to some astonishingly sex-hostile views, in part motivated by the belief that they love children more than anyone else, which leads them to take it upon themselves to "protect" children. That is a particularly sinister mindset, which when taken to the extreme results in the NOMAP even pleading guilty (like Gally did) because they believe so strongly that the feminist sex laws are right. Someone who will incriminate himself with bullshit crimes is obviously not someone you can trust at all, and it should come as no surprise when they turn on you for not sharing their fanatical belief in fake sexual abuse. At least in hindsight this should have been obvious, and now I am fully aware of it.

Mark said...

I think this new guy Erich is Gally, he appeared just when Gally disappeared, and basically he says very similar things, he looks suspicious to me. Maybe he want to start again here with another identity to delude us?

john said...

professor allessando strumia was suspended after stating physics was 'invented by men'(how dare he!)by cern.

he also 'proved' physics are NOT sexist against women.

I didn't provide a link but it's on Google of course, what Isn't?

that's what you get for telling the truth, fired.

john said...

so,some 3rd grade teachers school video has gone 'viral oh and Yahoo also says it's "brilliant".in it she has drawn a little chart replete with stick people on the topic of 'consent'!

now in the comments section people weren't happy one, that story Yahoo simply deleted and started a new one, this one not showing her drawings.

so, I started right in and posted this:
fyi, they are also teaching your 5 year old boys they're full of "toxic masculinity".

I tried posting that exact comment 7 times, and Yahoo deleted every one of them.i mean goddamn I know freedom of speech is on deaths door but really?

I also recommended people watch the YouTube video- the diversity delusion by Heather MacDonald, and that TOO was not posted.this shits infuriating and obviously Yahoo wants me to stop commenting.

I'm SO very thrilled I never had kids.i REALLY don't want to wind up with a feminist or a mangina.NO THANK YOU.
and a special thank you to all women who ignored saved me $100,000s of dollars just to raise sjw trash? thank you ladies!

Anonymous said...

This girl was 13 when she did this, regardless of the quality of this video, it's clearly no different than an 18-20 year old woman. If you think they are idiots at that age it's because of society and the education system makes them idiots, I doubt very much that an 18-20 woman is much more mature, if you want them to stop being idiotic children, just like we would do with 18-20 women, then pair them and marry them with older men. Sensible women and fertile mothers and wives. End of the problem of today's society.

Go and tell them why a 13-17 year old is different from an 18-20 year old. You will only find stupidity, evil and ignorance in their answers. I think the debate is closed. This is like the democratic centralism of the Communist parties. It has been debated in freedom and listening to all positions, but once an indisputable scientific truth has materialized, it is time to implement it as a doctrine and everyone is obliged to follow the resolution.

Anonymous said...

Eivind, are you sexually attracted to pubescent girls? Yes or no?

Eivind Berge said...

I am neither more nor less attracted to pubescent girls than the average heterosexual man. The short answer is yes, but my preference is post-pubescent. It would be physically impossible to be attracted by sexually mature characteristics without being at least somewhat attracted by the partial formation of them after all, so any man who claims that he isn't is just spouting gibberish.

I think hebephilia is a little on the unusual side but still normal (not even defined as a disorder by the psychiatric establishment) and ephebophilia is a complete non-issue. All the laws which exist to criminalize consensual sex with teenage girls are profoundly wrong.

Eivind Berge said...

Or perhaps I shouldn't say "physically impossible" in the above since it is possible to conceive of an intelligent designer who would have designed us to have zero attraction to pubescents in one way or another, but I certainly don't believe that is how nature works in the real world. Once a girl starts showing some signs of puberty, average heterosexual males will start feeling sexually attracted to her, and then her attractive power maxes out right after puberty and stays at a near peak level into her early 20s. 18 is close enough so that men can be convinced that they needn't bother with younger, but that doesn't mean they are not attracted to them, of course. At 13 girls also have the mental maturity to make every bit as good mate choices as "adult" women, if not better since there is something magical about those early bonds that first love can make. Evolutionary biologists have speculated that one purpose of a high age of consent is to get girls past that impressionable age so parents can exert more influence over her mate choices, but that doesn't mean they are bad choices from her point of view.

Anonymous said...

So the age of consent is not just the work of feminists?

Besides, do hebephilia and ephebophilia really exist? Even if they are not pathological.

Eivind Berge said...

Even the feminists exist within human biology, so their actions too can in principle be explained by biology. I don't have a strong opinion about the validity of the particular hypothesis that I mentioned, however. There are proximate and ultimate explanations, and I am mostly concerned with the proximate ones as a political activists, which don't invoke evolutionary biology so much. The hateful feminist attitude to sex and masculinity is sufficient explanation for most purposes.

I don't honestly think ephebophilia exists in any meaningful sense except as a potential rallying cry for criminalized men (and a bad one at that). Those men are just extremely picky, less willing to conform to normative limitations, or they have some fixation which might be strongly felt at times, but I don't think amounts to a category worthy of serious consideration. The difference between a girl at 14 and 18 is so insignificant that it only amounts to a fetish for a number, in my view, if you claim to be special, because the rest of us are extremely attracted to 14-year-old girls too. The notion that someone can be attracted to a girl at 14 but not at 18 seems to me absurd, and vice versa.

Hebephilia has more claim to existing as a meaningful category. I don't know how prevalent, but Gally seemed to be an example of the real thing, so I am compelled to conclude that they exist. If you honestly can't be satisfied with postpubescent girls, then you are sufficiently different to what I consider standard male sexuality to merit a special term, I think. But then again he seemed to be a virgin fixated on porn only, so who knows how his sexuality would have played out in real life? And I haven't met anyone else whom I felt like labeling a hebephile, so at best it is a rare condition.

john said...

I guess I'm at the wrong blog,at least for me.
this appears to have morphed into an "underage" sex blog

i have no trouble stating I would have sex with a 14-17 year old.but that is simply not going to happen in america without risking everything.

sex with a 16 year old? sounds great but it would have to be completely risk free. In other words, some other nation but the u.s.

just look at the insane 160 year sentence for the guy with the 10 year old

and some guy getting arrested for giving his girlfriend a 'wet willie'?!

Eivind Berge said...

I think you can still pursue 16-year-old girls in a bunch of states, John. Yes, you have to be careful (not accept nude pictures, be a teacher or a number of other things), but it can be done. So let's not let imagined obstacles get in the way. And it is a fact that a good number of teenage girls consider us perfectly reasonable lovers even in middle age.

Ok, I checked Wikipedia, and 16 is actually the most common age of consent in the US (counted by number of states, not population).

States where the age of consent is 16 (31): Alabama, Alaska, Arkansas, Connecticut, Georgia, Hawaii, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Mississippi, Montana, Nebraska, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Jersey, North Carolina, Ohio, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, South Carolina, South Dakota, Vermont, Washington, and West Virginia.

States where the age of consent is 17 (8): Colorado, Illinois, Louisiana, Missouri, New Mexico, New York, Texas,[c] and Wyoming.

States where the age of consent is 18 (11): Arizona, California, Delaware, Florida, Idaho, North Dakota, Oregon, Tennessee, Utah, Virginia, and Wisconsin.

So Florida is one of the shittiest states. As is Tennessee, where I lived for six years. I barely noticed it at the time though as I had no contact with girls younger than college age anyway.

john said...

yea,Florida is the king or "queen" of the police states.most of the police set up stings occur here and it seems most of the female teachers arrested for "molesting" their students also occurs in florida.

I had no idea you lived here!

john said...

those aoc,that's for marriage only correct?

Eivind Berge said...

No, the listed ages are for sex only. Marriage age may be higher in some states as there is a push to ban "child" marriage (under 18), but that doesn't immediately affect the age of consent.

Yeah, I lived in Clarksville, TN, and went to Austin Peay State University.

john said...

ah I see.that explains why the two latest guys that ran off from Florida with their 17 year old students were basically hunted down like escaped murderers and brought back to Florida to get the long prison sentences.

Eivind Berge said...

By the way, I just noticed something in that AOC page that I haven't seen before, and didn't think existed yet: discrimination against those over 30 only! I thought those close-in-age exceptions had to be actually close in age, not just criminalize much older people, which has zero validity even in the mumbo-jumbo theories that the feminists have put forth so far.

"The age of consent in Delaware is 18, but it is legal for teenagers aged 16 and 17 to engage in sexual intercourse as long as the older partner is younger than 30."

So it's already here, in part, criminalization of age gap and middle-aged or older men. Wow, that is hateful! And opens up a whole new avenue of criminalization if we go down that route. I haven't looked into how widespread this is yet, but it is an extremely worrying development.

john said...

wow.well there ya go.i didn't think my fears were imagined, and this really drives a nail in it!

well,my frequently recounted experience with that female in san fran trying to put me away and i never even met the bitch is pretty much as bad as it gets anyway.

I don't have ANY choice in the matter anyway,all I get from women are dirty looks/fear.

funny because I talk to them all the time, but it's always in public so they're not so terrified I guess.

Eivind Berge said...

This kind of law does have the potential to split the men's movement into older versus younger, as those under 30 or whatever age they use have less incentive to be against the laws and even a reason to support them in order to hurt their competition...

As if we didn't have enough difficulty with recruitment already. This is really nasty and more hateful than just having a high age of consent.

I have had the attitude of a dirty old man since I was very young because I knew I would get old, but lots of young men don't seem to think that way. So we risk the men's movement being reduced to old men fighting for their sexual rights while only men under 30 have access to teen girls and don't care. This for me is more hopeless and more motivating at the same time.

Eivind Berge said...

What do these haters imagine happens when you turn 30 that makes teen girls no longer able to consent to you? I mean, is there anything other than pure hate they use to even justify it to themselves? A 30-year-old would be slightly uglier, but that's what sexual attraction is for; you don't need to fucking legislate it. Other than that, men have the same kinds of qualities in their 20s and 30s and beyond. For some arbitrary age to cut you off from teen girls is just absurdly hateful and I didn't think the feminists would be so direct about the hatred at this stage. How did this law pass?

john said...

first time I've ever heard of it! at 31, at least in the u.s now, you are officially "creepy".and women are only going to get more politically powerful, so who knows how bad its going to get.millions of women are outraged kavanaughs on the supreme court.MAYBE a 36 year old possible "grope" story doesn't cut it.

Eivind Berge said...

Yes, we are considered creepy by many, but we can and should resist the hate and not do anything to conform to it. Not all teenage girls share it either, which is why they need a law to prevent their consent from counting.

Øyvind Holmstad said...

Forget him and enjoy Kunstler Cast!

- KunstlerCast 308 — Chatting with Jasun Horsley About the Sexual Hysteria of Our Time:

Anonymous said...

the fact is that all males like chicks above all else of 13-17 .

Beyond that age they have already been corrupted by the system, by the state, they make up, etc. That is to say, they have already lost the little soul they had and have been absorbed by the society and state apparatus in one way or another.

Anonymous said...

How can I get a 16-year-old girlfriend? Help Im desperate.

john said...

true. i still like Lana del ray.but she's now a 'new born' feminist. just a few years ago she slammed feminism.

john said...

ok,first,meet em online,text them dick pics.then drive 100s of miles to meet them at their house. bring wine, beer condoms,guns, weed, and drive the nicest car you have or can buy. then the fun begins!

Anonymous said...

john = resulting human waste between French maid and SS gestapo officer.

Anonymous said...

Your mom was underage when your dad sent her dick pics. Too bad the condom broke :(

john said...

uhm, I can assume you're the anonymous coward who asked how to get a 16 year old girl?
ok then, if so, beat it you creepy perv...

john said...

ok the wimmin are marching in Chicago again.the dems are absolutely going to need to rock the female vote.most men don't care anymore, especially about "Dr ford" or western women's endless abortions.

theantifeminist said...

When John's mom got pregnant with such a pile of shit, she tried to have an abortion with a clandestine doctor, he had a hook for a hand, the abortion failed and the result is John.

john said...

*yawn* after you've been doxxed, and the police come to your house at the request of some bitch you don't even know, these "insults" don't bother piss me off, claim I raped you in your country 36 years ago, then sick the cops on me.anyone can do it!

john said...

still- *yawn*.
ill try again. go on Twitter, tell Twitter I threatened you on twitter(or anywhere online really) 2 days later cops pounding on my's actually so easy to do,even YOU can do it.

BUT when you talk to the cops, you've GOTTA sound like a female! don't have one handy(obviously)
ok, just pay one a few bucks or dinner at McDonald's.

the last one of you pieces of shit that did that DID piss me off.insults have no effect.

oh I know! you could attack my dear sweet momma! that REALLY stings like ouch big time,oooooo,grrrr..see?
and thanks to whomever suggested my dad was an ss officer!

on these right wing blogs thats nothing but a huge compliment!

Robert Lindsay said...

Hi fellow Male Sexualist. My blog was just shut down by Wordpress, possibly for Male Sexualist content. Can you show me a site that has no freedom of speech or could you possibly blog about my case? Thank you!

Eivind Berge said...

Well, there is not much to blog about when I know nothing about the content you had. But you can tell us more if you want (without saying something that would get me censored as well).

john said...

weird...a leftist progressive who's NOT PRO feminist? well,ok I'm not a leftist but I am a classic liberal.whatever...

john said...

well, Twitter has no freedom of speech.hope that helps! your case huh? another false allegation? you know, those things are SO rare..

Eivind Berge said...

I see Tom did a post on Robert Lindsay:

Best of luck with getting your blog restored or finding a new venue.

Anonymous said...

You're probably lying, dear.

Anonymous said...

Well! our mass report of Lindsay has worked! the next to be mass reported is... for now we will keep the mass report on Eivid Berge, everyone reporting to this prick!

john said...

so you didn't take my advice?! I mean sure,there's an 80% chance a pig pile will be waiting to jump on you, but theres always that 20%!

Anonymous said...

john said...

Eivind, I've been reading your twitter.
as usual I agree again on how damn lucky these kids get with these hot teachers!

on the speeding sign/spy's true of course, but in Florida we're only required to have a plate in the back,not one on the front YET.

however, the pigs easily make up for this by driving around and running plates all damn day(when they're not writing citations aka stealing)

and yep I can't believe it, but hrc did say something true! Lewinsky WAS an adult and it WAS consensual after all.but even so, Lewinsky just had to jump on the metoo train, I think that was last year.

as for the Mississippi thing.EASILY my favorite half time show EVER!
fuck Beyonce and lady gaga.

Eivind Berge said...

Yes, John, I remember those license plates on the back only in some Southern states. Tennessee also had them. That was a breath of fresh air amid all the surveillance and oppression going on. A tiny bit of freedom still left, even if it probably doesn't avoid these automatic readings (and now they can use face recognition too) at least it feels more lax.

john said...

I guess.but they run my plate several times a week.the last time, I was in the turn lane to get on I-95.cop got right in back of me.a local cop.and I knew he wasn't getting on the interstate, and voila! as soon as he was 'satisfied' he pulled out of the on ramp lane.

I just wonder when we get our rfid chips? probably in the forearm.

john said...

on the Jordan Peterson tweet about kavanaugh.I think he already said it was 'foolishness'(something along those lines) on his part.similar to the comments he made about 'mgtows'. he later said that was a mistake/premature etc.

on the Halloween thing.isnt that just so fuckin pathetic? the fear mongering started when I was a kid with the "razors in apples" "pins in candy bars", you can go to jail just FOR trick or treating.

America has been circling the drain for a WHILE won't be long until the final flush.feminism seems to be the lever, as once again, in my "treasonous" opinion, the u.s has NO external threats. if it has enemies, its created them.

Anonymous said...

Hey Eivind,How many people in Norway think that sexuality with people under 18 is not rape, aberration etc.?

Eivind Berge said...

That would be a highly unusual view here. I don't know of anybody who thinks so. Only fictional sexuality is illegal up to 18, but most people probably don't even realize that the child porn law goes that high. Then the age of consent is 16, which is pretty well internalized in the sheeple to make it "abuse" under that. And then we got a new law in 2015 making it "rape" under 14, but I don't think most people are aware of that yet either or think that way.

Anonymous said...

Asia Argento? She is likely a pedophile. Argento showed Jimmy Bennett her breasts as a reward for a good actor, which is technically a sex crime, since Jimmy Bennett was underage.

Eivind Berge said...

My respect for the South Carolina man who put up a valiant fight against the cops a couple of weeks ago, Frederick Hopkins, went through the roof after reading this:

He is the real deal. Literally a defense against the sex laws, and not a pathetic incel who kills innocent people either but a real man who confronts the enemy head-on. Wow!

Also a Vietnam vet and 74 years old. They don't make 'em like that anymore.

Eivind Berge said...

Asia Argento is an evil feminist, but Jimmy Bennett is even worse for playing along with the charade that he was a victim. He did it for money, but it's still a terrible thing to do. Especially since he wasn't poor, so he had absolutely no excuse for supporting feminist sex-hostility and the female sex offender charade.

Anonymous said...

What is your opinion about the police? What would you do with them? Would you dissolve it and replace it with something? What would you do with the police if male sexualism came to power? Do you think they are criminals against humanity? if is so, what punishment do they deserve for their crimes?

Eivind Berge said...

We do need the police, but the laws need to be reformed according to male sexualism. I do see the feminist war on sex as a crime against humanity, but I am not so sure about the usefulness of prosecuting that concept in most cases. Sex-hostility is a social problem with so many perpetrators that it would be impractical to punish them all even if we could, so I would mostly be content with changing the laws and having them enforced reasonably from then on, of course with release and pardon to all men unfairly convicted under the old laws. Whenever cops have been guilty of violations of due process in order to obtain convictions, they certainly deserve punishment, however. And perhaps we could look into crimes-against-humanity charges for the most flagrant antisex efforts of the police, but that is an extremely distant an unrealistic goal for now. For now all we can do is to state our ideology and to admire the few heroes who actually fight for our cause.

john said...

yeah but didn't he get paid $380 grand? I'll play victim for that kind of money too.we're all in this alone and that goes triple for men

john said...

oh I'm completely for BIG time police reform, and an end to their goddamn immunity.

from personal experience I can tell you they are almost impossible to sue.

also, they HAVE to be disarmed of their ar15s.they DON'T need that kind of firepower! look what happened to shaver in arizona.murder on tape(it's on youtube) ,cop pig walked at trial and the guy did NOTHING and had NO prior record.

now, the other day, some black chic was arrested while waiting for the restaurant to open for her job interview. SHE'S suing. mucho damage to her car, and of course, false arrest.

john said...

hey Eivind.about those mobile speeding 'warning'/spy signs.I'm seeing them everywhere now.

since Florida is one of only 19 states(mostly southeastern) requiring only one plate,it must be to capture the plates,and faces from the snowbirds and tourists that flock to Disney.for "safety" reasons of COURSE.

theantifeminist said...

I wonder what Eivind thinks about this? Norway officially apologizes to its sluts who dated conquering German soldiers in WW2.

In France they shaved the heads and beat the shit out of the whores who went with the alpha male bad boy Nazis. In Norway, there was a bit of condemnation and discrimination, which needs an official apology 70 years later. Norwegian women can spread their legs for any conquering army, but Norwegian men can go to jail if a 17 year old Russian girl flashes her tits to them on Skype.

BTW, I was reading the previous article comments for the first time the other day and I saw that one of my comments where I disagreed with Eivind had been posted under the name of 'Gally'. I'm sure I posted that comment on an even earlier article, and maybe Eivind didn't see it, and then a troll posted it again under Gally's name.

Anonymous said...


You know, after you closed your blog I dedicated myself to preach your ideology in an orthodox way? denouncing ephebophilia, declaring that it is normal male sexuality etc.

That comment that you once saw in Tom O'Carroll where someone said that ephebohilia is nor real, and you commented here that there were still people who were not brainwashed by feminism, WAS ME, in fact almost all comments in these blogs like eivind, holocaust, tom grauer etc. are mine just I write with a thousand names, they think it comments dozens of diferent people, but not.

I've been the last year going to forums days after days to write THE SAME that you wrote in your blog. I imitated you, your style, everything, until you deleted everything I copied things from what you wrote.

Do you know what the result was? after going to anti-feminist and right-wing forums? don't think they were normal forums, NOTHING, just a group of people who are not enough people to form even a US army squad.

Almost nobody cared, half hated me, the other half didn't care about I say, the only people who supported me were already convinced BEFORE, I haven't convinced a single person after 2 or 3 years, I don't remember the time that has passed.

Now I have written another text and nobody has cared.

About WWII german soldiers... You know what was the highest rank of a German soldier? 'generalfeldmarschall'.

Never with so little has so much been said.

That is the subhuman, your greatest successor not tom grauer and the like.

0 male souls convinced. I have achieved nothing.

Eivind Berge said...

I am not sure what you are trying to accomplish by your trolling and impersonating us? Yes, we are a tiny movement, we knew that, and it's hard to convince people. What is your point? We do have real readers and they are usually easy to distinguish from trolling, so you are mostly ignored and your disruption is not really appreciated.

Comment like a normal person if you wish to participate.

About that WWII apology, at least it came after most of the women were dead. There was a lot of hate against those who slept with German soldiers in Norway too, and now it's politically correct to hold women blameless for everything (except being nice to boys, which ironically gets them prosecuted), so they get apologies.

When male sexualists get the power, we will apologize for the treatment of sex offenders in these dark times. If you want to help us get there, then please participate constructively.

john said...

yea, only that might never happen, certainly not in any of our lifetimes.

I've also got to make a new years resolution to stop commenting on this blog.

a good 97% of my comments are ignored and I wouldn't even be on here if I was 'allowed' back on Twitter

I just don't know how to change i.p and phone numbers like socks as some people can.

I'm not a practicing or wanna be pedo either so this appears not to be the place for me on the internet.

Eivind Berge said...

I have been putting a lot of effort into Twitter lately, John, but my number of followers isn't increasing. It stays put at just under 1500 even if I tweet all day long. No matter what we do, there simply isn't much interest in male sexualist ideas.

Things are happening that are indirectly good for men though and the left is getting pounded. Love the new NPC meme :)

For those who haven't seen it yet, NPC means non-player character and is a great way to dehumanize. The term is similar to "philosophical zombie" or just zombie which I have previously been using as a slur for people who buy into the female sex offender charade, since their "thinking" is so far removed from normal sexuality that they don't seem human.

The NPC meme is so successful that Twitter made a new rule against it, so I suggest not using it if you are planning to return there.

john said...

I won't if I ever do.and yeah, it seems "mras" mgtows on Twitter seem to be confined to around 1000+/- followers.

i miss it but I have to play the "bad guy" on and offline.shit gets VERY old but appears to be my "destiny".

Anonymous said...

bye john, we'll be better off without sexual eunuchs and paranoids like you.

john said...

who's "we"? you mean, you the troll?

Anonymous said...

I didn't say I impersonated anyone. I said that I have commented with other random names, why I had no reason to have a "persona" in these places.

I have not impersonated anyone in these 3 years, only instead of putting erich or another name I have used "iloveteens636754" to give an example or I have simply commented as anonymous.

Eivind Berge said...

Didn't you just say that you commented as The Antifeminist and even copied his content? That is impersonation.

john said...

I've got a tip for ya eivind.delete any and all commenting as anonymous. there fixed it for ya.

Anonymous said...

I never said that I impersonated theantifeminist and his commentary. What I say is that I copied content from his blog when it was open, i.e. to make threads in forums using his blog posts.

Eivind Berge said...

Ok, well, somebody has been doing it and there was even an impersonation of me on a male sexualist forum. But I'm glad that was not you then. Anyway I think activism is more effective if you use a consistent persona. If you agree with what The Antifeminist says, put it in your own words or quote him with attribution. The way you did it, it just seemed like someone was messing with us and trying to promote discord.

ZeroTheErmine said...

Sex-hostility and child porn laws are evil. Yeah. They rape children. If you talk to one of you pedophile friends as a underaged commentator, he’ll say that, when it comes to porn (which he tells you is likely going to happen to you if youre minor,) they, “not leave young girls alone… usually.” Usually. As in not always. As in they sometimes FUCK LITTLE GIRLS.

I don’t care if everything else they touch turns into rainbow fucking sprinkles, I don’t care if being a anti-pedophile is literally Hitler, that is not acceptable.

john said...

you can't invent a name? you must be retarded.your i.p number gives you completely away.i don't get the "anonymous" just type in Nancy or mangina.i hope that helps!

john said...

funny how some people say MY posts are least half the posts on here I have to read over and over.not eivinds
mind you.

Anonymous said...

From the Left, which defends human rights above all other considerations, we cannot continue to tolerate the situation of helplessness of the thousands and thousands of women and minors who are victims of this extreme form of male violence. According to data from different organizations, between 80% and 90% of the women prostituted are trafficked and forced.

To speak of "sex workers" with these data is an insult to intelligence. They are human beings enslaved and forced to perform acts against their will. In this context, controversy has arisen over the constitution of a self-styled union of "sex workers". In reality, it is a union of pimps, as can be seen from the trajectory of several of the people who promote it. We find ourselves, then, before another stratagem of the owners of alternates and brothels to improve their rates of profit.

It is necessary to bravely approach this problem from a double perspective, the first and most urgent is to implement policies that harshly pursue and punish the pimps and traffickers of women. The second is the adoption of a series of social, psychological and employment support measures for prostituted women, as well as the penalization of prostitution consumers and those locals who violate the integrity of women.

We must not forget that there is trafficking because there is prostitution, just as there was slave trade because there was slavery. The democratic attitude to slavery is based on the rejection of a statute degrading human dignity, not on the perception that each slave may have of his or her condition. That is why, under the Convention on Human Rights, we advocate the abolition of all forms of sexual exploitation, as the Swedish Government has done, eradicating demand without penalising prostituted women and prosecuting those responsible for trafficking or participating in this form of violence.

Prostitution is exploitation, slavery and the oldest violence invented by patriarchy to control and subdue women.

The Left clearly shares and defends the ambitious position of the abolitionist movement, which places the root of the problem in the violation of human rights. Rights which, as essential, are out of the question: the rights of all people not to be sexually abused or used, neither free of charge, nor in exchange for any economic compensation. At the same time, we are convinced of the need for women victims and survivors of this situation of exploitation to organise themselves in order to abolish this extreme form of macho violence.

john said...

yes,while were at it, lets also make stripping illegal,lol.i say put all those cock teasers out of that super easy high paying job!
I completely agree with that!

john said...

I think you disgust that girls under age 18 are seen by boys in a sexual way. I dislike lolis because i think is not normal to be turn on by a little girl in anime or in real life. But you know what it sells is what anime will still make.

john said...

another incoherent reply. where you at Latvia? Kazakhstan?


Well, I "don't like" Sabrina Vaz.

I prefer them with a lot of everything. And many of those are missing tits and ass. It's like eating a half-cooked sponge cake.

What I think is that you're either half queer and you're into androgyny or you like girls half grown up... you'll know.

Eivind Berge said...

You are entitled to your opinion as to what ages of women you prefer. However, I am sure you don't speak for the average man. Also I shake my head at your emphasis on skill, which has almost nothing to do with it in my view. The quality of sex is determined by the hotness of the woman, and I think most men agree that the teens to early twenties are the hottest ages. Well, falling in love overrides all of that, which can happen at more variable ages, but for pure lust, there is no question that teen girls reign supreme.

theantifeminist said...

This is one of the creepiest things I've ever seen. The 'Soham' murders of two little girls 15 or so years ago in a small English town by their psychopathic school caretaker, did more than just about any other single thing to launch full-blown paedohysteria in the UK. The irony is that the murderer had a 20 something girlfriend, and was probably just a psychopath seizing an opportunity to have his way with two vulnerable victims who couldn't fight back. So he wasn't a paedophile or an 'ephebophile' or even a 'hebephophile'.

Now the 'women of Soham' have posed nude for a Christmas calender, including one of the murdered girl's mothers and aunts. This is creepy beyond words. It's like these hags are publicly stating - 'those little girls didn't die in vain. Now we middle-aged hags can flaunt are bodies and all you men are paedophiles if you don't find us sexy' (I'm sure the mangina pervert 'advocat' above would agree with these lovely ladies').

I've always thought that the media in the UK turn child murders into some kind of inverted, perverted ancient fertility rite, where the 'sacrificial young virgin' instead of being used to 'celebrate' fertility as in our primitive pagan past, it's now exploited as a feminist celebration of the 'sex appeal' of infertility. Seems I was right all along (again).

«Oldest ‹Older   1 – 200 of 218   Newer› Newest»