What kind of world are we living in when Brenton Tarrant can be a role model? An unintended consequence of suppressing "objectionable" views like New Zealand is doing with his is to give the impression that they constitute esoteric knowledge that might be profound or convincing if you get to read them. But I have read these manifestos, and they are bullshit. That they nonetheless can inspire the youth, such as the would-be Norwegian mosque shooter Phillip Manshaus says more about the current climate than the persuasiveness of such writings.
There is something else going on here, a failure to be impressed by really good ideas and a willingness to go along with bullshit because one's standards are messed up. Maybe the kids these days don't get the good classical education that I had. Or maybe internet porn really is this emasculating. I don't know.
But I know I am a good role model, or at least try to be. Jeffrey Epstein was a terrific role model, with the exception of committing suicide instead of standing up as a proud male sexualist in court (but solitary confinement can do that to the best of us, so he deserves nothing but sympathy). Gary Wilson is another great role model because he promotes male sexual health and empowerment via nofap.
The Antifeminist is a role model, partly, if you look away from his defense of porn and masturbation. Holocaust21, likewise. Tom Grauer is a role model (read his manifesto), if you look past his worst trolling and tendency to delete his blogs once they gain traction. And even Roissy, censored from WordPress but now back online, is a decent role model. Somewhat less strident, but still a good role model for men is our old friend Men Factor. And that basically sums up the extant sex-positive manosphere, unless you count our allies the MAPs who have some good ones but constitute a special interest rather than male sexuality in general.
We the good role models don't currently inspire young men. What can we do differently? Well, if I knew, I would be doing it, so I can only keep at what I know. This is just another lamentation of the obvious. Comments are open to better ideas.
Monday, August 12, 2019
Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)
Why is a bullshit race war more inspirational than the struggle for male sexual rights? I don't get it, it's so messed up. Another thing that SHOULD inspire rebellion, but fails to, is the travesty that is the Norwegian "justice" system with all its secrecy and lack of due process. The court hearing today was held behind closed doors in order to help the police coerce a confession, with potentially many weeks of solitary confinement also employed to that end:
And when he goes to trial there will be no jury because that has been abolished too. Which itself would be sufficient reason for civil war if people were sane, but Norwegians are so complacent that I am the only one still even criticizing it.
It's not more inspirational, it's just what the main stream media is cramming down everybody's throats... Divide and conquer.
Many people aren't only interested in the rights of their cocks Eivind. Maybe population replacement and the the ending of 2,500 years of history that began with the divine Ancient Greek culture and its substitution with a backward anti-sex religion that has many, many parallels with feminism, is something worth being inspired to fight against.
It's also a simple matter that any discussion of 'Male Sexualism' - which has been reduced to 'paedophilia advocacy' by the mainstream media - is even more forbidden and censored than extreme right wing politics.
The Chan discussion boards were long ago forced to clamp down on any 'sexualization of minors', yet only now after three mass shootings that it directly inspired has 8chan been taken offline (and even then reluctantly by Cloudflare).
I understand the attraction of Islam to a femisexualist such as yourself Evind. On the surface it appears to be almost exactly what you see Male Sexualism as - anti-porn and pro teen sex. Only trouble is, men who have sex with other men's wives or unmarried daughters (well unless they belong to the 0.1% top clan) get stoned to death and such. I would suggest you try moving to one of the dozens of Muslim countries you could emigrate to, as there appears nothing tying you to Norway anymore. But unless you happen to have an inbred hairy Muslim female cousin to be married off to, I doubt if you will get as much sex as you'd like, as Tinder is most certainly illegal in most Islamic societies, as are nightclubs or attempting to pick up women in the street.
Maybe you should be asking how we can compete with both Islamism and white nationalism for the hearts and minds of radically minded young men. Islam offers a fantasy - sex with virgins in a non-existent paradise, while the 0.1% have a monopoly on the babes in real life. We can create the Muslim paradise on Earth, although it would likely have to involve developing technologies such as virtual reality and sex robots.
The problem is you offer an equally absurd fantasy to Islam. Not even the consolation of porn or sex robots which are at least more real than the Muslim paradise. But you really have no idea how you're going to create a society in which the average young male gets plenty of pussy. By supporting Islamization, you're going to make it even worse, especially as for the next 100 years in Europe we'll just get feminsists and the Muslim community holding hands to force the worst anti-sex laws and attitudes on us (for example Sadique Khan banning posters of bikini clad women on the tube in London and justifying it by feminist arguments).
If Islam is no worse or better than Western feminism as regards sex laws, why do millions of horny sexually frustrated Muslim men want to move to Europe?
I could understand fighting for our culture if it were still worth preserving. But now we got the sort of culture that drives men to death for our normal sexuality and thinks that's a good thing. So I am really not enthusiastic about standing up for it, even though I see problems with Islam as well.
I don't believe I offer an absurd fantasy either, because it was real just a century ago! Picture the times of Egon Schiele, who is curiously described as "not a sex offender" in this article from just a year ago for doing exactly the same things as Epstein:
"By all appearances, Schiele’s sexual escapades were fully in keeping with the norm for a bourgeois young man. Because males were not considered suitable marriage partners until they had established themselves professionally, they were expected to spend their early 20s consorting with prostitutes and lower-class lovers. Most of these prostitutes were minors; the age of consent in fin-de-siècle Austria was 14. And since any woman who earned her living in the buff was considered to be morally compromised, the line between prostitution and modelling was slender. It is less surprising that Schiele had brief liaisons with his models than that his affair with Neuzil developed into a meaningful professional and personal partnership lasting four years. Nor is it surprising that, shortly before his 25th birthday, Schiele rejected Neuzil in favour of a more suitably bourgeois marriage partner, Edith Harms."
This is proof of the concept that society can have a permissive attitude to sex with teen girls. No porn, robots or other fantasy needed because we can do this in real life, and those things detract from our mission to get there, to say the least. And the odious values that hold us back are no deeper than something to be dismissed because one admires an artist who lived around 1900, so come on, let's make society snap out of it for the rest of us as well!
At least, Islam requires 4 witnesses as a minimum to convict the accused.
And they don't have agents provocateurs fully committed to entice people to carry out criminal acts that they otherwise would not commit, and this for the sole purpose of filling up prisons.
It's ironic that you use the example of the great Egon Schiele, who was famously imprisoned under Austria's child obscenity laws - the first man in history convicted for child porn offences, if you like. He also famously liked to paint himself masturbating.
An asexualist perhaps?
Anyway, Jeffrey Epstein certainly was a male sexualist. If only he had donated a few million in bitcoin to you. Or perhaps, given that his mansion was apparently stacked with teenage nudes, he feared that life would be no better for him under the puritanical 'regulations' of Eivind and the nofappists?
Egon Schiele didn't live up to his potential, then, but whatever porn existed at the time was far less dangerous than ours so not such a big deal. I wish I had lived up to my potential from childhood, which would mean never masturbating. Sadly I had no role models who could make me appreciate how valuable nofap is, so now I am trying to be such a role model for future generations at least. And work with the dregs of life that I got left to have the best possible sex. Breeding is now highest priority, which is another thing you aren't succeeding at it seems because you don't hold the complete male sexualist values. Those of us who do hold those values realize we need to make each moment count because life is short and sexual vitality is shorter still. Transhumanism is most likely not going to help you either to get anything more than the opportunities now at hand. It didn't help Epstein. The thing to do is to cut the meaningless crap such as porn and live while we can.
Okay, that is not my kind of art, but I didn't bring up Schiele to celebrate his style; only to illustrate the sexual permissiveness of his times.
I see The Antifeminist has gone on another rant against nofap and my brand of male sexualism:
MLTO is a funny idea, but don't you see how inconsistent it is to promote that alongside fapping? Men don't love teens only if they include fapping/porn! Then it's diluted right back to, yes, an asexualist movement.
My kind of male sexualism -- which is the real male sexualism, not because I say so but because male masturbation is objectively asexuality or at least takes you in that direction -- consists of loving real partners only. Age discrimination is fine as a parallel to MGTOW if one wants to make such an additional statement, but the real deal for mass appeal is to be inclusive to all healthy sex. I see no reason to change this or to abandon nofap, which is a real, wonderful benefit men can gain from joining our movement without waiting for law reforms that may never happen in our lifetimes. And IF they are going to go to prison, it is anyway better that they do so for real sex and get some value out of it, so it's part of our ideology to boycott, as it were, nay literally boycott, the kind of bogus sex crimes like underage pornography that puts you in prison for nothing and in fact for abusing yourself and diminishing your sexuality.
Hva skjedde med pornoentusiast og "sikkerhetsekspert" Gally egentlig. Vant han hele ankesaken fordi politiet hadde brutt noen prosedyrer da de tok han med Norges største ulovlige pornosamling, eller?
Jeg har ikke hørt fra ham eller fulgt godt nok med på nyhetene til å vite hvordan det gikk med ankesaken, men tviler sterkt på at han kom heldigere ut enn i tingretten. Han hadde jo ikke planer om å nekte straffskyld engang.
Does anyone know what happened to Gally?
Her kan du lese litt om din egen type høyreekstremisme. Jeg tror ikke samfunnet oppfatter deg som en god rollemodell akkurat.
Nei, vi mannlige seksualister klarer jo ikke å være rollemodeller for incels engang. Hvis de hadde sett opp til meg så hadde de absolutt gjort endringer i egne liv, for eksempel nofap, og de ville hatet sedelighetslovene og politiet i stedet for kvinner. Så det der er ikke hva jeg vil kalle "min type høyreekstremisme" -- og ikke oppfatter jeg meg som høyreekstrem heller. Kampen for seksuelle rettigheter går i en libertariansk retning som har lite til felles med hverken høyre eller venstre, og kanskje flest likhetstrekk med venstresiden unntatt feminismen, da vi står for en slags seksuell sosialisme mot kvinners seksuelle kapitalisme med tilhørende lover.
Da kan man kanskje beskylde deg for å ha et kommunikasjonsproblem. Du har blitt fremstilt som høyreekstrem i mange mainstream media, og du sier jo selv at du ikke klarer å være noen rollemodell for INCELS. Vi er trolig begge enige i at INCEL bevegelsen er en særdeles form for mannsaktivisme, som snarere trykker ned, enn bygger opp menn som trenger det. Den er også dårlig egnet til å skape sympati og forandring i samfunnet for menn med problemer av denne art. Feminister har vært mye flinkere. De har klart å overbevise samfunnet om at det meste som kvinner finner vondt og vanskelig er et samfunnsproblem, noe som igjen har ført til demokratiske forandringer i vesten. Menn som sliter med noe derimot, har blitt fortalt at de kan takke seg selv, med andre menns velsignelse vel å merke. Noen av disse mennene som føler seg langt nede, eller nederst på rangstigen, kommer sammen på nett under en INCEL bevegelse, og fyrer opp under ekstremisme, eller legitimerer vold. Trolig kun med eneste resultat at enten så dør man eller blir fengslet som for de fremste ekstremistene, og enhver som måtte identifisere seg i noen grad med en slik gruppering, blir stigmatisert ytterligere av storsamfunnet. Du har jo også vært med på å stigmatisere marginaliserte menn med dine ekstreme uttrykk.Så takk skal du faen meg ha!
Vi kan si at incelbevegelsen sprang ut av den mannsbevegelsen som eksisterte for ti år siden og som jeg var en del av da. Siden har den gått i en retning jeg ikke liker, mens min type mannsaktivisme har mistet nesten all oppslutning. Men jeg har gjort så godt jeg kan. Vi har forsåvidt et kommunikasjonsproblem, men den eneste måten å ikke bli stemplet som ekstremist av samfunnet er å være som dem, spesielt når det er menns rettigheter som står på spill. Det skal ingenting til for sympatien for mannlig seksualitet er syltynn, så det beklager jeg ikke. Jeg vet ikke hva slag puslete greier du ville ansett som god mannsaktivisme, men den ville hvertfall ikke gjort noen forskjell heller.
Nei, jeg klarer ikke være noen effektiv rollemodell fordi ideene mine inspirerer ikke. Heller ikke incels som ville hatt god nytte av dem. Du har helt rett i at det de i stedet idealiserer bare er egnet til å resultere i fengsling eller død. Hvis de derimot hadde begynt med nofap, så er jeg overbevist om at de fleste hadde kommet ut av inceldom på noen måneder. Og så kunne vi samlet oss om den politiske kampen mot sedelighetslovene også. Men i stedet er de altså opptatt av å hate kvinner og (hvis de er virkelig høyreekstreme) muslimer og innvandrere også, alt sammen komplett fremmed for meg. Jeg har ikke dessverre ikke noen løsning, bare konstaterer at det bærer i gal retning.
Jeg tror forøvrig at det hatet mot kvinner som det hevdes incels er i besittelse av, er sterkt overdrevet. Det er mye lettere å sverte hatefulle mennesker enn det motsatte. Det å bli mislikt av dem man hater vil ikke gått inn på en. Tvert imot er incels sterkt fortvilet over å ikke bli elsket av kvinner, noe som heller betyr at man liker kvinner så alt for godt, og ikke hater dem. Hatet er nok heller rettet mot kvinners holdninger og sin egen selvbebreidelse. Det vil nok falle for langt i dette innlegget å gi en oversikt over hva jeg anser som god mannsaktivisme, men jeg registrerer at du automatisk ville ansett det som puslete på forhånd. Men da kan jeg bare få tillegge at hva feminismen har fått til av samfunnsrevolusjon er langt fra puslete, og dette har de klart i all vesentlighet uten vold. Sagt annerledes, har de bedrevet lobbyvirksomhet på en slik måte at de har fått voldsmonopolet på sin side, og kan nå altså nyte fruktene av sin misjonering på den måten at om man ikke følger feministenes lov vil man bli i første rekke bli svertet, i annen rekke risikere sanksjonering, og i ytterste konsekvens fengsel.
Enig i at kvinnehatet til incels er sterkt overdrevet. Media kan jo ikke fremstille det som om det er synd på dem heller, så alt må vinkles slik at de er maksimalt ondskapsfulle, selv om det i praksis bare er et par tre stykker som har levd opp til den betegnelsen og angrepet kvinner.
Det du sier om feministenes overtakelse av monopolvoldsmakten er også helt korrekt.
Siden dine holdninger er ganske forandret fra slik de var for en 10 år siden, og nå mer i tråd med mine egne kunne jeg kanskje tilkjennegitt noe av det jeg vil legge i en fornuftig aktivisme. Men jeg ser at det likevel vil bli for langt og for komplisert for et kommentarfelt som dette. Jeg kan likevel si at min aktivisme rekker videre enn bare begrensningene til kjønn. Jeg vil påstå at det foreligger et personlighetstyranni i vårt samfunn, og det er der i første rekke diskrimineringen foregår. Da enkelte personlighetstyper blir foretrukket fremfor andre. Og at dette også er opplest og vedtatt at det er slik skal det være. Den store humanisten M.L.King jr. sa jo sågar at det var greit å dømme noen "on the content of their character." Med andre ord, en fiks legitimering av karakterdrap. Grunnleggende sett kan man identifisere to motsetninger i menneskets karakter: nevrotisisme og psykopatisme. Psykopatisme er idealisert og nevrotisisme er fordømt. I den grad en mann ender opp som INCEL mener jeg i første rekke henger sammen med hans grad av nevrotisisme. I den grad han er det motsatte, altså har suksess hos damene, henger sammen med hans grad av psykopatisme. Det er også viktig å poengtere graden av her. Det er ikke slik at enhver mann med nevrotiske trekk er uattraktiv, og at enhver psykopat er Don Juan, men i den grad valget står mellom disse ytterpunktene foretrekker kvinner alltid det psykopatiske over det nevrotiske. Dette er betenkelig siden nevrotisme er et langt mer humant og sympatisk karaktertrekk enn psykopatisme. Og det går langt videre enn bare hvem kvinner finner attraktive. Menn med psykopatiske trekk har også langt større suksess både sosialt og økonomisk, og siden de langt lettere kan drysse om seg med overfladisk sjarm, står de ikke i veien for å tale de politisk korrekte sitt språk i sin skinnhellige drakt av feminisme og antirasisme, for å gi noen eksempler. Det er denne fienden man som personlighetsaktivist står overfor, og selv om personlighetstyranniet er noe som rammer begge kjønn, rammer det menn mest, siden kvinner i større grad blir dømt utifra utseende, heller enn sin personlighet.
We need to make it clear that we are not engaged in "Preference Politics," i.e., that we don't say what we say because we possess any specific preference for young teenagers. In this TAF is wrong, because he thinks that Preference Politics are an effective strategy. Perhaps in his case, he really does possess an exclusive fetish for teenagers, and doesn't find older women attractive at all, but this doesn't, and shouldn't, make for a political ideology.
When I state that when a horny 11-year-old girl seduces and invites an older dude to come to her apartment and bang her like ma drum, or -- as is often the case -- seduces and invites several older dudes to come to her apartment and bang her like a drum, it's not because I have any preference for 11-year-old girls. It is simply the truth that whenever a 11-year-old girl is found having an orgy with a bunch of guys, it's because she initiated the sexual encounter and enthusiastically delighted in it. "Group rape of young teenagers" is almost always a fiction. They are not raped.
And the best way to prove that 11-year-olds are sometimes lustful, horny, and wet indeed is documenting it; ah, but that constitutes sinister pixels.
My "extreme troll" (which was a mistake) was saying that it's okay to rape 8-year-old girls. Obviously, it's not okay to rape 8-year-old girls. I don't actually hold this position. My position is simply a recognition of the fact that sex-drive sets in among women in varying young ages, and that it's a fact of reality that when a girl ages 11 or 12 or 13 is found having an orgy with a bunch of older dudes, or same-age boys, it's almost always at her initiation and desire. A strong sex-drive is a volcanic force; it shines as brightly as a thousand suns. An 11-year-old with a strong sex-drive is going to get her pussy filled, and recognizing that fact, and that she is not a "victim" and that the men she seduces are not "victimizers" says nothing about my preferences or lack thereof.
Raping 8-year-old girls is wrong, but if a 11-year-old girls seduces a bunch of men, they should not be punished. An old-school patriarchal solution to this "problem" would be getting her married off to someone, whether someone her own age or someone older. Alternatively, we can say that 11-year-olds girls having orgies is not a problem. Whatever attitude one takes, it has nothing to do with any preference. "Pedophilia" is a distraction, and Preference Politics of the kind TAF advocates are a problem. TAF is probably a legit ephebophile if he thinks that 30-year-old women are all disgusting. I'm not a pedophile or any "phile" - I'm just a sex realist and an age realist, which entails the recognition that a horny girl will always score if she so desires, usually with little trouble or effort on her part (since the male sex drive *on average* is higher), and girls sometimes turn horny even prior to puberty, or commence puberty rather early.
Ruining the lives of a bunch of teenage boys, or older men, who were seduced by a 11-year-old horny chick is wrong. Feminists will say, "They ruined her life," but this is bullshit - she had her fun, she had her orgasms, and what's ruining her life are the people brainwashing her to believe that she's been victimized. Her life is not ruined; it's just started! It is the men who will be sent to prison and penalized whose life is ruined, and what's what I resist.
What matters is male sexual interests, not preferences. This is a key issue, which TAF fails to recognize. Not ruining the lives of teenage boys who were seduced by a teenage girl is what's at stake, and not someone's random sexual proclivity.
Thanks to both of you for valuable comments. Tom, I am glad you don't support child rape and though I knew it was trolling when you said those things, they could give the wrong impression of what we are about. Trolling may also have a place in support of our movement, but it doesn't really fit my style other than as a contrast to make me stand out like the serious guy I am.
To the anonymous Norwegian, I've always thought MLK's spiel about judging people based on "the content of their character" was a positive message, but you made me think whether this socially accepted judgment may in fact favor the wrong kind of character, like the psychopath who thrives under feminism.
Because anti-sex laws are not enough, gotta have anti-sex toilets too.
@Tom Grauer - WTF are you talking about? Presumably 'TAF' you're referring to is me? Don't misrepresent what I advocate you fraud. You've been identifying as a paedophile, onside with the likes of Tom O'Carroll, calling for the age of consent to be reduced to minus 9 months, and you're claiming I have an 'exclusive fetish for teen girls'??
Well if you mean that unlike you I don't want to fuck small children, then I guess it's true I have an 'exclusive fetish for teens', especially if you define 'teens' as nubile young females up to 23 or so. I have little or no interest in 30 year old women, that's correct. Co-incidentally, neither do porn producers or fashion houses (the average age of a 'MILF' in porn is something like 26).
What I'm advocating as regards 'MLTO' is completely different to the 'ephebophile' autists. They believe they suffer from a pathology, and think the progressive left will eventually feel sympathy and take them under their wing, just like they did with trannys and other perverts. I recognize that attraction to teens is completely natural, and I also recognize that older women, even (or especially women in their twenties) are benefiting sexually from the feminist persecution of men who show any attraction to teenage girls. I don't want to be part of that. And maybe I'm just not as thirsty as you and Eivind. Even the best preserved 30 year old women are way below the average 16 year old girl.
Go fuck yourself. I don't know what possible benefit you've brought us in your short time here. I still don't know whether you're just a paedophile (incompetent) troll who did want to start a movement that indirectly helped normal people like myself and millions of others who have a natural attraction to teens, or you are a malicious troll trying to destroy any hope of a movement arising. I'm leaning very strongly to the latter now, but I do know Eivind's immediate and unquestioning acceptance of you was just another sign of his lack of judgement (also displayed in a less important way by his support for the female worshiping virtuous ephebophile Gally).
Other news - https://www.liveleak.com/view?t=kJkQ9_1566020831
Feminist #MeTOO mobs in Mexico attacking journalists, shouting 'I believe you' in response to an alleged rape of a teen girl by four policewomen.
Only apparently she's now admitted that she made the story up.
I've no doubt both you and Eivind would happily have sex with every one of the feminist psycho skanks in that video, btw.
It is sad to see that few people actually having some courage to fight this American neo-puritan plague are behaving like this. It would be better for you to stop all this guru-style bullshit (nofap,female sexual power or whatever) and concentrate on law, and negative influence that various nutters have on our law systems and society in this particular sector.
I don't agree with you that women cannot commit sexual violence, but last theantifeminist's article is saddening to me, whataboutery and revenge-policy is a poisonous thing.
Here are some of my points (if someone is interested)
.although US is considered culturally same as western Europe, it is absolutely different world in field of sexuality,human relationships;
unfortunately this gap is narrowing(thanks to rubbish from Holywood, Silicon valley dominance,and plethora of NGO's influence).
There should be purely inter-European movement, not affected by US thinking and attitudes.
For instance let's compare AVFM with AngryHarry, or even better with some non EN-speaking webs.
.it would be better and probably more passable to refer to (not so distant) European past, our attitudes and societal customs towards teenage sexuality, nudity, sex crime etc.
People can see that in 1970,1980s our continent was so different and it was perfectly working.
Reference to movies and literature of those times would be useful.
.to show what kind of fanatic nutters are working in field of women\children welfare NGO's , not caring about them, but only forcing their ideological views and\or acquiring financial or political capital for themselves.
.to show how this new "War with..." and "zero tolerance" is actually causing more harm than good, same as it was with drugs. Some nasty real-life stories would be useful.
Please be wise, if your ideological enemies would have behaved like (all of) you at this moment we would live in better world.
At the end I would dare to recommend some books (unfortunately not in English):
Une Amérique qui fait peur - Edward Behr
Uncle Sam's Sexualhölle erobert die Welt- Max Roth
Thanks for your input. You make some good points even if I don't agree with everything. I think I should do both what you call guru-style and concentrate on specific laws, which I admittedly have been slacking on lately. I obviously still have work cut out for me on the female sex offender charade though when you still think women can commit sexual violence! Sure they can commit sexualized violence, but it isn't any worse because of the sexual aspect. The sex is a red herring that the justice system only pays attention to thanks to feminist delusions of equality. There is no such thing as a sexual violation by a woman that carries any weight to reasonable humans beyond the violence itself, which means it is absurd to put them on trial for "rape" or "sexual assault" and even more absurd to pretend they can commit crimes of sexual exploitation like all the female teachers get charged with. It is surreal and painful on so many levels that I can't leave it alone, up there with lobotomy and witch-hunts and lynchings or any travesty you can think of, and this is happening RIGHT NOW, which makes it urgent too!
Post a Comment