I regard the female sex offender charade as a study in how stupid humans can be. In a series of posts I compare it to the other stupidest ideas I can think of and see how it measures up. So far the lie that women can sexually abuse wins hands down. So let's keep trying to see if anything can be more deranged!
I promised lobotomy as the next idea. While I agree that lobotomy is more damaging than locking women up for "sex crimes," it at least had some semblance of justification. Mentally disturbed people can be problematic to both themselves and others, and when nothing else helps I can see where they were coming from when lobotomy was introduced, even more so when used as palliative care as happened to Eva Peron for example. Is there that much ethical difference between terminal lobotomy and terminal sedation as might be practiced today? I certainly do not condone lobotomy, BUT... provided that it is performed in the last stages of a terminal illness, and not for merely mental or social problems of course, it is not so exceptionally stupid as to rival the female sex offender charade.
Let us now move on to another crazy idea: belief in a flat earth. What flat-earth theory has going for it, that the female sex offender charade does not, is that it is phenomenologically true, at least in many everyday situations. If you get up in an airplane or even stare off into the horizon, the earth does look curved to me, but much of the time our immediate experience tells us that it might as well be flat. The female sex offender charade would merely be more ridiculous than flat earth if it weren't backed by violence, which also makes it morally repugnant.
The required-by-law metaphor for any kind of persecution of the innocent is a witch-hunt. And of course the female sex offender charade is a witch-hunt, even an actual one, but it is so much worse. Both because female sex offenders are nicer than other women and because witchcraft and other supernatural phenomena can be phenomenologically true. People really do have such subjective experiences as clairvoyance and ghosts and spirits and alien abductions and so on up to and including the complete mystical experience of being God.
But boys do not feel sexually abused by women, not in the theft-of-a-resource/exploitation sense that is required to fit that designation, because there is no male resource that is sexually exploitable by women in our social and biological reality. Of course they can be physically abused in a sexualized manner and feel very bad about that, but there is no transfer of sexual value to women because the kind of economy in which that could be true simply does not exist. "Sexual abuse by female" is counterfeit in much the same way as if you were to try to pass off Monopoly money as real. This is not open to debate, because it is an objective fact about the nature of the sexual market. It is (for lack of a better word) insane to pretend male sexuality is suddenly equal to female for the sole purpose of punishing women when all other experience tells us that male heterosexuality is dirt cheap like Monopoly money.
Again like flat earth, supernatural phenomena feel real to some people some of the time, though they don't stand up to scientific scrutiny. Sexual abuse by female never feels real -- at least not without a great deal of brainwashing imposed not by a healthy society but feminist law enforcement and "therapist" charlatans -- and is obviously scientifically false. It bears some relation to a supernatural phenomenon imposed from the top, by feminist legislators, kind of like transubstantiation is imposed by Catholic doctrine. Even though most partakers in the Eucharist probably don't feel very mystical about it, the sacrament at least latches onto a realm of experience that people can have and on occasion do.
Not so with the female sex offender charade, which is a sheer lie from beginning to end. It is insanity piled on top of the already insane persecution of male sexuality. While the persecution of men for abuse of females can be considered merely comparable to superstitions like transubstantiation (because it has some element of "truth" in the sense acknowledged above -- there really is a female sexual resource that males can exploit, though not nearly as often as laws now claim), the persecution of female "sex offenders" is in a realm so bizarre that it requires this series of writings to explicate. Well, unless you take the view of women as property and consider the feminist sex laws as based on an ulterior motive like that, but I think we should also debunk them according to their claimed merits so their proponents can be made to feel as stupid as they deserve. Lies, superstition, charlatanism, greed, insanity, nocebo, bigotry, ignorance, misogyny and subjugation of women -- all these concepts play a role, but the female sex offender charade transcends all of them and requires further explication; I am just getting started here.
Monday, January 06, 2020
Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)
Well you're preaching to a very tiny choir,and of course I agree.but there's a new problem.not the "threat" to $merikkka, since none exists, none externally anyway.
"We" meaning $merikkka led by an impeached orange pig buffoon, has started a new "war"(it'll actually be another one sided slaughter, which is NOT "war") and Iran, after being baited for years, caved in tonight after the u.s empire murdered their #3 guy.so they finally launched missiles, which means "we've" been attacked.
and right after this POS was impeached.this is another really sickening low moment in this shitass empires sad slide into authoritarianism or possibly even worse.capitalism is dying,LOTTA fools LOVE the inequality! MOSTLY "conservatives" aka brain dead shit.
well that's my rant, and we'll see just how bad THIS gets.
I would love to see trump GONE though.
Hes not the "chosen one" he's NOT the saviour of the white race.
the bum is just greed personified, the definition of the "ugly american".
well said all.
War with Iran getting started now? Maybe so, but the sexual persecution goes on despite this other madness, unless it escalates all the way up to WWIII and kills us all. So male sexualism is still as important as ever.
Trump backed down from confronting Iran, so the worst war is still the sex war. Carry on the resistance.
The UN is responsible for pushing the global anti-sex pedo hysteria.
"A girl of 12 reaches puberty and needs sexual contact"
This is another angle to win. That age of consent laws are cruel and unusual punishment on our children, who need sexual contact to function normally.
We see the effects of a lack of sexual contact in the West - more and more people turning to psychiatric drugs and transexualism - in other words, a lack of natural sexual stimulation is driving our children and adults insane.
There is also another study showing the earlier the first sexual experience, the more stable a person reported feeling in life.
Yes, I've seen those studies too -- not that we need them, because it is obvious. Early sexual experience is good for you, and boys also get messed up by porn and masturbation while society conspires to keep them away from women via the female sex offender charade. If there is one idea that might actually match the insanity of the lie that women sexually "abuse" underage boys instead of doing them favors, it is the idea that porn/masturbation is healthy to them. Profap is the mirror image of the female sex offender charade, and necessary to keep it going, while nofap might be sufficient to destroy their entire agenda.
The concept of "concept creep" is another way we can attempt to understand the female sex offender charade.
"Many of psychology’s concepts have undergone semantic shifts in recent years. These conceptual changes follow a consistent trend. Concepts that refer to the negative aspects of human experience and behavior have expanded their meanings so that they now encompass a much broader range of phenomena than before. This expansion takes ‘horizontal’ and ‘vertical’ forms: concepts extend outward to capture qualitatively new phenomena and downward to capture quantitatively less extreme phenomena. The concepts of abuse, bullying, trauma, mental disorder, addiction, and prejudice are examined to illustrate these historical changes. In each case, the concept’s boundary has stretched and its meaning has dilated."
But it still doesn't explain why something obviously beneficial such as women being sexually nice to boys should be contrived as abuse. Once again, words fail us to capture the insanity of the female sex offender charade.
On some level, surely you can see that a random MRA visiting this site would not be able to make any sense of you calling yourself a men's rights activist?
You come across a brilliant paper that looks into the 'concept creep' that we've been talking about in relation to 'paedophilia' for the last 11 years, and your first thought is 'does it explain the female sex offender charade'?
You've been obsessing about this for over a decade now and you still haven't a clue why feminists say women being 'sexually nice' to boys is contrived as abuse?
Maybe it's the CIA? Maybe Anglo-Saxon puritanism? Maybe the pedo commentator has convinced you it's not feminists at all because Camilla Pagilia once said nice things about pedos? Maybe a finer analysis is needed?
Of course concept creep is what we have been talking about happening to male "abusers," and to some extent applying the same definitions to women is a "logical" extension of the same madness. But it is also so insane that it beggars belief that they can get away with it, because boys had ZERO use for this kind of protection in the first place and now it is actively preventing their sexual success. So yes, I still need a finer analysis to get to the bottom of it.
And yes, I am well aware that the "random MRAs" don't see me as one of them, which is why we had to rebrand as male sexualism. They don't even see you as one of them, because the random MRAs have lost the plot just like the rest of society.
More nocebo nonsense:
"All of her victims, including their parents, believed that Gemma was a 16-year-old boy who was in a relationship with the young girls, only finding the truth when they were told by police."
So apparently being told by police that a boy is actually a woman is supposed to invoke the nocebo magic in this case -- but if so, why go through with telling them?
It is so sad that society can sink so low. It bothers me more than the persecution of men because it isn't simply a case of overprotection, but delusional thinking that makes me feel like an alien for being rational.
Antisex bigotry has also infested the Mormon Church and overridden anything formerly sacred:
In 2016, the lawsuit states, plaintiff Kristine Johnson learned that her husband, Timothy Johnson, had engaged in inappropriate conduct with an underage girl.
"In response to that, plaintiff Kristine Johnson and Timothy Johnson followed the rules and scriptures of the church, which ... requires and admonish church members to 'confess their sins unto the brethren before the Lord,'" the lawsuit says.
But the church failed to advise the couple that if he followed the guidance and confessed his sins, it would report him to state authorities. The church should have warned her husband that his confession would not stay private, the lawsuit says.
Timothy Samuel Johnson, 47, was arrested in 2017 and is serving 15 years in prison.
Not that I was ever a huge fan, but I thought they would consider their own principles more important than being an agecuck and suck feminist ass. I am once again genuinely shocked by how "sexual abuse" gains another foothold as the supreme bedrock of reality. As far as I know the Catholic Church still has a little bit of spine left though and wouldn't have reported confessions to the police, so if you want to be religious that would be a better choice -- or better yet, convert to Islam.
Sexual abuse is the eternal truth to which everything else must yield. Sexual abuse is stronger than love or loyalty or duty or God or Jesus or whatever else you believe in -- with the possible exception of Allah -- the supreme principle to which everyone and everything else must bow down. And bring on the concept creep, every last bit that the feminists can dream up, and all the holy and unholy men down to the last prisoner who isn't a nonce will solemnly internalize it and lie prostrate before the "sexual abuse," doing everything that this concept demands, because it is the supreme religion of our times, so powerful that it even swallows (almost) all other religions.
And she got eight years:
Simply because teen girls believed she was a 16-year-old boy instead of a 21-year-old woman, it is "grooming" and "sexual assault" to these dimwits. A culture so irrational that it thinks this constitutes abuse is beyond hope. The worst part is that so many people read these news reports and don't realize that they are bullshit, that there is no substance to the "abuse" whatsoever, all a delusion spun by feminists, primarily intended control male sexuality of course but now crept into oppressing women while nobody but us male sexualists looked back.
Can the true believers in the female sex offender charade articulate which mechanism by which, at the level of human experience, women have the capacity to "sexually assault"? I mean how the physical acts take on that significance? Of course they can't, and they don't even try because the populace is so docile that invoking the word is enough, and most of the time, like here, they don't even mention what the physical acts are supposed to be so we can try to evaluate whether they deserve the significance that feminist jurisprudence assigns to them. But if they did, it would be something so lame that it doesn't even require getting naked and revealing that she was a woman, and nobody questions this either because the trance of "sexual abuse" dupes you all and removes all critical ability.
antifeminist, yes, we understand these laws are meant to preserve the SMV of jealous harpies. however, this ignores all the cuck male judges and police, basically the whole system, going along with the abuse narrative - now that certainly requires finer analysis.
btw Gemma Watts wins the award for PUA of the new millennium so far. Guess it takes a woman to know a woman.
I've always said female PUA's are the best because they know the laws apply to them far less than a man, so they're more aggressive. She's going to jail even though she's a woman and the charges are bullshit because the harpies (and cucks apparently) hate young female sexuality. Imagine if a man did what she did? 8 years (4 years) would be a gift from heaven.
As for the catholic church, there is no hope. Have you seen the latest pope??
Also on that note, there seems to be a much deeper, sinister conspiracy going on than just anti-male sentiment.
Years ago, I watched daygame infield videos by the obscure lesbian PUA Flye Hudson. They were informative, and she was pretty successful, showing pulls back to her place. In the videos, she was empathetic, and super sexually aggressive because she knew the laws did not apply to her - it was like watching a man in a more normal society. Pretty cool stuff.
Well, I see now those videos were banned by Youtube in 2019. But this was just girls picking up girls, no guys involved. Faces and identities were obscured too. So why would Youtube ban the videos?
Seems to me like there is a general war against young female sexuality, no matter the orientation or gender. Applies to trannies taking over female sports too, although that is admittedly hilarious. Wtf is happening, and why is it originating in English speaking countries? This is beyond feminism and anti-male culture - it's like a new sex negative globalist religion with the UN and tech companies as Vatican City.
Yes, the sex-hostility is definitely more sinister than just misandry, because they ruin it for women too in very surprising ways. It is more like a religion of antisex and not just young either.
Canada taking it to the next level:
"Last April, Quebec author Yvan Godbout and his publisher Nycolas Doucet were charged with producing and distributing child pornography. The charges against them stem from a single paragraph in one of Godbout’s novels, a dark retelling of Hansel and Gretel, in which a father sexually assaults his daughter. Godbout and Doucet were arrested in March 2019, after a reader came upon the passage and called the authorities. The work was not marketed to children, contains no explicit visual images, a content warning was printed on the back, and the scene is meant to be horrifying, not erotic."
As crazy as this is, I do feel some glee when antisex criminalization even hurts those who are trying to portray sex negatively. At this rate the abuse industry is set to cannibalize itself, so I really hope they get a conviction in this case. The trial is scheduled for September 2020.
Another sad case of the female sex offender charade:
Toronto doctor stripped of licence after panel hears she had sex with cancer patient in his hospital bed.
Which goes to show how much more sinister the feminist antisex bigotry is than "just" targeting youth, because this is the very other end of life, making sure there is no intimacy till the bitter end due to their insane "abuse" definitions. It is hard to conceive of anything more anti-life than feminism, such a complete and total killjoy and delusional bigotry, which consists of one hateful value and only that, inflexibly applied to destroy every last glimmer of sexuality.
It's not all feminism though, sex-positive feminism is far better and we have allies there.
Porn is not a health crisis:
That is almost correct, in the same way inceldom isn't a public health crisis but a private one where the public doesn't give a shit about the men affected. Porn does lead to some clinical diagnoses of impotence and so on, but not enough to merit the term "health crisis" -- except for the men involved. So the question is, do YOU care about your sexual health, or are you happy to be a sucker who gets his ideas from society as to what he should care about based on what the politically correct mainstream considers important?
And even more to the point, do you care about your sexual success beyond what society considers "normal"? Or do you want to do better than that level of mediocrity? Which abstaining from porn and masturbation can greatly help you with! Hell, society doesn't even consider it a crisis that we can't legally have sex with teen girls, or that men and women get draconian sentences for victimless sex like that. How come some otherwise fine male sexualists suddenly defer to the mainstream when told porn isn't bad for them? Oh, I know the answer: anosognosia!
I suspected this was so, and this study confirms probably one of the reasons why I have managed to get away with blogging so forthrightly without any convictions. But on the downside it also means our activism is less emotionally impactful in our home countries when we write in a foreign language.
Crime and punishment: Morality judgment in a foreign language.
Woumans, E., Van der Cruyssen, I., & Duyck, W. (2020). Crime and punishment: Morality judgment in a foreign language. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1037/xge0000736
The current study examined whether use of a foreign language affects the manner in which people evaluate a criminal situation. We employed a range of crime scenarios, for which severity judgment scores were obtained. Crimes that were written in a foreign language were systematically evaluated as less severe compared with the same cases described in the native language. We propose that these differences may be due to attenuated emotional processing in a nonnative language. Crucially, this observed variation in severity judgment may also affect magistrates and police interrogators confronted with crime scenarios formulated in a foreign tongue. This in turn would have inevitable consequences for the penalty they will or will not exact on the suspect. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2020 APA, all rights reserved)
Eivind - that study also confirms what I’ve been saying about how there seems to be an English language-related problem with punishment. Other societies look at sex and interpret the situation totally differently. Yes, France and India have changed their laws to be worse on paper (mostly from English-speaking UN pressure), but the cultures are completely unaccepting of the laws currently, which will dramatically lower effective prosecution.
As for antifeminist’s latest posts, sexual trade union theory is correct, and it is also true that convicted female offenders would still call for the extreme punishment of male offenders and effective AOC laws if given the chance.
However, the real problem is not feminine nature, which was largely successfully tamed throughout history. The real problem is cuck white knights who allowed women to spiral completely out of control by giving men’s rights to women, and of course worshiping women. What’s an easier fix, getting a society of red pilled men together who make “white sharia” type laws, or fixing women through tech? I would argue the former, because feminists will be able to interfere with tech that fixes women as long as women are empowered with men’s rights.
All men could turn around tomorrow and remove men’s rights from women, and there wouldn’t be a thing any woman could do about it. So the problem lies with powerful simps basically. Funny thing is women are crying out for this to happen by importing all the Islamist darkies; they want to be controlled so badly by their native men, but it’s simply not happening.
I rarely even get angry at things like this anymore. Reading articles like this just feels like a dreary grind now. Another day, same bullshit...
Yeah, the same story just keeps repeating, that one is supposed to be damned for life by the slightest "sexual abuse," no matter how contrived. And sure, men could stop it if we wanted, but too many just go along with it. So it looks pretty hopeless.
Wouldn't it be nice to have a sliver of good news somewhere?
There's a blog called Face to Face (http://akinokure.blogspot.com/2020/01/bernies-last-chance-slam-metoo-as-witch.html) that argues for cycles, primarily in the US from what I can work out, in which people are outgoing, and in which people go inside their shells. This can be seen in everything from politics to pop music.
The owner believes the US has been in an extremely introverted stage but is beginning to come out of it. #MeToo epitomises the stage we have been in since round 2015, but people will become more outgoing and open-minded as we enter the 2020's.
IMHO there's something in it. Especially since the US is such a large influence on the rest of the world, there might be some cause for hope. For all I know, the owner has conventional views on teens and adults, but even so, who knows?
Just some links containing interesting views on Matzneff affair:
There are multiple articles on both sites, so I wont link every article separately.
Scary Matzneff's words from Roland Jaccard's blog article published in August:
He(Matzneff) ends his message with these words to which I fully subscribe: "The vulgarity, stupidity and Quackerism continue to expand their empire on the entire planet. To escape them, some have no other solution than to hang themselves in their New York cell (he alludes to the Epstein case). When's our turn, dear Roland? "
Yes, antisex bigotry is certainly not an anglophone phenomenon anymore. Even Japan is now set to get feminist rape laws:
There really is no light in the tunnel, only getting worse.
Well, there is the Amish. They are not feminists yet, and probably practicing nofap or at least no-porn, which translates to staggering sexual vitality...
The Amish punishment for sexual misconduct is merely to be shunned for six weeks by the community, and they even manage to hoodwink the justice system into tolerating more sexuality from them than other groups can dream of. Or did until this publicity, anyway.
Notice how all the women are portrayed as passive victims, but this is only the tip of the iceberg we are seeing here, those most likely to talk to feminists and be indoctrinated by them.
Perhaps the best part: no female sex offender charade!
Thank you Anonymous for your contribution and for belling the cat about those triple brackets.
My explanation, for what it's worth, of what Eivind called "the female sex offender charade" is this. Female sexual consent must come at a price for men. It cannot and may not be free. Hence, attractive women who give away sex for free are a threat to female power. They are betraying womankind. Outside their sexual consent, women have nothing, repeat NOTHING to trade in this world. Cheapening female sexual consent is the ultimate treason. What about women giving sex away to grown men then? Well, in that case some quid pro quo from the man is implied, while with a boy the contrary holds true.
In my view this also explains the irrational war on drugs. Hard drugs are known to make women abnormally horny, to the point they forget about charging for sex and give it for free. Indeed women who do hard drugs become as promiscuous and sex-seeking as men. This cannot be, as female sexual consent is the ultimate currency, primordial to all other currencies. If female sexual consent were storable, central banks would hold female sexual consent reserves instead of gold reserves.
Post a Comment