Take a look at the list of accused "sex offenders" in this news story: https://newspunch.com/arizona-cops-bust-massive-pedophile-ring-as-part-of-operation-broken-hearts/
Where others see another name on a list of targets we are accustomed to the police state putting out, I see a monumental step in the evolution of evil. Whereas previously women have only been entrapped under the "vice" paradigm of antisex bigotry for which no feminism is needed, or at most the "trafficking" that feminists have upgraded it to, this is the first time I have seen a successful entrapment of a woman because the persecutors are ostensibly protecting children from sexuality and hence doing it under the "victim" paradigm. I am not positively sure it is a woman, just going by the name, so forgive me if it is a transsexual or boy named Jessica, but what I am about to say applies to the point in history when women are also subjected to this kind of evil. It may have started a little earlier or later than this, but can't be far away the way things are going now.
Her name is Jessica Mihalovits:
"Jessica Mihalovits, 39, Mesa: Aggravated Luring of a Minor for Sexual Exploitation and Attempted Sex Conduct with a Minor."
"It’s like fishing. You put the bait out; the fish will come," Phoenix Police Commander Jim Gallagher told reporters after that sting ended.
Yes, that's what we are used to for men, and men are so worthless that nobody cares anymore, but we should not let this monster get away with pretending it's just another day in the feminist police state when they employ the same evil methodology against women. We should all be appalled at this escalation and women should be concerned for their safety. The female catch is 1 out of 34 (about 3%) here, but nothing prevents them form ramping this up because all conceptual barriers have been broken down.
And notice the Orwellian name of the crime here as lying monsters lure you into incriminating yourself for "luring a [fake] minor." Once you have accepted entrapment as a valid police method, there is a temptation for everyone. It's just a matter of exploiting your biggest weakness. Since they have so little intrinsic interest in it, the most viable way to entrap women into attempted sex with a minor is to offer money for it, which for all I know is what the pigs have done here already.
Using entrapment, it is just a matter of resources to have whatever level of crime and punishment is politically expedient, all while pretending it is "justice" at work rather than an outright holocaust. Only the delusional belief that sex is the greatest evil prevents cops from using this method for all other crimes as well. They get away with it because the culture doesn't protest, because no principles of justice are demanded for "sex crimes," with no limit to the triviality or absurdity or fakery involved to thus construe them. For now, we who see this antisex bigotry for what it is can only chronicle the evolution of evil. Nothing will change any time soon except for the worse, and my hope for this post is simply that historians will have something contemporary to look back on that wasn't as deranged as the rest of the culture when they write the history of feminist antisex persecutions and particularly the female sex offender charade. I am not sure if we have such sources for other historical witch-hunts -- someone who didn't go along with the mass-psychosis at the time it was ongoing -- and would appreciate if readers could point me to sources if there is a precedent for what I am doing.
Saturday, April 17, 2021
Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)
At least, in this case there are a few people that protest:
That article was from 2010 and what has happened since in Australia? Last I heard was in 2017 they had moved past the point of banning pictures of small-breasted women to imprisoning men just for chatting:
So now, presumably it is enough to describe and sexualize small breasts in a few words as well, and they can and will persecute you.
On the other hand here is a little bit of current pushback against hateful sex laws, but I doubt it will go anywhere:
Consensual incest advocates are rooting for an anonymous New York parent who wants to marry their own adult child.
Australian Richard Morris, who is pushing to change incest laws in about 60 countries, said he supports the legal push in Manhattan Federal Court and that such behavior between consenting adults “should not be criminalized.”
He and other advocates have launched about 130 petitions, mostly on change.org, seeking to change incest laws around the world. Most have received little support.
“We haven’t moved any mountains yet,” he told The Post.
Morris was inspired to fight for those in consenting incestual relationships, he said, after learning about a Scottish case in which a long-separated father and daughter were reunited, started an affair and were then criminally convicted.
I was watching the jake paul/ben askren ppv fight last night, and it was 2 hours of rap, and gross old ladies with giant tits and huge weirdly shaped asses dancing. Is this what "normal" men are attracted to? Disgusting.
Why is asutralia talking about 18 anyways. The AoC is 16 there. What the hell is up with this magical number 18 that everyone is so obsessed with.
18 is the global unofficial age of consent, already established as a cultural norm by the feminist media and to which laws are slowly catching up. If it hasn't been criminalized yet, they will still try to make a scandal out of any interaction across that line to shame the older person and make him think he might as well be punished.
In other news, France's absolute rape age of 15 is finalized:
Firstly the title "France outlaws sex with children aged under 15" is deliberately deceptive because it i was already outlawed, but let's dismiss that as clickbait and get down to how they actually describe this new concept of absolute pretend-rape as distinct from statutory rape or abuse:
"The French parliament on Thursday adopted legislation that characterizes sex with a child under the age of 15 as rape and punishable by up to 20 years in jail, bringing its penal code closer in line with many other Western nations."
So such sex is now "characterized as" rape -- well, that falls short of saying that it is rape. It doesn't seem like the antisex bigots quite believe their own propaganda and it shines through that they are merely going to punish it as if it were rape. Like I said on Twitter:
Good job trivializing rape, France. When rape is constituted by an age difference of five years, do we accept this technicality as reality or see through it and consider rapists guilty of civil disobedience rather than anything morally decrepit?
So of all the thousands and thousands of men who have been caught via entrapment by the pigs over the years, and when one female gets caught as collateral damage, you need to get on your trusty white steed and ride to her defence.
She'll almost certainly be given a suspended sentence, while the men will serve time and perhaps get anally raped or physically maimed by other male inmates.
Good to see you apologize on behalf of all your readers who would be offended by you misgendering Jessica as a female.
Eivind, there wont be historians in 1,000 years trying to figure out how the 'female sex offender charade' happened. Nobody cares except you. All you're doing is making it even more difficult for any future digital historians to see that there was an actual modicum of (intellectual) resistance to the feminist sexual holocaust of men.
The one word you got right there is “collateral damage.” Incarcerating female “sex offenders” in the feminist war on sex is a lot like bombing weddings in the war on terror. When parents with dollar signs in their eyes make boys accuse nice female teachers, we might understand it as such. It is regrettable, but explicable from the feminist point of view, just like bombing a wedding by mistake. When, however, pigs target women out of thin air in a sting -- okay, it might be a loose cannon this time, an incredibly rare fluke. But it deserves mention because by appearance it is like bombing weddings on purpose. If the Pentagon had announced “Operation Broken Hearts” (which was the actual name of this antisex sting) where they are going to target weddings all over the Middle East on purpose because there might be a terrorist in attendance -- future historians would be interested in that. Even more so if people failed to see the inhumanity of it -- except one lone dissident like me who can’t even elicit sympathy from the rest of the anti-war movement. That is what this step means to me, the point where pigs shamelessly make war on the collateral damage and treat it like a legitimate target in the sex war. It is profoundly significant because it represents not just an escalation of the persecution but a breakdown of the moral barrier to where not just men but now women too should be picked off at random for purely hypothetical sex crimes. With that, another huge chunk of what I thought was shared humanity is gone. That the pigs don’t feel nauseated by netting a woman in their hateful fishing operation, but proudly think they are having a good day on the job -- AND NO ONE EXCEPT ME GIVES THEM FEEDBACK TO THE CONTRARY -- is very bad news for humanity, compounding the already absurd situation where women are persecuted for better than victimless crimes with another layer of inhumanity.
Yes, I found another link where we can see them in larger pictures individually:
If you scroll all the way to the end there is Jessica Mihalovits. Not the prettiest female "sex offender"; if you told me she is trans I would believe you, but even so and with all the antisex hate that allows them to do anything they want, it looks like the pigs still have enough shame left to hide her away at the end.
We also learn that this is an annual sting by the Phoenix Police Department, so beware. It is absolutely mind-boggling that manufacturing fake crime like this to procure bodies for the prison system is normalized as proper "police work," female victims or not.
Stings like this are to me the final clincher for why cops morally deserve any and all evil. They can't use the excuse that they are “enforcing” laws that somebody else made since they are manufacturing crimes that wouldn't exist if not for their lies. This wouldn't fly in Norway just yet except perhaps when vigilantes do it (which is in a gray zone that courts sometimes accept, sometimes not), but why do Americans accept it? Why do you accept entrapment as regular police work from a force that is supposed to “serve and protect”?
They don't do it with temptations that are TOO obviously normal, such as depositing money into people’s bank accounts only to arrest you for theft if you try to spend it. Why not, when the concept is the same? Truth is you need a crimen exceptum for entrapment to be socially accepted, which any kind of sex crime now is, further propped up with the dishonest definition of “child” to include teenagers. The conceptualization cops use to justify it to themselves so they can sleep at night is that they are “targeting sexual predators” as if these people are already inherently sexual predators, who are just identified by the sting rather than created. There are many problems with this. Firstly, entrapment is so morally problematic even when it truly targets the bad guys that sensible people and most entire justice systems apart from the American one reject it, at least unless it also uncovers some real crime. It is extremely problematic to make the leap that just because someone falls for the contrived temptation of a police sting with no other evidence, they would have caused any trouble in real life. Life is a mixture of opportunity and tendency, we all have some bad tendencies of one kind or another, and it is batshit crazy to separate people into good and bad based on tendency alone -- might as well make the entire world a prison then. But if you are going to target people this way, for God’s sake at least make the fake temptation something you would have to be deviant to want, which in this case would mean prepubescent children, not the 15-year-olds they always pose as. The way they conduct these stings is by design to entrap sexually normal men, using sexually mature baits. This makes the evil bottomless, literally just singling out men at random for imprisonment who are no different than others, just like you would be if you spend money that mysteriously appear in your bank account, at which point it would be too much of a stretch even for deranged American piggies to claim they were just targeting some kind of pre-made criminal. But this is in fact what they are doing with “sexual predators” too, literally no different in kind. Always remember this when something evil befalls a cop. They have absolutely no moral leg to stand on whatsoever as human beings, because evil is how they chose to do their job. A sting like this is always an initiative of the police department -- pure, unadulterated, premeditated, inexcusable evil.
By the way I came across this book on the last kind of crimen exceptum, and wow the description is so eerily familiar it might as well be written about sex crimes, complete with the vigilantes and NGOs that serve the same roles as witchfinders today and how any problem can be blamed on sex...
"As the author notes, `The early-modern European witch-hunts were neither orchestrated massacres nor spontaneous pogroms. Alleged witches were not rounded up at night and summarily killed extra-judicially or lynched as the victims of mob justice. They were executed after trial and conviction with full legal process'. In this concise but highly-informed account of the persecution of witches, Gregory Durston demonstrates what a largely ordered process was the singling-out or hunting-down of perceived offenders. How a mix of superstition, fear, belief and ready explanations for ailments, misfortune or disasters caused law, politics and religion to indulge in criminalisation and the appearance of justice. Bearing echoes of modern-day `othering' and marginalisation of outsiders he shows how witchcraft became akin to treason (with its special rules), how evidentially speaking storms, sickness or coincidence might be attributed to conjuring, magic, curses and spells. All this reinforced by examples and detailed references to the law and practice through which a desired outcome was achieved.In another resonance with modern-times the author shows how decisions were often diverted into the hands of witch-hunters, witch-finders (including self-appointed Witchfinder General, Matthew Hopkins), witch-prickers and other experts as well as the quaintly titled `cunning-folk' consulted by prosecutors and `victims'. Crimen Exceptum (crimes apart).A straightforward and authoritative guide. Shows the rise and fall of prosecutions. Backed by a wealth of learning and research."
What is so striking is how the full legal process can be subverted to serve complete gobbledygook, with all the actors solemnly participating in the persecution of nothing, EXACTLY how we do sex crimes now. A lynch mob is a lot less horrifying by comparison.
So women could now be targeted in online sting operations, not just men. But why would that be bad news? Unlike the hot teachers Eivind feels so strongly about, such female online baiters are not making young men happy. If anything, they're participating in the entrapment of males. They're are a mix of self-appointed pedophiles huntresses, gold-diggers peddling pics or illegal sexual services, blackmailers, mischief makers who rejoice in getting men into trouble etc. What is so wrong about their henceforth running the same risk as men (although I doubt they really do)?
No man is an Iland, intire of itselfe; every man is a peece of the Continent, a part of the maine; if a Clod bee washed away by the Sea, Europe is the lesse, as well as if a Promontorie were, as well as if a Manor of thy friends or of thine owne were; any mans death diminishes me, because I am involved in Mankinde; And therefore never send to know for whom the bell tolls; It tolls for thee.
That is why. John Donne was a male sexualist. He understood what it is about.
"Entrapment of males"
Sounds like abuse hysteria from feminists. I wish a hot 20 year old would have "entrapped" me when I was 14. Lolol.
"Entrapment" refers to falling victim to a sting operation. It is possible that most female victims of antisex stings (other than those targeting sex workers) are likely to be self-appointed pedophile hunters, which raises the question of whether they deserve it when they find themselves on the other side. There is a certain poetic justice to that and Jack has a point, but everything I've said about the vileness of stings is still applicable in principle.
Might Jessica Mihalovits be a vigilante trying to entrap men and the cops didn't believe her that she is "one of them"? It is possible, sure, perhaps even the most likely explanation for how a woman got ensnared in something they are so unlikely to do that this looks like the first time in world history.
Oh look, Jake Paul under fire now for "sexual assault"
Had consensual sex with a 17 year old. Will this be the end of his career?
I don't even understand the story this girl is telling.
'One of those days, I was in the studio - some people were recording down there - and Jake pulled me into this little corner area in the studio and started kissing me. I was fine with that. I did think he was cute,' Paradise said in a YouTube video earlier this month.
Paradise claimed Paul then led her to his bedroom and they started dancing and kissing until 'he took it to his bed.' She claimed that when she moved her hands away from him, he asked: 'If nothing's going to happen, what's the point?'
Paradise said: 'Sex is very special and very important to me. Normally, everybody respects me when I don't want to do sexual things, so I thought that it was fine if I went in his room. I thought it would be fine to kiss him, because I thought he would stop if I didn't want to do anything else.'
Soooo? I don't get it. She pulled his hand away. He said come onnnn, lets just have sex. Then she had sex. How is that sexual assault lol. Why is it in none of these stories does the girl ever say "no". These girls are like little 4 year old children that can't take care of themselves. I bet she was just butthurt because he didnt reply to her texts afterwards.
Yes, there is nothing to understand beyond a redefinition of normal sexuality to rape and abuse. That sounds like something they need the latest definition of "rape" for which Sweden and Denmark already got and Norway soon will have, where sex with no force/threats/impairment but without explicit consent is covered. There is nothing left to do except realize we are all rapists and weaken them that way because there has to be some limit to how far they can punish men for just being normal.
Yes, let's desexualize gymnastics and get rid of the only reason why I would possibly want to watch it. It is now entirely irrelevant. Who needs sports, anyway? Cut the funding and put the girls to drudgery. As a display of how awful sex is is a weird reason why they think they should get attention, but that's what this culture teaches, and men need to simply ignore that stupidity.
"US gymnast Simone Biles, who has said she was sexually abused by jailed sports doctor Larry Nassar, said last week that one reason she was competing at the Tokyo Olympics this year was to speak out and give survivors of abuse a voice."
A survivor of having consensual sex with a doctor when she was 17 I bet. Life is so hard for these girls.
Eivind is the equivalent of a BLM leader constantly complaining about the killings of white men by the police. He is the equivalent of a legalize cannabis movement leader constantly screeching that cannabis is the most evil thing in the world and that the sole purpose of life is to get a 'natural high'. Eivind thinks that in 1,000 years time, digital archaeologists puzzling as to why there was never any resistance to the feminist war on male sexuality, will be pleasantly surprised at unearthing this blog and discovering there was, after all, some resistance. In fact, it's likely they wont even recognize this blog as being anti-feminist, although they may be puzzled by the constant statements expressing hatred of feminists and 'feminist laws'. More likely, they will recognize this blog as some kind of confused attempt to stand up to the feminist Sexual Holocaust against men, but conclude that it was the perfect embodiment of why such a movement never got off the ground.
Most people, even today, looking at this blog for the first time would come away with two things - that Eivind thinks women are the principle victims of feminist sex laws, and that the majority of the men in prison or on sex offender lists due to feminist laws probably deserve to be so, because 'porn is worse than heroin'.
Let me take a moment to emphasize that of course the principal victims of the feminist sex laws are men, but I still think it's defensible to give female victims as much attention as I do. Saying male sexuality leads to prison is like saying smoking leads to lung cancer. Yes, these are not bad people and we should help them, but it gets tedious to repeat this over and over. Better, then, to take some time to write about ills that befall especially good people, most spectacularly the women who are imprisoned for being nice to boys. There is a cancer equivalent here too, which actually punished women for being sexually generous and was relieved by the HPV vaccine. Probably just because cervical cancer was the easiest cancer to prevent rather than any ethical considerations, but it is certainly the one I would target first for the same reason I give female “sex offenders” most sympathy in the sex war. The HPV vaccine is an amazing medical success story that we should celebrate as male sexualists. It is most incredible that it wasn’t derailed by antisex bigots either and is now normative, making it that much safer to have sex with young girls and especially for the girls themselves too.
But of course the feminists make up for this loss by doubling down on the laws. I’ve been pondering an ethical truth in the past few days which sounds funky or even crazy to the normies, but which I sincerely hold and think I can defend. Namely that a true sexual accusation against a woman is worse persecution than a false accusation against a man. This is obviously true from a utilitarian perspective but also by virtue ethics and consequentialism. Because you don’t get moral points with me for obeying unjust laws. But women DO get points for breaking sex laws that would prevent them from being nice to boys and men. It follows, then, that a man who is persecuted for victimless sexuality is as good as a person who is persecuted at random, but women doing the same thing are usually better because they make the world a better place.
"It follows, then, that a man who is persecuted for victimless sexuality is as good as a person who is persecuted at random, but women doing the same thing are usually better because they make the world a better place."
They make the world a better place for whom? For ONE lucky male receiving their attention, surely not for others who may only feel left out and frustrated. But wait, a man persecuted for victimless sexuality was also making the world a better place for ONE male, ie himself. Where's the difference?
I think there is an ethical distinction. I will think about it and get back when I can articulate it.
"Eivind is the equivalent of a BLM leader constantly complaining about the killings of white men by the police"
Sounds like a BLM guy I would actually be able to get down with lmao.
Why does defending both genders arrested for breaking a stupid law make you so angry? Eivind has posts defending based pimp king Jeffrey too. What's the problem.
Yes, it is one thing if TheAntifeminist doesn’t want to focus so much on female “sex offenders” as I do, but I don’t understand his anger and I am not deterred from exploring this in more depth. Female sex offenders come with a halo in my view, a halo which is more pronounced the younger and more beautiful they are. Now, there’s a good subject for sexualist art if anyone wants to illustrate what I mean! We can’t fail to recognize it if we are psychologically healthy, but maybe it needs to be drawn explicit to get past the antisex brainwashing of some of the normies? This halo could partly be explained by the common bias to see beautiful people as more morally good -- beautiful women accused of actually heinous crimes have a little bit of it too, I must admit -- but I think there is something far more substantial to the female sex offender halo. To be more sympathy-deserving victims than men accused of the same victimless crimes, I agree there has to be something more to it than a general bias to make excuses for beautiful women, though their “crimes” in these cases are so entangled with beauty which the laws bizarrely deny that it’s kind of hard to know exactly which is which.
Suppose giving money or food to beggars were criminalized. To make it equally as absurd as the sex laws, let’s call it financial exploitation or theft or robbery to give money to a beggar. Wouldn’t violators of this evil law who helped the most needy beggars be the most morally deserving of activism to have them freed from jail? Women who have sex with underage boys are in this position. It doesn’t matter that they don’t do it out of altruism; it still benefits the most needy. Teenage girls involved with older men are not similarly needy and neither are their lucky partners since they have more options. Being lucky is not quite the same as needy and nowadays boys are even more needy than previous generations because of the harms inflicted by pornography which threatens to mess up their arousal pathways and ruin their future sex lives. I’ve been there and know how sexually needy young boys are and how much they could be helped by real sex with women, which creates a very strong ethical conviction in me. Female sex offenders definitely deserve their halo even if they mostly benefit alphas, which is an assumption that gets thrown around here too easily. Even if it is seldom realized, the mere possibility that women can have sex with you without being persecuted is a clear moral good. Not all victimless crimes are created equal because some are systematically a force for good, with female sexual offending the best example I can think of.
The antisex records are zooming by faster than I can keep up. Now we are (at least) up to 99 years for falling for a police sting in Texas. 99 years just for believing a lying pig!
A Lamar County jury sentenced a 32-year-old Roxton resident to 99 years in prison Monday after a one-day trial, according to information from the Lamar County District Attorney’s Office.
A jury found Brady Allan Goss, a registered sex offender, guilty of solicitation of a minor, First Assistant District Attorney Benjamin Kaminar said.
“The defendant used the Facebook Messenger application to contact someone he believed was a 14-year-old girl,” Kaminar said. “Over the course of several conversations, he repeatedly discussed meeting for sex and described specific sexual acts he desired from her.”
Unknown to the defendant, Oklahoma law enforcement had control of the Facebook account and conducted a sting operation in partnership with the Lamar County Sheriff’s Office. The defendant was captured at a meetup location and confessed to the offense, Kaminar said.
Words fail me to describe how sick society has gotten with feminism, but I can at least present two pieces of happy news where the shoe's on the other foot and the cops are the recipients of evil:
Poetic justice to the most antisex country in Europe there! Divine vengeance for their insanely hateful new absolute rape age law.
This Australian sure got a lot of anti-pig bang for his buck and only has to serve ten months.
And a kindred spirit on Twitter named Marie (@handbasketnotes) also has some sexualist words to let us know we are not completely alone:
"Attended a pre-trial hearing today to support a friend who is facing serious charges of sexual assault. I was there for him because his life has been upended; guilt or innocence has nothing to do with it. While we waited in the hallway for the hearing that never happened... 1/
11:02 PM · Apr 27, 2021
...we talked. His conversation made it clear that he sees himself as separate from all those *guilty* people who are also hanging around the hallway, waiting for their hearings. He was totally unsympathetic to their upended lives. He maintains his innocence and... 2/
...I think he probably *is* innocent. But he seems to have learned NOTHING from his experience. Nothing about how terrible the criminal legal system is, nothing about how wrong it is to see people shackled as they shuffled to their hearings... 3/
...while he was not shackled only because he could afford to put up bail. He is sure that he will come out okay because he is innocent, not because he has money to hire an attorney and to be free. 4/
I HAVE BEEN WRONG all those times I've said, "Some day, that judge/prosecutor/legislator will have a family member go through the system and then they will see what it is like." 5/
I still would not wish this on anyone, no matter how much they need a good lesson but now I see that even the harshest lessons might be wasted on some people. 6/6"
If peak feminism goes along with imminent dissolution of a culture like some historical treatises have suggested, France is a good example of how that can play out before our eyes. I watch with amusement signs that the feminist idyll is already cracking just as they are putting the finishing touches on the antisex laws.
The French government has condemned an open letter signed by active soldiers that said the country was heading for "civil war" due to religious extremism.
About 1,000 servicemen and women, including some 20 retired generals, put their names to the letter.
It blamed "fanatic partisans" for creating divisions between communities, and said Islamists were taking over whole parts of the nation's territory.
Ministers have condemned the message published in a right-wing magazine.
The letter was first published on 21 April - the 60th anniversary of a failed coup d'état.
"The hour is grave, France is in peril," the signatories said.
Lol, a cop gets to feel how hateful the system he serves is against male sexuality:
Former policeman Jamie Foster is looking to take his appeal to the Supreme Court over his conviction for raping a fellow police officer.
And his mother, Jackie Foster, is speaking out against what she calls a failed justice system, an unprepared Court of Appeal, and a process that has left her exasperated.
The appeals court doesn't bother looking at the evidence which was suppressed from the jury, but why should they when all sex is criminal anyway?
Foster said she no longer wanted to keep silent about what she called a "one-sided" system.
"Until you are subject to it yourself, no one in New Zealand really knows what goes on at a criminal trial.
"My son is an innocent man rotting in prison – both the justice system and the New Zealand Police have failed him and my family. We will never stop fighting for Jamie's innocence."
Yeah, welcome to the club and you still need some more enlightenment. The system hasn't "failed" your son -- it is doing exactly what it is designed to do.
Wow. And I thought this guy had it bad.
So 99 years for chatting with a fake 14-year-old versus 45 years for impregnating a real 14-year-old.
At least you could argue actual harm in the second case, not that I agree with that sentence either.
"If peak feminism goes along with imminent dissolution of a culture like some historical treatises have suggested, France is a good example of how that can play out before our eyes. I watch with amusement signs that the feminist idyll is already cracking just as they are putting the finishing touches on the antisex laws."
Feminist idyll cracking? In 20-30 years time, either France will have transitioned largely peacefully into a Muslim state - which is pretty close to a feminist idyll - or will have been wrecked by a bloody civil war in which either a fascist (white) utlra-conservative dictatorship emerges victorious or an Islamist regime does. Both of those outcomes are a feminist idyll x 100.
The sad fact is that if you live long enough to see the destruction of Europe in a few decades time Eivind, you'll actually be thinking 'at least the feminists have been spited!'. No Eivind, just no. What might surprise you is that the feminists would be even happier than you would if we all went back to living in caves. In fact feminists (and women) would be genuinely happy, whereas you will find it a bit tougher, especially as a 70 year old man.
Here's a question for you Eivind. If an almost inevitable civil war brought about by mass immigration and woke culture occurs which will 'crack the feminist idyll', why do you think feminists almost universally support mass immigration and woke culture? Oh I remember - it's because feminists are STUPID, unlike you.
Ah, the idea that women have no politics because they always come out on top. I don’t really disagree. They will enjoy a Muslim takeover of Europe as much as it can be enjoyed because they will always be kept out of harm’s way to the best of men’s ability, and at worst they simply have to switch sides. This is one thing the old manosphere got right, that patriarchal oppression of women is a feminist sham, that whenever women are oppressed, men are oppressed more. If women are forced into brothels like the Japanese did during WWII that means men are forced to be cannon fodder, and that pattern has kept all the way back to caveman days. No society that we know of has preferentially enslaved or otherwise oppressed women. If we go back to living in caves, that will barely register on women’s happiness because they will always get the best deal.
Women have no politics except the creation of sex offenses, no agenda except cultural suppression of sexuality, and very little morality. Of course they will have no sympathy for men, and not in a million years will it occur to them as a group that the female sex offender charade is immoral either. There are some incredibly rare exceptions such as Marie I quoted above, but by and large they do not care. With the exception of female genital mutilation if Baumeister is right, women do not drive either technology nor ideology. Sure they will embrace any technology invented by men in order to suppress sexuality, or its consequences as in abortion and birth control, but they don’t really need these things.
And they won’t miss what we call feminism either, because everything is relative and they will always get to see men suffer more. When almost nobody suffers and there is lots of prosperity, society will devote two million dollars to punish a man for 99 years (or realistically 50) for hypothetically desiring a 14-year-old, and that will be out of the question after collapse and cultural regression, but it won’t really matter. There will be simple rules, such as, “if you are married you can have sex with her,” and society won’t obsess over whether she really consents every step of the way or whether she is old enough etc., but these things are not essential to women’s happiness; they are mere luxuries grown out of too much prosperity.
Nonetheless, I would really relish seeing the hags who have been accustomed to that level of sex offenses lose their privilege.
"Women have no politics except the creation of sex offenses, no agenda except cultural suppression of sexuality, and very little morality. Of course they will have no sympathy for men, and not in a million years will it occur to them as a group that the female sex offender charade is immoral either"
I think this should be directed at just western women.
If you look in the comment section under this zhang muyi and akami miki video, it's all asian women. And they are all completely supportive of this 12 year old girl dating this 24 year old man. Asian girls love this couple. Their fanbase is almost entirely women.
Great, then I stand a little bit corrected and feminism is less inevitable than some of us think, even in very advanced societies.
"Eivind is the equivalent of a BLM leader constantly complaining about the killings of white men by the police"
Sounds like a BLM guy I would actually be able to get down with lmao.
Why does defending both genders arrested for breaking a stupid law make you so angry? Eivind has posts defending based pimp king Jeffrey too. What's the problem.
Because he's the self-proclaimed leader of the movement to fight feminist anti-sex laws, and chooses to spend over 50% of his time wailing against the 'persecution' of women (while at the same time dogmatically validating and supporting the intent behind the porn laws that result in the majority of feminist 'sex crimes' today). It's freaking comical, or would be if it wasn't so tragic. Women make up less than 1% of sex offenders under feminist laws, and even in a case like this - where a group of people have been arrested in a sting operation - he chooses to highlight the supposedly special persecution of the one (and extremely rare) woman arrested. It's just beyond comical. He's not defending both genders. He's highlighting rare female cases as being particularly deserving of sympathy and outrage. We're in a gender war, and the whole reason we're in this mess is because of the male instinct for White Knighting which leads men to not even realize they are in a fight. Admittedly, Eivind is one stop above the feminist supporting pedos and 'MAPs' he allies himself with, but not much. He can at least see 'feminists' as the enemy, though he has no idea how such a relatively small number of 'stupid' women came to overturn society in such a short space of time, virtually everywhere in the world. I think his recognition of 'feminists' as the enemy is simply a way of exonerating women in general.
Yeah, you'd get on well with a BLM leader who was constantly highlighting white men being the victims of police brutality, even in cases where multiple black men were killed, but that's likely due to the fact that such a BLM leader would clearly not be a true BLM leader, and would be immediately kicked out of the BLM movement as a laughing stock. Unfortunately, we don't have a movement. Eivind has five followers on YouTube (and I'm one of them) after 15 years of blogging. He's not even the leader of a tiny cult. He's just an eccentric blogger who has an obsession with female sex offenders, but who does often say some brilliant and honest things about feminist sex hostility, and is one of the few left online who does. Beggars can't be choosers, but just don't pretend there is a movement and that you have a right to define it.
How does this even need to be explained to you? OK, well as you've already tried to convince Eivind to become a feminist, then I see it's pointless. Oh, nice reference to my supposed 'alt-right' credentials there with the 'based pimp king Epstein'. As far as I can remember, he's posted one article on Epstein. No article on Ghislaine Maxwell, who is 1,000 x far more deserving of your white knight 'you go girl' sympathies than the whores thinking they had the pussy pass when sucking off little Chads in class. https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-56938988
No, I don't validate the intent behind the feminist porn laws; I validate a different intent that would discourage such laws if they could see it. To put it in their twisted terms, I argue that men should avoid porn so we can get better at sexual abuse. The feminists make laws against porn because they believe it *is* sexual abuse and exploitation of girls, which is the flipside of the wanker’s delusion that he is getting sexual value. I reject both sides of the delusion and know men have more and better sex without porn or masturbation. The feminists’ and my views on porn couldn’t be more mutually hateful and exclusive even though we reach the same practical advice that men need to stay away from it. I wrote about this in a post titled “Right answers for wrong reasons.” There is only superficial and deceptive common ground because if they knew what porn does, feminists would be the first to promote this self-harm to men -- except it is such a low-effort way to put men in prison (more efficient than stings, even) that they might opt to keep the laws anyway, seeing how men will both abuse themselves AND go to prison for it despite the nofappers and male sexualists telling them how insane it is to masturbate. Nofappers address the self-harm part and my kind of sexualism also don’t want men imprisoned for it of course, but we do acknowledge that porn is harmful to males because it is the truth. Lol, I was just reading Christoph Metzelder is the latest wanker moron who plays into this feminist nonsense and ACTUALLY validates their intent, supporting punishment of himself for enfeebling his sexuality in the delusion he did the opposite. There is truly a sucker born every minute, and this won’t stop but at least a sane view is on record thanks to me.
How hard is it to understand that sometimes diametrically opposite values can reach the same practical conclusion because one of them is deluded? This is sure not to register to those who only hear slogans and tidbits, but someone in the movement ought to be able to think deeper. I am not in it for the PR (which is useless anyway), but to formulate a sensible philosophy of male sexualism, and that will be the measure of my success rather than how many people I convince to take a futile stand against the laws. As to the fact that I only have five followers on YouTube; well, that’s not my medium, only did a handful of videos to try it out so far. I have put thousands of times more effort into my blog and gotten proportionally more views.
Regarding the idea that feminism only takes off in response to casual sex rather than long-term age-gap relationships, there is some truth to this. It is a shame that they need to do it with so much collateral damage -- all these loving relationships destroyed as well as the female sex offender charade, which is even more perverse in light of this motivation when you consider that boys especially enjoy casual sex with older women -- but apparently there is no less crude way to do it than to pretend minors simply can’t handle sex.
You are also wrong that I don’t have a post in honor of Ghislaine Maxwell. This one is for her:
And I did at least two on Epstein:
I extol him as a great role model and point out how insane the “pedophilia” accusations against him are. What more do you want?
I do realize that Ghislaine Maxwell desperately needs support to stop the ongoing abuse against her, but what can we do? Yeah, this is legal torture:
They “check her condition” every 15 minutes so she can't sleep in order to be sure she really goes insane and suicidal if she isn't already. This is standard prison brutality, to take both life and death away from you -- and for a crimen exceptum we can forget about eliciting any sympathy at all.
So, the development of feminism goes something like this. There is a sexual revolution leading to lots of casual sex with nubile girls making women go oh shit, we need to restrict this, because it's hurting our sexual market value as we get older and some of those young slutty experiences are not such good deals in retrospect because the man didn't stick around or wasn't alpha enough or whatever -- just wanting another dip into his money will do as a reason to accuse him! So they criminalize everything they can as "abuse" and most crucially extend "childhood" to 18 so everyone wanting to be with younger can be demonized as "pedophiles." They know this is bullshit, but it works. Never mind that it also creates a female sex offender charade (since you can't "discriminate" by sex anymore according to the ideology they got themselves into) which misses the mark completely since NONE of the reasons why men were criminalized apply, not even the ulterior motive, but that's how it goes and it's too late to backtrack now on just this aspect without losing the hard-won persecution of men. And so the female sex offender charade is entrenched and none of this will go away until either society collapses or men grow some balls.
Men are mere pawns being buffeted about by the sex laws now, most buffoonishly illustrated by Matt Gaetz at the moment:
Where female sex offenders have a halo, he has a clown face jumping out at you overriding the image on the screen in your qualia. A helpless fool who can't do anything other than being carried along by the insane sexual taboos, not so much as whimper a little protest that it's all bullshit empty accusations and he has nothing to be ashamed of even if everything is true. No, he sheepishly plays the part of the bad sexual man for being a man at all, which indeed is the only way he can hope to be "accepted" by this hateful feminist society, but that won't happen either, so what has he got to lose by becoming one of us male sexualists at this point?
Men need to STOP PLAYING THE PART as fake sexual abusers, or more generally important we need to stop playing the part as even potential fake sexual abusers. When faced with such accusations that we for example paid a minor for sex we need to say SO WHAT? and that needs to be the full extent of our attitude! We must not honor the hateful ideology behind it by even denying the accusations when they are lies.
This is a pretty good example of how unbelievably strong is the hate against men who try to pick up teen girls anymore, or talk to any woman in public. I mean not this tweet by Jessica Pin, who is very reasonable, but if you click on the tweet she is quoting (the second link below) and read the comments...
"Creep" is now the nicest way to describe anything to do with male sexuality, where every interaction starts, and then it's downhill from there.
If you shine a light on sexuality, there is always criminality. Because humanity can't handle itself anymore, thanks to the feminist sex laws. Which way does your beard point tonight, Mr. Whitman, who shall we shine on next?
How about Josh Duggar for starters:
And then we numerate Noel Clarke:
And Whitman, eyeing those grocery boys was very predatory! Off you go to jail too. Not to mention Allen Ginsberg was a predator too because we all are, though luckily you both escaped the most persecutory age.
On with the enumerations! Who is next?
So unbelievably persecutory... Josh Duggar is facing up to 20 years ON EACH COUNT just for looking at pictures years ago.
What kind of society would do this? What kind of insane witchcraft do they believe in to justify such absurd persecution? It feels so unreal that it can't possibly be true, that the authorities can't possibly be so sick in the head that they believe in this shit, but then I am forced to realize it's not a nightmare we shall snap out of but the actual society I live in...
They will keep pushing until every young pussy goes unfucked, and society itself collapses. Women's jealousy knows no bounds so they will sooner destroy the world than roll back punishments for men desiring younger attractive girls.
I would like to again draw attention to the fact that these new ultra-insane anti-sex sentences are being handed out in the most "conservative" and "right wing" parts of the USA. "Innocent Angel" feminism has infested the right wing ever since the Women's Christian Temperance movement in Tennessee got the 19th amendment passed 100 years ago. I keep telling you people these right-wingers are the most cucked faggots on the planet who put us in this position.
I got really pissed off today because I realized Instagram is now completely useless for pulling young girls. I had built up a nice profile that was getting hits, but without the ability to message girls first, the whole platform is completely destroyed as we all know girls hardly ever message first because they are girls. Maybe Tiktok will be better to try for a little while? I need to find a smaller social media company that is just starting out and not entirely compromised. These tech companies have created the worst society in human history.
Celebrities are falling like flies to sexual assault charges. Victimless crimes mostly, but should we sympathise? Barring few exceptions, as Eivind has pointed out, they never react by doing what could be of benefit to other men, ie fight the system. Instead, they feed the Beast by reaching "settlements" in order to save their own asses and buy themselves some more time in their privileged lives.
For decades they could have their pick of the litter and enjoy their own private harems with impunity, but they never used their prestige to get a word in edgeways for the millions of normal men suffering under misandric laws and being legislated/priced out of the sexual market. Now the Beast is going after them. Well-deserved!
@jack. Most celebrities do this. However, maybe we can make a list of celebrities that don't.
She's too cute to be a minute over 17 - Chuck Berry, little queenie. Arrested for hooking up with a 14 year old.
I can see that you're just 13. No I don't need to see no id - Mick jagger, stray cat blues.
Red hot chilli peppers. Catholic school girls rule. Song about the lead singer sleeping with a 14 year old when he was in his 20s. https://www.youtube.com/watchv=aU9zZxvrAro&ab_channel=FernandoDosSantos
Motley Crue. All in the name of rock. About sleeping with a 15 year old.
The beatles. Saw her standing there. She was just 17, if you know what I mean.
Good morning little school girl. Muddy waters. Name speaks for itself
Seems like there are a lot of celebrities that have tried to push back against the insanely high AoC in their music. But they just failed I guess. The rolling stones use to make posters that said "we survived underage sex". We really need a band like this to appear again. I think me and Eivinds new band is the only hope. lol.
I was looking at Hellotalk since it was recommended here, seems like a nice chat app that is under the radar.
Yubo is fertile grounds too, however, it was in the news already quite a bit after some intrepid dudes used it very successfully to fuck willing young teens. Jealous beta males and old hags lost their minds as usual and brought in the pigs to punish the party revelers. But I would think it would be hard to entrap someone because you can see who you're talking with, and I don't think the cops are hiring 13 year old girls to go online and trawl for horny guys, at least not yet because that would be some pretty scandalous "child labor".
The guys who were successful with the girls, but got busted by the pigs, only went down because:
1) the parents called the cops / a neighbor snitched
2) the cops found sexual content in messages
3) the girl was coerced to talk (of course)
4) sometimes the guy talked after he was arrested
5) he came in her pussy
Let's break down how to get around this bullshit, hypothetically of course, this is not legal advice.
#1, don't keep a girl overnight, visit her in the early afternoon and return her home when you're done. Rent your own studio apartment, not a hotel, check for surveillance cams inside/outside and cover with masking tape out of view before you bring her back. Go on a short date with her beforehand in a neutral location, to check if she's being tailed.
#2, no sexual content in any messages, phone calls or video chats. Try to stick to calls because these are more difficult to record. If she turns it sexual, smile, and change the subject, which she will probably like more. Assume everything is being recorded for use against you in the future (because it is). Show your sexual intent with your eyes by checking out her body periodically and smiling, and reserve getting physical for when you're in private at your studio apartment. This also applies to any date with any girl.
#3, the girl will most likely talk because she will be scared and traumatized by the pigs, and there is nothing you can do about this, except hold your own ground. See number 4.
#4, NEVER FUCKING TALK TO THE POLICE HOLY SHIT. Never ever. You'll feel traumatized yourself, scared, blindsided, insecure, exposed. They will yell accusations at you, call you names, make your girl cry, maybe point guns at you. WHATEVER. NEVER TALK. You're an ice cold motherfucker - "I did nothing wrong, can I go?" If they say no, or that you're under arrest, you say "I want to talk to my lawyer please" Then you SHUT THE FUCK UP. Bonus - when your girl watches you do this, she will be far less inclined to talk herself because you did not spill the beans, and she does not want to paint herself as a slut if you didn't out her as a slut by running your dumbass mouth.
#5, unless you marry the bitch first, do not come in her pussy. I find this to be an excellent rule in general. Unless the cops rush in the exact moment you blast off, you'll be fine if you make your girl take a shower with you when you're done.
So unbelievably persecutory... Josh Duggar is facing up to 20 years ON EACH COUNT just for looking at pictures years ago.
Yet you think it's a good tactical move to put - 'porn is evil' and 'worse than heroin' at the forefront of the anti-feminist movement. So unbelievable. Truly depressing.
@Holocaust22 Nice list there. Back in the 60's and 70's, at least in the UK and Europe, the age of consent was almost considered a legal fiction. In the UK the police would only prosecute, in fact they could only prosecute, if the parent of the girl made a complaint. And back then, just as Eivind rightly points out (again and again and again) that a 14 year old boy who has sex with his 1,000 lb hideous black teacher is lucky and not a victim, society was still sane enough in the 60's and 70's and even 80's, to recognize that a 14 year old working class girl getting to sleep with and be the girlfriend of a world famous handsome super rich rock star was even more 'lucky', rather than a victim of 'rape' who would be a traumatized 'survivor' for the rest of her life. But Jack has a point - I doubt if in the 80's an average Joe could openly bang a 13 year old girl like Bill Wyman could, even if the opportunity presented itself. I remember at the time that the girl - Mandy Smith - was as much accused of being a gold digger as much as Wyman a 'dirty old man' (the term paedophile hadn't been inflated yet, and in those days was rarely used and only applied to Eivind's allies). BTW, Mandy Smith, now that she's an aging has been, believes that the age of consent should be 21. https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-1266664/Mandy-Smith-I-DID-sleep-Bill-Wyman-I-14--man-life-God.html
Yes, the age of consent is of course a legal fiction and was generally recognized as such at least up throughout the twentieth century. The question is how does it get reified so much these days? Well, the reification isn’t quite solid after all, which is why feminists are now moving to the absolute rape age. This new upgraded legal fiction for the 21st century comes with another layer of fiction that says it isn’t a legal fiction, but actual rape. Does a fiction become more real when you add another fiction that says it isn’t a fiction? I think it only becomes more comical and try-hard, like a Rube Goldberg contraption of weaponization against our sexuality. They will soon have to upgrade it once more, perhaps with added criminalization of those who deride it as a legal fiction like we do here. But then they need yet another level of legal fiction to mask the fact that they are suppressing fact. It will then have to be criminal to point out that those who got convicted under the latest law got persecuted for blasphemy, and everyone better pretend they in fact raped children. Then this new absolute-rape-blasphemy law will be the frontier that can’t be criticized, and anyone who portrays it as anything less than rape without any of those other qualifiers will be rapists themselves, and so on and on; and that’s how it goes when law tries to fight reality.
I appreciate the practical advice by Anonymous above, but please don’t say “Do not come in her pussy.” That’s a depressing thing to say that shouldn’t be said. Also I don’t agree with letting the sex laws poison your relationships with girls beyond not using communication that feeds the details of everything you did together directly into the police state. Of course we should act normal around girls and not like we are handicapped or overly afraid of persecution, which is so unseemly and unattractive. If the girl likes you she will look out for you and minimize that risk. Heed the Cavafy poem instead about not bringing Laistrygonians and Cyclops along inside your soul:
As you set out for Ithaka
hope your road is a long one,
full of adventure, full of discovery.
angry Poseidon—don’t be afraid of them:
you’ll never find things like that on your way
as long as you keep your thoughts raised high,
as long as a rare excitement
stirs your spirit and your body.
wild Poseidon—you won’t encounter them
unless you bring them along inside your soul,
unless your soul sets them up in front of you.
The only real monsters are the cops, who indeed you should never talk to, and when they are not around you should act like the confident man you are. In fact and as you hint, not talking to the police also comes across as confident when it is applied as the general rule of life that it should be and not just resorted to when you think there is a law they can use against you, which is only the tip of the iceberg of the problems they can cause for you.
Thanks for those great song quotes, Holocaust22. Celebrities are not all feckless, and they do deserve sympathy like any man when persecuted for our normal and healthy sexuality. Yes, they tend to “settle” a lot of these claims, but then they are also much more vulnerable for precisely this possibility. The usual pattern with male celebrities seems to be that the accusers first make some defamatory statement in the hope that he will throw money at them to save his reputation. Failing that they will file a civil lawsuit as is now happening to Marilyn Manson for example, and only as a last possibility will they make a criminal complaint to the police. Us normal men only have this last step to worry about since we have no fame to destroy or much money to dish out, so we should really have some sympathy for all the extra problems that go along with that.
Billie Eilish says "sexual misconduct is everywhere" and she doesn't "know one girl or woman who hasn't had a weird experience, or a really bad experience":
LOL, yeah, when you can't tolerate sexuality that is what you get. Girls are now being trained to see all of sexuality as rape or abuse or misconduct or "weird experiences" which are apparently yet another expansion of the concept, which leaves pretty much literally no exceptions except when they resist the indoctrination, which does still happen because it is very hard to keep human sexuality down.
I agree that sometimes one can bring trouble into his life simply by looking for it, but putting on blinders and striding forward optimistically is a recipe for disaster. Better to take the precautions I mentioned that are researched and useful, then act confidently within those bounds. It is still possible to get laid with young girls this way and stay free, believe me.
Eivind, get yourself a Monero donation address.
Antifeminist, why did you take down your website? Put it back up!
Sure, I'll set up a Monero node today. The size of the blockchain is only 64 GB so it's very doable.
Eivind could have told you why I decided the cause was hopeless.
I realized that sex robots were not going to save us from the sexual trade union.
Companion robots are not going to be interesting until they can feel emotions such as jealousy, and then we are back to some of the same issues, yes. There is still some hope that they can be more polyamorously inclined than biological women, but I never considered robots a factor in men's rights issues because they are centuries away at best.
no harm in leaving it up
It will take a good while for my node to sync, but I now have a fully secure Monero address:
I have a theory that human Societies have always contrived to eliminate a substantial fraction of its male population through jailing or execution. The charges under which men are liquidated have varied. In the Middle Ages you could get killed if you questioned the Trinity or the existence of the Devil. In 19th century England you spent years in jail for peddling pictures of bare-breasted women or for engaging in homosexuality. In the 2nd half of the twentieth century prisons got filled with drug offenders.
Right now that sexual sin or sexual blasphemy is taking center stage, persecution for drugs is being relaxed. First cannabis, soon even Ecstasy:
My forecast for the near future: more opportunities to do drugs but less and less opportunities to have straight sex without risking jail.
Whether or not it is part of a "plan" to eliminate excess males by incarceration (maybe arguably an unconscious tendency, when wars don't take care it), the replacement of drug criminals with sex offenders is clearly happening, yes. It is a terrifying prospect how much they could ramp up the antisex-persecution by this substitution alone because convictions for drug crimes still outnumber sexual ones by far, if I am not mistaken. My feeling is there are five to ten times as many men in prison for drugs than sex, so this is a huge potential and a rotten deal. I do ideologically support decriminalization of drugs, but not really at this cost, if one or the other needs to be used to fill the prisons.
If most men were like me, it would be much harder to persecute sexuality than drugs, because the sex war cuts so deep into our identity. Our souls are criminal when sex is. And the war on drugs isn't really a war anyway, but a symbiosis with the drug cartels. I don't see them championing legalization and why would they when that would take their profit margins down to what you get for any legal commodity like coffee or sugar. We would need Fairtrade signs on the drugs to make sure growers and distributors earn a living wage if drugs were legal. Maybe that's already the case with weed.
No, the drug cartels and dealers only fight with cops at the bare minimum needed to get their drugs to market. They don't put up an ideological resistance like men ideally should with sex. But sadly men don't even do this with sex. If we had it in us, the homosexuals would have mounted a violent resistance when their sexuality was persecuted at the level we all soon will be, and if that ever happened, I haven't heard about it.
On a similar note, it seems the more homosexual sex and LBGB things gets tolerated and promoted, the stronger the repression of heterosexual sex. It is a bit as though homosexual sex were not considered real sex, which is probably the case. Real sex is when it involves wymmyns and their vaginas, which lends credence to the sexual trade-union theory.
Note that it is as irrational to jail people for taking synthetic or herbal chemicals into their bodies than it is to jail them for wanting to have sex. With drugs the victims are the perpetrators themselves, how's that for rationality?
Human psyche is a cesspool.
So the story there was:
"He was making out with a girl. He tried to have sex with her. She said no. He said come on. She said ok. The end."
We are all rapists now because feminists have made rape synonymous with sex, and we need to own this criminality with its political implications; i.e. be male sexualists.
@Jack - Prisons in the UK are literally overflowing with sex offenders. There isn't a private prison industry in the UK, so the state has to pay for it all. The government can't afford to lock up more than a certain percentage of the population, and something has to give if the sexual trade union wants to continue to ever inflate their laws and punishments. The reason is probably partly as you say, and partly for practicalities, especially in the UK and Europe. The majority of new sex offenders in the UK and I assume elsewhere are older men locked up either for looking at child porn (and now 'rape' porn) or for 'historical' abuse when they were banging willing teens in the 60's and 70's. Such men are now seen as disposable by society, I suppose in a similar way to old hags were in the middle-ages and were often burnt as witches. Society isn't quite ready to kill old males off in this way, although as more and more are now dying in prison it's more or less the same thing - the start of a sexual holocaust (we need a better name for this perhaps? Feminists have created 'femicide' to call attention to the small number of male on female murders, we need a male equivalent to draw attention to the real gender based holocaust targeting males on account of their sexuality. Menicide? Any suggestions? I realize asking this in the comments section of an article from our leader Eivind Berge in which he has chosen to single out one woman out of 30+ men to protest at her unique 'persecution', is somewhat ironic and tragic).
Back to your point - another reason why drugs are being de-criminalized is similar to that of homosexuality. The sexual trade union wears the mask of liberalism and tolerance while it pushes forward a brutal and oppressive war on normal male sexual freedoms.
A heads up to all Male Sexualists that it's International Masturbation Day today, so be sure to celebrate your right to fap before it's taken away for good by femihags (and Eivind)!
Masturbation is sex-negative and not to be celebrated or recommended, but the right to masturbate -- sure, that I can get behind.
I see Ray Teret is another victim of feminism that I hadn't heard of until now. His getting willing teens because he was famous and in the Jimmy Savile circle four to five decades ago is now called “grooming” and “rape” and the media promotes the lie that the girls “had little or no understanding what was happening and felt they could do little to prevent the abuse.” These scumbags will deliberately lie that girls from 13 to 15 don’t understand sex in order to demonize men; they twist girls’ willing actions into nothing but abuse by men because that is literally how much society now hates us and our sexuality.
My exhortation to all men is that we must publicly own this sexuality, which couldn’t be more normal, and not pretend it doesn’t concern us because we weren’t the one dying in prison right now. Ask not for whom the bell tolls; it tolls for thee.
11 girls were raped and abused and didn’t realize it until decades later, eh? No, it is society that has changed and retroactively defined healthy sex as abuse for to suit the selfish vindictive ideology powerful older women. This rewriting of the past in light of sick contemporary standards is just another hopeless aspect of men’s feeble-minded obsequiousness to any kind of antisexual persecution. We not only accept new rules that are to emasculate us from now on, but line up like sheep to the slaughter due to experiences we used to be proud of and thought everyone enjoyed. When they can take our proudest moments away from us and redefine them to abuse for which we are supposed to feel shameful and be punished, and men actually go along with this, it is hard to see any hope anywhere. Our lack of any meaningful resistance is simply not something that can be addressed by a Men's Rights Movement, which when we had it in the early 2000s did nothing to reverse the laws, nor the current Male Sexualist Movement that nobody listens to, but needs to play out until society changes for some other reason such as most likely collapse. As such, Gail Tverberg is our most reasonable beacon of hope and here is her latest post:
Energy collapse is underway and the signs are already so apparent that governments need to get heavy-handed with the censorship. It’s not just teen girls’ willing engagement in sex they need to lie about going forward, and their edifice will crack sooner rather than later because enforcing lies takes energy that we no longer have.
Or I shouldn’t say I “get behind” International Masturbation Day, because it is really an offensive concept. Not without emphasizing that I support your right to masturbate in the same way I support your right to desecrate your body with drug abuse or obesity, or become a celibate monk. The latter will actually get you closer to girls than masturbation if you also don't fap, because you will have a healthy libido and be ready to pounce when chances come along, which is what wankers ruin for themselves. Masturbation is based on a DELUSION that you are doing something sexually significant when you are making it harder to get sex. Just the opportunity cost from time spent fapping and the refractory period is tragic, but the damage goes much further too, cutting into what it is to be sexual beings. Your performance, enjoyment and pursuit will all be damaged, and the saddest part, which makes it morally important for a sexualist movement to warn against, is men’s innate vulnerability to high-tech porn which exacerbates masturbation beyond what we are adapted to handle while also having good sex lives. This evolutionary trap, or zero-day defect in male sexuality in relation to technological civilization, is why I absolutely need to make this a much bigger issue than, say, self-imposed celibacy for religious reasons, which nobody is suckered into based on false pretenses as happens with porn.
It insults our sexuality to present masturbation as something positive. Self-harm should never be presented in a positive light even if we of course shouldn’t make it worse than it needs to be with oppressive laws too. It is possible to be reasonable about both laws and masturbation, and I refuse to mangle my philosophy just so it can fit into braindead slogans like “masturbation is good for you” when it so clearly isn’t. I acknowledge that the anti-porn laws are oppressive and I do oppose them, but I also relish the irony in the antisex bigots’ inadvertently helping male sexuality because they, too, fall for the wanker’s delusion that masturbation has sexual value that they think is taken from girls. At least that is their explicit justification; maybe that’s more a convenient excuse for the feminist police state to pick off more males with little effort, but the fact remains that men shouldn’t masturbate if they know what is sexually good for them.
It is mind-bogglingly absurd that the feminists want to prohibit “sexualizing” underage girls in porn when the very thing they claim to be afraid of is accomplished so much more forcefully by men staying away from porn and masturbation and the girls just existing. This is perhaps the ultimate irony of antisex bigotry, rivaling even the female sex offender charade in topsy-turviness, and while I am happy to let them have their delusion, I will at least have it on record that I am not so dense myself.
Top runescape player from norway banned for saying teens are hot, and the age of consent should be lowered. Drop your comments under the video and show your support for him ;)
I made a twitter to message him but he has his messaging turned off, and replies to his posts turned off -.-
I was actually able to respond to one of his tweets and directed him over to this blog.
Eivind can you drop a comment under his post here?
Lets shower this dude with support. He's an ally!
Yeah, you know it's bad when every community is self-policing these insane norms. The feminists don't even have to expend any effort anymore because every fringe moderator will do it for them.
That video you linked to is even worse. The narrator assumes that every "self-aware" person will tow the feminist antisex party line publicly, even if they privately disagree. It does not even occur to him that anyone can CHOOSE to voice disagreement knowing full well that it is disagreement with the sick community standards that feminism has brought about, which my good-faith assumption is that our gamer friend did here, just like we do in the male sexualist movement. Our movement is sadly so obscure that it is literally unthinkable to normies like that narrator.
As to commenting on Twitter, remember I got banned just for saying women can't rape men; have to be very careful!
It is best to take a non-confrontational approach were we hash things out on our blogs and write thoughtful articles here; that way we have the best chance of at least having the opposing view on record sort of in the mainstream.
But I applaud your efforts if you have a Twitter account you can afford to lose.
An update on my Monero synching: I am 58% done and still have 971000 blocks to go. If anyone donated, it won't show up for me until synched, but I will definitely get it. My node wasn't receiving new blocks for a couple days, but now I figured out how to fix that by using the setting "--block-sync-size 10," so hopefully it will finish without further glitches. It runs on a workstation with an SSD and ECC RAM, so should be very stable, and I can always restore my wallet from the 25-word seed kept in a secure location if it crashes. And yes, I do intend to keep the node up indefinitely; even if my balance remains zero it is no sweat to run such a node. Never settle for less than a full node if you are going to use a cryptocurrency, because else you don't contribute to the decentralization which is the whole point.
Seems like that guy isn't an ally. He lets people call him a nonce, and pedophile. Doesn't block them, or remove their tweets. But then when I come in to defend him, he blocks me. I guess he's a self loather lol.
That is all too typical. The feminist brainwashing is so pervasive that lots of men who at first blush look like they should be our allies are badly affected too. Gally who used to comment here was like that. I've realized that men accused of sexual misconduct are no more likely to stand politically with us than average. Oftentimes they actively participate in the persecution against them, like Gally pleading guilty to his charges and refusing to consider doing anything else even after discussing it with me.
Seems like that guy isn't an ally. He lets people call him a nonce, and pedophile. Doesn't block them, or remove their tweets. But then when I come in to defend him, he blocks me. I guess he's a self loather lol."
Why should surprise you? Just a few weeks ago you were still trying to convince your leader to convert to feminism. Your leader who thinks it's a good idea to condemn male masturbation (and you agree) and who writes about the persecution of females every other post. The leader who gave a free post to 'Gally' the virtuous 'ephebophile' who began it with the words 'I am woman hear me roar', and which Eivind thought was a noble 'declaration of war' and didn't suss anything about him until he (Gally) started threatening him in autistic rages? Just about the only other follower we can muster is Jack, who once protested that it was cruel to call out feminists for being ugly (while having rather stronger things to say about men). Why does any of this surprise you? The idea that the reason why middle-aged feminists are lobbying (successfully) for law after law criminalizing male sexual access to younger females is because they are middle-aged women trying to curtail male sexual access to younger females, is just one competing 'theory' among countless others that every reader has. Why does any of this surprise you?
I remember Human-Stupidity once posted the article about the father in Brazil in prison for allegedly raping his son (I don't think the trial had taken place yet) and he was viciously gang raped by the other inmates (Brazilian prisons aren't Norwegian style holiday camps). He needed his ass to be stitched back together again, but when he came out of hospital the authorities just put him right back in with the same inmates and he got his ass raped again even harder. Anyway, this was one Human-Stupidity article that went viral and there were hundreds of the usual blood thirsty paedocrites leaving comments saying that this and even worse should happen to all 'nonces'. I asked Human-Stupidity why he allowed these comments, and the aspie was just excited about getting traffic to his site. He didn't even understand my question.
At this stage, the question as to why it is impossible to wake men up as to what is happening, to even wake up 3 or 4 individuals let alone 7 billion, is a far, far more interesting question as to why the sexual holocaust his happening.
I might come back and make a new site just devoted to that question. Why it is happening is obvious to any non-aspergic individual (the so-called 'sexual trade union' theory). It's obvious to anybody objective and detached who looks at it, such as Steve Moxon and Diana Fleichman for example. What's more interesting and needs to be settled for the sake of future digital historians is how it was allowed to happen. Or rather, why it was impossible to form any kind of male resistance whatsoever or even for anyone inclined to resist to form any understanding of why it was happening and who they were fighting.
Yes, how it can happen is the real question. The “female sexual trade union” is not explanatory unless you also explain how it can go unopposed. It’s not that men don’t cooperate. It seems to me we cooperate more than women. Men will cooperate to build entire empires and defend them for centuries, yet taking away our access to nubile girls is a cakewalk for some bizarre reason, as is any antisex law that any old hag can think of to empower women over men in any situation. There will always be other groups of men opposing any other empires or unions except this. Even within well-adjusted democracies there will always be opposition. Men will argue endlessly about things like Brexit, but never the age of consent or definition of rape. There they simply give the feminists all they want and then enforce it by banning and noncing anyone with a contrary opinion. With regard to the sex laws, the entire Western world is a one-party state. In any other political area than sex you need brutal totalitarianism to achieve that, but not sex because men don’t bother to resist. It’s like North Korea, China, Russia without any dissidents except us handful who are so irrelevant that the state doesn’t even bother to censor us.
Why, why, why can this happen?
A metaphor occurred to me that feminism is a social autoimmune disease. As I have been saying, humanity can’t tolerate itself anymore. We have trained our immune system, the police and courts, to attack and destroy sexuality in all its forms. When we can have such an absurd law that those under 18 can’t be “sexualized,” or the female sex offender charade, it makes most sense to describe it as an allergy that humanity has developed to itself. It is healthy tissue being destroyed because something has gone horribly wrong with our social immune system.
It matters what stories we tell. Female sexual trade union theory isn’t gaining traction. Overcriminalization as an autoimmune disease isn’t incompatible with that view either, but goes further to explain all the absurdities of sex laws that only do harm and help no one, like the absurd pretense that women can be sexual abusers. Currently people are looking for a justification and explanation of the sex laws in sex itself, and therefore imputing badness to sex that isn’t there. We need to help them realize that there is no reason to even look for the harm that the sex laws are supposed to address. When a sex law looks absurd it is because it is. It makes no more sense to look for an explanation in sex than trying to explain your allergy to cats by thinking cats must have really evil fur, and once you get that concept, you are free to see sex as healthy and society’s overreaction to it as the disease. It is liberating and relaxing and though it falls short of solving the problem, it gives the monsters one less supporter for every person who starts thinking this way. It is also liberating and relaxing because it absolves us from fighting with monsters who largely don’t exist -- these supposed femihags behind every persecution -- leaving only the cops as the enemy, or going one calming step further, the pathological mechanism by which laws and cops are now employed.
Men cooperate all right, men build countries and empires, set-up armies, etc. But they do so ONLY AGAINST OTHER MEN.
Men are unable to see the gynocracy as the enemy for more than a few minutes. When confronted with female psychopathy and immorality, men at once engage in mental gymnastics to find women excuses, the sooner to go over to the business at hand, which is to gang-up against other men: the Left, Trump, the Muslims, the Right, the Jews, the Chinese, ...
Even under the sexual trade-union theory, women do not fight each other head-on as men do one another. Women seek to relieve themselves from the competition of younger and prettier women, but they overwhelmingly do so by clamping down on men.
'Female sexual trade union theory isn't gaining traction'?
What the hell are you talking about? Not gaining traction in our 'movement' of 3 or 4 people, which you claim to be the leader of? Why would it 'gain traction' anywhere else, when anybody with half-a-mind to visit this blog sees a wall of 'female sex offender charade' articles and over intellectualized nonsense, together with absolving women, and even feminists of the blame (it's all the fault of MEN and especially the pigs).
Eivind, you've been blogging for 15 years. For a short time you were in the headlines in your native country. I was wrong about you having five followers on YouTube, so I apologize for that. You have four followers after 15+ years of activism (proudly under your own name). And one of them is me, and one of the others is Holocaust22 who thinks you should be a feminist. I assume Jack is the other one, and to be fair, I don't think Jack is a 'follower' of you, but rather likes to comment here on one of the few places left (outside the 100% aspie 'MAP' sites, if they still exist). So after 15 years, you have one 'follower' and I'd put money on him still fapping every day (or he would if he didn't have his harem of HB10 models).
Did I do any better? Well yeah, I was one of a small number of sites that Angry Harry linked to, Bernard Chapin was a big supporter, even Paul Elam wanted me to help him build A Voice For Men' etc etc. I was the only guy in the entire manosphere that Fraudtrelle was afraid of. Well, OK, you have Tom O'Carroll linking to you, the (real) paedophile who almost has made our job impossible after campaiging for the right to bang 8 year old boys in the 70's when normal male sexuality was almost free of criminalization even in the UK and the USA. And Tom Grauer, whoever he or that was. Congrats.
I was close to winning the battle to make male sexual criminalization, including the feminist age of consent, part of the men's rights movement. After 15 years you've done nothing except help it to be completely rejected.
You have no solutions. What's your solutions? Make campaigning against the female sex offender charade and male masturbation the twin planks of your cult? Voluntarily registering all 1 of us (you) as sex offenders? Wishing for the complete collapse of civilization? Our real enemies are the pigs and we need to get rid of all the pigs and then women will magically, in the inherent goodness of their sperm receptacle souls, let us bang all the ripe young teen pussy we want? 'Overcriminalization as an autoimmune disease'. I mean WTF? Seriously? You think this is going to 'gain traction'? Like 'nocebo' etc? One of your readers recently claimed that 'femihags etc' has been tried. No IT HAS NOT. What has been tried is the 'intellectual' approach for decades and it's gotten nowhere and never will. It's not about theory, it's about doing away with your white knightism and calling out the freaking elephant in the room.
Virtually none of your ideas has any coherence. One example. You claimed recently that not a single teenage girl has been persuaded by the full might of the abuse/therapy industry that she has been abused after a willing relationship with an older man. Yet you don't ask then why women are happy to go along with the idea that every girl who has underage sex is traumatized for life? Why are so few women standing up and saying this is a lie? Men can't do it on their behalf, aside from the 1,000 x danger a man is in when speaking up against the child abuse industry.
You're almost an anti-activist. In fact I'll say it - you are an anti-activist as much as Tom Grauer was, or even more so. It's hard to believe sometimes you can be for real or dismissed as just an eccentric blogger who can surprisingly see that most feminist sex laws are a nonsense, but gets just about everything else 100% wrong.
Now you're claiming that breaking feminist sex laws is political activism. Of course, given that you state in the same article that you think all sex is now criminalized, that can mean that having sex with one of your 1,000 black woman Tinder dates is defiant political activism for you, striking back against the 'overcriminalization of the autoimmune body'. Others watching probably wont interpret it that way.
Nothing you have ever said or done as an activist has had any importance other than negatively. You probably haven't even registered on the consciousness of a single feminist. Do you honestly think that any feminists coming across this blog think - 'oh no he's got us sussed, the way he calmly dissects the female sex offender charade is frightening. He even realizes that we are not to blame because he's not a misogynist and sees all women as dumb cute sperm receptacles, and that it's all the fault of MEN and especially the pigs'??
Even the BrassEye 'Peadogeggan' special by Chris Morris in the early days of paedohysteria understood 'Sexual Trade Union Theory'. You can see by the character of the female presenter ('SwanCheater'). He also directly stated it in another series he made (Nathan Barley).
In fact, I'll say that EVERY SINGLE person outside our 'movement' who has understood that feminists are behind age of consent/porn laws, also has understood that it is because of sexual jealousy or bitterness. Anyone with even a day 1 understanding of evolutionary psychology would understand that feminist anti-sex laws are about intrasexual competition.
Again, why we in our 'movement' (aside from myself) can't, is the only interesting question left. Can it be explained by some kind of filter that means that anyone who has a desire to 'fight back' also has hardcore aspergers etc, or a higher than even normal dose of male white knight instincts?
BTW, the paedocrite Elon Musk has admitted to being an aspie. Who would have guessed? https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-57045770
I am not committed to any one simplistic theory to explain all ills that male sexualism is up against. Female sexual trade unionism, while undoubtedly a big factor, doesn’t capture the full horror of what is happening, nor does it explain male self-loathing and complicity. It does little to address the surreal insanity of the female sex offender charade and other laws that do nothing but harm or actually go against the feminist agenda such as the porn laws that punish men for self-abuse. We are up against an even more uncaring monster than the feminists because the state is an AI that presumably doesn’t feel at all, and it has a life of its own enforcing these sick laws. The overarching purpose of male sexualism is to undermine the excessive criminalization of sexuality, which can be done in a multitude of ways. I already set the stage for Whitman in this thread, so let us turn to Song of Myself, Section 51:
The past and present wilt—I have fill'd them, emptied them.
And proceed to fill my next fold of the future.
Listener up there! what have you to confide to me?
Look in my face while I snuff the sidle of evening,
(Talk honestly, no one else hears you, and I stay only a minute longer.)
Do I contradict myself?
Very well then I contradict myself,
(I am large, I contain multitudes.)
I concentrate toward them that are nigh, I wait on the door-slab.
Who has done his day's work? who will soonest be through with his supper?
Who wishes to walk with me?
Will you speak before I am gone? will you prove already too late?
Activism is more like poetry than whatever you seem to make of it. There is no “right” answer to how to achieve justice, and the causes of injustice are also fuzzy. Your theory didn’t gain traction despite considerable blogging by you and others that you note, so it has already been tried in the wild, not just within our movement. Given that we definitely agree that the laws are bad, I honestly don’t understand why you are so upset by more ways to view things and support for female sex offenders too. I already said the autoimmune metaphor wasn’t incompatible with your view, just an extension. When I call the abuse industry the nocebo industry that also builds on Angry Harry’s excellent work.
I came across a paper a while back whose reference now eludes me that presented a proof that autoimmune diseases are inevitable. Very simplified I think it went something like a system can’t realize from within that it is insane. There was some relation to an incompleteness theorem or something and I can’t articulate the logic clearly, but anyway it makes intuitive sense.
You can decide that your immune system is overreacting and intervene if there is a treatment, but the immune system cannot know that it is attacking the wrong things. You overriding your immune system with antihistamines or steroids or whatever might work, but you cannot know that your judgment is sound, so there is no ultimate safeguard against insanity. Your doctor and society might correct you, but what if society is insane? Because the same limitation must be true for societies as well. They can’t call out their own insanity. Individuals and small groups sometimes can see it clearly like we are doing here, but no one has the power to stop a society in the throes of delusion because society is a higher power that emerges out of its own rules. No one can make a judgment from outside the system while having enough power to stop the insane behavior like the current persecution of sexuality. There is no reliable cure for witch-hunts; they must pass as mysteriously as they came, but I would like to think it helps to at least nudge things in the right direction, which again there is a multitude of ways to do.
The feminists inject their selfish motives into the AI that is the state with its laws and enforcers, and then their involvement pretty much stops there. It is misguided to think they are very powerful. Don’t confuse the psychopaths who work in the police or as judges with the monster either, which is its own entity using human beings as cogs in its machinery including for computing sentences and rulings via the courts. This entity is the real enemy, and it is not human, even less so now that we have lost the jury in Norway. Angry Harry called it an organism, which is the same concept. I am not really being innovative here, but new turns of phrases might help to wake some men up. Or such is my naive belief, anyway, that some may be swayed by other related theories even if what we have called it so far leaves them cold.
The most astonishingly hateful antisex quote of the day, May 10th 2021, still managing to shock me that we have fallen even further:
“Rogen also expressed regret over his infamous 2014 "Saturday Night Live" joke, which trivialized the then recent revelation Franco had propositioned a 17-year-old on Instagram.”
Men have gone insane and abjured their own sexuality, which is pretty hard to blame on women and their sexual trade union. Because no “union” has this black magic power no matter how much you stretch that concept; nothing women do can explain men so utterly and completely hating themselves.
So where we are at is now literally: think back and consider if there was ever a time that you “trivialized” attraction to 17-year-olds as anything less than the most heinous rape and abuse... If you are guilty of that, then you are too impure for society. At this cutting edge of inventing sexual misconduct is still time to recant and grovel and do the requisite virtue signaling that you have completely rejected sexuality, then cops maybe don’t break down your doors for the time being, but it is only a matter of time before even that won’t be enough and men need to proactively renounce sexuality before they are born, perhaps by banning the Y chromosome?
Lol, there are rumors Bill Gates is getting divorced because Melinda didn't like him hanging out with Epstein:
If the implications of that are true, maybe he can be a male sexualist and finally provide some counterweight to these pushover men who deny their sexuality? Or maybe he will just be dragged down too because antisex bigotry really is that powerful. So far he is simply not talking about it, which at least is better than groveling with antisex self-hate.
"Why should surprise you? Just a few weeks ago you were still trying to convince your leader to convert to feminism."
Doubtful. That RS player is just too much of a pussy to fight back when he's under fire. He's going to hide, apologize, and beg the normies to accept him back into society. While distancing himself from any renegades. I wish one person with a social media presence would lock down, be confident, and defend themselves. I guess Zhang Muyi did. That's the only one I can think of.
@eivind berge "Female sexual trade union theory isn’t gaining traction"
You might be surprised. I was on r/whiteknighting the other day, and I saw a post from a girl on twitter being shared, talking about creepy old men dating 21 year old girls. She was saying "guys always say we are jealous of younger girls, but no no, we just want to protect them"
Who are these guys? Who were the people telling her this? lol
"I was close to winning the battle to make male sexual criminalization, including the feminist age of consent, part of the men's rights movement"
The mens rights movement? You mean those guys that blog about evil college girls "sexually abusing" 17 year old boys? LOL.
Yeah, I just spotted the “Men’s Rights Movement” in action on Twitter in 2021, the Men Matter Foundation. @MenMatterFdn.
Men's Rights Organization | Justice and Fair Treatment for Men and Boys | +234 (0) 701 183 2747 | MenMatterFdn@gmail.com | #MenToo
And their gripe?
“Men get sexually harassed by women as much as—perhaps even more than—women do by men. The only difference is that groping and fondling men without their consent isn't frowned upon in society.”
A carbon copy of feminism except they want to double down on the antisex hysteria for men too. It doesn’t occur to him that there is anything wrong with the sex laws except they don’t punish enough women. So unbelievably, jaw-droppingly obtuse. Normie men are incapable of thinking a thought that’s not prefabricated, sealed and approved by feminist ideology. Remember the MGTOWs in the old manosphere? They at least had it in their name that men can go their own way, but now that’s literally unthinkable even as a slogan, much less as the substance of what they stand for, which is 100% copied from feminism. To say that TheAntifeminist and all of us failed at convincing the “mainstream” Men's Movement to be concerned about real men’s issues is the understatement of the century.
Maybe STU theory IS gaining traction. If some beyotch feels the need to deny obvious jealousy, and if there are already men who are hitting the nail on the head, that's good news.
It's not in here interest to invent guys who are always making that accusation.
There needs to be a few good memes about female jealousy.
Yes, that was a good sign that some cultural influence has happened. But the Men’s Rights Organizations sure aren’t picking it up that the sex laws laws are not there to help young girls but to empower jealous older women over men. To them, men serving 99 years in prison for attraction to teen girls is not an issue, but men being fondled by women is “sexual harassment” which is a big deal. The contrast to real men’s issues couldn’t be greater, nor could the emasculation inherent in what they stand for. Women according to feminism are delicate flowers who can't handle sexuality, so men must be too, eh? Our number one problem is clearly that we are getting too much sexual attention from women, not that we are rotting in prison for trying to meet them when they are naturally most attractive... You can't make this shit up, that this somehow passes as “Men's Rights” with a straight face.
It’s almost like taking away the male gaze. There’s freedom in taking that power back.”
Some Muslim women told researcher Anna Piela that the pandemic allowed them to feel more comfortable adopting the niqab, which they had wanted to do before.
Going out in public with a black surgical mask that covers her chin and sunglasses that cover her eye bags provides Miller with an escape from that sense of scrutiny.
“I 10,000% plan on wearing it for the foreseeable future,” she said. “After a full work day of worrying and not being able to focus on my actual job, it just feels nice to blend in. Simply put, I’m sick of being perceived.”
The hijab is so hot. My boner stands at attention when my gf wears it.
A post from that incel forum you linked
"There's nothing inherently pedo about liking a 16 year old"
And someone responds by saying
"You are only a pedo if the foid is 12 imo"
Yeah, no. 12-17 is normal male sexuality.
Akami Miki is a qt pie.
And I respect that incels question the age of consent. But can you guys just get a girl or something. It's really easy. I don't understand the issue.
Yes, that is exactly right and I think hijabs are hot too. They don't prevent the male gaze, but the niqab sort of does and if girls feel they need to wear that to be liberated in public, well, then that's okay as long as we get to meet them privately.
It is encouraging that incels aren't totally brainwashed with the age of consent. Now if they also practice nofap they can be like us and not incel anymore.
Another empty sex abuse conviction that as far I can tell simply boils down to the man being 20 years older than girls who are ABOVE the age of consent. No sex either; they are "assaulted through inappropriate massages" with no force and where he stops when they tell him to, and for this the man is "dangerous and predatory." He also "tried to hug" one girl which means he must have backed off there too, yet this is heinous abuse according to feminist antisex norms by which the world has gone stark raving mad.
Chang assaulted the four women, aged between 16 and 18 at the time, through inappropriate massages as he worked as part of the English National Ballet and Young Dancers Academy, the CPS said.
The crimes took place from December 2009 to February 2016, and a police investigation was opened in April 2016 after a victim reported the abuse.
During one incident, Chang asked a victim to lie down and began massaging her leg before moving his hands higher up, the CPS said, adding that the victim became concerned and told him to stop.
In another incident with the same woman, the CPS said, Chang led the victim to the men's changing area, got undressed and tried to hug her.
"Yat-Sen Chang used his position as a famed and trusted ballet teacher to groom and sexually assault teenage dancers under his training," Nahid Mannan, from the CPS, said.
"At 20 years their senior, Chang would have been well aware that his conduct was grossly inappropriate and predatory. Yet he used his power and influence to abuse and sexually intimidate his young victims," Mannan added.
Yes, we get the point that male sexuality is by definition predatory, and anything that can make the man more attractive to girls such as being a famous dancer only makes him more predatory.
Also notice how he was convicted based on prerecorded video interviews with the girls, which means no chance for cross-examination, plus they get anonymity for life from the moment they accuse -- all hallmarks of the crimen exceptum. The most absurdly draconian exceptions to principles of justice are granted to the lightest conceivable sex offense such as trying to hug a 17-year-old girl after "grooming" her with your dance instructor position -- which despite the empty content of course is presented to be profoundly serious and predatory and the sentence will be accordingly.
And another one all based on lack of consent in a woman's head:
"Former Australian international rugby league player Jarryd Hayne has been jailed for five years and nine months after being found guilty of sexual assault."
However, the most sinister part is this, because what does it mean?
"During the trial, the court heard that the incident took place after Hayne arrived, drunk, at the victim's home following a stag party. He then performed two sex acts against her without her consent."
Does it mean they lived together and she simply found it convenient to accuse him at some later time? Or did he arrive at a random woman's house? What is their relation? We CAN'T KNOW these things due to the mandated secrecy. If she is his wife or girlfriend, the media must hide that fact in order to shroud her identity in secrecy, which means we can't even judge whether there is anything blameworthy here -- which there might be if he imposed on some woman he didn't know, but it is a very different situation if they are in a relationship. It is horrifyingly bizarre that they can't be more specific. I am assuming they lived together because they would surely have said so if she were a stranger, and been able to without revealing her identity, but note that he CAN'T USE THIS FACT to defend himself to public opinion. This is how a crimen exceptum works and makes the witch-hunt all the more horrific by deliberately hiding essential details.
I am wondering if there are many more cases of men simply disappearing in the UK and Australia because the media couldn't report the man's name either since he was accused of sexually abusing a family member. They can't report on cases of men being convicted for "raping" their wives and daughters, can they, because that would reveal the identities of the accusers? Not without some twisted anonymization of the entire trial which wouldn't be very practical or would be so bizarre that it would let on to the public that there is something seriously wrong with the whole system -- so do they simply ignore it and let the justice or injustice unfold with no chance of the man getting any sympathy? Come to think of it, such cases are conspicuously absent from the media, but I know from all the relatives of the falsely accused I see on Twitter that there are many men in prison for such crimes... Holy shit, this is a dark hole.
It's harder to disappear a celebrity. Maybe that's why they reported this case, with gross distortions, whereas regular men are not even that lucky. Seriously, where are the media reports of men put on trial in the UK/Australia for sexually abusing family members?
One further observation on the depths of hell that antisex bigotry is. If you ask the normies what a crimen exceptum is, they will not mention sex. They will refer to the old witch-hunts in the 15-1700s and then scratch their heads and maybe mutter something about McCarthyism or AT BEST false accusations as more recent examples. The fact that sex is now punished so much harder than anything else and with all these exceptions to human rights and due process is transparent to them because it is a feature of just this sort of insanity that it doesn’t realize how insane it is. It is just normal to the normies that sex should be treated this way, because this is what society now does and they are society.
Eivind Berge said...
Yes, how it can happen is the real question.
Male jealousy, stupidity and a license to kill.
That's how it happened, especially with the conservative feminists who are worse than regular feminists.
"And I respect that incels question the age of consent. But can you guys just get a girl or something. It's really easy. I don't understand the issue."
Getting a girl worth fucking is not really easy. It is a giant pain in the ass, made many times worse by the fake pandemic.
""At 20 years their senior, Chang would have been well aware that his conduct was grossly inappropriate and predatory. Yet he used his power and influence to abuse and sexually intimidate his young victims," Mannan added."
The conservative/liberal/male/female feminists hate this the most - age gaps. This boils their blood with jealousy more than anything. I'm frankly stunned they haven't made age gap relationships statutory rape as of yet. They are coming for this next.
Hayne's accuser wasn't his wife, but she is standing by him.
The comments and votes on the Daily Mail are what you would expect.The wife is copping some criticism as well as Haynes himself. I still can't figure out what the serious criminal act was supposed to be.
Comments at the Fail can be weird. There was a story about Courtney Stodden, who married a 50 y.o. guy at 16, and how she received messages from Chrissy Teigen telling her to kill herself.There was one well-rated comment about how she was exploited by the man, yet most of the comments weren't about that at all, but the alleged nastiness of Teigen. I am not really interested in any of the people involved, but I presume Teigen might have an older female jealousy motivation behind her comments. As such, it's surprising the story was run by the Fail, pandering to the brood mares as it does and not wanting to shine a light on their true motives, and the for there not to be a whole lot about the age difference/alleged exploitation in the comments. It seems encouraging, but one swallow does not a summer make.
I'm sure the last paragraph of the above comment is right on the money.
Who needs a law against age gap when they can just call it rape or abuse of position and it gets convicted under the current laws? It would be a downgrade from the present situation if they had a statutory prohibition of age gap. But yeah, they might do it to have something to fall back on in the rare cases when rape convictions fail, or when the girl refuses to cooperate with the prosecution. Since they already have an absolute rape age, an absolute rape age gap is also in the cards. Indeed that is already reality in France, where a 5+ year difference from anyone under 15 makes what they pretend to be real rape.
Witch-hunt continues against high-ranking political man to see if he’s had sex with a 17-year-old. There is no accuser, but if they look really hard they might turn one up.
“Federal investigators scrutinizing Rep. Matt Gaetz are seeking the cooperation of a former Capitol Hill intern who was once a girlfriend of the Florida Republican, sources familiar with the matter tell CNN…. The ex-girlfriend could also be questioned by investigators about a second woman as they try to determine whether Gaetz may have slept with that woman when she was only 17.”
The intern wasn’t young enough to be incriminating, but if they torture her really hard she might be willing to accuse him at some other girl’s behalf?
The premise behind our time’s witch-hunt sure would seem strange to anyone not brainwashed with the current bigotry. Imagine if they had tried this against a Roman senator, or one of the Founding Fathers, how they would have struggled to explain the norms behind it. But now this is just normal, huh? Men don't think there is anything weird or oppressive here at all?
Abusers disappearing anonymously after being accused of abusing family members? Not likely. Families are the cradle of real, hard-core pedophilia (the kind even we tolerant folks on this forum would disapprove of). Real child martyrdom also happens in the bosom of families. That's why families are vociferous about punishing would-be outsider pedophiles. Families need to divest attention from their own domestic crime problem. Is it a coincidence that child martyrdom vanished from the headlines about at the sam time child (sexual) abuse took off?
It does happen. Here is a story of a Man in Malta who was accused by his daughter:
"Emanuel Camilleri spent almost 400 days in prison when his daughter falsely accused him of rape. In an emotional interview after he won compensation for the ordeal last week, he tells Jessica Arena how the experience shattered his life and how the support of his wife pulled him through... But for over a decade, he had to fight to prove he was innocent of an allegation of rape made by his then 10-year-old daughter that landed him in prison... The accusations were first levelled against him in 2004. Ten years later and after he had spent 397 days behind bars, his daughter, Leanne, now in her 20s, told a court she lied under oath and a perjury case against her mother, Lisa May, is ongoing."
The question is, would such an interview be publishable in the UK? Or would he be forbidden from speaking about his own case and most likely still be in prison, anonymous and forgotten by evil design of the laws? Anonymity for accusers is possibly the most Kafkaesque idea ever dreamt up, yet it is considered normal in the UK because sex is a crimen exceptum and they never had any constitutional freedom of speech anyway to prevent such an atrocity.
If you are innocently accused and you try to shed light on it to defend yourself, you are jailed anyway because the accuser has anonymity from the moment she makes her complaint. Not that anonymity is any more just for truthful accusers either; it is as fundamental as the jury that all parties to a trial and all witnesses must be public or else you don't have a justice system but tyranny. We only get to hear the tip of the iceberg of what is really going on in British courts and prisons because of this insane law.
"If he had dumped her when she was 17 and started dating another 14 year old, they would be screaming for his balls to be chopped off"
I mean, if he takes her virginity, then dumps her when she is 17 because she's too old, and leaves her as his leftovers, that is kind of a dick move? So of course people would be angry about that lol. Why would you dump your girlfriend that you've been with since she was 14? It would be like cutting out a part of yourself. When you're with someone for that long, she becomes a part of you. I support committed intergenerational relationships. Now of course if a 15 year old is promiscuous and just wants to sleep with you, whatever, doesn't matter. But if she's a sweet girl that wants to stay with you, and you throw her away, wtf is that? XD
"Now if they also practice nofap they can be like us and not incel anymore"
I mean, if he takes her virginity, then dumps her when she is 17 because she's too old, and leaves her as his leftovers, that is kind of a dick move? So of course people would be angry about that lol. Why would you dump your girlfriend that you've been with since she was 14? It would be like cutting out a part of yourself. When you're with someone for that long, she becomes a part of you. I support committed intergenerational relationships. Now of course if a 15 year old is promiscuous and just wants to sleep with you, whatever, doesn't matter. But if she's a sweet girl that wants to stay with you, and you throw her away, wtf is that? XD
OK, I'll rephrase it. If he either cheated on her or dumped her when she was 21, they would be screaming to have him cut into tiny pieces. In fact, if he ever dumps her they will probably be screaming paedophile (as will the girl).
You mentioned a little while ago that your 'last 3 girlfriends' were HB10s. Sounds like you don't actually stick around with these HB10s for very long. You claim to be able to attract HB10 models just by clicking your fingers. You obviously, just like everybody else here, have a strong attraction to teenage girls at their peak. I find it hard to believe that you're going to be committed to one of your model girlfriends for years without being tempted by any of the HB10 16 year olds or whatever that are throwing themselves at you.
"Now if they also practice nofap they can be like us and not incel anymore"
Do you not think these desperate incels don't often practice 'nofap' Eivind? You actually think somebody who is ugly, 5 ft 3 and has no social skills will suddenly be able to get a girlfriend if he stops masturbating? Will it add inches to his height, cure him of aspergers, add a strong jaw line? From your own writings, you've had one girlfriend in the last 20 years, who was apparently a fan of yours from reading your blog.
Are you claiming not to be an incel? Well I guess if you count 1,000 black mamas on Tinder...
The difference between you and the incel community is not NoFap, it's simply that you are incapabale of blaming women for anything.
No, I am not incel and nothing like them and I have yet to hear of any committed nofapper who is an incel, but you have to look no further than the last comment to illustrate how masturbation and incel go together. Thinking your jawline needs to be a certain way or you need to be taller or not liking BBW black girls are all dysfunctions that can be cured by nofap. Do you think a caveman would think any of those? No, he would go out and get girls; only by having and thinking internet porn is an acceptable alternative does one fall into those delusions.
I don't claim nofap can cure you of real, profound disabilities except porn-induced impotence and social anxiety, but society now slaps diagnoses on guys who are not really disabled. Aspergers isn't holding Elon Musk back, is it? He gives his kids weird names, but he does meet women and have children, I think up to seven now. So even if you have a diagnosis, nofap might cure you sufficiently that you can have a great sex life. Of course it also helps to be a billionaire, but if I had to pick one superpower between that and nofap, I would go for the latter.
Is Nofap synonymous with Noporn? Historically probably not. But in this day and age we can say that "do not fap" goes hand in hand (no pun intended) with "do not watch porn".
Porn has many benefits in terms of male approach to women.
Firstly it enables men to know their sexual triggers by becoming familiar not only with the types of female bodies that tick their boxes but also with what they expect from a woman in bed.
Secondly and similarly, it makes men more demanding in terms of sex-appeal and sexual attitude in bed. Gone are the days when a woman only needed to lie down for a couple of minutes each day to keep her man hooked. Being more demanding also means not marrying.
The general availability of porn also shattered a few lies about women and sex. I remember the days when porn was still censored and not widely available. The victimhood tale went round that women could never do porn of their own accord and were drawn into it by pimps. These days you don't need to watch porn for long before noticing this is lie. Some women enjoy themselves doing porn, others don't seem to mind one way or the other but the bias is very much one of having fun rather the contrary, which is more than you can say about normal work. Women seldom watch porn regularly but they watch porn occasionally more often than they admit. I'm sure the net effect of porn on women is positive as far as meeting men's sexual desires is concerned. Isn't sexting and lewd behaviour by some teenagers inspired to said teenagers by porn? Girls like to appear fashionable and daring. Remove porn, and then what inspiration will be left for girls to disobey the moral diktats of our time?
For men the benefits of porn are similar to those of prostitution. For me porn is an extension of prostitution. I rotate 4 or 5 regular girls during this lockdown (40 to 50 euros for short time) but I fap regularly as well. I often fap after the girl has gone, not to let the after-effects of the boner pill go wasted.
While I poke the girl I play a fantasy in my head because the girl as such is not enough to push me over the edge. At the end of the day it's all in the brain. The girl is a 3-dimensional porn actress who happens to be in my room for a while.
Is porn not real sex? Or rather, is sex not real porn? I wish real sex looked more like porn in my case.
That is extremely dysfunctional. The problem isn't watching porn, but associating it with arousal pathways via masturbation to where it replaces sex or you need it in addition to sex just like you describe above. So no, nofap doesn't need to be synonymous with no porn and if you only used porn for education and art with no masturbation, then no problem. But you and so many men have abused it and now you are addicted. The girls should be perfectly satisfying on their own, and since they aren't you have a serious problem, or at least would if you cared about having healthy sexual relationships.
It's just that standard sex with a girl doesn't cut it any more. Maybe I need younger girls and not just 25-30s. More likely I need other stimuli or being high on some shit.
Is there anything like "healthy sexual relationships". I mean can sexual fantasies be healthy? Arousing most often means kinky. When I hear "relationship" I think "boring". When I hear "healthy relationship" I think "boooooooring!". Sex should be nasty, wicked. I'm not alone thinking this.
It is a taboo thought that masturbation will reinforce kinks and paraphilias, because our cultural dogma has it that masturbation is harmless, but is it far-fetched? Don't you think standard sex with a girl would be far more satisfying if you practiced nofap your whole life? I don't mean you need to be monogamous and obviously men crave very young women without masturbating. But wanting to do other than standard sex with them, and feeling unfulfilled if you don't, that I think is adversely affected by masturbation, which means masturbation is evil and porn is to the extent that it exacerbates it, which is pretty much the definition of what it does these days. It is strange if masturbation can be exacerbated without the kinks that many men masturbate to, but that is what I am supposed to believe?
This is a very refreshing contrast to British secrecy. Not saying the American system is better overall when they also manage to sentence men to 99 years for trying to meet imaginary teenagers, but they sure do right by this:
The civil lawsuit against actor Kevin Spacey that alleges he sexually assaulted a teenager in the 1980s is expected to be dismissed after attorneys for the accuser on Thursday said he refused to identify himself.
A federal judge ruled last week that the man -- identified in court documents as C.D. -- who alleged Spacey sexually assaulted him when he was 14 must reveal his identity publicly.
Judge Lewis A. Kaplan determined that the public has a legitimate interest in knowing the identity of the man, noting in this case "that interest is magnified because C.D. has made his allegations against a public figure."
Attorneys for the accuser filed a letter Thursday in a New York court informing the judge of the decision and agreed to a dismissal of the case as it pertains to C.D.
"As we had previously informed the Court, C.D. believes he is unable to withstand the scrutiny and intrusion into his life if his identity is revealed in this matter," attorneys Richard M. Steigman and Peter J. Saghir wrote.
That kind of scrutiny is the only way it can be in any justice system worthy of the name and would be a wonderful way to prevent many of the atrocities happening in the UK and Australia, where anonymous accusers have nothing to lose by making up whatever they want -- well, at least not until they reach the Carl Beech level, which is what it takes not to get away with false accusations in the UK.
This is the most egregious thing I have read in a long while... For the first time in my life, I am genuinely considering that an Islamic takeover might be for the best. Our society deserves no better...
Yes, that is shocking. So Norway only allows three or four years age difference, resulting in
all these young men going to prison for sex with their girlfriends. I didn't know 19-year-old boys are the most commonly convicted "sex offenders"; this looks more like an out-of-control police state that simply pursues any criminality it can than any purposeful feminist jealousy. But it is amazing that the media for once does not simply parrot the antisex bigotry, but questions some of it. They bluntly state that many of these are victimless cases until the girls are in fact abused by the police and justice system, which is very refreshing to see in the mainstream media.
Pick up Robert Epsteins book saving our children from the torment of adolescence. He's got a quote in there from a muslim leader in the middle east saying 12 is old enough for marriage.
Open the boarders! lol
You remind me of quite a few readers I had who insisted that marrying 12 year old girls would be the way to go. They were so autistic that they genuinely couldn't conceptualize the fact that a 12 year old would not stay a 12 year old and that for most of your life you would be married to an aging hag.
Secondly, why is it always 'open the borders' with you fetishizers of Islam as a solution? Why don't you just move to any one of the 20+ Islamic countries in the world? You probably need to earn maybe $20 a day or less to live in half of them. But we know you wont. We know Eivind wont. That's because you're absolute self-deceitful frauds. Man oh man, if only there was just one nation on Earth I could move to and be free of feminist laws (OK, sorry, 'American conservative laws'). I'd move there like a shot. Unfortunately, there is no such place on Earth.
You're like one of those middle-class Marxist poseurs in the West during the Soviet Union, always claiming that it was a utopia compared to the Capitalist West, but you know you wouldn't survive one day in the hell hole.
Here in Europe the borders have certainly been opened big time. What has the result been? Last time i checked, the age of consent has not crashed down to 12. Quite the contrary. In Germany, which has seen a flood of Muslim immigration to add to their already huge Islamic population, the result has been an increase in anti-sex laws (in response to the regular sexual assaults and harassment (real) of local women), playing right into the feminist's hands. Further, feminist politicians have openly called on German women to wear the veil, to dress modestly, not to go out unaccompanied by a male, in response to these attacks. Also Holocaust22, do you think you would find it so easy getting your HB10 18 year old model girlfriends if you suddenly had 10 horny Muslim single males chasing every hot white female?
No disrespect, why don't you learn to be a bit more humble? You're young and trying to work out what's going, why don't you see what you've learnt in a few more years before drawing conclusions and thinking you have all the answers? You read one feminist out of millions calling for the age of consent to be reduced so you're convinced that feminists are our allies, and ignore the thousands upon thousands of feminists dominating NGOs and increasingly parliaments who are actually lobbying for and passing the laws against male sexuality. You read one quote of a Muslim saying 12 year olds are ready for marriage and ignore the fact that 9 out 10 countries in the world with an age of consent of 18 or higher are muslim countries. But you don't mind because if you married a 12 year old you'd be happier for ever after, because who wouldn't be happy married to a sweet 12 year old for the rest of their lives? Dumping her when she's a 50 year old sweet 12 year old would be a dick move.
"You remind me of quite a few readers I had who insisted that marrying 12 year old girls would be the way to go. They were so autistic that they genuinely couldn't conceptualize the fact that a 12 year old would not stay a 12 year old and that for most of your life you would be married to an aging hag."
It doesn't matter. This is the argument of antis, that say we will just date a young girl, then break up with her when she gets old. Do you want to actually do that, and give truth to their dumb argument?
Every single relationship is like that. Every couple that gets married is eventually going to lose attraction to their partner when they turn 80 lmao. It doesn't matter. That's still your little girl, and you stay with her. But the fact that you've been with her since she was young is beautiful. You being the first, and only person she's slept with, is beautiful. That's your ally in life.
"Here in Europe the borders have certainly been opened big time. What has the result been? Last time i checked, the age of consent has not crashed down to 12."
Because there's not enough fundamentalism. Dombipa, one of the Buddhas, married a 12 year old when he was in his 40s. But how many Buddhists in america have criticized the age of consent? One. Allen Ginsberg. Because he was a fundamentalist Buddhist. In the hindu texts, it states quite clearly that a man of 30 should marry a girl of 12. But modern hindu teachers are always ready to say "that was a different time" because they aren't fundamentalists. And are willing to change the religion at any time to fit modern cultural beliefs, and maintain their reputation, to keep selling their books or whatever.
"You read one quote of a Muslim saying 12 year olds are ready for marriage and ignore the fact that 9 out 10 countries in the world with an age of consent of 18 or higher are muslim countries"
Indonesia has an age of consent at 18 because of western globalism, right? They literally have feminist womens groups in the government calling for the castration of "pedophiles" ie, men with 17 year old girlfriends. This certainly came from the west?
"You're like one of those middle-class Marxist poseurs in the West during the Soviet Union"
Socialists like Richard Wolff and Bernie sanders have let me down unfortunately.
I think every male sexualist should convert to hinduism, buddhism, or taoism. All three religions support relationships with teenagers under the age of 18, and specifically say so in their texts. Convert, become a fundamentalist, tell every anti they are a buddhaphobe, hinduphobe, or taoistphobe. This is the age of political correctness and anti western sentiment. Come at them in the language they speak. This is what Allen Ginsberg did.
"What? Are you attacking my religion and culture? Intergenetional relationships are a part of both me and my girlfriends religion. Stop trying to globalize us imperialist. Do you think your culture is better than everyone elses? Racist"
This is the best thing that I can think of right now. lol
I actually got into an argument with a guy under a roman polanski youtube video the other day. I told him intergenerational relationships were a part of me and my gfs religion. The older husband is the teacher, caretaker, and protector of his younger wife. He did a 180, and said ok I understand where you're coming from now. Prior to me talking to him, he was going on about how men with a teenage girlfriend are evil pedophiles that shouldn't exist. He actually started trying to convince me that the west isn't so bad about intergenerational relationships, saying his grandma was with older men when she was 14, back in the day. Muahahaha. Got him.
I'm banned on twitter and gab. When freedom of speech starts applying to social media platforms, and we can get our ideas out there, people will start changing. The problem now is only one side of the argument is allowed to be presented. When both sides are allowed to be presented, we will win.
I was so surprised before I got banned from twitter, seeing how many people were supporting me. I got messages from a girl in an armenian ethnic tribe, thanking me, saying in her tribe younger girls marry older men. And the UN is trying to force them to change their laws. And I had a black guy with his full face and life on his twitter, who was defending me in my tweet wars.
Support anti-western sentiment, religions with intergenerational relationships, tribes, like armenian ethnic tribes, and freedom of speech. Speak out against globalism, the UN, and make friends with girls in other countries that married their husbands at a young age. Be multi-cultural.
We are getting more activity on this blog. I feel like this shit is going to kick off, and be the next revolution. I wake up every day with fire in my heart. I can taste the revolution. It's right around the corner. Anything can spark it.
I want to comment on a statement made by the prosecutor of sex crimes in the article provided by anonymous above about young Norwegian men being jailed for having sex with their girlfriends, who as we see there don't always succumb to the brainwashing that they have been "abused" but instead wait for the men outside while they serve their totally meaningless sentence. She is quoted, but the article very much undermines her and paints her as a villain, curiously while at the same time sort of sympathetically excusing her as just following orders from some inexplicable fount of bad laws that we have to accept as if the people don't really have a choice in the matter.
"– All forskning viser at en på 14 år ikke fullt ut forstår konsekvensene av å involvere kroppen i sex, sier Sandøy."
Har du sett denne forskningen? Bruker den metoder som er troverdige for deg? Åpner den for at antakelsen kan være gal og dermed i det hele tatt tilnærmer seg den på en måte som er egnet til å falsifisere den? Kan du vise referanse til slik forskning som tilfredsstiller disse kriteriene og som vanlige mennesker kan forstå uten å ha doktorgrad i heksejakt? Eller hvis man eventuelt trenger det, hvorfor tror du på dette hekseriet og hvorfor skulle jeg?
It is the tired old platitude about young teens not fully understanding the consequences of sex, which although poorly evidenced is supposed to lead to the certain conclusion that all sex is abuse; not really worthy of being humored in this forum, but that’s what I would have said if news sites still allowed comments. Though I will grant her that the youth don’t always fully understand how evil the state she represents is and what consequences it will inflict on them and their lovers for doing what comes naturally (as the article shows them naively talking to cops about and learning the hard way), so if that is what she means, then yeah.
Now to TheAntifeminist's Islamophobia, how much worse than this does it have to get before you are willing to consider that maybe Islam is a better option?
And Holocaust22, I like the idea of converting to those other religions too if it can help. Allen Ginsberg was indeed a role model and never mind that he was gay -- I hereby posthumously award him the title of male sexualist.
First most of us hate religions as much as we hate feminism.
Second, if you thought you would be free to marry a 12-year-old in countries say like Iran, don't forget such countries also allow "wronged" husbands to murder their wives' lover or suspected lover. You wanted a free love paradise, you get a murder free-for-all. And this is only the beginning of the downsides associated with living in such countries.
Muslim political parties have emerged in many EU countries. Some years ago I had a good mind to vote for a political party called "Islam" in one of the EU capitals. I thought better of it after reading their political agenda. It contained nothing that would go against feminism, quite the reverse. It was a political agenda focused on hand-outs for families and 2nd generation immigrants, with some retrograde censorship advocacies thrown in. A political agenda anathema to any MGTOW or libertarian mindset.
So Eivind thinks it's all about the female sex offender charade, nocebo, and nofap. All we need to do is bring about the collapse of civilization with our paedophile allies, convert to Islam, and then eliminate every policeman on the planet, and the over criminalization of the autoimmune response of the social body will end. Simplez. At least it would be if everybody here would just stop masturbating.
Holocaust22 thinks our allies are a Jewish feminist and Islam. We need to work with them to bring down the age of marriage to 12 and then we can all live happily ever after. A lifetime of cozy domestic bliss with a sweet 12 year old girl. Sure dicks will get castrated, but why would anyone not be satisfied with their 12 year old sweetheart just because she's turned 50?
The Antifeminist thinks that the reason why middle-aged women are preventing men from having sexual access to younger females is because it's a case of middle-aged women preventing men from having sexual access to younger females. Doesn't seem to add up to me. Too many internal contradictions to it. We can dismiss this one.
Jack thinks that it's all because of men cockblocking other men. Yeah, I like that one. That would explain why interracial dating is illegal in France and why incels are despised so much.
I think we need a new theory. I'm leaning towards it being a case of anti-sex laws being a reaction to global warming. Too much C02 in the atmosphere is making governments dependent on the solar wind industry. If you think about it, wind farms are just collections of castrated phalluses shedding their foreskin. So children passing these wind farms on the way to school are being conditioned to seeing all men as evil sex predators who need to be castrated, metaphorically or literally.
" I hereby posthumously award him the title of male sexualist."
Well done Lord Eivind! With you as leader, the nocebo over criminalization of the auto immune system of the autistic brain will soon be a thing of the past! All we need to do now is bring about the collapse of civilization and eliminate all policemen from the planet!
Imran Kahn introduces surgical castration for 'paedophiles' in Pakistan (age of consent 18).
Will Pakistan be your first choice destination as an Islamic paradise to escape to Eivind, Holocaust22?
I realize that Islamic countries now tend to stack feminist laws on top of their old system, giving you the worst of both worlds. Though feminist age of consent and crimen-exceptum punishment for sex offenders still can't be said to be inherent failings of Islam, I don't know know what to about it. We can only hope for collapse.
Meanwhile in the UK victims of 'paedophile hunter' and pig stings will get 14 years in prison in future, as much as if they had 'abused' a real child.
All the various sex crimes are merely stand-ins for removing undesirables from society. You only really need a label + removal by life in prison or execution. The details of how they apply that label are superfluous and can be reduced to pointing a finger. All the laws converge on that reality.
We only need to ask, who gets to point that finger? Any female who accuses, for sure. Any former child alleging historic abuse. Self-appointed pedophile hunters. And the cops can sting or independently raise accusation against anyone at will.
If a man hasn't yet been been accused of sexual misconduct, that just means he hasn't been investigated hard enough.
"Microsoft board members opened investigation into Bill Gates after a staffer said the pair had engaged in a sexual relationship [twenty years ago], report says." The fact that she worked there is of course enough to make it misconduct. The founder of the company is not powerful enough that we can tolerate him hooking up with women there, because feminist antisex bigotry is the supreme, overriding value of this civilization.
"Second, if you thought you would be free to marry a 12-year-old in countries say like Iran, don't forget such countries also allow "wronged" husbands to murder their wives' lover or suspected lover"
Don't cheat ;)
I was referring to Judith Levine. You remember, the one 'feminist' out of millions who convinces you that feminists are good?
"Don't cheat ;) Muahahaha"
"What does this have to do with islam? The number 18 doesn't exist in the quran."
Jesus, I can't wait for Eivind to retire and hand you his throne.
"if you thought you would be free to marry a 12-year-old in countries say like Iran, don't forget such countries also allow "wronged" husbands to murder their wives' lover or suspected lover. You wanted a free love paradise, you get a murder free-for-all. And this is only the beginning of the downsides associated with living in such countries."
Yes, and we see what 'pure' Islam does to 'loose' men.
Holocaust22 will be alright because it would be a dick move to ever cheat on your 12 year old wife. Also the Qoran doesn't actually have a word for 'stone' because it was written before the stone age.
"most of us hate religions as much as we hate feminism."
Yes, if an individual wants to find some solace or meaning in converting to Buddhism, or even Islam or Christianity, then that's fine, but most people sympathetic to our cause are likely to be libertarian and secular minded.
The list of requirements for true Male Sexualists under Eivind and his deputy get ever longer.
NoFap, bareback sex only, Woke, pro-marriage, anti sex robots, converted to some Oriental religion...etc. etc. At some stage, even Eivind and Holocaust22 will be ruled out.
This rigmarole might be of interest to everybody:
"but most people sympathetic to our cause are likely to be libertarian and secular minded"
Say hello to Dzongsar Khyentse Rinpoche. The Bhutanese Vajrayana Buddhist teacher, and libertarian, who made fun of leftist feminists for constantly accusing everyone of sexual abuse. He caused a big stir in the Buddhist community a couple of years ago. People accused him and other teachers of breaking the law, and using their "power imbalance" to manipulate their students. He told them the law is empty, and if you believe in the law, you can never attain the highest goal of Buddhism.
And here he is saying the west is abuse hysterical because of the influence of abhrahamic religions. And the chinese because of confucianism.
Being a vajrayana Buddhist means you are a libertarian, because Vajrayana Buddhism teaches that the rules of society are empty.
“People say Drukpa Kunley is utterly mad –
In madness all sensory forms are the Path!
People say that Drukpa Kunley’s penis is immense –
His member brings joy to the hearts of all young girls!"
A quote from one of the Buddhas, Drukpa Kunley. Bet you guys have never seen a religion like this! Muahahaha.
Bravo! To hell with all that feminist nonsense about power differentials. There is nothing wrong with teachers sleeping with their students, and Buddhism only makes this point much more profound. I like this quote:
"The Vajrayana student cannot know or consent to what they are getting into. The mundane egoic person who would ask for a legalistic contract to consent to a transformative process is the very person who would be destroyed by that process. They engage samaya because the teacher knows what they cannot know, what cannot be explained before it is realized. It can only be realized through the death of the mundane personality. Samaya marks that death."
Very similar to what I wrote in a blog post in 2019 about the wannabe Buddhist Robert Wright who thinks he can be a Buddhist while holding onto feminist ideals:
If you believe that masculinity is toxic like Robert Wright does -- curiously while being conversant in evolutionary psychology at the same time, so he knows "men are naturally these creeps," as he puts it, a truth which he correctly notes should be used to bolster the feminist movement rather than be denied if one actually holds their values -- you are forever doomed to self-loathing, forever in conflict with prominent parts of yourself and banished from nirvana. You can't have a sanitized version of nirvana with feminist chaperones there to cockblock reality, because reaching that state involves killing all chaperones, famously even including the Buddha himself.
I've never regarded Buddhism as a religion, and never understood why others do. I guess it's because of the elevation of the 'Buddhas' as kinds of Gods. But really, it's just a school of Eastern philosophy. I venerate the philosopher Schopenhauer, who synthesized some of the ideas of Eastern 'religions' with Western philosophy. But I don't see myself as belonging to a 'religion' or such and don't call on everybody else to belong to it. I might point out writings of Schopenhauer, such as his famous 'On Women' essay (you probably do need to read that, actually), or refer to the fact that he proposed to a 17 year old girl when he was in his fifties, but that's about it.
I would also say that as far as I can tell, Buddhist majority countries don't appear to be much more tolerant in their legal systems these days than Western ones. Of course, you can argue like Eivind does in defence of Islam, that this is because of the influence of Western feminism (or you may prefer, 'American Conservatism'). But it still begs the question - if they can't stop feminism, why are they superior to Western schools of thought (whether 'humanism' or 'Christianity' etc.).
When will our dear leader recognize that there is a sexual holocaust against MEN taking place, and that we don't fight against that by absurdly claiming that women are the primary victims of feminist persecution? At least when you're on your death bed Eivind, be content in the knowledge you fought against the sexual holocaust against men, instead of being the ultimate anosognosia suffering cuck, who championed the very gender that were persecuting him and his fellow man. You're ultimately no better than the feminist loving 'MAPs'.
Papa Johns founder, 59, shamed as creepy and 'victimizing' for sharing a Tik Tok video in which he winks at a 21 year old woman. https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-9597527/Papa-Johns-founder-59-called-creepy-thirst-trapping-TikTok-flirty-video.html
When will any of you Mo Fos realize and accept that EVERYTHING I ever predicted is coming true, and NOTHING that I have ever written, and which explains entirely feminism, paedohysteria, the war on male sexuality, as well as most importantly giving us the tools to at least put up a noble fight, has ever been proven inconsistent or false?
No, I never said women are the “primary” victims of feminist persecution! They are merely the MOST ABSURD victims. When a 59-year-old man is demonized for flirting with a 21-year-old woman and the sex laws will soon be ready to have him locked up, that is just a difference in degree from when feminism first got started and raised the age of consent to 16. The spirit is the same, same old misandry and female sexual jealousy, and there is nothing surprising about it. Perhaps eventually they will allow men a three-year downwards age gap or else face summary execution, and still it is just more of the same. Of course it needs to be fought and it is truly astonishing that men don’t do this, but the bigotry itself is not intellectually stimulating to chronicle on a blog anymore for every man who is lynched for his normal sexuality by a system we already know to be feminazi supremacist.
When they start going after the women though, ostensibly based on the same “sexual abuse” theory, there is a difference in kind that I still haven’t figured out. Imagine if during the height of the Jim Crow era they started lynching white Southern ladies for not segregating sufficiently from black boys. That is literally what feminists are now doing to their own. Feminist antisex bigotry is a social autoimmune disease and cancer in one. It is a cancer because the police state has grown vast and monstrous and an allergy to sex itself, attacking perfectly normal and harmless relations even from what should be the female perspective. That demands some serious thought beyond just activism against the bigotry and violence, because how could things go so horribly, horribly wrong that the anti-sex laws don’t even reliably serve women anymore, but might as well attack them?
Consider the lynching of Emmett Till, a 14-year-old boy, for coming onto a 21-year-old woman. It was a horrible atrocity, but totally in line with the usual oppression going on at the time, the racist equivalent of the feminist persecution of male sexuality that is happening now. But bizarrely, we have come full circle to where today THE WOMAN would be lynched if the two had a sexual interaction. Exactly like lynching the woman for flirting with Emmett Till on grounds that she wasn’t racially segregating! How on earth can something so absurd happen, just because you substitute sexual segregation between minors and adults for racial segregation between blacks and whites? How can “women’s rights” turn on itself like that? THAT is why I blog so much about the female sex offender charade. The sheer madness of it is inexplicable. It is an atrocity above and beyond any that went before, in every way except women aren’t the primary victims and probably never will be.
21 year old Japanese runner arrested for having consensual sex with a 17 year old girl. In Japan!
IMO Schopenhauer would have been a better philosopher had he not been distracted by religious mumbo-jumbo, albeit in the rather benign form of Hinduism and Buddhism. His opus magnum (Die Welt als Darstellung) is worthless because it revolves around the dumb premise that the universe didn't exist until sentient beings emerged that could "see" it. But his essays are eminently readable and can be downloaded for free on Amazon Kindle. Schopenhauer wrote to be understood, not like so many philosophers to baffle and impress.
Returning to muslims, where have muslims demonstrated against misandry or the encroachments of feminism? Nowhere. It's not for want of their demonstrating and demanding for someone to be killed though. They seem to be doing little else.
Well, at least they don't call it rape or abuse; it is the almost charmingly named "Tokyo Metropolitan Ordinance Regarding the Healthy Development of Youth" that got him arrested. But the result is the same if he is jailed for this, which means Japan has caught up with the most sex-hostile feminist nations. There is no sanctuary on earth left except perhaps the few remaining hunter-gatherers who are either uncontacted or allowed to live by their own customs.
By the way I just spotted a possible male sexualist in a rather strange place, this article on the invention of ransomware:
The first ransomware is credited to one Joseph Popp in 1987. He was an evolutionary biologist who was conducting AIDS research at the time and for some reason felt the need to attack his fellow researchers in this novel way, which then had to be distributed on floppy disks. His motivations seemed to be more idealistic (or crazy) than malicious though, and later he went on to do something even more interesting:
While the reasons for his act are unknown, Popp made a big effort to clear his name and moved on to other pursuits, Menting said. He self-published a self-help book called "Popular Evolution," for instance, in which he advocated that the marriage age be lowered and young women focus their lives on birthing children.
I tried to find his book, which is listed at Amazon but not available:
If this is some kind of male sexualist manual/manifesto, it might be worth looking into.
"refer to the fact that he proposed to a 17 year old girl when he was in his fifties"
"I would also say that as far as I can tell, Buddhist majority countries don't appear to be much more tolerant in their legal systems these days than Western ones"
So, a few things here.
17 year old girl with 50 year old, in isarn, north-east thailand. 67 thousand likes from thai people. 95% buddhist country.
13 year old tomboy with her 60 year old lesbian lover, and teacher. Also in isan.
Tibet has an age of consent at 14. Burma has an age of consent at 14. Cambodia has an age of consent at 15. All Buddhist countries. (Tibet was lower until china invaded) And the Tibetan Vajrayana Buddhist texts describe elaborate religious sex rituals with girls as young as 12. One of my asian Buddhist friends (from another country where it's legal) was with her husband when she was 12, and he was in his 40s. Both devout Buddhists, and her husband use to be a monk.
"But it still begs the question - if they can't stop feminism, why are they superior to Western schools of thought "
What do you mean by superior? Is the superior group the group that lies the most, and is the best at spreading propaganda, and brainwashing people?
Ayurveda, the system of medicine taught by the Buddhas doctor jivaka, continually outperforms modern medicine at treating every disease and mental illness. (Eivind should like Ayurveda, because it has elaborate teachings on the negative health consequences of over-masturbation)
The ayurvedic medicine immunofree outperforms modern medicine at curing covid-19 in clinical trials.
Manasamitra Vataka plus Shirodhara therapy beats clonazepam at treating severe anxiety, in clincal trials.
And the list goes on. Ayurveda is superior. But then why have so many people in south-east asia been led to believe their system of medicine is inferior to modern medicine? Because of blatant lies. How is this the fault of Buddhism? What can the Buddha do? When the british went to india, they burned ayurvedic medicine hospitals, killed ayurvedic medicine doctors, and convinced indians that ayurveda was prehistoric black magic. LOL. How can south-east asia fight against this shit? When youtube, google, netflix, twitter, and facebook, are all owned by america. And are all preaching intergenerational relationships are evil, they are prehistoric, if your country believes in them it's backwards, etc, and anyone that offers an alternative opinion gets banned, then what to do? The propaganda is just too great. Just because the liars have the most power doesn't mean they are superior.
Thailand has tried everything they could try. They fought off france, killing their generals. They executed a very powerful christian that tried to overthrow the monarchy, take over the country, and convert everyone to christianity. But now with the internet, the game has changed.
"Very similar to what I wrote in a blog post in 2019 about the wannabe Buddhist Robert Wright who thinks he can be a Buddhist while holding onto feminist ideals"
Imagine what feminist "Buddhist" Robert would think if he read this quote from Drukpa Kunley.
Pay no respect to mean Lamas,
Pay no respect to immoral monks,
Pay no respect to dogs, crows or women:
That is the teaching on the Three Rejects - Divine madman, pg 139.
They put a 77-year-old woman on trial for "historic abuse" of a boy in the 1980s.
She was acquitted, but the fact that they tried shows British insanity at its finest and may well set a new record in the female sex offender charade. I don't know what is more ludicrous -- jailing attractive young women to prevent boys from getting lucky or old women who are so far removed from any "abuse" that the whole thing becomes a parody of a parody?
Thanks for all that info about open-minded Buddhists and Ayurvedic medicine, Holocaust22. I don't agree that it is better than evidence-based medicine though, except for things that our doctors can't really treat anyway such as anxiety. They can only tranquilize you and eventually you will become more anxious by the drugs they give you than the original problem, like Jordan Peterson found out the hard way when he almost died while trying to quit the benzodiazepines.
If they got nofap right, that is great too. But you do not want to use alternative medicine when really sick. If your oxygen saturation drops below 80% due to covid, you need ventilation and maybe ECMO, not herbs. Before you get to that point though, which most don't, you can do pretty much anything you want, which is why alternative medicine can be found to be just as good and people believe in mumbo jumbo like vitamin D. Also vaccines really do work and there is no traditional equivalent to that.
Robert Wright wrote a book called "Why Buddhism is True," so yeah, he sure must have been pretty selective about which of their claims to endorse, lol. What our culture considers to be sexual abuse is not evidence-based, but merely an extra superstition which bears no relation to the medicine we have that really works. That part of our culture should not be underestimated or replaced by quackery, even if doctors are useless at applying critical thinking more broadly. If you need dialysis or transplants, or a hip replacement, or antibiotics for a bacterial infection, there is absolutely no contest with modern medicine. I don't think you would even trust the alternatives to relieve a simple headache when it comes down to it, but instead reach for the paracetamol or aspirin.
I would imagine Buddhists are more zen and less jealous. This would explain alot especially regarding male "conservatives" adopting feminist laws even more hardcore than "liberal" feminists.
Antifeminist of course is totally right about feminism being a sex trade union. However, he misses the addendum, which is that jealous males are the ones who reinforce it and in fact make it worse. Again, I draw your attention to the PROTECT act, written by "conservatives" Mike Pence and Orren Hatch. The PROTECT Act is responsible for sending more men to jail for absurd amounts of time for things like possessing pictures that used to be legal, or traveling to meet your 17 year old girlfriend. If this law did not exist, we probably wouldn't be complaining about anything on this blog.
Additionally, courts in "conservative" states are always the ones who hand out the harshest penalties for breaking feminist sex laws. "Conservative" politicians and sheriffs are the first to shame men for breaking feminist sex laws. More men were locked up for patronizing prostitutes under Trump in one year than in all EIGHT years of Obama. And these men get hit with bogus "human trafficking" charges, the reason is because the federal government gives extra money to local police when they charge a man with "human trafficking" instead of simple prostitution. The whole system is corrupted and riddled with feminism. The only solution is to get away from it if you're a man who values his life.
"there is absolutely no contest with modern medicine"
"The group taking ayurvedic medicine had 88% of patients test negative for covid-19 on day 5, in comparison to modern medicine with only 72% negative on day 5. 100% of patients on ayurvedic medicine tested negative on day 10 and only 88% on modern medicine tested negative. Hence this study suggests that natural medicine from Ayurveda is outperforming pharmaceuticals currently being used"
From the clinical trial I linked above. Not only does it compete, but it wins.
"If you need dialysis or transplants, or a hip replacement, or antibiotics for a bacterial infection, there is absolutely no contest with modern medicine"
Ayurveda has 8 parts, with surgery being 1
2.Salakya (Ent. &Optha.)
4.Visa Vigyan (Toxicology)
5.Bhuta Vidya (Psychiatry)
The main medical text dealing with surgery is the sushrutaa samhita, from the 6th-century CE.
See the ncbi article on sushrata, the father of surgery.
"Complicated surgeries such as cesarean, cataract, artificial limb, fractures, urinary stones plastic surgery, and procedures including per- and post-operative treatment along with complications written in Sushrutaa Samhita, which is considered to be a part of Atharva Veda, are surprisingly applicable even in the present time"
"I don't think you would even trust the alternatives to relieve a simple headache when it comes down to it, but instead reach for the paracetamol or aspirin"
Oh, I do. I use to have severe problems with allergies. I'd wake up every day in misery, not being able to breathe, My head was an ocean of mucus. I took modern medicine, it didn't work. I went to an indian ayurvedic doctor, I was cured in a day. Now I never have problems with allergies.
Some case studies here of ayurveda curing the deadly mrsa staff infection, which was resistant to antibiotics, and killed thousands of people.
Evidence is important. I don't think anyone should take things on blind faith. If you are sick, go to an ayurvedic doctor, and see for yourself. The proof of the pudding is in the eating.
"Robert Wright wrote a book called "Why Buddhism is True," so yeah, he sure must have been pretty selective about which of their claims to endorse, lol."
Some kind of cherry picker that combines meditation with leftist feminism I guess. Lmao. I see a lot of people doing this unfortunately.
"Thanks for all that info about open-minded Buddhists and Ayurvedic medicine, Holocaust22"
No problem. Perhaps we disagree on ayurveda vs modern medicine. That's fine. We both still like hot teens. That's all that matters to me. Lol
Something interesting that I just thought of, since I brought up the father of ayurvedic surgery. He mentions in one of the traditional ayurvedic texts that the proper age for marriage between a man and woman is 12 and 25. And he says at 16, the wife is fully mature, and should have a child at this time. This was when the average age of puberty was 15-16 for girls. Now it's 10-12. Why is it when the age of puberty goes down, the age of consent goes up? Lmao. Weird world.
For the record, the minimal age for women to work in the entertainment industry in Buddhist Thailand has been at 21 for some time. This minimal age is strictly enforced even if much else isn't.
With religion as with law, what the books say and what goes are two different things. Quoting the Quran to Egyptian or Moroccan law-enforcement will not get you out of trouble. At worst it will get you an additional charge of blasphemy.
Religion belongs to the "make this shit up as you go along" department anyway.
PS: If anyone is ever arguing, and uses these texts I'm sharing on intergenerational relationships in the debate. One of the common arguments is "people died earlier back then".
Be sure to quote them the charaka samhita.
"One who follows the code of good conduct for the healthy lives a life of 100 years without any abnormality" - Charaka. 400-200 BCE. PG 219. A fellow ayurvedic doctor, alongside of Acharya Sushruta. (who taught the marriage age for girls and guys should be 12 and 25).
"What do you mean by superior? Is the superior group the group that lies the most, and is the best at spreading propaganda, and brainwashing people?"
Well yeah, if you like. I know this is an alien concept here, but I'm thinking of practical methods we can get ourselves and our fellow men out of this mess.
If Buddhist societies can't even resist the Sexual Trade Union in their native lands, how do you think we 'Male Sexualists' are going to make any difference in converting to Buddhism? About as empty and meaningless as Eivind's 'big idea' of voluntarily registering as a sex offender (although undeniably much better for your personal life).
"I don't know what is more ludicrous -- jailing attractive young women to prevent boys from getting lucky or old women who are so far removed from any "abuse" that the whole thing becomes a parody of a parody?"
Leaving aside for a moment your intellectual obsession with the female sex offender charade, I read the other day about a British 55 year old man who was jailed recently for having sex with a 12 year old girl. He had paid her 50 pence for sex, and he was sentenced to something like 14 years in prison.
If you're thinking he deserved it for paying only 50 pence, remember that that was worth a bit more back in the early 80's when the event took place, and he was only 15 at the time himself.
"While the reasons for his act are unknown, Popp made a big effort to clear his name and moved on to other pursuits, Menting said. He self-published a self-help book called "Popular Evolution," for instance, in which he advocated that the marriage age be lowered and young women focus their lives on birthing children."
Not sure if this is Male Sexualism in my eyes. A lot of Conservative freaks would be happy to see a world in which men can marry 12 year old girls, so long as it's for life, and no sex happens outside marriage. Some of them end up on your blog as we know.
On a related note, Demo Lovato has come out as 'non-binary'. Jesus, she has gone downhill so much since she was a teen. One of the most adorable teen girls on the planet, and now a hatchet faced non-binary SJW, and she's still only 25 or something?? But aspie MAPs and 'ephebophile' freaks will still tell you that you are 'different' if you consider her more attractive at 15 than 25.
I used to say to autists who dreamed marrying 12 year old girls to look at a picture of Hilary Clinton when she was 12 and then look at a picture of her as she is today (or anytime past 30 or whatever). Now I'll tell them to look at a picture of Demi Lovato as a teen and then as she is at 25.
Judith Levine is one of those feminists who doesn't understand what feminism is and why it took over society. Feminism did not 'make a mistake' in creating the 'sex panics' of the last 40 years. That's what feminism is about - protecting the mass of female sexual interests and preserving the average female price of pussy in the face of pressures from technology and society reducing it.
Fair play to her to staying true to her ideals as a young feminist, as she must be reaching hag status by now, but that might just be down to her personal career necessities. I doubt if a book by her entitled - 'I was completely wrong about the age of consent, lets raise it to 21' would sell many copies.
"I used to say to autists who dreamed marrying 12 year old girls to look at a picture of Hilary Clinton when she was 12 and then look at a picture of her as she is today (or anytime past 30 or whatever). Now I'll tell them to look at a picture of Demi Lovato as a teen and then as she is at 25"
So if you've got a 15 year old girlfriend, who agrees with you about the age of consent, all your political opinions, and is your ally. You're just gonna throw her away when she's old to bang some roasties you share nothing in common with?
That's not how it works. You're going to be attached to her, and you're going to feel BAD when you're not with her.
"But aspie MAPs and 'ephebophile' freaks will still tell you that you are 'different' if you consider her more attractive at 15 than 25"
Who are these aspei maps and ephebophiles? I wouldn't say this. Although I've never really had a thing for demi lovato
"Religion belongs to the "make this shit up as you go along" department anyway"
No it doesn't. It belongs to the "meditate and see for yourself" industry.
"For the record, the minimal age for women to work in the entertainment industry in Buddhist Thailand has been at 21 for some time. This minimal age is strictly enforced even if much else isn't."
I don't know where you got this from. I can show you hundreds of thai 14 year olds in the entertainment industry.
Say hello to 14 year old khaimoog? (my future wife) muahahaha
Where did you get this from?
"what the books say and what goes are two different things"
It's not the religion then.
More girls way under 21 (and 18) in the entertainment industry, in thailand.
14 year old lily. ลิลลี่. Who made the biggest hit song in thailand, in 2019.
15 year old kratai, who got into a lot of trouble for sleeping with her 30 year old manager when he was married. lol
Do you see the amulet kratai has around her neck. That's the thai occult. The amulets are made with dead human body parts, to connect with the ghost of the person that died, or a particular occult spirit. One of the most popular spirits in the thai occult is Phra Ngang, a small meditating ghost with red eyes. When you buy his amulet, and bring it into your room, you now have a ghost living with you. Who seduces girls for you, in order to watch you fuck them. He has red eyes from being bonked on the head so many times by angry mothers, for sleeping with their daughters. And his statue goes below the Buddha on the altar. Welcome to Thailand. Hahahaha
Ok, by "entertainment industry" I meant sex-industry, not kids singing.
I would even regard kids singing (see "America has talent") as part of the star-system of child worship and idolising that is so dangerous for men.
The sex-industry, ie access to young pussy as far at least as non-Thais are concerned, is strongly policed in Thailand.
"Ok, by "entertainment industry" I meant sex-industry, not kids singing."
How is thailand going to have a porn industry with 15 year olds? They would just get attacked by the UN and forced to change their laws. There's nothing any country can do, even if they wanted to.
Who said anything about a "porn" industry? Don't tell me you don't understand what "sex-industry" means as applied to Thailand. There are no "15 year-old" working in prostitution in Thailand for sure, as even 20 year-old are banned from sex work.
Anyway, if countries that should be different owing to geography, religion, political culture, you name it, are no different because they bow to international pressure, we are back where we started.
"Who said anything about a "porn" industry? Don't tell me you don't understand what "sex-industry" means as applied to Thailand. There are no "15 year-old" working in prostitution in Thailand for sure, as even 20 year-old are banned from sex work"
Everyone is banned from sex work. Prostitution and porn are illegal lol.
"Prostitution itself was made illegal in Thailand in 1960, when a law was passed under pressure from the United Nations"
"Anyway, if countries that should be different owing to geography, religion, political culture, you name it, are no different because they bow to international pressure, we are back where we started"
Thailand still has an age of consent at 15, with parental permission. And 13, if you're married to the girl, with parents permission. Despite pressure from the UN. And just because laws are different, doesn't mean the culture is different.
For example, Phra Ngang, the thai occult spirit I told you about, is worshipped through offerings of menstrual blood. From 13-18 year old virgins. And I've met many thai girls that agree with me about the age of consent.
If you don't agree with me that this culture is better for this type of activism, then idk. It clearly is.
Theantifeminist is always talking about practical ways to change the world. So here's what I propose. We all get together in real life, do satanic rituals to Phra Ngang, to get him to change the government and laws. Then we become the scary occultists that conservative christians have nightmares about. Muahahaha. Everything else has failed. Time for something new.
PS: Eivind, an idea for our band, if we ever do start one.
We were talking about Motley Crue before, you said you liked them. Something unique that they did, which gave them an edge, was the use of occult symbols in their music. If you look at 3:39, you can see the upside down burning pentagram.
The perfect occult imagery for our band, seeing as what we're trying to do, is of course none other than Phra Ngang. The occult spirit, that has red eyes, from being hit on the head by angry mothers, for sleeping with their daughters. And accepts offerings of menstrual blood, from 13-18 year old virgins. Whether you believe in him or not, I'm sure you can appreciate the aesthetic of it, and the fact that it's cool as fuck there's a religious icon who's entire character is based on his attraction to teenagers.
I think Phra Ngang should be crowned as the deity of the male sexualist movement. To give us some color. And strike fear into the hearts of our enemies. Our wrathful protector.
Just imagine the burning image of Phra Ngang, crowned, in jewels, like royalty. With piercing red eyes, signifying his attraction to teenagers, plastered throughout our music videos. The perfect symbol of the male sexualist movement.
Yeah, that is my kind of occult symbol :)
Somewhat off-topic, but masks will still be required in hell:
It’s almost like clockwork. When female celebrities hit the wall, do they turn over their most attractive years and think, how can I renew that power? Oh, let’s see, it was all rape rape rape! Now I’m powerful again! Here goes Lady Gaga at it. From her current point of view aged 35 of course she was raped at 19!
Raped by a producer threatening to “burn her music,” whereupon she “froze” and let him have it, because that buzzword is enough to make everything rape now. We are to believe she was famous enough to win an Oscar but not to think she could get a new producer, and never mind that this level of threat doesn't rise to the level of rape by any reasonable definition even if totally believed. And then she lays it on thick with supposed trauma, all supposedly caused by something that can’t be verified because she (probably wisely) refuses to name her “attacker.”
Lady Gaga must be insane. She says R Kelly is an evil pedophile for sleeping with teenagers. But then she has a tattoo of David Bowie, on her left rib cage. A notorious shagger of 14 year olds. What?
Taking desexualization of teen girls to the next level :)
A Florida high school photoshopped all traces of cleavage out of girls' yearbook photos.
That valiant attempt at desexualization didn't go over well, because it is not so hateful and bizarre as the actual norm which is to pretend the sex doesn't exist in the male mind (except as "dirty thoughts"), which is the proper way to do desexualization according to the article:
"If someone sees a fold of skin at the top of a shirt in a high school yearbook and starts thinking dirty thoughts, that's on the viewer, 100 percent. There may be some people who think zero cleavage should ever be seen anywhere, but that's neither realistic or reasonabled. Unless you're wearing a turtleneck, cleavage happens with most fashionable clothing. And it happens more for some girls than others. Cleavage is literally just skin and tissue being pressed together—no one is showing actual cuppage or nipples or anything of the sort in these photos."
I think we have the most iconic image of the 21st century there, which poignantly sums up our hysterical fear/overprotection/jealousy/denial of teenage sexuality and pretense that they are children. Is this peak feminism or will they converge on the burqa?
An Italian translation of Gabriel Matzneff's book Vanessavirus has just been published by the Italien publishing house Liberilibri (means "free books"... cool!). A quick look at Liberilibri's catalogue show that they specialize in anti-establishment publications sold at affordable prices. The description of the book says:
Vanessavirus is the story of a manhunt. The story of an assassination. The prey? Gabriel Matzneff, a French writer, now hunted by a pack of hounds full of hatred and determined to destroy him. At the head of the pack is Vanessa, a woman who, at the age of fourteen, lived a passion with him and who today, thirty-three years later, gives her lover as food to the beasts with a book. The love with Vanessa has nothing clandestine: it inspired Matzneff a novel, a diary, poems of which he is proud and happy. Vanessavirus is, above all, the story of the social damnation of which the writer is a victim. A text that questions us about the boundaries of individual freedom and warns of the devastating effects of Sanhedrins created by the mob. The manuscript was published in January 2021 at the expense of the author, condemned without appeal to silence. This Italian edition is the first to be accepted by a European publishing house, and to be present in bookstores.
Well done by Matzneff! Good to see somebody is fighting back a little bit. That’s one barely publishable book against how many “abuse” memoirs this year? And all the laws on their side. Amazing how they turned an open, beautiful love affair into something so persecuted. Any comparable romance going on today would have to be clandestine too, making it that much harder to stand up for in the future.
And no, I don’t think the covid vaccines will save us from feminism either like the second last commenter claims, any more than the pandemic did, which was also a complete disappointment in that regard. There are some smart people such as Michael Yeadon who claim otherwise, but as far as I can tell they are just normal vaccines, with slightly more side effects than we are used to from well tested ones, but nothing like a depopulation event or anything suited to disrupt the powers that be. On the contrary, we are getting vaccine passports to enable more control and which mean I have little choice but to get vaccinated myself too. Which on balance is likely a health benefit, but I don't like the coercion and one thing Yeadon says that I can’t find good evidence against is that the “variants” they scare us with and now use to justify further restrictions don't have scientific basis as such. He calls them “sameiants” because the variation is far too small to break immunity gained from vaccination or infection.
You would be very wrong that the poison fake "vaccines" are safe. Everywhere that has received a large percentage of "vaccines" has seen a "covid" death spike, which is of course completely nonsensical, and is only explained by the fact that the "vaccines" are killing people directly. For those who do not die right away, their lives will be significantly cut short, and with debilitating immune disorders marring their lives. There is also a high percentage of sterilization occurring from the fake "vaccines". The VAERS database is filled with reports, only a fraction of which have gotten other vaccines in the past banned from distribution. You don't have to be a genius to figure out why the "covid vaccine" is not banned despite being on record as 1000x more dangerous than past vaccines that have been banned (hint: the billionaires want it distributed), and it is publicly acknowledged that the VAERS database only contains about 1% of all adverse reactions. I am surprised you would be stupid enough to voluntarily remove yourself from the reproducing population and from a chance to change the world considering your ideas outlined on your blog.
The poison fake "vaccines" may not save us from feminism, but they will without a doubt create a window to change viewpoints due to the fact that those who do not take the poison will be more attractive both in physicality and intelligence, and thus less jealous about sex.
If you came all this way just to drop the ball at the critical moment of resistance, it would be a foolish, but funny outcome.
I've registered for it, but still have the option to refuse vaccination since they haven't called my turn yet. However, are the claims of harm any more credible than, say, the idea that vaccines cause autism? Many of the same people are now attacking the covid vaccines for what seems to be equally baseless reasons. I know there are also some like Mike Yeadon who have far better insight than the usual antivaxxers and also claim something very sinister is going on with the current vaccines, but still, everybody in the medical groups that I read have eagerly gotten vaccinated. When nobody who is informed about medical research and whose judgment I respected since long before covid finds reason to believe the vaccine is poison, why should I think so? There will always be conspiracy theorists and plain crazies who come up with such paranoia no matter how good a vaccine is.
For a while they said the vaccine can cause prion disease, and there were reports of people driving erratically and imminent zombie apocalypse, but now it has been weeks since I've heard anything of the sort. Yes, infertility was a legitimate concern, but I think only in women and that too must have boiled down to almost nothing or we would be hearing much more about it right now. Blood clots in especially women and endocarditis in men are real side effects, but rare enough to be acceptable because covid is much more likely to kill you in those ways too and if you don't get vaccinated, you will likely sooner or later get covid now that it is endemic. I haven't 100% made up my mind and I am closely watching how the situation develops, but for now it looks like I most likely will get vaccinated.
I don't know what to tell you. You've been sufficiently warned. Go risk your entire future and the entire future of your political ideals for literally no reason at the critical moment of truth, again for literally no reason.
You're acting worse than the idiots who never read anything and walk right into the trap because they are told to do so.
Quote: "The poison fake "vaccines" may not save us from feminism, but they will without a doubt create a window to change viewpoints due to the fact that those who do not take the poison will be more attractive both in physicality and intelligence, and thus less jealous about sex." Unquote.
This is typical of why men will never be out of the woods. As I explained before, rather than confront the gynocracy, men will gang up against all sorts of male dangers and male enemies. Anything but to accept women as THE enemy. Here the red herring is "vaccines" or the pharmaceutical men. What you should write is "the poison fake vaccines may not save us from feminism but they will provide us with yet another wished-for digression".
Tell me, when will your "poison vaccines" take effect? Because it's now about half a year since people have been vaccinated en masse, and the only consequence for the vaccinated are beside vanishingly rare blood clots and whatnot, a near-zero incidence of clinical Covid. Why don't you publish an electronic book or at least a blog article about this so that we can look back 5 years from now and see if you were a genius or a fool?
That Mike Yeadon fellow did an about-turn on vaccines. So what? Former coworkers of his say they don't recognise him as the the Mike Yeadon they knew. Roosh V did an about-turn on picking-up girls remember? Did he get blackmailed or did he lose his mind? Montagnier most certainly has had Alzheimer.
@Eivind - do you believe a term like 'gay sex toy' is an oxymoron?
@Jack - you believe that males (or certain males for example in the legal system, politicians etc support feminist anti-sex hysteria laws as a form of cockblocking other men through locking them up?
It could explain partly why 1 in 5 young black men are imprisoned in the USA. Maybe it's a case of white men cockblocking young male bucks. But I remember that the idea that white women find young black men sexually attractive wasn't a popular idea in the Manosphere. And why are prisons clearing out the soft drug offenders (largely young males) and making room for more and more older male sex offenders? White men are cockblocking old white men for looking at illegal porn or for what they did in the 1970's?
Of course, we know that males are disposable, and that the average man is worth nothing to any other man or woman or society at large. This is why even our leader of the 'MALE Sexualist' movement Eivind focuses most of his efforts on the tiny 0.1% of sex offenders who are female as the greatest injustice and tragedy.
"@Eivind - do you believe a term like 'gay sex toy' is an oxymoron?"
I can't even parse that concept, so it must be. Don't know what it would refer to or why you ask the question.
"Fantastic news for Male Sexualists Eivind! Our anti-Porn activist femiservative allies have succeeded in raising the minimum age for strippers in Texas from 18 to 21."
There are two different issues here that must not be conflated. While I think it is wasteful for men to visit strip clubs or patronize any kind of "sex workers" who don't actually have sex with you, stripping is NOT pornography! Porn is what facilitates masturbation, and I don't think men masturbate in strip clubs. Masturbation is not just a waste of time, but actively detrimental to your sexuality, which is why you have understood nothing and are still in stupendous denial of your self-abuse if you think this new law in Texas should be any level of good news for male sexualists. It is not exactly good news to ban porn either because the punishment is undeserved, but men should stay away from porn for their own good -- or more to the point, not masturbate. Just watching strippers is not something I warn against or politicize at all.
Stripping is exploitative of the male sex drive since there is no sex, but not abusive and pathological like porn. You don't walk out of a strip club less able to have sex like you do after wanking. On the contrary, stripping works the way delusional people think porn stokes your sex drive, and sometimes strippers can also offer sex outside of the venues. To be clear, raising the minimum age of strippers to 21 is bad news, not least because it is part of the slippery slope of also raising the age of consent or criminalizing age gaps.
Meanwhile the men who don't fall prey to sexual laws get ruined by family law:
The trad MRAs may be wrong when it comes to sexual abuse and AOC but their other grievances still hold.
It says he has an "indeterminate number of children," lol! So he is doing it right, living the male sexualist dream exactly how I preach with no birth control and younger women, and you didn't expect that to be free, did you?
boris has access to infinite cash because he is the employee of the people who print the cash.
but this story shows a situation that is even worse, which is that a large amount of british men have no money from the divorce/child support system destroying them. the media ran this article to "humanize" boris and endear him to the population.
also, texas is very "conservative" and "right wing", notice their feminism on full display passing a law that even the most left wing places in the USA have not done.
and jack, I am not going to do the research for you. the fake poison vaccine is killing people at insane rates, they put the people who die from the fake poison vaccine into the coronavirus death category to cover up the death toll. even just using the VAERS system, which reports 1% of all adverse reactions at best, the fake poison coronavirus vaccine is more deadly than all past vaccines combined. this, for a disease that has a 99.9% survival rate, even when using their own highly inflated and fake death rate statistics. you have to be completely insane and stupid to put their poison into your body.
More criminalization - this time in Jesus' name:
So all the Christian sex-hostility plus celibacy for priests wasn't enough -- gotta have feminist "abuse" theory on top of that!
"The Vatican has long considered any sexual relations between a priest and an adult as sinful but consensual, believing that adults are able to offer or refuse consent purely by the nature of their age. But amid the #MeToo movement and scandals of seminarians and nuns being sexually abused by their superiors, the Vatican has come to realize that adults can be victimized too if there is a power imbalance in the relationship."
What a perfect match of hateful intolerant dogmas, guaranteeing that neither conservatives nor liberals will have any objections.
But I gotta laugh at their belief in the wanker's delusion and the feminist flipside of it which holds that minors can be sexually exploited remotely:
"The Vatican also criminalized the “grooming” of minors or vulnerable adults by priests to compel them to engage in pornography. It’s the first time church law has officially recognized as criminal the method used by sexual predators to build relationships with their victims to then sexually exploit them."
I also condemn pornography and wanking, but for diametrically opposite reasons that are lost on these buffoons, lol!
The feminists and normies believe porn is wrong because it exploits minors and women; male sexualists believe porn is wrong because it DOESN'T provide sexual value and in fact detracts from our ability to pursue, perform at and enjoy sex. It always boggles my mind how the feminists and now also the religious zealots can't see that they are shooting themselves in the foot when they criminalize porn.
Since more and more pornography is made by the minors themselves without being "compelled", and this phenomenon will grow even more as of the result of the fact that minors get more and more access to digital media, one can easily foresee that this neverending criminalization is going to be the feminists' and bigots' swan song.
By the way, do they have prisons at all, in the Vatican City?
They will always find a way to pretend the minor is "compelled" or exploited now matter who freely the pornography is made. It is by definition CSEM -- child sexual exploitation material, or in Norwegian "overgrepsmateriale," a self-reinforcing taboo whose name creates its own assumption, or if all else fails the same words are used to enforce the blasphemy of the mere concept that a minor can engage in anything sexual by their own accord. The feminists will gladly throw the baby out with the bathwater too as all the prosecutions of the minors themselves show. Ultimately it even works like honor killings and they still won't see anything wrong with it whatsoever. With the crimen exceptum, there can be no such thing as a cure worse than the disease because sexuality is seen as a fate worse than death, just like they burnt witches to save souls. So sorry, there is no swan song in sight for this bigotry and when it ultimately ends it won't be because the facts stared them in the face, which has no effect on such madness.
Just see what I mean, because here are the facts already staring them in the face from the scientific literature:
"The current review found little to no evidence that availability of the Internet has increased the worldwide incidence or prevalence of in-person child sexual abuse. In fact, during the time period in which the Internet has flourished, international crime statistics have shown a steady decrease of in-person child sexual abuse."
And the bigots don't care, and never will even though their persecution of pornography has the diametrically opposite effect of what it's advertised to be, because it is the idea of the sexual minor that they are fighting and in that worldview, porn and wanking are indeed equal if not worse crimes than contact offenses. It is bonkers, but that's literally how they are, the official dogma that our culture and certainly the justice system runs on.
So there are two possibilities. Either the feminists are delusional like the wankers who think they are getting sexual value from porn, or they are more against the idea of sex and sexual fantasies than sex itself. I am open to debate on which one of these carry more weight, and if it is the latter, that means means our activism needs to be somewhat modified like I am already doing with nofap and my refusal to include porn laws in our concept of antisexual persecution per se. It means the feminists are less ideological enemies than we thought, if they are able to comprehend that they aren't actually battling sex by all the anti-porn persecution and still think it worthwhile.
This may explain why they went on to criminalize non-in-person child sexual abuse: to keep statistics on abuse high and thus find a pretext for further criminalization...
Yes, that is definitely a big part of it. If they admitted that child sexual abuse is actually declining, in part because men are so busy masturbating to all the easily available porn on the Internet, it would be hard to justify ever more laws and funding for the abuse industry. So they needed to invent a new category of abuse and pretend it's real. But at the end of the day, is it possible to debate ideas on their merit? I realize that none of the professional feminists will go against their employer, but it is bizarre how unquestioned the dogma is that all this wanking and "grooming" that leads to nothing more counts as real abuse. The conformity is just staggering and it feels so empty and meaningless when no intellectual honesty can be found anywhere on the subject except these occasional scholarly publications that make no difference to the politics.
"The story of the great witch hunts of the 16th and 17th centuries remains a mystery in many respects. What caused this folly to take hold of the minds of the Europeans? And what caused that folly to abate? It turns out that evil has a natural cycle of growth and decline. It is possible to accelerate the decline of a killer meme if good people get together in rejecting it."
An inspirational quote from Ugo Bardi. The good people are now us, the male sexualists. Well worth reading:
As exterminations go, the war on witches was not the worst on record. In Europe, it caused about 50 thousand victims over a little more than a century. But it was so shockingly cruel in targeting mostly helpless women that it is remembered to this day as a form of collective madness. With us, the expression "witch hunt" is even proverbial.
Then they targeted helpless women and now with the female sex offender charade they target women who are not only helpless but also the sexually nicest and most generous.
Let us come together and accelerate the decline of the killer meme that women can be sexual abusers. Indeed this is what I have been doing for twenty years no, but let us continue. If the reason for hunting witches now as then is stress release, however, it is not looking good during times of collapse.
The extermination of the European witches generated plenty of studies in modern times, mostly concentrated on the causes of the phenomenon. Explanations are many but, in general, it is agreed that it was related to the stress generated by the Reformation and the associated wars. Apparently, torturing and killing women was a form of stress release. The human mind must have plenty of serious problems, evidently, but this much we know not just because of witch hunting.
It is no coincidence that the steady decrease of "in person child sexual abuse" (aka banging hot young teens) is exactly what the jealous old hags and their jealous men want, and they are achieving it through widespread cultural change. Porn is ubiquitous, and by constantly handing out draconian sentences for pictures of under 18 naked girls, they change the cultural attitudes in real life as well. Devious.
The real danger of Catholic law is not that the church itself has any punishment systems like the inquisition of olden times, but that Catholics are in political office and other authority positions and they'll make policy based on Catholic law.
This happens under the first Jesuit pope. Remember there's a Jesuit on both sides of every conflict, which could be a hint as to why conservative states are adopting feminist looking rules.
Sorry, I don't get what you mean by "there's a Jesuit on both sides of every conflict."
Post a Comment