Just a quick note to relay the sad news that Gary Wilson has died. He was the founder of the nofap movement, not a male sexualist per se but a public health advocate who helped millions of men including myself understand that porn/masturbation is bad for us. I consider nofap to be the self-help branch of male sexualism and have incorporated it into our ideology. Thanks for making our philosophy complete, Gary.
The press release from YourBrainOnPorn.com:
ASHLAND, OREGON: May 21, 2021: After years of battling chronic illness, public health advocate Gary Wilson passed away on May 20, 2021.
Gary Bruce Wilson is the author of the best-selling book Your Brain On Porn: Internet Pornography and the Emerging Science of Addiction*,* presenter of the immensely popular TEDx talk “The Great Porn Experiment” (14+ million views), and creator of the website YourBrainOnPorn.com, a clearinghouse for the latest research, media, and self-reports on pornography’s effects and potential harms.
Gary Wilson is survived by his wife, Marnia Robinson, his son, Arion Sprague, and his canine companion, Smokey. He was born in Seattle, Washington, and resided in Ashland, Oregon. In his personal life, Wilson was a wonderful husband, father, and friend, and he was loved by many.
Gary Wilson taught human pathology, anatomy, and physiology for years and has long been interested in the neurochemistry of addiction, mating, and bonding. Wilson possessed a gift for teaching, a passion for compiling information, and an unwavering desire to help others. After he noticed many young people online experiencing adverse effects associated with excessive porn use, he created YourBrainOnPorn.com in late 2010. Since the corresponding book was first published in 2014, Your Brain on Porn has been translated into Arabic, Dutch, German, Hungarian, Japanese, and Russian. In 2016, Wilson co-authored an academic paper with seven US Navy doctors entitled “Is Internet Pornography Causing Sexual Dysfunctions? A Review with Clinical Reports” and another journal article entitled “Eliminate Chronic Internet Pornography Use to Reveal Its Effects.” Gary Wilson’s tireless work in cataloging the research surrounding the effects of porn use touched countless lives worldwide.
Gary Wilson cannot be replicated or replaced, but his legacy will live on through the enormous impact that he had. He successfully pushed for more research on pornography to be conducted, gave a voice to people silently struggling with excessive porn use, and raised awareness about porn addiction to millions.
This press release was written by family members and friends of Gary Wilson, including Noah Church, Gabe Deem, Darryl Mead, Alexander Rhodes, Marnia Robinson, Mary Sharpe, Arion Sprague, Staci Sprout, and Liz Walker.
The public will be invited to share their condolences on an online memorial being set up at www dot GaryWilson dot life
216 comments:1 – 200 of 216 Newer› Newest»
Eivind, many things in life can be interpreted as an addiction. Many people, including myself, are only 100% alert in the two hours following their shot of coffee. Coffee, tee, sugar, fat, alcoholic drinks are addictive. Not to mention possible illegal drugs of course. Even music can become addictive (those tunes that keep playing themselves in your mind all day can become a nuisance). Reading plotty novels can become addictive. Surfing for news can be addictive.
By "addictive" I mean taking up too much of your time and draining out your mental and/or physical resources. I hope you can agree with this definition.
The brain is a wanker. It will seek to repeat anything that feeds it neurotransmitters. Singling out porn or masturbation as a particularly harmful addiction is just a moral choice.
I fuck 9 times a week on average these days, rotating 4 or 5 "regular" girls. I pay them the equivalent of 40 to 50 euros each time. Girls between 20 and 40 years old. Very often I don't even blow my load with the girl. Instead I wank to porn after she leaves, in order to finish the job and not leave the Sildenafil coursing through my veins in vain. Still, I like to fuck girls even if I don't finish. It's a good work-out and it's good for morale and self-image. Plus I like the interaction, the feel, the smell, you name it. I also like to compare notes with other mongers about girls we've fucked or are trying to entice. It's my social life, which porn can't be of course.
I consider my life a continuum between fantasy and reality. Porn and sexbots are bound to evolve and become more sophisticated as technologies advance. Real sex on the other hand will always stay what it is, except maybe when it can be enhanced by drugs.
It's all in the brain folks! And we're only killing time.
This is fantastic news. I cheer at this just as I would any feminist croaking. Gary Wilson has enabled and validated femihags in their incessant legislative war against porn, resulting in laws that are now the direct cause of the majority of male 'sex offenders' imprisoned (at least in the UK, and especially leaving aside 'historical' sex cases).
All built on feminist junk science. I just took a brief look at the 'Your Brain On Porn' home page :
"“But hasn’t porn use reduced rape rates?” No, rape rates have been rising in recent years:"
This is the feminist junk science you have been validating Eivind. We know why rape rates have been rising - because feminists have been forever widening the definitions of rape, as well as encouraging a culture in which women turn regretted sex into a rape accusation, as well as financially motivating women to make false claims. Also because of the import of millions of Third World immigrants (supported by feminists...and you) who commit rape at far greater levels then the natives (and which also feeds the cycle by justifying ever harsher feminist 'anti-rape' laws).
And just to be clear. There is no Male Sexualist movement, and even if there was, then you're not its leader, no matter how much your big ego tells you otherwise. Male Sexualism is an aspiration towards a movement. If it has any meaning it is the aspiration to be true to real men's rights and oppose all feminist laws that criminalize men unfairly. Even Paul Elam when he had a site that was 10 x bigger than any other men's rights site, and when he had thousands of followers in a community that had hundreds of sites, forums, YouTube channels etc did not have the ego to describe himself as the leader of the men's rights movement. Just because some weirdo appropriates my blog tag line (pro male-sexuality) and turns it into a noun, baits a couple of neo-nazi sites to write articles about him, then disappears within 2 weeks while pronouncing that you are the leader, doesn't mean you're the leader of anything.
BTW, how old was Gary Wilson? I thought NoFap was supposed to have amazing health benefits?
Jack, I don’t have a problem with your definition of addictive as “taking up too much of your time and draining out your mental and/or physical resources,” but you still don’t get it when think this is simply a generic case of that. Your thinking would only apply to extreme cases, missing what this is really all about. If being an addiction were the only thing wrong with masturbation, I would scarcely be more worried about it than breathing, or coffee (which might be borderline problematic due to the addictive aspects, but not enough that I care to quit). No, masturbation (and using porn to exacerbate it) is bad because it negatively impacts your life at any dose. It is simply a bad, meaningless thing in itself. Understanding this is like the enlightenment that great teachers of Eastern religion such as Alan Watts for example can help you reach. I do not believe what they call nirvana or whatever is a higher, more desirable plane of existence than our everyday lives, or more “real,” but it was always in us. Always will be, transcending our deaths too. That the state of enlightenment was always there is something they got right, and the teachers can only help us see it. That’s how it is with Gary Wilson enlightening us that masturbation is bad too. If you need to be convinced by logical steps such as “it is an addiction, and addiction is bad,” then you don’t get it. I’ve always known deep down that masturbation is wrong, and the bad effects it has, just not let go of my denial until Gary Wilson made it abundantly clear.
That neurotransmitters have causal power is a metaphysical theory. Not saying it is wrong, but we can’t be sure. That there are more possibilities can be realized through the analogy of the bus. If you don’t know anything about buses, you might be drawn to the conclusion that people congregating at bus stops make buses show up. You would miss the fact that there is something deeper -- bus schedules -- that determine when buses run. Neurotransmitters might be like that too, markers of something deeper causing our states of consciousness rather than making them, including the deep intersubjective connections of sex and love -- in fact I find that obviously true regardless of the metaphysics of physicalism vs. idealism. Thinking that you might as well masturbate to porn because the same thing is going on with your neurotransmitters as when you have sex is at that level of fail and perhaps a deep metaphysical fail too. It might NOT be “all in the brain,” plus it is indeed appropriate to single out porn addition as especially bad because it detracts from interpersonal relationships in ways that most other addictions don’t. Being “addicted” to music or the news doesn’t prevent you from loving another person, but porn does and is arguably even worse than a bad opiate addiction.
You are not exactly the audience most badly in need of Gary Wilson’s advice, being too old for digital porn to have really messed you up. On a scale from one to ten, you might be a two in terms of problematic porn use. But still you describe an obviously degraded version of sexuality due to porn and masturbation. You have lots of sex, which is great -- nine times per week is far above average at any age and even better at yours -- but you don’t seem to love any of the girls, have a problem with delayed ejaculation and probably more erectile dysfunction and hence needing sildenafil more than you would as a nofapper. Saying “the brain is a wanker” misses the fact that sex is transcendent, about actually connecting with people rather than produce states in your brain. And you don’t realize it because, well, maybe you are not cut out to. Better luck in the next incarnation.
"I consider my life a continuum between fantasy and reality. Porn and sexbots are bound to evolve and become more sophisticated as technologies advance. Real sex on the other hand will always stay what it is, except maybe when it can be enhanced by drugs."
We live in a shared fantasy, which gives the world some objective meaning. At some point, if the human race somehow survives another couple of centuries, we will have matrix style virtual reality that is indistinguishable from the real thing. Having sex with another mind inside that matrix will be just as real (and probably a million times better) than having sex with a real person in our present meat and bones physical world.
Sex can already be enhanced by drugs as you know, and as you would expect, feminists in the UK have already banned 'chemsex' drugs, even though they were used predominantly by the gay community. Imagine a world in which a mutual orgasm could last for hours, or you could literally fuck for hours and experience dozens of ejaculations, and you had the testosterone fuelled horniness of an 18 year old? No doubt we will be physically enhanced too, although there again feminists will probably ban pre-natal gene therapy to make every child a supermodel (especially girls of course). Then again, they will be the first to jump at the chance to receive rejuvenation therapy to make themselves younger, and to the surprise of the 'MAPs' and 'ephebophiles', they will turn themselves into adolescent girls if they could.
Meanwhile Eivind's solution is the complete collapse of industrial civilization just to spite the feminists - as if they wouldn't be happier in such a caveman world.
Creepy Joe strikes again.
Amazing to think that the last two most powerful men on Earth, in fact with Bill Clinton 3 of the last 5 US Presidents, were clearly 'male sexualists', and yet they happily go along with all the femihag laws. The MRAs were obviously right in their 'back seat driver' theory. Even Presidents are completely impotent against the Sexual Trade Union.
"Dom Krauer," that was an insensitive comment given that the man just died, and so what if Gary Wilson also bought into some feminist ideology? That can't change any of the real reasons why porn/masturbation is bad. That porn also produces more rape is obviously nonsense, something you can only arrive at via inflated feminist definitions, but I am not extolling Wilson for that part of his site. Nobody is right about everything or totally agreeable politically. If you are going to dismiss everything they say because you can find fault somewhere, no ideas from anyone would be useful to you.
And to clarify what I mean by being the leader of male sexualism--
I am just presenting a version in the marketplace of ideas, of what I think male sexualism should be. You can, too, and I still don't understand why you deleted your blog. I obviously don't lead a movement in the sense that word is usually taken, with followers you can boss around or inspire to take action. If I did, I would be the Osama bin Laden of sex, but for better of worse I have no organization or followers that don't just bore the intelligence agencies to death when they look into us.
Kudos to Biden for that comment about an "underage" girl looking 19! Of course we appreciate girls for what they are, not some stupid obsession with a number to replace reality, and if -- which is clearly the case -- Biden still sees their beauty as it is and is not afraid to say it then he is indeed a male sexualist at heart, even though he does nothing to push for the right legal reforms. It also means his senility has been exaggerated, as I am afraid your sense of beauty also gets destroyed when that really happens.
Hey, I discovered some other sexualists... Very cute, except they separate boys from girls and have a chaperone, and unlike us they demand money.
Sexualisterne Mariagerfjord er en gruppe unge mellem 15-18 år, der tager ud til klubber og folkeskolens ældste klasser samt efterskoler og skaber dialog om alt inden for emnet seksualitet. Vi dækker hele Mariagerfjord Kommune.
Sexualisterne taler om prævention, kønssygdomme, følelser, homoseksualitet, grænser, porno, forelskelse og den første gang. Vores mål er at skaber dialog mellem eleverne samt formidle vores viden om emnet. Sexualisterne har fået grundig oplæring og er årligt på kurser, således at de er opdaterede med den nyeste viden inden for området.
Et oplæg fra Sexualisterne varer ca. 2 timer, hvor drengene og pigerne bliver delt. Oplægget er en kombination af facts, holdningslege og debatter, hvor det primære mål er at få de unge på banen med deres holdninger og oplevelser, således der skabes debat om disse emner, der ellers er så svære at tale om. Sexualisterne medbringer ligeledes en kasse med de nyeste præventionsmidler, som de unge får lov at se.
Under oplægget med Sexualisterne er der ikke lærer/pædagoger tilstede, da fortroligheden er i centrum. Der vil dog altid være en voksen tovholder med ude på et sexualistbesøg.
Et besøg af Sexualisterne koster fra 750 kroner.
“Dom Krauer” also said:
“We live in a shared fantasy, which gives the world some objective meaning. At some point, if the human race somehow survives another couple of centuries, we will have matrix style virtual reality that is indistinguishable from the real thing. Having sex with another mind inside that matrix will be just as real (and probably a million times better) than having sex with a real person in our present meat and bones physical world.”
I feel I need to unpack the misconceptions here lest anyone get the idea that I agree with this. Firstly, the shared world is not a fantasy. It is real -- not at the level of particle physics but at the level of description that matters, it is real. It is also inextricably linked to our bodies. We can’t replace our bodies with a virtual avatar and have it be just as good. You can already play games and role-play today, and this would just be more of the same. It cannot replace our lives that really matter, and sexuality is among what matters most. It matters that our sexual partners be real. If VR “sex” is indistinguishable from the real thing, then yes, it does remove some problems. Provided that you stick to realistic women and don’t veer off into any paraphilias, this kind of masturbation would no longer train your nervous system in maladaptive ways and make men impotent (more or less) to real sex like porn does today because it conditions you to be aroused by 2D images. The primary motivation which leads men to take up nofap -- when they experience sexual dysfunction -- would be gone. But VR “sex” would still be empty and meaningless (or at any rate no more meaningful than a meeting of minds would be in a platonic conversation) and I would still promote nofap.
I am all for life extension (provided it actually extends healthy life, not just give you an extended stay in a nursing home) and rejuvenation (which sadly is totally out of reach in our lifetimes). Anything that can actually enhance our bodies would be good. As to “chemsex” drugs, my impression (not based on personal experience) is that they tend to detract from sexual intimacy. Drug highs are distractions from the exquisitely fine-tuned enjoyment of sex that nature has provided for us (when we practice nofap, of course). It really cannot be improved upon, just like a young healthy body probably can’t be improved much because it is already perfect. I am not an absolutist or moralist about avoiding “chemsex” and there might be exceptions, but in general, psychoactive drugs lead you astray.
The drugs I HAVE tried certainly do detract from sexuality. Alcohol is just an awful depressant and I am so glad I quit over a decade ago. So what are these magical “chemsex” drugs that actually are supposed to enhance it? Do you mean poppers that gays use? I haven't tried, but can't imagine it would be much of an enhancement over sex done right (with nofap).
Another death of concern to male sexualists:
According to the site above, "she is best known for exposing “sex researcher” Alfred Kinsey as a “predatory fraud”".
With these credentials, she will hardly be missed.
I see. No, I can't recall any positive contributions by Judith Reisman. She was anti-porn, but the way she went about it did not endear her even to nofappers, only to really sex-negative feminists, it seems. She was all about:
"Working to protect children from sexualization and sexual exploitation brought about by the ‘Sexual Revolution’ and its patriarch, Alfred Kinsey."
And I don't think any of that is relevant to us. As we see it the problem with porn is not that it sexualizes children, but that it desexualizes men.
Also a possible link to the covid vaccine, but easily coincidental for an 85-year-old in ill health. Hear death is a non-event in both respects.
To be clear, virtual reality is platonic. The matrix is platonic. It is the very definition of platonic, all ideas and no substance. Sex is supposed to be physical, not platonic, remember? Or else it's just what we used to call sexual fantasies. Men having fantasies about their platonic female friends is not news and cannot in principle be transformed into sex by technology. If you have forgotten this, then you are suffering from the wanker's delusion and need nofap. Male sexualism does not endorse "sex" in a matrix, no matter how good the technology gets, because that can only ever be platonic rather than sex. If you are having a VR interaction then you are having a platonic interaction even if you think sexual thoughts -- which men do all the time anyway, so nothing new to see here -- and let's get on with how to improve our actual sex lives rather than entertain such nonsense.
An additional problem, beyond porn and VR being sexually worthless to men, is when you promote it like TheAntifeminist does you also promote the likes of Judith Reisman's hogwash about girls being sexually exploited by the same technology. These are flipsides of the same delusion, and the proper way to combat feminist anti-porn laws is to assert that since porn has no sexual value to men, it cannot in principle sexually exploit women or children either. Why is this so hard to see? Why go down this absurd path that anti-porn laws supposedly infringe on our sexuality rather than being persecution based on false pretenses?
"We do not burn a book"
"According to AFP information, all the publishers he had approached refused the book without reading it."
That sums up the entire zeitgeist, doesn't it? Just knowing the subject is enough to condemn unless it falls in line with the abuse narrative, because the details don't matter... "Gabriel Matzneff, 84, is the target of an investigation for rape of a minor under 15" -- a concept invented in 2021 by the new absolute rape age law in France is now the only reality, retroactively changing what happened in the 1980s as well.
antifeminist can't complain about leadership until he puts his site back up.
wilson did good research on negative health effects of jerking off, but unfortunately it was taken and used for an evil purpose by conservative feminists to create the PROTECT Act in 2003 which destroys most men to this day.
italians continuing to represent some of the most normal sexual rules on the planet
"the antifeminist can't complain about leadership until he puts his site back up"
Yes I can. There is no leader because there is no Male Sexualist movement. For f***'s sake, you and Jack and Holocaust22 don't even 'follow' Eivind, you just use his blog as an opportunity to comment and express your own views. The only person on Earth who thinks that the female sex offender charade is the biggest criminalization of male sexuality AND that porn is 'worse than heroin' and needs to be regulated, is Eivind Berge. He's the leader of the Eivind Berge movement and he'll be the only member ever if he continues blogging for 1,000 years.
There probably can be no 'Male Sexualist' movement. Even if we got some momentum and a number of blogs and YouTube channels springing up, then we'd be squashed like ants pretty quickly. If we couldn't develop a movement ten years ago when there was a bit more freedom left online, then we surely can't now.
The one fundamental and essential characteristic of a 'Male Sexualist' is opposition to feminism and the feminist criminalization of male sexuality. Eivind falls short of that test. The first Male Sexualist was Ernest Belfort Bax, just as he was the first 'MRA', followed by the likes of David Thomas (Not Guilty:In Defence of the Male), and online with Angry Harry, Steve Moxon, and I guess you could call Heartiste and a few others Male Sexualists, including Ferdinand Bardemu (InMalaFide) before he turned into Matt Forney.
There should be a huge 'Male Sexualist' community now. In such a world, Eivind would be a very peripheral figure - a cranky blogger who has the occasional interesting thing to say and who does at least reject most feminist anti-male sex laws. As it is, you're right, he is just about the only blogger (outside the 'pedophile' community) willing to discuss these issues. That doesn't make him a leader. It just reveals the futility of our cause. Maybe now that Gary Wilson is dead, Eivind can take his place as writer for the Good Men Project?
@Eivind - I didn't read all of your comments about 'platonic wankers' etc, but just to point out that your understanding of philosophy, here as elsewhere, leaves a lot to be desired. Plato/Socrates were talking about moving away from the physical world of shadows and illusions into a permanent and true world of the mind/soul. A shared Matrix would be closer to that than our 'real' world. You want to remain chained to the physical world with 1,000 lb black mammas sitting on your thirsty face forever. You're the ultimate Platonic cave dweller.
"wilson did good research on negative health effects of jerking off"
He used feminist junk science to engage in the age old shaming of male masturbation.
There is no health benefit to not jerking off.
If Eivind can't get an erection for 7 days after jerking off, he needs to see a psychiatrist or perhaps get a prescription for testosterone or viagra.
When I was in my early twenties, I would jerk off sometimes twice a day, and it never prevented me from seizing any opportunity to get laid that presented itself.
Now I'm almost an old man, and I have prostate enlargement, and all the science shows that 'NoFap' will worsen symptoms and even increase the risk of prostate cancer.
It's up to individuals if they think NoFap has benefits, so long as you look at the science and realize that most of the 'science' supporting NoFap is the same feminist advocacy research that 'proves' 17 year old girls having willing sex with older men will be damaged for life etc.
To make it a central pillar of a movement that is by definition the fight against the feminist crimianlization of male sexuality, is absolutely insane.
Oh and I know Eivind will go off on a massive sperg out now trying to demonstrate that the definition of 'sexuality' does not include wanking.
"There is no health benefit to not jerking off"
I use to jerk off every day when I was a teenager. My body was broken, my back hurt, I was weak, and just suffering physically every day. I stopped jerking off, and by day 7 felt like I had so much energy I could run a marathon. My back didn't hurt anymore, my body was fixed, and stronger. I would do 40 mile bike rides to my martial arts class, get home at 2am, and still be filled with energy to do more. I studied every day, and was always filled with motivation. I was doing great for years. Then I fell off, started masturbating daily again, my body became weak, I got asthma, my teeth became discolored, lost all motivation to do anything, and became miserable. There's no denying the benefits of nofap. Just try it lol.
all I hear is boomer whining from antifeminist.
nofap significantly improved my health, much like H22 says above. should it be illegal, or used as the basis of feminist junk science that results in absurd claims of statutory rape of willing young girls? of course not, that is insane feminism, and a completely different agenda than men's health.
Look how far gone he is:
"Now I'm almost an old man, and I have prostate enlargement, and all the science shows that 'NoFap' will worsen symptoms and even increase the risk of prostate cancer."
It does not even occur to you that you can have sex? Fapping is the only option you can think of to relieve that prostate? These are the blinders masturbation will give you. Anyone who says fapping is healthy is so messed up by it he has lost the reference point, so desexualized he wouldn't know what sexualism is, as we are seeing here. Certainly not fit to lead the movement or tell me how.
I have always felt uneasy about the NoFap, quite part from not having any intention or need to put it into practice. NoFap is an asceticism that does nothing to relieve the cause of male sexual misery. Efforts to that end should concentrate on supply, not on demand. One obvious way to increase supply is through prostitution. Sexy women are in short supply (whatever Eivind has to say about this) and prostitution is a way to alleviate the shortage by the sharing of available sexy women. Men should be fighting to have prostitution decriminalized but they prefer to be their own usual self-defeating selves, concentrating on "changing their own behaviour" instead.
Quote: "There's no denying the benefits of nofap. Just try it lol." Unquote. Now do you think most of us never tried NoFap at one time or another in our lives? It's not like NoFap were some hard drug you can only go and buy in the Ghetto at the high risk of being pulled up by police on the way back. Most of us went through short phases of NoFap, either by choice or more likely at times where we were so busy traveling or working, or even maybe after we had a benign tumour removed from our dick. Went there, done that, no big deal. No perceived benefit (unlike giving up social drinking, cutting down on fat/sugar, working-out regularly).
Neither masturbation or porn have ever been to blame for whatever sexual misery I went through in my life. Instead:
1) Lack of good looks (I only saw the top-20 among women and I was not myself in the top-20)
2) Lack of Game
3) Lack of (affordable) prostitution where I had to live
Number 3 was the only variable I could do something about, and I did.
There is an ongoing polemics around a recent report from UNICEF which states, amongst other things, that blocking children from accessing pornography online might infringe on their human rights:
Nofap is not asceticism. This is another fallacy along the lines of thinking masturbation is "healthy" because it has been so normalized that sex isn't considered the alternative. With porn, fapping represents an evolutionary trap which makes nofap the equivalent of avoiding poison. Jack grew up at a time when this latter concern was small. That he still managed to only find 20% of women attractive indicates serious maladjustment, however, though not so bad as boys risk today, to where many are impotent even with the hottest girls due to porn-induced dysfunction. A porn addict will experience erectile dysfunction with the very girls he is most into in porn, if he were to get them in real life, because his entire arousal pathways are messed up to only respond to the artificial stimuli. There is absolutely nothing ascetic about avoiding this sad, ironic, horrible fate; on the contrary, nofap is the height of hedonism.
As to that UNICEF debate, I don't like blocking children from accessing information online either, so I would tend to agree with that side. Can call it a human right if you want to. However, it is important to teach boys the same facts I am trying to teach men about porn. They ARE more vulnerable, not because they are "underage" or because sex is inherently harmful to children, but because maladaptive sexuality is harmful to us all and adolescence is when maladaptive habits are most likely to take hold and be very difficult to reverse later. A common thread in the nofap self-help forums is how older men who first had normal sex have much less difficulty rebooting from porn than the younger generations, because sex has a protective effect. The worst possible way to go about it is to pretend sex is harmful to minors but pornography/fapping is okay, and I fear that's how government will enforce any children's "right" to access pornography. They have no sense of the real danger, only superstition against sex itself.
You don't need good looks to get girls. My best friend in school, who had black teeth, was overweight, and had acne all over his body, pulled incredibly hot girls. Because he was a badass, that was incredibly socially savvy.
Guys are primarily attracted to looks
Girls are primarily attracted to personality, and confidence.
@Jack - I agree with you entirely when you say that NoFap is yet another attempt to put the blame on men.
The problem is the sexual market. Everything comes down to this. And the reason why, as the MRAs always say, the gender war is a war in which only one side turns up (women) is because there is clearly something about our intrinsic natures that leads us to take totally different responses to the sexual market problem.
Technology led social changes (the pill, condoms, the internet etc) lead to a massive fall in the price of pussy and older and unnattractive women unable to sexually compete with younger and more attractive women.
The female solution (that is instinctively supported by billions of women across the world) - overturn 'patriarchy' within a couple of generations, criminalize prostitution (or rather the Johns to save the 'victims'), ban porn, raise the age of consent etc create the 'pedo' slander as the most savage sexual shaming term in human history.
And on the other hand...
Female hypergamy together with the anti-sex restrictions and laws implemented by the Sexual Trade Union have made it almost impossible for average men to obtain sex with attractive young females.
The male solution - blame the cock! Shame men for masturbating and tell them that if they would only take their hands off their dirty penises then they can get laid. And of course, at the same time, go along with women in shaming men as pedos if they try to have sex with teenage girls, or even younger women when they are middle-aged men, or if they have sex with prostitutes or go to places such as Thailand where the price of pussy is much lower.
At the end of the day, Eivind spends most of his time white knighting for women who thought they would get the pussy pass for banging teen chads, and shaming men for seeking some solace in masturbation and porn. In the last 12 months he's posted ONE SINGLE ARTICLE defending men against feminist sex laws. The other 6 or 7 articles were devoted to the 'female sex offender charade', NoFap, bitcoin, and I think one article on 'Peak Oil'. In the last 12 months, I've posted more articles on genuine Male Sexualist topics and I've retired my blog in that time! Jack is far more a 'leader' of Male Sexualism than Eivind is. The commentator who wont even chose a username and just posts as 'anonymous' is far more a leader than EIvind is. Holocaust22 is....well, ok, I'm not going that far.
UK madness gets worse - chief pig tells girls as young as four to wear 'modesty shorts' to prevent upskirting.
Hideous black female actress calls for 'intimacy directors' on studio sets to avoid 'exploitation'.
UK madness gets worse - chief pig tells girls as young as four to wear 'modesty shorts' to prevent upskirting.
That's probably because he discovered that he himself is attracted to girls that age and cannot cope with that. As Herman Hesse said: If you hate a person, you hate something in them that is part of yourself. What is not part of ourselves does not disturb us.
"BTW Eivind. Can you tell us exactly in what way NoFap is helping your sex life? I don't mean you telling us that you are feeling horny enough to chase 1,000 lb black mammas on Tinder or 50 year old 'MILFs' 24/7, but exactly how many times you are getting laid with young, attractive, ripe women, that most of us would only be interested in putting any effort at all into having sex with?"
No, I am not dating milfs. Young fertile women only. Don’t expect a running commentary, but I will announce when I have a family to show for it. The important lesson on nofap is not my personal success but the healthy sexuality it gives you that any man can validate for himself. Masturbation cripples male sexuality, and if you are fine with that then suit yourself, but I think we have a moral obligation as an aspiring Men’s Movement to at least inform the boys who are thrown into this feminist world that the official story that masturbation is harmless will hurt them if they believe it. Thankfully there is the NoFap movement, but it is still so marginal that the Male Sexualists definitely need to step up to the plate too. Of course we also need to fight the hateful sex laws, but self-help is actually more personally important plus it doubles as activism too when we tell the truth about porn and masturbation. My view is suited not only to put men in peak shape sexually but to mock and dismiss the feminists in a way you miserably fail at. All the normies believing in “grooming,” “online abuse,” “revenge porn” and all that no-contact crap made out to be serious crimes are wrong on a much deeper level than your philosophy allows for. They are wrong not just because the supposed abuse is harmless activities to females, but because there can be no online sexual abuse even in principle. Wanking of course isn’t sex even if it is interactive, only leads to more wanking and crucially, the horniness involved cannot be transferred to real life because the porn addict who tries that will invariably find himself unable to perform properly or enjoy real sex after the brain damage sustained by wanking. You validate feminist lies by going along with the charade that there is “solace” for men in wanking. There can be no solace in self-abuse and turning yourself into a sexual cripple, and your using that word shows you are still profoundly delusional about this.
"There can be no solace in self-abuse and turning yourself into a sexual cripple"
game set match there
"Anyway, why does it matter? You come across as having a need to brag constantly about your ability to get laid"
Huh. Nothing in the post you're replying to was me bragging about getting laid. Maybe I did it once or twice in the past, but I assume that was just to prove a point about something. Not just to "brag". It's also something I keep an eye on, and intentionally try not to do. Unless as I said, I'm trying to prove a point about something.
"nothing about you here that suggests to me that you are either 'super confident' or a 'bad boy"
I'm not a bad boy. I'm an incredibly religious Buddhist, that doesn't kill bugs, or tell white lies. lol.
"Women are attracted to thugs and scumbags"
You mean guys that think for themselves, and don't follow the status quo? Or do you mean actual bad people, that murder other people? I invite you to find me one temple girl in thailand, dawning white robes, following the 5 precepts, and meditating every day, that's dating a heroin dealer, or mafia member. One of my old friends, a devout religious Buddhist, who had never had sex, or kissed a boy in her life, almost stopped talking to me once because I said a curse word. The word "damn" lol. Another thai girl I use to have a crush on, a devout religious girl, was also dating a complete dork. Like attracts like
Now, of course these are anecdotal stories. I recall a story on your blog about girls in south america wanting to date cartel members. But did it ever occur to you that most people are actually pieces of shit, and the reason these girls are attracted to them is actually because they have violent serial killer tendencies themselves? Most people are dark my dude.
Also, this is incredibly one sided, and unfair to girls. There was a serial killer in thailand, (a girl), who got arrested, and thousands of guys were drooling over her because of how attractive she was. They wanted to fuck a female serial killer. Girls have to deal with this problem too. It's very common for good girls to have to deal with the fact that their boyfriend is attracted to sexually promiscuous twerking sluts. There's a lot of thai net idols that I'm attracted to, who could be classified as "bad girls" and when I talk about them, girls have gotten really angry at me, telling me that I'm attracted to bitches. It goes both ways.
I promise you that you could get a hot girlfriend though acting like a complete wimp, and dork. As long as you're confident, can have cool conversations, and aren't needy. After all, you're an incredibly unique person, and you can use that to your advantage. You have unique beliefs that a lot of people don't share. And what you have over "bad boys" is that you're theantifeminist, and they aren't.
Another victim of the sexual holocaust, drake bell. My childhood hero, from the nickelodeon show drake and josh, is now in prison for flirting with a 15 year old.
How many people need to go to prison before society realizes that teenagers, and older men, go together like coffee and sugar? lol
An example here of the male attraction to bad girls, for theantifeminist
Some notable lyrics
Tattoo crawlin' down her leg, so sexy
So young if I ever get caught, they'll arrest me
School girl, studied up well on hoochie coochie
Lick lips, kitten with a whip so undress me
Seductive ballerina, so trashy, trashy
The attraction to "bad people" isn't exclusively just a woman thing.
I'm not a bad boy but in my experience the rare traits that have got me some brownie points with girls are traits one would associate with bad boys (like some muscularity and dick size etc.). As to my other positive traits they never cut any ice with the girls I was after. Contrary to most MRAs I never blamed girls for going after bad boys because 1) if I were a girl I would go after bad boys and 2) I myself go after bad girls. Instead I blame human nature and this rotten deal everyone else seems to worship called "life".
All porn stars are bad girls. All strippers and hookers are bad girls. All hot girls I see are bad girls. Promiscuous girls (the ones who had sex with me and not just with one other guy who wasn't me) are bad girls. Hot girls who occasionally act like good girls are only bad girls who play good girls to a chose audience IMO. This doesn't mean there cannot be niches. If you are an Amish you might be offered marriage to a hot (good) girl in your Amish community. The price you would pay is to live an Amish life. Buddhist temple girls may be another niche I don't know, with some price to pay as well. In the real world though girls surf the internet, travel around, go out at night, have instagram and tik-tok accounts. They see numberless top-looking men and know damned well what they want in a man. I bet girls get as perverted by the internet and the cinema as men get by watching porn. Many photogenic girls who look far better on pics and vids than they do in real life end up never having real sex. Maybe Eivind should start a movement against the damage inflicted to girls' sexuality by social media.
If you don’t celebrate life, then why should you celebrate sex? It's a bit like the Platonism espoused by TheAntifeminist; no wonder you both endorse wanking. Life and carnality goes hand in hand and that’s what male sexualism is about. People feel most alive when they are having sex, followed by other physical social interactions. Exercise and manual labor are good for feeling alive too. People feel least alive when contemplating abstract ideas and at the very bottom is wanking to porn. The worst medical problem that can happen to a human is to be locked-in, unable to use your body at all. You can still see all the porn you want in that state, which is as close as you can come to platonic heaven, yet it would be hell. Most people choose to pass away instead of trying to maintain that condition, such as ALS patients for example. Plato was wrong: carnality is what we strive for and what gives life meaning. Recent work in artificial intelligence tells us it isn’t even possible to have an abstract detached mind. If there is a path to conscious AI, it goes through robotics. A mind must be embodied or it can’t think at all, other than on its way out in a locked-in state or a coma. Dreams also only have meaning in relation to the real world and can’t be as vivid.
I don't get what you mean by “bad” girls either. The only distinction that matters is, will she have sex with you? That usually makes her good. If you think hookers are bad girls despite giving you what you want then something is very wrong with your conceptions.
"Bad girls" may have been an unfortunate coinage on my part but I wanted to keep the symmetry with "bad boys" as bad boys are a key demographics in the sexual market . Like in the T-shirt slogan "bad girls go to hell, good girls go nowhere". "Wicked girls" would be a more accepted term in English but is infantilising.
Bad girls are the exact female counterpart of bad boys. Endowed with sex-appeal, promiscuous, pleasure-seeking, exploitative rather than altruistic, prone to use sexual leverage, to commit crimes, to prostitute, to take drugs, attracted to immorality and mischief ...
american law is pretty clear, if you send sexual messages to a girl under the age of consent in the state, it's "grooming" or "endangering" a child. If you send sexual messages to a girl above the age of consent, it should be ok, as long as you don't send any images. of course, sending sexual messages to a girl at all is a terrible idea, because if she is under or over the age of consent, now the state has concrete evidence against you to prove any sexual crime under the sun should things turn sour.
it is best to always write platonic messages, and save any sexual talk for video chat or in person dates, at least until the cops start to request video chat evidence, which hasn't happened yet to my knowledge.
i'm guessing the drake guy kissed her and they found evidence in texts that confirmed this, he's lucky he wasn't hit with a molestation charge.
I always said it was batshit insane to stay in the USA as a man who wanted to live a good life that he earned from being a good man. I think the rulers saw more and more men leaving the USA and renouncing citizenship because of the shit feminist USA deal, so they put a stop to travel with the flu hoax. Now you can't even leave without many more problems to solve.
I'm surprised if the "child endangerment" laws still respect the age of consent. It would be an easy way to bring the criminalization up to 18 without changing any more laws if they haven't thought of this already. The "child pornography" laws don't give a damn about age of consent, so why should "endangerment"? In today's hateful environment it would be easy to argue that age of consent was never intended to enable age gaps, so you are "endangering" her just by being older.
Justice Department withdraws FBI subpoena for USA TODAY records ID'ing readers:
Oh holy shit, just reading the news can get you branded a sexual abuser! This is yet another level of antisex violence that I couldn't even have imagined before it happens. We have to be aware that the feminist police is far more creative in its hatred against us than we can anticipate.
I guess the lesson here is use the Tor Browser for EVERYTHING. There is no such thing as an innocent act because government is pure, unadulterated hatred against sexuality, and they will turn every single detail of your life into "evidence" to convict you.
Imagine that Biden's government is literally so evil that they will make it unsafe for everyone to read newspapers just so they can have another way to catch someone suspected of "sexual exploitation" (which usually means some online nonsense far removed from any sex too). That's the crimen exceptum at work again as I can't imagine they would try this against anything nonsexual. The pigs would be too ashamed of their abuses of power and people will not put up with being targets of criminal investigations just because they read a newspaper, unless brainwashed that anything sexual that the law can touch in any way is a fate worse than death that justifies the removal of all liberties from everyone. The subpoena was only withdrawn because they found the suspect another way, so there is no principled retraction here. I am overjoyed that two of the enemy were also slain in that story which means David Huber wins a Male Sexualist Medal of Honor, but that doesn't make a dent in the feminist army and they will try again with this and other novel measures to suppress sexuality.
@Holocaust22 and Jack. There's 'bad girls', meaning girls who don't conform to society's 'demure' standards for the female sex, and there's serial killers, and women who bully other women, make false allegations against men etc. Most men just don't find these skanks attractive. Male serial killers get thousands of love letters from female admirers, female serial killers do not. I know Holocaust22 has always got an anecdote, probably largely made up, that supposedly completely negates the rule, but it's just a fact. Mexican men don't dream of dating a female cartel member who has skinned other cartel members alive, because despite what you say, most men aren't psychopaths. Women are, or at least they have a maladaptive sexual psychology that attracts them to male psychopaths. There is no female equivalent of Jeremy Meeks.
To the anonymous guy ( I don't know if it's one person, or there are several people here posting anonymously) - It's not game set and match' because Eivind calls me a 'sexual cripple' for refusing to condemn masturbation. It's all in his aspergic mind, and some worthless feminist advocacy research papers. I had my testosterone levels measured two weeks ago and I still have higher testosterone levels than the average 20 year old. I'd bet my life that I have higher test levels (all natural) than Eivind, and I'm at least 10 years older than him. Some 20 year old thug started on me in the street a couple of years ago and I gave him a black eye. According to athletics standards, I'm in the top 1% of my age group. People look at me and assume I'm on steroids (never have). I think I fapped the day before the test, it wouldn't have occurred to me not to. BTW, there's not a chance in hell that you don't masturbate to porn, therefore you're a hypocrite.
@Holocaust22 - why do you go along with Eivind in calling 99% of men who look at porn 'wankers', when you think calling men 'paedocrites' is a 'terrible thing to call somebody'?
And Eivind - frankly you're a total imbecile who is up your own arse. You somehow twist your limited powers of logic to come up with the conclusion that I'm validating feminist sex laws for claiming that occasional masturbation and porn use is harmless. It's like suggesting that somebody who believes cannabis is harmless is 'validating' laws against cannabis, as opposed to somebody who argues that cannabis is an evil and dangerously addictive. 15 years of blogging Eivind, and the closest thing to followers is Jack, who disagrees with you about almost everything, Holocaust22 who doesn't even think feminists are the enemy, and somebody or several people who post completely anonomously. I used to think you were quite bright, but I've long realized that you're simply the result of high functioning autism twinned with the best education system.
You've also got it wrong, or rather you're making it up as you go along about AI and 'embodied consciousness'. Many in the AI community may feel that progress in developing true AI will be faster through robots encountering problems in the real world, but that's totally different to all your psuedo-scientific claims about consciousness only being possible in a physical body and what not. What you're saying doesn't even make sense. Many philosophers and even physicists believe the physical reality we experience may be a simulation, others believe the universe is some kind of hologram. In any case, what you're stating is completely opposed to the Eastern systems of thought that Holocaust22 is espousing here. So really, your one follower after 15 years of blogging can hardly be called a follower after all. He thinks feminists are our friends, and is 100% opposed to you as regards spirituality and philosophy.
"People feel least alive when contemplating abstract ideas and at the very bottom is wanking to porn." Maybe you're just an animal Eivind? Autists do have a commonality with animals, but surely what makes us human is our ability to think and ponder about life. You're exalting manual labour above the feelings of profound ecstasy one might experience listening to a late Beethoven string quartet, or reading and understanding a classic novel or work of Shakespeare? BTW, I doubt if you've ever done a single day's manual labour in your life. I used to work in a factory doing routine repetitive tasks on machines, and believe me, I did not feel alive at any point when I was working there. You seem obsessed with the question of personal identity Eivind, which you call the most important question, so you're contradicting yourself, as you do almost every time you touch your keyboard and post any sentence online.
I will address the simulation argument first (and then I may or may not get around to answering the delusional wanking justifications of "Dom Krauer" here), because I was just watching this conversation between Tyler Cowen and the very smart physicist David Deutsch where he dismisses it as nonsense:
COWEN: Are we living in a simulation?
DEUTSCH: No, because living in a simulation is precisely a case of there being a barrier beyond which we cannot understand. If we’re living in a simulation that’s running on some computer, we can’t tell whether that computer is made of silicon or iron, or whether it obeys the same laws of computation, like Turing computability and quantum computability and so on, as ours. We can’t know anything about the physics there.
Well, we can know that it is at least a superset of our physics, but that’s not saying very much; it’s not telling us very much. It’s a typical example of a theory that can be rejected out of hand for the same reason that the supernatural ones — if somebody says, “Zeus did it,” then I’m going to say, “How should I respond? If I take that on board, how should I respond to the next person that comes along and tells me that Odin did it?”
COWEN: But it seems you’re rejecting an empirical claim on methodological grounds, and I get very suspicious. Philosophers typically reject transcendental arguments like, “Oh, we must be able to perceive reality, because if we couldn’t, how could we know that we couldn’t perceive reality?” It doesn’t prove you can perceive reality, right?
DEUTSCH: [laughs] First of all, that is a transcendental argument and therefore refutes itself.
Secondly, this theory about being in a simulation is not an empirical theory. It precisely isn’t. If it came along with a thing saying, “We are living in a computer, and we can access the GPU of it and cause weird effects by doing so-and-so,” that would be different. That would be a testable theory, potentially, so empirical. If it’s simply that we’re living in a simulation which we can’t get out of, then that is not an empirical theory. As I keep saying, it’s no more empirical than the theory that Zeus is out there, or Odin. And I can’t tell the difference between those three theories, not just experimentally, but by any argument.
I agree with this. It just doesn't make sense to claim we are living in a simulation because of this metaphysical barrier between our reality and whatever a simulation is supposed to mean. It just breaks down to nonsense or at least is no more explanatory than traditional theological claims.
I also recommend this episode for what he says at the beginning about the metaphysics of personal identity, very similar to Geoffrey Klempner's view of the idiotic conundrum. There might be something like "physicalism" (we don't really have a word for it) which prevents the duplication or uploading of an individual and very much grounds us in the real world. This means a Star Trek type transporter would probably kill us too.
And he surprised me by being extreme on children's rights, saying there should only be one set of rights for everyone, not different ones for children. So David Deutsch may even go beyond the male sexualists on this, or I might be convinced too if I go deeper into what he means exactly.
DEUTSCH: I don’t think there’s a scope for having a different philosophy for different kinds of people. I think there is only one kind of people. I think there is no fundamental difference between humans and artificial general intelligence when we invent it, humans many centuries ago, between men and women, between adults and children.
A new rule: accusations of autism may get your comment deleted in moderation. Not that I give a shit what delusional wankers think or say, but it gets too tiresome to have to rebut it so that new readers don't get the idea that I implicitly agree by letting it stand uncontested. I am not diagnosed and couldn’t be because I am nothing like that.
Is nofap autistic, or being interested in personal identity? That makes no sense on any level. If there is such a thing as an autistic philosophy, it would be the simulation argument endorsed by Elon Musk and yourself.
Your cannabis analogy also makes no sense. You literally validate the feminist worldview that girls can be sexually exploited via porn when you claim men get sexual benefit out of it.
I agree manual labor can easily be excessive and no fun when you do it for someone else. Repetitive factory work is not what I meant. I meant building something for yourself or of your own accord, or gardening or exercise that everyone understands as making us feel alive. Living in the Matrix would be the furthest removed from that.
Testosterone levels are loosely negatively related to masturbation, but not the goal in itself. You can have normal testosterone, hold your own in a fight and so on and still not be pursuing sex due to wanking. Nothing you just said indicates anything about a normal sex life.
@Holocaust22 - why do you go along with Eivind in calling 99% of men who look at porn 'wankers', when you think calling men 'paedocrites' is a 'terrible thing to call somebody'
Eivind, have you noticed theantifeminist constantly accuses me of stuff that I've never said? Every time I correct him, he just ignores it, and continues to say these things.
Where did you get the idea from that I think calling men paedocrites is a terrible thing to do? I call men paedocrites ALL THE TIME.
Look at me posting under this video, calling destiny and vaush paedocrites (freetheteens69).
"I know Holocaust22 has always got an anecdote, probably largely made up"
Clearly you still don't know anything about me. I don't make things up. There was a female serial killer in thailand, that a lot of guys wanted to fuck. I was talking to a girl once, about girls liking serial killers. And she shared this female serial killer with me, that a bunch of guys liked. It's not made up lol. Is it just an anecdote when a bunch of guys did want to fuck her? Also, who cares about girls writing love letters to serial killers. It's not any girl that I know. Just don't talk to girls that like serial killers.
The worlds most notorious hitman, with over 500 kills, actually stopped his job, because his wife told him she was going to leave him if he didn't quit it.
"Holocaust22 who doesn't even think feminists are the enemy"
Can you show me any of my posts where I espouse feminism? Oh no, of course you can't. Because I'm always making fun of whiney victims, and the metoo movement. I believe men and women are different. My beliefs are completely opposed to the beliefs of feminism lol. One week when I was talking to you, I was having a feminist moment. Then I did a 180, and changed my mind. And you're still on it. Whenever I talk to conservative types, I'm always accused of being a lefty degenerate feminist. Whenever I talk to leftists, I'm always accused of being a sexist homophobe misogynist prude that supports a radical patriarchy. It's rather amusing.
Just look at some of my discussions on freespeechtube
"As a lover of hot teens, I dissociate myself from abnormal things like beastiality and necrophilia. The attraction to 12-17 year old girls is completely normal male sexuality, and shouldn't be lumped together with stuff like goat shagging.
If you like dogs more than beautiful 14 year old girls, you have an issue.
If you like dead corpses, you have an issue
If you like old hags 20+ more than 14 year olds, you're a pervert.
If you like 6 year olds more than 14 year olds, you have an issue.
Stop wacking off so much, so your sexual desire can return to some state of normalcy. And stop putting things like horse love into the same category as something beautiful like marrying a teenager." - freetheteens69
"You have a problem with people who like people over the age of 20?
Not sure I read that right…"
"The attraction to girls 20+ is basically the same thing as necrophilia" - Freetheteens69
"If you haven't noticed he's a sexist prick" - Lord Abigor
"I'm not sexist. I love bitches" - Freetheteens69
"Thinking of women as nothing more than bitches to fuck is as sexist as and idiot like you can get" - Lord Abigor
"Uhhh, there's a lot more to a girl than just her body. Like her ability to do the dishes, clean the house, cook me dinner, etc" - Freetheteens69
And this is the guy that thenantifeminist calls a feminist. lol.
"So really, your one follower after 15 years of blogging can hardly be called a follower after all"
Imagine two people with different beliefs being able to enjoy each others stuff, and get along. Who would have thought lol. You can't handle it when someone has a different opinion than you about one thing (nofap) and are turning it into a huge issue for no reason. Who cares? xD
The most important thing is hot 14 year olds. That's all that matters. And that's where we are united. Revolution comrades! Bring back the blog theantifeminist!
Also, stop calling me a "map". lol
"Eivind, have you noticed theantifeminist constantly accuses me of stuff that I've never said? Every time I correct him, he just ignores it, and continues to say these things."
Yes, he does that to both of us. Either he isn't paying attention or it's some kind of cognitive deficit like early-onset dementia. So what if you flirted with feminism at some point? That's clearly not your position now. We can all learn from our mistakes and move on. And agree to disagree about certain things that can't be reconciled, like nofap. We still agree politically, and that's what matters against the sex laws. I am additionally trying to help men have healthy sex lives through nofap, and if TheAntifeminist doesn't want to get on board with that then fine, it's still a loss that he deleted his blog.
Eivind, har du læst dette?
Steigan plejer at levere tankevækkende og samfundskritiske artikler, og i begyndelsen ser denne artikel også interessant ud. Men efterhånden smager den mere og mere af sexfjendskhed, og til sidst bliver det tydeligt, at artiklen i større eller mindre grad er oversat fra amerikansk ultrakonservativ propaganda.
Et par eksempler: "til tross for at forskning gjentatte ganger har vist at barn utvikler betydelige problemer med sin identitet og kroppen sin når de blir utsatt for åpenlyst seksuelt materiale". Og "transgenderismen, som har utviklet seg fra og søker å skjule sine fetisjistiske røtter i transseksualisme, er ikke noe mindre rovdyraktig enn pedofili".
Det manglede da bare: "rovdyraktig"! Men som forsøg på oversættelse af "predatory" virker det i det mindste noget komisk på norsk/dansk...
Yes, it’s a little strange how a Norwegian communist site has morphed into a translation of American conservatism. Steigan did the same thing with Epstein, whom he understandably hates for being a capitalist and friend of billionaires, but why endorse the pretense that he was a pedophile? Steigan always calls Epstein “pedofilidømt” -- for paying a 17-year-old girl -- so I have to wonder how does otherwise legal sex become “pedophilia” because there is money involved? I still think Steigan.no is a better source of news than the mainstream media, but damn does it get annoying when they parrot the same sex-hostility. At least it is slanted more towards conservatism than feminism, but there is hardly any difference.
Yes, “rovdyraktig” sounds more comical than predatory. I wonder if they can sense the comedy or the crimen exceptum is so overpowering that it doesn’t register how absurd it gets. Looks like this is a subject that is now literally impossible to parody because there is no limit to what antisex they will take seriously.
A dream girl for Eivind and Holocaust22.
This bad girl is a keeper! Eivind should writer a fan letter to her - she might agree to breed with him when she gets out of prison.
I can't imagine she gets any more attraction from men for being a murderer on top of being a teen girl. This is a real sex difference. Of course we are still attracted to her, but not because of her character.
This is more what I have in mind when I think "bad girl".
So cool, confident, and popular ;)
Oh look at this theantifeminist, and anonymous
Jodi arias, the girl that slit her boyfriends throat, and murdered him, is getting married to one of her many fans.
She is flooded with love letters from men that want to fuck her.
How many men want to fuck harley quinn, the sociopath/serial killer from the batman movies?
It could have been you Holocaust22!
A BBW will get hundreds of admirers, at least from a population sample of 3 billion men. That doesn't change the fact that 99.9% of men find BBWs repulsive. There are men with a fetish with anything, and there are men who are so desperate for sex they will literally fuck anything with a pussy. Still, men are not attracted to 'bad girls' in the same way women are attracted to 'bad boys'. There's another difference. Jodi Arias would have thousands of thirsty men after her if she was a normal woman. Somebody like Charles Manson, who got thousands of love letters from female fans every week, wouldn't even be seen as human by virtually any woman if he had been a decent, normal person. He'd just be another incel.
@Eivind - you claim that you are developing a relationship that might lead to you starting a family which is your life goal. Have you considered the possibility that she may be an undercover police officer? I remember when you posted here about that 'underage girl' who was trying to bait you on Tinder that you assumed it was some vigilante group. My first thought was that it would be at least as likely, given your history and this blog, that it was an undercover Norwegian pig trying to trick you.
Eh, I am not pursuing fantasy relationships. I am a nofapper; I do not play games or do long distance without easy travel. Also, who said anything about underage? Except yes, I was attempted baited back in 2018 by an 18-year-old girl who made up a lie that she was actually 15 in a comical attempt to be a vigilante that instead led to me doing a reverse sting on her, but I would immediately have gone and fucked her if not for that bullshit. There is zero chance I am developing a relationship with a vigilante/pig because nothing “develops” before I already know she is real. Well, I suppose being undercover is still theoretically possible if the goal is to infiltrate our movement and they are willing to have actual relationships to achieve this like the English pigs did, but then at least the sex would be real... probably on birth control so it would be bad for my plans though, but I think this possibility is vanishingly small given the irrelevance of the male sexualist movement and the fact they would have to use a policeWOMAN, which I know of no precedence for. The more covert spy agencies probably do this, but not against such a puny movement.
As to male admirers of female serial killers, yes, you have to compare to the attention they would otherwise get, and I think it is less (adjusted for fame). Not comparable to BBW either, which is an actual preference by a good number of men (much higher than you think, more like 1-10%, and many more will be only slightly less attracted to them or not care about weight) in a way I really don't believe violent criminal is.
Another victory in the relentless march of feminist antisex bigotry:
The government has committed to raising the minimum legal age of marriage to 18 in England and Wales in a victory for campaigners.
Currently, 16 and 17-year-olds can marry with parental consent, but a coalition of charities has warned that this legal loophole is being exploited to coerce young people into child marriage.
And as usual, they don't rest on their laurels for one second before moving on to the next step of criminalization:
Natasha Rattu, director of Karma Nirvana, which has protected girls as young as 11 from child marriage, said: “We are delighted that after relentless campaigning the government has listened to our joint calls to end child marriage by committing to raising the legal age to 18.
“But while this is a huge step in the right direction, it remains imperative the government also makes child marriage a crime.
“This would ensure maximum safeguards against all forms of child marriage and sends out the strongest possible message that child marriage is not accepted or tolerated by our government.”
The panic is always at 100% no matter what laws we throw them. Next they will have to raise the age of consent to 18 based on the same hysteria and so on and on.
Yep, the real reason young girls feel bad about age gaps is trolls like this:
Last month, Courtney Stodden, who identifies as nonbinary, went public with Teigen being cruel to them on social media years ago after Stodden, then 16, married then 50-year-old actor Doug Hutchison.
"(Chrissy Teigen) wouldn't just publicly tweet about wanting me to take 'a dirt nap' but would privately DM me and tell me to kill myself," Stodden told The Daily Beast. "Things like, 'I can't wait for you to die.'"
Teigen apologized to Stodden, who has since gotten divorced from Hutchison.
No wonder she felt bad with all that hate, but now sadly she does NOT see anything wrong with the condemnation of such relationships and instead blames her ex-husband for "grooming" her into marriage as a "child" of 16. The solution must always be that men are bad, never that feminism is.
We must keep the hate against sexuality because feminism is supreme. That is fixed and cannot be changed in our lifetime because men just don't have it in them to object. So the only way for girls to feel better about themselves is to be redefined into abuse victims. That is the sad reality.
In her own words:
Meanwhile, Courtney also told Yahoo Lifestyle that one of the most difficult parts of the marriage was the attention she received from celebrities.
Courtney says an increasingly difficult marriage was compounded by the attention from high-profile celebrities and publications.
"I feel like society should have been far enough along not to judge the child, and to judge the responsible adults around them,” she says.
"Adults with huge platforms then jumping on the bandwagon and hating the child, I just really don’t get it.
"So, that scares me," she says. "Being [trolled] by big celebrities, it’s really scarring."
Society might indeed move beyond judging "the child" and only judge the man. So much is granted by current sentiment. In order to go further than that and stop hating the man, however, men need to stand up for themselves in greater numbers than the five of us here.
"Speaking with ABC News, Doug said when he found out she was 16 his "whole world turned upside down".
He added, "It didn't make me want to walk away, but it definitely was a struggle inside my heart … because I had already started falling for her."
What I would have said
"When I found out she was 16, I was a little apprehensive. 16 is old as fuck. 14/15 is way better. But she was pretty cool. So I gave her a pass"
As usually, also this law is going to be made from carefully selected individual cases. For every case where a 16 years old regrets her marriage with a significantly older man there are maybe 100 other cases where the girl is quite happy, but this does not seem to distract the charities.
That's funny, but I think 16 is plenty young :)
It is also clear that infantilization is the only way to go about deflecting hate from the girl. If a 17-year-old had to bear any part of the responsibility for choosing an older man, she would be subject to some of the hate from jealous old hags like Chrissie Teigen. All minors are infants and men are abusers, end of story. Women are also infants for purposes of accusing sex crimes for life, which define so hair-trigger violations that there is no difference. All of sexuality is grooming, rape and abuse. The only difference is that past 18 (and with lots and lots of exceptions such as prostitution) the accusations must come from the woman herself rather than hateful bystanders or the police.
Male sexualism is about owning the criminalization of our sexuality and adjusting our politics accordingly, not denying it until it hits you personally like most men do.
And I wonder how they plan to go about criminalizing marriage for 16 and 17-year-olds on top of abolishing it. If they can't marry then it simply wouldn’t be legally recognized if they tried, so in theory there is nothing to criminalize. How, then, to construe a crime to feed the feminist bloodlust and lock up more men? Hmm, might get creative and make it a crime to propose marriage? Or is the UK going to get an equivalent of the Mann Act where crossing the border for such purposes will be the crime? Probably yet another expansion of what they call “sex trafficking”… The purpose of the Mann Act, by the way, was to prevent Black men from taking White women from the South to the North. Now such laws are back with a vengeance and they are completely kosher. The white supremacists get their racism and the left get their misandrist antisex bigotry and there is no dissent whatsoever besides us.
UK home secretary, the Muslim Pakistani Sajid Javid - 'child marriage is child abuse'.
I remember reading some British manosphere blogger who had a theory that feminism and Islam were actually closely related and morphing into something even more insidious against male sexuality. 'Femislamization of the West' or something he called it. I think Eivind called him out for Islamophobia a few times.
I don't recall that, but can't deny now that he might have been onto something. Femislamization -- the worst of both worlds, is that what we are getting?
It is clear by now that whatever Islamization does, it does not stand up for any sexual freedom that was associated with it. There will be nobody to assert that for example being able to marry at 16 is part of their culture. Instead they take to lecturing us that 16 and 17-year-olds are children, and if there is anyone who disagrees, they cower in fear and irrelevance like traditional elements did in Christian culture. At the end of the day, we get the same sex laws as feminism or worse, with no real countermovement.
On the other hand:
Turkish Prof. Dr. Muttalip Kutluk Özgüven said "12-16 year old girls have perfect sexy bodies and ask any doctor, this is the ideal age to give birth to the first child"
Sabri Balaman, the host of the program, did not warn the professor who said that 13-year-old girls are at the most suitable age for getting pregnant."
Prof. Özgüven's words, which received a great reaction on social media, are as follows: "There is no such thing as a superman, but there is a thing called superwoman. And this is between the ages of 13-16, ask any doctor you want. 12 is okay too. She has tremendous regeneration ability, her body is super sexy. This age has been determined as an ideal age to give birth to the first child."
Indeed, that is biological truth. We have the same bodies now as in the bronze age when "most women were mothers at twelve, grandmothers at twenty-four, dead by thirty."
Even today, doctors call pregnancy past 35 "geriatric pregnancy," though there is a push to make the language more politically correct. So, let's call it rape and child marriage when women are in their prime and something nicer than it is at the end of fertility because our culture is screwed up, lol.
I remember reading some British manosphere blogger who had a theory that feminism and Islam were actually closely related and morphing into something even more insidious against male sexuality. 'Femislamization of the West' or something he called it. I think Eivind called him out for Islamophobia a few times."
Sajid Javid is a british politician, raised in bristol. And a member of the conservative party. He's not a feminist, nor a muslim.
Here's a quote directly from him
"Myself and my four brothers were brought up to believe in God, but I do not practice any religion. My wife is a practicing Christian and the only religion practiced in my house is Christianity"
Will the pious Muslims do anything to prevent this antisex reform, then, or any other? I don't think it matters what religion this Sajid Javid guy does practice, because culturally he is just like the ones who profess faith. Male sexuality is a lost cause on this side of collapse. Which luckily Gail keeps telling it is very late in the game for now. What remains, in a nutshell according to her, is "An extraordinarily large shock, caused by a worldwide problem with debt repayment and interchangeable money supply among countries," then "A shift toward much more rapid collapse, as attempts to live with much fewer imports don’t really work." At which point feminism becomes impossible to enforce anymore. And most of us die, but at least we get to see them suffer too. The timeline may just be a few months now.
While criminalizing more and more of the positive sides of male sexuality is the number one political priority, reinforcing maladaptive male proclivities by facilitating masturbation is... a business opportunity:
It is nauseating. This shit gets presented with zero reservations. If men's interests counted, it would be illegal to sell such devices or at least they would come with a warning like cigarette packs, with references to the research that Gary Wilson has collected.
Love is criminal and masturbation is the most celebrated business opportunity. No reservations whatsoever against commercially exploiting men's self-abuse, while the most remote imaginary female violation gets the utmost priority. South Korea takes the latter to the highest extreme:
South Korea has become the global epicenter of spycams -- the use of tiny, hidden cameras to film victims naked, urinating or having sex.
Other cases have involved intimate photos being leaked without permission, or sex abuse such as rapes captured on camera and the videos shared online.
Victims are often traumatized further and become "immersed in the abuse" by encounters with police and other justice officials, and by the expectation that they should gather evidence and monitor the internet for new appearances of images of themselves, United States-based Human Rights Watch (HRW) said in a report.
What is the point of cultivating women's feelings of voodoo violations like this? So what if a man looked at an image of you? He is only abusing himself and if anything if you hate him you should give him more of it so he can utterly ruin his sexuality like this civilization wants. It is so absurd and surreal that we can have this hysteria that women are sexually "abused" by the very means that bring men most apart from women and make them impotent and feckless. The real state of sexuality is reflected the South Korean fertility rate of 0.98 children per woman, which halves the population every generation and means their problem is very much too little sex instead of too much. For which admittedly it would help to get rid of porn and masturbation, but the feminists think they are fighting sex, every bit as deluded as the wanker who thinks he is getting sexual value from jerking himself further down into sterile asexuality.
The timeline may just be a few months now.
Gail has been saying it for years now, but the world is still here.
She might be wrong, but you must admit the world has gotten a lot crazier lately, in line with the decline she predicted. The only thing missing is the deathblow to the financial system, leading to rapid and irreversible collapse. I take her words more like a hopeful lamentation that feminism may be doomed than prophetic truth, but find it at least conceivable that our civilization may be as fragile as she now says.
Way to ignore the male health problem of masturbation and pretend women are the victims of porn:
Dozens of women sued Pornhub and its parent company Thursday, alleging that the site knowingly profited from videos depicting rape, child sexual exploitation, trafficking and other nonconsensual sexual content.
The civil complaint alleges that Pornhub parent company MindGeek, one of the largest online pornography companies, is a "classic criminal enterprise" with a business structure created to monetize nonconsensual sexual content — allegations Pornhub denies.
The suit was filed by Brown Rudnick LLP on behalf of 34 alleged victims of sexual exploitation, including minors, rape and human trafficking, and is seeking damages and protection for plaintiffs.
Be sure to include all the buzzwords of inflated female abuse and none about the real problem, because male issues are simply ignored in this gynocentric society. But if it can still help men embrace nofap, why not? I don't think this will have any of that effect though even if Pornhub is put out of business since porn is overflowing on the net anyway. Nofap needs to come from within when men realize how harmful masturbation is.
Underage cheerleaders are too sexy to be show on CNN, so must be blurred...
...unless they got Down's syndrome, lol. The culturally insane taboo manifests in new bizarre ways all the time. "CNN intentionally blurred the image due to the age of the other subjects in the image" -- yeah, but the one you didn't blur is the same age, 14. I guess that one girl doesn't inspire enough jealousy to apply the feminist treatment?
Come to think of it, it is really anachronistic that they still have cheerleaders, the one place left where we ditch the desexualization (except must be blurred on the news). Such a cute holdover from less bigoted times and only a matter of time before that institution has to go too, I suppose.
You post a comment about cheerleaders being blurred out of pictures for being too hot, straight after a comment denouncing porn and masturbation.
As I said, you contradict yourself almost every time you express yourself.
I doubt if you've ever read him Eivind, but Warren Farrell in 'The Myth of Male Power' denounces cheerleaders as being rituals for male disposability. Young, attractive females at peak ripeness tease their bodies to encourage young males to damage each other's brains on the football field in a display of alpha chad bad boyness.
Farrell also has some interesting things to say about the representations of female beauty in the media, which I guess includes porn. He's not a million miles away form your kind of position, but rather than claiming that 'porn is heroin' like feminists and you do, but rather that the constant bombardment of images of female beauty actually increase female sexual power over men. It leads men not to an addiction to wanking, but an addiction to being enslaved by female beauty.
Those are pretty reasonable takes by Warren Farrell there. He wasn't considered an old-school MRA for nothing (even agreeing with me on the female sex offender charade, stating clearly that males are not traumatized by female sexual coercion), but then he got mixed up with the feminists at A Voice for Men and lost relevance as far as I'm concerned.
Though there are sports less designed to inflict concussions, and some of them might have cheerleaders too now, American football is my first association and makes their role pretty much what he said, yes.
Warren Farrell is right, but incomplete about porn. His statements don't reflect the increased harm of constantly available Internet porn and is more geared to the Playboy and VHS tapes days when impotence wasn’t really an issue. Not saying masturbation was a good thing back then either, but it didn’t seriously displace real sex for most of us or induce brain damage so we couldn’t have it, so then it was appropriate to comment on just the cultural symbolism like he does rather than the downright pathologies that an updated view of porn will have to include. So his criticism there is mild, and I agree to some extent, but not when you meet real life. Being "enslaved by female beauty" is not a bad thing in itself in my view -- rather what life is about -- but it has to be real. What are now called “simps” who pay for OnlyFans, and of course the rest of the wankers who use porn, are doing it terribly wrong because they get nothing valuable back for their worship. Only if a woman gives herself to you is she worthy of worship, and sending you nudes doesn’t count, LOL!
If he thinks cheerleaders are bad, then porn the way it functions now should be the ultimate symbol of male disposability. The football players at least get laid, but wankers get nothing, making their sexuality disposable even to themselves because they are deluded like you that they aren't wasting themselves.
"He's not a million miles away form your kind of position, but rather than claiming that 'porn is heroin' like feminists and you do, but rather that the constant bombardment of images of female beauty actually increase female sexual power over men. It leads men not to an addiction to wanking, but an addiction to being enslaved by female beauty"
Doesn't this sound like something a feminist like Andrea Dworkin would say? Does the mens rights movement ever remind you a bit of just the male version of feminism?
Warren Farrel - Attractive girls dancing is enslaving men
Andrea Dworkin - Sex between a man and woman is enslavement of a woman. It's domination. It's sexist
Couldn't I just turn it around, and say female cheerleaders are enslaved to mens approval? That's why they try to act sexy, and show off? Why look at it like this though, through some kind of lens of victimhood? Trying to compete with feminists about who can be the biggest victim is a bit sus to me.
I agree that we must not go overboard with the victimhood. Attractive girls dancing who probably would and do fuck football players are not hurting them. That point was a bit silly, even though the brain damage from that sport is no joke.
But masturbation is indeed real harm. Every time you masturbate, you hurt your sexual potential. Every time you masturbate there is a girl you could have fucked but miss out on because of your pathological behavior -- and that’s just counting the opportunity cost, not the erectile and other sexual and social dysfunctions you inflict on yourself for next time you do find a girl. Masturbation is male self-abuse, self-sabotage and self-harm. And it is celebrated by our culture because this is a feminist culture that cares nothing about male interests. Gone are the days when even mild-mannered MRAs like Warren Farrell get attention in the mainstream. Men must stand up for themselves in renegade ways and resist the cultural narrative like Gary Wilson did. Is there a successor now that he is dead? Well, there is Gabe Deem, whom I recommend that everyone follow on Twitter.
But I don’t see Gabe Deem becoming a great activist since he lacks political and philosophical awareness, which frankly Gary Wilson did too. These men did not and do not understand that we are ideologically opposed to feminism. It is bizarre, but I guess understandable when you focus on self-help for porn addicts, which isn’t per se an antifeminist cause, but the nofap issue is so much larger than that. It is central to the philosophy of male sexualism that porn/masturbation is worthless because -- well, I struggle to put something so basic in simpler terms than “sexualism”; otherwise the movement should be called Onanism or asexualism. And when you make the value judgment that Onanism is worthless to males, there goes the supposed resulting “sexual exploitation” of females too. So it is funny when Gabe retweets that “The National Center on Sexual Exploitation Remembers Gary Wilson”:
But we bear with such otherwise great men for their foolishness in thinking we are compatible with feminism. It is the feminists who are useful idiots for us in this case, when they think we are aligned on porn. As I’ve said, the feminists and their male friends have the right answer for wrong reasons on this.
No I wont follow Gabe Deem, because he's a feminist who promotes the feminist child sex abuse industry. Why the fuck would I want to follow him? Because you suffer from erectile dysfunction and want to be able to get it up when a 1000 lb black woman finally swipes right on your Tinder profile?
And stop being such a freaking aspie. Sexualism refers to sexuality, not just 'sex'. According to you, there is no such thing as a celibate homosexual. A man could spend his entire life wanking to gay pornography, to lusting after men, even to chasing men, and to having no sexual interest in women whatsoever, but he wouldn't be a 'homosexual' because the right word would be 'homoonismual' or similar.
I believe that nofap should be judged by its results rather than the professed ideology of some of its promoters. Men who don't masturbate or look at porn are astronomically more likely to commit what feminists call "child sex abuse," because they chase sex instead of fantasy and are able to perform. That feminists distort this picture by calling non-contact offenses “sex abuse” rather than the self-sabotage it is is their problem and something I flat-out reject.
Also, last warning about “aspie” accusations before I simply delete such comments. I don't get your point about homosexuality either but will say this. My advice about nofap does not necessarily apply to them because I have no “ideal” homosexual life to compare it to, since none of it appeals to me. There is probably such a thing as a healthy homosexual arousal pathway and how their erections ought to work in various situations, but I couldn't tell you because I don’t have that orientation. They need to work this out for themselves.
Straight guys have an easy benchmark of penis in vagina that constitutes healthy sexuality, and if you can't perform at that (including ejaculating after a reasonable time) due to porn use or other reasons then a diagnosis of dysfunction is easy and clear. But I can't tell anyone who doesn't have that goal how they are supposed to function in situations that I consider repulsing.
Regarding the idea that porn/masturbation should be included in our cause because it is "sexual," I reject this. Yes, it is sexual in the sense of sexual dysfunction, maladaptation, paraphilia, pathology -- obviously not the things we fight for.
And finally, regarding the claim that I “suffer from erectile dysfunction” -- no I don’t, but would in various degrees if I used porn/masturbation. There is no shame in that because that is simply how it works. Porn/masturbation is toxic to our sexuality; it needs to be emphasized that these are the real problem and the man is healthy except for these getting in the way of his sexuality. There is absolutely no goal that we ought to be able to “tolerate” masturbation, because it has no value and should be discarded entirely.
No, you have less surplus than you think. I would question the whole idea of a male surplus sexual energy. It only seems that way because it is true at the level of egg and sperm that you strictly don't need so many sperm for each egg, but in a deeper sense, men evolved the "excess" for a reason, which was not to masturbate to porn, which was not even factored into the way it evolved! If digital porn were present all along, we would either have evolved not be aroused by it or alternatively had such a rapacious sex drive and short refractory period that there would actually be a surplus. As it is, given that fapping to porn is definitely not evolutionarily normal, even if you honestly think you are just blowing off some surplus, your subconscious motivation level is lowered by the act of masturbating, leading to suboptimal pursuit of sex. If you doubt this, then at least compare your drive and results with actual nofappers rather than what you imagine your "surplus" is.
But nocturnal emissions happen just because there is a surplus.
Sure, nocturnal emissions are benign. What is harmful is to deplete your reserve beyond that without actually having sex. Is is harmful in two ways: opportunity cost because it detracts from sexual pursuit, and neurologic damage as you abuse your sexual reactions and interfere with them to where you don't function as you should during sex (this latter danger most acute during adolescence, at which point it is a travesty that this society fails to warn boys about the harms of porn and masturbation).
Eivind the stud always has the possibility of a hot girl dropping her panties for him 24/7. He never wants to waste an opportunity.
More like he is on Tinder 24/7 hoping that a 40 year old land whale will eventually message him.
Seriously Eivind, you appear to live in cloud cuckoo land. You really think we believe that occasionally jerking off might lead you to missing out on an attractive girl suddenly wanting you to fuck her brains out?
Are you claiming that you have fucked girls you've just met or something? Sorry Eivind. Well maybe Holocaust22 believes you.
Studies show that abstinence (from sex) has the same short-term effect on testosterone as nofap.
So you can use the same argument to argue that you really, really shouldn't be wasting your time with 1,000 lb hogs Eivind. Raise your standards! And of course, watching porn in moderation - which usually features hot, young women - can help you to do that. This of course, is why feminists hate it - obvious to anybody who doesn't suffer from being on the autistic spectrum range.
And again, if you can't get it up when an opportunity to have sex with a hot, young woman arises, then you do need some psychiatric help or viagra. Stop blaming your teenage porn addiction.
Have you considered also that nofap and anti-porn are not the same thing? If short-term boosts in sexual desire and testosterone are so important, why not watch a little porn but just don't ejaculate?
You are simply not taking sex seriously, and it shows in your pessimistic and unrealistic assumptions.
No, I am not pursuing geriatric impregnation. And yes, I've fucked girls just after meeting; matching and fucking in the same day (and also the old-fashioned way of going home with women I just met from bars in the old days, but that's history for me). These opportunities exist and men who follow my advice will find them (oftentimes girls who will NOT be amenable to a slow approach because they get too much attention). Nofap will open up vistas of sexual opportunity you didn't know existed because your mind is clouded by the masturbatory fog.
As to standards, I think nofap also helps you pursue hotter/younger women, certainly did for me. You simply get hornier and more successful at it in every way. You don't feel desperation like a fapping incel but rather a sort of positive hunger and aggressivity that comes from a happy place of surplus and wonder and bliss; sort of a testosterone high for lack of a better word except it is much bigger than that, a spiritual experience of being fully aligned body and mind and purpose.
"Have you considered also that nofap and anti-porn are not the same thing?"
Indeed, and I am not against porn as such, only anti-porn in relation to masturbation. It is only when used for masturbation that it is harmful; otherwise it can be appreciated as art or whatever. For most practical intents and purposes though, what is porn used for nowadays? In the nofap forums it is often said that porn only exists in your mind, when used for this maladaptive purpose. Otherwise, the same thing used for a different purpose shouldn't even be called porn and we are not against it.
What is your take on this:
Law to protect parents wrongly accused of child abuse. They're out to protect families you see. Same old.
Ouch... The BBC has discovered that "children expose themselves on video chat site"! And they begin with a warning that the article contains disturbing adult themes.
Everyone loves talking about "children's right"... until children begin to enjoy them!
When Angry Harry railed against the abuse industry, I don't think he imagined they would literally use it as a job title for themselves. But now I see we have child abuse pediatricians, an official and growing subspecialty of doctors who do nothing but report abuse. It would be horrifying to let your child near any of those, wouldn't it? And even more so without the right to a second opinion. As such, this law seems like a good idea. So now we should double the amount of child abuse pediatricians and the abuse industry gets even bigger. What's not to love?
About that BBC article... containing "disturbing adult themes" that children come up with -- how is that possible in their world-view? "Self-generated child sexual abuse material." I love the contradictions in terms that undermine their whole ideology, but sadly this is insanity that we are dealing with, which is impervious to logic or reason or reality.
The BBC puritans are probably concerned about the fact that all those officers that pose as minors on Internet for the sole purpose of jailing naïve people will soon be outnumbered by real children. And this means that the officers will be transferred to the team responsible for polishing floors at the police station, but they can hardly hold a broom in their hands...
Yes, it has to happen everywhere in this climate, and Islamophobia is the crowbar they use to push it through along with pedohysteria: make it a categorical crime to marry anyone under 18. Some hysterically funny comments in the signatures there if you read Danish.
However, not entirely without controversy. I see a bit about the background here:
"Inger Støjberg is accused of unlawfully ordering the separation of asylum-seeking couples arriving from Syria... Støjberg served as Denmark's immigration minister from 2015 to 2019 and is accused of issuing an illegal order to separate asylum-seeking couples in 2016, where one of them is under the age of 18."
It is one thing to push the idea that "child marriage" is bad and should be illegal, but when it came to breaking apart existing couples, Denmark still isn't quite ready for it? Bravo for that! I always thought of Denmark as a bit freer than the rest of us, having a lower age of consent too at 15, though they seem to be catching up fast.
Holy shit, what a story. An anti on trial for separating intergenerational couples. The tables have turned! Hahaha. And it's actually the liberal party in Denmark that brought the case against her, and she's in the conservative party? Interestng.
Where is theantifeminist to talk about the islamic feminist criminalization of intergenerational relationships. Here we have the immigration minister of denmark on trial for separating muslim couples in intergenerational relationships. Allah loves hot 14 year olds!
Were the couples "intergenerational", and were the girls 14 year olds? I don't think so. It is only reported that the couples were from abroad.
"where is the antifeminist to talk..blah blah blah blah"
Well why don't you and Eivind fuck off to an Islamic country then? But you know that neither of you ever, ever will. You mention about moving to Europe because it's not quite so insane as the US, but why aren't you learning Arabic and choosing from the dozen+ Muslim countries you could escape to? If your goal in life is to marry your 14 year old inbred cousin with a moustache, then go for it. Especially, as you in particular, are one of those aspergic ephebophiles who genuinely can't even conceive the the 14 year old wont stay 14 years old, and when you're still married to her at 30, 40, 50, will actually be 30, 40, 50, not 14 anymore, and you'll be pining for another 14 year old but you'll get stoned to death in the public square for adultery if you so much as look at another 14 year old in her hijab. It would be a 'dick move' anyway to dump a hot 14 year old just because she's turned 50.
BTW, are you really so dumb that you think that a Danish court refusing to seperate an 18 year old with his 16 year old immigrant girlfriend proves that Islam is a male sexual paradise?
If you're 18 or 19 Holocaust22, then fair enough, maybe you will mature in about 10 years time. But I'm pretty sure you're the same 'AB' guy who used to post the exact same type of comments and display the exact same anecodotal faulty reasoning time and time again on my blog ten years ago, which would make you at least in your late twenties. In which case, there is no hope for you. You're just not very bright (although I'm sure you'll now claim to have been a Stanford scholar or something).
Hungarian femiservatives are passing a new anti-paedophilia bill that will create a sex offenders registry and stiffen sentences etc. From what I've read, they haven't actually increased the age of consent. The only reason it's had any coverage in the West is because it contains a clause that bans the promotion of 'non-traditional sexual relationships', which has been taken to include homosexuality. Could perhaps make a blog like this containing any rational discussion of the age of consent likely illegal in Hungary.
Why can't 'Conservatives' see that paedohysteria and the domestic abuse industry is actually tearing families apart and undermining respect between generations, particularly fostering hatred and mistrust from the young against the old?
"Were the couples "intergenerational", and were the girls 14 year olds? I don't think so. It is only reported that the couples were from abroad."
Yet Holocaust22 somehow turns this case into a general 'proof' that Islam is pro male sexuality. I think he needs to take a course in basic reasoning skills.
'Conservatives' throughout history (up until recently) approved of older men marrying young teenage girls, or even 12 year olds. Yet Holocaust22 wouldn't infer from that fact that Conservatism is the way forward for Male Sexualists.
There is no solution in 'Left' or 'Right'. We're caught in a pincer movement between the feminist dominated 'Left' and the Conservative 'Right' (increasingly influenced or even dominated by femiservatives) who both are against the idea of older men having sex with younger females.
No 'solution' will be found until you wake up and realize that the fundamental problem is that men having sex with younger females is never, ever going to be allowed by the vast majority of women, simply because turkeys never vote for Christmas.
I think this ties in well with the last comment. This clip attacks wokeness, but then gets disappointing in the way a lot of commentary that seem promising does. Youtube: Awaken With JP channel, "Victoria's Secret Has Gone Woke".
It was all pretty level level headed satirical stuff until he criticized Victoria's Secret for using a 17-y-o model as a "brand ambassador", Eileen Gu (Spelling? I'll look her up straight after this lol). "Paedophile" and "child" of course.The left think the right are promoting paedophilia and vice versa, yet both are hysterically anti-paedophile-at least when it comes to men with girls or much younger women.
I also saw an article in the Daily Mail about Victoria's Secret and how they're against ageism-except for one particular kind, which will go unmentioned. These people don't have a trace of self awareness.
Where did holocaust22 say he thinks teen girls stay that way forever, or should be replaced just because they got older? Of course people get old. Advocacy for intergenerational relationships is not the same thing as being deluded or badly behaved. We just want to get rid of unreasonable punishments. People break up for any number of reasons at all ages, many of which are dick moves for other reasons too, but none of which should be criminalized. I guess the conservatives offered a sort of compromise where they allow young brides but crack down on adultery, and perhaps this is the best we can do. Then again, Islam allows four wives, so if you space them out you CAN have a young one for most of your life :)
Yes, Eileen Gu, 17 years old, is the new face of Victora's Secret, now in June 2021!
I am stunned that this slipped through the cracks and am sure it will be reversed and apologized for profusely.
Oh no, they sexualized Marilyn Monroe:
Multiple protests, a popular petition, a legal action and a small fire have not been enough to stop the city of Palm Springs from installing a supersized and "hyper-sexualized" Marilyn Monroe sculpture on a public site next to the Palm Springs Art Museum.
On Sunday, city council members presided over a dedication ceremony for the sculpture by late artist Seward Johnson known as "Forever Marilyn" -- or #metoomarilyn by those who find it exploitative -- that shows the actress with her white dress flying up above her waist. There was no damage from the fire, which took place 10 days ago when welders were working on sculpture and some bubble wrap started smoking.
Can't sexualize a sex symbol, can we? Is there any sexual sign that won't be protested against these days?
Multiple protests, a popular petition, a legal action and a small fire
Petitions are popular these days - even monkeys are able to press a keyboard key!
There is a horrifying new law coming in New Zealand which takes it one step further than anything seen before:
The Sexual Violence Bill, currently before Parliament, looks to increase convictions by effectively revoking the defendant’s right to silence, and prohibiting types of evidence tending to indicate innocence. As an academic, qualified forensic physician, and expert witness in sexual cases (for both sides), I am concerned by the rationale for this bill.
What the fuck!? Did I read that correctly?
Another good blog post about the situation there:
Instead of respect for science, common sense and the presumption of innocence, we are in an unhappy age of Salem witch-trial-style hysteria that has now given us the Sexual Violence Bill. There are numerous very ugly consequences that will flow from the bill and while conviction and imprisonment on a false allegation is of course the worst outcome – and an outcome this bill will multiply – another collection of indignities has not received focus, being life as an accused person prior to and during the trial process. Indeed, even if acquitted, men can still expect to have survived their prosecutions at an often-crippling price.
The first problem in our present legal climate is that no man is ever safe – and he won’t be for the balance of his time on this earth. Countless defendants are older men who have led lives free of criminal convictions. It is not that older men are disproportionately inclined to offend sexually, but that in a country without a Statute of Limitations on these charges, senior citizens can suddenly be surprised by charges alleging offending decades earlier.
Once charged, though still (literally) legally innocent, the purgatory of life in limbo while facing a pending case can include being remanded in custody (i.e. jailed) during some or all of that time, which can put a man at grave disadvantage in preparing his defence, thereby of course increasing the probability of his conviction and return to jail. Better is to be on bail, but that may be no sweetheart deal either, since bail may come with repressive conditions – usually insisted upon by the prosecution – which may be so intrusive and unsettling that they can even sometimes destroy livelihoods. In one of my (domestic assault) cases, a bail condition ring-fenced my client from entering an entire city – the city where he lived and he where operated his business.
For lawyers too, defending sexual cases has become traumatic. Those lawyers who work through legal aid are disillusioned with the dismal pay and the heavy hand of a state under political pressure to produce more sexual convictions at any cost to their innocent clients – and to their own peace of mind and sense of justice. Many are refusing to take on such work. What then for those defendants, thrust into a terrifying world that once seemed inconceivable in an enlightened country like ours?
And those who are neither accused (yet) nor lawyers simply look away. This is why we need male sexualism. WAKE UP!
"Yet Holocaust22 somehow turns this case into a general 'proof' that Islam is pro male sexuality. I think he needs to take a course in basic reasoning skills."
I wonder why this guy holocaust22 would think a religion with a leader that married a 12 year old, and has intergenerational relationships in its texts, would think islam supports intergenerational relationships. So weird for him to come to that conclusion.
"Were the couples "intergenerational", and were the girls 14 year olds? I don't think so. It is only reported that the couples were from abroad."
Yes, she separated the couples because the wife was under the age of 18. It's in plain english.
"Støjberg served as Denmark's immigration minister from 2015 to 2019 and is accused of issuing an illegal order to separate asylum-seeking couples in 2016, where one of them is under the age of 18."
A quote directly from the article? lol
"Especially, as you in particular, are one of those aspergic ephebophiles who genuinely can't even conceive the the 14 year old wont stay 14 years old, and when you're still married to her at 30, 40, 50, will actually be 30, 40, 50, not 14 anymore, and you'll be pining for another 14 year old but you'll get stoned to death in the public square for adultery if you so much as look at another 14 year old in her hijab. It would be a 'dick move' anyway to dump a hot 14 year old just because she's turned 50"
I wouldn't be being stoned to death though, because I wouldn't cheat on my wife. I understand she's not going to stay 14 forever, and she will eventually become unattractive. That's fine. I'm still staying with her.
"If you're 18 or 19 Holocaust22, then fair enough, maybe you will mature in about 10 years time. But I'm pretty sure you're the same 'AB' guy who used to post the exact same type of comments and display the exact same anecodotal faulty reasoning time and time again on my blog ten years ago"
Ageism! Muahahaha. And mate, how many times do I have to tell you this. I'm not this guy you're talking about. And I've never posted on your blog, because the comments were always turned off for me. You told me before that guy AB didn't support lowering the age of consent. I've wanted the age of consent to be around 13 for like my entire life! I'm not AB! xD
Re: Eileen Gu. I haven't found any images of her in lingerie or anything else skimpy except for one bikini photo that's probably a g-string but is unconnected with Victoria's Secret-just her at the beach.
So, what is she actually doing for Victoria's Secret? Nothing that I can see.I don't know what is going on.
That Awaken With JP guy said that they could more easily sexualize her because she's Asian. I don't know what he's smoking, any more than I know what Ms Gu is actually doing in her work for Victoria's Secret. For that matter she's not even fully Asian but Eurasian, so wtf? He's a smart guy in other ways, but it's this feature of life in 2021 that even smart people's brains stop working when it comes to "paedophilia".
Re: New Zealand new law-terrifying and unbelievable, and no doubt trailblazing for other countries.
Despite the fact that it makes perfect sense as far as it goes, I sometimes doubt the STU theory is really the cause of what is going on. It's as if it's a juggernaut with a life of its own that takes over people's minds. It will go when it goes and in the meantime, only a handful of people will even be aware of its existence.
"Then again, Islam allows four wives, so if you space them out you CAN have a young one for most of your life :)"
OK. that's great Eivind and Holocaust22. All I'm saying is that if you're claiming to be the leader of a movement that doesn't even exist yet (and likely never will), and claiming to determine what basic tenets we should all follow to be part of it, then you should at least use some basic critical thinking skills.
For example, yes having multiple wives does sound good. But are either of you capable of basic mathematics? Do you understand that if one man has four wives, three men don't have any wives etc.?
Well I know that Holocaust22 is a 6ft4" stud and Standford post grad who picks up HB10s like a butterfly collector, but I'm sceptical that if Norway was suddenly turned into a traditional Islamic society overnight, that you Eivind would soon be finding yourself with four wives, even with your low standards. I think even 1,000 lb black mammas might be out of the question.
Men in places like Saudi Arabia and Syria do not have four wives. 0.01% of the male population (the ruling tribal families) have harems of young wives, while 90% of young males face the choice of lifelong inceldom or marrying their 18 year old inbred cousin with hairy lips. This is why millions of single males flock to Europe from Islamic countries in Africa and the Middle-East, in the search of pussy. This is why Islam created the myth of 72 virgins in paradise. It intentionally creates incel warriors who will die on the battlefield in order to get pussy. No matter how bad things are in Europe with feminism, for the average young male, things are much, much worse in Muslim societies.
Similarly to Holocaust22 and his humble brag that he doesn't understand how incels find it hard to get girlfriends because he always has a 'HB10' girl on his arm. It's basic mathematics sir. Unfortunately, there's not an unlimited supply of HB10 young women to go around. It's a zero sum game. You having a HB10 or a HB9 girlfriend means that somebody else has to settle for a HB8 etc. etc.
As regards your comment on Russia, maybe I'm being overly harsh, but you honestly don't come across to me as being very bright. Putin has been President of Russia for what is it - 20 years now or something like that? Just five years ago and Russia was (along with Japan) just about the only place left on Earth where the State could not arrest or imprison you for private possession of 'child porn'. PUAs flocked to Russia because the women were so beautiful, and because they opened their legs for charming foreigners, even foreigners 20 or 30 years older than them. Remember the hit single 'All The Things She Said'? This was a Russian fake lesbian duo consisting of two 14 year old Russian girls. Their manager who was 30 or something openly bragged of banging both of them (as I said, they were fake lesbians). I remember when they came to the UK to promote their new album and the manager asked schoolgirls in London to come in uniform to their promotion event so they could film a video for their next single. He got into trouble with the British police for that, but fired back saying the British were ridiculously prudish when it came to schoolgirl sex. The famous video of their hit single is actually a censored version of the Russian original to comply with Western 'child porn' laws. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8mGBaXPlri8
Feminists always go for the weakest link in the chain and ensure it becomes the strongest. This is why the Netherlands is the most paedohysteric nation on Earth just 20 years after having an age of consent of 12 and having a satellite TV channel devoted to 16 and 17 year old girls in hardcore sex. Even Putin can't resist the Sexual Trade Union, just like your Thai buddhists can't.
Point is, when I used to promote Russia, it was remarkably friendly to 'inter-generational' relationships. When I used to 'promote' alt-right figures, many of the leading alt-right figures were openly speaking out against paedohysteria and even the age of consent. Things change, and I appear to be the only person with a theoretical base that doesn't see the problem of 'Conservatism' or 'radical feminism' or 'Anglo-Saxon puritanism' but rather a global inevitablity that transcends politics and religion.
Thanks, Anonymous, for a very perceptive comment regarding Eileen Gu and the hysteria possessing that guy. That's how I see it as well. He isn't promoting the female sexual trade union, though there might be some influence since he's amplifying things he already heard. What he contributes himself is something far more insane, because a "trade union" or special interest for women is something anyone should be able to reason critically about without going insane, which is clearly impossible with this phenomenon for most people. Yes, "it's a juggernaut with a life of its own that takes over people's minds" -- a collective psychosis, but even that concept is inadequate to describe it.
No, this girl isn't posing in any sexy underwear as far as I can tell. She is in something called the Victoria's Secret Collective:
So proud to be part of the @victoriassecret collective, and incredibly excited to see how this dynamic and empowered group of women will help contribute to the future of such an iconic brand.
That's all it is. But the association of a role vaguely related to something sexy -> 17-year-old -> child -> pedophilia -> WE NEED TO EXPAND THE WITCH-HUNT! -> more associations and ravings about her supposedly being even more sexualized because she's Asian or whatever -- yeah, this is a juggernaut with a life of its own, and it afflicts men almost as much as women.
Dom Krauer said this earlier which I missed until now because it was overlooked in moderation:
"You post a comment about cheerleaders being blurred out of pictures for being too hot, straight after a comment denouncing porn and masturbation. As I said, you contradict yourself almost every time you express yourself."
Sigh. You still don't understand what porn is, do you? Porn is what men use to masturbate. Cheerleaders are not porn. Cheerleaders are real girls that you can have sex with -- I have even done so myself!
Why is it so fucking hard to understand that when I say porn/masturbation is bad, I don't mean it's bad to see girls as sex objects or "sexualize" them or any of that nonsense that feminists and religious zealots mean. I mean men waste their sexuality on pixels/images/fantasies rather than real women, and THAT is the problem, rather then anything whatsoever to do with being attracted in real life or how sexy they appear then (which is good, because then you are more likely to pursue them!). So unless you want to argue that men masturbate at football games or to CNN articles or high school yearbooks, cheerleaders have nothing to do with this. This was a story about real girls, not porn stars dressing up as cheerleaders either -- so why on earth should you associate it with porn and masturbation?! I'd say that's yet more evidence that you are so deranged by it that you can't even relate to real sex anymore. It is pathological to think of masturbation when you see a sexy girl. Porn is what is designed to entice you over in that maladaptive direction rather than think how you can pursue her or girls like her, which is why it is bad, but everyday news articles and yearbook pictures and such don't do this to healthy men. If they do this to you, you've got a problem you should work on by getting on the nofap wagon.
"Despite the fact that it makes perfect sense as far as it goes, I sometimes doubt the STU theory is really the cause of what is going on. It's as if it's a juggernaut with a life of its own that takes over people's minds. It will go when it goes and in the meantime, only a handful of people will even be aware of its existence."
I never said it doesn't have a 'life of its own', but the Sexual Trade Union is the driving force. @Eivind, I've always clearly stated that it was largely irrational and unconscious. You never even really read my blog did you? You certainly never understood sexual trade union 'theory'. Although by 'unintended consequences' you probably mean things like the female sex offender charade and the feminist criminalization of porn, which you somehow have reasoned is a good thing for men.
There are clearly unintended consequences from this having a 'life of its own'. One example is the tranny question. When leading members of the Sexual Trade Union end up getting death threats from tranny activists for denying that men with cocks are women, then yes, these are unintended consequences that shows the war on male sexuality has a life of its own. That doesn't disprove the fact that tranny and gay rights (and general 'woke' culture) emerged from a desire for feminists to subvert and criminalize normal male sexuality while appearing 'progressive' and 'tolerant' in the process. They just couldn't fully control the genie they (largely subconsciously) unleashed.
One more time, it's not a theory its a blatantly obvious fact. Again, EVERY SINGLE intelligent commentator outside our 'movement' who is able to see that paedohystria is suspect can clearly see that it is feminist/female sexual jealousy. Why can't we (except me)? Because clearly there is some kind of selective barrier that means any individual who raises his head above the parapet to call himself an 'activist' (rather than satirizing paedohysteria in the manner of for example a comedian like Chris Morris) has to be either aspergic or mentally ill in the first place.
We don't deny that female sexual jealousy is a factor. But the hysteria has now gotten so far out of hand that it no longer makes sense to think that motivation as the driving force.
Here's an analogy. Suppose the garbage collectors in your town are on strike because they feel underpaid and underappreciated. A real-life example of what a union or special interest group can do, and the limits of that model. People are able to reason about the merit of their grievances without going on insane rants to amplify them without being garbage collectors themselves like that YouTuber did on behalf of the Asia girl. And at some point before long, the stink of all the trash in the streets becomes unbearable. Sentiment turns against the strikers, who may get some of their more reasonable demands met, but not all and then some ad infinitum as is happening with sex crimes.
Why can't people notice the stink of sex hysteria and all the problems it leads to? Why can't they recognize their own insane reasoning in the service of making it worse? Why can't they see the garbage piled high even as it threatens to suffocate their very own lives? That is the question.
What I mean is that, if the girl in the couple is under 18 and the husband 25 or even 30, it is not "intergenerational".
I read somewhere that possess of CP in Russia is only forbidden if the possess is with a view to resale. Can anybody confirm?
Depends on the definition of generations, which is one of those things that get distorted the same way "child" does to include 17-year-olds. A real child is not the same generation as an adult, but when we reduce the difference to one second, you can have an intergenerational relationship between a 17 and 18-year-old.
By the way, I watched this interesting video on YouTube regarding the philosophical question, Are generations real?
Mostly about the "named" generations such as Millenials and Baby Boomers, but I think also a subtle way to break down intergenerational taboos.
Another male sexualist killed by the American government. https://indianexpress.com/article/explained/john-mcafee-story-life-anti-virus-software-politics-suicide-7373633/
When his compound was originally raided, it is alleged that they found him in bed with a 17 year old girl. Although given that the Sexual Trade Union has somehow managed to turn sex with a 17 year old girl into a paedophilia slander, perhaps they were just trying to blacken his name. In any case, he certainly chased younger women.
Like Epstein, probably another billionaire libertarian who came across Eivind's blog looking to fund a pro male sexuality movement, and then left scratching his head at all the female sex offender posts and calls to 'legislate' the evils of pornography.
"I read somewhere that possess of CP in Russia is only forbidden if the possess is with a view to resale. Can anybody confirm?"
No, as I said, that was the case, but they changed the law last year or in 2019. This was part of a bill that imposed mandatory life sentences on any male convicted of sex with a minor. The lawmaker who pushed for the bill was, of course, a woman. Of all the femihags I've seen she was quite the ugliest. I wont even try to search for her picture again because seeing it the last time required brain bleach afterwards.
Yes, I heard the sad news about John McAfee’s alleged suicide in Spanish prison. Which he had tolerated just fine since he was arrested last year and even having a blast at times judging by the tweets that he was apparently able to put out from there (and I think genuine) on the account I had followed for years:
But the decision of Spanish courts to extradite him to the United States where he would likely spend the rest of his life in worse prisons pushed him to suicide, we are told. Maybe, and it is at least plausible. Countless men have chosen death over that fate and yes, he was a male sexualist judging by his love for much younger women. That doesn’t stop the right-wing conspiracy lunatics from taking him as evidence for their pedohysterical delusions, though. They are now pushing the story that McAfee was going to expose Epstein’s circle in American court and therefore had to die like Epstein himself, probably ordered by the head witch Hilary Clinton herself (it’s funny how all the most powerful people are total pedophiles at the same time as not lifting a finger to stop the legislative tide against themselves). So says Jim Stone, who is so radioactive in terms of having actual clout against the powers that be and therefore being targeted for censorship that I won't link his blog here -- a smart guy in many (engineering, practical) ways, but on pedophilia and many other things like blaming the Jews for everything or how the election was stolen and the covid vaccine is genocide he draws a total blank. He also says McAfee obtained drone footage from Epstein's mansion, where a flood-stained mattress is supposed to prove bloody pedosatanic rituals, and he even believes there is a market for adrenochrome from enslaved and murdered children. Pedohysteria is so versatile that if I were to die under murky circumstances, they no doubt would have found a way to make me a poster boy for them too. I DID NOT SUICIDE EITHER. McAffee actually had that message tattooed on his arm -- “$WHACKD.” Doesn’t prove he didn’t change his mind under duress, and in any case he is a victim of the cruelty of the American government, guilty of nothing worse than refusing to file tax returns (so not even lying about his income), but he was a very strong and resilient man, a true hero of our times. RIP.
The lawmaker who pushed for the bill was, of course, a woman. Of all the femihags I've seen she was quite the ugliest.
Yes, but she doesn't own the Parliament, so a lot of men must have taken part in the adoption of that law, too.
I'm glad you liked my comment, and that you did some extra research and got into the details of Ms Guo's involvement with VC. I might have known it wasn't going to be anything encouraging. Dull, dull, dull.
Interesting info from Dom Krauer about Tatu and the problems the manager had in Britain-again, not very surprising.
See the latest from Australian female MRA Bettina Arndt on y/tube about new affirmative consent laws in New South Wales.
In case you're wondering, Arndt breaks the mold. She isn't one of those everything-but-paedohysteria MRA's. She criticized widespread credence given to a couple of women in Australia in the last 6 month or so about how their claims of abuse as 15-y-o girls.She simply commented they were willing partners or even seducers of the men. She's a psychologist and I suspect she understands better than most that most of what passes for sexual abuse of minors is a load of nonsense.
Bettina Arndt deserves honorable mention then. Very good points. A bit on her background:
"Bettina Mary Arndt AM (born 1 August 1949) is an Australian writer and commentator who specialises in sex and gender issues. Starting as a sex therapist and feminist, she came to public prominence in the 1970s, establishing a career in publishing and broadcasting as well as writing several books. In the last two decades she has abandoned feminism and attracted controversy with her social commentary and her views on sexual abuse, domestic violence and men's rights advocacy."
So a 71-year-old woman who used to be a feminist is the only notable MRA? It's just her and the nominally existent male sexualists left to oppose the sex laws? The juggernaut is so powerful it is surreal. No trade union can vaporize all resistance like that.
In other news, French prosecutors only want to give a murderess one year in prison (already served, or else even that would be too much) because she claims abuse ("raped" in the new sense of word by her stepfather from the age of 12, which she enjoyed so much that she married him and stayed married to endure much more alleged abuse for many years until she killed him with premeditation; why can't these women be expected to leave instead?):
So claiming "abuse" now very near gives women license to kill, so little are men worth.
Honorable mention to Sean Carroll for doing an entire podcast with a criminologist without mentioning sex crimes. When they started talking about how crime went online during the pandemic (but decreased on the streets), both of them actually managed to avoid what an idiot would have done and include sex crimes in that. Sex crimes cannot “go online” by their very nature. If someone defrauds you out of $1000, that is an equal crime online as stealing it from your wallet, but we need to resist the idea that the feminists can have a sexual equivalent. “Grooming” a minor into masturbating on cam is NOT sexual abuse, just sorry self-abuse by the wanker. Here is the podcast:
And I recommend listening to many more of Sean Carroll’s podcasts as well, where I have yet to run into any antisex hysteria. This latest episode is also very amusing and shocking for how rap lyrics are used as evidence in court so prosecutors can have their mass-incarceration of especially Black men. I do feel my white privilege here, because if they used that tactic on me I should be convicted of every unsolved cop-killing :) And Johnny Cash should have been imprisoned for "I shot a man in Reno just to watch him die" etc. -- but that simply doesn't happen outside of rap.
"The lawmaker who pushed for the bill was, of course, a woman. Of all the femihags I've seen she was quite the ugliest.
Yes, but she doesn't own the Parliament, so a lot of men must have taken part in the adoption of that law, too."
But what does this mean (literally hitting my head against the wall)? We should ignore the fact that 90% of the lobbying for anti-sex laws is by ugly, usually older women? Because male politicians are useful idiots and that feminists and femiservatives have created peaedohysteria and it is so powerful that no male politician just about anywhere in the world would dare to vote against a law 'cracking down on paedophiles', not least because it would cost him the votes of women that decide nearly every election?
It's true that the Nazis could never have carried out the Holocaust without the German population. In fact, without millions of willing and able Poles, Ukrainians, Latvians etc, many or most of them who never regarded themselves as Nazis.
But I know for a fact, that no Jew on Earth, no anti-racism campaigner, no non-aspergic person who wishes to never see the Holocaust repeated, would use the logic - 'but the Nazis couldn't have done what they did without millions of non-Nazis. It's therefore wrong to blame the Nazis. The idea that the Nazis committed the Holocaust is an interesting theory and makes some sense, but I prefer Eivind Bergsteins 'Nocebo over-criminalization of the German political dissident charade theory as a defective auto-immune disorder caused by wanking' theory. People were wrong to fight the Nazis in World War 2. They should instead have campaigned for the collapse of Industrial civilization and the elimination of every policeman on the planet, while foregoing masturbation and criminalizing the Talmud'.
Fifty years the 'rational' approach to anti-sex laws has been tried. You yourself admit it's not entirely rational and has a 'life of it's own'. But onward we go, like clueless autists hoping that somehow society will be swayed by the likes of Holocaust22 leaving comments on YouTube videos claiming that intergenerational relationships are seen as natural in certain cultures.
We need to flip it around. It's impossible to convince society through rational argument that prostitution is ok, that a 15 year old girl is not harmed by sex with an older man. Not when feminists have so successfully normalized the 'abuse' and 'exploitation' narrative. Instead, we point out the motives of the people responsible for forming the narrative in the first place. The mind blowingly obvious motivations that are as clear as day to anybody but us.
I recently heard a story about Nazi concentration camp with only five guards present over Christmas. This was possible because the prisoners policed themselves. Don't know if true, but it certainly describes the power relation between feminists and men. Five feminists can easily control an entire concentration camp of fake sex offenders, and possibly just one in the legislature is enough. But we are forgetting that half the world was fighting the Nazis, while the feminist juggernaut is unopposed globally, so the analogy doesn't quite work. There is something far more sinister going on than one group controlling another. In any other persecution except possibly the height of witch-hunts, the victims would have snapped out of it pretty soon when they realized there are only so few guards, all of them much weaker than the average man.
And yes, Valérie Bacot walks free just like prosecutors wanted. Imagine how coddled you have to be to get a murder prosecution which aims to set you free right after trial, while there is no end to the push for more draconian sex laws. That men don't seem to mind this state of affairs is a failing that we have to look for within.
"But onward we go, like clueless autists hoping that somehow society will be swayed by the likes of Holocaust22 leaving comments on YouTube videos claiming that intergenerational relationships are seen as natural in certain cultures."
I mean, I set twitter on fire, got my message out to thousands of people, had my posts shared all over multiple twitter accounts, and had people from armenian ethnic tribes messaging me to thank me for arguing in favor of lowering the AoC. I imagine at least 10 thousand people saw my posts. That's pretty good imo for one person. What else am I suppose to do lmao? I'm just a dude sitting here with a computer.
Anyways, I wacked off 3 times yesterday, and felt like absolute shit. Time to get back on nofap, starting today. I already feel better now, and have some ayurvedic medicine to recover from the effects of over-masturbation. Over the next 5 days my motivation to do shit is going to increase and increase. Gonna be working on a guitar cover of Motley Crue, all in the name of rock, to share with some thai friends on social media.
(she's only 15, but she's the reason I can't sleep) ;)
Eivind, you ever notice how much your motivation increases on nofap? At around day 4 I'm filled with motivation to practice martial arts, study guitar, and learn new languages. But as soon as I start masturbating too much, I don't even have the motivation to breathe. I turn into a zombie.
Dr Sudhir Bhola, an Ayurvedic medicine doctor, talking about how ancient india use to prevent masturbation. Teenage girls use to marry older men at around 12-5 years olds, to prevent over-masturbation, and single motherhood. A teenage girl has sexual desire, and if she doesn't express it in a committed relationship with an older man she likes, it leads to all sorts of problems.
"These disorders generally occurred due to late marriages. Late marriage leads to a lot of disorders. Earlier, when our forefather used to marry at the age of 13 or 14 years, there was no need for masturbation. Ample sexual activity was taking place. There was no space for any kind of sexual disorder. These days even in the females, there would be many concerns such as discharges, leucorrhoea, Polycystic Ovary Disease (PCOD), and many other disorders of their reproductive system"
Traditional wisdom lost in time.
Yes, for teenage boys not to masturbate, they need to be sexually active, and society needs to facilitate this. Instead we have this insane situation where it is claimed that sex is bad for them and masturbation is fine. Two insane beliefs working together to make the absolute worst situation. But if we cannot change the antisex bigotry, then boys still need to be told they should not masturbate. Nocturnal emissions will take care of what is strictly physically necessary, so they will be okay, but it will be frustrating, which is worth it to prevent harming their sexuality.
I don't know of medical evidence for PCOD due to lack of sexual activity and I don't make strong claims of other benefits besides the sexual ones from nofap for boys either, but those may well exist and provide further reasons beyond the supreme sexual importance of dissuading masturbation in males. Though I don't doubt exist in many cases, we don't want to promise other advantages that might cause boys and men to doubt nofap when they don't materialize. The sexual reasons are more than enough and ALWAYS present. Just the opportunity cost of lost sexual opportunities and drive should make you scared shitless of porn and masturbation.
Interesting blog post by John Michael Greer, the former archdruid, about Victorian attitudes to masturbation and sex:
"During the second half of the nineteenth century, throughout the English-speaking world, the great majority of educated opinion held that sex was the source of all human evil, and that sexual acts were at best filthy animal practices and at worst an infallible source of ruin that dragged not only the participants but all of society into utter degradation of body and mind. This was the era, remember, when physicians insisted in all seriousness that masturbation would cause you to sprout hair on your palms and go insane.
That bizarre belief points straight to the source of these collective neuroses, because of course hair on the palms in traditional European folklore is the classic mark of the werewolf, the man who becomes an animal. At the root of the problem was Charles Darwin’s writings on evolution, which delivered a body blow to the self-confidence of Victorian intellectuals. Used to thinking of themselves as a little less than the angels, they suddenly found themselves only a little more than the gorillas, and the thought that they might slip the rest of the way into a purely animal existence haunted their nightmares. The werewolf, a fixture of the romantic fiction of the time, made a great metaphor for that fear; the physicians who warned young men about hairy palms probably weren’t conscious of the metaphor, which made it all the more powerful in its time."
Which is to say the Victorians were also deluded about masturbation similar to what I call the wanker’s delusion, but at least they came to the right conclusion. They told boys not to masturbate for ostensibly sex-negative reasons. Today we tell boys they can masturbate all they want because sex is good. Which is a lie. This society will literally lock women up for having sex with young boys, being the most sex-hostile society the world has ever seen. Today’s hypocrisy is just as strong, but in the opposite direction and sadly with the wrong advice and much less sex. If had to choose between the two, I would definitely go back to when people pretended to be against sex but lived the other way:
"Of course people still had sex. Victorian London, to judge by the available evidence, had more sex workers than any other city in Europe, and the great cities of Victorian America were almost as well provided. Read the fiction or, for that matter, the newspapers of the time and you’ll find yourself in the middle of a torrent of sexual activities wrapped up in just enough euphemisms to give them an additional jolt of prurient interest. The Victorian era was not so much a time of heightened morality as one of heightened hypocrisy or, not quite so nastily, of a vastly widened gap between the ideals people thought they should embrace and the lives they actually led. Most Victorians in the English-speaking world really did believe that sex was beastly and that a life of strict moral purity was much better; the fact that they couldn’t live up to these beliefs didn’t make the beliefs themselves any less earnestly held."
Now people pretend to be sex-positive while they sit there as isolated wankers. They say sex is everywhere and good while in truth it has never been more persecuted and practiced so little while people instead resort to porn and masturbation. Only we the male sexualists embrace real sex-positivity, which means being anti porn and masturbation.
"Teenage girls use to marry older men at around 12-5 years olds, to prevent over-masturbation, and single motherhood."
Ok for girls but what about the "older men" ? How were they supposed to cope till they were old enough to marry a young bride ?
— Too much masturbation is certainly unhealthy (like too much food or drink).
— It seems obvious that the real thing is better than wasting your sex drive on fantasies.
— It is certainly easier to get allies with nofap than with "MAP uber alles". But what sort of allies ? For what purpose ?
NOFAP is very defensible indeed. What is very objectionable is putting this creed at the forefront when more and more young or older people lead a wretched sex life for lack of safe opportunities. What is the point of whipping up their sexual desire when there's no realistic outlet ? It should be enough to plead for a balanced attitude (don't fap if it encroaches on your sex drive) and aim at the essential by far : the "sexual holocaust" of men.
Amelie, you might as well argue that unemployed and retired people shouldn't get healthcare and honest information about how to be healthy! Nofap is basic male sexual health, that one must address first before figuring out one's success in life. It is a prerequisite for having a good life, and when you don't even want to tell them about it, you don't know if they would live up to their potential or remain the losers you assume they are.
It is amazing but true to think Victorians are our real-life role models. Not in ideology, but in practice they are. Even their advice to boys regarding masturbation will work today. I made the case myself that masturbation leads to blindness:
And it is certainly a sort of insanity. I don't have a truthful justification for saying it will turn you into a werewolf, however, since that metaphor plays into the wanker's delusion that it makes you more sexual, so I would advice against promoting the idea that masturbation will cause hair to grow on palms.
Well, since it's becoming a matter of faith ...
Why not assert : masturbation makes you blind but it might be an asset, look (!) at Stevie Wonder , Ray Charles etc... ?
"Amelie, you might as well argue that unemployed and retired people shouldn't get healthcare and honest information about how to be healthy! "
"Nofap is basic male sexual health" This is an assertion not a demonstration. Same as Nobooze etc...
The ideology lies in the "no" , the prohibition against the moderation, the absolute (truth) against the relative.
Not a matter of faith, but literal blindness to female beauty. Read the post. Stevie Wonder and Ray Charles could still love women because they didn't have this problem, which is worse than the kind of blindness measured by ophthalmologists.
I think the Victorians probably didn't heed the advice against masturbation more than they did other antisex lectures. But they didn't have that much porn, so it was self-limiting. The rise of Internet porn is what has suddenly made nofap deadly relevant. Boys growing up today need nofap to save their sex lives. Unlike all previous generations who could only marginally benefit, this advice isn't just an optional curiosity anymore like the old stories that sound comical to us. Now we have teenage boys becoming impotent from porn, which is a whole other reality that is heartless to dismiss. It is a bona fide health concern that most doctors deny because they are indoctrinated with the dogma that masturbation cannot possibly be bad. They will try everything else first, pills and so on and even when all that fails they usually deny that porn/masturbation can be the problem.
Booze is a serious problem, but not comparable because the vast majority can handle it, which means the culture as a whole can handle it. Pornography, not historically but now as provided by high tech, exploits a much bigger weakness in male sexual neurology, as if everyone were alcoholics, in which case we simply wouldn't be able to tolerate alcohol as a culture. That is the case with porn. It is a zero-day weakness exposed by new technology that men need external protection from, if not by legislation then at least at the level of strong self-help advice that I give since they are powerless to deal with it from within. Probably we need shame and morality to help too, even myths of the hairy palms type or whatever would actually scare them -- which is hard to imagine when impotence won't, so maybe there is no way around legislation after all.
"so maybe there is no way around legislation after all."
that's a goal that can be achieved pretty soon. It's the next step in the feminist agenda. Since prostitution is rape, porn is the filming of rape. It should be "abolished".
You can have porn available and choose not to look at it. You can wank or drink or drive a fast car and control your speed.
You have absolutely no proof that porn or fap are evil to the extent you claim. It's a credo. But that credo is so strong that you could team up with the worst ennemies of sexual freedom to defend it. In spite of the excellent and rational points you make on everything else.
"Not a matter of faith, but literal blindness to female beauty."
Why should an occasional wanker be blind to female beauty ? He probably faps off to more beautiful women than he would get in the real world (as far as the sight is concerned)
"this problem, which is worse than the kind of blindness measured by ophthalmologists."
Really ? Cool off. Think it over. Imagine yourself blind to everything. Aren't you getting carried away ?
Take a look at the research that Gary Wilson collected over his lifetime:
You can argue with aspects of that, but it is certainly much more than a credo.
Even your specifically "scary" point here is not so scary in context. It will hardly make it worse for men who care about real sex if porn is criminalized. If instead of committing the crime of "watching rape" because the porn stars are paid and therefore raped by feminists standards, he pays a woman to have sex, he isn't any more criminal than he is already. And since he should already be doing this instead for his own good, the feminists are helping him by pushing him in that direction by criminalizing porn. The feminists are shooting themselves in the foot here, which is obviously good for us. I agree we can have porn available and not use it and this is the preferred solution, but I don't see a reason to resist the criminalization of porn in the context that most of sexuality has already been criminalized, because at this point the feminists are chasing mirages that will have the opposite of their intended effect.
"he pays a woman to have sex, he isn't any more criminal than he is already"
That's for the feminists to decide. If they criminalise porn, they will over-criminalise prostitution. There's no shooting in the foot...
Moreover, IMO, hard core prostitution (street hookers) is more disgusting than porn. You're having sex with someone who doesn't t like you for money whereas porn models usually have sexy male partners. But, as a rule, I think prostitution is useful ans should never be criminalised.
Extreme cases just to prove one's point. That's what the feminists do... Sorry...
I think a majority of people and a vast majority of women will agree with you on porn and fap.
Of course they won't agree because real sex is good but because men are pigs. Does it make a difference ? That's how majorities work.
When they get to power they soon vaporize those who shared their plans for the wrong reasons.
Since you will never get many allies on nofap + no AOC, you will have to drop the noAOC and be part of a solid majority with the outcome here above mentioned... It's sad.
They already have power. Criminalization is still increasing but curiously more so for porn and online "grooming" than actual relationships. Which ironically makes it easier to get away with the latter, and that particular trend is not something we should oppose. Imagine if the army now hunting porn and posing as fake victims for groomers were to fight real sex instead? It can get so much worse, but not via more laws against porn and masturbation.
It's just because there are less and less people who dare break the AOC laws so they have to create new crimes to fill the jails.
You've noticed that "predator catchers" don't pose as 8 yo but as 14 yo, otherwise they wouldn't catch any prey...
Some men think they can get away with meeting a horny fully equipped nearly legal 14/15 yo on the internet and they end up with an overweight 40 yo cop handcuffing them...
I think you underestimate how much more damage they could already have done to male sexuality and relations with young girls if they didn't bark up the wrong tree. Law enforcement is a limited resource, even with all the vigilante help that this subject gets. If they had snapped out of the wanker's delusion and decided not to pursue porn anymore, all those resources could be devoted to for example grooming girls into revealing that they have had sex with older men. Then these older boyfriends could be hunted down based on this info. They don't do this at all; instead they pursue men who either only ever looked at porn or haven't even tried to meet a girl before falling victim to a sting operation. If the goal were to crack down on sex, this is a horribly wasteful way to do it, and we don't want to help them get better ideas. Let them have their moronic idea that porn is bad for the reasons they think, while male sexualists agree it's bad but for diametrically opposite reasons.
I missed this when it was going on last year, but looking more into Bettina Arndt this is well worth reading:
She is truly the most notable MRA at the moment, or even the only one besides me who does it under her real name and in the true sense of fighting for sexual freedom. Of course the Australians want to cancel her from that, taking away some honors award which I don't know if succeeded:
This year, men's rights commentator Bettina Arndt became a Member (AM) in the General Division of the Order of Australia. Ms Arndt said her interview with a convicted paedophile had nothing to do with her Australia Day honour. Grace Tame has spoken exclusively to the ABC about her request to the Governor-General Grace Tame told the ABC she wanted Ms Arndt stripped of her AM for "significant service … to gender equity" because she had publicly sympathised with the man who repeatedly raped Grace when she was 15 years old.
Yes, of course calling out false rape (and "pedophilia" with a 15-year-old, lol) will get you that now. Good response by Bettina Arndt:
"The question that remains for me is whether there is any room in this conversation for talking to … young girls about behaving sensibly and not exploiting their seductive power to ruin the lives of men," Ms Arndt said in the video.
We know the answer is there is absolutely no room for that anymore. As she puts it in her Twitter tagline: Once it was sex that was taboo, now it’s men’s issues. Help Bettina achieve gender equity through advocacy for men. #MenToo
The Turkish professor we were talking about earlier has been fired from his university because of his statements. Truth that speaks against political correctness is not even accepted in universities, apparently:
Absolutely true. Teenage girls are superwomen, or goddesses depending on how poetically and worshipfully you want to put it. But nothing less than superwomen, for sure, even in objective medical terms. That a professor should be fired for stating this truth is... what we expect by now anywhere in the world, so invincible has feminism become.
Meanwhile there are no supermen, but someone like John McAfee comes close. He died with a 37 years younger wife and reportedly 47 children, which is even more impressive than I realized when he lived. Now, that is something to aspire to as ultimate goals, though I will be very happy just to have a few children with a woman 20 years younger or so.
"Look at the requests they make! Never about meeting in real life, just all sorts of often degrading deranged fantasies to "help them cum." That boy is probably literally surrounded by hot girls and he can't notice them! This is real blindness to real beauty and beautiful experiences they should be seeking, even though their optic machinery actually works, arguably worse than the kind of blindness that gets you an official handicap because it prevents normal loving relationships and reproduction that many blind men have just fine."
Yet you're the same person who thinks boys surrounded by hot girls are 'lucky' if they get seduced by a 1,000lb black mamma.
"it prevents normal loving relationships and reproduction"
Sounds like you're creeping ever closer to saying even casual sex is wrong.
I wonder what the likes of Hannah Wallen, TyphonBlue and Paul Elam's other 'lovely looking sheilas' think of Bettina Arndt?
I remember reading that if a nuclear war happened, experts say that the most likely group to survive would be teenage girls. Nature has made them near indestructible, as they carry the very survival of the human species in their ripe young bodies.
Yet ugly, middle-aged women have created the myth that teenage girls are the most vulnerable and easily harmed. So much as a kiss on their cheeks from an older man would cause them to crumble and be disabled for the rest of their lives.
I wonder why those ugly, middle-aged feminists and femiservatives have done this? I just can't think why? Maybe Jack has a theory? Anyone?
"I remember reading that if a nuclear war happened, experts say that the most likely group to survive would be teenage girls. Nature has made them near indestructible, as they carry the very survival of the human species in their ripe young bodies."
Only if their ripe young bodies gets them the protection of sturdy lustful males…
"I wonder why those ugly, middle-aged feminists and femiservatives have done this?"
I have a clue but wouldn't like to spoil the content of your new book !
Jeffrey Epstein tribute video. This was blocked in the USA for 3 days, and 30 days worldwide.
They are making Epstein Sigma Male memes now
This has 188k views and 10k likes? xD
"Instead, we point out the motives of the people responsible for forming the narrative in the first place."
What is the motive of Mike Pence (and other male conservatives) when he created the PROTECT Act, which is responsible for the harshest penalties on earth for "child porn" and criminalizes all sex with girls under 16 anywhere in the world, even if it's legal in the country you're in?
I say the motive for pedohysteria is the same whether it's a male or female, liberal or conservative - jealousy. What we are witnessing is a global phenomenon of jealousy.
The PROTECT act and the thermal PROTECTion system on the space shuttle Columbia.
A microgravity research mission. Leaving Earth to do things in space you can't do on Earth. Just like leaving the USA to engage in sexual activity you can't do in the USA. On your way home, you're in trouble this time. Imbolc sacrifice by feminism to celebrate banning sex tourism.
Kobe Bryant, #24, overtakes Michael Jordan, #23. United States Code 2423 is the PROTECT act.
The PROTECT act signed into law April 30 2003 88 days after Feb 1 Columbia shuttle disaster. 88 lines about 44 women.
Dom Krauer revealed yet another height of wanker's delusion when he said:
"Sounds like you're creeping ever closer to saying even casual sex is wrong."
No, porn/masturbation is the enemy of casual sex as much as any kind of real sex. Actually more so, since wanking in a relationship will weaken it but not immediately destroy it. Casual opportunities you will often miss entirely out on if you don't put in max effort, so nofap is even more important for men who want to be promiscuous. And I will never, ever say promiscuity isn't incredibly rewarding to men, because that is obviously one of the most salient facts about male sexuality.
Yesterday I was out filming for the documentary that NRK is making about men's issues, so that is coming. I don't remember ever talking so much in a day, certainly not on camera, and it includes a new kind of exciting performance by me which I won't include spoilers for here. With all this material though, they can cut it in many different ways to edit the context, not necessarily constrained by the messages I wanted to convey. But that's just one of the risks you have to live with I guess if you want to be a star activist.
I assume that Holocaust22 is responsible for this : https://www.freespeechtube.org/user/Freetheteens69
If so, then well done! Maybe I was wrong about you. If we had maybe even a dozen of us doing stuff like that, then it might eventually be able to spawn some kind of movement.
I was reading on Quora the answers to a question on whether it was true that Charlie Chaplin was evil for dating young girls. Most of the paedocrites agree that he was, and there was one Bangladeshi born feminist woman, the embodiment of femislamization, stridently asserting that he was a paedophile for marrying a 15 year old, and getting hundreds of upvotes. She claims that teenage girls are more likely to develop problems than pregnant women 20-24, and somebody pointed out that this is a myth - it's correlation (malnutrition etc) regarding the low income demographic that in today's world constitutes most pregnant teenage girls. I'm going to create a Quora account tonight and give it to her back there, educate her and the paedocrites about 'Sexual Trade Union theory', lol.
"With all this material though, they can cut it in many different ways to edit the context, not necessarily constrained by the messages"
Well I hope it turns out well Eivind, but I think any of us here could tell you (and several of us did) that you're likely about to be the victim of a hitjob. I think the 'best' you can hope for is that they show you talking about wankers and how NoFap has given you King Kong testosterone levels etc.
Personally, I would back up this site and also order in enough food and essentials for at least a week or so, just in case.
Well, we did talk a lot about nofap too, so I am sure they will cover that, hopefully including a nice scene in a park where some hot babes inadvertently helped illustrate what we mean -- so perfect and unstaged that people will assume it was staged, lol. But we also talked about everything else, so there is no telling what they will emphasize or take out of context. It's nothing worse than I've said before though and the public didn't go crazy then -- only the cops did and they had no case then or now.
Eivind, another "female offender charade" for you to rant about:
Yes, there are no sex cults anymore, only sex crimes. Anything remotely to do with cultish practices, or recruitment to such, is already more than enough to define all sexual activity as rape and abuse. So no wonder Allison Mack got convicted for her role in that. And wow, 17 years in prison just for such missionary work, but that is also par for the course now.
I guess the traditional religions still feel safe from such persecution, but they shouldn't. The only difference between joining a sex cult and a Jesus cult is the sex (if that); otherwise they both seek to control your life, to which your consent can never count if these standards were to be applied equally. How come going on a diet of 500 to 900 calories per day is evidence of crime in a sex cult, for example, while fasting in Christianity or Islam isn't? All about the sex rays making everything they touch criminal, the crimen exceptum again which doesn't need a crime, just sex to make everything else too criminal.
What is a nun if not a voluntary slave for the church? What makes that okay, but a woman wanting to serve as a "sex slave" for a master in a sex cult is not? How come recruitment for the former is okay, but the latter can get you 17 years? Again, the antisex bigots have no self-awareness, only psychotic hysteria that sexuality incriminates everything it touches. As to the charges of racketeering and blackmail, churches have tax-exempt status, lol, and will also try to make your life difficult if you leave. And the branding on their bodies, much like fraternities do with impunity except more humane because done with a cauterizing pen instead of the crude irons they use, is made out to be a heinous crime because Raniere's initials were marked near the women's bikini lines... The sex rays strike again to make otherwise permissible practices horrible crimes due to the remotest association with sex.
Once again it should be clear that we are dealing with a behemoth rather than (or in addition to) a female sexual trade union. Women will brand ANYTHING on their bodies, left and right at the drop of a pen -- usually by tattoos, but same difference -- and society is complacent except if they pick the mere INITIALS of a "sex guru," then OMG it's heinous abuse and anyone associated with the cult must be thrown in prison! And I am the only one to even point out the absurdity of making a big deal out of those initials. That pure symbolism having to do with sex, however faintly remote, is enough that their minds go blank and the behemoth takes over.
With that, one more way to get laid is criminalized. They came for the johns, the PUAs and now sex gurus are history or in prison. If anything can still get you sex, you can be sure it won't be long before it is criminalized if it isn't already.
A rare victory for men's rights!
Bill Cosby will be released after the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania vacated his conviction and judgment of sentence.
Cosby not only impressed me with his defiance and refusal to show any "contrition" for his wrongful conviction, but also won the legal reality in the end just like I did. This is the way to do it when accused of bullshit crimes, gentlemen. Never give them ANY recognition at any stage even when all appears lost.
Bill Cosby is a great ambassador for men's rights!
One accuser, Victoria Valentino, said in a statement: "I am outraged! Outraged! Stunned! My stomach is in knots. The work that we have done to uplift women has been overturned by a legal glitch. We now have a serial predator on the street."
Of course her stomach is in knots. She had become accustomed to hearing "Yes", "Yes", "Yes" every single time she breathed a word, so when she hears "No" for once, a hysterical crisis is the natural reaction.
She's a total freak. And pretty hot. I'd smash
But one of the things that stands out to me is that accusation of blackmail. She had nude pictures of girls and threatened to release them publicly if they didn't put out? Like what. REEE. It triggers me so much that these people are always in the headlines, making us all look bad. Instead of relationships like Zhang Muyi and Akami Miki. Why are these people so obsessed with making us all look bad. We're not blackmailers, "groomers" or any nonsense. We just think teenage girls are hot. And now I'm reading about the guru in another article, stuff about him blackmailing people, and working with a hypnotist to manipulate people? I have no problem with this guy sleeping with 15 year olds of course, but gawd, asshats like this are such bad PR.
"I assume that Holocaust22 is responsible for this https://www.freespeechtube.org/user/Freetheteens69"
You got it
"If so, then well done! Maybe I was wrong about you. If we had maybe even a dozen of us doing stuff like that, then it might eventually be able to spawn some kind of movement."
The movement starts now! Ready to stir some shit up? I am ;)
"I'm going to create a Quora account tonight and give it to her back there, educate her and the paedocrites about 'Sexual Trade Union theory', lol"
How did it go? First time I posted on Quora I got banned within 5 minutes. I've got a burner account over on twitter if you want to go start some shit together. Lets get another wehuntedthemammoth article posted about us.
As for the "predator", on the picture he looks more like a poor elderly man who is barely able to walk. I hope this angry madame meets a hungry lion who has just run away from the zoo, so she will learn the difference...
"She claims that teenage girls are more likely to develop problems than pregnant women 20-24, and somebody pointed out that this is a myth - it's correlation (malnutrition etc) regarding the low income demographic that in today's world constitutes most pregnant teenage girls"
This is interesting. There are studies showing 15-19 year olds have less mortality rate than 20-24 year olds during childbirth. And then there are studies that show the opposite. The malnutrition is a good explanation for the few studies that show more mortality rate in 15-19 year olds (even though the mortality rate is minimal)
But what's really funny is that all the studies show 30+ year olds have more mortality rate than 15-25 year olds. So I guess that girl on Quora should be arguing to criminalize sex with girls 30+. lol. She's obviously full of it.
Yes, I don't endorse blackmail either, and nofappers usually don't even ask for nudes. His guru power must have been rather weak if he had to resort to that. What a ridiculous demonstration of lower value to tell women you need to be able to blackmail them in order to keep them in the cult! It shouldn't be criminalized either, because the harm to women of having their pictures shared is imaginary, something they can snap out of and shouldn't be encouraged to feel victimized by, plus in this case the blackmail material appears to have been willingly submitted for that purpose in order to cement their allegiance. And there is the greater philosophical question of whether ANY blackmail should be criminalized, called the blackmail PARADOX for a good reason. As opposed to extortion, where the thing threatened is a crime in itself, it is unintelligible what exactly makes the crime. For just blackmail, where you threaten something legal or permitted or something the women even appear to have been getting a thrill out of, I agree with the side which holds it shouldn't be a crime. That doesn't mean it's nice, of course. Unless it is some kind of kink that the "victim" enjoys, which frankly seems to be the case here based on what I've heard so far -- you know how much these things get distorted before they end up in an article about sex crimes prosecution -- blackmail by nude pictures should neither be practiced nor criminalized.
Another blow to humanity, with Nebraska now being the epicenter of the profoundest evil.
Christina Greer, 38, is sentenced to 64 to 102 years for being sweet to a 13-year-old boy and some other equally meaningless counts, which just going by the minimum 32 years before parole eligibility sets a solid new record in the female sex offender charade. In don't have the energy to process this in a more polished way right now than to note once again that I have never heard something so bizarre in my life. It is as if we do live in a simulation after all, where whoever controls it is constantly cranking up the dial for evil/madness/cruelty/stupidity/absurdity.
We caught this article at around the same time. I saw it a couple of hours ago, and made a small post about it on freespeechtube. It's incredibly sadistic. Like, this is actually hell. Wtf is going on.
I really hope that insane sentences like this cause some sort of revolt, and push-back. There's gotta be a massive revolution about to spark. How long can this insanity go on. Why are humans so stupid.
I'm going to examine Freetheteens69 on Free Speech Tube when I get the chance. Thanks H21.
I see, good post. So many barriers have been broken. First they needed to come up with the idea that child sexual abuse is worse than everything else including murder as you note the sentence reflects. Then they need to establish the delusion that teenagers are children. And finally that there is no difference between men or women having sex with them. Once you have all that, this just forms a new floor from which the hysterical mobs seek to push the punishment up further, having no awareness that there is anything draconian about it (just look at the comments to that article -- except this is hopefully a biased sample where the sane comments didn't make it through).
Actually there are some decent comments there when I click to see them all, but they are a small minority and limited to calling the sentence "extremely excessive," which only concerns level one of the delusions I referred to. For the first time it looks like even that last bastion of uncensored comment sections being dominated by envious men calling the boys lucky has fallen too... If so then yes, this is actual hell with no hope left.
"For the first time it looks like even that last bastion of uncensored comment sections being dominated by envious men calling the boys lucky has fallen too"
Until I came....
"Wow, this sounds like a great time. I'm sure these teenagers are severely "traumatized" from having consensual sex with a hot based mom. LOL. You people are OUT of your minds. WAKE UP. The magical number 18 is DELUSIONAL. You're all BRAINWASHED.
Consensual sex is not sexual assault!
My comments were all approved. I'm replying to everyone. Muahahaha. Lets see how long it takes to get banned.
Yikes. Look at this shit. This dude got a 5 lifetime concurrent sentence for asking for nudes from 15 year olds.
Nebraska - extremely "conservative" red state. The feminist "conservatives" are at it again. Basically, the USA is a draconian feminist loony bin.
"5 lifetime concurrent sentence for asking for nudes from 15 year olds."
Yes, it had to happen. Most countries don't have that level of punishment for the worst crimes, but this is the crimen excpetum we are talking about. Once you get into hairsplitting how many concurrent lifetimes they should get for the emptiest conceivable "sex crime," is it maxed out yet or do we need to move to consecutive lifetimes? And what then?
Americans are actually able to stomach this and let it pass as "justice," huh?
Found a better link since the one you gave doesn't work in Europe. Worth quoting this press release from the Department of Justice in full to take in the full official insanity. Let it sink in that this isn't a tabloid version, but the twisted language of those we entrust to govern us. Also I wonder what worse punishment they had threatened him with to get him to plead guilty? What made it worth not having a jury trial just so you can escape with life in prison instead? How could it not occur to him or at least his lawyer that maybe a jury would nullify this shit? This level has already become so normalized that they don't even consider that possibility?
Department of Justice
U.S. Attorney’s Office
Northern District of West Virginia
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Monday, November 25, 2019
Fairmont man sentenced to life for enticing minors
CLARKSBURG, WEST VIRGINIA – Quionte Jordan Crawford, of Fairmont, West Virginia, was sentenced to five life sentences to run concurrently for using his smart phone to convince minors to send explicit pictures and videos, U.S. Attorney Bill Powell announced.
Crawford, also known as “Kayla Stevens,” age 27, pled guilty to five counts of “Enticement of a Minor” in June 2019. Crawford admitted to using his smart phone to persuade five different teenage boys to send sexually explicit pictures and videos to him. The crimes took place from November 2017 to December 2018 in Marion County.
“The defendant’s conduct was reprehensible and directed at children. Unfortunately, technology provides many options for those with evil intent. The defendant will now spend the rest of his life in a place where he cannot continue the vile activities he orchestrated,” said Powell.
Crawford preyed on teenagers by using a fake persona and picture of a teenage girl to attract their attention and to coerce them into sharing the inappropriate pictures and videos. Crawford used threats at times to gain the explicit materials.
Crawford deftly, and sometimes cruelly, employed emotional and psychological coercion in order to obtain gratification for his sexual interests.
Assistant U.S. Attorney David J. Perri prosecuted the case on behalf of the government. The Bridgeport Police Department investigated.
This case is prosecuted as part of Project Safe Childhood, a nationwide initiative designed to protect children from online exploitation and abuse. Led by the United States Attorneys’ Offices, Project Safe Childhood marshals federal, state, and local resources to better locate, apprehend, and prosecute individuals who exploit children via the Internet, as well as identify and rescue victims. For more information about Project Safe Childhood, please visit http://www.justice.gov/psc/.
From the press release I think I can answer how the plea bargain worked. He simply pled catfishing and blackmail down to enticement. So the five lifetimes are what you get for asking nicely for nudes, one lifetime per minor. He behaved in an ever so slightly mean way, but none of it was any worse than catfishing and probably blackmail. This is worth lifetime incarceration to the state.
How about we just teach children that they shouldn't necessarily trust everyone they talk to online instead? I think 15-year-old boys have probably figured out what catfishing is anyway and weren't so invested in this fake girl. And in three years they must also be ready for the truly malignant kind of catfishing that the government does itself, all in the name of protecting them.
It seems that Brazilian judges are less brainwashed than their Norwegian colleagues:
(machine translation from Portuguese):
A 19 yo man who got his 11-yo girlfriend pregnant was acquitted by the Brazil Court. The justice understood that the relationship was consented and approved by the family.
"Based on all the testimonies, it is observed that the accused and the victim had the intention of starting a family, that sexual relations were consensual and free from violence and threat, and the victim's vulnerability must be relativized, as although with at a young age demonstrated the ability to consent to a sexual relationship," said the juri.
In Brazil sexual relations with minors 14 yo are considered a crime, but in this case the juri decided to release the man because they understood that 11yo girl consented to the sexual relation.
Wow, they evaluated the case on its merits rather than absolute cartoon characteristics of abuse and vulnerability. And nullified the law, flat out refused to enforce it. This is why feminists hate juries and managed to abolish it in Norway, so the professionals can always impose the totalitarian view. As we just saw in the US there are other ways for the feminists to bypass juries, but I wonder, faced with the choice of convicting a man for something like catfishing and knowing he will get life, how many would actually vote to convict? Methinks the feminists are pulling a gigantic bluff when they coerce such men into pleading guilty. The hysteria must be paper thin at that point, truly a monster we bring along inside our souls that we otherwise won't encounter.
The decision was appealed by the Ministerio Publico.
I've ben banned from that news website, and all my comments have been removed. Took around 7 hours.
There's a video on youtube back in the 1990s, in a brazilian school, where a bunch of teenagers were debating whether or not the age of consent should be lower than 14. They were asking, is it right to not give people under the age of 14 legal rights? Brazil has always been pretty good about this topic.
Since you were banned that means it wasn't an unbiased sample after all and public sentiment is probably far less bleak, so that is good news.
I am at work on a new blog post which is overdue since we are now on page two of comments here that most readers probably don't click to, but might take up to a couple days to complete.
Anyway, here is an article I just came across from 2015 to lighten us up a little, maybe you've seen it already, speaking some sanity about saner days.
IN THE EARLY 1970S, the Sunset Strip was a magnet for rock stars: Bowie, Zeppelin, Iggy Pop, Mott the Hoople, The Who. They all hung out in the VIP rooms of louche LA nightclubs like E Club, the Rainbow, and Rodney Bingenheimer’s English Disco. And with them, of course, came groupies. Scantily clad 14- and 15-year-olds like Sable Starr and Lynn “Queenie” Koenigsaecker sipped cherry cola, dropped pills, and evolved into pubescent dream girls for the platform-shoed rockers who could get anything and anyone they desired.
Decades before Drake dissed Tyga for dating 17-year-old Kylie Jenner, and R. Kelly faced multiple allegations of having sex with minors, the most visible rock stars in the world blithely made it with girls who were barely out of junior high school. It was all glorified in the pages of a glossy magazine called Star, which reveled in the underage groupie scene for five issues. Other publications, such as the rock ‘n’ roll bible Creem, flicked at the Sunset Strip doings without so much as a wagged finger. Hell, in 1973, a leisure-suited Tom Snyder devoted an entire show to interviews with some of LA’s highly desired teenage groupies.
Starting from the age of 15, Lori Mattix ranked among the most desired of these so-called baby groupies who were helping to satisfy the sexual appetites of Jimmy Page, David Bowie, Mick Jagger, and others. She hung out at the Playboy Mansion and modeled in the pages of Star. In time, she and Sable Starr helped inspire Kate Hudson’s character in the film Almost Famous....
And the way I found it was via David Ley, who disagrees with me about nofap, but on this he speaks wisdom:
"Before making concrete judgments that any teen girl with an older male is automatically a victim, remember these stories from the past. This girl had no regrets. I Lost My Virginity to David Bowie - Thrillist"
"At 16, I dated men who were 21. I pursued them. I knew what I was doing & I didn’t come from an abusive home. Young teens like sex, and surprise, not just young teen boys. She slept with David Bowie. I think that’s awesome. Sorry not sorry. Teen girls aren’t always so innocent."
From a girl named Danielle kingstrom under that post. Lol great. We've got some allies.
Young couple kill themselves in suicide pact after being raided by pigs for 'child porn' investigation.
The comments underneath are worth reading. Unusually for the Daily Mail and stories like this, most of the comments are sympathetic (probably because one of them is a young woman, if it was just the man nobody would care - Eivind will understand).
But the comments are quite illuminating as well. Many people have experiences of friends or relatives being similarly raided by the pigs, being made to wait not just months but years before their computers and phones are returned with the all-clear (and no apologies from the pigs afterwards). One reader mentions that over 300 people in the UK have their electronic devices seized EVERY DAY by the pigs under the grounds of child porn investigations. That's around 100,000 a year. Given that nearly all are male, that means that over the course of two decades, the average male in the UK has around a 1 in 15 chance of suffering a dawn raid by pigs and having to wait months or years to know whether his life will be destroyed. All because of 0s and 1s, mere pictures. It's high tech medievalism.
Child porn hysteria and laws alone are enough to explain the rise in male suicide rates over the last 20 years. But as we know, the MRAs refuse to even discuss feminist inflated and draconian 'child porn' laws.
And our dear leader himself thinks porn is worse than heroin... ironic that we're talking about cases like this and the American guy sentenced to five lifetimes, under an article regretting the death of a male feminist anti-porn activist whose very homepage argues against porn on the grounds it leads to rape culture and child abuse.
So sad. The scale of the witch-hunt is astonishing, a Kafkaesque punishment machine that runs forever on nothing. It's no thanks to me that they persecute indecent magnetization on hard drives (or electrons trapped in floating-gate transistors, if you use an SSD), but we do need to put it into perspective. This is not persecution of our sexuality, since the indecent bits do our sexuality no good, but malignant madness and evil and sadism and a runaway bureaucracy with its own life once these instructions are fed into it -- unopposed, of course, because no one dares question the voodoo "child abuse" narrative.
Eureka, a humble proposal. I was just reading this today:
About infinite libraries in literature, such as Borges's Library of Babel. All possible indecent images (or instructions for how to encode them) exist in such an infinite library. They are all there, forever, in Platonic heaven or the multiverse or whatever you want to call it. Since it is metaphysically impossible to destroy this library no matter how many hard drives they seize, how about we just agree once and for all that it is pointless to root them out and call off the witch-hunt?
Post a Comment