I am thankful for Newgon because they ensure that our activism lives on regardless of what happens to this little clique over which I sometimes style myself as leader with varying degrees of seriousness. In truth, we are almost irrelevant, but Newgon is a serious organization. Just look at their page on the female sex offender charade! I could scarcely have done it better myself:
Kudos and praise to high heavens! We are not alone! We have kindred activists out there whose ideology if not precisely identical at least overlaps a good 90% with what we used to call the Men's Rights Movement back in the days of Angry Harry and now refer to as male sexualism here on my blog -- or just sexualism is really what I have landed on. I say 90% because they don't seem to be on board with nofap, but you can't have everything. The Newgon site is much more impressive than it looks at first sight, archiving all kinds of sex-positive writings that may otherwise get lost, and even better, I know the people behind it are solid, enthusiastic activists. So even though I don't expect us to make much political progress any time soon, I can rest assured that sexualism is in good hands irrespective of my own efforts. Long live sexualism as (mostly) synonymous with MAP activism! I still prefer "sexualism" and use that in my own writings, but I warmly welcome our new allies, regardless of how they want to style themselves.
Not sure I agree with those other areas or the passport model, but it is a refreshing position in this day and age and close enough to our own ideology as to be almost indistinguishable. If anything, they are more moderate than us. I would also say that an age of consent of 12 is non-binding but at least as low as 13 is definitely binding to be called a male sexualist, along with a complete rejection of the female sex offender charade as equally nonsensical as criminalizing witchcraft -- and I do not care how this is received, because my conscience does not permit me to condone the persecution of harmless women. As you can see, neither Newgon or us are currently trying to normalize actual pedophilia in men, but we do not care what the public calls our eminently sensible positions on male sexuality either.
Elective 12 is our (non-binding) Age of Consent position
The best available evidence supports the idea of an elective-emancipation system for young people aged 12 and up. We do not bind participants to this position.
The proposed model is in effect, a passport system where young people age 12 and up, can sign to emancipate themselves in (potentially) a variety of areas. With respect to adults and emancipated minors, this will include legal consent to physical/sexual relations. Other important rights may be included, however, we will not campaign on most of these issues until there are signs of an emerging policy consensus:
- Employment, inc. military
- Driving a motor vehicle
- Alcohol, substances, gambling, body modifications and medical
- Graphic media content bars
- Voting (this might be dependent upon the above)
We propose that emancipation will be the choice of the young person, assuming they can be assessed by a doctor as mentally competent - broadly in line with their peers. With respect to sexual relations, the age of 12 is identical to the system employed in the Netherlands up until very recently. However, allowing young people to self emancipate gives them the power to choose what aspects of their lives they will be responsible for. Various controlled outcome studies will be conducted by social scientists after these changes are put into effect, creating more jobs.
Do most MAPs even recognize that feminists are 'anti-map'?
Two problems with MAPs. First, like other 'ephebophiles' they don't generally see feminists as an enemy (example 'freetheteens').
Secondly, like the 'ephebophile' identification, it validates the feminist war on normal male sexuality by pretending that not every single normal male on Earth is a 'MAP'.
Your identification as a MAP is an admission of failure. Not sure it will help your Hollywood career either.
Pro-C MAPs realize that the sex laws are bad. Whether they also recognize that these laws are made by feminists is beside the point. Newgon is building a wonderful resource for all activists who want to challenge the laws. Of course we are all MAPs just for being normal men, but that doesn't negate the value of the self-conscious "MAP movement."
I am not going to quit being a male sexualist, just taking a moment to applaud some real, serious activism on our side.
Quite annoying in my eyes, but maybe of interest to Eivind:
Validity was supported by correlations with puberty changes, sexual intentions, sexting, and sexual behavior, and hypothesized mean differences associated with dating and preference for shoes culturally associated with female sexual attractiveness (p < .01).
Good for a laugh, at least. And maybe proof of some serious signs coming from within rather than our culture "sexualizing" young girls as we are often told.
Eivind still can't see that male and female sexuality is inherently at conflict. That's the 'sex war' that everybody is talking about Eivind.
Male and female sexuality is a zero sum game, especially in a free sexual market.
It would be great if male and female sexuality was the same. Imagine if 99% of women wanted to bang teenage boys! Maybe after 20 years of making 'the female sex offender charade' the center of his crusade, Eivind would stop and wonder why not a single female has ever been attracted to our cause, or left a comment stating that she too would like to bang teenage boys and that this is a cause worth fighting for.
Men want to fuck as many hot young females as they can. Women want one alpha male chad to protect them and breed with, and perhaps a few beta orbitors they can extract wealth from. Of course, if the woman is older and didn't manage to attract a permanent chad when she was younger, she will likely go the beta bucks route while trying to cuck him by secretly getting impregnated by a random chad.
Do you remember The Spearhead Eivind?
Trying to 'promote' male and female sexuality at the same time, is a bit like trying to promote Russian and Ukrainian nationalism at the same time.
Also, the aspie MAP idea that this is solveable by fighting for 'teen rights' is just laughable. It's been tried for 70 years. If they couldn't do it in the 60's and 70's, it's not going to happen now.
It's a sex war. It's men vs women. And yes, women can be defeated. The trannys have demonstrated this.
You are exaggerating. Yes, women and men have different optimal strategies, but there is considerable overlap, for example when having a baby together, and any man with experience knows that women often enjoy sex without expecting an additional reward for it, even teen girls with much older men. Women are much more selective, but there are limits to how large harems women want to join to get a bigger alpha. Perhaps they would gravitate to something like harems of five in a totally free mating market, but these wouldn't be fixed and most men should be able to occasionally get lucky. If you don't think this is possible then you suffer from an incel delusion, probably use porn and don't apply the secret to magical attainment that I mentioned in the previous thread:
In order to achieve an end you must outline that end and limit yourself to it, rejecting all that is irrelevant.
This means nofap and works in our personal lives (unless the police state ruins it). Politically, it is much harder to change laws, but the difference between men and women is only something like for example 60% of women and 50% of men wanting to criminalize prostitution on actual surveys, and I imagine age of consent and rape law would get similar results whenever feminists want to pass a reform. It is too simplistic to see this as a zero-sum game between men and women, although it can certainly be described as a battle of the sexes in a conceptual sense. The problem is so many men go along with whatever the feminists throw at us, so even if we have up to 40% of women on our side it is hopeless.
Here's Australia now tightening rape law to affirmative consent in the endless series of reforms we are facing:
Under the new "affirmative consent" laws in New South Wales (NSW), a person must say or do something to communicate their consent for sex.
Previously defendants could argue they reasonably believed they had consent - even if the alleged victim did nothing to convey it.
Essentially, consent now relies on a person saying yes to sex, rather than the absence of them saying no.
Also, this alone makes rapists out of all men: The new laws clarify that consent can be withdrawn at any time, and that consenting to one sexual activity is not consent for another. Because who hasn't started with licking pussy and moved on to penetration without asking for consent first or again or however many times you need to comply with the latest standards (which would be so annoying that I doubt any woman would put up with you for long). Men still don't realize that this is a total criminalization of our sexuality, or care. The scope of criminalization is mind-boggling, a complete condemnation of sexuality. Every single relationship contains at least one and usually countless occasions that can be convicted as rape if simply the woman feels like pressing charges, and still men don't care to fight back. Australia has only one MRA I have heard of, and she is a woman, whose name I momentarily forget(?).
The new laws clarify that consent can be withdrawn at any time, and that consenting to one sexual activity is not consent for another.
This is the indirect reason why Julian Assange is in jail today and faces 175 years in the US. He did some thing with the woman's full consent, and when he did exactly the same things a few seconds after she had fallen asleep, the prosecutor shouted: "BINGO! He is a rapist!"
Imagine if consent could be withdrawn at any time in contractual law. No contrat or agreement would ever be possible.
On another note Eivind, one of your favourite arguments is that masturbation and porn are maladaptive, while sex with real women is adaptive. You must recognise however that in a context of criminalisation and extorsion, there is value in the counterargument, ie that porn and wanking may be a way to avoid getting into serious trouble, and therefore it may be adaptive. Trout stop rising for flies in streams where herons and cormorants abound, and that is considered adaptive. Staying out of jail or out of alimony slavery has adaptive priority over acting out your real male sexuality or whatever you choose to call screwing women bareback.
As to taking sex seriously as you said you did in a previous post, I'm sure the women and fathers out there would tell you sexuality is a serious matter aimed at reproduction and marriage, and that it should not be misused for pleasure by horny men like you and me. Im my view taking sex lightly is the basis of any sexual hedonism and permissiveness.
Beyond rape, beyond sexual abuse, and beyond grooming, there is safeguarding. Yet another feminist buzzword and level of antisex hysteria by which one can be punished, in this case for failing to safeguard teen girls from the implied nudity of their own breasts.
Emma Wright, 41, permitted students as young as 15 to take partially naked pictures of themselves and others at a school in Northamptonshire.
The Teaching Regulation Agency ruled the "highly inappropriate" class had broken safeguarding rules and ordered her to be struck off.
In the photos, children dressed in underwear held alcohol or used their hands to cover their breasts.
Other images showed students making offensive gestures while wearing school uniform, smoking and posing in swimwear.
She told a panel hearing last month she had introduced a new artist to the kids which she accepted did "suggestive pictures" - but insisted she had told students this did not mean for them to create similar work.
Mrs Wright added that in her opinion the artist’s work was not sexual in nature, but she did accept that, with hindsight, she should have told the pupils their photographs were not appropriate.
Decision-maker Alan Meyrick concluded Mrs Wright had committed a serious breach of professional teaching standards, and failed to safeguard pupils' well-being.
Despite being an experienced teacher "of previous good history" who had been at the school since 2004, she was banned from the profession.
She was spared jail this time, but banning from the teaching profession is still pretty serious and yet another expansion of the female sex offender charade. Without even doing anything sexual since we have moved beyond that now into new opportunities.
Safeguarding... what a fantastically expansive concept, with no end of opportunism for the abuse industry. For example, how do we safeguard girls from looking at their own nudity in the mirror? Here is a need for further innovation and punishment and administration and counseling if we fail to safeguard them!
We can construct all kinds of hypotethical scenarios from which girls need to be safeguarded lest they somewhere down the line get into something sexual or have a sexual thought, and hold everyone who failed to keep the girls in a straitjacket at all times accountable.
"As to taking sex seriously as you said you did in a previous post, I'm sure the women and fathers out there would tell you sexuality is a serious matter aimed at reproduction and marriage, and that it should not be misused for pleasure by horny men like you and me. Im my view taking sex lightly is the basis of any sexual hedonism and permissiveness."
Eivind can't get this. He wants a world where men are free to go around trying to impregnate every woman that they see, and seems to think that this is consistent with 'female sexuality'. Worse still, he'd prefer it all to take place in the context of his much hoped for industrial collapse.
Also that women will obviously be more picky about who they sleep with when every act of sex might lead to pregnancy, AND more likely to falsely accuse 'creeps' of sexual harassment or rape. That doesn't worry Eivind though as he's convinced himself he is an alpha male chad who every HB10 wants to be inseminated by. Bad news for me and Jack though.
"As such, calling ourselves antifeminists would hardly be intelligible to this society as it would not even begin to describe to them how radical we are."
No, feminists are the enemy. They are the ones who are responsible for this. You can't win a war if you don't even know who the enemy is.
This is truly the worst article I've ever read of yours Eivind. You probably wrote it just to annoy me.
Still, it's perhaps better if we split off. Eivind, FreeTheTeens, Gally, Tom O'Carrol can be MAPs and ephebophiles and not mention feminists and focus on women as victims, and the rest of us can be Male Sexualists (real MRAs) and continue to oppose feminists and champion normal male sexuality. Guys like Milan as a traditional 'anti-sex hysteria writer' can sort of take the middle-ground.
British singer Kate Bush is seeing a revival of her 1980's hits after one of her songs (Running Up That Hill) was featured in the NetFlix drama 'Stranger Things'.
She wrote her first hit when she was 13 and recorded it when she was 15/16. It's about her relationship with a much older man. I wonder what her new fans will make of that?
I was reading a thread on the incels.is forum the other day about teen sex during the Nazi Germany period. The OP quoted Nazi police reports describing how common teen sex was with older men. Groups of 13 year olds would hang outside army barracks, even dancing naked, hoping to get lucky with the soldiers. Can't find the link now, lol.
Even the NAZIs couldn't stop teen girls from wanting older men.
But feminists pretty much have today.
And of course, Milan and the MAPs would have you believe that 'American Conservatism' has done it, Lol.
Newgon has a music page:
This one is great too: Sparks - "Young Girls"
And of course, the definitive mockery of the female sex offender charade:
Busted - "What I Go To School For" (Official Video)
I was taking a look at the infamous TOC blog and see that the Netherlands are now locking people up for 'glorifying paedophilia'. I suspect that they were not convicted for simply referring to academic peer reviewed studies on adolescent-adult sex, as the blog post suggests, but rather for mirorring Tom O'Caroll's statements that four year olds are capable of sex etc. Still a chilling development though.
Shows the danger of associating with and certainly identifying as 'MAPS', which is correctly seen as simply a rebranding of 'paedophiles'. Unfortunately, Eivind has never been aware of the need to keep a clear line between real paedophilia and the feminist inflation of paedophilia. I honestly think the 'MAP' movement may have been started by Feds to crush any chance of a real anti-feminist movement for normal male sexuality. Don't know its history entirely, but it seems I first started hearing of 'MAPs' just when the MRM was taking off online and we were trying to make sure it spoke out against the criminalization of male sexuality.
I clearly made the distinction from pedophilia in my post. The rest of the map movement is in a sense created by the feds, but only via criminalization. Men now have something to fight for whether we are infiltrated or not. Why don't you show us how it's done if you think there is a better movement for normal male sexuality right now than the maps?
Look Eivind - your next article has presented itself.
Miss McConnell, 34, previously admitted holding hands with the schoolboy - but denied kissing him.
However the teaching panel have now found her guilty after they believed there was enough evidence to prove that the married mother danced in a 'flirtatious' manner with him.
Is there any limit to this madness? We have reached the point where holding hands and dancing with a 17-year-old is sexual abuse, and still no one in the mainstream wakes up to how insane and surreal it is??? Why this complete blindness to intolerance just because of the magic connection to sex? They think they are rational seeing any difference from this and run-of-the-mill witchcraft accusations from the darkest times for that, besides the woman being demonstrably nicer?
Hei Eivind. Forstår du noe som helst av denne saken og hva som gjør det til en påstått "overgrepssak"?
It's just absolute rape age. When girls are 13 in Norway it is "rape" (pretended to be literally so, not statutory) when consensual and even when the girl is getting paid. Hence we get absurd titles like "Young man paid young girls huge amounts for rapes."
I used to think statutory rape would at least remain statutory, but Norway is proving this wrong. Perhaps because we went directly from "abuse" to pretend-rape without a warm-up period of statutory rape like the US did and still does. It is easier to suck the public into a trance of thinking rape means what it sounds like when they just change the definition directly to absolute rape. These funny titles should still give it away though, if people weren't in a mass psychosis where they accept limitless persecution of anything sexual. If the next proposal is death penalty for holding hands they wouldn't even blink, just go along with it without question like all the rest.
I don't get how they count so many "rapes" even though most of the girls were older than 13 though. From the looks of it just paying a girl under 18 makes it rape now (and of course he is persecuted for the older women he paid as well), but there might be some journalistic confusion here. He was quite the sugar daddy at a ripe young age of 19, which is amazing, and of course totally criminal like all other sexuality now, with ever more draconian categories for each new case still.
"Why don't you show us how it's done if you think there is a better movement for normal male sexuality right now than the maps?"
Pretty sure if you asked a feminist willing to give an honest answer, who she fears more - 'maps' or incels, she would say the latter.
Incels are defending normal male sexuality (the only ones other than us), maps are actually doing the exact opposite. They're doing it with anger and rage, not by rainbow themed blogs and references to 1970's academic journals.
I couldn't care what you do here, you can publish your next 100 articles on the female sex offender charade, just please stop imagining that you can define what Male Sexualism is. You are an individual blogger with zero followers.
Maps don't have to argue incessantly about teenage rights. Maps don't have to point to 1970's academic studies that show no harm from consenting sex between teens and adults. Maps just have to point out that the whole thing is bullshit and motivated by sexual jealousy and bitterness on the part of the people making these laws - feminist hags! But of course, they're never going to do that, as for one thing, they accept like dogs the feminist classification of themselves as perverts.
Of course it is bullshit that consensual sex causes trauma. All you need is an honest skeptic movement to tell us that, without doing any more studies. Pure philosophical skepticism debunks CSA and maps incorporate that line of reasoning as well.
RE "mass psychosis"
The official framing of this "phenomenon" is misleading and wrong. The false hope-addicted psychologists and their acolytes want you to believe this is "just some temporary occasional" madness by the masses that has been going on for a couple of centuries when it is but a spike of a CHRONIC madness going on for aeons with "civilized" people --- read “The 2 Married Pink Elephants In The Historical Room –The Holocaustal Covid-19 Coronavirus Madness: A Sociological Perspective & Historical Assessment Of The Covid “Phenomenon”” .... https://www.rolf-hefti.com/covid-19-coronavirus.html
One of these mainstream psychologists who have been spreading this whitewashed reality, Dr. Desmet, also fails to see that the PLANNED Covid Psyop is a TOTALLY deliberate ploy because he doesn't think (after more than 1 year, even 2 years, into this total PLANNED scam!) it's ALL intentionally sinister as he stated in a prior podcast (this makes him witting or unwitting controlled opposition).
In the May of 2022 podcast with James Corbett he stated that "some people tend to overestimate the degree of planning and intentions" (behind the COUNTLESS, VERIFIABLE, FULLY INTENTIONAL, FULLY PLANNED atrocities by the ruling tribe of psychopaths over the last century alone) and see all of it as being planned which Desmet called "an extreme position" ... Sound logical thinking is "extreme" and therefore false and sick in his demented delusional view!!!
In his overpriced misleading whitewashing old material regurgitated book the psychology of totalitarianism he too states that "There are countless ... examples that seem to point in the direction of a plan being implemented, such as the fact that the definition of 'pandemic' was adjusted shortly before the coronavirus crisis; that the definition of 'herd immunity' was changed during the crisis, implying that only vaccines can achieve it ... [he continuous with several other obvious facts of an ENTIRELY PLANNED event, especially discerned through the totality of all these facts]." "SEEM to point in the direction of a plan"??? No! They most evidently, clearly, and irrefutably DO demonstrate and prove it IS a COMPLETELY AND FULLY DELIBERATE PlanDemic! A big scam. An Entirely Planned Holocaust against the non-ruling herd of people (see cited link above). A coherent 12-year old kid can figure that out.
It clearly shows Desmet's own complete lunacy. But because almost everyone in the culture is a member of mass formation (madness), including the "woke" people of the alternative media domain, hardly anyone recognizes Desmet's lunacy. Not surprising that he has even become some type of popular "guru" among the adherents of the alternative media landscape.
How do self-styled "truth-tellers" wake up the masses to the so-called truth when they THEMSELVES use lies with their deceitful fake language???
No one is "teaching" or "waking up" the ignorant masses to the CORE truths with lies, with the official "language of lies" (see cited source above).
This all means Desmet is ALSO a member of the masses of lunatics, an ACTIVE CARD-CARRYING MEMBER of mass formation!!! When, if at all, will he wake up from his state of mass psychosis?
Worst of all, perhaps, the mass formation/mass psychosis notion frames the problem as the public being a mere unaccountable non-culpable victim in this phenomenon (the gist of the circular argument is: the masses should change their thinking but they got brainwashed so they're victims). Nothing could be further from the truth (see referenced source above).
Desmet is right in that truth-activists must fight against mass formation psychosis (human madness). That also means exposing HIS deeply destructive mad part of it. This comment serves, in part, that objective.
@Previous poster-I share your misgivings about Desmett-funny how he often uses Hannah Arendt is another res flag to me.
If you are awake to conspiracies and also consider the AOC too high or even unnecessary, you might like Galileo2333 on Freespeechtube and Youtube.
Post a Comment