Wednesday, October 18, 2023

The wisdom of G.K. Chesterton in "The Man Who Was Thursday"

Hearing Alan Watts speak highly of G.K. Chesterton I was inspired to read his novel The Man Who Was Thursday (first published in 1908; Chesterton lived from 1874 to 1936). I am impressed! It is usually described as a metaphysical thriller, which as ambitious as it sounds I must say it fully lives up to. It is also so much more, most superficially a kind of detective story, with much wisdom along the way not least about activism, which is why I found it surprisingly relevant to our sexualist movement. I recommend reading it as a philosophical exploration of activism and heresy, good and evil, and the meaning of the whole universe and existence itself. At the deepest level it can be read as an allegory of how God brings souls into the world:
“Are you the new recruit?” asked a heavy voice.
And in some strange way, though there was not the shadow of a shape in the gloom, Syme knew two things: first, that it came from a man of massive stature; and second, that the man had his back to him.
“Are you the new recruit?” said the invisible chief, who seemed to have heard all about it. “All right. You are engaged.”
Syme, quite swept off his feet, made a feeble fight against this irrevocable phrase.
“I really have no experience,” he began.
“No one has any experience,” said the other, “of the Battle of Armageddon.”
“But I am really unfit—”
“You are willing, that is enough,” said the unknown.
“Well, really,” said Syme, “I don’t know any profession of which mere willingness is the final test.”
“I do,” said the other—“martyrs. I am condemning you to death. Good day.”
Life is first of all surprise. The only known fact to begin with is that you are sentenced to death, from which all the variation of life springs out (you can't even know you are alive without knowing you must die). This is the "joyous cosmology" of Alan Watts which despite the latter's atheism and nihilism (Buddhism) bears an amazing resemblance to the cosmology of the deeply Christian Chesterton here. Given that you have accepted the challenge to be an activist or perhaps just to live at all, we get this delightful wisdom about how to go about it. Should people like anarchists, MAPs and sexualists disguise their identity? I know none of you will believe it, but there is much truth to this:
“The history of the thing might amuse you,” he said. “When first I became one of the New Anarchists I tried all kinds of respectable disguises. I dressed up as a bishop. I read up all about bishops in our anarchist pamphlets, in Superstition the Vampire and Priests of Prey. I certainly understood from them that bishops are strange and terrible old men keeping a cruel secret from mankind. I was misinformed. When on my first appearing in episcopal gaiters in a drawing-room I cried out in a voice of thunder, ‘Down! down! presumptuous human reason!’ they found out in some way that I was not a bishop at all. I was nabbed at once. Then I made up as a millionaire; but I defended Capital with so much intelligence that a fool could see that I was quite poor. Then I tried being a major. Now I am a humanitarian myself, but I have, I hope, enough intellectual breadth to understand the position of those who, like Nietzsche, admire violence—the proud, mad war of Nature and all that, you know. I threw myself into the major. I drew my sword and waved it constantly. I called out ‘Blood!’ abstractedly, like a man calling for wine. I often said, ‘Let the weak perish; it is the Law.’ Well, well, it seems majors don’t do this. I was nabbed again. At last I went in despair to the President of the Central Anarchist Council, who is the greatest man in Europe.” [...] I said to him, ‘What disguise will hide me from the world? What can I find more respectable than bishops and majors?’ He looked at me with his large but indecipherable face. ‘You want a safe disguise, do you? You want a dress which will guarantee you harmless; a dress in which no one would ever look for a bomb?’ I nodded. He suddenly lifted his lion’s voice. ‘Why, then, dress up as an anarchist, you fool!’ he roared so that the room shook. ‘Nobody will ever expect you to do anything dangerous then.’ And he turned his broad back on me without another word. I took his advice, and have never regretted it. I preached blood and murder to those women day and night, and—by God!—they would let me wheel their perambulators.”
And I know -- I know I will keep getting 99% anonymous comments after this hilariously touching quote too. But you are mistaken about the utility of keeping your true colors hidden in your daily lives as majors or bishops or whatever is your "respectable" role. The fact of the matter is that such secrecy is counterproductive not just to our movement but your personal safety against the feminist police state as well.

Certainly now that society currently isn't persecuting heretics. Even for sex crimes now when antisex is the state religion, the heresy itself isn't punished. Just watch me deny the metaphysical badness of sex in blog post after blog post without getting arrested -- or if I do get arrested, at least without conviction. Hey, even Heretic TOC is still up and I have no doubt women would let him wheel their perambulators because he is so open and honest about his activism, not the least bit creepy or hypocritical. The closest we come to punishing heresy is the obscenity laws, which admittedly come very close and sometimes do serve as repurposed blasphemy laws but still allow considerable rhetorical leeway. Chesterton allows us to imagine what it would be like if the police were philosophers and not just brutes:
“You are not sufficiently democratic,” answered the policeman, “but you were right when you said just now that our ordinary treatment of the poor criminal was a pretty brutal business. I tell you I am sometimes sick of my trade when I see how perpetually it means merely a war upon the ignorant and the desperate. But this new movement of ours is a very different affair. We deny the snobbish English assumption that the uneducated are the dangerous criminals. We remember the Roman Emperors. We remember the great poisoning princes of the Renaissance. We say that the dangerous criminal is the educated criminal. We say that the most dangerous criminal now is the entirely lawless modern philosopher. Compared to him, burglars and bigamists are essentially moral men; my heart goes out to them. They accept the essential ideal of man; they merely seek it wrongly. Thieves respect property. They merely wish the property to become their property that they may more perfectly respect it. But philosophers dislike property as property; they wish to destroy the very idea of personal possession. Bigamists respect marriage, or they would not go through the highly ceremonial and even ritualistic formality of bigamy. But philosophers despise marriage as marriage. Murderers respect human life; they merely wish to attain a greater fulness of human life in themselves by the sacrifice of what seems to them to be lesser lives.”
I would add that most sex offenders have no political or philosophical beef with the sex laws. They have no interest in denying the supposed metaphysical badness of sex with minors, or women's right to regret-rape laws or whatever. They merely thought they could get away with breaking these laws, or that they are somehow more innocent at heart than other men doing precisely the same things. The protagonist replies thus to the policeman:
“How true that is,” he cried. “I have felt it from my boyhood, but never could state the verbal antithesis. The common criminal is a bad man, but at least he is, as it were, a conditional good man. He says that if only a certain obstacle be removed—say a wealthy uncle—he is then prepared to accept the universe and to praise God. He is a reformer, but not an anarchist. He wishes to cleanse the edifice, but not to destroy it. But the evil philosopher is not trying to alter things, but to annihilate them. Yes, the modern world has retained all those parts of police work which are really oppressive and ignominious, the harrying of the poor, the spying upon the unfortunate. It has given up its more dignified work, the punishment of powerful traitors in the State and powerful heresiarchs in the Church. The moderns say we must not punish heretics. My only doubt is whether we have a right to punish anybody else.”
This is eerily similar to what I have been thinking ever since I was arrested in 2012 and found myself to be the worst person in the prison from the point of view of philosophical policing, because everyone else was this sort of "conditionally good person" or someone who had problems with impulse control and I alone a heretic. I marvel that I am not punished for speaking heresy against the sex laws while pathetic harmless wankers who would never say a bad word about the sex laws are.

But rest assured the police does not read Chesterton, and neither do the feminists who deliver their ideological premises. They are set to continue their absurdly misguided war on sex for a long time, which leaves us peace to organize our intellectual opposition. Newgon is on track to produce a powerful body of work which can jumpstart a movement for sexual liberation in no time when conditions are right. If the feminists wise up a little bit it it may well have to survive in illegal channels for a while like the "CSAM" the state also fights with perfect futility, but I am confident it will persist. The feminists can kill us, but they can't kill our ideas because we are already too many dedicated activists for that to succeed.

As to the book I just reviewed, there were no spoilers here. Go ahead and read it for fun and edification and perhaps even the deepest meaning Chesterton seems to intend, which is a sort of periphrasis of the Bible. It is not overly preachy, however, closer to Alan Watts as such. Although the subtitle is "A Nightmare," it feels uplifting in the end, whether you ultimately believe in a God or not. It is a bringer of good news as in a gospel and renewed sense of wonder. Poetry is the art of saying what cannot be said, and I think this succeeds as such. Since it cannot be put simply, you would have to read it to find out what this is. To me it even speaks to my role in the battle between good and evil as a male sexualist. To paraphrase the ending a little bit, I am left with an unnatural buoyancy in my body and a crystal simplicity in mind. I now feel in possession of some impossible good news which makes every other thing a triviality, but an adorable triviality.


Anonymous said...

No. Stop telling everybody they are cowards for not being public.

Firstly, if you lived in just about anywhere else than Norway, you would likely have been either arrested or beaten up by now.

Secondly, you promote being public as somehow being authentic. In your case at least, it seems to have had the opposite effect, even to the point of you claiming to be the leader of a movement that others spent the last 20 years trying to build and changing the name of it in order to attract a female fan you can potentially bang.

Thirdly, I realize you can't see this, but your persona is that of a weirdo. Nobody is going to take you seriously with your YouTube shower videos or your appearance on that Norwegian documentary in a cardigan on a hot summer's day. You think that because a documentary maker noticed you as the biggest weirdo in Scandinavia and won a Cannes award portraying you as such in a cringe inducing black comedy that you have actually done something positive, rather than ensured that we're seen as a joke forever.

If you were serious about activists being public, then you would at least make it a rule here for your Pedocels For Palestine and hebophile autist followers to choose a regular handle instead of all posting as 'Anonymous'.

Anonymous said...

According to the Daily Mail today, over 25% of girls have been choked by their partners during sex by the time they are 17. It's the new normal for under 30's. Yet a couple of weeks ago they were demanding to bring in a staggered age of consent to protect 17 year old girls from older lovers.

Just shows this has nothing to do with rationality. Following the same old 'pedo rationalist' approach that the MAPs and the 'anti-sex hysteria' bloggers use is as much use as a Palestinian standing waving at an Israeli jet overhead holding up a sign saying 'I am not Hamas', or an Israeli civilian calmly telling a Hamas terrorist that he belives in a two state solution just before he gets his brains blown out or his head cut off by them. Appeals to reason, even when you do it standing naked in the shower hoping somebody 'serious' will 'take you seriously', is not going to make a difference.

Eivind Berge said...

I am not making rules about ditching your anonymity, just saying what works. I see from Wikipedia that I’m not the only activist who has made this observation in regard to The Man Who Was Thursday: Chesterton’s book reputedly inspired the Irish Republican Michael Collins with the idea “if you didn't seem to be hiding nobody hunted you out.”

But I guess you all prefer to be hunted. And a weird sort of phobia against being seen as a heretic in a secular world. As to being a weirdo, I think an obsessive-compulsive fear of being a “weirdo” is a sign of a real weirdo. This is obviously the AF again trying to be as rude as he can get away with, and fine, you can dislike my fashion all you want. Those who have been to Bergen know a cardigan is rarely out of place on sunny days. People like to pretend it’s hot by sitting outside in a T-shirt drinking beer in 10 degrees C; personally I find that weird, but again I am not obsessed with looking like everyone else. I also think it would be weird to not be naked in the shower, but perhaps that would also be tolerable as an experiment in trying to find something that could get attention. It doesn’t hurt you if try something that doesn’t catch on. And as it happened my shower eulogy about Nathan Larson is the most successful thing I ever did on YouTube.

Eivind Berge said...

I see the Daily Fail has finally hit upon an abusive sexual trend with some reality to it there. Choking and other painful things the boys learn from porn and want to try out on their appropriate-aged teen girls... thanks heavens the girls are safeguarded from older men who could have showed them a pleasant time! And as they point out it's decried as "kink-shaming" to be negative to anything other than age gaps.

I guess the metaphysical badness of age is so choking that a real choking is nothing: we have to segregate the generations at all costs.

Of course the female sex offender charade is a also part of this problem, but once again we can't have boys learning from older women either.

Jack said...

I think the Daily Mail article is yet another female victimhood piece. Choking is a minority fantasy in porn. If you don't search for it with the right keywords you may surf porn sites for years without ever stumbling upon it.

The feminists have always try to discredit porn with tales of violence, although compared to other genres in the cinema, porn is the the one with the lowest violence content.

Eivind Berge said...

Jack, I would have thought so too if not for other evidence. From this case of a young man who literally strangled a girl to death:

Now check out this link:

There another girl, obviously not Grace Millane whom he murdered, testified as a witness that when he choked her he applied "just the right pressure," indicating that it's a normal "consensual" thing now when they don't die...

"We asked each other what we prefer during sex and so I did mention that I like rough sex and also choking.

"He did say that he likes rough sex as well but I don't remember if he said anything about choking."

The witness told the jury she picked up a bottle of rum on her way to the man's apartment and met him in the lobby before going up to his room and chatting about their lives.

She drank about five rum and coke drinks while he drank about four beers, she said.

"It started off as just talking to one another. Then after he went to the toilet on the way out he kissed me. From there, it just slowly moved to the bed."

The woman said the pair then had sex, where the accused put one hand around her neck with her consent.

"He did choke me a bit because that's a preference of mine."

The jury has been told it will hear from a pathologist who will confirm Ms Millane's cause of death was pressure to the neck.

The woman said she did not have to physically push the man away and the choking left no marks or soreness.

"It wasn't too hard that I was gasping for air but it wasn't so soft that I wouldn't be able to feel it so it was just the right pressure."

From that it seems the trend has gone so far that some girls positively expect it, but it's seriously not something I would do even if they asked for it.

Eivind Berge said...

Think, how do girls develop a preference for choking? I bet they only get the idea from the porn influence, probably via boys doing it to them, and for every girl who likes it there must be many who feel uncomfortable to say the least.

Jack said...

Now you seem to be embracing the pot-calling-the-kettle-black narrative of porn as an source of murderous intent, while mainstream cinema is replete with ultra-violence without anyone ever finding fault. Porn as a genre is in fact remarkable in its non-portrayal of any violence. Even bdsm porn ritualises the exercise of force to the point of the latter often being laughable.

Not to mention that you lend credence to a gutter press article. I bet the one who penned that piece had a good wank while writing it.

If choking is the only thing girls nowadays develop a preference for, I'm all for it but I don't believe they do.

However, if you want to believe some of the article is true, it might contain a irksome reminder for us frustrated guys. While we are threatened with jail if we as much as text a teenage girl, some blokes out can afford to fuck & choke them like there's no tomorrow.

Eivind Berge said...

No, I do not think porn leads to murderous intent. But it does seem to normalize a kind of behavior which is both unpleasant for most girls and indistinguishable from murderous behavior right until a girl is choked a little too long.

As a nofapper I know this is not the main problem with porn. The real problem is the fakeness of the sexual stimuli of it which, no matter how nonviolent and ethical in every other way robs and degrades men’s arousal pathways. The degrading sexual behavior apart from masturbation it teaches to some boys is the least of the problems, but it can still be a real one and here it goes to show the benefit of tolerating intergenerational relations instead of insisting that young teens must always figure it out on their own. It turns out that leaving them to themselves and porn wasn’t so ideal after all, and this is good to know even if it won’t register to society at this time because age gaps remain the most horrible abuse imaginable to the normies.

Eivind Berge said...

Another victim of the feminist police state, in Florida: 54-year-old former HS teacher Charles Maglio kills himself while facing a trial for "sexual misconduct" over his relationship with a 16-year-old girl. The teacher was caught by the pigs, who were monitoring his calls. The relationship was consensual, with the girl giving him heads up about a possible investigation. She made sure to delete all of her text messages and, when questioned, she told the cops "I don't want him to get in trouble. I'm in love with him." The investigation began after a restaurant owner contacted the principal over a teacher giving flowers to a teen employee.

That will teach her to get an age-appropriate boyfriend who is into choking for good measure and I suppose the restaurant owner is an even bigger hero than the cops.

Eivind Berge said...

Older man giving flowers to a teen girl... now there's a real crime! Unlike teens chocking each other and other distractions from this civilization's supreme mission of persecuting age gaps.

But we have a real MAP movement now! Look at Newgon's solid efforts to document these sad cases:

Special Article: Adverse effects of hysteria

Moral panics pertaining to children, sexuality and minor attracted people don't only cost the taxpayer money, but have many unintended or otherwise negative consequences -- especially for minors. While the obsession with Sex Offenders and creating "special laws" for them stretches back many decades, we list just a few 21st century news sources as examples, and are well aware that we must have neglected many more recent examples, which you may alert us to. We try instead to present the breadth of unintended consequences related to the war on Sex Offenders.

Anonymous said...

@Jack - I remember Steve Moxon explaining how most men have an instinctive dislike of seeing any woman in pain or distress. If choking is becoming more common, it's likely it is coming from women asking their partners to do it. Far more women fantasize about being raped, than men fantasize about raping women. And of course women are having sex with an ever smaller percentage of men (mainly Chads) thanks to dating apps, and no doubt Chads are more likely to engage in aggressive sex practices.

But yeah, when the femiservative hags that read and write the Daily Mail want laws against older men banging hot teens, then it's older men who have rough sex with young girls. When they want to ban porn, it suddenly becomes teen boys and young men who are having the rough sex with young girls. It's all about increasing their SMV and limiting the competition from hot teens (and porn).

Jack said...

By the way Eivind, there's a minority for whom even you will concede porn is good: porn actors and actresses. At least they are having real sex. For many actresses porn is also a source of easy money to boot. If it wasn't for porn we might wonder whether women ever have sex at all in countries like the US or the UK where anti-sex bigotry is extreme.

Note that with the boom in amateur or half-amateur porn, the numbers of people who upload home-grown porn might be anything but negligible. Porn may in fact represent a real percentage of any "real" sex taking place in the world (IMO it even represents a sizeable percentage of the World's interesting sex, owing to the selection effect in terms of looks and the incentive to explore fetishes which would be lacking in mum and dad's sex).

Porn has resisted condomism. It constitutes a live advertisement for bareback sex in the face of ongoing safe-sex campaigns.

Since you'd rather porn ceased to exist, are you sure the vacuum left behind would be replaced by anything tangible in terms of sex positivity?

Eivind Berge said...

Of course you are none the worse for filming your sex. It can be good for bragging at the very least and if you make money, all the better for you. So sure, porn can be good that way but not as porn. It is only good in the same way drugs are good for drug dealers or the covid vaccine is good for Pfizer even though it left many damaged.

As I keep saying, the conceptual level of porn is something like 0.1% of the problem with it. Sure it is a problem if it teaches naïve boys problematic things like choking is a good way to please girls, or that girls need to be 18 before you can have sex with them, and those things might even be outweighed by the good side on the conceptual level like mostly showing bareback. If the only problems with porn were conceptual like what kind of attitudes it might promote, I wouldn’t bother criticizing it much and certainly not call for any regulation.

No, the problem is that males are not evolutionarily developed to consent to using it, and I mean using it as porn, not as a way to make money or brag about the girls you bang. Porn leaves a blight in the lives of boys growing up where their sex lives should have been, because it so readily hijacks their sex drives. This defenselessness, inability to consent properly (to be clear, even with a fully developed brain because the deficiency is at the evolutionary level), is why porn is so problematic. And then there is the physiological mistraining -- NOT conceptual -- which leads to erectile dysfunctions when boys later attempt real sex. The combination of opportunity cost and physiological, neurological misalignment is what makes up 99.9% of the harm from porn. Our first line of defense should be education instead of criminalization however, which is why I am doing that work by promoting nofap. I don’t call for heavy-handed laws, but there is a case to be made for making porn less available somehow. And we must understand that it is almost completely beside the point whether the porn portrays wholesome sexual activities or choking or has “underage” girls and so on, so regulation only targeting such things is pointless. I have basically next to nothing common with mainstream/feminist opposition to porn -- I only happen to converge to the same conclusion from a diametrically opposite value system, namely sex-positivity or sexualism.

Eivind Berge said...

Now to the question whether, if porn were successfully banned, am I sure the vacuum left behind would be replaced by anything tangible in terms of sex positivity?

Yeah! I most assuredly am. The "vacuum" would be filled by our natural sex drive, duh, and real sex. You see, nature has sexualized girls maximally for us, from which porn can only detract. We only need to get males and females together and nature takes its course like it has done since our species appeared and beyond.

Of course men won't get as much sex and certainly not as many women as they had in their wanking fantasies, but that's okay! All the porn fantasies were completely fake; what you get now is real and what counts. There will be more of that now, which proves porn was bad. And if you still want to wank, non-pornographic pictures will be roughly as arousing as the porn was anyway, just less addictive so you don't waste too much of your sex drive (basically the situation before digital porn, when whatever smut existed wasn't a real problem).

Kaser said...

The Pedophile is not the same as the pedophile. It is written in lower case when it refers to the long-term, effective and systematic sexual attraction to Prepubescent children by Adult people, but it is written in capital letters when it refers to the ideological construct created by a Feminist oligarchy starting in late 1800 to defend their (sex) class interests and invalidate any criticism of Women's policy of aggression against men.

The Pedophile, in capital letters, is an immune ideological construction. One of the most important propaganda tools in history. The deployment of the Paedophile narrative has allowed one of the world's most fearsome police powers, with a horrific record in the field of human rights, to turn itself into a 'protection' of children...This deceptive victimization produces considerable dividends, namely, immunity from criticism, even when it is more than justified. In short, it is about instrumentalizing the narrative of the Paedophile to build a Child Sexual Abuse industry that serves to defend specific interests that allow the Feminist mafia to operate with impunity.

The Paedophile, with a capital letter, operated as an invulnerable identity. A historical identity based on becoming the ultimate evil stereotype. There is nothing like the Paedo, which achieves the dogma of singularity; There are no other victims comparable to Children and Teens in the so-called "CSA", and therefore, this gives them the status of the identity paradigm as evils in the culture of victimization.

There can be no victims in the Paedophile side, they are not like the gypsies, the communists, the disabled people, the jews, for the story of their own Holocaust. That is why the repeated number of victims of sexual intolerance always refers only to the LGTBIQ and women, segregating the rest. Being a people who is the source of a singular and incomparable crime against children and youth provides immunizing moral capital.

If there is nothing comparable in history to the Child Sexual Abuse industry, there is no evil comparable to the Paedophile and that makes it the object of an irrational hatred that directs any criticism to everything done by any Men and the Adult-Teen relationship as a concrete representation of the evil. Men as the Paedo.

The accusation of Pedophile when state crimes against men and their natural sexuality are denounced is the recognition of their moral failure, the effective acceptance that their behavior is so inhuman and lacks rational defense that they can only appeal to a supreme hatred. To try to mitigate any criticism of the genocidal feminist politics of the modern Liberal Welfare State. The children (some) were victims of the pedophile, but the men are the victims of the Pedophile.

Eivind Berge said...

This capital P is another reason why you shouldn't hide. A real MAP is always going to be underwhelming compared to this mythical beast, so the normies will hardly associate you with the monster in their heads.

Eivind Berge said...

It was sadly not causally connected, but we can still rejoice in the slaying of a judge who sentenced a 33-year old man to 14 years in prison for consensual sex with a 15 year old girl.

Eivind Berge said...

Judge Andrew F. Wilkinson sentenced Brent Thomas Chaney, 35, of the Sharpsburg area, to 14 years incarceration, suspending all but 18 months.

Wilkinson said he'd read the pre-sentence investigation and a behavioral health analysis and told Chaney he was concerned that even as of this spring Chaney "continued to grossly minimize your own actions." Wilkinson said he understood that Chaney was sorry and realized he did wrong, but that he seems to continue to minimize that his role was "100% of the problem."

Explaining that all four sentencing factors apply to "one degree or another" in Chaney's case, Wilkinson said the most important factors in this instance were punishment and deterrence. The other two are rehabilitation and public safety.

Wilkinson said Chaney deserves punishment and advised the defendant to use his punishment time to "think hard about never doing this sort of thing at all."

A sickeningly hateful judge he was. Good riddance.

AF said...

@Kaser - that is an outstanding comment. I don't think Eivind gets it.

Eivind Berge said...

I get that society has constructed a monster which has nothing to do with reality. CSA is both a complete hoax when consensual and the new conception of evil which replaces Satan now that God is dead. No human can live up to it, but all it takes is to flirt with a 17-year-old to be categorically and fully evil. The myth thrives on hunting shadows and you anonymouses duly oblige them.

Eivind Berge said...

I have a friend on Facebook who is obsessed with pedos, and disgusting as he is I haven’t unfriended him yet because it’s interesting to see what they are up to. A few days ago he shared this:

Idag er Aron i Molde, han observerer en Rettsak mot en 26 år gammel mann som er tiltalt for voldtekt av barn under 14 år. Mannen fremstår som ubemerket og uinteressert i alvoret han står tiltalt for, idag har Aron hørt på en jente som fortalte om nettovergrep. Det er mange berørte over hele Norge i denne saken, som er blitt utsatt av denne mannen sitt forvrengte & uakseptable oppførsel mot barn. Ikke et eneste media har snakket om denne saken, siden den startet! Kun en liten artikkel i april mnd. Takket være @alle dere som er støttende medlem så får Aron reist rundt og observert å registrert overgripere. Takk for at du melder deg inn å støtter organisasjonen med medlemskap. Medlemskap tegnes via denne linken

They have a frigging organization of card-carrying membership fee-paying pedo hunters who travel the country to “observe and register abusers” and meanwhile I am completely and utterly ignored when I write essays and make videos denying their whole worldview. In that quote they confronted an accused abuser and found him disappointingly bland, like he didn’t know he was evil, lol. The myth cannot meet reality at all. It can only chase shadows. It cannot handle MAP pride (or even indifference to their theories of evil as we have just seen) nor philosophical scrutiny, all of which is simply ignored. It is no fun for them -- or sadism or whatever it is they are after -- to confront the real thing. My neighbors have NO CLUE that am a capital P Satan Heretic Which Than Which There Is No Whicher by their worldview, even though I do my level best to promote my blog and ideology in all channels up to and including award-winning films. Oh, they know I am slightly famous all right, but they simply cannot make the connection from such an open spectacle to the Supreme Evil which lurks in the shadows.

Eivind Berge said...

The CSA hoax serves multiple purposes, from bread and butter to cops and prosecutors and the rest of the abuse industry, parental control, female sexual trade union, a way for these pathetic private pedo hunters to be "macho" in a feminist-approved way and up to a stand-in for Satan when we no longer believe in him.

Notice that the CSA panic started out as a Satanic panic in the 1980s, but the Satanic part was dropped by the 90s and now the Pedophile fully embodies Satan while doing nothing more than sending flowers to a teen girl. This satisfies a spiritual need to believe in Evil, which I think is why the normies and not just feminists have embraced the new mythology so wholeheartedly.

Eivind Berge said...

I would say that the female sexual trade union ceased to be the dominant driver or explanation for the sex laws after the 1980s. By the time we had the Satanic Panic, sex with children (at that time only prepubescent) was already taking on this demonic quality which is now in full bloom as a purely secular belief, a sort of scientism more superstitious than religion ever was. This cannot be explained by feminism alone. There is no way old hags wanting to guard their sexual power can be so influential that former friends whom I grew up with are now pedo-hunting psychos (or to be fair they tend to be slightly to much younger than me), while the Pedophile they are hunting has mushroomed into the entirety of sexuality relating to anyone under 18. This is a demonic cultural Zeitgeist best explained as a belief in sort of transcendental Evil which is scarcely recognizable as the original raising of the age of consent which feminism explicitly did. In the first hundred years after raising it from 10 to 16 it had all the force which feminism can muster, which is not all that much enforcement and certainly not dragging all the normies into a frenzy for them as we see now. That requires another demonic dimension altogether. Even the latest superstition about brain development is not enough to do that on its own along with the feminist agenda.

Anonymous said...

"here is no way old hags wanting to guard their sexual power can be so influential that former friends whom I grew up with are now pedo-hunting psychos (or to be fair they tend to be slightly to much younger than me), while the Pedophile they are hunting has mushroomed into the entirety of sexuality relating to anyone under 18. "

You don't make any sense or case. There's no logic or argument in that statement. So rather than attribute the changes in laws and consequent changes in attitudes, that have all been driven by female dominated NGO groups like ECAPT, Save the Children, the NSPCC etc, to those feminists and femiservatives, we bring in some kind of metaphysical demonic force. Is this the next step of the Bergian religious Sexualist cult? The MAPs are right, and it's not feminists we are fighting. We are fighting a supernatural demon, unknown and unnamed, and we know it's out there, and the only way it can be defeated is the collapse of industrial civilization? We shake our fists at the skies at this demon, while we pray for the inevitable collapse.

'Pedohunters' of today were doing the same to homosexuals 100 years ago. They were still doing it to homosexuals in Russia just ten years ago, but there too they have switched to 'pedos' as their targets. That's largely why we have LBGTQ++? shoved down our throats. Feminists needed to switch the primal hate for the sexual outsider from gays to pedos (not that there was any difference between a gay and a pederast for most of human history), while doing so under the guise of 'sexual tolerance'.

At some point Eivind you've got to give feminists credit. Yes I know you worship women as childlike and sweet, and nothing but a sexual resource, even feminist hags, but women are actually very intelligent, and very cunning and evil when it comes to protecting their fundamental value as sexual resources.

Anonymous said...

I can't envision any worse hell than to be an autistic MAP and to not know who he is fighting, to not at least be aware of who the oppressor grinding him into the dirt with their boot is.

Autistic maps are like slugs being stepped on and crushed. They have as much awareness as to who or what kind of creature is responsible for their fate as a slug has awareness that it's a human foot crushing them into slime.

At least I know, and maybe 2 or 3 others here know, who is responsible, and we'll go to our graves knowing that we at least raised our fists to them, instead of to a 'demonic force' in the sky or something.

Unfortunately, the slugs are more numerous and appear to multiply and invade every corner, even corners like ours where the last hope of a sexual self-consciousness and a movement remained.

Anonymous said...

16 year old girl beaten into a coma by female 'morality police' in Iran for showing some skin.

Oh, sorry, 16 year old girl beaten into a coma by demonic force in the sky of whom we know neither their name nor their motivation.

Eivind Berge said...

Perhaps I am not making myself clear. I do not believe in a demonic force behind the sex war. I believe the normies believe sex is a demonic force which corrupts the young. They believe sexuality puts children in hell, even if they are enjoying it, particularly when they are exposed to a person who is more than a couple years older. They implicitly believe in a sexual soul (or perhaps “innocent” soul) which is silently corrupted by sexuality. This corruption is then believed to manifest as something like PTSD throughout the “CSA victims’” adult lives, and again the damage can be silent there too so that positive memories are false consciousness. Sexuality is believed to have an entire alternative universe where all of sexuality relating to minors is this demonic substance, “pedophilia,” that they need to hunt and exorcise except it can’t be exorcised so the Pedophile must be separated from society via incarceration and registration. This is a superstitious belief akin to demonic possession or animism whereby the physical and psychological phenomenon of sexuality is imbued with an extra, perfectly evil dimension. In short they believe in the metaphysical badness of sex. Sex is the new Satan for all the normies to believe in even if they are atheists.

I am not sure it makes sense to attribute causal powers to beliefs (if it were that simple, Bruce Rind would win a Nobel prize). But this is at any rate how sex-hostility plays out now. The war on sex now goes along with this belief system. In other cultures they may have a different kind of morality police, often more theistic as did we back in the days of laycase. We are no better than the Iranians either then or now when CSA is our religion.

Older women guarding their sexual power no doubt enters into the picture on some level, but it does not make sense to make that the whole explanation, and the male pedohunters can’t relate to it at all since it’s not their conscious motivation. They are suckered into a value system like any morality police, or perhaps more accurately they exploit this value system to gain power for themselves. It is something society as a whole is doing, which is why I blame the Zeitgeist. It is not clear that we can change practices by changing beliefs or pointing the blame to anyone. Maybe it is more fruitful to think of beliefs as justifications that go along with actions. MAP Pride can slowly change those actions when more of us become open and unafraid of the morality police as is happening Iran too, though there will sadly be many martyrs along the way.

Eivind Berge said...

Our culture is in a sense worse than Iran, because presumably the Iranian morality police are at least aware they are morality police. Our social scientists made up this fake construct of CSA which now even vigilantes are enforcing in the belief that professionals handled it responsibly except they didn’t go far enough to protect children. The normies can’t fathom the social scientists are a morality police in the grips of a moral panic. As Bruce Rind said, “the moral panic acted as an extreme form of moral-political influence in biasing scientific understanding of the nature and effects of interactions classified as CSA. Because this panic is ongoing, it will not be obvious to many that any real or significant bias has been occurring, under the assumption that professionals have dealt with the issue rationally.”

However, I would not assume that “scientific” myths are necessarily more resilient than religious ones.

Anonymous said...

I know who the primary causes are. At least me, I don't know if the rest are autistic maps. What sets me apart from you is that I don't waste my time on immoral, supremacist scum called "normal straight men."

See the youtuber:
"Grown adult man tries to pick 14 year old girl. This is pathetic"

I have never seen a better definition of what 99% of normal straight men feel about an grown men who pick teenagers or very young women.

Most of them are truly disgusted by all of you, without any doubt, and are very happy with feminism and dating women their age, they are not "oppressed", while AF and others believe that men are dedicated to drooling over 13-14 year old kids... hell they wouldn't even know what to do with these kids, talk about their favorite singers?

That's what it means to be an man scum like these, straight or gay (same garbage with a different name, herpes or AIDS), most of them are the same criminal, psycho, discriminatory and hateful human garbage as the feminists (short word for female scum) LOL

Add to that adult supremacy and submission against "non-adults", we deserve hatred for not accepting the caste system and loving another caste, non-adults, we are like those who kill for falling in love with someone of another race , religion, caste etc.

BTW You see how sometimes it's worth being anonymous, when I write as Kaser (kaiser) I'm great and when feldmarschall (another German title) I'm a pathetic ephebophile scum.

Ephebophilia does not exist, yes, but it is a political construction that those of us who are oppressed to give ourselves an identity, which is how communities are defended.

Specifically, those of us who like post-pubescent teenagers from 15 to 17 years old, and if they put 19-year-olds also at our level, anyone who wanted them would also be one of us. It doesn't matter that 99% of biologically straight men desire them sexually, because socially, culturally and personally they reject them, which is what matters.

If you don't like the word ephebophilia, that's fine with me, I don't like it either, I have defended using ephebosexualty, others talk about teenlove, youthlove, etc.

I don't defend the MAP movement, I don't see it as useful, it's just a burden, but I wouldn't support the MRA or "anti-feminism" either, and that's what bothers you.

Normal straight men will never accept you even if tomorrow there was an anti-feminist revolution and we went back to 1700, that is that barbaric cult called Islam (which is human misery for men and girls), those who do not believe: look at the age of consent or marriage (which is usually the same) in Islamic garbage dumps (India, Indonesia, Pakistan, Iraq, Gaza, proposed in Saui Arabia, etc.) or even in moderately civilized countries like Lebanon, Jordan or Turkey... hell at least in Syria is 15 and they are not even pure Muslims, they are a strange thing called Alawite.

The Straight Man is a supremacist addicted to "real" women, anything that goes beyond are "false men" that deserves hatred or death, they are like Islamic fundamentalism, then the traitorous gay men have joined them and their tyranny, and now only those "attracted to minors", zoophiles and paraphiliacs are the targets of their hatred.

FM said...

My previous message goes to AF not to Eivind.

Eivind Berge said...

@Kaser/FM I disagree with you about tactics but you are right about the hate. It is so overwhelming at the moment that there is no chance our side can go viral no matter how we package it. It just doesn't work in any platform even if we manage to evade censorship, because the support is not out there. Men are assuredly attracted to 14-year-old girls but they prefer to go with the flow publicly including all their likes on social media and then break the sex laws in secret.

Let's just write for the future and use sensible words (not "ephebophilia"). And I think the MAP movement is worthy of support. It won't have political power any time soon but whatever momentum exists in that direction right now is all coming from them.

I am irrelevant to the mainstream and don't think I can turn that around anymore. If anyone new reads my blog it is only to confirm a prejudice, which is done by picking out two sentences from fifteen years ago or something like that while the rest is ignored. No one is interested in what we are actually saying because they "know" we are sick as surely as they think they can know anything. They were only ever interested in that momentary shock value to begin with and no one was ever persuaded who didn't agree with us to begin with.