The Men’s Human Rights Movement claims that 1 in 6 boys have been sexually abused. Now let’s be charitable and assume for the moment that their intentions in supporting this claim (that comes from a radical feminist study) are noble, with the genuine interest of men and boys at heart, rather than the selfish desire to grab for themselves a share of the trillion dollar profits generated by the feminist child abuse industry each year.
Are they doing more harm than good in spreading this message?
Is claiming that 1 in 6 boys are sexually abused something that will help men? In particular, will it lead to fewer false accusations? Fewer pointing fingers at fathers walking their 5 year old sons in the park unaccompanied by their wives?
Perhaps it will lead to a reduction in the general demonization of men as ‘potential paedophiles’, or perhaps it will have no effect on these things, and simply be a good thing in itself if society becomes aware and takes more action to stop 1 in 6 boys being abused, and as we all know, being emotionally crippled for life.
Well let’s start with some simple mathematics.
AVfM claims that a feminist study has revealed (and then supressed the fact) that 1 in 6 boys have been sexually abused, and that half of the paedophiles who abused those 1 in 6 boys were women. They (AVfM) made great play of this ‘fact’, presumably with the conviction that if such knowledge can be made available to the wider public, the demonization of men as paedophiles will indeed come to an end.
But hold on a moment. If half of those boys were abused by women, then that means half were abused by men, and that means that around 1 in 12 boys have been sexually abused by men.
Yes that’s right, one of the leading goals of the men’s human rights movement appears to be to spread the message that 1 in 12 boys are sexually abused by men.
Now we know that each individual paedophile may abuse many victims. But it’s also true that many paedophiles commit their crimes in cohort with other paedophiles, via ‘child sex rings’ and such like. Many may even act individually, but abuse the same unlucky or vulnerable boy. For example, one underage male prostitute could be abused by hundreds or even thousands of male clients. This is made even more possible by the advance of technology. One 17 year old boy could strip on webcam for the illicit pleasure of countless male ‘paedophiles’ around the world. Under the definition of child sexual abuse that the radical feminists used, and which AVfM supports, every one of those men watching the boy strip would be party to his abuse (at least if they were more than 5 years older than him).
So I think we can fairly say that if 1 in 12 boys have been sexually abused by men, then there are probably at least 1 in 12 men out there who took part in the abuse.
That’s a whole lot of men abusing boys. Not only that, but the implications of this in particular for homophobia and the demonization of homosexuality are truly horrendous. If we go by even the most liberal estimate of the percentage of the male sex who are homosexual – say 10% – and we assume that it is homosexual men who abuse boys, just as it is heterosexual men who abuse girls, then it means that nearly every homosexual male in America has sexually abused a boy.
Now I have to state categorically that this is NOT MY VIEW. It is CLEARLY FUCKING RETARDED NONSENSE that only a fucking simpleton with a strategic or intellectual IQ of minus 50 could possibly believe. I have stated categorically also that the claim of 1 in 6 boys being abused is UTTER NONSENSE THAT WAS FARTED OUT OF THE ARSEHOLES OF A BUNCH OF RADICAL FEMINISTS. But, nevertheless, if AVfM believes that 1 in 12 boys have been abused by a man (i.e. a homosexual) then it appears to follow that AVfM believes that most homosexuals are child sex abusers. Given that most of the male leadership of the MHRM is openly homosexual, this is somewhat bizarre. But no more bizarre than holding that you believe in ending the social demonization of men (misandry) and yet at the same time thinking it makes sense to spread the message that 1 in 12 boys are abused by men and that therefore 1 in 12 men are likely child sex abusers.
But our exercises in mathematics and logic should not stop here.
Accepting feminist figures on the abuse of boys means we must surely accept and validate feminist figures on the abuse of girls. Here, those same feminists who think 1 in 6 boys are abused, claim that at least 1 in 4 girls are sexually abused, but unlike with boys, feminists claim that it is men who are overwhelmingly the abusers – 92%, in fact.
So if 1 in 4 girls are being abused, almost entirely by men, then it follows that close to 1 in 4 men are abusing those girls. If we combine this with the idea that 1 in 12 men are abusing boys, then it is hard to deny that at least 1 in 4 men is a child abusing paedophile.
Yes, the official position of the men’s human rights movement appears to be that at least 1 in 4 men is a child abusing paedophile.
And this is men’s rights. Or at least, men’s ‘human’ rights.
God help us.