It seems that there is a, frankly unbridgeable, schism developing between two sides of Male Sexualist thought.

On the one hand you have the Bergian wing. Under the ‘leadership’ of Eivind Berge, they are composed mainly of ‘paedosexualist’ LGBT, Muslim (or sympathetic to the Muslim world view), feminist supporting, Left leaning ‘MAPs’ and ‘Ephebophiles’. Their leader, Eivind, is also fervently anti- masturbation and anti-porn, although it’s unclear if any of his followers or those who identify on the same Male Sexualist wing as him, actually share his views on NoFap.

We could call them Bergians, Bergian Male Sexualists, or perhaps LGBT, as their common goal appears to be to gain acceptance within the LGBT movement, which would become the LGBTP movement. Let’s settle then on LGBTP male sexualists.

Members of the Bergians include (or comprise of) the notorious Tom O’Carroll, Holocaust 21, the notorioius Tom Grauer, and Holocaust 22(!).

The other school of Male Sexualist thought, largely rejects the idea of a movement all-together. In fact, those who might be loosely classified under the term, might not even acknowledge themselves as ‘Male Sexualists’, let alone be part of a movement.

But it’s clear that there is a very small group of bloggers and commentators left over from the early days of men’s rights and the Manosphere (and they might even reject those terms), who remain both staunchly anti-feminist, and honest about issues of male sexuality and its persecution by the feminist state.

So we wont give them a name, other than ‘Male Sexualists’ (if for no other reason than the simplest description of men who still discuss normal male sexuality). Their numbers include of course myself (the antifeminist), Scarecrow (Men-Factor), Rookh (Anglo-Bitch), and others, including commentators such as ‘Jack’, even if they comment regularly at LGBTP blogs such as Eivind’s.

As the anti-feminist wing of Male Sexualists is not really a ‘movement’ (of course, neither is the LGBTP wing), there is no ‘leader’. Just a loose and small collection of bloggers and online commentators who share certain positions (and disagree on lots!). Despite this, most or all would likely tip their hats at certain figures who went before, such as the great, much loved and much missed Angry Harry. Perhaps also, certain early figures of the Manosphere who are no longer around, an example of whom is Roissy, or those who are still here but who have been transformed into something so different as to not really be the same thing at all, like a caterpillar into a butterfly, like a beautiful teenage girl into a femihag, as ‘Ferdinand Bardemu’ into Matt Forney.

Can the two sides get along, or even, dare I say it, reconcile? The former, probably not, unless simply to ignore each other. As for reconciling, it would be in at least my view that the LGBTP ‘male sexualists’ are at this stage more of an enemy than a friend, and that the differences are irrecocnilable. Anti-porn, anti-masturbation, failing to distinguish normal male sexuality from ‘paedosexuality’ (another clumsy invention of Eivind it seems), failing to even discern the primary enemy (feminists). Eivind today seems intent on taking on the equivalent role that Paul Elam performed in the MRM, and committing the same murderous deed – taking the roots of a dangerous revolutionary but fledgling intellectual idea, cutting them out and replacing them with something benign and feminine, while still (vaguely) claiming to be fighting for men.

As for calling Male Sexualism a movement – this is almost as absurd as annointing ‘leaders’. The modern online MRM had hundreds of active participants before anyone even called it a movement, and even then, I can’t remember anyone ever calling somebody a ‘leader’. After it had been established for some time, and consisted of thousands of men active in blogs, and then on other forms of Web 2.0 (now known as social media), then many of us started to refer to Angry Harry as ‘the father’ of the MRM, or Roissy as the founder of the Manosphere (and Roissy himself called Michael Houellebecq the ‘father’ of the Manosphere). Angry Harry certainly never called himself or thought of himself as leader of a men’s rights movement. Even today, nobody has ever tried to claim a ‘leadership’ role (of course, Paul Elam did in all but name, but did not succeed).

Should we then ignore the LGBTP male sexualists, attempt to get along with them, or attack them? Perhaps ignoring them is the best option, but consider that if one side embraces the term Male Sexualism (which might be a deadweight term already because of Tom Grauer), then it might succeed in hijacking our cause, especially if ‘our side’ doesn’t particularly acknowledge that banner (Male Sexualism). On the other hand, they are such a ragamuffin band of (to be frank) autists, that they wont make any headway (thankfully). I mean, seriously, to anyone not an autist – what are the odds of a movement trying to reconcile Islam, LGBT(P), ‘paedosexualism’, normal male sexuality (though Eivind increasingly likes to pretend this is cougar chasing), NoFap and masturbation shaming, the female sex offender charade..succeeding? Or even attracting more than a dozen followers in the next 100 years?

So yes, let us ignore them (finally!).

No doubt I triggered all this with my article 2 or 3 years ago lamenting the fact that no such movement for male sexuality had arisen, and immediately up popped Tom Grauer – who did certainly have a (brief) go at kickstarting something, and perhaps he ought to be considered a (clumsy) hero for that. Unfortunately, it has to be more deft, slow, and organic than he had wished for, particularly as cancel culture (which the clueless and autistic LGBTP male sexualists don’t seem able to associate with feminists either) becomes increasingly vicious.

Certainly, despite their lofty ambitions and overblown pretensions, the LGBTP male sexualists, with their pink pussy hats and flags, and their #LoveIsLove slogans printed on their pink t-shirts, wont be storming the Bastille anytime soon.

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-54930488

A Dutch police chief has called for an end to “paedophile hunting” after a 73-year-old retired teacher was beaten up by teenagers and died of his injuries.

Oscar Dros said there was a risk more people could die and he appealed for justice to be left to the authorities.

The man from the eastern city of Arnhem was lured into having sexual contact with a minor while in a gay chatroom.

As I mentioned the other day, there doesn’t seem much point carrying on the struggle, at least not in this form. We lost. We tried our best…or at least I did…but we’ve lost. One in 4 billion men with balls and fists can’t do much alone.

I had realistic hopes when starting this blog. We were never going to defeat feminism or crush anti-sex and paedo hysterias. The aim was to show that many of us were men enough to raise our fists in defiance. At least point out who the enemy were – the femihags. Perhaps, optimistically, with the growing manosphere and more specifically the men’s rights movement at our side, we could slow the pace of legislation and hatred, until such time as society changed fundamentally (in my optimistic hope – the world of eternal youth and sex rationally divorced entirely from reproduction), that the underlying reasons for the hysterias would dissipate.

But the truth is, it was clear before very long that we didn’t have a chance. I’m not going to compose another essay in what went wrong, but /r/mensrights, Paul Elam, the ‘Honey Badgers’ etc, and the general American puritanical stupidity took over what might have been a secular, pro male sexuality men’s rights movement in the style of Angry Harry, Steve Moxon, or any number of British writers on men’s rights who had gone before.

I visited reddit/com/r/mensrights for the first time in years the other day. The first post at the top of the page was, of course, a story about a female teacher getting a short sentence for banging a lucky teen lad, and the consequent outrage from MRA arseholes in the comments section. One of them actually said something close to ‘equal injustice for all’, as a thing to be proud of (‘the fight for justice is equal’ or such). I almost threw up. I doubt if the story on the Dutch teacher being beaten to death by anti-paedophile vigilantes was even posted (what has this to do with men’s rights dude?).

The only thing that remains is for digital archaologists in the year 3,000, probably Chinese or Turkish or something like that, to uncover our writings, and conclude as evidence that there was some defiance in that brief, inexplicable period of terminal decline of the West, when trannies were held up as normal and attraction to fertile youth was the worst perversion imaginable.

But there’s really no hope of that. They certainly wont call it the ‘Male Sexualist Movement’, taken over as it has by paedophile activists, MAPs, feminists, and other anti-porn puritans.

I stated the other day that the only good thing about Eivind’s blog is that he does allow comments still. Of course, it’s rapidly being taken over by the aspie paedophiles and MAPs that he chooses to ally himself with (and then clumsily distance himself from). One such creature claimed I have been proven mistaken in my opposition to feminism all along, because Judith Levine has got a new book out, and Ruth Ginsburg wanted to lower the age of consent to 12.

Well, well, well. I guess that totally overrides the fact that the vast majority of the countless NGO members working day and night to further increase the odds of creatures like him to be raped in prison (not to mention ordinary people like you and me), are hardcore feminists. Not to mention that the age of consent was raised from 12 to 16 or 18 in the West by feminists, and today, they have raised the age at which a girl is automatically assumed to have been raped, no matter how willing she engaged in sex, to 13 (in the UK) or 15 (in France). In fact, this aspie paedophile actually thinks that Ruth Ginsburg, who implemented that feminist treaty into law in the USA (or tried to) – raising the threshold to 12 – actually meant that I’m a fool for not getting behind her and her fellow feminists.

As I wrote a while ago when the bitch croaked :

The words above may upset the several followers of Eivind Berge’s ‘MAP NO FAP’ movement (I will not mention Eivind again in this post), given that Ruth was a feminist, and the alt-right pedocrites have been quick (while taking a break from fapping to anime 8 year old girl pics) to promote nonsense viral memes suggesting she wanted to lower the age of consent. In fact, she was simply arguing for the case (pushed by feminists on a global level and now introduced worldwide) for sex with under 12’s to be automatically considered rape, no matter however willing. Indeed, she also stressed that this and other age of consent laws should apply equally to women having sex with boys. So maybe Eivind and his MAPs wont be a fan of her’s after all (O.K., I lied about not mentioning Eivind again), although MRA paedocrites will.

What I remember most strikingly about Ruth Ginsburg is her quote soon after taking up her role, of comparing sex offenders to a virus that ‘needs to be eradicated’. In the feminist Sexual Holocaust against men, this evil cunt has certainly been one of the leading players.

As for Judith Levine, great she’s got a new book out. Probably the only book she could sell, given that her name is permanently associated with her first one (the excellent ‘Harmful to Minors’). To say that she, or Camille Pagilia, somehow prove that feminists are our natural allies instead of the enemy, is like saying that MRAs believe that women should be allowed to have sex with 12 year old boys because of Eivind Berge’s writings.