That’s Disgusting! – This is what a paedocrite looks like
It’s time for the 2012 David Fraudtrelle Paedocrite of the Year Award – and you get to choose the winner!!
It’s been an outstanding year for those of us who like to observe the human male mind’s endless capacity for self-deceit and nauseating hypocrisy over the ‘perversion’ of finding nubile post-pubescent 17 year old ‘children’ attractive. All of the candidates below are worthy of the title, but unfortunately there can only be one winner in this highly contested and prestigious category.
You can vote for up to THREE paedocrites below :
Who was the worst Paedocrite of 2012?
- David Futrelle (54%, 27 Votes)
- Carolina Courtland (22%, 11 Votes)
- Adrian Chen/Gawker Media (20%, 10 Votes)
- Jay Hammers (18%, 9 Votes)
- Gregory M Pyle (14%, 7 Votes)
- Eryemil (12%, 6 Votes)
- Kyle Payne (10%, 5 Votes)
- Lisa Biron (10%, 5 Votes)
- Arthoir An Broc (8%, 4 Votes)
- Farnham01 (2%, 1 Votes)
Total Voters: 50
Loading ...Kyle Payne : Male feminist and anti-porn blogger Kyle Payne had already served time for violating and filming a sleeping college girl under his care as a student counsellor – a position he obtained through his feminist activism. Despite this, he continued to blog in support of feminism and against ‘the objectification of women’. This appeared to be finally put to an end when he was caught downloading kiddy porn whilst out on probation – but no, Kyle was soon back blogging on the evils of pornography, even calmly explaining how he invented his feminist persona purely in order to get into positions of trust and authority where he could sexually abuse women and children (yet claiming that now his feminism was ‘for real’!!).
Farnham01 : Left a comment at the Telegraph demanding that a fellow commentator be ‘checked out’ by the police for showing a non-conformist lack of paedohysterical outrage at the alleged half-a-century old crimes of deceased celeb Jimmy Saville. A quick Google of his username predictably revealed a Daily Motion account full of videos of semi-naked Japanese schoolgirls and dancing preteens.
David Futrelle : The master paedocrite himself, 2012 was a vintage year for Fraudtrelle and his unique brand of unashamed psychopathic rank paedocrisy. Fat-troll reached a height of split personality selective amnesia last month – condoning the violence and intimidation by feminists against students wishing to hear Warren Farrell speak on the grounds that he gave a controversial interview on incest back in the 1970′s, whilst he himself wrote numerous articles much more recently protesting against the raising of the age of consent from 12 to 16 as co-ercive and puritan means of ‘controlling the sexuality of young girls’ and even whining about the first internet regulations against paedophilia and pornography online.
Adrian Chen/Gawker : Adrian Chen doxxed an anonymous Redditor behind truly sick categories such as ‘beating women’ and ‘dead kids photos’. However, these subreddits themselves seemed to be of little moral concern to Chen. He was doxxed because he also ran a popular subreddit featuring fully legal (in the USA, at least) pictures of clothed teenagers in bikinis and tight jeans. According to Chen this was child pornography, and he and Gawker magazine had already sucessfully put pressure on the owners of Reddit to close it down. However, when ‘Violentcranz’ began another subreddit devoted to voyeuristic candid shots of shy women and teenagers wishing to preserve their privacy and decorum by wearing transparent leggings in public, it was the last straw for Chen. But in a show of schizophrenic selective amnesia that Fraudtrelle would likely even blush at, Chen forgot that only a couple of years previously Gawker Media was publishing photos of a naked underage child, as well as continuing to regularly publish illegal upskirt photographs of adult celebrities. Not only that, but Gawker Media had been deriving a significant proportion of its income (and hence ability to pay Chen’s and Jezebel’s wages) from advertising an adult network that included a porn site promoted as containing images and videos hacked from the social network accounts of teenage girls and which featured girls who looked as young as 13.
Eryemil : This shining example of the next generation of Reddit men’s rights activist sees the feminist holocaust of male sexual attraction to teenage girls as a ‘sob story’, yet sympathises with rapists of 3 year olds, likes erotic pictures of teenage boys, and even advocates for necrophilia – something he considers ‘harmless’ fun. Quoting feminist patriarchy theory, this self-declared ‘moral relativist’ and MRA also sees heterosexuality as inherently abusive, and considers same age homosexual relationships between adults with identical interests and hobbies as the only form of truly consenting sex. Apart from fucking dead toddlers.
Arthoir An Broc : mRA and regular commentator at men’s rights sites, Arthoir went into full on paedocrite rage mode when loyal and esteemed reader Alan Vaughn dared to question paedohysteria. This was despite Arthoir himself previously (and very articulately) questioning the age of consent and draconian statutory rape punishments at another site. This in itself wouldn’t be enough to make Arthoir a contender for paedocrite of the year, but the fact that he appears to pay young women (at least two of which – ‘alliemadison12′ and ‘cherrypop’ – were presented as clear jailbait) to pose as his girlfriends on Facebook does turn him into a formidable rival even to Fraudtrelle himself.
Gregory M. Pyle : A McHenry County sheriff’s deputy formerly head of child porn investigations and charged this year with sexually assaulting a young boy AND taking explicit pictures of a 10-year-old boy and transmitting them over the Internet
Carolina Courtland : One of only two females to make the the list, Carolina is a self-published author of trashy vampire gothic erotic novels aimed at kids. Despite claiming that any man who has sex with a 16 or 17 year old is a paedophile, Carolina writes fiction novels that portray 200 year old men seducing virginal teenage kids – clearly expressing her own sad fantasy of being a ripe young virgin again, still able to attract older Alpha males. Her books would undoubtedly be classed as child pornography under the United Nations definition and possibly prosecutable under laws in most countries of the world. At least if she was a man.
Jay Hammers (JeremiahMRA) : A late addition to the list, the author of the fine essay ‘The Age of Consent is Misandry’ has since descended into a dark hole of drugs, gender identity confusion, paedocrisy, and general insanity. Hammers contributions to men’s rights thus far consist of alienating the most powerful MRA – Paul Elam – on the paedohysteria issue by trolling him relentlessly for not being left-wing enough and ignoring global warming, then running like a little bitch as soon as Elam decided he’d had enough and things turned nasty. Jay Hammers now contributes to the cause by endlessly trolling men’s rights sites under the name of JeremiahMRA, claiming that even the likes of the Spearhead are run by left-wing manginas. Recently, whilst high on drugs and in between marathon sessions on his PlayStation (he is in his forties), Hammers proved to himself that he is a real man by leaving comments here demanding that 14 year old sluts be stoned to death, along with his own graphic sexual fantasies. Showing MikeeUSA levels of insanity (I suspect they might even be the same person), Jay doesn’t seem to realise that if all 14 year old girls were stoned to death for having sex or showing flesh, there wouldn’t be many 14 year old girls to have sex with. The age of consent would then certainly be a waste of time.
Lisa Biron : Radical Christian anti-pornography femiservative, the type that Jay Hammers would like to force all males to spend their lives married to, was charged this year with allegedly taking a teenage girl across the border to Canada to have sex with, which she then videotaped and photographed.
Well I cast my vote, but must say it was one of the most difficult polls I’ve ever had to cast a vote in! They are all almost equally paedocritical!
Is it possible to have a numbered voting format, where 1 is the biggest and 10 is the smallest paedocrite? On second thoughts: Nah! Forget it, that would be even tougher!
Haha, you’re right Alan.
BTW, unfortunately I will have to approve all comments now because of the idiot JeremiahMRA, something that will obviously slow down discussion here.
@theantifeminist,
Yep, fair enough and in a way probably a good thing, although a lot more work for you which isn’t so good…
That’s the nicest photo of Puketrelle I’ve seen. He looks so much better without all that facial hair.
I voted for Carolina Parakeet because she’s not in the running for top spot and I like to barrack for the underDOG. I am pleasantly surprised at how well she’s doing, though. It’s not like she doesn’t deserve it. Her novels I’m guessing bring in more money for her than Fraudtrelle’s activities do for him.
I’m actually Carolina’s campaign manager and I’ve come up with a slogan: Don’t be a white knight. Vote for Carlolina Parakeet!
That was fun.
The letter to ECPAT I’ve been writing is almozt done, though it might not be finished before AOC month ends.
This was a tough choice, but more entertaining (and more productive) than the recent US presidental elections!
With comments closed yesterday, I spent the evening going over Sabrina Vaz videos. I felt like she deserves a different kind of ‘stoning’, but due to EUssr standards, I won’t elaborate further…
The EUssr paedocrites probably prefer JeremiahMRA’s version of stoning anyway. Maybe we should send him to Brussels where he’d no doubt be employed tracking down ‘sex offenders’. He’s really no crazier than the others already engaged in that business! LOL
Maybe it’s just my interest in psychology, but comparing JeremiahMRA and MikeeUSA, I’ve noticed two interesting patterns:
1. Both are politically right-wing to the point of outright fascism. JeremiahMRA got banned from the Spearhead for praising Anders Breivik and MikeeUSA paid several compliments to Osama bin Laden over at Rookh’s.
2. Besides their idolization of right-wing terrorists, they both have obsessions with grotesque execution methods. Jeremiah favors stoning; Mikee favors beheadings. People who’ve read Freud can’t help but notice the obvious sexual symbology here, sort of in the same way paedohysterical commenters are with stake-burnings (i.e. ‘the fires of passion’).
3. Both are monomaniacs who seem to have a pathological need to force their perverted sexual fantasies on the world at large, as though it were some kind of religious mission.
The diagnosis: they’re both a couple of serious fruitcakes! LOL
@theantifeminist
About Carolina Courtland – Accomplished and esteemed child pornography author, you said this:
I read all of the Paedocrite of the Year Award, candidate’s summaries earlier today, but the one for Carolina really stuck in my mind. It was still stuck there while I was sitting in an aeroplane, traveling from Melbourne to Brisbane, (which I just disembarked from about 10 minutes ago) and I started chuckling away again as I remembered your words, especially what I’ve highlighted in bold text. Several other perplexed passengers seated near me were staring, clearly thinking I was either drunk or crazy, or both!
Thanks theantifeminist for helping me make a fool of myself. LOL!
@theantifeminst-Here I go again-I’ve just pasted a more readable version on the Barbarossaaa article.
Until I went to send the letter to Brarti Patel I didn’t realise how much errors in the Word Version with italics and bold text etc., were compounded in a version without those things. Sheesh!
Some may think I’m off track with the common law stuff but I think I’m pretty much on-track.
If you want to put it up as an article I’d be happy to correspond with you by email about it and iron out remaining mistakes or otherwise improve it.
I won’t say another word about it unless someone else does.
Not sure exactly what on Earth you’re hoping to achieve there. Do you think she’s going to study it or even read it and then think ‘hey this guys right’?
Although the common law stuff is interesting and definately worth pursuing, I have a number of very serious issues with it.
For example, when you say that ‘to be honest, adults having sexual relationships with 14 year olds creeps me out as well’, we’re definately straying into paedocrite territory here.
And there were two other things in there that unsettled me even more than that.
@Dog meat,
To make bold text or strong text, italic text or even bold italic text on this or other Word Press blogs, you need to learn and use basic HTML codes for Word Press blogs and include the codes in your posts. Most of the codes will work with other blogs, i.e blogger posts too.
You can find a great little tutorial on WP HTML editing, including a handy little app – ‘Try it Yourself’ editor, right here:
Alan:
Thankfully, they didn’t know what you were laughing about, or you might have taken aside for some ‘waterboarding’!
My candidate, Aoirthor, seems to be losing. It was really difficult to surmount the prodigeous efforts Fat-Troll mounted during the last two months; or JeremiahMRAs last-minute push. However, I think with the expanding co-opting of mainstream that Aoirthor may have a good shot at next year. Especially if his exploits in the Phillippines and SE Asia get more attention! LOL
@Dog Meat
OK, I’ll say something:
If your article is the VERY long-winded one that was (it’s no longer there) posted under the Barbarossaaa article, all I can say is that it was too long and too detailed for the purpose I think the letter was supposed to serve.
I was also a bit disappointed when I read that you agree that adults having sexual relationships with 14 year olds is creepy behaviour (or words to that effect), thus couldn’t be bothered reading much more beyond that.
If I couldn’t be bothered with it, I’d say the femihags it was addressed to, would probably be even less interested…
Offering logical and empirical arguments to those in the upper echelons of the world’s gynocracy, (or ANY feminists), is somewhat like offering them excrement on a plate and expecting them to sit down and eat it then complimenting you on your fine selection of cuisine.
They simply will not read it and even if they did, they will counter your arguments with even more nonsense, more junk-science and even bigger than their normal sized well
researchedrehearsed lies, anyway.What you must also understand is that our indoctrinated society will listen to THEM, long before taking you or any other MRA seriously, especially one trying to question the dominant narratives surrounding AofC laws and ‘protecting children’ (from predatory paedophile bogey-men, that they believe are everywhere).
Adults having sexual relationships with 14 year olds is not very common, is it?
No, it’s not common, for obvious reasons. If you mean to imply that Dog Meat is right to describe such relationships as creepy, then it’s a bit of a circular argument.
Anyway, the point is that it seems odd that Dog Meat has provided such a cogent argument to attack ECPAT’s (successful) attempts to have such relationships criminalized when travelling abroad and yet thinks such relationships are ‘creepy’. To my mind, that implies a moral judgement.
The thought of two men pleasuring each other leaves me slightly nauseated, but that wouldn’t stop me defending homosexuals from persecution. It’s just an instinctive physical response (my nausea) that I can’t help avoiding, as a heterosexual. It’s not a moral judgement at all. On the other hand, if I found homosexuality ‘creepy’…(which I don’t).
Yeah, I’d certainly go along with that. As I explained above, I stopped not long after reaching the part where (he proclaimed) to agree that men with 14 year olds are creeps, thus thought it as blatantly paedocritical and actually gutless.
I was thinking to myself that he was using you or even this blog (and all of us too) as a sort of shield – expressing your views instead of coming straight out and admitting that he (and he alone) is a paedohysteria dissenter and WHY he thinks the Draconian laws need to be repealed…
If he’s going to do that he might as well sign it with your name or anyone’s name but his own too.
As I explained to him in my follow-up comment, his argument would probably amuse the bitter femihags he was supposed to be addressing and even further validate, or strengthen their resolve for even more oppressive, anti-pervert laws!
@Dog Meat
You’re STILL saying it and it DOES make you a fucking paedocrite!
WHY are you creeped out by this?
The whole point of us disputing feminist NORMAL male sexuality law is that what 2 consenting ADULT people do in their private lives and in their privacy of their homes is THEIR business; not the bitter / jealous sexual trade union’s, nor the manipulated media enterprises and governments the bitter / jealous, man-hating femihags control.
It was only as recently as 2 generations ago, even in our Western society, that relationships (that creep you out) were not only acceptable, they were common and most importantly: were also LEGAL. (I.e. my own maternal grandparents).
Many millions of people are still alive today who MARRIED, LEGALLY when they were 14 or 15 year olds and even had their own children, who THEY (not the feminist totalitarian state and its brainless feminist-indoctrinated thought police like today), protected THEIR children from everything dangerous!
I doubt whether ANY of them (well, perhaps 1 in every 100,000) felt any need to protect their kids from paedophile bogie-men (that today’s paedohysterical public, mostly believe lurk in every home and on every street corner).
At the end of the day, the sexual trade union literally control our sex lives. They do so with ridiculous and oppressive laws that demonize and CRIMINALIZE normal male sexual responses and behaviours.
If 50 year old (or any age) men want to have young adult 14 yr/old girlfriends (yes, young adults, NOT ‘children’) and have fully consenting sexual relationships with them, it is THEIR business, not the sexual trade union’s, or the paedohysterical public’s, who are ‘CREEPED OUT’ by such fully consensual relationships, because they, like YOU: have been fooled by the nonsense feminist propaganda about such relationships…
You, Dog Meat are embarrassed by their lies and cannot admit (even to yourself) that young teenage girls are sexually attractive to you. You have no reason to feel ashamed or to admit that – it is NORMAL (if you’re not gay or a necrophiliac or other REAL pervert), to find nubile and fertile young women sexually arousing. I do and so does every other normal red blooded man on this planet!
Frankly: I am not ‘creeped out’ by anything that other people do in their private lives, providing whatever it is they do together does not HARM ANYONE else. What they do is none of my business, so how or why should their behaviour ‘creep me out’?
A 14 year old girl having a consenting sexual relationship with an older boyfriend is hardly HARMFUL to anyone else, especially not to me. It is however, very harmful to a bitter and jealous feminist, for reasons any regular reader of this blog knows and thoroughly understands.
Apparently, it creeps you out too – you said so, thus you at least want anyone reading your letter to think it does (so in their eyes, you appear to conform with the feminist dominant narrative: that men who are attracted to what their pc language defines as a ‘child’ are creeps or paedophiles and you endorse that narrative by claiming they ‘creep you out’).
That’s what makes you a paedocrtite.
Speaking of paedocrites, it looks like JeremiahMRA is already working on getting next year’s award:
http://www.men-factor.blogspot.com/2013/01/it-has-begun.html
Alan:
To be honest, the thought of a normal male wanting sex with a 50-something cougar like Madonna is creepy to me. Still, I wouldn’t outlaw such behavior.
What bothers me most about what Brady is arguing is that that kind of cougarism is exactly what the EU/US femihags want to foist on everybody else as the ‘new normal’.
The problem with ‘creepy perverts’ going after teenaged girls is BECAUSE of the AOC laws. Just like gun control and anti-drug laws: when a behavior is criminalized, the criminals move in and take advantage. The reason that respectable men aren’t pursuing teenaged girls is because they are legally prohibited from doing so. The real perverts—who don’t care about the law—have no problem with it.
If the EU femihags were really concerned with protecting younger women, they would recind AOC laws and go after (genuine) sex predators. But protecting women isn’t their real agenda.
@Eric,
Thanks Eric, you’re right on there.
That sentence says in about 30 words, most of what I was trying to point out to Dog Meat in a reply of over 500 words!
However, I have to disagree about what you say about men finding >50 y/o femihags attractive, being ‘creepy’, simply because as I pointed out to our friend Dog Meat (and maybe NOW he might understand me): if that’s what they like and enjoy, it is THEIR business, not mine and if they love each other, their relationship has my full endorsement, just as a 50 y/o man with a <18 y/o girlfriend (or back in the good days: wife), would have my full approval.
My whole point being: what has the private sex lives of ANYONE got to do with anyone else for a start; and therefore: what gives the bitter / jealous feminist hags the right to control every man's private sex lives in any way whatsoever..? Let alone the totally unforgiving, intolerant and SELFISH ways they are doing so at present?
Our society is now bordering on the verge of anarchy, where we have paedocrites accusing other men (paedocrites) of being paedophiles, (no) thanks to the totally destructive ‘child-abuse’ myths and hysteria that the sexual trade union fabricated for no good reasons, other than to try and relieve their own bitter and twisted sexual jealousy!
“About 5% of my search engine traffic comes from NSPCC researchers.”
LOL—sounds like I’m probably on another watchlist!
But that well illustrates the point I was making to Dogmeat—how many of those NSPCC researchers are changing policy because of what they’re reading here? None, of course. The object is to educate enough reasonable citizens to change the government policies and see groups like NSPCC abolished.
Alan:
You might remember that it was Hillary Clinton herself who coined the term: ‘It takes a village to raise a child.’ Sentiments, BTW, which are still fully endorsed by Dean Esmay’s new sidekick Erin Prizzey.
Of course, if child-rearing becomes the interest of society at large, sexuality as a social concern logically follows.
When I said that chasing cougars was creepy, I meant it as a personal opinion, which is what Brady did with interest in teenagers. The point here being that if sexuality is social and not personal, the laws can cut both ways. There’s no logical reason for banning one or the other, except as a personal opinion. And when sexually repressed jealous femihags and white knights are making the laws those ‘opinions’ are going to turn into outright mania, like we saw with Sir Jimmy Savile who, if he were alive today, might not escape burning at the stake!
@ TheAntifeminist-
I’m glad you liked some of my letter anyway.
I’m still baffled by the reaction I’ve received. There’s no point in arguing about it any further.
Some of the people who think I’m a dickhead could perhaps use the energy it takes to knock me to
contact ECPAT or NSPCC and ask them some hard questions. Or politicians, for that matter.
In fact, I don’t care who uses any of my material. I’d prefer to be given some credit but I don’t even much care about that as long as it gets used, because I think it is useful.
About the lawyer bizzo with ECPAT, that’s an interesting one. I’m not about to delete their emails to me and those emails, along with the whole question of how they view common law, may be worth asking a lawyer about. Considering these questions appear to be quite embarrassing for them, others could take 5-10 minutes emailing ECPAT about them.
The article that vanished was strange in other ways than its dislike of common law and national constitutions. There was this strange double standard where Sweden is criticised because it sets its o/s AOC at 15, yet Japan is not and the article shows Japan set, at the time of writing, its o/s AOC at 12. Even then it’s only
if there is forceable rape(in other words it’s not something I have a problem with).
Australia’s CST law gets praised but at 16 is said to be too low. It’s far from my intention to defend femihag-dominated Sweden and Australia but surely Japan should be criticised first by ECPAT’s own logic. I read there’s some sort of connection between ECPAT and the Japanese government re funding-maybe that’s it. Then again, maybe it’s simply that they didn’t really read what they wrote.
The Article That Never Was might turn up one day. Maybe some disgruntled former employee will dig it up.
ECPAT is a sexual trade union. Trade unions protect the interests of their members, in this case, seeking to maintain the highest possible sexual ‘wages’ for its members. As far as I know, ECPAT is a mainly European organisation. It might have many Australian members and affiliates, but probably not so many Japanese femi-hags. The age of consent in Japan is not so much of a threat to its members, but the age of consent in Australia is, and the aoc in Sweden definately is.
Of course, what Japanese society and culture does do to bring down the ‘market value’ of European hags is its historical acceptance of ‘child pornography’ – this cannot be tolerated in the internet age, and so ECPAT and all the other Western femihag trade unions do put enormous pressure on Japan to introduce the same draconian laws they have forced on us here.
BTW There was a case in which an accusation of committing an indecent act with a child under 16 outside Australian territory, was dismissed because the court believed the Defence that the accused thought the alleged victim was over 16.
They’re only interested in enforcing a UN treaty and common law doesn’t come into it, clearly enough.
BTW DogMeat. I noticed in your letter you didn’t mention anything about sexual trade unions or sexual jealousy, but a lot about the possibility that ECPAT might have been created by Virgin Atlantic in order to bankrupt budget airlines who can’t afford to get sued for faciliatating sexual tourism.
I take it you don’t have much sympathy with my absurd and outlandish theory that older women with unprescedented political power will misuse that power to restrict the sexual availability of younger women?
Sometimes I feel like hitting my head against a wall, lol.
I’ve said it before, I’ll say it again – if just 100 people regularly left simple comments underneath MSM articles and news reports pointing out the clear and obvious sexual motive of these hags, it would possibly be enough to slow the pace of legislation.
@Eric
I did understand what you meant there – you even said “Still, I wouldn’t outlaw such behavior”.
You and I are both ‘on the same page’ with this one anyway.
What I was mainly trying to point out to Dog Meat was, that to use phrases like ‘creeped out by’ (older men with what the sexual trade union has indoctrinated society to accept as ‘children’) is not at all helpful to his, or OUR cause.
Speaking (writing) in those terms is effectively validating their nonsense and justifying their misandry. He’s either against their ridiculous laws or he isn’t. There can be no half-way or sitting on the fence with issues like these.
If he believes the law is unjust and probably illegal then he should say so.
Not half agree with it by validating it with comments like “I agree that men with 14 year old girls are creeps”…
Indeed.
I have no time for paedocrites here, whether they claim to be on the same side as us or not, and especially not when they appear to hide behind me in order to further their own goals.
However, although it concerns me that Dog Meat doesn’t understand our concerns, let’s give him a clean start and another chance.
For Sure!
Believe me Dog Meat, I DO think what you did was undoubtedly courageous and you do indeed deserve my respect and you have it!
I just hope in future you won’t effectively spoil what could probably be true and EFFECTIVE Men’s Rights Activism with clumsy mistakes like agreeing with femihag cows that ‘older men with young girls creep you out’.
Apart from your open letter, I generally (and genuinely) enjoy your commentary and believe you have some great ideas…
Eric wrote:
“To be honest, the thought of a normal male wanting sex with a 50-something cougar like Madonna is creepy to me.”
What if the normal male is a 50-something himself?
Birds of a feather flock together.
Only because they can’t get anything better. A 50 year old man actually wanting sex with a 50 year old woman, even a relatively well-preserved cougar, over a nubile young woman or girl, is creepy
In fact it’s still creepy even if you can’t get anything better. I would rather use my hand whilst fantasising over some hot 17 year old than have sex with a wrinkly hag.
Alan:
LOL—today I was having lunch in a Sushi place. I overheard the two femihags in the next booth bitterly complaining about a ‘creepy’ relative of theirs who, at 45, had the audacity to marry a much younger woman.
Then I heard that his prospective wife was 34!
My attention though was distracted by the cute 20-something Asian waitress. I had an interesting talk with her after lunch—and out of the corner of my eye saw the two femihags and a mangina in another booth sending icy glares in our direction!
Antifeminist & Anon:
I’ve observed that those guys who settle for aging cougars when they really wanted something better and younger are usually the most flaming paedocrites and White Knights of all. A specimen of which is Socon White Knight Dr. Thomas Fleming who recently said:
‘Feminism does not cause men’s failures. Men’s failures cause feminism.’
Fleming is also an admirer of the barbaric Assyrian Empire and often fantasizes about Assyrian modes of punishment being inflicted on pornographers and paedophiles who ‘exploit women’.
@Eric
I get those same icy glares from the same types of bitter and JEALOUS femihags and manginas almost every time I go somewhere in public with my wife.
I hope you did what I always do: stare even more icily back at them, until they look away – clearly embarrassed at how I let them know, that I know what they’re thinking…
Another spin-off from feminism and it’s related paedohysteria, is how blatantly RUDE it makes the average person. They seem to think because a man might be a ‘creep’ through their paedohysterical eyes, they have some sort of feminist endorsed and approved ‘right’ to ignore normal manners and courtesy.
Of course that same attitude is also quintessential to the encouragement of paedophile vigilantism, which feminists and their supporting white-knight manginas are more than happy about…
The antifeminist wrote:”A 50 year old man actually wanting sex with a 50 year old woman, even a relatively well-preserved cougar, over a nubile young woman or girl, is creepy”
So is a 50 year old woman wanting sex with a 50 year old man over a young man also creepy,or are the attraction cues for women completely different than the attraction cues for men?
@Anonymous
No, it wouldn’t be creepy, and yes, the attraction cues are very much different for men and women. Not sure how you’ve gone through life thus far not noticing that. This is why 45 year old Daniel Craig can play the lead in James Bond and have females from 11 to 70 creaming their panties at the sight of his muscular athletic body and handsome angular features matched with his powerful charisma and dominating personality.
And yes, men prefer youth and beauty, women prefer power in both physique and character. Women over 40 simply cannot hold on to their youth and beauty, whereas men, if they try hard, can even increase their physique and character.
But really, I’m not the person you should be having an argument with, you should be addressing your concerns to mother nature. Nature is cruel and sexist. That’s life. This is why we have Christianity and Islam and most religions. We trick men into marrying young nubile women and try to ensure that it is the only way they will ever get sex, and thus be reasonably satisfied even when the girl turns into a woman with a loss of sexual appeal day by day until he finds himself waking up to a hag every morning. Nature is cruel to women, and religion is a balancing act that also provides a benefit to civilisation (an of course now that society has become largely secular, feminism is trying to take over the role that religion played – at least in terms of protecting female sexual needs).
@theantifeminist-
“BTW DogMeat. I noticed in your letter you didn’t mention anything about sexual trade unions or sexual jealousy, but a lot about the possibility that ECPAT might have been created by Virgin Atlantic in order to bankrupt budget airlines who can’t afford to get sued for faciliatating sexual tourism.”
Strangely enough it simply didn’t occur to me. Others’ mistakes and omissions are easier to see than your own.
Far from dismissing the sexual jealousy theory, I consider it fundamental to any understanding of what’s been going on-with sex tourism laws, pornography, guilty-until-proven-innocent, divorce and child support, you name it. I regard sexual jealousy as axiomatic. It’s human nature.
I could have mentioned it in my letter and given Bhati a good kick in the ovaries. Oh well, it’ll go in any revised version I might send somewhere.
There are three reasons it would be useful to include sexual jealousy and sexual trade unionism.
1/ It is mind-numbingly, obviously true that this is what ECPAT and the femihags are doing.
2/ Women are very susceptible to shaming. The situation is a bit like the Emperor’s New Clothes. Feminists are only able to criminalize millions of men and jail thousands to be raped in prison through obvious pure jealousy and self-interested sexual motives because for some bizarre reason, out of the 3 billion men on the planet, the handful of commentators at this site are the only ones who will call them out on it. As I said earlier, I reckon it would only take a few dozen of us to do so again and again and the shame and embarrassment the femihags will feel when they see men are recognising and actually pointing out what they are doing, might actually be enough.
3/ It opens the possibility that the femihags could actually be prosecuted under existing laws covering rape, attempted rape, or sexual harrassment.
Alan:
“…give icy stares back at them.”
Unfortunately, I’m so intuned to their jealous motives that I have to keep myself from laughing. That invariably causes whatever nubile young foreigner I’m with to start giggling, which pisses the paedocrites off even more!
When I’ve been out on an actual date with such women another trick is to give the paedocrites a knowing ‘don’t you wish you were me (or her)’ smile and a wink. That tactic especially infuriates White Knights. I actually made a White Knight bite his tongue in a restaurant once doing that! LOLLLLLL
Eric,
Yes it does make one wonder just WHY these manginas choose to be creepy, crawling heroic white-knights to biter, jealous and FUGLY old bags, when they could just as easily be in our shoes and go out with and enjoy great sex with real girls!!
What makes them even more hard to fathom is that those femihag bitches and cows they protect and grovel to, wouldn’t piss on them if they were on fire or help them in any way, when they need ‘protecting’.
They’d more likely run them into the cops on some trumped-up ‘rape’ allegation for not tearing down a misogynist’s anti-feminist poster.
These manginas might be better off arranging a meet-up with manboobz!
Dick-heads…
Alan:
I think a lot of it is what Rookh calls the ‘Pedestal Syndrome.’ These jokers actually believe, along with their leading spokes-mouth, Dr. Thomas Fleming, that bad women are the product of bad men. Of course, in their own minds they are the ‘superior’ types who rise above the mere flesh (in spite of the fact that most of them would love nothing more than to ‘rescue’ and ‘re-educate’ all these wayward teenaged girls from our evil clutches after a good stake-burning).