David Futrelle Pleads for an End to the Regulation of Internet Pornography & Paedophilia in 1995, Fearing ‘Mass Arrests’

David Futrelle O FaceWhatever pornographic newsgroups David Futrelle was checking out back in the notorious ‘Wild West’ days of the early internet, they must have contained some darned addictive stuff.  How else to explain the following curious, and also somewhat disturbing plea, for the government not to embark upon the regulation of internet pornography and the protection of children from obscene material and paedophiles…in 1995?


In the article, Futrelle rails against the proposed ‘Communications Decency Act’ – the first piece of legislation designed to protect children from images such as bestiality and child rape online, as well as intending to protect them from solicitations and indecent messages from paedophiles, something which was also a growing concern at the time.

From Wikipedia :

Passed by Congress on February 1, 1996, and signed by President Bill Clinton on February 8, 1996, the CDA imposed criminal sanctions on anyone who

knowingly (A) uses an interactive computer service to send to a specific person or persons under 18 years of age, or (B) uses any interactive computer service to display in a manner available to a person under 18 years of age, any comment, request, suggestion, proposal, image, or other communication that, in context, depicts or describes, in terms patently offensive as measured by contemporary community standards, sexual or excretory activities or organs.

It further criminalized the transmission of materials that were “obscene or indecent” to persons known to be under 18.

In Futurelle’s article, which appeared in the printed magazine ‘In These Times’ in 1995, little concern is displayed for the protection of children and, indeed, the arguments and evidence used by child protection advocates are mocked in the very same disdainful way that he has since made famous in his current incarnation as ‘Manboobz’ (only the target these days is not anti-paedophile campaigners, but men’s rights activists… and in a display of astonishing psychopathic selective amnesia, often accusing them of paedophilia for attacking paedohysteria and draconian 21st century laws on pornography).

Futrelle ends his article with the following plea :

…short of draconian regulations of speech, mass arrests and the virtual dismantling or disabling of much of the vast worldwide network, there is almost nothing that can be done to ensure that the Net remains always and forever free of improper images and words

This is somebody who once described a grown man’s fantasy of sexually assaulting a boy in a bar as ‘tender’ and ‘erotic’.  He also wrote extensively on the 1990’s child sex abuse panics, denouncing them as hysteria at a time when even prominent child protection organisations such as the NSPCC were leading campaigns promoting them.  In another shocking article, perhaps the very worst that he has written, he appeared to suggest that adults who rape and impregnate underage children should be spared jail (“we can’t send them all to prison”).

I say the worst, but the truth is that I have read only a fraction of the hundreds of articles that Futrelle spewed out in the 1990’s, long before he apparently tired of fapping off to porn and hit upon his ‘Manboobz Meet-Ups’ scheme.  The thought of what is still lying out there in the dusty internet archives, waiting to be re-discovered, almost sends a chill down my spine.

And probably his too.


11 Comments on "David Futrelle Pleads for an End to the Regulation of Internet Pornography & Paedophilia in 1995, Fearing ‘Mass Arrests’"

  1. Ironic fact of the day – the following Futrelle article is actually referenced in Judith Levine’s ‘Harmful to Minors’, the most famous attack on age of consent laws :


    David Futrelle also quotes Levine in the article. They appear to have worked alongside each other at Salon magazine.

    Maybe Futrelle can tell us if Juidth Levine is a paedophile or if she gets a pussy pass from that accusation of his, despite being the most famous ‘statutory rape apologist’ in the world?

  2. Another Futrelle classic :


    Attacks Victorian morality and in particular Josephine Butler and the social purity movement feminists who raised the age of consent to 16.

    “But even the Butlerites couldn’t heed their own advice, at times falling back on coercive strategies to control the sexual behaviour of young girls.”

    Err…what can that statement of yours possibly mean David, unless it is referring to the Butlerites raising of the age of consent from 12 to 16?


    Also puts the white slave trade in quotes, apparently mocking it as hysteria, despite it being the primary justification for the age of consent of 16.

    I see Fraudtrelle is bitching on his site that I’m ‘misrepresenting’ him for an article he ‘wrote in the 90’s’.

    This is a guy who deliberately lied that I wanted to scrap the age of consent all together and who devotes his entire blog to misrepresenting MRAs and taking quotes out of context.

    This is somebody who today appeared to condone violence against an old man for an interview he gave in the 1970’s (and was probably misquoted).

    There is no way any fair minded person can read Futrelle’s articles from the 1990’s and not be struck by the complete reversal in his (apparent) attitude towards child sex abuse hysteria.

    Doesn’t have anything to do with a ‘manboobz meetup’ does it?

  3. ‘And was probably misquoted’

    As nearly as I can tell, all Farrell had said in the 1970s was that incest had worse potential for psychological damage in boys than in girls. Apparently he also concluded that the definition of what constituted incest was too broad and could be employed to accuse men of abuse when nothing had actually occurred.

    And we all that prediction didn’t come true, right? HAW! Just ask Jerry Sandunsky; a football coach who cracked jokes in the locker-room shower with some teenaged boys and is doing 46 years in the pen for it. Or his boss, Joe Paterno, who got the whole Jimmy Saville treatment (before and after his death) for simply not taking allegations seriously.

  4. If I remember correctly, femihags Hillary Clinton and Janet Reno were lobbying ferociously for passage of that bill. I wonder what Fraudtrelle thought of them then?

    BTW, that bill passed a Republican-controlled Congress: so much for the Socons being less anti-male than the Radfems.

  5. If you read the article you will notice it is written from a pro-gay point of view. The 5th paragraph says the women who is being charged was a member of an organisation which Among other things,[…] has fought against the legislative entrenchment of gay rights.

    It’s gay activists exposing femiservative anti-gay paedocrites. All the same, not bad at all.

  6. It’s gay activists exposing femiservative anti-gay paedocrites. All the same, not bad at all.

    Until the mid-nineties, femiservatism was the place to go if you wanted to control male sexuality (unless you were a ‘radical’ feminist).

    Most ‘progressive’ feminists, even in the 90’s, of which David Futrelle was one, and which was epitomised by Salon magazine which he wrote for at the time, were strongly pro-porn of just about any kind, and would regularly publish articles questioning the age of consent, supporting ‘jailbait’ non-nude porn etc. As I said, Judith Levine wrote for them alongside Fraudtrelle.

    I found an old David Futrelle site (David Futrelle’s girly page) last night, that was linked to by another site (also defunct) that linked to beastiality and all manner of things. He even claimed in one edition that he would love the job of an internet porn family filter editor and stated that he disagreed even with such filters that protect children.

    Meanwhile, back in the 70’s, feminists in Sweden were legalising hardcore child pornography (of any age children) because ‘children have a right to sexual expression’.

    Futrelle wants us to put his 90’s articles in context, but he won’t put an interview back in the 70’s in its proper context (made by somebody who was a feminist at the time).

    Farrell can perhaps be judged a little naieve to give such an interview with a porn magazine, not realising that they would ‘sex it up’ a little. Then again, there’s no evidence I know of that it caused a stir at the time. Such views (even the likely distorted views now attributed to Farrell) were common at the time.

    Seems that Futrelle himself has always supported whatever viewpoints on sex that will most likely get him laid with other feminists.

    Given what Futrelle was writing about little more than a decade ago, I can’t begin to imagine what viewpoints he would have been supporting when it was hip to do so in the confused sexual anarchy of the 1970’s. I can imagine that he would have made Farrell look positively prudish.

  7. Highwayman:
    I went through the paedocrite’s femiservative website (the Alliance for Defending Freedom), and although they talk a lot about religious liberty and the sanctity of marriage; I haven’t seen any articles yet defending the rights of religious sects who don’t recognize the AOC laws.

  8. I wonder if this is the slimeball’s grandfather – notice the uncanny physical resemblance, along with the shared (rare) surname, as well as profession (writer) :


    Returning from Europe aboard the RMS Titanic, Futrelle, a first-cabin passenger, refused to board a lifeboat insisting his wife board instead until the point of forcing her in. His wife remembered the last she saw of him, he was smoking a cigarette with John J. Astor. He perished in the Atlantic. Futrelle’s last work, “My Lady’s Garter”, was published posthumously later in 1912. His wife inscribed in the book, “To the heroes of the Titanic, I dedicate this my husband’s book” under a photo of her late husband. On 29 July 1912 his mother, Linnie Futrelle, died in her Georgia home; her death was attributed to grief over her son’s death.

    Seems like being a mangina runs in the family!

  9. Antifeminist:
    That IS an uncanny resemblance. I don’t know whether the Paedocrite-in-Chief would surrender his place in lifeboat, though.

    Ha—when I looked up one of the links, Mrs. Futrelle gave testimony at the inquest of the Titanic’s sinking. She mentions that J. Bruce Ismay, managing director of the cruise line, was in charge of the lifeboats. LOL—Ismay and Esmay sound remarkably similar too!

Comments are closed.