Morrissey Puts the MRAs to Shame

The iconic former lead singer with 80’s band ‘The Smiths’ – Morrissey – has had the balls to say things that are simply taboo for so called ‘men’s rights activists’ these days. In an interview with a German news magazine, he defended both Harvey Weinstein and Kevin Spacey, as well as speaking out on sex with minors.

Morrissey has attracted controversy after defending Kevin Spacey over allegations of sexual abuse.
He said the star had been “attacked unnecessarily”, adding it was “ridiculous” that Spacey was being erased from an upcoming film.
The former Smiths singer also argued that definitions of harassment and assault have become too broad.
“Anyone who ever said ‘I like you’ to someone else is suddenly being charged with sexual harassment,” he said

He then goes on to attack the present climate on sex with minors, stating the obvious fact that musicians have always had sex with underage groupies, and asking if we will end up jailing everybody (most ‘MRAs’ would apparently be happy with every man being jailed for ‘paedophilia’ so long as a few cougar teachers are put in prison with them).

Morrissey added that many famous musicians had slept with fans who were under the age of consent.
“Throughout the history of music and rock ‘n’ roll there have been musicians who slept with their groupies,” he said, while clarifying that he was not one of them.
“If you go through history, almost everyone is guilty of sleeping with minors. Why not throw everyone in jail right away?

http://www.bbc.com/news/entertainment-arts-42050512

http://www.spiegel.de/spiegel/morrissey-ueber-brexit-kevin-spacey-und-merkels-fluechtlingspolitik-a-1178545.html

If there is a huge backlash against Morrissey’s comments on underage sex, we can only hope that unlike the gay leader of the alt-right – Milo Yiannopoulos – he doesn’t lose control of his bowels and instead stands firm.

The paedohysteria aspect of the witchhunts sparked by the Harvey Weinstein scandal may mark a turning point in that for the first time, feminists appear to be targeting homosexual men and, encouragingly, it seems that a few prominent gay men are fighting back on behalf of their condemned brothers. As I’ve repeatedly argued here over the last ten years, the homosexual/feminist alliance was a pact of opportunism that will never survive in the long run. Homosexuals wanted liberation, feminists wanted to paint a picture of ‘tolerance’ while they embarked upon a brutal assault on normal male sexuality. But the elephant in the room was always homosexual pederastry. There had to be an underlying tacit assumption on the part of both parties, with both sides agreeing to forget about pederastry and pretend that homosexuality has nothing to do with the sexual attraction to teenagers. Homosexuals in effect sold their soul to the devil in return for feminist protection. Now that feminist witchhunts are targetting prominent gay men for fondles with fresh chicken decades ago, the feminist/homosexual alliance – ‘a union as uneasy in its fundamentals as the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact‘ – will be strained like never before.

In an ironic way, the fake MRAs of A Voice for Men and the Honey Badgers such as Hannah Wallen may inadvertently speed this along. With their obsession with forcing sexual victimhood upon boys and validating feminist age of consent laws, they are inevitably reawakening latent mob persecution of the homosexual. I once wrote an article here attacking their absurd support for the claim that ‘1 in 6 boys has been sexually abused’, pointing out the obvious fact that not only does it imply that a huge percentage of men are paedophile child sex abusers, it entails that the majority of homosexual men are active paedophile child molestors.

Homosexuals from Socrates to Alan Turing, and indeed Mozza himself, were enamoured with the beauty of boys. Homosexuality is male sexuality free from the constraints of chimpanzee female monogamy, or at least it was for thousands of years until, ironically, homosexuality was ‘legalized’ by the feminist/gay lib pact. Without the female need to be protected and provided for by one ‘alpha male’, and without the reproductive aspect of the sex act, male heterosexuals would behave just like homosexuals did throughout history until their so called ‘liberation’. It would all be about chasing young tail. And in fact, that’s how heterosexual men, or at least those with power and status, did behave in the 60’s and 70’s era. Now feminists are forcing them to pay the price, but whether by design or by simply ‘collateral damage’, so are homosexual men, and this could be the game changer.

All the streets are crammed with things
Eager to be held
I know what hands are for
And I’d like to help myself
You ask me the time
But I sense something more
And I would like to give
What I think you’re asking for
You handsome devil
Oh, you handsome devil
Let me get my hands
On your mammary glands
And let me get your head
On the conjugal bed
I say, I say, I say
I crack the whip
And you skip
But you deserve it
You deserve it, deserve it, deserve it
A boy in the bush
Is worth two in the hand
I think I can help you get through your exams
Oh, you handsome devil
Oh, let me get my hands
On your mammary glands
And let me get your head
On the conjugal bed
I say, I say, I say
I crack the whip
And you skip
But you deserve it
You deserve it, deserve it, deserve it

**UPDATE – it just occurred to me that there are very important parallels between the gay liberation movement and the men’s rights movement. In the early days of gay rights, it was taken as granted that what was being fought for was liberation of the ‘pederast’. In fact, I’m not sure that the term ‘homosexual’ was even used before the 1960’s. As the movement grew stronger, it was infiltrated by ‘sympathetic feminists’. Very soon, ‘homosexuals’, who were simply delighted to have such powerful allies, allowed themselves to be distanced from the ‘pederasts’ who, of course, had ‘nothing to do with homosexuality’. Fifty years later, we’re seeing the end results. Famous gay men being ‘outed’ amidst feminist anti-male witchhunts as child abusers for alleged fumbles with teenage boys decades ago. At the same time, supposed ‘victories’ for gay rights such as ‘gay marriage’ simply validate female monogamy and the female self-interested system of sexual ethics.

Similarly, feminist age of consent laws and the demonization of normal male sexual attraction to teenagers was always part of men’s rights, as it obviously should be. However, as the movement grew, leading individuals such as Paul Elam allowed the infiltration of ‘sympathetic women’ (of course, claiming to be actually ‘anti-feminist (although Paul Elam did actually once flirt with reaching out to overt feminists and even claimed to be a feminist himself)). Very soon, weak imbeciles and useful idiots such as Elam were so happy at winning persuasive female support (and finding donations were going up, as well as work as therapists for ‘sexually abused men’) they readily agreed to denounce any MRAs who continued to speak out on paedohysteria or the age of consent. The feminist age of consent now has ‘nothing to do with men’s rights or anti-feminism’. In fact, the feminist age of consent should be higher because boys need protecting from gay men cougars! Of course, any intelligent reader and real MRA can see what the end results will be for men.

Leave a Reply