Paedocrites Out of Pocket

It’s been a bad week for the finances of three of the biggest paedocrites on the planet.

Gawker Media has been ordered by a judge to pay Hulk Hogan 115 million dollars for a voyeuristic sex tape they published without the wrestler’s consent. Gawker posted the sex tape at a time when they, along with master paedocrite David Futrelle, were running a successful self-righteous campaign against voyeuristic reddits such as r/creepshot and r/jailbait. Gawker has a history of publishing indecent upskirt pictures of female celebrities but even more disturbingly than this, also made a large percentage of their revenue from advertising revenge child pornography as I documented here : http://theantifeminist.com/when-gawker-staff-wages-paid-revenge-child-porn/
Somewhat bizarrely, my article never went viral, even at the height of the GamerGate wars.

The David Fraudtrelle 2015 paedocrite of the year Simon Danczuk has also found himself out of pocket. The shameless sleazeball and child spanking fan, who made his name accusing deceased political opponents of being child spanking perverts, has agreed to repay over £11,000 in expenses he falsely claimed as a Member of Parliament.

Finally, things just keep getting worse for arsonist, domestic abuser, and anti-paedophile vigilante’ Stinson Hunter. The subhuman piece of garbage was planning on holding a ‘live show’ in Coventry, England this month, but ticket sales for the paedocrite meetup have apparently been abysmal. Perhaps not surpising given that claims have emerged that the convicted arsonist, who recently uploaded a video of himself urinating on the underwear of his 14 year old looking girlfriend, allegedly once sang about his intention to suck the the penises of small boys whilst a member of pathetic punk band ‘Ubercuntz’. Even hardened paedocrite fans of Stinson couldn’t apparently stomach that.

51 thoughts on “Paedocrites Out of Pocket”

  1. Now it ’emerges’ that he was arrested for possessing ‘extreme’ pornography when the police raided his home. He apparently had one video showing a woman having sex with an animal. So kissing a 15 year old girl and watching a whore being fucked by a dog – neither ‘offence’ would be illegal in the majority of Europe, yet in the UK he is treated as one of the worst criminals imaginable.

    It also emerges that he is a supposed ‘sex addict’ who ‘treats women as objects’. His case almost reads like the culmination of the demonization of male sexuality in the UK, though I’m sure things can still get even worse.

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/law-and-order/12202923/Adam-Johnson-to-be-sentenced-for-child-sex-offence.html

  2. Excuse me for asking a dumb question here, and I’m not nitpicking or trying to be pedantic either, but are these 2 comments really on topic?
    What I mean is they both appear under a topic discussing the woes of three confirmed paedocrites, in fact, ‘three of the biggest paedocrites on the planet’.
    Is it really fair to classify Adam Johnson as a paedocrite, or even to associate him with the topic of paedocrissy?
    I wouldn’t have thought so. Please correct me if I am wrong here, but I’m more inclined to consider him a bit of a martyr and definitely an unfortunate victim, who has just been genuinely and thoroughly RAPED by the totalitarian feminazi state.

    I was quite surprised and disappointed when I opened the link “http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-35891143” (which doesn’t contain any names and I hadn’t seen the second one in the next comment which contains the words ‘Adam-Johnson’), to the BBC story about his 6 year prison sentence, in your first comment; when I was expecting and in fact hoping, to find yet another story naming and shaming my favourite, vile, psychopathic criminal and the world’s most blatant paedocrite, yet national hero: Kieran Parsons. Or, maybe even another scoop on the current Paedocfinder General and David Fraudtrelle 2015 Paedocrite of The Year – Simon Danczuk…

    But…
    SIX YEARS??? For that… Essentially NOTHING? Why are we the only ones who see this huge elephant in the room? Mind boggling and frightening isn’t it?
    I wonder if our favourite DM reporter Katie Hopkins will have anything to say about this. If she does, I hope she will use the same honesty and common sense thinking she applied to her last story about him and the medieval mindset of the paedohysterical British Lynch-mob public.

  3. Excuse me for asking a dumb question here, and I’m not nitpicking or trying to be pedantic either, but are these 2 comments really on topic?
    What I mean is they both appear under a topic discussing the woes of three confirmed paedocrites, in fact, ‘three of the biggest paedocrites on the planet’.

    Well I don’t think anyone would assume I’m accusing Johnson of being a paedocrite (I have no idea if he is – the fact that he has been accused by quack police psychologists of ‘being a sex addict’ suggest he isn’t). I don’t think I’ve posted an article on Adam Johnson at all and all the ‘recent'(i.e. last 3 months) articles have been about paedocrites. I posted it on the latest article because 1/ it’s easier for readers to find and 2/ as I post one a article a month these days compared to 2 or 3 articles a day up to a year or so ago, it’s a bit less important as to putting comments under the most relevant article. I once chastised Jon over the issue it’s true, for posting one of his comments that were invariably about the age of consent under the one article out of 10 on the home page that wasn’t about the age of consent. Also, you were right to point out the recent comment made by Concerned that was about a topic that I had written an article on just below the article he posted his comment under – i.e. it demonstrated that he hadn’t bothered to read my article (one of the reasons I’m now semi-retired as an mra). That hardly applies here (I didn’t write an article on Adam Johnson, and if I did, I would have read it methinks.).

    Basically, as I think I mentioned recently, I only bother posting new articles these days so that the comments from the handful of readers I have left can be ‘refreshed’ (ie. a new comment thread opened).

    As for posting an article on Adam Johnson as mentioned I’ve semi-retired this site now. I think I’ve paid my dues of 8 years of my life spent on this site, and all the risks as well as the general time sink it represents. At the end of the day, I had about 5 genuine readers (one of whom is you) and spurned maybe one genuine worthwhile non aspie activist (Holocaust21) who tried to utilize some of the tools, attitudes, and memes I attempted to convey here. As I’ve said, if we could just have 100 individuals who would go out and post the ‘paedocrite’ meme for example at every opportunity, scream from the rooftops that feminism is the rape of male sexuality and a sex union/pussy cartel, and point out again and again such things as the age of consent of 16 hails from the Victorian era etc, then I do believe the tide would be turning. As it happens, ‘mainstream’ individuals such as Katie Hopkins are speaking out (nothing to do with me or us, of course), and maybe paedohysteria will simply run it’s course or eat itself.

    On a related note, I e-mailed Angry Harry today, so hopefully I’ll have news to relay soon.

  4. It’s sad that you have to retire this site, but I certainly understand you for doing so. I feel in a way, partly responsible because I stayed away too long – I’m aware that I did at least contribute in some way towards keeping things active or ‘lively’ here and my sudden disappearance wouldn’t have been very helpful. I always love to comment on most of your posts because I really enjoy your writing style and especially your sense of humour! I’ve sometimes been laughing that hard, my guts hurt, let alone tears of laughter…

    As for the above comment about being off topic, I was really only talking about my initial reaction – I saw the first comment with a link to an article and immediately clicked it, expecting to see a story about Parsons or Danczuk, but didn’t.
    At the end of the day, who really cares what topic a comment gets posted under anyway, yet ironically (can you read my mind)? I was actually recalling how you told that Jon a while ago, to try and post his comments under more relevant topics, thinking that you preferred to keep everything ‘tidy’ and in proper order, but also realized that now you’re winding things up, probably don’t really worry about trivial matters like what gets posted where anymore. I should have said something like that, just so you’d know I wasn’t really complaining…

  5. to try and post his comments under more relevant topics, thinking that you preferred to keep everything ‘tidy’ and in proper order,

    With Jon in particular it’s more to do with not letting critics of this site, within and without the men’s rights movement, dismiss it and myself as being obsessed with the age of consent and simply ‘riding on the coattails of the MRM’ to fight that issue. As well as this, as I alluded to regarding Concerned and his recent off-topic comment, it betrays the fact that the commentator hasn’t actually read my articles and appears to be using my site as simply a vehicle for his own particular views.

    Also, I’m only using the comment of Concerned as an example (not many other examples recently) as he left a very good comment here a few months back that demonstrated that he has a sounder grasp of the arguments I’ve made here than most, and that he is a genuine reader. Just on this occasion, it appears he hadn’t read my post on the rapefugee doublestandards before making his comment (under an unrelated article), and you were right to point it out.

    As for your absence at least we had Eric and a couple of others while you were away, imagine how blank the comments here would be now if you hadn’t come back.

    We also haven’t seen Opus for quite a while.

  6. “I think I’ve paid my dues of 8 years of my life spent on this site, and all the risks as well as the general time sink it represents”

    What do you mean by “all the risks”?

    I really wish we could communicate via E-mail. Shit just got real for me over here… I am experiencing the risks, and realizing that we are now in a full fascist society where “thought crime” is a very real thing. You do not go to jail for it – but there are other repercussions. Try getting rid of a facebook profile for example…

    After you get rid of it – do a google search for the profile.

    BTW – the death threats I received on facebook were totally unrelated to my blog – they were in fact coming from somebody else (nothing related to feminism).

  7. I am experiencing the risks, and realizing that we are now in a full fascist society where “thought crime” is a very real thing. You do not go to jail for it – but there are other repercussions.

    Err… Prisons are rapidly filling with “thought crime” offenders – child-porn possession for instance, to the point they are already full to capacity and where Paedofinder Generals are ordering new prisons to be built, to house and of course, punish the rampant influx of “thought crime” perpetrators.

    You definitely DO go to jail for it and many thousands already are in jail for it…

  8. and realizing that we are now in a full fascist society where “thought crime” is a very real thing. You do not go to jail for it – but there are other repercussions.

    In the UK and Europe more and more people are getting arrested for saying things online. In Belgium the day after the terrorist attacks a teacher was arrested for tweeting – ‘how can I teach when my pupils celebrate the attacks?’.

    But yea, the risks are that thousands and thousands of crazies and paedocrites would like to see me hanging from a noose for running a site like this.

    Just think of what Roosh went through recently, and he was a typical manosphere writer who wouldn’t touch the subject of paedohysteria/age of consent for fear of the blowback, even attempting to accuse SJWs of ‘wanting to lower the age of consent’.

  9. @Alan – on the subject of thought crime, I see also that hags in your country are trying to ban ‘child sex dolls’ :

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3501037/That-devices-exist-abhorrent-Petition-seeks-ban-importation-depraved-child-like-sex-dolls-Australia.html

    It’s absolutely no concern to them that all the evidence (and common sense) suggests that such dolls are a substitute for the real thing, and hence if preventing real ‘abuse’ is the goal should be encouraged rather than banned. They just can’t stand the thought that a lot of men might prefer to have sex with a young looking doll than a fat middle-aged entitled skank.

  10. A good example : http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/law-and-order/12205303/I-confronted-a-Muslim-tweet-suspect-says-he-will-sue-Metropolitan-Police-after-race-hate-charges-are-dropped.html

    He has now told The Mail on Sunday he now plans on taking legal action.
    “I cannot understand why I was detained, my flat trashed, my passport seized and two PCs, two tablets and my phone taken,” he said.
    Mr Doyle, a partner at a south London-based talent and PR agency, allegedly posted a tweet on Wednesday morning saying: “I confronted a Muslim woman in Croydon yesterday. I asked her to explain Brussels. She said ‘nothing to do with me’. A mealy mouthed reply.”

  11. They just can’t stand the thought that a lot of men might prefer to have sex with a young looking doll than a fat middle-aged entitled skank.

    Absolutely. And an even bigger problem is that almost no other men can see that blatantly obvious fact either. In fact, they would very likely label us ‘misogynists’ for merely suggesting it and soon, we’ll be (legally) detained and have our homes raided etc., similarly to Mr Doyle and his tweet, on suspicion of committing such a serious thought crime.

  12. I apologize – when referring to risks – I was not referring to men wanting to have sex with young women. I was referring to just being against feminism in general.

    That in itself – is a thought crime.

    Suggesting that sex-trafficking is more myth than fact – is a thought crime.

    Suggesting that 1 in 3 or 1 in 4 or 1 in 5 or 1 in 6 (get your factoids right!!!!) is an exaggeration – is a thought crime.

  13. What about this case for exemplifying the utter stupidity of the paedocrite legal system : http://www.miltonkeynes.co.uk/news/crime/would-be-olympian-jailed-after-flying-400-miles-to-rape-a-12-year-old-girl-in-milton-keynes-1-7288355

    Two lives ruined for absolutely no reason.

    “The court had heard how Van de Velde’s child victim had been consumed with guilt in the wake of his arrest and felt responsible for him being in custody.”

    That was actually used against him – that she was so fucked by his arrest and trial she started self-harming.

  14. From the Harvey Proctor story –

    “I do believe there should be a change in the law. And in this I agree, very few things I agree with Sir Bernard Hogan-Howe, that there should now be anonymity before charge for suspects as well as alleged complainants,” he said.

    Now that’s something I have never quite understood: I thought the farce law already and always has, mandated such anonymity for an accused person, until found guilty of ANY offence. Yet it seems not to apply to sexual offences, especially whenever the accused perpetrator (as in 99.9% of cases), is male.

    Is it actually legal for the press or other news reporting agencies to publicly name (and shame) anyone so accused, before the allegations are even heard and judged by a court of law?
    Also, whenever an accused man person is found not guilty and the case against him / her dismissed, the female accuser is still protected by total anonymity, when she he / she should be named and publicly SHAMED, since their false allegations probably destroyed an innocent person’s reputation and often his or her life…

    Surely this is a FARCE (not law)?

  15. It is a shame your site has died, I didn’t agree with everything you said, but my god you are brave to say it.

    That is the problem, in the current witch hunt it is near suicidal for men to fight against it. Adam Johnson got six years for nothing, if he not met the girl who, lets be honest, seduced him and decided instead to go home and beat his girlfriend. He would have got a lighter sentence and I doubt his career would have been detroyed. That is how nuts the world is.

    I don’t share your optimism about the pedo crisis, I think it will get worse. Feminists demanding thought crime laws for even questioning the madness.

  16. Schoolgirl beaten up, hair pulled out, head stamped on by a gang, bystanders film it instead of helping and upload video to social media.

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/crime/12207408/Bystanders-film-schoolgirl-14-as-she-is-beaten-up-by-two-teenagers-in-Staffordshire.html

    Could have been worse – she might have been that poor girl who seduced a multi-millionaire footballer then realized (after some therapy) that she had been ‘abused’ by him.

  17. Could have been worse – she might have been that poor girl who seduced a multi-millionaire footballer then realized (after some therapy) that she had been ‘abused’ by him.

    Indeed and why is it that only about 0.001% of the population (i.e. that tiny selection of non-paedohysterical aspies, who understand feminism and its wicked ideologies), see it that way and would make such an informed and intelligent comment?
    Honestly, we’re akin to fugitives, or a gang of escapee prisoners who are somehow roaming free amongst a population of moronic, primitively superstitious and fucking IGNORANT inquisitors!

  18. http://www.returnofkings.com/84213/soccer-star-gets-6-years-in-jail-for-fingering-teenage-girl-while-female-abusers-get-lighter-sentences#disqus_thread

    Pretty crap article (I should really post a new article there myself – I thought the standard of writing has risen above the likes of me, but apparently not) but some good comments underneath. Seems the majority think he should have gotten a slap on the wrist at most, with the only contrary voices the ultra-conservative paedocrites claiming that girls must be protected because they’ll be ‘ruined’ (straight out of the 19th century social purity textbook).

  19. Why are feminazis trying to increase the age of consent in the Caribbean islands? Didn’t they campaign for 16 a few decades ago, but now they want it to 18?

    Are feminazis increasing the age of consent for inflation? Of course those laws will only apply to girls. Notice how the majority of “children rights” activists are from the US or Canada.

    Feminazis and “child rights activists” have been pressuring countries like St. Vincent, Barbados, Trinidad and Tobago, Antigua, Jamaica, Guyana (ex-British Guiana) to increase their age of consent to 18. Trinidad recently raised the age of sexual intercourse consent to 18, but made provisions for “sexual touching” consent at 16, and exceptions under the Hindu and Muslim Acts.

    Here are some of the stories. I sense some kind of American-Canadian feminist agenda to increase the feminist trade union of sexual scarcity.

    Barbados-
    http://www.barbadostoday.bb/2015/07/21/change-the-age-of-consent-to-18/

    St. Vincent and the Grenadines
    http://www.looptt.com/content/sexual-health-group-says-raising-age-consent-will-not-stop-violence

    Guyana
    http://guyanachronicle.com/please-dont-tinker-with-the-age-of-sexual-consent/

    So much push from these feminazis to jack up the age of consent like that? Will 18 be the new 16, and 21 the new 18 in the future?

    The Caribbean is not that pussywhipped, but remember that these countries are FORCED to abide by UNICEF, UN and US feminist NGO treaties or else they might end up getting “democracy” served to them..

  20. You need to do an article for the Caribbean people regarding this “trend” of governments being forced to increase their age of consent from 16 to 18 under the powers of American and Canadian “child rights advocates”.

    Antigua and Barbuda-
    antiguaobserver.com/govt-mulls-raising-age-of-consent/

    Jamaica-
    http://rjrnewsonline.com/local/childrens-advocate-continues-to-press-for-raising-age-of-consent

    Trinidad (raised to 18, but “sexual touching” allowed at 16, and marriage by Hindus and Muslims allowed exceptions which might infuriate UNICEF and UN agenda)
    http://www.looptt.com/content/childrens-authority-comments-age-sexual-consent

    Many of these Caribbean countries are being dictated to increase their age of consent by apparent feminazis using the US, Canadian and UN establishments as proxies. Jamaica might be the only country in the Caribbean to refuse the feminist push, but it’s insane how out of all issues such as poverty, crime, armed robberies, etc the feminazis are forcing the governments in the Caribbean islands to put “age of consent to 18” as a national first priority. It’s strange and messed up.

    I hope you research on this phenomenon and make an article. It’s peculiar how feminazis are trying to impose their moral crusade on the Caribbean islands like that. Maybe the locals should deal with those feminazis when they step foot in their countries by telling those incarcerated young men who will be in jail for sex with a 17-year-old how the foreigner feminazis created such laws which caused them to go in jail!!

  21. Okay, so I read up on some news about Guyana, which is a country of around 800,000 people and suffers from a high per capita of random violent robberies and kidnappings. However, the “age of consent should be 18” is being set as a priority. Lemme get this straight…Guyanese people are getting victimized by armed robbers due to the high crime, and all these American agencies want is to jack up the age of consent to jail more young men? At least one guy had balls and the newspapers published his letter too; a letter which would have been labelled “controversial’ or “banned due to misogyny” in Canada or UK

    http://www.kaieteurnewsonline.com/2016/03/31/putting-teens-in-jail-to-be-raped-is-appalling/

    I looked up on one of the individuals behind raising the age of consent and she looks like an old white scarecrow. She is an American UNICEF activist too. Old women behind raising the age of consent in a crime-ridden country where a person is more likely to die from armed robbery than an STD or violent rape. Way to go feminazis!

    In Barbados, the local women activists disagree with raising the age of consent to 18 because it will definitely put more young adults in jail
    http://www.barbadostoday.bb/2015/11/06/bfpa-against-raising-the-legal-age-of-consent/

    These American and Canadian feminazis are very eager to focus on “age of consent should be 18” on other people’s countries. Damn.

  22. @King of Spades – that’s extremely disturbing to see the Anglo femihags forcing the Carbibbean nations to raise the age of consent to 18. I guess South American countries like Argentina and Brazil will be next in line.

    Also, in countries that have a problem with gangs, violent crime etc amongst the male youth, I would have thought the last thing on Earth you would want to be doing is to further deprive these young men/boys of legal pussy.

  23. Meanwhile, a mass grave of women and children, many of them beheaded, discovered after the liberation of Palmyra :

    http://www.ndtv.com/world-news/mass-grave-of-victims-of-isis-found-in-syrias-palmyra-1316207

    Thousands of young girls being raped, sold as sex slaves, and tortured and beheaded by ISIS, but for feminists the key global issue is raising the age of consent in Third World nations. Not a peep out of them about what’s happening in Syria and Iraq, just proposals to make the non-muslim males on the planet equally as sexually deprived which leads to such violence and depravity and real misogyny.

    I will try to write an article if I have time based upon the links you have left here.

  24. The old Anglo feminazis are picking on countries like Mexico, Colombia and Brazil for their age of consent laws too.

    The common stereotype by BOTH Marxist feminazis and Trad-con Feminazis is that American and Canadian men who go into Mexico are “looking for 12-year-old girls because the age of consent in Mexico is 12”. However, many states in Mexico have their age of consent from 16-18 for older people. The age 12 theory is a feminazi hyperbole used to shame men from travelling abroad.

    A while back, when Brazil was hosting the World Cup, there were numerous news articles complaining how Brazil will become a playground of “child prostitutes because the age of consent in Brazil is 14”.

    These old Anglo feminazis and their hypocritical beta cucks don’t seem to realize that the age of consent rules in Latin America are designed in a way where an older teen or young adult male isn’t going to become fodder for the prison system for a consenting relationship with a 14-year-old, because traditional Latin American societies view a girl as a woman when she reaches menarche.

    Old Anglo feminazis blow everything out of proportion that they blindly accuse those countries with age of consent laws less than 18 for harbouring the social ills which are ironically found in the tradcon Vatican City where priests molest very young boys yet have their tradcons in the US to call to increase the age of consent to 18 in every space on earth.

    US Foreign policy is so feminized that dating back to the Bush era, there were campaigns to justify invasion into Iraq because “to protect the women from abuse”. This gained public support, but look at the mess the Middle East is in now, with all of that toddler trafficking going on as you hyperlinked before.

    Now it looks like the main objectives of NATO countries are to force other countries to increase their age of consent to 18 and beyond, or else they might get “democracy” given to them or become penalized from the IMF and World Bank.

    Fifty years ago, the US foreign policy was to stop Communism; Now US foreign policy is fixated on increasing the age of consent to 18 and beyond.

    The old Anglo feminazis only want to raise the age of consent to 18 to affect teens and young men. However, reading one of the letters from the Caribbean, the old Anglo feminazis don’t seem to be so “activist” against naughty female teachers who fuck under-16 male students.

    I wonder if all of this feminazi campaigns to increase the worlwide age of consent to 18 and beyond will backfire, or if that will be used against them in the future in case there is World War 3. I have a feeling that many countries resent these feminazis, but they can’t say anything for fear that the US, Canada and other NATO countries will exercise either sanctions or violent warfare in their countries.

    I’ve read how Brazil REFUSED to criminalize prostitution and the country rejected monetary offers from the US government to criminalize prostitution. Later on, the articles keep on coming which demonize Brazil as some hub of toddler trafficking.

    The old Anglo feminazis don’t understand that the rest of the world is not like Canada or the US where they can sit their fat, stink asses on a make-work government job and bitch all day about fake oppression. In Other countries, people can end up dead if a child’s parents refuse to send their 13-year-old daughter to work as a prostitute for a pimp.

    The life is different. A teenager might have to choose whether to sell her body for the next meal or starve. Old Anglo feminazis actually believe that third world countries have the luxury to print money out of thin air to pay for feminazi programs.

  25. Guyana appears to have some very Red Pill people. This lawyer literally defended the rights of defendants over false accusations of sexual abuse.
    http://www.kaieteurnewsonline.com/2016/04/03/the-sexual-offence-act-is-legally-and-seriously-flawed/

    But then again, in that country, armed robbers go on killing sprees and only get a few nights in jail. I wonder if the Anglo Feminazis in Canada will go crazy knowing that they targeted a female lawyer Madam Marie Henein because she successfully did her job in representing BDSM radio host Jian Ghomeshi against false accusations.

  26. Seems the majority think he should have gotten a slap on the wrist at most, with the only contrary voices the ultra-conservative paedocrites claiming that girls must be protected because they’ll be ‘ruined’ (straight out of the 19th century social purity textbook).

    It seems the ‘universal’ problem for men is their seemingly total blindness to the bleeding obvious. They ‘can’t see the wood for trees’. What they fail to see right before their eyes, or maybe they’ve forgotten and possibly, what many (younger people) simply do not know: is that only a couple of decades ago, NOTHING that Adam Johnson and many others like him were severely punished for, was even an issue worthy of discussion, let alone a ‘crime’, never mind the heinous crime it has evolved into now.

    Even ‘a slap on the wrist’ is too severe. It should not even be an offence in the first place.

    They should be saying everything that can be said against these ridiculous [non]’offences’ and demanding that all of the laws regarding private and consensual sexual relationships between individuals, irrespective of their age, be repealed.
    Indeed, writing ‘crap articles’ such as the one at Return of Kings you refer to, will do nothing useful for the plight of men and only serve to further validate feminist’s claims that young girls are always ‘traumatized’ or ‘damaged for life’ by doing what God put them here to do and at the very age He expected them to perform His reproductive task…

    As both Eric and I often mention: our great-grandmothers were legally married with their own children at 15 years old. I’d love to see my great grandfather’s reaction to anyone who’d have dared to call him a ‘predator’ or ‘paedophile’, but of course at the time, NOBODY would have because it was so normal.
    However, unlike today: they were inclined to question why people who were over say 25 and still single, albeit not to accuse them of being perverts or anything, just assumed they were too busy with their career, or business commitments, or maybe thought they were just shy or something…

  27. From Return of Kings’ Adam Johnson article:

    If he deserves six years in jail, a menagerie of women convicted of more counts of child sexual abuse when in positions of authority deserve between 10 and 40 years in many cases. Yet so many of these women, usually female teachers, escape proper punishment, receiving a good behavior bond (the British equivalent of probation) or a short jail stint that belies the number of times and the severity with which they have offended against minors.

    NO! Equal injustice is not a solution and will help nobody.
    What needs to be said is that Adam Johnson, nor any of the ‘menagerie of women’, David Garrett-Brown listed with brief commentary for each of them in his story, should never even have been interviewed by the police, let alone charged. None of these ‘offences’ should be offences.
    He is commenting on what should be and not so very long ago, would have been so regarded, as a perfectly innocent and PRIVATE, but more importantly: fully consensual liaison between two people. It should not even be a story for anyone to discuss, let alone for a newspaper to report. And ending up in an expensive Supreme Court trial, resulting in a guilty verdict with a six year prison sentence is just mind bogglingly outrageous!

    It appears that either nobody (apart from a few of us here and even fewer that comment at other equally obscure websites), can see that or, maybe they are just too afraid to publicly say so.
    The RoK article only validates the insane and draconian feminist anti-male sexuality laws. i.e. Garrett Brown stated:

    I will not at all attempt to defend Adam Johnson’s self-admitted behavior, kissing and grooming the girl, and am inclined to believe he did statutorily sexually assault the girl digitally.

    By saying that he is actually paying homage to a ridiculous feminist law: He should be questioning the purpose, or usefulness of the existence of such a law, where he can even be questioned, let alone charged with statutorily sexually assaulting the girl in any way whatsoever. Especially when the ‘victim’ (as defined by ludicrous, feminist pseudo-science), was a fully consenting partner.

  28. By saying that he is actually paying homage to a ridiculous feminist law: He should be questioning the purpose, or usefulness of the existence of such a law, where he can even be questioned, let alone charged with statutorily sexually assaulting the girl in any way whatsoever

    He probably doesn’t even believe his ‘disclaimer’ about ‘not condoning his behaviour’ etc. I’m not sure why these ‘red pill’ writers are so fucking scared shitless to point out the obvious – that these feminist laws are freaking ridiculous and a curse on normal heterosexual men.

    BTW, no word back from Angry Harry, so it doesn’t look good I’m afraid. Last time I mailed him about his health I think he replied back with a long e-mail the same day. I’ll try messaging Bernard Chapin, who should surely know as I think they were friends in real life. I cant believe Harry has passed away maybe months ago and it’s gone unnoticed in the men’s rights movement/manosphere.

    Also still no word on Eric, sadly, so it doesn’t look good there either.

  29. Regarding Angry Harry, I just checked his domain name (AngryHarry.com) and it was updated November last year, a couple of months before it was due to expire. That suggests it must have been done manually, presumably by Harry himself.

  30. NO! Equal injustice is not a solution and will help nobody.

    I agree with you, obviously, about equality of injustice, but to be fair to the ROK writer here, he does phrase that pretty well. I think nobody would take seriously women being caged for 40 years for sex with a teenager, so he is basically saying that the Adam Johnson sentence is manifestly unfair (or maybe I’m giving him too much credit).

    Look at the smug smile on this cunt’s face :

    I’d put money on her (prior to her conviction), whenever the subject of men and teenage girls came up, to be ranting about how they are ‘paedos’ and deserve to be castrated and tortured to death etc Most of these women are just so confident of getting the pussy pass, and probably use the conservative paedocrite justification of ‘only girls are ruined by early sex’.

    It is an outrage the disparity in sentencing, the problem as we know is that the MHRA imbeciles are scared shitless of questioning the feminist age of consent, and so all they do is scream their fury at the inequality (of injustice), and end up validating the laws themselves, as you say, and which clearly target heterosexual men (even if the law and sentencing was applied equally).

  31. BTW, I don’t know if you saw, but myself and Scarecrow had a bit of a debate with our old friend Eivind on this very subject recently : http://eivindberge.blogspot.co.uk/2015/12/free-jennifer-fichter.html

    Eivind seems to almost go to the other extreme sometimes, and himself ends up validating some of the justifications that paedocrite conservatives and femiservatives make (sex is a female resource, only girls can be ruined by sex etc.)

  32. BTW, I don’t know if you saw, but myself and Scarecrow had a bit of a debate with our old friend Eivind on this very subject recently : http://eivindberge.blogspot.co.uk/2015/12/free-jennifer-fichter.html

    Yes, I did see it actually – soon after I returned from my long absence and was quite impressed with both yours and Scarecrow’s arguments – Scarecrow in fact set the ball rolling by informing Eivind he’d gladly support the female ‘predator’, but only if Eivind assured him he’d support any MAN in the same predicament…
    I was tempted to go to Scarecrow’s blog and offer some support there as well, but I forgot.
    One thing that spoiled the debate slightly, was a couple of stupid comments by what appeared to be a typical mHRA commentator, calling himself ‘Bluestatedad’. He even attacked you for your views on paedohysteria, by saying something along the lines of being able to look at himself in the mirror without feeling guilty because he has enough morals to know where to draw the line with sexual matters, or something like that anyway… I’m not going to there and quote him, because you probably already read it and further frustrated him by totally IGNORING him. LOL! 😀

  33. I’d put money on her (prior to her conviction), whenever the subject of men and teenage girls came up, to be ranting about how they are ‘paedos’ and deserve to be castrated and tortured to death etc.

    Quite right. I reckon you could even put money on her ranting with the same venomous hatred on the subject of men and teenage girls, AFTER her conviction too and for the same reason – only girls are traumatized by sex early in life etc.
    In reality however, according to the laws of nature and ignoring feminist pseudo junk-science, it should be the other way around: girls in their teen years are at their peak fertility and therefore SHOULD be having sex at that age. It is also why they are at their peak attractiveness at that age.

  34. I am now really worried about both Angry Harry and Eric. You’re right, I’m sure somebody in the manosphere must know who AH really is and if he’d passed away, would have conveyed it to someone to spread the news… I think Scarecrow would know something about Eric, but then maybe not. He said that he was able to communicate with him only by e-mail and he too had sent him an e-mail a while ago and is still awaiting a reply…

  35. One thing that spoiled the debate slightly, was a couple of stupid comments by what appeared to be a typical mHRA commentator, calling himself ‘Bluestatedad’.

    Yea, I don’t know why Eivind lets trolls and cretins comment at his site, but I guess with what he’s been through in the courts he feels he has to maintain the ‘freedom of speech’ stance.

  36. In reality however, according to the laws of nature and ignoring feminist pseudo junk-science, it should be the other way around: girls in their teen years are at their peak fertility and therefore SHOULD be having sex at that age. It is also why they are at their peak attractiveness at that age.

    Very well put, you’re in peak form the last couple of days Alan!

  37. You’re right, I’m sure somebody in the manosphere must know who AH really is and if he’d passed away

    Surely Paul Elam must know, given that Harry was delivering regular podcasts for him.

  38. The Anglo feminazi society is one of double standards. Just the other day in the UK, a 12-year-old boy who had sex with a 13-year-old girl was treated like a sex criminal over false accusations. He was barred from interacting with anyone under 16, a condition given to people who molest kids. Insanity.

    What infuriates me is that the old Anglo feminazis from UNICEF are busy trying to lobby with the American and Canadian non-profits to force governments to increase the Caribbean age of consent from 16 to 18 because to “prevent teenage pregnancies”. Sarcastically hilarious.

    What will happen to Caribbean youth if they are 17 and seek help for an unplanned pregnancy? Are they going to go in jail too? These old Anglo feminazis need to take a fucking hike. They are increasing the age of consent in the Caribbean because they want to restrict legal sex for teens and young adults while keeping the artificial scarcity of old Anglo pussy upheld.

    Probition didn’t work in the US either, and luckily the Caribbean does not have that white knight pedohysteria trend yet because the locals aren’t manginas and sexual deviants who have female teachers fucking underaged students.

    Kind of weird how countries with the most militant feminism tend to have higher cases of female teachers fucking underaged students, yet those same feminazis want to give the female teachers a pussy pass, yet force governments to jack up the age of consent to 18 as if it’s a do-or-die situation. Fuck feminazis.

    Feminazis are causing a shitstorm in the Caribbean and Latin America. Honestly, many of the locals in Latin America do not like Anglo feminazis. The Anglo feminazis just barge into their communities and try to impose feminism on them like that. Rude feminazis.

  39. “Quite right. I reckon you could even put money on her ranting with the same venomous hatred on the subject of men and teenage girls, AFTER her conviction too and for the same reason – only girls are traumatized by sex early in life etc.
    In reality however, according to the laws of nature and ignoring feminist pseudo junk-science, it should be the other way around: girls in their teen years are at their peak fertility and therefore SHOULD be having sex at that age. It is also why they are at their peak attractiveness at that age.”

    Feminazis are only going to shout hysterical comments on that, but your comment is TRUE. That is why in Latin America there is a minimum age of consent from 13-14, to allow these teenage chicks to consent to an older male teenager or young man without creating any legal troubles. Unfortunately, the Anglo feminazis are very damn determined to hike up the minimum age of consent to 18 in the Caribbean and Latin America. Countries like Jamaica and Barbados maintain that 16 is a legitimate age of consent because 16 is legal in over half of the 1st world.

    I have a feeling that if a country’s age of consent is 17 years 364 days 23 hours and 59 mins, the Anglo feminazis will create a shit and accuse the country of all kinds of pedohysteria until the country is forced to increase their age of consent to 18. Meanwhile, feminazi teachers are getting fucked in their holes by way under-age-of-16 students in US/Canada/UK and they are literally considered the victims or someone who “only made a mistake” and “the male student enjoyed it”. Pedocrites.

  40. “I think even Eivind might feel a little sense of injustice at this :”
    Well, we’d certainly hope so…

    All I can say about this incredibly disgusting story is that apart from recognizing yet again that Janet Bloomfield (better known as JudgyBitch in manosphere circles), has more balls than all the mHRA members combined, Mr David Garrett-Brown whom I recently criticised on his apparent equality of INjustice for all
    stance and reflected in his writing, would have been totally right to include this case to support his argument and if he had, I would have agreed 100% with his views.
    This story itself is an example of REAL paedophilia, yet at the same time it also proves that such (real) paedophilia is something VERY rare. I.e. how often do we read stories of this nature even when the offending paedophile is a man?
    I just cannot believe how she was let off with impunity for this, but what’s even more despicable and worthy of equally severe, MALE paedophile draconian treatment, was the tweet from an entitled psychopathic SLUT with a censored name, who stated:
    “It’s her baby. She can do what she wants. No man should tell her what to do…
    And 4 ‘Likes’!

    Imagine how ‘viral’ the reaction would be if the sexes of those concerned were swapped?
    Uuuugghhhhhh!! Fucking women!

  41. Ted Cruz loses a primary vote and here is what the BBC has to say about the REAL PROBLEM :

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election-us-2016-35975052

    “For nine months now it has seemed that Donald Trump could say and do whatever he liked without there being consequences.
    But then he took on women. Well to be strictly accurate he had taken on women before, with seemingly no ill effect. But then a few things came together in quick succession.
    The insulting photo of Heidi Cruz, the suggestion that women should be punished for having an abortion if it is outlawed, Mr Trump standing up for his campaign manager when he is charged with assaulting a female journalist, crystallised into his poll standings falling, too.
    And so Wisconsin is lost. And Mr Trump has shown he is mortal.”

    Sorry Eivind, Jack etc. Women are the REAL PROBLEM. Enabled to a large extent by loathsome paedocrites and manginas to be sure, but the underlying REAL PROBLEM at the end of the day. Just as the real problem in the Holocaust was the NAZIs and their ideology, not the civilians who drove the trains to Auschwitz.

  42. You can tell I’m taking a greater interest in this site and the cause when I’m ranting on again about the REAL PROBLEM, lol!

  43. I was walking down a High Street in London yesterday and happened to glance through the doorway of a clothes shop I was passing. A really pretty teenage girl of about 16, browsing the clothes rack near the door, was wearing stockings and micro shorts half way up her arse. As I looked (whilst continuing walking) I saw the security guard checking her arse out. He then noticed me noticing him looking at the girl. He immediately resorted to the classic paedocrite trick of giving me a filthy look as he looked back at the girl, as though HE had caught ME perving. LOL! What a fu**** paedocrite!!!

  44. He immediately resorted to the classic paedocrite trick of giving me a filthy look as he looked back at the girl, as though HE had caught ME perving. LOL! What a fu**** paedocrite!!!

    Although it may seem rather amusing from (our) perspective, there is also a very sinister side to that little encounter. It also tells us an awful lot really about how much and how rapidly our society has descended into its current feminist totalitarian state, ruled by the dominant narrative of man hatred, which rides upon the lies and associated paedohysteria, spread by feminists; which totally distort the truth about nothing more than normal and innocent human behaviour.
    And worst of all is that about 99.9% of the indoctrinated sheeple not only believe it, they in fact embrace the sick philosophies to the degree that they cannot see the obvious: that they will be the true losers from it all: the victims of a terrible and far reaching holocaust! Suggest anything like that to the average dumbed-down obedient, feminist-following ram and he’ll look at you like you’re some loony and should be locked up…

    Jesus Himself would have been appalled at what’s happening now. And He’d supposedly seen and dealt with all manifestations of pure EVIL. It’s little wonder certain religious cults and increasingly more mainstream faiths are convinced we are now living in the era of Armageddon. Eivind Berge thinks we are. He makes such views very clear when you read his posts on peak oil, especially when considered in conjunction with the current societal effects of feminist ideology. (Institutionalized HATRED).

    Anyway, (as I step down from the soap box)…
    As recently as 15 years ago, you and that security guard would more likely have been exchanging cheesy grins and winking at each other or, also even dared one another to approach her and ask for her phone number or go for a cup of coffee somewhere…

    The whole world’s in a relative state of psychosis when men are hating other men just for being MEN. I’m convinced we are in the middle of a world-wide Inquisition – the WORST ever seen throughout history.

Comments are closed.