“I beg to move: That leave be given to bring in a Bill to amend the Sexual Offences Act 2003 to create an offence of paying for sexual services of a person under the age of 21 years; and for connected purposes….

…There is an important debate to be held on the rights and wrongs of prostitution and the laws that should have an impact on it, by my Bill does not deal with that. My Bill does one thing: it raises the threshold for the illegality of paying for sex. Of course there is a threshold, which is currently 16. Where someone is under 16, the huge consequences of the criminal law and imprisonment are involved because of the age of consent. But the moment the victim becomes older than 16 there are no punitive powers to deal with the person who is paying. I wish to see this Bill adopted by the Government at some stage solely and simply to raise that threshold, because by raising the threshold one raises the threshold. That may sound like a truism, but this approach will change the behaviour of those choosing to pay. The behavioural implication is there for those worried about breaching the criminal law and risking 14 years in prison because someone could be a minor of 15 and a half years old. On that borderline, threshold behaviour changes, so I would like Parliament to change that threshold to 21. In essence, that will take all the teenage years out of the real threshold and will change the behaviour of people who are paying. I am not making moral judgments about what people do as adults.

My Bill seeks solely and simply to raise that threshold. I think that raising the threshold will have a huge impact because the age group involved—older teenagers—must be given the space in which to turn around their lives. Our current legislative framework makes them the victims as, in reality, the powers available to the police, even though they are often wisely and deliberately not used, are to arrest and criminalise young people, which worsens their life chances and their chances of turning around the situation.

http://www.theyworkforyou.com/debates/?id=2012-01-17b.618.0

Notice the part of his speech that I have highlighted in bold – at first it reads rather like gibberish, but he appears to be saying exactly what I’ve always stated here as the true motivation behind higher and higher age of consent laws.  The threshold must be raised to 21 so that men won’t even go near anyone who even could be under 21.  I’ll quote him again :

The behavioural implication is there for those worried about breaching the criminal law and risking 14 years in prison because someone could be a minor of 15 and a half years old. On that borderline, threshold behaviour changes, so I would like Parliament to change that threshold to 21.

In other words, we are now entering the world in which I have always predicted that feminists and their mangina puppets would be leading us into – where men are beginning to face legal risks (from ‘child protection’ laws) for even seeking out adult women in their early twenties.

And given that most females in the UK complete puberty by the age of 16, how exactly can you distinguish between a 20 year old adult woman and a 21 year old adult woman?  Obviously, the only sure way would be to only seek prostitutes who have obvious signs of aging – women in their late twenties or thirties.

This bill, if it becomes law, will have numerous consequences.  A line will have been crossed in the sexual demarcation between ‘children’ and adults (already ridiculously defined by feminists at 18).  Even young adult women over 18 can now fall under the ‘protection’ of anti-paedophile and child abuse laws.  Just as the raising of the minimum age for prostitution and pornography to 18 has made having sex with 17 year old girls morally and socially dubious, even though the age of consent is still 16 in the UK and most other countries (or lower), soon simply having sex with 20 year old women will carry connotations of paedophilia and child abuse.

Note also that it will become legally hazardous to buy a 20 year old woman a meal before having sex, or even buying a young woman a drink in a nightclub, lest you be accused of ‘paying for sex’.

And this, of course, is the real intention.  This is better for the average woman than the complete criminilization of paying for sex would be.  With this law, with this discrimination between women under and over 21, the sexual market price of the older woman is again raised.

Thanks to Human-Stupidity for notifying me of this bill – I can only find it on two sites online – the link given above, and Adult World News, which appears to be related to the excellent Melon Farmers anti-censorship/sex positive (male and female) news website.  But I can’t find it on any mainstream media site.

This is how politics works in the UK, especially the never ending barrage of anti-male sexuality legislation.  A bill is introduced into parliament, the House of Commons and then the House of Lords debate it, and shortly after, the new law is announced on page 9 of the Daily Telegraph.  There is no public debate – 99% of the public probably won’t be aware of it even when it has become law.  And of course, in the present climate it is almost impossible to repeal sex laws (apart, of course, from those relating to homosexuality and trans-genders).

http://gothamist.com/2012/01/17/undercover_cops_pose_as_prostitutes.php

Here’s the original posters :

And here are his replies :

http://eivindberge.blogspot.com/

You might not agree with everything he says, as I’m sure not many of you agree with everything I say here.  For example, his latest post is actually an attack on feminist laws that criminalise female teachers who end up sleeping with their male students.  I don’t agree with the idea that there are less moral issues involved in female teachers sleeping with teenage boys than the other way around (in fact there are arguments to the contrary – for example that boys mature later than girls).  But I do agree that it’s an absurdity that such ‘lucky’ boys are being damaged by having the child abuse victim label forced upon them, and I think that the way forward for MRAs is to highlight the double standards whilst taking care not to victimise boys ourselves in the name of ‘equality’.

Here’s a paragraph from another post entitlted : ‘The Trafficking Trade Groweth‘

Suppose you hire an au pair while making it clear that she is expected to provide sex as part of the deal, which the woman accepts. A perfectly fair exchange, right? I would naturally expect sex from an au pair myself or I wouldn’t hire her, and if she agrees, no reasonable person could object. Unfortunately, we live in a sick society with unbridled feminist power. In the feminist police state of Norway, this is now criminalized as “trafficking.” A man and his wife are now on trial for this exact scenario, and it really makes my blood boil with renewed hatred. Just when you thought we had reached the high-water mark, feminism keeps escalating and inventing new ways of persecuting male sexuality. The feminist police state is on a relentless march towards criminalizing ever greater areas of male sexuality — or in this case, applying existing laws in innovative ways in order to imprison more men. To feminist prosecutor Anne Cathrine Aga I have the following message: The Men’s Movement is watching you, bitch, and we are seething with hatred against you personally and the police state you represent. Actions have consequences. Trials are still (mostly) public and they sink into our collective minds, where they form the basis of future activism. Hate breeds hate — that is a fact of life too smugly ignored by feminists.

Our basic goals could be usefully separated into simply continuing to grow the men’s rights/anti-feminist/pro-male sexuality movements, and having some concrete activist results that demonstrate the reality and effectiveness of that growth.

In terms of effective activism, the MRM has been derided in a number of quarters as having not yet actually achieved anything of substance.  I disagree.  Given that we are still a very small movement (the main thing is we are unequivocally now growing), the fact that we have already demonstrated the ability to become a nuisance, at least to certain feminists, shows that we are probably punching above our present weight, thanks largely to a handful of unusually dynamic individuals (such as Paul Elam, obviously).  This is a very hopeful sign for what we could be achieving in a few years time, when we are many times our present size and level of experience and organisation.

There remains a feeling amongst many MRAs that we won’t be a true political movement until online activism spills over into ‘the real world’, with street protests and the like.  I don’t entirely subscribe to that position either.  As Angry Harry often points out, the internet is the most useful tool for political activism and change that has ever been put into the hands of ordinary men (but, somewhat bizarrely, it has to be admitted that feminists themselves have exploited the internet rather well).

Online and offline activism can go hand in hand, and ultimately both will be needed for substantive results.

Another mainstream Men’s Rights assumption that I disagree with is that feminism can only be defeated when ‘we’ outnumber the enemy.  Hence the insistance of many MRA’s that we simply have to embrace women into our movement, often pointing to the fact that the success of feminism has relied upon the support of men.

I believe that political activism should be more than a simple numbers game, and in terms of voting blocs and the like, I think it’s a futile hope anyway that the sexual trade union can ever be defeated through the ballot box.  It’s not impossible that sufficient numbers of disenchanted women (and voters) could be drawn to a sexually conservative ‘men’s rights movement’ – enough to meaningfully sway the policies of politicians facing re-election.  Likewise, we could ‘reach out’ and seek alliances with the Islamic hordes. But as my readers are aware – this is an anti-feminist, pro-male sexuality men’s rights site, not a conservative father’s rights blog.  So I have nothing much to say on those possible strategies.  Readers will also be aware of my position that large numbers of ‘sympathetic’ women entering the movement will inevitably dilute the cause and lead to sexually conservative policies that will be as much in the selfish interests of women as they are of men in general, and justice in particular.

Next week I’ll post an article on what type of demographics a pro-male sexuality men’s rights movement could and should hope to attract.

Suffice to say at this point that the results that the MRM have achieved thus far with the simple but effective online activism involved in Register-Her, demonstrates to my mind that the success of the MRM is not dependent on a crude ‘numbers game’.

Concrete Goals

Apart from maintaining the growth of the men’s rights movement, spreading the word, waking up men, and ensuring that the MRM stays true to its pro-male sexuality roots, there is one over-riding goal that we should aim to achieve as early as possible :

That the feminists who are launching wave after wave of draconian anti-male legislation wake up to the fact that if they continue in their actions, being held accountable for their crimes against humanity within their life-times is a realistic possibility – sufficiently so to put a check on their legislative ambitions within the next 5 – 10 years or so.

To achieve this overarching goal, it should be a primary aim within the next 5 – 10 years to have established a pro male sexuality lobby group that has the funds and means to actively pressure, and even to seek prosecutions against certain key members of the sexual trade union.

Establishing such an effective lobby group will not be easy.  It would require an individual (or individuals) who possess the dynamism and commitment of a Paul Elam type figure, who is unremittingly pro-male sexuality, and who will have the strength to withstand the inevitable merciless scrutiny and character assassinations that both the sexual trade union and the media will throw at him.

We could get lucky, and a high-profile figure – a Dominique Strauss Kahn or a Silvio Berlusconi – somebody who has had their life and mainstream career destroyed by the sexual trade union, and who has nothing much left to lose, join our fight.  Perhaps if I’m being realistic, that would be the best chance for achieving the goal I set out above in any near future time frame.

Personal Goals

2012 will personally be a big year for me, as I’ll probably finally join the quarter of a million White Flight Brits escaping annually from the utterly destroyed society that a decade of FemiLabour rule has left our formerly great land in.  Unfortunately, the clueless and cowardly ‘Conservative’ Party are likewise far too much obligated to the Vagina Vote to even begin to repair the damage.

Of course, there aren’t many places left in the world to ‘escape’ to these days.  All I want is a place in the sun, where being white and having muscles doesn’t subject me to racist physical intimidation and challenge, or even assault, every time I pop out to my local grocery store. I want to be able to walk down the street and not see row after row of boarded up shops that have been torched and looted by ‘disaffected yoof’ – the first generation of ‘children’ (and last) in human history to be taught that not only is hating older males an act of youthful rebellion, but actually one of the only true and absolute values and civic duties that exist in the (feminist Cultural Marxist) moral relativerse.

Oh, and perhaps where I can walk down the street and smile at a pretty and fully developed 17 year old girl and be reasonably sure I won’t be spat on as a ‘paedophile’ in return. Especially as I slowly turn into that most detested and unforgivable creature in 21st century progressive society – an old white guy with a dick that still functions.  Not much to ask is it?

I’ll try to devote as much time as I have in the past to maintaining this site.  I even have ideas for some new projects, but perhaps I shouldn’t bite off more than I can chew.

I want to spend more time researching the history of early feminism, explore the philosophical ideas behind the notion of ‘consent’, and also to develop a trans-humanist men’s rights position.  I also want to get more organised and industrious in regards to posting pro-male comments on news sites and such like.

Let’s hope 2012 is another good year for the men’s rights movement.

Of course, this year has been something of a breakthrough one for men’s rights.  Although the pace of anti-male legislation still appears to be accelerating, I’ve never been more confident that a genuine pro-male sexuality men’s rights movement is emerging that will soon have the strength to challenge feminists.

This site continues to grow modestly but continually, more or less.  Although traffic took a hit in the summer when I went offline for a few weeks, it’s more than picked up since.  For that I have to thank the continued support of the likes of Ferdinand Bardemu, Angry Harry, Man Woman Myth, and several other MRA bloggers, and also to the loyal and esteemed readers who have been posting links to this site on forums and other men’s rights sites.

Visitors to the Anti-Feminist 2010-2011

I’ve  been dabbling with this sort of activism myself over the last year, and whilst I can’t claim any results nearly as shocking or definitive as ‘Agent Orange’s‘, I have gathered a quantity of information that, when taken together, supports the general ‘sexual trade union’ thesis of this website.  I’m not yet ready to publish the results of this activism, as the feminist organisations involved will naturally be more guarded when that happens, and I feel that there is still more water in the well to be drawn.

But regarding the femi-nazis of RadFem – one or two of the individuals exposed are of particular interest to readers of this blog.  For example, Kat Pinder (‘AmazonManCrusher’), was (screen)captured as expressing her wish that all of us men be given a special day, in order that we can be ‘raped and battered’, as well as be made to understand how it feels to be ‘purchased from brothels’.

While briefly Googling Kat Pinder, I came across the following blogspot page that has been devoted to her – and it’s certainly not been made by a fan :

Kat Pinder (blogspot)

Amongst other things, it is revealed that whilst appearing on female porn show ‘Big Brother’, Kat revealed to a (black male) fellow contestant that she had been exploited as a prostitute at the age 16 :

LESBIAN housemate Kitten Pinder has sensationally admitted she worked as a cheap vice girl when she was just 16. She shamelessly revealed how she sold her body to men as she struggled on the breadline.
Foul-mouthed Kitten, 24, stunned another contestant with the confession just hours after triggering uproar with her bad-tempered arrival at the Big Brother house and threatening to quit. Wearing a sailor suit, the brunette weirdo told student Victor Ebuwa she spent a year as a prostitute at a brothel in Forest Gate, east London, in 1996.
She told him: “Yeah, I lived in Forest Gate for a while. I lived there with some other girls and we worked as prostitutes. “It was the worst year of my life. I couldn’t believe I survived. Some bloke acted as our pimp and just took advantage.” Shocked Victor, 23, spluttered: “Really?”
Kitten – real name Kat – told him: “Yeah, I was 16. I had nowhere else to go.” Londoner Victor asked gallantly: “You want me to sort him out?” But she replied: “Nah, it was years ago. I don’t really have secrets, I am very open.”

However, as we know, feminist statements about prostitution rarely go hand in hand with the truth :

She has already proclaimed herself the hardcore Left-wing lesbian of Big Brother. But the father of Kathryn ‘Kitten’ Pinder last night said her tales of being a teenage prostitute are a lie – and slammed Channel 4 for the show’s obsession with sex. Kenneth Pinder, a retired surveyor, said his daughter was in fact at a £12,000-a-year boarding school at 16, the age when she told fellow contestants on the reality show she was working as a child prostitute in London.
She had, however, completed a well-regarded dissertation on prostitution while a university student, so he assumed she must have drawn on that knowledge for her attention-seeking stories on screen. And Mr Pinder, 57, who had to remortgage the family’s detached home to satisfy ‘radical’ Kathryn’s request to go to private school, said the whole family are devastated by her sudden appearance on television.

Meanwhile in Ireland….

A top lawyer claims that men guilty of soliciting for sex could be driven to suicide over naming, writes Jim Cusack

http://www.independent.ie/opinion/analysis/consequences-of-public-shaming-2966910.html

A leading lawyer has claimed that the naming and shaming of men caught propositioning undercover gardai posing as prostitutes could drive some to suicide.

The claim was made as it emerged that €10,000 in fines imposed on 21 men caught in the Limerick garda “honey trap” soliciting operation has been given to a group which is proposing that prostitution be prohibited and men caught paying women for sex prosecuted and publicly named.

Gardai last week defended their actions in bringing 21 men to court and publicising their identities but claimed it was not their intention that their names be made public.

However, one of Limerick’s leading lawyers, solicitor Ted McCarthy, who represented some of the men, said there was a danger that the public shaming of the men could drive some to suicide. There were persistent rumours in Limerick last week that one had killed himself. There was a male suicide in the area but the man was not on the list of those arrested.

A medical student ordered two ‘gangster friends’ to kill a ‘besotted’ television executive in revenge after he tried to rape her, a court heard yesterday.

Mundill Mahil, 20, lured millionaire Gagandip Singh to her house, where he was beaten unconscious then bundled into the boot of a car and burned alive, the jury was told.

She allegedly told friends she wanted Mr Singh dead – and, the court heard, persuaded another man who was infatuated with her to murder him.

Mr Singh, 21, was killed in February, after the ‘intelligent and attractive young woman’ convinced him, through a series of  text messages, to come to her student digs in Brighton at 11pm, the jury was told.

But when he walked into her bedroom, carrying a teddy bear and flowers, he found Harvinder Shoker – who was also in love with Mahil – and ‘hired muscle’ Darren Peters waiting for him, the court heard.

During the beating Mr Singh – the owner of a new broadcasting service called Sikh TV – screamed Mahil’s name and begged for help, it was claimed.

The two men, both 20, wrapped the victim in Mahil’s duvet and bundled him into the boot of the Mercedes he arrived in, then drove to a quiet street in Blackheath, south-east London, doused the car in petrol and set it alight, the Old Bailey was told.

A post mortem examination revealed Mr Singh was still alive when the fire was started.

Prosecutor Aftab Jafferjee QC told the jury that the attack was carried out to ‘exact revenge and retribution’ on Mr Singh, whom Mahil knew ‘remained besotted by her’…

…A housemate, Becky Edwards, described Mahil as an ‘agony aunt’ and said: ‘During our first year she talked to him about very intimate, personal things.

‘He was a millionaire who offered her lots of gifts which she refused. After his father died they became closer and he was dependent on her.’

But Mr Jafferjee said the attempted rape changed everything.

He said: ‘It is common ground that he tried to have sex with her by getting into her bed.

‘She forced him away, he broke down in tears and he left.’

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2070632/Mundil-Mahil-enlisted-gangsters-set-ex-Gagandip-Singh-rape-claim.html

See also : http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/crime/8938575/Student-Mundill-Mahil-lured-besotted-TV-exec-into-honeytrap.html

Last week the parents of a Wisconsin boy sued Grant County District Attorney Lisa Riniker for charging their son with first-degree sexual assault, a Class B felony, after he played “butt doctor” with a 5-year-old girl. He was 6 at the time. When the boy’s lawyer tried to have the charge dismissed, Riniker replied: “The legislature could have put an age restriction in the statute if it wanted to. The legislature did no such thing.”

According to the complaint (PDF), the girl is “the daughter of a well-known political figure in Grant County,” and her brother, who is the same age, also was involved in playing doctor but was not charged. In addition to Riniker, the lawsuit names as defendants retired Grant County Sheriff’s Sgt. James Kopp and Jan Moravits, an investigator with Grant County Social Services “whose regional supervisor…is the political figure’s wife’s sister-in-law”—i.e., the aunt of the alleged victim.

Although the boy, now 7, is too young to be prosecuted or named in a juvenile delinquency petitition, Madison.com reports, county officials are using the felony charge to force his parents into accepting “protection or services” for him. The lawsuit says that once he turns 18, he will be listed as a sex offender.

http://reason.com/blog/2011/11/23/parents-sue-da-for-charging-their-6-year

Good.  This is one of the surest ways that sex offender hysteria will end – when the criminals in the child abuse industry start getting sued.

I would also suggest that Grant County District Attorney Lisa Riniker deserves a place on Register-Her.com