Most of you will probably have heard of the decision by Reddit to ban all of its infamous ‘Jailbait’ sub-reddits – which apparently had been devoted to the sharing of ‘sexualised’ pictures of clothed teenagers in bikinis and such like. Most men’s rights supporters will have become aware because Adrian Chen, of Gawker.com, has decided to link this issue to his wish to see r/mensrights shut down.
This has immediately put r/mensrights back on the defensive, with many MRAs there fiercely proclaiming that the only context in which ‘child porn’ and ‘paedophilia’ are men’s rights issues is in the cases of double standards in sentencing.
Of course, it’s pointed out quite correctly how odd it is that Adrien Chen want’s men’s rights banned next, instead of any of the clearly awful reddits still out there such as r/beatingwomen or r/nigger. In fact, it’s odd enough that legal (at least in America) pictures of clothed teenagers should warrant such attention ahead of such other subreddits. I’ve even read that there is a reddit devoted to pictures of dead babies…well I guess it’s no surprise that feminists and ‘progressive liberals’ would be more enraged at pictures of 17 year old ‘children’ in bikinis than creatures taking pride in looking at pictures of murdered babies.
In fact, it’s no surprise that feminists see pictures of jailbait and talk of men’s rights to be on the same level. Both, when it comes down to it, threaten to weaken the sexual value of women in a free sexual market. Instead of being cowards again, the men’s rights community should realise that it is the very power that the ‘child porn/paedophile’ hysterias give feminists and their allies over men that make it such an imperative to continue to question the underlying basis of those hysterias.
Personally, I wouldn’t be totally saddened to see the demise of reddit/r/mensrights. Yes, it’s a highly useful source of links and news pertaining to men’s rights issues, but the inherent nature of reddit itself means that the mens’ rights subreddit will always be vulnerable to false flag attacks and manipulation from other self-interested groups. The level of discussion there is typically absolutely dreadful – near imbecilic. To try to contribute even intermittently is to be dragged into a femi-troll hell. You end up arguing a point, usually of the nature – ‘is this really a men’s rights issue?’ – with somebody who is ostensibly also an MRA, then finally click on ‘his’ comment history and find that you’ve wasted an hour of your life discussing with somebody who has either never commented about men’s rights before, is a diaper wearing fetishist, or even a feminist troll. And this is all made worse by the poor moderation (improved since the imbecile Kloo2Yoo left and was replaced by Annarchist, but still having to suffer from the mangina like moderation of feminist supporting Ignoratisloyla).
The ‘advantage’ and appeal of Reddit lies in it’s community ‘upvoting’ system. But for a nascent, and still rather small political movement like men’s rights, this is its very weakness in terms of the potential it gives our cause to be manipulated by larger groups – such as feminists – as well as diluted by casual wanderers whose multiple accounts make up the majority of the 30,000+ ‘men’s rights supporters’ there (impressive only on paper). I still get far more visitors to this site coming from a link by InMalaFide than I do from r/mensrights. And if people feel the need for a reddit type service that cannot be manipulated or false flagged then I suggest they support Ferdinand Bardemu’s InBonaFide.
But back to the jailbait issue. Note the phrase ‘sexualised pictures’. What we’re talking about here is ‘jailbait‘. Although certain manginas are most often found boasting of their lack of ability to distinguish between pre-pubescent sexless children and hormone flushed large breasted ‘jailbait’, they seem to have found a way of exploiting the shock value of a ‘preteen’ reddit in this instance. But what I’m talking about here is ‘jailbait’ – clothed pictures of staggeringly attractive sexual beings that according to feminists are ‘sexualised’ and have become defined as child porn. Err, no, you can de-sexualise teenage post-pubescent girls, you can’t ‘sexualise’ them. These pictures might be sexual – any picture of an attractive 15 year old girl in a bikini is sexual to a healthy man – but they are not ‘sexualised’. Continue creating law after law that criminalise normal male sexuality in order to remove even images of such breathtakingly beautiful girls from the sexual market – but stop rationalizing your bitterness and jealousy by pretending that these post-pubescent teenagers are being ‘sexualised’.
When a man tells a young woman to stop dressing in public in a sexual manner, lest it increases the chances that they are sexually assualted, riots quickly ensue, and young slut walkers, most of whom are barely ‘adults’ themselves, go out of their way to exercise their feminist right to dress provocatively.
When women, or indeed, when a male feminist like Adrian Chen, tells 15, 16, 17 year old ‘children’ that any pictures of their even clothed bodies are obscene and pornographic, likely to lead to a lifetime of regret, shame, and bullying, then it’s just another divinely revealed secular truth, and any heretic like me who questions it is a sick bag pedo.
One of my readers posted an interesting link to the case of a 14 year old girl who became an ‘internet sex symbol’ after her Facebook photos were hacked into. The invasion of privacy involved is highly unethical, of course, but what the girl herself has to say about how the matter ‘ruined her life’ is illuminating :
It was a decision that she said ‘has ruined her life’.
‘When you’re 14 you don’t realise that the things you do really do matter at that point,’ she said in an interview on ABC News’ Nightline.
‘No one ever thinks that, ‘yeah, I’m going to take these pictures and it’s going to end up all over the Internet.’ You just do it for yourself.’
She was repeatedly called names and a ‘porn star’ at her high school after the photos spread online, from appearing in porn sites to popping up in advertisements.
Miss Varona thought the unwanted attention would eventually come to an end, but the problem has only worsened, she said.
A recent Google search of ‘Angie Varona’ drew almost 65,000 images.
There are also numerous unauthorised Facebook profiles, Twitter accounts and YouTube channels, all claiming to be Angie — one Facebook fan page has more than 41,000 likes.
‘[People were] telling me that I deserve everything that’s going to come for me, that they’re going to rape me when they see me because I want it and because I ask for it,’ she said.
I would confidently predict that most of the bullying, and likely the threats to kill her, came from her less attractive female peers. Again, this is being used as a feminist rationalisation as to why beautiful teenage girls should not post pictures of themselves in bikinis or revealing poses online – because they will be slut shamed by their peers, or because it might increase the risk of themselves being sexually assaulted or harassed. Yet overweight pug ugly feminist ‘slut walkers’ of 18 and 19 can turn the ‘right to be a slut in public’ into a mass political protest.
I should add that I use the word ‘slut’ in a non-judgemental manner. The male instinct to slut shame, whilst having a sound evolutionary basis, should be outdated so long as fathers have a right to paternity testing and the right not to support a child who isn’t their own. Personally, I think the men who are into slut shaming, whether of teenage girls or women, are scum – particularly the ones who are happy to bang ‘sluts’ themselves given the opportunity. But the nauseating fact is, feminists are only too happy to tap into this unwholesome feature of male sexual psychology when it suits their purpose of de-sexualising teenage girls.
Of course, 14 year olds are a little less mature than 18 or 19 year olds, and to a degree less able to foresee the consequences of their actions. The gap is hardly wide enough to justify the discrepancy, however – the ‘ right to be a slut’. And the same principle applies – if it is society’s fault for slut walkers being unable to express themselves sexually, then why shouldn’t 14 year old post-pubescent females be able to post pictures of themselves online without fear of bullying – something which the thinly disguised child slut shaming of feminists and Adrian Chen actually encourages?
Because ‘pedos’ jack off to such pictures? Aww, a beautiful teen posts sexy pictures of herself online and surprise, surprise, it’s not just 17 year old Justin Bieber look-alikes that click on them when they show up at the top of Google image search. And what harm is done exactly by a ‘dirty old man’ being aroused by a picture of a fertile young female who ticks all the boxes – youthful skin, pert firm breasts etc.? If a young girl is taught to despise older people (men) so much that she is somehow traumatised by the thought that an old lonely wrinkly might be spending a few minutes in bliss just thinking about her perfect body that he can never have outside of his imagination, then that is simply a problem for our not so civilised and progressive society – the first (and last) civilisation in history to turn the hatred of the old into the basis of social morality.
Personally, I’m somewhat pleased that these subreddits were removed – not that I visited them, or ‘researched’ them myself anyway – I’m far too aware of crazy feminist laws to do that. Whether or not they are legal or illegal in the USA, they are now illegal in most of the rest of the world, thanks to the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of
Middle Aged Feminist Hags the Child. Removing such content makes it a little less likely for an ordinary Brit, a Canadian, or an Australian male that their government will have the power to break into their homes at 2 in the morning and seize them as a subhuman pervert. In this regard, the police forces of these countries are the biggest losers in Reddit’s decision.
Of course, as has been pointed out here before, thanks to the sick world of psychotically jealous feminists, pictures of ‘sexualised’ anime characters who look under 18 are considered just as illegal, and just as much defined as child porn, as are pictures of real jailbait teenagers in bikinis. Odd then, that the forum – SomethingAwful.com – which apparently led the campaign to have the jailbait reddits removed as child porn is apparently a hotbed of anime images and videos.
I was also struck by the following post by ‘BoggiDWurms’ on the *site of a professional male feminist, crowing over the decision to close down the ‘child porn’ reddits :
The anime girl certainly looks under 18, and if she was real she’d likely be stoned to death in a jiffy if found walking the streets of Taliban controlled Afghanistan like that.
The other ironic thing about that post and use of video, totally lost on the self-rationalising ugly aging cretins who frequent that site, is that Beethoven – whilst something of an idealistic mangina in his misguided support for the proto-feminist movements of the day (of which his opera ‘Fidelio’ is an example) – was probably an ‘ephebophile’ (if such a category does exist), or in their progressive language – a pedo.
I remember reading a biography of the great composer in which a contemporary is quoted as describing how, as a twenty something, Beethoven would wander around the main square of his hometown Bonn, looking bashful and love stricken at every pretty young teenage girl who caught his eye. It is thought that Beethoven, who never married and who seems to have had a rabid dislike of forming any committed sexual relationship, composed some of his greatest works inspired by the beauty of the upper-class teenage pupils who he was paid to give music lessons to, and who he often and invariably fell in love with – including the Moonlight Sonata, perhaps the most romantic and beautiful piece of of all – being dedicated to a 16 year old girl (remember too that in this period girls began puberty a little later than the present and historical norm). It is also thought that the ‘Elise’ of his famous bagatelle – ‘Für Elise‘ – refers to a Viennese slang word of the time for ‘slutty’ young teenage girls.
Like his near contemporary Schopenhauer, Beethoven would likely have satisfied his raging sexual lusts with the young adolescent serving girls who were the norm in well-to-do European households at the time.
It is somewhat sobering to think that, thanks to feminist laws, in prisons around the world, there are human beings as sensitive and creative as Beethoven being raped and beaten every day as subhuman animals for simply looking at pictures, in the privacy of their own homes, of ‘sexualised’ teenage girls. It is an even more disturbing thought that ‘progressive’ 21st century civilisation, which justifies the naturalness of homosexuality on the basis that some penguins have been observed to be ‘homosexual’, will not even allow a sensible debate as to whether a serious crime against male sexuality, if not humanity itself, is being committed.
Selena Gomez breaks down describing the threats and bullying she gets from other jealous female teenagers – of course, these ugly girls then go on to become purely objective ugly women, who create laws and define paedophilia purely on the basis of the interests of ‘children’, it being purely co-incidental that such laws also raise their own small and diminishing sexual market value. And shouldn’t Selena be more upset and traumatised by the thought that lonely old men might find ‘sexualised’ pictures of her stimulating?
*I never have and never will link to that disgusting site, in doing so giving it page ranking with Google. On that one thread alone, I saw :
1/ feminists declaring that they have ‘no problem’ with minors being prosecuted for uploading sexy pics of each other (notice that 16 year old girls are children in the context of ‘paedophilia’, but simply ‘minors’ when discussing whether feminists can have them prosecuted ‘for their own protection’).
2/ a feminist declaring that ‘they are armed and ready’ for men’s rights supporters. Needless to say, if I approved a comment like that here from a men’s rights supporter….
3/ an aging feminist invoking voodoo science and declaring that men who look at a picture of a 17 year old ‘child’ in a bikini are ‘stealing’ her sexuality – something akin to the primitive beliefs of African tribes who, never having seen a camera before, believed that their souls were being stolen when photographed for the first time. Also, again, something very like the medieval Christian and present day Muslim view of the importance of a teenage daughter’s virginity. Muslim fathers would honour kill their teenage ‘sluts’. Feminists are a little more sophisticated, and impose voodoo victim science on the poor girls.