‘Sexualised Pictures of Teenage Girls’

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 :

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2060065/Angie-Varona-Most-Googled-teen-tears-risqu-photos-ruined-life.html

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 :

hate child porn love child porn

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.

Reddit MensRights Very Own Version of ‘Dear Woman’

In the very same week that Sharon Osbourne and her female audience chuckled at the horrific castration of a man, Reddit.com/r/mensrights came up with its very own version of ‘Dear Woman‘, in an apparent attempt to show that whatever the misogynistic sins of the men’s rights past, under the leadership of Kloo2 the clueless, we are entering into a new era of higher consciousness co-creation with our fellow feminists :

mras-support-womens-rights

This is what we are fighting for, my fellow MRAs – the right of women not to have to cancel their summer vacations because of inconvenient mistakes like this little fucka :

aborted baby

To be fair, Reddit mensrights might have been pushed into the defensive because of a  new anti-men’s rights sub-reddit  –  http://www.reddit.com/r/againstmensrights  – formed by a group of feminists who are such retarded radical anarchists that they want anyone who questions feminist laws put in prison.  One of the ring-leaders is the trans-sexual ‘thepinkmask‘, formerly known as ‘catlebrity’, who earlier this year persuaded Kloo2 to agree that forcing 5 year old boys to dress up as little girls and be paraded around talk shows like a freak is an essential men’s rights cause.

Tomek77 left the most sensible comment underneath the men’s rights Dear Women post :

I upvoted this on principle, but we don’t owe anyone an apology or an explanation. We shouldn’t get shamed into “proving” that we are not “woman-haters” – doing so is playing by the rules of those who hate us (and no amount of apologizing for our gender will ever satisfy them anyway).

Considering that feminists advocating the extermination of men (like Mary Daly) are hailed as heroes by most mainstream media, and show hosts can laugh about sexual assaults and genital mutilation of a man wondering whether “he deserved it”, I think the burden of proof is on women to show that they support men’s rights (and so far I am not impressed).

 

Kloo2Yoo Calls the Cops on Men’s Rights Redditor

Kloo2Yoo, the mentally retarded founder and moderator of reddit.com/r/mensrights, exceeded even his notoriously ‘high’ standards of incompetence and sheer infantile lunacy this week.  He actually called the cops on a men’s rights redditor for posting a harmless and well known picture that appears on hundreds of ‘funny pic’ sites, alleging that it was ‘child porn’.  The picture is of a little boy and girl, with the boy peering down the girls pants and a speech caption coming from the girl with the words – “And with this I will control your life”.

I’m not going to publish the photo here, although it is clearly not sexual in any way but simply a funny, innocent picture (although with the caption it does carry a profound anti-feminist message)  but if you Google the girl’s words (as I did) you will find it on hundreds of sites.  Some Redditors claim that the picture has appeared on Hallmark cards.  It’s the kind of innocent picture that only a paedophile could see anything sexual or pornographic in.

As well as reporting the photo to ‘law enforcement’ and potentially causing a men’s rights supporter some unpleasant hassle, Kloo2 also claimed to have seriously thought about locking the men’s rights reddit, which is now by far and away the largest online men’s rights community with over 21,000 members and counting.  This clown, supported by his feminist Men’s Rights Fraud co-moderator Ignatiusloyola, is the biggest single threat to the growth of the movement.  The time has surely come to finally put pressure on these two idiots to hand over the most important men’s rights resource to more able and genuine men’s rights activists.

This is what some of the other outraged men’s rights redditors had to say about Kloo’s actions :

kloo2yoo crazy

http://www.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/g959a/i_am_begging_users_if_you_see_sexual_images/

Reddit Feminist Concern Troll

Couldn’t resist posting this work of genius :

Feminist Concern Troll

Massively downvoted of course. One of the two reddit men’s rights moderators who persistantly refuse to ban such trolls – ignatiusloyla, made the following typicaly revealing comment concerning the image :

Really? A meme image? Give me a break.

I didn’t think the populace of r/MR had devolved enough to think that posting this type of crap was a good idea. There is enough of it in r/pics, r/funny and all those subreddits.

Have a point to make? Make the point and open a dialogue. But these meme posts are so overdone, and very ineffective at making the point.

Or maybe I am just so sick of them that I am thoroughly annoyed when I see them.

Meanwhile, it seems to be the majority view at Reddit that Paul Elam is an extremist fringe figure in the movement. I’ve had major disagreements with Paul, but nobody can deny that he’s currently taking men’s rights forward more than any other activist. His blisteringly raw and honest piece entitled ‘the scourge of rape. yea, whatever’ was predictably savaged by the concern trolls at Reddit.

Of course, what these feminist trolls understand is that if men are truly woken up to the extent that they can question even the most holy of gynocratic dogmas, then it’s only a matter of time before their intellectual free lunch is over.  The shocking truth of essays like the above, presented fearlessly and with an ‘I don’t give a fuck if you don’t like it’ attitude, is exactly the kind of thing that might wake men up from their sleep.

Another gem I can’t resist posting – Krauser PUA almost decking his first Brazillian anti-English Western civilisation hating cock block :

http://krauserpua.com/2011/02/24/i-blow-an-sdl-by-trying-to-start-a-fight/

The best and the worst of the week that was

The Futurist (Fifth Horseman) – the author of ‘The Misandry Bubble’ – revealed a new strategy to kickstart the men’s rights movement into going viral – ‘URLs for Urinals’ consists of posting men’s rights flyers on to the spaces above men’s urinals.  Jay Hammers has some ready made versions for you to print out and start posting : https://sites.google.com/site/jaymhammers/files/misandry-01-03-11.ppt

Perhaps it would be a good idea if we all took photos of our activist deeds?  Of course, taking photographs in a men’s urinals is always a bit open to misinterpretation, but I guess most of us will be putting up the flyers when the loos are empty.   So get posting and snapping, scream homophobia if anybody ‘catches’ you (you could claim they are gay rights flyers), and then publish the photos online as proof of your good work and as inspiration for others.  I’ll try to put a photo up here myself in the next couple of weeks.

And just to prove that the men’s rights movement is gaining ground, or at least attention, both the Futurist and Paul Elam were referred to in a New York Times piece entitled ‘The Study of Man’, with Paul Elam’s website actually linked to.  Some cheeky conspiracy theorists have suggested that the author of the apparently damning piece might actually be sympathetic to the cause.  As I’ve mentioned here before, the traditional publishing industry is in slave to the female dollar.  This was highlighted a year or so ago when the outspoken Rod Liddle was effectively blocked from becoming editor of the British ‘Independent’ broadsheet newspaper because of concerns that his regular anti-feminist statements might turn off women readers.  If Charles McGrath, who wrote the New York Times article, really had wanted to bash men’s rights, he could have chosen some far more ‘mysogynistic’ websites than Paul’s.  In fact, he linked to one of the men’s rights sites most likely to appear reasonable to the average male reader of that paper.

Not that, in my humble and perhaps biased opinion, any publicity is bad publicity for the men’s rights movement.  At the moment, the fact is, 90% of men don’t even know we exist.  With more mainstream media outlets now covering the movement every now and again, the outlook is clearly more positive that this will change, albeit rather slowly. The main task is still to wake men up from their feminist induced chivalrous stupour.  Men won’t listen until they can hear us.

The biggest threat to any growing men’s rights movement is still that some voices will be silenced at the expense of others.  I don’t apologise for the controversial subjects that I discuss in this blog.  However big men’s rights might become, it won’t speak for all men, or even a minority of men, unless such topics are part of the movement.  I firmly believe that there is nothing I have said of importance on this site that key men’s rights supporters and anti-feminists from Schopenhauer to Ernest Belfort Bax, to the likes of modern writers such as Neil Lyndon and Steve Moxon, wouldn’t recognise to be manifestly true and obvious.  And when a ‘senior’ men’s rights activist tells me, as one did last week, that the possibility of feminists raising the age of consent to 20 is not a men’s rights issue, and to think that it is is tantamount to campaigning for paedophilia, then that person is either a fraud or a coward, or at least he is on this issue. 

At the minimum, such men’s rights supporters should be consistant.  For example – if you truly believe that it is so manifestly obvious that men should go to prison to be raped as paedophiles for having consensual sex with women old enough to vote – and that this is consistant with men’s rights, then you shouldn’t also hold that it is right for politically motivated radical feminists to interfere with the very identities of 3 year old toddlers, as Kloo2Yoo, the moderator of reddit.com/r/mensrights, appears to do here : http://www.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/exrxm/princessboy_supporting_crossdressing_behaviour_in/c1bs2o0?context=3

THE FEMINIST ABUSE OF INFANTS IS NOT MEN’S RIGHTS – I WANT NO PART OF IT

I will be devoting an entire article to this later in the week.

Reddit Men’s Rights has become a joke…and is now becoming a danger to our movement

Is there really a men’s rights forum whose members consist mainly of ‘sympathetic’ feminists supported by white knight manginas who claim also to be ‘men’s rights supporters’. Men’s rights supporters who will downvote you, call you an extremist, and tell you to fuck off if you ever dare to criticise feminism in any way? Notice I said ‘criticise feminism’, not criticise ‘women’. We all know that the men’s movement has a vociferous and public wing who firmly believe that our cause is not served by baiting cheap accusations of ‘misogyny’ through crudely expressed, if understandably motivated, verbal attacks on women. I have no problem with such a position, although I think that the concern is sometimes a little overstated.

But can there really be a men’s rights page that actively denounces as heresy any mere finger pointing at feminists and their role in the decline and fall of the contemporary male?

Yes, incredibly, there is. It’s called Reddit Men’s Rights, and it is the fastest growing men’s rights resource on the web, proudly numbering 8,000 readers and counting. And it’s a place where newcomers to our young movement will ‘learn’ that the likes of Angry Harry and The Spearhead are ‘ crazy extremist sites’ morally equivalent to feminazi blogs that call for the entire male sex to be burned alive (and we shouldn’t post links to feminazi blogs at Reddit because they ‘misrepresent feminism’!).

Reddit, in terms of the comments section and the constant downvoting, is clearly a joke and a travesty to our movement. The question is – is it now becoming a real threat to our movement?

The first thing I should say is that there are a lot of intelligent and genuine men’s rights supporters on Reddit who I respect and admire. A couple of very important MRAs – MGTOW and Pierce Hanlon, of the false rape society, also post important and relevant links there. In fact, between them, they post nearly all of the important and relevant links. Having said that, only Pierce Hanlon and JayHammers are MRAs who participate in discussions there who I recognise from elsewhere in the movement (and JayHammers is also tired to death of what Reddit is sadly becoming).

To those of you unfamiliar with it, Reddit is a social ‘bookmarking’ site, in which members post links in suitably defined categories which are then up or downvoted according to how readers view their relevance and interest. Thanks largely to the hard work of MGTOW and Pierce, Reddit had become an unmatched source for up to the minute stories relating to men’s rights issues. Over the last few months, however, it has become noticeable that perfectly good links immediately get downvoted (they are then automatically removed from the front page and become near invisible). More recently still, it has become apparant in the comments sections below the posts, that there are clearly more feminists now visiting ‘our’ Reddit than genuine men’s rights supporters. And the ‘men’s rights discussion’ at Reddit is becoming proportionately crazier and crazier and out of touch with mainstream men’s rights as a result.

Before I give a couple of brief examples, I should explain why I feel that this issue is important, and why Reddit could become a real danger to men’s rights. As I’ve already said, however twisted the viewpoint there is becoming, it is the fastest growing men’s rights resource on the web. At least in brute numbers. Attracting over 1,000 readers each month is impressive, even if most of those numbers are feminists (and the others don’t seem to hang around). If you google ‘mens’ rights’ you will find that Reddit already appears on the second page of results. With the massive page rank that Reddit enjoys, it probably won’t be long before it sits right at the top of the Google mountain, the unofficial ‘homepage’ of our movement. The demographic of Reddit is also different to most other men’s rights places online. I assume it is a lot younger. It certainly sounds younger. Whichever way you look at it, this subreddit is many people’s first encounter with men’s rights, especially those of young people. A place for men’s rights beginners that is overpopulated (infested might be a better description) with ‘sympathetic’ feminists and chivalrous white knights who forbid even the slightest criticism of feminism, is potentially a threat to our nascant movement if it is teaching those newcomers a completely erroneous view of what most men’s rights activists believe and struggle for.

In a sense the Men’s Rights Reddit is irrelevant in terms of real activism (I’ve tried to set up a ‘call to action’ system there, which was largely ignored). However, in terms of demographic and sheer weight of numbers, there is a very real possibility that it could begin to mould the future agenda and outlook of the men’s movement. And it is an agenda that feminist trojan whorses there, such as CryptoGirl and Inabook, are only too willing to pervert.

Take the following example. A highly relevant post was submitted consisting of a news report stating that over two thirds of murder victims in the UK last year were male. Men’s rights? Of course it is. Just as much as it is accepted that the fact that a disproportionate number of male homicide victims are black is a ‘black rights issue’.

But not for feminist male rights supporter CryptoGirl, who immediately denounced the irrelevance of the post by pointing out that most of the murderers of males were also males. Men killing men is not men’s rights. His/Her comment (‘she’s’ a transvestite waiting for the snip), since deleted, swiftly recieved the customary barrage of upvotes, other MRAs promptly agreed with her, and her position as the independent arbiterer of what is and isn’t men’s rights was further cemented – with a final comment consisting of ‘now, back to equal rights! 🙂‘ . Yes she actually did make that last comment (whichReddit MRAs naturally again upvoted).

Except that men killing men is a men’s rights issue. If men are more than twice as likely to be the victims of murder than women are, then that should at least be a cause to question the feminist dogma that society is better for men than it is for women, no matter who is doing the killing. And you can’t have your cake and eat it. If we have to blame ‘society’ on the need for men’s rights rather than feminists, then we should also be able to blame a society that is unfair to men on such gender imbalances as the likelihood of being a victim of murder. In fact, there is a strong case for arguing that it is women, and not ‘society’, let alone men, who play a dominant role in the greater incidence of male homicide – especially when so many of those murders are the results of gang feuds, typically between young, urban black males, who have had their sense of masculine worth defined and perverted by the grotesque and racist sexual needs of white females.

Another example. Only yesterday another sympathetic feminist (inabook) praised a senate bill that will prevent teenagers from being jailed as sex offenders under feminist created statutory rape laws. Nothing wrong with that you might say. It is indeed a welcome and long overdue initiative to stop a child abusing practice that puts the American justice system into disrepute and was only serving as an increasingly embarrassing reminder that such laws have nothing to do with child protection. But is the following comment really worth 10+ upvotes on a men’s rights page? :

This sounds like an excellent step forward– focusing on age difference rather than purely on age of consent.

So a 16 year old slut can quite happily bang a similarly immature 16 year old boy, but if it happens to be a 25 year old who knows how to put on a condom but is perhaps a little emotionally immature and is attracted to younger girls, then lock him away and throw away the key? If a 16 year old can consent to sex with a boy her own age, why is she mysteriously unable to consent to sex with an older male? Studies have proven time and time again that young people are far more likely to be sexually abused by their peers than by older partners. In fact, it seems that inabook and the asshats who vote her inane comments up don’t even understand the concept of peer pressure…or perhaps just conveniently forget it when it justifies them stopping their boyfriends or husbands ever being tempted by nubile younger flesh.

In fact, surely it follows, if consent only becomes invalid if there is a percieved possible imbalance in power, that crazy feminist laws that lock professors up for sleeping with 21 year old students or that criminilize men as rapists for having sex with tipsy women, are also justified? Well, actually the crazy gang at men’s rights reddit probably think that those laws are justified. After all, only extremists think that men’s rights has any connection with anti-feminism…

As well as illustrating the danger that Reddit has become, the above two examples clearly showcase one of the fundamental errors of the men’s rights movement in general. Allowing feminists to set our agenda by chasing a ridiculously naive and simplistic conception of the notion of equality. As I have stated here many times, equality is not just about the distribution of goods, but about the valuation and selection of those goods in the first place. I keep half-expecting to see CryptoGirl make a post declaring her disappointment that society has been slow to accept the right of men to have an abortion….and no doubt that too would get dozens of upvotes from the simple-minded equality whores at Reddit.

Men’s Rights is about speaking up against the abuse and discrimination suffered by men in an increasingly misandristic society created by feminists and their supporters. Our movement is still very young and still, all too depressingly, very small. Reddit Men’s Rights is one of the few places (and in sheer numbers, the largest) where the future outlook and agenda of our cause is being decided and debated.

We must not let feminists decide what that agenda should be. This isn’t about silencing opposition to our cause (in the expert manner of feminists). It’s about allowing our nascent cause to develop its own true voice. Surely we deserve that dignity at least?

A new Reddit Men’s Rights has been created and all genuine men’s rights supporters are welcome to join and participate :

http://reddit.com/r/mensrightslinks