Imagine being alive and a man in the summer of 1977! Attractive young women were everywhere, strutting about in mini-skirts. Wolf-whistling was a compliment, but better still, you could approach these sexually liberated hotties and hope to get a one-night stand, rather than a place on the register for ‘sexual harassment’. The age of consent was 16 in the UK, but it was effectively 14 if the parents didn’t object, and punishments were – from the perspective of today – extraordinarilly light anyway. The word ‘paedophile’ was largely unknown, and tabloid newspapers such as the Sun were boosting their sales by showing topless ‘page 3 girls’, many of whom, including Samantha Fox and Linda Lusardi, had become stars at barely 16 years of age.
If all this was still too ‘puritan’ and sexually stifling for you, then the new budget airlines meant that places like Sweden or Amsterdam, far more liberal than even 70’s Britain, were only an hour or two away. On the face of it, life was good for a normal horny male in the 70’s in Britain, and it seemed reasonable to suppose it might even get a little better, or at least no worse.
But some people in Britain weren’t content with this. They demanded the right of men to have sex with toddlers. They were real paedophiles. The 1970’s version of today’s MAPs, or Eivind Berge’s ‘sexualists’. And equally as clueless.
Led by the homosexual Tom O’Carroll, his 250 strong organization ‘PIE’ (paedophile information exchange) hoped to hold public meetings to discuss their goals and strategies. This was long before the Internet, of course, so for any type of large-scale ‘discussion’ to take place, it would by necessity have to be in ‘public’, or at least in a real-world venue. Despite this, O’Carroll could have arranged things in a smaller and more anonymous way, rather than booking a large hall and advertising the event to the public, as he appears to have done, seemingly in the hope that new paedophiles would be attracted to attend and join PIE. Looking back at some of the newspaper archives covering his efforts in 1977, it does seem that he was (typically) rather oblivious to the response by the public his agenda would provoke.
O’Carroll probably first realized that allowing sex with four year olds was not on many people’s wish lists a few weeks earlier, when his first attempt to hold a PIE meeting – at London’s Shaftesbury Hotel – led to the entire staff threatening to walk out if it was allowed.
He fared little better at the start of September, when he had hoped to attend an academic conference on ‘love and attraction’ in Wales, but was turned away, with the organizer telling the press that “paedophilia would be better described as child molestation”.
Note that before this, the term ‘paedophilia’ was a word largely unfamiliar to the public, and used mainly in academic contexts and in the treatment of real paedophiles – men sexually attracted to toddlers. Tom O’Carroll brought it into public consciousness, as well as forming the assocation with ‘the age of consent’. O’Carroll and his fellow (largely homosexual) PIE members didn’t seek to lower the age of consent, or return it to the pre-feminist age of 12 or 13, but to more-or-less abolish it entirely. An age of consent of four was the official goal of PIE.
On being ejected from the conference, O’Carroll sought solace in a local pub. Unfortunately, rather than a pint to drown his sorrows, he found one being poured over his head, preceded by the fists of an angry woman.
After being turned away from the Shaftesbury Hotel, and then the Love and Attraction conference, O’Carroll finally found success with his attempt in September to organize a meeting at the Conway Hall in London. That is, ‘success’ in the Eivind Berge type meaning of the word – “no PR is bad PR”. Or mabye – “drawing one’s own blood with every word” measure of success. The Conway Hall was, and is still is owned by the Conway Hall Ethical Society – formed in the 18th century to combat the Christian idea of eternal damnation, and which has since then existed to this day as a meeting place for free and independent thought. The society made clear that it did not associate with the beliefs and goals of PIE, but decided to allow the meeting in the spirit of its mission to defend free speech. O’Carroll, and the small number of paedophiles who turned up to the Conway Hall on Monday September 19th 1977, were soon left ruing that decision. A mob of mainly outraged women were waiting for them, chanting “KILL, KILL, KILL”, and “Let the women get their hands on the perverts”. Words quickly turned into violence, with objects being thrown at the paedophiles that included a smoke bomb. One young paedo was chased nearly 200 meters by local women and given a good beating.
No doubt Tom and the paedophiles expected that women, being the gentler and more compassionate sex, would be supportive of their desires to bang toddlers. Remarkably, they still do today. But what PIE did succeed in doing was to kickstart the backlash to the sexual revolution and the liberalism of the 60’s and 70’s. The glorious summer of male sexuality was coming to an end. Homosexual paedophiles who wanted to sodomize four year old boys, had ensured that a long dark winter was ahead for all of us.
Thank you for this article AF.
You’re welcome Anonymous 2, and good to see you here!
On the subject of the 70’s and picking up hotties in the street, this German pop video from 1970 somehow appeared in my YouTube suggested list, and it’s almost like an allegory predicting that it would all come to an end, lol.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zc4IzOc4jd8
I think you’re right to distance yourself from paedophiles like Eivind Berge and this O’Carol person.
I am not too familiar with the word MAP and its exact definition. I know it stands for “minor attracted- person.” But here is my problem with this acronym having the word “minor” in it. What does that exactly mean? Minor, and I don’t really like this word in this context, can mean anything between 0 and 17. At least here on this site we know there is a very big difference between a 1-year-old, a 7-year-old, and a 17-year-old. Only idiots and/or brainwashed people group them all together, and apply the same standards to them. So for people like us that understand the attraction towards (post)pubescent women under the age of 18 is not the same as the attraction toward toddlers and children. So if MAP stands for the same as real pedophile, we should clearly distance ourselves from these people since we are not them.
I am not an expert on human history, but in the past centuries and millenia not many nations and civilizations were for a lack of a better word “advocating” for sexual relations between actual children, but also used puberty or the ages of around 14,15 to be considered old enough.
What am I trying to say here? Times have evolved so badly that even the attraction towards young adult women over 18 and age gaps have been demonized. It is then one thing to say that 14/15-17 year olds can be hot and are sexually active which is already almost impossible. But those people that want to go even lower will also lose any marginal support that was even there.
Making up numbers for examples:
If 15% of population see no problem between age gaps and the attraction to young adult women, then you have let’s say 5% that see no problem between 14/15/16/17-year-olds and adult men, this number will go down to 0.5% or even lower for those that want lower the age even further, and really go into pedophilia territory. I see men on the internet here and there that are awakened like ourselves, but totally draw the line to go even further lower, like myself since I am not a pedophile (using the real definition).
Despite the overuse and false application of the word pedophile, real pedophiles are a tiny minority. And those will destroy any work and discussion we have. I don’t know if for example Eivind is also promoting actual pedophilia, but if he is then he is not only not an ally, but makes things even worse and harder for us.
So I agree with you that those people in the late 70s certainly did not help with their activism and fucking toddlers. Even back then what were they thinking? “Hi, I am just here to pick up your 3-year-old daughter. She can barely talk, doesn’t really know what is going on, but she can surely take my dick” Insane and sick. That is truly sick.
I agree completely Steve. Sorry to mention Eivind again, but it’s evident he has some kind of delusion that there is a ‘hidden’ groundswell of support among the public (even women!) for legalizing even real paedophilia. I remember him claiming that he was ‘100% certain” that a middle-aged TV presenter, who posted a pic of herself in a bikini on Instagram, would agree with his views. It took me literally 10 minutes of Googling to find a video of her interviewing a man who claimed to have had sex with an older woman when he was 15 and was so badly ‘traumatized’ by it, with her aggreeing wholeheartedly.
Eivind thinks that 80% of women secretly have sympathy with the idea of him being allowed to bang young teens. In fact, 80% of women would gladly see him tortured to death for just arguing that it should be legal.
Even if Eivind is correct that society now sees men who are attracted to 15 and 16 year olds as ‘paedophiles’ (and in a sense, that is obviously true), we still shouldn’t ‘give up’ and accept the label of ‘paedophiles’ or ally ourselves with real paedophiles on that basis. It’s effectively committing suicide as far as any hope of forming any real political movement that might change things is concerned. Our only hope is to not only argue for the distinction between real paedophilia and normal male sexual attraction, but point out that feminists have deliberately inflated the paedophile term for their own selfish sexual ends.
“…. for legalizing even real paedophilia.”
So does that mean he is for real pedophilia? If that is the case you know my answer from above.
I think he is right though or would be right that if women would start speaking out for men and start supporting them, then things could be turned around. But the problem is “if”. The vast majority of women don’t like men, and especially their sexuality. Otherwise we would have seen some change.
Take a look at this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rosenstrasse_protest.
It is about (non-Jewish) German women during WW2 that successfully protested until their Jewish husbands were released from prison in 1943! I don’t know how the story ended for their husbands in the end, but for the moment these women were successful in their endeavor to help their men in Nazi Germany in 1943. Can you imagine a modern woman doing something like that for a man today? I doubt it. But if for some miracle you can get women on your side, better make full use of it, and make it count. The irony is that despite being physically the weaker gender, women’s voices and their opinions are considered much greater for quite some time now.
What would be the ideal situation? Young adult women, but also those young women that are 15 etc. actually voicing and protesting against the insanity. Because then those pedocrites/anti-male people (women and men) would have a problem since their whole foundation is to “protect” them, but now those they are trying to “protect” are speaking against them.
Eivind certainly and increasingly blurs the line between a real paedophile and a feminist ‘paedophile’. I remember a few weeks ago he said we should not be so ‘uptight’ about puberty marking the difference. He also defended a father who sodomized his own 10 year old son.
Thanks for sharing the Rosenstrasse link – I’d never read about that before. Yes, it would certainly help if teenage girls actually protested. As far as 15 year old girls or underage girls are concerned, the problem is that they obviously wouldn’t protest before their lover was arrested (it would hardly be wise to), and as soon as their lovers were arrested, the child abuse industry quickly goes to work in labeling them as victims, even offering them financial rewards. And of course, a lot of the times the man is arrested is because the girl has decided she is victim (maybe she caught him dating another girl too or suchlike) and has made the complaint herself.
Frankly it is never going to happen. Ditto with women. What’s in it for them? I refer back to my comments recently to ‘Original Insights’, asking him why no female has ever commented on Eivind’s blog in 20 years to my knowledge except as a hater (aside from his former girlfriend). Eivind and he think that women are at least as much victims as men, but don’t have the mental equipment to ask themselves why none of us here or at Eivind’s blog are ever female. The answer is that feminist anti-sex laws benefit 3 billion women, and actively persecute perhaps 100 or so female sex offenders worldwide. Apart from that, women are entirely callous towards men (except perhaps their ‘man’).
So yeah, German women might protest when their Jewish husbands are being carted to death camps, but it’s never going to happen for us. Perhaps if they do start rounding up ‘paedophiles’ for death camps today, a lot of their mothers would protest, but most mothers tend to disown their sons even for trivial offences such as teen bikini pics.
But maybe the recent teenage protests against social media bans are a small sign of hope, but not much.
Btw, I did once have somebody claiming to be a teenage girl here leaving a comment expressing her support. But who knows?
“He also defended a father who sodomized his own 10 year old son.”
Yeah, then I would good night and “good luck.” Such statements will not help at all. If he truly sees no problem with it, or would even do it himself, it will certainly destroy any marginal support that is there.
While at least a few men are waking up, probably only 1 % of them agree with prepubscent boys getting assfucked by their own fathers.
If she doesn’t turn on the man for her own cash and prizes, or convinces herself she’s a victim with help from the NGO’s, then the cops will literally just threaten her to prosecute, especially if it’s the federal police. Local police are better, because many of them are still caught with teens themselves by the federal police.
There are a few women here and there who speak up, and they are completely ignored. A few are on freespeechtube, most are sex workers who understand all sex is “paid for” and that they as professionals are hunted by the amateurs, too, for crossing the sexual picket line and breaking the union. Like Doug Stanhope says, the mentality of the amateurs is “you can’t just go out there and sell pussy for what it’s worth!”
“Thanks for sharing the Rosenstrasse link – I’d never read about that before. Yes, it would certainly help if teenage girls actually protested. As far as 15 year old girls or underage girls are concerned, the problem is that they obviously wouldn’t protest before their lover was arrested (it would hardly be wise to), and as soon as their lovers were arrested, the child abuse industry quickly goes to work in labeling them as victims, even offering them financial rewards. And of course, a lot of the times the man is arrested is because the girl has decided she is victim (maybe she caught him dating another girl too or suchlike) and has made the complaint herself.”
I agree with what you stated here. When I wrote my comment I was more thinking with starting with young adult women. Right now society’s view of legal/adult age gaps between older men and younger women is at best tolerated, even when they are small ones of a couple of years. Having read a lot of stories from young adult women being worried and riddled with anxiety how their environment (parents/friends) would react if they would know that they are attracted to older men or are even dating one. I truly believe many more young women are attracted to older men, but keep it on the down low and don’t express it because of the harshest stigma in human history.
I think one of these two things need to happen to get step one underway. Remember when I said doing step one before ten.
Either (young/adult) women themselves grow some “balls”, and start defending and expressing their attraction towards older men, and also start defending men and their normal desires when they get attacked. If enough women were doing this, we may see some change.
But we know women are like cattle have a much more pronounced herd mentality. We also know what happened when women gained power in the last century. Everything got worse for men and their sexuality. So we can’t count on that, otherwise it would have happened by now. Not only that, we went in the total opposite direction. And women love to play the victim, and have a hard time taking accountability.
Or we as men need to make the change happen. Still unlikely, but probably more realistic than option one. Like I already mentioned in previous comments about men need to show strength, solidarity and stand up for themselves and their attractions. The more men we can wake up from this anti-male/pedo hysteria, the more likely it is to make this change happen via critical mass. For example, when you linked the story of this Stephen Bear guy, and him figuratively showing everyone the middle finger by getting with an 18-year-old.
I have another intersting fact or thought for you that you maybe didn’t know. You probably heard of Oskar Schindler, the German industrialist that rescued many Jews. Or maybe you have seen the film adaptation by Steve Spielberg.
In the movie during his birthday party he kisses two Jewish females. The little girl/prepubescent child on the cheek, and with the older one he really goes all in. I don’t know the females’ ages. In the case of the little one, it doesn’t matter. She clearly a little girl. So anything other than a little kiss on the cheek would have been too much. And nowadays you wouldn’t want to be caught dead even doing this, even if she is really sweet and you want express your gratitude.
The older one seems signifcantly younger than Oskar, and maybe even underage. Referencing Wikipedia, they write about “girls.” So I assume the older one was also underage. Consequently he was arrested for a couple of days. Why?…….not for pedohilia or being an “old creepy nonce/pedo,” but because they were Jewish.
To point this out: In reality he was really arrested for kissing Jewish girls.
Watch this clip:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xpxWq-hhoxE
I was specifically looking for a link to provide here, and before I even looked at the comments, I knew someone would bring up pedophilia.
Intersting comments from that clip:
“nowadays he would be called pedophile and imprisoned for sexual abuses”
One wrote: “Why did they jail him for? because they thought schindler is pedophille? why????”
then another replied: “Schindler kissed a jew”
Interesting comments indeed.
I remember back in the early days of the MRM when we were trying to establish these issues as core men’s rights issues, I argued that MRAs refusing to accept that feminist laws against relationships with teens were a valid issue, were akin to black rights leaders in the 60’s refusing to accept that laws against interracial marriage were a valid civil rights issue.
BTW, I mentioned that my mother was Scottish Irish – her family came from the Neesons of Northern Ireland.
“BTW, I mentioned that my mother was Scottish Irish – her family came from the Neesons of Northern Ireland.”
I don’t know how common that last name is, but if its rare, does that mean you are (distantly) related to Liam Neeson?
Going back to Schindler’s List. Another interesting plot in the movie is the “relationship” between Amon Goeth (SS-officer) and his Jewish maid Helen Hirsch who is around 17,18,19. He starts getting attached to her and even develops sexual desire for her. Note that unlike Oskar Schindler and him kissing Jewish girls, the sexual desire from Amon Goeth towards Helen Hirsch is fabricated and made up for the movie.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I7vXc2HsMZg Starts at around 0:52
But there is reason why I still mention it here. The portrayal of men’s sexual desire towards young women especially in that area between 15-19. It was still possible to show something like this to a greater audience without causing a big(ger) outrage because of some arbitrary age or age gap, compared to today at least. What was the point about Amon Goeth’s desire for Helen Hirsch. Back then, when to movie was made and shown, nobody cared about the age gap portrayed or that he is a supposed “predator/pedophile.” The point was to show how he was wavering in his conviction that the Jews are vermin, and not human. Nowadays as you can guess what the reaction would be nonce this, pedophile and predator that…yadda yadda yadda
Let me reference two more movies you have probably seen, Jurassic Park (1993) and American Beauty (1999), and a television show Californication (2007-2014)
Jurassic Park (the movie/not the book) by comparrison is tame. As you know it is not about a love story or anything like that. But the protagonists, Alan Grant 40s and Ellie Sattler 20s are in an age gap relationship. The movie does very little to show that they are an actual couple, and show very little PDA. I watched that ad nauseum as a child, and even as I grew older, I have never once heard any criticism about that until a couple of years ago (mid-late 2010s). All of the sudden the love part of the relationship that wasn’t even really portrayed was seen as problematic.
American beauty clearly shows what many middle-aged men want, but don’t admit. No an old, nagging wife that makes your life miserable, but a young, attractive women that gives you everything you desire. Keep in mind the young woman he desires is 16 or 17 if I recall correctly. Again, making such a movie today? Same pattern.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6cKcCGHuojc
Californication ran from 2007-2014. The show starts with the protagonist having sex with an 16-year-old (actress is older, but potrays a 16-year-old), and she was the one who initiated it, though he didn’t know at the time that she was 16. In this show, while the sexual encounter with her was not advocated as something good, and eventually he went to court, but not to prison, the whole tone or vibe was not about portraying him as this evil monster that deserves only the worst one could wish on a human.
Season one was released in 2007, and even up to this point such shows could still be aired without a big uproar. I doubt this show could have started in 2017 like that. As in my reply to “anon69”, the latest big shift pertaining all of this must have happed around the mid-late 2010s.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=72XClfJ1Grw
Yes, I am distant cousin or something to Liam Neeson (don’t tell him, lol!).
It makes you wonder how bad things will be in another 20 or 30 years. I mean, things were already bad in the 2000’s, but now as you point out with these clips, things are even worse. Notice that you rarely ever see or hear the word ‘jailbait’ online anymore, yet back then it was very frequently used and comedy sketches would often make use of the idea. First they established the idea that teen sex was wrong, then they established that teen girls aren’t attractive – and never have been!
I often wondered how Paul Elam could openly state many times that his favorite movie was American Beauty (obviously seeing himself in Lester Burnham), and yet be so dogmatic about teen sex issues not being men’s rights issues.
Great for mentioning jailbait. There obviously a good reason why was termed/coined like that. It is for young attractive women many men, younger or older, are attracted to, but her being under an arbitrary age that lead to your demise. If men were not attracted to 15, 16, 17 year olds, there would be no need to include bait in jailbait. Bait only works if you want it, and are attracted to it. May it be cheese for a mouse, or some young, hot woman for men of all ages.
“I often wondered how Paul Elam could openly state many times that his favorite movie was American Beauty (obviously seeing himself in Lester Burnham), and yet be so dogmatic about teen sex issues not being men’s rights issues.”
Let me tell you why (in my opinion). Men have been so much figuratively castrated, and been indoctrinated to the nth degree, they just can’t see, and/or admit it. Remember my first posts when I first started posting on your blog, and how even grown men feel so guilty for being attracted to young adult women, even in their 20s!? I truly think our gender has suffered a major trauma, otherwise you can’t explain it.
We modern humans are in a way very arrogant when we describe people of the past as stuperstitious, dumb, and backwards. We are still the same people with stupid believes and stuperstitions. You wanna another one you probably heard about? “Half your age plus 7” There are people that actually believe it and follow it as if it was some kind of commandment from the Bible. Or criticize other men if they don’t follow it.
For example, we laugh, mock and despise the Atzecs or Inkas for their human sacrifices, but what are we doing today? The same, just packaged differently. Look at the riot in the UK you just posted. Without the police making sure that some order is in place. Without it? Goodnight. Even then, look at all the comments and the mobs chanting for violence, rape, and murder for those imprisoned. In one moment rape is the most horrible thing that can happen according to normies, but at the same time make these stupid jokes and mean them. For what? It wasn’t even actual/real rape of a little girl. It was exchanging messages with fake 14-year-old, while actual 14-year-olds are sexting all the time.
“We modern humans are in a way very arrogant when we describe people of the past as stuperstitious, dumb, and backwards. We are still the same people with stupid believes and stuperstitions.”
I think that’s why Black Mirror is so unnerving. It gets to the heart of the matter – no matter how much tech progresses, humans with our chimp instincts and primitive morals will f**k it up and use it in the worst way. And of course, as we discussed here recently, Charlie Brooker definitely ‘gets it’.
“I often wondered how Paul Elam could openly state many times that his favorite movie was American Beauty (obviously seeing himself in Lester Burnham), and yet be so dogmatic about teen sex issues not being men’s rights issues.”
Part 2
When I first discovered you, and finally started commenting, I did not expect to write this many and lengthy comments. But as one can see, we will probably never run out of content. So here we are.
I just watched a video that perfectly fits your question. There is this Youtuber called “Raymond – Thoughts and Minds.” He basically covers articles, but also his life, his lack of sex and relationships, his looks, work, societal changes etc. And he puts out so many videos and live streams that it is for the most part very difficult to watch them all.
Throughout his videos and live streams, he is very vocal about wanting a young woman, and not a woman his age (he is 37). Here and there he says he wants a 21-year-old, sometimes a says he wants a 24-year-old, or more rarely he mentioned he wants a 18-19-year-old as he does in this video.
In his latest video “these people are just pure dysfunctional…” he changes the topic for a second, and talks about his chat or discord server, and he how doesn’t want any discussion about the age of consent. He as a very stern look and says he doesn’t want that. The lower limit for him is absolutely 18 since according to him everything else is illegal and immoral.
He is from Ohio. I just looked it up. The age of consent is 16 for adults. So his argument already falls flat since he doesn’t even know his own state law. That’s one of my problems with some (uneducated) Americans. Many of them don’t even know their own laws, and then want to apply their (perception of) laws to the rest of the world. But I still get why he is doing it. Even if it was just for self-preservation. It is one thing to be an older man attracted to young adult women, bad enough, it is another one to get the real truth out today.
What about “morality.” Well, what difference does it make if the woman is 17.999999999 or 18 years old. There is no difference. The “moral” age of 18 is totally arbitrary, and in many places even above the age of consent. They are postpubescent, developed young women that are already sexualy active.
But the indoctrination or believe is so strong that they just can’t fathom that. Or they are so deathly afraid to be honest, which I also believe. But at least he is brave and vocal enough to express his desire for younger adult women in general. So that’s something.
We’re delighted to have you here Steve and I’m glad you’ve found a home among us!
It was a nice surprise really to see you and now Duke commenting, because my site traffic is still very small as Google hasn’t really found it yet (or maybe has penalized it after it being used as a Sabrina Vaz redirect for so many years).
That Raymond YouTuber comes across as articulate and makes some good points.
TBH, as well as being an age cuck, he might be worried about getting demonetized (if he hasn’t been already for talking about MGTOW issues), as we know how absurdly strict YouTube are about anything that supposedly ‘sexualizes minors’. His videos get up to 40K views or more and he’s pumping them out every day, so he could be earning more than $2K a week from his channel.
“TBH, as well as being an age cuck, he might be worried about getting demonetized (if he hasn’t been already for talking about MGTOW issues), as we know how absurdly strict YouTube are about anything that supposedly ‘sexualizes minors’. His videos get up to 40K views or more and he’s pumping them out every day, so he could be earning more than $2K a week from his channel.”
Exactly, that’s what I meant by “self-preservation.” I am not attacking, or critizing him directly. I admit it myself. I am only this honest and frank here. In real life, in public with your face and name out, the inhibition is much, much greater, and you need to be very careful and cautious. What your place provides is the opportunity to be completely frank and honest.
“We’re delighted to have you here Steve and I’m glad you’ve found a home among us!
It was a nice surprise really to see you and now Duke commenting, because my site traffic is still very small as Google hasn’t really found it yet (or maybe has penalized it after it being used as a Sabrina Vaz redirect for so many years).”
Thanks for having me. Also I can give the compliment back to you. Like I mentioned in my introduction, if you haven’t had posted your blog on Eivind’s blog, I never would have found it. Maybe you should do that more often?
I frequent other “pro-male” spaces, and even there I could not have written what I have written here. If we had to measure this space, your blog, on a taboo scale, it would be at the second highest measurement. Only real pedophiles that are attracted to little prepubescent children, and want to legalize sex with them I would place higher. But since I am not interested in children or pedophilia, this is in a way the most taboo space I am frequenting right now. The only other place I could think of would be CityCrusher’s Youtube channel. But Youtube is not really the place for many, prolonged comments and exchanges.
If you think my comments and what I provide here is useful, feel free to use the information or examples for future blog posts, references or whatever.
What happened with Sabrina Vaz? I looked her up. Isn’t she some ASMR/Onlyfans creator?
And I remember now exactly how I found Eivinds, and thus your blog. I wanted to share some Youtube channels anyway, and that got the ball rolling. I will share them, and other interesting pieces information in a separate comment.
Regarding your blog itself. From my point of view the good news is that you don’t have a “complex” URL. It is just “theantifeminist.com.” No multiple dots or blog or blogspot in the url. So that should be easier to find. When I type “theantifeminist” in duckduckgo, I find your blog immediately. But it needs to be written without spaces. If you type “the antifeminist,” I don’t find you at all, at least on the first 1-2 pages. When it comes to google, I don’t find your blog, even when I type “theantifeminist” into the search engine.
Yeah, the whole cancel culture thing is really a form of financial blackmail or bribe to ensure everyone ‘keeps to the script’.
If I start commenting on Eivind’s blog again, I probably wont stop and will start boring and antagonizing his readers again. Now that I am blogging again here, there isn’t much point. Of course, I don’t mind you or other of my readers linking to me from his comments section occasionally.
There was a time when I was sending him far more new readers and commentators than he was to me. It wont be long before normal service has resumed.
Yeah, ‘theantifeminist.com domain name is pretty good. I guess most of my old readers had given up on me ever blogging again. Even Jack probably wouldn’t have checked in here if he hadn’t seen in Eivind’s comments section that I had re-started.
Sabrina Vaz is making literally tens of thousands of dollars a week on OnlyFans. She posted her earnings once on Instagram. She probably has at least $10 million in the bank. The world is full of simps. She has taken down all her old teen music covers on YouTube, but I still have a load of them 😀
Google is a pain in the ass these days. It might take years for it to recognize me again. I’ve started another Male Sexualist blog, but I wont link it here until I’ve developed it a bit more. Hopefully Google will like it.
Youtube is under blanket censorhip. On a video about Thomas Hardy’s novels (nothing to do with men’s rights), I posted a comment to a comment. Let’s call it a sub-comment. My sub-comment read: “This shows women are full of shit”. Guess what, my sub-comment never appeared and I wasn’t warned about it. The Ai algorithm didn’t tolerate “women” and “full of shit” within the same sentence.
Up to now censorhip was never perfect because it was costly. Now with AI it is to be feared censorhip will cost the censors nothing and it will be “transparent” as they say in data processing jargon.
I am not sure whether at that time some sort of AI was already used, but
few years ago I used to comment under some paedohysteria videos on YouTube(and also I was trying to spread other unpopular opinions).
My comments suffered the same fate. It was visible for me, but not for others-almost instantly, so it was not result of downvoting.
For some time I haven’t trusted any of these big platforms to be the right place for open discussion, as it seems that screaming from window would be more effective, in terms of influence .
Yes, censorship and control/surveillance is more and more cheaper/effective,but people are not being able to imagine consequences of such development…
Ever heard of Looksmaximus? I highly recommend him. He was active between 2020 and 2022/2023. As far as I know he is no longer active. He had somewhat of a “meltdown” towards the end due to cancer scare, enlarged spleen, trolls and other stuff. But as far as I know he is still alive.
https://www.bitchute.com/video/53Sor4JpqeQH -> The Aryan Pigeonhood
Great video dissecting how we have not just to blame (feminist) women, but also men.
As I have dealt with all these topics, I can’t shake the feeling that especially men, and thus societies of Germanic/Anglo-Saxon descent are or at least were on the forefront of the anti-male/sexuality, pedo-hysteria. Not saying other nationalities are better, particularly today, but relatively speaking.
I really dislike these prison guys that act holier-than-thou as if they are better than one that had sex with a 15-year-old.
Another video: https://www.bitchute.com/video/hWx2bqK56yOh -> He mentions Hungary briefly, and since you have been there, you may confirm.
His archive:
https://www.youtube.com/@flavusthelesser/posts
https://www.bitchute.com/channel/qePAzEJRyVuv/
Thanks Steve, ‘LooksMaximus’ does sound vaguely familiar. I will have a good look at his videos.
seems like this article is going for the weak-minded “blame game” argument and trying to create a division between other natural (yes, it also has historical relevance) desires like pedophilia for the sake of optics, as well as misrepresenting the PIE with the constant strawmanning of wanting to “fuck toddlers”, notating your lack of research on them at all. this repression on teenage and child sexuality was long coming regardless of this
i was intrigued because i’m rather against feminism too but ultimately with the collectivist mindset among this general community and dishonest tone, it seems like you also fall into the similar tactics they have. really unfortunate
…bless for at least letting this message go through. so let me clear things up
no, the 1970s were NOT a paradise as is exaggerated here (ask jerry lee lewis). the reason PIE came about in the first place is because of the lack of sexual freedoms. the age of consent was 16, FOR HETEROSEXUALS, and even that . if you were gay like carroll, it was 21. obviously that’s not going to stand with gays
it’s very telling that this article uses the same “toddler” exaggeration that the media coverage also did, like it’s okay to propagate slander now for “real pedophiles” but not us “natural grown men”. there was a poll made for members of the PIE to show their interests (G. Wilson, C. David – The Child-Lovers, a Study of Paedophiles in Society). the lowest age of attraction in the poll was seven (at the least, girls have been shown to be able to go into puberty by five if we stop working off of arbitrary numbers), and the median age was around 12 to 14 for boys.
the same things they say about the PIE in the new clippings could certainly be reapplied stronger to people attracted to teens. i mean this in the most offensive way possible: this reads like a vox article
O’Carol shoukd have just set up a UK branch of Nambla.
The fact is that in the 60s and 70s men could legally bang a 14 year old girl so long as her parents didn’t object, there was no sex offenders register, 16 year olds could pose naked, and you could fly to places like Sweden or the Netherlands where things were even more liberal. For a normal man even with a very strong attraction to teen girls, things couldn’t be much better than the UK back then.
“…there was no sex offenders register,…”
I was curious when it was introduced in the UK etc. Here is a list provided by ChatGPT. Even for the the better part of the 90s there was no sex offender registry.
“1. United Kingdom (UK)
Introduced: 1997
Legislation: Sex Offenders Act 1997
2. Australia
Introduced: 2004
Legislation: Child Protection (Offender Reporting) Act 2004 (New South Wales; other states followed with similar laws)
3. New Zealand
Introduced: Proposed (2019; still under development)
Legislation: Discussions for a registry, but not yet fully implemented
4. United States
Introduced: 1994
Legislation: Jacob Wetterling Crimes Against Children and Sexually Violent Offender Registration Act (1994), followed by Megan’s Law (1996) and Pam Lychner Sexual Offender Tracking and Identification Act (1996)
5. Canada
Introduced: 2004
Legislation: Sex Offender Information Registration Act (SOIRA) under the National Sex Offender Registry”
It came in the UK after the murder of Sarah Payne by a random psycho, lobbied for by Rebekkah Wade – the feminist editor of the News of the World, which was later forced to close after they were caught hacking the phone of missing 13 yo schoolgirl Milly Dowler. It happens that she was already dead, but their actions wrongly led not only her parents to believe she was still alive but also the police – thereby interfering with their attempts to find both her amd the psycho who murdered her.
For several decades after WW2 it was tabboo everywhere the idea of a sex offenders register because of fresh memories of the concentration camps, including forcing homosexuals to wear pink triangles.
I visited the official MAP site a while back and the webmaster (the guy who made Berge “outreach ambassador”) was talking about zoophillia and even discussing communities who get a sexual kick out of torturing animals and whether MAPs should ally with them too.
“I’m rather against feminists”.
You mean like a Jew facing the gas chambers in Nazi Germany would be “rather against the Nazis”?
Conflating real paedophilia with normal male attraction to teens and increasingly even young women is central to the whole feminist project, something I’ve been arguing for 20 years. And it’s vital that we fight to maintain the truth. I can see though why after 50 years of failed pedorationalism you’d want to be part of a more aggressive movement that offers some hope.
I’m not blaming Tom O’Caroll for everything as I’ve made clear the STU was inevitable but they certainly made it easier for the feminist backlash.