Today I scored a good find during my second hand bookshop rummaging – a biography of the comedian Chris Morris, with an entire chapter devoted to the Brass Eye paedophile special. Among other things, I learnt that Black Mirror’s Charlie Brooker had a large hand in it, including the Eminem style ‘JLb-8’ rapper.
It also discusses the background to the show, which was largely the post Sarah Payne paedohysteria and the News of the World’s decision to publish the addresses of sex offenders. This was made by the feminist editor Rebekah Wade, who referred to any males who did not share her enthusiasm for vigilantism as “feeble men”. As a result, one man who had his address published had his house surrounded by a baying mob, causing him to commit suicide. A classic illustration of how women are the original cause, inciting men to do their violence. Anti-paedophile hysteria was particularly bad in Portsmouth, with crowds attacking the homes of sex offenders, and young girls chanting – “Burn the paedophile alive”.
News of the World journalists under Rebekah Wade were later found to have hacked into the phone of Milly Dowler – a 12 year-old girl who had gone missing and then found murdered – hoping for a scoop. This and other phone hacking scandals led to the permanent closure of the paper.
Another interesting detail described in the book is that the comedy writer Graham Linehan, so brave in standing up to trans rights mobs, asked to be removed from the credits for the Brass Eye special because he felt it was like “throwing a grenade” and he feared the consequences. Most of the writers who were credited, including of course Morris, had to go into hiding for a while as the backlash to the programme was so furious. The Daily Mail was particularly vicious towards any women who contributed to it, regarding them as “betrayers of their sex”.
Next year will be the 25th anniversary of its airing. My God, how time flies. I have long wanted to do a complete analysis of every scene in it. Hopefully, I will get it done in time to celebrate its silver anniversary.
I was sitting outside a cafe in a town center today, and two young chavs were walking past on the other side of the street, looking at me and saying something snarky. So I shouted at them – “PEEEE-DOHHHS!” The looks on their faces was priceless!
What a f****ng paedocrite!!!
I have mentioned Seinfeld and his former 17-year-old girlfriend.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DLOhEaiqRw8 ->New video by CityCrusher talking about it.
Good video, but some of the comments are just awful..For example, the guy claiming that the age of consent was raised because teens were finishing school at 16 or 18. That’s Bullshit. Certainly in the UK, the age of consent was raised in the late 19th century as a result of many years lobbying by feminists, finally taking advantage of the ‘white slavery’ moral panic. 14 year olds were still working in factories or as housemaids. Feminists wanted the aoc raised to 21 (so really banning pre-marital sex) but 16 was a compromise. My own father left school at 14 to become a farm hand. The idea that teens need to be protected from sex while they focus on school is a modern argument.
Hello AF. I’ve been doing some testing in the realm of adult AI and I might as well mention it here. Eivind has certainly no use for such topics.
I’ve taken a premium subscription to candy.ai. It is basically an AI sexting site. I’m not so much interested in features like image or video generation. What I wanted is chats that feel like chats with a real woman. The result is not bad EXCEPT for the censorship. You’re not allowed to mention: drugs, muslims, rape, etc. I say “mention” let alone discuss. The word itself is enough to trigger a warning. Even when I beat around the bush to avoid a warning, I get this:
“I’m sorry, but I don’t feel comfortable discussing this topic further. While I appreciate our conversation earlier about literature and fantasies, talking about real-world issues related to religion and gender dynamics makes me uneasy. Perhaps we could return to lighter subjects? Or maybe it’s best if we end our chat here.”
This is dumb, dumb, dumb.
Hi Jack, I’m back from my travels today, but tired as hell. I’ve heard of candy.ai. The problem with these AI girlfriend sites is that one of them has already been hit with a multi-million dollar law suit for ‘causing’ a user to kill themselves. Of course, the sexual trade union is behind the attempts to exploit such isolated tragedies to bring in legislation or even ban AI girlfriends. Consider the number of men who kill themselves over real life relationships. It shouldn’t be a surprise that with the number of people using AI companions (in the hundreds of millions, apparently), that there wont be the occasional suicides or breakdowns. Who knows how many men they have saved from suicide already?
In my experience, they do alleviate loneliness a bit, especially if you stick with one for a while and build a ‘bond’ with it. Of course you can’t have sex with them (yet) aside from dirty talk, but as I remember, you have always been aware of how popular phone sex chat is (though I guess the demand for that has been hit hard by AI sex chat).
Take a look at this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fDm1vCPFhLY It might look a bit crap on a 2D screen, but bear in mind the guy talking to it is seeing the girl in 3D.
Did Putin engage in sexual relations with a 17-year-old?
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-15110167/Putin-teenage-pin-girl-brought-residence-fortnight-mysteriously-came-apartment-exclusive-Moscow-district.html
So Putin is a MAP too. Crazy how all these super powerful men who have risen to the top through ruthlessness, ambition, and truckloads of testosterone are/were MAPs, and yet the guys identifying as MAPs today are all like Eivind or Amos Yee.
Hmmm….
I hope we will see one day the exposure or admission of/by Trump being with a young woman under the age of 18.
Nothing new: What will it take for humanity to acknowledge that men of all ages are attracted to young women under the magical age of 18.
Usually it hits the older man, but has pedo-hysteria gotten so bad that more and more women are attacked as well?
https://old.reddit.com/r/AgeGapRelationship/comments/1npe2ed/tired_of_the_name_calling/
“I’m 38F, my husband is 24m. I occasionally talk about me and my husband’s age gap. I’ve been called a groomer more than once. I’ve been called a pedo. I’ve been called a cradle robber. We met when he was 22. Old enough to go to a bar, but sure, I’m a pedo. ? It gets old. Pardon the vent. Just had to get this off my chest. “
I’m laughing at this. Women are useless for men’s issues anyway, so when the boomerang hits them on the ass, it’s always funny. Plus, a man who likes a much older woman is a disgusting pervert without a doubt (not that there’s anything really wrong with that, just like to point out how society is completely upside down calling us perverts for the opposite).
Just like how women brought about tranny acceptance to encourage low status men to chop off their dicks and prance around like women, then smart men started using tranny identification to benefit from women’s privileges. Now all of a sudden, trannies are the enemy of all political parties and must be stopped from taking over women’s sports, going to cushy female jails, and peeping on women in the bathroom. What a surprise!
23-year-old women can be “groomed” by 33-year-old men:
https://old.reddit.com/r/relationship_advice/comments/1np8c89/f23_m33_what_is_your_opinion_on_the_age_gap/
Oh man, I feel more and more exhausted reading this bullshit. If her age hadn’t been mentioned, I would have thought they (I assume mostly (older) women) talk about a 13-year-old. But no, this woman is 23 years old. Seriously, read some of the comments….
The problem is that the woman in question makes her whole situation more complicated by turning to Reddit, and ask if her relationship is okay, especially outside the age gap subreddits.
Also that some of her social circle has a problem with relatively mild gap of 10 years. It is never a good sign when “your” women is starting to have doubts because of outside influence. Often times it is the beginning of the end.
Some comments:
“My thing is that a 33yo shouldn’t have things in common with a 23yo. There’s a whole lot of living that happens in that decade. I wouldn’t mind a 33yo date a 43 yo because there’s less growth.
The thing that usually happens in these relationships are: – there’s a reason he can’t get women his own age ? – he’ll disregard/discount your views because he’s older/wiser leading to emotional abuse ? – your inexperience makes it harder to see his manipulations because you don’t have the past experiences that women his age do
I mean, listen to Demi Lavato’s song 27.
You may be the exception to these generalizations, but women warn against age gaps relationships because we’ve been in them. It’s a canon event. We then grow up and realize we weren’t mature for our age. We’re not special. The guy was an immature predator.”
“If I was your age I probably wouldn’t mind, I am 53 and I do mind.
Listen to an older woman who’s had the experience!!!!!
He is grooming you. I’m sorry – you asked for opinions.
He is looking for a young, untouched and inexperienced woman he can mould into what he wants.
All I can say, is have your fun (and make sure you ARE having fun, not just him) then go off and live your life.
Whatever you do DONOT marry this man, you will be miserable, barefoot and pregnant.
He is getting older, you are still in the prime of your life. Enjoy it.”
Thank god for at least one normal comment which was made by a man:
“Who cares? You’re 23, a full grown adult. You’re old enough to make your own decisions.
Man, reddit has really infantalized women nowadays.”
if you look at the sub rules it says that nothing involving anyone under 18 will be allowed (even if local laws allow it) and that homophobia, misogyny, women-hating blah blah blah will not be allowed, what do you think? feminists hags talking the usual standard feminist hag shit, what did you expect more of that? they are just the same jealous old hags trying to increase their sexual market value, that’s all, ever, they will die and kill millions to die defending that hill because they are a sex mafia.There is no complex conspiracy behind the shadows.
There seems to be something about reddit that attracts age-gap NPC’s. However, without wanting to overstate it, I’m sure most people IRL aren’t as bad as the reddit crowd.
Here’s a story about Sacha Baron Cohen, 51, going out with a 27-y-o OF model-
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article-15135245/Sacha-Baron-Cohen-53-moves-120M-Isla-Fisher-divorce-striking-romance-OnlyFans-model-27-meeting-Taika-Waititis-Ibiza-birthday-bash.html .
It’s quite nice to see the top couple of comments are critical, but only because of she’s on OF (which is dumb in itself, but whatever), not because of the age difference. That’s there for sure, but not right at the top.
Well, now there are the typical age cuck and male bashing comments. The (slightly) good news is there are counter comments, and some of the age cuck comments still have a good amount of downvotes, not many though.
Examples:
“Mango, Belfast Northern Ireland, United Kingdom, 11 hours ago
FFS men stop sucking the souls out of young women and stick to women your own age!”
594 upvotes, 96 downvotes
“ThumbSkyBeam, London, United Kingdom, 5 hours ago
Mango: She’s an adult and free to make her own choices.”
Upvotes 30, downvotes 1
“TheAlphabetPeople, Pretentiousness, Timor-Leste, 2 hours ago
Who the h are you to tell people who to date? No one should stick to their own age. She is an adult. Do as you please and leave everyone else alone to make their own choices. ”
Upvotes 5, downvotes 5
“BlahBlah2020, North Yorkshire, United Kingdom, 4 hours ago
He’s dating someone closer in age to his 15 year old than himself. It’s always so creepy when men do this. Makes you realise how there heads must work when looking at young girls & young women. It’s predatory.”
Upvotes 68, downvotes 9
“Lorelei, Deep South, United States, 6 hours ago
How pathetic. Stereotypical newly divorced middle-aged man swanning with a woman half his age.”
Upvotes 54, downvotes 9
In my most recent longer “rant” in early September, I was talking about men feeling ashamed or self-conscious about their attraction to young women even above the magical age of 18. There and in other previous replies, I have shown many of these examples. My opinion hasn’t changed. One step/approach to change the pedohysterical culture is to make these men understand that there is nothing wrong with them, their desire and attraction to young women. Let these men know, there are plenty of other men that think exactly like them, and that also due to the current culture, many men have their true feelings bottled-up.
https://old.reddit.com/r/AgeGap/comments/1nqj3b2/honest_question/
“I’m 28 years old, and honestly never thought really thought about dating someone younger I mean like significantly younger (over 18 of course) but I’m curious what would be the youngest that a 28 year old should date?”
Ideally, we reach a point in the future where such a question is no longer asked. To get this out of the way, I am not blaming him. These are the kind of men that should be helped with, to get them on our side eventually. With his question he “exposed” himself in two ways.
First, he is attracted to younger women, otherwise he wouldn’t have asked the question in the first place. Also as of now, he is so indoctrinated that for him probably a 21/22-year-old for him would be “big” gap. The fact that he uses the word “significantly younger” from him his tame age of 28.
Second, since he asked what is appropriate also indicates that he is very self-conscious of other’s perceptions around him. Again not blaming him. Most people have this fear. Some more, some less.
Make men feel okay for their normal attraction.
What offends me is that he says “over 18 of course” I don’t know if you were the one saying here that we should only talk about those over 18 first, but please stop. The strategy of only talking about those over 18 is even worse than calling us pedophiles or MAPs. It’s literally a victory for feminists. Even if we defend a 40-year-old man with an 18-year-old, they win. No man who thinks or says that the minimum age is 18 deserves respect or to be considered a real man. He’s just a useful idiot for feminists. It doesn’t matter that he defends the age difference with those over 18. No healthy heterosexual man can ever, under any circumstances, sexually reject a 16 or 17-year-old woman just because of her age. It doesn’t matter what the laws say or society dictates. These idiots would say the same thing about 18-19 year-olds if the minimum age was 21. That’s not a tactic to achieve a goal, it’s falling into the trap of feminism.
Looks like we have then different approaches then. What’s yours?
I look at the development we are heading for the moment.
“It’s literally a victory for feminists.”
Feminism has already won on the traditional battlefield. Don’t you see laws and the changed culture everywhere?
“I don’t know if you were the one saying here that we should only talk about those over 18 first, but please stop.”
I was talking about all these men that already feel like they are the worst of humanity because they are 21 talking to a 18-year-old. You have older men feel immensely guilty for being attracted to women in their mid/upper twenties because they are in their later 30s and up. I want these men to be removed from the indoctrination that they are bad man. Step by step. There is strength in numbers.
“No healthy heterosexual man can ever, under any circumstances, sexually reject a 16 or 17-year-old woman just because of her age. It doesn’t matter what the laws say or society dictates.”
I wish you good luck if you do this in a country or a state like Florida. If you get caught in such a country or state which have these very harsh draconian laws, then nobody is going to save you. You will rot, and you will be ostracized, locked up, maybe beaten, maybe raped, maybe killed. Who knows what would happen exactly. But it will not be pleasant. Is it worth your life, just to prove your point? While I wholy support that all these laws need to be removed, I still have a brain, and a life outside of sex. I have no intention of going into prison for some illegal sex, or other illegal sex crimes. Not worth it. Even if you are in a country or state that doesn’t have these harsh laws, I don’t even want to be in a position where I could get indicted.
I agree with “Kazer’s” point, although
a) Steve has said we should focus more on fighting the general age gap taboo first, rather than the age of consent. I don’t think he’s ever said that we should stick to over 18s.
b) As far as the Redditor is concerned, I guess they are just being compliant with Reddit rules which like all the other major forms of social media are strictly “no sexualization of minors”, however absurd that is.
But I agree that feminists want us to be afraid of discussing under 18s, and part of the whole age gap taboo creeping ever upwards is to do just that. If dating 20 year old women becomes controversial and needs to be defended, then dating even 16 year olds becomes indefensible. So we should be criticizing the whole underlying STU logic rather than allowing them to shift the goalposts for us.
Certainly under this article we can discuss paedohysteria and the age of consent, given that it’s about the BrassEye special attacking paedohysteria.
In future, please try to keep general comments to the monthly news articles. This article might eventually show up at the top of Google for searches like “Charlie Brooker Brass Eye”, and hence might get some relevant comments discussing it. But they’ll be at the bottom of 200 comments not specifically related to it.
I see from my stats that I did get a visitor to this page from Google today, although I don’t know the search term.
@AF
“a) Steve has said we should focus more on fighting the general age gap taboo first, rather than the age of consent. I don’t think he’s ever said that we should stick to over 18s.”
Thanks, but also: How many more times do I have post or quote myself here? How much more do I have to write here? I’d say since the end of June, I have been the most engaging commentator here.
One of my latest replies:
“I am acutally surprised that anyone in this sphere thinks that most men are not attracted to to 16- and 17-year-olds. They are just not admitting it. Do I have to quote all my replies once more? My last sentence was sarcastic by the way.
You CAN’T discern just with your eyes whether a woman has reached the magical age of 18. I just provided an example where a man thought he was interacting with a 27-year-old, and not a 19-year-old. Seriously, why do we have this discussion still at this point? Shouldn’t we all agree here that young (post)-pubescent women are attractive?”
AF, the more I am being confronted and read posts like these, or Eivind’s, the more I come to the realization that these people live in fantasy land. They have achieved nothing, zero. As I said not so long ago, people like CityCrusher are much more helpful, even if you don’t agree with every single statement. That’s normal for most of the time.
For me these people only care about busting a nut, no matter how, or what the consequences are. 15 seconds of pleasure for a lifetime of potential misery. Ironically, and I mentioned this a couple of weeks ago, Eivind conceded that culture matters a lot when it comes to meeting and getting with a young women, especially underage.
I think about the big picture here. Not hiding in the dark, hoping no one will ever find out. Always living in secrecy.
You already can all do these things secretly, as long you are not caught…..
This is certainly relevant to the article, given that one of the key aspects of the Brass Eye special was in mocking children’s protection charities and the incredibly unthinking way both celebs and the public accept everything they say about ‘paedophiles’ and ‘child abuse’.
I’ve restored my 2011 article in which I examined the eight senior research staff at the NSPCC at the time, and found that 7 had a clear left-wing feminist background, and the only one who hadn’t, still had published a work looking at the impact of domestic violence upon children.
7 of the 8 were also women.
https://theantifeminist.com/the-nspcc-as-an-evil-feminist-organization/
That article makes it clear who’s behind the NSPCC and the “child protection” racket, that’s for sure.
What I find notable is the variety of commentators from different areas of the internet, before the corporate algos started throttling wrongthink. The age of freedom on the internet is over until we get some truly decentralized AI, which has yet to appear.
Thanks Anon69. Yes, there was a good mix of commentators there. I’d forgotten about most of them. Back then, each article would usually attract one or two new commentators.
The most important thing to note from that article is that apart from showing the NSPCC is a left-wing feminist organization dominated by women, it’s only 8 individuals really controlling it and pushing the policies. And yet the influence of the NSPCC is huge. I’m not certain, but for example, I believe that the change in the law to make even consenting sex with a ‘child’ below a certain age ‘rape’, and that has been introduced into every country in Europe (as far as I know), came from the NSPCC.
At the end of the day, the ‘real’ enemy is not the group of men outside the pub who call you a nonce because they saw you checking out a 16 year old girl. It’s not even the 60 million police worldwide who are enforcing the laws. I get it that they trigger our reptilian brain and cock rival aggression modes, and there are no internal white knight conflicts with seeing them as the ‘real enemy’, but they’re not (even if it’s true that they are the ‘traitors’ for betraying their own sex). It’s literally the 100 or 200 or even 500 dedicated feminists (and femiservatives) worldwide who are making all these laws, even if its behind the scenes mostly and some MAGA supporting cuck Republican Senator is taking the credit for pushing some new ‘anti-paedo’ law.
And what I really love about Chris Morris and the Brass Eye special, is that he was able to get this in its entirety.
How is that a comedian making a one-off show is able to grasp this just from doing his (and his team’s) research on the subject?
How is that trannies can immediately see that ‘TERFs’ are their principle enemy, and yet maybe 1,000 or 5,000 ‘MAPs’ can’t appear to see that radical feminists are also their principle enemy? Even our relatively small number of MRAs who can engage in these issues, sometimes struggle with it?
I think this is all true. The question becomes, how do we get these people out of these damaging positions. Let’s take a place like Florida. If some male politician attempts to repeal even a few sex offender registry laws, women will yell so loud he will probably be shot by another cuck before they even get a chance to replace him.
It would probably require a female politician, because then it would just be women yelling at each other, cucks would not be involved, and laws could be changed. But what female politician would do that, and how could she be controlled or expected to stay on topic without drifting into her own feminist interests?
I think we know the answer – the best bet is a tranny that passes well enough to not have their gender questioned. An Asian ladyboy would work. Strange times but I think it’s true. Someone should get this message to Amos Yee (lol), although his autism would probably prevent him from understanding the utility.
I could sum up Paedogeddon this way-“Sophie Bexican” and” Gloriora Paymaster” are very pretty and are bordering on old enough to be within the age of attraction for most men. Therein lies the problem.
My sense with this film has always been that the makers, and everyone appearing in it, realize that much of what is considered harmful is in fact harmless and normal. I think it worth noting that the film conflates paedophilia with age gaps with the joke about how old the woman was when the man was a certain age. To me this shows the makers know that the hysteria is not exclusively about children. They probably also understand STU theory.
This notion has been reinforced by watching this critique-https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FUxRglIxAyI . The title is “The Brasseye Special – a Misunderstood work of Genius | Stubagful’s Voiceover TV Reviews”. I didn’t expect this bloke to say anything too radical despite the title, and I was wise not to. His boldest idea was that Paedogeddon satyrises the dehumanization of “paedophiles” (which in today’s society includes males who admit they like teenage girls). He doesn’t condemn the dehumanization of “paedophiles” because it’s wrong in itself, of course. And that’s it. Thank you Mr Original. Your lack of self-awareness shows in the title of your video.
Graham Linehan was brave enough to give the world his honest opinion about trans people, but has also distanced himself from his involvement in Paedogeddon. Perhaps he can’t be blamed for this, since how much flak is one expected to cop at any one time? However, it would be great if some high-profile person used some opportunity or other to just rip into the bullshit, consequences be damned.
Thanks for the comment on the article Anonymous2. Sophie Bexican” and” Gloriora Paymaster” are definitely a pair of posh cuties. I lived for a time in Kensington in London (including at the time the Brass Eye Special was shown), one of the poshest areas, and most girls looked simmilar. Now if the 10 year olds look cute, imagine what the teens look like!
Watching that Brass Eye special for the very first time was an amazingly life reaffirming experience for me. I was still fairly young, and the steady increase in hysteria, dehumanization, and laws were absolutely crushing me, knowing I still had a lifetime ahead of me in which things would only get worse – and I was surrounded by gorgeous teen girls who looked and talked like Sophie Bexican! And the very worst was that there appeared no voices of sanity at all speaking out against the madness. At the time, the Internet was just about to really take off, so I hadn’t even come across any dissenting voices online. Of course, I wasn’t a paedophile, but I was fully aware that ‘paedophilia’ had almost overnight come to mean men who show any attraction to teenage girls, rather than real perverts finding 7 year olds sexually attractive. And here was the best comedian in the UK directly mocking it all, with an incredible understanding of every single element of it.
People constantly defend Chris Morris and the Brass Eye special by stating that he was only satarizing the media obsession with paedophilia, or at best ‘the dehumanization of paedophiles’, but there’s no doubt he and the writers understand that the whole child abuse industry is a racket. And yes, he fully understands the STU, with the feminist ‘Swan Cheater’ presenting the programme. In the next comedy series that he and Chris Brooker wrote – Nathan Barley – he has the main character actually accusing his female colleague of being sexually jealous of a 13 year old girl.
I’m sure I remember reading at the time that Chris Morris had stated that one of his motivations in writing the show was that he had read about a case in which a gay man had had sex with a slightly underage boy, and although it was mutually consensual and the couple were happy together, the man was arrested and sentenced to prison. Unfortunately, there’s no mention of that in the book.
Thanks for sharing your experiences, AF.
I too noticed a sudden change in Australia in probably the very late 90’s. Somehow I was the only person I knew who didn’t get the memo.
The most baffling thing was the way no-one seemed to remember that their own attitudes were very different only a short time before.
Sounds like he Brass Eye writers were pretty switched on. And of course the real message of Paedogeddon is absolute kryptonite to the STU.
PS Mr. Original is making the point that if you dehumanize paedophiles, you make it harder to spot them and thereby increase the risk they pose to children.
Somebody posts a reasonable comment regarding the production of CP being many times more harmful than the consumption, and gets the usual response. Reminds me of the ‘gunishment’ section in the BrassEye special.
https://x.com/ShitpostRock/status/1973504186143875355
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pkO2_LdgSas
Watching that clip again, it seems obvious to me that it’s referring to paedocrites, and that when men are screaming about death to ‘paedophiles’, they are really screaming at their own cocks.
Interesting thread in the Black Mirror subreddit: https://www.reddit.com/r/blackmirror/comments/1o1ak1t/sometimes_i_think_about_this_episode_a_decade/
“Sometimes I think about this episode, a decade later, now that we know intelligence agencies actually do use CP footage to blackmail and control, politicians, yes, but also people in the entertainment industry ??”
I had a chat with Grok and Google AI.
https://i.postimg.cc/3JBSHBYk/G21-Hp-UAXUAAGWo.png
https://i.postimg.cc/RVRszR47/G21-KQt-RW4-AAb-A6.png
https://i.postimg.cc/BQgYGg4N/G21-KQt-RW4-AAb-A7.png
https://i.postimg.cc/15HCZHsc/G21-KQt-RW4-AAb-A8.png
Sorry Bernd, your comment was automatically spam filtered because you posted four links and you hadn’t had a previous comment approved.
Thanks for the links. Isn’t it interesting that when the age of consent was raised to 16 in the UK, girls were starting puberty at 16 or 17, and today girls are starting puberty at 12 or even earlier. Yet people automatically assume that the age of consent of 16 is the result of some rational decision making that is relevant to today.
Interesting and depressing how such medical and historical data gets ignored in sexual politics. Anyway the fems have already shifted the goal posts by launching the brain maturity charade, with some help from mainstream science alas:
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-15197463/Scientists-reveal-age-brain-reaches-peak.html
Quote: “Scientists in Australia say that overall mental functioning in the brain actually peaks between the ages of 55 and 60”. Really? Try learning a new foreign language at 55 and you’ll see how “peak” your brain has become!
Yes, I got to near fluency in German just from reading text books in a year or so when I was in my late teens. I’m still struggling with the local language where I am and I’ve lived here for well over a decade. Chess players peak in their 30’s, but that’s also because they are still mastering techniques and gaining from matchplay experience. It’s like the UFC – most of the guys peak maybe around 30, but we know that the athletic peak of the body is the early to mid twenties.
Still, maybe if they keep pushing up the age at which the brain ‘reaches maturity’ it will just make those using it to argue against age gap relationships or for a higher age of consent look increasingly ridiculous.
Hold on, according to current misandrist justification for the age of consent hysteria (including countless court cases where the prosecutor was allowed to repeat over and over that a man took advantage of a girl whose brain was not fully developed resulting in a decades long jail sentence), shouldn’t the age of consent now be somewhere between 55 and 60?
What happened to my comment?