Long-time readers will remember that I used to hold an annual ‘Paedocrite of the Year’ award (which was usually won by ‘Manboobz’ David Futrelle). Well it’s only the first week of May, but there sure is already a lot of elite competition entered if we want to award a prize for the biggest paedocrite of 2025. A Dutch ‘researcher’ for investigative website ‘Bellingcat’, who wrote under the name of ‘Daniël Romein’ and specialized in tracking down the makers of child porn from clues left in the images, apparently died peacefully in his sleep at the age of 52 three years ago. His life and work was eulogized at the time by his colleagues, but now another investigative website has turned their searchlight on his past and discovered some shocking information. He did not die in his sleep from cardiac arrest, but rather committed suicide after being sentenced by a Dutch court for raping his own preteen daughter. Just as shockingly, he had already been found guilty of downloading child porn in the early 2000’s.
The scandal appears to be focusing on to what if any extent Bellingcat knew of the paedocrite’s child porn past and the more recent child rape allegations and conviction. However, what’s even more pertinent in my view is the fact that he not only performed his ‘research’ for Bellingcat, but for Interpol as well. A guy who was jerking off to child porn and raping his own six year old daughter every day – well that’s no surprise to anybody here. We all know that this is probably par for the course for a ‘CSAM researcher’ at these law enforcement agencies. Hell, he might even have been a ‘virtuous paedophile’ by their standards. But the fact that Interpol employed him AFTER he had already been convicted of downloading child porn??? Are they not even hiding it anymore?
“Romein’s suicide was apparently motivated by his March 2022 sentencing to 36 months in prison for sexual abuse. He was also barred from seeing his daughter, the subject of his abuse, for the rest of his life.
The ruling, released three years later due to pressure from independent Dutch outlet De Andere Kant, details Romein’s shocking sexual assault and rape of his daughter while she was between the ages of 6 and 10, and reveals he was convicted of possession of child pornography “over 15 years” prior.”
“Romein was not only involved in MH17 for Bellingcat, but also in the Stop Child Abuse initiative, a project by Interpol to combat child abuse. The international police organization shows objects on its website, such as curtains, furniture and clothing, that can be seen in the background of photos or videos of child abuse, in the hope that someone will recognize them and alert the police. Bellingcat has collaborated on this project. Articles about this on the Bellingcat website show that Romein actively contributed to it from 2018 to 2020. He is mentioned as the main author in two articles.”
https://thegrayzone.com/2025/05/02/bellingcat-operative-dies-conviction/
https://deanderekrant.nl/kinderporno-onderzoeker-bellingcat/
Seen by me on Eivind’s blog. https://www.blogger.com/comment/fullpage/post/26678806/4723746915516643114
And on the topic of federal agents wanking to hot young teen porn for years non-stop, the great satan USA finally got around to passing a disgusting feminist bill criminalizing AI-generated look-alike porn, and any sexual picture that any female wants to ban because she says it looks like her (if she’s under 18, it’s another case of automatic magical abuse, and an extra year of prison is added on, because why not?). Unsurprisingly, aging old model Melania Trump is in full support.
What a country full of embarrassing f@ggots chained to their sick, fat, ugly old hysterical hair bun females. You know what – the “males” in the USA deserve it for letting this shit happen, and in fact, encouraging and enforcing it.
https://reason.com/2025/04/30/the-take-it-down-acts-good-intentions-dont-make-up-for-its-bad-policy/
Of course, if you’re a badge n1gger, you’re exempt and you can jerk off all day long (and also run those lucrative trap stings). That would probably be a pretty cool job.
Possibly in response to this new bill, the notorious MrDeepfakes site closed this week. I once visited it and took a look around its forum. Even though deepfake porn was already coming under attack by feminists at the time, there were no threads about it or anything ‘political’. Just members sharing advice on how to deepfake celebs. It seems that it’s impossible to ‘politicize’ the right of men to enjoy porn, which is pretty wacky when you realize that 95% of men do look at porn regularly.
An irony is that the Deepfake porn site was closed partly as a result of an ‘investigation by the Bellingcat website – the same one the paedocrite ‘researcher’ was working for!
That’s funny, I was just thinking of all the goofy photoshopped celeb porn that appeared on almost every porn site on the 90’s internet, and how that would now be considered highly illegal by these Western h0mo societies. No one remembers how cool and free the early internet was. I guess just like how no one remembers how cool porn was when 16 year olds (gasp) were legally and regularly featured. Back in the day, we had guys like Howard Stern pushing hard against censorship of men’s sexuality, although indirectly. Now, we have no one popular, and Howard Stern is just another simp, who would be hated by his 40 year old self.
That makes us the new punk rockers and rebels, unwilling to give up our God given right to pursue young pussy, with the hope that a decentralized AI is taking notes on our musings.
When I was a teen and in my twenties, the working-class newspapers that later stoked up paedohysteria – such as The Sun – were publishing topless 16 year old girls on ‘page 3’. Another tabloid – ‘The Sunday Sport’ – would count down the days until they could publish topless photos of a 15 year old (meanwhile, titilating their readers with photos of her in skimpy bikinis and lingerie).
Hardcore porn featuring 16 year old girls was fully legal in Europe, and were among the most popular (obviously). ‘Channel Seventeen’ (which is still going and only recently changed their name) featured only 16 and 17 year old girls and was possibly the most popular porn franchise in Europe. I watched so many of their videos, and in every single one the girls were absolutely loving what they were doing. Now these girls would be labeled as victims and ‘survivors’ and would be forced to undergo counselling. And, of course, anybody caught watching the videos today would face being jailed as a paedophile nonce.
“MAPS” literally never talk about this. I don’t understand (but I do understand) why your comment isn’t expanded upon and repeated constantly on every webpage and talking point they have. They should be challenging governments and f@ggots and women to label all of pre-2000’s Europe (and all of their families) pedophiles.
Celebrities do not want AI porn to use their faces? No problem, it’s best for AI porn to focus on not having anything to do with real women. Then the same women who pushed for deepfake to be suppressed will come crying that they’re not wanted for anything anymore, not even as motif for “deepfakes”. If they had any sense they would try to strike royalty bargains.
Regarding 16-year olds, I remember hard porn theaters in The Hague and Amsterdam in the 70s. You could tell them from afar down the street because they had a big neon sign showing “16”. That was how old you had to be to get in. Same minimal age for sex shops.
I remember visiting a sex shop in Germany in the early 90’s and there was a girl working on the till who must have been no older than 16. She was cute too!
It was the same with nightclubs in Europe. I spent some time in Salzburg in the early 2000’s, and some clubs would be full of teens from 13 – 17. Even in the UK it was easy to get into clubs for 15 and 16 year old girls, even if they looked their age.
I honestly think that the ‘woke mind virus’, as well as the general dumbing down of politics and culture over the last couple of decades, has been enabled by the extension of adolescence and the treating even of 17 year olds as defenceless kids who still need to be nannied by the state. I know that the ‘Case Against Adolescence’ guy makes that kind of point, but I’m surprised that it’s not made more in relation to the present craziness of ‘Generation Z’, and in particular their politics (I guess because conservatives don’t want to make that argument). I remember when I was younger I and most Europeans tended to think of Americans in general as a bit ‘immature’ and childish. Now Europeans are exactly the same. One example is the WWE or whatever professional wrestling is called these days. I can’t recall that ever being really popular in Europe. We used to think it crazy that American adults could watch a fake sport in their millions with such childish scripted ‘dramas’ and confrontations. Now it’s almost as popular in Europe as the USA.
I saw this article was posted on Eivind’s blog comments : https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-14691587/Graeme-Davidson-kayak-drowning-murder-charge-hua-hin-thailand.html
What a disgusting misandrist article! Good to see some of the Daily Mail commentators are pointing out the double standards regarding all the fat old white whales who flock to Jamaica or Turkey to have sex with poverty-stricken barely legal men.
Refreshing to see the pushback on this Daily Mail hitpiece. The Daily Mail underestimated the sensitivity of Thailand’s English-speaking community. It is a shrinking community these days, being gradually replaced by other demographics, but it is made up of people who avidly read anything that comes up in the mainstream media regarding Thailand. They resented seeing their lifestyle rubbished by some armchair misandrist who had obviously never set foot in Thailand.
Regarding the deepfake porn thing, I’m starting to think that ‘women’ are a solution to the Fermi paradox.
You (Jack) are far more of a biologist than me, so feel free to tell me if I’m talking crap, but perhaps all intelligent life must be formed by sexual reproduction (ie two parents and two ‘genders) and invariably entails the ‘male’ gender who competes for sexual access and the ‘female gender’ whose whole existance depends on controlling that access. The different mating strategies and mentalities between the genders that have evolved over hundreds of thousands of years enable complex societies and advanced civilizations (built almost entirely by the ‘rational’ male gender), but at some point the ‘contraceptive pill’ or equivalent is invented, creating the female Sexual trade Union to eventually go into overdrive. Inevitably, AI that is smarter than its biological creators gets invented in a similar time frame to the contraceptive pill (within a century or so), and because of things like deepfake porn that AI enables, the Sexual Trade Union convinces society that such ‘threats to women’ are the most important issues, leaving the real existential threat of super AI to be relegated as a less immediate concern – leading to extinction.
Lol!
It’s interesting because I have my own explanation of the Fermi Paradox, one based on antinatalism. Fermi asked “where is everybody?”. What he meant was what with billions of habitable planets out there, extraterrestrial civilizations should long have made contact.
I posit that a genuinely intelligent civilization (not a half-way intelligent one like our own) soon comes to the conclusion that sentient life, with maximization of suffering at the core of it, is nothing but a tragedy. Said civilization then takes steps to end the “Life” experiment through voluntary extinction. Left in the galaxies are non intelligent civilizations unable to make contact.
That could well be the solution Jack. You’re probably familiar with the anti-natalist philosopher David Benatar.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bzn2OHAO-i0
Interestingly, Benatar is, I think, the only respected philosopher who has taken men’s rights seriously: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VWhR5jkjq20
There is one Youtube comment that is very interesting – “I like how the interviewer says in the end to David, ‘I’m glad that you are in existence.'”
That comment destroys his entire argument because it affirms the value of the very person arguing that life has no value. Benatar incorrectly assumes you can measure and compare the net value of existence and universally apply the results to everyone, when the emotional data is subjective, qualitative, and most importantly, context sensitive.
A lightswitch argument would make more sense, where either we all go away at once, or continue existence. But even in that case, existence must happen in order to experience the values which Benatar ignores that make existence worthwhile. So, it’s basically just a depressed man arguing he’s unhappy, until the interviewer makes him feel better with just one comment. Which is completely understandable.
I know that if I could be banging hot teenies every day that my existence would certainly have a net positive value!
Going back to Jack’s solution, I’ve always thought something along those lines is the most likely. It might not be that advanced civilizations realize that life has negative value in terms of happiness and suffering, it could be that their science discovers something that makes life meaningless – such as that consciousness is an illusion (as some argue today).
Either that, or AI-generated VR porn just gets tooooo good, lol! Space is teeming with alien ‘wankers’ who have no interest or time to do things like explore the universe.
I’m a Benatar reader and follower, have been for some years now.
Holy shit the #metoo MAGA train just keeps getting more homosexual
https://www.tiktok.com/@nalaray/video/7503221842493099295
This is just straight up women’s christian temperance movement shit
It’s amusing that the ‘former’ OnlyFans model turned femiservative still wants to wear a tight top.
yes, everyone virtue signaling for attention and power, a disgusting pile of complete bullshit. And the little baby boys cheering this shit on deserve exactly what they will get. But the rest of the world does not, and that is the problem with these virtue signalers who want to conform everyone to their fucked up, cruel, self serving “morality.”
I made a blog post comment reply inspired by the Benatar stuff here, it’s a bit counter-intuitive but I think very important. It works in tandem with the sexual trade union theory, but viewed more from the emotional value side.
Healing the Gender Divide Starts with Emotional Value
In today’s gender wars, much of the conflict is framed in terms of power, control, and sexual politics. But underneath the transactional logic lies something deeper and more human: a crisis of emotional value.
One of the most under-discussed emotional wounds in modern society is the invisibility of older women. As men age, many grow into their social and sexual value – gaining confidence, resources, and romantic viability. But women, living in a culture obsessed with youth, often feel their emotional and romantic worth declines through no fault of their own.
This can trigger a deep sense of loss, grief, and resentment – not just toward aging itself, but toward men who seem to thrive while women feel emotionally discarded. When that resentment gains institutional traction, it can manifest as punitive laws or cultural hostility toward male sexuality, especially in cases like large age-gap relationships.
But this isn’t about jealousy or entitlement. It’s about emotional survival.
If we want to de-escalate the gender conflict and preserve freedom in how we love and relate, we have to start by restoring emotional value to those who feel most abandoned. That means celebrating, including, and emotionally recognizing middle-aged and older women – not out of guilt or obligation, but because a healthy society depends on everyone feeling seen.
Men don’t need to apologize for loving youth, but they do need to lead with emotional maturity. A man who dates younger women but also honors, includes, and uplifts women his own age sends a powerful message:
“Your worth was never about your age. It was always about your presence.”
And that message might just be the first step toward healing what the culture wars alone can’t fix.
Emotional hunger, not just sexual politics, is driving much of the cultural conflict between men and women today.
If we want to prevent punitive cultural or legal attacks on men’s sexuality, then one of the most effective long-term solutions is to make sure that women – especially older women – don’t feel emotionally abandoned.
If women can’t get emotional value out of life that justifies the time and effort of living, that is going to create huge resentment and attacks on men who are perceived as still able to get that emotional value.
Therefore, it seems to me, that in order to solve this enormous problem of women using institutional power to attack men’s sexuality out of emotional hurt and spite, that we should do everything we can possible to celebrate and make middle aged and older women feel emotionally fulfilled in society, especially if we are older men who want to enjoy the fruits of younger women.
That’s a tremendous, enthusiastic philosophy right there, Anon69. Though, I feel like everyone puts too much focus on sexual jealousy and STU here and on Eivind’s blog. I feel everyone is forgetting something in particular.
Everyone tends to go on and on about how the Feminists are always sneering at the older men for doing this and that, but are you guys missing a big puzzle piece here. Do you really think all this hysteria, disgust, and moral panic regarding age-gap relationships are simply because of jealousy and competition of fertility? No, it’s because they feel women and girls are going to be victimized left and right, essentially everywhere and at every moment. They feel that men are too patriarchal and are going to take away a girl’s freedom and choice of independence, simply because they are not jealous, but rather the fear of being dominated, controlled, and remaining helpless. That’s the reason the why women are always at the height and primal focus of sexual violence awareness, trafficking, domestic violence, etc. because of the belief that women are destined to be victimized through power and control, not to dissuade the competition. It’s why more often that women are used as examples of the cardboard cutout of victimology. They are trying to do what they believe is best for girls and women, but they have obviously gone too far. Why do you think feminist uprisings occur in the first place? Because they are sick and tired of supposed patriarchy keeping them in place. Women are sociable, so their over reliance on “social issues” is not surprising.
No I don’t think we’re missing anything here. We’re all fully aware that feminists justify anti-sex laws on ‘patriarchy’, ‘male control’, ‘victimhood’. Yeah, we have noticed that OriginalInsights (Your ‘insight’ is about as original as the observation that night follows day).
The MAPs and paedo rationalists take this at face value. Eivind, as a MAP and a paedo rationalist, pretty much takes it at face value too. This causes the poor soul a lot of confusion, particularly with the ‘female sex offender charade’. If feminists just want to protect helpless girls from evil men, why are they locking up women for having sex with boys? It doesn’t make any sense. Eivind has to post yet another article on it, trying to convince feminists of their stupidity and to give these gorgeous female teachers the pussy pass.
Well, I’m trying to build something different here. If you want to spend the next 50 years in the same manner as the last 50 years, trying to convince feminists (and society) that 15 year old girls are not quite as helpless, and can consent to sex, and that ‘well-meaning feminists have gone just a little too far’, then I wish you all the best. I’d say that you haven’t got a one in a billion chance of making ANY headway.
In first wave feminism, although feminists did use the ‘victim’ angle, especially with ‘child prostitutes’, there was also to a large degree the age old ‘shaming’ of prostitutes, only modified slightly and with the term used ‘fallen women’. Now, of course, they couldn’t use such language, but make no mistake – they see 15 year old girls who send naked selfies, or Ukrainian sex workers selling sex for $20 as ‘sluts’ (‘scabs’).
Even back then, the ‘first MRA’ – Ernest Belfort Bax – was pointing out that feminists were trying to raise the age of consent to 21, whilst campaigning for 18 year old women to have the vote.
A decade or so ago, I set up various throw-away email accounts, and over a few months sent emails to the NSPCC, asking them questions. Sometimes I would post as a teenage girl, sometimes simply as a concerned adult. For example, as a concerned adult I sent them an email pointing out some gross sites that featured fights, car accidents and the like. I told them that they often featured teenage girls being bullied, having their head literally ‘kicked in’ by other girls etc. Clearly, if viewing ‘child porn’ supposedly leads to more child porn being produced (a standard feminist argument), then a commercial website showing these videos is encouraging the bullying and violence too.
I didn’t receive a reply.
I think a week later, I sent an email as a 14 year old girl asking for information about abortion, and immediately got a long ‘helpful’ reply.
Why do you think feminists believe that a client not paying for sex with a prostitute is as much “rape” as a stranger dragging a woman into bushes? Why do you think feminists have made the ‘child porn’ laws in the UK such as to have no reference to the age of the ‘child’, so that a video of a 17 year old woman engaging in BDSM roleplay is considered more serious than a video of a 3 year old touching itself? Why do you think feminists are treating ‘deepfake porn’ so seriously? Why do you think feminists are so obsessed with sex in any case?
“Why do you think feminist uprisings occur in the first place?”
Now this does make me more than a little bit angry. I can say I’ve truly resolved to conduct myself much better in my ‘return’ to blogging, particularly in the handling of readers and their comments. I realize I was often rude and let my frustrations get the better of me, even with esteemed commentators such as Jack. But this kind of thing annoyed me a lot and likely will do so again.
Yes, just as I’ve noticed that feminists tend to say that they are ‘protecting’ teenage girls from male ‘abuse’ and ‘exploitation’, I have also given a little thought as to why ‘feminist revolutions keep occuring’. And no, I do not think it is because they are ‘tired of patriarchy keeping them in place’.
I saw that you mentioned to Eivind that you’ve been reading his blog from the start, even the comments sections. I realize I’ve only restored a percentage of my old pages and articles, but there’s still several here that explain my views on what causes feminist revolutions. For example: https://theantifeminist.com/a-very-brief-history-of-feminism/
I also saw you mention your fears about developing your blog, and admitting you would do so at a “snail’s pace”. Well, believe it or not, I have the same concerns here. I’m defintely not a loner living in an isolated Norwegian cabin on welfare all day with nothing to lose. There’s no way this blog is going to be little more than a platform for anti-sex hysteria rationalists, arguing that feminists are good people and largely right, but just gone a ‘little too far’. Especially if the person making those arguments hasn’t even read or understood my position here. You’re more than welcome to do that at your blog, or Eivind’s blog. I wont post on your blog every day pushing my ‘jealousy’ theories. I know I did that a lot at Eivind’s blog, but there’s a difference there that he was (and still is ) claiming to be my/our ‘leader’ and speaking for us. And I’ve stopped now. I’m not claiming to be your leader, and I’m definitely not claiming to be the leader of the paedophile rationalist movement.
I wanted to reply to Jack and Anon69, but I honestly haven’t got time now – I have to get to work.
Interesting take Anon69. I do believe that the only solution is for older women not to feel sexual jealousy and envy any longer, but to be frank, the only way that will happen I feel is through something like rejuvenation tech or that we all spend our sex lives in the Metaverse, so that older women are not so sexually disadvantaged.
Praising older women and such is probably only going to increase their political power, which they use to control the sexuality of men and younger females.
And if the idea is for us to stop calling older women femihags and instead praise their ‘confidence’ and ‘power’ then…no thanks, lol.
I would say though that I do not ‘hate’ older women. I actually feel so much pity when I see a really old woman struggle along the street (just as I do for elderly men). I dislike middle-aged women, or at least what they represent.
I’m also in favor of ‘sexual redistribution’, and that could equally be for older women as much as male incels. Having said that, female sexual jealousy is a force of nature. Not sure if giving older women young men to bang would even placate their jealousy at older men being allowed to have sex with young girls.
I would say the same thing to you as OriginalInsights – we do not need to ‘understand’ feminists, we need to FIGHT them.
I agree with all that of course, but it also illustrates the problem I see that can be fixed. Praising women for their confidence and power and telling them they can be sexy at any age is a patronizing farce that benefits no one, and this is what society has done. Instead, take the emphasis off sex and put it on something that is legitimately true. For example, a woman who spends 30 years teaching mathematics will know alot about math. Praising her for her math skills and telling her she is valuable in her field gives her real emotional value as she gets older. Showing respect to a woman like that has in many cases opened up access to her younger female family members with her blessing, because she understands she’s not as sexually attractive, but she’s still emotionally valued and respected for her real abilities. There is little impetus for jealousy in that example. She will think “of course he wants my younger niece, that’s how men are, but he’s also very nice and respectful of my accomplishments, and I’m not as interested in sex in my older age anyway.”
Women are not nearly as horny as men generally due to difference in hormone makeup, especially after menopause, so that lends more credence to my argument that praising them for their legitimate, non-sexual strengths as they get older will yield better results for men’s sexuality. Yes, some women will still be jealous of what is now in their past, but we can make a large dent in that jealousy with most women who simply don’t desire to be sexy anymore, they get their emotional worth from respect for real accomplishments. It’s a cultural problem where sex is emphasized too much. I don’t think it’s a coincidence that Asian cultures who respect their elders have far more tolerance for male sexuality.
You have a good point about Asian cultures respecting older people AND male sexuality, but I think the relationship is at least as much due to the Western assault on male sexuality primarily being about older men’s sexuality. i.e. paedohysteria and #MeToo isn’t so possible in a society which venerates older men (and women).
Michael Houllebecq says in one of his novels that the reason for paedohysteria is because of Western society’s hatred of older people and the veneration of youth.
Jack might have something to say about this.
But back to the ‘debate’ as to whether feminists are trying to protect girls from genuine abuse and harm – the biggest smoking gun for myself and most people is the fact that feminsits are invariably ugly, and older ‘post-wall’ too.
If feminists were genuinely ‘well-meaning’ and acting selflessly, why are they almost always ugly and trying to curtail the sexual opportunities for the young and beautiful?
And then you have the patently obvious truths of evolutionary psychology. Anyone who believes there isn’t at least some element of sexual competition going on when ugly old hags are demanding laws against men having sex with beautiful young women and girls, has to be naieve or stupid in the extreme.