Of course there’s more than five, and the five I’ve selected are almost off the top of my head on a cold December Wednesday morning. But it’s been statistically proven that ‘Five Things’ headlined articles get more clicks and ‘reader engagement’…
The Inability Of Male Sexualists To Agree On Broad Fundamentals
I’ll try to keep this concise, even though I could write twenty 10,000 word posts on it. ‘Male Sexualists’ can’t’ even agree on the basic fundamentals. Any nascent rights movement has to keep it simple, and keep it broad. Male Sexualists, including the few readers of our blogs, seem to want to be the founder of a cult movement, rather than proclaim – ‘Hey World – you sick of feminists and their endless laws that lock up more and more men as ‘sex offenders’? The fight back starts here. We are here. We’re going to fight this. Please join us‘.
For me, it couldn’t get simpler. Male Sexualists are necessary because MRAs no longer even discuss feminist sex offender laws. Not only the age of consent or ‘child porn’ laws nowadays. Did MRAs even discuss the Addy A-Game trial? I think a few, and no doubt Paula Elam and his disgusting Honey Badgers, did discuss the recent case of the teenage boy arrested for touching a girl’s arm, but probably only to bitch that girls don’t get arrested for touching boy’s arms. Equal injustice for all!
Other male sexualists seem to be appealing to a demographic composed entirely of NoFap pea brains, who are also Muslim, somehow pro tranny and homosexual (fapping to pics of girls is wrong, wanting to sodomize other men is good!), think contraception is evil, wish for legalization of sex with five year old boys because it’s no more paedophilia than sex with 17 year old girls, vegans, only eat peanut butter on a Wednesday etc etc.
In other words, their global potential demographic reach is limited to….errr… Eivind?
It’s no secret I don’t like Islam. There are many reasons for this, most connected I believe to our cause and goals. But at the end of the day, I don’t exclude anyone who disagrees with this, and Muslims themselves, from our movement. It’s not a core thing. The only essential component of Male Sexualism should be anti-feminism and anti all feminist sex laws. It’s that simple. Let’s have a potential demographic of 4 billion men, not 1 man in Bergen (or wherever).
An Inability To See Women As The Enemy Let Alone Feminists
Unlike other Male Sexualists, I fully respect feminists, and indeed women. They are not simply innocent and passive sexual resources that MEN have successfully cockblocked our access to (the young and hot ones). Feminsts and women have done this themselves. In the space of one or two generations, since the introduction of the birth control pill in the sixties that suddenly created a free sexual market and divorced sex from morality, feminists have turned the world upside down. From a society just fifty years ago when few women were in higher education, when nearly EVERY man openly lusted after 16 year old girls and younger, and you were considered a ‘fairy’ if you didn’t, to a world where the greatest possible thought crime today is to admit that 17 year old girls are attractive. Only rivaled by the equally heretical and criminal thought crime of considering square jawed men with cocks who dress up in women’s clothes to be perverts rather than ‘women’. And to do this, women have effectively seized control. Even though they are not (quite) yet dominant in government, every election in any country where women have the vote, the election is decided by the women’s vote.
An Inability To Counter The Paedophile Slander
As above, feminists, the unstoppable force of primal nature that they are, have created the biggest sexual shaming term in history – that of the ‘paedophile’.
From a term invented in the 19th century to refer to a tiny minority of men with a real pathology (a sexual obsession with pre-pubescent girls – below 16 in the 19thC, below 10 in the 20thC), it is now a term that applies to any man even admitting that 17 year olds are sexually attractive, let alone ever daring to chase or fuck one. And it seems, this term will continue to get further and further inflated and broadened. Even if it is not quite yet written into law that finding 20 year olds is attractive (but it is ‘creepy’ for a man past 30), men accused of paedophilia have to ‘prove’ they are more attracted to older women as their defence (for example, the British diver accused of being a paedophile by Elon Musk had to show that he met his wife in her thirties as part of his (failed) defamation case).
And we have no answer to the paedophile slander.
Both in terms of deconstructing it, AND through creating an equally powerful counter-shaming term or meme.
We can’t even agree ourselves on how to deal with the pedo label. Eivind allows himself to be influenced by real paedophiles aiming to hijack our nascent movement. Even though real paedophile activists like Tom O’Carroll have achieved nothing in 50 years, still unable after half-a-century of a legislative march to the death camps, to even recognize that feminists are the principle beasts responsible. They even had the advantage of starting in the sexual liberation heyday of the 60’s and 70’s. Yet Tom O’Caroll appears to be Eivind’s role model.
Real paedophiles try to convince Eivind that because we can’t fight the pedo slander, we must embrace it. A bit like the Afro-American community has embraced ‘nigger’ (even though they did so only after it became a virtual death sentence for a non-black person to say the word).
And it’s true that the ‘pedo pill’ has gained some currency in the Chans and Incel forums.
Still, it’s not what Male Sexualism or ‘Real Men’s Rights’ is about. We’re about normal male sexuality. And it’s still important to distinguish between real paedophilia and the evil feminist inflation of the term.
I’m not a paedophile. Eivind is not a paedophile. Tom is not…well he’s an Iranian agent. 😉
Given all that, I get the point that if we can’t defeat the pedo accusation, then we shouldn’t be afraid of it. But that’s not the same as holding hands with real paedophiles and embracing it.
As for countering the peadophile slander with a term we can fire back at feminists and manginas with, well I’ve tried with the term ‘paedocrite‘. As far as I know, Eivind hasn’t used it once. In fact, to be fair, only Tom and a couple of my old readers seem to have used it. Why? I don’t know. It seems to me a simple and powerful portmanteau of ‘paedophile’ and ‘hypocrite’. Admittedly, it works better on the ear to a non-American, pronouncing the term ‘pee-do’ not ‘peah-do’. And one of my most intelligent aspie readers – Ian B – once claimed he couldn’t see it. I think he was just being a typical aspie ephebohile though.
I’m sure it’s as obvious as a term like ‘mangina’. You don’t have to explain to an average person what a ‘mangina’ is, at least when given in the context of a pro-men’s rights comment. Even if you’d never encountered the word before surely.
I can’t see it being any different with ‘paedocrite’. Of course there’s an extra hurdle here that for 99.99% of the planet right now, the very thought that most men secretly lust after teen girls is something they either don’t consider or supress. But in the context of anti-feminism, it’s pretty clear to any non-aspie I’m sure.
Compare with a term that Eivind recently came up with as an ‘improvement’ on Angry Harry’s (successful) introduction of the term ‘abuse industry’ – ‘Nocebo‘ (warning – link contains obligatory pic of Brittany Zamora – try not to fap). Now my brains been pretty ravaged by stress over the last twenty years, but I’m sure I still have more firing neurons than the average person, even if I’m not as sharp as when I was in my university days. I don’t get it. I don’t think I would get it if Eivind spent an hour explaining it to me personally. And I don’t think anyone else ever will, let alone use it, let alone hundreds use it – including in mainstream discourse – like they have Harry’s ‘abuse industry’, or Chris Brand’s ‘paedohysteria’.
One of Eivind’s ephebophile readers recently claimed that the term ‘paedocrite’ was ‘terrible, terrible’, because it ‘shamed men’. Err, that’s the whole point you aspie. His preferred suggestion was ‘pedo Nazi’.
Oh dear God, I give up.
The other week I was walking down the street and passed two beautiful teenage girls and smiled at them and both smiled back. A hag and her partner walking some way behind them noticed and the wrinkled, sagging breasted bag said to her cucked partner – ‘that’s a paedophile’.
Now what stinging retort should I have come up with? I could have called the man a paedocrite, but I doubt if he would even hear it correctly let alone understand (‘pedo nazi’ on the other hand…lol). He didn’t look like Tom. I could have called the woman a rapist, as she is, but she wouldn’t know what I was talking about.
So I just called her a jealous old bag.
I guess that’s the best we can do. But of course, again, only a handful of my readers will do that. Most of my, and Eivind’s readers, let alone the half-witted aspies in the ‘ephebophile’ community, would rather deliver a treatise to the jealous old bag on why American Conservatism is unfairly making her think that something is wrong with an older man admiring perfect skinned, nubile, fertile teenage girls, and that if she thinks it’s wrong to be hateful towards homosexuals and transsexuals, surely she should be pro-paedophiles too!
And she’d just laugh (or call the police).
There is nothing that can trump the shaming power of an accusation of ‘you’re a paedophile’. Other than ‘you’re a jealous hag/bag’ at a female accuser, and a ‘paedocrite’ (if we could promote this meme) at a male accuser.
The 1989 United Nations Convention On The Rights Of The Child
The biggest disaster in history for normal male sexuality was the 1989 ratification of the United Nations Convention On The Rights Of Hags Children.
Since that point, every country on Earth has been obliged to define children as any person under 18 (not including unborn children of course – women still free to flush their unborn and unwanted down the pan). So now, everywhere it is illegal to look at pictures of 17 year old girls in a ‘sexual context’, which could mean a fully clothed teen giving a saucy smile at the camera, or just in a skimpy bikini. And it even defined child pornography as the ‘representation’ of a person appearing to be under 18. In other words, anime porn and the like was doomed since that day in 89, even though countries like Japan aren’t succumbing to the hags without a fight.
The original intention of the makers of that Convention – mainly women, the chief lobbying group being the NGO ‘ECPAT‘, dominated by women and led at the time by a German hag – was to introduce a global age of consent of 18. In the words of that hag (I forget her name) it was ‘the only way to ensure the protection of young girls from exploitation’. They failed in that, but the very fact that they managed to convince the world to define 17 year olds as children, means that feminists everywhere have been able to bring in de facto age of consent laws of 18, through ‘grooming laws’ and the like. And the very fact that porn is ubiquitous now thanks to the Internet, and anything below 18 is ‘child porn’ and paedophilia, means that while it might still be technically legal to have sex with a 17 year old in most places, it’s now considered socially taboo and paedophilia.
So basically, we can’t make real progress without overturning the 1989 United Nations Convention On The Rights Of The Hags Child.
Good luck with that.
An Inability To Read And Understand History
Aspie ephebophiles and paedophiles seem so willing to pronounce on the causes of their persecution, without having apparently once read anything on the history of the laws that restrict or criminalize them.
Just take half a fucking hour to read the history of the age of consent laws in the USA and the UK in the late 19th, early 20th century. Spend one evening reading some of the countless online material documenting the absolutely female dominated and driven ‘Social Purity Movement’ that campaigned for the age of consent to be raised, and which is widely accepted by historians (including feminist historians) to be the precursor of the feminist movement itself.
Read up on the United Nations Convention On The Rights Of The Hag Child. Read up on the history of the NSPCC, of ECPAT, or study their present make up of staff, their backgrounds, and note that nearly all are hardcore feminists.
Or just give up.
Pedo Nazis.