The Antifeminist is ready to throw the towel. One of the lone sex positive MRA’s who oppose the long draconic prison terms for millions of men for doing things men have done for tens of thousands, if not millions of years:
- having sex with fertile post pubertal 17 year old women or
- looking at cave paintings of girls who could be under 18 years. 2 3
Well, it is time as antifeminism will be illegal hate speech all over the world
The antifeminist‘s biggest despair is the treason by the men’s rights movement, who support draconian prison terms for millions of men, and support ever growing sex offender lists …..…
as long as pretty 25 year old female cheer leaders also get punished  for having sex with 220 pound 17 year old adolescent football player hunk vicims. As the antifeminist would put it: equal injustice for all is the goal of most MRA.
Human-Stupidity encourage discussion in the comment section below.
Human-Stupidity.com is ne of the last free unconsored places on the internet, after we got kicked out from AVoiceForMen and shadowbanned in Reddit. We appreciate free speech laws enshrined in the US constitution! Citing the antifeminist’s despair.
The legislative creep of feminists is ultimately going to embrace us all, it will not stop of its own accord, and it will require an army of angry young men to defeat it. After 6 years, it’s evident to me now that I can never hope to attract here an army of angry young men, and the best I will get is a handful of ungrateful, creepy, aspie young men who are more of a burden than an asset.
I have to stress that the word " angry" does not mean we support or call for violence.
The other reason for my despair is the evident reality that Paul Elam and his co-bandits have effectively killed the men’s rights movement and turned it into a mirror version of that very same corrupt feminist financial industry that we have been fighting. Now, turning the MRM into a donations industry is not in itself a bad thing, given that we face an enemy with a trillion dollars of financial backing. But as I said, they have simply created a mirror version of feminism, and in their ‘equality of injustice’ stupidity, and desire for ‘liberal progressive rights’ legitimacy, have chosen to adopt the same values of feminism and applied them to men (and boys) unable to grasp (or rather to admit) that those values were chosen because they served feminists and women, not men and boys.
Thus the MHRM, although still doing some very good things for men, is now financing itself, and trying to legitimize itself, through the forced abusive victim labeling of even 17 year old boys who have sex with partners 5 years older than themselves (who in most cases would be other men). And hand in hand with that goes the validation of the entire feminist abuse industry that is behind the never ending legislative creep that now sees almost 2 million men in the USA and Europe on the sex offenders register, increasingly under undeniably insane feminist anti-sex laws and facing ever more draconian and degrading punishments, both in prison and after.
And the real violent forcible rapists hide behind the inumerous consensual sex offenders, Who had sex with women that enthusiasticaly consented but were a bit drunk, or 17 years old.
But what is even worse, is that these ‘men’s human righVoicts activists’ appear to be supporting the feminist mind rape of teenage boys and validating the persecution of millions of decent men as a means to fund a lavish lifestyle for themselves : http://manboobz.com/2014/01/06/a-voice-for-mens-paul-elam-finally-admits-that-hes-been-pocketing-an-unspecified-chunk-of-site-donations/
We actually don’t mind if activists who dedicate their life to a good cause, get financial support from donations. We do mind if MRA’s actively attack, threaten, malign and ban other MRA’s (Men’s rights activists) fornot condoning the feminist sex crime industry.
I don’t want to share in any responsibility for the forced mental anguish of millions of boys, based only upon feminist logic and self-interest, nor for the real violent anal rape of potentially millions of men under injust feminist laws accepted and validated by these frauds and traitors. I want to be able to sleep at night, and I don’t want to go to hell. My journey in the men’s rights movement over the last 6 years has been one of ever greater disillusionment, and maybe its time to admit that the road is going nowhere.
We beg the antifeminist to continue. We offer to take over the site, and leave it dormant as a document, if he decides to rescind responsibility.
While being represseb by the men’s rights movement
- MRA against men! Most MRA (men’s rights activist) actively support draconian prison sentences for men #4
- Get a lawyer before courting: 34 precautions before risking sex with a woman: MRA oppose some of these problems but actively support many others which gets us to absudities like Teenage sexuality: The immense complexity of local laws, state lines and international travel
We still have the support of a few respectable main stream people
- Lower age of consent to 13. Who is in support of Barbara Hewson?
- Tea Abuse: How a traumatic event impacts children depends on how the adults cope with it. (MRA Angry Harry) In a nutshell: Whatever kind of ‘abuse’ people have experienced in the past (rape, harassment, assault etc) is made CONSIDERABLY WORSE by those whose self-serving propaganda is designed to make them feel worse. And then, unsurprisingly, the ‘researchers’ will ERRONEOUSLY interpret the CONSIDERABLY WORSE…
- Teacher Sex with 14 Year Old: 40 year Prison in USA, Acquittal in Germany
These sex persecutions of men are accompanied with life long sex offender listings, vigilante death threats. As normal criminals hate "sex offenders", these male victims of feminist and religious zealot sex laws almost certainly will suffer beatings and ass rape in prison by HIV positive felons for crimes such as
- having sex with enthusiastic consent of 17 year old women (ahem, *children)
- for watching nude photos of 17 year old children even if she is his legal girl friend: Mandatory 15 years jail for photos of legal girl friend: You Can Have Sex With Them; Just Don’t Photograph Them
- Woman causes permanent brain damage in infant: 2 years. Kills baby: 4 years. Man possesses photos: priceless (40 years)
- Jailed for possession of video of himself masturbating when he was 12. Another victim of child porn laws faces minimum 2 year jail
- watching cartoons so far costs only $3000 fine Fake Simpsons cartoon is child porn, judge rules – ABC News // Man convicted of ‘Simpsons‘ child pornography – PrisonPlanet Forum
- Teenagers who aggressively seek sex are always rape victims
These feminists and their MHRA don’t even mind increasing real sex abuse of children: Legalizing Child Pornography reduces child sex abuse crimes (Scientific study by Dr. Milton Diamond, U. Hawaii)
2013 Was Bad, 2014 Will Be Worse
The Worst of 2013
The UK made it illegal to view online actresses pretending to be raped – punishable by up to 3 years in prison.
note that rape is one of the favorite the favorite female sex fantasies, and females are avid consumers of child abuse books
- The UK introduced a porn filter that also covers political ‘hate’ sites.
- The UK introduced new guidelines making it easier for the police, courts, and therapists to force underage teenagers to accept the label of ‘child abuse victim’.
- The UK gave the police the power to effectively put men, unconvicted of any crime, under house arrest, on the vague grounds that they ‘might’ commit a sex crime.
- The UK government announced plans to make it illegal to pay for sex.
- France made it illegal, punishable by a fine, to pay for sex.
- Spain raised the age of consent from 13 to 16.
- India raised the age of consent from 12 to 18.
- The EU came close to making all pornography illegal.
- The UK began to pass heavier sentences for ‘child sex abusers’ than they do for murderers.
- In the aftermath of the Jimmy Savile hysteria, a number of celebrities, including very old men, have been arrested in the UK for ancient sex crimes, and some, such as Stuart Hall, convicted.
- A man was burned alive as a suspected ‘pedo’ by a mob for taking photos of a 19 year old vandal who had been invading his home and garden. The police actually arrested the man and seized his computers prior to him being burned alive. Meanwhile,
- Alan Turing was given a Royal pardon for buggering a 19 year old boy 60 years ago. Progress.
What the next 50 years will bring for a soon to be Islamic Europe
What Tourists Need to Know Before Going to Dubai
Any sex positive mras who think Islam would be preferable to feminism should look at the following list of ‘what not to do in Dubai’ – one of the more ‘liberal’ middle-eastern countries. In fact, it reads something like how Europe will be with a further 20 years or so of Femislamification. […]
Ramadan: During Ramadan, it is illegal for non-Muslims to eat, drink or smoke in public in front of Muslims between sunrise and sunset.
Medicines: Many medications available over the counter or by prescription in Australia are illegal in the Dubai.
Drugs: The UAE laws on drugs are extremely strict, and include the death penalty or life in jail
A string of British tourists have been jailed for offences such as a peck on the cheek, been caught in a compromising position on the beach and for engaging in sex outside marriage.
A 30-year-old British woman and a 28-year-old Irish man were jailed after a long legal battle for having sex in a taxi, though DNA tests proved intercourse had not taken place. In 2010 a British couple were jailed for a month for kissing in a restaurant.
58 thoughts on “TheAntiFeminist.com closing down? MRA (Men’s right) support incarceration of men for normal male sexuality”
Both of the wordpress default themes are simple and clear and highly customizable.
The other problem with using an old theme like this is that hackers can easily exploit it.
I am open to this. As long as it is the same layout, with a right side bar.
Are the problems due to the theme? is there still some weird formatting in internet explorer?
I could use a tech specialist, in addition to contributors.
Will try to make a few posts that can be interesting to you guys.
LOL—Eivind Berge gives a paedocrite a dose of his own medicine:
Here is the link to the comment in which Paul Elam declares that he is ‘nauseated’ by the thought of romantic involvement with even, it appears, 19 year old women :
“I cannot “connect” as an adult, with a teen, in the nature of a romantic involvement, no matter how “responsible” she is.
In fact, the very idea of it makes me nauseous.”
This comment recieved 7 upvotes and 0 downvotes.
And this is the article on my site where we discussed it in the comments section :
Why don’t they just cut to the chase and ban sex altogether? As for those cave-paintings, I was disappointed that there was no photo of them. Then again, I guess they’d consider it “illegal” eh?
Human-Stupidity is the only one that notices that nude cave paintings and stone statues do not come with an proof of age and thus we might be victimizing stone age women by looking at the statues.
We are the only one that mentions that Trayvon Martin or Osama Bin Laden might have possessed child porn.
Normally these laws get enforced selectively, to terrorize the average man.
In your comment at AVFM on Sep 5, 2012, you say:
Now thats a big allegation to make, and I just cant find ANY evidence for your claims. Tawil (Peter Wright) responded to you rejecting your claims. Really.. you have to provide evidence for your claims.
And the evidence should be a blogpost on AVFM say, that went unchallenged. Not something in the comments section, which people often dont bother challenging for various reasons.
By making those allegations without ANY evidence, you have already riled them up.
So when you made the comment on Nov 8 2012, to “share your outrage on some mom & pop getting arrested…” along with why Paul is not responding to you, he just addresses the second part of your question.
So thats where he stands. Having looked at your site, for whatever reason he got the impression you are talking about 13 yos.
He does not say anything about 17yos.
Anyway man.. you have to provide solid evidence for your bolded claims above. When you provide a link to your own blogpost as evidence, I go there and inside there are several 10s of other links. It just gets painful trying to figure out where exactly the offending evidence is. I follow a few links, read through them only to find nothing directly pointing to AVFM.
Paul Elam has specifically stated that he finds men who have relationships with 17 year old girls to be ‘nauseating’. (But clearly gets a boner and boasts of the fact when three 15 year old school girls send him an e-mail).
And what exactly is not ‘cruel’ about child porn laws that lead to men being raped in prison for posessing (or even looking at) pictures of 17 year old girls under laws made by disgusting old feminist hags?
The AVfM article on the sexual abuse of boys, which is proudly contained in the ‘classics’ section linked on the front page, supports the radical feminist definition of child abuse including 17 year old ‘children’ having entirely willing sex with partners just 5 years older than themselves. Under the article, TyphonBlue dicusses why such 17 year old ‘abuse victims’ can be in such denial about their abuse. When another commentator points out the ridiculousness of this, and describes how governments have used child sex hysteria to supress society and men, Paul Elam responds in one sentence – ‘You’re entitled to your opinion, but you’re full of shit’. Presumably he was then banned.
You see, here we have it.
Paul Elam clearly states that middle age men who get actively seduced by 13 year old girls should rot in prison. No exceptions allowed for female predators that look 18 and have fake ID. No exception. Not even if the girl raped him while he was passed out drunk. No exceptions. And he also seems to agree that it is ok to call it RAPE and not “illegal sexual conduct with a minor”.
Now one point of my blog is: there is zero evidence that consensual sex at ANY age is harmful.
Rind Study ||
child sex trauma myth
All evidence to the contrary is fake like feminist Domestic violence research. But, I creep out even the antifeminist with these statements of wanting to totally abolish age of consent laws, as unneeded. Or put them as low as they were before women got the vote and raised them.
If Paul puts a line at 13, I have never seen that he opposes attempts to raise the AOC age of consent past 18, to 21 for prostitution in Holland and other places.
I have never seen him oppose laws that arrest men for watching porn with 25 year old actresses with pony tails that APPEAR under 18 (Europe, Australia). He simply abandons these male victims.
So if Paul said that he opposes age of consent of under 14, we could probably coexist. As the antifeminist would probably say, this takes care of most, but not all, normal sexuality of sexually mature adolescents.
Are you aware that boys mature much slower, and thus require a higher age of consent then girls? Are you aware that legal marriage age was, and still is in many countries, lower for women then for men? Where is AVM proposing Age of Consent based on scientific criteria of maturity? Afraid of feminist backlash.
Did you read what I posted what prompted Paul to attack me? Do you favor men being imprisoned for photographing their 16 year old wives naked. DO YOU? DOES HE?
Can you please name any logical intelligent reason for such imprisonment, other then voodoo theory CAN YOU? CAN HE?
What about prison for possession of underage DRAWINGS with sexual topics? And why can women read their VERBAL TEXTUAL child abuse and rape novels?
I wish the antifeminist had a link for Paul calling sex with 17 year old’s creepy, and for calling for imprisonment of such creeps like me.
Do you favor men spending years in prison for possession of their homemade video of THEMSELVES f.pping off at age 11. DO YOU? DOES HE?
This is why I was attacked and evicted. Not for promoting total abolishment of age of consent on his site. I was attacked and evicted for mentioning the worst EXCESSES of these laws. Which not only don’t interest MRAs, but actually get them into banning frenzy.
Do you all agree on the URGENT NEED to imprison men, and women, who have a relationship with a 17,15, or yes, precocious 14 y 6 foot tall football player. Whose relationships are so strong that after years in prison, they actually MARRY. And who had kids before imprisonment. Is this in the best interest of the children, to lock away on parent, most likely the bread winner? DO YOU HAVE AN OPINION? DO YOU SEE A PRESSING NEED FOR THE STATE to spend precious resources prosecuting these people for clearly consensual crimes?
One main point of my blog is feminist language subversion. So insiduous that even the antifeminist does not notice the depth of it. The ridiculous re-definition of “rape”, or of “consent”.
If you are against adolescent or child sex, call it truly “illegal sexual acts with a minor”. Don’t call consensual petting with a 17 year old “RAPE”, just to mislead the world. And to mislead the prison rapist thug who will teach the RAPIST a lesson.
In engineering, in law, everywhere we strive to have PRECISE terminology. Only in feminism, we obfuscate and confuse, and MRA don’t oppose it.
If AVM lets me back in, I would refrain from some of the above statements, on their site. As I said, I understand the political explosiveness of some of the issues can detract from other issues.
But aggressing on and kicking out people for wanting to defend MEN imprisoned for possession of their OWN childhood sex photos.
I still admire the OTHER work of Paul, and favor his great work. But I perfectly understand the antifeminist’s notion, that it is extremely damaging if the top dog MRA actively favors arrest of men for victimless crimes typical for male sexual behavior. If he actively favors feminist’s favorite laws. That this is worse then the average guy on the street favoring such violence against men.
And if the antifeminist goes a little overboard in his pedocrite of the year awards. That is understandable, if he puts MRA to higher standards regarding misandry.
Astrokid & Others:
I saw the link on Futrelle’s blog about MHRM funding, and Futrelle misquoted one part; saying that Elam is being supported by a ‘girlfriend’. Actually the word Elam used was ‘partner’ which has a little more equivocal meaning.
Look at the sheer number of open homosexuals and barely closeted ‘Sheilas’ at that site, I cannot imagine their support for normal male sexual activities is very high.
That, and their ridiculous caricatures of femihag junk science: ‘1 in 6 boys are sexual abused!’ That whole nonsense is premised on the femihag definition, which includes persons supposedly ‘unable to consent’ because of their age.
And as you can see, Dean Esmay is no stranger to junk science and crackpot theories himself:
1) In short, you STILL will not provide ANY EVIDENCE of your specific claims I mentioned above.
YOU STILL will not provide evidence which articles in AVFM made those claims.
All that you will do is take the Paul Comment Snippet that I cut+pasted here, and use that as a launchpad into a defense of your cause.
And why did Paul make that comment? Because you went to his site, and after a period of commenting, you PRODDED him.. by posting 2 links to your site, and asking him to “share your outrage” AND Then also asked him why he is not responding to your requests.
He just ignore the first part, and responded only to the second part. He formed an overall impression of your site, and decided not to support you. Why you cant accept that is beyond me. How does that become equivalent to his obstructing your cause?
Re Read what you said in your earlier comment..
To be clear, I am NOT here Trashing/Debating YOUR CAUSE. I am here asking you to provide evidence of your very specific claims against AVFM.
2) Coming to your interpretation of his comment..
Lets say I comment (pithyly) somewhere: Birds Fly or Mammals give birth to live young
And someone takes that and trashes those statements to someone else:
Birds Fly? No exceptions? Not even the Ostrich, Kakapo, the Dodo?
Mammals give live birth? No exceptions? Not even the egg-laying duck billed platypus?
Thats how ridiculous your finding fault with Elam’s comment is. If he had laid out his thoughts eleborately in some article, then you have a case. Otherwise, its just laughable man.
You seem to be targeting him.. and not other MRAs such as Chapin or WFPrice, from whom you could have extracted comments just like you did for Elam. WHY?
Because you are looking for a vehicle for wider dissemination of YOUR CAUSE.
There is no shame in it. I try to spread MRM ideas in other communities as well.
But he’s not playing ball, and thats why you are stretching the facts to pin blame on him.
4) You keep asking questions like this
Its pretty much irrelevant, but I will answer it anyway.
No I dont favor it. Period.
What now? Did it help your cause? Did it hurt your cause? Neither. I am a nobody.
Paul’s opinion on this is also of no bearing.. coz he’s not publishing any articles on the subject. He has his priorities.
Now.. on this very question, your comment at AVFM in Sep 2012 said..
WUT? You argued there that they support it.. AS IF YOU HAD SEEN EVIDENCE.. and yet here you are asking me what Paul thinks on this very question?
Seriously dude.. this is getting painful.
Almost the entire MRA,especially the MHRA either totally ignore, or more likely actively support the large scale male imprisonment for sex crimes that did not exist before women lobbied for new re-definitions and laws.
So Paul Elam is just a prominent scape goat, for being outspoken, and a leader.
After being admonished at AVM, I did my best to refrain from really conflict laden problems. I only gave examples like the one where you agreed to me. Excesses of the Teenage sexuality hysteria and the 17 “child” “porn” hysteria, based on feminist re-definition of “child” as 17 year old and porn as collection of harmless department store photos.
I was kicked out for only quoting totally disgusting examples of men, or the occasional mother, being persecuted for totally harmless and normal acts.
This is when Paul attacked me further and got me kicked out.
I do understand that really provocative issues like real porn with real children, or “racism”, should not be the focus of his site.
I repeat, I was kicked out for quoting examples of egregious abuse and imprisonment of men that are so appalling that even the mainstream press, high ranking judges voice their opposition.
It actually was hilarious:
AVM bemoans the disunity of MRA. Human-stupidity shows an angle that AVM disowns and how they (AVM) actively oppose relevant MRA topics and wholesale male imprisonment. AVM proves HS’s point by kicking him out for it.
Maybe AVM could, rightfully state: “We don’t touch these two topics with a 10 foot pole. No comment.”
But also no hostility towards those that do. No recommendation to imprison them, no allegations that they engage in what constitutes serious felonies.
At least some peaceful coexistence.
Selling out millions of men, accepting that every man risks arrest at any border crossing, for possession of photos he can not prove are of over 18 year old girls.
If you have a collection of 10 teenage photos, like the ones Schopenbecq questioned, you risk mandatory 5 or more years in prison. We think this should be a men’s rights topic.
Totally ignoring the most egregious legal abuse, we think is a problem.
And again, I understand there is a violent reaction of the masses, and even of MRA to such topics. So AVM taking on feminists on the issue of rape, ahem SOME RAPES, already is a show of courage.
Maybe there should be an official position.
If it is not:
AVM backs all persecution of 17 year olds for sex with 15 year olds, and arrest of men for possession of nude photos of 23 year old underage looking girls.
Then maybe it should be:
AVM refuses to discuss such issues for distracting from our main issues. We take no position. We accept all underage sex laws and leave their discussion to others, off site.
Well, that’s the reason you got no reply. I wasn’t allowed to reply to you.
Anyway, I think my reaction – ‘disgust’ – would have been the normal reaction of most Americans had that AVFM post got wider popularity, which, fortunately, it didn’t. And for once, NONE of the major feminist blogs followed up (unlike what they tend to do with school shootings and such) with an article blaming masculinity for the attacks.
And the commenters chiding me as if neither nor the FBI had considered the possibility of female bombers or accomplices were a bunch of goofballs. In fact, briefly, there was a female suspect, but more to the point I just loved so many people’s certainty that they were smarter than the FBI.
I’m not sure I’ll go back there even if they let me. Alek Novy hasn’t liked me for years ( I think some of female dating behavior is biologically based and I disagree with him on pickup stuff) and he has control of the server and the backend. It wouldn’t surprise me if he was the one who ‘pulled the plug’ on me without telling anyone. And I don’t hang at places that have secret bans and policies.
Anyway, I only tell you all this because I really respected you. Had I been allowed to post in response to you, I’m sure it would have been much more of a conversation than what else I endured in that thread.
I wish to tell Astrokid NJ that I was banned from A Voice for Men with no warning or reason given. I know I was banned because for a period of two days no post of mine showed up whatsoever even though I posted from multiple computers with multiple operating systems and browsers and I didn’t have a problem posting elsewhere. The only thing Elam did in the thread in question was lob a single insult my way, he never engaged or warned or anything. The thread in question was about how the fact that the only suspects in the Boston Bombing were men was an example of cultural misandry or some such. I merely pointed out that while it was true that in some cultures there are a considerable number of female suicide bombers and such, in the USA, over the past 30 plus years (since after the time of the Weather Underground) the vast majority of terrorists in the USA for whatever reason have been men. I farther stated in another comment that it was not the time to try to use terrorist bombings to make the case for cultural misandry (if I recall correctly this was just before the 2 bombers were caught, in other words they were still on the loose). Oh the pile-on’s I endured. It was glorious(in a sad way), but it also taught me (as also did the silent banning) that AVFM was a bit of an echo chamber. And at least The Antifeminist would tell you when HE banned you, even if it was after the fact.
Yeah I read your comment elsewhere that you got banned on that thread.
First off, I have written on AVFM comments itself that the moderators (NOT necessarily Elam) do screw up occasionally. for e.g on a recent Game post Alek Novy got quite riled up and banned a guy called Lost Sailor, and I told him he’s overreacting. And they unbanned him soon after.
I accept it as an unfortunate byproduct of the environment they operate in, and that they are only as human as anyone else.
I have seen numerous people come and do dick-swinging there.. YOU AINT DOING IT RIGHT, YOU GOT TO DO IT DIFFERENTLY.. from guys who are newbies, or outright hostiles. Its bound to mess with the owners/moderators who are all doing voluntary stuff putting in ENORMOUS EFFORT.
And the fact that their moderators screw up occasionally is one reason I welcomed the recent ‘let bygones be bygones’ move of unbanning all.
Re: Pile On.. I remember reading the Boston Bombing thread sometime after your exchange, and
1) Yes I agree that pile on happens. IIRC dhanu/Peter Wright reacted somewhat harshly .. not realizing that you are an old hand at this.
Maybe No-Pile-On rules (say n more than 2 contra-responses to a particular post) will make a difference. But I really dont want to ask those guys who are already doing a lot.. to do more.
2) Escalation of emotional responses (adhom etc) happens on AVFM side too.. I myself am guilty of that sometimes.
Do remember that the Boston Bombing article was not by an AVFM regular, but an NCFM member Robert Franklin. My experience is that those guys are more patient and circumspect than MRAs, and less likely to throw accusations of misandry willy nilly. I went back to the article and I see I have responded to you there 🙂 It looks like both sides had some degree of emotional response.
Either way, I dont deny the possibility that you were wrongly banned.
Personally I would prefer when a commenter is banned, then that Banned status appear next to the name.. like it does in some forums. I dont remember seeing that feature in blogs.
But ultimately.. as the martial arts guy says in the Matrix, you dont truly know someone until you fight them
So just get back in the game 🙂
I got totally deleted off AVM. My password does not work, when i try to recover neither my user name nor my email are recognized
I wrote to Dean Esmay. I can try to re-register, I guess …….
Clarence – moderating comments on any reasonably sized site can quickly become a headache. It’s not as easy as you think. I’m also sure that Human-Stupdiity is going to find out the same thing over the coming weeks if all of my former commentators migrate here.
For example, with regards to your ‘ban’ at my site – you offended Alan with one remark you made, I can’t even remember the specific reason, and it quickly degenirated into vicious insult trading involving you on one side and Alan and Eric on the other. Given that Eric and Alan are/were my most loyal and regular commentators, I don’t think I had much option other than to ban you. You then went on to sites like Eivinds directing offensive insults to me personally, even implying I must a paedophile.
I have actually banned very few commentators apart from obvious feminist trolls. And generally, the only times I disapprove comments is when I fear those comments could be misinterpreted and put at risk the commentator, myself, or other readers being arrested. This has happened about 5 times.
The idea that I’m a ‘dictator’ comes from the fact I banned you (i’ve explained that I had little choice), and the fact that I do argue a lot with my readers and remind them to stay on track with their comments. I make no apologies for this. I was running a highly controversial anti-feminist anti-paedohysteria blog in the country which is the home of paedohysteria and where people are getting arrested for making anti-feminist jokes on Twitter and Facebook. I’m not putting myself at risk just to give a platform to other people’s stupid ideas or clearly wrongheaded tactical approaches.
For example, I get vexated when people repeatedly stress the Christian/American puritan fruitcake causes of paedohysteria and anti-male sexuality legislation. The main justification of my site is to establish these issues as men’s rights issues, which they clearly are, and stressing the Conservative influence (which no doubt is great) and ignoring the feminist one (which is even greater, especially in Europe) is defeating the whole purpose of my blog.
Similarly when AB drags me into never ending arguments that go round in circles with him changing his original point of view just in order to continue disagreeing with me.
As for the question of censorship in general, my site is hardly comparable to the Guardian, or the comments section of the Huffington Post etc. It’s effectively a private blog – inviting a few friends into my home to discuss ideas. If those ‘friends’ are rude or tactless, then I have the right to ask them to leave. The Guardian is a truly public forum that sets the whole discourse of society (with a number of other mainstream sites). That is a real question of free speech.
My site isn’t even comparable to AVfM. They accept 6 figure donations each year now (and that will continue to grow), and have set themselves up as representing the entire men’s rights movement (even to the extent of renaming it). I owe very few people anything on my site, and if people want to do it differently, it takes 10 minutes to set up a wordpress blog (or else just come here or to somewhere like http://kingofhits.co.uk).
If I do re-open my site, I’m going to take a far firmer line actually. I should have banned DogMeat when he wrote that rambling letter to the NSPCC claiming that he found relationships with teenagers to be ‘creepy”, and I should have banned AB a long time ago when it was clear he was a clueless aspie.
While you are free to run your blog however you see fit, and I, personally, might think that the way you ran it was very counterproductive, you are not free to make up your own facts:
” You then went on to sites like Eivinds directing offensive insults to me personally, even implying I must a paedophile.”
Here’s a link to all relevant threads, and not just on Eivinds site, but on Emma’s too:
I fail to see where I called you any kind of pedophile, though I do note the two commenters on your site who reliably sucked your balls engaging in all sorts of misbehavior.
So anyway, I’ll graciously allow for you to have mistaken me for someone else.
Anyway, I don’t wish anything bad happens to you personally despite our personality clash, as I say, you’ve done good work.
Let us try not to focus on past problems, and quibbles among us. Let us move ahead and discuss relevant issues.
I appreciate your attitude, that you try to keep everything peaceful.
I wondered how long it would be before you reared your charming head again…I don’t your getting banned from AVfM was a big deal at all, most blogs don’t seem to consider your presence a very welcome one.
Are you the same guy who posted at Hawaiian Libertarian?
If so, you characterizing Clarence’s presence on blogs is rich. LOL
I’ve known Keoni for a long time, and he was kidding (or didn’t you notice the ‘lol’)?
Speaking of W.F. Price:
“He (Paul Elam) thought that throwing the Manosphere under the bus was the ticket to respectability…this is the stupidity of the MHRM in a nutshell.”
I thought he was lol’ing coz it was a fact that you have had issues with many in the sphere. Perhaps I was mistaken.
I have seen WFPrice’s article and participated in the comments back then. He made a fool of himself with fact collection in that article, and lost a good deal of respect he had earned the hard way, by doubling down.
OK I get it.. you dont like Elam and Esmay.
No, you weren’t mistaken.
By the way, Price has publicly lauded me.
Just another reason for Eric to loathe me, I guess.
Anyway, let’s hope he doesn’t stalk you.
No, it was kind of an ‘inside joke’ between us. Keoni and I have written back and forth a lot before. Reading the whole comment thread in context it can be seen.
I kind of understand what you mean about Price, he’s not very consistent. I used to comment at the Spearhead but left because I didn’t like the direction it was going. Sometimes Price still has a good article though.
I don’t like the direction the MHRM is going either—BTW, though I’ve read comments of yours elsewhere and generally agree with them. A lot of guys support AVfM and, other than that, I don’t much problem with them.
You’re projecting again. You’re loathesome enough without any help from me or anybody else.
Nobody’s ‘stalking’ you, Dipshit. Even since you got banned at Antifeminist’s you’ve been running around the whole Manosphere squawking about it and trying to stir up problems for him. So stop bitching just because you get confronted. You just end up looking like a retard.
Bad news…the guy who runs the sex trafficking myths blog has swallowed equality of injustice :
‘Why can’t MEN be Sex Trafficking Victims’?
This blog looks very reasonable to me.
I think that comment is meant that government talks only about female sex trafficking victims.
Elsewhere he says that prostitutes normally are NOT trafficking victims and that UK or US police often entice them to claim that they are.
If men work as transvestite prostitute, then they probably work under similar conditions as women, especially if they were operated.
The article looks a bit unclear, but does not look problematic to me.
The blog looks very reasonable to me too, that’s why I wrote ‘bad news’. It would be unfortunate if the guy who runs that blog has embraced equality of victimhood.
And yes, it’s a valid and important point, but the way he has expressed it looks to me like he is calling for ladyboys to be seen as victims too and action to be taken against the ‘ trafficking’ of ladyboys and male prostitutes. He posted the article at r/mensrights, and that’s certainly how its been interpreted there.
“Paul Elam is looking for a meme writer. We would be happy if we could go viral”
I’m disappointed that you have never once used the term ‘paedocrite’ here HS.
Is this because it is too ‘unscientific’ and you don’t like name calling?
@Clarence, the antifeminist is not very patient, I noticed. Gratefully I was not evicted there. Here, I am a lot more tolerant.
@Eric, @theantifeminist etc., feel free to use this or another thread to post issues, links etc.
I also still hope to revive http://www.reddit.com/r/Pedosexhysteria/
We have a problem though, that all admins are shadowbanned, we have to watch very carefully if this reddit works all right.
If in doubt we have to post here.
My problem is that I spread myself too thin, with racial and other issues too.
I can also accept articles, give author rights to select people. I am open.
All this lone wolf, lone fighter issue is problematic. This is why we don’t get anywhere. I admire avoiceformen, they suddenly got a lot of valuable contributors and took up steam.
Some of these people are quite sympathetic to our issues, I wish they would post their more deviant thought here.
I have some major plans and ideas I never manage to materialize.
For example, I would not mind paying a 1000 dollar prize in some contest, if that would get us a huge amount of attention. I would also suggest to start with simpler topics, like obvious ridiculous law abuses with borderline legal 17 year olds
Paul Elam is looking for a meme writer. We would be happy if we could go viral
I would wish to get a cartoonist, I do have great ideas but need someone who gets the idea and can put it on paper. I could spend a little money on that, too, but nothing extravagant. Ideally a friend who does it for love, or a low salary Asian who, alas, might not understand our issues.
Yes, but the Antifeminist is partly himself to blame.
He almost banned YOU several times because you weren’t quite syncophantic enough.
Hell, I agree with everything on his sexual rights manifesto and even the stuff in the comments by Alan Vaughn, but I just wasn’t ‘pure’ enough to continue posting there.
That being said, I’m sad to see him go, and I hope he comes back if he ever feels like it. He was one of the few people who had the balls to take this stuff head-on and I can appreciate that, even though I find myself disagreeing with how he ran his little treehouse.
Part of me would like to believe the ‘MHRM’ will eventually take some of the more egregious abuses of this stuff on, but it’s probably wishful thinking. I think its true that to have a chance to get some of their other legislative priorities considered (let alone PASSED, changing laws to be more fair to men in custody, marriage, or family court is at BEST a multiyear project and more likely multi decade) they’ve decided to accept feminist definitions of abuse.
Sad thing is, these definitions and the war on male sexuality can ultimately UNDO or subvert any gains they get in the other areas, and I’m not sure they recognize that.
I saw Typhonblue recently defending the ‘male gaze’ from some hysterical (gaze is like rape!) Indian females. However, if that ‘male gaze’ fell on a SEXUALLY DEVELOPED teenage girl, suddenly it becomes The Evil Eye again.
Male gazes can’t harm anyone, grandmas or teenyboppers alike. Only once that is recognized can the battle even be started.
Thanks for hanging in there, HS.
I was late coming to this movement; my enlightenment is when I found I had been walking for four months past a van in which was the body of a dead man. The police had been told of his disappearance, and the van had been reported abandoned, yet they did absolutely nothing. I note the Telegraph piece is inaccurate on a number of points, he was not a soldier.
In the same space and time, a woman murders three men, and attempts to kill two more, and little is made of it. If it had been a man who tried to murder five women, the press would have had headlines for months.
I would urge the owner of anti-feminist to keep the blog open as a historical document, it is well written and a splendid source of material. I suppose it’s always available on the way-back machine, but it’s hard to find pages there.
I note that the political blogger Annaraccoon has had to give in, after blogging about the Jimmy Savile case which she knows personally about, and was subsequently deluged by hate emails. For a full detailed debunking of the claims, visit
I wouldn’t say it’s the only free and sex-positive blog left, but they are getting fewer in number. With the MHRM showing its true colors, Antifeminist was the major voice in opposition.
I hope he comes back, but if decides not to, take the advice of another retired MRM pioneer, Rob Fedders: “Don’t delete your blog.” Fedders, BTW was also chased away by MHRM shenanigans.
In the meantime here and Eivind Berge’s are probably the best places to regroup.
Thanks for the support.
A Voice for Men complaining about a new UK law that extends the definition of and increases the punishment for domestic violence.
Yet they themselves effectively call for raising the age of consent (where it is not 18 – nearly everywhere) and the legal definition of child sex abuse…so long as male and female perps are treated the same.
And they claim that as many men as women are the victims of domestic violence – so why aren’t they applying the principle of ‘equality of injustice’ when it comes to domestic violence?
Interesting idea, mandatory arrest laws, arrest everyone involved in a domestic conflict. Especially if it is mutual violence.
FYI a couple of us took Fidelbogen to task for his recent comments as well, but he didn’t reply to them. Apparently, as latest own strategy blunder, he’s posting his Youtube videos without his avatar. Now that I see what he really looks like, I can see why he might have sympathy with a sex-negative movement like the MHRM! LOL
“Now that I see what he really looks like, I can see why he might have sympathy with a sex-negative movement like the MHRM! LOL”
Hahaha…yea, I was actually thinking that myself.
And thanks for your support.
I was thinking, after seeing those videos, that if the MHRM wants to imitate feminist tactics, they should do what worked for feminists:
As MRAFront points out, nobody was taking fat, ugly femihags seriously—so they made themselves ‘chic’ by using Gloria Steinhem, Jessica Valenti, and Melissa Gorga as their spokeswomen.
Maybe the MHRM could do the same? Keep all these Omega-loser looking males in the background and recruit some handsome, dashing young men to pitch their message.
But then, they’d have competition for the ‘Lovely Sheilas’, so they may not like the idea…
1) It doesnt surprise me that the AntiFeminist blames AVFM for his failures. So 6 years of his efforts yielded NOTHING. He couldnt build up a community at all.. and what does he do? Bitch about those who are lot more successful.
I am an AVFM donor.. you guys are not. And I AM happy with how the money is being spent there. And the Anti-Feminist argues that money (NOT HIS) is used to “fund a lavish lifestyle”? What a joke. This is SOUR GRAPES plain and simple.
2) FREE SPEECH:
On the internet I have been part of SEVERAL communities, not just the Manosphere. Different sites have different goals.. and their commenting policies vary from no comments at all (Sam Harris), Valuable comments only (blogger decides) on Science2.0 blog, to anything-but-kiddie-porn forums.
Arguing that some site doesnt allow you absolute freedom to do what you want (i.e “free speech”).. is untenable. The only thing one can ask.. is consistency in applying the policies. i.e Does same rule apply for all commenters? Or one rule for some, another rule for others.
3) AGE OF CONSENT ISSUES:
AVFM has not gone out of its way to attack you “Mens Sexual Liberation Activists”. Show me articles there which do that. NONE.
AVFM have had disagreements with you guys when you came there. And thats expected.
You guys have significant disagreements amongst yourselves, dont you? for e.g you were (for a while) candidate for “Paedocrite of the year” at the Anti-Feminist. Didnt Jay Hammers get banned at the Anti-Feminist?
AVFM (and much of the MRM) is in the business of changing cultural narrative.. not lobbying for law making (like Fathers Rights Groups have been trying for decades with minimal success).
You guys are also in the business of changing cultural narrative. Your success depends on your branding. Not piggybacking on them, or expecting them to add your hot-potato issue with the already large load of hot issues they are fighting.
Well, I might donate, but I have been banned. I can not even comment there. And I believed I have even been told that I deserve to be treated with serious violence.
I really wish that AVM would just shut up about our sex positive topics. Refuse to comment. But not take an almost violent ANTI-MALE position.
1) Re: Bans, all bans were lifted as goodwill in the new year. Except for some egregious offenders apparently.
2) Re: I really wish that AVM would just shut up about our sex positive topics. But not take an almost violent ANTI-MALE position.
“almost Violent ANTI-MALE Position”?
You need to pick your characterization appropriately, to be even considered seriously.
A while ago, that antifeminist fellow had this to say, in his retarded nomination of Elam as Paedocrite of the Year.
Wut? Clearly sexualised picture?
Who sexualised the women? If someone wanted to do that, couldnt a more clear cut picture be found?
Really.. how can anyone take this fellow seriously if he has such terrible reading/interpretation skills?
“Wut? Clearly sexualised picture?”
They’re not exactly wearing burqas are they?
“If someone wanted to do that, couldn’t a more clear cut picture be found?”
No, because any more sexualised and it would be outright child pornography.
” how can anyone take this fellow seriously if he has such terrible reading/interpretation skills?”
Yea, right, there’s no innuendo in the description, nothing that AVoiceforMen readers are assumed to understand by the fact that Paul Elam gets an e-mail from three high shcool girls and ‘answered them right away’ (and then posted it on the front page of AVfM within 3 hours), after explaining that such ‘interesting’ mails are a ‘perk of the job’ and accompanied by a picture of three ‘young women’ in bikinis.
I admire schopenbecq’s keen observation skills.
All of us, even I myself, tend to forget what child porn really is.
p>These girls photos do constitute Child Porn level 1 on the Copine scale: Non-erotic and non-sexualized pictures showing children in their underwear, swimming costumes from either commercial sources or family albums. Pictures of children playing in normal settings, in which the context or organisation of pictures by the collector indicates inappropriateness. ‘Don’t forget that 17 year olds are children. See also Knox vs. USA, regarding girls fully dressed in Leotards gyrating sensually.
Actually, the photo of the girls can move up to Child Porn Copine level 4!
“Deliberately posed pictures of children fully clothed, partially clothed or naked (where the amount,context and organisation suggests sexual interest). ”
Totally harmless and inoffensive Level 1 photos become level 4 just by context.
A collection of department store child lingerie photos becomes child porn just because it is suspected that the collector is turned on by it. The crime is in the mind of the collector, not perpetrated against the children.
I will reply here to avoid going too many levels deep into replies.
I put this down in a few articles. From what I remember, I heard comments as far as me deserving to get raped in prison. The antifeminist has a better memory, I did not take this so seriously.
What bothered me was that Paul could not even agree to condemn ridiculous perversions of the law, like mom and dad arrested for baby photos in the bath tub.
Balkanized Men’s Rights Movement vehemently supports feminist sex hysteria. MRA easily defeated by feminist unity (#5)
MRA against men! Most MRA (men’s rights activist) actively support draconian prison sentences for men #4
Human-Stupidity hostilized, warned, banned by MRA
Human-Stupidity was blocked, chided, and banned at leading men’s rights sites r/mensrights and AVoiceForMen.
Check how Human-Stupidity’s moderate and reasonable comment 1, 2 led to banning from the otherwise excellent MRA activism site AVoiceForMen. My comments 1, 2 at the excellent article cited below (in #5) were understood by a few, but misunderstood by Paul Elam, who stands for many sex-repressive MRA’s
The comment above led to Human_Stupidity.com’s definite expulsion from the site of the most active and very representative MRA, AVoiceForMen.
I think the antifeminist overshot the goal here. A pedocrite, according to his definition, is a anti-pedophilia activist, who opposes adolescent sexuality, while in reality being a closet pedophile who gets caught red-handed.
Like Jerry Falwell on extramarital sex and prostitution.
So Paul Elam showed pretty strong tendencies to side with feminist sex hysteria even in pretty clear cut shocking cases. He seems to have mellowed out because I see Angry Harry and Lucian Valsan would espouse theories that would have gotten me kicked out.
But to be a pedocrite, one has to engage in pedophilia. At least the so called pedophilia, with 17 year old “children”. And thus the antifeminist dug up this photo of cute, young, attractive jail bait that by itself really does not incriminate Paul Elam.
I guess all this was for shock value, overdoing things a little. But I understand that this could offend people.
You’ve misdefined my term ‘paedocrite’.
“A pedocrite, according to his definition, is a anti-pedophilia activist, who opposes adolescent sexuality, while in reality being a closet pedophile who gets caught red-handed.”
That is YOUR definition, which you have just made up (although such an ‘anti-paedophila activist’ would certainly be a paedocrite). I have never defined it in this narrow way.
A paedocrite is anyone who accuses others of paedophilia in order to avoid having the accusing finger pointed at them. Your definition would certainly cover extreme paedocrites, but not all paedocrites are hardcore paedophiles, and i’m NOT accusing Paul Elam of being a paedophile (although he has accused you directly, and me of being one by association).
However, he is a paedocrite given that he accuses us of being paedophiles for calling for an end to draconian sentences for men looking at pictures of teenagers, and claims that sex with 19 year old ‘children’ is nauseating, and then practically confesses to getting a boner when he gets an e-mail out of the blue from 3 jailbait 15 year old girls, calling them ‘young women’ , and getting Alek Novy or whoever to post a racy picture of three jailbait ‘young women’.
Similarly, you’re a paedocrite when you come on my site and claim that you are less ‘radical’ than myself and my readers because you don’t actually want the age of consent reduced,and even support laws allowing fathers to punish men who have sex with their 17 year old children, and then proceed to publish articles calling for the legalisation of sex with toddlers.
And @Clarence, FYI, this is why I came close to banning HS from my site. That and because he continously criticised my articles, without even bothering to read them properly (it appears).
I guess we have different personalities and ways of fighting HS.
You think everything will be decided by the professor of science at the University of Munchenhausen looking under his microscope and declaring that ‘sex with minors is harmless’. Suddenly, the trillion dollar child abuse industry will admit defeat and the age of consent will be abolished.
Well actually Bruce Rind will tell you that this wont ever happen.
This is a FIGHT we are in, and to be honest, when David Futrelle directly accuses you of being a paedophile, and you shrug your shoulders, and when Paul Elam accuses you of ‘extolling the virtues of child porn’ and stating that he finds you creepy, and you then defend him when I hit back, you actually demonstrate why we’re pissing into the wind here. In fact, I’m slightly creeped out.
Perhaps this will help you focus your mind :
If you decide to reopen your blog again, here’s a suggestion: a blogger whom I also follow had the same problem you were having: he wanted to post a new topic every day but troll-suppression got to be too much of a burden. The way he resolved it was to open comments for each new post, but close comments on all the previous ones whenever a new one was posted.
It doesn’t stop trolling completely but it makes it much easier for him to control them. If he has an especially hot topic going, he might leave the post open a day or two longer.
Anyway, it seems to have worked for him: his blog is really high-trafficked now and it’s less work than before.
that’s an interesting suggestion.
It would also reward the truly loyal and regular readers, such as you and Alan, who read updates every day.
BTW, am I the only one who thinks HS should update this wordpress theme? Seems to be a lot of problems with the comments – I couldn’t reply to your comment, but only mine.
I do hope that if you continue the blog, I can be one of your loyal readers (more importantly, supporters). I was a bit concerned about whether I said something wrong (the straw that broke the camel’s back), seeing as you took a break only a few days after I started to comment…
Paul must have had bad days, or knee jerk reactions against me to overreact.
Read the harmless comments I made that got him over the top and to kick me out.
I think the policy could be talked over off line, because I perfectly understand that he wants to avoid, ignore or even disassociate from some points that I defend on my blog.
Too hot a potato, and to peripheral or uninteresting for him.
On AVM, after some admonishment I tried to refrain from extreme issues (very young, etc) and stick to fairly mature almost 18 year olds and/or extremely harmless “crimes” like child porn accusations for photographing your 17 year old LEGAL girl friend or wife
But I really appreciate you sending me the link, and I definitely will try if I am unblocked.
If you have a direct line, please have them check if I am unblocked.
You can see, even in my article condemning my expulsion, I could not but recognize the otherwise valuable work at avm.
please support us on reddit
Please comment and discuss.
Intelligent and well argued dissent is also welcome.
” As normal criminals hate “sex offenders”, these male victims of feminist and religious zealot sex laws almost certainly will suffer beatings and ass rape in prison by HIV positive felons”
These normal criminals are men as well. Why do they let themselves be indoctrinated by feminist drivel? I’d say we should write letters to inmates explaining our positions.
@oogenhand, it is not quite that simple. Men have always had a knee jerk reaction against rapists, real rapists.
And tough guys like gang bangers even more so. Human-Stupidity already reasoned that ass rape is not even a proper punishment for real sex offenders. Rather those who are in favor of prison abuse for rapists should be honest and consider whipping, which at least does not transmit AIDS.
The problem is that even our newspaper and bloggers can not see the fine difference between classic forcible rape-rape and consensual forms of rape, or other trumped up victimless sex crimes.
Then how do you think the prison toughs will see these differences? They just rape indifferently. And lots of the victimless sex criminals are just weak nerdy guys who can not stand up to street gang bangers.
But there are some guys who make a point: go to rough neighborhoods to “teach real rapists not to rape” instead of going to college and teaching the non-violent nerds and harmless jocks not to rape.
But surely the Aryan Brotherhood notices that those targeted for prison rape tend not to be the gang bangers.
It is no use convincing the feminists; the real rapists are attractive…