After ten years, time to take the chair

Old soldiers never die,
Never die, never die,
Old soldiers never die,
They just fade away.

The earliest version of this song is said to date back to the First World War. I don’t go back that far, but at 77 I am getting on a bit, and after Heretic TOC arrived at its 10th anniversary earlier this week, the time has come to take a serious look at what the future holds.

Mercifully, I feel in remarkably good nick for my age, both physically and mentally. So, who knows, I might go on fading so slowly you’d hardly notice for another decade, or even two. Or not. None of us knows when our luck will run out, and when the odds start turning against us it makes sense to plan for change.

I’ll come back to that. But first, let’s celebrate that birthday. Ten years is a long survival time for any personal blog, especially one that faces constant threats to its existence from hostile forces, and is never going to attract corporate sponsorship or other easy monetisation to cover expenses.

Yet over this time Heretic TOC has not just survived, but thrived, steadily increasing its readership throughout. Today’s blog is the 270th. Just let that sink in: hundreds of chunky essays. As a student, in the laid-back 1960s, I was just as bone idle as  many of my friends, preferring to booze and party my way through uni, rather than do any actual studying. Essays were a dreaded imposition, not something to be tackled voluntarily. So it is still weird to me that I ever became an enthusiastic writer.

As a newspaper journalist, which was the trade I turned to after MAP issues terminated my short teaching career, I found it satisfying to see my work in print, especially after turning from news reporting to feature writing, which offered more scope for personal expression. But the strongest motivation to write, I find, comes from reader engagement, which Heretic TOC readers have given in spades. This is what gives a blog its life, its sense of purpose.

The extent of this engagement may be judged from the fact that there have been well over a million and a half words of readers’ comment, in over 17,000 published reader contributions, a great many of which have been well argued and exceedingly well informed: I learn a lot from your posts. Overwhelmingly, they have also been courteous and good-humoured, putting to shame the abysmal “hellscape” that prevails elsewhere in the social media. Look, Elon Musk, and learn!

The readership has also been the source of many excellent guest blogs, most of them coming from regular commentators. Nearly all of these have been thoroughgoing heretics like me, albeit sometimes coming from very different angles, offering fresh perspectives. Non-heretics, notably VirPed, have also been given a platform. Rather than keeping this as a “safe space” where we block our ears against the hateful slanders spat constantly our way, we do well to debate with anyone who has a halfway coherent argument and reasonably good manners. It can be unpleasant to have our views and good faith challenged by those we feel should be on our side, but it keeps us real.

Is this where heretics like us will end up? No, it’s the hellscape so many have been lured into by the social media platforms. New boss Elon Musk, the hot-looking guy in the middle, is seen presiding.

Another key aspect of Heretic TOC’s resilience over the years has been that it does not stand alone. I may appear to be just one guy voicing a personal opinion, one of the last men standing, as it were, following the collapse of organised radical MAP groups around the world under pressure from hostile surveillance and policing over the course of several decades. But things have moved on in more positive ways as well. Rather than being choked off into silence, a tremendous diversity of MAP voices are beginning to find expression through an increasingly rich ecology of online social media output, with young contributors bringing great messaging skills to bear, in which graphics, animations, podcasts, etc., are reaching out to a much wider audience than I could hope to find with my clunky slabs of text.

Discerning MAPs, though, still have an appetite for formal argument backed by substantial scholarship. Heretic’s TOC’s place in the free market of ideas is bound to be confined to a rather nerdy minority of a minority, a slim niche within a niche; but within these constraints the stats for page hits have always been healthy and have seen a marked upward trend this year, since becoming well established on an independent hosting platform. Hits were up by a third in October from just three months earlier, and now stand at over 20,000 per month.

This could not have happened without support from the MAP community at two critical points in the history of Heretic TOC. One was seven years ago at a very trying time – literally so, when I faced a trial and likely prison sentence in an “historic” case on which I reported. Financial pledges from Heretic TOC readers and generous leading figures in the wider community were absolutely vital in making sure I could cope with legal costs when it looked as though I would be unable to get state legal aid. Hotel bills and travel expenses necessarily incurred to attend numerous hearings at courts far from home were also taken care of, enabling me and my legal team to focus on (successfully) dodging the bullet. That is solidarity. That is community in action. I will be forever in the debt of those who stood with me.

The second crisis came a couple of years ago when Heretic TOC was kicked off the blogging platform following hostile media coverage. This time key figures in the community rallied round not only financially but also with extensive technical help and advice, thereby securing a new host, a handsome makeover of the blog’s appearance, and enhanced functionality, so no more comment threads getting ever narrower with each new comment! Remember that? 🙂 Again, my heartfelt thanks to all concerned.

Turning now to the future, Heretic TOC will need to become far less dependent on me. Rather than just go on blogging until I drop, or until heretics start finding better places to hang out, I see the focus of my energies shifting towards more academic work in such years of writing as remain to me – that and “putting my affairs in order”, a phrase which usually means rich people deciding who gets the money when they go, but in my impecunious case means something more like sorting the wheat from the chaff of my ye olde parchments from the last century, noting what might be of some interest to MAP chroniclers.

I do not intend to disappear suddenly from the fray, like a soldier shot on the battlefield. I hope to find time for more blogs, but they will be less frequent. There may be something of the old soldier fading away but I hope the change will seem more like the intensely busy CEO who steps up into a less energetic oversight role in later years, when they move up to become chairman of the board.

So what I hope to see is more guest bloggers to continue the mission set out in Heretic TOC’s About page i.e. presenting a “discourse of resistance” to “the dominant narrative” of sexual morality. Individual bloggers will have their own styles. I do not expect and would not want a clone of myself, but I hope they will continue the tradition of “humour and cheerfulness” along with “reason and research”. I see my role on the site, going forward, as primarily that of editor and resource developer, building the website as a multi-page reference resource, in which, among much else, the back catalogue of blogs is properly indexed and made attractively visible.

One specific offsite project I have in mind  is bring out a paperback book next year featuring maybe 20-30 of what I feel are the best blogs of the last ten years, including some of the best comments and discussion threads. Combined with an original introduction written by me, outlining the purpose and history of the blog, I hope those readers who still have bookshelves in this digital age will be attracted to the idea of a souvenir edition gracing their home – or disgracing it, perhaps, in the eyes of the many shockable friends, relatives, LEA, carpet fitters, etc., who might see it. Fortunately, the expectation is not that this will be a best seller. The idea, rather, is to lay down something in a relatively permanent format, which would find a place in the British Library. So this would be for posterity, if you will. It is entirely likely that posterity will take no interest whatever, but one can live in hope!

Before the book, though, in the remainder of this year, it looks unlikely that I will be able to blog again. That is because I have been invited to make a substantial contribution to a book in the field of ethics, and I need to focus on that between now and Christmas. Sorry about that. But, hey, guest bloggers, here’s your cue: time to get scribbling!


Word has reached me that historian William Armstrong Percy III, best known to MAPs, and more specifically BLs, for his book Pederasty and Pedagogy in Archaic Greece, died late last month at the age of 88.

His passing is particularly sad for me for several reasons. I must have read his pederasty book not long after its publication in 1996, when I was struck by its refreshing lack of moralising against boy-love in the ancient world, including Crete, where he theorised that institutionalised pederasty originated, and in classical Athens, Sparta and other Greek city states. I was even more impressed when I heard him fearlessly defend the Greeks’ enthusiasm for boys in a radio interview. It was almost as though he couldn’t care less that he was saying anything “scandalous”, or even relished the potential controversy.

So when I needed scholarly reviewers to give pre-publication endorsements for my book Michael Jackson’s Dangerous Liaisons, he came to mind as one of the few people brave enough for such a task. Luckily for me, he read the book, said he loved it, and gave me a great review snippet that went on the end-page, along with his title: professor, University of Massachusetts, Boston. And on the strength of his keenness on my work, he soon after recruited me in a writing and research capacity on several of his projects. He paid handsomely, and our collaboration lasted for a number of years before age and infirmity put an end to his historical writing.

I never met Bill, but we must have spent dozens of hours on the phone talking about history, politics, and much else, in transatlantic conversations that went on long after the paid work dried up. We had become friends, in other words, and I would have taken up his offer to stay at his place in Boston but for the knowledge that I would never be allowed to enter the United States these days.

Bill was a larger than life character who was always a joy to talk with. His conversation was provocative, lively, and often outrageously politically incorrect. In the earlier part of his career he had fallen foul of anti-gay prejudice, when he had posts at universities in the Deep South, but survived to become a prominent gay activist in more liberal Boston. A significant landmark in that regard was his joint editorship, with Warren Johansson, of the Encyclopedia of Homosexuality.

From a wealthy family, he had substantial personal assets of his own which enabled him late in life to establish the William A. Percy Foundation for Social and Historical Studies, of which classicist Professor Thomas Hubbard is now the director – Tom himself has been outspoken in his honest scholarship on pederasty, as you may recall from his eventually embattled position at the University of Texas, which I blogged about at the time. Another part of Bill’s legacy is a personal website, still extant as I write,  which includes biographical notes on gay and BL activists and much else of interest.

An official announcement of Bill’s death has been made here. I am sure obituaries and tributes in the gay press and elsewhere will be appearing soon.


Did anybody see Jimmy Carr Destroys Art? This was a Channel 4 TV show with reviews ranging all the way from “moronic” to “pathetic”. But that was the MSM view, so could it actually have been rather good, like the widely panned Brass Eye special on paedophilia, now regarded as a classic?

Comedian Jimmy Carr, more famous as a notorious tax dodger than for making people laugh, didn’t have me doubled up with mirth, but that was not the point on this occasion. This was meant to be a provocation, an incitement to serious thought, or downright outrage, depending on your taste and values.

At this level it could hardly have failed because the provocation in question was massively controversial: original art, acquired at considerable expense by the programme makers, with work by some seriously famous figures, including Picasso, stood to be destroyed during the show, after a short debate, if the audience decided to “cancel” the artist based on disapproval of their private lives.

No surprise, then, that works by nonce artists Rolf Harris and Eric Gill were up for shredding, or burning. So far so tacky. There’s no way these dodgy dudes can survive the audience’s wrath, is there? So isn’t it just shooting fish in a barrel? Well, no. The admittedly rather clever if vile bit is that these two wrong’uns are pitted against each other in a sort of gladiatorial sword fight between two pervy penises.

Guess who wins! Will it be Rolph, who had a bit of a thing for teenage girls (no big deal) and was once a national treasure but whose art, to put it charitably, is undistinguished? Or will it be Eric, hailed as the greatest artist-craftsman of the twentieth century, but who had sex with his prepubertal daughters and shagged the family dog for good measure?

Well, it’s a no brainer, isn’t it? No brains in the studio audience, that is, or nothing in their heads to deter them from cultural vandalism: obviously, Gill had to go! Sadly, it seems this bunch of clowns had failed to read and learn from my defence of Gill back in January. That came after a hammer-wielding philistine attacked his Prospero and Ariel, the best known of the artist’s sculptured group of figures that graces the BBC’s Broadcasting House in London. See Heretic TOC downpage item Why didn’t they shoot this philistine?

What a terrible disaster for broadcasting standards! However could the programme commissioners possibly have judged that the destruction of real works of art could be justified in the name of vulgar entertainment? – even if it was quite thought provoking, albeit more so on the subject of art than of minor attraction.


Apart from an unexplained reference to Newgon as an autogenerated baby name, there doesn’t seem to be anything on the Home page of NewgonWiki, or the About page, that says how this marvellous resource of MAP-related information got its name.

So this looks like an opportunity for anyone who knows the origin story to edit the site by adding a sentence or two about it. Or if you fancy adding a whole page about something of MAP interest that isn’t already covered, you can do that too. Using similar software to Wikipedia, Newgon volunteer editors can simply write their stuff and add it themselves. But there is a huge difference to Wikipedia, where anyone these days trying to add well-sourced information on child sexuality or attraction to minors will invariably find their work censored if there is the slightest suspicion that it comes from a MAP or MAP-friendly editor – including neutrally-presented research data that could be thought to favour MAP claims.

By sharp contrast, the Newgon Organization, and its support team who maintain the NewgonWiki site, are MAP-friendly and welcome good information from MAP editors about MAP issues. That’s what they are for. That’s the mission.

Take a look around the NewgonWiki site, if you haven’t already, and you will discover a treasure trove of goodies. But it needs more volunteer editors, to strengthen what is already there and to keep the site growing, so it will become as indispensable to MAPs as Wikipedia now is on most subjects.

Unlike Wikipedia, which pretends to welcome all editors but in practice freezes out those who stray too far from orthodox input on controversial issues, NewgonWiki is upfront in having a recruitment policy. All applicants to do editing go through an initial vetting process. I have not (yet) done editing there myself, so I cannot describe the process in detail, but I imagine there will be a warm welcome for anyone with a bona fide interest who has the necessary skills, or could develop them with a bit of guidance, such as you will find on the editing portal and in the working standards and technical advice.

All you need to do to get started is email with basic information about the areas in which you think you will be able to contribute, and the skill level you can bring to the work in relevant tasks – notably researching (digging out interesting material to write about), writing, and editing.


Unlike the Marquis de Sade’s novel The 120 Days of Sodom, in which violence escalates into torture and slaughter and was written while the author was in prison, the four months of Norbert de Jonge’s recent incarceration did not end in carnage, but they were pretty terrifying and grim – hence, no doubt, the title he has given to a brief account of his experiences circulated to me and others a few days ago: The 120 Days of Norbert.

Heretics here may remember that I have blogged repeatedly about the increasingly hard line taken against MAPs in the Netherlands in recent times, notably in Repression in Netherlands rivals Russia’s. Norbert was one of several activists tried for attempting to revive a banned pro-MAP organisation. He was convicted in March this year and given a sentence of four months, a prison term that began  somewhat later, in late June, and ended late last month.

In the UK he would probably have been assessed immediately on arrival as a vulnerable prisoner, on account of the hostility and violence to which inmates are routinely subjected if they are thought to be “paedos”. As such, he would have been put on a segregated wing for his own protection along with fellow MAPs and others likely to be given a hard time.

Not in the Netherlands, or not in Norbert’s case at least. Left to sink or swim among the main prison population, he soon came under suspicion. Some three weeks of rising tension and threats against him led to a crisis in which Norbert could stand no more, so he deliberately smashed the fluorescent lighting in the toilet area of his shared cell, an offence which saw him put into bleak but safe solitary confinement. Nearly two weeks later he was finally given a single cell on a separate floor for vulnerable prisoners, which is obviously where he should have been all along. Except, of course, that he should never have been jailed in the first place.

5 3 votes
Article Rating
Notify of

Oldest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Zen Thinker

I think in the general confusion of this cultural moment we are in danger of overlooking something quite incredible – indeed which would have been mocked as a possibility only 2-3 years ago – child sexuality has become a mainstream topic of debate in (US dominated) Western society.

We’re familiar with old stories like the movie Cuties and the “Disney Groomer” debate. Well the frequency of stories surrounding child sexuality and “sexualisation” are increasing dramatically in velocity and mainstream cultural impact. Only very recently we had the Balenciaga furore ( ) which has blown up on social media, with the hashtag – predictably enough – #BalenciagaGroomers

Then there has been the more recent Washington Post article ( ) praising a theatrical production sympathetic to child sex offenders, which upon reading doesn’t strike me as particularly controversial, but which has caused more chaos and furore around the idea of the normalisation of paedophilia.

Then there is the Online Safety Bill (restricted geographically to the UK of course) which aims to police children online but which is perhaps in large measure unenforceable. The pace of child “sexualisation” (admittedly I hate that term) or better child innate self-discovery on social media has been incredible. I am talking about wholly legal social media characterisations and self-fashioning by children which are frankly surprising to me – the level to which children have imbibed the adult sexual norms of our society and converted it into their own subculture.

So yes, it is actually happening, child sexuality is now a mainstream battleground the way trans ideology has been. The trend may be in its early stages, and let me tell you the opponents of child sexuality are rabidly vicious in their pushback – Tucker Carlson, Candace Owens, Matt Walsh are just the very tip of the iceberg – but this is now becoming a major cultural battleground: something which was unthinkable when I first began contributing to this blog about three years ago.

This is an incredible moment for MAPs too, and we need to consider how we respond to these cultural developments and this dramatic foment of new emerging perspectives and ideas in popular culture regarding children.

Stephen James

I think we need to be ready with a radical perspective. A VP approach will seem old hat in the face of growing awareness that children are sexual beings.


Then there is the Online Safety Bill (restricted geographically to the UK of course) which aims to police children online but which is perhaps in large measure unenforceable

Usually such bills is hide behind by “child safety”, with the aim of limit freespeech on the Internet.

This coincides with their fears of child sexuality. The rise of social media has allowed youths to express themselves and they fear it will get out of their desexual control.

Academic groups are gradually realizing that minor attraction is natural sexuality that cannot be chosen and changed.

This is an incredible moment for MAPs too, and we need to consider how we respond

MAP needs to build community, write a modern YouthLove/MAP declaration, in which it is necessary to recall that according to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, all people have equal rights, protection from discrimination, freedom of opinions and peaceful associations.

Zen Thinker

>The rise of social media has allowed youths to express themselves

Yes, and each ensuing decade, of the music industry for example, has been increasingly sexual, and kids soak up these influences like a sponge, for better or worse. But it is deeply hypocritical for anti-MAP commentators to lament child sexuality when mainstream society brought about the precise conditions for a burgeoning and robust child sexuality to flourish. Imagine if we’d kept the social and cultural values of the 50s lol, none of this would have ever happened. The “mainstreamers” have been well and truly hoisted by their own petard.


“Tucker Carlson, Candace Owens…The irony is, when it came to Lockdowns and vaccine mandates, I am on the same side as them, the side of freedom and individuality, not some collectivist hell hold that always leads to mass murder. I was naive in thinking that technology will free man, now it looks like a real threat. Just look at China. But yes, always when this subject comes up, we part company.
I was in a Jeep with a mate who, for a short time, worked with convicts doing landscape gardening etc. He left because many were MAPs. Not that I’m physically scared of him, I know the reaction I would get and it was just not worth it if you knew the character of this guy, who I still consider, on subjects other than MAP related, a mate.

Now time driving through town, we passed a young girl wearing tight revealing clothes, he mentioned about his experiences with Prisoners saying how easily manipulated young girls are and should wear more clothes. I just said something like, we’re not in Saudi Arabia and tried to change the conversation.

Another time in the vehicle, on there BBC R4 a conversation about “online abuse” came up. Maybe he suspects me, he mentioned paedophilia and said, “what do you think of it”…Frustratingly I had to avoid taking the bait and just said, well I can never understand how people can find underdeveloped breasts attractive and moved to conversation on to the real Trojan horse that is online censorship being ushered in in the name of “protecting the kiddies”…..I discovered this site in 2013 not long after getting into the research on MAPs and child sexuality. It was actually an anti-pedo blog that was a good source of information ‘Evil Unveiled’…That’s when I first read about Norbert.

Zen Thinker

Yeah don’t reveal sexual orientation to friends.

It’s a private matter

Last edited 23 hours ago by Zen Thinker

As Tom said to that undercover guy (somewhere on holiday, I been reading H-Toc from the start but can’t remember everything) when asked what sort of sex are you into…”I’m as straight as they come”


It seems online censorship is worsening in the UK:

Tom (and others), what do you think about it? Is there a possibility that this censorship initiative will endanger online (pro-)MAP and Child Liberation communities?


Hasn’t there been backlash against the “legal but harmful” aspect of this bill?

Zen Thinker

Inveterate sinner against MAPs Tucker Carlson tonight launched an astonishing attack on the “left wing media” for the “sexualisation of children”. In his impassioned speech Carlson noted with a voracious despotic aplomb that the wrong half of the US were hell bent on sexualising kids and “legitimising kiddie porn” (sic). The damning evidence: a fashion house released an advertising campaign today of young children holding teddies, and the teddies were dressed in BDSM gear. Tucker’s weird pal Chris Rufo affirmed the dire state of affairs, and “the left” were deflecting any criticism by calling such critique “anti-LGBTQ”. Elsewhere on the internet the advertising campaign was branded “demonic” by right wing firebrands. What most offended this spectator, though, was the cringeworthy moral panic flamed by this clear societal drift towards the attempt to set free the totemistic child and all its associated taboos.


Conservatives will always be thus. Especially in the US where religion is still so damn strong (but in the early stages of falling off the map). As less people and less people are religious, the hangups that religion bequeathed us will begin to fall away. The US currently exercises cultural imperialism upon it’s fellow members of the Empire™- making them more puritanical than they would otherwise be. Once our own puritanism begins to fade, the puritanism we and Britain have imposed on the rest of the world will start to be undone quickly.

Zen Thinker

I think religion is a false flag. Look at France, a strongly Catholic country, and famous intellectuals there tried to petition for child sexual liberalisation (in the 70s I think). Evangelical Protestantism in the US is slightly different, in that many of these are “off the chart” nutters – Young Earth Creationists, for example. It’s no coincidence that Catholic European countries have some of the most relaxed attitudes to child sexuality – for example, the age of consent in Spain is only thirteen. France, Spain, and Italy have much more relaxed attitudes than the US and UK, and the political and cultural hegemony of the Anglosphere has really damaged and set back child liberation. Oh, and in Latin America, Brazil, also strongly Catholic, has some of the most progressive attitudes towards children in the world. So I think your argument is with a certain strain of Puritanical Protestantism (common in the Anglosphere), not Catholicism 🙂

As for mass secularisation improving society, I doubt it.


No, a few years ago, under the PP (conservative) government, the AoC was raised to 15 in Spain.
France is not very religious, but ever more puritanical. Customers of prostitutes are penalised (as in Sweden), and for youth, the AoC of 15, which meant before that sex is OK above that age, is also made in reverse the age under which sex with someone older by more than 5 years will be assumed to be rape, without need of a proof of non-consent.


I would put it that it is, again, largely under the pressure exerted by the United States government, and the global surveillance state it heads, rather than any increase of puritanism organically among the French.

Last edited 7 days ago by Perplexed
Zen Thinker

Age of consent isn’t everything. A middle aged man finding even eighteen year olds desirable is considered deeply problematic and inappropriate in our society. There are laws and there are cultural norms, and laws simply follow the mood music of the zeitgeist and the tyranny of the majority. I don’t have an issue with ages of consent, because the girls I am most attracted to are in a band of four to eight years old, which would never be sanctioned by law anyway. There are many ways to give pleasure to a girl and engage in fantasy fulfillment which don’t have to be sexual. The power of the imagination is vast and massively expands the range and possibilities of interpersonal transaction between an adult and a child. Perhaps my ultimate fantasy is one of sexually gratifying a child orally, but I never expect this to be a tangible reality and nor does it ever have to be, because the power of the idea itself is so great, that it takes on a life of its own. Finding any way to give a child simple pleasure, through a smile or act of kindness, is enough of a substitute gratification for me (psychology 101!), because the feelings and desires are so highly charged that the slightest social transaction can be deeply meaningful. Demanding full on sex with children is an absurdity and a failure of imagination; also probably impractical, certainly almost universally held in the highest detestation by non-MAPs, and unlikely to succeed in our lifetimes. But the power of the idea of a subtle child sexuality and an intermingling of all these cross-currents in the societal coexistence of adult and child (massively amplified also by social media), creates a very interesting dynamic. There is nothing that gives me greater personal fulfillment than seeing a child happy. People must be as dull as a clod of earth and lack all sensitivity to think that the only way they can gain true fulfillment is by having full on sex. That is simply not true. Life has infinite depths and exploring these depths in a playful, loving and responsible way is enough for a lifetime of true fulfillment. Age of consent is bunk. What MAPs should be focusing on is giving children the space to explore their own personal sexuality, and the erotic potential of subtle interrelationships between adult and child, which are inevitable because we live in such an interconnected world. It is therefore an abject failure of the imagination which sees the only solution, or the only mark of success, as being the legitimation of full on sex between adults and children. That is a gross underselling of the power of heart and mind and the depth of interrelationship. So much of what we can do and explore, and have the potential to do, is already legal. It is not a failure of legal codes to be sufficiently progressive but a failure of the human imagination to conceive of deeply erotic legal interrelationships between adult and child. It requires skill, it requires subtlety, a light touch (metaphorically speaking) – something that can scarcely be imagined in our solidified age.


There is nothing that gives me greater personal fulfillment than seeing a child happy. People must be as dull as a clod of earth and lack all sensitivity to think that the only way they can gain true fulfillment is by having full on sex.

People are really stupid. A friend or a lover (most often) does not pursue the goal of satisfying himself. These desires are mutual and cross. Any person first of all wants to please/satisfy his friend/partner and that brings mutual satisfaction. People use this all the time, but think that MAP is different. Thinking MAPs are grooming and using minors is like saying that gays are grooming and using each other to satisfy their perverted desires. This is absurd. Among the gays there are sadists and murderers.

Age of consent is bunk. What MAPs should be focusing on is giving children the space to explore their own personal sexuality, and the erotic potential of subtle interrelationships between adult and child, which are inevitable because we live in such an interconnected world.

People need a clear concept. Like the laws on the age of consent in the Netherlands 90s. Unfortunately the MAPs still separate into GL/BL and cannot unite to form a full-fledged community with a common flag and a charter.

Last edited 7 days ago by Leonerd
Zen Thinker

I 100% agree about the mutual satisfaction of pleasing the other person. That is at the heart of any relationship: family bond, friendship or romance.

A non-sexual social transaction with a child is infinitely fulfilling to a MAP – whether eros is the basis of his motivation or simply compassion (yes, MAPs have tremendous compassion for children!)


Now that perplexes me- the infighting and haggling among MAPs. It’s as, if not more, baffling to me than the infighting I hear of in LGBTQ+ circles (though I’ve never experienced it myself. All the queer people I know are generally supportive of each other, and inclusive).

And the only thing I can gather is that it’s a split between, as with so many things, right and left. Those under some patriarchal, anti-feminist, anti-queer, quasi-fascist, alt-right conservatism, and those of a more progressive bent.

It is strange to me at how ununified, or rather, unallied MAPs are with one another. To bring the right/left split more clarity- it, from what I can tell, a split between MAPs who are basically under a traditionalist viewpoint- who basically want society as is, plus them (which is akin to how some queer people seem to just want heteronormativity and the same puritanical bullshit plus them married), and those who aren’t just looking to carve out an exemption to themselves, otherwise preserving the status quo, or retreating to the past. I do find that MAPs of the traditionalist bent off-putting, as they sound just like religious conservatives and the like. Misogynistic, queerphobic, xenophobic, transphobic, paternalistic, etc.

The fight between sexual liberationists vs the sexual traditionalists, which rather ironically (at least I think most people would find it ironic if they knew) gets waged between MAPs. I would say it’s almost a more fundamental split than that between NOMAPs and whatever pro-contact MAPs are called.

Last edited 7 days ago by Perplexed

So far, you haven’t given the slightest indication of even being able to tell the Left apart from those obsessing about identity politcs, defending the “rights” of the select few (e.g. feminists vs girls, LGBTs vs straights), and raving about the failure of the working class to be sufficiently PC and act against their interest.


France is not very religious, but ever more puritanical

Some time ago, France seemed to oppose American puritanism. French films openly showed child sexuality and wasn’t afraid of naked and kiss scenes.

“Tom et Lola” (1990)
veeery strange film with fully naked kids.

“De wereld van Ludovic” (1993)
Popular french love story of boy and girl with kisses and nudity.

Le surdoué (1997)
love story of boy and girl with kisses and a little bit nudity.

Clément (2001)
simple love story of young teen boy and woman with passionate kisses and light nudity.


Dear Tom, I wouldn’t be upset if you deleted my post, if this is important for this blog. Even though these are ordinary films that just show French culture was quite tolerant and not so puritanical. Until recently, fragments of these films could be found on YouTube. Sorry.


No religion is your friend. All of them have their taboos and their patriarchal control of sex. No, good sir, there is not a religion on the planet that is a friend to humanity.


Not every religion is as hostile towards adult/child relationships as the feminist faith, as evidenced by the lower AoCs and far greater tolerance found within Christianity and Islam. This remains true even under the fictional patriarchy, when compared to feminist laws.


The historical low AoCs found in the US (7,10 and 12) and Spain (12) shows a possibly conservative and traditionally religious society need not be hostile to adult/child relationships, whereas Sweden’s high (15) AoC and hunting of pedophile and/or straight men (like Assange) worldwide shows the result of decades of “progress” (including anti-pedophile indoctrination of children and the abolition of free speech).

If a multipolar world can rise, despite the efforts of Western elites to counter it at virtually any cost to their own populations, such “progress” may be contained to an increasingly degenerate and irrelevant West.

Zen Thinker



Sometimes It seems to me Tucker’s systematic interest in MAP is something more personal.

Don’t show Mr. Tucker this old defiant аd. 🙂

Last edited 8 days ago by Leonerd
Zen Thinker

Conservatives are perhaps a bit repressed, and this warps their psyches and gives them strange obsessions. I’m reminded of the old male neighbour in American Dream who hates gays and then tries to kiss Kevin Spacey.


Realizing that the forum capacity here is limited:

What would you all like to see? If you could have 3 specific things change (whether specific to your country or locale or more broadly)- what would those be? 3 policies and/or social norms.

Me, in relation to these sorts of things, I’d want the following changes:

  1. Voting age lowered to 14
  2. Bodily autonomy for children the norm
  3. Comprehensive sex education for children and adolescents.

Voting age to 14 is likely too low honestly, however I’d support a voting age of 16. I am in full agreement with you on the bodily autonomy and the comprehensive sex education. I’d also like to see the ridiculous “age of consent” laws repealed …. there is plenty of law covering rape, and sexual assault. A young person who is in control of their bodily autonomy can certainly file a complaint of rape or sexual assault when it is warranted, rather than the legal system taking that ability and choice away from the young person.


Repealing age of consent law: good, voting age to 14: too low? Feels rather contradictory to me. And not only contradictory but very askew in which is more serious in the “too low” department.

You would make minors legally sexually accessible to adults, but not allow them to have a say in society? That doesn’t make any sense to me. Seems almost self-serving to believe in one but not the other.

Last edited 9 days ago by Perplexed

Even if the thought of (young) proles reproducing sickens you to the core, democracy is not a precondition for sexual reproduction – 7-year-old girls and men of the working class could legally have sex before they could vote!

What right to control the lives of such girls and men do you imagine yourself to have (absolute, as well as relative to the tolerant religions/societies you rail against)?

Stephen James

The voting age could go even lower than 14. In fact, does there really need to be a minimum age? I don’t think you’d find many toddlers queuing up to vote, if there wasn’t one. On the other hand, bodily autonomy probably does need a minimum age, as parents need to be able to make overriding decisions about the physical well-being of their very young children.


14 is just, as the previous comment demonstrates- a number that people wouldn’t be willing to go lower on in granting the right to vote.

I choose 14 based off three things: based on personal observation, and based on classical age categorization, and biology.

In my personal observation, 14/15 is about the time youth stop hanging around with the younger kids, and begin to seek out more adult or older adolescent company- they no longer find playing childhood games fun. I noticed this in my aunts and uncles as a child (they’d be less interested in me as a playmate about that age) and in myself (I found the same with my cousins) and I’ve noticed it with my siblings and other of my cousins as well- as well in neighbor kids and friends and friends of siblings. And it’s all unbidden by any overt social pressure or by any social mandate- it seems to happen naturally. A 13 year old would more likely prefer the company of an 11 year old to a 16 year old, where a 14 year old seems to prefer the company of an 18 year old to a 13 year old.

14 is part of the classical 7 year stage cycle found in so many ancient, particularly Indo-European civilizations and tribes, though it’s also not too different from other civilizations and tribes- where about 7 is considered to be age of reason- where a child is considered old enough to know right from wrong, understand the rules, and be able to receive a proper education (and in most society- a differentiated education- where boys and girls received different educations, where before they’d been grouped together), and about 14 the end of childhood and the beginning of the transition to adulthood, and where 21 is considered the age of full maturity and majority. Not hard and fast, but as a general guideline in classical societies.

And biologically- 14 is about the time they’re really getting into their adolescence, and even late bloomers are on their way. They’re becoming adults, and begin thinking about the world and their place in it more seriously- and I think should have a say in shaping that world, in a way that children aren’t really all that conscious or aware of. And they’re more likely to be thinking independently of their parents, in a way that children aren’t. Again, in my observation, people’s political consciousness has generally begun about that time, if they indeed go onto become politically active or opinionated.

I wouldn’t be opposed to letting children vote as well, just I think that if you go much lower it’s not an expression of the child’s will, but rather just giving parents an extra vote to throw around.

Last edited 9 days ago by Perplexed

I agree that 14 is the optimal voting age. But in combination with optimal age of consent (12) and current criminal responsibility age (11 in USA), it’s a bit unbalanced.


The United States is a hodge podge of bad laws. But the entirety of our society is all wonky, as is everyone on earth. There is not a well-constituted society anywhere on this planet.

Stephen James

Exceptionally bright young children may well want to vote. The only question then is whether there are any dangers in letting them do so. One is the possibility you mentioned at the end of your response: that parents will persuade or cajole their children to vote a certain way, But having a secret ballot considerably mitigates this danger. That children may be influenced by their parents in casting their vote is certainly true. But is that necessarily a problem? Such influence is just a part of life in a democracy.


As I said, I’m not opposed to children being allowed to vote. I’d be willing to drop it to age 7- when they biologically can think concretely and exit the magical thinking stage. I just think it’d be enough of a hurdle getting people to lower the voting age at all- whether to 16, or 14, or anything under 18, really.

I would not be okay with dropping it below 7, on account of said magical thinking- which would be just giving parents an extra vote to throw around, regardless of how brilliant the child.

Last edited 8 days ago by Perplexed

Bodily autonomy is tricky. Because you have a discrepancy between human development, and human society.

I fall back on the 7 year cycle model because it has precedent and a good deal of observable biology behind it.

7 is when the brain has developed to where it can reason concretely, and exits the magical stage of thinking (hence the most common age to stop believing in Santa, with no one in particular telling you is about 7: This is the age that kids stop believing in Santa ( They possess the capacity to question what they’re told and make concrete observations about their world and experience, and have a clearer eye with which to see it, and are able to take in and account for the perspectives of others, where a year ago they can only see their own perspective, and don’t have the ability to realize that others may see something else.

And I think most people would agree that 7 (school age) is when the apron strings need to be loosened- and bodily autonomy respected. They’re past the stage where parents would even want to dress them, they’re potty trained, they’re not in the constant care and tending stage anymore.

So I would probably say 7 is when bodily autonomy needs to be formally granted in at least some measure, and before then, still totally under the say of the parent.

However, developmentally, the time when children actually deal with autonomy (vs. shame and doubt) is actually around 3-4. This is when children are wired to want to exert themselves, and make their own decisions- like what to wear, what to eat, and if people do not let them, they learn instead to become doubtful, hesitant, and ashamed of themselves and what they want. They learn they’re bad, at this age, for wanting to do something contrary to the will of mommy and daddy. Bad and wrong for putting their shoes on the wrong feet, or wanting to wear dresses, or nail polish, or whatever. And so, biologically- bodily autonomy actually kicks in sooner, however, the legal ramifications of that are not something people would be willing to hazard. They’d have a hard time enough hazarding any formal autonomy for 7 year olds, and 14 year olds, let alone 3 year olds.

Last edited 9 days ago by Perplexed
Ed Chambers

Thank you Tom for all your work. Being arguably the most prominent representative of the MAP community, you have tackled the most taboo of all topics with aplomb, dignity and considerable intellect. I hope we’ll see a few blogs from you on a reasonably regular basis. I’ve not been posting much, but have always looked forward to your new publications, and the discussion it generates. Hoping you reach 100 not out.

Last edited 16 days ago by Ed Chambers

I think I would be interested in contributing a few blogs, if I could figure out anything to say. I would probably have to make up a relatively anonymous email account to send it to you, to feel comfortable doing so (you may have noticed I’ve never put a proper email when making my comments).

I must say, my opinion of you as was greatly improved after reading an article in an old magazine I was able to find archived somewhere (I don’t remember if it was from a link in one of your blogs or if I’d found it searching elsewhere in the dusty corners of the internet), where a feminist talked about you and vouched for you, and what you were getting at- this was an article from the late 70s or early 80s. It was an article about childhood and adolescent sexual experiences that spoke very personally to me.

My opinion of you has also grown with engagement here. You do not strike me as some raving lunatic or monster, and while the current climate would never paint you as anything but, direct interaction shows very much the contrary. I’m surprised at how conservative you are in many respects, and find you quite sentimental (in a charming way). There is unfinished business in our society when it comes to MAPs and children and their sexuality. I don’t know where the road leads in the end, but the status quo isn’t working, and is plainly deficient, if not outright wrong.

It’s a shame that more people aren’t ready to have such frank discussions about these things, but it’s nice to know that blogs like yours exist, and that people like you have the courage (yes, I will say courage) to keep speaking despite the demonization you have faced for it, whether rightly or wrongly. I certainly could not handle that myself, or place my own reputation so publicly on the line like you have.

If you have any suggestions for essay topics or research to do and come back with a blog entry on, I would certainly be open to suggestions, and if I get around to it, I will certainly make the effort to submit something I think would be worthwhile.

Last edited 16 days ago by Perplexed

“I must say, my opinion of you as was greatly improved after reading an article in an old magazine I was able to find archived somewhere (I don’t remember if it was from a link in one of your blogs or if I’d found it searching elsewhere in the dusty corners of the internet), where a feminist talked about you and vouched for you, and what you were getting at- this was an article from the late 70s or early 80s. It was an article about childhood and adolescent sexual experiences that spoke very personally to me.”

> Do you have any inkling as to who this feminist author might be? It could be Nettie Pollard, a pro-sex feminist who helped to create bidges between the gay left via the GLF (Gay Liberation Front) and other radical groups (in this case PIE). I can imagine she would have spoken up for the civil liberties of any minority group seeking social acceptance for non-harmful activity, including for Tom et al. to campaign and write books and articles.

“I think I would be interested in contributing a few blogs, if I could figure out anything to say. I would probably have to make up a relatively anonymous email account” […] “I’m surprised at how conservative you are in many respects”

> If you want to be really anonymous, use Tutanota over TOR. As anonymous as you could hope to get if you’re worried about your reputation when discussing sensitive issues.
> You could write about MAPs and feminism? I wonder if this post by Anon Lover would be thought provoking for you? “Why We Never Slipped Down The Slippery Slope: A Girl’s Love Perspective” <;
You might consider contrasting Tom’s position of legalization via legal change in an existing state, to those who take an anarchist position (see for example Comrade Abigor In point of fact, if you’ve read Tom’s 1980 book you might recall he mentions intergen eroticism in communes, so Tom does acknowledge the existence of self-organized communities even if he does not advocate for them at the expense of country-wide legal change. (Rightly, in my view, as groups trying to set up their own communities tend to face massive opposition from police and other state operatives; the biggest problem of actually existing anarchism outlined even by advocates like Peter Gelderloos in his “Anarchy Works” book).
I found this example of Irish direct action very inspiring, and then shocked by the insanely overkill government reaction to it (see from 15:19 for gov response)

Here’s some other ideas:

  • Review / tell us about minor-attraction and portrayel’s of youth in media. Hikari said they had lots of fun finding all the clips for thei stellar video “The Ethics of Pedophilia” <; and this could be something fun fo you – talk about you fav MAP related media – what’s significant about it to you?
  • You might think about whether silence can ever be a political strategy? (see the work of MAP firendly Dean Durber). A friend of mine recently got heavy into queer theory and sported the idea that MAPs should never have accepted a label or sexual identity – essentially that this labelling – “paedophile” – provided a means to categorize a subset of people as distinct and thereby scapegoat them and oppress them. I have mixed thoughts about that, but I see de-stabilizing the view of MAPs as necessarily exclusive, and emphasizing attraction as fluid and dynamic rather than fixed, as essential for MAPs to be de-stigmatized. I’m so glad and we have research into MAPs who have sex with adults. We need so much more of this, as well as more accounts of love and romantic attraction. Keeping discussion focused on “sex” is misleading.
  • You seem radical. Why not write a response to this article which cites Theo Sandfort but doesn’t explicitly argue the ethics / emancipation of intergen eroticism? How, if at all, do your views differ with those expressed by the author? The Pedophile as a Human Being: An Autoethnography for the Recognition of a Marginalized Sexual Orientation
  • For anyone who can read Dutch, we could do with a deep dive into why the Netherlands effective age of consent at 12 was changed?
  • The relevance of technology and climate change to the future of cross-generational relations. Can a space be made fo non reproductive sexuality be carved out and mobilized if the need for population control becomes prescient?
  • Technology education. Content creation. Videos. Blogs. Movies. Archives. Staying safe online. Reference managers for the scholars (Libre office and zotero). Starting a charity (e.g. B4U-ACT, founded with the real names of 2 people, now run by people using psuedonyms). What do MAPs and Allies need to be competent activists in today’s world?
  • Is consent complicated? Discuss Max Karson’s argument
Stephen James

Hi Prue,

The links for the ‘slippery slope’ video and the video about Hikari appear to be broken.

I watched the one about Irish housing activism and found it very interesting. I wish, however, that groups like this wouldn’t couch their views in the language of ‘revolution’. It’s bad PR, as it gives the false impression that it’s all about violent change. I hope, for the same reason, that no-one is going to start calling for a ‘paedophile revolution’!



> The links for the ‘slippery slope’ video and the video about Hikari appear to be broken.
Remove the “&gt” at the end of the link

Stephen James

Yes, that works, thank you.


I’ve given some suggestions but as Tom says below:

“So there is a big opportunity but there is no rush. I don’t want anyone to be writing just to fill a gap. I want blogs coming in from people who are bursting to say things that have not been said here before, or who are keen to bring new perspectives to core topics. I want everyone to bring their “A game”.”


It would be a while before I’d be able to throw together an adequately academic essay, that wasn’t just me going on a rant and purely editorial.

I can give some preliminary commentary on some of the suggestions, which could certainly be expanded for a full article:

Can silence be a winning strategy? Unless you expect the impending collapse of civilization- no. It cannot be. It’s going to take people speaking up and humanizing themselves- just as the LGBTQ+ movement did- that MAPs are family members, friends, neighbors, and even kids. To demand humane treatment if nothing further than that. The use of labels is only temporary. With the trend and trajectory society is on heteronormativity and the need for labels at all is going to disappear before the end of the century, save perhaps in regards to gender (that’s gonna be up in the air for at least a couple more decades I think, whether or not the baseline binary will hold or not). But the use of labels, while temporary in the long arc, will be necessary- being able to name and identify what you’re talking about is important to have conversations, especially when trying to change society.

I will no doubt write about feminism, queer theory, the LGBTQ+ movement, trans-youth, and economic leftism (for lack of a better term)- as they all interlink heavily with this arena- and are points of correspondence, rather than the opposition it can feel like, a felt opposition that has made many an alt-right MAP. But an alliance with the right in any form or fashion will be a dead end for MAPs in gaining human treatment, let alone bearing out any wishes for intergen relationships to be “acceptable”. The medievally based conservative of now over 200 years ago doesn’t exist, and wouldn’t be an ally in today’s context either on account of Christianity’s innate hostility toward the sexual human, regardless of orientation. Living in centuries and millennia past is not a pathway forward. Pleading medieval ages of consent, child marriages, and ancient civilizations’ pederasty (Greece, Rome, Gaul, Persia, etc.) is not going to go anywhere. It’s too far distant, and unrelated to the present context in which we live. Ancients would find our context as unintelligible as people now would find medieval and ancient contexts and thinking.

I will absolutely write about youth liberation. There is no question in my mind that youth and children are oppressed and treated like property, regardless of what one thinks about MAPs.

And consent is a woefully inadequate social and legal framework to engage with alone and simply leave it there, and many in queer and feminist circles people are coming to realize this. Consent is not enough, consent is too convoluted I would say, and consent is too relegated to the realm of adults- and is applied to children hazardously. It’s too binary of a concept. It has to be engaged with, but the conversation has to broaden beyond it. And it touches not just sex, but all aspects of life- school, medicine, work, money, recreation, and more. Consent is not the be all end all it’s been made out to be, there is a wider range of experiences and nuance than current ideas about consent, and the legal heritage of consent, can account for. Which also lays bare the inadequacy of relying on law, legislation, and codified rules to govern us more generally.

Last edited 15 days ago by Perplexed

And I do not know whose article it was, or who it was that was talking. I’d have to scrounge around the internet to find it again.

Zen Thinker

Tom, I’m sad to hear that you’re winding down your activity on this blog, but it’s completely understandable. You’re a credit to the MAP community: kind, intelligent and undoubtedly more ethical than your detractors. If you ever want me to write another guest blog, I would be delighted to do so.


“So there is a big opportunity but there is no rush. I don’t want anyone to be writing just to fill a gap. I want blogs coming in from people who are bursting to say things that have not been said here before, or who are keen to bring new perspectives to core topics. I want everyone to bring their “A game”.

> Beautiful sentiment.


Hi Tom, congratulations on your 10 year anniversary. Although I have only known you in person since 2016 it was you who was there at a difficult time in my life which I think deserves a pint of real ale when next we meet.
On another note, did you see the dailymail regarding a sex accuser changing her story ? link below
see you in a couple weeks


Happy Anniversary Tom!

Glad to see that you’re still kicking!

Steve Diamond

“…how this marvellous resource of MAP-related information got its name.”

The original owner of Newgon was, like me, a blogspot blogger. Their blog was named “Game On”. When the 2006 MAP blog purge happened, he [Jim] invited a number of us banished to unite and join him. His new website/blog was ‘New Game On”. It quickly got shortened to Newgon [New-G-On], presumably for brevity.

Thank you for all you have done, Tom. You are truly loved, by those who know and genuinely understand you.


That is essentially accurate, but the concept was very much Daniel’s (the initial blogger, now largely inactive) and Jillium (a north-American activist who is currently absent), who footed most of the administrative burden back then. I (Jim) was not publicly named and offered some hosting and financial support (occasionally content) once we found someone who would keep it online. I advised on the Wikipedia campaign, which was the major outgoing initiative of activists affiliated with the Newgon private forum (now archived for viewing by trusted individuals).

When admins left for varying reasons, I kept the site online for a few years and arranged for private archiving after the host terminated us.

At that point, a prominent BL (who rarely conducts public-facing work) stepped in and hosted a public archive in 2014 at

In 2021, I verified myself to this BL and took over some of the content/organizational side, also buying and another domain to expand with new ventures. We spoke at some point then, as I believe you were also helping in some way you may or may not wish to discuss here.


And if things can’t get any more confusing, just this year, the Web Archive delisted

Last edited 18 days ago by Strat

Dear Tom. I join in the congratulations. This blog is a great place ever.

It’s so sad that such brave and cheeky people as William Percy leaves us. But I’m sure there will be new figures who will continue enlightenment activity despite political obstacles.


Happy anniversary, Tom! These were interesting years, for sure.

Unfortunately, I was largely inactive lately, here as well as elsewhere on the Web. Maybe that’s because I feel too emotionally exhausted and intellectually withered due to all the repression that I, along with the rest of the world, had to endure since the bleak spring of 2020, with the further increase of ugliness since the gloomy winter of 2022, when the rulers of my country dragged it into a bloody debacle that no one knows how to escape now… Maybe it is also due to my work and private life – nowadays, I sadly have notably less time and energy for writing than I had just some years ago.

Well, the comment section is active still, one way or another, with or without me. Maybe it was even somewhat… quieter in my absence. Understandable: being informed about, and interested in, the widest (and wildest) possible range of controversies scientific, philosophical, social and political, and unwilling to keep my mouth shut in order neither to upset nor to enrage anyone, I have a tendency to cause emotional overdoses in some readers of my comments, no matter what online platform I choose for my writings… Even if I never intend to offend anyone at all, just sharing controversial knowledge and my positions regarding it, with the ones are willing to study them. Here as well as everywhere else, I unintentionally enraged and upsetted quite a few people – the author of the blog included – with my fully well-intentioned knowledge-and-worldview-sharing attempts.

But, Tom, you were, overall, a comparatively more controversy-welcoming host than many others – my gratitude to you for that. Even if sometimes even you dissatisfied me a bit with some slight shades of censoriousness left even in your, remarkably open, wide and deep mind (concerning, say, one controversial recent illness and even more controversial measures supposedly initiated to fight it)… but, well, no one is perfect, including myself. Such openness to challenge and debate, furthermore combined with a width of intellectual outreach and a depth of comprehension, is hardly seen in our Era of Righteous Outrage!

Maybe this is because your most formative years, as well as mine, were the rare periods of freedom among the predominantly repressive history of the human society: the rebellious West of 1960s – 1970s in your case, the anarchic Russia of 1990s in mine… But, even many people who also lived their youth in such liberated times, turned their back on freedom as soon as it went out of fashion – but we two didn’t, did we? Such are our Wills and our Spirits, I suppose.

So, once again, Tom – thanks for all that was, and looking forward to all that will be.

And let what will be, to be as we will it to be!


Congratulations on this anniversary! In many fields, from scientific research to political activism, an important responsibility of leaders is to prepare the new generation that will replace the older one when it dies or fades away.

Stephen James

I have been invited to make a substantial contribution to a book in the field of ethics

I’m intrigued. Can you tell us more?


>so no more comment threads getting ever narrower with each new comment! Remember that?
LOL! Yes I remember that!!

>One specific offsite project I have in mind is bring out a paperback book next year featuring maybe 20-30 of what I feel are the best blogs of the last ten years
Definitely would be interested in buying a book like that.

Congratulations on your invitation!

Rest in power William A. Percy. I did not know him personally but I enjoyed reading his website and have a personal offline copy of it.

I hope that Norbert will stay as safe as he possibly can in prison.

And Newgon is a pretty cool baby name.


Thanks, Tom, for mentioning NewgonWiki. I will tend to give editorial membership out based on references, or just watching somebody I know in chat. That can be from this blog, or anywhere – I just need to be confident about that person, and of course there are non-admin accounts available to start with.

The future likelihood of this blog eventually moving to a team format, was something I was imagining the other day, as many people have approached me asking for a WordPress installation, but none have been willing to maintain and moderate it. Hopefully, you can put together an editorial team who also have moderator control over the comments, and the higher frequency of posting will keep those conversations flowing. Running blogs off a team is actually something MAPs did occasionally towards the end of the 00s, including the predecessor to The originator of, I believe, had two personal blogs named and operated on a game on/game off basis, i.e. constructive arguments vs answers to trolls and antis. Thus, when Google destroyed his archives, he was looking for a short domain name, and was available, which then evolved to when it entered a phase of archiving.

By the way – the offer is always open from me to help moderate the comments (unfortunately, not in line with any regular schedule). Should your ability to keep this site running in any way be impeded, I will be happy to host it and keep it running with the same team, editorial controls, for as long as there are people behind it. Or otherwise maintain the archive and new comments if it cannot sustain itself.


Congradulations, Tom. As a last hope for MAPs, you should not fade away. Be healthy and productive, thank you for your activity, wish you good luck with your book and the other your projects.

Would love your thoughts, please comment.x
Scroll to Top