Paradise turns to hell for Dutch duo

Hard to believe I am writing this, but two of my friends have been tortured. In the UK when we talk about getting “hammered” it is just colourful way of saying “drunk”.  But for Dutch nationals Marthijn Uittenbogaard and his partner Lesley it is no mere figure of speech. They are reliably reported to have been “tortured” (non-specific) and battered with hammers (all too horrifically specific) in an attack by thugs in a prison in Ecuador.

Those who have been around Heretic TOC for a while will be aware that Marthijn and Lesley have featured here a few times before. Anyone who needs a reminder of the backstory can get up to speed through a sequence of earlier blog pieces, which can be found here, here, and here.

Alternatively, you could go to Newgon, where there is an in-depth 9,000-word article by Dutch writer Anton Dautzenberg. He starts at the beginning of a long story, in which the Netherlands, once the world’s best hope for a more civilised approach towards MAP sexuality, began to take a more repressive turn. Consistently in the running for literary prizes over many years, Dautzenberg has been widely published in the Dutch national press. As might he expected, the Newgon piece is excellent, not least thanks to his sympathetic friendship with Marthijn (with an “h”) and Lesley. He even daringly joined the pro-MAP Martijn Association (without an “h”), shortly before it was banned, to protest against the “witch hunt against paedophiles”.

Rather than just linking to his lengthy essay, though, or referring you to my own back catalogue linked above, I will cut to the chase by coming straight to the nightmare situation in which these guys now find themselves in Ecuador.  What follows will be largely extracts from the later parts of Dautzenberg’s account, interspersed with a little bit of “connective tissue” from me. My bits will be set in italics and, where appropriate, square brackets.

All I would add to this shocking account is to note the key themes I see as emerging. It is not just about the brutality meted out to the two Dutchmen, and the ghastly uncertainty of their present situation. The fate of the families they befriended also reveals much about the hypocrisy of a system that pretends to be concerned with the protection of children, but actually terrorises them.

Let’s begin at the point where the leading members of Martijn Association, prosecuted in the Netherlands for allegedly attempting to revive the banned group, decided the time had come to look for a new life in a new country. As they were to discover very quickly, this would be a leap “out of the frying pan and into the fire”. Dautzenberg takes up the story:


Because Marthijn and Lesley no longer have a (safe) future in the Netherlands, they decided to emigrate to a country where life is cheap. They eventually choose Ecuador because they could buy an old hotel there. The plan was to open a vegan restaurant on the ground floor, to make apartments in the rest of the building, and to rent them out.

They called in local construction workers for the renovation. Some (paid) villagers have also come to help. Meanwhile, their children played with Marthijn’s PlayStation, a luxury they cannot afford. Nelson [i.e. Nelson Maatman, one of those who had been prosecuted] visited and rented a room, but Lesley turned him away; his alcohol and drug use and fatalistic attitude could put them in danger. Nelson left for Mexico [I would just caution that we have not heard Nelson’s side of the story. Nelson was acquitted as he had never been a member of Martijn Association].

Marthijn Uittenbogaard and Anton Dautzenberg (right) ten years ago at a cultural event in Tilburg, Netherlands. Dautzenberg heads the Tilburg Writers’ Guild. Photo: Gemma van der Heyden

Norbert [i.e. Norbert de Jonge, another who had been prosecuted], a friend of Marthijn for more than twenty-five years, comes along a few months later, as does a (straight) friend. They soon leave. They think it is unwise that village and construction worker children freely walk in and out of the house. In addition, ominous reports are beginning to appear in the local media.

The hotel, its new owners and their visitors have been on the radar of paedo hunter Tim Ballard of Operation Underground Railroad (OUR )and the Dutch organisation Free a Girl. The latter decided to track down the men after their emigration and called OUR in.

Tim Ballard is a conservative Mormon, a fanatical Trump and QAnon supporter, who, with his organisation, hunts alleged paedophiles (supposed “networks”) and pro-abortion activists worldwide. He also fulminates against the LGBTIQ + community; according to him, only straight relationships are godly. His organisation raises many millions annually, without it being clear exactly where the money goes.

[Dutch national newspaper] Algemeen Dagblad wrote about Marthijn’s arrest on June 24, 2022: “The convicted and since-then fugitive paedosexual Marthijn U. from Hengelo was arrested in Ecuador on Thursday evening. The fugitive pedophile Lesley L. was also arrested.”

[Dautzenberg says that neither Marthijn nor Lesley were fugitives. It seems to me this could be a matter of interpretation. They had left their home country by the time of the trial and were definitely fugitives from the hostile conditions there. But this does not mean they were “on the run” and trying to evade a police manhunt, as the word fugitive may be taken to imply. They were simply trying to make a new life in a new country. As AD says, Lesley was working at the hotel at the time of the arrest. Neither he nor Marthijn were in hiding. I have not heard it suggested that either of them had left the Netherlands illegally. Prison sentences in the Netherlands do not necessarily begin immediately the court has passed sentence, so we should not assume they were “on the run” simply because they were absent from the trial and sentencing. Marthijn, as will be seen below, was preparing to appeal.]

The story in Algemeen Dagblad continues: “Lesley L. was sentenced [in his absence] in Rotterdam on April 26, 2022 to 10 weeks in prison for producing child pornography. L. was now under arrest in the seaside resort of Canoa, for suspected abuse of three young children in his home. The organisation Free a Girl had passed on incriminating information about the three men to its American partner Operation Underground Railroad and the authorities of Mexico and Ecuador.”


A few minutes before Marthijn was arrested, I contacted him through a mobile phone app. He was on his way to the Netherlands to reconsider his situation there and to prepare for the appeal. His last message: “We haven’t done anything, but there are lies everywhere on the internet. Norbert also had problems, I think I will, too, at customs here. Fascism. I’m listening to the song Wonderful World at the airport. It’s not the Louis Armstrong version, but a cover.”

A few days after the arrest, the first ominous messages began to reach me. Marthijn and Lesley had been tortured and beaten with hammers in prison by the mafia. The videos of this were sent to acquaintances, along with ransom demands. If no payment was made, the men would be killed. That money for the ransom was put together by some friends, and then transferred to the mafia through online pay sites.

I got some photos of the cell and of the courtyard. And of the men, too. The photos didn’t make me happy. Marthijn in particular looked terrible: he was skinny and sad. Lesley, despite his bruises, seemed to be doing better. He wrote me that he wants to donate the hotel and restaurant to a vegan movement and then, with the proceeds, his friends and the poor people from the village can be helped.


More is now becoming clear about the arrests. Several reports had appeared in the local media, each time with the name “Tim Ballard” appearing in them. The hotel had (according to him) housed an international network of pedophiles, of which Marthijn and Lesley were the leaders. Hundreds of children were (supposedly) drugged, abused and sold for sexual purposes. “Sex parties” with children were (supposedly) regularly held in the hotel’s swimming pool, something Free a Girl claimed as well. For now, it is enough to note that Marthijn and Lesley’s hotel does not have a swimming pool at all!

Paradise lost: The beach resort of Canoa, Ecuador, where Marthijn and Lesley ran their hotel. The dream for a new life in a tropical paradise turned all too soon into a nightmare.

Ballard ramped up coverage [after the arrests]. He claimed in films that he had tracked down and liberated more than four hundred victims in the home of Marthijn and Lesley. He emphasized the conviction of Lesley (production of child pornography) and the case against Marthijn (continuation of a prohibited association). The snowball … keeps growing…

Due to the coverage in the Ecuadorian media*, the two men were transferred for security reasons to a secluded part of the prison, and they have a room they have to share with seven drug addicts. A lawyer is now in the picture, who keeps in touch with a family member of Marthijn.

[*Heretic TOC, using Advanced Google Search targeted on six national newspapers listed in the BBC’s Ecuador media guide, could find coverage in only one of them,  El Comercio. Significantly, an opinion piece in this paper said the case raised “a political issue, since it questions us as a society, over the fact that the parents of the minors say in the case records that the Dutch are ‘good men’, who were doing nothing wrong by offering sweets, video games and money to children”. The writer implicitly criticises these parents, without evidence, for allowing themselves to be caught up in “normalising perversion”.]

After a while, Marthijn and Lesley managed to arrange a lawyer. She asked for thirty thousand euros to bribe the judge and the police. A day later this amount was increased to one hundred and sixty thousand euros. Maybe she too was threatened. The fact that communication took place via Google Translate did not make it any easier: the lawyer barely speaks English.

Together with the family member with whom the men were and are in contact, I decided not to take up the family member’s offer, perhaps it was a trap. Fortunately, the family member got in touch with Lesley via the prison telephone, and he and Marthijn also wanted no illegal “hanky-panky”, but they wanted a fair trial. The lawyer gave in, but she had to have money to do research and prepare the case.

Martijn and Lesley were now back in contact with their fellow villagers. They heard from them that Tim Ballard was paying the media to write the menacing reports. Reports also reached Martijn and Lesley that Ballard had paid witnesses to give false statements; if they refused – these friends had pointed out that Lesley and Marthijn were innocent – he threatened them with trial and imprisonment. They also heard that Americans in contact with Ballard were offering money to have them killed.

According to the lawyer, the first session, without Marthijn and Lesley, was halted by the judge; he wanted more money for him and his secretary. He also threatened to transfer the men to another prison if payment was not made.


The tone of reporting in the Ecuadorian media has become even grimmer. The newspapers and web sites claim that Ballard has exposed the largest international paedo ring ever known. Not much later, Lesley and Marthijn were suddenly transferred to the most notorious prison in the country, the Guayaquil Prison. According to the lawyer, there were plans to hang Marthijn and Lesley in their cell and call it suicide. That explains the move.


An “influential” fellow prisoner informed Lesley that he had brought them to Guayaquil because he wanted to use them for a prisoner exchange with the Netherlands. Whether that is true, we do not know, but Marthijn and Lesley were “safe” again.


Other messages [from Lesley and Marthijn], on the other hand, were pretty grim. “Two days ago 14 dead. Prisoners have machine guns, pistols, knives, etc. We hear the fighting, shots and loud explosions, but they are at a another location, not far away.”

And this one, about a fellow villager: “Then comes a statement from G. who says ‘the police keep harassing me, I want this to stop. The police insist that I make false statements about Lesley. They offered me money to do so, and also things like a TV and a refrigerator. I saw that they also tried to bribe my sister, too.’”


Meanwhile, Tim Ballard received a national award from the wife of the president of Mexico for dismantling “the network” of Marthijn, Lesley and Nelson. It’s unclear what happened to Nelson. However, it is suspected that Ballard set a trap for him and was present at Nelson’s arrest.

In any case, when Lesley was arrested, Ballard was conspicuously present, dressed in a police uniform and equipped with a machine gun. His team filmed the spectacular arrest; the footage will be featured in a documentary that Ballard plans to put online in March 2023, The Hidden War*. He claims online that he intends to visit the Netherlands, among other places, to promote it.

[*A trailer has been around for a while, and was featured at a recent promotional event in Utah. No sign yet of the actual launch, though.”]

The men have not yet seen a judge*; without their being involved in the process, their detention has been extended several times.

[*It looks as though this finally happened on 16 March, in a court process that looks set to continue until the end of the month.]

They still don’t know exactly what crime they are suspected of having committed. Marthijn emailed Amnesty International about their case, and also about the lawsuit that is still pending in the Netherlands. The Amnesty spokesperson replied: “We do not focus on individual cases, but on situations where criticism (from the media, political parties, activist groups, lawyers and investigative committees, etc. etc.) of the authorities are deliberately and systematically blocked (as in China for example).”

Soldiers guard the Guayas 1 prison in Guayaquil, Ecuador, during a riot. Prison violence has reportedly soared in the country since late 2020, with at least 400 people killed while in detention, many beheaded or burned. The violence has been compounded by corruption among prison guards that facilitates inmates’ access to guns and explosives. Photo: Gerado Menoscal/AFP.

De Telegraaf  [a Dutch newspaper] interviewed Tim Ballard at the time. In response to the text submitted to him via [Dutch lawyer] Sidney Smeets, Lesley wrote, as I mentioned, that he is in close contact with friendly villagers: “I heard that the children were detained by the police for 24 hours when I was arrested. And that they were repeatedly threatened with being beaten with batons. When they were hungry, they were not given food. Police were eating in front of the children, and laughing at them. Their parents sat outside crying. And it is understood that the police here are known to be violent. Tim Ballard was always there. And he threatened the parents several times. The problem is that if you report these things publicly, it is very risky. Tim Ballard can operate with impunity in these countries. With the money he has, he can wrap the police and the OM [the Dutch prosecution service, “Openbaar Ministerie”] around his finger. And people don’t dare stand up for themselves.’

De Telegraaf decided not to publish the interview with Ballard.



February 7th:

Lesley emailed me that OUR is back in Canoa and is offering parents big bucks to falsely testify. “Because the police have nothing, they try to bribe the parents. They are offering large amounts of money. One of the parents told me: ‘If I had said yes, I would never have to work again for the rest of my life.’”

“OUR has promised family F., among other things, to buy them a house if they testify against me. C., who has been bribed, is said to have received, among other things, a piece of land in Jama. G. was promised large sums of money and a house yesterday. Tomorrow they will declare under oath.”

February 16:

The men have found a new (reliable) lawyer. According to Lesley, the file has recently changed (afterwards). Tim Ballard and OUR have disappeared from the text as the reason for the arrest. Now that it is becoming increasingly clear that the arrest was based on lies, nonsense stories and prejudices of Ballard trying to keep his name out of the file.

February 20:

Marth & Lesley have told me that their lawyer has prevented parents from giving incriminating statements about OUR and the police.

“All lawyers here are liars who always claim something else.”

According to them, a false statement has been included from a woman who has received goods, a house and a piece of land from the police in exchange for fabrications about Lesley. There would be several witnesses that confirm this.

March 2:

A message from Lesley:

I’m going to talk about corruption in court. By name and by everyone. I want to inform you that I and Marthijn are not going to commit suicide. Regardless of what comes out. If we are found dead, I want to be very clear here that it was not suicide. Regardless of what it would look like according to the authorities… Police who gets money from someone to preach lies. A judge who asks me personal money to release me… Police who promised parents money, goods and houses in exchange for false statements… My strength lies in that foreign media is following it*. And I am sending it my file right now. So we wait.

[*On 11 February there was an article in the Dutch newspaper Het Parool by a previously sympathetic writer, Arnon Grunberg, who is said to have drawn attention to the bad practices of Tim Ballard and OUR. Online, it is behind a paywall.]

Marthijn’s new lawyer was refused entry to the prison despite obtaining written permission. She wants to prepare the case with her client. According to her, the defence is very bad so far, probably deliberately so. The necessary opportunities for entering and requesting evidence are wasted. The OM and the Ministry of Foreign Affairs have still not answered the letter from Sidney Smeets (March 1). The session will take place definitively on March 14 and 15.

March 14:

Lesley and Marthijn now have the same lawyer. She has now been partly paid, but she demands more money to “pay” the police and the judge. Lesley and Marthijn refuse; they do not want to participate in corruption.

March 16:

The process was extended by a day. The men get the impression that the lawyers are taking their own course, without consultation. The interpreter that is present during the process hardly speaks English, let alone Dutch. Lesley says that the parents who have to testify today are threatened by the police. They do not feel safe and do not want to testify without the presence of a reliable lawyer. Lesley asks for this today at the judge.

March 17:

The Dutch OM has finally responded to the letter from Sidney Smeets. However, they do not give a clear answer and beat around the bush. Moreover, the Public Prosecutor sends his answer (consciously) exactly one day after the hearing in Ecuador would have been officially completed. That hearing has been postponed to March 22. Lesley did not want to participate in corruption and fired the lawyer. The court now appoints its own lawyer. In addition, a Dutch translator will be arranged.

March 22:

Lesley said that documents have emerged on which the previous lawyer forged the signatures of Marthijn and Lesley. He sent a clear example. These were documents that gave her “permission” to act on their behalf.

March 24:

The process will continue on March 31.



Heretic TOC has agreed to publicise a notice to recruit participants in a research survey. The request to do so came from Allen Bishop, Science Director OF B4U-ACT. The team consists of three researchers at Nottingham Trent University, in the UK, and Allen himself.

I am happy to endorse this project to the extent that it will be looking into the wellbeing of MAPs in addition to its other stated objectives. I also have great confidence in B4U-ACT as an organisation with a sincere interest in enhancing MAP welfare and in how professionals can best engage with it.

Here, then, is the recruitment notice as worded by the research team, along with a link to the online survey:


Title: Understanding MAP Attitudes and Beliefs about Attractions to Children

This survey explores the beliefs held by MAPs about their attractions. Participants will be asked to complete a survey that will last for 15-20 minutes, and respond to a range of different questions about their identity, and beliefs about attractions to children. There are also questions about wellbeing, social relationships, and sexual behaviors. The research team is made up of Dr. Rebecca Lievesley (NTU), Dr. Craig Harper (NTU), Allen Bishop (B4U-ACT), and Alisha Awan (postgraduate researcher; NTU).

The survey is completely anonymous. It does not ask for any identifiable information, it does not collect IP addresses and it can be accessed using a Tor browser. The link to the survey is below – the first page provides full information about the study and you can then choose whether or not to take part. If you have any questions please email the study lead on Please feel free to share or post elsewhere to increase the reach of this research.

3.7 3 votes
Article Rating
Notify of

Oldest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Fata Morgana

It’s that time of year. The ‘love is love’ message is even being paraded in television adverts. Would be nice if society took that message to its logical conclusion.


From boychat: An 11-year-old Maine boy stood up in front of the local school board and read from a “pornographic” book he found at his middle school’s library.
The book, called “Nick and Charlie,” opens with two young teen boys stealing alcohol from their parents and experimenting sexually with each other.’

Short twitter vid contained in article


Right or wrong, good or bad, problematic or unproblematic, true or false, conservatives are playing the role of the boy who cried wolf. Eventually the epithets lose their sting from overuse, and people start asking questions they’re told they can’t ask. Especially those whose experience doesn’t line up with conventional paradigms.


Pre-Woke, P.C., or Victorian AOC what happened to centuries of critical, lateral thinking ‘outside the box’, to bring ignoramii, and all antis in from the stone age?

1: Centuries of elite-Brit high-fees brutal boardings schools for young boys, produce not life-scarred victims needing lifelong help and BIG Ca$h Compo, but sneering trauma free, high achievers. Then paying high fees for their own young boys sent to elite-Brit brutal boarding schools, to sustain their cycle of the amused-not-abused. (Stone Age antis please explain?)

2: 20th Century ongoing mass media adult stars chased, grabbed, groped, groomed, layed by swarms of (often underage) young fans. Many now grinning grannies proudly recall being sexually highly amused not foully abused. (Stone Age antis please explain?)


Yes and all the 16-17 year olds who were photographed in the 80s/90s for national newspapers now have major drug problems or have committed suicide… Oh, wait they all seem to be perfectly fine, how very strange…


That made me LOL. Some good MAP humour I could see that kind of point being incorporated into a comedy special. The future edgy comedians: the future Dave Chappelle “How old is 15?”‘s of this world…

Brian Dixon

<i>”Centuries of elite-Brit high-fees brutal boardings schools for young boys, produce not life-scarred victims needing lifelong help and BIG Ca$h Compo, but sneering trauma free, high achievers. Then paying high fees for their own young boys sent to elite-Brit brutal boarding schools, to sustain their cycle of the amused-not-abused.”</i>

HappyHumpingPup, I hope you are being ironic, not sincere, in claiming that the graduates of admittedly brutal boarding schools are “trauma free”. The unironic interpretation of that statement sounds preposterous, as if I had heard someone say, “Sure, there are lots of knife fights on this street, but nobody ever bleeds.”

Poe’s law suggests that a good many online misunderstandings can be avoided by verifying the sincerity or irony of the statements of others, and so I inquire about yours.

Kawaii Ganesha by Arihoma - Large.jpg
Last edited 9 months ago by Brian Dixon
Ed Chambers

Can anyone offer an update on the progress of Will it ever return or is it no longer on the list of rebootable projects?


I wish to know too… But these silly people who keep trying to censor us dont realsie we will always find somewhere else…Alas, thats why im here! Twitter disposed of me too. And my views arent even extreme..

Dave Thompson


I tried to contact you through twitter a few months ago, but it was like you could not see me, or you didn’t want to. Can you confirm you were giving me the cold shoulder so I can process your rejection? (I’ve just been kicked off twitter simply for defending myself. It’s worse with Elon Musk).
Dave Thompson


Someone who is/has fast become one of my academic heroes, Richard Green (Newgon page I made on him here), produced a dedicated chapter on ‘intergenerational sexuality’ in his 1992 book sexual science and the law. I’d seen a VERY based quoted cited by Rind et al. and quoted in the Newgon page, and I’ve now discovered that the chapter can be read on google books! How cool! Check it out here:


Yeah, but who are your contemporary scholars? You can’t sustain a movement on the past, it must have relevance in the present. The past is dead. The scholarship of the past is dead. It is about the scholarship of the present. Studies done decades ago, in a prior century, have no relevance to the conversation today. Not a criticism, just an observation and word of advice. Society will not change on account of outdated studies and research, which even if valid in its time, is still irrelevant to trends, circumstances, and experiences of the present, which take place in a different landscape and context.

Like, Harmful to Minors is probably the only thing you could bring up that could have any weight in discussions today, and even it is outdated and old now.

Last edited 11 months ago by Perplexed

What I’m saying is it would be good to start honing in on a 21st century, 2020s/2030s relevant case, because society is rapidly throwing itself in trajectory towards this conversation, knowingly or not. Conservatives are forcing the issue through their groomer panic, and liberals and leftists are forcing the issue through their whitewashing (rainbowashing?) denialism of their history, origins, and ignorance of where queer theory and feminist theory eventually lead to (despite the very conservative, conventional politics of LGBTQ+ and womens issues).

The existence of queer (and even more speciifically trans and nonbinary kids) begs the question. The existence of new technology and the access kids have to it, with the attendant phenomena of sexting, catfishing, webcamming, porn access, and digital nativism, begs the question. The declining viability and relevancy of marriage begs the question. The increase of loneliness and mental health decline begs the question. Discourse about gender identity, and ideas of masculinity and femininity begs the question. The truth is that all of our culture wars share a subtle, but very uncomfortable undercurrent, a common root- child sexuality, child autonomy, and pedophilia.

Even the incease of child pornography, sexual crimes, consent, etc. all leads there. It cannot help but go there. People are trying very hard to not go there, avoid it at all costs, but all attempts to try and resolve social and cultural problems will fail, until the underly, existentially anxiety-inducing issue is addressed, and reevaluated.

For all you mystically minded people- we have to revisit the Garden of Eden. Revisit Neverland. Revisit childhood, growing up, and the fall from grace and condemnation that is growing up. The child being cast as innocent, the adult as sinful, shameful, and dangerous. It is the origin of the danger that men pose to women. That men pose to children. All born of real experience, but also of existential dread. And for those who believe in low-key magic, whether of a dark, conspiratorial kind, or an archetypal, enlightened kind, our stories and media are casting the spells moving us in that direction. Our society is aging- and both changing social norms and economic pressure have forced a reexamination of what childhood, adolescence, and adulthood mean. Simultaneous forces which are making kids grow up faster in some ways, and infantilizing adults in others.

We fumble our way on this issue, and it will surface, with a vengeance, sooner rather than later. The subliminal will not last much longer. Just as the Hayes Code days eventually gave way to an overt LGBT movement, so too will our subliminal dancing around childhood and sexuality, eventually give way to overt discussion about it. It’s already happening. And the current groomer panic will lead us there.

Zen Thinker

There’s a groomer panic among conservatives that faintly echoes the “paedophile killer” hysteria of the 90s that led to sex offender registries, but the big difference now is that the “groomers” are legitimate mega corporations and teaching unions.

I agree that this only goes one way and minor sexuality will culturally surface in a big way.

But already (for example) the days of social media parents blocking adult men are mostly gone – men are respectful, and parents don’t mind. That’s progress in and of itself.

Parent-run minor accounts on Instagram have tonnes of adult male followers and admirers. It’s just part of online life.


And you don’t find the idea of parent curated accounts with “tonnes” of adult male followers to be creepy at all? You know, prostitution? You find the idea of sex as play to be vulgar and base, but not that…

Zen Thinker

I think I need to clarify my position.

I don’t find sex as play to be vulgar and base – for one thing we all fantasise about it anyway. But sexual contact with children is illegal, with horrifically severe penalties, so I’m just being pragmatic when I take a sceptical view of real adult-minor sexual interplay.

I said some queer practices are “unseemly and even degenerate”. I meant public displays of BDSM, of a gay man in bondage gear tied to a cross being whipped by another gay man on a LGBT float parade, at a “family friendly event”. Of bondage dressed men on all fours on leashes behaving like dogs, and being petted by young children. Of drag queens shaking their ass in a toddler’s face. Need I go on? All these things are technically legal. While innocent sex play between adults and minors is strictly prohibited with lengthy incarceration. Does this make sense? No. But it is the practical reality.

Adult males admiring parent curated child accounts is entirely innocent in my view, unless they leave an offensive or inappropriate comment, which is actually very rare, thanks to the block and report system. Men leave comments such as “beautiful” or “perfect”, heart emojis, rose emojis, etc. It’s innocent and sweet, not creepy, and certainly not “prostitution”. Lots of men admire beautiful children, it’s just a self-evident fact on social media, and a virtual space gives them the safe and appropriate context to demonstrate a loving gesture.

There may well be a tipping point where we reassess the legality, appropriateness and permissiveness of light sexual interplay, but as a society we’re not there yet, and it is dangerous to pre-empt society on things they still consider to be illegal.


Just to say, I don’t wanna give the impression that academia is everything.

You wrote: “a 21st century, 2020s/2030s relevant case”.

> I’m not sure what you mean by this? Should we all focus on trans kids, trans MAPs, and publicize cases of trans youth saying they had good sexy time w/ older ppl?

Admittedly, that would be pretty fun.

On the Pediverse I have seen a trend towards MAPs who identify as trans, and sometimes agefluid/transage.


I suppose I mean that current studies (to the extent they can be found) should be cited. That making arguments and approaching the issue from the context of the present and near future would be better than rehashing approaches that were put forth in the context of the 1970s.


An interesting piece by an anarchist who’s hostile but clearly read-up on intergen issues

If anyone’s wanting a more educated than typical Anti to get them thinking, this could be interesting…


Skimmed some of this person’s work via a review of Judith Levine’s Harmful to Minors. Their work’s an exercise in narrative if nothing else. They’re so… weird. They’re such… an Anti! They just don’t want it to be true, can’t accept that mutually willing age-disparate sex could be an overall positive thing for the majority. At least, in a very different society.

The character assassination is so disappointing and a bit pathetic coming from someone who’s obviously not a complete idiot. I almost feel sorry for them, their creativity is being wasted. They attack Bruce Rind and others b/c of associations w/ Paidika. Repeatedly. But, despite saying they will, they don’t dare touch Paul Okami. They don’t even mention Allie Kilpatrick! Y’kow why? Because, unlike Bruce Rind, they can’t dismiss their research with petty slander.

It would be so, so much easier for me if the ‘Left’ were correct to have adopted what I take to have once been a largely Right-wing position: being a priori against the demonized group in vogue. I.e. unlawful age-gap sex. But, they’re not right, and their arguments are so, so bad that Stephen Kershnar, an economic libertarian of all things, could destroy them in a debate (see his brain in a vat YouTube vid). Thank god for the Lefty MAPs and allies of the past and present: they give me some hope that the Left isn’t just full of people who think Left=Good / Right=Bad therefore I’m ‘Left’…

In short, putting it nicely, this anarchist writer is more style than substance…

Stephen James

They attack Bruce Rind and others b/c of associations w/ Paidika.”

And even that is of course ad hominem.


Some statistics from b4u-act about the effects of discrimination:

“The results showed striking differences between MAPs and the general population. Approximately 86% of participants in this study indicated that they thought about or attempted suicide at some point during their lives, compared to only 9% for the general population. These rates are similar to ones reported in similar studies of people attracted to children. Over 17% also reported having made an attempt in the past and one-third indicated they had thought about taking their own life five or more times in the past year. In contrast only 3% of people in the general population have made similar plans in their lives. […] The vast majority met criteria for lifetime major depressive disorder (88%) – over four times the number of American adults (21%) – and one-quarter self-reported severe hopelessness. […] In the discussion, the authors emphasize the high prevalence of suicidal ideation in the present sample compared to the general population (64% compared to 5% past-year prevalence).”

Non-adult MAPs as well as MAPs who broke laws were excluded, so the percentages might have been higher had these groups been included. And of course the mental health of many MAPs might be too bad to participate in surveys, thereby excluding them from the results as well.

“[A]lthough the results paint a bleak reality (people attracted to children are more susceptible to suicidality), the authors point to a hopeful solution: the increased development of programs which aim to help people attracted to children live happy, healthy, fulfilling lives.”

ha ha


Interesting book for everyone here:

Inappropriate Relationships: the Unconventional, the Disapproved, and the Forbidden (2002)

A very non stigmatizing book which includes a chapter on Necrophilia of all things, and of course, a chapter on Pedophilia by the very sympathetic Dennis Howitt, called “Social Exclusion – Pedophile Style”. He cites Theo Sandfort et al. so he clearly knows of the ‘other side’ of pedophilic and, more generally, age gap relationships. Cool stuff and something worth saving methinks.


Note to others: this piece is NOT, actually, very sympathetic. I read a bit which seemed kinda Foucault inspired, and suggested to me he’d be more critical of ‘ideology’ underlying his own thinking. In fact, now I’ve listened to it all, he was not very insightful and isn’t nearly critical enough of academic hacks like Gene Abel. So yh, maybe other parts of the book’ll be more interesting, but this chapter has nothin on Robert Bauserman, Terry Leahy, and Paul Okami.

Zen Thinker

“MAP” is becoming more commonplace now, it’s even trending on Twitter as we speak, but what disturbs me is a) how far left the MAP community seems to want to position itself; b) how the MAP community seems happy to tack onto LGBTQIA+ even though many of the behaviours and practices of that broad umbrella are unseemly and even degenerate.

People argue “MAP” should be far left because it is “more extreme” even than child trans mutilation. How is that possible? My experience has been that the adult male “loving respect” for children is deeply seemly, honourable and grounded in reverence and veneration.

Children provoke wonder and admiration, not licentious lusts and sadistic impulses, at least in normal and grounded human beings who have a common decency. To admire a child is as much a conservative impulse as a liberal one: it is universal. I don’t identify with anything far left and I certainly wouldn’t entertain a far left MAP community.

I know this particular space (HTOC) is a broad church but let me appeal to our better natures and say we need to raise the discourse.


“MAP” is becoming more commonplace now, it’s even trending on Twitter as we speak, but what disturbs me is a) how far left the MAP community seems to want to position itself
> MAP has gone mainstream and Newgon are / have helped to make that happen. From what I see in the background, a younger generation of MAPs are fed up of the hatred. Pooling their extraordinary talents, making memes, infographics and, hopefully soon, new media outlets, MAPs are making their mark and vying to become the next fashionable struggle.

For point b: the problem is that many MAPs may themselves be LGBT, even without their MAP-ness they might be trans or at least same-sex attracted. Certainly, they’re queer (non normative), so for me it’s only logical and makes perfect sense that MAPs would disproportionally lean towards interest in LGBTQ spaces and rhetoric. Even if, rightly, many MAPs would and should be pissed off at how the mainstream LGBTers have treated them in the past. For shame! Maybe one day we’ll be hearing about MAPs as part of inclusivity and diversity training, and lobbying to get MAPs reparations payments for all the tyranny they’ve been subjected to, forced to hide in secrecy under a long, dark shadow as Allyn Walker called it. Anyway, whatever political “side” you’re on, if committed people keep at it, the future could be a very MAPpy one! It’s all to play / work for!

Zen Thinker

I’m pleased with Newgon and the efforts of all contributors to make it more mainstream. I also agree that MAP is in many ways non-normative, and even that it may be labelled as a queer sexuality. The dark cloud of illegality is of course the elephant in the room, whereas mainstream LGBT have a legal mandate (even if lingering public controversy).

But MAP is not just about sexuality; it underpins a broad range of cultural attitudes, behaviours and values, and in that sense many aspects of MAP are deeply legal and respectable. Such is the consideration and appreciation (with parental control / oversight) MAPs can subtly present to children in social and virtual spaces. The key requirement of course is to present non-sexually as a matter of decency and keeping within the law – but this is what I mean about the broad range of cultural attitudes in the MAP’s arsenal.

LGBT have treated MAPs disgracefully and I’m not a supporter of Pride, believing it has become an authoritarian imposition upon the public. But MAPs need legitimate recognition and understanding – long before any sexual license is considered.


Concerning point (a): being “far left” has nothing to do with “more extreme even than child trans mutilation” or “licentious lusts and sadistic impulses”. Simply: almost all fascists, conservatives, liberals and social-democrats are anti-MAP; on the other hand some “far left” tendencies (such as the “Spartacists”) are pro-MAP. So MAPs will reject political tendencies hostile to them, and become attracted to those supporting them.

Zen Thinker

Lol I don’t suddenly flip to the far left based on a single issue.

Fata Morgana

What have these social issues got to do with the political left?


The News Aggregator Blog idea is coming on slowly. It looks like I have a host for WordPress, and we are designing a logo, based on the historical magazine, Paedo Alert News. It will be named “MAP Alert News” (MAN).


The logo designs I saw were beautiful and would make anyone from PAN proud… “MAN” may not be the best acroynym though, considering that the public already thinks, innacurately, that all MAPs are men (tho I accept that most MAPs, or most people willing to live under a MAP identity, may be men). What about “MANA” – MAP Alert News Agency? Still keep the MAP Alert News logo in homage to PAN, but a different acronym may be helpful when spreading a message in future. Just my 2 cents…


Predictive Tom’s bete noir, hypocrite UK CSA Enquiry failed!

From 35m:00s: 28 May 2023 available for over a year

“The government has announced plans to deal with the problem of child sex abuse, but what are the implications for religious organisations? Almost every week, there are news stories about churches or religious groups facing allegations of the abuse of children or vulnerable adults. While the issue exists across society, its prevalence in religious settings has been striking. We explore why this is the case and what churches need to do if they are to tackle it effectively;” (And why failed former chair Baroness Alexis Jay is so frustrated).

Followed by failed Dame Esther Rancid’s 1980s scam ‘Childline’, closely followed by ex-rebel failed ‘Wolfy’ Smith/Bob Lindsay shamelessly beggng for even more failed Victorian NSPCC dough – DOH!

(Conveniently unseen, as ever, in plain sight are centuries of successful systematic abuse of young-boys in elite-Brit brutal boarding schools. Creating, not life-scarred victim-survivors needing lifelong help and BIG Cash compo, but trauma-free sneering high achievers like Churchill, Johnson, et al. Then paying high fees for their own young boys sent to elite Brit brutal boarding schools to sustain their sneering cycle of the amused-not-abused – all unseen by the failed CSA Enquiry.)


From 34m:55s, failed Leveson enquiry Sir Brian, and failed CSA Enquiry Baroness Jay.


Holland then and now?

1978, sunny Amsterdam Crowded Redlight Zone Summer Weekend, a 30-something Brit Loli-fan asks a routinely armed young Dutch cop, “Excuse me officer, but with many young families and tourists passing by do you get any complaints about the SeX Shops with windows clearly showing some nude children, and inside even more explicit child-sex magazines; and children allowed inside the shops?” 

Reply in perfect English, “You are English Sir? Well, post-Holocaust/Anne Frank etc, we teach our children that the human body and all mutual sex is natural, to be enjoyed not destroyed. So, we have no complaints unless there is evidence of tears or blood, then we act fast and strong! Tell me, do you not have such shops in England?”

“Yes we have so called ‘Sex Shops’ but the windows are painted over so that nothing is on street-view, and only 21+ can enter or buy so called ‘Sex Magazines’ with only adult images, but no homosexuals or lesbians, no male erections or ejaculations, and no female pubic hair allowed.”

“No street-views, no under-21s, no homosexuals or lesbians, no male erections or ejaculations, no female pubic hair – then why have ‘Sex Shops’? Good day to you sir, enjoy your stay in Holland.”

On the same trip with a couple of Brit-MAP pals strolling in an Amsterdam park, three cop cars suddenly appeared speeding across the grass to a paddling pool. The oldest Brit, ex-WW2 ‘Military Medal’ veteran rightly said, “That’s rare, most likely for some kid-snatcher, possibly a dim-Brit spoiling it for everyone.” 

So, the 30-something bold Brit strolled over and asked a cop, “Excuse me officer, is there some emergency here?” 

“Not now sir, the park ranger called us to report a ‘Poof’ trying to lure children away.”
(‘Poof’ not ‘Pedo’ not then the ‘Dominant Narrative’).

Next day searching for back-issues we were helpfully advised to visit a nearby huge wholeseale warehouse where relaxed middle-aged women doubtless including moms, showed us the many Kid-SeX shelves comfortably among the numerous 18+ mags and ‘rollers’/8mm or VHS movies.

2008, 30-years on, the same bold Brit disingenuously asks an Amsterdam Sex Shop manager, “Where are all the Golden Boy & Loli mags?” 
“All gone in police raids across Europe since the 1990s due to you unnatural English meddling in our naturally relaxed Dutch and European affairs.”

The bold-Brit then spotted a smiling older gent on a racing bike leaning on a wall as crowds passed by in the central Damstraat, “Excuse me but are you an under cover policeman, you seem to be observing people quite closely?”

“And, you are quite observant for an Englishman. Yes, I’m a retired police detective who can’t stop watching people, though there’s not much crime here, unlike in smash-and-grab Britain eh? I was once seconded to Scotland Yard to study your police methods, but mostly we were ‘skiving’ in the pubs and pool-halls. Do they still ‘skive’ now on public funds?”

“Yeah, ‘skiving’ public servants, a common dirty breed in lazy Britain. And, what’s the truth of UK tabloid tales about the Amsterdam ‘Window Girls’ trafficked across Europe against their will?”

“Just that, UK tabloid trash tales, because all our Window Girls are willing professionals, properly licensed and regularly checked with no problems, while your UK distorters-not-reporters just come here to lie, make trouble and profit from your gullible UK morons.”

“And, what actually happend to 1970s Dutch ‘Lolita’ pioneer Joop Wilhelmus increasingly popular, but then drowned in Dordrecht?”

“Same thing, you backward Brits can’t face the fact that post-War civilised Europe including younger generations, rightly moved on from your repressed Victorian values.”

Later, resting on a residential doorstep, the bold-Brit was aked by a smiling mature woman in perfect English, “So you are British, and are you comfortable on my doorstep? Perhaps you’d like to come in for a coffee?”

Soon, more than ‘coffee’ was on offer, and the bold-Brit asked about the sweet widowed woman’s family photos on the wall, “Are those your children from the 1970s, and what did they think of all the Amsterdam SeX Shops on open view including kids their own age?”

“We all just giggled at those harmless, amusing magazines, many from naturist families with Dutch nudist clubs still poplar now. But no Under 18s now in sex-magazines due to your UK backward Victorian values brutally imposed upon us.”

Last edited 11 months ago by HappyHumpingPup

Interesting scandal hailing from Brazil, and perhaps quite beautiful given their relationship appears to have survived backlash. I hope a happy marriage for them!

Added to alongside Noam Chomsky drama and Prince Andrew.


Do you have article on Rolf Harris? I dont hate him. Theres far, far worse people but of course he is considered by the masses as a monster.


I though you might be asking in general but i have just seen that Rolf Harris has died… Yes, I’m sure I can create something small about him, especially if it’s easy to see precisely what he was accused of in life.

A good starting point and piece of interest, our very own dear Tom wrote about Harris in 2014


A good place to start will be his lawyer’s book…


Id like to buy that… but id have to hide it, sadly. Also Toms … but im not sure they available in physical form..


Wow published in 2022 how incredible!


Oh, cool i will enjoy reading that. Im not completely clear what Harris did, it might just be a bit blown out of proportion.. it is sad to see myfriends` on facebook saying bad things… People ignore the good things he did..


If you read Tom’s blog article on Harris linked above it gives a good summary.

The main facts are that Harris was convicted of 12 counts of indecent assault committed decades ago, between 1969 and 1986, against four females. These ranged from one-off incidents of groping in public to a long involvement in the life of his daughter Bindi’s best friend (Victim C). The youngest was an eight-year-old girl (Victim A) who asked for his autograph at a public event. He twice put his hand up her skirt and felt her vagina over her underwear.


Victim C and her family were friends with Harris and his family in the mid 1960s. In 1978 when C was aged 13 and Harris was 48 he was allowed by C’s parents to take her on holiday abroad with his wife and Bindi. That is when he started touching her sexually. After the holiday, and while she was still under the age of consent (not that she ever did consent, by her own account) there were further incidents at C’s own home. While his wife and C’s parents were downstairs he went to C’s bedroom upstairs, where he inserted his finger into her vagina, in the words of the judge, “for about a minute until she managed to get away”.

Several further such incidents, the last when she was 19, were specified in the indictment, including ones in which he licked her vagina. The judge said to Harris “Whilst I do not sentence you in relation to what you did to C in the decade that followed that offence, I am sure that offences against her continued until 1994.”

Harris also faced four charges of possessing indecent images of children on his computer following a police raid on his home in 2012. This case was dropped following his conviction on the other charges.

So, in summary, we have groping incidents including one against an eight-year-old over her clothing which robbed her of her childhood and has been a cross she has had to bear for the rest of her life. And we have a series of assaults over a period of 16 years against one victim, several of them while her parents were in another room of the same house at the time, until she was 29 years old. And a porn case that was dropped.

Does anything begin to seem a bit unlikely, or even impossible about this[?]

warbling j turpitude

Would simply like to THANK you Prue for pulling off this wonderfully detailed and superbly comprehensive history, which of course i’ve promptly added to my homescreen for regular reference. That “Police Scotland” affair bypassed me altogether, and i wondered if you might say something about where it ‘ended’, whether in fact the aforesaid men-in-uniform went to any lengths at all to defend their sympathetic take, or perhaps, as one suspects, just the opposite?

Zen Thinker

No guarantees, but this may well be my last post. I’ve got other projects to focus on, and I no longer feel comfortable being a public (albeit anonymous) advocate of MAP causes. Ultimately, I don’t believe in “adult-minor sexual contact” as a sensible future legal possibility. Sorry about that. However, I have great sympathy for the cause.

Tom, if you wish to remain in email contact, that’s a link that could be maintained.

Zen Thinker

I totally respect your position, but I’ve thought about it, and as a man with MAP inclinations I never have the need, desire or wish for sexual contact with a child. Be that tactile or verbal. This is partly a result of my particular spiritual outlook where I put the things of the mind above the things of the body.

Best of luck on your own journey.

Warbling J Turpitude

This kind of talk really and truly dismays me. Because his thoughts appear to be located up there in his head, ZT decides they must therefore be “above” those lowly sensations that he feels “in his body”. Decides that the former must belong to some impossibly vague realm he calls ‘spiritual”

As if he could have one without the other for one miserable second!

And now we learn that the “Zen Thinker” has no desire for ‘sexual contact” with a child whatsover. If i didn”t know better (bitter laugh) i would capitulate at this point to complete despond and despair

Zen Thinker

Warbling, why torture yourself with a longing for sexual contact when nothing like it may be on the legal horizon in our lifetimes?

On the other hand, private fantasy is incredibly powerful, especially for people with a strong creative imagination, and gives me all the sexual fulfilment I need.

Zen Thinker

It is pusillanimous but in the face of a) intense social opposition b) illegality c) widespread censorship d) a societally inflicted deep sense of shame e) deep introversion f) resignation, I have no choice.

Ed Chambers

There is always a choice, no matter how pervasive and insidious the repression

Zen Thinker

Yes, and if you have Instagram and a hand you’re pretty much set for life, in that regard.

Warbling J Turpitude

Any tetchiness on my part was no doubt due that day to stuff seeping into my Twitter feed regarding the demise of one Rolf Harris. Not only The Spectator but Unherd as well could not resist the opportunity to play tabloid for a day, Unherd deploying “his (RH’s) heinous crimes” ( = being unfortunate enough to encounter a woman whose ‘command’ of victimary logic forged new dimensions in the pathological), The Spectator (in its piece’s wider Yewtree sweep) “he (Savile) abused on an industrial scale”.

Stunning to see that, in the years since the notorious pogrom, these otherwise reputable pundits have learned nothing, have gained nothing you could ever call a finer perspective of any kind.. Nope, it’s staight to the magic box of reader-sating hyperbole and be done with it. Multiple tweets expressing hope that the Ocker had perished “in pain and anguish” could be seen, and the honking great MailyDail of course featured as terrible a photograph of its subject as could be found, one of an obviously frail and infirm human-being shocked by paparazzi ambush..

Of ZT i would ask why he here associates longing with self-torture, when surely he as Christian must be familiar with that sphere’s celebrated notion of Sehnsucht? I would moreover say that the more one longs, the greater intensity with which one must inevitably imagine? After all, was it not only the deferral of spontaneous, instinctual action that gave us desiring imaginations in the very first place?

Last edited 11 months ago by Warbling J Turpitude
Zen Thinker

Very good points, Warbling, in your last paragraph. Yes, we can enjoy the acknowledged absence of physical consummation almost as a spiritual ideal, it raises the love object to a transcendental status and arguably gives more pleasure, satisfaction and fulfilment than a mere act of consummation would. The wonders of the human mind eh


Rolfs old news now.. philip schofield is a sadistic grooming predator now…. of course they wont even interview the young man in question he was involved with.. just come to conclusions

Ed Chambers

Interesting to see PS reap the whirlwind though, after disowning his pedophile brother not too long back….


No agency below so called ‘AOC’?

FOUR-year-old boy DEMANDS SeX with HOT Male teacher, er…his Photo Removed After School Used It On Banner Without His Permission.


Tom, you were mentioned in the (as I predicted, inevitable) deletion discussions on Wikipedia. It looks like *all* of the researcher’s articles are up for the chop, including those written about CSA prevention, Allyn Walker and a discredited Vigilante “Predator Hunter” group run by a man who looks like a living, walking Chudjak meme.

The offending researcher was permanently banned for “pedophile advocacy” after, get this… a random, newly created account appeared on the deletion thread for his article, and accused him of personally knowing you, because he referred to you simply as “Tom” in one of his editing summaries. This seemingly sparked a wave of hysteria, and was successful in getting the researcher banned.

The controversy is covered here, for those interested in this kind of thing.

The now sanitized article is here, and may still survive its brush with death.


This Bigots don’t realize all their censorship attempts will be noted in this article in the future.

The more united, educated, and culturally rich a MAP community will be, the harder it would be for them to ignore MAP people.


To update you, it was deleted, as I have documented in the Newgon article. This is not the last we will see of a MAP article, but I believe the plans to bring one back are going to involve strict controls on how the topic is addressed.


The 1885 UK AOC was raised in a now typical Parliamentary panic in 6-weeks, from a centuries long satisfactory 13 to an arbitrary 16.

To placate the press hysteria created by self-serving William Stead’s ‘Pall Mall Gazette’ (no surprise became The Daily Mail). Stead’s sellout sensationalist serial, ‘A Maiden Tribute in Modern Babylon’ pre-dated by a century the tabloid bullied Tory Home Sec Howard criminalising CP in 1994; coward Howard quote, “Prison works!” 

Stead had proven he could buy and sedate for sex/rape a 13yo virgin, Liza Armstrong for £5 in a Covent Garden brothel (later source of G.B. Shaw’s ‘Pygmalion’/Hollywood ‘My Fair Lady’). Stead served a short sentence to prove his point and that he had not ‘deflowered’ flower-seller Liza. 

Another typical Anglo irony is that no ‘normal’ Victorian nonce could afford £5 but well paid duly elected decent Parliamentary ‘Family Men’ could, with a 10-minute fast ‘limp’ or even faster Hansom carriage from Westminster, “Don’t spare the nag, cabbie, speed down Whitehall farce, er fast? Then, lust sated, I must be fast home by rail to read my sweet young daughters a bedtime fairytale about mythical bogeymen.”

Anglo-Irish Victorian visionary victim genius Oscar Wilde was fast onto the now familiar stench of Anglo hypocrisy derailing so called ‘Democracy’. 1891 quote, “The fourth estate is now the only estate. It has eaten up the other three. The Lords Spiritual say nothing, the Lords Temporal have nothing to say, and the Commons has nothing to say – and says it. We are dominated by journalism!”

UK ex-childsex offender genius victim Wilde died in Paris exile in 1900, and neatly karmic, less than thirteen years later Stead went down on the Titanic’s 1912 ‘Maiden Voyage’. (‘Went Down’ on the Titanic? “They can’t touch ya for it, can they Guv?!”)


And, in plain sight, behind the perverse Anglo hypocrisy exposed by boy-lover genius victim Wilde, is.

The grotesque (Gothic) backdrop to UK Parliaments setting standards for so called ‘Child Protection’ while composed of elite men (no wimmin or workers pre-WW1) who from age-8 were proudly, systematically, mentally, physically, emotionally, sexually abused, in high-fees brutal boarding schools. 

Somehow creating not life-scarred ‘victim survivors’ needing lifelong help and BIG Cash Compo, but trauma-free, sneering high achievers like Churchill, Mountbatten, and Johnson. 

Then paying high-fees for their own young boys from age-8 sent to brutal elite Anglo boarding schools, to sustain their exclusive Anglo-elite cycle of the amused-not-abused?

Quote, elite-Anglo hypocrite, “Traditional character forming, no harm done – spare the ROD spoil the child!”

Quote, common MAP sense-defender worthy of a Whitehall farce, “No sense please we’re Brits?”,_We%27re_British


“The Worm In The Bud”.

Swingin’ 1960s ‘classic’ on repressed Victorian sexuality and hypocrisy. In which author Pearsall nails profiteering Stead’s excessively salacious expose of young virgins-a-la-carte, as ‘pornography posing as journalism’.

Role model for 20th Century-ongoing tabloid trash ‘Dominant Narrative’.

Quote, Swingin ’62 classic Brit-flick, “Only Two Can Play”, local novelist made-bigtime, paperback writer patronises hometown librarian, “Still peddling trash to the masses are you?” Librarian, “Still writing it are you?!”


Further proving, genius victim Wilde’s dark Victorian vision.

The only relaxation, or reduction in UK AOC law since 1885 were both via late 20th Century media-sceptic Labour governments.

In 1967 against huge media mock outrage P.M. Wilson finally made UK Gay Sex OK in private 21+ (no cottaging). Paraphrased at a rare press-media amnesty, “You stop lying about us, and we’ll stop telling the truth about you.”

And, in year 2000 against even more mock outrage, New Labour’s tabloid puppet Blair (later BLiar) became a worm-who-turned by invoking the rarely used Parliament Act, 1911, to ram through the equalising of all UK consentual sex to 16+. Quote, rightly angry former lefty P.M Blair in Parliament, “We have a fundamentally dishonest press-media.”

And in 2006 on Parkinson’s TV Show asked by Parky, “How are you getting on now with the media?” Blair rapped back, “They’re deranged!” The interesting exchange was about to expand when the puppet director cut to the ads and returned with a new guest, while rebel Tony was blocked.

So, no change there.


Last edited 1 year ago by HappyHumpingPup

Blairs no good guy…. He pushed through the sex crimes act 2003 which allowed room to punish under 18s for sexting.


Even before ’97 Blair was just another populist P.C. tabloid pawn, with RARE exception plus ‘Mandy’ Mandelson against neo Victorian mock-outrage they FORCED through the UK ‘Equal AOC’ 16+ Gay OK. .

Since the 1970s when the sex-soaked ‘Family’ rag The SUN became the UK top sales ‘Dominant Narrative’, the Murdochs not the ministers make or break most laws.

Quote fearless peerless Pilger: The hypocrisy is almost magical. In July 1995, Murdoch flew Tony and Cherie Blair first-class to Hayman Island, Australia, where the aspiring war criminal spoke about “the need for a new moral purpose in politics”, which included the lifting of government regulations on the media. Murdoch shook his hand warmly. The next day the SUN commented: “Mr Blair has vision, he has purpose and he speaks our language on morality and family life.”
The two are devout Christians, after all.

Not forgetting Victorian visionary genius victim-Wilde, 1891, “We are dominated by journalism.”


Currently and very randomly skimming Sarah Goode’s attack on Sandfort and she is just… hysterical. I am so unimpressed. She blatantly appeals to popular ideas and doesn’t bother to question her own assumptions about ‘power’, for example, despite what she’s reading and despite writers like Angelides who criticize one-sided notions of power. The implication that Sandfort may have himself been a minor’s sexual partner is an awful snide remark and I can’t quite believe she went there and yet surely expected to be percieved as a respectable scholar… I know you know Sandfort’s work well, and discuss it in fair depth in your Michael Jackson book, so i suspect you had many a thought reading Goode’s chapter…

She’s right to say that it’s a sad comment on ‘our’ culture that many young ppl don’t have an adult friend that could benefit their lives in lieu of their potentially terrible parents, and she’s right to suggest the context of Sandfort’s study is relevant to its production (obviously). But at points she comes across as hysterical and far too eager to dismiss.

Last edited 1 year ago by Prue
Fata Morgana

She asked me in correspondence a few years ago for comments on StopItNow’s rhetoric on their website. I offered constructive criticism on the glut of pathologising turns of phrase that littered their website and their campaigns, which I said could put people off seeking help and make some people more likely to offend. A lot of the language echoed society’s negative judgements and there was a risk that individuals visiting the website in the hope of finding help for depression due to stigma (with that depression perhaps making them more likely to offend) would be put off or made to feel worse (thereby making them even more likely to offend). She said there wasn’t much that they could do about the rhetoric because at the end of the day they had to secure funding, which would be difficult without echoing society’s judgements. However, to be fair, I’ve just taken a look at their website now, several years later, and the language is much, much better.

Zen Thinker

It is very important that MAPs don’t offend, as to do so smashes away the foundations of any moral claim and societal credibility. As Julius Caesar said, only those seizing political power have a justifiable claim in breaking the law; in all other cases the law should be observed. And the law is only changed through weight of moral example. When society is shamed by its persecution, then there is hope: then pathologising turns in on itself, and they fall into their own pit. That day will certainly come, because a deeply contingent and historically circumstantial law cannot maintain itself forever; it will be finally dislodged by societal and even civilisational change. Many of the true believers are probably blind to this historical inevitability, because they have built up the case so elaborately in their minds, and dug their trenches deep.

It’s been a long time coming, but I know a change gonna come, oh yes it will. Like Sam Cooke, I see the seeds of change apparent already, strongly even, in various elements of society.

Fata Morgana

This is essentially assimilationist versus non-assimilationist. I don’t advocate breaking the law, but I do waver between the two positions. One way to challenge society’s perception is, as you say, to toe the line, in so doing showing that MAPs are indeed decent law-abiding citizens. Another, however, is to have salubrious relationships with minors, thereby demonstrating that salubrious relationships between adults and minors are indeed possible. Again, I’m not advocating anything.

Perhaps a very loose analogy can be drawn with a topical issue. Now that peaceful protest seems to be under threat from ‘Braverman’s law’, should would-be protesters demonstrate that they are peaceful and non-disruptive by abstaining from all protest or by continuing to protest peacefully and non-disruptively to show that peaceful, non-disruptive protest is indeed possible? And which approach is more likely to lead to change?

Zen Thinker

It’s very difficult, or rather impossible, to be a public advocate for anything MAP related. I don’t think there’s a comparable situation in Western society; it’s rather absurd. There’s a blanket ban on mentioning anything MAP related on public platforms. One wonders why this top down orchestrated suppression is so necessary if they have nothing to fear in the way of social change.

I would never advocate for breaking the law. You may as well give them the W and give yourself the L. One has to be subtle, because complete suppression is of course impossible. But I don’t think the technological age suits direct and overt protests.


Everyday access to technology is gonna be one of those changes. The amount of kids that are gonna be arrested, cautioned, investigated for “self-generated abuse material”. The amount of kids who must be making tik toks and sending snapchats of a suggestive nature; if space can be made to discuss this it’ll be a great topic to shatter the obvious lies and misconceptions popularized since the late 70’s (children as sexually incapable etc).

Just like news articles about kids being tried as both producers and distributors of their own child pornography boggles the mind and forces one too think, so too can these increasingly ordinary facets of young people’s lives. It wouldn’t even need to be explicitly sexual discussion: imagine reems of “child tik tok producer discusses their career” type articles.

Certainly there’s contestation going on, even while i do agree with a comment I read recently that the trend is towards infantilization of youth and young people. Indeed, extended adolescence is increasingly a thing with people living with their parents etc in relations of dependency for longer and longer. Arguably, the material gap between adults and children is less pronounced at present; many “adults” still live like “children.”

I think liberation is fragile, but not impossible…

Zen Thinker

>The amount of kids that are gonna be arrested, cautioned, investigated for “self-generated abuse material”

Yes you’ve just reminded me to read the IWF’s latest annual report, as I would like to get a factual idea of the scale of the problem. I think there is a lot of governmental consternation and anxiety about these developing issues which is mostly hidden from the public. It is certainly beginning to reach crisis proportions.


From Newgon:

Most “child pornography” in circulation is self-produced (in 2020, it even made up around half of the images processed by the IWF, rising to almost 3/4 in 2021)[7]. By that year, even half of the prepubescent material was self generated. Prohibitions (if they are to be applied universally) are therefore unworkable, as it is extremely hard to define who is “exploiting” who using a conventional victimological model. While activists have been pointing towards the trend of self-produced images for some time, it has taken much longer for “Child-Protection” officials to admit that minors are capable of producing child pornography, and more recently that a significant majority of said material is voluntarily produced.

“Of the 252,194 webpages actioned during 2021, almost three quarters (182,281 or 72%) were assessed as containing self-generated imagery. This is a 28 percentage point increase on 2020 when 44% of actioned reports (or 68,000) were self-generated.”

Fata Morgana

Interestingly, the report says that 65% of the self-generated content involves no sexual activity whatsoever. Probably just guys with foot fetishes asking girls to take their socks off while they’re doing a TikTok live or suchlike. Not cool, of course, but it’s hardly the end of the world. Do we really need to lump such cases in with the genuine CSAM in order to triple the headline figure (and then wheel out the obligatory tip of the iceberg line to make the problem sound even worse)?


The reason why there is so much self generated imagery is… *drum roll* because they arent children. Adolescents, at the least.


Major media platforms such as YouTube have been silent since their launch about the fact that they remove prohibited content created by children themselves every day. They disable comments to hide existence of minor attraction. Mr. “FreeSpeech” removes accounts for mentioning MAP and their flag on Twitter.

I think liberation is fragile, but not impossible…

The liberation is unavoidable
Everything the antis do just delays it.

Last edited 1 year ago by Leonerd
Stephen James

This part is simply mendacious:

“Sandfort also remains silent on how exactly the boys were chosen to participate in the sample, and how many boys may have been selected out as ‘unsuitable’, although he does tell us that:

[the] possibility cannot be excluded that only the ‘better’ relationships were here investigated. Although we made absolutely no effort to ‘select’ a favorable sample, it is undoubtedly true that men and boys will be more willing to participate in a project like this if what is being studied does not cause problems in their relationship and so create a bad impression of it. (Sandfort, 1987: 35)

This rather convoluted sentence seems to mean that, although ‘we’ (that is, Sandfort) may not have deliberately selected only a ‘favorable’ sample, it is more than likely that the men (who actually recruited the sample) did.”

The sentence is not particularly convoluted and it does not in any way mean what she says it means!


Very interesting to see that Goode went on to be a vaccine/lockdown-sceptic on Twitter (which I don’t necessarily have anything against, just interesting to see).


Maybe we can document this in a Newgon page?


Yes, as a preventionist figure, she deserves a fair and balanced article.


Hey Tom, I know Bailey review your Michael Jackson book but i just discovered another review I’d not seen before or seen discussed, by UK academics Eric Anderson and Matt Ripley. You might’ve seen it already but in case not, thought I’d share for yourself and of course for others.

Archive links at:

Sci hub link from that archive:


I’d like to bring the readers’ attention to three relatively new Wikipedia articles:

One hopes the quality of these articles is good enough to deflect the inevitable “deletion votes”.



Here another incorect article. Antis forgot about any impartiality and dared to wishful thinking. They distort any inconvenient facts and try to present them as untenable.

Numerous studies and professional clinical experience in the field of psychology, both before and after Rind et al.’s publications, have long borne out that children cannot consent to sexual activity and that child and adolescent sexual abuse cause harm

I hope this nonsense will also be corrected in the future.

Fata Morgana

I’m not aware of any studies that have borne out that children cannot consent to sexual activity. I’ve always assumed that consent is a legal term rather than a scientific one and that the ipse dixit itself is based solely on ‘reverse engineering’ the legal position to produce an item of folk knowledge dressed up as scientific knowledge. Ironically, children aged 16 and 17 can consent to sexual activity in the country in which I live. Does the law in my jurisdiction go against the science? Was the law ever based on science? (Rhetorical questions. I’ve read the Priscilla Alderson studies and I’ve read Matthew Waites’ 2005 book on consent.)

Zen Thinker

The law was strengthened in the nineteenth century to curb child prostitution. It has absolutely no bearing on the physical or psychological constitution of the child, merely on the facticity of a historical moral problem.

We overestimate the sagacity and justice of laws if we think they are planned with an absolute rationality and maintained according to the nature of a timeless wisdom. Instead, laws arise to fix a specific historical problem, in this case endemic child prostitution, and they stay on the statute books long after, even for centuries, due to an inertia of critical thought and the authority of an ever deepening foothold in tradition.

In plain fact, there is not sufficient critical mass to upset the inertia, even though a high age of consent has almost no basis in scientific fact. Because of course it was never about scientific fact, it was about a historical problem and an extreme safety culture flourishing around a now inert piece of legislation.

The legislation is by now encrusted with all manner of self-justifying safety subcultures, and to preserve their hegemony they adopt extremely harsh, impactful and negative language to hedge in their interests, because if it was presented with neutral and fact-based language, there might be the danger of an (entirely justified) rationalistic challenge.

So yes, in short, the current “consent” legislation is entirely resulting from legal paralysis, around which interest groups have been digging deep defensive trenches for many decades.

Fata Morgana

Yes, Waites goes into great detail on such matters. He also explores how consent was not an ingredient until the second half of the twentieth century. What we call the age of consent was originally about protecting the prized commodity of female virginity and later about preventing acts deemed unholy. Waites highlights the fact that as late as the 1950s judges were routinely throwing out rape cases where the victim hadn’t put up stiff physical resistance.

According to Waites, the age of consent was very nearly raised to 15 rather than 16 in the UK in 1885. MPs raised it by an extra year as some kind of knee-jerk reaction after returning from their summer recess.

It’s also worth noting that the vast majority of jurisdictions have copied ages of consent from precedents like the UK’s. People then ‘reverse engineer’ that too, claiming that the worldwide prevalence of, say, 16 or 18 as a legal threshold serves as evidence that these ages are biologically appropriate rather than simply copied. The consensus is right because it’s the consensus.

Zen Thinker

All good points. There is of course nothing biologically appropriate or fitting about the 16-18 age of consent, it is entirely a historical happenstance.

However it has contributed to creating a mass illusion that these ages were specially selected from a carefully handed down, timeless wisdom – and that they are an infallible measure of our civilisation – all of which is laughably false.

Fata Morgana

I’ve heard it argued (always by women – coincidence?) that brain maturation doesn’t complete until around 25 years of age ergo the age of consent ought to be 25. What?!

I’ve never heard them follow up that argument for severe curtailment of youth and young adult rights with cogent points about why complete brain maturation is necessary for capacity for informed consent to sexual activity.

And it’s always come as news to them that 1) capacity for informed consent in every other arena (medical treatment, social care decisions, etc.) is deemed by professionals (including scientists such as Priscilla Alderson, who is the leading researcher on children’s capacity to consent) to be much lower, making arguments on sexual consent look like instances of special pleading, and 2) close-in-age exemptions undermine the can/can’t consent binary opposition by suggesting that children’s capacity to consent to sexual activity is contingent not on their psychological development but instead on the chronological age of their chosen partner. Or to put it another way, close-in-age exemptions prove what we already knew from the history of AOC legislation, i.e. that the rationale behind it has nothing to do with capacity to consent.


>I’ve heard it argued (always by women – coincidence?)
>that brain maturation doesn’t complete until around 25
>years of age ergo the age of consent ought to be 25.

You should recommend this book to them:

Bronski states, among other things, that in ancient Rome “legal and medical training in particular took only 2 to 4 years to complete, and in consequence there are myriad examples of young, well-regarded physicians and lawyers from the ages of 17 to 21. These individuals evidently started training around 14, continuing for a few years before assuming full responsibilities in their late teens. And indeed did they have full responsibilities: many inscriptions mourning dead youths include lines such as, “he was a talented doctor who was not greedy to the detriment of the poor””

Their contemporaries should have said to those teens: “Who do you think you are? You can’t be so brazen as to be well-regarded and responsible, for 2000 years from now a couple of women, after looking at some colored spots on a screen, will reveal that you are nothing but a small child with no brain!”


“The law was strengthened in the nineteenth century to curb child prostitution. It has absolutely no bearing on the physical or psychological constitution of the child, merely on the facticity of a historical moral problem.”

> beautiful comment and beautifully written overall. Absolutely spot on Zen.

Zen Thinker

Thank you Prue for your gracious praise, I’m grateful

Last edited 1 year ago by Strat

However, they don’t want to delete such nonsense as Non-binary person. Where is the following written:

Non-binary people may identify as an intermediate or separate third gender, identify with more than one gender, no gender, or have a fluctuating gender identity

What is the “third gender” ? Male, Female and … Bigender ? As I know “more than one gender” means that the person is Bigender. Even if the gender is floating, such a person is a Bigender anyway. Or have they already forgotten about this term ? If a person has no gender(which is strange in itself), it should be called Agender at least by analogy with Asexual.

In this case, I come to the conclusion that term “Non-binary person” is contrived, redundant and unnecessary, because all the relevant terms already exist (Cisgender, Bigender, Transgender and suppose Agender)

Last edited 1 year ago by Leonerd

And now for a totally unrelated comment, which is actually a request for information, condoned by Tom himself…
If anyone knows of ‘on-topic’ writing (books, articles, etc) by pedophiles themselves. I mean stories, musings, ponderings from the perspective of people like you and me, not from a distances, scientific viewpoint. For informational and entertaining purposes.

Frances, or Francis

Ed Chambers

> MAP erotica

I should imagine the breadth of this definition is huge, particularly bearing in mind the nature of Lesley Uittenbogaard’s conviction for CP (although this was in Holland).


If you like poems or song expressing love for young girls, even if the authors do not claim to be MAPs, then visit my site (click on my name).


Incredibly beautiful artwork as well, Christian!


These countries are highly religious, yet very violent. I dont think God approves? Grass doesnt appear to be greener. Although I feel moving to European mainland i wouldnt get harassed so much (Im in the UK). This country has become increasingly hostile to MAPSs or whatever you want to call us.Even Philip Schofield is being called a N&*%$ and a predator, groomer. and he was with a 18 year old…


Another one from The SUN, my son: “Sex pests aged 4 kicked out of school: 14,754 expelled or suspended Sep ’06 – Jul ’11 for sexual misconduct. 1,123 children were of primary age, some in reception!”

Plus, Transgender Minnesota State Rep moves for MAPS protection (a protected species?).

Ed Chambers

Moral crusaders, bent on ending peoples right to privacy, hype up by using ‘child abuse imagery’ excuse as the finalisation on the Online Safety Bill nears?

Zen Thinker

No-one wants to see a child undergo ANY harm or suffering. And CSAM is toxic because, even if there weren’t cases of egregious harm, its high enforcement priority means the police will inevitably knock down your door.

Having said that, the IWF admits that four in every five instances are solitary children self-filming in their bedroom. This is the reality of the situation, and far removed from the thunderous rhetoric of the enforcers. I would question the high enforcement priority of children self-filming – it is clearly only de facto and not de jure that a moral, sensible man never seek out this “illegally branded” stuff: for the sake of his own well-being, safety and security, and that of his family. There is a crazy disproportion to enforcement but so be it – I won’t argue.

However, the moral crusade has reached such proportions now that interested parties want to universally spy on the public’s communications. I don’t particularly care about privacy and I’m not a privacy advocate, but I know that for swathes of ordinary people this is an intolerable red line. And the worst of these “interested parties”, the wretched wankers at the NSPCC, unsurprisingly want the most Stalinist extreme of proposal.

I am very moral and very cautious, and even for me the draconian enforcement factor is the main reason for never seeking out this material, rather than an argument from morality, or righteousness, or the magic “harm” of a passive act. But when I think of the hundreds of thousands of Joe Public less moral and cautious than me, I foresee CSAM becoming an uncontrollable problem, leading to desperate attempts to curtail the inevitable: these absurd propositions of spying on everybody are an attempt to prevent going further down the road of eventual legalisation.


When you ban visual material under the pretext that it is “abuse” and “obscenity”, you end up censoring art. I know that well, with the repeated attempts to block and censor Pigtails in Paint. Strong forces are always pushing to make the window of what is allowed ever narrower. Therefore I am against the censorship of Internet and the monitoring of its private use.

Fata Morgana

I wonder how much of the rise in serious CSAM is down to law enforcement resources being directed towards ‘low-hanging fruit’ in order to bolster conviction rates. By ‘low-hanging fruit’ I mean easy-to-crack cases of guys viewing non-sexual j***bait images on the clearnet, for example. One way of redirecting law enforcement resources towards serious CSA and serious CSAM cases would be to acknowledge that when girls hit a certain stage of development (mid-teens), the belly tops and short skirts come out and they want to display themselves and men want to look. Even some police chief in charge of the team that deal with this (can’t remember his name) said they should be focusing on the genuinely harmful stuff but can’t because when they discover the minor stuff they still have to act, and the minor stuff is so much easier to discover.

Zen Thinker

There is a legal risk in all such images. Enforcement rules are very harsh.

Maybe this could be changed, but the public will just isn’t there. Today Elon banned a prominent MAP account on Twitter and said “this isn’t tolerated on this platform”. It seemed to me like tossing red meat to the conservative wolves. They all lavished praise on Elon in the replies.

What I’m saying is that if even the free speech to discuss MAP issues is banned, how can we possibly expect any easing in image laws? Free speech on major platforms will come first.


What is this prominent MAP account may i ask? I am present on Twitter and my views are very extreme. Ie i even say 17 year olds arent childen…

Zen Thinker

Can’t remember the Twitter handle now but he had about 2,500 followers, a lot for a MAP account. He designed a paedophilia flag and this was apparently the cardinal sin. But conservatives really got on his case and by then it was inevitable he would be suspended. Elon is a strong believer in the weight of public opinion in decisions to suspend.


Oh dear ive just found him.. i have interacted with him before. I dont think hes even pro pedo, i think he likes teens, as to why he is using the term YAP youth attracted person.


Update- ive just been suspended by twitter!! For perfectly valid views. I am a bit annoyed to say the least, but alas i have been here before. Thanks Musk, freespeech absolutist. Absolute LIAR more like.


Do download Element and join our workgroup if you are not already a member. Twitter is within our purview and we have live support, resources and funding to help you keep up the fight.

Last edited 1 year ago by Strat

What is this Element may i ask? True i am running out of options. FST seems to have gone, and Twitter i may return again somehow but will probably get banned again.. Kayne West has bought Parler i believe but im pretty sure he wont allow MAP views. As all these pro free speechers are real hypocrites


The media can lie about this topic without ever being fact-checked, because it’s illegal to independently view the images.

The rise in the most severe images being found was branded ‘deeply disturbing’ by the National Police Chiefs’ Council (NPCC), which warned of the ‘life-long harm it causes these children’.

The way they describe it makes it seem like the material involves rape, penetration by an adult, bestiality, and all sorts of terrible acts which can cause life-long harm to children.

Luckily, the IWF lets us know that the overwhelming majority of what they define as category A, “the most extreme material”, is just footage of girls younger than 18 inserting fingers and household objects into their vaginas. Anything which involves penetration, by any object, including one’s own fingers, according to the IWF’s system of categorization, is included as the “most extreme” category, alongside bestiality and rape.

comment image


Meanwhile, hapless UK Keystone/keypad cops (‘truncheons’ drawn?) now chase unstoppable guilt-free five and six year olds mocking so called ‘Sex Laws’ with self made CP and Sexting.

Thousands of children including a boy aged five, have been investigated for sexting, the BBC has learned.

“Children as young as six are sexting suspects, Met Police reveal”

Sexting among under-16s skyrocketing, says Labour. 

And, not just porn. Check, hypocrite U.K SeX-Filled top sales ‘FAMILY’ rag the SUN, Chief London Reporter Tom Wells, “Kids Aged 6 are Teacher Sex Abusers! Among a sharp rise in similar shocking cases, a six year old girl stood in front of a male teacher, lifted her skirt and boldly massaged herself through her underwear.”


The Anglosphere governments are completely out of control. Once the hysterical moralists were allowed dominion over people’s personal lives, government was only too happy to oblige.

Zen Thinker

>The Anglosphere governments are completely out of control

What I find most offensive is the corrupt and deviant use made of language by governmental organisations. I analyse language closely, particular diction, related semantic field, emotive manipulation…Language creates reality, and governmental organisations are Orwellian abusers of language.

Consider this:

Victims and survivors of child sexual abuse are traumatised long after the physical suffering has ended. We exist to stop child sexual abuse online, because no child should ever face this horror.

The nexus “victim trauma suffering horror” is designed to activate the amygdala in the brain that deals with a fear response to threats, and conditions emotional behaviour. The heavily laden formulae are mental conditioning scripts to excite extreme negative emotional responses.

If we restricted ourselves to a balanced assessment of the facts, we would say the descriptor “trauma suffering horror” only applies to a small minority of child sexual activity, namely where an adult forcibly assaults a child. The statisticians say a large proportion of child sexual activity is “self-abuse” or, more colloquially, self-exploration by the solitary child.

This Orwellian dishonesty in language, when applied to MAPs, is responsible for much of the public hatred and psychological violence directed at minor attracted sexuality, even simply in the abstract.

If governmental organisations didn’t continue to exert this criminal linguistic grip on reality (for language creates reality) then maybe some of the demonic hatred in society would lessen.

Seriously – is that really what we believe is responsible for creating reality? The activity in goodness knows how many individual “amygdalas”, prompted by language? That somehow then all miraculously coincide to produce the effects we live under? Wouldn’t it be more sensible to say that it is the *sign* of the freshly however blooded victim that now commands/demands our collective-attention? That this was all set in motion by the crucifixion of one Christ Jesus of Nazareth but since we arrived at the ultimate power asymmetries of Hiroshima and Auschwitz has gone radically pear-shaped? That language everywhere now seeks to propagate & consecrate this sign quite heedless of the potential social consequences? Would the blurted signs “victim trauma suffering horror” have “instantly triggered” any citizen before, let’s say, the year 1965? Let us rise from the rather silly fact of our individual amygdalas, gentlemen, and realize that that is NOT where any *significance* resides …

Last edited 1 year ago by Warbling J Turpitude

What’s instantly wrong there Tom is the idea that the brainpart MEDIATES. What mediates is what manner of representation goes inbetween, and alters as it goes the perspective of whatever parties are present on whichever particular scene.

I think we should admit that what body parts do is rather *sponsor* emotion. With this term we hope to reduce metaphorical dependence to a minimum

Hmmm. For my money – and might i recklessly assume that of countless others – the phrase “struck fear into her heart” is as specific/accurate as it gets. That’s where we *feel* the fear – and corresponding ‘counterforce’ of any courage – quite regardless of whatever physico-chemical transactiions might serve as accompaniment. Therefore, in the name of science, not of poetry, i’m rooting for the emotional-body being indeed “seated”right there…in the center of one’s chest.

.what do you think so far?

Last edited 1 year ago by warbling j turpitude
Stephen James

It seems that according to Mr. Turps, a mental state is located wherever we feel it is located. But what about an amputee who feels a pain in a leg that isn’t there?

What about the amputee?

Stephen James

The amputee feels pain in a leg that no longer exists, which seems to show that a pain is not always located in the place where it seems to be.

One would expect that the neural network of a body is thrown into considerable confusion following such a major alteration of the ‘territory’ and that signals as perceived by that body’s owner would do many a strange thing for quite some time. I do not see how this refutes my insistence that fear/courage felt in the heart cannot be any kind of ‘illusion’. It is felt there because it is there! Is it your wish to refute such, and if so, how would you go about doing that? NB ..i am not talking about pain, i am talking about the “seat” of emotion – where it instantly situates itself.


All feelings are in fact activity of neurons in the brain. When you feel pain in the heart, it happens in the brain.

warbling j turpitude

Right. So your “heart” feels nothing. Now i’ve heard it all..Maybe that’s the whole problem with our so-called “MAP” movement? It has no real heart? None that does not automatically assign any potential motivation to an abstraction in the crow’s nest? Strictly reserved for safe spaces like this one, in which we may freewheel away merrily in what amounts to a social vacuum?

All the devoted Japanese doll accounts on Twitter got wiped last week by Mr Musk, simply because a pack of profoundly ignorant hysterics from Oz called “CollectiveShout” reported them.

And then he tweets: “censor not, lest ye be censored”

Until we publically fight back, we are toast. That’s really all there is to it

Last edited 1 year ago by warbling j turpitude
Stephen James

We can talk about the location of the fear in terms of the location of those events most directly correlated with the fear’s occurrence (in the brain) or we can talk about its location in terms of where it is felt to be. But to insist that, over and above those two things, there is somewhere which is the pain’s real location, is, I suggest, a piece of idle metaphysics.

So in effect, SJ, given this rather measly choice between “most correlated with” and “most felt to be” we are saying that in order to appease the demand for “accuracy”, we should say the feeling has NO location? I think you are misapplying the term ‘metaphysics’ altogether, which as i understand it, means the triunph of the propositional idea over everything else that might have ever led up to, fed into, its. final/ideational ‘coronation’?

What would you say it is that we really have against the prospect of a real location? An event is something quite other than a simple occurrence, surely! To be an event an occurrence must be collectively witnessed and able to be recalled, amirite? By more than one experiencing agent?.

Last edited 1 year ago by Warbling J Turpitude
Stephen James

I find your notion of metaphysics a bit puzzling. For me, metaphysical statements are statements which look as if they say something, but actually assert nothing.

I think the terms ‘event’ and ‘occurrence’ are pretty much interchangeable. I think we can call a pain or a feeling of fear an event, but if so, we must say that it is an event that can only be witnessed by one person – the person who experiences it.


The police have no business investigating kids for sexting, you really think they want the police looking at their private pics? This is abuse to me.


Exactly, because the kids do it to show their secret beauties, while the police look at it with inquisitorial eyes, which is quite the opposite.


This guy Ballard is a real piece of shi*t

He set up the Dutch guys and paid off the Ecuador government so he could make a promo film for his corrupt company O.U.R. The government of Ecuador should be ashamed to be Ballard’s bitch, used by a corrupt American scumbag to make himself rich. Don’t the Ecuadorians and Mexicans have any self-respect? Disgusting and outrageous.

Ed Chambers

I would like to see the footage featuring Nelson. There is the possibility he could’ve tried to do something crazy and stupid. That to one side, there is so much hyperbole and virtue signalling rhetoric in the promos, it just goes to show how far these organisations will push the truth, or at least their version of it. Difficulty believing what I’ve just seen. But not in the least bit surprising.


The whole operation is a fake and degenerate hysteria. Now we see directly how these “child-trafficking” organizations fabricate moral panic to collect funding and gain power. They are truly evil, as are their retarded supporters, because they will stop at no end for their agenda, which in this example alone includes destroying free speech, funding corrupt politicians, and torturing political activists.

Ed Chambers

Well said. However, pedophile activists in general need to be more aware of what they are up against, and they sadly tend to underestimate the lengths to which these moral crusader types will go.

Anyone got any lowdown on this? ..

Where might one expect such a “report” to have any impact?

Last edited 1 year ago by Warbling J Turpitude

The link to the UN report was given in the Washington Examiner article:
Read page 22.

warbling j turpitude

Wow! Nice work – Thankyou, Christian!

Ed Chambers

A number of more than reasonable suggestions for rational people, but I’m guessing this article is designed to invite people to virtue signal.

Zen Thinker

“Mature minor doctrine” in liberal states such as Washington radically sets the age of medical consent at twelve. Those twelve or older can take medical decisions independent of their parents on for example gender dysphoria. In practice the school doctor, nurse or counsellor can hide information from the parents and the question has been raised: “if children can consent to independent medical choices at twelve, what will this extend to?”

Zen Thinker

Ok, this is my source, you can judge for yourself:


@Zen: It’s not mature minor doctrine. It’s the medical age of consent. And yes, it will eventually lead exactly where you think. Which is why you should stop bagging on trans kids and queer people in general. Your religious friends are nothing but a bunch of fascists who would kill you if they had the chance.

Last edited 1 year ago by Perplexed
Zen Thinker


1) I’ve never attacked LGBT+, in fact I respect their right to their own sexuality and views (how could I not without being a hypocrite?) While I think castrations and mastectomies on children are morally problematic, and more psychotherapeutic solutions should be implemented for gender dysphoria, I don’t “deny” the rights of trans kids either. My own view is that I don’t identify with the rainbow flag nor would I want my sexuality to be represented by the rainbow flag, with all its attendant cultural baggage.

2) Religion is a rich cultural heritage and a vital source of meaning for many. Just because some (excessively vocal) religious people have “fascist” views as you put it, this doesn’t tar all religious people with the same brush. Politics is entirely separate from religion and we don’t all have to act like Matt Walsh just because we have a spiritual nature (which is as innate a part of character as sexuality). To deny someone’s spirituality is commensurate with denying someone’s sexuality.

3) I’m glad you think lower medical ages of consent (and Tucker Carlson quoted seven in some contexts) will ultimately impact on views surrounding the sexual prohibitions and taboos of children; I would be inclined to agree. Also, while traditional working class views are solidly and virulently anti-paedophilic, never underestimate the ability of intelligent liberal elites to manipulate and soothe public opinion: the common man can be brought round to our position – that is not the issue. The issue is in more liberal elites agreeing that minor sexuality – and the minor attracted sexuality of adults – are legitimate areas of concern for social acceptance and normalisation.


Mutilation of children (e.g. breast removal on 12-year-old girls, puberty blockers, typically followed by cross-sex hormones, to younger children) leads to great suffering and is a direct attack on the future!

Is it any wonder people (such as parents, obviously, or pedophiles) with actual skin in the game might push back against gender ideology, triggering the queer persecution complex?


Quote, ye visionary Hibbing Bard, Swingin’ 64, “Your sons and your daughters are beyond your command, for the times (if not The Examiner) they are a-changin'”

The Washington Examiner, Thursday, April 20, 2023 BELTWAY CONFIDENTIAL
The United Nations now promotes adults having sex with minorsby Zachary Faria, Commentary Writer 

“In case you need yet another reason to support defunding the United Nations, the organization is promoting the idea that minors can consent to sex with adults.

The International Commission of Jurists published a report claiming that “sexual conduct involving persons below the domestically prescribed minimum age of consent to sex may be consensual in fact, if not in law.”

According to the ICJ, “criminal law should reflect the rights and capacity of persons under 18 years of age to make decisions about engaging in consensual sexual conduct and their right to be heard in matters concerning them.”

Last edited 1 year ago by HappyHumpingPup
Fata Morgana

Unsurprisingly, this is a cynical attempt to get readers foaming at the mouth, to partisan political ends.

The ICJ argues for the application of criminal law in a non-discriminatory way. Yet it fails to recognise the discrimination that inheres in its conformity with the consensus position on close-in-age exemptions, which render minors’ capacity to consent contingent not on their own chronological age or physical or psychological development but instead on the chronological age of their chosen partner.

To be fully non-discriminatory, we should not have a situation in which a 15-year-old girl who is primaily attracted to men aged 25-45 (for example) cannot express herself sexually with a partner of her choosing for fear of that partner facing life-changing consequences whilst her peers are happily getting it on with close-in-age partners without such fear. That is discrimination plain and simple, and it’s predicated on the baseless assumption that all sexual expression between adults and minors is necessarily exploitative.


So, finally trashing the ancient myth of the ‘asexual child’ Worldwide, or recently suggested ‘Schrodinger’s child’ in the next room. Today’s dominant narrative via mainstream Wiki is now assertively all-age pro-Wanking.

And, with no way to ever enforce an AOCM/’Age Of Consent To Masturbate’ there can be no way to prove that emancipated healthy minors wanking to fantasies or images of attractive adults, distant, nearby, or in the next room; are in any way self harmed or abused.

Indeed, when such healthy fantasies become normal realities equalised to a 6+ Age Of Criminal Responsibility/AOCR, a self-asserting minor mutually masturbating an attractive adult, might amusingly say, “My Mind, My body, My Choice – Mind yer own!”.

Quote, assertive Tuesday Weld, 13, already HOT dating Hollywood stars like Frank Sinatra and John Ireland, when asked by her Mom to test for Kubrick’s planned ‘Lolita’ movie, “No thanks, and I don’t need to test – I AM Lolita!” (Though, sadly current unfunny fake-Puritan ‘Wokesters’ have mentally abused gently ageing Tuesday to recently exclaim, paraphrased, “I was a very naughty girl.”)

Last edited 1 year ago by HappyHumpingPup

Could Vladimir Nabokov have been a repressed hebephile? He certainly understood that most of his audience would not have a favorable opinion of “child molesters” and used that to his benefit and to great effect in Lolita, The Enchanter and some of his other less well-known novellas. In public, he never said or did anything that could suggest he approved of hebephilia. And no doubt most modern readers of Lolita would like to believe that Nabokov was just as much opposed to it as they are.

So I was quite surprised when I read the following passage that appeared in article about Lolita by Nabokov scholar J.E Rivers: 

As a matter of fact , Nabokov himself points us toward a pluralistic sexual ethics in a comment that scholars of his work have managed studiously to ignore: he told his cousin Peter de Peterson that he thought love could exist in the form depicted in Lolita and could last longer than most people assumed. In a conversation with Andrew Field , he declared that sexual tastes such as Humbert’s are “the commonest thing,” another remark scholars of his work have chosen to pretend does not exist.

Clearly, Nabokov’s private views on hebephilia were far more nuanced than those of most people alive today.

This blog post discusses a number of facts about Nabokov that, when considered holistically, seem to suggest that he was, in fact, hebephilic. For example, he wrote a poem so graphic that it would likely be considered child erotica if it had been written today, and he was an admirer of the now highly controversial Balthus, known for his erotic paintings of pubescent girls.

Last edited 1 year ago by Leo

Adding to my previous comment: books and articles about Lolita abound with victimologist claims that Vladimir Nabokov was abused as a child by his uncle Vasily Ivanovich Rukavishnikov, and that this “traumatizing” experience is what inspired him to write stories with unhappy endings for the antihero minor-attracted protagonists.

In the early 2000s, Vladimir Nabokov’s son was so frustrated by these baseless claims that he almost burned the unpublished manuscript of The Original of Laura because of them:

Ron Rosenbaum: Yes, he [Dmitri Nabokov] has a couple of times expressed extreme irritation, particularly with a couple of pseudo scholarly books which claim that Vladimir Nabokov was molested by an uncle and this helps explain Lolita. He called them the ‘Lolitologists’, and he feels that he doesn’t want to subject his father’s last incomplete work to, in effect, critical molestation by such people.

One single sentence from Nabokov’s autobiography, Speak, Memory, is often taken out of context and cited as evidence of childhood abuse:

When I was eight or nine, he [Ruka] would invariably take me upon his knee after lunch and (while two young footmen were clearing the table in the empty dining room) fondle me, with crooning sounds and fancy endearments

That Nabokov must have found this to be traumatizing and uncomfortable is usually just assumed to be the case. Because apparently, there is no way a child could not be traumatized or hurt by an adult’s touch.

A perusal of the entire passage paints a very different picture:

When I was eight or nine, he [Ruka] would invariably take me upon his knee after lunch and (while two young footmen were clearing the table in the empty dining room) fondle me, with crooning sounds and fancy endearments, and I felt embarrassed for my uncle by the presence of the servants and relieved when my father called him from the veranda: “Basile, on vous attend.”

Nabokov makes no mention of being disturbed by his uncle’s touch; he merely felt embarrassed for him due to the presence of servants in the same room. Nowhere in the book is uncle Ruka portrayed as a bad person. And yet, some writers have let their fantasies run wild on this particular passage and claimed that trauma from this experience is what motivated Nabokov to write Lolita and similarly themed books.

Last edited 1 year ago by Leo

Integrated this info into a new page:

Any suggestions for additions, do let me know…

I didn’t find the blog post particularly convincing, more conspiratorial / leading, but I do agree with the obviously indisputable: he was willing to write about nymphets and topics like incest (with Ada), and was clearly an intellectual very aware of literary and art figures who relate to such topics. The subject was of great interest to him, as it is to many people today for a variety of reasons (sometimes, hostile reasons). Any more than that, however, just isn’t there. No one seems to know if he ever engaged in real-life sexual activity with young people, for whatever reason.

I must admit I’ve never read Lolita, only about it. If it’s anything like the Stanley Kubrick film (which I watched), I’m not sure I want to read it. A gross, ridiculous portrayal of the most unsexy and one-sided relationship I’ve ever seen. It was utterly depressing and sad…


Nabokov seems to represent a great candidate for the “self-hating” pedophile/hebephile label…

Thanks Tom, will check out the hopefully much better film version sometime. I recently watched Leon: The Professional (1994), a film recommended to me by an MAP over a forum a long time ago. I can see why they recommended it: it’s action packed, humorous, a bit cringy at points, and there’s even erotic tension between the main cast… So, a good film: I also recommend!


I agree that Nabokov unfortunately appears to endorse popular prejudice to at least some degree, but the degree to which he does so is often exaggerated by modern readers.

Lolita was rejected by all respectable publishers in America. Nabokov eventually had it published by a Paris-based company that mostly published erotica.

If Nabokov had been courageous enough to portray Humbert in a positive light, he would have had an even harder time getting the book published and bringing it to the public’s attention, not to mention he would have risked being labelled as a pervert.

Lolita begins with a faux-warning by “Dr. John Ray” that is filled with moralizing platitudes and that flatters the prejudices of his audience. It’s only at the very end of the book that Nabokov reveals that it was meant as a guide on how not to read the book. 

In the afterword of the novel, Nabokov disavows “Dr. John Ray’s” fictional foreword, which waxes lyrical about Humbert’s “moral leprosy”, stating unambiguously that “Lolita has no moral in tow”. As Craig Raine convincingly argues in the Penguin Modern Classics edition, the foreword of Lolita reads like it was meant to parody conventional sexual morality and the outrage of moral crusaders:

Dr. Ray represents the conventional moral viewpoint we are sometimes urged to attribute to Nabokov. Ray is the spokesman for a world of papier mâché pieties, as exemplified in his final auto-ironic flourish: ‘Lolita should make all of us – parents, social workers, educators – apply ourselves with still greater vigilance and vision to the task of bringing up a better generation in a safer world.’ The authentic intonation of a man finding his mouth full of conventional solemnities. No wonder Nabokov specifically disowns him: ‘I am neither a reader nor a writer of didactic fiction, and, despite John Ray’s assertion, Lolita has no moral in tow’ – in tow, one is tempted to add, like ‘the huge fat house trailer weaving in front’ of the Haze sedan. (Weaving!)

What I find interesting about the book is not Humbert’s disturbed personality, but rather the passionate way in which he expresses his love for Dolores. To quote the words of the legendary American literary critic Lionel Trilling:

“In recent fiction no lover has thought of his beloved with so much tenderness, no woman has been so charmingly evoked, in such grace and delicacy, as Lolita; it is one of the few examples of rapture in modern writing. I think that the real reason why Mr Nabokov chose his outrageous subject matter is that he wanted to write a story about love. Lolita is about love. “

Could Nabokov have written so elegantly about the love of a disturbed man for a 12-year-old girl without being attracted to her himself? It’s possible, of course, but I don’t think it’s very likely. 

Fata Morgana

I am neither a reader nor a writer of didactic fiction
Lolita has no moral in tow

These statements should be considered within the context of Nabokov’s own brand of aestheticism, which outwardly championed art for art’s sake credos yet ultimately centred on the idea that good art is deceptive. Didacticism involves overt moralising. Lolita does have a covert moral or two in tow, the main one being to ‘caress the divine detail’ in order to transcend solipsism and treat others not as a means to an end but as an end in themselves. Nabokov adopts a strategy of reader seduction and demands that we read closely so as to avoid becoming HH’s dupe.

Lionel Trilling

In a televised interview with Trilling and Nabokov, Trilling declared Lolita to be a love story and Nabokov was polite enough not to dismiss this outright, instead saying that if it is a love story, it’s the story of his (Nabokov’s) love of the English language. Trilling was way off the mark.

In Strong Opinions, Nabokov described HH as ‘a vain and cruel wretch who manages to appear touching’. Close reading reveals the extent of HH’s solipsism and abuse (of Annabel, of Dolores). Scenes that seem innocent enough on the surface prove on closer inspection to be abusive. There are plenty of hints in the description of the ‘tryst’ with Annabel in the mimosa grove that he has gotten her drunk, is forcing himself on her and that she isn’t enjoying it. (There are some interesting scholarly analyses of dates in Lolita that suggest he was much older than Annabel — 17 or 18 to her 8 or 9, if I recall correctly.) The davenport scene also gives hints that he’s forcing himself upon Dolores. As for what JRJ terms the ‘moral apotheosis’ at the end of the novel, Michael Wood (2003) has argued convincingly that HH’s tone is too mawkish and self-regarding to be taken seriously as genuinely contrite, and Kevin Ohi’s analysis (2005) of the passage is masterful. The lines of the ‘old poet’ have also been revealed as a self-serving lament (Gerard de Vries, 1994). HH’s part of the novel ends, as it began, with ‘Lolita’, Dolores once again ‘safely solipsised’ in the (for HH) inescapable circularity of an impenetrable, amoral ‘refuge of art’.

Trilling and his view of Lolita as a love story belong to a past era of Nabokov scholarship. There have been much more sophisticated and convincing analyses since what is referred to as the ‘ethical turn’ in Nabokovian studies, which began with Ellen Pifer in 1980 and continued more notably with Richard Rorty’s brilliant but imperfect analysis in 1989.

Last edited 1 year ago by Fata Morgana

 >It’s a long time since I paid much attention to fiction.<

Er, daily mainstream Dominant Narrative “Fiction”?

And, flip the script, in plain sight for decades a lusty “Lolita’s” own tale told by the former 14yr old, among millions more ‘Lolitas’ Worldwide largely unheard, who lust after and lay adults.

Recalls a lusty 13yr old ‘Lolita’ deviously on an 18+ pre-Web Chatline (free for femmes), paraphrased, “Hi, Man I like your voice.”
“You’re not eighteen, more like 13!”
“So, I ain’t bovvered. Have ya got a BIG Bulge?” “Well, I’m not gonna say I’ve got a small one am I? So, who’s your fave pinup?”
“And, shy little thing, what would you do if he was there with you right now?”
“I’d pull his shorts DOWN!”


Considering that Nabokov himself used the term “love” to describe what Lolita is about, writers who claim that wasn’t his intent seem to be on rather flimsy grounds. I guess it’s not a coincidence that the alleged “ethical turn” in scholars’ opinions only began after Nabokov himself had died.

In a televised interview with Trilling and Nabokov, Trilling declared Lolita to be a love story and Nabokov was polite enough not to dismiss this outright, instead saying that if it is a love story, it’s the story of his (Nabokov’s) love of the English language. Trilling was way off the mark.

The part of the interview where Trilling and Nabokov discuss whether Lolita is about love is available on Youtube. Having watched that and also having read the transcript of the full interview, which is available on page 30 of this book, I can say with full confidence that you’re mistaken and that Nabokov never made that remark to Trilling.

Nabokov did appear to challenge Trilling’s view that “love shouldn’t be scandalous”, but in the end he clearly agreed with him that Lolita is about love:

Interviewer: What Mr. Trilling is saying, I think, is your book is about love and not about sex.

Vladimir Nabokov: I agree with him perfectly in that.

In her 2018 paper, the victimologist writer Lucia C. A. Williams ignored all of the above context, paraphrased Trilling incorrectly, and had to resort to body language analysis in a highly unconvincing attempt to convince her readers that Nabokov disagreed with Trilling:

The critic reiterates this point in the aforementioned TV interview: Lolita “is not a book so much about an aberration, as much as an actual love … very full of tenderness and very full of passion as well…” (Trilling & Nabokov). Nabokov seems slightly amused as he listens. Trilling grasps for words, mentions passionate love in normal marriage, and notes that people think in clichés, indicating that perhaps they don’t know what love is.

Of course, it’s completely unsurprising that writers whose minds are completely closed off to the possibility of an adult being in love with a child, would be anxious to prove that Lolita is not an exception.

To say that Humbert loved Lolita is neither a defence of him as a person, nor an excuse for his behavior, for the same reason that to say that Henry VIII loved Anne Boleyn is not a defence of that King’s mistreatment of his ill-fated queen: flawed people can also love. Of course, one can disagree and argue that such people are incapable of love; fair enough. I just don’t think there is any evidence that is what Nabokov believed.

Jealousy is the guard dog of love—any kind of love—and it’s evident that in both the case of Humbert and that of Henry VIII, it was a thoroughly vicious dog that should have been put down. But that need not always be the case.

Fata Morgana

One should be careful not to fall into the trap of assuming that because an author (particularly one as inveterately deceptive as Nabokov) is willing to agree that his/her novel is ‘about love’ that he/she is confirming that Character X’s feelings for Character Y amount to love. And not only because the cast of characters extends beyond Character X and Character Y, but also because an author can produce a novel that is ‘about love’ whilst showing only what love isn’t, or showing only a vain and cruel wretch’s narcissistic self-love and entrapment in a solipsistic aestheticism (the bars of HH’s cage) in which preoccupation with beauty is an end in itself rather than a stepping stone to moral edification, as it is in Friedrich Schiller’s ‘aesthetic education’. Ohi’s analysis (2005) shows how HH’s outpourings of contrition in the clifftop scene at the end of the novel amount to a subtle parody of Schiller’s conviction that preoccupation with beauty can be morally elevating. De Vries’ analysis (1994) shows how the lines of the ‘old poet’, which superficially express contrition, are in fact a concise summary of a passage from Poe’s Poetic Principle. When viewed in the light of what Poe is asserting in that passage, the lines of the old poet are revealed as a self-serving lament on the inextricability of morality from preoccupation with beauty.

Just to reinforce the point, Dostoevsky’s Notes from Underground could be said to be ‘about freedom’ (as an antidote to Chernyshevskian rational egoism), but are we to conclude that Underground Man is truly free?

I watched that interview, just once, shortly after it was first put on YouTube and a few years after I stopped working in the field. Watching it back now, I see that I have misremembered its content. The interview is only of passing interest to scholars, of course. Nabokov’s statement that the novel is about his love of the English language is quoted instead in Thomas Frosch’s ‘Parody and Authenticity’ (2003). Note that in the interview with Trilling, Nabokov is quick to correct the interviewer’s characterisation of HH’s feelings as love to ‘passion’, and although he agrees with Trilling that ‘passionate love’ exists in novels, as in life, when Trilling tries to pin down HH’s passion as ‘love’, Nabokov responds characteristically cryptically from his pre-prepared notes: ‘If sex is the sermon made of art, love is the lady of that tower’.

Yes, it is unsurprising that writers whose minds are completely closed off to the possibility of an adult being in love with a child are keen to prove that this novel (the name of which I’m deliberately not mentioning in case it’s what’s triggering the spam filter) isn’t an exception. Confirmation bias is a natural human tendency. And for that reason, we should expect to find some who know, perhaps from first-hand experience, that an adult can love a child in a romantic sense being no less keen to prove that the novel is an exception (or else to resort to downvoting — that indolent surrogate for ad lapidems). With that in mind, if you’d like to continue the discussion (I’m happy to do so, with Tom’s permission), let’s deal in specifics. If you’d like to make a case for HH loving Dolores, I invite you to produce some textual evidence from the novel and perhaps I can show how HH’s text undercuts itself.

Fata Morgana

Thanks, Tom. In that case, it seems fair to assume that the title of the novel is triggering the spam filter. It does have certain connotations, after all.


In case I didn’t make this clear in my previous post: My issue is less with people who argue that the novel is not about love or that Humbert did not love Lolita, as with those who claim that Nabokov himself said that the novel it is not about love and that he wrote it to further a moralistic message.

Nabokov’s choice to use an internal narrative point of view, as well as his statement that the book doesn’t have a moral in tow, leave it up to the reader to make a subjective moral judgment. Whether or not the book is about love is not something that readers or even scholars can make objective claims about; it depends on their interpretation of the novel and their personal definition of the word “love”. My personal opinion is that Humbert being, in Nabokov’s own words, a vain and cruel wretch, doesn’t preclude him from being passionately in love with Lolita.

In the novel, the term “pedophilia” is never used, while occurrences of the term “rape” are rare and limited to contexts that have nothing to do with the legal fiction known as “statutory rape”. Humbert describes their first sexual relationship as a game initiated by Lolita. Granted, he is an unreliable narrator, so there is no way to know for certain if he was being honest, but it’s certainly not something that can be ruled out, no matter how many people may wish they could rule it out.

What is much more certain is that Lolita did like older men. That’s why she ended up fleeing with, and loving, Quilty. She said she loved Quilty and that he was the only man she ever loved, and that she would run away to him after Humbert had asked her to return. I don’t think Humbert had any reason to lie about things that did not reflect positively on him.

Nabokov did indeed say that Lolita is about his love of the English language: the quote is from the afterword of the novel. However, it’s obvious from the context that it tells us nothing about whether the novel is about love:

After Olympia Press, in Paris, published the book, an American critic suggested that Lolita was the record of my love affair with the romantic novel. The substitution “English language” for “romantic novel” would make this elegant formula more correct.

There are, unfortunately, several sources on the internet that take this quote out of context. 

Nabokov knew about the existence of hebephilia, defined as a preferential attraction to pubescent minors, at a time when no one, except actual hebephiles, knew that it existed. 50-years before Blanchard coined the term and identified hebephilia as a distinct sexual preference, Nabokov termed it “Nympholepsy” and gave a remarkably accurate description of it in Lolita:

Between the age limits of nine and fourteen there occur maidens who, to certain bewitched travelers, twice or many times older than they, reveal their true nature which is not human, but nymphic (that is, demoniac); and these chosen creatures I propose to designate as nymphets.

As Mo Ibrahim has documented in this small book, much of Nabokov’s oevre—even many of his earliest works—contain references to hebephilia. So it’s clearly not the case that he learned about the attraction from the few case studies of people convicted for statutory rape that he read when he was writing Lolita.

Last edited 1 year ago by Leo
Fata Morgana

With the greatest of respect, Leo, I’m a former scholar in the field and your latest comment (as with your previous comments on the topic) shows that you’re nowhere near ready for a scholarly debate on the topic. Or to put it a little more charitably, when engaging in a debate, one hopes for a certain level of return on the investment of one’s time into the debate. Please take this in the spirit in which it’s intended. We’re all at different stages on our learning journeys, after all.

Fata Morgana

I totally get that, Tom, and it’s not my usual style. I read Leo’s latest response whilst in a mood for honesty.


Is too much weight placed on furtive introvert Humbert, a weak role-model for aspiring MAPS? When cheeky Lo had earlier willing sex with at least two other men, like Sturdy Charlie at the nicely named ‘Camp Climax For Girls’, plus bold extrovert Hollywood director Clare Quilty. And, as Humbert admits after giggling Lo’s ‘whispered sweet thunder in my ear’ in bed at The Enchanted Hunters, “It was she who seduced me, dear reader.”


A few years ago, I read again Nabokov’s L novel (translated in French), and I did not like it, to me it was not a good example of a love story. The character of HH is that of a lazy and selfish man, he does not work and thinks only about his own interest. He is infatuated with Dolores, but is it real love?
Also, Nabokov’s conception of “nympholepsy” is anti-democratic, because only a tiny minority of girls aged 9 to 14 are real nymphets, the others are just uninteresting kids. To me, almost all LGs are charming and attractive.


Great work! I’m glad to see that Newgon finally has an article about Nabokov.


For whatever it’s worth, here’s a quote from Nicholas Fox Weber’s biography of Balthus that confirms Nabokov’s appreciation of Balthus:

Once, when a group of people were visiting the filmmaker Billy Wilder, whose art collection included major paintings by many of the best-known twentieth century masters (Picasso, Matisse, etc.), the guests were all musing about which picture they would take as their own if they could choose just one. Nabokov had no doubt as to what his selection would be, and was proud of it. He pointed to the Balthus frontal nude of a teenage girl and said with unabashed delight that he would pick that one.

I don’t know how many of Balthus’ frontal nude paintings of teenage girls Wilder had in his collection, but there’s evidence he had at least one:

Records were set for 12 artists. Balthus’ painting of a teen-age nude, “La Toilette,” sold to a European dealer for a record $2 million.

So this painting, which depicts a minor, seems like it could be the one Nabokov saw during that visit and liked so much.  [MODERATOR: LINK TO THIS PAINTING DELETED, IN CONFORMITY WITH UK LAW. THE ARTIST’S STATUS IS IRRELEVANT FOR THIS PURPOSE.]

Last edited 1 year ago by Leo
Ed Chambers

Update April 12:
The men informed me that the process is well under way. Agents who lied earlier now tell the truth: children were not drugged and abused. The psychologist who spoke to the children reported that they were never touched. The neighborhood researcher indicated that the villagers are angry about the behavior of the police and that Lesley and Marthijn are good friendly people.

From :

I’ve been critical of L & M in the past, perhaps wrongly, although my criticism of Neslon remains. If this turn of events is true, I’d be v happy. Good to see a prick like Ballard being shown to be the Nazi he is.

Zen Thinker

An extended quote from an essay called “Bring Back Stigma” (2000) by Roger Scruton. It may be of interest to study the intellectual roots of sexual and paedophilic stigma.

There is, however, one great exception to this attitude, and it goes to the heart of our moral nature. This exception is pedophilia. Britons have been up in arms for months…

…But people are afraid to judge their neighbors and hope that somehow the future of society will be taken care of, even though everyone is busy retreating from the arduous business of moral judgment.

I’ll leave any analysis to others on here, although I have my own thoughts.


Zen Thinker

>His book

Bought 🙂

I’m a strong believer in studying, as you say in great detail, the intellectual roots of the opposing position, as full exposure of the flaws in establishment thinking is the only way to make inroads and gain deeper understanding.

To that end, I’m a bit surprised you censored my quote, but of course it’s your blog, so I don’t object. I would refer interested readers to a google search of the essay – it appears in City Journal.

Zen Thinker

Fair enough

Ed Chambers

These regressive Conservative types strike me as being deeply unhappy, and like to manifest this in ways that make others just as unhappy as they are.


Also there were plenty like that during the Lockdowns too!


Something you may find interesting regarding the Dalai Lama:


Hey Tom you might have a comment of mine go to spam. About a book by Nancy Friday…


Okay well I’ll re type something.

If anyone’s in need of bit of positivity, check out Nacncy Friday’s book:

Published in 1973, it’s a collection of women’s fantasies. Includes overt discussion of sadomasochism, bestiality, and sexual fantasy in childhood and involving children. It’s a very positive work and a beautiful read. I’ve selected some quotes you’ll see on the Newgon page.
One of the most unashamedly positive things I’ve read to do with sex, about as positive as Gayle Rubin.

I am not sure the same book could be published today without a lot of caveats…

Zen Thinker

I’ve contributed a lot to this blog, but if you think I’m too right wing, I’m happy to accept criticism. I often find contributions on here are almost universally “intellectually progressive”. I’m very much an “intellectual traditionalist”. But if nothing else, I show visitors of Tom’s blog that there is not a universal radical leftist LGBTQIA+ cut-out for people with minor attraction, and we all have different intellectual and cultural assumptions. So I feel that is something useful to demonstrate at least.

Above all, don’t be offended if I display different values or assumptions.

Fata Morgana

I enjoy hearing opinions different to my own and playing devil’s advocate to opinions that are similar or different to my own in an effort to better understand people, human nature, etc. I’m politically a centrist and socially liberal, and by that I mean genuinely liberal rather than the alternative social conservatism of today that labels itself liberalism whilst demanding unquestioning conformity. What I don’t get, however, is the conflation of social liberalism with the political left.


I like your comments 🙂 A very different perspective to my own, but always interesting.


Even mainstream Wiki is all-age, pro-Wanking.

“Masturbation is frequent in both sexes and at any age. Various medical and psychological benefits have been attributed to a healthy attitude toward sexual activity in general and to masturbation in particular. No causal relationship is known between masturbation and any form of mental or physical disorder.[6][7] In the Western world, masturbation in private or with a partner is generally considered a normal and healthy part of sexual enjoyment. Alongside many other factors—such as medical evidence, age-inappropriate sexual knowledge, sexualized play and precocious or seductive behavior—excessive masturbation may be an indicator of sexual abuse.[110][111]

Masturbation is considered normal when performed by children,[47][7][48] even in early infancy.[39][49][50] In 2009, the Sheffield NHS Health Trust issued a pamphlet called “Pleasure” which discussed the health benefits of masturbation. This was done in response to data and experience from the other EU member states to reduce teen pregnancy and STIs (STDs), and to promote healthy habits.[51]

According to the New Oxford Textbook of Psychiatry (1st ed.), “Masturbation and sexual play are common well before puberty… ”


Is it time to take another small step for humankind, and ‘cancel’ the inhuman AOC. To be humanely equalised to the sensible AOCR/Age of Criminal Responsibilty?

The minimum age of criminal responsibility set by different countries ranges from as low as six up to 18, the median age is 12. 


The masturbation shouldn’t be regulated by AoC laws, in the same way these laws do not regulate family nudism now.

The current state of affairs is rather absurd. On the one hand, they claim that masturbation is harmless to both adults and children, but on the other hand, only as long as they do it in separate rooms. If, as part of a thought experiment, we imagine that the wall between an adult and a minor can move, and if we slowly move the wall away, we get a funny situation in which the minor slowly becomes a “survivor”, and the adult slowly becomes a “criminal” without leaving their seats. It’s sort of “Schrödinger’s child” who simultaneously enjoys and suffers.

Fata Morgana

To play devil’s advocate, imagine you’re defecating in a public toilet. In the cubicle next to you another member of the pubic is defecating. Now the wall is removed. Is the experience the same? Or do you now feel awkward, embarrassed and annoyed? Basically, context matters.


I mean, for most of human existence, going to the bathroom hasn’t been a “private” thing either. Only really since the invention of the water closet. The embarrassment around it is pretty much social conditioning. Just as all shame is. Shame is neither inherent nor necessary. Shame is only arbitrary, and there is nothing innate nor natural about it.

Last edited 1 year ago by Perplexed
Fata Morgana

Socially conditioned or otherwise, context is still very much relevant.


For ethical reasons, most people don’t want to openly observe outsiders or be observed by them while using a public restroom (due to instilled embarrass and physiological odors). Although the creators of male urinals apparently thought otherwise.

My example illustrated the absurdity of the fact that in order to become a “victim” and a “criminal” people don’t even need to interact with each other. On the one hand, the law prohibits minors from watching adult nudity and genitals, for demonstrating which an adult automatically becomes a “molester”, and a minor automatically becomes a “victim”. On the other hand, we have nudist camps and public locker rooms where minors see it and it certainly doesn’t molest or traumatize them.

Fata Morgana

Well, in my example both parties are potentially rendered perpetrator and/or victim of an act of voyeurism by the removal of the wall. But the fact that either set of acts starts out with a wall makes it completely different. No mens rea to accompany the actus reus, in legal terms. And don’t forget that there’s another potential ‘victim’, namely the public morals.


Existing archaic Anglo ‘actus reus’ includes a voluntary failure to act causing a PROSCRIBED CRIME. E.G. an innocent adult waking up to find a naturally inquisitive child manipulating the adult’s genitals, and then NOT stopping, i.e. encouraging, the naturally attracted child!

Last edited 1 year ago by HappyHumpingPup
Fata Morgana

Indeed. Once the wall is removed, failure to change one’s actions could leave one in breach of the law.


Speaking of Schrodinger, have you seen the fact-checker style page I made on him?

A very detailed page, I checked over the 2 biographies used by Wikipedia and a nasty piece by the Irish Times, finding, to my genuine shock, that the own sources they’d relied on either didn’t state what they claimed or disproved their claims.

I’d bet that a journalist could use the info there as a good starting point to write about Schrodinger… Jon Henley perhaps?


I am truly amazed at how many people think you can’t cum before puberty. That you can’t climax. That you can’t orgasm. Oh, sure, you can’t ejaculate, you don’t have sperm. But you can orgasm. Babies masturbate in the womb to orgasm. It’s not just a low level pleasure trip (though it is that too), and it’s not just a comfort mechanism. It just plain feels good, and then feels great for a short while. It’s not the exclusive experience of adults or adolescents.

Zen Thinker

Most Churches today do not proscribe masturbation, although the RCC still relies on an eleventh century text by Peter Damian for its condemnatory teaching:

This is an amazing work, “The Book of Gomorrah”

It is worth noting however that even here, “solitary masturbation” is considered one of the least sexual sins.

I hope the RCC updates its teaching though as I once went several months without masturbation and this is painful and unnatural. There is of course zero harm from solitary masturbation, it is the safest form of sex imaginable.

Everything in moderation, but masturbation can be fulfilling and promote emotional happiness, especially for people who can’t have a sexual partner.

Last edited 1 year ago by Zen Thinker

A nicer outcome compared to the manga writer I mentioned below (though it is too early to tell how his life will pan out), comes from an earlier case I and I’m confident virtually zero people know about, the artist of the extremely popular manga Toriko:


Another page I made before finally deciding it was best to sleep

Readers will probably feel less sympathy with this particular case as, to be frank, he comes across as a classic molester. Needless to say, I don’t find it impossible to empathize with someone who’s deeply stressed and uses (arguably) non normative sexual behavior as a way to have *some* enjoyment in life. It doesn’t make it all A-OK, but I understand: it’s a very harsh world out there. In Japan especially, loneliness, suicide and intense work schedules are commonplace.

It’s a real pity that, at least from everything I’ve read, he didn’t have a girlfriend or wife: that way, perhaps, he could’ve had an outlet and channeled his sexual energies towards a socially acceptable and willing outlet. Admittedly, that doesn’t guarantee he’d curtail some of his (potentially ‘victimless’) bad habits, but it could, could have helped. I hope he can live well later on in life…


Made page for arrested Manga writer

And a page for the creator of the first anthology of homo literature in America, titled “Men and Boys” (1924):

Of general interest.

Ed Chambers

How is it organisations are allowed to promote material like this and claim they are protecting children? Were these girls volunteers? Did they understand they would be playing with sex toys on camera?

Fata Morgana

I can’t see how it harms them if they don’t know what the toys are for. A vibrator can also be used as a massager for sore muscles (as many reviewers seem desperate to point out after a purchase on Amazon). And yes, perhaps a double dildo could double up as a rolling pin, if suitably washed.

I wonder how long the advert will last, though. I recall a similar (picture) advert with a similar message, years ago, which featured a young girl holding a condom still in its packet in between her lips. It didn’t last long. Vertbaudet’s slogan, ‘where children come first’, disappeared at some point, no doubt after someone pointed out the unintended possible connotation of them being paedophiles, albeit considerate lovers. And anyone studying the history of the Werther’s adverts will notice that the decreasing touch and proximity between adult and child over successive editions are inversely proportional to the increasing beauty of the child over successive editions, which itself is proportional to the increasing geriatric chastity (one might say ‘Santafication’) of the adult. Which I take to aptly express the (very much twinned?) cultural obsessions with viewing the figure of the child through an adult aesthetic whilst simultaneously crying ‘sexualisation’.


Spacey’s alleged conduct, imposing himself unwanted on a 14-year-old boy, is in no way defensible, nor is closeted queerness an excuse that authorizes bad behavior.

There was nothing serious that couldn’t be justified. It was just plain gay flirting that the boy ignored. An alternative positive way of scenario is shown in the film “For a lost soldier”


I had heard of Thomas Waugh before, though my knowledge of him and his work is very limited, but I’ve just discovered he co-authored an entire book about a film featuring an intergen relationship. It’s called “Montreal Main” and can be found as PDF here

Interestingly, the foreword is by Shannon Bell, a very based lady who was one of the contributors to Bad Attitude/s on Trial: Pornography, Feminism, and the Butler Decision (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1997). A rather unique book showing women in a far more reasonable light than many MAPs have come to think of ‘feminists’, the book is described in the following way:

Bad Attitude(s) on Trial is a critical analysis of pornography in the context of contemporary Canada. The notion that pornography both reflects sexual domination and ‘victimizes’ women has recently found expression in law in the landmark Canadian Supreme Court decision of R. v. Butler (1992). Many feminists embrace this new law as progressive, but in the post-Butler years, straight, mainstream pornography is still flourishing, while sexual representations that challenge conventional notions of sexuality, such as those centering on gay and lesbian sex and s/m sex, are the focus of censorship. It is the censorship of sexual others that the authors critique from a legal, cultural, gay, and philosophical standpoint.

Interesting stuff, and something I’ll look into. Of course, I hope you’re feeling better soon Tom. Scoff blueberries is my advice! 🙂

[Note: just discovered a potential work of interest from one of the contributors to Bad Attitudes on Trial: Brenda Cossman, The New Sex Wars: Sexual Harm in the Age of #MeToo was published by NYU Press in 2021.

Last edited 1 year ago by Prue

Well things have certainly changed on the porn front. Sure, straight porn is still king, but there has been an ever increasing interest (how organic and actual this interest is is another matter) in transgender porn, gay and lesbian, S&M, etc…

However, this is based off analytics self-released by Pornhub. The same company that, after years of it reigning as #1, removed “Teen” from their included ‘most searched keywords’ of the year. What with their CP scandal I guess it makes *some* sense to appear exclusionary of youth, but it doesn’t change the fact that the attraction is one of the strongest that exists in our species. This is the same Hub that pushes MILF content and promotes it as one of its top categories, while all often “Teens” are in their mid 20’s or older. Also of note is that “Twink” was still on the Gay list, just no hetero equivalent.

In 2023 Canada, ‘sexual others’ (minus a few notable exceptions) are treated like special, more evolved and progressive individuals, whereas typical normal (male) heterosexual attraction to fertile females is deemed as inherently creepy, predatory, etc…