From fallen ‘angels’ to bare Bear

The big story this time was supposed to have been Bruce Rind’s latest, a fantastic paper that came out a couple of months ago, based on German survey data. It is worth making a song and dance about, with a proper analysis and discussion of its contents.

But that will have to wait until another time. There is no urgency compared to a whole bunch of other stuff that needs a more immediate airing, some of which can be dealt with more briefly. I’ll be highlighting my own news in a moment but decency demands prior mention of the continuing plight in Ecuador of Dutch former MAP activist Marthijn Uittenbogaard and his partner Lesley. As I reported briefly in June in the Comment space, linking to a Dutch newspaper report, the pair have been given 10-year prison terms based on convictions there is good reason to believe are based on false testimony. There is little new to say at the moment except that an appeal is said to be underway, and that Newgon’s page on Marthijn is worth following as updates will likely appear there first.

So, what’s my exciting news then? I have been CANCELLED.

Yes, yes, I know. No big deal bearing in mind that MAPs are being wiped out on a daily basis from social media. But say the Pope invites you to a personal audience. You’re a good Catholic. You’re thrilled. It’s a huge honour. You rock up at the Vatican in your smart new Pope-meeting schmutter, glowing with pride as liveried flunkies usher you into His Holiness’ presence. But instead of being greeted warmly with a blessing, all you get is a blunt rebuff: “You, you ingleesha cunt, you’re fucking EX-a-COMMUNICATED as of righta NOW! So fucka you off, maximo pronto!”

The equivalent, for me, of the Pope on this occasion was a newish academic publishing house of growing repute (having published the work of several Nobel prize winners) who had accepted a chapter of mine back in February for inclusion in a forthcoming book, Ethics in Scientific Research: New Perspectives, being edited by a professor at the University of Belgrade. Publication as a hardback, at £79, was scheduled for late July. I felt this was a major triumph. I do not recall any other case in which an easily identifiable MAP such as myself, who favours sexual self-determination for children and writes under their own name, has been given a prestigious and highly visible platform on which to speak on an equal footing with career scientists.

My chapter was duly published online in March, ahead of the print edition. The title speaks for itself: “Where Angels Fear to Tread: Anxieties over Researching Child Sexuality Must Be Overcome”. I had submitted it at the invitation of the publishers, who cited my earlier paper, “Childhood ‘Innocence’ is Not Ideal: Virtue Ethics and Child–Adult Sex”, as the reason for their interest. This paper, which appeared in 2018 in Sexuality & Culture, has been accessed 56k times – massive for an academic article.

The book’s editor, Miroslav Radenkovic, is a professor of pharmacology and bioethics expert at the University of Belgrade. After reading the submitted chapter, he “wholeheartedly” endorsed my approach, saying I had conducted a “very well prepared and executed analysis”. The chapter proposes ethical grounds for researching child sexuality more extensively and in new ways: instead of research targeted, as in the past, at identifying and eliminating “abnormal” child behaviour, I propose a new paradigm aimed at a more positive and inclusive approach to sexual health – one which would allow for a diversity of sexual and gender expression and (reading between the lines) would not rule out minors’ active interest in older partners.

So far so good. And my newly minted Open Access online chapter began to attract significant interest. The numbers are quite small as yet, but known readers include important figures in the field, including Jenny Walsh, a leading light of sexuality education in Australia, and Steven Angelides, author of The Fear of Child Sexuality. There has also been enthusiastic feedback from people I know personally in academic circles.

Loud and proud: A PIE contingent at London Gay Pride in 1983 proclaims the MAP message with no evident fear of “cancellation” by the movement. Forty years on, how times have changed. Photo: Bob Workman.

So, with all this positivity around, what could possibly go wrong? Bizarrely, I still do not know for sure, because publishers IntechOpen have refused to specify any particular grounds for withdrawing the chapter, a cancellation they announced in the middle of last month. They just left a notice on the chapter’s webpage. As well as announcing the retraction, this notice gives a link to the company’s general policy page on retractions and corrections, where all sorts of possible reasons for withdrawal are listed, such as fraud, plagiarism, etc., plus a catch-all clause covering any practice or act “considered potentially harmful to the scientific community”.

But we do not have to look far to see what probably kicked it all off. The very day before the Intech take-down, there was a pile-on against me on Sexnet. As many here will already be aware, this is primarily an expert forum for psychologists, endocrinologists, neuro-scientists, etc., in which most of the invitation-only subscribers are researchers and clinicians, although there has always been a smattering of odd bods – including “specimens” of sexual minorities, such as me, and a few journalists with a specialist interest. The pile-on was dominated not by researchers but by newer feminist members known more for their writing in papers such as the New York Times and the Guardian. They would dearly love to see me kicked off the forum, but support from the moderator, psychologist Prof. Mike Bailey, was very robust. So it seems they went for a softer target: IntechOpen.

Reassuringly, one professor emailed me privately saying “I am sure that the retraction has nothing to do with the quality or ethics of the article itself, but is merely based on some victimological activists contacting them to protest publishing anything written by you. The argument would be that no paedophile can be objective about child sexuality. By the same infernal logic, no victim of CSA can be objective about it, no woman can be objective about women’s issues, no black can be objective about black studies, no gay person can be objective about gay studies, etc.”

Quite. But never mind, there is a silver lining. The paper remains available for free download from ResearchGate, where online readings and downloads are now ticking up nicely. Interest, it seems, has been boosted not diminished by IntechOpen’s precipitate cancellation. In fact there has also been an upturn of interest in my “back catalogue” of academic articles listed at the site, and I am pleased to say I have other new ones in the pipeline.

On a lighter note, my Sexnet battle with the “feminazis”, reminds me that back in June I was approached by Róisín Michaux, a thuggish TERF who writes for a despicable smear sheet called Reduxx. She said she was thinking about starting a podcast and wanted to record a conversation with me on sex education, specifically as regards “the gender identity stuff”, which she felt was “was worrying for parents”.

Why me? Presumably because in an earlier email exchange with her there had been some common ground between us. Like her, and other TERFs, I do feel strongly that the more militant trans activists take their claims to “equality” too far, notably as regards their insistence that big, hairy, muscular “women” with penises should be allowed to compete in women’s athletics. This sort of “equal” rights creates anything but a level playing field. So Michaux was no doubt hoping she could get evidence that even paedos activists are anti-trans (which I am not).

Inspired by the impending Musk-Zuckerberg showdown, I replied saying I had a better idea than a podcast. How about a cage fight instead? I wrote: “As a young, fit, butch dyke (tell me you aren’t!) you’d have no trouble quickly destroying an old-timer like me and it would be far less painful than a conversation with you.”

“Seriously, though,” I added, “the idea of doing a recorded convo for a podcast or whatever is not hugely attractive bearing in mind you must be seeing my role as that of useful idiot. If you want to trying selling it to me somehow by all means give it a go, but it’s not as though I am short of things to do and my energy levels are not what they were.”

She did not “give it a go”. Nor did she reply in any way. No sense of humour, evidently. These attack bitches can dish it out but they can’t take it, can they?



Children do consent to sex, in fact, if not in law. You know that. It’s hardly news.

What is news, though, is that the United Nations has woken up to this simple truth in ways that have palpably begun to alarm conservatives this year and should bring cheer to our hearts – as well as renewed determination among us to assert the human rights principle that lies behind the great  awakening in question.

Have you heard of “The 8 March Principles”?

This is a ground-breaking human rights approach to criminal law, the fruit of lengthy deliberations by the International Commission of Jurists (ICJ), put out in a document earlier this year on, you guessed it, 8 March. It is high-powered stuff, developed through a five-year consultative process involving the UN’s Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) along with numerous relevant NGOs and legal experts.

Best of all is Principle 16. This is the one that has frightened the horses. Donald Trump’s Republican rival Senator Marco Rubio was quick to put out a statement that began by saying the UN had “sponsored a report that asserted underage minors can consent to sex with adults”. He reported that he had fired off a letter to the US ambassador to the UN demanding to know “whether the Biden Administration was aware of the report prior to its publication and expressing opposition to providing UN contributions to any initiatives that promote underage sex”.

Was Rubio exaggerating? Judge for yourself. Headed “Consensual sexual conduct”, here is Principle 16 in full:

Consensual sexual conduct, irrespective of the type of sexual activity, the sex/gender, sexual orientation, gender identity or gender expression of the people involved or their marital status, may not be criminalized in any circumstances. Consensual same-sex, as well as consensual different-sex sexual relations, or consensual sexual relations with or between trans, non-binary and other gender-diverse people, or outside marriage – whether pre-marital or extramarital – may, therefore, never be criminalized.

With respect to the enforcement of criminal law, any prescribed minimum age of consent to sex must be applied in a non-discriminatory manner. Enforcement may not be linked to the sex/gender of participants or age of consent to marriage.

Moreover, sexual conduct involving persons below the domestically prescribed minimum age of consent to sex may be consensual in fact, if not in law. In this context, the enforcement of 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. Pursuant to their evolving capacities and progressive autonomy, persons under 18 years of age should participate in decisions affecting them, with due regard to their age, maturity and best interests, and with specific attention to non-discrimination guarantees.

Consensual sex, we read, may not be criminalized in any circumstances. If they had meant to exclude children below any particular ages of consent they would have said so. Abolition of age of consent laws is not proposed but it is asserted that, despite what these laws stipulate, law enforcement should “reflect the rights and capacity” of minors “to make decisions about engaging in consensual conduct”. They do not say only if the conduct is solitary masturbation of oneself, or sex with another minor. There are no such caveats. There is nothing to invalidate a child’s decision to have sex with a consenting adult. And there is no specification that the child would lack the necessary “capacity” unless they had reached a certain age. Thus, much would depend on how “capacity” is interpreted, but I see nothing here to suggest that Rubio is fundamentally wrong.

Some MAP activists have already started running with this, and I hope there will be many more. Prominent among those taking up the challenge has been a new star (new to me at least) on the pro-MAP scene, Master Seaman Jessica Silva of the Royal Canadian Navy.

In connection with June’s Pride festivities, she reportedly commented on her social media page: “Pride is for everyone and every sexuality is valid and every experience is valid. MAP rights are human rights and MAP is a legitimate part of the queer community and culture.” When challenged with the view that children cannot consent, she shot back smartly by citing the 8 March Principles.

Jessica, I am sure I speak for all at HTOC in saying, “We salute you!”

And a notable contribution has reached me from activist Steve Carson, who describes himself as a MAP and an advocate for a more rational understanding of human sexuality. He has written a rather good essay on consent. It does not mention the 8 March Principles but could easily have been inspired by them, as it puts kids’ de facto ability to consent at the front and centre of his clearly presented argument. Encouraging signs!



As close followers of the Comments space will recollect, Heretic TOC has been approached by a team of researchers in Germany who are seeking participants for a MAP-focused online questionnaire they have put out.

Briefly, the questionnaire is for MAPs who have undergone “any kind of treatment or therapy” in connection with their sexual orientation and have dropped out of doing so for some reason. The stated aim is to explore why they have dropped out, in order to “identify approaches to tailor treatment services more closely to the needs of MAPs”. The researchers emphasise that “It is explicitly not our position that all MAPs need therapy or require treatment”.

Along with a link to the survey itself, the researchers furnished me with an introductory Letter to Participants and a more detailed formal statement, Rationale for the Proposed Study. I read these items and completed the survey myself, in order to get a full appreciation of the questions asked, and the experience of answering them. I published the relevant links and invited readers’ feedback, without making any recommendations as to whether I felt participation was a good idea or not.

Feedback was duly received. In my view, readers made a number of good points, with some support for the survey but also a lot of scepticism as to the value of therapy for MAPs even in any “improved” therapy style that research might lead to. My own feeling is broadly that it is hard to see therapy being of benefit to radical, self-confident MAPs who know how to stay out of trouble. But we are not all like that. Others may take a completely different view, and for their benefit I have decided to take this matter “above the line” i.e. to publicise the research in the main blog space rather than just the Comments.

All you need to do to take part in the survey is to go to the survey link. This starts with all the participation information you need, which may help you decide whether you want to take part.

The four-strong team of researchers are led by Dr Stephan Mühlig, Professor of Clinical Psychology and Psychotherapy at the University of Technology, Chemnitz.

The Karl Marx Monument in Chemnitz, Saxony, which was part of the former Communist state of East Germany, when the city was known as Karl-Marx-Stadt. Chemnitz is be the European Capital of Culture of 2025.

It is perhaps worth adding that as part of my short email correspondence with team member Alina Göpel, I gave her a link to a paper of mine published years ago by ATSA, on the very subject the survey is investigating. Titled “What to do with the entrenched client: A paedophilic entrenched client’s view”, it details my own feelings about unsuccessful therapy undertaken while I was on a period of post-release licence after serving a prison sentence. The paper appeared in ATSA Forum and the full text is here.

Ms Göpel, a Master’s student, replied that she was “very interested” in reading about my experience. She said she had done an internship in a German prison. She had not observed such negative reactions as I reported, but she said, “I can understand your unhappiness regarding the attitude with which you were treated”. She also added, “Also in German programs, we have been confronted with a number of critical arguments regarding their form of treatment and  about the intentions behind such programs.”

“We found your insights to be very educative,” she said, but she hoped I would “understand the point where we’re coming from as well”.

I hope I do understand where they are coming from; but it is where they are going to that is of more concern. I don’t mean this research team, who are simply fact finding. Rather, our concern should be over where therapy itself is heading. As will be widely understood here, treatment programs, especially those in forensic settings, tend to be grounded in cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT) and run in an inflexible, authoritarian, “by the book” style. It is interesting to note that even in relatively benign settings aimed at addressing non-sexual problems, the downside of CBT appears at last to be coming into focus in public discourse. One swallow doesn’t make a summer, but a recent piece in UnHerd (a lively place for spotting signs of the times) may be indicative. Titled “Why CBT won’t set you free: Therapy isn’t making us any happier”, it is by Nina Lyon, who writes on psychology and philosophy. Recommended.



When he’s a drag artist protected by the warm embrace of the LGBT community it seems, aided and abetted by gay-friendly media, police forces keen to promote a pro-diversity image, nightclub owners unwilling to let go of a popular act, and event-space managers such as the prestigious Tate Britain, hosting Drag Queen Story Hour for nursery age kids.

Staggeringly, a man has just been convicted of a public order offence, described by a judge as “hate speech”, for protesting outside a Story Hour performance room at the Tate – not just against the performance itself but more significantly against the drag performer’s  earlier support for another drag queen who had a conviction for child rape. The media and judicial sympathy in this case seemed to be not just for drag queens in general (OK, that’s great) but also for something far more dubious: they appeared to be hell-bent on silencing a protestor who, whatever we may think of him, was actually telling the truth about a matter of legitimate public interest.

Admittedly, one has to suspect that the “rape” may not have been a real one, but a consensual affair that could plausibly be seen as a gay relationship between roughly “equal” partners, given that the “rapist” and the “victim” had both been teenagers at the time, the younger of the two having been 14. Piecing things together from an old news report, it looks as though the older boy (Darren Sewell, who later changed his name to Darren Moore) could have been as young as 17, hence a minor himself. There had been four counts of “rape”, from which we can infer that this had not been a single violent assault, but more likely an ongoing relationship.

The late Darren Moore: the man, and the drag act.

However, these mitigating circumstances are largely conjectural (I have been unable to find a report of the original rape case online) and would not have been known to most of the people who were so keen to deny the protestor’s freedom of speech. Instead, they were prepared to sweep under the carpet what might truly have been a horrible crime simply because it is unfashionable to hold trans people to account for their behaviour, no matter how bad that behaviour might have been.

That, in my old-fashioned view is wrong. Truth, and the freedom to express inconvenient truths, should trump the grubby expediency of identity politics any day, even when it favours MAPs. But I was never any good at politics, so I guess I would say that, wouldn’t I?

Anyway, that’s the downside, but it must be admitted that this single case provides compelling evidence for the extraordinary power of intersectional solidarity between a wide range of sexual minorities if they can plausibly present themselves as on the right side of the gender revolution. Some of us have taken it for granted that a “P” will never be added as a new ingredient to the LGBT+ alphabet soup, but this rallying of support for a “child rapist” reminds us that we can never say never with certainty.

The Tate Britain case is just the latest development in a more complex story with a very tragic side (the “child rapist” was murdered earlier this year, in an all too real “hate” crime) that need not be foregrounded here. However, the backstory shows in spectacular fashion just how improbably popular Darren Moore had become as drag artist Crystal Couture, despite his youthful labelling as a “nonce” offender. See, for instance, news stories: here and here. Also, The Spectator carried a comment piece along somewhat similar lines to my own, albeit from a more conservative position.



I see that star BBC presenter Stephen Nolan is in hot water. The Irish News reported this week that Nolan sent unsolicited sexual images of a potential guest to staff on his radio and television shows some years ago. According to a follow-up in The Guardian:

The guest was Stephen Bear, a Celebrity Big Brother winner wanted by Nolan for his TV show. “I want Bear!” Nolan wrote in one message, saying in another: “If I don’t get Bear tomorrow night, I’m sending more Bear photos.”

One recipient of the images, which showed Bear’s penis, said they were “beyond the pale” in an internal complaint to the BBC, according to the Irish News.

The Guardian solemnly adds that Nolan succeeded in landing Bear for his show in 2016, during which both men stripped to their underwear for “a segment on modelling”.

Look out, there’s a complainant about! The two Stephens, Bear (the slim one) and Nolan (the bear-sized one) strut their stuff in a TV “modelling” sequence.

Whatever the excuse, the show must have been hilarious. See photo. Nolan is clearly “a bit of a lad”. With a body like his you need guts in every sense to run such an item, and indeed to risk the ire of humour-challenged colleagues and our equally po-faced modern media by sending the dick pick, even in the year just before #MeToo.

I always thought he was one of the BBC’s bravest. I don’t watch his shows but I know he was brave enough to invite me as a guest on his TV show some years ago. Talks with his researchers had gone well over the course of several weeks only for the item to be knocked on the head. The BBC’s top brass, I learned, had told Nolan they would not let him do it: too controversial. They felt the corporation should not give the MAP cause “the oxygen of publicity”.



Some heretics will have seen a post by “Scotusbaby” on Boychat reporting that Jacob Breslow has quit his job as an academic at the London School of Economics (LSE). Dr Breslow himself put out a press statement. I would just remind everyone of the Heretic TOC blog last year in which significant background to this latest development was given an airing.

Breslow said that he left because of harassment, which he understands to be “to be part of a broader movement against the field of gender studies, and against trans rights and dignity”.

Did he jump, or was he pushed officially? His statement mentions “LSE’s independent investigation exonerating me”. It is possible that despite this exoneration he was pushed gently; or, rather, encouraged to jump with the help of an undisclosed financial incentive to do so. It would be odd to abandon an attractive academic position, now styling himself an “Independent Scholar and Researcher”, without having won any means to support himself in such a career.

There was a follow-up report earlier this month in Times Higher Education. The article does not speculate or show sign of inquiry into any official pressure, but does give the following as context:

Dr Breslow has been on leave after his involvement with Mermaids, a transgender youth support charity, was highlighted by The Times in October,  which also found he had attended a symposium organised by B4U-ACT, which promotes services and resources “for self-identified individuals…who are sexually attracted to children and desire such assistance”, according to its website.




5 3 votes
Article Rating
Notify of

Oldest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

Wanted to spotlight something I came across that I am so, so proud of, and hope you’ll all take a look over:

Newgon videos! Yes, you heard that right! I do not yet know who’s making them, but there’s a youtube channel and FST channel where you can find informative, concise videos which condense down the info from various Newgon pages into digestible form. Using the voice of David Attenborough and others, I think it’s great to see these brilliant attempts at alternative media content.

I particularly recommend the two personal profiles, both of which are based on pages made by me. Check out:

[I got emotional watching this one; I was so, so proud to see the research I did being summarized and making it into a video. Esp. considering this article contains independent research / connections made by myself, not just copy-pasting from Wikipedia etc.]

Definitely worth a look and hope you’ll find one you like 🙂


One argument often given in defense of age of consent laws is that they (supposedly) reduce the rates of teenage pregnancy, which is assumed to have negative/harmful effects.

A 2023 study published in the Demography journal failed to find evidence of a causal link between teen pregnancy and psychological problems in adulthood, concluding that “it seems increasingly likely that causal effects of young motherhood are small or nonexistent, or in some cases confined to relatively advantaged segments of the population who are unlikely to experience young motherhood in any case.” A professor of demographics commented thusly on the study:

There’s an article in demography saying anti-teen-pregnancy policies are not justified because Teen Pregnancy Is Fine After All… and it’s not [sic] by anybody even vaguely on the right! i’m gonna be honest i find this paper fairly shocking.

There are numerous papers that found that children born to teenage mothers are more likely to have behavioral problems and lower intelligence. This recent study tested the causality of this finding by using polygenic scores (PGS) to control for the confounding effects of parental intelligence. After controlling for this confound, children born to teenage mothers were found to have higher IQ scores on average than children born to older mothers.

Here is a comment on this study by a statistician with a large following on Twitter:

The relationship between parental age and kids’ intelligence is nonlinear and indicates harms for younger parents.

But that is because of selection.

If you adjust with edutainment polygenic scores, you can see that parental age is negatively related to kids’ intelligence.

Last edited 18 hours ago by AnonyMAP

11 year old in Ohio could face prosecution after being dolicited for nude pics by guy in 30s…
glad they got their priorities right? psychopaths,, am i ok to share link? so you can read this horror story (of which is happening all over the land of the jail)


Video shows officer repeatedly discussed charging 11-year-old victim with child sexual abuse offense | AP News

There are laws in most states now that address this issue. Ohio seems to be late to the party.


Yes, laws that prevent children from being charged.

I’m not working on anything at present, but I certainly want to. I’m just waiting for something to strike me. I have a few ideas, but nothing concrete yet. I want to have something done at some point before the end of the year.


interesting that they deem the girl capable of producing it… but apparently its illegal as they are innocent? such hypocrisy and madness , but then usa is a bit of a country of lunatics…. am i allowed to say that? bit similar to the protection given to 17 year olds here by not letting them drink .. but will punish them for attempting to buy it? people have no right sayign any one on here abuses children when they make laws like this….


Religion is one hell of a drug. People still believe in deterrence theory. People love the police. People love punishment and suffering. The United States, like all Anglospheric countries, is fundamentally conservative and puritanical.

Ed Chambers

I think the general idea is you post (Inc links) and Tom moderates.


Body Guilt and Shame.

Sex Shame and Guilt.

Last edited 3 days ago by HappyHumpingPup

‘Sex4All’ – a new universally popular movement with BIG slogan on all apparel and ad spaces Worldwide (small motto “antis need HELP!”)

(All rights reserved HappyHumpingPup, Sept 2023, all proceeds to HTOC.)


Quote two HOT Loli twins, “Mommy, Mommy, for our seXy siXth birthday we want some ‘Sex4All’ white knickers so we can flaSh them to your seXy new boyfriend who we both fancy now he gets HARD when we wriggle and giggle on his lap.”

Last edited 2 days ago by HappyHumpingPup

Good ask Boss, and what to do (but love) incorrigble AAMS based on lifelong ‘Love & Peace Generation’ positive seXperiences. Now demonised and moneytised by negative neo Victorian ‘War & Hate Generating’ antis – TOSSERS!!

Last edited 2 days ago by HappyHumpingPup

Incorrigible 20th Century pro-active/affirmative AAMs.

Child Minder Bold MAP had to carry two HOT Lolis, 8 & 9, across a muddy winter park to the dry-tarmac play area. En route, the swaying gymnast leggy HOT Loli, 9, let her free hand swing down to repeatedly brush …


Last edited 1 day ago by HappyHumpingPup

Kathleen Stock seems such a warm amd winning sort of girl-sausage otherwise but here the brazen presuppositions undergirding everything said render her entire article a largely superfluous indulgence, one that, for the millionth time, serves before anything else to verily sing of how utterly intrinsic the idea of paedophilia is to the ongoing generation, sustenance and maintenance of unconscious public desire…

Last edited 4 days ago by warbling j turpitude

Could you elaborate? Are you saying that paedophilia is intrinsic to today’s youth? I am not going to read the article as it will no doubt make me angry.

Perhaps “disavowed” would have been a better choice of word than “unconscious” desire. The kind of disavowal intrinsic to that whole cultural operation by which we see children as, among other things, sweet, innocent, vacant, smooth-skinned, spontaneous and mischievous – at the very same time constructing the desirable ideal as, among other things, sweet, innocent, vacant, smooth-skinned, spontaneous and mischievous. The obsession with paedophilia might be most simply characterised as the outraged sense that some bounder other than oneself has dared to cast his shadow over this very ideal, situated as it is at dead center of our entire cultural malaise..

It would seem that some deadly earnest tosser has flagged your comment already Tom, for scrolling through the whole damn lot of ’em just now it is nowhere to be found. Can only hope the mods have their heads still screwed on and restore it asap. My own comment at one of the Brand-related essays was thusly flagged, but pretty soon managed to pass Unherd muster (sic) …and why, even got some upvotes!

Last edited 4 days ago by warbling j turpitude
Ed Chambers

A lot of the usual rhetoric in the article, as already pointed out. Trying to see the glass half full, the author does well to point out we should be allowing the academic freedoms Kershner was punished for using.


She writes:

For instance, he discusses a situation where there exist children who are “precocious and fully grasp the different dimensions of sex like some precocious children can grasp the different dimensions of music and mathematics” (and moreover where, presumably. we could somehow reliably test for this understanding). The relevance to the actual world, where children are not actually precocious in this way and sex is nothing relevantly like mathematics or music, is totally obscure.

Here she uses common victimological and sex-negative misconceptions and makes no attempt to be neutral. Not some children are precociously developed, but on the contrary, most children are artificially inhibited in their development by Puritan society. “Sex” is no different from studying mathematics and music. This is the same natural activity that develops and brings satisfaction.

Novels can do this stuff much better. Lolita can tell you what is wrong with paedophilia much more powerfully than any dry fictional construct from a bloodless academic.

It’s shifting to the negative side again. Ok, if she likes books, how about this.Voor een verloren soldaat – a Dutch autobiographical novel written by choreographer Rudi van Dantzig about his youth during World War II. In 1992, a film was made based on this story, also called “For the Lost Soldier.”
Both the book and the film are one of the positive examples, not being a fiction of the “perverted” mind of the writer, to which she could refer to in order to defend her negative point of view. The author described his own experience of positive inter-generational relationships
I would be glad if someone repeated this post in the comments under her article.


Ok, im not completely stupid, but could you simplify that post please? I know people have better vocabulary than me on here, but…

warbling j turpitude

Ok i will try to simplify. The image of a perfectly-formed but elusive child is the one from which our culture’s erotic ideal is essentially derived. The more closely a grown-up/legal person can manage to approximate such qualities = the more desirable they are (The erotic is always several steps ahead of the plainly sexual). But god forbid anyone ever try to ‘close the gap’ between image and the actual model on which it is based = the child itself.

Haha…how did i do?


nope, still struggling… you mean, instead of looking, moving on to actual sex??
anyway, this whole image thing is a bit absurd… im not sure what you are equating to as a child, but by my book, (and science) its soemone before puberty..
i cant even look at my old page 3s from the 90s as they feature 16 yr olds and i am abusingthem by looking at them…. yes they were legal then if anyone asks. (actually i dont even have any im just puttign that idea out there.)


By such typically perverse Anglo anti-logic an AAM ogling an adult is either a self made ‘victim’, or an ‘offender’ victimising that adult?


Consent culture:

Sex-positive movement emphasizes and supports the importance of consent in sexual encounters. Consent is the first and most basic form of respect between people when engaging in sexual activities. The negotiation and form of communication when discussing consent is the most important aspect when promoting healthy sexual relationships. Consent culture promotes affirmative consent, encourages enthusiastic consent, and the importance of consent education to foster healthy and respectful sexual relations. Consent gives a way to articulate and legitimize our moral judgments in public.

Affirmative consent describes the explicit, informed, and voluntary assent to engage in sexual behavior. Anyone engaging in sexual interactions is responsible for making sure that the other party or parties have given their direct consent without hesitation. Absence of protest, words, or action does not mean consent, and silence will never be a form of consent. There should be no expectation of protest or opposition.

A positive expression of consent is the main focus of enthusiastic consent. Invoking enthusiastic consent entails focusing on the presence of a “yes” as opposed to the absence of a “no.” It can be communicated vocally or nonverbally using encouraging body language. These include nodding, maintaining eye contact, and smiling, as examples of body language. It is significant to remember that while these may infer consent, they do not represent explicit affirmative consent, always get verbal confirmation. The key to maintaining a healthy sexual relationship and consent is to regularly check in with one’s partner or partners to make sure they are comfortable and that their opinions have not changed.

Quote Bold MAP, “Always get affirmative consent. E.G. A mid-20th Century affirmative HOT Loli, 6, on a quiet grassy knoll learning of teens regularly copulating there, ‘Let’s DO it!’ Pulled her panties down and excitedly straddled an unprepared Bold MAP, but then said, ‘THAT’S no good. YOU get on top!’ Affirmative, or demanding to the point of abusive?”

Last edited 5 days ago by HappyHumpingPup

Bold MAP, ‘Affirmative Consent’. Part Two of WAY too many to retell here.

WAY back Bold MAP, 14, with HOT Loli cousin, 11, quote, “I’ve got the keys to my friend’s house while she’s on holiday with her family…


Last edited 4 days ago by HappyHumpingPup

Unsubstantiated claims (in the latest “updates”) that Ballard is facing a probe for his maneuverings in Canoa.


Concerns this:

Officials can’t find the many victims. They must have been hidden in tunnels.

Ed Chambers

All if his virtue signalling and underhand tactics finally coming back around for him. In his case, I couldn’t care less if these allegations are unsubstantiated or otherwise. Throw him to the dogs, in the same manner he threw others.


New book has become available: “Ideological and Political Bias in Psychology: Nature, Scope, and Solutions” (2023) The book features a chapter from Bruce Rhind “Sacred Values, Politics, and Moral Panic: A Potent Mix Biasing the Science behind Child Sexual Abuse and Related Phenomena” and also a chapter from Michael Bailey

Fillip’s post on BC


I found out about this new chapter, looked up the book and came here to post about it, and someone’s beat me to it! :p

Happy days anyway, there seems to be lots of interesting chapters well worth thinking about and that, I’m sure, would generate discussion. I’m half way through Rind’s chapter…


Among a pro-MAP Holy Femme Trinty: Levine, Silva, Hewson.

Late great leading lawyer barrister Barbara Hewson was involved in controversy in 2013, after the Press Officer of the National Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Children (NSPCC) strongly urged her to remove or reword an article she had written for the online magazine Spiked on 8 May entitled “Yewtree is Destroying the Rule of Law,” Hewson’s article criticised the role of the NSPCC (which she called a “moral crusader”) and the Metropolitan Police in treating complainants as “victims” in the wake of the Savile scandal, and the proliferation of prosecutions of elderly defendants. She had observed that the crimes of television presenter Stuart Hall (who had pleaded guilty to numerous charges of indecent assault on girls as young as 8) constituted ‘misdemeanor offences’, as opposed to crimes like rape and murder.

Hewson had proposed that there be a statute of limitations for criminal sex offences; that complainant anonymity be removed, and that the Age Of Consent, which was raised by the Criminal Law (Amendment) Act 1885 should be changed back to the previous age of thirteen.

In December 2019, Hewson was suspended from practising for two years for alleged ‘offensive’ social media comments responding to proven offensive attacks on her. However, Mr Justice Pepperall later reduced the suspension to one year but said it was based on “significant evidence of additional mitigating circumstances” in Hewson’s terminal cancer diagnosis which were not before the Bar tribunal. In this way, Hewson died with her bar privileges intact.

Last edited 6 days ago by HappyHumpingPup

4 / 7:58
Barbara Hewson interview over her controversial child sex abuse comments (Channel 4 News, 8.7.13)


Like the death of Barbara Hewson, we’ve lost another sympathetic individual: French philosopher Rene Scherer. He died in February this year, aged 100.

As part of a tribute to Schérer after his death, his friend a former sexual partner Patrick Schindler gives a brief account of minor-iniated sexual activity, arguing that Schérer was not a pedophile or advocate for sexual activity between pre-pubescents and older people:

I must point out that when I went to his house the many times with my friend Guy P. (who was one of his lovers), I always knew René to be in a relationship with consenting minors over the age of eighteen (obviously at the time the majority were 21 years old, so…!). And that I affirm loud and clear!

Anecdotally, at sixteen, therefore a minor, I was part of the MLJ (Mouvement de Libération de la Jeunesse) which called for total liberation, especially sexual. That year I had had one of my first homosexual experiences with R., a friend of my mother’s, and I can swear that it was really me who initiated it! Today, this wouldn’t be serious since the age of consent is now 15, but at the time, imagine the trial my partner would have had!…

I have updated the page for him with more info about his thought, the latter of which focuses on the figure of the ‘immigrant’ or ‘stranger’, as well as his rejection of identity politics, including the injunction of victim culture to identity as a ‘victim’.


Yawn! Another ‘philosopher’ who nobody has heard of who may have had some sensibleish ideas decades ago, and even his pathetic friend has to state that he was not a pedophile or an advocate of such. Really is such dull stuff!


In fairness, he might be obscure to you, but for those who’re familiar w/ Michel Foucault, Beauvior etc., the French scene, he isn’t all that obscure. All it takes is Foucault, to Deleuze, and bam you’ll end up seeing the name Hocquenghem or Schérer somewhere along the line. They were contemporaries, taught and worked together, read each others books and were influenced by each other. Obscurity depends on what world you’re in and what your interests are.

Bruce Rind is not exactly well known either, outside certain segments of academia and interested individuals and groups. None of these are big time, current celebrities like say, Russell Brand, but they’ve had their moments in the spotlight w/ the Rind et al. controversy and the Coral Affair (Scherer)

You may find it boring, but others do not. And, I think his friend was meaning that Scherer was not himself a pedophile, which may well be true.


Whether he was a pedophile we cannot know, but those who say that he did not advocate for sexual activity between pre-pubescents and older people, they clearly have never read a single page of “L’Emile Perverti” and “Co-ire”!


I have a bad feeling after this Russell Brand madness that the AOC might be risen due to people saying 16 year old schoolgirls cant consent to older guys nah, the abuse is her being in school against her will, surely?


I think you may be right. I’ve seen multiple news segments float the idea:

Here’s a recent one from the Right-wing aligned GB News: Russell Brand accuser calls for change in law to stop men in their 30s having sex with 16-year-olds. I remember this one and how the speakers frame legal change not as a case of preventing older males having legal sex w/ younger females, but as a case of changing the law so that 16YO’s can’t have sex w/ older males! I.e. the 16YO’s have to be stopped! ‘Child protection’ doesn’t even come in to the discussion; older/younger is just deemed ‘innapropriate’ and that’s apparently enough…
Here’s one from a more liberal outlet, where mainstream reporters speak about current affairs: Bringing down Russell Brand
[I can’t remember where exactly but either this vid or the next one does explicitly float the idea of raising the AOC].

The case of Russell Brand presents a great opportunity for media to home in on the seeming loophole of 16YO’s and above, in the UK, being in a legal grey area for age-gap sex contact [to my understanding?].

From my memory of school, a lot of young women I knew would have been very pissed off they couldn’t date all the seemingly interesting older guys outside of school. I think they’d have been a lot more unhappy, that’s for sure….
From where I stand, the happiest young people I know are those who started early and got on w/ work or school, and have a very relaxed attitude with very little sexual hangups, w/ sex just being a pleasant part of life. By contrast, the unhappy ones are those who are obsessed with age and psychologically crushed under the weight of age consciousness, virginal or lacking in sexual experience while being conscious of their age clock tick tick ticking. “I’m X years old and I still haven’t!” Etc.
As I get older, it is clearer and clearer to me that suddenly starting “real” life at 16 or 18 is far too late, and a childhood full of playing video games and not developing social and technical skills (computer skills, learning instruments, singing and speaking, cooking and domestic life) is not likely to give you a fighting chance of having a fallback or making something of yourself, even just having a meaningful life (unless you want to be a videogame streamer).

So yeah, media is pushing largely to the completely wrong direction IMO when it comes to people’s sense of freedom, their sense of being wanted, desired and needed (which apparently is only supposed to start when you’re 18 if it doesn’t come from family or peers), and their long-term mental health.

Don’t want to be depressing, bc I think ppl are getting very pissed off with the incessant age taboo and self-policing and nonsense ‘cancellations’ over nothing (i.e. losing your job over tweets). So I think that, the crazier it gets, the more the Antis reach and render ppl paranoid and miserable that they might, dear god the horror, find a 17YO attractive, all the while treating legal age gap relations as though they’re criminal – the more they create space for backlash.


WAY back 2014. Natch it’s all changed since then. It’s WAY worse/better, but the fakestream coverups are so much better/worse.

Radio KUER & BBC World Service October 15, 2014: ‘Why Kids Sext’ Describes Nude Photos As ‘Social Currency’ Among Teens.

In April, residents of Louisa County, Va., were shocked to learn of a sexting “ring” among the town’s teenagers. When Hanna Rosin asked teens from Louisa County High School how many people they knew who had sexted, a lot of them replied: “Everyone.” But what was originally characterized in the media as an organized criminal affair was soon revealed to be widespread teen behavior.

So they’ve moved from thinking this is sinister to realizing, within a few days, this is completely common.

That’s what’s amazing to me that this is so common given what we all know to be true about teenage awkwardness. The girls would actually get around this. I mean, some girls are just into it. They look great, they look like the pop stars they see, they’re proud to send their pictures.

People would get around this by taking pictures of parts of their body, like they might just do the upper part of their body, or they might take a picture in a dark room or at certain angles. People worked hard at these pictures — not the guys, they just take one kind of picture — but the girls worked pretty hard at these pictures to make them look like the pictures that they saw in other magazines.

On what the sexts mean to the boys who receive them
The sexts are just their currency. The girls described it to me as, “Oh, [it’s like] the guys are collecting baseball cards or Pokemon cards.” They don’t actually take them that seriously. They’re not a huge part of their sex life; it’s just something [the boys] collect. … It’s cool to have one that nobody else has. It’s kind of a social currency more than it is a springboard for fantasy, which is kind of surprising.

There’s so much free porn out there that these pictures serve a different role. These guys look at these pictures for five seconds; they’re just not that big of a deal to them. And so sending them along is kind of fun. … It seems like a prank.

Last edited 8 days ago by HappyHumpingPup

One parent in the UK who we spoke to said her eight-year-old daughter was nearly coerced into sexual activity with an older man on the website.

She told the BBC: “My daughter had seen some videos go viral on TikTok about people being on this Omegle, so she explored this site and there’s no log-in or age restrictions or anything. These people were saying she was beautiful, hot, sexy. She told them she was only eight years old and they were OK with that. She witnessed a man masturbating and another man wanted to play truth or dare with her. He was asking her to shake her bum, take off her top and trousers, which she thankfully did not do.”


why kids sext? well, becasue they are horny? their God given right?? But no, thye are being repressed in the guise of protection..


A news story worth thinking about:

A man killed an 18YO and the rest of the 18YO’s immediate family, after the 18YO had masturbated / exposed himself in front of the man’s kids and partner (an event for which he was already facing legal repercussions brought about by this man). Vowing to “do something” about this “pedophile”, in an argument with the 18YO’s family, he ends up shooting all 4 of them.

I think most ppl would see how obviously extreme it would be to kill someone, let alone 4 people including children, over masturbation or being naked. This man is clearly far more dangerous than a masturbator… But I can just hear the shrill apologists: “what if it was your child”?

For one, if my child got flashed etc, I’d react depending on how they felt. I’d ask the child about it, not just fester and stew in silent rage and assume it’s the worst thing that could have ever happened in a girl’s life (from the 1 woman I know who got flashed as a child, the fear of how her mother would react, and then the reality of her enraged mother, was what terrified her. In addition to school dramas and loneliness).
You know what I can say with a lot of confidence I would not do: kill someone over it. I might be horrified and pissed off if it was a particularly nasty person who flashed, or who seemed violent. But I still wouldn’t kill over it.

If you ever needed evidence that the symbol of the innocent child leads to real harm, it’s cases like these…


Several years ago, a mother told me about an episode her daughter had been confronted with while she was going for a walk in a park with the educators and the other children in her class (she was maybe 7-8 at the time), for they met an exhibitionist who showed himself naked to them.
They quickly returned to school, and while the educators called all the parents by phone, one by one, to tell them about the “terrible experience” their children had been through, the children, who stood aside, giggled and boasted to each other: “I saw him completely, you saw nothing!”.

Ed Chambers

Kids ain’t the angels they’re supposed to be. It’s systematic nonsense that says they should be. Centuries of dogmatic nonsense dressed up in the narratives of Ibrahimic Religions.


What utter nonsense!

It’s ENTIRELY the consequence of feminism, and all the pathetic attempts on this blog to say otherwise will get you nowhere. It’s as simple as this: girls and women don’t NEED sexual intimacy, only males are born with this curse, and females run the world and so combine their labor to prevent younger females from outcompeting them with men, so that they can live a parasitical existence off those men by way of marriage, alimony or abuse payments, in an accustomed manner their useless degrees in sociology, psychology, management and the soft humanities would never acquire for themselves. Me-gain Sharkle, anyone?

But yes, go on fighting the foaming at the mouth priests, the Moral Majority a la Handmaid’s Tale, because they are the ones with the power who are persecuting children by putting them on the sex offenders registry. Or accept the truth contained within the Abrahamic religions: women are indeed the seed of evil, which is why they need to be brought up well by their fathers, with a diet of sexual touching, of course, before their husbands take command.


Utter Anglophone/Anglobitch ‘dominant narrative’!

Meanwhile within or beyond the narrow, repressed Ibrahamic matriarchal phoney Anglophone, sexual needs are linked to individual libido FMLGBTQ.

And, early Islamic (not earlier Ibrahamic) cults first noted that Lolitots soon found the ‘curse’ of their HOT clits and became insatiable. Enter brutal male manufactured FGM to deter naturally promiscuous HOT Lolis, “Hotter than the male”.

Naturally undetered uncut HOT Lolis have always let all-age, often hapless, males do the chasing while they do the catching.

Quote, olde seaside postcard cartoon with Laddie boasting to Loli, “I’ve got one of these, you haven’t got one of these.” Loli: “No, but I’ve got one of these, and with one of these I can get as many of those as I want!”

Last edited 5 days ago by HappyHumpingPup

You are absolutely right. Victimology feminism has its roots in religious fundamentalism. And both work together to push punitive laws based on puritanical indoctrination!


all these xenophobias and taboos are invented and spread by ignorant adults under the guise of “morality”. Children just laugh and don’t pay much attention to it. Their innocence lies not in the absence of erotic desires and fantasies, but in the absence of sex-negative attitudes that society imposes on them.


“Their innocence lies not in the absence of erotic desires and fantasies, but in the absence of sex-negative attitudes that society imposes on them.”

>Nice point, very quotable!

Ed Chambers

I read about this a while back. I could be very wrong but I suspect the murderer saw this situation as an opportunity to virtue signal, signifying any such sex crime, or similar, as punishable by death with extreme prejudice. I blame the MSM with #metoo and feminazis for hyper sensitising the populous, some of whom are already unstable enough as it is.

How any reasonably minded person could ever think flashing / masturbating should be punished by death is testament to how polarised the world has become, pro violence / anti sex.

Make love, not war.


A guy not far from me was attacked by one of these not right in the head vigilantes…. he had exposed himsefl to adults… he had his penis cut off and died excruciatingly…. if this vile psycho wasnt jailed for life then i this country has no justice.. im to scraed to even read the articles..


From 25m.08s This week, in a new series called The Knock, we’ve heard the stories of two women whose lives were changed when they were told that a loved one had been arrested for sexual offences against children. Anita talks to Deborah Denis, Chief Executive of the Lucy Faithfull Foundation, and Rachel Armitage, Professor of Criminology the University of Huddersfield about the impact of ‘the knock’ on the families and friends of men arrested for these crimes. They’ll discuss what support families need, and what they are calling for.

Last edited 11 days ago by HappyHumpingPup

I got the knock .. cos of what i wrote .. the robots (police) did a great job of traumatiasing me and my parents. one of who was undergoing cancer treatment. pure evil they are!


“Damn The Children When The Devil Must Be Found!’ I thought of those lines last Monday night, as I watched Panorama’s television account of the Orkney ‘Satanic abuse’ scandal. They come from W H Auden’s poem ‘Voltaire at Ferney’, which is about the defence of humanity against superstitious madness. Panorama played an audiotape: a six- year-old girl screaming tearful denials to three adult interrogators. ‘He did so put his dickie in your fanny’ they insisted. She screamed again.’ ”


ICJ March 8 Principle/Principle 16.

Facts, posi-checked by

Christine Stegling. UNAIDS deputy executive director for the policy, advocacy and knowledge branch. Email to 22 Apr 2023.
Di Fiore, Bettina.

Fact Check Response: What does the UN-linked report actually say about children and consent?” Live Action. 21 Apr 2023.

Last edited 14 days ago by HappyHumpingPup

Links positively confirm that AAAMs Amorous Adult Attracted Minors can in fact consent to shared, or solo, sex pleasure with any age partner(s). Though not in totalitarian Anglo-Victorian fake law now made Worldwide ‘Dominant Narrative’ propaganda. Perversely turning pleasure into so called ‘pain’, with pretentious pretext unfounded in any fact.

Check-mate, UK Grand Chess Master victim-MAP Brian Eley. In July 1991, Eley was arrested at his South Yorkshire home on suspicion of sexually abusing an underage male he had once coached. He was released on bail. Although not charged at the time, Eley jumped bail approximately one month after his arrest, and disappeared. He was subsequently charged with more than 30 offences of a similar nature and remained a fugitive, wanted by the British police and Interpol.

There were over the years numerous unconfirmed reports of sightings of Eley in various places, MOSTLY IN AMSTERDAM. According to reportage by Plaskett’s wife, Fiona Pitt-Kethley, which was published some months after his death, Eley had a “miserable time” as a FUGITIVE FROM BRITISH JUSTICE. After running out of the money he received from selling his house in the UK, he earned a living playing chess for small bets in cafés and doing computer work for a religious organization’s ashram. In 1992, he was identified in Amsterdam by UK Grandmaster Stuart Conquest and a Dutch chess player who NOTIFIED DUTCH POLICE BUT FOR UNKNOWN REASONS ELEY WAS NOT APPREHENDED. (HHP: Modern-EU Dutch cops still know pleasure from pain, fact from fiction? Pity that Anglo mass mind-RAPED Ecuador don’t – DOH!)

He had reportedly established a small circle of friends in the city to whom he claimed everything was about a “disagreement with the BCF/BritishChessFederation.”


The anti-consent Antis love MAPS constantly bLogged down in ancient semantic swamps about who the fuck first defined so called ‘consent’.

Surely a subjective more than objective concept. E.G. Post-WW2 Boomers ‘Love Generation’ quote, “Whatever turns you on.” Or, olde Victorian Sunday skool quote, “Sex is fun, but sex is sin. Sins are forgiven, so get stuck in.”

While increasingly clean out of control-freaks’ control, modern Worldwide self-defined ‘Generation Sext’ mercilessly mocks Ancient & Victorian so called ‘Sex Laws’, and blasts, “My Mind My Body My Choice My MAP – Mind Yer Own!”


Since so called Original Sin/Carnal Knowledge, a Biblical Blind Faith concept first enforced, long since scrapped by self-assumed self-serving powers self-consenting to falsely define and enforce private and public consent. Now falsely assumed by self-serving, profiteering populist media….

[MOD: etc., etc., etc. etc. deleted. Quite long, largely incoherent.]

Last edited 17 days ago by HappyHumpingPup

Was the Ancient Greek poetess and lesbian archetype Sappho a MAP? That’s not entirely clear from reading the English translation of her work. Although the word “girl” occurs regularly in her poems, no exact ages are given. In English, the word “girl” can also refer to young adult women. And while her explicit use of the word “child” in Gorgo and in The First Kiss is intriguing and suggests an openness to intergenerational romance, a metaphorical interpretation cannot be completely ruled out, although it seems unlikely.

It turns out that the answer to this question has been lost in translation, and that there is, in fact, linguistic evidence that Sappho was a MAP. In this paper by Sappho scholar André Lardinois, the author refutes Holt Parker’s claim that the subjects of Sappho’s poetry were adult women, explaining that Sappho used Greek words that specifically refer to girls aged 12–18, and calls out the tendency of modern scholars to omit this information from their works.

Here are some relevant quotes from Lardinois’ paper:

Parker argues that there is no credible evidence that Sappho’s audience consisted of young, unmarried girls, and instead proposes that she sang at banquets about her love for other adult women.[2] […] It is my conclusion, after a review of the evidence, that Parker is correct in rejecting the ‘Sappho school- mistress’ paradigm as a plausible reconstruction of the performance circumstances of her poetry, but that the subject of her poetry is, nevertheless, young women or girls.[4]

2. Parker’s article brings to its logical conclusion a trend in modem Sappho studies to refer to the subjects of her poetry as “women,” without specifying that they were probably young, adolescent women: Winkler 1981/1990, Stehle 1990, Snyder 1991. These studies, however,unlike Parker’s, do not explicitly deny that these women were adolescent.

4. By young women or girls, I mean women who in our sources, including Sappho’s poetry, are referred to as κόραι, παρθένοι, and sometimes παῖδες. They denote the age-group between puberty and marriage (roughly twelve to eighteen year olds): see Calame 1977: 1.63-64.

We may conclude that there is no reason to doubt that Sappho talked about young, adolescent women in her poetry. This is confirmed by eleven testimonia which, although late, could have easily inferred this from her poetry. Parker’s hypothesis that our classical sources misread Sappho’s poetry in this respect, changing adult women into girls, lacks positive proof and is actually contradicted by other representations of homosexual women in the Roman period. The fragments also speak overwhelmingly about paides and parthenoi and, in one or two cases, address them directly (frs. 58 and 140a). There are, furthermore, among her poetry at least two types of songs, the wedding songs and the hymns, which must have involved her in the setting up of young women’s choruses.

Last edited 17 days ago by AnonyMAP

“The ancient writers who quote the poem, Plutarch and Pseudo-Longinus, treat the physical symptoms which Sappho describes so fully as a manifestation of her eros for the girl; so they are, in the sense that if she had not been in love with the girl she would not have experienced such symptoms” Greek Homosexuality, p. 179,

“While the foregoing examples all concern sex among men, histories of women’s same-sex sex have also demonstrated instances of age asymmetry. Some scholars believe that Archaic Greek poet Sappho, perhaps the original lesbian, and certainly the reason for the name, had one significantly younger lover.” ( Introduction to “Sex across the Ages: Restoring Intergenerational Dynamics to Queer History”)

Archilochos, Sappho, Alkman: Three Lyric Poets of the Late Greek Bronze Age:
“And the first biographical entry on Sappho in the tenth-century A.D. lexicon known as the Suda simply states that “she was slanderously accused of shameful intimacy with certain of her female pupils. […] 6. Ovid Tristia 2.365, “Lesbia quid docuit Sappho nisi amare puellas?” though often cited as evidence for Sappho’s homosexuality, probably means that Sappho taught girls to love and belongs to a tradition, discussed by Dover (pp. 174-75), of Sappho as an instructor of girls. 7. Horace Odes 2.13.25 (querentem)lSappho puellis de popularibus, cited by Dover (p. 174) as a source for Sappho’s homosexuality, merely refers to Sappho’s plaintive verses about the girls of her native Lesbos and does not mention her sexual conduct as such. 8. A remark by the fourth century A.D. Greek rhetorician Themistius (p. xiii; p. 170 D), to the effect that Sappho lavished praise on herpaidika, may also deserve mention (this word is a standard Greek term for the youthful beloved in a male homosexual union). Yet as Themistius is only talking about verbal expressions of passion, his statement cannot truly be regarded as testimony to Sappho’s sexual habits. ”
Hallett, J. P. (1979). Sappho and Her Social Context: Sense and Sensuality. Signs: Journal of Women in Culture and Society, 4(3), 447–464. doi:10.1086/493630

Ah yes, “taught girls to love” couldn’t possibly mean anything sexual/romantic. The popular phrase “To be a friend of Sappho” originiates from the often absurd mental gymanstics of historians to interprete everything as heteronormative (and teleionormative).

“In other lyrics, too, the speaker, presumably Sappho herself, is portrayed as sensually attracted and aroused by other women. Most notable of these is fragment 49 L-P, addressing a woman named Atthis. Its speaker states: “I adored you, once in the past, when you seemed to me to be a small, graceless child.” Fragment 96 L-P, which avows desire for Atthis, and fragment 1 L-P, the hymn to Aphrodite, merit note in this context as well”;;doc.view=print

“The relationship of desire and withholding, of presence and absence seems to move Sappho to write, to create in the elusive, illusive fragmentary net of words the absent one, the desired one. In fragment 105a, the poet’s gaze in the simile enacts the drama of desire and withholding, presence and absence. […] The distance, absence, of the sweet-apple are bound up with desire for the unattainable fruit. And the hyacinth [flower, symbol of boylove], once fallen from an imagined height, is destroyed. The fragments [105a and 2] suggest an aesthetic distance, of the beauty of the unreachable object of desire, suggest the superiority of the unattainable. Like the voice of the poet in other poems, yearning for a girl, for Aphrodite’s presence to help her win the girl, watching her beloved seated next to a man, remembering the girl Atthis loves, the voice in these fragments values the absent object of desire, regrets the fall of the sweet flower in the present, to the ground, to the realm of men, of daily work. The sweetness of the desired object is lost when it enters the realm of marriage, adulthood, consumption.” Sappho Is Burning, Page duBois, page 52

“The person most associated with lesbian love in Greece was Sappho, the 6th century poet from the island of Lesbos. Save one poem, only fragments of her work have come down to us. In her poetry Sappho wrote about the world of women, their daily loves, their marriages and their participation in religious ceremonies. She also praised the beauty of women and the love that they shared, and spoke of her own love for girls. We can surmise from her poetry that she kept a group of young women around her whom she sang verses. In all likelihood these girls had been entrusted to Sappho before their impending marriages and were being instructed by her in all manner of things.” Aldrich, Robert, ed. (2006). Gay Life and Culture: A World History, p. 47

“The last interpretation is supported by our knowledge that erotic attachments between older women and young girls were encouraged at Sparta. It is likely that in the female atmosphere of the girls’ choir lesbian relationships flourished. The most important factor, both at Sparta and at Lesbos, in fostering female homoerotic attachments was that women in both societies were highly valued. […] Women did not, as has been suggested, turn to other women in desperation, due to men’s disparagement of them. Rather, it appears that they could love other women in milieux where the entire society cherished women, educated them comparably to men of their class, and allowed them to carry over into maturity the attachments they had formed in the all-female social and educational context of youth.” Goddesses, Whores, Wives, and Slaves, Sarah B. Pomeroy

“The boys’ lovers also shared with them in their honour or disgrace; and it is said that one of them was once fined by the magistrates because his favourite boy had let an ungenerous cry escape him while he was fighting. Moreover, though this sort of love was so approved among them that even the maidens found lovers in good and noble women, still, there was no jealous rivalry in it, but those who fixed their affections on the same boys made this rather a foundation for friendship with one another, and persevered in common efforts to make their loved one as noble as possible.”


A new master’s thesis on “rape myths” supported by the CSA survivors themselves is quite important. Victimologists admitted that children may consider themselves consenting. Is there any difference between consenting and considering oneself consenting?


Alanis morrisette was covinced that she was consenting at 15 for many years until recently until she was brainwashed to think she hadnt… (AOC in canada was 14 not so long ago!)


You have to be incredibly careful with this particular argument. Because there absolutely is a difference between considering yourself consenting, and actually being consenting.

I grew up in a cult. I was groomed to think and behave and react certain ways. Religion and schools, btw- biggest grooming institutions of them all. I paid tithing to the church, “consensually”. As a child. I did and submitted to all sorts of things, as a child and adolescent, and even adult, that I would never in a million years subject myself to now, but I didn’t know any better, and there was no way for me to have known better. I didn’t know anything else. I never really got to make decisions for myself, and I never really got to know or explore what I actually wanted. I only was able to conceive of what I was told I should want, and want to do. Everything else was rebellious and sinful, and I would feel deep shame and guilt if I ever did those things or did what I wanted, but what I wanted I had been conditioned to view as temptation, rather than my own will. Though it’s definitely “your choice” when the time for punishment comes.

The truth was I was taken advantage of and defrauded. I was used and abused. Not by anyone in particular, but just generally. By other people who were similarly in thrall and being taken advantage of and defrauded. But collective delusions are as powerful and sustaining and self delusions.

Power differentials and abuse of authority are absolutely serious issues that need to be considered. This is why I say that consent is such a faulty framework. It is contract law, and amounts to agreement to your own abuse.

Autonomy is better. Autonomy is better because it has to do with the development and will of the person- their own will, as opposed to the will of parents, the will of partners, the will of priests, the will of community, of family, of society, of god, of the church. Consent, even informed consent, will always leave people lacking. But autonomy- where one is acting in their own capacity, and acting in their own capacity with the conscious recognition that they may indeed be being manipulated and or being taken advantage of, but still deciding for themselves anyway. While consent has theoretical limitations of duress- and duress doesn’t lose its applicability to autonomy either- consent often involves situations where manipulation and undue advantage and fraud aren’t even detected. It is one thing to be aware of the active potential that you are being manipulated, lied to, or taken advantage of, and proceeding anyway, versus not knowing that you are being manipulated, being lied to, and being taken advantage of, and not even recognizing that that might be the case.

Because I would have defended the church to the death, and insisted that I was doing it all of my own free will and volition- when I was in the midst of it. I now know that I was played for a fool, and I was being robbed of my agency and personhood in the process.

Any pretense of authority is innately dangerous to any promotion of laxer laws and norms regarding children’s sexuality.


I dont subscribe to the idea that people everyone over one day can consent but noone under that day cant… I know, there has to be a line .(apparently) . but the line is too thick.. we need to be more .. flexible…


Awaiting an author? “Understanding & addressing child sexual attraction to adults”
Subtitle, “AAAMs Amorous Adult Attracted Minors”.

Rachel Hope Cleves, Unspeakable: A Life Beyond Sexual Morality (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2020)

“One evening,” we read, “she [Viva King] and Douglas got onto the subject of whether sex should be taught in schools. “Norman was asked his opinion as to whether ten years old was too young for such knowledge. ‘Nonsense,’ he replied, ‘children can’t learn early enough what fun it is.’” (p. 238). As Cleves explains, “Douglas refused to disavow children’s entitlement to sexualized pleasure” (Ibid).

(Sister Emmanuelle, Confessions of a Religious Woman, Flammarion editions)
“How and on what occasion did I start masturbating, I don’t remember.” I thought it was wrong since I did it secretly and willingly at school where I felt safer. But the mistress noticed and warned my mother. One day, my cheeks were on fire, I was shaking in class and suddenly I saw her staring at me intensely through the window door. She then explained to me that it was nasty for a little girl and I shouldn’t start again. But it had become a habit and I wasn’t very accustomed to obey. When the assault of desire attacked me, only some foreign presence had the power to stop me, otherwise I would confess powerless to the greed of pleasure.”

Early 20th Century honest reality of natural early sexual pleasure privately practised. Reality BLOCKED by backward Anglo-Victorian totalitarian tabloid hypocrisy. Perversely with daily sex-filled ‘Family’ media of near-nude adults role-models & sex-objects also naturally aMusing pre-teens & pre-tweens.

Now forcing so called ‘adults’ to face 21st Century reality of natural kids sexually aMused and PUBLICLY practising!

Check, UK top-sales SeX-Filled ‘FAMILY’ tabloid 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 massaged herself through her underwear.”

Plus, pre-tween guilt-free ‘sexting’ and self-made C.P. – totally out of neo-Victorian control-freaks’ control.


Supposed ‘Adult’ fairytales for curious studious humourous Gen-Sext/AAAMs Amorous Adult Attracted Minors to read, review. ridicule. On their forthcumming all-age blog MyMindMyBodyMyChoiceMyMAPMindYerOwn.cum.


Gagnon, John H. (1965). Sexuality and Sexual Learning in the Child. Psychiatry, 28(3), 212–228. doi:10.1080/00332747.1965.11023429

Sci hub link here:

A paper I’m currently looking at, written by one of Kinsey’s associates and one of the originators of social constructionism/symbolic interactionism. A big influence on Ken Plummer.

Interestingly, Gagnon predicts that the new “special” consciousness around children and childhood, which demands a special psychology distinct to those deemed children, will be the “dominant orientation of the future”.


A book that sounds pretty interesting, co edited by the based Trevor Hoppe, Unsafe Words: Queering Consent in the #MeToo Era

Quoting a review by the Percy Foundation

“Hoppe continues in this vein by recounting his experiences coming of age as a gay teenager in the 1990s […] Hoppe began his sexual career in adolescence, having sex with men he found on Craigslist”

The most interesting essay to me [Prue] seems to be this one:

In [Alexander] Cheves’ essay, “Consent in the Dark,” he discusses the practice of “fisting” which became popularized in the gay leather culture of the 1970s and 1980s and involves one individual inserting his balled-up hand into another male’s anal cavity. Here, Cheves recalls a particularly pleasurable experience: the first time he was “double-fisted.” Afterward, however, he remembers that he did not ask his partner to double-fist him, but actually asked him to slow down (p. 41). 

One of the traits that Cheves likes about this partner is that “He knew when to push my limits, when to listen to my ‘no,’ and when to charge past it” (pp. 41-42). Cheves calls fisting “one of those rare spaces where the established rules of consent sometimes get murky—where I might not fully know what I want while someone else might have a clearer idea of my desires” (p. 42). One of the reasons why boundaries are so fluid during fisting is because, as Cheves claims, the activity itself requires a surrendering of the “mind’s natural defenses” and a literal opening up to whatever comes (p. 42). This inherent ambiguity is made more consequential by the fact that fisting is dangerous. No matter how cautiously performed, a trip to the ER cannot be ruled out as a possible outcome (p. 43).

 In addition to fisting, Cheves cites the backrooms and darkrooms of gay establishments which “count as the best parts of [his] sex life” (p. 45). Describing them as “beautifully egalitarian, democratic, and rogue” these places, according to Cheves, “are the relics … of an antiquated gay male ethos that once existed outside the law and away from the media spotlight” (p. 45). People who enter these places “waive a degree of consent” and speak through glances, gestures, and other non-verbal cues. Gropes from strangers are to be expected. However, these establishments have recently been shutting down or else sanitizing themselves to cater to straight women—who now nearly outnumber gay men. For example, when one straight woman entered the backroom of a gay bar in Atlanta in 2017 and was touched, she threatened to call the police (p. 46). Considering the long history gay bars have of police raids and shutdowns, the bar took this seriously and responded by installing bright lights, taking down the curtains, and turning the area into a smoking lounge

Available as PDF here:

warbling j turpitude

Well this is …interestin’ – i guess! I had the thought recently that what typifies, meaning represents rather well somehow, bog standard conservative rhetoric (BSCR) is the expressed belief that homosexual men can only ever be pretending that anal experience of any kind is pleasurable, whereas it is in fact, believes BSCR, exceedingly painful, always. But descriptions such as this one do make me wonder! Double fist in one’s anus?? How is it even possible to relax such anatomy to the degree that this would actually become pleasurable? (The likes of “literal opening up” explains nothing for me). BSCR would answer without hesitation that the answer is dangerous drugs, and lots of them. My question then is something along the lines of how come we never hear much tell of such drug use today? Have ‘gay men’ attained over time extraordinary levels of physical dexterity that has made them Absolute Masters of the Sphincter, or what? It seems to me that there is a convergence/divergence along the axis of pleasure and pain within a human anus that requires the utmost in care and tenderness to even think of negotiating properly, yet the way in which so many gay testimonies are expressed you’d think anything but was the norm. But perhaps i am just thinking of BSGR?.Bog standard gay rhetoric?

Well anyhoo, as a ‘break’ from the frustating ‘dead-ends’ of so many MAP avenues of enquiry, this might be a novel opportunity for sharing some experiential curves?


As far as not seeing / hearing stories about drug use and double fisting gay sex in dark rooms: it may be a case of 1. Dark rooms and nightlife spaces in general becoming more watered down, along with people themselves becoming more sensitive to “consent”, I.e. asking beforehand, which impacts on people’s sense of, and ability to be, spontaneous and fun (I.e. to be outside of their comfort zone and discover they like / enjoy something they might not have previously enjoyed or assumed they wouldn’t).

And 2. I’m sure there are many such stories and examples, it just depends where and when you’re looking, and what online / IRL spaces you’re part of. Reddit will have such stories if they don’t get removed. On Fetlife (a kinky version of Facebook), I have seen some of the most extreme “pain slut” content that’s so far removed from mainstream porn. People with needles piercing their skin all across their hands, people stapled to a cross by the thin skin on their arms, and people who enjoy being punched in the face to the point of black eyes and spanked and whipped till their ass is a literal bloody mess.

Online censorship can be a problem here. I can remember one woman who complained that Fetlife would remove her content bc it was too “extreme”: I.e. too much blood. Likewise, and more relevant to the MAP sphere, I once saw a thread where someone spoke about their positive incest experience in youth, and the comment had been pinned and not removed by a moderator bc it was used as an example of what you’re NOT allowed to post(!).

Also, in general as regards to anal, drug use can and does make a huge difference, but I have met men who say they find anal distinctly pleasurable and feel no pain during. So… who knows maybe some ppl have more relaxed sphincters? Whether this applies to double fisting, I doubt it. And yes, I’m sure double anal fisting is possible, but best to be done with someone who’s very used to / experienced with anal, and with someone who’s willing to push past the “ahs”, the “it hurts”, etc. Nothwistanding the prevalence of women’s rape fantasies and eroticizing CNC (consensual non consent), I have seen how people very much want someone to “take control” and “have their way with them”. Sometimes ppl want other’s to decide for them… it’s a lot to put on individuals to always know a priori what they want and will or won’t like, and I don’t think it’s realistic. I think there’s a gap between what people say publicly and think privately, and you’ll see that gap on display in anonymous comments sections…

I can remember seeing a particularly submissive woman having her vagina double fisted, and although I wouldn’t actively go looking for it with men, I’m sure it’s possible and indeed pleasurable. (Even if pleasurable partly because it’s scary / worrying and you’re forced to let go.) Part of the attraction in some of these experiences is self-objectification, the lack of personhood and needing to keep up an identity. You just want to “let go”…

warbling j turpitude

Thankyou for this Prue, i will work on what i hope to be an eventual reply. In service if this intent i very much wanted to share what you say here with that actor who first used the aforementioned expression “BSCR” with me, in hope of expanding ‘multipolar conversation’ on as many fronts as possible. But a weird technical thing is happening. If i try to copy your (credited) text, taking care to copy only your text, what happens when i paste upon the target venue is that the whole of the blog & commemts preceding yours get pasted! I’ve tried several times and it keeps happening. Anyone have any clue how to rectify (no rectum intended!) ?

warbling j turpitude

No worries Tom it is only private correspondence i have in mind, i guess my use of “venue” there was somewhat misplaced. I’m also pretty sure the problem will not occur when i get back to my desktop. Phones are so much more susceptible to this sort of thing..


“one of those rare spaces where the established rules of consent sometimes get murky—where I might not fully know what I want while someone else might have a clearer idea of my desires”

This can be called the concept of Continuous consent, which was discussed in an old blog-
The staircase has not one step but many

Consent is not a one-time indulgence, after which you can do anything. Any activity in which a person participates is constantly evaluated during the session. Pleasant actions prolong consent, unpleasant and painful actions stop consent permanently or temporarily.

When children are involving in physical activity, they have only a general idea of the difficulties and traumas. A positive reaction to success allows them to cope with difficulties and injuries. Failures lead to a stop or abandonment of the activity.

From an early age, children learn the rules of the road and ride a bicycle. Training begins with a tricycle. No one says that their psyche is not ready enough, no one forbids them to ride a bicycle until the age of 16-18, despite the risk of injury. From a very early age they are enrolled in gymnastics, hockey, equestrian sports. Every day they consent to something and refuse something.

[MOD ADDS: Had to rescue this one from Spam. Not sure why it went there. Leonerd, are you writing from a valid email address?]

Last edited 23 days ago by Leonerd

Had to rescue this one from Spam. Not sure why it went there.

A quick edit resulted in the message being marked as spam. Previously, this required three edits in a row, but this time it happened the first time.


Theres a very dangerous mountain ridge near me.. there is no age limit. You can take 5 year olds up there. Baffling. But you need to be 18 to have a mild photo of your own body??

Warbling J Turpitude

Just like to say thankyou for linking to this the painstaking work of our now somehow long lost Lensman (LSM), and to attach this screenshot of a tweet currently shared by the otherwise astute Mary Harrington no less, showing how passionately bone-headed these hundreds of people really are (might i coin “likespittles”?), when it comes to so much as any mention of children and sex in the same breath. In the words of the marvellously adroit James R Kincaid, how can they possibly not know that they are “wildly busy estranging pedophilia in order to guarantee its otherness and thus drench it with desire? In saying so loudly that pedophilia is monstrous, even impossible, aren’t we building up a chorus that sings of how the sexual attractiveness of children is indubitable and pedophilia is inevitable? What could be more normal than this monstrousness?”

warbling j turpitude

Am unsuitably intrigued, Tom! What pray tell is the manner then of this “worth” which somehow moves beyond what we can or cannot agree with? What can it even mean for something to be always “worth reading”? Surely one cannot know what is “worth reading” until a particular reading is done?

So far as i can see she is chiefly valuable for pointing up the cyborg-bound destiny of so many women following the advent of contraception. But do you read her just for some sort of titillation, for that which seems to promise far more than it can guarantee to actually deliver, such being all the more entertaining for just that .. or what?

And does the designation “Catholic, conservative” really account for all that she does and might ever one day say?

Last edited 21 days ago by warbling j turpitude
warbling j turpitude

I can indeed sir! And might we refer henceforth to yonder Mary as The (Highly) Readable One? But oh how her sharing of that thoughtless “diddle” tweet did irk! Lo, i have however more immediately pressing matters here – a response from eugyppius that rises in full to the great calling of argument if anything does… I need to know if it is okay with you to c&p that right here on the blog?

warbling j turpitude

It’s definitely on topic and is 530 words. Too long?

warbling j turpitude

Maywald’s theories about supervised child sexual play don’t rest on any robust body of evidence, OK? He cites nothing of note. Nor is Maywald a child psychologist. He has a Ph.D. in sociology and he claims to specialise in “children’s rights.” His scholarly publications are all of a legal nature and most of them don’t clearly support his sexual pedagogical agenda. His programme of child sexual socialisation is rooted in a variety of politicised social constructivist preconceptions, of which I take a very dim view (on the basis of actual empirical evidence, of the kind Maywald seems not to know). There’s no evidence anywhere that encouraging toddler masturbation in dedicated masturbation rooms or adult-supervised child sexual play yields better outcomes that traditional approaches to childcare. None at all. So perhaps you can appreciate how demanding an empirical, evidence-based engagement with this purely unscientific ideological programme is a bit silly.

It is in Maywald’s own pedagogical scheme that all of this supervised child sexual play leads to non-consensual sexual assault scenarios among children. You may think this is all about “catching problems in the bud,” but this not an argument that Maywald makes. Even in Maywald’s own imaginary, the sexual assaults about which he fantasises are a product of the extremely bizarre situations he proposes that childcare staff foster. These are much graver than “learning opportunities.” Parents of children who are sexually assaulted in Maywald’s “doctor games” could pursue legal or civil actions against the care centre or even against the offending child or his parents. Do you think it’s a good idea to foster scenarios which will have children investigated by the police and their parents sued in court? Why do you think Maywald, a self-styled legal expert, never considers this angle at all?

Perhaps there is a reason that adult human society discourages casual sexual play in public among acquaintances. I have never worked at an office or university, for example, with masturbation rooms or with mutual body exploration time. Were adults to engage in these activities, I have no doubt they’d increase by orders of magnitude the opportunities to transgress boundaries and offend each other in the most intimate and awkward of ways. Given that an important early function of childcare is the socialisation of young children, we have to ask why Maywald wants to socialise them according to a set of sexual norms that don’t obtain anywhere in adult society. 

That children have sexual feelings and that some children act on them in inappropriate ways is of course natural. What’s also natural, is the general adult discouragement of children engaging in overtly sexualised play. The aversion to Maywald’s sexual pedagogical programme is also clearly natural. But whatever your views of childhood sexuality, I propose that allowing government bureaucrats and childcare staff to directly supervise young children in sexual play is an absurdly bad idea, and that people from all across the political spectrum have no trouble noticing this. These are non-relatives, whom the parents don’t even know all that well, who have very little direct investment in the children they’re supervising, and Maywald proposes we allow them to directly intervene in the sexuality of minors. 

warbling j turpitude

Ok so that is a definite ‘gaping hole’ in what he says here for sure, but can you honestly say that it negates just like that the worth of everything else that is said? I myself Tom cannot really see that it does? I mean this is rather uncharted paedagogical territory wherever you happen to be coming from, n’est-ce pas? I’ll say no more right now but it seems to me his objections are valid ones somehow…

warbling j turpitude

Oh dear methinks this is not good. Am i wrong in my estimation that such a comment is not like you? That is to say, that in reaching for the lowest hanging fruit – “like some random..” a great reluctance to actually argue the point is revealed? I am seriously confused, tbh! What is it about the motives of these schoolmarms Tom that you feel is beyond criticism somehow?

Last edited 18 days ago by warbling j turpitude

She claims that morality distinguishes us from animals, but people appealed to the morality when they committed the most terrible deeds. Persecution and murder of people on the basis of religion, race, nationality, sexual orientation began because of the alleged “immorality” of scapegoats. 

The bigots use the language of emotion and extremes as “arguments”. When it comes to positive or neutral experiences of mutual and voluntary relationships, they always take out a negatively colored victimological dictionary and remember about cannibalism and so on

This is a quasi-religion of the modern society, only instead of exorcising non-existent demons, they treat non-existent trauma. An important note, I’m not saying that a rape does not cause harm, but only that voluntary and mutual relationship are not the rape, which can be proven. But the antis ignore the facts.


I spoke to a young person of 19 in the pub the other night… he said he was interested in a girl but found out she was 16 and was suddenly not interested? now this isnt a 40 year old, but a 19 year old! this is worrying.. i said, but not much age gap?? but he says, but shes just left school! but whats that got to do with anything?? shes there against her will anyway.
If i was interested in someone and they were 16, i would be relieved as i wont be prosecuted! Just called named by the bullies.. which is most people, sadly.


Sounds like nothing went wrong, other than the usual conservative bitching and bigotry. People who can’t handle increasing nominal equality have no business in being platformed in any societal institution. You can free speech into the wind all you want, we’re not obligated to give you an institutionalized platform for it. We owe you no respect for your opinion. And if you can’t meet the requirements of a job- which entails teaching science (including social science), and treating people with basic respect and dignity- then you have no business having that job. You can have your bigoted opinions. Airing them on the clock at your job using your position of authority, in which you are supposed to serve the general public, is not your right.


Lost Freedom: The Landscape of the Child and the British Post-War Settlement 
by Mathew Thomson

Published: Oxford University Press 26 September 2013
Online ISBN: 9780191757006 Print ISBN: 9780199677481

Before the 1970s British children still had much more physical freedom than they do today.

The book explores why this situation has changed. It pays particular attention to the 1970s as a period of transition, and one which saw radical visions of child liberation but also anxieties about child protection escalating in response. This is strikingly demonstrated in the story of how the paedophile emerged as a figure of major public concern. The book argues that this crisis of concern over child freedom is indicative of some of the broader problems of the social settlement that had been forged out of the Second World War.

CHAPTER 6 Sexual Danger and the Age of the Paedophile 

This chapter examines the threat of sexual molestation. It demonstrates that up until the 1970s this was a far less significant factor behind the segregation of children than was traffic. Indeed, the language of paedophilia and widespread alarm over sexual abuse of children only became commonplace after the mid-1970s.

Psychology initially tended to downplay danger, accepting the sexuality of the child, viewing criminal procedures as psychologically damaging, and casting suspicion on the reliability of the child voice.

The second half of the chapter looks at how this situation changed in the 1970s. It examines an extraordinary moment in which a paedophile rights lobby mistakenly saw an opportunity to publicize their cause. The resulting outcry was significant in helping to draw to a close a radical stream of thinking about child freedom that came to the fore in the early 1970s.


PDF here:

Sounds like a good book / chapter 🙂


>Truth, and the freedom to express inconvenient truths, should trump the grubby expediency of identity politics any day, even when it favours MAPs.

Until, judging from the blogs, truth runs into conflict with at least feminist or LGBT identity politics, at which point concerns of useful idiocy and those (charitably) seeking to deny, by way of trivial hacks or not, the privileges of the few are trotted out.

For MAPs, outside of such identity politics and the cover it might extend to behaviors of all kinds, what benefit do you see of such a strategy?


The strategy of putting concerns of “useful idiocy” and some identity polititics over truth.

Examples would be the present blog, your comment to Michaux, and
for starters.


In the linked blog, you wrote:

>Once again, I have been a “useful idiot” doing the conservatives’ work for them.

If it is the case that truth trumps identity politics, no need to to spend posts bemoaning the possibility of truth (from pedophiles finding children attractive to them accepting the reality of biological sex) rolling back indentity politics.


>No, I did not write that.

Funny, as grepping the linked blog proves otherwise. If you don’t even bother checking the return value, no wonder my question of strategy confuses you.


ID politics is often subjective. E.G..A self-serving Fox falsely identifies as a chicken and wants to live in the chicken coup?

Though way back boy-girl Quentin Crisp rightly identified as more-girl-than-boy and bravely dressed and behaved accordingly.

So, self-id AAMS can rightly say, “My Mind, My Body, My Choice, My MAP – Mind Yer Own!”


Bravely? You have sympathy for LGBTQZ faggots like Crisp? You think he was pro-MAP? He was just another degenerate who was rightly mocked.


@Tom, if I were to write a guest blog, I’d need some direction, to narrow it down. An assignment, in a way. Is there anything in particular I’ve talked about you’d like me to do it on? Or a short list of potential (somewhat specific, not overlybroad) topics you’d want me to cover, that I could choose from?

warbling j turpitude

Firstly thankyou Tom for a highly informative blogpost!

Here’s the thing. I subscribe to a consistently fearless and insightful substack called A Plague Chronicle, written by a fully ‘renounced’ Deutsch academic who writes under the pseudonym ‘eugyppius’. He surprised me today by posting a report on certain activities gping on now at a couple of ;German childcare centers. This was for the most part simply quotes from the advisories (or whatever you call ’em) issued by same centers. The unrestrained orgy of disgust and horror that follows via his commentariat will be all too familiar to everyone here. What amazed me however, is that the whipsmart eugyppius himself responded completely level-headedly to my objection that handwringing minus any reasoned argument was not what i signed up for. He has asked simply “what reasoned argument is missing? ” i am so flat out surprised i cannot decide what to say exactly, and must consult you, Tom, for advice. IHave asked him for time to think carefully on this. Here is a link to the substack. Please tell me if you are unable to read the whole of it (being unsubscribed) and i will c & p the rest

Warbling J Turpitude

This is just terrific, Tom, it has put ny thought right back on firmest track. Thankyou, and i will get to work asap. There is always a period (for me) of being mentally ‘stunned’ by the effect of seeing such utter uniformity of non-thought present itself en masse yet again, via streams of comments that are surely a sort of. masturbation in their own right – ironically enough!

I have enormous respect for the intelligence otherwise of eugyppius, who as i rather clumsily noted before renounced his academic career entirely as direct result of what he beheld as the c*v*d fiasco unfolded. He now devotes himself 100% to personal research & substacking. From him have i learned more than i could’ve ever dreamed about viruses and immunology, everything from the Marek effect to the effects of what has been dubbed for decades now ‘original antigenic sin‘. If you have any thinking room spare to read these explorations of his sometime, i will gladly send them your way

warbling j turpitude

In my excitement an errant thumb wiped out the whole of my initial response to you. With that weird ‘sobriety’ that usually then descends on one’s prose following such a shock, i’d just like to mentally salvage this much….first i cannot access the NG piece, it appears to be sub only, NG however being the last place i would look to get my learn on! (Their clinging to Darwinian evo-dogma at every step is the exact mirroring of the fundamentalism they doubtless imagine they’re eluding)

Now your apparently rather reflexive need to know here what ‘authority’ might legitimize the findings of eugyppius (his previous academic rôle remains an unknown) both puzzles and intrigues me somewhat, Tom. For do the events of the past three years – the utterly brazen manufacture of consensus in “the science” and concomitant suppression of any dissent, the very lifeblood of scientific purpose – not confirm for us once and for all that the scientific establishment is now as subject to pervasive corruption as any politcal body one cares to name?

If we follow that same compulsive authority-seeking logic, would we not then ask to see your own credentials as, say, pediatrician?

warbling j turpitude

Several aspects of this that you write here with which i might contend, but first i must ask, what is “the topic” from which we have strayed?

warbling j turpitude

I surely do not wish to irritate or anything by saying this, Tom, but wasn’t your paper for Sexuality & Culture guided throughout by its contesting the view that sex is an exceptional aspect of morality? And wouldn’t that by extension mean that our real “topic” here ‘when it comes down to it’ is plain morality, in all its awful glory?

What qualifies a person at any given moment in the ongoing human conversation? I think it a question well worth exploring, and not at all satisfied by your pilot suggestion (btw am a single engine/fixed-wing jockey myself – or was until i couldn’t keep up the cost of keeping my license current!)

It’s my conviction that the internet has shown one example after another of intelligence possessed by individuals who have, by the very liberty they possess to range far beyond the strictures/structure of a particular zone of expertise, brought much more to the table than those in positions of authority could ever have managed to do.

Again, i must play up (as play-fully as possible) the example of TO’C vs paediatrician…

Last edited 30 days ago by warbling j turpitude

Still begging for a place a the back of the scientific bus to sit with all the cool kids! Coronavirus was a scientific scam by Fauci/Gates and his Schwabist mates. I gave up on the ‘minor attracted’ community when they went along with lockdown and the dangerous jabs. That said, I also decided that I hated kids too because they never rebelled against it. I don’t even think that kids exist anymore. They are still beautiful but they act dull. Dull, conformist shitty little adult tyrants in the making. Now going back to Berge’s blog.


You can rest assured that I have no intention of raping or using violence against anyone, if that is what you picked up on. I am saying that tween and teen girls don’t have any spark of originality or natural transgressiveness and are very conformist. This will be different in other places, maybe. Basically robots fixated on tablets and whose conception of the world is derived from those tablets.


Sixty years ago, children enjoyed much more freedom and autonomy than now; they could roam in the streets without adult supervision. Now, in a society dominated by fear, adults can’t imagine letting children be without constant supervision. And now, society has become heavily moralistic, non-conforming attitudes are less tolerated.


With your relevant criminal record, you’re hardly in a position to adopt a holier-than-thou attitude towards involuntary celibate men (GLs, in context). Should the GL mating strategies, following from the feminist oppression you fundamentally support, not be to your liking – though cookies!

Do tell us more of your mindset though, as it obviously enabled criminality and denigration of GL.


>Nada, I have nothing against GLs

Contradicted by e.g. attacking man/girl mating strategies and, now, even going after a new contributor for finding girls beautiful (and reading the “wrong” linked blog). Despite the trivially found hostility towards man/girl love within the feminist and homosexual world, never(!) have I seen you hold a BL, feminist or homosexual contributor here to an equivalent standard.

>What I think is wrong is the pro-rape attitude that has been promoted by some of those who campaign as incels.

Premised, thanks to feminist laws, on a distinction without a difference, and demanding far more “virtue”/virtue of incels than of praise-worthy activists (e.g. Tatchell), despite the fact, in times and places, homosexuality is at least as much a crime as man/girl love.

Searching yields examples of incels, defending man/girl love and pedophilia, daring to question the distribution of sex beyond their own interests – presumably the attitude you’re on about, as I doubt it’s found on feminist or homosexual forums!


The updates about Marthijn will occasionally be posted here, and at Anton’s blog linked.


In Love & Wars over 4-centuries ongoing on five continents. Opinionated Anglo psychos RULE the World?

14m:30s “A lot of the criticism of Psychiatry is based on suspicion of the DSM/The Diagnostic and Statistical Manual drawn up by the American Psychiatric Association. It’s a manual of categories of mental disorders, critics argue it leads to prejudice and subjective decision making.” 

“Well yes, but we are not Americans and we don’t neccessarily use the DSM. The rest of the World uses the ICD11 which is the International Classification of Diseases which is published by The World Health Organisation, and the ICD11 doesn’t refer only to psychiatric conditions it is exactly what is says it is, an international classification of diseases including mental health, mental illnesses.”

“But many would say that the DSM has impacted the way psychiatrists work?”

“You are right in saying that. So, the American system relies much more on the menu, a kind of recipe approach, where you are ticking boxes and that has, I think, adversely influenced the clinicians approach to patients. So if you think of the ICD11 and you think of how psychiatry is developing in other parts of the World there’s a tremendous, a fierce interest in psycho-patholgy which requires attentive listening, it requires a degree of interest in the person in front of you. So that you listen properly to what they are saying to you, and that you’re not preoccupied with looking for minor items that you can tick-off a box. So you are right in saying that because of the economic and political power of The United States, whatever developes there, even though the rest of us aren’t necessarily benighted to them, but we are influenced by their culture and their current culture, their current psychiatric culture tends to make people want to just listen to little bits of information rather than to have a comprehensive approach to attending to the patient’s concerns.”

“Professor Mary Boyle offers another perspective on diagnosis. Mary is an eminent clinical psychologist. In her view while psychiatrists tend to deal with symptoms, often with medication, psychologists focus more on causes. She and a group of practitioners have profound questions over the way psychiatry uses diagnosis. They’re encouraging a move to think differently about mental distress. Rather than asking ‘What is wrong with you?’ instead they suggest asking, ‘What has happened to you?’.

“…Professor Boyle also suggests the social norms of the time influence diagnosis. So, Homosexuality was once classed as a disorder, does this temporal and temporary aspect of diagnosis worry you?”

“Yes it does, and this aspect of diagnostic practice for me is the ‘Achilles Heel’ of the use of diagnosis in medical practice. So that we know and can give an example, an extreme example, of the fact that enslaved Africans in the United States of America who ran away from their vicious masters. The doctors in the United States of the time gave a diagnosis of ‘kleptomania’ to the these people and that is outrageous! So I agree totally that it is open to risk if we were to use, only use, solely use, behaviours which are thought to be ‘abnormal’, the behaviours which are out with what people normally expect in the culture as the sole basis for making a diagnosis.”

“Social norms and attitudes around diagnoses are changing fast…” 

“It’s a criticism of the whole idea of diagnosis as a medical procedure being applied to peoples’ emotions, their behaviour. The main difficulties I think that raises are first of all the diagnostic categories that psychiatry uses are based on very subjective criteria which are always based on social norms and that raises quite lot of difficulties as well.”


Thanx for the correction Tom. Slavery seen as the ‘norm’? A bit like ye olde fake leading-question, “When did you stop beating your wife?”

Recalls 1980S non-PC alt comedian Roy ‘Chubby’ Brown in a Cleveland nightclub during the fake ‘Satanic Panics’, “Eee thars a goodly crowd in here tonight. I thought you’d all be home fucking yer kids.”


No doubt Tom knows. Post-Anglo Reformation (of convenience not conviction) the kept dumb Anglowbrows (today’s tabloid trash) were sold useful demons/scapegoats. First Catholics witchunted and into the New World, of Salem, 1692. Never far from their village idiot/lynch mob rule minds easily spooked. Their bad taste for Dark Ages Gothic Horror fairytales transferred from Olde World ‘Hansel & Gretel’ ‘Pied Piper of Hamelin’ bedtime myths, to 1980s ‘Satanic Panics’ SRA/Satanic Ritual Abuse. Fuelled by 1970s HollyWeird cheap fiction of kids ‘possessed’, “The Omen” & “The Excorcist”. Plus aptly ‘Victoria’, B.C. fake-psycho Pazder’s bestseller “Michelle Remembers”. False memories swept the Anglophone from the L.A. McMartin, pre-school panic, through to Protestant Ulster, remote Orkney, bustling Nottingham, and ‘edgy’ Chubby’s underclass Cleveland, UK.

“And still all over Europe stood the horrible nurses Itching to boil their children. Only his verses Perhaps could stop them” I THOUGHT of those lines last Monday night, as I watched Panorama’s television account of the Orkney ‘Satanic abuse’ scandal. They come from W H Auden’s poem ‘Voltaire at Ferney’, which is about the defence of humanity against superstitious madness. Panorama played an audiotape: a six- year-old girl screaming tearful denials to three adult interrogators. ‘He did so put his dickie in your fanny’ they insisted. She screamed again.

Last edited 1 month ago by HappyHumpingPup

The 1980s medieval Anglo Gothic Victorian psycho ‘Satanic Panics’ SRA/Satanic Ritual Abuse.

Ghoulishly exhumed by Century 21 medieval conspiracy craZed anti-Christ undead Anglo clowns QAnon.

False memories swept the Anglophone from the L.A. McMartin, pre-school panic, across the USA, through to Protestant Ulster, remote Orkney, bustling Nottingham, and ‘edgy’ Chubby’s underclass Cleveland, UK – all ‘fucking their kids’?

Last edited 1 month ago by HappyHumpingPup

Cartwright invented a second disease affecting slaves: “dysaesthesia aethiopica,” whose symptoms were insensitivity to the whip, “hebetude” and “laziness,” not wanting to work hard. See his article here:


Have any serious scholars ever addressed two basic points in plain-sight?

1) For a century ongoing in the Anglosphere, since the 1920s very first mass-media adult ‘Idols’ Valentino, thru Sinatra, Presley, Beatles, et al. Millions of largely low-income sexually amused-not-abused underage fans have pro-actively chased, grabbed, groped, groomed, layed adult idols also receiving massed fan-mail compliments, few complaints; and no court cases until some recent ‘MeToo’ gold-diggers. Point proven in Tom’s/Carl Toms’ 2010 “Michael Jackson – Dangerous Liasons”.

2) While, for centuries high-income Anglosphere brutal boarding schools serially multiple-abused students from age-8. Somehow creating not life-scarred victims needing lifelong help and large payouts, but trauma-free, sneering high achievers including National and World leaders. Then sending their own young children from age-8 to the same brutal boarding schools to sustain their perverse cycle of the brutally amused-not-abused? All endorsed for their kept-dumb shallow ignorant masses by the elite Anglo sadist abusive mantra, “Spare the rod spoil the child.”

A scholarly broadcast-TV/YT channel now interacting with self-declared ‘non victims’ and self-styled ‘victim-survivors’. Might shock today’s fakestream-groomed, dumbed-down shallow ignorant masses into finally distinguishing the few seriously abused, from the many underage sexually amused and mercilessly mocking Anglo Victorian so called ‘Consent Laws’ by increasingly unstoppable Worldwide guilt-free sexting and self-made C.P.

With bold AAM slogan on-screen, and for Tee-Hee Shirts BIG Sales, World copyright 2023, TOC & HHP, “My Mind, My Body, My Choice, My MAP – Mind Yer Own!”

Last edited 1 month ago by HappyHumpingPup

As for Fat-Nappie Nolan, on any anti-MAP issue his first port-ly of call has always been his close ulcer, er, Ulster CEOP bent-Cop Fat Gamble.

CEOP and its Chief Executive, Jim Gamble, were accused of using vague terms which do not have a recognised meaning within either child protection or law enforcement when they defended the operation.


ah, cEOP. (Otherwise known as the teen repression agency). yes i had some trouble off them… took all my stuff… traumatised my parents.. and for what? and no, teens arent children, but adolescents.. robots.


>a new star (new to me at least) on the pro-MAP scene, Master Seaman Jessica Silva of the Royal Canadian Navy<
Surely, “Ms Seaperson”?

Meanwhile, still no scholarly recognition for MILLIONS of ‘AAMS’ in plain-sight?

[MOD: REMAINDER DELETED. (Near) repetition of previous anecdote. Good point about “Seaperson” though.]

Last edited 1 month ago by HappyHumpingPup
Ed Chambers

“As a young, fit, butch dyke (tell me you aren’t!) you’d have no trouble quickly destroying an old-timer like me and it would be far less painful than a conversation with you.”

Love it. Great blog Tom, nice to see a comprehensive reminder there are so many inconvenient truths the system is so terribly afraid of.


I admit that the fat diapered fella looks rather hot…




Are the 8 March principles a big deal? They claim minors aged less than 18 to be able to consent, but many countries would have AoC 16 before these principles, and adult-child sex would be still forbidden. Do the 8 March principles make any difference?

Marco Antonio

No big deal, as Christian already pointed out in the comment below.

We should rather make our own principles…


The ICJ 8 March document was mentioned by Warbling JT and Happy HP in the comments to your March article on the Dutch duo; then I gave then a link to it (now dead). Beside sexual consent (Principle 16), Principle 17 about sex work calls for decriminalising paid sexual services between consenting adults, and Principle 20 states that “Criminal law may not proscribe drug use or the possession, purchase or cultivation of drugs for personal use, including by anyone under the age of 18 or while pregnant.” This too infuriated Senator Rubio, who calls that “condemning laws, such as those in the United States, that prohibit socially deleterious industries and behaviors, including prostitution and narcotics use.”
The UNO has responded to the backlash against Principle 16, see the “UNAIDS Report” in

I want to read something on behalf of our colleagues at the Joint United Nations Programme on HIV/AIDS (UNAIDS), because there has been a lot of — how to say — malicious misreporting on a recent report on the age of legal consent. And I can tell you that the report released by the International Commission of Jurists in March has recently been misrepresented on a number of websites. It did not call for the decriminalization of sex with children, nor did it call for the abolition of the age of consent. The International Commission of Jurists report set out legal principles to guide the application of the international human rights law to criminal law across a range of issues. In the application of law, it is recognized that criminal sanctions are not appropriate against adolescents of similar ages for consensual non-exploitative sexual activity. So, too, it is recognized that adolescents should not be prevented from accessing health services, which protect them. The UN is resolute in fighting the sexual exploitation of children, upholds that sexual exploitation and abuse of children is a crime, and supports countries to protect children.

warbling j turpitude

Gadzooks! Should we call that a walk-back, a flip-flop, a U-turn, a backflip or all four at once? I mean, does it not explicitly contradict what Tom quotes from “Principle 16”?

Marco Antonio

So… In the end it was only about the gay/lesbian stuff, and nothing about the MAP/AAP stuff. It took them “lengthy deliberations” and a “five-year consultative process” to come to the conclusion that consent laws should not be discriminatory with regards to homosexual vs heterosexual relationships. Well… This already illustrates at what stage international organisations are.

I was wondering if there is any set of Principles that reflect ‘our views’ regarding consent/autonomy laws. In another comment I mentioned about specific age intervals, but I acknowledge that the more specific you are in your statements, the fewer supporters you will get. On the other side, being too generic is not very useful. So, a well-thought set of Principles to which individuals and organisations can adhere would be nice. I’m thinking about something around the lines of “Consent laws must distinguish between sexuality and sensuality“, “Consent laws must distinguish between infancy, pre-pubery, post-puberty, and adulthood“, “Consent laws must establish sexual intercourse between post-puberty children and adults legal under certain circumstances“, and things of that tone. Perhaps there should also be a principle around the freedom of expression regarding opinions on consent laws (sometimes obvious things need to be highlighted…). Pornography is another aspect that could be addressed as well (self-generated, AI-generated, artistic, etc.).

Maybe this has already been done. In your video there is a mention about a law proposal by PIE, but I have been unable to find the document. I also checked the PNVD, which could be inspirational.

Last edited 1 month ago by Marco Antonio

It took them “lengthy deliberations” and a “five-year consultative process” to come to the conclusion that consent laws should not be discriminatory with regards to homosexual vs heterosexual relationships. Well… This already illustrates at what stage international organisations are.

The Emancipation Proclamation and the 13th Amendment were passed in 1863-1865. The Universal Declaration of Human Rights was adopted in 1948. But as Martin Luther King Jr. acknowledged in reference to that very proclamation, racism still exists 100 years later. In the Declaration of Human Rights, sexual freedom is in embryo, as René Guyon wrote in his Manifesto. People remained and still partially remain disadvantaged on the basis of his gender, race and sexual orientation. It takes a very long time for societies and organizations to reconsider the old prejudices and taboo on which they have been raised.


If I remember correctly, Tom, you were canceled much the same way in 2001, when your speech “Is Pedophilia Violent?”, that was scheduled for the World Congress of Sexology in Paris, was withdrawn at the last minute. And again if I remember correctly, the feminists were the architects of the censorship.


The sex offender registry in the US is a rather authoritarian measure, but damn if you guys in Britain don’t go hog wild with it. You guys will put just about anyone on it, even kids. Not even California is that bad. Good grief, what the hell is wrong with Britain? You all seem to have gone utterly and insanely mad. I think losing the empire really did a number on you guys. You’ve been ever so increasingly weird since WWII. And Brexit seems to have just made it all worse. But I digress.

As for CBT, I don’t like CBT. It is condescending to the max. It’s selling point is that it’s “evidence based”, but unless you are just a complete social and emotional illiterate, it is basically useless. And more than a tad coercive- a sort of attempted brainwashing through repetition that would make Pavlov blush. That’s all just my subjective experience of it though.

I don’t know what to make of the UN report. Other than clearly the West is losing it’s ability to just force everyone to bow to Anglo-American puritanism. Which is just another sign of the decline of the Anglo-American hegemony.

As for your article, I had no idea you were such an established and respected scholar. I’m rather surprised at how much, tolerance, if not respect, you have in academic circles. I would have thought you would have been blackballed entirely.

Last edited 1 month ago by Perplexed
Marco Antonio

What a charged post. Sounds like the antis never are on holidays…

Regarding Steve Carson’s consent essay, when he says that the “children can’t consent” statement is a legal and moral one, I would add that it is also a political statement. And I feel we lack a concise political counter-proposal regarding consent laws. Actually… I think that the statement holds true: children can’t consent… in exactly the same way as adults do (i.e. fully autonomously). I mean, the rules regarding consent among adults do not have the be the same as the ones between a child and an adult, or even among children. For example, if it is the teenager who takes explicit initiative to ask for sex to an adult, this should be considered a strong indication of consensual activity. In prepubescent ages, maybe parental consent or supervision by a third party adult should be required. Maybe we can establish stages of consent based on age intervals, rather than a single age of consent. The idea is that, for every age interval, consent laws should establish criteria about HOW consent must be articulated to be considered valid, rather than with WHO you can or you cannot get laid. Let’s be creative. Under such stringent conditions, sex between a minor and an adult becomes even more consensual than among two minors. Thoughts?

Last edited 1 month ago by Marco Antonio

I think the framing of consent is a faulty one. Consent is a legal fiction. A construct born of contract law and property law. Much like laws which once allowed someone to sell themselves (or their family) to slavery or indentured servitude. Consent amounts to little more than agreement to your, or another’s, exploitation. Which makes sense in a society born of Christian dogma, puritanical zeal, and patriarchal dominance, which all but makes sex an innately exploitative act. Just consider even the language and manner which we talk about sex. Penetrative. Fuck. Fucked. Servicing. Wifely duties. Husbandly prerogative. Making yourself available. A kept wife. Marriage is in essence glorified prostitution born of an imperative to preserve a patriarchal order’s property and wealth. First beginning with the man/father’s consent to obtain sex from his daughter. Rape being originally a crime against the father, or husband, not the woman. And even after consent being extended to women, it is still a situation where consent is being given- a contract for exploitation, similar to submitting to an employer, a bureaucrat, a corporation, or obtaining authorization from the crown/government to go forth and exploit a resource, turn a profit, etc. Giving/obtaining this legal, propertied fiction of consent is almost a doomed project from the outset. Because the system of thinking from which it is derived is exploitative in its very nature.

And then add in the element of informed consent- which is nothing more than a CYA (cover-your-ass) move. Which is, whether we want to admit it or not (but is very evident when dealing with formal, written contracts), trying to get immunity from being prosecuted should something go wrong. To protect yourself, or your organization, from accountability. Not to mention, information is often withheld, or just simply not known. People don’t have crystal balls with which they can read the future. Informed consent can only ever be relative. But then, if you’re the wronged party- which is almost always the disadvantaged party- the onus is on you to prove that you were wronged, which is incredibly difficult to do. Because the legal stakes- on account of the system in its very nature being exploitative from the getgo- are always high. Which makes the process even more arduous, rigorous, excruciating for both parties, and perilous for both parties. It necessarily becomes this way. And the more we try to “fix” it, the more we tend to up the stakes, and thus aggravate the situation further. It’s not about finding and dealing with the truth, and making good faith attempts to right wrongs. It’s instead a game of cat and mouse- of sheep and wolves. It makes exploiters and victims of everyone.

Autonomy is a better construct, as it deals with natural reality and actual ability- namely that to simply say yes or no, full stop, no other qualifiers. Autonomy isn’t bound by information or ignorance. Autonomy doesn’t extend to authority or control over others. Autonomy is in its very nature accountable and liable for the (natural) consequences of its own actions. Autonomy is the ability to assert one’s self. Aggression and manipulation- violations of autonomy- are what are the identified problem, and are a simple matter of assertion. But even inadvertent wrongs can be addressed. But the stakes aren’t as high, in either case. Nothing more is required than the harmed party saying “You hurt me”, even if the hurt wasn’t seen or perceived at the time, and the other party being willing to hear them out and make amends. It relies more on the good will and nature of people, rather than hounding people for their bad natures, and bad behavior born of an exploitative ideological/economical system. The punitive aspect only kicks in if the harming party demonstrates unwillingness to negotiate and demonstrates a lack of respect of the autonomy of another. But the stakes are much lower, at least initially. And we can acknowledge that people may know better now than they did then, can more easily flow with the changes of the times and social norms. It becomes more a matter of negotiation and consideration of and between equals, rather than overextension of self through property, or a matter of superior and subordinate, of exploiter and victim. Things become more forgiveable and reconcilable, and work-out-able than they are under a system that has to invent such a concept as consent.

People conflate consent and autonomy, and I think it’s confounding the conversation.

Last edited 1 month ago by Perplexed
Brian Dixon

Nothing more is required than the harmed party saying “You hurt me”, even if the hurt wasn’t seen or perceived at the time, and the other party being willing to hear them out and make amends.… The punitive aspect only kicks in if the harming party demonstrates unwillingness to negotiate and demonstrates a lack of respect of the autonomy of another.

If I understand you correctly, that system would be very dangerous. All it would take for anyone at any time to humiliate and exploit a former lover would be the three little words “You hurt me.” Those three words could be anybody’s golden ticket to opportunistic “amends” under threat of a “punitive aspect”. Ironically, you call this the non-exploitative alternative.

That is, if I understand you correctly. If not, please clarify.

Kawaii Ganesha by Arihoma - Large.jpg

You guys are approaching this from a way too legalistic perspective. Legalism and laws are something to move away from, not toward. Not a bolstered police state, but a weakened police state. The point is to move towards a system based more on mediation, negotiation, and judgment (as in exercising judgment, rather than “judging” or condemnation), rather than laws, codification, bureaucracy, and legislation. Away from mandates. Away from incarceration. Lower the stakes, not increase them. Away from punishment and more towards reconciliation or at least, making amends. Which our present, punitive, adversarial system, does not. The point isn’t to make a set legal standard, but rather to allow for creativity and community engagement. A system where the death penalty and incarceration are not the go to, if they are even still an option at all.

Unless the traumatic nature of the current system suits you just fine. In which case, you undermine your own cause. The rigidity of legal codes, and the high stakes involved, necessarily make the process traumatic, and exacerbate the situation. It makes wrongdoers have to fight harder, and it makes victims have to be run through the wringer- especially if they’re children. Which will just reinforce people’s instinct to not grant children any sort of personhood.

You want to have a system that is soft enough that child can make their own case, as it were, and that people who did some wrong or bad can feel both comfortable that they can make amends, that it won’t be the functional end of their lives, but that the problem still gets resolved. And, unlike our current system, which posits incarceration as “justice”- as though that makes anyone whole again, that it somehow helps anybody, it would allow for the accused to actually make direct amends to the person wronged, and allow the person to decide what justice looks like for themselves- what it would it would take to make it up to them, that isn’t violence or sequestration and isolation. That would be more substantive justice than the cold, purportedly “rational” legal system.

All the worries and concerns you bring up, already exist, mightily I might add, in the current system. Indeed, I would argue are exacerbated by the current system. By having a legal/punitive framework to begin with. And the present system is far more vengeful in its nature and effect than what I propose could ever be. What I propose is more in line with how people actually work, how people actually function. The legal system is so unnatural and contorts people into a sort of hamstrung, psychological torture- making them far more vengeful, anxious, and frustrated than they otherwise would be.

Last edited 1 month ago by Perplexed
Brian Dixon

Questions: Let’s suppose that the accused thinks—perhaps rightly—that the person saying “You hurt me” is a whining, opportunistic gold digger who deserves no amends or compensation whatsoever. Who decides whether the “punitive aspect” needs to kick in because “the [alleged] harming party demonstrates unwillingness to negotiate and demonstrates a lack of respect of the autonomy of another“? On what basis is this decision made? Given the undeniable existence of whining, opportunistic gold diggers both young and old, both male and female, both rich and poor, how would we stop your system from being abused?

Kawaii Ganesha by Arihoma - Large.jpg

You can’t stop any system from being abused. However, mediators and juries of peers, so, say, you had someone who was a teenager making a complaint against you, you’d have a jury of lets say 10 people, half of whom would be teenagers and half of whom would be adults of similar age range to you. Could be other demographic factors that’d have to be represented, that are relevant to the situation, but for simplicity sake, we’ll just keep it to age for now.

Mediators and juries would have the ability to do whatever investigating and inquiries they need to ascertain the truth and make a decision, and also determine what is fair.

As far as preventing abuse, no system can prevent abuse or miscarriage of justice. However, the ability to get to the truth, and the limited stakes involved- so that you’re not working with the binary (or rigid scales) of current legal systems- where you’re found guilty or not guilty, where you’re either incarcerated or set free (or some form of probation/parole), where you pay maximum penalty or no penalty- there can be middle ground found. Intentions can be taken into account. Character can be taken into account. Not in some bureaucratic point system. Not in some mandated scale. But in a way that allows it be more in line with peoples sense of justice. A sense of justice that doesn’t have incarceration, death, or injury, or lengthy sentences in its purview.

A fluid system than can also reconsider itself and alleviate conditions, and say “it’s enough”, “it was a long time ago”, and “time to move on” at some point. That is much more likely, over time and experience, to produce better outcomes, than the cumbersome, binary, and rigid systems of law ever could.

Again, the fears and concerns you have over this system, already exist in the current system. And the “safeguards” of the current system just make it worse. They just exacerbate it. They up the stakes, up the costs, and make it harder to do anything in any direction. Because it’s only tools are, and can only ever be due to their institutional & bureaucratic nature, incarceration, massive fines, death, injury/maiming, and heavy surveillance. And the process to change laws is so arduous, so biased, and so slanted towards money.

The point of a system is to make a calculation of likely, aggregate outcomes. Not to prevent any and all abuse, which is impossible (hence why we have justice system at all, even though they too are susceptible). The question is, which is more likely to do an overall better job, more often? The legal system, along with its binaries, high stakes, rigid calculations, blunt and violent penalties, lethargy, psychological toll, prohibitive financial costs, and intransigence against change? Or a fluid system, more naturalistic, malleable system, that doesn’t have violent options on the table, that isn’t high stakes, that well within anyone’s means to pursue, that isn’t life-ending for either participant, that is less procedural, more likely to ascertain the truth because the penalties for finding the truth aren’t so life-consuming, thereby not needing endless protections against state aggression, and done by a more calculated representation of peers in juries according to relevant points of the case or complaint, and that can find middle ground where needed?

What’s so great about the current system, that this sort of system wouldn’t be worth at least being presented as an option for people to use instead of the conventional system?


Or to put it more succinctly, the TL;DR version of my previous comment- children will never be able to consent because consent is a legal fiction, and is whatever the law says it is. It is circular and by definition correct. Furthermore, consent is a legal fiction born of an abusive system, where consent means to agree to one’s abuse, sex is considered innately abusive and bad (even if only latently), and thus, people will never want that legal fiction to be (re)extended to children or adolescents.

Consent is a dead end concept. Autonomy is what needs to be discussed instead of consent.

Last edited 1 month ago by Perplexed
Marco Antonio

[Autonomy] relies more on the good will and nature of people

Laws exist because people do bad stuff sometimes, and that’s how our civilization has decided to deal with such unfair situations. If you say that laws should talk about autonomy rather than consent because it relies more on “good will of people”, for me this tries to defeat the whole purpose of the laws.

Consent is a legal fiction, and is whatever the law says it is.

Yes! And as a fiction, we can (we should!) mould it in alignment with our political standpoint. Instead of ignoring or avoiding the laws, we should own them and take leadership.

Consent means to agree to one’s abuse

When someone asks me if I want sex and I say ‘yes’, am I consenting to be abused? Nah.

Don’t take me wrong. I do like your ‘autonomy’ concept because it calls for an active role by everybody in sexual interactions, rather than just a passive one. However, it does not fully reflect the nature of sexual relationships, in which my own autonomy must be conjugated with other people’s own autonomy. Oversimplifying, there is typically a moment when someone eventually asks someone else to have sex, right? This interaction is asymmetrical (one asks, and the other replies), and this is precisely what the concept of consent tries to reflect.

Anyway… This sounds to me like a semantic debate, and not a very productive one. Call it whatever you want… consentonomy, or whatever. I would happily embrace a consent law that allows children to have sex with adults, than an autonomy law that forbids it. To be honest, I care way more about the content.


Maybe we can establish stages of consent based on age intervals, rather than a single age of consent. The idea is that, for every age interval, consent laws should establish criteria about HOW consent must be articulated to be considered valid, rather than with WHO you can or you cannot get laid. Let’s be creative.

I think it’s easier than it seems.
It is enough to simply limit anal / vaginal intercourse until the age of 12. But such harmless things as friendship, mentorship, romantic, hugs, kisses, masturbation need NOT be regulated by law. This is the task of proper sex education. Let’s take the statistics of the cases of the “earliest” pregnancy and this will be the starting point to which proper sexual education should begin. Pregnancy comes, not because minors had “early” sex, but because sex education is belated and incompetent.

Consenting to erotic activities is no different than consenting to any other everyday activities. All people who claim that minors cannot give consent must then recognize themselves as abusers ) Minors purposefully engage in masturbation, sexting, watching porn at will. What kind of inability to give informed consent are the antis talking about ? )

Marco Antonio

It is enough to simply limit anal / vaginal intercourse until the age of 12

I like the suggestion of distinguishing between sensuality and sexuality, as it aligns with the idea of having more autonomy, progressively, as children grow older.

But such harmless things as friendship, mentorship, romantic, hugs, kisses, masturbation need NOT be regulated by law

Do you refer to self masturbation, or to masturbation to the partner? Masturbation to the partner is more sex than sensuality. Self masturbation does not imply interaction with others and therefore consent does not apply. Also, what about oral sex?

From 13 to 18 years old they should have more autonomy than below 13, but I don’t think they can be treated exactly as adults either. In those ages, the criteria for a valid consent when having sex with an adult should be different than among adults. Also, between 9 and 12 they should be able to have sex with adults, with prior parental consent. Some people already have sexual interactions around 10 and 11. We should not forbid them or establish with who they can have sex. Instead, consent criteria should be more stringent so as to ensure that it is genuine.

This is the task of proper sex education. Let’s take the statistics of the cases of the “earliest” pregnancy

Pregnancy implies intercourse (sex), and sex education is ineffective and unless the laws unambiguously make it clear that children can have sex (sorry, but we have again the consent debate back in the scenes…). If they can’t consent, the only sex education you can give is: “DO NOT HAVE SEX. PERIOD.”

But yes, I actively advocate for sexual education whenever I have the opportunity, not only for the wellness and sexual health of the youth, but also because it is strategic: It makes it explicit that children can have sex, and it obliges adults to debate about child sexuality. So I love it!!!!

Consenting to erotic activities is no different than consenting to any other everyday activities

Not sure if I understood well. Erotic activities imply privacy and intimacy, while consenting to sign a job contract doesn’t. Also, watching porn does not involve a (live) interaction between two people (and therefore consent does not apply at all).


…Masturbation to the partner is more sex than sensuality….

…Erotic activities imply privacy and intimacy…

There is not much difference in consenting to play video games with a friend or to wank together. It depends on the degree of trust and closeness between friends.

From 13 to 18 years old they should have more autonomy than below 13

therefore, before 12 they can kiss, jerk, suck, and after 12 the possibility of vaginal/anal intercourse is added.

Sex education should explain that they must be vigilant and autonomous enough to determine who they can trust. Starting from online safety and ending with offline communication.

Brian Dixon

“Let’s be creative,” you say? Actually, no, let’s not exercise creativity of the legalistic sort you’re recommending. Your suggestions could easily make it necessary to consult a lawyer before fooling around with somebody. One’s sex life could easily become a Kafkaesque nightmare.

You ask for “a concise political counter-proposal regarding consent laws“. It seems to me that Carson already has an implied counterproposal far more concise than yours.

Kawaii Ganesha by Arihoma - Large.jpg
Brian Dixon

“The brain does not fully mature until the mid-to late-20s,” says Steve Carson, seemingly in agreement with this false notion. Since the MAP dignity movement and the youth rights movement appear destined to ride each other’s coattails, I refer you all to “The Myth of the Teen Brain”, an excellent debunking by psychology professor Robert Epstein.

Kawaii Ganesha by Arihoma - Large.jpg
Brian Dixon

…[M]y reading of Carson’s point is somewhat different to yours. He seems to me to be airing claims about the teenage brain … in order to suggest that no good case has been made based upon them.

Reading that paragraph from Carson again, I suppose he is not necessarily endorsing that popular notion of brain development after all. I should have made clear in my comment above that, in either case, Carson’s argument strengthens the case for youth rights by direct implication.

I do not have Alzheimer’s, though, and feel as though my brain is still functioning pretty well. Perhaps this tells us that brain volume and brain functionality have only a very loose relationship; or else we are underestimating the cognitive ability of three-year-olds.

Most importantly of all, it should warn us against invoking questionable neuroscience to justify ageism, whether of the anti-youth or the anti-elder variety.

Kawaii Ganesha by Arihoma - Very Small.jpg
Brian Dixon

Here’s some encouragement for you, Tom: Despite his presumably shrunken brain, 97-year-old Dick Van Dyke has just taken up the ukulele. Let’s hope his musical performance gets better than his English accent in Mary Poppins.

Kawaii Ganesha by Arihoma - Large.jpg

How about this
“scientists research man missing 90% of his brain who leads a normal life”

Should this man not be allowed to have sex ? Does that mean he is incapable of giving consent ? Is his wife a sex offender ? Of course not.


The brain does not fully mature until the mid- to late-20s

As it was discussed in the Newgon chat recently, the brain does not fully mature until the mid-40s—does it mean milfs cannot consent too?

output-onlinepngtools (4).png
Róisín Michaux

Hi Tom. I didn’t reply to your email because I forgot all about it. Just popping in to point out that you defend sex segregation in sports in one sentence and then challenge a woman to a cage fight in the next. That’s gas. Also, you’ve misunderstood my position. I don’t want to bait you into trans bashing at all. As I probably explained to you in previous correspondence, I am talking to paedos because my fellow TERFs are convinced you guys are the root and branch of transgenderism as it is an ideology that involves talking to children endlessly about sex and sexuality. I dispute this. I think paedos are certainly making hay from the gender identity ideology takeover but I don’t think you’re the instigators of it. I want to get to the origins of it. That’s all. Róisín


Dear Roisin,

What’s your current view / thoughts on the origins of gender identity ideology (as you put it)? I imagine it’s pretty hard to track down, though some gender scholar academics have likely tried to. You might find something fruitful if you look through google scholar…

I think most would point to Simone de Beauvoir, who I’ve included quotes about here. But of course, she must’ve had influences too, which would date further back?… Someone else who’s famous for Westerners, that I’ve made a page for, is John Money. He’s influential, but the origin? I’m not so sure…

Equally, it’s clear that earlier thinkers like these two were not ‘pro trans’ and ‘pro paedo’ as a person would currently be. The term transgender did not exist and was not a popular one during their respective influential writings / time periods. ‘Paedophilia’ was a marginal psychiatric term which only came to public awareness towards the end of the 1970s (Basannavar, 2019), and then attracted a negative connotation of rape, murder and violence in the conservative backlash era of the 1980s and beyond (see Breland, 2019; Angelides, 2019; Jenkins, 1998).

Looking to different cultures, there are traditions such as ‘two-spirit’ peoples, or the ‘third sex’ Hijras of India, which closely resemble modern transness but are, of course, expressed, understood, and culturally legitimized through different justifying ideologies / thought patterns, traditions, everyday practices, etc. (Ideas about spirituality and religion for example, which would feel alien to many of us in the modern, secular West). Here’s a short, interesting article about gender variance in non-western cultures from 1987, from a scholar [profiled here] whose work was influential for American academics who were interested in non-normative gender and sexual practices. Every culture has ever-changing social / sexual taboos, and you can prob find examples where acceptance of gender variance and age-gap sex expression crossover. But, that’s usually because of a lack of discourse, or problematization, of either gender variance or age-gap sex contact. See the passage here by William Davenport, which illustrates the lack of psychological maladjustment because X or Y behavior wasn’t considered a big deal or was considered ‘normal’. Other scholars have compared past panic around children’s masturbation with CSA, and on that note I highly recommend Malon’s 2010 article, and feminist writers Egan and Hawkes (2012).

In my years of research into MAP history and scholarship, I’ve not come across masses of evidence linking gender variance and pedophilia / paedophilia. However, researchers like Allyn Walker who are willing to ask for MAP participants’ gender identification, may increasingly find MAPs who self-identify in a way that would make them trans by definition. Although, it should be said, Walker’s 2019 article on MAPs and ‘Queer-spectrum identities’ found mixed results.

I will just add that MAPs and MAP liberation groups in the past (e.g. Tom O’Carroll and PIE), typically express a desire for young people to express their wishes and desires; to have their voice heard, taken seriously, and not be shamed for doing so. That approach, however, does have its limits. Many, like O’Carroll in his 1980 book Paedophilia: The Radical Case, take a stand against penetrative sex with pre-pubescents (for example). Likewise, many MAPs will feel that medical intervention and especially sex reassignment surgery of any kind, when relating to children and young people, should be approached with caution.

If you look closely at early MAP history (which begins in the 50s-70s if talking about ‘paedophilia’; before then the term barely existed and ‘pederasty’ was the hot topic), you’ll find that Roger Moody, the 1st British person to self-identify as a ‘paedophile’ in print (1975), argued for a separation between sex and gender in a 1986 book chapter. He was himself influenced by Feminist theorist Andrea Dworkin who, at one time (1976), was supportive of children’s sexual expression with post-pubescent individuals; something she felt would emerge in an future ‘androgynous society’.

You can find relevant quotes and info about this in the links to Newgon provided. These are some interesting tid bits I’ve found, but I’m doubtful that any one individual can be pin-pointed as the originator of social constructionist theories of gender, and definitely not modern trans politics. There are countless people involved, developing ideas, theories, and living their lives in whatever normative/non-normative ways they choose (whether good consequences or bad). They all have wildly varying levels of influence…

I’ve written too much but I hope at least some of that’s interesting if you have the time to read over any of it. I am very suspicious of you I’m not gonna lie, but I believe in sharing or, in this case, spotlighting knowledge.

Róisín Michaux

Hi Tom. The reason I asked for a conversation is because I am busy and I can’t find time to talk, transcribe, edit and publish. No gotchas. No public platform or following to speak of, either, as you say. Just a search for the truth. In terms of the origins, I should clarify: I want to know how it got into law and policy. As you say, the purported value of DQSH is to expose kids to diverse sexualities. Fair enough. The question for me is: who wants to expose them to this diversity? It’s not enough to say: the pharma industry, the patriarchy, neoliberalism, paedophiles… I want to know what boring policy rationale has led us to this moment. In which meeting was it conceived and decided? Who chaired the meeting? Who typed up the minutes? Who paid for the room rental? I am getting close to the answer, and it’s boring.