Sometimes humanity sickens me. Gotta remember though that thankfully not all give themselves to the dark side so fully.

“Cis White Male — Parody Song” (by Teatac) / plus further thoughts on pedo Omnipolitics16

Good parody! Wanted to note that along the way in my travels this evening online. Messed up as it might be to use that as my intro on this topic. Still was a quality parody, IMO.

Happened to stumble across that channel tonight while attempting to look into that self-described pedophile omnipolitics16. Andy and Chris Warski held a Google hangout with him on Saturday, which was interesting. Previously watched another video by andywarski on this pedo, and that prompted me to watch several videos on the guy’s channel as well so as to seek out more info. Created a video Saturday night about it, for better or worse. Frickin’ sickened by this type of shit. Hurts the soul to even know about it going on and the thought process behind it. Seeking justification for why sex with a 7-year-old is somehow all right. Fuckin’ horrible as well as incredibly stupid.

The joker has been pulling down his YT videos on his omni channel this evening. But it appears plenty of others have already downloaded his content so as to make their own response videos. Good on them. Meaning his videos have been preserved despite his attempts to remove them in recent hours from further public viewing. But he promises more content is coming soon, which I’m sure it’s bound to be equally unsettling. Deeply introspective and self-aware he is not.

Perused about a couple hours of the guy’s content directly before he marked so much of it private. Is he the worst sicko I’ve ever encountered? Likely not. But he’s what I happen to have come across a few days ago. Unfortunately. Was having a relatively decent week before that strolled across my radar.

Have personally had a problem with pedophiles (and hebephiles, though to a somewhat slightly lesser extent) since way back when. Can’t tolerate the shit. Won’t. Simply not conducive to a civilized and functional society because it fucks innocent people up psychologically. Screws their minds at tender ages in completely unnecessary ways. Cannot tolerate any aspect of that shit. Can barely accept the notion of chimos who don’t actually offend against minors (however their perverted asses manage that) speaking from their own unique perspectives. Because they too are members of society, as I am frequently reminded. Okay, fine. So say you all. Fuck it. But when they start openly advocating for and aiming to justify pedophilia (and here I am using the strict definition in regards to pre-pubescent children), they’ve stepped past a line with me. Nope. Cannot go for that. I suppose you can speak and share your views in the public square as you so desire, but do not be surprised if law enforcement starts taking an interest in you as a result. As they rightly should in such an instance.

Now, I grasp that may sounds like running them underground when stating it so plainly. Honey, most of them are underground already. Difficult as hell typically to pin down and successfully charge such sons of bitches. When one is stupid and naive enough to wander onto the internet and declare his ambitions and desires out loud and with his face shown, well, then he gets whatever he gets. Same holds true for those who get caught in the act. My sympathy for humanity dries up at some point.

The guy even claims in videos that he himself was never sexually molested or raped as a child. So what he’s describing in his videos demonstrates a total lack of empathy for potential victims. He himself claims to be aiming to refrain from sexualizing kids, which is good if that’s to be believed. Doesn’t seem too interested in seeking psychological help on the matter though. Much more focused on reaching for rationales instead.

Yeah, he’s young himself, and that’s what makes it especially troubling. The guy is obviously messed up in the head, for whatever reasons. Do I feel an ounce of pity for him? Of course I do. But goddamn. One has to draw the line somewhere. And this is where I draw mine. Period.

The guy deserves to be looked into, in the least, that much I believe firmly. And preferably by law enforcement officials.

Documentary of the evening: “An Open Secret”


Can’t seem to get this Veoh video to embed tonight.

A whole lot has changed since the 1900s…

While I understand the desire to maximize our experience of freedom to the greatest extent possible, we run into a number of problems in a society this heavily populated and technologically-sophisticated. I’ve said it a bunch and will say it again — a substantial difference in most-modern life compared against how people lived a mere century or two ago is that nowadays there are a WHOLE LOT more of us crammed in urban areas and we do not know (are incapable of knowing) most others who surround us in these shared living spaces. We’ve long-since left the times when people lived in relatively small communities where they were at least roughly acquainted with everybody therein (even if only through family reputation), and it doesn’t look like we’ll be returning to such ways of life anytime soon. In short, a major aspect of most-modern-day life is living among/around and interacting with countless strangers.

The reason this matters and is a massive game-changer is obviously compounded by various cultural inputs, meaning we’re not even living among people who necessarily identify with the culture(s) we do. And that seriously complicates shit, because with culture comes values. In the U.S., we have numerous subcultures that vary widely in the ways people communicate, what religion they’re likely to embrace or at least be exposed to, differences in attitudes on things like corporal punishment and what constitutes reasonable self-defense/reactions to disrespect, etc. We have people in this country from all around the globe, some of whom have lived here for generations, others who haven’t been here long at all. And we’re saturated with an untold number of ideologies varying according to which faction(s) one wishes to associate with.

A sea of diverse strangers, more or less depending on one’s particular locale.

And yet some still seem to be laboring under the fantasy that the vast majority of us see things in some similar sort of fashion, at least so much that we’d like to think most of these other strangers out here share similar values and will act accordingly. That appears to be a false assumption.

Kinda like the difference between, on one hand, the man who learns the system so as to play within it in a bid to succeed, and, on the other hand, the man who learns the system so as to game it, even if that winds up doing harm to others in the process. See, the truth is that there are a number of people out here who simply don’t care about you or what you’re trying to do or what you value most. This shouldn’t be a secret, considering we all know of some of these types who are hell-bent on doing whatever they want regardless of the social cost to others. We hear about it on the news and from our friends and family members who’ve been impacted and/or we experience this issue directly ourselves.

Once again, we’re not all on the same team. And in keeping that in mind, how much trust should we reasonably extend to others? I don’t believe there is a magic, universally-applicable answer here. Rather, we’re prompted to treat others with scrutiny until we have good reason to do otherwise. That is, until trust is established.

But how does one go about establishing trust when most people we’re surrounded by will remain strangers to us?

Well, we obviously can’t establish trust with most folks. Just not possible. And we’re never really certain which stranger out of the bunch will pose a problem for us. Hence why we have laws in place in an attempt to curb unwanted behaviors through the threat of possible legal action. And yes, due to the complexity of the society we live within and residents of each state having some say on local conditions and laws, we’ve constructed a complicated legal nightmare to traverse in this country.

But some of these laws are quite useful. For example, statutory limits placed on youths’ ability to consent to sex with grown adults. Considering parents can’t be around at all times throughout their children’s upbringing (we not living in old agrarian times anymore), they are unable to play the role of overseer where as historically parents arguably had a great deal more control in that arena. So we created laws to try to deter adults from sexually messing with youths, and as to be expected, some of those laws have been misused and abused over time. I sincerely wish we could get around that, and perhaps people of tomorrow will figure out better ways of doing so. But as it stands today, there’s a need for protection over the most vulnerable persons in our society from those who could potentially present the most harm by attempting to use youths for their own sexual desires. If parents could take such people out back and string them up from a tree, undoubtedly more than a few would try that. But we’re expected to remain civilized and to let the governing bodies sort out and punish such offenses.

We can’t simply trust random people to do right by us, let alone to do right by young people who tend to be too trusting for their own good. We know this. This is not a secret. And yet some play with the idea and come up with thinking that such laws should be removed because they’re illogical and arbitrarily determined. Many laws involve rather arbitrarily decided lines drawn in the sand, from the age to begin collecting social security payments to the legal drinking age out at bars to when you’re legally allowed to apply for a driver’s license. If we were to make an argument about the arbitrariness of age requirements in legal codes, we’d have to swipe countless laws from the books and reinvent whole new ways of determining appropriate points in development for whatever is in question. And what I’ve heard advocated was that individuals being assessed on a case-by-case basis would be fairer. Perhaps that’s true that it might be fairer for each individual, but in a society this heavily populated that just isn’t feasible.

It’s obviously not my love for Big Government or a desire to feel like I’m little more than a number that propels my thinking here, seeing as how I’ve raged against both concerns plenty enough on here. But I also am forced to be realistic with where we stand today. Times have radically changed in a few short decades and we’re embarking in a new direction, whether we individually like it or not. There will be restrictions and lines drawn in the sand all over the place. The best we can likely do is try to sway where the lines are drawn, but to eliminate them entirely? Good luck with that.

And that’s why I’m not too concerned with Justicar’s arguments, other than worrying about his expressed views pandering to those who do wish to take advantage of youths, as if we need anymore of those types cropping up and acting out. All societies draw lines in the sand, and that’s essentially what a legal system is. Our moral concerns may vary over time and laws are updated in response to that, and sometimes those laws go too far and wind up criminalizing some of the people they were intended to initially protect. That’s not good, and we should call those cases out. But I also don’t think it’s wise to throw the baby out with the bathwater by assuming that since a law can be misapplied that it therefore must have no value at all. That does not appear to be the case when we look at age of consent laws overall.

But I’m tired of that fool and have devoted enough attention to his mind games for one day.

“Laws control the lesser man. Right conduct controls the greater one.”

That quote above is attributed to Mark Twain.

Well, looks like The Justicar is still at it in defending his NAMBLA-supporting position to do away with age of consent laws entirely. Before anybody says shit to me on this, I’ve already watched the man’s first three videos on this subject and today I listened to most of the fourth. I know people like to assume that you must be “completely ignorant” to pipe up with disagreements (strangely enough), but that’s not the case here. I disagree with that motherfucker because his “logic” in this instance is shit and his argument style is purely deflective, and furthermore, he’s advocating for something that in no way would improve conditions for kids in the U.S.

So, anyway, here’s what I chose to say to him today:

Jesus. You won’t give up on this topic, will you? It does not make worthwhile sense to do away with the age of consent laws and then require each minor in question to go to the police and defend themselves in court and somehow demonstrate their inability to meaningfully consent to sex with a grown adult. That would be too taxing on the system itself and would be far more complex for law officers and members of the public to understand.

Furthermore, it would improve nothing for the youths of society. The only people you’re impressing with your arguments here are rebellious teenagers who pine for more independence and NAMBLA-supporting adults who’d like to take advantage of the situation if ever age of consent laws were stricken from the books.

I’ve watched and read enough out of you to see that your game here is to jump back and forth across topics in an attempt to confuse the key topic actually up for discussion. You’re obviously not interested predominantly in changing the laws as they pertain to teenagers (despite playing around as if that’s the central focus), but rather wish to do away with all legal protections even for pre-teen minors. Arguing that they may begin puberty around age 8 still says nothing about their emotional maturity or ability to meaningfully consent to sex with a much older adult. And youths’ math skills tell us nothing at all in relation to their sexual maturity and is therefore irrelevant.

Because you, as a 9-year-old, chose to perform fellatio on a 20-something-year-old guy doesn’t make that right and it certainly doesn’t make it ideal for others to follow in your footsteps. God only knows what happened to you before then (besides problems with your mother that you’ve mentioned on various occasions) that propelled you toward acting out sexually in such a manner, but that’s neither here nor there since YOU and your personal experiences are not set as the base norm worthy of being applied to all others. To do so would be ludicrous.

You apparently lack the compassion to allow youths to be youths and to explore whatever they’re going to explore among their peers and instead are arguing for adults to inject themselves into the scenario, while doing away with age of consent laws so that children OF ANY AGE would then have to act as adults by reporting the case to police and submit to being put through the legal process in an effort to legally STOP those who are indeed taking advantage of youths. What this basically is arguing for is to shift nearly all of the responsibility from the adult to the minor in question, regardless of their age. If they remain quiet, then you and your ilk gleefully presume that no crime or offense took place. But you know as well as I do, assuming you ever really were a cop, that children are the least likely to report sexual abuse out of any demographic. There already are plenty out here who’ve suffered real sexual abuse at the hands of adults, yet they never went to police and many never even told a family member (or weren’t believed if they did). You’d be making those youths more vulnerable, and all for what? So some of you and your pals can get your jollies without legal consequences?

Sick fuck.

Was burnt out on this topic over a week back already. But it sucks to remain silent when people advocate shit like that.

Was I being a bit hyperbolic and reactively bitchy there? Yep. Justicar (a.k.a integralmath) irritates me to no end. I don’t buy his stated claims that this comes down to how illogical and arbitrary our age of consent laws are. Nope. Viewed and read enough from him to seriously doubt he has his heart anywhere near the right place on this matter. And since he behaves like a bitchy queen himself, he’d rather throw around insults than try to clearly explain what the hell he’s driving at with all of this. So I don’t owe him much in the way of decency.

Btw, I screen-captured his claims about his sexual experiences as a 9-year-old from one of his past videos in the series’ comment section, which can be viewed here. Though I recommend others not only watch or listen to his videos but to actually read a wide array of his responses in the comment sections as I have done. They tell you a lot more about this man’s mindset than his snarky video footage cared to.

Pedo-supportive? Judge for yourself.

Learning how to use my new screen shot software. And what better way to try it out than by capturing Justicar’s posts in a comment thread where he talks about being capable at age 9 of consciously fully consenting to deciding to perform fellatio on a 20+-year-old man:







Click the link above to see the original comments on Google+ (still up when I checked today, 2/23/2017, though Justicar has since deleted the videos).

Crude, I know. But I didn’t write it. Just trying to capture it since it ties in with my claims about him from my previous post. Best to get it directly from the horse’s mouth.


Update March 30, 2016: Stumbled back across this post tonight and checked links. Wouldn’t you know it — Justicar marked his videos on this subject private.

And then the “manosphere” imploded…

Interesting couple of weeks to be tracking the so-called “manosphere” online.

Let’s see…first there were “doxxing” attempts made on popular “MGTOW” personalities where someone created an anonymous Twitter account and posted up Barbarossa and Stardusk’s photos, along with links to things they’d said or written years back. And my name got drug into it since this anonymous person decided to publicly forward this info to me along with a handful of others. Still not sure what to make of that aspect.

Then the “MGTOWs” (a.k.a., Men Going Their Own Way) went full-frontal against the MRM (men’s rights movement), particularly the organization AVFM (A Voice For Men) which is billed as the biggest and most influential in the online “manosphere.” That included much lampooning of Aaron Clarey, another youtuber sent the “doxxed” info mentioned above, plus RBK’s (RazorBladeKandy2) uploading of hours-long videos critical of one Janet Bloomfield who works for AVFM before he came out with a couple more videos arguing that the MRM as a whole will prove futile (an argument I’d like to analyze another day). Then a bunch of others jumped into the mix and began howling and ridiculing back and forth.

Then, GQ came out with its unflattering article on the MRM and AVFM (linked and mentioned in a past post).

And then, it came out that Jordan Owen (mentioned in my last post) and Davis M.J. Aurini had a falling out and it’s questionable as to whether they will (together or separately) complete the documentary called “The Sarkeesian Effect” after raising thousands of dollars in donations to do so. Aurini has taken to defaming and entirely blaming his (now former) co-creator on his blog (post one and two). Typical of Aurini, from what I’ve seen out of the weasel.

AND THEN, most interesting of all, in my opinion, a youtuber who calls himself The Justicar has basically gone full-NAMBLA (that is, North American Man/Boy Love Association) in his recent 3-part series of videos arguing that the age of consent laws should be done away with in favor of assessing individual children and teens according to their own individual capabilities to consent, regardless of age. Determined how? He claims this should be clearly evident by simply talking to them. Hmmm… This might sound hyperbolic on my end, but I listened to all he had to say in those 3 videos and read and interacted a great deal in his comment sections over the last few days. And yes, I acknowledge that he obfuscates the main point by bringing in children being tried as adults for crimes and the arbitrariness of age limits for alcohol and military service and whatever else. He’s not much fun to take the time to read and hear out due to his snarky nature, but I’ve done so out of curiosity, waiting for him to claim this was all some sort of ruse ultimately intended to jab at libertarianism (since he likes to do that in roundabout ways sometimes, forever toying with “logic”). But that has yet to be the case. Instead, Justicar has offered up his own story of having been a 9 year old who made the fully conscious and consensual decision to perform fellatio on a man in his 20s (so he claims). While in other comments he comes across as extremely calloused toward others who reportedly endured negative sexual experiences as children at the hands of adults, most especially if he viewed them as lower ranking in terms of socioeconomic class, quality of upbringing, and general intelligence level (at least according to his own assessment).

Haven’t liked the guy since viewing more than a few of his videos, beginning nearly 3 years ago (kinda liked his channel initially though before delving deeper). Grade A asshole right there, and now he’s stepped over a line that definitively has destroyed any ounce of respect I may have ever had for him. What bugs me most is how his fans just keep going along with whatever he says, humbling themselves in responses to him and vehemently defending him against any others who might be (legitimately) critical.

In other news, a youtuber who goes by the handle TL;DR is still batting around an idiot by the name SexyMGTOW (which he undeniably deserves after making several videos claiming, incredibly enough, that women are not real human beings). Went around with that jerk nearly a year ago. Total waste of time. Glad someone else is finally willing to try setting him straight.

So yep, some of this has been interesting, some mildly entertaining, and some utterly depressing. I won’t pretend to know what to do with all of this. It’s understandable that folks are going to fight, especially online, and I can see where some matters needed to be dragged out into the light of day and openly hashed out, since not everybody can simply be on-board with and tolerant of everything and everyone. But it’s a question of where these sort of factions intend to go from here. Guess this is part of the problem with such loose affiliations that show clear signs of poor leadership. I am being harsh here, because I’ve said for a long time (long before knowing anything of the “manosphere”) that there are some people who do not deserve to be considered one’s brethren. Not all are on the same team, nor will they ever be. Some are purely opportunists who look out only for what they want, the rest be damned. Some are flaming idiots, and some are liable to be dangerous, as life demonstrates to us regularly enough.

Sorry folks, but not all men are good or worthy of respect. Just as not all women are. As should be quite obvious. Sadly though, charisma is not dependent on one’s scruples. People flock toward highly charismatic persons, nevermind that they may be snakes in the grass. More reasonable, fairer and more balanced voices tend to wind up ignored. Unfortunately this is also clearly demonstrated within our U.S. political system. I don’t like this fact more than anybody else, but we can see it play out plain as day. Idiots and assholes rule the day, much as I wish that wasn’t the case. And we allow this to be so.

I’m not sure what’s worth backing these days, hence why I’m taking time to hang back and observe. Hence why I feel it’s so important for us to work with those we’re able instead of devoting so much time and energy trying to shape movements when so many people within said movements are prone to discredit themselves and the movement as well. It’s another paradox where the only way to affect political change is to group up and consolidate funds; and yet, through doing so, one becomes vulnerable to being undermined by people within one’s own movement. So there’s this need to know who we’re choosing to affiliate with and to control for that, yet mass movements scattered across entire countries (or the entire internet) makes it possible for practically anybody to waltz in and claim affiliation, and there’s not much one can do about it. And if one or a handful of them fuck up, the black eye winds up distributed to all under said banner, deemed guilty by association. The bigger the movement, the less control any one individual therein really has, especially as a mere rank-and-file participant. And some people will prove to be either incredibly stupid or wicked or both — that’s always a given.

But to walk one’s own way and shun affiliations is to give the impression of not caring (even if you sincerely do) and may very well lead to one having less access to possibly influence a greater number of people. But then it becomes a question of the sort of influence one’s even trying to have. I personally would rather stand with my own vetted friends, loved ones, and willing associates than join up with a bunch of strangers who, more often than not (in my experience), turn out to have very different agendas than my own. I don’t know how to remedy this recurring conflict in interests.

Time to head to work.