Chip Smith of Nine Banded Books said he liked it, and it should be published in a book. He said it reminded him of Peter Sotos‘ work. Interview with Sotos by Chip Smith. Nine Banded Books is his book publishing outlet for sick fuck books. Chip Smith is a sick fuck too, by the way. I kind of liked that, being compared to Peter Sotos. Peter Sotos, in case you are wondering, is a homosexual. He’s also sick fuck, a sick fuck writer of sick fuck fiction. But he was the King of the Sick Fucks, and the King of the Sick Fuck Writers of Sick Fuck Books, and you know that has to count for something. I was in good company. I’m still proud to this day of being compared to that sick sonofabitch.
In his books, Sotos examines sadistic sexual criminals and sexually violent pornography, particularly involving children. His writings are interpreted by some as commenting on media hypocrisy around these issues. His books are often first person narratives, taking on the point of view of the sexual predator in order to explore sadistic and pedophilic sexual impulses.
In addition to offering many details about the crimes of serial killers and Nazis, the text in the magazine praises them, describing them using such terms as “genius”, “glorious”, “exemplary”, and “illustrious”. The text is juxtaposed with pictures and newspaper clippings relevant to the crimes discussed, showing that the media also abuses the victims. A short manifesto introducing the first issue says the magazine “satiates and encourages true lusts.”
Good Lord, no way am I as sick as this guy!
Some of his sick fuck books:
Lazy (1999) examines the public fascination with sex crimes, and their influence on artworks such as the painting Myra by Marcus Harvey.
Selfish, Little (2004) recounts the murder of Lesley Ann Downey by British Moors Murderers Ian Brady and Myra Hindley in 1964.
Predicate (2005) explores the Dunblane Massacre in Scotland in 1996 and the motives and life of its perpetrator Thomas Watt Hamilton. Other topics covered include Operation Ore, the Wonderland murders, Russian orphanages, Megan’s Law, and non-nude teen websites.
Comfort and Critique (2005) explores the hidden motives of reporters and citizens as shown by their reactions to sexual crimes.
Show Adult (2007) investigates the experience of pornography. The book also analyzes the TV shows Supernanny and To Catch a Predator as publicly acceptable forms of child pornography.
Lordotics (2008) deals with sex offenders and the art of photography.
Pure Filth (2012) details transcripts of the gonzo movies porn star Jamie Gillis produced during the 1990s. Gillis adds an introduction to each transcript. Sotos, who was a friend of Gillis, brings his own perspective to these records. The book was completed a few days before Gillis died in February 2010.
A sample of his prose from Mine, of his sick fuck books. I think I like it already.
I have to pin the words down, cut them out and place them as far as possible from the dunce economy. I’m not an exegete. But I take the words and ideas and stutters and stick them somewhere far more successful. You’ll understand this, finally, when I demean myself enough to tell you what I do with the words that these mouthy pigs just repeat often enough to tell you that they stand behind them. It’s not what I take, or who I take them away from. But where I put them. Not rewrite them.
Not change or charge the context. I identify them. I don’t, idiot, masturbate with them. I can’t imagine wanting to do anything without having these words fully included. I wouldn’t even consider doing anything without them. The cunts that make cartoons out of their ideas. Little collages and signatures and slack versions. Strippers and songwriters and female’d max factors. I live all over them. I write through them, use them, come away with little more than a dangling possible.
What I do is inescapable.
The main characters here are some guys I knew, or maybe I never knew, or maybe I made up, or maybe they’re really me – Thrillseekerman, an all around petty criminal and moral degenerate, Internetman, an Internet semi-criminal who straddles the line between legal and illegal, and Killerdude, a truly dangerous fellow with psychopathic tendencies whose bark is worse than his bite. Of course none of these people could possibly bear any possible resemblance to me, right? Of course not! This is just stuff a bunch of maniacs told me. I’m just a journalist, scribbling things down, good and bad, right and wrong, not caring to distinguish between any of them.
They Were Committing Crimes
There were committing crimes.
And no one ever caught.
They Were Committing Internet Sex Crimes
A few months ago, or 10 years ago, or maybe today, or maybe I read it on the Net, Internetman met 15-year-old girls on the Net, and they sent him nude pics without him even asking, and said they wanted to have sex with him right now, but they were too far away. So what did he do with the pics? Delete them, call the cops and turn himself in, or keep them in an evil secret file to show it to his most evil friends? I bet they are gone now. Internetman is paranoid. Not only that, but he’s not stupid. Were they illegal? Was Internetman a criminal? He never got caught.
Internetman went into a chatroom the other night, or was it five years ago, or was it just something some friend said? There was a teenage girl in there masturbating on cam, and everyone in the room was watching the fun. Well, she was 13, but she looked like a full-grown to him. The chat room was full, mostly kids but some adults too, both sexes, including middle-aged women. They were all watching the girl on cam and cheering her on.
Some kid in the room said, “I know her! She’s 13! She goes to my school!”
Internetman turned on the cam and it was ok. It was like you take the body of a full-grown woman and then stick a little girl’s face on it, then you make it act like a little girl sometimes. The effect was jarring. Was it illegal? He got away with it.
It was seven years ago, or seven weeks ago, or seven months ago, or tomorrow, and 14-year-old girls came to talk to Internetman in the chatrooms and ask for cybersex. What’s a man to do? What did he do? I bet he didn’t get caught. It was a while back, or the other day, or some time ago, or 4-7 years ago, and Internetman did the cybersex thing with them, the 14-yr-olds, the 15-yr-olds, and the 16-yr-olds, and of course the droves of many more legal-aged women as well, and it was all in good fun.
One of them was just a friend, but she begged and begged for him to send her porn, so he broke down and sent porn to a 14-yr-old girl. Was that illegal? Now he’s paranoid, and he’ll never do it again. Or will he? Maybe he better not. Times change, you know. But then again, he never got caught.
In a chatroom, five days ago, or last year, or five years back, or yesterday, or ten years from now, the 17-year-old girl saw he had a cam and asked him to turn it on. Internetman did so. She started whining for him to take his pants off so she could see his stuff, because she had never seen one before.
“But I’ve never seeeeen one before,” she whined into Internetman’s headphones, but he chickened out again. I bet he wouldn’t have gotten caught.
They Were Committing Statutory Rape
Internetman met a girl once on the Net a few weeks ago, or was it seven years ago, or was it in a dream? She was 17 years and seven months old, and wanted sex right now. She kept demanding and demanding, and she would not knock it off. She was a lesbian, but she wanted to try it with a guy to see what it felt like.
“Why with me?” Internetman asked.
“Because,” she said. “You are handsome.”
Internetman thought and thought and thought, and he almost did it because she wouldn’t quit pestering him, but finally he worried it was an evil plot by one of his enemies trying to get him arrested for statutory rape. Good thing he was paranoid, so he never took her up. He still wonders about it. “Would I have gotten caught?” he wonders.
They Were Collecting Child Porn
Internetman went into these really evil chatrooms, just on a wild dare, and people were all trying to do horrible and illegal stuff in there, men and women of all ages, normal folks, and weird, the whole human panoply. Internetman tried not to do anything illegal. Will he go there again? He doubts it.
The Internet is the most evil place Internetman knows, and Internetman knows a lot of evil places, and he’s been to most of them at one time or another. Somehow he always got out alive. Somehow he never got caught.
You can do just about anything on the Net, and who knows if it’s even legal or what? Where are the cops? What’s a cop? There are bulletin boards right now where people are asking for child porn and bragging about their antisocial acts, and Internetman knows where they are. He’s been to them, lurking, never talking, but he didn’t do anything illegal. There was nothing illegal on the boards. Just a lot of evil talk. A lot.
He just stayed and watched the perverts perving.
“Young!” the perverts said, “Anyone got any young?”
And you know what that means.
There were men and women in there of all ages, goodlooking young couples, middle aged housewife types, the most normal people in the whole world, all trading the most evil pornography of all. Why? What gives? Was it the thrill? Of the forbidden? Of the crime, the rush of the crime, a rush like no other? Of getting away with it?
Internetman went to chatrooms where sex perverts traded porn pics. Internetman, being a pervert, was right at home. Mostly it was fun, but some people sent Internetman really illegal pics without him even asking, and he freaked out and deleted them about as quick as they hit the screen. Was that illegal? Did Internetman commit a crime? Internetman trembled in his seat. Trembled with excitement. With terror. With the rush. The rush of getting away with it.
They Were Raping Women
Internetman went to this chatroom last year, or eight years ago, or yesterday, or just some lie he told the cops, and met this guy in Kentucky, a psychopath I guess, who wanted someone to rape his wife.
“I’m looking for someone to rape my wife.” he announced.
Well, that was about the weirdest thing Internetman had ever heard, so he was intrigued and stuck around for the ride.
The guy would be gone. You had to break in, tie her up, rape her, and get away with it. Well, actually you didn’t have to get away with it, but that would certainly be preferable! He said you could not hurt her in any way.He described the sex acts he wanted Internetman to engage in with his wife.
“Fuck all holes,” he said.
Internetman was worried. “What if she doesn’t like it?”
“Don’t worry,” the guy said. “She’ll love it.”
Getting away with it was Internetman’s business, he’d been doing it his whole life and he’d never been caught for any of the crimes he’d ever done, and here the guy said would not call the cops and report the rape.
“How do I get away with it?” Internetman asked.
“That’s your business. Your problem. You’re on you own there,” the guy said.
So Internetman sat there and wondered whether or not he could be a criminal rapist and try to get get away with it, under special circumstances of course in which at least the victim’s husband consented, but he chickened out at the end. But he used to think about it sometimes? Could he have done it? Would he have done it? What if he got caught? What if he got away with it?
They Were Killing People
Killerdude came over a while back, or 25 years ago, or the other day, and said he was considering taking an offer to kill some guy, from a woman who was offering big money to have her husband knocked off.
So they, Thrillseekerman and Killerdude, sat around for hours blasted out of their minds on dope and talked about whether or not you should murder someone for the money. They discussed Christianity, as in whether or not a Christian should kill, and whether or not the would-be murder victim deserved it since he was a wife-beater, and Thrillseekerman tried to spy on Killerdude for the cops, but it did not work.
Thrillseekerman didn’t like the idea of killing for money (even Thrillseekerman had some basic values, if only a measly few) and thought his friend was degenerating morally. Even though his name was Killerdude, Thrillseekerman had never taken it literally. He thought it was all for show, like most things men do.
What if Killerdude did it? Would it corrode his mortal soul? Could he ever look in a mirror again without smashing it? Would he make his peace with God and the Devil both? Could he keep it a secret? Would the guy have deserved it? Is there a universal morality, or nothing beyond the ether? And most importantly, would he have gotten caught?
They Were Serial Killers
They took lots of drugs, Thrillseekerman and Killerdude did, while they talked about all this insane and evil stuff. It was last month, or was it 15 years ago, or it was something he hallucinated while he was on acid. They sat around for hours at night stoned out of their minds on chemicals.
Killerdude exclaimed, “Yeah! I could play the role of the insane serial killer! I could play that role! I could play any role! I could play as many roles as you could, Thrillseekerman! And that’s a lot of roles.”
They shook their heads and laughed demoniacally. It was fun to be evil sometimes. You can’t be a choir boy forever. Sometimes you need a bit of rough.
But Thrillseekerman didn’t really consider it, just fantasized about it. About what? Being a serial killer? How many people do that? Could he have done it? Could Killerdude have done it? Could they have gotten away with it?
It was really weird back in those days, or the other day, or whenever it was, or maybe it never even happened, but not too many actual crimes happened. There was just a lot of talk. Cheap talk. Talk is cheap.
They Were Selling Drugs
Thrillseekerman sold dope for 14 years, and the cops never caught on. He finally quit, and now he’s scared to do it again, but the temptation is always there, because he so loved the outlaw dealer life where you never get caught and outsmart the law. He also loved being a dealer because he loved being a criminal. As a dealer, you can be a criminal without hurting anyone else, so if you have a shred of guilt left, and Thrillseekerman does, but only just a shred mind you, it’s a great Catholic profession.
They Were Robbing Stores and Driving Getaway Cars
One of his drug addict friends, Killerdude, came over the other day, or was it 22 years ago, or was it a lie his enemies made up? He asked Thrillseekerman to be the getaway driver for an armed robbery, and Thrillseekerman considered it, but thank God he didn’t do it.
A few months back, or 18 years ago, or just some lie he told, one of Thrillseekerman’s doper friends drove the getaway car for an armed robbery, and he told Thrillseekerman all about it. Then the armed robber himself came over to Thrillseekerman’s house with his girlfriend, and they sat around and took drugs. He seemed like a smiling psychopath, and those guys are always charming in a way. Later Thrillseekerman called the cops and told them the guy’s name, but there was not much they could do.
They Were Turning People In to the Cops
Last week, or 21 years ago, or while he was daydreaming, Thrillseekerman called the cops on his friends and tried to get them busted. Once for selling heroin because Thrillseekerman thought that was shitty. The other time because Thrillseekerman was mad at his friend who sold pot and wanted to burn the guy.
Dealers work with narcs all the time, and Thrillseekerman was a dealer like a lot of thrillseekers. Why? Mostly for revenge reasons. Most people don’t know that. Without dopers to work alongside them, every narc in America would be unemployed.
They Were Stealing Cars
Once, 11 years ago, or a few weeks back, or in a movie he saw once, Thrillseekerman stole Killerdude’s car, not to be a criminal or anything, but just because he was furious at him, but he brought it back when the cop’s son across the street was going to have him arrested.
They Were Vandalizing Businesses
One time, it was last month, or last year, or it was 20 years ago, or long ago in another world, and Thrillseekerman drove by a business at 5 AM with a slingshot and blew out a window in a business because he hated it and it was evil.
Committing street crimes like that, which were actually a revolutionary acts in favor of People’s Power and against the crooked businesses that rip off the People, is one of the biggest rushes that Thrillseekerman knows. You will shake like a leaf. You will shake so hard it will be hard to steer the car after you do it. You will be terrified and thrilled all at the same time, and when you get away with it, there will be no better feeling.
They Were Setting Off Bombs
Once, in another country, or on the run or the lam, or just for shits and giggles, or maybe just as an urban legend, they got loaded and made some bombs. It was a few months ago, or 13 years ago, or back in the 80’s, or I made up the whole thing. Thrillseekerman had these antisocial maniac friends, some of whom seemed like they might snap, but Thrillseekerman wasn’t worried, and they liked to make bombs, like all maniacs do. It’s so fun making illegal bombs! The psycho dudes showed Thrillseekerman how to make bombs, which is so easy it’s scary.
You take some Piccolo Pete fireworks, take them apart, and there’s gunpowder inside. You take a softball and hollow it out and fill it with the gunpowder from the Piccolo Petes. You patch the hole but leave a small hole for the string. That’s your fuse. You put a string down in and fasten it. It’s not really a bomb. It’s more like a giant firecracker, like an M-80. It’s not a shrapnel bomb.
Then they took the bombs and blew up this dude’s windshield (who deserved it) with a fused time bomb, and they slashed his tires (he deserved that too) and never got caught. Then later they went to his apartment complex and they got a bunch of guys and they all turned his car upside down so it was sitting on its roof and they never got caught for that either! He’d been ripping off the local dealers. The street has a thousand eyes and thousand ears. The street knows everything. Nothing gets away from the street. The thing about the street is the Paybacks. The paybacks are a bitch, you know? Believe it.
Then they took another bomb, this time sort of a firebomb that shoots up a flame, and threw it on some other guy’s lawn (who deserved it), and it burned a hole in the lawn. They got away with it.
Making little bombs is the easiest thing in whole world to do, and every revolutionary and maniac of any age might want to make them and set off them in the street at least, that is if you have the nerve, just to see what an explosion looks like and to piss off the boring neighbors.
They Were Waging Gang Warfare
Once, when they were young, or maybe when they were old, or maybe they just read it in a book somewhere, they called themselves a gang and sat on the front porch of Thrillseekerman’s house and shot BB pellets and rocks and dirt clods at the neighbors’ house (who deserved it) and dared them to call the cops. The people did call the cops, but the cops hardly cared because they thought Thrillseekerman was doing a civic duty by getting rid of the real criminal (the neighbor) he was attacking. In other words, Thrillseekerman was a public service vigilante ridding the neighborhood of scum as he saw fit. So they got away with it.
They Were Smashing in Doors with Baseball Bats
Once upon a time, today, or happily ever after, Thrillseekerman grabbed a baseball bat, laughed maniacally, and ran across the street in broad daylight as a joke so the whole world could see it and to dare the coward neighbors cowering in their sissy kitchens to call the cops. When he got to the scum’s door, he smashed it in with his baseball bat! Bam! The door caved in! Then he ran back home. He laughed because he thought he got away with it. The cops paid him a visit on the phone, told him to watch it, and told him to spend $10 to repair the door.
Moral: If you’re doing a public service crime, do it in broad daylight.
They Were Flashing Women
It was just the other day, or long, long ago, or it was just some made-up bullshit. Thrillseekerman sneaked into the ladies room to take a crap because the criminal, feral, 13 year old Black youths were in the men’s room threatening with their eyes to attack anyone who came in. He thought he could do it quick and dirty and simple without anyone seeing. He thought he could get away with it. He was wrong. A woman called the cops, and the detectives threatened to kick Thrillseekerman’s ass if he did not confess to a perverted crime he did not commit. He only wanted to confess to taking a crap in the wrong place and the wrong time, which was the only crime he did.
Well, he was also trying to see if he could get away with it, so there was a thrillseeker aspect. The detectives quickly figured out he was not a pervert, but they kept on torturing him anyway and trying to get him to confess. Don’t you just love detectives? How many people in the US just confess unless the cops beat the shit out of them?
They Were Molesting Children
He was 20 again, or was he 50, or was he 35 or was it some lie his enemies made up? He was jogging in the park, and Thrillseekerman met a 12 year old girl he had known from an old job for a long time, and they chatted a bit and smiled and laughed, and then she flat out asked Thrillseekerman to have sex with her and smiled when she said it, just like that. Not only that but she was beautiful, brilliant, wise, and athletic.
And Thrillseekerman considered becoming the ultimate criminal that you can be, a child molesting sick evil scumbag piece of dirt, but then he decided against it. There are Lolitas and teenage girls that want it, 12 and up, with adult men, 18-65. And if you do it and get caught, you are going down in the worst way. Is it worth it? Will you do it? Can you resist it? And most of all, will you get caught?
They Were Having Gang Shootouts
It was yesterday, or long ago in another world. A whole crowd of gangsters came in the door. There had just been a gang fight, and people were hurt. The gangsters were underage, some of them, but they used an 18 year old girl to get in the door because they knew Thrillseekerman’s fatal weaknesses.
Later there were shots fired 50 yards from his door, and the cops didn’t even want to take any witnesses. They never do in gang crimes, and besides, in Greater Tijuana, here in California, there are pro-gang Hispanic spies everywhere. Thrillseekerman’s White, and he claims Norteno, or does he? Or does the whole neighborhood? After all, he lives in a Norteno hood, so everyone more or less claims in a way. Thrillseekerman wears jogging shoes with N on them for a reason, or does he?
They Were Doing Drive-by Shootings
Three weeks ago, or nine months ago, or 12 years ago, or never, someone came by and flashed a United Farm Workers shirt – Do you get it? Nortenos! – at Thrillseekerman and asked him to go out with a shotgun and kill some Surenos.
“Hey Thrillseekerman, let’s go get a shotgun and shoot some Scraps!”
Thrillseekerman had to think about it for a bit because nothing would be so thrilling and dangerous, and Surenos probably deserved it anyway, being scumbags after all, but thank God he declined. In the barrio anyway, no snitching was the rule, so you might even get away with it, but you could still get caught. Thrillseekerman didn’t like to get caught. He liked to get away with it. After all, he’d been getting away with it his whole life. Which, after all, was the point of it all. All the crime. All the bad behavior. All the bad boy fun and games and shit. The getting away with it. The not getting caught.
They Were Committing Crimes
There were criminal opportunities all over the place for decades, right under your nose, people enticing you here and there to break the law and commit serious crimes, some of them felonies, if only one was psycho enough, and they seemed to dare you and egg you on. Will you do it? Can you resist it? Will you get away with it? Will you get caught?
Sure, 16 year old girls look awesome, but she opens up her mouth and she sounds like a 10 year old. Total turnoff. Even those two topless 17 year olds were a turnoff and one of them had awesome huge tits. But they sounded like brain-dead idiot teenyboppers and that was the biggest turnoff. I don’t like “girlishness.”
I like “womanlyness.” To the extent that a female is womanly, she turns me on. To the extent that she is girlish in a silly or stupid way, she turns me off. I don’t date morons. Plus it feels creepy to fuck a woman who acts girlish. I had an 18 year old girlfriend a while back. She was head over heels in love with me. To the extent that she acted like an adult, she turned me on, but when she acted girlish, it was a turnoff.
I don’t have anything against men who are oriented towards girls instead of women, though that’s not me. 16% of men are hebephiles and 3% of men are pedophiles, and if you want to expand the definition of hebephile to where the Shitheads want it, it goes up to 26% or even 100% of all men! Those men are going to be attracted to girlishness and youth. The more a woman looks neotenic or childlike (think Asian women), the more turned on they get.
It’s been said that all men are turned on by neotenism, and perhaps they are feature-wise. But the norm for men is to be teliophilic, not pedophilic or hebephilic.
81% of men are teleiophilic. That means they are maximally attracted to females from 15 up. That includes 15-17 year old girls and women in general. These men are attracted to the features of maturity of “womanishness” in a female. This is the polar opposite of “pedophilia” or whatever the Shitheads are screaming about today. Being attracted to womanishness and turned off by girlishness is the norm for all males. But note that this attraction to maturity includes 15-17 year old girls because in the sexual minds of men, 15-17 year old girls are just women and men are attracted to them because they are womanish, not girlish. Hence this is an incredibly normal attraction.
We can diagnose people with sexual orientations not so much based on the “objects” they are attracted to but more on the “essences” to which they are attracted. Attracted to girlishness? Fine, that’s 19% of all men, but it’s also “pedo-ish” if you will. But note that 19% of all men are “pedo-ish,” so to me, it’s almost normal. How can you that 20% of all men have a horrific and dangerous sexual deviation or paraphilia so awful that they need to be locked up forever? You can’t.
Once you start getting into features that are displayed by large percentages of the population, we really start balking at calling them mental disorders. I don’t think we would call any feature or set of features that 20% of men display a disorder. That’s too many.
“Normal” in psychiatry or psychopathology is more of a numbers name than anything else. In a society where all men beat their wives, sadly, wife-beating is “normal.”
But then we get into the notion of whether bad things can be normal. I would argue that a lot of bad behavior is normal. Is stealing abnormal? Hitting people? Throwing tantrums? Succumbing to depression from time to time? Grieving after a death? Hell, I would almost argue that rape, jealously, and murder are “normal.” We humans sure do it a lot, don’t we? We do it all the time, we’ve been doing it in vast numbers forever, so how could it be abnormal? It’s shitty, but it’s common as Hell and it’s never going away. These things are an essential aspect of our behavior as a species.
But it is a very interesting question whether normal behavior can actually be bad or even horrendous in the sense that normal simply means “common.”
So, readers, which is it, are a lot of bad behaviors actually “normal” in that our species sure does it a lot? So that means “normal” could encompass both good and bad behaviors.
I’m very torn philosophically as far as this goes. Perhaps we should just chuck the idea of “normal” altogether. Normies wrecked it ages ago anyway so what good is it?
I guess girlishness is attractive in terms of features, though I’m not even sure there. I’ve seen 18 year old girls on Tinder who looked underage. I’m sure they were 18 but the fact that they looked underage was a huge turnoff for me. I want a woman, not a girl!
Now I have nothing against a woman acted child-like in the sense of getting in touch with her Inner Girl. Now watch the Shitheads panic because I said that.
There’s a girl in every woman and a woman in every girl. The Shitheads already went batshit insane when I said that.
Her Inner Girl is her Inner Child if you will. A lot of adult women have killed off their Inner Child, and that is a huge turnoff. The Inner Child particularly comes out to play during sex or sexual times or when you are madly in love.
PUA/Game pro-tip: When a woman starts laughing hysterically and acting child-like or girlish, you can absolutely fuck her, guaranteed. Jump on her, Goddamn it! Don’t worry, she’ll go for it.
Because sex somehow is connected with child-like or girlish behavior in the female. Sex is also funny. I can’t help but notice how many people think sex is funny. Think back to the women you’ve slept with and notice how often they started laughing when you were having sex. There was a Joy of Sex book that came out back in the 1970’s back when people were sane, before Mass Shithead Disorder infected 90% of the population. I remember that book said that when it comes down to it, sex is pretty damn funny.
I’ve been with women and we were madly in love with each other and she was acting like a kid. I started acting like a kid too and saying, “Mommy can you fix me some bweckfast?” I’ve done that with other girlfriends too and they think it’s funny. I get to play the little boy and they get to play the mother. One laughed every time I did that and said, “Ok, little boy.” I usually did it in the morning because I wanted “Mommy” to fix me breakfast and I wanted to play “little boy.”
All women want to be mothers. If they don’t have a kid, they have a dog that subs for a kid. The maternal instinct cannot be extinguished. I had a girlfriend age 49 who had never had kids and even said she hated kids. But at some point in her life, she had babysat or looked after this little six year old boy, and she simply would not stop talking about him.
It wasn’t pedo-ish or weird in that sense, but she would not stop talking about that damned little boy! I finally figured out that she had mothered him in a sense, and in a way, that was the child she never had. She got to play mother with him and he got to play son. She talked about him all the time because in a way, that boy she took care of was the child she never had. It seemed to important to her. Her relationship with her French poodle dog was absolutely nuts. He was basically her kid. He even slept in her bed. That’s not uncommon. A lot of single women sleep with their dogs. The dog is their kid in a sense. Or a substitute for a man? Which is it? Both?
Note: I don’t really hate cops, but I’m not wild about them either. Now if a cop is, say, a detective working robbery or homicide, why should I have a beef with him? He’s catching robbers and killers. Why would I have an issue with that?
I don’t even mind dope cops anymore (although I used to hate narcs) as long as they aren’t busting pot. I have no problems with cops busting people for selling meth, crack cocaine, fentanyl, or heroin. That’s stuff’s garbage.
Now we get down to your ordinary street cop. Let’s look at my city. About half of the cops in my city are huge assholes, the biggest dicks on Earth. It’s like they’re always trying to pick a fight. Don’t like them one bit. But the other half are often pretty nice, and sometimes, they’re extremely nice to me.
But fed cops busting guys for buying whores or fucking 17 year old girls or kids sexting each other or adults possessing written stories or pictures of clothed humans that the cops don’t like? Get out. They’re pigs, plain and simple. Pests.
And the worst cops of all are feds. Now if feds are only going after murderers as some FBI do, I have no problem with them. Or financial criminals or fraudsters.
But you don’t even want to be a subject of one of their investigations. Federal sentencing guidelines are batshit insane, far in excess of a reasonable sentence. They’re ridiculous! And if the feds want to get you, they will get you. They will dump all of your possessions on the floor and go over them with a fine toothcomb. They will examine your whole life with a magnifying glass. And they will probably find that you are breaking some law somewhere somehow.
I imagine most of us are violating some stupid-ass law on a fairly regular basis. I know I do. I don’t feel good about myself unless I’m breaking at least one law. I feel like a great big pussy. Call it Permanent Bad Boy Syndrome. God forbid I should arrive at a time in my life when I’m no longer at least one dumbass law. I would probably look around like crazy to try to find a new idiot law to break. Who wants to be a goody-good or an altar boy? Screw that.
So if you see the word pigs below, I’m referring to sex cops. Cops butt out of our sex lives!
Butthead, a commenter, linked to a Youtube video. I clicked on it but it was already taken down.
RL: What was on the video?
Butthead: Bare schoolgirl boobage. She was brushing her hair in the bathroom and her towel “accidentally” slipped for a second.
Well, that’s legal. It’s not CP. Tits are legal on anyone of any age.
Nudity Is Not Necessarily Child Porn
So is nudity, honestly, but that does get a bit trickier. There are sites all over the Net of teenage girls, probably underage but who knows, taking nude selfies of themselves in front of mirrors. A lot of them are in Russia. They’re actually a bit hard to find but if you know what you are looking for, you can find them. I’ve seen them before but I don’t have a teenage girl fetish, so it’s not big deal to me, and I haven’t been back. Been there, done that. As long as they are just standing in front of a mirror or on the beach with their clothes off, it’s not child porn, because child porn is a lot worse than nudity.
There was a site where a lot of teenagers were camming all the time, teenage girls and boys both. Fairly regularly, one of the girls would take off some or all of her clothes. You could see over to the side the people camming and how many were watching. One cammer would suddenly go from five to 50 to 100 viewers, and if you went to look at the cam, sure enough, there’s some teenage girl with her top off.
I did watch one video like that. Two teenage girls aged 17 with their tops off. Problem was every time they opened up their mouths, they sounded like 10 year olds. All this retarded high school gossip. Total turnoff. I went once and never went back. Like I said, it’s not my fetish.
I’ve seen enough naked teenage girls in the flesh back in the day for 10 or 20 lifetimes. There’s nothing special. It just looks like the body of a woman, same thing.
I will never understand why everyone is so freaked out about the Goddamned naked body of a human being, whether it’s a teenager or a child, no matter. A naked human being isn’t necessarily sexual. It’s simply the way we were all born. This idea that some photos of naked human beings are some sort of evil pornography is completely insane. And not to mention, it’s wildly puritanical and prudish. It’s downright sex-hating and anti-sexual.
“Lascivious Display of the Genitalia”
As long as there is no “lascivious display of the genitalia,” everything’s fine. Child porn must involve “lascivious display of the genitalia.” There’s a lot of uncertainty about what that means, but usually it means she has her legs spread or she’s masturbating. Or it could simply be a photo or a video where the focus on the photographic material via zoom lens or whatever is the genitalia. That would be considered lascivious display. For a girl, it would be a focus on the vaginal area. For a boy it would be a focus on his penis, particularly if it is erect. It all depends on the focus of the photographic material.
“If She Has Clothes on, It’s Legal,” until It’s Not!
If she has clothes on, it was traditionally legal. The FBI was quoted as saying, “If she clothes on, it’s not child porn.” This seems reasonable to me. How on Earth could a photo of any human with their Goddamned clothes on be considered the most evil type of pornography? That’s wildly priggish and Victorian right there?
You see, any possible photographic material is legal (not child porn) until one day the fed pigs decide the change the rules and say it’s illegal! And they’re always changing the rules. It’s madness and you would think it’s out and out unconstitutional because you never know when you are breaking the law. A photo that is legal one day when the fed pigs are in a good mood all of a sudden becomes illegal the next day when the pigs automagically declare it to be illegal!
For instance, pedophilic stories have always been legal. They’re all over the Internet. I’ve read them for a few weeks decades ago before I decided this was one perversion I’d rather not explore, and I haven’t read one since. On the other hand, I don’t really read written erotica on the Net anymore.That was more of a phase I went through in my 40’s.
There was a large site called Mr. D.’s which dealt in pornographic stories. I’ve been on the site and there was a Hell of a lot of pedophilic material on there.
What was odd was that many of the authors were women! Grown women, often in their 30’s or 40’s, with a husband and kids! A lot of them had photographs and biographies on their author profile. I have no idea why those women were writing that stuff except that perhaps more people are interested in that kink than we think. Indeed, 18% of men and 7% of women report pedophilic sex fantasies, and many of them have masturbated to them. The vast majority of these people are not pedophiles.
Anyway, Mr. D.’s had been sitting up there forever with all that pedophilic erotica and nobody did a thing about it. In fact, the top OCD experts on the world out of Phillipson’s office back east were assigning those stories as homework for people who had OCD with the pedophile theme, which is an extremely common theme by the way. I know because I spoke to one of their clients.
Well, the other day, the fed pigs decided to change the law again! All of a sudden, written pedophilic erotica was illegal! Mr. D. was arrested in Florida, and his site was shut down. They were looking at throwing the book at him too.
So the fed pigs decided to change the law on the fly.
The Sad Saga of the Black Cat Scans
For instance, as I noted above, the rule always was, “If they have clothes on, it’s legal.” The men who ran Black Cat Scans and their photographer read the law and felt that they were within the law with their hebephilic photos of fully clothed young girls posing in some very erotic photos. All of a sudden out of the blue, the fed pigs decided that if they have clothes on, it could be illegal sometimes!
They arrested the two guys who ran the site, both Jews by the way, and they also arrested the photographer, who seemed like a really good man. They threw the book at all of them. None of these men were pedophilic or hebephilic. The Jews were just out to make a buck like they always are, and the photographer just liked to take pictures.
The arrest and sentencing of the photographer was particularly controversial. Most of the girl models were out of Russia, and they had all been brought in by their mothers. They were all adults by the time of the arrests, and they were all unrepentant about their modeling. There were 20-30 Youtube videos of former models and their mothers protesting the arrest of the photographer, saying that the girls were not harmed, that they did not regret what they did, and that the photographer was completely professional. It is important to note that none of the girls were molested in any way, shape or form. I believe the mothers were even present during the shooting.
Just to show you how absurd the law is, Black Cat scans had been visited by 25 million (!) men, and I assume a lot of them downloaded the pics. In order to enforce the law, the fed pigs would need to arrest and throw the book at 25 million guys! Good luck with that.
There are still some Black Cat scans floating around. What anyone sees in those photos is beyond me. I’ve seen them but I don’t like them because they seem creeptastic.
There are art photographers like David Hamilton who took many art photos of young teenage girls. You can find those all over the Net. They’re perfectly legal.
There are nudist photos all over the Net with humans of all ages, including plenty of teenagers and kids, strolling or sitting around naked in woods, beaches, and whatnot. It’s all perfectly legal. They don’t seem to be very popular so I imagine there isn’t much of a market for nudist pics.
It’s also perfectly legal for minors, including kids, to be stark naked at nude beaches, at least in the UK. Teenagers and kids get to walk around naked and look at naked adults and the adults are allowed to look at the kids. Anyone can look at anyone all they want.
I knew a 29 year old woman recently who often took her two daughters, ages 9 and 13, to nude beaches. She was always bugging me to go with them, but I never did. She also often made perverted comments about her girls, which seemed weird to me. She actually asked me to move in with her the second or third time I talked to her, but she was pretty far away, plus she was kind of fat. But she was cute.
Medical Text Photos
Medical texts often have nudity, including closeups of genitalia. All legal.
The Problem of Having an Internet Flooded with Photos of Nude Minors
Be that as it may, a lot of hosts want nothing to do with any photos of naked underage teen girls or kids, so sites with this material, even nudist sites, are few and far between.
I’d like to keep it like this.
Could you see if people started posting this stuff all over the Net and all these porn sites sprang up with nude underage teenagers and worse, kids?
That might flood the whole Internet porn industry pretty quickly. I don’t know what do do about that, as it would make me uncomfortable to see all this sites out there with naked underage teenagers and kids. Also, it would cause a tsunami of outrage, and there would be all these calls to ban the stuff.
By the way, a lot of that sexting those teenagers are outrageously getting arrested for is probably legal. It the girls and boys are simply sending each other nudes with no lascivious display of the genitalia, it should be perfectly legal. So it’s not illegal for teenagers to send nudes to each other or at least it shouldn’t be, but who knows how the pigs enforce the crazy laws in their area.
The problem here is that most of them are probably not sending legal photos. Have you ever gotten nudes from a woman on the Net? Hell, they send them out before the first date these days! More women than I can count have sent me nudes over the Net. They were mostly 18-23. I have a whole huge folder of them. Unfortunately, you almost never get to meet them. They just send nudes and maybe talk dirty and then take off.
Well, if you have ever gotten nudes from a woman, first of all, there is typically a focus on the breasts and there is absolutely a focus on the genitalia. Often it is simply a photo of her breasts alone or her genitals alone, usually a huge closeup of the latter. Yep, women focus that camera right on those parts of their body. Women are such perverts!
And men, well, what are the complaints that women make about men when men send nudes? Men don’t send nudes. They send dick pics! So many selfies that men send women tend to focus on the male genitalia or it’s simply a photo of their penis.
So probably most of teen sexting involves sending each other pics with lascivious display of the genitalia, and yes, that would be CP.
But we have to think about this in some other way. It’s insane to bust teenagers for sending nudes to each other. It’s madness. But what can we do about it? I say we let them do send the real thing to each other – lascivious display of genitalia, photos of them having sex, whatever, but they can’t put it up on the Internet.
The Ever-Mutating Rationale for Making the “Child Porn Du Jour” Illegal
The rationale for making child porn illegal – that the child is harmed merely by having their photos floating around for everyone to see – doesn’t seem to apply here. These teens sexting each other – are they being harmed by sending those dirty pics to each other. Generally speaking, no! Ok, so what’s the new rationale for making this stuff illegal. The pigs have to go back to the drawing board and say the old rationale for illegal CP doesn’t apply here and somehow some new rationale applies. But what exactly would the new rationale be?
You see what they are doing?
First they make a reasonable case for making child pornography illegal. It is a document of a very serious crime of child molesting in most cases. But that alone does not seem a good argument because there are videos out there of criminals murdering their victims live on video. Perfectly legal. So photographic depictions of crimes is apparently completely legal.
The other better argument is that the kid did not consent to being molested, and the kid is being harmed merely by having pornographic photos of them floating around. I actually agree with this, though the rationale du jour “the child is harmed every time someone downloads one of their photos” seems ridiculous in a philosophical sense. How exactly does that work. So a girl’s photo gets downloaded 1,000 times. Does she suffer 1,000X harm? What if it was downloaded once? Does she suffer 1X harm? How in God’s name does the victim know how many times their photo gets downloaded? Does the crime go out in some metaphysical space and zap over to the kid’s head and ring up another download in their brain, harming them ever so slightly more with each download? Of course not. But that is what this asinine article implies.
In the case above, did the girl whose photo was downloaded 1,000 times really suffer 1,000 times the harm of the girl whose photo was downloaded once? That seems bizarre. What if the girl doesn’t even know her stuff is out there on the Net. Theoretically, she suffers absolutely zero harm unless and until she discovers that her photo is out there. What she doesn’t know can’t hurt her, right?
Riffing off the argument above that the child is harmed every time their photo is downloaded, is the girl really harmed ever so slightly more with each subsequent download? Why would she? She has no idea how often the pic’s being saved.
This argument sounds convincing at first until you realize it’s garbage. But for kids who know their photos are out there or for adults who know pics of themselves are out there, I agree that they are being harmed, assuming they don’t want them to be there. But what if they are perfectly happy to have their child porn on the Net? Are they still being harmed with each and every new download? Of course not.
This argument is full of holes, but it does work in a number of cases.
I would make another much better argument that society is harmed by this stuff too. Even if it’s on the Dark Net where hardly anyone but the worst pedophiles is looking at it, I still think society is being harmed. Even if someone has the photos taken by themselves on their computer and has never shown them to anyone else? Yes, I would argue that society is still being harmed. We simply cannot allow photographic documentation of children being molested, willingly or not, floating around in society. I do not wish to live in a society where this garbage is legal. It’s disgusting and outrageous that it even exists at all. Kids shouldn’t be molested and we should not take photos of kids getting molested. Because we don’t wish to live in a society where we allow this sort of perverse and revolting garbage occur or exist.
The Anti-CP Argument Mutates Again
But notice how that definition alone isn’t good enough? What about in the case of the Black Cat Scans? The girls were not harmed and in fact they are quite happy to have these erotic pics of themselves floating around. So the argument that the girls are harmed is garbage. Are the Black Cat scans photos of a crime? I certainly hope not. I certainly hope it’s not illegal to take photographs of clothed pubescents in dirty poses.
So on what grounds is it illegal? Who knows? Notice how they have to keep going back to the drawing board and inventing new and weirder and weirder reasons for extending the crime beyond what was intended? Perhaps it is harmful to society to let this stuff float around willy-nilly. That’s a tough argument because even I find that stuff repulsive, but I don’t think stuff really harms society. But I don’t want the Net flooded with it either. If it only exists in a very secretive niche websites, I don’t have a problem with it.
And the Argument Mutates Again!
Pigs wouldn’t be pigs if they only had one mutating argument for making something questionable illegal. The reason they’re pigs is because the arguments for the illegality of this or that keep changing, seemingly with the wind. With each new unannounced expansion of the law, new justifications for the material’s illegal must be invented. The fact that people have to wrack their minds to come up with some argument, any argument, for making something illegal implies to me that it probably shouldn’t be illegal. Crimes ought to be justifiable on their face. It’s illegal to take another’s life without cause. It’s illegal to break into other’s homes. It’s illegal to see dangerous drugs that cause death and destruction. It’s illegal to drive drunk and possibly lethally endanger other people’s lives and limbs. It’s illegal to steal other people’s stuff.
With each of those crimes, did we have to wrack our brains forever to come up with some BS reason for the law to exist? Of course not. In general, all of those things are illegal because the person or possessions of another is harmed to taken from them. In other cases, innocent people are being subjected to unreasonable harm to life and limb due to the irresponsibility of others. Sensible laws are about hurting, harming, or killing other persons, relieving them of their possessions, or unreasonably threatening their lives and bodily health.
So we see that the child porn argument mutates yet again!
What about in the case of Mr. D.’s erotica? This is even crazier. The Black Cat scans at least dealt with real humans. With written erotica we are not even dealing with that. We are dealing with people who literally don’t even exist. The fictional characters apparently being harmed in these stories aren’t real! So how could they be harmed? There’s just a bunch of words. No humans, no photos, just words. Any girls get harmed? Nope, there were no girls to harm! A written depiction of a crime with fake fictional characters? I assume you can write stories about committing disgusting crimes all you want to. It’s a pretty weird thing to do, and I worry about people who do that, but it would seem to legal under freedom of speech.
Is society harmed by allowing pedophilic written erotica to exist? I doubt it. Who even knows that those stories even exist on the Net? 1% of the population? Who reads them? Less than that. I would argue that society is not harmed by a bunch of silly words that no one reads.
I got banned from Reddit a while back. I still go there all the time and I am always greeted by this horrible message that my account is permanently banned. The site keeps throwing it in my face while I surf around the site. It’s very depressing to see that message over and over. It makes you feel hopeless. I kept sneaking back on and they kept banning me again. Sucks that these bans are for a lifetime. I hardly think what I did was worth a lifetime ban. I posted something. My opinion on a particular issue. You know, like free speech. And it wasn’t even particularly outrageous.
People were posting the usual insane bullshit about adult men and teenage girls, and someone discussed a man and a 13 year old girl. I made a post that said, “A man having sex with a 13 year old girl is normal.” I was banned for promoting pedophilia!
You can’t “promote pedophilia.” You can’t be for it or against it. It’s a biological disorder that some folks just end up with. Can you promote schizophrenia? Blue eyes? Albinism? Manic-depressive illness? Borderline Personality Disorder? Foot fetishism? Depression?
How on Earth can you promote or oppose any of those things, and what difference would it make if you did? None of those are really acquired behaviors. You can’t just decide you want to acquire any of those things. You either get wired up that way or you don’t, pretty much. Most are acquired in childhood, adolescence, or early adulthood, and tend to have a chronic course. People acquire mental disorders. You cannot promote or oppose any mental disorder. It’s ridiculous. These are simply maladaptive ways of thinking that some people get into. They’re not something where you wake up one day and decide you want to be this way.
And what would happen if you did promote any of the things above? Would you increase the rate of that thing? Of course not. What if you opposed it? Would you stop people from acquiring those conditions? Of course not. Those conditions are not really willed actions as in I can decide to go to the store right now.
Get my pack, comb my hair, get my keys and phone, open the door, shut it and lock it, walk out of the complex to the sidewalk, and walk 200 yards to the store, then walk in, buy something, get change, turn around, and walk home with my item. Those are all willed actions. I can decide to either do them or not. You can support or oppose any willed actions. Perhaps you wish people would not make decisions to do certain things. Perhaps you think it’s just fine if people decide to do this or that.
Anyway, what did I mean? Well, the American Psychiatric Association has decided that Hebephilia, usually an attraction or preference for pubescents aged ~12-14 is not a mental disorder. There was a big fight about it in the discussions of the latest DSM-5. The people saying it was not a disorder won. Furthermore, they went beyond that to say that not only was it not a disorder, it was also completely normal!
Turns out what they meant was that is it is completely normal for men to be attracted to 12-14 year old girls. In fact, 16% of all men have a primary attraction for girls that age; that is, they are more attracted to 12-14 girls than they are to mature females. It’s hard to say that 16% of all men are sick with some terrible mental disorder.
81% of men are primarily attracted to mature females, 15+. These men are called teleophiles. However, teleophilic men are also attracted to 11-14 year old girls, albeit on a slightly lower level than they are to matures. The usual estimate is that 100% of men are attracted to 12-15 year old girls and 95% of men are attracted to girls 2-12! However, in the latter case, almost all of those men are attracted to little girls at substantially lower level than they are to mature females. 3% of men are pedophiles; that is, they have are more attracted to girls under 11 than they are to mature females. That’s a lot of men.
So it is absolutely normal for a man to be attracted to 13 year old girls. There’s nothing wrong with that. Basically, all men have this attraction to some degree.
Hence, does it follow that if he acts on the attraction, is that normal too? I said it was on Reddit, but I am not sure. It doesn’t strike me as intrinsically disordered behavior like child molestation. Men have been having sex with girls that age for almost all of human evolution. They still do in primitive societies, where men generally start having sex with girls after menarche, which is typically age 13.
In the DSM debate, they said that men who acted on their hebephilic urges were criminals in many Western countries. I would agree with that. If you’re asking me if I am advocating men to have sex with 13 year old girls in places where it is illegal, I am not. The reason is because it’s illegal and you might get caught. If you get caught they will throw the book at you and you may go to prison for a long time, where you might not be real welcomed by the other inmates. If you ever get out you go on the Sex Offender list for life.
So I absolutely am not saying men should do these things. I completely oppose adult men having sex with 13 year old girls in our society. In addition, it ought to be illegal for grown men to have sex with 13 year old girls. I would give a break to, say, an 18 year old man, but once you start getting a bit above that, you have to seriously outlaw it. And if men are caught having sex with 13 year old girls, I think they should be incarcerated. I don’t wish to live in a society where it’s legal for grown men to have sex with 13 year old girls. That creeps me out.
I’m just saying it’s not psychologically disordered to do so. Is it normal? Well, maybe, but perhaps a lot of bad behavior is normal. Almost all crime is considered “normal” in that it is not mentally disordered behavior. Criminals don’t do it because they’re crazy. Committing crimes doesn’t make you nuts.
Instead, while crime is “normal,” it is also wrong in most cases. And I think you can make a case that a lot of crime is intrinsically wrong. That is, when you seriously harm other persons or their property or cause them losses, that seems to be immoral in a global sense of universal morality. Wife beating is probably intrinsically wrong too. But it’s not nuts. Sadly, it’s very normal to beat your wife.
But is a man having sex with a 13 year old girl intrinsically wrong? You can’t really make a case for that. If the girl seduces the man and the sex is 100% consensual, it’s hard to see how it is wrong. If there’s any coercion involved and the man is seducing a reluctant girl, that strikes me as wrong.
A good rule is that non-coercive sex with is generally morally right (except with adults and little children), and coercive sex is morally wrong. And in certain societies, men having sex with girls that age is morally proper. It’s seen as immoral and abnormal in our society. Our society and any society has a right to decide what is right and what is wrong within reason. Societies get to make their own rules about morality.
Men having sex with young teenage girls is a behavior that is intrinsically neither right nor wrong. This is one of those behaviors where society decides whether and how right or wrong it is. Quite a few societies think it’s just fine. Our society thinks it is wrong, bad, immoral, evil, disgusting, creepy, on and on.
That’s the value that our society has placed on that act. It’s perfectly acceptable for a society to decide that men having sex with 13 year old girls is dead wrong, a seriously immoral act. So societies have a right to outlaw this behavior and even throw the book at people who violate these laws. So it’s acceptable for a society to punish men who have sex with 13 year old girls with imprisonment.
These things are more matters of right and wrong, good and bad, good and evil than matters of crazy or sane or normal or abnormal. These are not things that psychiatry deals with. Psychiatry only cares if you are nuts or not. We don’t care if something is right or wrong, and we don’t have a good idea what is anyway. Issues of right and wrong and good and bad behavior are matters for Moral Philosophers, Societal Morality, and the Law to figure out. They are moral and legal matters, not psychiatric ones.
I still think it was low and hysterical to ban me on this petty offense. Obviously, Redditors are in the throes of this idiot sex panic. Society has gone completely hysterical about this stupid issue. Shame on every one of you for falling for this asinine moral panic.
Problem? Nobody raped anyone and Virginia (The Liar) Giuffre never got raped one time.
I suppose you could argue that Andrew may have committed statutory rape, but that’s not rape at all. Instead it’s simply illegal intercourse.
Second problem? Virginia Giuffre is a whore. A lowdown, lying, scamming prostitute of the lowest variety, lower even than most disgusting whores, and that’s pretty low.
Giuffre decided at age 17 that her goal in life was to be a whore! That’s right, a prostitute. Such a noble calling. She somehow got in with Epstein and Maxwell’s blackmail ring and she was basically offered a job working as a little teenie whore for Epstein’s Mossad spying blackmail ring. Of course, since her life dream was to be a lowly prostitute, she jumped at the chance.
Epstein et al were soon pimping her out to famous people, except it’s hard to call it pimping because they let her keep all the money.
The one famous incident with Prince Andrew occurred in the Virgin Islands. Giuffre was paid a measly $15,000 to have sex (excuse me, to get raaaaaaped) by Andrew. She reportedly had lots of fun screwing the guy, since by all accounts she was a little teen nympho slut.
Problem? 17 year old Virginia was not underage! She was legal in the Virgin Islands, perfectly legal fresh teen pussy.
Now we move on to the other fake charges.
Turns out she had sex with Andrew several more times in New York, Florida, New Mexico and the UK.
Problem? 17 year old Virginia was perfectly legal teen snatch in New York, New Mexico and the UK. No rape. No statutory rape. No any kind of rape, except in her ditzy teen whore brain.
Now, moving on to Florida, we do have another matter. If she had sex with Andrew in Florida, she would have been underage, because the Age of Consent there is 18. But notice she was legal and of age in four different states or countries and illegal and underage in only one state? Big deal! That’s barely even a crime.
Statutory rape of a 17 year old girl is a garbage crime anyway. 17 year old girls are perfectly legal to fuck by any adult, even a 90 year old man, in most of the world. They’re only illegal in a few backwards places like Florida.
It’s perfectly reasonable to set an AOC at 16 or 17. Most of the world has it at ~16. Most of Europe has it at 15! There have been absolutely zero problems reported in any of these places by setting the AOC at 15-17.
Now setting an AOC at 15 is sketchy in the US because we are too backwards, puritanical, and weird to handle that low of an AOC. Europeans, being civilized, can cope with it but Americans are uncivilized backwards boors and sex-hating super-prudes, so we can’t deal.
However, there is an argument for making a Romeo and Juliet clause for 15 year old girls. In many states they are legal for men up to 18 or 19. Colorado is particularly reasonable in this regard, as 15 year old girls are legal for men up to age 24. I dated a lot of 15 year old girls as a boy and for few years into adulthood. They’re horny as Hell and from the point of view of a young man 18-21, they seem quite mature, about as mature as you are.
Now the problem is that wherever you put that AOC, men are going to start fucking those girls. Put it at 17? Men will fuck 17 year old girls. Put it at 16? Men will screw 16 year old girls. Put it at 15? Men will gleefully bonk 15 year old girls.
And if you put it at 13 or 14, men will jump on 13 and 14 year old girls. I’m not entirely comfortable with that, though sex with 14 year old girls and 18-21 year old men doesn’t bother me. The thing about this sort of sex is it seems a lot more ok when the man is very young because after all, college boys and young men have been screwing high school girls forever. It’s so natural it’s almost set in stone. But as the man gets older than, say, 25, a lot of people start getting a lot less comfortable with it for all sorts of reasons. And as he gets older and older, it gets less and less ok. This is fine with me and I understand people’s distaste for this sort of thing.
I’d like to keep the 13 and 14 year old girls illegal for most adults, though we definitely need a Romeo and Juliet clause for both of them. I’m not sure where to put the limits though.
I met some 14 year old girls at the store a while back. They were fooling around like teenagers. I looked at them real close and I thought, “You know what? These girls need to be protected from us men. And even more so, we men need to be protected from those girls!” We both need to be protected from each other. A good way to do that is with an AOC law because most men beyond age ~21 will start to seriously think twice about underage girls and men significantly older than that will avoid them as if they’re radioactive. Which they are, in a sense. Teenage girls are dangerous!
I think 13-15 year old girls ought to be legal for boys 13-17 though at the very least. We really need to stop putting kids in jail and on sex offender lists for having sex with each other. Guess what? Teenagers have a sex drive, often a raging one. And many, many of them engage in sexual behaviors and even have intercourse before age 18. It’s as common as dirt.
Now we do run into problems with Andrew and Giuffre due to the fact that Giuffre was more than just a teen slut. In fact, she was an out an out real thing teenage prostitute! What a noble, morally elevated female!
Now the problem is that in most of the US at least, it was perfectly legal to screw Giuffre for free, but automagically, one you pay her for screwing you, you’ve committed a crime. You can screw them all you want, but you just can’t pay them for it! I sort of like this law. We should extend to all women, not just the teenies. It sure would save us men an awful lot of money!
Now, buying a teenage prostitute under age 18 is illegal in the US. It doesn’t strike me as much of a crime because there are many enthusiastic schoolgirl prostitutes. But I don’t see how you make it legal either. Make it a misdemeanor. Instead, it’s a serious crime and worse that, it’s somehow or other sex trafficking!
Now sex trafficking is a completely abused term once the US Justice Department got a hold of it after Congress made a retarded law in the midst of a Sex Panic. Sex trafficking used to be pretty serious. It meant more or less sex slaves. These women are out and out sex slaves, being imprisoned or locked into service by evil pimps, mostly men. A lot are literally locked in and can’t escape while they are ordered to have sex with man after man.
It’s really gross and it’s a very serious crime. And the truth is that most pimping probably is trafficking. If the prostitutes are free to leave the pimp, it’s not, but when are they ever free to leave? Not real often. Pimps threaten to harm, hurt, or kill any prostitute who leaves their harem, so most prostitutes with pimps feel locked into them. Obviously, pimps are one of the dirtiest aspects of this dirty business.
However! The Justice Department decided to somehow include all underage teen prostitutes under the rubric of “trafficking,” which is quite dubious. I don’t mind a crime called Prostituting a Minor, but it sure as hell isn’t “trafficking.” Even worse, any man who patronizes an underage teen prostitute is himself somehow guilty of trafficking! You paid this 17 year old whore for sex, did the deed, and walked out. Turns out you just committed an act of sex trafficking! That’s absolutely ridiculous, but that’s the crazy new law.
As expected, the feminists took the ball, ran away with it, and were never seen again. The feminists have somehow decided that not only are sex slaves and teeny prostitutes being “trafficked,” but in fact, every single woman who is engaged in prostitution is engaged in sex trafficking! More properly, since feminists insist that women have agency, they are “being trafficked (by others, basically men).”
Notice how when feminists talk, women never have any agency? That means that they’re basically children and not responsible for any of their actions. Women never do anything. Everything that happens to a woman is not because she did it because I guess she can’t do anything, but instead it got done to her by someone else (typically an evil man).
I would say that according to this silly logic, prostitutes in business for themselves, which is lots of them, are apparently trafficking themselves! But feminists logically say this is not possible, and I agree. Instead they are argue that prostitutes in business for themselves are being trafficked by the male customers who purchase their services! So every time a man buys a whore, he’s “trafficking” her. Ridiculous, huh?
So it appears that the morally upright Ms. Giuffre, now older, wiser, and probably a lot less horny, was never raped even one time, ever. Statutory rape doesn’t count. It’s a bit hard to argue that she was being trafficked, but Maxwell and Epstein caught her trying to leave them a couple of times and brought her back and threatened her. Ok, now they’re trafficking her, so she was trafficked some of the time.
Giuffre was working very profitably for as a prostitute for the rich and famous from ages 17-23. So for most of her career, from ages 18-23, she was an adult, a grown woman. Giuffre claims that during this entire time, she was being “sexually abused” or “abused.” She never had real sex the whole time. Instead she had some weird abuse masquerading as sex. Are you sure you didn’t like it, Ms. Giuffre? A lot of women like that sort of thing, you know.
“Sexual abuse” is a term that has been tortured, raped, and murdered by sex-panicked morons for a very long time now. It used to refer to child molestation, which involves adults and children under 13. From 13-17, depending on the laws, there is no sexual abuse. There’s just statutory rape or illegal intercourse. It’s not possibly to sexually abuse a teenage girl and you certainly cannot abuse a grown woman because no matter how infantile her silly little brain is, she’s still an adult, at least chronologically. Sexual abuse literally means child molestation and I don’t mind referring to child molestation and sexual abuse. It’s a logical way to see it.
Somehow now teenage girls with ravenous, nymphomaniacal sex drives get “sexually abused” a good part of the time when they have sex, even when it’s consensual. In other words, the term for child molesting got inflated by dumbshits all the way to teenage girls and from there all the way to so-called adult women, assuming there even are in an emotional sense.
It’s bullshit. It’s nonsense.
Poor Virginia suffered through the horrific ordeal of getting paid $15,000 to fuck a hot, sexy older man. It boggles the mind. No doubt this indignity was inflicted on the poor virginal Virginia endless times. How did she ever recover from getting paid $15K to get laid by some hot dude? Obviously, she’s a survivor. How she survived such a horror is simply beyond me.
Poor girl! Girls are crying! Poor Virginia! Virginia is crying! Poor women! Women are crying!
She never got sexually abused even one time except in her tiny little pea brain. And of course she never got raped even one time except her the fever dreams of her mind. Now she may well have been trafficked.
Virginia, I will take time out for abusing your sorry ass here to tell you that I am very sorry that these low lifes basically imprisoned you as a sex slave. I really am truly sorry.
And I hope whatever damage this may have caused you – and it may well have done so – you are able to get over it and move it. I’m sorry you got taken back and threatened when you tried to run away. At that point, Epstein and Maxwell were trafficking you. That’s a serious crime, and I hope you can make peace with it, and I mean that with all my heart, dear.
Now that I am done addressing Ms. Giuffre, back to the story.
95% of Virginian Giuffre’s story is a pathetic joke. It’s not even true. She’s just another silly bitch trying to milk us men for everything we’ve got like so many of her sisters. I hope she decides to do something more productive and dignified with her life than act like a baby, be a permanent victim, and make a living scamming men.
I get to see all the search terms people use to navigate the treacherous and polluted waters to make it to this sick, fucked up abattoir of a website in the lowest depths of Net. Even if you have a fairly normal site, you often get some pretty weird search engine terms in your stats.
Here’s a couple just from the last two weeks.
“Gay men wear diapers.”
LOL no way did I write about that? Or did I? I hope I didn’t.
It’s an interesing question. Gay politics and the straight anal sex crowd will tell you that this is a myth and it’s something that never happens. For some sick, evil reason I’ve been researching this. I have no idea why I do this as I am not a fan of this type of sex on either end, especially playing catcher. Not that a few women’s fingers haven’t made their way up there. Right before orgasm, it’s inside you massaging your prostate. Unbelievable orgasm. Try it sometime, unless you’re too homophobic, which I get.
Well the truth is that sadly, some gay men do indeed have to wear diapers. It’s called anal incontinence in case you were wondering. There is a gay Catholic man named Joseph Scambria who has written quite a bit about that. He was asswrecked at age 29, apparently through extensive scar tissue, and now he has to wear diapers. The scar tissue was probably from repeated untreated STD infections. These can then cause an abscess if untreated, which can transform into a fistula if you don’t deal with.
On his comment threads, I have seen three other gay men in their 40’s and 50’s all say that they were asswrecked too, and they were also all in diapers. One said he has to time it just right when he leaves the house so he’s not gone too long or an accident might happen. All of them were bitter. I haven’t the faintest idea what sort of Ass Acrobatics they were doing do land themselves in Anal Purgatory like this, but apparently it’s possible. Perhaps if it goes on long enough, you can work off enough gay sin to make it in the gates. No idea.
I also saw a young White woman in her early 30’s say she used to have lots of anal sex, and now she has to wear a diaper. And a 70 year old woman who was bitter for similar reasons.
Ok, that’s six so far. Four gay men and two straight women, all chronic cases. I guess it happens, but it seems to be rather rare. Are there other cases that are more occasional or negligible? Probably.
I haven’t the faintest idea what sort of Sexual Assholery you have to do engage in for what length of period to end up in this particularly unpleasant state of affairs, but it looks like it’s not a myth after all. Butt (Get it?) permanent anal incontinence does not seem to be a common side effect of even decades of receptive anal sex, despite the extreme homophobic boneheads blathering on about it.
Second search term:
“What does a naked 12 year old girl look like?”
Jesus Christ! Did I write about that? I hope not. What do they look like?
I guess it looks like a naked little girl, and I’ve seen a few of those. Back when I was a kid, naked young kids used to run around all the time in backyards and especially at campgrounds in the woods. My Mom insists this was never true, but I have many memories of naked kids, boys and girls, running around naked in my boyhood and adolescence back when people were sane before the whole West went crazy about stupid shit. I never thought anything of it, and it had no effect on me because as a boy I had no sex drive, and as an adolescent, I couldn’t think of anything more boring and antisexual than a ridiculous naked little girl.
But even back then, once they got to 11 or 12, it seemed like they didn’t run around naked anymore. And adolescents never ran around naked. Just little kids, because everyone assumed, unlike in these sex-panicked times, that there was nothing on Earth less sexual and more boring and banal than naked little boys or girls running through the damned sprinklers on a summer day. Who the Hell would get turned on by that? Sure, a pedo would, but we never thought about weird stuff like that back then, unlike now, when it’s on the tip of everyone’s idiot tongue.
When I was 13, my 12 year old cousins got this 11 year old girl to strip for us. It was one of the most idiotic spectacles I have ever seen, and the look of utter stupidity on her face the whole time played a good role in that. She did go into the robot mind-controlled zombie role, which is what mature females do when they’re horny, so maybe there’s something universal there. She sure followed orders all right, like we were drill sergeants. More women need to be like this!
She stood there in front of us naked, looking like a complete retard. My cousins and I were all clothed, and we all had huge erections which were all discussing. Neither of us touched the girl or vice versa. I have no idea if we should have.
Sexual stuff between 11 and 12-13 year olds pretty much falls into “childhood sex play” because this extends barely into adolescence. But no one cares about that nowadays, and the sex offender lists are overflowing with people put on there as minors presumably for childhood sex play bullshit. Another reason that Nazi list needs to be burned. I’m pretty sure if I was 13 today and we had just done this yesterday and gotten caught, my cousins and I would be headed for the list as pedophiles and child molesters. That’s how stupid this shit has gotten.
But the searcher wants 12 year old girls, not 11 year olds! Sorry! Perhaps they look different? I’ve never seen a naked 12 year old girl in the wild, even in my wasted youth, nor do I care to see one.
We had a hebephilic commenter with an obsession with 12-14 year old girls who was on here for a bit. He hadn’t had much luck with women, but he got some money at age 30 and started taking vacations all over the world, apparently paying to have sex with 12-14 year old Lolitas in various shitholes around the globe. He said he had met many men on his journeys who had traveled to those locations to do exactly what he was doing. It wasn’t rare at all. Which doesn’t surprise me, but I figure the market for girls under 12 must be dramatically lower.
Like an asshole, he left a link to child porn in my comments. He had uploaded it to Youtube like a jerk. 12 year old girl stripping naked in the back of a bar in Colombia. Probably one of the most boring videos I’ve ever seen. The whole time I’m thinking:
Why the Hell would anyone get turned on by this shit?
Huge turnoff. I watched it and reported his hebephilic ass to Youtube for uploading illegal stuff. So, as far as the search query goes, yes, I have seen one. And I must say, a naked 12 year old girl is one of the most boring and unsexy things I could possibly think of. Why everyone thinks this is the most evil thing on Earth is beyond me. It’s a naked human. You know, when we take our clothes off, we are actually naked skin creature mammals? A naked human is a naked human, no matter the age. It’s a perfectly natural state of affairs. Why is this the image of ultimate evil?
I went to this punk rock show in LA in fall 1981. I talked to this 15 year old girl, a blond punker chick, who was sitting on a low wall outside the place. She said her Dad had brought here there. She was swinging her legs back and forth like a teenager. She kept talking about fags and faggots the whole time I was talking to her. Each time she said it, she looked me dead on in the eye. I think she was calling me a faggot, but at the same time had a dead-on blank frozen robot stare in her eyes.
She was calling me a fag, but she also wanted to fuck me. Tug of war in her head. What’s a girl to do? Females have contradictory thoughts like this going on all the time, and its very hard for them to sort them out and try to make sense of them.
I think an essence of the Female Character is Conflict between Contradictory Feelings. One part of her is pulling her one way, and the other part of her is pulling her the other way. All of this mental jumble is probably pretty confusing. They’re probably trying to untie these mental knots all the time, but being in the middle of a tug of war like that would drive anyone nuts. That may be why they seem nutty a fair amount of the time. All those wild contradictory feelings going this way and that all the time would drive anyone nuts.
If you’re Chad, a lot of women don’t particularly care if you look or seem faggy. Sometimes I wonder if they care if you are faggy. Some of the most fagged out men I met in LA, including one totally obvious haunted closet case, had the hottest girlfriends you’ll see.
Chad’s looks just blind women to everything else about him. Nothing else matters but that damned pretty face. They overlook it all, at least at first. I think Chad’s looks are literally intoxicating to women. So women are in sense drunk or high out of their minds when they first hook up with Chad, and they’re not really in control of themselves anymore. They’re entranced by those hot looks so deeply that they can’t think straight and they overlook all of his flaws, at least for a while.
I saw her later at a punk concert with the Angry Samoans in the San Fernando Valley in Summer 1982. She was sitting on this table-like thing in the concert hall, literally chewing and smacking and blowing bubbles with bubble gum, the stereotypical teenage girl. But she was mature far beyond her age and hanging out at nightclubs where almost everyone was an adult. She was 15 going on 30, face it. She’s hanging out at punk rock adult nightclubs all the time full of degenerate punk rockers, and she’s hot. You don’t think she’s going to get fucked by one of those young degenerate nihilist punker guys at some point? She threw herself into the cauldron. She’s liable to get cooked.
After the show, my friend and I saw her and her friends in the parking lot and went over and talked to them. She stopped and had a dead frozen stare. Her friends could care less that she was talking to a couple of young men. They were all probably teen going on 30 too. She also seemed to be drawing slowly closer to me as if some force field was sucking her towards me. She was locked into me like radar so bad you would almost have to pull her to get her outside of my orbit. I could have easily gotten her number, but I chickened out.
My friend looked a bit concerned as we walked away. “Bob, don’t you think she’s a little young? She’s 15 years old, man.” I shrugged my shoulders.
I was living in the Valley and so was she, with her Dad. I think she was in Sylmar. I was in Van Nuys. I could have easily gotten her number and dated her, and I’m pretty sure I could have had sex with her. And back then, I’m sad to say that I would have definitely done it. It’s true that she was 15 and I was 24, but back in 1982, no one much cared about that.
I haven’t had the slightest thing to do with those girls since then or for three years prior. I’m glad I quit those girls when I was so young because if I would have kept doing it I would have so much more to feel guilty about and live down in these manic days of frenzied sex panics. Of course I’ve sometimes felt that I would like to, but the penalties are so insane that you have to control yourself.
Whenever a woman seems to go into a robot-like trance and gives you that blank frozen stare, it only means one thing. It means she likes you! As in, really, really likes you. As in, she’s in love with you, she wants to fuck you, you’re making her horny, she wants to have a romantic/sexual relationship with you. Whenever you see a woman staring at you like that, jump on it fast and do something. Go talk to her. Get her phone number.
Now, if you make a poor performance, she will leave.
I remember when I was 27 at the peak of my looks in Summer 1984 or 85, and I was sitting on an island in the Carson Mall, probably on a weekend. I haven’t the faintest idea why I was there. I was stoned out of my skull like I was every weekend.
I sat there for an hour or two. One after the other, a young single woman would lock eyes on me, go into the frozen robot trance, and head straight for my island as if she were under remote control. I think three of them did that in the course of an hour or two. These women kept homing in on my like radar and being remote-controlled to my island. At the time, I didn’t know that when a woman acts like that, it means she wants to fuck. Period.You’re making her horny.Period. Turned out these were all single Moms in their late 20’s to early 30’s.
Unfortunately, my head was a complete mess at the time, and I was in the middle of what was basically a nervous breakdown that went on for 3-4 years. Even worse, it was rather obvious to anyone who looked that my head was fucked, and it was turning people off everywhere. You can’t always hide mental illness. So at the mall that day, we would talk for a bit and after a bit they would get a concerned look on their face. Soon they would get tuned off and leave.
So you see, just because she goes into autopilot when she sees you, it doesn’t mean you’ve got her. You can still blow it if you don’t play your cards right.
This was happening to me all the time back then, but I was still connecting with some women, and I was definitely dating a lot and having a lot of sex. Apparently I looked really good back then, so the killer looks were getting me laid despite my screwed head. I’m not sure if women care that much if Chad is nuts. Of course they do care, and it throws a monkey wrench into things pretty badly, but Crazy Chad still probably does better than your AFC as long as he’s not too far gone.
Looking back on it, I probably could have fucked all three or four of them. Just ask to go to her apartment from the mall, and it’s done. That’s how easy it is to pick up a woman in the daytime if you’ve got the Looks and Game. Or get her number at least.
I almost never get these dead-on blank frozen robot zombie entranced looks anymore. I got one recently from a young woman at a coffee shop though. It’s the first time I’ve gotten that look in it seems like years. I wonder what she means by that. She’s been extremely friendly ever since. I think I will try to find out.
Thing is, “social skills” is a sick joke. No one ever learns them 100%, there are 300,000-3 million of them at any given time, they’re always changing, and it’s impossible to keep track of all of them and their permutations. Everyone thinks they have great social skills, but they’re almost all liars. No one knows all those rules.
Anyway, extroverts break all of them all the time, and no one cares. We introverts agonize over every single one of them, are always worried about breaking them, and then get creamed when we forget to dot one i or cross one t.
With this insane #metoo crap, it’s gotten 10X worse than it already was, and it had been getting very bad for a good 15 years already. It started getting very bad in 2005-2008, somewhere thereabouts.
I remember for instance in the 1990’s, the baristas at a local coffee shop when I was told by the female manager that all the baristas talked about how I was always checking them out, but no one really cared because, you know, it’s normal for straight men (as in guys who are not screaming faggots) to, you know, look at women. Like, it’s what we do. Sure, they tell you not to stare and whatnot, but that’s hard to do. Some of the other baristas talked about it too, but they just shook their heads and sort of laughed. This is always the way it’s been my whole life. I’ve never even thought of this questions my whole life. “Do you stare at women? or “Do you look at women?” It seemed like I was doing it the whole time and simply never came up.
Punish Bad Service
I didn’t like the way the baristas were treating me, so I stopped tipping them. Then they got one that was really nice and I started tipping her. After a while, I saved up all my tips from the ones I was shunning and dumped them all on the nice one. One time I gave her $4.50, all in change. One of the ones I snubbed said, “Hey! You gave her a huge tip, and you never give me anything!” I said, “That’s right. Because she’s nice!” She said, “I’m nice…” and I said, “I don’t think so…” Anyway they figured out the drill and after that day all the baristas who had been so cold and mean to me were suddenly extremely friendly, almost over the top friendly.
I never knew if it was fake or not and I couldn’t care less if it was, honestly. I’m not sure if I care that people are just pretending to like me. Pretending to like me is a lot better than disliking me.
You have to discipline people sometimes.
There are a lot of things you can do. Animate your face a bit so it doesn’t look like a blank, creepy stare. Move your eyes around somewhat. Anyway, if a woman likes you, I assure you that she doesn’t give two one-hundreds of a shit about the fact that you “stare” at her. She won’t even call it staring. She’ll say, “He’s always looking at me he he.” It’s only staring if she doesn’t like you. Otherwise it’s just looking. Truth is you can “stare” exactly the same way at different women, and if they don’t like you, they will call it staring and if they like you, they will call it looking.
So there’s no real difference between staring and looking. Stares look creepy because they’re blank. Animate your face. Look happy. Smile. Tell yourself little jokes. If you look like you’re enjoying yourself, you’re not “staring.” It also helps to look around. Don’t stare at one woman the whole time. Though to be honest, I’ve “stared” at one woman a hundred million times, and I don’t think any of them ever cared. A lot of them like it, and they will call you over to talk to them.
Truth is, I’ve never given two-hundreds of a shit about any of this, and now that I think about it, I’ve probably been “staring” at women and girls my whole life. Generally speaking there have been no repercussions.
Until I started getting older.
At age 47, I got temporarily banned from a Starbucks for “looking at baristas’ bodies.” Some cuck faggot banned me and told me to “control myself.” Weird thing is he thought he was a big man but no real man confronts another man about something that pussy and gay. No real man gets another guy in trouble for checking out chicks.
I suppose if I were in a supervisory position and I was told to tell a customer that he was making the female employees mad by looking at them, I would take him outside and talk to him, man to man, smiling and winking, calling the women misogynistic names like “stupid bitches” and saying, “Look, there’s nothing wrong with looking at women but you’re being too obvious about it. Try these tricks instead.” The truth is the female employees tried to get him banned for the crime of being ugly and looking at women. Ugly men can’t look at women. Only Chad can look at women. The rest of the men? I dunno.
So what I had been getting away with my whole life, I could no longer get away with. All of the rules had changed. See how I told you they change the rules on you.
I also learned a few other things.
You Can’t Look at Kids Anymore. At All
You can’t look at kids anymore. Well, we all love kids, and everybody likes to look at cute little kids of either sex running around or having fun. At the same shop as above, there were these two boys running up and down this very steep hill, laughing and playing the whole time. They might have been 10. I did the same stuff when I was that age, so it reminded me of my youth.
I sat there and watched those boys going up and down that hill with a big smile on my face, traveling back in time. After a while, it seemed like some of the local cucks and fags were staring at me with a very hostile look. It took me until a while later to figure it out, but in our insane society nowadays, a grown man cannot watch two young boys play and enjoy themselves. If he does, that means he is a gay pedophile who is plotting to molest them. Pedophile Mass Hysteria again. Sigh. I don’t even date men. Why would I have sex with a boy?
But after that, I started being a lot more careful at how I look at kids. I still look at them sometimes, but I’m a lot more careful how I do it.
How to Talk to Kids Or Adults with Kids
Most of us are not molesters, but even if you’re not a molester, most adults still find kids delightful and any normal adult might want to talk to a kid of a parent with a kid sometime.
This is to show you how to do that.
I saw a boy with his apparent father the other in the store. They smiled back at me, and I went over and said, “Father and son?” I pointed to the boy, “Ten?” He smiled, “Eight.” That was it. I walked away. They were Hispanic and Hispanics are way less weird about this stuff.
One time a man and a woman and what must have been a 12 year old girl came into a coffee shop. The girl had to have been 12 years old because no other age looks like that. 12 year old girls are adorable and wonderful creatures, but obviously you can’t touch them. I don’t even have sexual thoughts when I look at them because they really don’t do it for me. The girl had an equally adorable puppy in the pocket of her dress, poking its head out. The whole scene was quite adorable really, the adorable young girl and her adorable little dog and their obvious love for each other. She was with Mom and Dad.
I did turn around and look at her quite a bit. I would look for a bit, and then I would turn back around. I always mostly looked a the dog. I put these thoughts in my head while I was doing it,
What a wonderful, adorable dog! Look at that adorable little girl and how devoted she is to that too-cute little puppy! Tugs at your heartstrings!
I didn’t have any sexual thoughts about her, though there would have been nothing wrong if I did. Those girls just don’t do it for me. I like grown up girls, not little girls. I’m convinced that the thoughts you put in your head when you look at people help to convey a message. If you’re going to look at a little girl and her puppy, put innocent, angelic, “Oh how cute” thoughts in your head. I did that a while and no one cared. If you looked at me, it mostly looked like I was looking at the dog anyway. The parents didn’t care, but they were Hispanics and Hispanics don’t give a fuck. They probably figured I was looking at the cute dog, not perving on the girl, and they didn’t give a damn.
I Have to Admit It’s Pretty Fun Living in a Patriarchal Society as a Man
Now that I live a patriarchal “men rule” Hispanic community, you can sometimes approach a father and son and ask in a neighborly way whether they are father and son, that sort of thing. Don’t get nervous or scared that you will think the wrong thing. Just put completely innocent thoughts in your head.
Hey, I’m going over to talk to this guy and his son in a totally innocent and non-creepy way.
As long as you have that mindset, you should be ok. One guy to another sort of thing. For some reason, Hispanic men never think you’re trying to fuck their little boy like stupid White men are.
Now if it’s a girl, it’s a whole other ballgame. I was in a coffee shop and an Hispanic man had his little daughter in there. She was doing dance moves, running from the center of the room 15 feet towards the front and doing twirls and whatnot. She was wearing a little ballerina dress. It was cute as all get out watching that little girl do her delightful dance moves in public, so I sat back and admired her with a big smile on my face for a few minutes. I didn’t think sexual thoughts about her, but it wouldn’t have mattered if I did. Anyone can think anything they want. Seven year old girls just don’t do it for me, sorry!
The father soon glared at me, grabbed his daughter, and walked out. Ridiculous. See? You can’t even look at kids being their delightful selves anymore. Pedophile Mass Hysteria.
How to Ask How Old a Kid Is
Maybe you want to know how old the kid is. The ages of children and teens are interesting because they change so much with every year. Think of the growth spurts and changes from one year to the next from ages 1-10 or 11-17 and compare them to the year to year changes of someone in their 20’s. People in their 20’s barely register any perceptual changes from year to year. As far as kids go, I mostly want to guess their ages more than anything because that is interesting to me and it’s also a bit of an intellectual challenge.
Remember how I said you could ask the age of a man’s son? You can, but I prefer to do it as a guess. I nod to the kid and guess his age, “Eight?” Then the father beams and you’re either right or he happily corrects you. “How old is he?” sounds a bit weird and creepy in these ridiculous and hysterical times. It’s better to do it super casual like I do. Be totally relaxed when you do this because if you seem nervous or fearful, you might freak out the father.
After that I generally turn away unless the father gives me a signal to keep talking. It’s very non-creepy to walk up to a father and son, inquire if they are father and son, non-creepily ask the age of the kid, smile and then walk away, acting extremely casual about it the whole time. Don’t try to have conversations where other people clearly don’t want to have them.
Talking to Female Minors
The best attitude here is to do it as infrequently as possible because it’s so rent with landmines. But many men with no sexual intentions at all nevertheless wish to speak to female minors and even children because all normal humans love and are enchanted by kids and even teenagers.
Now if you see a girl and you want to ask her age, that’s going to be a lot more difficult, especially if she’s a teenager. If she’s a little girl with her Mom and you say it innocently enough, it will probably go over. A little girl alone or with a friend, just forget it. But you need to be extra careful where any female minors are involved. Most of the time, I probably wouldn’t even ask.
I used to but I started getting some bad vibes. I would talk to the mother, nod my head at the girl and say, “13?” Sometimes it went over but other times it didn’t at all. And once they start getting into 14-17, you can barely ask their ages at all because everything has sexual overtones and everyone assumes you are trying to fuck her. I’m not trying to fuck any girl that age, but if I try to talk to her, everyone is going to assume just that. Teenage Girl Sex Panic.
There were a pair of young Hispanic females who came in the other day. I kept looking at them because they were both quite Indian-looking and about the same height. One was 13 or so obviously, but I couldn’t figure out the other one. Was she the mother? I started thinking the mother looked about as old as the daughter. This was very puzzling to me so I was looking at them and trying to figure out which one was the mother and which was the daughter! This shows you the degree of peadomorphiism and neotenism in some of these Indian groups. Their neotenic appearance is enhanced by their small sizes – they are typically quite short.
I was looking at them ordering from behind, and I was looking at the older one’s body and trying to figure out if she was the mother. I wasn’t even really thinking anything sexual, though that would have been just fine. I was trying to discern a familial relationship! The barista looked at me weird like I shouldn’t be looking at them, and I didn’t understand that. Why can’t I look at a woman?
They ordered and then came back near me. I sidled over to them and spoke to them in extremely casual, “I don’t care” type of way (which could also be construed as “not serious” and “no need to worry about me”). Females of all ages feel pretty threatened by us men, especially male strangers, so it’s important to try to put them at ease not just for your own, not just for your own purpose but even if only from a humanistic point of view.
“Mother and daughter?,” I asked, as if it were the most casual, don’t give a damn question on Earth. They were very Hispanic which means very relaxed about most uptight bullshit like Teenage Girl Mass Hysteria. The older one looked at me and said, “No, sisters.” I laughed hard and said, “No way.” Then I think I asked their ages, but I was laughing the whole time. If you’re going to ask the ages of female minors, you have to do so in a joking, laughing, “don’t care” sort of way because this question can be frightening to them. When you laugh it takes the tension off and makes it seem less sexual.
“I’m 15 and she’s 13,” she said. I just said, “No way” and laughed some more. They didn’t particularly seem like they wanted to talk anymore, so I ended the conversation very quickly and walked away. Whenever someone acts like they don’t particularly want to talk to you (which is all day long every single day at my age), just end the conversation quickly, and turn around or walk away, all very casually. Don’t act angry. You can roll your eyes, though because it is pretty dicky to shut down friendly strangers.
The problem here is your brain. Your brain or ego really sees it as an insult that this person is giving off vibes saying, “I don’t want to talk to you.” Your brain and psyche would rather have a quite unpleasant conversation where the person acts like they don’t want to talk to you the whole time than to be shut down right away and walk away in humiliation. I suppose if you managed even an unpleasant conversation, your psyche sees it as some sort of a perverse win or at least not a fail.
You can often ask the age of the minor if you see what looks like an obvious mom and daughter. It’s probably better if she is a child than if she is a teenager because with the teenager both the girl and the mother are going to make a lot of automatic sexual assumptions. You might want to try to clear out sexual thoughts when you say it too, to the extent that’s possible. With a lot of teenage girls, that’s going to be quite difficult, so try to put them aside so to speak instead. Put them “on the backburner” in your brain. I am convinced that sexual thoughts get transmitted pretty easily to others.
Look at the girl, point to her, and guess an age in a very quick and casual way, and then turn and look away from them. Or look at both of them and ask, “Mother and daughter?” The latter question seems to go over a lot better. When you turn and look away from people this is a sign of submissiveness and harmlessness so you can appear casual, nonsexual, and nonthreatening. That’s how I see it. Keep it “casual.” Super, super casual. They will probably give you the girl’s age. Then just smile and nod and walk away if it doesn’t seem like they want to carry the conversation beyond that, which is the usual case.
I’m not sure what else you could say afterwards anyway, and I’d be afraid of continuing for fear of being seen as sexual. Generally I’m extremely cautious about saying much of anything to any female minors. Also, mothers of teenage girls are extremely dangerous and are insanely suspicious about any male stranger inquiring even in the most harmless way about her daughter. Especially now with Teenage Girl Mass Hysteria where even the admission of having the normal attraction that all men have to teenage girls is enough to bring out death threats and lynch mobs.
Teenage girls and their mothers are all totally paranoid nowadays because of the Moral Panics, so it’s best for you to be paranoid too.
You Can’t Just Go Up and Talk to Anybody
I got banned from a Starbucks for the crime of “talking to humans.” Some young women banned me. I think I knew the ones who did, too. I was literally talking to them about the weather. At that point in my life I was going up and talking to people all the time, talking to people out of the blue, etc. Basically treating a lot of strangers like potential conversation partners. Which I’d been doing my whole life because I’m the sort of person who strikes up conversations with strangers a lot. It had never been much of a problem but now at my age, it’s turning into a big deal.
Turns out I had been talking to young women, but I had been talking to people of every other age group too. I would walk over to a table and say something, make a joke or something, and walk away. Turns out you can’t do that anymore. Truth is I’d been going to this shop for years. Sure, I talked to a number of young women, but in my utter patheticness, I never flirted with a single one of them for even one second. I just chit-chatted about this, that, or whatever, the weather, made jokes, just casual conversational bullshit. Absolutely no sexual content or vibes whatsoever with any of them.
I would have loved to have flirted with some of them or even be openly sexual, but none of them even seemed to give off strong enough signals that they wanted to me to do that, and I need green lights.
Turns out you can’t do that anymore or at least I can’t do it anymore at my age. Past a certain age, you just can’t walk up to young women and start talking to them, even if they are standing next to you in life. It’s pretty much banned, and if you do it, people act like they are going to call the cops.
So I got banned for “talking to humans.” Apparently “talking to humans” is now “harassment.” I guess nowadays you are “harassing” people by trying to talk to them! Who knew? The speech need not be sexual in any way. The mere fact The sexual overtones are obvious but I never once even flirted with one of those women in the slightest. It shouldn’t really matter it I did because after all, men have a right to flirt with women, but I didn’t.
What I learned is that I have to be totally paranoid at my age. I only talk to people if they give off a strong vibe of wanting to talk to me. If they seem like they don’t want to talk to me, I don’t talk to them. If they seem like they are ignoring me, I don’t talk to them.If a woman acts like she’s ignoring you, she probably is. I don’t think you should approach her.
Look at people and see how they react. If they ignore you, leave them alone. If she’s busy on her laptop or with her schoolwork, leave her the Hell alone. Can’t you see she’s busy? Look over at people.
If you think you might want to talk to them, you can look at them a number of times. Look at them a bit, then look away. Then look at them a bit, then look away. Or look at them out of the corner of your eye. If they see you look at them but don’t act open and friendly, don’t go over and talk to them. That’s what I was doing before. It was a bad idea.
If people seem like they are not open and friendly and you go over and talk to them, they may open up. But more often than not, they don’t. They may just stay cold. You get vibes like:
“Why the Hell are you talking to us?”
“Who the Hell are you, anyway?”
“What gives you the right to talk to us?”
“You’re a stranger, why should I talk to you?”
“You’re being audacious.”
“We don’t know you, so why are you talking to us.”
I’ve gotten all of these messages a million times in my life, and nowadays it’s pretty much an all day every day type of thing.
The thing is once you get that vibe, you need to just take off. And try not to get mad. They have a right not to talk to you. They’re not being mean or cold or rude or anything by not talking to you. Nobody has to talk to anyone.Just because they don’t want to talk to you doesn’t mean that they necessarily don’t like you or hate you. Mostly you’re probably just not on their mind at all.
There’s a problem here. When someone gives off those vibes, your brain rebels. Actually, your ego rebels. Your ego takes it as an insult. Your ego will want to ignore the vibes they are giving off and try to keep talking to them. Your ego will tell you, “If you keep talking to them, they will warm up.” Also to walk away is to admit that someone snubbed you, and that’s an insult. It seems less of an insult if you keep talking to them. It keeps the insult at bay.
There’s a real problem here. It doesn’t work.When conversations start out bad like that, they never or almost never warm up. In fact, they tend to go downhill if they go anywhere. Still, your ego tells you to keep plugging on.
The “Subconscious Cope”
I call it “the subconscious cope.”
It has very serious Game/PUA implications. The subconscious cope is where your brain keeps telling you some woman is into you when she’s not. You always interpret everything in a positive way as if it’s a possible come-on. I’ve had to deal with this my whole life, but now that I am paranoid, I have a handle on my subconscious cope. The subconscious cope keeps telling you:
“Hey, that woman likes you!”
“Look, that woman smiled at you!”
“She stared at you – that means she likes you!”
“She stared at you with frightened eyes – that means she’s horny!”
“She’s nervous around you – that’s because she likes you!”
“She acted cold. She doesn’t mean it. Really she still likes you. Ignore it and keep trying!”
Your ego wants to think that all the women everywhere are into you and it’s going to be telling you that your whole life. Problem is it’s lying to you. They’re not all into you. A lot of them probably hate you. There are plenty of young women (and even some older women for that matter) around here who act like they hate me. I haven’t the faintest idea why they feel this way.
The woman who looked at you with those frightened eyes? That’s because you’re scaring her, not because she’s horny. And lately I have found a few cases of women staring at me because they hate me.
And for the first time in my life, I have found women acting nervous around me because they think I’m hitting on them and they’re not comfortable with that, probably because of my age. I’m starting to get pretty worried now whenever any woman acts nervous around me. Lately that’s just not a good thing at all.
I started noticing some other things too.
Some baristas at the coffee shop would go into the back room soon after I showed up. I didn’t think anything of it for a long time until it hit me with a hammer in the face. They were going to the back room because I looked at them, and they didn’t like it. Solution was to try not to look at them, but they were hot, so that was almost impossible. But that realization really hit me in the face. In order to see something like that, you have be able to see patterns. That’s hard to do because your brain doesn’t want to see patterns, especially lousy patterns.
Subconscious cope. Your brain is very biased to ignore expressions unpleasant patterns where people seem like they don’t like you. That’s something it just wants to ignore because it’s so painful. And it wants to look for pleasant and uplifting patterns because those make it feel good. So it’s always going to be biased towards thinking people like you when they don’t, and not recognizing it when people act like they don’t like you. When you’re being dumped, the subconscious cope says it’s not happening and she’s really still with you. It’s looking for positives everywhere and imagining a lot of them and ignoring all the negatives, even when they are real.
You need to recognize that your subconscious cope is operating all the time, and you need to try to combat it because if you listen to it, you tend to get into trouble.
Dating sites are full of these scammers in the last few years.
A friend of mine almost got nailed for this. Admittedly, hers was a little different.
She out and out told him that she was 17, two weeks shy of her 18th birthday. AOC in California is 18. Well, to a lot of men, “two weeks shy of my 18th birthday” means you’re 18 years old. I don’t care that he did this. In fact, I worry if I would have enough self-control not to.
However, several years ago, a miracle happened, Jesus came back down to Earth briefly and dropped an 18 year old girl in my lap to be my girlfriend. Then he flew back to Wherever.
Truth is she was 17, two weeks shy of her 18th birthday when we started dating or hanging out. We held hands, put our arms around each other, hugged a bit, and kissed pecks on the lips, but that was it. We figured that was legal, but I was really scared to take it any farther at all. But she kept bugging me to take it further and it was really hard to say no. She ended up falling head over heels on love with me, wanted to marry me, have my kids, the whole nine yards, then three months in, she dumps me. Anyway, dating’s not illegal. Anybody can date anyone. It’s having sex that might be illegal
They figure, “Fuck it, she’s basically 18.” I have no idea how the pigs would treat it nowadays. I assume the FBI pigs would probably put you on the Sex Crimes most wanted list for doing it with a girl two weeks shy of her 18th birthday. That’s how deranged the pigs and the system are nowadays, all thanks for feminists.
I grew up in the 1970’s, and no one gave two shits about jailbait teenage girls. They were known as “dangerous” because they’re horny as Hell, don’t have a lot of experience, often think boys their age are immature, and not a few of them love men. Not boys, men. College age men dating high school girls was an absolutely normal back then, but at some point, you might want to knock it off.
They let you get away with it for a few years, but as the man got older, they started cracking down. I remember a case of a divorced 53 year old man who had with a number of 15 year old high school girls in trade for pot and coke. Of course the little sluts knew exactly what they were doing. Most of them love to fuck and they were freely screwing this guy for dope of their own free will. No girl ever got harmed by this nonsense, which is consensual anyway.
Well, he got caught, and even though people were notoriously laissez-faire about this stuff back then. I don’t even recognize this planet anymore in regard to this issue as it seems like I’m living among pod people who are barely even and probably not human. That’s how different things are from 40 years ago. Anyway, this guy got three years in prison. Nowadays he’d probably get beat up as a “chomo,” but back then, prisoners were sane, and he’d probably be the hero of the prison for being an old dog and banging all those hottie JB’s. Yep, even prison convicts have gone insane. Back then, you were marked if you went after little girl children, but no inmate cared about jailbaits.
The interesting thing is that everyone in my family, including me, thought the guy deserved it. Three years seemed about right. There wasn’t really anything wrong with what he did, but we thought the age gap was too extreme. 18-23 year old guy and 15 year old girl, no one really cared. 30 year old guy and 15 year old guy would raise eyebrows, as it was very uncommon, but no one cared about that either. But 53 and 15? Not just one 15 year old girl, but several? Hey, wait a minute. There was something unseemly, disturbing, not quite right, etc. about it. Society has a right to any sort of reasonable morals it wants, and even back then, a lot of people thought 53 and multiple 15 year old girls went over the line.
See, back then, people were sane, not like nowadays when everyone’s a shithead. They believed in degrees and sliding scales and continua and extenuating factors and the spirit of the law, not the letter. Now everyone’s a black and white dipshit twitching with mass hysteria and wild-eyed with moral panic.
Here’s the write-up of the scam I found on the web. It matches what my friend went through.
1. You are on some kind of adult dating or chat site — either heterosexual or gay– where a person says they are over 18, and either sends you (or lures you into sending them) sexy pictures.
2. Then they say that they are actually 16, or 14, or some other age under 18.
3. Next, the “father”, the “mother” or a “detective” calls or texts you and demands money to keep them from filing charges. Often, the money is supposed to replace a “smashed phone”, “computer”, or something else… even a car that the “minor wrecked while going to meet up with you”. Sometimes they “send the minor to a juvenile military boot camp”.
4 The tip-off is that they want payment by Western Union, MoneyGram, iStore credit, Paypal.Me, Snapcash, Zelle, CashApp, money order, or gift cards BUT NOT by cash or checks. 5. Don’t buy gift cards and give them the numbers. Don’t Zelle or CashApp money. There is no minor child, no father, no mother, no detective, no wrecked car, no damaged garage door, and no ruined computer.
6. You are not alone. Questions about this scam come up several times a week here on AVVO.
7. Just to be clear: THIS IS A SCAM. THIS SCAM HAS BEEN GOING ON FOR YEARS. THERE IS NO FATHER, NO GIRL, NO FBI, NO DETECTIVE, NO COUNSELING, NO THERAPY, and NO EARLY TERMINATION FEES ON THE PHONE, and the “girl” does not have a hospital bill from “her” suicide attempt.
8. The best thing to do is block their numbers and ignore them. You can report them to the police for fraud and extortion, but without an ID that is a dead end. They use “burner” phones and spoof caller ID to make you think that it is the police number.
9. If you want to fool around with them, offer to send a check, or offer to meet them somewhere with cash. They WILL NOT give you their name or address, and will not meet with you. Green Dot cards & MoneyPak, Western Union, Target and Walmart gift cards, Cash App or Zelle, Bitcoin ATM machines, eBay, Google Play, iTunes, and Amazon prepaid/reloadable cards and the like are all ANONYMOUS ways to receive money, and the scammers will not identify themselves or they would risk being arrested for EXTORTION.
The problem is that we are in such a crazy moral panic and mass hysteria over this subject right now that anyone who simply recites the good, hard, solid science behind this matter, as discovered in many good laboratory studies, will get accused of being a pedophile. Because the science, according to the modern craziness, is “pro-pedophile.”
This is nonsense. Science isn’t pro anything or anti anything. If it is, it’s not science, it’s politics. Which is what a lot of what passes for science nowadays, especially in the pathetic social sciences (which aren’t even sciences) right now, especially when it’s driven by SJWism, Identity Politics, and Critical Race Theory, three viciously anti-science plagues menacing our society.
I’ve done a lot of research on this subject because it interests me. Now the morons, which is 95% of humans, think that makes you guilty right there. If you study it, you do it. If you talk or write about it, you do it. Your average idiot actually believes that. Of course it’s true in some cases, but pro-pedophile types are pretty easy to spot. I’ve seen quite a few of their webpages. They’re not very shy about it.
I’m also interested in a million things, including a lot of sick and fucked up things I would never think of doing. I do seem to have some sort of attraction to sick and fucked up stuff. I don’t do these things, but for some reason, I am fascinated by them. How about if I write next time about the coprophiles, or shiteaters? What do you all think? Good subject for a post? No? Too bad, I’ll write about them anyway!
Anyway the figures are absolutely shocking:
3% of men are pure pedophiles, having more attraction to girls age 2-10 than to mature females. That’s absolutely bizarre. That’s 3.3 million American men right there. Now, as long as these guys don’t touch any kids, I don’t care what their sexual orientation is. We are not into the era of thought crimes, but we are headed that way. This is why I appear to be defending these people sometimes.
If they are not offending, I have beef with them, and any man with an orientation like this can’t help it anyway. It appears to be a developmental disorder like homosexuality, transsexualism and so many other things.
The debate about this has gotten so heated. People want to execute every “pedophile” in the US or at least lock them up for life. I’m not willing to execute 3.3 million American men and I’m not willing to lock them all up for life either. I don’t have any solutions to this mess, but those are not the way to go.
Beyond that, 18% of men are more attracted to females under age 15 (some say under 13) than to mature females. Most everyone would call these men pedophiles, but in the literature they are calling them hebephiles (maximal attraction to 11-14 year old girls, though the attraction does go up to age 15 in the hebephiles I have seen). That figure is truly shocking to me!
Most of these men probably have strong drives towards mature women, so they can substitute a prosocial drive for an antisocial one. But the way most Americans see it, 21% of all US men are pedophiles!I’m not about to condemn 20% of my brothers. I love my fellow men too much. I’m not about to jump on board this Misandry Train and condemn tens of millions of men to the gallows or life imprisonment. It’s bizarre.
26% of all men are as attracted or more attracted to girls under 15 than they are to mature females. Of the 26%, 3% of them or 10% of the total, are literal pedophiles. The rest are hebephiles or at least most people would see them that way. The vast majority of these men probably have strong attraction to mature females too, hence they can put aside their urges for young girls and focus on mature teenagers (16-17) and women (18+), hence they are not particularly dangerous.
That is absolutely shocking! How could 1/4 of all men have such a strong orientation to girls under 15, even preferring them to mature females? It boggles the mind.
Now almost everyone you tell this to will raise a fit, start screaming and yelling, and will quickly accuse you of being a pedophile yourself.
Beyond that, how on Earth has such a strong attraction or even preference for girls under 15 compared to mature females even evolve in our species (because it must be evolved).
The commenter here attempts to answer that question in terms of evolutionary biology. He is responding to this post:
bluestar: Well, the truth is that a certain amount of pedophilic attraction is normal for men and makes biological sense. Because what matters is the amount of offspring a female can give a man over the long-term, men have evolved to prefer young, nulliparous females that have all their fertile years ahead of them.
In primitive societies it’s common for men to pursue little girls for marriage. It makes more biological sense for men to chase after 8 yo girls who have all their fertile years ahead of them than 30 yr olds who have used up half of their fertility.
We see a similar thing in Hamadryas baboons. When the males come up to maturity they become interested in the juvenile females and want to take them into their harems. They often kidnap them from neighbouring communities.
Men in hunter-gatherer societies do the same thing. This practice is often called “woman theft” which makes it sound like the men are kidnapping 25 yr olds, but they’re usually much younger than that. Chagnon saw men in the Yanomamo tribe in Venezuela often kidnap “unripe” girls from neighbouring villages. Native American tribes would often kidnap little girls from other tribes. A famous case of this is Cynthia Parker, who was kidnapped at about age 10 and lived with the Comanche tribe for over 20 years, having 3 kids with the chief.
Hamadryas baboons are very interesting as the modern human mating may have evolved something like the generalized polygyny system they use.
The whole topic of pedophilia is so taboo that evolutionary psychologists won’t touch it. It just has to be completely evolutionarily maladaptive and abnormal!
16+ is another way of saying mature females because females have a full sexually mature female body by that age.
Before that age from 13-15, the female body is developing and changing from a girl’s body into a woman’s body, and in certain ways, it is not fully sexually mature.
The curves that men like so much in a woman’s body, mostly a consequence of enlarged hips, buttocks, and breasts, develop over this period.
13-14 year old girls often have stick-like straight bodies similar to a boy’s body. For this reason, a lot of men find them not fully attractive. That stick-like body is a killer at least for me and some men I know.
A 15 year old girl is just odd. Frequently their bodies simply appear out of sorts as if they are not developing properly. Their bodies often look “awkward.” Of course, this is around the age that teenagers are often “awkward” anyway, and if you approach one of these “awkward”-looking 15 year old girls and try to talk to her, she will often give you a response that is rather “awkward.” I was on Kik a while ago, and a 15 year old girl messaged me apparently wanting to talk dirty. I talked to her for just a tiny bit with no serious dirty talking before I blocked her out of fear.
Nowadays they will put you in jail for the crime of “talking dirty” to a girl that age, which is a ridiculous crime in my opinion. Anyone can say anything to anybody within reason. The whole idea of crimes called “illegal talking” is perverse and bizarre. However, the way she approached me in a flirtatious manner was also rather awkward. She didn’t even know how to talk dirty in the few sentences we exchanged.
13 year old girls still have what my friends call “those little girl faces,” and they and I both regard it as a turnoff. My Mom said it’s probably “baby fat” that is present in the faces of all little girls. The baby fat probably starts to go away around age 14.
If you look at a grown woman, her face is rather bony. It is not bony in a bad way, but it is quite hardened. The most beautiful women have prominently bony faces with “sharp” and well-defined features. Noses and upper cheekbones are some of the important bones in woman’s face in terms of beauty. In fatter women, these bony features tend to be covered up with fat, which can make fatter women less attractive, though I admit there are some fat and even very fat women who have absolutely gorgeous faces.
During this period, the breasts often grow larger, and there are also changes in their appearance that are hard for me to quantify, but I will only say if you have seen enough of them, there appears to be something “wrong” with the breasts of 13-16 year old girls, and I don’t mean in just size. It is something about their general appearance and also I believe the appearance of the areola. But I’m not an expert on breasts, so I’m guessing here.
Pubic hair growth is complete by age 14 in the female, but it does grow a bit more to areas that are normally shaved nowadays to the inner things, the perineum, the area around the anus, and even in some cases above the public mons towards the navel in a long thin line.
These are called “happy trails” and back in the day (the 1960’s and 1970’s) you saw them occasionally. I remember one of the female lifeguards at the pool we went to used to have one which she sported in proud and showing manner. My eyes always drifted right to it as a teenage boy, and she always smiled at that. Nowadays it would be regarded by most younger men are horrible and disgusting. Nowadays they’d probably ban a teenage boy from a pool for even looking at a young lifeguard’s happy trail.
The vagina and anus probably grow between 13-16 in size and shape as does the rest of the body. As female height is complete by about age 16 (there is another inch or two of growth that may occur at age 17), the organs of the body should all also be fully developed by 16. In Yemen, they often marry girls at age 13 to grown men. I was not aware that sex with between men and girls that age was dangerous, but there are reports that some of these girls die with complications from having sex with these men, possibly because hard sex with a large male penis is too much for a 13 year old girl’s vagina to cope with. But don’t quote me on that.
Also, 13-15 year old girls have anuses that are smaller than that of a grown woman. In my lifetime (though it has been 20 years since my last such conversation) I have talked to girls around that age about anal sex. Some of said that they did it, but they only liked smaller or “thinner” penises. I’ve never heard a grown woman say such a thing, so this implies that in girls this age, the anus is smaller than adult size.
Of course it becomes increasingly more difficult for girls to get pregnant as we descend from 15 down to 13 years old. Females are not fully fertile until age 16. This implies once again that females are fully developed at that age, not only in organ size and height but in other ways too.
Females do grow a bit after 16-17. Around ages ~18-19, females hips widen quite a bit. This is done in order to be more able to carry a baby. Girls under 18 have hips that are not really wide enough to carry a baby, hence there are many more birth complications with girls that age, with consequences for both the girl and the baby.
This is why girls around age ~16-17 have bodies that seem to be the perfect female body, which in nature barely exists. They have the fully rounded body of a female with full female breasts, but their hips have not widened yet. So you end up with skinny girls who are very curvy. It’s a male dream. However, this dream woman is an aberration, and she is not even very physically or genetically fit. What you are seeing is a woman who is not yet developed enough to carry a baby, so it is not natural or normal for a female to be this way.
The ideal female for males is an abnormal female such as barely exists in any full-grown woman. The truth is that curves and big breasts go with heavier women. Thinner women tend to have smaller breasts and less curved bodies. Some almost have the stick-like figures of boys or 13-14 year old girls.
You love big tits but you hate fatties. You’re out of luck, pal. You love thin women but you hate small tits. Sorry guy, your model’s been out of order forever.
You got one or the other. You want big tits? Fine, accept a little fattiness. You want thin bodies. No problem, but smaller breasts come with that model.
The male ideal, a thin but curved woman with big breasts, is basically a nonexistent creature, though some 16-17 year old girls look this way, but that body is abnormal and will function poorly in some ways.
21% of all men are more attracted to girls under 13 than they are to mature females!
I realize that figure is shocking, but bear with me. It’s been born out by study after study. The studies compared male reactions to females under 13 with reactions to females 16+.
Whenever anything is that common, there is probably a genetic tendency for it. Also, age preference in males cannot be corrected by any experimental means. Things that cannot be corrected in the lab are usually thought to be hardwired and biologically based.
So why are 20% (!) of all men basically preferential pedophiles?
It appears that there is a genetic preference for pubertal age girls that has been encoded in males and is present in a sizeable minority of them. The reasons for this are up for grabs, but among the Yanonamo Indians of Venezuela, men usually grab a wife at age 12 and often fight other men for girls that age. Sex may not take place for a few years later, but at least they nab them very young.
Perhaps there was a preference to select pubertal girls and sequester them away from other men for a bit until they became fully fertile at age 16, at which time she would be locked into that man and all of her children would be his.
Historically, early life was indeed short, nasty, and brutish, and perhaps primitive life still is. By age 40, every Yanonamo man has committed at least one homicide of another man. If you’re a pacifist you simply don’t make it to age 40. You die young, killed by other men. Kill or be killed. The law of the jungle.
It’s not pathological for a man of any age to have sex with a teenage girl of any age. That’s clear from the debates around DSM-5 Hebephilia which wished to pathologize men who have a preference for girls under 15 over mature females. The criteria would probably have been been severe and persistent fantasies of pubertal girls, so that would rule out most men. However, fully 21% of all men are more attracted to girls under 13 than they are to mature females!
I realize that figure is shocking, but bear with me. It’s been born out by study after study.
I did some research on the local Yokuts Indians from a site in the 1600’s-1700’s. They had a series of skeletons of young women who had all died. They were between ages of 27-35. The assumption was that this was a woman’s lifespan among this primitive tribe. She was dead by age 31! If a woman is going to be dead by age 31, she’d best start having kids at age 16 or maybe even younger. If she starts breeding at age 16, her children will be 15 when she dies. Starting at 15, her kids would be 16 when she died. Starting at 14, her kids would be 17 when she died.
In Mexico, they marry their women and start breeding them at age 14, and it is usually an adult man who marries her. In most primitive tribes, there is a coming of age ceremony around age 15. Even today among most primitive tribes, girls and boys are both considered full adults at age 15. According to modern, advanced American thinking, 100% of the people in primitive tribes today are child molesters and pedophiles! See how stupid that sounds? 95% of the American population actually thinks like this.
You might think it’s terrible for a teen’s mother to die when the teen is 15-17 years old, but back then, that was just normal. The kids would not be left adrift anyway as by that age, they were all no longer boys and girls but full-fledged men and women.
Furthermore, sad events that are normalized in your society may not be very traumatizing. Much of the trauma occurs because people are told that something horrible has happened to them. Before they get told that, they were often not sure of how to process the event. If instead we told that that what happened was wrong or bad but it was no big deal and they would get over it, you would see the trauma rates collapse.
Tell someone they’ve been traumatized and guess how they act? They act traumatized! In our society, we’ve decided that 50% of life is traumatizing, especially with the snowflakes and their safe spaces and microaggressions. No wonder so much young people seem so nuts these days. We’ve been yelling at them that they’re being traumatized all the time all through childhood and teen years and it doesn’t even get better when they grow up. So they act, duh. Traumatized! Of course once you have a Traumatizing Society, you need to set up a huge Trauma Industry dedicated to making mountains out of molehills and ensuring that grown adults remain pussified babies long into adulthood.
The modern notion that people are all little tiny children until the day they hate 18 is insane. It’s backed up by notions that the brain is not fully matured by 17. Well, it’s not fully matured by age 24-26 either, so let’s put the age of consent for sex and the majority at age 25! After all, you’re only an adult when your brain is mature, right?
Truth is that people mature at different ages. In early times in the West, children were considered “little adults” and were often treated as such. It’s not known if they matured earlier then but maybe they did. Treat someone like a kid, they act like a kid. Treat someone like an adult, they act like an adult.
Although this sounds very groovy and compassionate to our postmodern, late capitalist, metrosexual, 3rd Wave feminist ears, the truth is that for 200,000 years of our evolution, no human gave two shits that the brain didn’t fully mature until age 25, although they probably had some notion of the idea. They simply didn’t feel it was worth thinking about because frankly it isn’t.Our present culture infantalizes teenagers and young adults to an extreme degree. Infantalizing humans doesn’t seem to be a good idea to me, but maybe “modern people” have other ideas. After all, treat someone like a baby and they act like one, right?
Further, most primitive tribes allow both boys and girls to start having sex at puberty, around age 13. The girls often have sex with boys, but sometimes they have sex with men. For instance, the typical marriage among the Blackfoot Indians was between a man aged 35 and a 15 year old girl. Our “modern, scientific, compassionate” society would state unequivocally that all Blackfoot men were pedophiles or child molesters for the thousands of years that the tribe was in existence.
Isn’t that a stupid way to think? Look how stupid we are! We’re surrounded by all these damned gadgets, we are so technologically advanced that we’re about to become literal aliens, we can cure or help most diseases, we understand most of the most important questions, including the biggies or we’re on our way to figuring them out. Unified Theory, here we come!
But some goddamned primitive Indian with a digging stick and a rock to grind acorns in who doesn’t know the first thing about technology, science, or medicine has more wisdom we “advanced” clowns do. For Chrissake, we may be advancing technologically, but we’re going backwards in terms of wisdom. How pathetic is it that Silicon Valley ultra-technologists have less wisdom that some primitive tribe eking out an existence in the jungle? Are we too civilized for our own damn good? It’s possible to get so “civilized,” protective, pampering, and fussy that you’re not even rational anymore. That my modern colleagues have less wisdom than some spearchucker in the jungle is a pretty sad statement!
From age 13-15, most girls are not very fertile, so it’s hard to get pregnant.
The debate around Hebephilia ended up concluding that even having a strong preference for pubertal children as sex partners was not mentally disordered. Further, it wasn’t even abnormal! Having been in chatrooms full of these guys, I’m not so sure about that, but it’s best to keep as much sex crap out of the DSM as we can.
It was even decided that having sex with 13-15 year old girls if one had a preference for them was not mentally disordered either because most crimes are not mental disorders and most criminals aren’t nuts. Instead, the argument was that these men weren’t nuts – instead they were just criminals, with being criminal and being nuts as two different things!
Of course most crooks aren’t nuts. They’re just bad. Are there disorders called Murder Disorder, Mugging Disorder, Fraudster Disorder, Batterer Disorder, Attempted Murder Disorder, Burglar Disorder, Robber Disorder, Forger Disorder, etc.? Well, of course not.
In mental health all we care about is if something is nuts or not. Hence we don’t care much about criminal behavior because most crooks aren’t nuts. We leave that to the judicial system to deal with and moral philosophers to decide what to allow and forbid. If people are disordered, we say they are abnormal. If people are not disordered, we say they are normal.Obviously a lot of real bad people are not disordered. So we are forced to call a lot of criminal behavior and most criminals normal because neither one is generally crazy. So a lot of very bad behavior and people are “normal” in the sense that they’re not nuts.
So a man of any age having sex with a teenage girl of any age does not make him sexually abnormal, as it’s completely “normal” behavior, as in, it’s not nuts, and even, looking at human history and other cultures, in most places and times, it was more or less normal.
But normal behavior doesn’t necessarily mean ok behavior. It just means that the behavior is not crazy.
The statutory rape matter is a moral and legal problem, not a psychological one.
We in mental health do not like to pathologize crimes and morally unethical behavior as psychological disorder. This is outside of what we care about and off into the lands of moral philosophers, religious thinkers, and legal theorists. It is in the area of right and wrong, good and bad, and good and evil. Most criminal behavior is not driven by psychological disorder. It’s driven by a defective moral conscience.
So whether it should be legal for a man of whatever age to have sex with a teenage girl or whatever age is a moral matter, a moral question. Perhaps you feel it is the worst behavior on Earth. Perhaps you think it’s completely ok and should be legal. Probably you are somewhere between those views. All of those views about this behavior are valid, as everyone and hence society itself is entitled to reasonable moral values of right and wrong.
Why was there an attempt to shove Hebephilia into the DMSO category in the first place. Because it was a game. A game called “Call Em Crazy, Lock Em up as Dangerous Forever, and Throw Away the Key.” Otherwise known as preventive detention. Or putting people in prison for life for the crime of “dangerousness.”
The game here is make a lot of the sexual behavior we dislike into “mental illnesses.” Because the only way we can lock someone up forever on the bullshit charge of “dangerousness” (there’s no such crime) is if they’re nuts. Yep. You can be dangerous as Hell, and as long as you’re not officially crazy and you’re just a mean SOB, it’s all kosher.
Obviously most sex offenders are not the slightest bit nuts, so a scam was made up to call them crazy so we could lock them up forever in preventive detention (which is probably illegal) for the rest of their lives because we think maybe they might sort of kind of a little bit possibly theoretically plausibly do something, we don’t know what, to someone, we don’t who, somewhere, we don’t know where, somehow, we don’t know how.
That’s unconstitutional on its face.
The only people you can lock up like are the dangerously mentally ill, and you are supposed to release them when they get better, except we never do because no matter how much better they get, we always say they’re not better enough. So we wanted to lock all these poor sops away forever, but we couldn’t because they weren’t nuts, they were just bad people, you know, like most criminals? So a scam was created to make up a bunch of “mental disorders” out of what are mostly just kinks and sexual perversions, when it’s doubtful whether any kinky or perverted people are actually nuts.
Generally they’re not nuts. They’re just perverts. Perverts aren’t nuts. They’re perverted. Two different things.
So they made up a fake mental disorder called Pedophilia to lock up all the child molesters forever, although most men in preventive detention are nonpedophilic molesters. Also they never let them out even when they get better because no matter how much better they get, the cops still say they’re not better enough yet. When will they be better enough? When they’re dead! It’s right out of Kafka. They just sit and rot forever. All because, you know, think of the children! And the usual pearl clutching we Americans so excel at.
So we decided all the chomos and short eyes had a “mental disease” called “Pedophilia” that made them “insane” or if you prefer “crazy.” Well, it doesn’t make you insane and it doesn’t even make you crazy. It might make you do bad things, but it doesn’t make you nuts. And since we decided on no rational basis whatsoever that all of these people were permanently dangerous, we have locked them all away forever on the basis that they are “dangerously mentally ill.” It’s all a big joke.
Dangerously mentally ill is supposed to be for the paranoid schizophrenic who grabs a gun and climbs a tower. It’s not for run of the mill criminals. Merely being dangerous as opposed to being nuts and dangerous is not granted the penalty of preventive detention because it’s decided that as long as you’re not nuts, you have at least some ability to control your dangerous behavior because obviously if you’re nuts, you lose that ability.
How about all the other paraphilias? Why don’t we decide they’re all dangerously mentally ill too? There’s nothing preventing it. The peeping toms? The flashers? The fetishists? The masochists? The sexual sadists? The first two are low level criminals so no one cares, the third are harmless except to women’s panties, shoes, and pocketbooks, the fourth only hurt themselves so no one cares, but the fourth? The sexual sadists? One might make the case that some convicted sexual sadists are dangerously mentally ill, but they never go down on this stuff. Only the Chesters. Because, you know, everyone hates Touchers. Think of the children!
One might think that as Antisocial Personality Disorder is in the DSM, a lot of these guys could go down on dangerously mentally ill, but there’s a serious argument whether any personality disordered person is mentally ill per se as opposed to be what I would call sick, character disordered, twisted, etc. Axis 2 people are what I call “soul-sick.” They’re permanently disordered, but the issue is at the core of their selves so they’re not really mentally ill. Instead, they are “sick.”
But nope, no PD’s go down on dangerously mentally ill. We save that for the sex criminals! Because, you know, the sex criminals are really so much worse than your ordinary variety criminals who burgle, rob, thieve, defraud, beat, maim, mug, shoot, stab, torture, and kill people because as long as they’re not fucking anyone while they’re doing it, it’s never quite so bad, you see? Because Puritanism. Obviously it’s so much worse to do bad things when you are fucking someone as opposed to just, you know, doing bad things when you don’t happen to be fucking anyone. Because whether you’re fucking someone or not when you commit your crime makes such a difference!
There has been a very devious attempt lately to sneak another mentally disordered sex offender (MDSO) into the mix.
But first notice that they singled out the sex criminals for permanent preventive detention as opposed to, you know, your garden variety maniacs. But why? Why do only sex criminals deserve preventive detention as opposed to regular murderers, muggers, and robbers? Because moral panic. That’s why.
They went after the rapists. Because of course everyone hates rapists. Except we live in a rape culture that says it’s ok to rape and encourages all men to go rape all they want. But at the same time everyone hates rapists. Makes sense, huh? They tried to sneak in a Rape Paraphilic Disorder in order to round up all the rapists just like they rounded up all the Chesters.
Problem? The vast majority of rapists do not have any sort of a paraphilia about rape. They do it for all sorts of reasons. Some like to hurt people (sadistic rapists), some are angry at or hate women (anger rapists) and two different types do it for different power trips – the Power Reassurance Rapist and another that slips my mind. One of these types is the “gentleman rapist” who actually feels bad about raping you! So there are different kinds, and almost all rapists won’t kill you, except the Sadists (5%) are very dangerous, and the Anger Rapists (30%?) may well hurt you but generally won’t kill you unless you fight them, in which case they might.
But men who have a specific paraphilia about rape? That is, they get aroused more by the idea of raping women than by anything else, possibly to the point that unless they rape or pretend to rape, it just doesn’t move the meter? It’s either very uncommon or nonexistent, depending on who you listen to. But of course, once they sneak in Rape Paraphilic Disorder, they’re going to label allthe rapists mentally ill with this fake illness, and lock them all away as MDSO’s! Neat trick, huh? Thankfully the DSM-5 committees stopped that one coming and dodged the bullet.
DSM-5 Hebephilia was shot down on similar grounds, that this was an attempt to round up men who committed statutory rape with young teens (13-15 year old girls) and missed the deadline for going down on Child Molestation (usually under 13). So this way we get to lock up countless men who bang hot to trot little jailbaits forever as dangerously mentally ill.
As you can see, in Matt Gaetz’ case, the whole case is completely fake. The guy literally did nothing wrong. Furthermore, he lacked mens rea, or a guilty mind, so he’s innocent on that basis alone.
He committed the crime of buying a teen whore, except she lied about her age, and told everyone she was 19 when she was really 17. Actually it looks more like 17 1/2 now that I’m looking into it. By the way, she’s still whoring away. Once a whore always a whore. As soon as Gaetz and friends found out, they got furious at her and ended all contact.
Buying a Whore Means You are a “Sex Trafficker”
At 17, in most states she would be legal, but even there, if you pay her, you just committed “sex trafficking.” Yeah, if you buy a whore, you’re a “sex trafficker.” What a bunch of crap. Because the state, in the midst of an idiot moral panic, decided that all teenage prostitution is “sex trafficking.”
Not just the pimps. Indeed, one can make an argument that most pimps are sex traffickers.
Sex trafficking was supposed to mean women who were sex slaves and forced to prostitute themselves and were not able to escape. This is literally the case with most pimps, though most whores are quite willing to whore themselves out. But most pimps won’t let them leave.
So anytime you see an hysterical headline about “sex trafficking,” it just means whores and pimps, which is like, most whores. Whores have had pimps forever. So there’s nothing new going on here, just the same old same old.
But now all teen prostitutes are supposedly being “sex trafficked” too because that’s how they wrote the stupid law in 2012. Even if they’re doing it on their own, which I assume many are. In that case, apparently they are trafficking themselves! See how none of this shit makes sense?
And now if you’re unlucky enough to buy the services some teen whore is freely offering you, instead of just buying a teen whore, you’re a “sex trafficker”! Yep buying whores is “sex trafficking”! Isn’t that stupid? I would say if you want to make a crime out of it, calling it “Purchasing an Underage Prostitute.” It shouldn’t be much of a crime really, but at least the law would make sense.
In many US states, you can freely fuck all the 16 and 17 year old girls you want, but as soon as you hand her a dollar bill (or I guess a penny) for her services, you broke the law! You’re now a “sex trafficker.” Isn’t that stupid? And you go on the idiot Sex Offender List as a “sex trafficker.”
Also, don’t take a picture of her. You can have sex with all the girls you want as above, just don’t take pictures of any of them. Because if you do, you “manufactured and possessed child pornography.” You know, when we made the kiddie porn laws, I don’t think this is what we were thinking of. And you go on the Sex Offender List as a child pornographer.
Kids are getting busted all over the country for manufacturing, distributing and possessing child pornography when they do their sexting. I don’t have the solution to teen sexting but this insanity doesn’t seem to be it.
By the way, those lists are getting really stupid. There are now 3 million people, almost all men, on these stupid lists. Anyone feel any safer? Somehow I think when we came up with the idea for these lists we didn’t imagine putting 3 million Goddamned men on the list!
By the way, if you commit statutory rape, you go on the idiot list too.
And most states have Sex Offender laws that make it almost impossible for sex offenders to live anywhere except maybe under a bridge. Which is exactly where most of them end up living. I’m sure that’s going to rehabilitate them real good and I’m sure they won’t be more likely to commit new offenses! The worse you treat these guys, the more the offend. Well, that’s the case with child molesters anyway and even with non-offending pedophiles.
These Sex Offender Lists and laws have gone completely out of control. I don’t know what to do about this either, but this ain’t it.
I really wish the Left would being so gay and faggoty about this stuff and quit calling men pedophiles for doing what comes perfectly naturally to them – fucking teenage girls.
Matt Gaetz is the Left’s latest obsession. Yes, we’re screaming that he’s a pedophile. And the government is going after him on bullshit sex charges.
Here’s what it’s all about. The allegation is that Gaetz paid for the services of an underage prostitute. He supposedly paid her for sex and her paid her to travel across state lines. Hold on a second. Suppose I have a perfectly legal 16 year old girlfriend. I buy her an airline ticket and now I’m “sex trafficking” her. The law says that if you reimburse her for sex in any way, it’s “sex trafficking.” So I buy my 16 year old girlfriend a hamburger and now I’m “sex trafficking” her. This shit’s getting stupid.
Anyway, once you dig into it, there’s nothing there. Yes, Gaetz and Greenberg, his proucurer, did pay for the services of this more than willing teen whore. But they didn’t know she was 17! She lied and told them she was 19, and I think she even had a fake ID saying so! Anyway she got uncovered by one of Greenberg’s friends, and Greenberg called her in and read her the riot act about how her lying could get a lot of men in trouble. At that point, both Greenberg and Gaetz cut off all contact with the girl. As any reasonable man would do, right?
So this is the charge. This little teen whore lied about her age, told men she was 19 when she was really 17, and guys paid her for sex. As soon as they found out she was underage, they get very angry with her and ended all contact with her.
This is what the fucking Feds (they’re just pigs too – in fact, they’re the worst pigs of them all) are going after Gaetz for. Fake bullshit or what? Even the case against Greenberg looks pretty flimsy.
Long, 45 pages. Deals with gruesome matters concerning the brutal sex murders of four female minors – mostly about two young teenage girls aged 13 and 14 but also a bit about related murders of two little girls aged 8 and 10. If you can’t handle such material, don’t read!
The first sections deal with somewhat extraneous material that you may or may not find interesting. If you want to get to the real meat of the post, scroll down to Facts of the Main Suspect in the Case – Mr. X.
First, a pitch for support for this website and our sleuthing group:
People are donating lots of money to Delphi podcasters Mike Greeno and Gray Hughes, which is their right. Gray makes over $100,000/year from his podcasts, which is fine by me. I don’t agree that any of these people are grifters as everyone says. A grifter is literally a criminal fraudster and he is breaking the law.
The people paying Hughes and Greeno clearly feel that they are getting their money’s worth. But what shocks me is how little these men give their audiences in return for their purchases. Gray’s videos run to 3-4 hours and may contain five minutes of useful material if you are lucky during that time. Greeno’s videos are almost completely worthless, and group members who have spoken to him told me he has nothing new to add to the case.
Which brings me to the question, why not donate to our enterprise here? It’s a much better purchase for your money than throwing money at Hughes and Greeno, for which you get almost nothing in return. And you won’t by enriching someone who is already wealthy like Hughes. I live on a fixed income which is barely above the poverty level. Our group is clearly the best Delphi sleuthing group on the Internet by far.
Unlike any other sleuthers, we have actually determined the main suspect in the case, and we have a pretty good idea of what happened during the crime and what the crime scene looked like. And most of what we have reported is based on solid sources such as search party members, official case documents, and detectives in other areas of LE that leak to us what they’ve heard via the LE grapevine. No one else has come close to uncovering the amount and quality of information we have, and almost the entire community rejects our findings even though they are correct.
So why waste your money on Hughes and Greeno? Why not donate to the best Delphi sleuthing team of all by donating to me, leader of a group of 230+ sleuthers who have been working on the case for four years now? How about getting your money’s worth?
I estimate that 85% of what we said here in past years has been shown to be false over time. One problem was we went down the rabbit hole chasing the wrong guy for a couple of years. Turned out he was just some troll who wanted people to think he committed these murders instead of being the person who actually did them.
Thing is, over time your information tends to get better. You learn which rumors have promise and which have not panned out. Also, you develop better sources. We now have search party members who saw the crime scene; official case documents; the testimony of Leigh Kerr, a man who claims to have seen official case documents; accurate crime scene photos; and the best LE sources we have ever had. In the first four years, two LE officers only affirmed one rumor each. But now we have an excellent regular LE source, a detective, the best we’ve ever had.
Bottom line is the quality of our sources has increased dramatically over time. Consequently, the accuracy of our statements should go up a lot too. Our error rate at the moment is probably under 50% and quite possibly lower.
Qualification of Claims
You will see below where we regard certain things as Proven. That is because we got these statements either directly from LE, official case documents, or the same conclusions reached independently by two different sources (for this to be false, both sources would have had to make up the exact same lie), or from direct statements from one of the girls’ guardians. These are the only claims that people can hold us to because with all the rest, we openly admit that the claims are Unverified, so we should not be held to any of those claims.
The category below Proven is ally called Unverified with Different Qualifications. Keep in mind that we are not claiming that anything listed below as Unverified is true, although some it has a good chance of being true.
Unverified but Likely. In these cases, we have 4-5 separate sources, usually vaguely referred to as inside sources, testifying to the truth of something. Because of the number of people saying this rumor is true, it goes into the likely category.
Unverified with Some Likelihood of Being True is a common qualification. Most of Leigh Kerr’s and the search party member’s testimony has gone into this bracket because unfortunately, while we think they are right, we cannot regard their testimony as probative.
Unverified. Some claims are listed as unverified. These are simply unverified rumors.
Unverified and Probably Not True. This claims are quite dubious and we don’t suggest anyone put any weight into them.
The Uselessness of Most Delphi Murders Podcasters and Reddit Groups
Few of the illustrious Delphi Murders Youtubers has touched the real truth about this case as laid out in this website, probably because they are all narcissists who hate each other and hate anyone stealing their thunder. However, Mindtruth has done a number of episodes on our information and I thank Bruce for that very much. Remember how all these Youtubers trashed Leigh Kerr? That’s because he was competition. See? These guys are mostly narcissists and they don’t believe in cooperation. It’s all about the zero-sum game. One person wins and everyone else loses. I like some of these guys.
John Kelly has some good information. Indiana Cold Cases is similar and so is True Crime Jesus. Most of the rest are not bad people, but they are showboats, loudmouths, and boasters with egos the size of small planets. Every podcast is all about them! Obviously this is the only type of personality that is capable of podcasting – an egomaniac – on the other hand, their personality pathology limits the usefulness of their shows.
I tune in to their broadcasts and most of it is these narcissists collecting narcissistic supply, which is being doled out by their worshipful audience. Furthermore, almost nothing of consequence is being said, and it reminds you of a night with your friends drinking, and no one says one thing of importance for hours.
Most of these podcasts are silly speculation or talk about POI’s who are all ruled out. There is endless silly speculation in the comments about BG – “I think BG was a teenager…What if BG escaped on a hand glider?…What if BG is dead?…What if BG escaped to a deserted island where he now renamed himself Lord Jim and is now king of the savages?…What if BG is really a woman in drag?…What if BG is Mafia hitman?…Bla bla bla bla.”
I’m sure it’s very interesting to posit your wandering speculation about what if this or maybe something or possibly why, who or what, but at the end of the day, it’s writing words in the air with water vapor to be blown away with the next wind. Idle speculation at its finest. Apparently there is a human need to wonder, guess, and posit. Otherwise why do we have religions? Why do kids play make-believe?
I guess this need continues into adulthood, but I like a little meat on my bone.
The Reddit sites are pretty useless too, mostly because most posters regard the best sources on this crime as false. They’ve been doing this from the very start, so this is nothing new. These are mostly hate sites. Little if any good information comes out of these places. R/LibbyandAbby is awful, but it’s a lot better than r/DelphiMurders. And there are some good posters on r/LibbyandAbby; it’s just that they happen to be in the minority and all the best posters get downvoted to Hell and the people who are dead wrong get scores of upvotes!
R/DelphiMurders is completely useless due to their “no rumors or speculation” rules, which means that you can only discuss what is proven about the case, which after four years, is just about nothing. R/LibbyandAbby does allow rumors and speculations, so at least they get some good posts and posters, while the overall mood is still a downer.
However, there are some good posters, especially on r/LibbyandAbby. In particular, user/tobor is excellent.
The scope of this investigation in terms of who the police think did it and how it unfolded has been dramatically narrowed. We have the basic outlines of the crime sketched, and we’ve even filled in a lot of the blanks.
Questions Regarding My Credibility and Professionalism
Answers to questions about my credibility. I am creating a special article about this to link to in order to deal with the constant hate comments in this regard so I don’t have to keep going over this stuff in every update.
Finally, after Four Years, Acquisition of Good LE Sources
It turns out that we have acquired a sleuth who is a former detective. He’s bored and has nothing to do, so we recruited him to sleuth for us. He is happy to do so. He has connections with current LE officers in Indiana.
We sent him off to dig into Mr. X. He went away for a bit and came back a while later with proof from LE that some of the things we have been reporting as rumors here are absolute fact. The source is a detective in another part of Indiana who is not working on the case.
Mr. X Is Innocent Until Proven Guilty
I am not revealing the name of the main suspect here and will only refer to him as Mr. X. I also request all commenters to also refer to him as Mr. X. I do this as a simple measure to try to protect his identity. I do not feel comfortable using his initials or certainly his name. I do not want to see this man or his family harassed in any way. No one knows if he did this crime or not. Maybe he did, maybe he didn’t.
Yes, this man is the prime suspect at the moment, but that doesn’t mean a whole lot. Twice in the the Evansdale Murders, LE thought they were certain that they had the right man. Twice they were wrong. They have thought they had the right guy several times in the Zodiac case, but all of the suspects fell through.
Mr. X has is not even at the Person of Interest stage in this case. Person of Interest is a much higher standard than unnamed suspect, and he hasn’t even risen to that level yet. No one knows if Mr. X is guilty or not. I happen to think he probably did it, but what do I know?
LE doesn’t have much in the way of good, solid evidence against Mr. X. They have enough suggestive evidence to make them think he did it, but if you look a the nature of their actual evidence, it’s awfully thin. In fact, the rumor is that LE simply does not have enough evidence against Mr. X to take the case to court. DA’s require a very high standard of evidence to bring a homicide charge against someone. If the DA does not think he has enough evidence in a homicide case to win in court, they won’t take it to trial. At this point, they don’t even have enough for an arrest.
Say for instance LE arrested Mr. X and charged him with the double homicides of these two girls. If they tried to take it to court, I am almost certain that the judge would throw it out before it even got to the trial stage. The judge would say you don’t even have enough evidence against this man to take this case to court and throw it out of court. That’s very embarrassing.
Furthermore, homicide is the most serious thing you can charge anyone with. The judicial system likes to make sure that they get it right, if only to protect the due process rights of the accused.
There are cases like this all over the country.
A famous one is the Lewiston Killer in Lewiston, Idaho in the late 1970’s. He killed at least five people, specializing in young women. The police chief says he is 99% sure that the main suspect, who is named, committed the crimes. The suspect has since moved back to North Carolina, and young women have begun to disappear from the trails there now.
There is a suspected child killer in the Bay Area who is responsible for 5-10 child murders. They don’t have enough on the main suspect him to take him to trial, but they enough to think did it. A book has been published accusing this man of this crime. The main suspect is brazen, openly admits to being a pedophile, goes to the victims’ graves and leaves flowers, and visits the victims’ families to offer “solace for their losses.” See the sort of games these guys play? A police chief in Martinez accused the man of committing these crimes, and the man sued the city and won $50,000.
This is why you don’t hear LE openly accusing people of committing serious crimes like homicide unless they have enough evidence to take them to trial.
And those are just a few of the suspected serials running around free. There are many cases of homicides or attempted homicides in the same category.
If Mr. X Were on Trial for These Murders Today and I Were in the Jury, I Would Vote to Acquit Him
Yes, I think Mr. X did this crime. But my opinion isn’t worth anything. And if Mr. X was being tried today and I was on the jury, I would certainly vote to acquit. Because it doesn’t matter whether I think he’s guilty or not. The state has to prove it. If I were on the jury, the only thing I would care about was whether the state had proved that Mr. X committed this crime. And with the evidence they currently have, they haven’t proven it. So I would definitely hang the jury and let Mr. X walk, and in all probability, BG would be free to walk the streets again. That’s the price you pay to live in a free society.
Time to Give up on All These POI’s
This is getting ridiculous. No one has to believe me when I say LE has a main suspect, but there are number of suspects that ought to be put to rest.
Ron Logan: Enough already. Give it a rest, dammit! How many times has he been cleared? 242? Maybe we need to clear him a 243rd time then just to make sure! However, an interesting theory is that BG may have attempted to frame Ron Logan with this crime for obscure reasons. BG was dressed in clothes similar to what Ron wore, and he took the girls to Ron’s land and killed them there.
Mike Patty: Just stop, ok? Stop. He’s innocent. Leave this poor man alone, for God’s sake. Hasn’t he suffered enough? No, he didn’t kill his own granddaughter. Come on, people.
Becky Patty: Obviously they’re not accusing her of the homicides! The accusation is that she “knows something” or “knows way too much” and is covering for someone, presumably the killer. I doubt it. No one’s been hurt by this case more than Becky Patty. It’s as if she took the grief of a whole town under her breast and pledged to suffer for them all, Jesus-like. Not quite sainthood, but getting there. I heard that at the 2019 conference, she burst into tears. Of course she did. She still hasn’t been able to process this, assuming such a thing can ever be processed. She has channeled her pain into grief and sadness.
Others close to the victims, who I will not name, have channeled their grief into rage and lashing out at everyone around them. It’s an understandable reaction, but they’re not pleasant to be around. This person is externalizing their pain into rage and projecting it outwards at the world. I won’t reveal who I am talking about here though it should be obvious. I will say that Libby’s birth mother has also dealt with her loss by turning rageful. Both of these people were probably ragers before, so it’s not like they did a U-turn. Of course, we empathize with their losses, but sympathy wears thin when someone is screaming in your face. Let’s hope they find some peace.
The last person on Earth to “protect the killer” is poor Becky Patty, God bless her mortal soul.
Derrick German: Libby’s father, meth dealer, convict who served time in prison and supposedly ratted people out to get a lower sentence. He has dealt with his grief with silence and hiding himself away. I don’t know this man very well, but he wasn’t in on this crime.
Kelsi German: Sister of Libby. Kelsi’s DNA was the only DNA found on the bodies. Kelsi has been investigated quite a bit, and she has been interviewed a few times by the FBI, including a couple of times at her school. For whatever reason, she confuses facts all the time and can’t keep her stories straight. I have no idea why she’s doing this, but it’s not because she killed her own sister. Kelsi German has been cleared.
FSG, or DMC: Probably shouldn’t use his real name, but he’s on everybody’s suspect list. He was one of the original witnesses who saw BG and gave a description. Now he says he never saw BG at all. I guess he can’t make up his mind. He’s also thoroughly lawyered up, and he’s not saying a word. I get it. He’s a greedy businessman with dollar signs in fluttering eyes that sound like clanging cash registers every time he blinks. His favorite color is green: like the woods, like the loot. Hey, it’s a capitalist country, right? The theory is that he was in on these murders for mercenary reasons, such as a malign desire to purchase Ron Logan’s land. Sure he’s a greedy businessman, but I doubt if he’s that greedy.
FSG along with others present at the bridge have been investigated as possible lookouts for BG. Not because there’s any evidence that they were lookouts, but more because everyone in that situation at the time of the murders is being looked at that way. I’d be surprised if he were in on this, but stranger things have happened.
Paul Etter: A 55 year old local man of many interests. One of his many interesting hobbies was abducting and raping young women. But alas, he raped one lass too many, and the law closed in on him holed up in his home, which now resembled Dodge City. He saved society a lot of money by eating a bullet, freeing up some fresh air and making the world the tiniest bit of a better place. He raped women, not young teenage girls. He was the right age, but he doesn’t look like BG. LE has already looked into him quite a bit, and I assume he’s cleared.
CM: Not even going to bother to reveal his name. Professor at a local university, known for the Geocaching Theory. Some connection with Libby via geocaching. I was never aware that anyone had any good evidence against this harmless-looking fellow. Lawyered up, not talking. He’s afraid he’s going to be framed with these murders, a reasonable fear.
CN: Middle aged man, resident of Delphi. Well, he’s the right age anyway. Never knew what the case was against this man other than that he had property near the bridge, and he and his wife’s alibi of being out of the state traveling got a bit mangled. We all stumble over our words sometimes. He’s a local executive of a government function or perhaps better yet a nonprofit of some sort. Possibly works with kids. I’ve looked this man over and I can’t think of anyone less likely to commit this crime. His wife has taken to social media lately, pleading with people to stop harassing them and insisting he had nothing to do with this crime. Good advice. How bout taking it to heed, everyone?
Garrett Kirts: Local man, all around run of the mill bad person. He killed a woman. So he’s a murderer. He’s in prison where he belongs. I never knew what evidence anyone had against this guy except, “He kills chicks! So that means he killed these girls because they’re chicks too!” Doesn’t sound like a logical progression of thought to me. Empiricism is a thing. Besides, he’s the wrong age, 27-28. BG is a 50 year old man. Give it a rest, everyone.
Brad Holder: Brad’s son, Jason, was Abby’s boyfriend. Brad was a suspect for a while, and one of the detectives working on the case even stated off the record that he thought Brad did it. Holder has an alibi that he was working out at a gym at the time. In general, the less said about the other aspects of his life the better, and they have no relationship to this case anyway.
The point is that that Mr. Holder had nothing to do with this crime. And although he’s no no saint, I don’t think he has it in him to commit a crime like this. We wrote an article a while back pointing out that we felt Holder was innocent, and that set off a spate of hate mail and threats from him and his son, which we found odd. You write an article saying some guy’s not involved, and you get swamped with threats to track and hunt you down? I don’t get it.
Clearing Up Some Recent Attacks on Our Theories
It is being said that we are claiming all sorts of odd things about this crime, what happened, and the crime scene. We openly admit that much of what we are saying about this crime are unverified rumors. See below for which rumors we believe are proven and which are unverified.
Furthermore, when people say that I, Robert Lindsay, have no sources, no documents, on and on, please keep something in mind. “Robert Lindsay” isn’t just one guy. “Robert Lindsay” is the leader of a sleuthing group that presently has ~230 paid members. They all go off and do their own work. They have their own sources. On and on. These people are from all over the country and have expertise in all sorts of different areas.
So when you are saying, “No way does Lindsay have inside sources or official documents,” do you think it’s possible that a team of 230 sleuths all working together could have come up such things? Something to think about.
Specifically, we are getting much of the the following information straight from the cops themselves. Got it? Instead of bashing us, why don’t you ask why the cops are telling us this stuff? Are they deliberately lying to us? If so, why? Are we making up lies about getting information from police when we actually have no contacts with them? Why would we do that? We don’t do that on here and never have. For one, it’s a gross violation of journalistic ethics, and I was trained to be a journalist – I have a BA in Journalism and worked as an editor of a large magazine, among other things.
Facts about the Main Suspect in the Case – Mr. X
The motive is apparently lust murder motivated by sexual sadism combined with psychopathy, the classic formulation almost all serial killers have. The motive was sexual. This was a sex crime, a sex homicide.
We now know a lot of things about the main suspect, including the name, age, height, weight, marital status, possible offspring, address, names of wife and children, and history of his life.
These are the facts about the man LE suspects is BG. An asterisk means the information is proven via LE information leaked to us. A double asterisk means the information is proven by case documents in our possession.
Items known to be carried or worn by BG at the time of crime:
Loaded handgun in right jacket pocket, type unknown, possibly a rare .40mm collector’s item.
Members Only jacket, blue.
Old style 501 blue jeans from the 1980’s – Dad jeans.
Indiana Packers boots.
Camouflage hunting cap.
Go Pro camera on waist.
Deer kit on waist with five hunting knives.
White scarf covering the lower half of his face.
Bottle of toilet bowl cleaner in left pocket.*
Known facts about the personal life of the main suspect, Mr. X.:
Residence history: Unknown for first 18 years, possibly Illinois. Delphi, Indiana from at least 1984-2021. Resident of Delphi in 1984-85 at minimum.
Important residence periods: Moved to Evansdale, Iowa in 2011-2012 to work at a slaughterhouse possibly aligned with Tyson Foods there. Was present when the Evansdale Murders occurred. Homeless for a period in the 2000’s, where he resided at a homeless shelter.
Education history: Primary and junior high unknown.
Senior high school: First years unknown but graduated from Delphi High School in 1984-85.
Age at time of crime: 49-50 (uncertain).
Present age: 53-54 (uncertain).
Hair color: Dark brown.
Facial hair: Goatee or trimmed beard.
Height: Approximately 5’8.
Weight: Approximately 180.
Sexual age orientation: Pedohebephilia, nonexclusive, AOA 8-14.
Sexual object orientation: Heterosexual.
Residence at time of crime: Delphi, Indiana since 1984. Recently moved to a small city nearby, possibly due to the heat of being a suspect in the crime. Lists a factory as place of residence.
Employment history: Unknown prior to 2011. May have worked at Tyson Foods slaughterhouse in Logansport, Indiana and sister facility in Waterloo, Iowa in 2011-2012. Employed at two factories in nearby towns as a machine operator in recent years.
Occupation: Handicrafter making wooden signs.
Distance of residence from crime scene at the time of the crime: Less than 2 miles to the east along the creek.
Familiarity with crime location: Extreme. Friends with Ron Logan on whose property the crime occurred. Frequently hunted deer on Ron’s land. Clearly very familiar with the area of the crime and perhaps knew it as well as the back of his hand.
Marital status: Married, rocky and tumultuous marriage with breakups where they go live on their own and later get back together. At least two prior marriages.
Children: Two daughters, one ~22, another ~30. Ages approximate. One stepson, age 21 with the same first and last names.
Relationship with younger daughter: Excellent, she is very fond of him.
Relationship with older daughter and stepson: Unknown.
Important friendships: Very casual friend of Mike Patty, father of one of the girl victims. Possible Harley buddies (friends who ride Harley-Davidson motorcycles), as Mike is an avid Harley rider. There is a rumor of a falling out between the two men at some time before the crime. What that has to do with anything is not known. Hunting partner of Anthony Greeno, podcaster who has reported on the case avidly.
Hobbies: Raising goats, riding and fixing up Harley-Davidson motorcycles, very avid deer hunter, handicrafting wooden signs.
Specific Information about the Crime Confirmed to Us by the Police
Numbers 1-4 were told to a retired detective who works with one of our team members us by an Indiana detective who the retired LE is close to. The detective didn’t work on the case.
Number 5 was told to JM, an excellent local sleuth, and then to us by an Indiana detective who works in Narcotics based on crime scene photos he had seen. The Narcotics detective did not work on the case. We also heard it from someone very close to a detective who was working on the case who had confided in them.
Number 6, an extremely controversial statement, was told to JM and then to us by a sheriff in a nearby county. The sheriff’s deputy did not work on the case.
Both girls were posed. Keep in mind that they did not say how they were posed, if they were posed in a sexual manner, etc. Source: A detective in Indiana.
Doll(s) were scattered about the crime scene. We have two LE sources for this information. The first source, the same as above, said there were quite a few of them. The detective said, “There were so many dolls scattered around that it looked like he had gone to the Goodwill store and bought a bunch of dolls.” This also answers questions about why the cops have been using phrases like “odd,” “peculiar,” “strange,” not your average crime scene,” “many signatures,” etc. It fits right in with all of that. The second source was asked if there was one doll or more than one doll and would only state, “at least one doll was found at the crime scene.” Sources: The first source is the detective in Indiana. The second source is brand new information from a high-ranking figure from directly inside the investigation!
A bottle of toilet cleaner was found at the crime scene. Presumably it was used to throw bleach over everything, which solves the riddle of why no usable DNA was collected in this case. Source: The detective in Indiana.
The girls were “violated with inanimate objects.” Source: The detective in Indiana.
Sticks, twigs, and branches were jammed into the girls lower orifices. Presumably this is what the “violated with inanimate objects” statement above refers to this. Note: A new rejoinder is that both of the girls were found clothed. This is not true. Libby was nude. Abby may have been naked below the waist. Sources:A narcotics detective in Indiana and the wife of a detective working on the case, who posted this on the Internet.
One girl was in the early stage of pregnancy. This is one very old rumor that started up within a few weeks of the murder. The first person who told me that was a middle aged woman who lived in the area. Just saying that for everyone who accuses me of making this up. This rumor just would not die. We hated reporting on it, but it kept popping up over and over, so we had to keep reporting it. We were never sure if it was true or not, so it was always just another unverified rumor.
We didn’t want to bring this up because we’ve caught so much crap for it, but we felt we had to because an Indiana LE officer stated to us that this was actually true. When we get information straight from the police, we feel we must report it. This is not something we relish reporting.
His exact quote was, “One of the girls was in the very early stages of pregnancy.” He did not state which girl it was. We have an idea which girl it might be, but we are not going to upset people even more by naming the girl. If this is true, then the girl was 6-8 weeks pregnant, when pregnancy is hard to diagnose but can be confirmed on autopsy. Specifically, there will be a thickening of the walls of the uterus that can be determined at this time.
Our information is that at least one girl was sexually active. We don’t know which girl that refers to. That’s all we know. One girl had PIV sex at least one time. This is important to know if there is a question of one possibly being pregnant because in order to get pregnant, you have to be sexually active.
People are furious with us for reporting this because they say we are sullying these girls’ reputations, thereby disqualifying them for posthumous sainthood. We do not feel that inexperienced 13-14 year old girls have some sort of purity that can be dirtied, nor do we feel that a girl this age sullies her reputation by engaging in PIV sex. People who think like this are prudes, Puritans, and sex haters.
We do not feel that it is immoral for 13-14 year old girls to have PIV sex or to get pregnant. It’s stupid for them to get pregnant, but it’s not immoral. ~15% of girls that age, and probably more, are already having PIV sex. Source:A sheriff’s officer in a nearby county.
Specific Information about the Crime Confirmed to Us Via Official Case Documents in Our Possession
Update: We can now state that one of these documents is a search warrant, specifically for the Maxwell home. We also have at least one other search warrant for another home. In addition, we may have more documents. For information on these documents, see the special section below where their nature and provenance is explained. The search warrant list a number of items that LE is looking for.
A pair of binoculars. This lines up nicely with Leigh Kerr’s testimony where he said that BG used binoculars in this crime.
Photos, videos, cameras, videocameras, and film. In other words, LE are convinced that BG filmed or videotaped his crime. The only way they could know this is if the rumors about BG sending photos or video of the crime to Abby’s phone after the crime occurred are true. So the rumor that he filmed the crime and sent the film to a victim’s phone is proven. This proves more of Leigh Kerr’s testimony where he said BG sent photos or video to one of the girl’s phones after the crime.
43 seconds of audio. It is interesting that they are looking for precisely 43 seconds of audio. LE must know that BG recorded 43 seconds of audio, presumably of his crime. But how could they possibly know this? Only if he had sent this much audio to one of the girls’ phones after the crime.
A handgun, in order to do ballistics tests on it. This means that they have at least one fired cartridge. BG must have fired his gun at some point in this crime. The rumor that there was a spent cartridge at the scene is therefore confirmed. The gun is a rare collector’s item, possibly a .40mm. In the case of the search of the Maxwell home, a gun was taken from the home in order to do ballistics tests on it. The gun failed the tests and was returned to the home.
Knives. He is wearing a deer kit, which contains five different types of knives.
Clothing soaked in blood, seen and unseen. This blood will probably will not come out with the wash. The documents state that the wound to one of the girls was so brutal that the blood splatter would have been dramatic, drenching the killer’s clothes in blood.
Specific mention is made that the girls were abducted at exactly 2:13 PM.The crime occurred on February 13, or 2/13. As you can see, the numbers are the same. People are saying this is a coincidence, but apparently LE does not believe it is coincidental.
Some Aspects of the Crime Scene Not Verified by LE But Instead Verified by Two People Working Independently and Coming to the Same Conclusion, One Sleuth and One Witness or Two Witnesses
Those aspects of the crime are the following:
Both girls were posed with their legs spread wide in a sexual posing. Source: A female member of the search team and our analysis of the crime scene photos.
There was a knife sticking out of the log next to one girl’s head. Source: A female member of the search team and our analysis of the crime scene photos.
There was some sort of a large object, apparently of toy, at the crime scene that was too large for BG to have had it with him on the bridge. That is the statement from the woman on the search team. While we see a giant plush bear, that’s too weird, so we will defer to the search party lady and agree with her statement. Source: A female member of the search team and our analysis of the crime scene photos.
Dolls were hanging from trees at the crime scene. Source:Two female members of the search team.
Cause of death of one girl was a deep cut to the throat. Source: A conversation with one girl’s guardian and a photograph of this victim’s funeral, which we have chosen not to release, backing up the guardian’s statement.
We feel that these facts are validated because in 1-3, they were seen by us in the crime scene photos and also by a female search party member at the scene, in 4, they were seen by two separate female search party members who had never talked to each other, and in 5, it was verified by a conversation with the girl’s guardian herself backed up by a postmortem photo.
In all four instances, people arrived at their conclusions independently of the other party. What are the odds that both parties made up these specific lies on their own? Almost zero. That’s good enough for us to be probative.
Interpretations of Some Aspects of the Crime Scene Photos Now Proven (Crime Scene Photos Now Proven to Be Actually That)
The crime scene photos have been widely trashed as paraedolia. Nevertheless, as you can see above, three things that we spotted in the crime scene photos have been verified by independent sources in the search party, so the fact that these are crime scene photos is now proven.
Rumors That Are Now Confirmed Via Indiana LE
LE Believes Mr. X is BG
Via our detective source in Indiana, LE has a main suspect in the Delphi Murders, Mr. X, and the case is focused on him. All other POI’s are dropped or cleared at least as being the killers themselves. However, it is still not clear that Mr. X did this on his own or if someone helped him. LE would also be interested in anyone who may have helped Mr. X after the crime, perhaps burning evidence or whatever.
It is important to note that you are under no obligation to tell the police anything. I could know that some guy was a serial killer with 10 victims, and I don’t have to go to the police. He could have even confessed to me, but I am still not under obligation to tell the cops. The one thing I cannot do is help him get away with his crimes, that is, be an accessory
Anyway, LE believes that Bridge Guy is Mr. X. They’re not looking at anyone else. They think he did it. End of story.
LE Believes that Bridge Guy (Mr. X) Is a Serial Killer and Was Also Responsible for the Evansdale Murders
Via our detective source, we learned that LE has only recently started to believe that BG (Mr. X) is also responsible for the Evansdale Murders. Much more on that below.
LE Believes There Are Similarities Between the Evansdale and Delphi Double Homicides
Via our detective source in Indiana, we have learned that in both crimes:
There was posing. So, yes, although the Evansdale girls were mere skeletons when found, LE believes they were posed.
Girls in the pedohebephilic age range (8-14 years old) were brazenly abducted two at once from trails in busy parks in rural Midwestern towns in the middle of daytime with many people around.
The bodies were dumped near flowing water, creeks or rivers.
A number of strange objects were found around the Evansdale girls similar to the bizarre images decorating the Delphi crime scene.
Unconfirmed Rumors Not Validated by the Police
The following are unverified rumors with at least some probability of being true:
A sheet with a smiley face on it at the crime scene, possibly hung from a tree. Source:A female member of the search team.
Phallic objects, specifically a log and a doll, placed next and perpendicular to the genitals of the girls to give the impression that they were being sexually penetrated by these objects. A log was placed in front of one of the girls, and a doll was placed in front of the other girl. Source:A female member of the search team.
A girl’s hand wrapped around a knife which was plunged into a log that she was resting her head on. The knife in the log was located near the girl’s right shoulder. The girl’s hand was wrapped around the knife to make it appear that she was stabbing herself. Source:A female member of the search team.
Rumors About the Crime Scene Not Verified by Indiana LE and Hence Still Mostly Unconfirmed, with Varying Confidence Levels
Indiana LE did not validate the rumors about some aspects of the crime scene such as:
Presence of a crucifix. Source: A female member of the search party.
A series of events where one girl screamed and then was quickly hit on the head with a blunt object, which we believe is a gun butt. Source: Leigh Kerr.
Stabbing of one girl in the neck artery at some point after the above events. Source: Leigh Kerr.
More Weirdness Abounds: 2/13, 2:13, and 2-13
This is probably one of the flat-out weirdest aspects of the case of all. The crime was committed in February 13 or 2/13. In the documents we have, it is openly stated that BG abducted the girls at precisely 2:13 PM. Some insist that this is merely a coincidence, but apparently LE do not think it is coincidental. If so, this proves that this crime was planned nearly down to the minute. The date of the crime and the time of the abduction are both 2-13. Apparently he planned this abduction to occur at precisely this time, which is shocking. In addition, note that he abducted two girls on the 13th, 2-13.
2/13, 2:13, 2-13. What is this guy, another Zodiac? Is he into numerology? Is there any meaning to these numbers or is he just playing sneaky, tricky games with us like these guys often do. These crimes are often a great big game to these guys, and they often try to insert clever little coincidences into their crimes, probably just to freak people out and make themselves seem diabolically clever, evil geniuses.
It is interesting to note that the Evansdale girls were also abducted on the 13th. And two girls were abducted there also. 2-13 again.
The DNA and Fingerprint Questions
The main suspect’s DNA is found in the forest around the crime scene. However, he was one of the searchers who found the bodies, and he was also known to have searched the area in the dark the previous evening. Hence, none of his DNA from the forest around the girls is usable.
BG threw toilet cleaner over the girls and every object at the crime scene, thereby eliminating most if not all of the usable DNA. The only DNA found on the girls was that of Kelsi, sister of Libby. Kelsi has been cleared.
There is a rumor that LE has a partial DNA sample from an unknown male from one of the girls. Problem is they only have nine markers on that partial sample. That’s not very many. Conceivably, perhaps ~10% of men might have those nine markers.
These partial DNA samples are useful to LE. For instance, if LE have a suspect, and they have a partial present in 10% of the population, this is one more bit of evidence that might point towards them having the right guy. On the other hand, a sample with only nine markers is absolutely not usable in court. We think people need to stop talking about DNA. It’s a dead end.
About those fingerprints.
LE themselves have admitted that they have one smudged fingerprint. They don’t say where they collected it from, but that’s an important question. However, smudged prints are of very dubious value. They’re generally unusable. We wish people would stop talking about fingerprints.
The Lady Walking Her Dogs at the Bridge at 12:30 PM on the Day of the Murders
This is a rumor that a woman walking her dogs on the bridge at 12:30 PM on the day of the murders, a full hour before BG probably appeared on the trails at 1:30 PM, met BG somewhere, possibly on the south side of the bridge, and even had a brief conversation with BG. However, this information does not seem to be coming from LE.
Instead it is coming from Delphi podcaster Anthony Greeno, a dubious man and apparent con artist with a rap sheet so long it fades into the horizon when you try to read it. That doesn’t mean he’s wrong. It means to consider information coming from him with a lot of caution.
This woman was apparently a discovery of Greeno’s. Ok, wait. Greeno finds this woman but LE never did? She approached Greeno but she didn’t approach LE? My smellometer is registering stinky.
Furthermore the woman has since gone into hiding, possibly because of people bothering her, or maybe because she is afraid BG is going to kill her. Anyway, she’s not talking. Before she departed us though, she did inform us that she could not identify what the man she met looked like. Except she was sure he was BG. Now wait a minute. I’m kind of thinking this eyewitness account ain’t making it to the witness stand, ya know?
Obviously this is very much an unconfirmed rumor, though everyone is treating it as if it’s the word of God. I beg to differ. If anyone has any more information on this odd rumor, please let me know in the comments or in my email. Obviously if we can place BG at the bridge at 12:30 PM, that changes everything.
Quit Referencing LE’s Statements at the 2019 Press Conference (The “Fakeference”) As Factual
Although we do not have any evidence that this is true, we believe that the 2019 Press Conference was a gigantic ruse. We believe they already had a main suspect at the time, and they thought he was going to be at the meeting. So the meeting was designed to trick him. The entire meeting was meant for the consumption of one person, Mr. X. Mr. X was in the conference room that day, seated directly in the middle of the room, as if he were the center of attention.
Notice that LE told the public to stop focusing on the old BG and to focus on the New BG instead. The New BG was said to be the man who carried out the murders – he was BG. They also said that BG was 18-40 years old. Anyone with any sense can see, intuitively, that BG cannot possibly be the young man in the sketch, nor can he be 18-40 years old.
BG is obviously a middle-aged man around 50. You can tell by many things – gait, body shape, manner of walking, voice, etc. LE actually believes BG was 49-50 years old when he committed the crime. If LE actually believes that BG was 50 years old, why did they put out this statement that he looks like this ridiculous sketch of a very young man or even an 18-40 year old man? Why would they deliberately contradict their own beliefs? Easy, they were lying!
Pay no attention to the first sketch, which looks like a middle aged man, Mr. X. Instead pay attention to this new sketch, some kid.
And at the end, Carter says, “He may even be in this room right now,” (he was in fact) and then looks in the complete opposite direction of Mr. X.
The truth is that some of the things LE said in that conference are true. The sketch of the younger man is been the catfish of the 19 year old boy used to lure in Libby from Snapchat.
And Mr. X or BG is the one who used that catfish to bring Libby in. So when LE said the younger sketch is the one who committed the crime, they were correct! He did commit the crime because the younger sketch is just BG in catfish form, his other younger personality that he used to snare victims.
And when they said BG was actually better described as a combination of both sketches, they were correct too. BG himself is both the catfish young man and the older man who is the actual killer, so he is “both sketches at once,” obviously.
Also note that LE are now acting like they think the young catfish did the crime, not the older BG. This was done to get Mr. X to think that they think the catfish did the crime, not BG himself.
Granted, we don’t have any evidence that this is true other than Leigh Kerr’s statements. We regard Leaker as credible, but we now demand sources beyond his level to be considered probative. Hence, formally, everything Leaker said has gone into unconfirmed rumors other than the things we were able to confirm from other probative sources. Nevertheless, we do feel that Leaker’s notion that this was all a big ruse rang true for us and sent us off on on our investigation, with the help of the notorious Godsey I might add.
We currently feel that this is the best explanation of the facts. Can we prove it? No. But all theories must be judged against their competitors (Occam’s). Put the competing theory to the logic test. Is there any way on Earth that BG could look like the young man in that sketch or even an 18-40 year old? Get real. When we line the two theories against each other, ours wins hands down. Hence, following Occam’s, our theory is the best explanation of the facts.
Mr. X’s Employment at a Packing Plant in Indiana and Possible Connection to the Evansdale Murders Verified by Article in the Indiana Star
Via our detective source in Indiana, Mr. X ‘s roommate in 2011-2012 in Delphi told LE that BG was absolutely Mr. X. The voice was a good match, the clothes “looked familiar,” and the walk was dead on. The roommate also said he suspected Mr. X of the Evansdale Murders because during the time of the Evansdale Murders, Mr. X and the roommate were both over in Evansdale being put up in hotels for months while they worked on a plant there.
Many people from the Delphi area have gone over to went over to Evansdale to work on plants over there. These seem to have been packing plant workers in the Delphi area who get transferred over to the Evansdale area for periods of time to work on sister plants over there. The two men may have been working at the Tyson plant in Logansport, Indiana and may have been shipped to the sister Tyson plant in Waterloo, Iowa, where they were put up temporarily in motels for months at a time.
If this roommate is correct, it looks like Mr. X worked in 2011-2012 at as packing plant in the Delphi area, and he was moved to near Evansdale, Iowa for a period during these two years to work on a sister plant near Evansdale.
We don’t know what his job was there, but if it was slitting the throats of screaming, squealing pigs on ropes swinging towards him with a knife so huge that it looks like a sword as is done at some slaughterhouses, we would say a job like that would be right up BG’s alley.
BG made a deep cut to the throat of one victim, probably with a hatchet, that resembles the deep cuts made to the throats of pigs at some slaughterhouses. Notice that BG committed his crime with large knives or hatchets, his preferred weapon. Mr. X also cuts up a lot of deer that he shoots for food. To do this, he uses the knives the deer kit that BG has around his waist. So it looks like Mr. X is using to cutting up dead and possibly living animals with large knives. And humans are animals too.
The Mystery of BG’s Indiana Packers Boots
There was an early raid on the Indiana Packers plant in Delphi that was done by LE. Remember that they came out with a pair of boots? They showed the boots in an evidence bag to the media later on that night, and they said, “Oh, this is nothing. Don’t pay any attention to that.”
It turns out that BG’s shoes are dead perfect matches for Indiana Packers workboots. If he is wearing Indiana Packers workboots, this solves one more question. How did BG get across that knee-high stream in the middle of winter without nearly getting hypothermia and needing a change of clothes? Indiana Packers workboots go up to knee-high, and they are waterproof. So if he wore Packers boots to do his crime, he would have been able to cross that cold stream where the water is knee-deep. He could have worn those boots over his jeans, and he wouldn’t have gotten wet.
However, we presently lack evidence that Mr. X worked at Indiana Packers. There is evidence that may have worked at a Tyson packing plant in Logansport in 2011-2012.
Which begs the question, if Mr. X is BG, how did he come to acquire a pair of Indiana Packers boots, which is what he appears to be wearing during his crime?
Weird Behavior of Mr. X Surrounding His Truck at the Crime Scene
We now have a better time frame for Mr. X’s truck being parked at the cemetery. Note that it was parked in head first. We believe he staged the crime with these elaborate props either before or after the crime from this exact location. We don’t know why he asked permission to search Ron Logan’s land at 6:30 PM, but this is also a huge red flag because he asked to search the land a full half hour before the fire department had even announced the formation of a search team.
Not only that, but Mr. X’s alibi is that he was in another town from 2:15-3:15 PM on the day of the crime. That would mean he would have had to drive back to Delphi by at least 3:45 and possibly later, depending on what town he was in and when he left. The problem here is that before 5:30 PM, no one knew the girls were missing other than the families and a few friends.
He could have called his wife, who was friends with Becky Patty, and the wife could have told him about the girls going missing. But that would mean that Becky Patty would have to say that she called the wife. We doubt if she did contact his wife. They weren’t that close.
After 5:30 PM, news of the girls going missing went out over the police scanner. We suppose if was listening to a police scanner, he could have known that early, but what’s the likelihood of Mr. X listening to a police scanner between 5:30-6:30 PM on the day of the crime? We would say it is low.
He parked 1,000 feet away from Ron’s door, almost a quarter mile away. Why didn’t he pull up to his front door? We don’t know about you all, but when we go visit our friends, we generally don’t park a quarter mile away and hike in. We park right at the front door.
We also don’t know what he was doing searching down there that night. We also do not know why out of all of the places to search, he happened to pick the exact location where the girls were killed. However, this early searching meant that he could use his “lost my keys” excuse as a reason why his car just happened to be parked for 18 straight hours soon after the crime and right above where the girls were foundbecause he could say the next day that he lost them during the previous evening’s search.
It is interesting that Mr. X appears to have stayed with his truck from 6:30 PM to on Monday, February 13, to 12:30 PM Tuesday, February 14 when the girls were found. That’s a full 18 hours. Why on Earth would someone stay next to their truck all through one evening and night through the next early AM and morning into the afternoon? It doesn’t seem like a normal person would stay at that location for all that time.
We believe he could have been staging that elaborate crime scene during that time. Where his truck was parked was a five minute walk to the crime scene. If he had those objects found at the crime scene in his truck, he could have easily carried them down to the crime scene and used them to stage it with the objects.
Mr. X needed the lost his keys excuse to explain how he stayed in that spot for 18 hours. If he didn’t have his keys, he could not move his truck. He could have gone home, but for some reason he stayed with his truck. Did he eat? Where did he get the food and what was the food? Did he sleep? If so, where and when? Urinating is no problem, but what if he had to defecate? That would have been quite a problem. It doesn’t seem reasonable to stay out there all that time for no good reason.
But it’s even worse than that.
Even after the girls were recovered, Mr. X stayed around through all of the media and police hubbub for the next eight hours, from 12:30 PM to 8:30 PM, so his truck was out at the crime scene for 26 full hours, with Mr X presumably with it the entire time. Why on Earth would anyone hang around near their vehicle for a full day just because they lost their keys? Were they are waiting for God Himself to come bring the keys?
We believe Mr. X stayed with the truck all that time in order to watch it. If he left, LE might tow it or search it. He stayed to guard his truck. We believe he did this because there may have been incriminating evidence in there.
Another reason he stayed is we believe that he enjoyed the drama. Everyone was crowding around to look at the crime he had committed. He was right in the middle of all the police and media, and no one suspected him. I’m sure that was a LOL feeling for him. “These idiot cops. They’re swarming all over this crime scene, and the killer is standing right here under their noses in the midst of the chaos for hours, and these coptards can’t figure this out.” We think he likes to fool and troll LE. “I’m fooling the cops, ha ha!” is the thinking.
Why did Mr. X not drive his truck away when it was in the way of all of the police cars? He had his keys with him, so why didn’t he move his truck when they asked him to instead of lying and saying he couldn’t because he had lost his keys? LE asked him to move the vehicle. He said he had lost his keys and was going to call his wife to bring a spare set of keys to him.
Three problems with that story:
We believe he never lost his keys.
We believe he never called the wife to ask her to bring a spare set.
We believe there was no spare set in the first place.
At 8:20 PM, the police scanner said that A., Mr. X’s wife, was coming to bring Mr. X a spare set of keys. This has been misrepresented by doubters as the scanner saying to let Mrs. X intothe sealed off areabecause she’s bringing Mr. X his keys. We believe he just told LE she was coming, it went out over the scanner, and she never showed up.
There are unconfirmed rumors Mr. X’s truck was towed after his wife never came to bring the car keys and that Mr. X’s truck was never searched by police.
Mr. X’s wife, his daughter, and Becky Patty are now putting out a story that Mr. X never lost his keys in the first place. We agree with that because we think they were sitting in his pocket the whole time! Also, a copy of the police scanner is available showing that Mr. X’s wife is supposed to be coming to the site to retrieve Mr. X’s truck. The only reason his wife would be coming to the site to retrieve his keys is if he lost his keys and she was coming to deliver a spare set.
We believe that his truck got towed later on when his wife never showed up with the keys, that Mr. X searched Ron Logan’s land that evening with two other men, and that he left his truck sitting in that same spot for 18 hours until the next day when the bodies were found. However, these are all unconfirmed rumors.
LE caught Mr. X in the lies about losing his keys, calling his wife to bring him a spare, and a spare even existing in the first place. LE doesn’t like being lied to, especially when they are investigating a double homicide. This what first aroused LE suspicions of Mr. X.
The rejoinders also say that either he never lost his keys or he did and he called the wife to bring a spare, and she did, evidence being the police scanner. But the scanner doesn’t say she came to bring the keys. It said she was coming to deliver the keys. We believe she never showed up, he never called the wife, he never lost his keys in the first place, and there was no spare set. We believe this because this is what we were told.
Mr. X’s Traumatic Reaction upon Discovering the Bodies Appears Staged and Fake
Mr. X not only discovered the bodies, but he ran away in terror afterwards. Like a coward, we would add. Then he needed 2-3 months of therapy to work through this traumatic experience. We believe that those reactions were overblown. No one else reacted that way. Not even Becky Patty and she was probably more devastated than anyone and probably still is.
So Mr. X was more traumatized by this crime than anyone else, including the victim’s grandmother who was hurt more than anyone. We believe that the running away and months of therapy were also “staged.” In other words, they were faked. Faked to make it look like he could not possibly have committed the crime because he was more devastated than anyone else.
We Don’t Have a Copy of the Gag Order Supposedly Issued about the Towing of a Truck from the CPS Building on February 14
People are saying that we have a copy of the gag order that was issued on the towing of the truck at the CPS building. We believe that this happened in the first place because a photo exists of a truck being towed from the CPS building around February 14. We do not have a copy of that gag order, but we were told that one had been issued by the courts. We have no idea why the order was issued. The idea that a gag order was issued on this truck is an unconfirmed rumor.
Nature of Case Documents in My Possession
We do indeed have documents from the case. A man was a suspect in this crime, and one document, a search warrant, are from LE’s investigation of him. The doc is his property. He ran off for s copy for us and sent it to us in the mail. He got turned in because two brothers for some reason were saying that he was BG. There are signatures on the document. The sigs are from the FBI and a court official. you’re smart enough you should be able to figure it out by these bomb-sized hints we keep dropping.
The man who owns the document is not happy with us going public with these docs. He doesn’t want to get uncovered revealing official case documents to the media.
Another document we have is another search warrant, this time for the Maxwell property. We obtained this document via a public records request.
We may or may not have from 1-8 more official case documents from this case.
Mr. X’s Criminal Record
The only crime on Mr. X’s record is an expunged conviction for statutory rape from 1984 in Indiana when he 18 and the girl was 14. Mr. X was a senior in high school at the time. The girl could well have been his high school freshman girlfriend.
The conviction is expunged. Expunged just means taken out of public records. LE still has access to the conviction. One of our team members talked to a detective in Kentucky a couple of years ago who told us about this expunged conviction.
Have you seen all these mental midgets accusing everyone and their uncle of being “pedophiles?” This is getting downright stupid. Everyone and their uncle has been accused of a being a “pedophile.” How many of these morons have ever met even one pedophile? How many have talked to one? Talked to one at length? Talked to one at length about their sexual orientation? Well, I have. I worked with a couple of these guys in my practice. One was a very difficult person but I worked with him for months. And I made him a whole lot better too, by the way.
How many of these people getting called “predators” and “pedophiles” are the real thing? 1%? Is it even that high? I’ve been saying for a long time that we are in the midst of a mass hysteria and moral panic about this ridiculous subject, which has somehow managed to conflate the perfectly normal and healthy sexual desires and lives of teenage girls with child molesters who molest little girl childrenwho have no sex drive or interest in sex.
Really this moral panic is, as so many of these Retard Infections are, about sex. Sex, you know, that all-American eternal hangup. What this really is is a mass hysteria around the sexuality of teenage girls. It’s Teenage Girl Sexuality Mass Hysteria. Notice how little of the time they talk about actual molesters and pedophiles and how it’s always some guy committing stat rape with some horny as Hell jailbait teenybopper who probably seduced him in the first place?
We Americans just can’t bear the notion that these girls have an actual, very strong sex drive, have very real sexual lives, needs, and desires, that they like, pursue, and seduce grown men, and that all normal men are strongly aroused by them. True to our puritanical roots, we just can’t bear any of this. Hence the pearl-clutching epidemics.
I’d also like to point out that idiot moral panics are often about “kids.” Remember the moral panic about “drugs,” especially marijuana? You know what that was really all about? I was around in that era back in the day, an advocate for legalization when it was hazardous to be one, and I lived through that particularly insipid moral panic, an actual moral panic about marijuana. It was all about the kids. Kids were smoking pot. Kids were taking “drugs.”
Remember the Satanic Panic of the 1980’s? All about the kiddies, no? Save the little children from the satanic child molesters who could literally fly, had sex with animals, flushed them down toilets, beheaded babies in front of them and forced them to drink the blood, and abused them in airports and bowling alleys.
At the end of the day, as always, it’s all down to “think of the children!“
This term has been grotesquely abused lately, starting with feminists, who equate all prostitution with “trafficking” and then the federal government, which passed a rather silly law 5-10 years against “sex trafficking.” Increasingly what you are seeing in the media is a complete conflation of prostitution and “sex trafficking.”
In particular, anyone pimping minor females is said to be “trafficking” no matter whether there is any coercion at all. Trafficking was originally supposed to mean women who were being essentially enslaved, kept prisoner, held against their will, and forced to prostitute themselves for others. Basically sex slaves. There are a lot of forms of this coerced and imprisoned sort of prostitution in the world, and it is an ugly thing to be sure!
But that silly federal law conflated that with any prostitution of minors. So “sex trafficking” is not just sex slavery but it’s also prostituting of minors. Which seems a bit silly. How are minors being “trafficked” if they are not being held against their will? It’s ridiculous. The crime should be something like Prostituting a Minor, along those lines. Perhaps that’s a serious offense, I have no idea. But it sure isn’t “trafficking.”
Increasingly I have seen articles, many coming out of Texas, about big roundups of “sex traffickers.” They were rounding up 50-60 men at once and the guys looked pretty ordinary. That’s an awful lot of “traffickers” to round up at once. When they do round these guys up, they usually only catch a few at a time as they are hard to catch and not particularly common anyway. So I did some research. It turned out that of those 60 men, only one of them actually trafficked in prostitutes, and even he was just prostituting minors. I have no idea if coercion or imprisonment was involved. The other 59 men were guilty of…get this: buying a teenage prostitute!
Look I’m not saying that buying an underage prostitute should be legal. But you should have to prove that he knew that she was underage or by her appearance, she could not possibly have been 18. The bizarre thing about these laws is that in many states, it is perfectly legal for any adult man to have sex with a 16-17 year old girl as long as he does it for free and doesn’t pay her. The minute he gives her some money for her treasures, it’s a crime!
Even knowingly buying an underage prostitute is not “trafficking” in any way, shape, or form. It’s a crime called “Buying a Minor Prostitute.” How in the Hell is buying a whore “trafficking?” It’s absurd.
To tell the truth, many prostitutes with pimps may be being trafficked. That’s because many pimps won’t let the girls in their stables free. They threaten to hunt them down, beat them up, or kill them if they run away from the pimp. Any prostitute in a situation like that with her pimp is indeed being trafficked.
Now buying a teenage prostitute is an odd crime. Minors are not allowed to legally prostitute themselves, but many do it anyway. And 50% of minor female prostitutes are Black. Blacks are only 13% of the population. So there’s massive over-representation of Black teenage girls in minor prostitution. Quite a few of those girls probably have psychopathic tendencies too, or will develop into psychopaths when they are adults because we are not supposed to diagnose psychopathy or any other personality disorder in minors. Fully 45% of adult female prostitutes are psychopaths. Newsflash: whores aren’t very nice women. They not even very nice people.
A lot of them are simply criminals and ripoffs and all sorts of petty thievery and female prostitution go hand and hand. In my opinion, a prostitute and a thief are the same thing. This is what the female psychopath becomes: Histrionic Personality Disorder, the “Mata Hari” or “femme fatale” disorder. Basically what I would call a thieving whore. Many female strippers, porn stars and other sex workers are also female psychopaths or have high scores on the PCL.
Many male porn stars are the same. This was observed as far back as the 1970’s and 80’s. If you look at those old porn movies, look at how mean and evil so many of those male porn stars are. And look at how crass, loud, brassy, and cold the women are. That’s the typical whore personality: hard, cold, brassy, callous, cynical. It looks like a damaged woman. Their emotions look shut down and they’ve gone hard.
A famous study on childhood sexual abuse was done 20 years ago by Rind et al. I think I still have a copy of it on my desktop here.
It provoked wild outrage. Even the idiotic American Psychological Association denounced it, notable as one of the most anti-scientific statements this anti-scientific organization has ever issued. Even the US Congress got in on the act. The Congress passed a resolution condemning the study! Congressmen, mostly Republicans, stood up and denounced it forcefully.
The problem? The study came up with the wrong answer. In other words, the truth was wrong and society preferred to believe pleasant lies over unpleasant truths, so the paper was condemned for discovering the wrong facts.
Usually when theory and facts do not match up, we say that the theory was wrong and go back to the drawing board.
However, in this case and with all ideological arguments by ideologues and politics types, when the theory and the facts don’t match up, the facts are wrong, and the facts are not the facts! Why? Because the theory is said to be automatically a priori true. The theory must be true. It cannot be false. So the facts must be wrong and we need to change the facts, wipe out the truth, and say that reality isn’t real, instead, what is real is some fantasy world that doesn’t exist.
A number of fake “studies” were undertaken by other behavioral “scientists” taking about the Rind findings and finding fault with this or that conclusion. None of the fake studies denouncing it were worth a hill of beans. That they made it into the journals at all shows that pathetic anti-scientific nature of the social sciences, sadly also including Psychology, which has been trying to become more of a science for a long time now.
But by the very fact that it is a social science means that Psychology will always be a fake science in some ways because its findings have to do with people, and the science of people will always be twisted by politics, ideology, bias, and mostly emotional reaction.
It’s hard to get emotional about a new finding in math or physics. Who cares! But findings in the social sciences are inherently emotional because we are always emotional about ourselves and our fellow humans, and anything people are strongly emotional about will always be tainted by bias, propaganda, politics, and ideology. In other words, lies. This is why the social sciences will always be doomed to the charge of being fake sciences and will always carry the guilty burden of physics envy.
Ritter et al conducted a meta-analysis of a huge number of studies on the effects of childhood sexual abuse on children as adults. Child abuse was mostly defined as sexual abuse below age 13, so sex with teenage girls and boys, a massive minefield, was left out.
The available evidence shows that consensual sex with teenage girls and boys and adults causes little if any damage to teenagers. This behavior is illegal not because it is harmful to the teens, as I doubt that it is. Instead it is outlawed because society’s morals say that members of society do not wish to live in a society where adults are free to have sex with teenagers of various ages.
It’s seen as unsavory, unpleasant, disgusting or revolting, and often morally wrong. But this behavior is not psychologically disordered in any way. This is a moral and legal problem, not a psychological one.
Unfortunately we are now in the midst of a truly insane mass hysteria around the sexuality of teenage girls in which 90% of the population has thrown reason out the window and gone batshit insane, out and out lies are widely believed, and science and facts are no where to be seen.
In fact, the people who quote the science and the facts about this question are attacked as pedophiles! Because I guess only pedophiles believe in science and truth when it comes to this sort of thing. If you don’t want to be called a pedophile, just spout the usual lies about this subject. As long as you keep lying and don’t ever resort to facts, you’re in the clear!
Fact: nothing published in an academic journal has ever produced evidence suggesting that teen/adult relationships are harmful or predatory. Literally not even one. Anthropological and historical studies all over the world have found that such relationships are common in many societies and no harm was reported in any society ever studied.
How do I know this? I’ve studied them. A particularly large one was done out of Germany in the 1950’s. You can find this evil science of banned truths on the Net, though I can’t tell you where to look. The pedo advocate sites have links to it, but I don’t want to send you there. I suspect the motives of those who wrote this study, but the science seems good.
Furthermore, historically speaking, I’ve learned from the Psychohistorian sites that teen/adult relations were normal in most of the world including the West up until 1900. Zero harm was reported.
Sadly, mass molestation of children was also reported in the West from Roman and Greek times until 1900. Under the crowded urban conditions that arose with the onset of capitalism and the Industrial Revolution, where families were packed together in tiny spaces, a great deal of molestation went on. I’m not happy about this at all, but it’s notable that no ill effects were observed in Greece and Rome until the pre-1900 West.
Perhaps the reason for this was that molestation of children was simply an expected fact of life. If you grow up as a female and get molested and all of your woman friends also got molested, it’s seen as a normal thing. There’s usually nothing inherently wrong with this behavior absent physical damage. Things that are normalized in any society tend to cause little if any damage.
I disagree here with some folks like psychohistorians who argue that all sexual abuse of children under any circumstances, normalized or condemned, results in inevitable terrible lifetime damage to the person. They also believe that many other things experienced in childhood cannot but cause horrible lifelong damage.
I doubt if that is true. If you grow up in a society that normalizes this or that behavior, outside of extreme perversion, aggression, and sadism, it’s probably seen as normalized and shrugged off. In other words, the damage of most of these things is relative and depends on the degree to which your society condemns or pathologizes the behavior.
However, for small children, the true victims of child molestation, it is quite different.
Granted, the victims were interviewed when in college so the abuse was a long ways away. Conceivably if they had interviewed them earlier as minors, they would manifested more damage. The findings were shocking:
Rind et al found that the long-term effects of child sexual abuse were typically neither pervasive nor intense, and men reacted much less negatively than women. Ritter et al also found that less than 10% of victims were traumatized. The most common effects were shame, blame, and confusion.
To explicate that further, the effects were shame about having been abused, blame for themselves for allowing it to happen to them, and confusion about the abuse itself.
The confusion may manifest in various ways. A female friend of mine from 10 years ago was molested. Of course she absolutely hates my guts now, but that’s not an unusual reaction for women who get involved with me in some way or another. I’m used to it.
She told me that she was molested by a pedophile in her church group when she was 8 years old. The molester was a young man and he does appear to have been a pedophilic or preferential molester. She told me, “It’s confusing because it feels good but it’s wrong.” This is part of the thinking behind the confusion that kids experience after being abused.
She also told me that she had completely gotten over it by age 50, but she seemed to have gotten over it much before then. I knew two other women (I actually got involved with these two whereas with the other one it was more email and hot phone conversations) of the same age who were sexually abused as girls, one by a probable pedophile and the other by her opportunistic teenage older brother. They both told me that they had gotten over it by age 50 but implied that they had gotten over it much before then.
The shame, blame, and confusion are apparently short-term effects in most victims, and at the very least have dissipated by college age.
The implication is that children or minors may experience those effects for some time in their youth, but these effects mostly go away by adulthood, and there is no lasting damage in almost all (90%) of cases. The study also found that where the molestation was consensual or non-coerced, there was little if any long-term damage. However, when coercion was involved, damage was much more likely and could easily last into adulthood or perhaps an entire lifeftime.
Unfortunately, pedophiles have gotten a hold of the Rind et al study and like to wave it around to try to push for legalization of child/adult sexual relations.
That’s not my intention here. I don’t care if most victims get over it. Good for them. I’m happy that they are not damaged in the long term.
Nevertheless, this behavior still needs to be outlawed because I don’t want to live in a society where adults are allowed to have sex with young children below age 13. I don’t have to have a reason. I just don’t like it. That’s all the reason I need.
Rambo: From the very beginning of the Delphi case, a lot of people had sneaking suspicions that there was a better than average chance that the person or persons involved in this knew beforehand that the day of the crimes would be a school off-day for the girls. A lot of people’s first thought was someone connected with the girls’ school.
Yes, of course. It’s worse than that. He actually stalked Libby for four months beforehand. And the idea that this was a last minute decision has been proven wrong. The girls were discussing it as early as Friday because people who knew the girls were talking about their upcoming trip in local bars that night. And it looks like Libby posted on her Instagram at some point that she was going to the bridge.
I suppose he must have known Abby was going to be there too, so he may have targeted her in a sense too. Instagram is the site that he was catfishing Libby on with that young man’s photo.
This whole idea that he went to that crowded bridge that afternoon with his full-blown murder kit just to haphazardly see if he could find female or two to kill is insane. Others say he was just there to kill anyone, even a man. That’s even more insane. Further, I’m wondering if he’s into killing women. Maybe he is, maybe he isn’t. He’s not a pedophile, but he could be a hebephile, a very common sexual orientation. After all, 26% of all men could be classified as hebephiles or pedophiles!
13 and 14 is a bit young to be targeting females, but a number of serials have killed young teenage girls and women too because after all, teenage girls look like women! Face facts. Ted Bundy killed a 12 year old girl, but 12 year old girls are on the cusp of puberty and while they don’t look like women, they look enough like women that a lot of men are starting to find them “interesting.”
I believe Bundy also killed an 8 year old girl when he was 14, but he would never admit to that. He even implied in interviews that he had done some things that he would never admit to. Even for Ted Bundy, killing a little 8 year old girl was too low. Maybe not too low but just shameful. Bundy was a narcissist, a malignant narcissist. Perhaps he thought it was shameful to his reputation as the Greatest Serial Killer of All Time if he would admit to killing a little girl. It was a bridge too far.
This is fascinating because it implies that even the worst people of all think there are some things that are just beyond the pale.
Hitler was appalled by the mistreatment of animals. I guess he thought Jews and Slavs were below animals. And one of the worst Nazis of all, Goebbels, has a bit of a moral compass. In the early days of the Holocaust, they were just lining Jews up and shooting them with firing squads. Goebbels witnessed one of these shootings and he completely freaked out. He broke down in front of everyone, started crying, just carried on. And he decreed that there was to be no more of this or they needed to get away from that as quickly as possible.
The next step was not the gas chambers as everyone thinks. Instead it was “gas vans.” Jews were killed in these vans for a while before the Final Solution was agreed upon at the Wansee Conference in 1942 and they moved to the chambers in the name of efficiency but also because they wanted to kill people in as sterile of clean way as possible, in an almost antiseptic was hidden way the same way your cat is kindly quickly, efficiently and cruelly when it is taken to the vet for the last time.
Murder is murder but when you do it as cleanly as possible, it’s easier to rationalize it. If you murder in a cold and cruel way, it seems horrible as disgust sets in and it seems like you really did kill them. If you do it clean, in your mind you can make it seem that you didn’t really “kill” them in the same way as if you chopped them to pieces. Of course it makes no sense, but we are emotional creatures so we are not purely logical and our conscious and especially subconscious mind is “irrational” that can only be understood if we are using “emotional logic” instead of “pure logic” or the logic of Spock on Star Trek.
So they went to the gas chambers. But at first they were not burning the bodies. They were burying them in mass graves, especially at a few little known camps that were truly extermination camps such as Sobibor and Theresienstat. All of these were in Poland. It is odd that Auschwitz is more famous than these extermination camps while Auschwitz was less exterminationist than these others. 15% of the inmates at Auschwitz survived.
After all, it was first and foremost a labor camp. It sounds awful that 85% of them were killed of course, but at some of those Polish extermination camps it was even worse. There was one that killed 900,000 people. There were perhaps 30 survivors who ran for it into the local woods at the very end as the Allies were closing in. Even most of these escapees were killed. Only .0003 percent survived. 15% is a Hell of a lot more than .0003%.
Anyway, Goebbels was at one of those extermination camps and he saw the mass graves where they had buried maybe 10,000’s on inmates. It had been raining and the bloating from the decaying corpses was so extreme owing to the rain and sheer number of the dead that the ground beneath them was literally rising up and falling as they were standing on it. The Earth was alive but in a terrible way.
Once again, Goebbels completely flipped out, got hysterical, started yelling and crying and said no more mass graves. This is how the ovens were added to the gas chambers. To eliminate dead bodies in a more efficient and especially less disgusting way. Once again if you put them in ovens, you can almost rationalize it away. All that’s left are ashes and it’s hard to see those are former humans. Your mind can always tell you, “Oh those are just ashes, that’s all. Not formerly human corpses.” Again this is not logical, but according to emotional logic, it makes complete sense.
It’s interesting that three of the most evil men of the 20th Century actually had a moral compass. A very tiny and meager one for sure, but some things were beyond the pale even for them. One wonders if there has ever been a human with no moral compass at all if one such a human is even possible. Even wild animals have moral compasses. A female mountain lion won’t kill her cubs. A male mountain lion won’t kill his mate.
It’s also interesting that if the kill people and get rid of bodies in as cold, efficient, sterile and maybe democratic way as possible, the mind can rationalize that you’re not “really” killing people and disappearing bodies.
Rape: Non-consensual sex generally involving force, the threat of force, gross deception like pretending to be another person, or drugging the victim. Everything else is gray rape and most DA’s won’t touch it with a 10 foot pole. Realistically, if she is protesting and telling you to stop and you are forcing yourself on her, it’s rape whether a DA will take it or not.
Coercion is an odd word. Anyone can coerce anyone into doing anything legal. People have been coercing me all my life. It’s not very nice, but it’s hardly rape as long as she ends up willing. It’s important to limit our definition of rape because even stranger rape is rarely prosecuted.
Almost no one ever goes down on sex with an intoxicated woman, no matter what she is intoxicated on. The feminist line that intoxicated women can never consent to sex is odd.
By this logic, intoxicated men can never consent either. Conceivably, a sober woman having sex with an intoxicated man is guilty or rape!
By the same token, an intoxicated man and an intoxicated woman are guilty of raping each other! Except of course only the man will conceivably ever go down on it.
And what of alcoholic women and women are drug addicts? Apparently every single time they have sex with anyone, they’re being raped!
Also, no one even knows what intoxicated means? At what point is someone drunk enough to not consent? Who knows!
What about other drugs – heroin, cocaine, cannabis, hallucinogens? At what point is one so intoxicated on this or that drug that they cannot consent? No one knows!
Obviously this law is ridiculously vague. All vague laws are unconstitutional and illegal because no one knows whether they are breaking them or not.
As usual, the intoxication is rape argument makes absolutely no sense, like almost everything feminists say ever. Which is a good reason to abandon feminism. It’s nothing but lies!
If you wish to know, DA’s will only prosecute on intoxicated sex as rape if she is passed out cold or passing in and out of consciousness. And even then, some video evidence might be nice. Case in point: the Steubenville boys. If she’s passed out, leave her alone! What are you, a necrophile? If she’s passing in and out of consciousness, forget it. She’s too wasted to enjoy it and half the time, you’ll be having sex with a corpse. In which case, what the Hell is wrong with you?
Logically speaking, you can coerce anyone into sex legally. If you make a condition of a job, it’s not illegal then either, but you can be sued as it’s a civil offense. As I said, anyone can coerce anyone into doing anything legal as long as there is no force or threat of force involved. If by the time she’s in bed, she’s awake and enthusiastic, it’s not important how you got her there unless you used force or the threat of force.
All affirmative consent laws are insane and stupid because no man has ever gone down on failing to read a woman’s mind properly. But if she looks terrified and unenthusiastic in bed as if you are forcing her to do something you don’t want to do, I don’t know pal, but that sounds awful rapey to me. It may be legal but that doesn’t mean it’s right.
Statutory rape (illegal intercourse): Of course teenage girls can consent, but in a legal sense we say some cannot with certain different-aged partners for various reasons, mostly that society finds the idea of adults having sex with teens of certain ages to be unsavory. Where it is consensual, the harm is almost zero.
Nevertheless, men should be advised that these laws are enforced, and nowadays they put you in prison. It’s mostly a non-issue compared to the others here. AOC varies but tends to be ~15-16 in most of the world. In European countries with AOC’s at this level, problems are very rare. This isn’t even really rape. It’s better to call it “illegal intercourse.”
Child molestation: Any sex with an adult and a child under 13 is child molestation. It has to be sex. Backrubs and shoulder pats don’t count. There has to be some sort of genital contact. As I noted in a previous post, harm varies with the degree of coercion.
Feminists should wish to recover all victims of child molestation to live full lives instead of being victims. Child molestation is illegal and should never be allowed. Some kids actually like it believe it or not (I’ve met adult women who enjoyed being molested), but we still need to keep it illegal because we do not wish to live in a society where adults have sex with kids.
Child rape: Sadly it is important to separate child rape from child molestation. This is because feminists and moral scolds have taken to conflating all child molestation as “child rape.” They’re not the same thing. Yes, small children cannot consent to sex with adults but that doesn’t mean it’s rape when it happens. Instead we use the word molestation to refer to the fact that little kids can’t legally consent. There’s no need to muddy the waters here.
Child molestation is generally “consensual” psychologically. However it is not consensual legally because we say that kids can’t consent to sex with an adult. Almost all sex with kids is molestation, not rape. Child rape does exist and it is a severe crime. It often involves strangers, abductions, threats, weapons, and violence. It’s always non-consensual by definition. In some cases, the children are physically harmed or even killed.
The consequences can certainly be long-lasting, even affecting the victim over a lifetime. Nonetheless, women seem to be able to get over rape. I know a number of women who were raped and got over it fine. I’ve only met one woman raped as a child and she won’t discuss it. And yes, it was pretty bad. Two 11 year old girls raped at knifepoint. As bad as it gets.
Pedophilia: This is simply a sexual orientation like homosexuality that means the primary or sole attraction is to children under 13. Hebephilia (primary attraction to pubescents age 12-14) and ephebephilia (primary attraction to teenagers) are not included in pedophilia.
These men cannot help their condition and need to be helped to manage it so they do not offend. There are now organizations of virtuous pedophiles dedicated to pedophiles who have committed themselves to non-offending. Pedophilia cannot be combated or prevented because we have no idea what causes it. There’s no way to fight it because it simply exists.
~75% of child molesters are non-pedophilic molesters. They’re no more pedophiles than any other man. This shows again that there is a difference between the terms pedophile and child molester. Most of this molesting tends to be in the family whereas pedophilic molesters tend to molest outside the family, in part because they often have no children of their own.
There is nothing wrong with these non-pedophilic molesters sexually and probably even psychologically – their sexual interests are quite ordinary. They are “normal” in the way that most criminals are “normal” – that is, they are not the slightest bit crazy. The fact that criminals in general are not crazy and in fact are often remarkably sane is in part what makes them so dangerous. If they were crazy we could protect ourselves from them better. The fact that they are so sane is what enables them to get away with their crimes and also makes them hard to catch.
Rather these are simply bad men who are opportunistic and will have sex with females in general – women, children, no matter. A female relative or child is also a very easy target for these very manipulative men. In some cases it is an alternative if the wife has cut off the sex. The best description of these men is that they are simply criminals. They are users and their behavior is part of a pattern of control and abuse, often combined with verbal and physical abuse.
It is hard to say how girls how girls are effected, for it is mostly girls who are effected by intrafamilial child molesting in part because most gay men do not have children nor do they have access to them. Most molesting of boys does not occur in the family, and in fact such molesting is not very common.
Instead most boys are molested by homosexual pedophiles. And of course there are homosexual pedophiles – the woke crowd claims that homosexuals and pedophiles cannot be one and the same and yet they can.
They tell this lie because sadly gay men do have a pretty high rate of child molesting, mostly probably of the pedophilic variety.
A logical explanation for this is that both homosexuality and pedophilia are probably developmental disorders, as is biological transsexualism. Something goes wrong developmentally with the fetus in the womb, hormonally in the case of male homosexuality and biological transsexualism but due to unknown factors in the case of pedophilia. It would stand to reason that developmental disorders might tend to overlap due to a common cause.
Pedophilia may be caused by subtle brain damage. Neurological soft signs – typically evidence of subtle brain damage – are very common in pedophiles. Furthermore, pedophiles tend to have lower IQ’s than non-pedophiles, once again suggestive of mild brain damage.
In some ways it is worse if your own father is doing it to you. Nevertheless, most seem to get over it with time. The behavior of non-pedophilic molesters is outside the purview of mental health because we just talk about whether behavior or persons are crazy or not. And these men are not crazy. They’re just bad. We are talking about matters of morality and law, not matters of psychology and psychiatry.
There is often significant Cluster B Axis 2 Personality Disorder pathology as is the case with most men who use and abuse others. These men are fairly easy to rehabilitate absent significant psychopathy because significant guilt is not uncommon, and they are not pedophilic, so they can easily fulfill their sexual needs without resorting to children. Probably in India, Morocco and most of the Third World, most molesting is by non-pedophilic molesters because pedophilia proper is not well known in these places, and most men, even gay men, tend to marry and have children due to societal pressure.
First is the orientation to persons or objects of attraction. Heterosexuals are primarily attracted to the opposite sex. Homosexuals are mostly attracted to their own sex. Bisexuals have significant attraction to both sexes.
Sexual Orientation and Sexual Behavior Are Not Synonymous
Sexual orientation is somewhat independent of behavior. Heterosexuals are quite capable of homosexual behavior, and many homosexuals engage in some heterosexual sex. Bisexuals may be behaviorally heterosexual or homosexual for long periods of time.
Orientation is what you are primarily attracted to – behavior is who you have sex with. In cases such as ancient Sparta, the two did not line up very well at least for teenage boys and young men.
The second is age orientation.
Most people, including me believe it or not, are teleophiles – that is, they are primarily attracted to mature persons. This usually means age 16+ because 16-17 year old adolescents are almost indistinguishable from adults in terms of their sexual features.
As the age of the person declines below age 16, teleophilic attraction tends to decline, however, all men still have measurable but much lower attraction even to girls aged 7-13. Some studies show that normal male attraction to girls declines steadily from age 16 to a very low level at age 7, and below age 7, there is no measurable attraction. This is probably correct and any man with significant attraction to very small girl children below 7 is no doubt quite pedophilic.
Girls still have female features of women, especially after age 7, and these features grow more prominent from age 7-12. Around age 10-11, most girls develop very long legs; in short, the legs of a woman. Normal males are attracted to girls this age mostly to the extent that they like their legs, since their legs look like an adult woman’s.
The more a minor looks and acts like a woman, the more attractive she will be a normal male. The more a minor looks and acts like a child, the less attractive she will be to a normal man. The opposite is true for a man with a pedophilic or hebephilic attraction.
For instance, letting little girls under age 13 wear makeup is probably a very bad idea because many normal men say that when little girls put on makeup, they start to look a lot more attractive to men. I can concur that this occurs. It also makes me very uncomfortable. A little girl is not a sexual creature, as she has no sex drive per se. Why sexualize a non-sexual creature? Childhood for both boys and girls below age 13 should be sexless. Normal children have little or no interest in sex.
Note that since teleophiles react maximally in the lab to 16-17 year old girls and most Americans consider such a strong attraction to be “pedophilia,” the remarkable conclusion is that the current feminist and social conservative hysteria about “pedophilia” means that 100% of normal American men are pedophiles! That sounds like the very definition of a mass hysteria right there!
There are also ephebephiles like Jeffrey Epstein who are primarily attracted to girls age 15-19 or mid to late adolescents. Girls this age often have significant to fully developed adult features and bodies. Psychiatry has decided that ephebephilia is completely normal, therefore, there was nothing wrong with Epstein psychologically.
Epstein was not a pedophile in any sense of the word despite continuous descriptions of him in this way. Nevertheless, most men are probably not ephebephiles.
Women reach their peak attractiveness to normal men at age ~23. Men reach their peak attractiveness to women at age ~27. As you can see, women prefer their men a bit older and men prefer their women a bit younger. This seems to be a natural tendency of the human race as even the Romans remarked up this fact of human nature.
A man can still have a child when there is snow on the roof (when his hair is White), but a woman’s time is short.
– Roman saying of unknown provenance.
Hebephiles are primarily attracted to pubertal persons around the age 12-15. All attraction is gone by age 16. Hebephilia is quite a bit more normal than you might think. 26% of all men react as strongly or stronger in the lab to 12-14 year old girls than they do to women.
In most cases there is strong attraction to mature females too, so most of these men never act on this attraction as adults. Hebephilic attraction is generally antisocial in adults, whereas attraction to mature persons is pro-social. Faced with strong prosocial and antisocial attractions, most probably focus on the prosocial attraction and repress or suppress the antisocial one.
Considering that idiot popular culture (99% of people) would say that any man as or more attracted to 12-14 year old girls as to adult women is clearly a pedophile, our ludicrous culture would easily class a minimum of 26% of all men as pedophiles. That’s 28 million “pedophiles” in the US, idiots. Good luck executing all of them or locking them all away forever!
It is important to note that hebephilia per se is not considered to be a mental disorder in any way. In other words, it is quite normal. Nevertheless acting on it is a moral and legal problem but probably not a psychological one as in mental health we don’t deal with crime as mental abnormality per se. We are only concerned if people are crazy or disordered or not.
Pedophiles have a primary attraction to children under age 13. It is quite common. 3% of adult men or 3.3 million American men are pure pedophiles of this type. Substantially more common are men who are as attracted to children under 13 as they are to mature persons. 18% of all US men fall into this category for a total of 21% of all men being as attracted to children under 13 as they are to adults, a shocking figure. Our current culture would clearly call all of these men pedophiles. So once again we end up with 20 million “pedophiles.” Good luck executing or imprisoning for life 20 million American men, moral hysterics!
Note that we don’t even bother to call all men who react maximally to children under 13 pedophiles! We would have to call 20% of all men pedophiles, and no one wants to do that. In mental health, we are mostly concerned with the 3% pure pedophiles because the only way they can satisfy their sexual urges is with a child under 13. This makes these men dangerous almost by definition. Hence it is recommended that they get with an empathetic therapist regularly to keep from acting on their attraction and offending.
Here probably even more than with hebephiles, most of this 18% of men above probably repress or suppress the antisocial attraction to children under 13 and instead focus on the equally strong attraction to mature persons.
In contrast to hebephilia, pedophilia is considered a mental disorder if it is upsetting to the person or if they have acted on their urges with children under 13. It is interesting to note that pedophiles who have never molested children and are not bothered by their attraction are considered to be completely normal psychologically.
Judeophilia, shekeling, or blackmail? Which is it?
I don’t get it. From the sound of it, Americans are just Judeophiles. Polls repeatedly show support for Israel around 50% and often a majority towards 60%. Doesn’t sound good but support for Palestinians is generally ~15% with not much upward trend.
Sure it seems like the US is simply a bunch of Jew-loving fools, fanatical Judeophiles. Well, fine, but that’s pretty stupid. Why don’t we hand the country over to Swedes or Vietnamese, or Hmong, or Cubans, or Japanese, or whoever. What are the Jews? Just another ethnic group; in other words, a tribe of humans. Tell me why they are so special?
To me they’re no more special than the Ingush, the Tigreans, the Karens, the Garifura, the Muong, the Naga, the Yakuts, the Han, the Basques, the Azeris, the Kyrgyz, the Akan, the Mapuche or name any nationality where the people are of a certain type. The Jews are just another pissant little petty tribe of humans that don’t want any special treatment positive of negative. Who cares about them. Sure, but why hand over the keys of the kingdom to this petty and fanatically ethnocentric tribe or ethnic group. What’s the point?
On the other hand, there might be the shekeling. Both political parties are shekeled to the hilt. Jewish money provides 60% of the funding for the Democrats and 30% for the Republicans. Presumably most politicians are taking money from AIPAC, the rightwing organization that encompasses most pro-Israeli organizations in the US.
Every now and then, every President and many Senators make a sojourn to the AIPAC convention to fall all over themselves with their love for the wonderful Jewish people and Israel. The fawning is almost suspect. Are they paid off with campaign contributtions? The fanatical love that US politicians even at the state level have for this shitty little country is hard to figure. There’s something weird about it. It doesn’t seem normal.
On the other hand, are they being blackmailed? The Epstein Affair was a Mossad honeypot operation using underage girls to get powerful US men in business and government on film having sex with underage girls. All of the men having sex with those underage girls were filmed by Epstein. He kept these in a safe.
The FBI reportedly confiscated many of these blackmail tapes. Suspiciously, absolutely nothing has come of it though no doubt there are tapes of many prominent men committing statutory rape or illegal intercourse with underage girls. Why won’t the FBI prosecute these men? What’s up with that? It’s been rumored for some time that Israel is in possession of a tape of Bill Clinton having sex with a 13 year old girl and they used this to blackmail him.
The Epstein operation has been proven to have been run by Mossad. Epstein was a Mossad asset. He was recruited in 1986 and he stayed an Israeli asset for the next 34 years. At some point, he started his blackmail operations. Ghislane Maxwell, his partner in crime, is absolutely a Mossad asset. Her father Robert Maxwell was an out and out Mossad spy. He was one of the richest men in the UK, ran a huge media network and was probably one of the worst men on Earth. A real scumbag. Spent his whole life lying, cheating, thieving, conspiring, sleazing out, backstabbing, and apparently blackmailing.
At some point he was apparently running the same blackmail operation for Israel that Epstein was running. These operations are called brownstones based on the fact that they used to be housed in brownstone buildings. The CIA has reportedly run brownstones with underage teenage girls, boys and possibly even prepubescent children (!!) all over the world for decades.
These are full of cameras and the CIA uses these houses to get powerful men on tape having sex with underage people, hence they are blackmailed by the CIA. Oh, and the CIA runs the US media more or less. The whole US media works closely with the CIA. Look up Operation Mockingbird. So these blackmail tapes can be suddenly leaked to the media should any of the blackmailees prove disobedient to the CIA. A lot of powerful men are being blackmailed this way.
Reportedly, somebody is in possession of a tape of Lindsay Graham having sex with an underage teenage boy and somebody is using this to blackmail him. This might explain his sudden 180 degree flips on various political matters and his wanton worship of some politicians, notably Trump this last time around.
A woman gets molested as a girl? Well, it some cases she just likes it, believe it or not. I’ve met them and they’re not exactly rare. Others didn’t like it but decided to sexualize it as a way to get beyond it. I’ve met them too. There’s nothing wrong with enjoying getting molested consensually as a child and deciding that you enjoyed that experience.
It doesn’t make you a bad person of a “defender of pedophilia” as they say about Milo when he reacted that way to statutory rape with older men when he was a 13 year old gay boy. He loved it. Most gay teenage boys love the sex they have with older men, and up to 1/3 are in a relationship; with an older man at any time. So gay boys absolutely do not get harmed by statutory rape. They love it!
It’s your choice how to react to such things.
We still need to keep it illegal though. In many other cases, she doesn’t like it, but she’s mostly just confused because “it feels good but it’s wrong,” as one woman told me. But she just moves on too. I’ve dated a number of women who were molested as girls. They told me they just got over it.
In fact, studies show that most women just get over it. This is what is in the Reiner et al study that Congress itself voted to condemn, although it was a completely scientific study. And I think the psychological establishment even had a fit over it. Some facts are not ok so they must not be facts! And they call these people “scientists of psychology.” What a joke.
This goes completely against the narrative that getting molested as a kid ruins women for life, and it’s not PC at all to say that. But we should be happy that so many women just handle lousy things that happen to them. What do the PC idiots and feminists want? They want all women damaged for life so they can say child molesting is bad? We already know it’s bad. And so they got over it? So what? That doesn’t make it ok. And the more coercion that was involved, the more likely the woman is to be damaged. However, most child molestation is just that – molestation.
It’s not rape. Most molestation is indeed consensual. The kid usually just goes along with it or gets convinced to go along with it. I’m not sure exactly how this works, not having been molested or molested a kid myself. I imagine the consent aspect is pretty complex. But indeed, most kids do “consent” to getting molested – consent in a psychological sense.
However, they are not consenting legally because we do not recognize a child’s consent as valid. So the lie that “kids can’t consent!” and “minors can’t consent!” all the way down to 17 year old girls two weeks shy of their birthday is nonsense. Of course they can consent and with teenage girls, it’s almost always consensual. So they can consent, but we do not recognize their consent legally. That’s the sane way to say it. “Minors can’t consent” is cucked faggotry. That’s for male feminists and other soyboys. No real man says that about a teenage girl.
Child rape and child molestation are two different crimes. Child rape is quite rare. It’s is often a stranger and a weapon is often involved. The child may well be harmed or even killed. Now that feminists have weaponized the definition of men raping females to include everything but the kitchen sink, all molestation is being seen as “rape.” And all perfectly consensual sex with teenage girls – often initiated by the girl, by the way – is also rape. I guess everything’s rape then! Hey feminists. Is there any kind of male-female sex where it’s not rape on the man’s part? Wondering here.
This is a long-awaited update to the Delphi Murders case. You wonder why I have not published, but it was due to how I was treated. I was reported to the police probably 40 times for being the murderer or for being a “pedophile” (I wasn’t aware that being a pedophile was against the law). I was reported to the IRS 20 times. I was interviewed by a detective as a suspect in the murders. Too bad I hadn’t left California in 3 1/2 years!
I wrote a lot about sexual aspects of the case and this got turned into an idea that I was writing about my sexual fantasies of raping and murdering teenage girls! None of these things other than being the killer would mean anything even if it were true. After all, it’s actions not thoughts that count in this world. But if it makes you feel better, there’s nothing to any of it. I received more death threats than I can count.
Getting down to lesser complaints, it was said that I deliberately made up lies about this case out of whole cloth in order to get more hits! It was said that I was ripping people off by charging for the forum but if you knew the time I put in, I doubt if I made minimum wage.
At first it was free, but we had to get rid of that. See all those posting restrictions on public forums. We were trying to avoid that. We started charging $10 to get in, but we had spies and enemies paying the $10 and then taking our private material out of the group and posting. We went up to $20 to keep spies and enemies out. It worked.
The site’s not monetized so that doesn’t matter, but I have a BA in Journalism and have worked in the field. If there’s one thing that will kill your career, it’s that, and my records clean after decades of published journalism. We charge money for a private forum that met to investigate the crime. There was a tremendous amount of information about the crime there – in fact, it was one of the largest databases for materials about this case around.
We made it private because we were talking about real people as suspects and doxxing people. I’m not sure if there’s a legal liability there, but we were trying to avoid that. It was also done to protect the privacy of our members. Contrary to rumor, we never listed anyone’s name as a suspect for the crime. We did bring up some names but mostly to say that they were cleared or they were not involved. Their names were brought up because they were being passed around.
Some of these people have made it a mission to hunt me down and do unknown threatening things to me. I never realized that pointing out someone was innocent was deserving an ass-beating! We did have one suspect that we were looking at for a long time, but we never published his name one time on this site nor did I publish it anywhere on the Net.
I have never published the names of people we were investigating on the site or anywhere else. Some people got mad because we were looking at them, but don’t worry. We investigated everyone and their brother for this crime. Not many people were off-limits. And of course we looked at family members.
Another rumor says the families hate me. I wouldn’t care if it was true but I do have a good relationship with one of the three parents.
We never had an “secret, special, inside or otherwise sources.” We listed anonymous sources a lot because that’s what we do in journalism! The anonymous sources somehow drove people into a frenzy.
Law enforcement worked with some of us a little bit, but not much. They requested some material from us and we gave it to them. A local sheriff’s deputy was one of the most active members of our group. It was and is extremely difficult for us to get law enforcement (LE) sources, but now and then, we get lucky.
It somehow got out that we had a prime suspect in this case. It was more like my prime suspect. He’s done a number of very suspicious things in relation to this crime, including recording numerous videos inferring that he killed the girls. A lot of his other behavior was suspicious too. Turns out we now feel that he was a dead end and he’s not implicated in the crime.
He’s still a lousy person and he threatened to murder me many times. But he didn’t kill those girls and that’s all that counts. Contrary to rumor, his name was never published one time on this site or anywhere else on the Net. I’d apologize to him but he sent me too many death threats to bother with that and he’s a scumbag anyway. A scumbag? Sure. A homicidal scumbag? Guess not.
Anyway, we recommend that people turn their attention away from this man.
He’s just one of many, of course. There have already been several false confessions in the crime already.
We do have a lot of new information that I have never seen published anywhere but some of the Facebook groups seem to have been privy to some of this data. Anyway, the rest of the world has never heard of it, so here goes.
The motive for the crime has been revealed:
For a long time there was much controversy about whether there was a sexual assault in this crime. I always thought there was because any time a man murders two teenage girl strangers in this fashion, there’s almost always a sexual component, rape, torture, sexual sadism. The rape and torture are motivated by the sexual sadism.
Anyway, the motive for the crime was the rape of Abbie Williams. I will sit back and let that settle for a bit. I don’t have any specifics on what exactly he did to her sexually, but the sex act was definitely consummated, let’s put it that way. I’m not sure if she was raped while alive or dead. That’s unclear.
Both girls appear to have been bound with ropes behind their backs.We know this because Libby German’s fingernails were covered with bruises and dirt. That means she was digging her fingers into the ground behind her back while being assaulted.
Libby German had numerous defensive wounds on her hands and arms. It appears she put up quite a bit of a fight.
The girls were controlled with a gun. You can see the gun clearly in his right jacket pocket. I can’t believe people still think it’s a rumor. A fifth grader could have figured that out. He pulled the gun on them and controlled them with it.
The video of UNSUB (the suspect) was taken by Libby’s cellphone. There were also trail cams active at the time. We do not know what photos, if any, were captured there. The murders themselves may even have been recorded by trail cams, but this is uncertain. An audio of the murders may also have been recorded on Libby’s phone. This is uncertain. Obviously this material cannot be released. The reason only the small snippet of voice recording has been released is that that is all there is. There is a lot of other recording from the phone, but it is all muffled and inaudible.
The girls were both definitely marched across the creek by UNSUB.
The pack around UNSUB’s lap is as we said forever a deer kit. Deer kits contain ~5 different knives that are used to cut up a deer carcass after you kill it. This is a bit disturbing because it implies that he may have seen the girls were like wild animals that get hunted legally every year. We do not know if that is a go-pro on his forehead, and we also do not know if the crime was recorded.
But we are now 100% certain that UNSUB brought his own camera or whatever sort to the crime, and he used to it take pictures at the crime scene.
We are also now certain that Abbie also had a phone during the crime. Her phone also played a role in the crime.
Abbie was raped, correct, and the sex act was completed, that is, UNSUB ejaculated. I don’t have any further details than that nor do I know the nature of the sex acts. Hence, police absolutely have DNA because they have sperm cells from UNSUB’s semen. In addition, they have epithelial cells from UNSUB’s skin. The samples match.
There are reports that the crime occurred over an extended space. Supposedly the “crime scene” starts at the Robinson family’s backyard near the dump spot and extends 1,000 yards to the dump site. We don’t know what that means. Maybe it means he was chasing them as they were running away from him and he was attacking them while they ran. But we still don’t know if this rumor is even true.
It is still not known that the girls were killed at the dump site or that they were murdered on the day they disappeared at all. There are continuing rumors that they were removed from the scene and taken to a barn (apparently the Mears’ barn) where they were kept for some time and then returned to the crime scene, dead.
The Mears barn was prominent in one of our theories for a while and it is interesting that it is coming back.
We had an investigator at the barn and he talked to the owners. He mentioned a rumor that the girls were murdered in the barn and he said that their faces both went hard, cold, and pale. They said nothing. He considered that an ominous sign. Also we did discover a small flower set in the barn that looks like the sort of flowered memorials that are left at death sites along highways.In addition, the barn was absolutely searched by cadaver dogs during the search of Lucas’ property.
The rest of his property was also searched by the cadaver dogs. We don’t know what they found. Keep in mind that none of this means that the barn was used in the killings, but it is only interesting that this old theory we thought was dead and buried has experienced a recrudescence. There is a problem with the barn information at the moment, in that it is all coming from a single source, and some people think she is trying to misdirect theories about the crime. Everything about a barn or that barn is completely speculation at this point.
For the moment, we assume that the girls were killed at the scene. Indeed, reports said, “It was all over in 40 minutes.” That means that they were dead by 3 PM. UNSUB was seen hiking away from the crime scene at 3:15 PM. So you can see, there is also evidence that they were killed at the scene. Arguing against that once again are reports that the site was searched more than once the night before.
In addition, Ron Logan described the crime scene as “pristine.” I assume that this is when the police left, but how many homicide sites are “pristine?” It seems a bit odd. Once again, we have no evidence that they were killed away from the dump site and the theory that they were killed at the site remains the best one.
If they were killed in the barn then they would have been returned to the dump site later, probably in the middle of the night. Investigators discovered the dump site by following two sets of footprints downhill from the graveyard to the crime scene. This descending pair of footprints is not explained and it hard to figure a theory for why they are there.
We now have repeated statements that the dump site was absolutely searched during the searches the night before. There were no girls there when they searched. Of course, maybe the girls were there, and searchers were mistaken that they searched the site.
The crime scene was absolutely disturbed. At least two and possibly more searchers touched the bodies. Two searchers tried to revive the girls by mouth to mouth resuscitation. This seems odd if we were dealing with 21 hour cold corpses. Anyway this has contaminated the crime scene.
There is no evidence that police botched the investigation in any way. Everyone is saying that because that’s what people say when a killer cannot be found. But quite a few killers are very hard to catch even by the best police and a large number are never caught and die with their secrets. A homicide case open for three years or even a cold case is not evidence of a botched investigation. Botched investigations are not common in the US.
As I said, the murder weapons were knives as we knew from the start. Libby had her throat cut so badly that she was nearly beheaded.There was a scarf tied around her neck at the funeral to hide this wound. People have attacked this story endlessly, but it is fact. For one thing, I spoke to Libby’s mother and she verified the wound to me and in tears told me that she was the one who tied the scarf around her neck to hide the wound.
The story that Libby was wearing a scarf at the funeral has also been attacked with attendees saying they never saw a scarf on either girl. However, we are in possession of a photograph of Libby’s funeral. In the photo, you can see her casket and you can make out Libby inside of it. Indeed she has a scarf tied around her neck. We have decided not to release this photo. I assume all of this stuff will come out at some time or another as old crime scene photos of all sorts tend to make their way onto the Net after a decade or two.
There is also a strong rumor that Libby was attacked with a gut knife. A gut knife is included in a deer kit. It is used to for gutting a deer. Libby was stabbed in her abdomen to such an extent that her intestines were protruding from her body. This leads to the horrifying implication that he gutted her body as if it was a dead deer. One wonders if UNSUB is a deer hunter? Additional evidence supporting the story of Libby being gutted in this way is in the form of several reports of detectives in hardware stores a week or two after the crime, asking if anyone had bought a gut knife recently.
There are continuing rumors that the crime scene was staged and that UNSUB left a signature or particular style that was his own at the scene. We reported earlier that UNSUB had stabbed the girls with sticks and branches. Sticks and branches were shoved into both girls’ vaginas and anuses. In addition, Abbie was impaled with a large branch which was plunged into her body right below her solar plexis. The cause of death of Abbie continues to be a single knife wound to the heart.
We heard this rumor first when someone in the community had crime scene photos and published them to his blog the evening of the crime. He thought the killing was some sort of a Satanic ritual and he was the first source about the story of sticks and branches being shoved into the girls’ bodies. We talked about a possible Satanic theme to the crime in early blog posts and were ripped to pieces over it. The reason we wondered about that was due to this young man’s crime scene photos and his description of them.
This rumor was later verified by the wife of a detective. He could not sleep at night and finally broke down and told his wife about the murders. She also stated that sticks and branches were shoved into the girls’ bodies.
Now we have a third source, a detective from a different branch of LE. This confirms once again the story about sticks and branches being shoved into the girls’ bodies. So we now have three sources for that story.
However, there is no evidence for the Satanic nature of the crime. This was only theorized early on due to the bizarre things that were done to the girls’ bodies. Both bodies were staged and posed.
UNSUB may have used some sort of bleach to kill DNA at the crime scene. In the photo, UNSUB has a bottle of something in his left pocket. We could never figure out what it is but it seems to be toilet cleaner. This consists of a lot of bleach. Some substance containing bleach, possibly toilet cleaner, may have been thrown onto the body of at least one of the girls. It was tossed onto her the area of her genitalia and lower abdomen. We don’t know which girl he threw this stuff on.
Abbie was nude below the waist and Libby was completely nude so the killer disrobed the girls.
We published rumors that one of the girls was in the early stages of pregnancy. We have been ripped to pieces over this story probably more than any other. However, we recently were able to verify the story via a sheriff’s deputy in a neighboring county. He said that the autopsy revealed that one of the girls was in the early stages of pregnancy. We are not going to reveal which girl was said to be pregnant but maybe we will later. So we now have many unverified and one excellent verified source for this story.
Perhaps the strangest of the new evidence is that Abbie and the murderer had known each other for 3-4 months before the crime. So she knew her killer and he knew her. He apparently met her on social media. A social media link was reported by police early on. Since he was on her social media, he absolutely knew that both girls were on the trails that day.
There are stories that the journey to the bridge was a last minute decision but we now have information that it had been planned since at least the previous Friday. We have a report that people were discussing Abbie and Libby’s upcoming trip to the bridge at a local bar on Friday night. And there seems to have been continuing discussion over the weekend.
As you can see, the killer was very prepared. He knew exactly where the girls would be and at what time. The idea of a random serial killing is nonsense. The killer has no DNA match in the many databases in the Rust Belt that were searched. But LE may have been able to identify the killer by DNA in some other way.
There is now a story that the killer took photos of the presumably dead girls at the crime scene. Photos of the dead girls from the crime scene were sent to Abbie’s phone after the murders, possibly on the evening of the crime.
This killer seems to be using cellphones and social media. And we can’t find him? Color me confused.
Police may or may not have a particular suspect that they are looking at. We are getting conflicting stories on that. But if they do have a suspect, the killer may be a local. There is also a rumor that the killer may have a close relationship with the girls’ families. This means someone either in the extended families or in their extended friends group. Keep in mind that this not yet v verified. However, a familiar name from early in the investigation of someone in and around the extended families has been mentioned. I do not know if LE actually considers this man to be a suspect.
There are persistent rumors that LE may have a suspect, but simply do not have enough on them to file. We received this information for the first time from an LE officer who works for the Presidential Secret Service, the branch that protests Presidents, their families, and even Presidential candidates. We received this story about one month after the crime.
The implication is that LE have a lot of evidence, but problems with the case have made it difficult to file against any possible murderer. This is presumably making the DA balk at filing charges as DA’s will not take a homicide case to court unless they think they are pretty sure that they can win it.
LE investigated many suspects. They also looked very hard at a family angle.
A well-known and prominent member of one of the families was kept under surveillance by a detective for nine months after the crime.The detective even followed this person when they went on a vacation with their families a considerable distance away. The surveillance ended after 10 months. We don’t know why this person was being investigated and tailed, but apparently LE thought they might have had something to do with the crime. This person is no longer under investigation and LE don’t think he was involved.
First of all, all three of these men were absolutely antifa, but antifa is not a group. Instead it’s an idea. It’s like saying they were all Communists or anarchists. Are you going to make an organization called “Communism” or “anarchism” illegal? See how dumb it is to try to make antifa illegal? Antifa’s not an organization, and you can’t ban an idea. At least not yet. Don’t worry though, the SJW’s are working on it!
First, 37 (not 38 as everyone says) year old Joseph M. Rosenbaum, later Joseph Don Rosenbaum, after a name change. His race is often given as White, but prison records actually list it as Wigger.
I learned quite a bit about this fellow in doing in depth research into this charming fellow yesterday afternoon.
Born in Texas. At some point moves to Pima County, Arizona, where his father appears to be an attorney.
At age 16, he appears to have married in Arizona. He seems to have divorced afterwards, but there’s no record of it.
Around age 18, he enrolls at Pima County Community College, but his time there is short.
At age 18 in 1992, he is sentenced to 12 years in prison on what looks like two counts for Sexual Contact with a Minor, 10 years for one count and 2 years for the other count. I have revised my view of this crime, and I now think he raped a 15-17 year old girl with either force or drugs.
He ends up suing the state for prison conditions a couple of times, once because his toilet overflows. The toilets are terrible in those places, I must say. I think they are designed to overflow.
He gets out in 2014, now aged 30. But he hasn’t learned much as the first thing he does after he gets out is get arrested for absconding on parole. He’s sentenced in 2016 and apparently serves one year for this offense. He seems to act better this time in prison. I did find some documents on this case, but nothing much of interest.
I think for all of these cases, someone would need to go to Pima County Superior Court and do a record search.
He moves to Wisconsin at some point, and he ends up being the father of a two year old child. The girlfriend and child live in Waco, Texas, Rosenbaum’s hometown. When he moves to Wisconsin, he has to register on the Sex Offender Registry, but he’s listed as non-compliant.
He has a conviction for Carrying a Firearm while Intoxicated. He also has a record for the minor crimes of Disobeying an Officer and Disturbing the Peace (Excessive Noise). He was affiliated with an antifa grouping called People’s Revolution. A member of this group has been accused of shooting at a police officer in Wawatosa, Wisconsin. He’s generally considered to be White. We tried to find information to see whether his race was White or Wigger, but we were unable to find any. Please comment with any updates on Grosskreutz’ race.
I find this quite shocking that so many of these White rioters have criminal records. It’s almost like antifa are a bunch of criminals!
This is so perfect. I found this on a men’s rights site. It’s brilliant and I think it explains this latest moral panic about pedophilia and child molesting (and more importantly, the sexuality of teenage girls, which is what it is really all about).
The “popular usage” of the term pedophilia is basically the pedo-scare created by feminists to criminalize healthy and normal male sexuality as many boys who are either in jail or on sex offender lists have now discovered. How many? We don’t know since there are no federal stats on who is actually on those lists, but some local studies point to a very significant percentage of “sex offenders” being kids just fooling around.
Just like the definitions of “rape,” “assault,” “domestic violence” that have been redefined to include pretty much anything a female finds convenient, “pedophile” now effectively means “any guy who is attracted to a woman younger than me.”
Then why have we suddenly felt the need to protect young females from sex more now that feminists are in charge?
Why has there been a sudden ramping up of the legislation ‘protecting’ teenage girls from “abuse” since feminists started gaining real power at governmental level, particularly since 2000? Isn’t a simple EP explanation that it is in feminists selfish gene reproductive interests to limit sexual competition from younger girls by raising the age of consent and creating pedohysteria memes?
And it was 19th century feminists who largely determined that 14 year olds are children – something that would have been considered ridiculous in most of human history and even in much of Europe before 2000.
Pedophilia got hijacked by feminists, expanded well beyond its clinical definition or even basic common sense (like jailing consenting kids or guys who had no reasonable way of suspecting the age of their partners), criminalized to the point of absurdity (sex offender lists for consenting kids having sex with each other? Really?) and used as a “scarlet letter” that needs no proof (RL: And hence is not falsifiable and is also tautological).
It’s the same strategy that led to do the absurdly broad definitions, lack of due process, and blatantly sexist criminalization of “domestic violence,” “sexual assaults,” or “sexual harassment.” They not only smear an entire gender but also keep individual men in a permanent state of subjugation to women. Note that most men would think twice before arguing against an abusive female because they can easily get expelled from school, or lose their job, or get evicted from their home.
The root is deeper in my opinion: the “men only want one thing” is just a special case of “male sexuality is bad” which itself is coming from “men are evil”.
The decades-old smear campaign of lies spearheaded by feminists has basically left the general public with an appalling opinion of men:
Men are considered as pedophiles. Never mind that being attracted to a healthy fertile female is a perfectly normal behavior, and Romeo and Juliet were 14 yrs old or so.
Men are considered as perverts guilty of sexual harassment for looking at a girl with her tits and ass hanging out, but having your tits and ass hanging out in the workplace is somehow not considered perverted or sexual harassment.
Men are considered dangerous to children. Never mind that biological fathers are protectors of their children and have an absolutely incredibly positive influence on them.
If you redefine male sexuality as evil and perverted, then it becomes a rhetorical question. (RL: Absolutely perfect and immaculate.)
Jason: Well, honestly @Robert Lindsay, women are not going to touch men “they don’t like”. In other to get them to like you, you have to show confidence. What these romantic misfits think – is that women “owe them something”. Well, nothing is going to change for these men.
RL: Ok, I am 62 years old. At this point, it seems like when I go out into the world, 0% of the population of women want anything to do with me in any romantic or sexual sense.
I’m banned from flirting with any woman. Any woman I flirt with, I assure you I will get called creep, and I might even get in trouble and get banned from the establishment.
I’m not allowed to touch any women ever anywhere for any reason. If I do, same thing. She will act like she’s going to call the cops.
I’m a goddamned incel for all intents and purposes at this point.
Now you tell me, if I just show some confidence, this is all going to go away, and some women are going to get interested in me?
Jason: Being too negative. Also, a lot of older women are highly sexy. We shouldn’t be so closed-minded. Anyway, they would be attracted by confidence, of course.
Anyway, this gets me to thinking about those older East Asian women that are so hot.
Women my age and up look like shit! Yeah, they look at me but most look like grandmas who belong in a nursing home! Most of them don’t even look human. They look like goddamn wild animals. I look at them and I see hippos, rhinos, water buffaloes, Sasquatches, bison, and wildebeests. I see them and I wonder, “What happened? Was there a zoo breakout? Did the animals break out of the zoo somehow? Why are these wild animals running around in the streets? Isn’t that hazardous? Why don’t the zookeepers come catch them?”
Sorry, I only fuck humans. I don’t do bestiality.
Women my age are on a 1-10 scale just like us men. 8-10 women my age seem to still look fairly good. But they are increasingly rare.
And this is how many of them want to fuck: 0.00000000000%. This is how many of them don’t want to fuck: 100.0000000%. They’re all born-again virgins and prudes. If you start talking sexual with them, they pretty much call you a creep, but they often do it in an adult, polite way like someone who’s dealt with this their whole lives, is used to it, and doesn’t get hysterical about it. They’re basically all #metoo’ers.
Most act like they have no interest in any men and are perfectly happy to be alone. Further, most have horrendous, angry, griping, mean, cold, bitter, cynical personalities. They’re nasty and insulting bitches. What’s crazy is most of them look like complete shit. Everyone knows that the ugly girl has to act really nice if she wants to get a chance of a date. If an ugly girl has an ugly personality, she’s doomed. She has zero positive features. She’s useless for any sort of companionship. So these women are not only ugly but they also have horrible personalities! They literally have nothing whatsoever to offer!
But trust me, even after menopause when 95% of them have their sex drives hit by a nuclear bomb, older women continue to believe they have diamond-studded, gold-plated pussies. They don’t. I’d like to tell them, “You think your pussy is made out of solid gold? Look at it in the mirror sometime. It’s so thrashed most of us barely want to even stick a dick in that monstrosity. At the very least, it’s nothing special anymore.”
On dating sites, older women act like princesses. “All you older men have to fall all over yourselves fighting for my pretty pussy (which you won’t even get to use) because I am just that good. I might respond to you. Maybe. Once I get through this barrage of likes and messages. Fight over me boys! I’m special! I’m a prize! I’m entitled X10!”
And the sad fact is that the best looking ones my age are getting bombarded by men. I was talking to a smoking hot 62 year old. We would message when we got up in the morning and when we went to sleep at night. It was that good. We were almost with each other all day in that sense.
And she acted like she was starting to fall in love of course, which is nearly always the case when you are greeting each other on waking and saying goodnight on nodding. That’s what a married or cohabiting couple does, right? So you’re like a cohabiting or married couple in a sense. And once it gets like that, 95% of the time, she’s falling in love with you, guaranteed. Women can’t get that close to a man without starting to fall in love unless there’s something really wrong with them.
She told me I was one of 30 men fighting for her, and I was in close to first place. Then a couple of weeks later she met some other guy, and he was going to move in in three weeks,and it got cold on my end. Yeah, men my age actually do this. All the time. They meet some woman and in two or three weeks, they want to move in or they are moving in. It almost seems pathetic to me. It certainly seems desperate.
But notice. A 62 year old woman had such a diamond-studded, gold-plated pussy that literally 30 older men with nothing to offer were fighting like little boys over her for her affection. Being pussybeggars. Pretty pathetic ones at that.
So you see, it never ends. Dating sites are 3-1 women to men, and that’s on the best sites. On Adultfriendfinder, it’s 20 women to every man. Good luck ever getting laid on there.
Anyway, yeah. Women my age. Fuck them. I’m a goodlooking man. I am an 8-10 Chad for a man my age. I’ll take an 8-10 woman my age. But none of them want me. And women 18-50 don’t want to touch me. Even a lot of 50’s women don’t want me because I’m too old.
I’m not even allowed to have a sex drive. If I act like I have a sex drive, I’m evil. I’m an evil creep scumbag who needs the cops called on him for even looking at them! That’s how pissed a lot them are that I even dare to look at them.
I’m not allowed to say I’m dating someone. That’s gross, sickening, and repulsive I guess because the idea of me fucking another human at my age is gross, sickening, and repulsive.
Some young women at a store asked what I had been doing, and I laughed and told them the truth. “I’ve been chasing women.” It was true. I wasn’t doing much else. They both immediately said I was coming onto them, that was sexual harassment, and they could report me!
Can you believe that? Telling them that I have a sex drive, date, and have romantic and sexual interests means is sexual harassment! If I do those things, that means I’m human. But at my age pointing out that I am human is sexual harassment.
If I even mention that I might have a date sometime in the future, that’s gross and disgusting, and the conversation is shut down. If I say I recently met a woman who liked me, I get a negative reaction and a conversation shutdown, even from older women. I’m trying to think if there is even one woman out there who would smile and be happy if someone told her I got laid or I had a date or a girlfriend. Most would probably act physically disgusted. Which is weird.
I go out into the world every day looking to get laid, and the whole universe of women rejects me all day long. The best I get is this cold businesslike attitude, but if I try to probe deeper, I get “That’s personal, I can’t tell you that”. So no women is interested in even having a personal friendship with me. They want an acquaintanceship only and even then only with a cold, businesslike where a Wall whenever the relation starts threatening to get a little bit warmer.
What I don’t get about this is that older women tell me I’m goodlooking, “very handsome,” etc. A 40 year old woman recently said, “You’re fucking hot!” A lot of young women I meet online keep telling me I’m handsome, cute, etc. Mostly they say I’m handsome. They range in age from 18-30.
A few underage girls even say it. A 17 year old girl recently told me I was handsome. We were in a chatroom and she said, “Well, I went into the Members to see who was in that room, and I saw you, and I said, ‘Damn! He’s handsome! I think I want to go talk to him!'” But those are in specialized “Younger Women for Older Men” chatrooms. And those are pretty much the only place I can meet women who want me.
On Tinder I was getting young women coming to me all day long, opening with “Hi handsome!”, “You’re cute!”, “Hi cutie!”, etc. At one point, I was getting 4-5 hot young women a day who came to me and quickly told me I was hot and they wanted to go out with me. But then it came down that they would only go out with me if I paid them. Sugar babies. Looking for a sugar daddy.
So at my age, even if I’m hot, nobody really wants to fuck me, and the only people who want to fuck me say I have to pay them to do it. That’s insulting! But it felt good to at least get all those strokes.
So I am at the age where good looks are absolutely useless. Looks are at their sell-by, expiration date. Even if you look great, still nobody wants you. It feels weird as Hell. I’m “totally hot” but you don’t want to fuck, date, or make friends with me? WTF. I think even the best looking man in my age bracket would be ignored by almost all women.
I can’t put into words how painful this is to me. To matters worse, I am an extremely sexual person, a total sex maniac, and a sex addict. I regularly go for 1-2 week periods where it feels like I am masturbating in some way and looking at porn every waking minute. Yeah, I practically jerk off 12-16 hours a day. At 62 fucking years old! Can you believe it? All for nothing.
I am also a friendly person who needs people, but no one wants to be my friend. I am very romantic and almost need to be in love to get up in the morning, but no one wants to fall in love with me. I am a very touchy, tactile person who almost needs touch as much as water to live, and I’m not really allowed to touch anyone, especially any woman, and if I do, it’s #metoo and time to call the cops.
It is true that if I go to those special older man fetish I can definitely meet women in there, women who want to talk dirty, have cybersex,, trade nudes and videos, fall in love, date me, have sex, have a relationship, or come live with them as a partner to her and a stepfather to her kids. So let’s face it. That’s pretty nice. I’m much better off than the typical poor incel. But the whole rest of the world is nothing but a bunch of cold fish.
But outside of those specific fetish rooms, it’s zero.
I have to admit that women are not giving me very good reasons to like them very much. I have a question for you women: Why should I like you all these days? Give me one reason why I should keep on liking you. Give me on reason why I shouldn’t start hating you. Gimme a reason.
Of course they’ve loved me and vice versa for most of my life, so that right there makes me want to like them for the rest of my life anyway no matter how shitty they treat me now.
On the other hand, the world of men is friendly and warm. Especially older men but a lot of younger men are quite friendly too.
So the world of men still likes me (though not as much as before), but the whole world of women either hates, dislikes, ignores, acts merely businesslike and doesn’t want to be friends or even acquaintances, and of course doesn’t want to date or have sex with me. And if I try to so much as talk to them, they act like they’re going to call the police. There’s anything wrong with me. If there were, the whole world of men would be rejecting me too just like the women.
I guess most women really hate us men who are this age.
And @Jason says I’m too negative.
He just won’t swallow the Black Pill. He’s cope, cope, cope, cope, cope. Any lie to keep him from believing the ugly, wicked, and brutal truth.
I don’t blame him, but he’s not talking about reality. He’s talking about a dreamworld that doesn’t even exist and claiming that’s reality. If you disagree it’s gaslighting.
Fine, so why are we making such a big stink about it then?
The rest of the world does not care about child abuse.
You mean child sexual abuse or the rest of it, physical abuse, verbal abuse, psychological abuse?
I do have a feeling that child molestation may be quite common in the rest of the world.
I have heard Indian women say that on reservations, “All Indian girls get molested.” A friend told me the same thing about Indians in Canada.
He also implied that all French Canadian girls get molested.
The notion that pedophilia and child molestation is a White man thing is a big lie made up by White-hating Blacks and anti-White racist woke types. You simply don’t hear of molestation in the ghetto because it’s ubiquitous. Black and Hispanic girls are twice as likely to be molested as White girls are. So much for the “White male molester” meme. I read a few articles on this, and the women were quite honest. A common refrain was “All girls get molested in the ghetto.”
So we see once again very high levels of child molestation in impoverished non-White communities in the West such as ghetto Blacks and reservation Indians.
53% of East Indian girls get molested. Few if any men are ever arrested for this.
We had an actual pedophile on here, and he had relocated to Mexico where he could get away with his behavior better. He posted on the comments about how he was molesting little girls. Probably some of the most shocking comments that ever showed up on this blog. The other commenters all jumped on him and beat him up badly, which was probably appropriate. I didn’t turn him in. He’s in Mexico. That’s not my country. Anyway, I’m not a cop. If police want to go investigate this guy, I’ll help them but I’m not into turning people in to the police. Fuck that.
Anyway this guy did have some interesting things to say. He is the first predatory child molester that I’ve ever conversed with, so his conversation was interesting because you never meet someone like that, and it’s hard to figure out what they are thinking.
In Mexico, he molested a 5 year old girl next door in the bathroom a couple of times. Her mother told her to quit hanging around with him and looked at him suspiciously.
Then he molested a six year old girl next door a couple of times. If you must know, he got these girls to jerk him off in the bathroom, which is probably fairly low on the damage scale. Same thing. Mother said quit hanging around with him and looked at him suspiciously.
He implied that it was basically normal for poor and lower middle class Mexican girls to get molested at some point. It’s just something that happens to girls there and women in those classes just figure it’s something all women go through as girls. Apparently most of them just get over it or accommodate it.
I don’t like the idea of this happening (I’d rather it did not happen at all), but where it’s rife, a lot of women probably just adjust. He said it is so common among these classes that if you go to the police, they just shrug their shoulders and say, “Keep the girl away from him.” Prosecutions are rare, apparently because it’s so common. So most women don’t even bother going to the cops if their girls get molested.
He went to another city where he met some runaway prostitutes who were living in a house together. He told them he was a pedophile, and they said, “No problem,” totally nonchalantly and brought an 8 year old girl out of the house for him. They acted like they did this as a special request pretty regularly. They went under a bridge. She got him off. I don’t want to go into details here but it was fairly similar to what happened to the girls in the bathroom.
The 8 year old girl appeared to be into it, perhaps because she’s come to enjoy it for some odd reason. Perhaps it was fun for her. Girls that age have no sex drive, but perhaps they can learn to enjoy sex like playing on a playground, chasing around with other kids, or swinging on a swing, on that level. I still don’t approve even if they enjoy it. I’m just trying to theorize why they enjoy these activities with no sex drive.
But this got me to thinking. How common is this in the 3rd World? Mexico is heading out of the 3rd world into the 1st. If it’s that bad there, think of how bad it might be in the real 3rd World?
I’m wondering how common this is elsewhere. I’m told that in poor Filipino households, molestation of girls is rampant, possibly even taking the form of rape. Nothing much happens because these slums are such hellholes of crime and despair anyway.
I assume that verbal and psychological abuse is simply normal and legal in most of the world. God knows physical abuse of children may well be too. A lot of tribal people beat their kids pretty bad for no good reason. The kids seem to grow up fine anyway. Thing is in those societies, it’s normal to get beaten as a kid. No one thinks anything of it. So if you say you got beaten as a kid and it fucked you up, everyone looks at you like you’re nuts.
The commenter may be correct that in the rest of the world, psychological and verbal abuse of kids is probably almost normal, and even physical abuse is probably quite common. Remember back to our parents generation? How many men in that generation told you that their Dad used to beat their ass up regularly? Lots of men in that generation got their asses beat by their fathers. I don’t approve of it, but the WW2 generation seemed to come out ok.
I’ve dealt with sexual abuse above. I have a feeling that in the 3rd World, this is perhaps way more common than we want to think.
I think what you are getting at here is that levels of psychological, verbal, certainly physical and definitely sexual abuse are more proscribed here than anywhere else on Earth. We’ve declared war on all of these things. Who else has? No one.
So the levels of such things in the US may well be very low by world standards. Still the scolds won’t shut up about it and go on and on about the “child abuse catastrophe” now somehow morphing normal late adolescent consensual sex into 18 year old “grown men” “molesting” and “raping” 17 year old “little girls” (equivalent to toddlers I guess) who “cannot consent and are therefore always raped every time they have sex (!!),” all teenage girls who get fucked by adult men (the # must be very high) have been “molested” like little girls, and all of them are now somehow damaged for the rest of their lives!!