One of the comments for an article that I originally submitted to “Strike The Root,” concerning Roman Polanski’s rape of a thirteen-year-old, perhaps needs a little light shed upon it, in spite of the bigoted, anti-Semitic, and thoroughly incorrect nature of it. I can’t clarify the commenter’s position all that much, but I do need to clarify what I think about an issue that the commenter raises. In essence, the point that the commenter is trying to bring home is that “Roman Polanski is a pedophile and had sex with children.”
The commenter rightly points out that sex with children is equal to death. With this I agree, and factually so. Rape of an adult, being a coercive act, is also an act that leads directly and immediately to death, on multiple levels, as I pointed out in my article “Coercion Is Death.” It’s this troublesome business of sex with children, and the commenter’s insinuation that I am somehow responsible, given my views, for the encouragement of this death-oriented activity, with which I feel I must take issue.
But first, let’s talk about the movie “Nine,” starring the talented Daniel Day-Lewis. This was one of those rare films in my Netflix queue that got taken out of the DVD player before it finished. First there’s the fact that it appeared to be a musical that was more concerned with people belting out tunes than it was with creating any kind of inviting or enjoyable atmosphere, and I found myself not caring in the least that this spoiled, oversexed, stereotypical Italian male film director was lacking any inspiration for a movie yet to be made. The makers of this musical never bothered to stir the pathos in me.
Beyond that, there is an abhorrent scene in the middle of the film (at about the point where I pushed the eject button) where a group of eight- and nine-year-old girls pay a grown man to whip out his penis. That feminists en masse are not up-in-arms about this scene is condemnable. The idea that any adult should take money from children, even with no touching involved, to reveal sexuality to them is abominable, as I shall explain.
Except that I need to make one correction first: It wasn’t a bunch of giggling girls and a grown man; it was a bunch of mystified little boys – little boys – and a grown woman. The women who belt out everything they sing (as if that’s the very essence of singing), are practically yelling, “Be Italian!” Get it? Italian prepubescent boys are just as horned up as Italian men. They can’t help it. It’s in-a the blood!
I guess a few things need to be explained to the lyricist, the composer, the playwright, the screenwriter, Daniel Day-Lewis, Judy Dench, and a host of other nincompoops: Children don’t understand sex.
Mind you, if a five-year-old who is in my charge wants to know where babies come from, he or she is going to find out. Not by putting in a porno, but by simple explanation of the facts of life. Children are curious, and should have that curiosity satisfied by responsible adult caretakers.
It has been a practice across cultures for centuries to find healthy ways for boys to bond with men, and to satisfy a natural curiosity that most boys possess about the adult male body. Sadly, there have been parallel practices to induct children in the ways of adult sexuality, and these death-oriented practices, inhabiting a gray area, have found their way into the lives of many boys, to their detriment. It is this area where groups like NAMbLA thrive.
I admit freely to questioning the appropriate boundaries in the past (only in my mind, I assure you), as I have talked with other gay men who became sexually active at much younger ages than I did. (I didn’t lose my virginity until I was 29.) Many of these men don’t seem to have a problem with what happened, which interested me. I am not one of those guys who turned gay because some irresponsible adult introduced me before I was ready. I have read “testimonials” from men who were the younger participants in sex acts, confirming their volitional desires to engage in sex with adults. Prior to understanding how coercion is death, I must say that I found such arguments compelling, but was not convinced.
I am now convinced that the opposite holds true, and that the alternative argument can be backed up with facts. Having sex with children – babies, toddlers, and prepubescents – is never anything but coercive, and therefore death-oriented. Lovers of “Nine” beware.
Coercion can be used against more than the volition of other individuals; it may also be used against the truth. Truth does not live like we do, but it does indeed exist. Its very nature is immovable and unchangeable. Our continued discovery of the intricacies of natural law make it apparent, but they do not make it so. Children, I believe, should know the truth about everything from math and science, to the truth about Santa Claus and where babies come from. I also believe that children should be in charge of the progress and criteria for their own education, which is why I believe in unschooling, free-schooling, and homeschooling.
The truth of human sexuality, as far as procreation, can be grasped by little minds, but the full force of this natural phenomenon cannot be explained in words; it must be experienced, if only vicariously, when full sexual arousal is possible. This phenomenon, according to natural law, cannot be experienced by children. True, children can experience orgasm, as well as other sexually stimulating feelings, to an extent, but there are a great many crucial parts of sexuality that are completely absent in a child’s mind. Not to go on at great length about it, but the simple facts that boys cannot ejaculate semen during masturbation, and that girls cannot menstruate, should be wisdom enough that this is so.
If it’s at all possible, try to remember your own curiosity about men when you were a boy. For many heterosexually-oriented prepubescents, a few experiences, skinny dipping with dad, for instance, are enough to satisfy this natural curiosity. That was never the case with me, but stay with me. Go back to this innocent experience you had and try to mentally interject an adult male (or female) introducing seduction into the experience. How do you feel about it now?
Whether or not a child is volitional in sexual experimentation with adults is irrelevant. Children don’t get it, because sexuality, in order to be understood, has to be experienced. I don’t mean that you have to lose your virginity, but you do have to experience the arousal. This is why responsible Catholic priests can counsel married couples. Sure, maybe the guy’s a virgin since he’s been a priest since he was 19, but by that time, he has had erections, wet dreams, and if he’s like most men, he’s experienced the pleasure of his own penis in his hand. If he’s a heterosexual priest, he has also felt the attendant desires to caress and mount women. If he is sufficiently mature and has done his research, he’s ready to counsel without ever having committed the marital act. An altar boy is not.
This truth is hidden from children by nature, not by society’s dictates, not by the state, not by some set of arbitrary religious rules. Children don’t get it. What Mom and Dad do to make babies is weird. Girls are gross. Boys are stupid. This mentality doesn’t truly understand what is happening when an adult begins touching in a sexual manner, even if it’s what the child wants.
Therefore, to coerce against the truth is to reduce the volitional capacity of the child. To coerce a child’s volition by withholding vital information is death. Abused children, whether willing or not, are permanently damaged.
Even after puberty has commenced, and the area is far grayer (since cultures the world over have been known to marry off 12- and 13-year-olds), it is also unwise for adults who have passed through puberty to disturb the sometimes agonizing process of growing body hair, bleeding from the vagina, descending testicles, wet dreams, budding breasts, and so on. In those critical seven or eight years, a great many changes are happening, and to interfere from a more mature perspective is likewise coercion against the greater truths that will only be obtained when the young adult has made it all the way through. That is how I perceive it at this time; however, I am fully aware that grown men, in the past, have thought nothing of taking teenage brides as child-bearers. How messed up were those women? I can’t say for sure, but a great many of them managed to raise children all the same, and stay with their marriage partners for life.
Therefore, it is now undoubtedly clear to me that organizations like NAMbLA are coercive, and therefore death-oriented, in a particularly pernicious way. Since the finer points of individuality lay hidden to the majority of adults wandering around on land masses all over this planet, the efforts of such organizations can be sadly be expected to make headway. This is not a good development.
Notice that I’ve hardly brought up Polanski’s rape. That is because not only have I thoroughly covered my thoughts and feelings on the matter elsewhere, but it doesn’t matter to me whether the victim should be considered a child or a young woman. Rape is rape. All sex with children should be considered rape. I also believe that nature has infused humanity with a general disinterest in children as sex partners, an infusion that goes ignored along with individuality, when adults who themselves have been so abused disregard the truth. These things are plain to me.
So the commenter’s accusations sting not because they are true, but because he reveals his inability to see me as I am, as an admirer and defender of children. It reminds me that I will never have any, and my brief opportunities to spend time with them are not enough.
I have endured other people going on about how grown men who want to spend time with little children are weird, like there’s something wrong with us. I had to defend myself, and gay men in general, over at “Strike The Root” when I made a passing comment about a funny article at “The Onion” about gays in the military. My opponent in the ensuing argument is of the opinion that I should not be in intimate contact with prepubescent boys, since some gays are molesters. In spite of the fact that the majority of child molesters are heterosexuals, and in spite of most comments at “Strike The Root” being directed at ideas of individuality, I am to be lumped in with coercive, death-oriented adults by virtue of my liking men’s cocks. (And people think it’s all downhill for us faggots because “Will & Grace” was a hit.)
The idea that I would ever want to coerce any child, or would ever be accused of such an act, offends me as a member of the gay community, and as a man. Make no mistake about it, condemning Polanski after he served his time and made financial restitution to the victim, most especially when she herself wants the condemnation to stop, is part and parcel with misandry. See here a far superior writer talking about much the same thing. When scare tactics are used by the state, it is not the image of violent women running into the streets brandishing weapons that is used; it is the violent image of violent men. Us guys are all just a few steps away from it, at all times. And the children will suffer.
This is nonsense. It is false. It makes me sick. It is tiresome. It is cruel and hurtful. It separates children from manhood, to the detriment of both boys and girls. Men who join in the chorus are doing the rest of us no favors.
The thought occurred to me earlier today as I was driving home from my boring corporate job: Why are marriages failing? There are probably many reasons, but up until now, no one has bothered to touch upon one reason that I think is worth considering. Government schools, television, corporate superstores, so very much of modern life is meant for the purposes of homogenization. The ruling elite can thrive on a continent filled by people who buy the Democrat-Republican-division ruse, who all watch the same inane programs, who tune into the same radio stations, who go to schools that teach the same things, who all have tax “withheld” from their paychecks.
Beyond the fact that modern technology has made obsolete the dire necessity of making a family for survival purposes, the modern corporate state also attempts to make the same that which can never be equal. Individuals are bound to have separate strengths, and consequently separate interests. Remove children from the surrounding community all day, set them in front of the homogenous television all night, ensure that the same packaged foods are available in Alaska as well as Florida, and you have people who experience many of the same things.
So why wouldn’t marriage between two same-thinking people work? One reason is because these two people have spent their most critical years separate from grown men, grown women, old people, toddlers, immigrants, babies, prepubescents, teenagers, shop owners, mechanics, farmers, truck drivers, entrepreneurs, construction workers, nurses, doctors, homemakers, and various other individuals pursuing their individual interests in the communities in which they “live.” This experience ought to be quite natural, and should aid children in learning to relate to many different kinds of people.
Unfortunately, people are stifled from what ought to be natural relationships. They are kept from everybody else. Children now go on play dates. Men are suspect if they’re sitting in playgrounds. All of this, thanks to the hysteria over NAMbLA and what some man somewhere might do. People who don’t know how to get along with lots of different people are bound to have marital problems. It’s easier to despise those with whom you are unfamiliar.
If people truly understood their very natures, so much of what separates us, as well as what truly threatens children, would simply go by the wayside. Instead, Polanski is an eternal villain in spite of the pleadings of the very person he hurt, and men everywhere are suspect as rapists and child molesters, especially us homos. Sadly, my prediction is that this backward, reactionary way of thinking is far from over. Those who will pay the price are children, kept from vital relationships that would teach them about getting along in marriage, and the most unfortunate few that come into contact with adults who never bothered to face their own childhoods of abuse. It is a pity that there are some who choose instead to read into my words that which is not there, rather than listen to hurt children, whether they’ve grown up or have yet to do so. It will take a world of men willing to stand up to the cacophony to set things right.
B.R. Merrick writes for “Strike The Root” and “A Voice for Men,” lives in the Northeast, is proud to be a classical music reviewer at Amazon.com and iTunes, and in spite of the poisonous nature of television, God Himself will have to pry his DVDs of “Monty Python’s Flying Circus” out of his cold, dead hands, under threat of eternal damnation.
Tags: B.R. Merrick, Culture, Divorce, Education, False Accusation, Family, Fathers, Gay, Government Tyranny, Law, Masculinity, Media Bias, Men, Men's Issues, Miscellaneous, Mythbusting, Psychology, Sex, sexual orientation
37 Posts in Total 
donations either one-time or on a monthly subscription basis.If you don't have paypal, check out the other options. If you want to get some merchandise and sponsor us at the same time, consider the AVfM store. 
quolls:
Jared White:
Codebuster:
napocapo69:
Rper1959:
I love “Will and Grace”.
I don’t believe what you said, the truth is human beings are animals and kids can have sexual attraction to adults, many young kids masterbate from very early ages. Me and my cousin used to rub our genitals together between the ages of 4-6 in secret. The idea that kids have no sexuality is something left over from judeo-christian influences on the west. The Greeks were pederasts for gods sakes, the idea that modern ideas of what you think is co-ercion and sexuality is modern socially programmed “respectable” views that have no basis in reality, morality changes with the tides of history and culture.
There are tonnes of people out there who in secret want to engage in illicit behaviours but will never own up to this publically for fear of discrimination. Human beings – all of them, are sexual animals and that sexuality exists from birth onward. The idea kids aren’t sexual does not hold true for anyone who understands or has observed animal sexuality in the animal kingdom or anyone who like me was sexual with other kids from a very early age.
Kids willingly explore sexuality behind closed doors of the adult world, and many of the more risk taking might even instigate sexual behaviour with an adult. Not all kids are ignorant or innocent, many are just naturally curious.
As a culture in the west and many other places, people are afraid of their animal sexuality, human trafficking and sex with children exists because both are willing to engage in the practice. Why do you think so many men go out of country for sex tourism? They tire of the whiny moralism of their home countries. The real world is a tawdry place, many people won’t admit to their more instinctual desires but they exist in most men and women, they come out in fantasies and many will never act on them, but many men and women if given the freedom from society would have no problem engaging in sexual acts with kids. People are really afraid of affection in many places in society and a lot of this is just to do with idiotic ideas and conflicting impulses and anxiety of their own sexuality.
I don’t neither judge nor condemn peoples sexuality, people are animals the result of a bloody, indifferent evolutionary process.
Why do we have militaries for instance? for defence? hah.. More like because the more “civilized” people in rich countries need to keep their competitors poor for imperialistic purposes which drives people in poor countries to do whatever it takes for money, so you get things like child prostitution and sweat shops.
The whole idea that people or children are “innocent” is a naive an uninformed view of history of the human race.
Correct me if I am wrong, please. I could be suffering from insular isolation
What I think you are saying is if we spend all of our lives isolated and insulated by what we believe without measuring it’s validity against the experience of reality. Things might get screwy and may in fact be screwy.
That if we define men as the “boogey man” we might learn to and do fear and hate him.
That’s certainly another way of putting it, keith. Interesting perspective.
BC, the example you give of two children experimenting with each other is separate from the content of the article. Two boys rubbing their genitals together is a non-coercive, volitional act. Children are indeed curious about their bodies, the bodies of others, and what they will eventually know as human sexuality, but this does not mean that they can comprehend the immense differences naturally inherent in adult sexual relations. I don’t buy the rest of the argument simply because it happens throughout the world. I see no logic or life-orientation behind adults introducing children to sex acts.
@BC
that’s a curious outlook, but it opens the door to a particular kind of abuse and particularly to boys.
If you withhold physical affection from a child (boys often being raised this way)
will they accept sexual affection as a replacement?
Is the intent for the outcome or the intent that fuels the desire the same between a child and adult.
How would you determine the difference if a child lacks the language to express it?
If you can’t determine the difference what gives you the right to assume the motivation is the same?
@keith
Nature does not care for peoples “morality” if we turned men’s and women’s minds inside out to see what the dreamed and fantasized about consistently, a good 80 percent of the human race would be in jail.
Human beings are animals keith, the civilization and morality layed on top of animal behaviour is the fiction. Language obscures the truth of what what people desire. If we lived in a culture that accepted and praticed their impulses we would accept them, the same way many children before the advent of school and science accepted their parents religion and customs.
Human beings are more creatures of inertia and habit then rational thought, our views are colored by other peoples standards which they inherited from their parents, and in the west conserativism and christianity have had a big influence on secular morality whether one admits this or not, the further you go back into the past and the more you study people outside of your own culture, you see sexuality that is radically different from our own.
It’s only damaging to people because people believe it is, it’s a self-fulfilling prophecy. Unfortunately we can’t run objective experiments but we can assume for the sake of argument that a behaviour that is not treated as evil in a childs youth will be by and large accepted by children born into that group.
People cannot really be honest about biology or animal behaviour because they exist in a bubble in time, it takes an honest look at history and animal behaviour to understand things in depth.
The real issue people have a problem with is that it jives against what they’ve been taught to believe, belief that something is evil for human beings, makes it so, perception is reality, the same way many religious believers on earth think their religion and morality and god is the _one true faith_ same thing happens in the moral and sexual realms.
I’m not here to judge nor condemn but I speak from my own experiences I was attracted to adults as a kid and I certainly wouldn’t have minded, in fact I came on to adults specifically in a naive way because I was a horny kid. A lot of horny young boys would have easily gotten it on with adults and not had a problem with it, your own youth may not have been like this, but remember your experience is your own other people are different.
Once a kids sexuality emerges it’s not going away, as much as parents would like to deny or supress their children’s sexuality. In the west people liked to keep kids in the dark because they themselves were anxious or uncomfortable with it, but with the internet now, kids can explore on their own at lightning speed, so you see human nature and all that underlying animal sexuality resurface.
Adults would like to tell themselves the fairytale that kids are not sexual but that is not the reality if people could have an honest and open conversation about these things without the fear of condemnation by others who are ignorant and bigotted about the truth about human beings animal sexuality.
@BC
A number of issues you touch on are poignant and worth discussing. Since I can see better into my head than yours, I will personalize your points for my own clarity.
Nature has a great way of defining life as impersonal, disconnected and dangerous. Morality attempts to contradict that message. One purpose this serves is to alter the flow of hormonal excretion, so we can feel something different, and usually in less extreme ways.
So I think I am agreeing with you that there are things such as biology, going on outside of our consciousness that may and do direct our consciousness. Morality may act as a governor to it’s extreme experience.
At this point I would argue that nature has a morality, not subject to judgment. Trees don’t suckle animals, dogs don’t hump bricks, fish don’t ride bicycles. Our morality is organic in nature and shaped by our interpretation of natures laws of survival and existence. Civilization is man made weather.
As far as being jailed for our thoughts, we pretty much are. It’s called repetition or what I like to refer to as beliefs. I think most of us are feeling pretty safe in our prisons. Check out the spin cycle.
If one thought lasts as long as 5 seconds, we would have 12 every minute, 720 every hour, 11,520 thoughts a day, not including our sleep. Most if not all of those thoughts are repetitious unoriginal, and serve to filter new information into the system of our indoctrination, and dump the rest. In my opinion our thoughts are populated by our stressors. Be it finance, violence or sex.
Family, religion, law are all systems of indoctrination. I think you would agree that they don’t function perfectly and to some degree are fucked up. Which throws indoctrination processes into question and it would be right and correct to say that some of those processes do damage.
BC, the following is your words, these I have a problem with.
“Unfortunately we can’t run objective experiments but we can assume for the sake of argument that a behavior that is not treated as evil in a child’s youth will be by and large accepted by children born into that group.”
We can and have run objective experiments with children, thousands of them. They define our understanding of early childhood development. Empirical data has proven much more reliable than what you would “assume for the sake argument”.
“behavior that is not treated as evil in a child’s youth will be by and large accepted by children born into that group.”
This is another indoctrination process and a dangerous and potentially damaging one. Though your statement may be true it does not give license or justification. Your earlier characterization of the 4 and 6 year old represents indoctrination or initiation by one of them. Tracking backwards it would be curious to discover the ages of earlier initiators. This behavior is coerced and is not mutual. There is a chain here, it’s being hidden. Sorry BC I have also lived through this shit, and I’m not buying your statements, justifications or conclusions.
In my experience it was initiated by older children, who were again initiated by children older than them. I’m telling you flat out that I did not and do not find it acceptable. Though you may, you should limit your argument to yourself. Don’t speak for others.
Aside from the grooming and hot housing, there are other biological processes that take place. Premature stimulation of the hypothalamus and pineal glands directly affecting the brain stem and brain chemistry that can cause symptoms similar to attention deficit disorder. Over stimulation of the vagus nerve that can contribute to hyperactivity or just plain restlessness.
I’m curious did you experience an early onset of puberty, I started at age eight with facial hair starting at thirteen. I suspect this was the result of altered brain chemistry. But I can’t prove it.
To take your argument to it’s absurd extreme is equal to saying
if you fuck children and tell them it’s alright then its alright.
Which is a great argument for castration. You know to alter your brain chemistry.
Merrick, I don’t think there is any necessity to defend yourself against such accusations, they were already well defended in the original article. His crimes were discussed and refusing to engage in the demonization of Roman Polanski as a central theme is not advocacy of pedophilia. Good article and issue to discuss, I just don’t think the defensive lead was necessary.
The discussion basic bodily functions and names of body parts should be natural and regular for a parent and child. The teaching of sexual pleasure and unnecessary detail is inappropriate for all children. Not only do children not understand sex at that age, they are easily manipulated and groomed by predatory adults with a great imbalance in knowledge and control. It doesn’t matter if a child is curious or permissive; any discussion of sexual pleasure with children is despicable.
Human beings are sexual animals; young children touch themselves because it feels good. As long as there is no adult involvement in their exploration, it is a natural curiosity. Civilization makes us better than animals and that is worth defending. It is a moral judgement issue that can be changed at any point in time based on popular support in a democracy. I’m non-religious and anti-marriage but I have no desire to emulate bonobos. 16 sounds about right and is unlikely to change anytime soon. The other issue, which I wish you had addressed, is relationships between 17year old boys and 15 year old girls, which is something quite different, particularly with sexting. There is much less power imbalance and difference in maturity between 15 and 17.
I really think that the mass media sexualisation of youth is a far more sinister problem than anything to do with Roman Polanski, the MSM is teaching children the power and over importance of sexuality. Further, young boys and girls are learning about sex from internet porn and they are emulating them. As an adult, I’m not particularly disturbed by these freedoms, but children are bombarded with sexual messages from the MSM that will affect their future relationships.
Young girls quickly learn the power of their sexuality; there are cases of 13-15 year girls actively prostituting themselves to older men for the primary purpose of money for clothes and partying. College smoot is the holy grail of pussy and they understand this power and use it to their advantage.
Denis, I can’t think of a single thing you said with which I disagree. The only exception I would make is that I wasn’t so much on the defensive, but thought this would be an excellent opportunity to delve further into issues of sexuality, coercion, and misandry. Then your excellent comments took it up another level. Thank you.
@ BR
These two articles about Polanski are excellent and the comments following are interesting to say the least.
In the realm of misandry regarding this topic, I wonder why we overlook the fact that this girl 13, had parents and likely an agent. What was she doing at the party and why did she remain afterward. Who was her agent. It is legitimate to ask whether they conspired to exchange flesh for gain. Or an unspoken willingness to let it happen. These may well be questions that the “victim” wishes to avoid for the sake of family. Although a court room may not entertain such questioning, MSM does not respect such boundaries.
I”ll apologize if I sound to sophic, I think equality may be achieved by our effort to elevate others in dignity. I like to believe that children are entitled to their own dignity.
I gotta respond to this.I first jerked off when i was ten years old.and i kam.and it was FANTASTIC!!!! ang i have been jerking off ever since.I agree with BC.Humens are curious creatures.and sexual.girls at 12 have their periods.I heard somewhere that is when they are ready for mating.is that true?anyways…we humens are alot of things.I feel this writer is just defending his homo life style.I dont care about his HOMO life style.thats his life style.
@ sean moor
I am literally laughing out loud here- sort of.
Is the “HOMO” in all caps supposed to be some sort of Beavis and Butthead shot at locker room humor? Do you think being gay needs defense? From what? Stupidity?
If that is the case I think you are right. And as an MRA I am acutely aware of having to defend myself from the stupidity of the culture around me. A lot of that going around these days.
I am going to say a couple of things here for the record, knowing that this would eventually come up at AVFM, especially since we have a contributor that happens to be homosexual. But I don’t want it confused with defending Merrick. He can clearly do that for himself.
The larger issue for me is the histrionic and roundly ignorant reactions of a limited amount of MRA’s to the mere mention of the word “gay.”
To be clear, as a strict constitutional conservative, I have a natural aversion to identity politics, and the “gay rights” agenda is no exception. I would torch it right along with feminism in a heartbeat. And if the MRM were an organized agenda to seek pro-male legislation, I would light it up and laugh while it burned as well.
But having no sympathy for a gay political agenda does not make me want to waste time with inanities like worrying about people who are gay. In fact, I have a lot more sympathy for the social end of their circumstances because I am an MGTOW type advocate.
One bottom line that I have seen in play historically is a prejudice against gay men rooted in chivalry. We scorn gay men because they are free from the burden of taking care of women. They are, as long as we only value men based on utility to women, dead weight.
But aren’t most of us in the MRM screaming the loudest about how we are being used for the benefit of women?
It is crystal clear to me the forces that hurt men, aka forced chivalry, are the same forces that hurt gay men. And we can only benefit collectively by an honest dialog about that. Unfortunately we won’t get there with 12 year old jargon like HOMO or the equivalent from the gay community, BREEDER.
There is a lot more to say about this, and I hope to hear more from other readers as well.
@ sean
Paul was keeping his usual standard in his answer and was trying to be polite and political correct (to my surprise^^)
My answer is a lot shorter but still appropriate, I guess:
“That was the sickest and dumbest comment I ever read on a page like this.”
@ sean moore (or less)
Its wonderful that you were able to locate the centre of your universe at the age of 10. Consistent with advice I have given my own children, is before allowing someone else to play with your body, play with it yourself first and find out how it works. Well done sean, a good healthy approach, hopefully you didn’t get any in your eye. Sounds like you and your box of kleenex can move forward in life and over cum just about anything.
@ BR
I am 54 years old, white hair white beard, I have a six year old autistic son. I can tell you without going into detail, I am tired of being called his grampa, along with the looks and leading questions. I couldn’t say which group is vilified
more, yours or mine. I do know we are both men, we are both individuals and we both deserve better.
I guess as the victim groups diversify so to must the perceived perpetrators. Otherwise the ruze wouldn’t stand up to most of the socially illiterate.
I have nine brothers and sisters, 27 nieces and nephews, 3 children of my own and 3 grandchildren. Kids in my life were pretty normal and very welcome. Not now and never again. I spend time with my 6 year old son, that’s it. The rest becomes risk management and tolerance and I don’t have much of either left.
When my now 29 year old daughter was six or seven, I remember her bringing home a pamphlet from school on street wising your kids. All the perpetrators in it were men. While sitting in the living room, I overheard her asking her mother, “would dad do something like that to me”. It broke my heart that the relationship with my daughter was so vulnerable to bullshit. After that I was not even comfortable giving her a hug. Today its pretty much down to a hand shake but I haven’t seen her or her children in over five years. I wouldn’t even dream of being alone with her children in the same room.
I often question my presence with my 6 year old son. The funny thing is I haven’t done anything questionable. I don’t think people understand the damage that has been done and continues to be done to men and their children.
Not nice to say but I advise men not to get emotionally entangled with kids, it’s just to painful to say goodbye and you will.
I gonna comment on what paul and keith said about my comment on the article i read.Hey guys… those were my thoughts and feelings.I thought this was a place where us men can be honest with each other. america has become a politically correct country,where you have to watch what you say about the gov.and groups of people.I have heard pauls videos where he exspressed his feelings on the politically correct bullshit.I AM sick and tired of having to watch my mouth around people.Thats why i dont hang with to many. as for the homo remark…Homo-which is short for homosexual.and that is the politically correct name for a humen who is sexually attracted to the same gender.I knew some homosexual men and women.I found the men to be more cool to be around than the lezbos.oh…excuse me!! lesbian american!!! I wanted to make sure i was politically correct on that.What im also tired of,is having the gay world thrown in my face.forcing me to be nice and accept them.Ill accept who i want to.If the person has a good charater,integerty,heart and shit.I dont care if they are HOMO!!!!!!! I had a chance to be around the gay crowd.and they are no different than us.no special than us.I have found them(some that is)to be fucking hypocrites.They have their pet names for us straights.BREEDERS!!! is one.if you want to take offence at what i said then go ahead.It would be nice if i could find a place where us americans can just be FUCKING honest with each other for fucking once.is that to much to ask??? forgive my spelling.writing is my weakest point
@ sean
I made no comment to you about your homo crack (no pun intended). We’re all big boys here.
However in a world that is increasingly attaching men, I personally see no need for attacking each other. I think the comment I directed at you was reasonably sarcastic, a little amusing, but not attacking. If that was hard to take why not just extend the same respect to others. I think you may be confusing “FUCKING honest” with what could otherwise be a reasonable level of respect. I think you’ll discover that you will also receive respect. All of us here exchanging with each other are worthy of at least that.
@ sean
You are free to be honest here, as are the men who may disagree with you. I don’t think you can be free to be honest and expect to be protected from the honesty of others at the same time.
You made a post that engaged in name calling, and was clearly a personal attack on the writer of the article above. Yet, I let it stand right where it was and only offered my honest opinion to you in response.
Others have done the same, so I really don’t know what you are looking for.
And BTW, many of the people who come here aren’t American, nor would I call this an Amero-centric site.
It’s a site for men, sean, and I personally don’t care about what their bedroom habits or nationality happen to be.
I don’t really mind being called a breeder. Why would I find that offensive? It’s about as offensive as being called a honkey. Although, as a MGHOW, I’m not sure ‘breeder’ is really the appropriate term.
O.k let me step back here.This is the real thing.and you can believe me.Though i still stand by what i said.I was commenting on BC’s comment.the first comment i wrote was longer.It explained my thoughts and feelings about the article,as well as the writers sexuality.but it didnt go thruw when i went to submit it.I fucked up or something.so i wrote it again.trying to remember what i said and ending it the way i did,from frusteration.angered by my first writing, not being submited the first time.I ended it the way i did.It didnt come out the way i wanted it to.But hey…those are the brakes.Im not here to attack anyone boys.but im still gonna be honest on things that bother me.like politics in anything.Then i have to accept others honesty.its fair enough. and i meant to comment on rulaZ comment,not you keith.so i am sorry.I let emotions get in the way of my thinking.i cant put my feelings and thoughts in a sophisticated way like mr.elam.I guess thats where the psychology training comes in.so lets just be cool. im willing to be.
“Human beings are animals keith, the civilization and morality layed on top of animal behaviour is the fiction. Language obscures the truth of what what people desire.”
BC, animals do not stand, as I do, at the edge of the Grand Canyon and marvel, nor do they try to capture it in oil-on-canvas, nor write music about it, nor run to their relatives, crying out, “You’ve gotta see this!” We have animal-like instincts, however, the civilization “layed on top” of those instincts is not a fiction, but the physical proof of our otherness from the animal world. Likewise, I have not heard any arguments that can factually show me a child’s supposed ability to see sexuality for what we adults understand it to be, by virtue of the fact that in spite of some children’s volitional participation in the behavior, they are physically incapable of reproduction, and all the various intense emotions that accompany the act. I’m not buying it, as compelling as some of it sounds.
“After that I was not even comfortable giving her a hug.” Keith, that once again strikes at the heart of one of the things I was trying to say. Men like you and me are vilified, and it’s unfounded and ultimately degrading to the culture in which we live. That’s very sad.
And sean moor, I don’t care for political correctness either, and you are free to disagree with me and side with BC if you want, but I still see no factual evidence for your argument. A pre-pubescent boy who masturbates himself of his own volition, and two boys who experiment with one another of their own volition, were deliberately not mentioned in the article because that is a separate issue. I am referring to adult sexuality and its separateness from boyhood experiences, since boys are incapable of understanding sexuality from an adult male perspective.
B.R fair enough.But i still side with BC on somethings.that first comment i wrote was not the original one i wrote.I pour out my feelings and thoughts in letters and at times they dont go thruw.and i wasted my time.That pisses me off.you raised some good points.but so did BC and keith.My father was the same way as keith mentioned about himself.and you have a right to your opinion as well as i do,BC and keith does.I dont want this to turn out to be some shoving match.Thats what women do.They act like that.if no one here minds me saying that. and as for evidence…I did have an orgasm at age ten.when i discovered masterbation.Peace.
@ sean
I don’t perceive a pushing match, or at least, no comments to try and run you off.
Personally, its good to push each other a little, our responses to it seem to create a larger view. I agree with several points made by BC and others.
I always take exception to the same thing. Assuming what I believe and my beliefs will be good for you. This is a feminist mantra I hear all the time.
It try’s to tell me who I am, what I think and how I feel to the point that even try’s to define my worth.
Don’t tell me what’s good for me, you may not be as qualified as I am.
I try to extend that to others, even children.
@ Keith
“When my now 29 year old daughter was six or seven, I remember her bringing home a pamphlet from school on street wising your kids. All the perpetrators in it were men. While sitting in the living room, I overheard her asking her mother, “would dad do something like that to me”. It broke my heart that the relationship with my daughter was so vulnerable to bullshit. After that I was not even comfortable giving her a hug.”
I feel your pain. It’s been almost 4 years ago that I took my then 5 year old granddaughterto the “Barbie Store” (that’s what she called it). She had asked for a Barbie for Christmas and to be taken to the store to pick it out. So I bought her a gift card and promised to take her after Christmas. While at the checkout, the cashier began questioning her. As I listened, I suddenly realized that the cashier was trying to find out whether or not this little girl belonged with this old man. I suddenly became terrified. Having worked with children all my life, I knew they could easily say something that might be misconstrued. I spent the rest of the day wondering whether someone had taken down my license plate and would be sending the cops to my door. I haven’t taken either of my granddaughters out alone since. Now I tell them that we have to wait for their mother or grandmother to go with us. I have never hurt a child, nor would I ever.
It makes me sick to think that people see me with my grandchildren and think of me like that. But that’s the way society views men nowadays. We’re all molesters, rapists, murderers, etc. Men are monsters and instead of being the protectors of society, now society must be protected from us.
This is the reason I cannot go along with the comments made by BC. Morality is what seperates us from other animals. Humans have the capability of denying our basic instincts and controlling our behavior. Children may have a curiosity about their own bodies and those of adults. Exploring that curiosity might feel good to them, so they may think it is what they want. But they do not have the cognitive ability to understand sexuality in an adult manner, therefore it is the responsibility of the adult to control their own behavior and to place limits on the behavior of children.
A child may have a natural instinct to grab the handle of a pot cooking on the stove. The child may be curious about it. What the child may not understand is that it is hot and can burn, causing injury and harm. The adult does have that capability and therefore a responsibility to prevent the child from grabbing the pot. Childhood sexuality is no different. We don’t have to make children ashamed of their bodies or feelings, but we do have a responsibility to protect them and not abuse them.
TDOM
@Snark.
Ugh, OK, what is a MGHOW?
In the interest of giving Richard a quick answer, I’ll answer for Snark. 99.9% chance he means ‘Man Going His Own Way.’
Thanks Eincrou. Spin off of MGTOW.
DUH – I should have figured that out myself.
So much lingo and abbreviations that are alien to me…
@ TDOM
I am sorry to hear that you carry that wound. It is an experience that is very difficult to share. Family members may view it as an over sensitivity and not understand. You must really be in the midst of it, to take it’s full meaning and the implications. It’s something I think typically has to be experienced to understand.
It’s a vicious characterization of men. I have great disdain and distaste for gender based victimology. Such is the gifts of gender feminists. A politic that states that the crime is only unacceptable if it happens to me. So protect me.
@ Keith
The experience is one of the things that brought me into the MRM. I had always had a sense that in many ways, society was biased against men, but had always been taught the opposite. I had always believed, and still do, that men and women should have equal rights. But I also had a general distrust of feminism, although I never understood where it came from. Now I know. I understand and I speak out about it.
I read a story on another blog today about a 12 year old boy who told his uncle that his mother wouldn’t allow him to act like a boy and that he had no intention of acting like a typical man when he grows up. This after hearing his mother make very generalized and derogatory remarks about men. His uncle apparently had to remind him that he IS a boy and WILL BE a man and there is nothing wrong with acting like either. Apparently his mother views herself as a victim and has no idea what she is doing to her son. How’s that for gender feminism?
Recently I’ve written a couple of articles on my blog about equailty. I’m currently writing another, though this one is more about egalitarianism. I hope to have it completed and posted by the end of next week, if not sooner. It’s kind of long and I may break it into three parts. I haven’t decided. It’s almost a manifesto, but not quite. I’m trying to keep it more intellectual than political. I haven’t mentioned the word “feminism” yet and I hope to refrain from it.
TDOM
My father had a problem getting close to us for fear someone might take what he did as wrong.so i and the rest of my bros.and sis’s.missed out on the fatherly love children need.so i, as a child once, can fully understand what is being said among keith and couple others. But the real reason i bash women is ,not because i feel men are perfect.far from FUCKING perfect. is because women have been treated, and still is, as FUCKING prefect!!! do i hear a amen!?! Im tired of hearing how “great” women are. peace keith.
@ TDOM
“mother wouldn’t allow him to act like a boy”
I’ve said this before, but I don’t think people captured the insight. I’d like to repeat it again TDOM. I think you may better understand, based on your example.
For young boys and young men, to be in such an environment, to be subject to rejection of their gender by a mother carping about an intimate partner is equal in my eyes to creating (psychologically) a divorced man that has never been married. It is a form of incest in which the child is unable to protect himself.
@ sean
“My father had a problem getting close to us for fear someone might take what he did as wrong”
This is truly the loss of intimate masculinity. Sean I would ask you to read again an earlier question I posed.
If you withhold physical affection from a child (boys often being raised this way)
will they accept sexual affection as a replacement?
I’m posting this with the statement about your relationship with your father, to highlight the vulnerability to predators young boys can be faced with. Predators are not only men and they don’t necessarily seek sexual advantage. When we lose our fathers we are often left with a hole that wants to be filled. As children the dignity of our experience to know our father can and is diminished in this culture. I wholly understand your position about women and yes you have my AMEN!!!! The last words to my ex were “baby your just as dirty with life as I am, you just want me to believe your not.” peace sean.
@TDOM
I would very much like to read your articles, post a link. I have 5 brothers and 4 sisters. Equality in my youth was unavoidable, my sisters would never have anything less.
For myself, I think equality emanates from respect. It’s an invisible quality that can only be noticed or recognized when you pay attention. Like a spirit or intention, it can’t be measured but it can be felt. Women are greatly lacking in respect. Respect for men, respect for children and respect for themselves. Excuse my directness. They should be kicked off their fucking pedestals and climb back down in the dirt like the rest of us.
@ sean
thanks for hanging in even with the pushing. It was definitely worth reading your post about your experience with your father. More comments like yours will help to bring fathers back to their children. Don’t stop talking about it, there’s too much to gain. When it’s common language it will change. peace brother sean.
@ Keith,
Thanks for your comments. The link to my blog is http://thedamnedoldeman.com or you can just click on my name. the blog is about various things that interest me and that I think most men would be interested in. Men’s rights and issues are just part of it. Being a student of psychology and retired social worker, I also write about those subjects as well as philosophy. I’m now a chef, so I write about food, beer, and wine. I’m in the middle of a series on BBQ, the intro series is nearing completion and I hope to be writing on more advanced topics later on. Of course, I’m a sports fan so there’s some of that too. I also review movies and tv shows, mostly from an MRA oint of view by discussing the misandry present in them. And of course, I’m not above shamelessly plugging my blog in the comments section of other blogs. It’s the only promotion I do.
TDOM
Thanks for the support keith.I could have taken a differnt route on the comments i recieved from what i wrote.and been a total dick.but that never did me any good.on some things it did good.but like i said…the original comment i wrote was longer and more understandible.but i took some shots so there.My point in my comment, based on the article i read.was there is bais in every group.and children(cause i was one once.still am i feel)experianced a sexual thrill in jacking off.oh…excuse me.masterbation.I hope that doesnt turn anyone off.so i was commenting on several things the writer wrote about.in the longer version.This isnt the only web site on men for men that i can go to when im checking out things to read and such.There is others.But i like this web site.Mr.elam is intersting and entertaining to listen to.and i can relate to things he says.so that is why i come here.I have my thoughts and feelings about women and alot of things in this world.I just have a hard time exspressing myself in a way where it comes out the way paul elam says it.SMOOTH!!! I just need to sharpen my skills.I dont know how i can do that.but i will find a way. forgive my spelling.I suck at writing.