The purity spiral on age of consent has devolved into something actually harmful for healthy marriages. These people would flip their shit at Romeo and Juliet laws if they heard about them. Also RIP handling jannies.
A relationship between an 18 year old and a 23 year old is neither illegal nor widely frowned upon outside some fringe age-gap sticklers, so I don't think it was that.
The problem with them was that they also had significant deficits in reading comprehension and were leaping to conclusions, usually to hysterically screech at Bronski. They assumed that because he advocated for an age of consent as low as 15, that his wife must have been 15 as well, though it said no such thing in any of his posts.
In short they were unbelievably stupid and proportionally impulsive
It is ridiculous that there were dozens of people outright flinging threats at him and the guy getting banned was a man in a legal and normal marriage. In the 21st century West it is de-facto impossible to get married it seems.
The concept of the "age of consent" by itself was always a sign of harm towards healthy marriages, since the concept assumes that the only relevant thing at play is the consent of the party (whether for sex or for marriage is irrelevant). In a healthy society, we would have "marriageable age", unambiguous what that aims to regulate, unlike the vague and amorphous concept of "consent" being thrown around.
I also received a 7 day block because I responded in kind to a person fantasising about violence towards me. Sad to see the state of affairs in our civilisation when something objectively healthy and normal for most of history until about 20 years ago is now enough to summon envious commie lynch-mobs and justify their actions in the eyes of the so-called "silent" majority.
People are so reluctant to bring up the difference between pedophilia and ephebophilia, the latter of which is not even considered pathological in clinical and forensic contexts, because all they'll get is "Oh-hoh, you're THAT guy! You really went there!" But it's true and should be said, especially if we're going to have serious conversations about sexuality and sex offenders.
Pedophiles are a deviant minority of men, but they're nowhere near rare enough to be a trivial concern. Female pedophiles are close to nonexistent. (Some would point out the news stories of female teachers getting arrested for immoral conduct. If we use the actual definition of the disorder we're talking about, no, they don't count - and neither do men who get with teenage girls.) The problem with lumping all attraction to youth together as "pedophilia" and saying what's wrong about it is the "power imbalance" is that it applies excessive moral panic to cases involving older youth *and* too little emphasis on what makes pedohebephilia so abhorrent. "MAP" activists claim that the legal arguments against what they want to do are stupid; adult relationships have all kinds of "power imbalances," so why single out age gaps as uniquely harmful? Of course, it's because *no* imbalance between sexually developed adults even comes close to the profound imbalance between an adult and a child, and no desire for a sexually developed person even comes close to the deviance and selfishness it would take for an adult to impose lascivious acts on a child and risk messing them up for life.
There are only 13 US states in which people under 18 cannot marry under any circumstances. In states that allow minor marriage with parental consent, there are still laws against fornicating with teens and involving them in pornography, which I think is fair, but I cannot see a good argument for an age of consent that is lower than a jurisdiction's minimum marriage age.
Ephebophilia always meant homosexual attraction to teenaged boys before the 2010s. During the 2010s it was silently expanded to describe normal young men, who are naturally attracted to young women in the species-historical marriage age window. I prefer "straight", "healthy", or "normal" as terms for this. Obviously, calling it "pedophilia" is an even bigger lie.
They want to justify their hatred of the gaps, but they can't use biology to do so, because no biological explanation ever justifies any of the opinions they hold, and -almost as importantly- the type of person to be outraged about this is allergic to any discussion of biological facts. So the motivation (hatred of the age gap and the person who dates in such a way) comes first, then comes the justification. Using the "power imbalance" as an excuse gives a plausible enough reason to rally the leftist mobs to the attack, in a way that biology can never do, since the left is obsessed with framing things in terms of "privilege" or "power" differences.
Of course, one might then pose the question of why these people never display the same hysteria towards age-matched couples who nevertheless have a power imbalance (such as a poor woman with a millionaire husband), but that's precisely the thing, none of them actually care about the expressed purposes: They are excuses and always were.
In a similar way, communists use the excuse of exploitation to attack the wealthy and the powerful.
I don't like the promotion of "age gaps" either, as someone expecting a child with a 2000-born man who's seemingly the odd one out for men his age nowadays. It reinforces the message to men that their 20s are not for settling down, which would shrink the pool for serious-minded young women who don't have a thing for big age gaps. (At this age, women naturally find men in their 20s most attractive.) My brother just turned 32 and doesn't plan to marry until he's 40; this should be considered absurd!
Probably best to just inform men that their sperm is mutating, and that women prefer smaller age gaps. I was doing this on X. It's different from shoving couples with more than a 1 year age gap into a wood chipper and so on, which is what the crazy LGBT folx want to do.
I think it was a hack. Turning off two-factor allowed someone to use a stolen password (probably from the recent huge leak) to login to your account. I have no idea how they managed that. They might have had direct access to one of your devices.
Not possible, all of my devices except my phone were off when it happened. My phone was with me. I was marked as suspended first. https://i.imgur.com/ZyIRjQX.png
Something just seems off. MFA being disabled is telltale sign of something being hacked (unless that just happens when an account is deleted). Hope that I’m right and they can get it restored instead of it being censorship.
Joseph Bronski, I think I owe an apology. Because before that shitstorm on Twitter unfolded, I had mentioned you by name and your book on a Discord server called "Cat's Lair" (It's this gay-fest here: https://discord.com/invite/ebDCCZRCcn).
I made a post replying to another person, correcting their statement on brain development (they pushed myth it wasn't developed until 25 while I said it was developed before 18), citing your book with your name. That resulted in me getting dogpiled by some of the most dogmatic, toxic people ever. And it seems like not long after that, you go into your controversy.
Not to “shift attention” from your situation but my account twitter was also banned (@retnail) and I suspect (though despite not having a significant following) it’s because I liked and retweeted all of your tweets regarding the whole age of consent debacle. In addition to that I also replied to several people in defense of teenage women being married as well liking tweets and retweeting others who were in agreement.
Also as a sidenote and idk if you know this but, some of your posts have been getting shared by accounts with pretty sizable followings and this may have contributed to the influx of proles on your account (here’s an example: https://www.instagram.com/p/DLagMO6J--1/?igsh=dHRiOHYyZGxqN3E3)
I posted this on my Twitter account, I have a couple of Twitter employees who follow me so hopefully they’ll see it.
Did you seriously lose majority of your paid subscribers here over having a wife ~4 years younger than you and saying age of consent should be 15?
Is the long house really that long?
It is really that long.
Weird to lose subscribers over this.
I joined just because of this.
Avid reader here
Unbelievable
The purity spiral on age of consent has devolved into something actually harmful for healthy marriages. These people would flip their shit at Romeo and Juliet laws if they heard about them. Also RIP handling jannies.
This situation is proof that it's harmful for healthy marriages. It's a lynch mob e-lynching someone for having a healthy marriage.
A relationship between an 18 year old and a 23 year old is neither illegal nor widely frowned upon outside some fringe age-gap sticklers, so I don't think it was that.
They were also mad I said the minimum legal age for marriage should be 15.
The problem with them was that they also had significant deficits in reading comprehension and were leaping to conclusions, usually to hysterically screech at Bronski. They assumed that because he advocated for an age of consent as low as 15, that his wife must have been 15 as well, though it said no such thing in any of his posts.
In short they were unbelievably stupid and proportionally impulsive
It is ridiculous that there were dozens of people outright flinging threats at him and the guy getting banned was a man in a legal and normal marriage. In the 21st century West it is de-facto impossible to get married it seems.
<i> In the 21st century West it is de-facto impossible to get married it seems.</i>
Agree; a form of sterilization.
The concept of the "age of consent" by itself was always a sign of harm towards healthy marriages, since the concept assumes that the only relevant thing at play is the consent of the party (whether for sex or for marriage is irrelevant). In a healthy society, we would have "marriageable age", unambiguous what that aims to regulate, unlike the vague and amorphous concept of "consent" being thrown around.
If it is a heinous crime. Then Romeo and Juliet laws are irrelevant.
Also if they can't themselves. No one can.
Sad to see.
Makes it apparent that the average hobbit is driven by nothing but envy and sadism.
I also received a 7 day block because I responded in kind to a person fantasising about violence towards me. Sad to see the state of affairs in our civilisation when something objectively healthy and normal for most of history until about 20 years ago is now enough to summon envious commie lynch-mobs and justify their actions in the eyes of the so-called "silent" majority.
Mutational load off the charts.
About half of the mob had LGBT flags, the other half were so-called "conservatives."
People are so reluctant to bring up the difference between pedophilia and ephebophilia, the latter of which is not even considered pathological in clinical and forensic contexts, because all they'll get is "Oh-hoh, you're THAT guy! You really went there!" But it's true and should be said, especially if we're going to have serious conversations about sexuality and sex offenders.
Pedophiles are a deviant minority of men, but they're nowhere near rare enough to be a trivial concern. Female pedophiles are close to nonexistent. (Some would point out the news stories of female teachers getting arrested for immoral conduct. If we use the actual definition of the disorder we're talking about, no, they don't count - and neither do men who get with teenage girls.) The problem with lumping all attraction to youth together as "pedophilia" and saying what's wrong about it is the "power imbalance" is that it applies excessive moral panic to cases involving older youth *and* too little emphasis on what makes pedohebephilia so abhorrent. "MAP" activists claim that the legal arguments against what they want to do are stupid; adult relationships have all kinds of "power imbalances," so why single out age gaps as uniquely harmful? Of course, it's because *no* imbalance between sexually developed adults even comes close to the profound imbalance between an adult and a child, and no desire for a sexually developed person even comes close to the deviance and selfishness it would take for an adult to impose lascivious acts on a child and risk messing them up for life.
There are only 13 US states in which people under 18 cannot marry under any circumstances. In states that allow minor marriage with parental consent, there are still laws against fornicating with teens and involving them in pornography, which I think is fair, but I cannot see a good argument for an age of consent that is lower than a jurisdiction's minimum marriage age.
Ephebophilia always meant homosexual attraction to teenaged boys before the 2010s. During the 2010s it was silently expanded to describe normal young men, who are naturally attracted to young women in the species-historical marriage age window. I prefer "straight", "healthy", or "normal" as terms for this. Obviously, calling it "pedophilia" is an even bigger lie.
They want to justify their hatred of the gaps, but they can't use biology to do so, because no biological explanation ever justifies any of the opinions they hold, and -almost as importantly- the type of person to be outraged about this is allergic to any discussion of biological facts. So the motivation (hatred of the age gap and the person who dates in such a way) comes first, then comes the justification. Using the "power imbalance" as an excuse gives a plausible enough reason to rally the leftist mobs to the attack, in a way that biology can never do, since the left is obsessed with framing things in terms of "privilege" or "power" differences.
Of course, one might then pose the question of why these people never display the same hysteria towards age-matched couples who nevertheless have a power imbalance (such as a poor woman with a millionaire husband), but that's precisely the thing, none of them actually care about the expressed purposes: They are excuses and always were.
In a similar way, communists use the excuse of exploitation to attack the wealthy and the powerful.
I don't like the promotion of "age gaps" either, as someone expecting a child with a 2000-born man who's seemingly the odd one out for men his age nowadays. It reinforces the message to men that their 20s are not for settling down, which would shrink the pool for serious-minded young women who don't have a thing for big age gaps. (At this age, women naturally find men in their 20s most attractive.) My brother just turned 32 and doesn't plan to marry until he's 40; this should be considered absurd!
Probably best to just inform men that their sperm is mutating, and that women prefer smaller age gaps. I was doing this on X. It's different from shoving couples with more than a 1 year age gap into a wood chipper and so on, which is what the crazy LGBT folx want to do.
A lot of hysterical retards on the conservitard right
I wouldn't have imagined this is what the guy posting with a Lothrop Stoddard avatar would get banned for.
I think it was a hack. Turning off two-factor allowed someone to use a stolen password (probably from the recent huge leak) to login to your account. I have no idea how they managed that. They might have had direct access to one of your devices.
Not possible, all of my devices except my phone were off when it happened. My phone was with me. I was marked as suspended first. https://i.imgur.com/ZyIRjQX.png
Something just seems off. MFA being disabled is telltale sign of something being hacked (unless that just happens when an account is deleted). Hope that I’m right and they can get it restored instead of it being censorship.
it's an attempted censorship. It's well known that they disable it when they suspend the account. Just look it up.
Thought you were trolling with the wife thing. Anyway, it's a shame you were banned. Lots of gems on your handle.
Joseph Bronski, I think I owe an apology. Because before that shitstorm on Twitter unfolded, I had mentioned you by name and your book on a Discord server called "Cat's Lair" (It's this gay-fest here: https://discord.com/invite/ebDCCZRCcn).
I made a post replying to another person, correcting their statement on brain development (they pushed myth it wasn't developed until 25 while I said it was developed before 18), citing your book with your name. That resulted in me getting dogpiled by some of the most dogmatic, toxic people ever. And it seems like not long after that, you go into your controversy.
Sorry to hear about your situation man, hope it works out. Either way I’ll still follow you here.
Not to “shift attention” from your situation but my account twitter was also banned (@retnail) and I suspect (though despite not having a significant following) it’s because I liked and retweeted all of your tweets regarding the whole age of consent debacle. In addition to that I also replied to several people in defense of teenage women being married as well liking tweets and retweeting others who were in agreement.
Also as a sidenote and idk if you know this but, some of your posts have been getting shared by accounts with pretty sizable followings and this may have contributed to the influx of proles on your account (here’s an example: https://www.instagram.com/p/DLagMO6J--1/?igsh=dHRiOHYyZGxqN3E3)
I'm sorry for what these bastards have done to you
Do you live in France? Let's hang out if so.