Seeing that it’s a year ago to the day that I launched this blog with “18 common misconceptions about paedophiles & paedophilia”, today seems an apt date to announce the start of a prolonged sabbatical from blogging.

It’s a decision that I’m taking with much regret: during the past year this blog has been my baby, my major project and preoccupation, a pleasurable servitude, a discipline, an anchor and a bridle, a thief of hours and days, something into which I could divert the energies of thwarted love, a source of self-respect, an education, and a charm for keeping my demons at bay.

I’m stopping not for those reasons that might be most readily assumed for a blog of this nature: trouble from the law, capitulation to the hegemony of society’s narrative, despair, or threats, abuse and trolling.

I have had no attention (or at least none that I know of) from my local constabulary; as to ‘capitulation’ – the chances of me going ‘virtuous’ (or worse) are as near to zero as dammit; and I suspect that all Kind folk who manage to remain sane and reasonably happy have had to, in some way or another, make some kind of peace with Despair.

As far as ‘threats, abuse and trolling’ – the blog, I think, has received no more than two such ‘comments’, which consisted of nothing more than five or six misspelled words written by someone probably more deserving of pity than contempt or fear.

Indeed, this lack of negativity and hatred has bothered me. The comments on this blog have been interesting, entertaining, challenging, informative, friendly (and occasionally quite erotic), and if the quality of these comments reflects the quality of my blog’s readership then I have much to be proud of and grateful for. But the lack of usual insults and hatred, or even polite disagreement, suggests that the blog has failed to reach an audience outside the ‘paedosphere’.

Maybe this is not an entirely bad thing: maybe the difference between having a pro-choice paedophile blog that only paedophiles read, and having one which non-paedophiles also read might also be the difference between a good night’s sleep and a night’s sleep interrupted by a 4 a.m. knock at the door from the local vice squad.

But I suspect that this is not the case – Heretic TOC, Tom O’Carroll’s flagship blog, is not only read by Kinds, but undoubtedly also by some who are decidedly unkind in their intentions – and I know that Tom’s courage, integrity and doggedness in fighting for the cause have sometimes meant that life has not always been un long fleuve tranquille for him, yet I don’t get the impression that his blog has been a significant source of trouble for him.

So if it’s not for the usual reasons why then am I stopping blogging?

My reason amounts to nothing more exciting that ‘burn out’.

Arthur Rothstein: Farmer and Sons Walking in Dust Storm, Cimaroon County, Oklahoma, April 1936

These past few months my mind has come to feel more and more like an over-farmed, depleted dust-bowl. When I sit down to write an essay all the ideas and inspiration that I thought I had worked out are as insubstantial fled phantoms fading in the light of the screen and its remorseless, pulsing cursor. To quote Ernest Dowson – that most kind of poets – “I have forgot much, Cynara! gone with the wind”.

In its first few months I was driven by a wild enthusiasm – the prospect of being able to share with the world thoughts and feelings I had resigned myself to keeping secret was exhilarating. I was like a child in front of a bag of sweets, or like myself in front of a packet of crisps: I could not stop myself: during the first two weeks I published ten blogs in all! Then I managed to control my enthusiasm and for a few months published only once a week, and after a month’s break in February I settled down to publishing fortnightly.

Writing and researching the essays has been immensely challenging and rewarding. I have gone for long walks before dawn with my notebook, and come back having filled its pages with my near-indecipherable scrawl. I have often gone to bed, my mind buzzing with questions, puzzles, half-formed intuitions, with that same notebook on my bedside table, knowing that it was likely that I would wake up in the wee small hours with some insight or revelation flashing in my mind like a lightbulb, a connection made or some problem solved, or just a wonderful metaphor or turn of phrase.

I’m aware of having pushed myself intellectually, and with more purpose and enthusiasm than ever I managed when a student.

Working on my thesis at university I took it for granted that no idea that might occur to me, nothing I’d write, would add to humanity’s pool of knowledge, thought or feeling – I was merely recycling the thoughts of those who had come before me: those of the authors I’d read, of my tutors and the artists whose works I’d been studying and absorbing. I was performing a rite of passage, a ritual whose meaning was entirely symbolic. Nothing I wrote had the potential to change the world, nor had I any aspiration to do so – I was casting sterile seed on the sterile ground of tired, bored, over-worked examiners.

Working on this blog has felt very different to the above. All through my life I have enjoyed reading essays that mattered, essays that have changed people’s way of thinking, that have changed the world: as a teenager I worked my way through the essays of George Orwell; more recently I’ve developed a passion for John Ruskin and Montaigne. But for the first time I experienced what it meant to write with fire in one’s own pen, to write with urgency; for the first time I felt that in writing I was doing something truly dangerous, both to myself and to the status quo. I felt that the world, or at least a part of it I cared about, needed to read what I was writing.

Radical paedophilia is a pioneer subject. As far as I know there is no department of ‘Paedophile Studies’ in any institution of learning anywhere in the world. It is a subject where the ordinary man and women can break new ground. Granted this ‘new ground’ is not soft and yielding to the trowel but is a ground that has been fenced off with razor-wire and which been concreted over for fear that the inconvenient truths that lie buried there might one day see the light of day.

And it is exhilarating to be one of those who have cut through through the razor wire, broken through the concrete and are studying what lies beneath. We are unearthing truths that society does not wish to be revealed. I think of Galileo, emerging, scathed and humiliated, from the inquisition, stamping upon the earth and asserting ‘Eppur si muove’ – ‘and yet it moves’.

This fire is still in me and wants to burn as brightly – but it is a fire that has burnt at a rate beyond the capacity of its fuel to renew itself. I intend this to be a ‘sabbatical’ rather than a ‘retirement’: I plan to take off between six months and a year. During that period I will continue with my on-topic reading, reflection and research. I also intend to continue preparing and writing, though not publishing, blogs; and hopefully I will be able to do this with more ease – without the pressure of looming deadlines, and without having to integrate into an essay ideas and information which I have only just read – a too-rapid intellectual turnover for an essentially slow and sluggish mind such as mine.

I can imagine indefinitely continuing a ‘6-months-on/6-months off’ rhythm for this blog – recharging my batteries during the six months off, doing reading and research which, rather than being immediately employed in an essay is left, rather, to ‘compost down’ and integrate itself into my broader thinking on the issues.

Indeed, even as I type this ‘au-revoir’, I have several essays which are straining at the leash to be researched, pondered and written.

It still feels like I am at the start of my exploration of the over-arching thesis of this blog – that paedophobia is a result of a generalised anxiety resulting from the two dominant archetypes of ‘childhood’ that exist in our society, archetypes which most spectacularly conflict in their conception of child sexuality.

I have just finished reading “Moral Panics – The social Construction of Deviance” by Eriche Goode and Nachman Ben-Yehuda – and this book, in combination with a rereading of Arthur Miller’s ‘The Crucible’, has really developed my thinking on the conditions that give rise to moral panics, and how, on issues around child sexuality, a low-level moral panic has endured since the 1980s which has been reinforced and impelled by regular outbursts of more spectacularly hysterical witch-hunting.

The Crucible

“Williamstheatre presents THE CRUCIBLE by Arthur Miller. Directed by Omar Sangare. Once emblematic of political persecution in the 1950s, THE CRUCIBLE is an allegory that resonates wherever sanctimony is used as a weapon of oppression and intolerance. In this canonical American drama set during the seventeenth-century Salem witch trials, Arthur Miller explores human cruelty and the manipulations, accusations, and dishonesty that afflict a paranoid community looking for scapegoats.”

I’m also aware that I have the second part of ‘The Consumer Child’ to complete (the ‘Consumer Child’ being one of contemporary society’s two principle archetypes that, I strongly suspect, are so intensely in conflict with each other).

My failure to complete this second part, despite having an enormous amount of things I want to explore and communicate on the subject, is largely what has brought the issue of ‘burn out’ to a crisis point. I have felt daunted and fettered by the importance of getting this essay ‘right’. Also, much of what I need to say draws on notes taken from my reading of several books. I have found it hard to write with any fluency, and have several times restarted the essay, and each time scrapped it, dissatisfied with what I’ve written – it feeling too much like a picture made up of random pieces from several disparate jigsaws.

It’s all gone quiet…

Is it just me but have things have gone a bit quiet across the ‘paedosphere’ recently? There seem to be fewer posts on other blogs, fewer comments, and all the pro-paedophile podcasts and youtube channels I know of have gone silent.

I’ve only been blogging a year – clearly not long enough to be able to distinguish and identify annual patterns in activity – but I wonder whether it is a seasonal thing – people more busy in the Summer, the long Winter nights being more conducive to engaging in the world of internet groups and forums..?

But this might be related to another reason for my taking this break: in the face of climate change and the evils of islamism, paedophile liberation and child sexual rights do not feel like the most pressing issues the world currently faces.

This puts me in a dilemma: the issues I know most about, and feel most zealous about, are paedophilia-related ones. I don’t think it’s hubristic of me to state that I’m more informed about and understand these issues better than probably 99.9% of the population. This is something I could never say about climate change or islamism: though I feel very strongly about these issues I have nothing to contribute to the debates and discussions round these issues. I could never aspire to pioneer new ideas or approaches to these issues – I haven’t put in the foot-, book- or brain-work necessary to make a difference regarding these issues.

So is it better to dedicate all your efforts to being a mere pawn or foot-soldier around those issues where the fate of humanity, civilisation and the biosphere are at stake, and to make a negligible contribution to them, or to dedicate yourself to being a knight, rook or bishop in a lesser issue, to which you can maybe make some significant contribution or difference?

Of course the two are not mutually exclusive: if I had infinite time, an infinite attention span and greater intellectual capacities maybe I could fulfill my sense of duty to all these causes. But I don’t, and I have found that maintaining a wordy fortnightly blog is as near-as-damn-it a full-time job, and given that I already have a demanding full-time job and various other passions and responsibilities I’m left having to choose which battles I wish to engage in.

Winning a debate, especially with a disrespectful opponent, is a wonderful feeling. Before I started ConsentingA̶d̶u̶l̶t̶s̶Humans, before Tom O’Carroll published my first essay on his blog, I had a phase of debating paedophile issues on various forums. I quickly realised that the knowledge-gap was so great between myself and those opposing my position that I often ended up feeling guilty at the battering I was subjecting my opponents to. They seemed so unprepared to face the arguments and evidence I had ready to hand – they seemed to have never thought beyond the mantras of ‘children are not sexual’ and ‘children cannot consent’.

low hanging fruit

Purely in terms of debates and discussions, we find ourselves in an orchard-full of low-hanging-fruit. If a non-paedophile is willing to engage in a serious and civil discussion it is relatively easy to change their way of thinking, or at least to introduce nuances into their prejudices. But of course, society, knowing this, does everything to forestall such discussions: the rooms which contain the most valuable treasures, or the most subversive truths, lie behind the doors with the most locks and guards – and consequently, and to mix metaphors, it is extremely rare to encounter someone whose well has not already been poisoned to such an extent that they are incapable of even acknowledging that some debate is possible.

In my experience, debates and disagreements about climate change and islamism can often end up at a level which the layman cannot follow, getting bogged down in whataboutery, questions of methodology, statistical complexities, quibbling about details of research, and unpicking biases inherent in the vocabulary used. Such debates can quickly become attritional rather than constructive.

However In my experience debating paedophilia rarely feels this way – at least when debating with non-paedophiles (and aren’t they, because their ignorance and prejudice are so profound, exactly those people who are most in need of enlightenment?). Yes, the debates can be nasty and disrespectful – but, because of our opponents’ profound ignorance, the debates tend to turn around big concepts: the nature of child sexuality, the nature of consent or the true nature of paedophilic love.

I’ll still be contactable through this blog. I may publish the occasional announcement or link if the need arises. I’ll also be doing some occasional ‘house-keeping’: I intend to create a page which lists and links to all the posts on the blog. This is because, as it is, old posts effectively disappear out of sight. The only way of accessing them is by using the ‘archive’ menu at the bottom of the page – but in order to use that you have to already know that a particular post exists, and know during which month it was published.

48 thoughts on “To Blog or Not To Blog?

  1. Weird or wot, or not?

    1) Open mind scholar & gent Loli Luvin Learned Leonard welcomes input from anti Pedphiles.

    2) Closed mind blocker & bent Loli Luvin Learned Leonard BLOCKS input from anti Muzphobes.

    Weird or wot, or not?

    Liked by 1 person

    1. that’s not fair SeXie – the comment in question has been approved on HereticTOC, and I’ve replied to it there. It’s best to continue our discussion there, as it’s more germane to the topic than here – there’s no need to reproduce the same comment and reply here.

      Liked by 1 person

  2. Comment awaiting Stalinist/Fascist/Jihadist BLOCKeration on a supposed Free Speech Democratic site – in deep denial not good fer the soul sisters & bruvs?

    SEPTEMBER 21, 2016 AT 9:19 PM

    Hopefully not Stalinist/Fascist/Jihadist BLOCKED, as Sexentric’s self-seXcommunication post for merely noting blunt facts inconvenient to Muzzyphobes on a supposed ‘Democratic Free Speech’ site?

    Seems like Grauniad/Indie-phile KindPed Learned Leonard’s WAY off beam on thIslam-dunk deal?

    Sooo, inline, SeXentric’s c.160 words BRIEF 4-points (plus HOT lynx fer Cool Cats), reply to current H-TOC blog where Democratic Free Speech SeXentric was Stalinist/Fascist/Jihadist BLOCKED for merely noting some inconvenient blunt facts. Much like factual H-TOC recently Stalinist/Fascist/Jihadist BLOCKED by blunt fantasists NuLab/Lite Tory – DOH!

    Once more, in hope this cuntributes to, or finally seals, the tiresome issue/non issue of Killer Muzzys v Killer Rest Of The World = No Cuntest.

    1: The Judeo-Christian ANCIENT Holy GodPed IMPREGNATED Holy Mary, TWELVE, wed to Holy OLD JoePed c.70. Parents to Holy Prophet pro social sweet Jeez weeping at what so called ‘Christians’ have done and STILL do in his name!

    2: In FOUR CENTURIES ongoing, post-Reformation anti social WASPS-WhiteAngloSaxonProtestants have mass killed millions more Worldwide where they don’t belong, including millions of innocent kids – more than all other religions and cultures combined!

    3: Began in the 1600s self-justified by their early LYING media (no change there) with HALF A MILLION pro social Catholics including innocent kids, killed by anti social WASPS in Ireland – where they STILL don’t belong!

    4: And, since winning World War 2 for supposed ‘Free Democracy’, anti social KILLER WASPS have mass killed c.10 MILLION Worldwide where they don’t belong, including innocent children! (Recent amateurs Muzzys, Nazis, Ruskis, et al – don’t even cum close. Paraphrase Flirty 30s thru SeXy 70s ‘Start-Rite’ shoes ad, with two tots trekkin’ on a leafy lane to a far horizon, “They have far to go.”

    Sexy 70s KindPed version:

    Liked by 1 person

    1. hi SeXie,

      It seems that T(op)O’C(at) has approved your comment over where the HeRe ET(h)Ix gather – I’ve replied to you There (and off course – tHERE) (It looks like T.C. will approve your comments provided that you maintain a veritably Haiku-like brevity) – CU ova (plural of ‘ovum’) tHere(tic)…toc (which meanz (beanz) no thyme two waist!!)

      Liked by 1 person

  3. Plum near fergot!

    Rockin ’50s/Swingin ’60s/SeXy 70s lurve magnet HOT Darin – R ock In P erpetuity. Near nuff a stone clone fer Rockin ’50s – Ongoin’ lurve magnet HOT SeXentric (sans BIG Bob’s muso mult-eye talents natch).


  4. Cuntinuing SeXentric’s ‘to brag, or not to brag’. That is the question: whether ’tis nobler in the mind to suffer the slings and arrows of outrageous Anglos, Or to take arms against their seas of anti-PedAdulto U$/UK $hite, Y-UK!! And by opposing end them?

    Ham-actor SeXentric’s 1st official OpheliaLoli (cuntversion on the road to DamNation Y-Uk) was 56 SeXy yrs ago this month, September Swingin ’60!

    When SeXentric woz a Rockin Rollin Racin’ Ped-al cyclin’ cyclone 17ys 3 mths young.

    And most ‘appropriately’ (Y-UK buzzword) for today’s mid-’90s ongoing WorldWeb CP et al, ’twas a still legal skillfully drawn CP/UnPC pic – wot dun it!

    (Kwik backtrak, by age 15 in Rockin ’58 Lurve Magnet SeXentric had seXperienced several natchral Lolis as young as 5 makin’ themselves available. Even ‘Pestering Grooming Stalking’ SeXentric, but ’til AOC+1 age 17 that was sho nuff juss peer-sexplay. Misquote Late Great Rockin Eddie Cochran, “No harm dun juss a-havin sum fun ohn the weak-end.”)

    Then, on a quiet seXy Sunday/sinday in east Lunnen’s spacious lung Victoria Park (BBC/BritBrainCrap’s fun-free ‘Deadenders’ cuntry) the clean, cream-painted Gents’ bog walls, World role-models for today’s WorldWeb ‘Blog Walls’ CP et al, had a real stunna in trap-2, or woz it trap-3? Anyhow, there at a tall man’s height woz pencil drawn a kindped’s/unkindped’s dream, pedantically-dependant on the participants’ or voyeurs’ views. Bondage/S&M not SeXentric’s cup o’ meat, tho some SadoMaso Lolis lurve a lil lite lashing – taking AND giving!!

    The arty ped had perfectly in pencil line-drawn a 3/4 rear view, just-budding, nude, tippytoe, ankle-sox, ponytailed Loli hands tied high to a bedroom door coat-hook. So that her slender arms, snakey body, slim knobbly-kneed legs, and neat pert-butt were all accentuated, tense and taught. While being taught lessons in a Kind/Unkind Of Loving, (Swingin ’60s/Lurve Gen BIG flick gratis ref.)

    WOW! Oh Gawd….ya’ll know the rest.

    More to, er, cum soon-er or later squirt-spurt-Splish Splash. Misquote HOT Loli fave, Rockin Bobby Darin disappearing down the plughole, “Pass the Kleenex please”. (Later, a real HOT Loli tale linked to the rise ‘n’ rise of cocky Rockin ’50s BIG TV-M.C. Dick ‘Dirt’ Clark – here intros HOT Bobby.)


  5. HOPEFULLY not fer summary/no notice, totalitarian tabloid Fascist/Stalinist/Jihadist TRASHING by SeXentric-phobes HERE – of all kind face places??

    Quote Free Speech BOFFINS LearnedLeonard/CARTOGRAPHMAP, ” ‘..I could try to bring some anti-attention here.’. Yes, I’d like to give that a go… as an experiment. There seems to be some real knuckle dragging idiots (‘antipedosquad’) and the respectful way you have dealt with them does both yourself and paedophiles credit. I’m not so confident I could keep the red mist at bay, but it could be an interesting exercise.”

    “SeXperiment? SeXercise” ??

    Streetwize WARRIORS SeXentric&Co’s BIG CRIME SCENES ain’t no mere ‘SeXperiMental SeXercise’.

    But are RESULTS PROVEN metaphorical/metaphysical/metastatistical MASS SLAUGHTERERS of ALL antis – YT WebWizeWordWide & WAY beyond! (Speciality – BLASTING BIG NEW A$$HOLES in UptiteSexualAssholes/U$A !)

    Be in NO DOUBT ya’ll statistical Olympian record collectors of metadataseX metadatasets com-piled & crammed into Humbertesque lil BIG tiddle cups. (Com-PILED? Kinda recalls real dumb Right-tard dude to BIG quack, “Doc, fer all the good these supposiTORIES have done I might just as well have STUCK ’em up my arse!”)

    Forged-in-FIRE worthy warriors streetwize SeXentric & Co guaRANTeed DELIVER zee Vynil Solution from which NO antis, antipodean antiped-eans et al, can ever recover, Only PROGRESS, Get UP off their knuckles & knuckle down-under to the motha lovin, lowdown-under, cotton-panty pickin NUCLEAR FACTS from which there is NO WAY BACK! Just FORWARD to ‘The Future’s Bright – The Future’s ADULTOPHILE!’

    GuaRANTeed DELIVERY in a motha lovin, lowdown, cotton-panty pickin – 46 SeXy words:
    ” Under 13s have the Mental/Moral/Emotional ability to CONSENT to commit CRIMES & be CAGED for causing PAIN to ADULT VICTIMS. So, it’s OBVIOUS even to totalitarian tabloid twats that kids have the SAME ability to CONSENT to mere seXual PLEASURE with kind adults – creating NO VICTIMS!! ”

    WorthyWarriors SeXentric&Co – now *STUCK fer more to add, tho MUCH more’s a-cummin WAY on Down The Line whenever & wherever dumbed down antis appear & then real fast DISappear – all Wized UP!!

    So, over to *UHU – Worthy BOFFINS & WANKA Antis?


  6. To brag, or not to brag?

    As this fine blog may be dormant (parrotfaze Alice lover Carrol, “dormoused”) fer awhiles. While undormant Mighty-Mouse-Mounty SuperKind O’ Carroll blogs on undaunted from his sleepy hollow BIG BOSS Bullfrog Blog fer KindPed Keyboard Kommandos.

    Modest SeXentric kinda thought sum lil closeout cute tail-pieces from WAY bak might be lurved by proven titillating true tales fo’ fun fans of titless lil tweens, tots & toddlers, ‘tiara-less Princesses’. (Nice Nonce Nuanced Note: Tiara TRUE Princess Brit Liz woz a HOT ADULTOPHILE lil Loli, 13, stalkin’/groomin’ Phil The ADULT GreekPed, 18, from their 1st private meet in Flirty ’39. Tho their 1st formal intro was when HOT Loli Liz woz 8 and Phil, 13, in Flirty ’34, A full flirteen lawng yeers afore she finally got him wed BIG State BALLS and all – in Nawty ’47. BIG Effin Deal! Another late starter, “Consent Matters – Age Doesn’t”.)

    The most recent (thus far) ADULTOPHILE PROACTIVE GROOMER/STALKER of SeXentric (then a STUNNING 51) woz in Nawty ’94. When (quote BIG Ped Chuck “ridin’ along in mah automobile”) wi’ TWO HOT Lolis, perv-paraphile babysitter SeXentric spied a slim HOT lawng legged microskirt LEGAL TEEN, and natchrally he seXclaimed, ” Wow! Look at that!!

    At which SeXentric’s prime babysit Loli, 10, ridin ‘Shotgun’ alongside, jealously squawked, “Alright, watch Ur drivin’, we know Ur looking fer a gelfriend.”

    At which the rear-seat real purty quiet lil Loli, leaned forward and seXclaimed, “I know I’m only NINE, but I could be….”

    At which the real jealous ‘Shotgun’ Loli, rudely conflab-interruptus, “Watchout! U should be turning left, not lookin’ right at teenage gels.”

    Those two classmate Lolis had an on-off friendship which once seXploded in class, as told to SeXentric by his babyist Laddie, 12, (BIG bruv of ‘Shotgun’ Loli), “They’ve been separated and banned from talking to each other in class cos my lil sis said to her, “I’ve got tits – U ain’t got tits!!”

    At which her 9 y.o. mate said, “U’ve only got tits -cos Ur FAT!”

    And they woz ready to cat-fight.

    Mo’ later (if learned Leonard OKs) on real purty quiet lil Loli. 1st free-range streetwize chatted by ‘stranger’ SeXentric in Nawty 92. When he woz a STUNNING 49-er and she woz a lil fair-haired, snub nosed, BIG blue eyes, rosebud lips, long slim legs, knobbly knees, pixie-butt ballet tights sooo Sexy 7. (Olde Skoole lore, ‘Quiet ones R best – Oh Gawd I’ve ….ya’ll know the rest.)

    BIG Bonus Trak – Rockin ’58 – BIG Ped Chuck, “Sweet Lil Rock & Roller -NINE years old and sweet as she can be….”


  7. I understand burn out all too well. I was unfortunate to have my computer follow my lead in burning out shortly after my last video. This time away has been wonderful, even though I still respond to comments, but I’m not at the point where I will burst if I don’t produce something soon, and yet I am unable to do so securely. But that’s my own issue, and I don’t need to rant about it here.

    A 6-month on 6-month off thing sounds great. Less pressure to produce, more time to enjoy producing. That’ll come through in your essays, so I’m excited for the future.

    Also, if you’d like, I could try to bring some anti- attention here. I know my channel isn’t huge, but I do get quite a bit of hilarious and frustrating hate. I’d be happy to offload some of that here. 😛


    1. Yes, it’s great to have a break – but I hope your break won’t be too long either, Cart – you’re missed.

      And the funny thing is that taking a break hasn’t (yet) slowed me down – I’m working on a few essays, and at the same time – something I’ve never done before, and I’m really enjoying not having a deadline – I’m hoping to maybe have half the essays prepared in advance for the next six-months-on period.

      “Also, if you’d like, I could try to bring some anti- attention here.”

      Yes, I’d like to give that a go… as an experiment. There seems to be some real knuckle dragging idiots (‘antipedosquad’) and the respectful way you have dealt with them does both yourself and paedophiles credit. I’m not so confident I could keep the red mist at bay, but it could be an interesting exercise.


    1. Warm August thoughts for warm Silvano Agosti, born 23 March, 1938, Brescia, Italy. Agosti Is a film director/screenwriter/author/poet. At age 17, Silvano left his family and traveled to London to see the tomb of Charlie Chaplin. He lived in England, France, Germany and North Africa. Returning to Italy in 1960 he auditioned for the film arts college in Rome (Centro Sperimentale di Cinematografia), where he graduated in 1962. Silvano’s first feature film was made in 1967, and from then he worked as an independent filmmaker. There are several feature and documentary films connected to his name, which sadly are rarely seen outside of Italy. In addition to his films Silvano worked as professor of film at the Rome Academy between 1976 and 1978. Since the early nineties, he writes books, and in 2010 published a book for children, ‘Pinocchio returns’.,

      And, fer ya’ll worthy wordy BOFFINS. ‘Nother foren-sick science ‘Crime Scene BIG Result’. Streetwize SeXentric’s BOSS Bitch Tina SLAUGHTERS all antis in juss 104skin YT wize-wurdz – agin !!
      Silvano Agosti – ‘Love you live’ published by Guillaume Bonzom on Oct 25, 2015. Subscribe 30, Views 26.320 Like 266 Dislike 4

      Top Comments, Tina Willis: ” Dumbed Down main media mind RAPED parrots. Still mastur-debating over commonplace KidSeX? While science has long since shown that unborn babes wank-in-the womb, and kids CAN consent! Cos they have the mental/moral/emotional ability to CONSENT to commit crimes & be caged for causing PAIN to ADULT VICTIMS. So it’s obvious they have the same ability to CONSENT to mere benign sex with ADULTS sharing mutual PLEASURE creating NO VICTIMS. Increasingly irrelevant because MILLIONS of SeX-keen kids including Adult-keen ADULTOPHILES now mercilessly mock so called ‘Sex Laws’ while Selfie-SeXting Worldwide & WAY beyond all control. Don’t Dumb Down Parrots – Wize UP!! “

      As fer M’Lud Good Judge MELORDER FALLABURR’s Gold Key?

      Surely fits an Olde Tyme Chastity, “Belt-UP lil Loli and stay bald Cunt-tied ’til Ur pouting Camel Toe matches Ur tite lil bare Butt Crack!”

      SeXentric, Camel toed, Tongue tied, Butt cracked – agin!

      Liked by 1 person

  8. HOODIES SeXentric & Co kinda hoped BOFFINS Leonard & Co might find a RESULTS BASED approach, er, “Enlightening”?

    Like, SeXentric’s streetwize ‘Crime Scene’ BIG result. SLAUGHTERS all antis, ever motha lovin, lowdown, cotton panty pickin time – on or off tabloid-TV fer MILLIONS o’ mind-RAPED parrots to see & hear-ya!

    Who’s a Cheeky Boy then?

    Kinda recalls the admirable Good Ole Admiral Insurance TV-ad wi’ COCKY COCKatoo’s closeout BIG line, “U fergot to say ‘FreeFone 08008000800′ – Ur NUTHIN’ wivout me !”

    RealMeanwhile here’s a real lurvin pair o’ Good Ole Southern Cuntry Cousin PedAdultos , from WAY bak juss 79+ yrs – Jan, Flirty 37.

    Quote Good Ole Hillbilly lore, “A South o’ Dixie virgin is a gal who can run faster ‘n’ her Daddy.”

    Quote Good Ole Southern Boy, Ferriday Fireball, Looziana Lewis, 22, “Yeah, well ah sho nuff ran real fast, but Sweet Lil Memhis Myra still caught me!”

    Quote 13 y.o. preggie Memphis Myra, Jun Rockin ’58, “Where we all cum from a gal can wed at TEN ! If she can find a man.” (Er, ya mean a ‘Pedo’ don’tcha Myra?)

    Liked by 1 person

  9. You will eventually take it up again, so i think. In the mean time, your blog will still get visits and your ideas will contribute. I had a longer break from posting at my blog – but the numbers increased. And then i had something i had to write about – and again it took time to formulate the ideas.



  10. In whatever future path ye take, Good Luck to learned Leonard.

    While, increasingly SeXentric, finds the very best place for trashing tabloid antis on all issues is not learned academia but the very opposite (if slightly emasculated Google-ized post-‘011 buyout) YT/YouTube – the WorldWeb’s true equivalent of street-fighting!

    Sadly the only language that the main media mind-raped lynch mob of parrots, truly understands.

    And SeXentric’s definitive, deliberately ‘McCarthyite’ quasi-fascist short blast (88 Words/2 FAT Ladies) which all understand but none can best, still creates a BIG ‘Crime Scene’ leaving ALL antis ‘Slaughtered’ ! (Modest SeXentric’s masterclass for KindPed ineffectual intellectuals tongue tied and trashed on dumbed down retard Right TV-shows, and needing to FIGHT BACK reverse positions and ask their own far HARDER QUESTIONS of mainstream parrot soft interviewers also ‘Slaughtered’!)

    “Answer the question. If kids have the mental, moral, emotional ability to CONSENT to commit crimes and be caged for causing PAIN to ADULT VICTIMS. Why can’t they have the very same ability to CONSENT to mere benign sex with kind ADULTS sharing mutual PLEASURE while creating NO VICTIMS? Answer the question! Answer the Goddam Question!! And when you’ve finally answered that childish ask, it’s long past time for you to. Grow Up, Stand Up, Own Up, Show Up, Throw Up, Pay Up – and Shut The Fuck Up!!”


  11. Do I even need to say how much I will miss your blog until your sabbatical ends, Lensman? Need I even mention how much I’ll be counting the minutes until your next foray into penned enlightenment? Both rhetorical 🙂 One simple thing need be said, and it doesn’t need to be said eloquently: You need to get your arse back here ASAP. You are needed. It’s really that simple. Everything you have said here really needs to be said, and really needs to be on cyber-record, so to speak, no matter how long it takes for a sizable audience to find them. Never doubt how much of a difference your blog makes, both in the community and outside of it.

    As for the “evils” of Islamism, maybe, my friend, you would find some enlightenment and ease of mind by reading the difference between Wahhabism, the extremeist sect of Islam, and conventional Islam. Read about that here if you’re so inclined, and you certainly should be:

    Liked by 1 person

    1. Dissy, this site is crude pro-Erdogan propaganda: read the other articles. I would rather have the opinion of experts in Islamic theology about the “orthodoxy” of Wahhabism…


      1. So noted, Christian, and thank you for letting me know! I will indeed check out the other articles, as I have in the past; this one I found and linked to “on the fly”.


    2. Thanks for your supportive words Dissident – but don’t worry, my arse (and hopefully the rest of me) will be back here before you know it – you know how quickly holidays seem to pass…

      Regarding islamism and the essay you linke to – I’ve started reading it and have broken off to write this since the essay raises a larger question:

      The French have a good phrase for it – ‘il ne faut pas faire l’amalgam’ – which means one must not confuse ordinary moslems with islamists and jihadists and terrorists.

      There is, of course, a lot of truth in this, though I think that ordinary, non-violent islam has an important role in providing an environment in which more extreme forms can fester and prosper. And to an extent much more marked than in other religions – where are the violent Jains, Amish? And the proportion of violent and extreme sects and individuals in religions like contemporary Buddhism, Hinduism and Christianity are low enough for those religions not to be defined by violence?

      The truth is that the koran prescribes violence, slavery, and the subjugation of women, and the spreading of the religion through those means, in a way that no other contemporary major religion does – if you are a christian and want to find a justification for violence you have to do a great deal of mental gymnastics to find that in Jesus’s teachings – however, the contrary is the case with islam – those who want to think of it as a religion of peace are the ones that have to twist and distort the apparent injunctions and example of mohammed.

      Which is why I think that it is not up to myself, or people like me – atheists, Kaffirs, infidels – to not ‘faire l’amalgam’ – I am ignorant about islam and have no more interest in their actual beliefs and principals than I have in the beliefs of the Aztecs or the Zoroastrians – I’m an atheist. I do not have the knowledge nor the interest to distinguish ‘good’ moslems from the ‘bad’ .

      But most importantly – making this distinction is not the job of ignorant kaffirs like myself but undoubtedly the job of moslems themselves – the ball is in their court, they are the ones who are in charge of their own beliefs and actions: it is up to the moslem community to clearly and unambiguously demonstrate that they have no sympathy or allegiance with the islamists, jihadists and terrorists.

      In the countries I know bestl they have been singularly quiet, reticent, reluctant to put clear blue sky between themselves and the islamists – after each new atrocity where have the protests been consisting of tens of thousands of moslems waving placards saying ‘not in my name’?

      They have been notably reticent in condemning these atrocities – the best they generally can manage is something like ‘this is not islam’ – and this shows that they are more concerned with protecting islam than addressing the responsibility that islam and moslems have for these crimes.

      I think we, as paedophiles, face a similar situation and our own experience has made me somewhat aware of the complexities the moslem communitity face, and also something of the equivocation and double-dealing.

      When some case of child abuse is reported in the news my reaction can take three forms

      1/ if it’s complete fabrication, a product of hysteria, such as the Westminster farago, or Jimmy Saville or Satanic abuse scandals – I just want to shout out “Read The Crucible! This is all a product of hysteria, there is hardly a grain of truth in these stories!!”. Of course to do so, and to explain my reasons for thinking this, would be quite risky, so I generally stay silent.

      2/ if I perceive, through all the obfuscation of the reporting, that the ‘abuse’ in question was actually not abuse, but was caring and consensual – I want to say “this wasn’t ‘abuse’ – it was probably a loving and pleasant experience for the child has been reshaped into a false narrative!” – but, of course, I can’t say this, or at least not unless I do so anonymously – so I stay silent. Or, if pushed, I might say something like ‘child abuse is terrible’ – meaning ‘REAL child abuse is terrible, but the case in question doesn’t appear to be REAL child abuse’ – let’s be honest – weasel words.

      3/ if it was real abuse – then I would wish to let the world, as clearly and unambiguously as possible, that this has nothing to do with the kind of ethical and caring paedophilia defend and believe in – but, again, I can not do this, at lest not as an identified, known person – so I remain silent.

      I think a similar schema maps onto moslems in the West – though the stigma is much less, and, unlike paedophiles, they exist in a situation where opinions that are unacceptable host culture are often accepted in the moslem community.

      After a terrorist incident they can either feel that:

      1/ it was a fabrication of the Western media (as they often claim for 9/11) or, when a lot of moslems, are killed, that it was the ‘americans wot dun it’.

      2/ or that, because of the biased western media, what was in fact a noble and holy act is being portrayed as something negative, as terrorism. Moslems often say things like ‘I condemn terrorism’ meaning ‘I condemn the terrorism of the west in bombing and killing our brave lions fighting for the caliphate in Syria’ – weasel words.

      3/ or they condemn the terrorist act, but in doing so are more preoccupied with distancing values and ideas they cherish from contamination –

      The third is that which, in a way, is what we paedophiles do when we say ‘this abuse has nothing to do with paedophilia’. Of course I am sincere in my anger and sorrow at real abuse, but I also see it as a kind of duty, or opportunity, to try to make clear the gulf that exists between ‘abuse’ and ‘paedophilia’. Of course this is something I can only do anonymously.

      But underlying both cases is a belief system that is unacceptable to the mainstream, and both we paedophiles and moslem have to employ various strategies for keeping ones integrity while at the same time hiding one’s true opinions.

      But the thing is – I would love to be able to speak up and set that clear blue sky between Abuse and Paedophilia – I would jump at every opportunity to do so – to put our case. However moslems are troublingly reluctant to do the equivalent between islamism and ‘normal’ islam – I suspect that it may be because there is no real difference.

      I hope that makes some sense, Dissy – I’ll get back down to reading the page you link to – but, in summary, I don’t think it’s up to me/us to distinguish between islamists and ‘good’ moslems – it is the job of the moslem community to do this. And to do it with as much vigour and energy as when they feel offended by a book or a cartoon.


      1. There is, of course, a lot of truth in this, though I think that ordinary, non-violent islam has an important role in providing an environment in which more extreme forms can fester and prosper. And to an extent much more marked than in other religions – where are the violent Jains, Amish? And the proportion of violent and extreme sects and individuals in religions like contemporary Buddhism, Hinduism and Christianity are low enough for those religions not to be defined by violence?

        Actually, my friend, be VERY thankful that the fundamentalist Christians in the United States, who are very politically active on the Right side of politics, have not gained sufficient political power to put their interpretation of Biblical scripture into practice. Certain of the warlike policies of George W. Bush, even though their main reason lies in economics, were influenced by his literalist interpetation of the Bible — and is the sole reason why so many of his fundie followers support his warlike policies, and his attacks on Islamic nations when a long way towards empowering the extremist forms of Islam whose roots lie in Wahahibism. If the American Christian fundies had their way, the United States would be a despotic theocracy based on their interpretation of Biblical law, and the U.S.’s economic and military power would be brought to bear on the rest of the world in the name of these theocratic laws. It’s a festering demon waiting to happen.

        Which is why I think that it is not up to myself, or people like me – atheists, Kaffirs, infidels – to not ‘faire l’amalgam’ – I am ignorant about islam and have no more interest in their actual beliefs and principals than I have in the beliefs of the Aztecs or the Zoroastrians – I’m an atheist. I do not have the knowledge nor the interest to distinguish ‘good’ moslems from the ‘bad’ .

        But most importantly – making this distinction is not the job of ignorant kaffirs like myself but undoubtedly the job of moslems themselves – the ball is in their court, they are the ones who are in charge of their own beliefs and actions: it is up to the moslem community to clearly and unambiguously demonstrate that they have no sympathy or allegiance with the islamists, jihadists and terrorists.

        IMO, Leondard, being an atheist is no excuse not to keep informed on theocratic matters that are prominent in the world, especially if your own belief system (i.e., atheism) is based on a repudiation of religion and all spiritual matters in general. That can easily put you in the emotional position of thinking harshly about all iterations of certain religions, rather than only the extremists.

        That being said, too often the many peaceful sects of Islam have the same problem as the liberal and open-minded denominations of Christianity in the United States: they tend to be quiet and avoid arguments, which allows the fundamentalist, extremeist handful among them to take on the illusion of being the dominant voice, and de facto representatives of the entire theocratic foundation (e.g., Christians, Muslims), and this is something that many frankly intellectually dishonest atheists are quick to use against all religion. This is why it’s not a good idea to make excuses for yourself not doing the research. We’re all responsible to learn and educate ourselves, especially if the betterment of the world depends on as many of us becoming intellectually enlightened as possible.

        The truth is that the koran prescribes violence, slavery, and the subjugation of women, and the spreading of the religion through those means, in a way that no other contemporary major religion does – if you are a christian and want to find a justification for violence you have to do a great deal of mental gymnastics to find that in Jesus’s teachings – however, the contrary is the case with islam – those who want to think of it as a religion of peace are the ones that have to twist and distort the apparent injunctions and example of mohammed.

        My friend, this is so not the truth. The Bible is filled with the same type of medieval-minded justifications and encouragements for all kinds of atrocities against “non-believers,” women, etc., and this was often put into practice for centuries after the Catholic Church rose to power starting in the Holy Roman Empire following the death of Jesus. Note the Crusades, for example! However, due to the connection between Christianity and the Western world, the liberalism and democratic principles (however nominal and subordinate to plutocracy) adopted by the latter over the past century has largely expiated modern Christianity of its worst excesses and made Western nations, including the U.S., largely secular, and thus not conducting destructive terrorist actions in the overt name of the Christian God.

        However, as noted above, the politically organized Christian fundies in the U.S. would totally love to bring a modern version of the Crusades into play against the world, only now backed up by the U.S.’s economic and military might. They just have yet to achieve sufficient political power to do so, but it’s not due to lack of trying! In contrast to the above, the section of the world referred to as the Middle East has yet to develop technologically to the point where it would be conducive to embrace a fully secular and liberal political system, which is why nations dominated by extremist Islamic fundamentalism, such as Saudi Arabia, continue to thrive. Nevertheless, there are still several Middle Eastern nations ruled by individuals with a secular bent, but these rulers — including Saddam Hussien of Iraq, Muhammar Gaddaffi of Libya, and Bashar al-Assad of Syria — have either been brutally ousted (in the case of the first two) or subject to several recent attempts at ousting (in the case of Assad) by the U.S. government, including Hillary Clinton during her tenure as Secretary of State and sitting president Barack Obama during his eight years in office, both of whom are Democrats but qute conservative (i.e., “centrists,” as they call themselves here). Both major U.S. political parties maintain strong friendly relations with Saudi Arabia, whose government is believed to be responsible for a huge amount of funding for Wahhabi-inspired terrorist groups, including al-quaida and ISIS, going so far Obama recently refusing to allow the passage of a measure that would enable the families of the American 9/11 victims to sue the ruling family of Saudi Arabia (all but one of the 9/11 terrorists were Saudi, including ringleader Osama bin Laden, and NONE of them were Iraqi).

        The Koran and the Bible alike are old books written from the political standpoint of people living thousands of years ago, which is why so many of their scriptures and declarations are extremely non-enlightened by modern standards, However, in both cases, most modern denominations of Islam and Christianity no longer adhere to the most extreme aspects, and this can be seen in the case of Islamic people with various Middle Eastern nations becoming increasingly secular and liberal as they embrace new technology and ways of breaking out of the limitations of production which once made it easier to oppress women by keeping them out of the labor force, etc. And yes, IMO it is your responsibility to study the Bible as well as the Koran so you can see all of this, because much of what is written in these books have very strong political connotations that atheists are certainly not exempt from having to understand.

        Liked by 1 person

        1. Dissy, I already had such a discussion with LSM in the comments to:
          Leon: you mention the Amish and the Jain. The Amish are a peaceful sect originating in Anabaptism. There are other peaceful sects of Christian origin, such as the Jehovah Witnesses (who refuse to serve in the army). In Islam, you have also peaceful Sufi sects.
          On the other hand you have violent tendencies inside Buddhism: look how Sri Lanka dealt with its Hinduist Tamil minority, and see the persecution of the Rohinga Muslim minority in Burma/Myanmar, in particular the fascist Buddhist monks who advocate Nazi-type solutions to the question.

          Liked by 1 person

            1. ha, ha, – good luck with that my friends.

              Actually, this discussion has inspired me to start researching and writing an article titled ‘the little girl under Sharia’ – as you might expect it will almost certainly take an anti-sharia stance – but I DO want to be accurate, and no set up straw men.

              If you’ve got, or know of, any material which is informative, and not just islamist propaganda, which gives a positive slant on the condition of little girls and adolescent women under strict sharia law then I would be most grateful for your pointing it out or sending it to me.


              1. One thing I do want to make clear, Lensman, is this: I do not support Sharia law, nor do I think being forced to live under any type of theocratic law is positive. However, I wouldn’t want to live under a fundamentalist Christian theology any more than one based on Sharia law, as you can rest assured that life would be pretty comparable under both. I simply do not believe that Islam, when existing under a democratic framework and kept out of government, is inherently any worse than Christianity. There are also extreme sects of Islam, much as there are of Christianity, and Wahhabism is the main example of the former that creates an environment where violence and intolerance can fester.

                In other words, I’m not pro-Islam, just like I’m not pro-Christian; but I’m not vehemently anti-Islam or anti-Christian either. Those who have a liberal interpretation of each system’s scripture, modified for modern forms of enlightenment, are fine by me. I, in turn, am fine with any religion as long as it stays out of government and does not try to exploit others under the market (as does Scientology IMO).


                1. Hi Dissy – I acknowledge and appreciate the position that you outline – that all religions are equally dangerous once they start dictating public policy either directly through government or indirectly through other means (e.g. the market, the media…)

                  However (and I hesitate to write this as I don’t want to push this discussion beyond yours or my patience) I disagree with it. I don’t think all belief systems are equally dangerous – they are not all as equally liable to pushed to an extreme, nor are the respective extremes of every belief system equally noxious.

                  And this is most clearly demonstrated by considering the the subset of ‘ideology’ that is ‘religion’. All extant religions are based on texts – and the contents of those texts determines the forms that the extreme implementations of those religions take. Now, here I’m repeating something I’ve already said in a comment to BJMuirhead – so apologies if I’m getting repetitive in my old age.

                  If it’s ones ambition to live as closely with the literal message of the koran then one has got to take into account ‘Verses of Violence’ – the (at least) 109 exhortations of mohamed that call Muslims to war with nonbelievers for the sake of Islamic rule – such as “I will cast terror into the hearts of those who disbelieve. Therefore strike off their heads and strike off every fingertip of them” (Quran (8:12)). Also you have to take into account that mohamed was ‘the perfect man, who led the most perfect life’ and who is an example to all humanity and the assassinations he ordered or commited (43 – I think), and the mass slaughters by his own hand or by the hands of his followers.

                  Compare this to a fundamentalist interpretation of the various Jain texts – a fundamentalist Jain is Vegan, sweeps the floor before him (or her) with a soft brush in order not to step on any small animals, and wears a gauze mask in order not to inhale any insects.

                  Fundamentalist, or literalist, interpretations of the texts of islam and Jainism produce sharply contrasting results – clearly one holds the moral high-ground compared to the other (though I suspect that fundamentalist Jainism would not be particularly conducive to a free and happy society – conducive to the flourishing of individuals and communities – though if I had to choose I would pick Jain fundamentalism over islamic fundamentalism every time).

                  Moreover, in the current world there is no problem with fundamentalist Jain terrorism, – islamic terrorism is THE terrorism of our age – even the Buddhists, so persecuted in Tibet, haven’t taking to shooting chinese preschoolers or decapitating 76 year old chinese clerics, or driving into crowds of chinese people celebrating a festival.

                  I think that islam is the most noxious of current religions because it has the largest population of people who are keen to take a fundamental interpretation of its texts – and, with the words and example of Jesus it is those who want to find excuses for violence and war that have to do the hard work, bending his words, performing intellectual gymnastics, whereas with islam it is those who want to portray it, or think of it, as a religion of peace, a religion that respects women, etc etc that have to do similar gymnastics and intellectual double-dealing.

                  Jesus: “You have heard that it was said, ‘You shall love your neighbor and hate your enemy.’ But I say to you, love your enemies, bless those who curse you, do good to those who hate you, and pray for those who spitefully use you and persecute you” (Matthew 5:38-39, 43-44)

                  mohamed: Quran (8:39) – “And fight with them until there is no more fitna (disorder, unbelief) and religion is all for Allah” (of course there are peaceful quotes in the early parts of the koran but they are contradicted, superseded and annulled by the bloodthirsty and vengeful latter parts of the koran…)

                  in friendly disagreement



                  1. I remember reading somewhere, at some time, that the man in a cave re-wrote sections in order to reflect contemporary political ends and aims. These revisions all were to justify war and killing those who—he wanted to kill and war with.


                  2. Just two brief notes:

                    All extant religions are based on texts – and the contents of those texts determines the forms that the extreme implementations of those religions take.

                    Wrong, my friend. Remember, I’m a Pagan, and we do not follow any sacred book, nor was our faith “revealed” by any particular prophet. And none of us take any of the world mythologies attributed to our respective religion to be literal history, but simply allegories.

                    As for your insistence that Christian fundamentalism isn’t prone to violence: for one thing, that is also not true. Christian fundamentalists are well known for bombing abortion clinics and killing doctors who legally perform abortions in the United States. The reason they do not do things of this nature on a wider basis is because they simply lack the political power, or a powerfully armed nation with Christian law written into the legal system, to enable this. However, we have had our share of right-wing fundie Christian politicians who have justified wars, including defense of everything Israel does, on the basis of their interpretation of Christian morality. George W. Bush is a very good recent example of that. In fact, Bush was notorious for doing his best to get openly faith-based legal policies passed, albeit with limited success.

                    Some more friendly disagreement for ya 🙂


        2. Agreed, with nearly everything you say here. Indeed, one fellow I knew, who eventually became the head of the anglican church in Australia, regarded fundamentalist chirstianity as one of the greatest threats to the world. I suspect he would now include all religioius fundamentalisms in this evaluation. In any event, fundamentalist christians are in no way averse to violence, and practice it …er…religiously, when it suits their aims.


          1. You surprise me BJ! Are you really saying, in the world today, the big problem is Christian fundamentalist violence? Can we take a few example countries? France? Belgium? Nigeria? Bangladesh? Pakistan? Syria? Iraq? Nigeria? Chad. Niger? northern Cameroon?

            Is it Christian fundamentalism that is perpetrating the violence in these countries? what countries can you name that are suffering from an equivalent level of Christian violence (let’s, for the sake of simplicity, compare number of religiously inspired murders during 2015-2016)?

            It seems that it’s become a reflex to forgive or explain away every atrocity committed in the name of islam and to seek out anything that can be at all attributed to christians or atheists.

            A moslem beheads an atheist… not the moslem’s fault – he’s as much a victim as the atheist is (was) – a victim of the crusades, the iraq war, the loss of Spain to the islamic world, victim of racism, victim of western values, victim of atheists drawing cartoons of his prophet…

            If the dictates of Sharia law (the execution of homosexuals and atheists and apostates – all by the most cruel and grotesque and public means, the taking of slaves, the status of women as chattels, the spreading of their beliefs by war and terror etc) had been invented today by white middle class rich men the world would not hesitate in condemning those dictates.

            Identity politics, the fact that it is felt that one should not criticise a person’s religious beliefs, especially if that person ticks certain criteria of ‘being oppressed’ means that islam gets a free ride – can systematically and with relish burn people alive, behead them, kidnap and sexually enslave children, murder innocent civilians in the most grotesque and visible ways, has left people of the left in a kind of moral confusion.

            Well, religious beliefs are ideologies, and some ideologies are simply better than others. Sharia is a political system -and the fact that it comes under the guise of a religion seems to have led people to think that it should not be available for criticism. I disagree – it’s a system that stunk in the 8th Century, when the world was cruel and barbaric, and it stinks even more now, now that the ideals of democracy, equality before the law, proportionality of punishment, the equality of women, secularism etc predominate in the most civilised nations.

            Also can you point out, in the world today, where Christian fundamentalists are committing atrocities as systematically, with as much relish and on the scale and with the visibility of, say, Isis and Boko Haram, or their supporters in Bangladesh?

            I have no wish to defend Christianity, and certainly not Christian fundamentalists, though I’ll go so far as to say that the texts of Christianity are more conducive to civilised behaviour than those of islam – not least because Jesus led a peaceful life – (number of people killed by Jesus with his own hands or through command, in the gospels – none / number of people killed by mohammed in the quran – well, it’s hard to keep count – as a warlord he ordered the murder of individuals about 45 times, with his own hands, but also waged war against tribes throughout the latter part of the koran – “kill any Jew that falls into your power,”) , nor does Jesus give any injunctions to kill to his followers, nor is there anything in the Gospels themselves that state that the bible should be read literally – an absence that allowed the reformation and the enlightenment to happen. Unfortunately the same can’t be said for islam in which literalist interpretations of the text are becoming more and more predominant and de rigeur.

            It is a central tenet of islam that paradise awaits those who who wage jihad and die in the defence of the faith, and it is the duty of all moslem men to wage jihad – and this is set in a context of islam’s belief in its right, its destiny, of world domination – a lethal combination of ideas – the fruit of which we are seeing in the world today.

            To say that Christians, not Islamists, are the problem in the world today is like a doctor focusing his concerns on a patient’s stubbed toe rather than the huge malignant tumour disfiguring the patient’s face.


            1. 🙂 I didn’t intend to get you all worked up. What he meant was that it is the fundamentalists (christian, islamic, buddhist, etc), fundamentalism itself, which is the problem. He isolated america for specific attention because they are the most militarily powerful and morally bankrupt nation. (Actually, Baha’i law was introduced into america before any where else on the view that the country was morally bankrupt).

              A long while ago I watched a video, I think by Stephen Pinker, concerning violence in america, and how violent crimes decreased in parallel with the degree of secularity—the more secular, the less violent. I understand a lot of what you are saying about Islam, but I suspect the real culprit is fundamentalism and fear…specifically what Erich Fromm called the fear of freedom. But, itr is far too complicated to respond adequately here and now, especially when I suspect that america’s treatment of islamic countries has contributed to the problem.


              1. Don’t worry BJ, I’m not worked up – but you know, just as with paedophilia related issues, I DO enjoy a good, vigorous debate! I’ll pay you, and all the other interlocutors on this blogn the respect of not pulling my punches – of stating my case a plainly as possible, and accepting, welcoming, the same from you 🙂

                But I am slightly abashed to read people whom I respect and admire going to great lengths to over-look and exculpate islamic violence and imperialism (the big story, or rather the second biggest, of the 21st century) whilst going to great efforts to blame for that violence everyone and anyone (including its victims) other than its actual perpetrators , advocates and supporters.

                The worst thing is that it is the left that is so complicit, so hypnotised, by this knee-jerk of giving islamism a free pass. I think that this is a symptom of the loss of direction of the left after the fall of the Berlin wall. The class struggle has died, and in its place has come a struggle of identity – where the value of a person’s ideology is evaluated not on its merits, but the identity-status of the person advocating it. And islam has been very able in playing this game – we give it a free pass on its treament of women, homosexuals, child marriage, slavery – whilst few westerners would dare defend the acts of Sati or the Hindu Caste system, or condemn Britain, and other western powers who colonised India for having done their best to stamp such practices out. Fundamentalist Hinduism hasn’t played the western identity/victim game as effectively as islamists have.

                The real left should be strong in its values – never accepting the oppression of women and children, never accepting an ideology that believe homosexuality should be illegal, never accepting an ideology that encourages the taking of slaves. That is the left I am proud to belong to.

                And ethical paedophiles likewise should be taking a stand against child marriage – a child should be free, and remain free, in her sexuality – childhood should be a time for play and experimentation, a time when they can make bad choices and mistakes and not be condemned for the rest of their lives for such choices – such marriages are, especially in the more islamic societies, a life-time commitment to servitude and reproduction and reduced education and rights – a child should not be condemned to that by the religion, or the customs, of her parents and community. I think that if the paedophile community is to show itself as ethically alert – we should condemn such practices and ideologies (and FGM) as clearly and vocally as possible – and not be hampered from doing so by the demands by religions that they not be criticised, or fear of being slimed as ‘racist’ or ‘islamophobe’ or offending the readily-offended.

                “What he meant was that it is the fundamentalists (christian, islamic, buddhist, etc), fundamentalism itself, which is the problem. “

                I disagree with that statement, BJ – everything depends on the nature of the ideology one is being fundamentalist about: there is a world of difference between a fundamentalist moslem (whose ideology is fundamentally one of conquest through violence) and a fundamentalist Jain – the latter will wear a face mask to prevent him inhaling insects, and brush the ground he walks on with a soft broom so he doesn’t step on any living thing – both are a bit extreme and loopy – but I know which fundamentalism is more likely to promote civilised values and foster a moral outlook.

                Yes, there is a lot of gun crime in America, and violence – but what proportion of that gun crime religiously motivated? How many people in America have recently been shot by someone shouting ‘Jesus is great’ – as to people shouting ‘allah akhabar’ whilst killing people, the question kind of answers itself…

                “america’s treatment of islamic countries has contributed to the problem.”

                How does that explain that most murders by islamists are murders of fellow moslems in their own countries? How does that explain the murder of atheist bloggers and homosexuals in Bangladesh?

                Take any theocratic moslem country – what is there that is any good in those countries is not a product of the West and America? I can think of some architecture, poetry, music – relics from a by-gone age on the whole. Modern effective medicine, rule of law, equality before the law, cars, trains, penicillin, scientific research, telephones, electricity, – it strikes me that all the inventions and ideas that have lifted such countries out of the dark ages are ideas and inventions that have come from the West and western tradition dating back to before the ancient Greeks.


                1. Ah Leonard, you are going to have to just forgive me, because I just don’t have the energy to give the type of reply that your comments deserve. especially when I did not intend to give islam a “free pass”. There is much about islam of which I disapprove. Perhaps in a few days, when I have more energy, and when the tribulations have passed, I will be able to answer thoroughly.


                  1. I know how you feel BJ.

                    I actually find it a depressing topic to debate – I much prefer, and find more interesting, issues and questions round paedophilia and child sexuality.

                    We don’t need to bludgeon each other into submission. I’m happy to move onto other things if you are.

                    (Having said that I think EVERYBODY should listen to Sam Harris’s latest podcast ‘What Do Jihadists Really Want? ‘ in which he ‘reads from the latest issue of Dabiq, the magazine of ISIS, and discusses the beliefs and goals of jihadists worldwide.’

                    It’s one of the most sobering, terrifying and enlightening things I’ve heard since… since…. well, Sam Harris’s last podcast…;-) )


  12. I am a bit sad to hear this—but at the same time, I have been trying to write a post for the past month explaining why I haven’t been writing, or photographing and posting. For that reason: enjoy yourself.

    Liked by 1 person

    1. Thanks for that BJ. I’m hoping, during my sabbatical, to consecrate more time to photographing – I lost my enlarger in a house fire a couple of years ago and am determined to get back into regular printing, and have amassed a huge backlog of print-worthy negatives. Nothing explicity sensual, like your work, no beautiful women, or (sob) little girls unfortunately…

      Liked by 1 person

      1. Yeah, I’m going to be a pain now…

        It sounds to me that you have exhausted yourself, and not being in a relationship of your choice, you have no intimate means of reinvigorating yourself. So go for a walk in a park, look, and enjoy. As a person who hasn’t been in a relationship since separating from the second wife (ten years ago now), and as someone with few female friends, walking and looking at women brings a lot of good feelings into my life. And it is not yet, as far as I know, illegal to look, even at children if that is your desire.

        At the same time, not knowing you personally, I can empathise if, even though you still have thoughts you want to communicate, you no longer have the same strong urge to write them out. This, at least, is the point at which I have arrived. So much so that I stopped revising my essay on childhood sexuality, and haven’t even started the one I planned on the nature of sex and desire. Perhaps the urge will return at some stage, I don’t know, and it doesn’t really matter in the grand scheme, or even in my life. If—and only if—you are experiencing something like this, then take whatever direction seems least troublesome while your unconscious works out what to do with all the other stuff. The urge to print some photos seems not unwelcome, so maybe you could post some of them? I have to laugh about that, because your comment about photography has led to my looking through some old shots and thinking, well, why not post them, even if I’m not doing new work at the moment?

        Whatever you do for the next while, take it easy and enjoy yourself while you let the mud settle and begin to see clearly again.

        Besides, I have no doubt, all things being equal, that I will continue to be in contact, one way or another. (Insert aging but none the less cheeky grin.)

        Liked by 1 person

  13. But for the first time I experienced what it meant to write with fire in one’s own pen, to write with urgency; for the first time I felt that in writing I was doing something truly dangerous, both to myself and to the status quo. I felt that the world, or at least a part of it I cared about, needed to read what I was writing.

    It’s an incredible feeling, yeah? And I can say that I’m one of those people who needed to read. There are most certainly a number of things about which I disagree with you, but it was really only in hearing your thoughts on some of those things that I was able to more fully articulate my own views, to congeal “gut feeling” into a conscious, concrete position.

    Take the break you need. Burning so brightly, so spectacularly, cannot be sustained at any significant length… and I suspect I’m not the only one who would be sad to see your flame extinguished if you were to keep pushing yourself beyond what you’re able and find yourself unable to continue at all.

    Those who need your words will still be here when you return.

    Liked by 1 person

    1. Thanks for your supportive thoughts Sophia NL. Your blog is certainly one written with passion, especially with the rave/rant idea – (btw – if you think ‘six months’ is bad the last time I got laid was at the end of the last millenium!).

      ” it was really only in hearing your thoughts on some of those things that I was able to more fully articulate my own views, to congeal “gut feeling” into a conscious, concrete position.”

      I’m glad to read that my blog has helped you in your own thinking on these issues. I’m, of course, curious to learn more about your position – though I know that you can’t write about that on Σαφικος Σοφια.

      Liked by 1 person

      1. Oh, the points of contention are not, generally speaking, in regard to p[a]edophilia; you’ve expressed a very specific path toward a “better” future, for example, where many of the particulars (though not the overall concept) sound quite horrible to me. Or there’s the (sadly far too prevalent in atheist/humanist/etc. communities) misconceptions and outright falsehoods you’ve regurgitated regarding Islam, which Dissident has already responded to much more eloquently than I could have done. (But then, that’s kinda what Dissy does; I’ve read his work for quite some time elsewhere and been grateful for his ability to say, essentially, “well, actually… about that. Here’s what’s really going on…” and to support that with something substantial.)

        The stuff that I can’t easily write about on my own blog is the stuff we already agree about.


        1. Thanks for that Sophia (NL!) – I think it’s interesting and good that a group of people can meet and agree on shared ideas, but also disagree strongly on issues that are maybe peripheral to those ideas (islam, politic etc) and I appreciate respectful disagreement, though there isn’t always as much time to consecrate to such discussions as I would like.

          Having said that, I’m working on addressing the points Dissy makes in his latest comment – though I really don’t want this blog to be too taken over by discussions and disagreements over religion…


  14. Blogs that die out after a few months are a regular feature, independently of topic. Many blogs die in their first year. Quoting
    According to a 2008 survey by Technorati, which runs a search engine for blogs, only 7.4 million out of the 133 million blogs the company tracks had been updated in the past 120 days. That translates to 95 percent of blogs being essentially abandoned, left to lie fallow on the Web […]
    Recently, a highly successful poetry blog in my reading list was terminated for lack of time.
    My advice as someone active on two blogs:
    – the most important thing is contents;
    – the contents can be yours or an excerpt from someone else’s work (e.g., a poem from a book);
    – write about what you know best, even if it is not a fashionable subject: writing low quality contents about a fashionable subject leads to nowhere;
    – when you don’t have a long post ready, write a short post, even a very short one;
    – if at a moment you have several posts ready, don’t publish them all immediately, spread them in time (I often schedule posts one or two weeks in advance);
    – have discriminating categories (in a hierarchy) and tags, they help readers find relevant posts;
    – comment and “like” in other blogs, it attracts readers.

    I think that most people don’t want to comment on blogs that they don’t like or disapprove of. Myself I read only blogs I like. So normally the number of negative comments should be low. On Pigtails in Paint trolls are very rare, we have sometime people telling us that it is CP and that they will report it, otherwise the overwhelming majority of comments are either positive appreciations or simply discussing: making inquiries or correcting errors or providing information (which is positive).

    Last detail: You seem to confuse “pro-choice” with “paedo” and “non-” with “anti-“. There are standard hetero-teleio-philes who support sexual free choice, many more than you think.

    Liked by 1 person

    1. Thanks for that Christian.
      You give some good advice – I’ve been tempted by the short post but don’t feel quite at ease with it. The truth is that once I get going I find that I have a lot I want to say – but the struggle is giving it structure, coherence and trying to express my thoughts as effectively as possible.

      ” if at a moment you have several posts ready, don’t publish them all immediately, spread them in time (I often schedule posts one or two weeks in advance);”

      Yes. It’s my intention to get four or five blogs written up during my break – if I do that – and I keep to a six months on/six months off routine, then I can buy myself a lot more time to write the posts.

      “You seem to confuse “pro-choice” with “paedo” and “non-” with “anti-“. There are standard hetero-teleio-philes who support sexual free choice, many more than you think.”

      You are right, of course – I’ve been a bit less rigorous in this post than I would be for my others – I wrote it more in the spirit of an open letter than a proper essay – so sometimes I haven’t communicated with as much accuracy as I would choose to do.


  15. It is your baby LSM, no-one else’s. It is therefore completely up to you when you write to it, presumably when inspiration, angst, love, hate, passion, or wotever gets the better of you and you just have to tell the world about it.. Whenever that happens, I am sure those that have enjoyed following your gifted on-topic prose to date, will contribute accordingly,

    Liked by 1 person

    1. “… when inspiration, angst, love, hate, passion, or wotever gets the better of you and you just have to tell the world about it.”

      On reflection, one of the major factors contributing to my ‘burn out’ is that I’ve had so little contact with children over the past couple of years that my desire feels a little ‘theoretical’, a little abstract. In 2013-14, after several years of social isolation, I had the good fortune to spend a few weeks running workshops for many of my region’s primary schools and the interactions I had with children during these workshops, and the affection and enthusiasm of some of these children, reminded me of just how wonderful and beautiful children could be. This blog has been an after-effect of those weeks.

      Those workshops now feel like history – so much has happened since. Maybe what I, and this blog, need is some intense encounter with a beautiful seven year old girl, something like what happens in ‘Lamb’, to remind me what it’s all about – all this blog’s intellectual and cultural belly-aching is all well and good, but it’s really just a substitute for a little girl I’ve been tickling, stopping, climbing onto my lap, staring into my eyes too long, glancing at my lips and leaning closer…


........................... PLEASE LEAVE A COMMENT........................... comments from the outraged will be approved only if they are polite and address issues raised in the accompanying article or discussion. The 'email' field can be left blank.

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s