Norwegian Men’s Rights Activist blogger Eivind Berge, known for his violent rhetoric and rape apologia, has been arrested for death threats against police.
Not too surprising, given that he once announced on his blog that “[k]illing at least one cop is on my bucket list.”
Here are some Google-translated details from a news account here:
The right-wing extremist and anti-feminist blogger Eivind Berge has been arrested for having encouraged and glorified the killing of policemen. The police have found both ammunition and textbooks in use of explosives at Berge.
The police regard the threats as an invitation to others to kill police officers, but also feared that he would commit the acts themselves shortly.
He was evidently arrested on Wednesday. According to this story — at least as far as I can tell from the obviously crude Google translation — he made a specific threat to kill a police officer this Saturday:
Berge also writes about how he was planning to attack a policeman with a knife on a Saturday evening:
“Then I used the trial to come forward as a good example for men, and I considered it to be worth 21 years in prison for premeditated murder.”
According to this account, Berge is being held for two weeks. He claims innocence.
Berge, as readers of this blog may well already know, is a fan of right-wing terrorist and mass murderer Anders Brevik. On his blog, he’s also argued (among other things) that “Rape is Equality.”
He’s glorified the murder of police on his blog numerous times.
Some examples, taken from the second news account:
“… attack on the police is something 100% in harmony with everything I stand for.”
“I maintain that police murder is both ethically and tactically correct.”
Some other examples, direct from his blog (each paragraph is from a separate post; click on the quote for the source):
I viscerally despise cops and wish them the worst. Killing at least one cop is on my bucket list.
If ever a victim of psychiatry, here is what I would do. I would first attempt to kill the cops or whoever tried to apprehend me. Failing that, I would feign docility in order to get out as soon as possible and then kill a representative of the industry as revenge. … killing cops is also very much a men’s issue. Every pig killed is also a blow against feminism, so men should be doubly elated whenever an officer goes down in the line of encroaching on our cognitive liberty.
This was his reaction to a news story about a police officer being killed:
Good news for men is rare in this hateful feminist utopia that is Norway, but today is a joyous day! Today I feel schadenfreude in my heart along with all the hate that feminism and resultant mate deprivation have instilled in me. One blue thug less on the streets.
From another post on the same subject:
The swine Olav Kildal died while trying to enforce our lack of cognitive liberty. This was a defensive, much deserved killing that cheered me up.
Here he threatens a female prosecutor:
To feminist prosecutor Anne Cathrine Aga I have the following message: The Men’s Movement is watching you, bitch, and we are seething with hatred against you personally and the police state you represent. Actions have consequences. Trials are still (mostly) public and they sink into our collective minds, where they form the basis of future activism. Hate breeds hate — that is a fact of life too smugly ignored by feminists. …
2011 is the year Norwegian men as a group emerged out of the blogosphere and into the battlefield. This in turn has led to a breakthrough for MRAs such as my good self in the public discourse, probably for the simple reason that the powers that be now realize ignoring us has deadly consequences. Men are angry now, and we have proven that we are deathly serious about resisting feminism. So the feminist prosecutors referred to above ought to wipe that smug look off their faces before it is too late. Clearly seventy-seven body bags wasn’t enough, but I am fairly confident that you will be sorry one day.
Aside from the explicit threats of violence, the violent and threatening rhetoric here is not unlike much of the rhetoric we see regularly on A Voice for Men and other MRA sites. AVFM founder Paul Elam, for example, told one feminist that:
I find you so pernicious and repugnant that the idea of fucking your shit up gives me an erection. … We are coming for you.
The blogger Emma the Emo, Berge’s girlfriend, has posted comments here in the past defending him. The news account quotes someone identified as Nataliya Kochergova, described as his girlfriend; I assume this is “Emma,” because what she told the media is similar to what she posted here. She of course denies that he planned any real violence. According to the article, she said:
There are not really threats. He has never had plans to kill someone, he has said several times in his blog. When for example, he says that “the police killings are an effective way to prevent stupid laws,” it’s a factual description and not a threat. Even those who love the police agree with it.
Berge, for his part, has stated publicly that if he had not met Emma, he probably would have killed by now:
At the time I wrote my last blog post, I believed I would probably become Norway’s first modern violent activist in peacetime. Celibacy enforced by a feminist regime had driven me to the point where I saw no other option. I would target the pigs who enforce feminist law, knowing I could realistically at least kill one of them before I would be captured or killed myself. Thus revenge would be assured and if I lived, my reputation as a violent criminal would make me attractive to some women. But then in the nick of time this blog attracted a lovely girl commenting as “Emma.”
This is why I take violent rhetoric from MRAs very seriously.
Meanwhile, on this side of the Atlantic, MRAs glorify MRA “martyr” Thomas Ball, who killed himself on the steps of a New Hampshire courthouse last year in hopes that his death would inspire MRAs to literally burn down courthouses and police stations.
Ball’s manifesto is still up on A Voice for Men in its “activism” section, including these passages:
So boys, we need to start burning down police stations and courthouses. … This is too important to be using that touchy- feeling coaching that is so popular with business these days. You need to flatten them, like Wile E. Coyote. They need to be taught never to replace the rule of law. BURN-THEM-OUT!
Most of the police stations built in New England over the last 20 years are stone or brick. Fortunately, the roofs are still wood. The advantage of fire on the roof is that it is above the sprinklers
AVFM tastefully omitted Ball’s specific instructions on how to make Molotov cocktails, but left this in:
There will be some casualties in this war. Some killed, some wounded, some captured. Some of them will be theirs. Some of the casualties will be ours.
For many more examples of violent threatening rhetoric from MRAs, I urge you to go through some of my posts here and here.
1,601 replies on “Norwegian Men’s Rights Activist blogger Eivind Berge arrested for death threats against police [UPDATE 3]”
@hellkell: don’t forget depraved, contemptible, unscrupulous, abhorrent and putrid.
I get my hopes up, every time. “You want to know where these fundamental principles of the MRM come from? Sure, I’ll be right back with several reputable sources!” Or: “You want links to moderate and prominent MRAs? Why, I know several! Here, I’ll show them to you right now.” Or: “You want to know what we’re doing for the men in our local communities? Why, I personally involve myself in spreading awareness of men’s issues where I live, and here is what I’ve been doing specifically…”
But no.
@ VoIP
Unfortunately “Banish Eurosabra” seems to be a very advanced spell that nobody here has learned yet. For the sake of women as a whole I really think we should invest in some research.
Yep, so one of you is STILL pretending that you didn’t get the memo that actually my lawsuit did not involve a complaint about hard chairs and that Cuntrelle deliberately chose to continue misleading you all on it by witholding info from an email I sent him. Try slinging facts you whores.
He actually sent me a return email saying that as I had once complained about hard chairs, that this would be good enough for him to continue pretending that my lawsuit was about hard chairs. What a douche!
Another one of you pretending children can’t distinguish between sex for money and rape, like children don’t know what money can buy.
There does seem to be this idea that children are snatched, or sequestered to become child prostitute rape victims, when in this next video, such victim-feminist bog-standard rhetoric aside, it becomes clear the kids make a conscious decision to go to the beach where the white sex tourists lurk, and strike up a deal.
It mentions that the kids will make 9 times more money a day performing sex than they would from hard labour.
I personally was once sequestered, by an adult who attempted to sexually assault me. I managed to get away – but to compare that predicament, to a scenario where a child actively seeks money from an adult for sex, is a total lie.
Cuntrelle is lying to you all, by deliberately witholding the truth from his readers on the hard seats issue, so that you will continue to berate me on a false premise.
You all let that one go under the bridge though, didn’t you.
One of you saying there were all of a sudden more important issues etc, etc, but ultimately letting his deception slide.
It speaks volumes about him, and his drone readership, doesn’t it.
With v-fem ideologues, it boils down to their refusal to take responsibility for setting the terms, conditions and pricing structures for their own prostitution behaviours, and their expansion of this responsibility-absolving ideology to placate child prostitutes too.
Cuntrelle and his readership will vacillate between making hardcore allegations against MRAs, but when they lose the argument and get caught lying, they resort to ‘we’re only a joke blog. We mock MRAs, don’t expect any consistency from us’.
Cuntrelle’s life:
“I wake up, select some MRA discourse, weed out all the sensible or challenging stuff, then present it to my readership as cast iron evidence that I am not a complete loser. Then I withold any further evidence that might contradict my original assertions, and then I repeat this, and ask people to donate to this clearly good cause.”
Has someone forced Cuntrelle into this prostitutional lifestyle?
I mean imagine you are Cuntrelle, and you’re arguing vitriolically, that x, y, or z is so, but then you find out it isn’t. It’s a very hard position to back out of, because you’ve been such a douche setting up the assertion in the first place. And the embarrassing thing for the casual observer, is that 98% of the commenting readership just seem to go along with it.
Dumbass, WE DON’T CARE. You’re a moron for your chair issue, you’re a moron for your fucking bullshit lawsuit, and no one cares about getting the story straight because we’re LAUGHING AT YOU FOR BEING FUCKING STUPID. You are not someone with serious, important things to say. You’re a fraud, and an imbecile.
<blockquote.Yep, so one of you is STILL pretending that you didn’t get the memo that actually my lawsuit did not involve a complaint about hard chairs and that Cuntrelle deliberately chose to continue misleading you all on it by witholding info from an email I sent him. Try slinging facts you whores.
sorry i got the exact details of your massive failure wrong, bro. ill try to actually care next time
what is wrong with you that you think kids having to choose between hard labor and prostitution to make money is even a little okay/
Tom, I’m not going to get into the rest of your horrible comment at the moment, but when you posted a comment saying that the lawsuit did not involve hard chairs, I added lengthy quotes from this comment to my original post.
http://manboobz.com/2012/03/16/tom-martins-anti-male-discrimination-case-against-the-london-school-of-economics-dismissed-he-responds-by-calling-his-critics-whores/
I also linked to the entire comment:
http://manboobz.com/2012/03/16/tom-martins-anti-male-discrimination-case-against-the-london-school-of-economics-dismissed-he-responds-by-calling-his-critics-whores/comment-page-2/#comment-135843
I’m not sure how quoting your comments on the subject counts as “lying” unless you were lying.
@Cliff Pervocracy
“The MRM is FIGHTING FEMINISM, and until every trace of feminism is expunged from the Earth, they can’t possibly do anything like:”
“-Find housing for men who’ve lost their homes”
The destruction of feminism will reunite 10s of millions of men with their families and stop men from being evicted from their families.
————–
“-Contribute to prostate/testicular cancer research”
The destruction of feminism will allow money once going exclusively to women to be equally shared.
—————
“-Contribute to (or create, in an alternate universe where the thought wasn’t terrifying) afterschool and tutoring programs for boys”
With the destruction of feminism boys/men will no longer be vilified, hamstrung and hobbled at every turn in education.
—————
“-Support or provide suicide prevention counseling for men”
The destruction of feminism would decrease mens suicide by 80%, to pre 2nd wave feminist days.
————–
“-Support or provide domestic abuse resources for men”
The destruction of feminism free’s half the funds which go exclusively to women and stopping the hatred of men will do the rest.
————–
“-Create men’s studies curricula, instead of just demanding someone out there do so”
With the destruction of feminism there won’t be a need for men’s studies since indoctrinated hatred of men will no longer be in fashion.
Tom Martin is a rancid pustule of a child rape apologist. Penalize the child prostitutes! Don’t criminalize the pedophile rapist “clients” of child prostitutes, show them some compassion! (You cunts.) WHORES!
Die a painful death, Tom Martin.
if that was all david then youd have a much easier time convincing people that you werent a failed professional crybaby. i mean, not you personally, because of the whole incompetence thing, but someone like you.
also the chair thing is still completely fucking stupid so youre gonna keep gettin made fun of for it, duder
But Tom, if David was to restrict himself to only posting about MRAs who had some sort of sensible and challenging ideas that would be left behind after weeding out all the non-sensible stuff, he would never be able to write a post about you again. And then you’d be sad.
Tom, stop drunk posting, you pustulant attention whore.
I still don’t know why you’re wasting your time with us, Tom. Bring your message to the people. I fucking dare you.
@ Dracula- Oh and I just wish that he would. He deserves to be locked in a small room somewhere, far away from children (or anyone really, but especially children).
@Tom Martin:
Clearly no one forced you into your position as an attention whore, Tom Martin but most people with fully functional brains understand why it is that in the civilized world kids are unable to consent to sex. I’m sure you do too unless you suffer from severe brain damage. You just like being an asshole to stick it to the people you don’t like. Trolling or not, adopting a position in which child prostitutes are all willing and ten year olds are able to consent to sex makes you a pro-pedophile scumbag of epic proportions. If you were to die today, the world would be actually a better place for it.
From my last post:
I personally was once sequestered, by an adult who attempted to sexually assault me. I managed to get away – but to compare that predicament, to a scenario where a child actively seeks money from an adult for sex, is a total lie.
Please explain to me again why you people think being raped and being a whore are the same thing for a child.
And just to clarify, the hard chair complaint has already been vindicated, by the authorities taking action, the library management writing to me and introducing soft chairs, by the research on the subject and by a Dragon’s Den pitch for a satchel which goes on a back of a school chair with fold down padded panels, which all the dragons decide to invest in.
Even a little thing like penguins being whores. The media reports it, I re-report it here, and suddeny I am portrayed as some extremist.
You are unreliable witnesses.
The debates I’ve had here have been sparse.
It has been histrionic handbag clutching most of the way.
On serious feminist sites they have a go with facts. Here, they just say “OMG! He’s so…. [fill in descriptive expletive]
There has been a constant background whinging that prostitutes are victims of rape (whatever their age).
There has been a constant reluctance to admit I’ve been right about ANY THING.
Often, after I’ve won an argument, peoplke will comment “We don’t care about your stupid [fill in thing we’d all just been arguing about that you did care about before losing argument].
The court case was dismissed by a judge and therefore to you conformists, the whole idea that gender studies needs to improve towards its treatment of men must be “stupid”.
It’s very much a childish, “it’s our ball, and we’re not playing anymore” type of vibe.
And then when I or another MRA actually tries to pin one of you hookers down on a point, you’ll resort to the “don’t tell us what language to use or how to think” stuff, like it’s empowering to lose an argument then change the subject.
Your humour levels here are (for feminist blogs) … below par too, so it’s not like your making up for the lack of integrity with many jokes either, and some people here often simply resort to posting videos of cute animals doing stupid things. It’s totally lame.
There is a lot of wishing people dead appearing here as well by the regulars, which is a sure sign of below average intelligence.
And a lot of comments comparing MRAs to excrement etc – another sure sign that you’ve run out of any valid criticisms of the arguments being made.
And then there is this constant sieving process… ignore or misinterpret any valid points, and then try and sensationalize any controversial or challenging ones.
At no point do I recall a single feminist commenter telling off or even criticizing another one for making an idiotic, wrong, violent, or oppressive comment. There is no policing of each other in the greater struggle to dispatch the men’s rights activist arguments. Instead, it’s all hands to the deck in throwing up general noise or flack or ad hominem hysteria to dislodge the irritant perspectives, and to hell with a principled argument. Total in-group morality. You know when one of your positions is wrong, but not one of you are prepared to say a thing.
Overall, it’s a deeply conservative, prudish, hookery mix.
If you people are feminism, then feminism is in a lot worse shape than I thought.
“Please explain to me again why you people think being raped and being a whore are the same thing for a child.”
Children lack the emotional and mental maturity to consent to sex. Period. Any adult having sex with said child is a rapist. Period.
Do you want to argue that children can consent to sex, and can become prostitutes, because you have a desire to sleep with one? I really can’t understand why else you would be in favor of being compassionate to pedophiles, while subjecting child prostitutes to criminal charges. It makes absolutely no sense. Either way, you’re fucked up.
Those prudish, conservative hookers really are the worse.
(Steele, please note – this is what ultimately happens when you decide that words can mean anything you want them to mean. You end up ranting about prudish sex workers and how conservative they are.)
When Tom is in a hole, he just keeps digging. It illustrates the reason he lost his case so completely.
PS. justifying child prostitution is not a coherent argument for men’s rights.
“You know when one of your positions is wrong, but not one of you are prepared to say a thing.”
What are we wrong about, again?
“If you people are feminism, then feminism is in a lot worse shape than I thought.”
You don’t know jack shit about feminism.
And calling us all whores and hookers, and Dave Futrelle “cuntrelle” just makes you look like an even bigger dumbass. But by all means, keep it up. If you are what the men’s rights “movement” looks like, then it is in a lot worse shape than I thought.
In Tom’s world, prudery = not supporting child rape. So yeah, I guess we are all prudes, here.
Fembot, from this thread alone, it has become increasingly clear that the MRM is not only worse than we imagine, it is worse than we can imagine.
The MRM really is the abuser’s lobby. Protecting wife beaters and child rapists since 1975!
@ Tom dear- you said this:
This is a lie. We call one another out respectfully ALL THE TIME. I just participated in a rather long conversation about some questionable comments on another thread yesterday. And in turn, I have been criticized on more than one occasion. In fact, as a commentariat, I think that we are REMARKABLY good about criticizing one another in order to promote a more inclusive and supportive atmosphere among the non-trolls. It’s something I love about this site.
Whether your complaint about the hard chairs was part of the court case or not, your argument against them on the grounds that they created study conditions more favourable for women than for men, is stupid. Even if they were backed up by this documentary that you claim to have seen some time. This is why people make fun of you for it!
People make fun of you because in spite of the fact you can’t assemble a coherent argument and your skill at citing your claims is feeble, you still managed to get into a postgrad course at one of the most prestigious universities for social studies in the UK; arguably in the English speaking world. And do you thank you thank every lucky star you have to have succeeded so far ahead of what your talent should allow? No, you complain about bullshit, piss off your fellow students who were actually there to learn and take them to court over abject nonsense.
People make fun of you because you think calling all women whores is a reasonable argument in gender studies. People make fun of you because when you’re challenged on something stupid, you dig in further. People make fun of you because you are not just a misogynist, but the reducto ad absurdum of misogyny.
People make fun of you because you are stupid enough to be easy to make fun of, and nasty enough that making fun of you is vindicated.
As for the child rape apologism? Well, I can’t speak for anyone but I’m not making fun of you there, because that shit ain’t funny. It’s just sick. Seek help.
@ Bostonian- It is difficult for decent people with functioning senses of empathy to even fathom how deep these assholes will dig themselves. I, for one, am okay with this.
Where? Link to one time that this has ever occurred on this blog.
“There is a lot of wishing people dead appearing here as well by the regulars, which is a sure sign of below average intelligence.”
No, I think it is a sign that we are morally outraged at your rape apologies and justification for child rape.
You’d have to begin by knowing -or giving a shit- about the realities of mental development in children. The various ways children react to physical and sexual abuse, violence and day-to-day struggles of living in grinding poverty. You could begin by doing some of the actual reading on how children process consequences and their capacity for decision making. My sister is a pediatrician; I could provide you with a list of books to start. I doubt it would help as you’re a horrible person. But you could start there.
No, it’s your insistence that every woman -whether she’s had sex with a man who’s given her a birthday present or has never had sex but will be subject to an arranged marriage under the rules of her culture- is a whore that paints you as an extremist. The penguin thing just shows that your stupid for anthropomorphizing penguins.
I’m not sure how I could be misinterpreting or sensationalizing your assertion that child prostitutes are whores who should be criminally penalized but the pedophiles who rape them should be treated with compassion. But tell you what, why don’t you write a major letter to the editor expanding on this point and see what kind of reaction you get from a broader, less feminist audience.
That’s because you’re narcissistic, piece of shit, attention whore who is not a regular participant in this site’s community. There is a great deal of criticism of self-identified feminists as well as debates and arguments among the regulars.
To sum up, you’re a terrible person and an obvious fraud without so much as a shred of morality or basic decency.
“Your humour levels here are (for feminist blogs) … below par too, so it’s not like your making up for the lack of integrity with many jokes either, and some people here often simply resort to posting videos of cute animals doing stupid things. It’s totally lame.”
Oh, Tom. That really hurts my feelings. Why you no love me???????????????????????
Steele: It’s the logically correct position on the issue. I don’t know what your objection is.
Why don’t you know? We spent three days telling you what our objections were. Did you bother to read them?
I’ve never said you had to use it, I’m arguing that you should acknowledge it as a valid way for other people to use it.
What? Aren’t you the dude who’s preaching an asbolutist view of dictionaries? Now it’s all, “use it the way you want to,”?
Pick one, and stick to it.
So the guy who wrote this:
thinks that the commenters here are childish. Yuh-huh. Because every piece of professional and academic writing I’ve ever seen has “(you cunts)” sprinkled through it.
@ jumbofisch
Misanthropicmuse and I have both wished him dead in this thread. Because I, for one, think the world would be a better place if he weren’t alive in it.
“But tell you what, why don’t you write a major letter to the editor expanding on this point and see what kind of reaction you get from a broader, less feminist audience.”
Please, Tom, do this. In fact I’ll even point you in the right direction. Let’s pick some papers that most definitely do not lean feminists. I’m not going to ask you to write this letter to The Guardian because I know you’ll tbink they’re all feminist whores in the newsroom there. So, instead, here is a list.
The Times
The Financial Times
The Sun
The Daily Mail
And, just to round things out, a magazine.
The Economist
Write a letter expounding upon your theory of how child prostitutes should be punished and the pedophiles who hire them should be coddled and treated with sympathy, and see what responses you get.The Daily Mail at least would probably publish the whole thing. Think how famous you could be then.
Getting a lot of support on Reddit apparently looks like this:
Stop linking to Man Boobz, dude.
[penis jokes]
Don’t give Futrelle’s site hits.
More griping about Sarkeesian.
25 up votes; 16 down votes. 20 comments.
http://redd.it/wf2wf
(Many apologies for all the typos, everyone else who is not Tom.)
@ Unimaginative
“Because every piece of professional and academic writing I’ve ever seen has “(you cunts)” sprinkled through it.”
LMAO 😀
I would love to see Tom’s video of him discussing his views with people on the street. I’d love to see their reactions to his idea that some children have sex with adults out of a love of profit.
I was out drinking & talking about Tom’s positions with an Armenian friend tonight, and she said one of their worst insults is “I hope rats ejaculate on you.” (It sounds better in Armenian.) She wanted me to pass that along to Tommy. Consider it passed, with my solemn endorsement.
Can you imagine Tom’s footnotes?
1. Is a cunt
2. Whore
3 Even bigger whore
4. This is another example of the whoredom of women.
5. Please note that Article 3.5.2323123 of the Official Declaration of the EC Chair Cushion Committee stipulates that being a cunt is punishable by 5 years of hard labor
“Child rape apologist!” They said it 50 times, so it must be true!
No, I said pedophiles should be taken out of circulation and treated compassionately because they probably suffer from a pathology.
Incidentally, the same position that this wikipedia overview of pedophillia says US society already takes:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pedophilia
But pedophiles who pay children for sex are not really rapists, because the child consents, then performs the act, indicating they understand the nature of the contract. The elder is still a pedophiles, but the child prostitute is still a prostitute.
If the child is enslaved – it’s rape, or too young or stupid to know what he or she’s doing – rape. But poor, and in need of food? Not rape. A choice. Unwilling to do other hard labour paying 9 times less than the prostitution route? Not rape. A choice.
I think there are a too few prostitute feminists on this blog who will do anything to perpetuate the tax-free lifestyle prostitutes are currently legally entitled to in most places.
Prostitution tax avoidance and accountability avoidance opportunities need to be shut down.
If a grown woman would make the argument she’s a prostitute due to being victim of circumstance, then a child will be encouraged to make the same argument. Set a better example.
Whatever your age, follow the golden rule, of never taking money for sex, then prostitution will be eradicated. Only the prostitute can stop charging for sex.
And of course, that means rejecting courtship gifts, engagement gifts, marriage gifts, divorce gifts, and government largess also.
I don’t think many of you are ready to renounce prostitution in all its forms.
It’s such a simple course of action – but manboobzers will conspire to make it seem ridiculous, unquantifiable, un-knowable and so on.
I know a whore when I see one.
6. BBC documentary I saw one time, BBC (20??)
7. Willy, C. Antarctic Prostitution: a Reexamination Penguin Press:Mawson Station (2006)
8. I made this up, but some people in the comments on YouTube agreed it must be true
9. No citation here, but fail me and I’ll fucking sue you, you whore.
No Tom, you don’t. You couldn’t possibly, since you don’t know what that word means.
No. No. That is rape and you are revolting.
This pales in comparison to your nauseating wrongness about children being responsible for being raped, but I’m curious to know why you care if a consenting adult decides to do sex work? What makes you think people share your opinion that sex work should be eradicated?
“And of course, that means rejecting courtship gifts, engagement gifts, marriage gifts, divorce gifts, and government largess also.”
Hmmm. Well I guess I’ll have to get rid of that bottle of Johnny Walker I got for my husband. I wouldn’t want him to feel like a whore, now.
You baffle and sicken me. You can see that prostitution is a dangerous, and you don’t think children should be doing it, and your solution to it is to blame the prostitutes for being WHORES.
You can acknowledge that a person might choose to prostitute if they are desperately poor and starving, and you still judge the person for choosing not to starve to death.
Sex work should be eradicated because Tom can’t afford to pay a woman to sleep with him. Therefore, all sex is wrong. Women should just have sex with him for free. But of course, no one will. Because they’re all being whores for other men.
Here we go again
Children cannot consent sufficiently to sex with adults period.
Also why is prostitution and prostitutes bad? Why do you loath “whores” as oppose to “johns” since you need both for prostitution? Why don’t “johns” have to renounce being johns? In tom Martin world should no one ever give their partner gifts or is there any acceptable way to give your partner a gift?
Also, that is not the golden rule.
I meant, therefore all sex WORK is wrong.