“Muckraking” has pretty negative connotations in journalism today, but it was coined as a badge of honour. In the early 1900s, “muck rakers” were not cheap scandal-mongers, but investigative journalists who dug deep in areas polite society preferred to avoid, in order to expose the horrors lurking underneath: raking through the muck.
Today’s muck rakers are often condemned for exposing what polite media society would prefer not to see — or to let the rest of us see. Whatever his faults, James O’Keefe is a muck raker par excellence. The New York Post splendidly raked through the muck to bring us the truth about the odious Biden family.
We can thank our lucky stars that despite the servile grovelling to power of the legacy media, there are still muck rakers out there who are willing to go into the filthiest sewers of the internet and expose the monsters lurking there.
Brussels-based writer Roisin Michaux is “a European journalist with a focus on investigating gender ideology influence on policy and law in the EU”. In a recent Twitter thread, she reported on the disturbing push to normalise paedophilia. Very far from a figment of the imaginations of deranged “right-wing nut jobs”, there’s a very real if carefully hidden paedophile underground who are diligently working to have their criminal perversions normalised — and legalised.
They are rallying, and they have a strategy. The strategy is intended to desensitise “normies” to certain concepts. The know the concepts infuriate normal people, but they are operating from such a deeply taboo position that they consider any mention of their terms a “win”.
So, every time video emerges of a “family friendly drag event” featuring a grotesque man waggling his fake tits in children’s faces, every time “child drag queens” dance for money in gay bars, every time a high-profile brand promotes not-so-subtly-coded paedophilia content — that’s a “win”. Because, the strategy is to wear us down through sheer, unrelenting exposure.
Rainbow activism is a convenient “in” (though as far as I can tell, “retro” politically activated paedophiles think gender woo is nonsense). They care much more about amplifying academic mentions of terms like MAP, AAM etc. Queer academia is their road to legitimacy.
Every time a queer theory research paper mentions queer “temporalities”, they’re happy. When a Twitter account ridicules a vile euphemism like “MAP”, they’re happy. They want us to get used to MAP like our parents got used to having a gay neighbour. They think it’s the same.
And they’re rapidly bringing a great many “progressives” around to their way of thinking. Sound ludicrous? Consider the furious reaction of the left to the Wi Spa incident. When a man (with a lengthy record of sex offending, as it transpired) exposed himself to women and girls, the left violently defended him. Antifa turned up to protest for the man’s “rights”, Anita Sarkeesian tweeted her determination to defend it as “trans rights”.
These are people who’ve opened their minds so much that their brains and basic decency have fallen out.
As one person responded to Michaux’s Twitter thread:
I met a man in real life who said he defends pedophiles, he’s all for ‘freedom’ and who’s to say if it’s not just as likely that the child harms the pedophile as vice versa.
This attitude is, in fact, the logical end-point of the last decade of “rainbow” activism. The moronic slogan “love is love” is an open invitation: if “love” is the only metric, and paedophiles are adamant that they genuinely “love” their victims, then how can you logically object to a “loving” paedophilic relationship?
This is also why there is an open and determined push to reframe paedophilia as a “sexual orientation”. Having established, both socially and legally, that discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation is a bigotry second only to racism, then by what right can we legally or morally object to paedophilia if it’s a sexual orientation?
Get it? You’re the monster, not the child-rapist.
They feel mistreated. Think about how strongly you feel about climate change/electoral integrity/whatever. With the same level of intensity as you feel about your pet cause, they feel that denying them access to sex with kids is a violation of their civil, if not human, rights.
Like all underground political movements, of course, there are schisms.
They are strategising constantly, and there’s an ideological rift between the old-school paedos and the modern ones. there is a lot of infighting. it’s like any political movement.
So there are 2 main camps: the older guys who had an official association […] who think the only way back is via official sex-positive gay male movements. They believe in real-life political organising . The other group think online shitposting is the way forward. They don’t believe in politics. Both agree they are “queer” and thus part of LGBTQIA, but the younger guys think spamming words like MAP etc on Twitter are the way forward. They have a whole strategy […] it’s respectability politics versus spamming something into a “norm”.
Then there are the “third way pedos”, so to speak: the ones who just want to rape your children.
There is an entire other undercurrent of paedos who are targetting kids on Fortnite, Roblox etc. They have no need/desire for political recognition. The internet made it too easy.
I can only admire Roisin Michaux for her fearless determination to rake through this muck. I feel soiled just reporting it second-hand.
