Friday, June 20, 2014

David Futrelle is a Homosexual Pedophile Rapist

As Dr.  Rookh Kshatriya claims, the underlying male-hatred in our society (or as I call it, heterosexual hatred) is due to the fact that many of it's "founding fathers" are in fact homosexual pedophiles.  Make no mistake here either.  When I say pedophile, I am not talking about teenagers - I am referring to prepubescents - you find this mentality of boy-raping lunatics in cults (a future post I will make). Because of this insane hatred of straight adult males, any form of adult male sexuality will be hated.  In days past it was referred to as "lust".  Today, it is referred to as "misogyny".  Being a full grown man, and admiring a woman's figure is "objectifying her" and considered disrespectful.  What about doing the same to a prepubescent boy - you never hear people complaining about that - they do not care -it is a HATRED of ADULT MALE HETEROSEXUALITY that infects them.  Today, many people supporting this polluting attitude call themselves feminists.

The following text is a re-post from the Anti-Feminist's blog.

MonsterBoobz – David Futrelle and his Disturbing Defence of a Film that Consists Almost Entirely of Graphic Scenes Depicting the Sexual Abuse and Torture of Naked Children

David Futrelle once described an adult male's fantasy of violently sexually assualting a random boy in a bar as 'tender' and 'erotic'. Writing about this, I posed the question - if this was Futrelle's idea of a 'tender' homoerotic yearning, what would his definition of a more hardcore sexual fantasy involving teenage boys possibly consist of?

Sexually humiliating them? Forcing them to eat human faeces? Mutilating them? Torturing them before murdering them?

No. Futrelle apparently accepts that these evil depravities should not be the subjects of sexual fantasy. We can all breathe a sigh of relief. Especially our teenage sons.

For according to Futrelle, such things are the theme of great art, not sexploitation.

Even when sold in seedy gay bookstores. Even when one of the boy actors later killed himself. Even when the homosexual director of the movie was murdered soon after the film was completed by a teenage boy he was exploiting in real life. Even when the film is officially banned in at least 15 different countries and is routinely described as the most appalling and grotesque ever made.

David Futrelle was an active freelance writer back in the 90's, writing for both online and offline liberal publications that included Salon, and 'In These Times'. Quote-mining from the many articles he wrote in this period, we find that he claimed that an age of consent above 12 is apparently nothing more than prudish feminists 'controlling the sexuality of young girls', described the sexual fantasy of violently assaulting a random boy in a bar as 'tender' and 'erotic', suggested that child rape victims be encouraged to marry their abusers (who would be spared jail), repeatedly accused the world's leading child protection organizations (such as the NSPCC) of generating hysteria and lies over child abuse, and railed against the first government efforts to protect children from online paedophilia and porn.

Describing some of these shocking and outrageous viewpoints of David Futrelle, I wondered what more dark secrets and even more disturbing quotes were still to be found in the dusty internet archives, amongst the hundreds of pieces he wrote for his liberal 'sex positive' feminist audience back in the 1990's. I specifically mentioned that the thought of what still might be discovered sent a shiver up my spine...and likely his too.

I wasn't wrong.

David Futrelle and his Defence of 'Salò, or the 120 Days of Sodom'

How would you describe a 'man' who not only cried 'censorship' against the authorities for clamping down on a sexploitation film that contained graphic scenes of children being raped, tortured, forced to eat excrement, mutilated, and then murdered, but went on to argue brazenly that the authorities themselves should face arrest for attempting to censor it?

PDF File Here

Most normal, sane, moral people would call such a film beyond evil. One of the traumatized male child actors, who would have been only 15 or 16 when the sickening movie was filmed, in which he is made to eat the shit of his abuser before having his nipples burned off, later killed himself through a drug overdose at the age of just 33. Today, such a film would undoubtedly be classed as category 5 child pornography (the very worst). Writing about the movie back in the 1990's, David Futrelle judged it only as being 'not exactly family entertainment'.

In fact, he also suggested that instead of arresting the men distributing the 'art' movie at a notorious gay sex shop, that the police should themselves be arrested for 'renting films that go over the head of the average undercover cop'.

Futrelle's defence of the film seems to rest entirely on the status of the director - Pier Paolo Pasolini - as an 'artistic genius'. The director, a homosexual, was murdered soon after the movie's release. It is believed that the killer was a teenage male prostitute that Pasolini was abusing (unrelated to the movie), although others suspect that it may have been the work of an outraged family member of the young cast, who were all aged between 14-18.

This grotesque sexploitation movie is officially banned in 15 different countries, although, as stated above, it should undoubtedly be automatically classed as the worst form of child pornography. Its defenders claim that it makes an artistic statement about the 'corruption of power over innocence and youth'. The abusers in the film are portrayed as Italian wartime fascists who kidnap eight teenage boys and girls and subject them to 120 days of grotesque sexual torture and humiliation before murdering them. I have not watched the movie, and never will, but according to most online reviews and descriptions, it consists almost entirely of the graphic depiction of these tortures, with the teenage cast of victims, aged as young as 14, looking genuinely terrified.

Despite the film's supposed artistic statement about fascism and the corruption of power, and hence justification as an 'art movie', rather than porn or sexploitation, it is unclear why the director was homosexual, the audience of the film appears to be mainly homosexual, most of the positive online reviewers of the movie appear to be homosexual, why most of the movie's focus is aparently on the graphic sexual torture of naked underage boys, and why the movie was being rented out in a Cincinnati 'gay and lesbian bookstore' that deals mainly with erotic homosexual products.

Wikipedia - 120 Days of Sodom

IMDB - 120 Days of Sodom

An Amazon customer's review (yes, unbelievably this is still being sold openly on Amazon) :

I have read the reviews of what a deep movie this is and the important social message. What I saw was a badly acted porno with some near vomit-inducing moments. It's as if the director was looking for an excuse to portray acts of pedophilia and extreme cruelty and then calling it art to justify it. How anyone can sit through this more than once and get some kind of enjoyment from it is beyond me.

David Futrelle still tries to incite violence against a frail old man for a misquoted comment made nearly half-a-century ago.

Excellent job Mr. Anti-Feminist!

Have a nice weekend all!


  1. Futrelle reminds me of those creepy fat guys who hang around playgrounds dressed in clown suits; trying to lure the kids to come back to his house.

    "Don't worry boys and girls. You can always trust your old Uncle Davy. Want to come over and look at the kitties?"


    1. LMFAO - that is actually true now huh...

      Why do feminists even want that creep talking for them?

  2. well, uh, jack don-0-van wanted me to dress up like a lil boi, I thought that was creepier than hugo schwietzer and chuck ross with roosh 5 in a hot tub...

    at least mandy just hits it than quits it with a strap-on...

  3. There is a lax attitude about child abuse, if a male child
    is the victim. Orginazations like the "North American Man/Boy
    Love Association (Which has many professional members) are
    allowed to exist unharrased, and pornography involving the abuse of young boys is shrugged off.

  4. If AVfMen really want to show they care for boys, they might make a start by both denouncing Fraudtrelle for his disturbing defence of this film, AND by campaigning to have it banned as the worst kind of child pornography.

  5. @Eric - it looks like somebody at AVfM has been reading your comments...

  6. I just want to add a comment here.

    The point of this post is not to incite violence against David Futrelle. If anything, he should be institutionalized in a mental health facility, and given the help and medication that he needs - to overcome his disturbing attitudes that a movie portraying children being forced to eat fecal matter is "art".

    Unfortunately, our modern day psychiatrists - like Peter Breggin - seem more intent on making all men apologize for the actions of less than 3% of the male population.

    We truly do live in disturbing and dark times. A man who believes that children being forced to eat fecal matter and being raped is "art" and psychiatrists like Peter Breggin do not see this as illness- but rather see men as beasts.

    The TRUE reality is that the overwhelming majority of men do not commit crimes against children or women - nor do they consider the portrayal of such vile acts as being "artistic"

  7. I'm not trying to incite violence against Fraudtrelle either, but he most certainly is against Warren Farrell. The whole point of his attacks is to rabble rouse feminists into violently protesting (again) when Farrell speaks at the forthcoming Detroit conference.

    I agree that Futrelle probably needs to be institutionalized for his own sake. His writings from the 90's are troublesome and indicative of a psychological disorder in themselves, but his unrepentant attitude towards them now - refusing to admit their disturbing character whilst continuing to accuse others of being paedophiles for much less extreme comments, is truly the sign of a schizophrenic psychopath.

    And surely even a warped mind which saw a grotesque film such as this as art, would see it as problematic that Futrelle called for the police to themselves be arrested for trying to remove it from a gay sex shop being sold alongside other gay pornos?

    1. Yes, I know. I merely made that comment, because - well - some people get very angry at people who approve of the raping and abusing of children. I am guessing also, that there are more people out there who would become angry at the thought of somebody labeling a film that depicts children being forced to eat fecal matter as "art".

      Hence,that comment is more of a disclaimer than an accusation towards you.

      This blog is friendly to you - you NEVER have to be on the defensive here. If you ever feel defensive here, then you have misunderstood my intentions.

      Also, like you, I do not approve of violence - that is why I said that Futrelle needs professional psychiatric help, or to be institutionalized.

      That is the peaceful route - and I endorse it - as I am sure you and others like you do too.

      Be honest - this is the kind of thing that Futrelle likes to twist as being "a death threat".

    2. "I do not approve of violence...Futrelle needs professional psychiatric help, or to be institutionalized."

      I wouldn't be adverse though to a hanging, if it followed a legal trial by jury.

  8. There has been further revelations btw - Futrelle also once argued that victims of abuse should take responsibility for their abuse as their 'innocence' is 'exaggerated' by society, and made a special point (very rare at the time) that many abuse victims are male.
    He also appeared to mock the idea that babies with AIDS are 'innocent'.
    I'm not sure I even want to know what he meant by that...

    1. Yes, I am reading that - and I cannot thank you enough for exposing that creep for what he really is.

      Why feminists would want a "thing" like that speaking for them is beyond me.

      I am guessing that Futrelle will try to escape your findings the way many women I meet do...

      "I was young and stupid".

      If I had a dollar for every woman I have heard give me that line of crap - I'd be a millionaire (pardon the cliche).

  9. From what I hear Andrea Dworkin is still accepted. Her writings are assigned in Women's Studies courses. When she died Christopher Hitchens wrote an elegy in praising that "she could write."

    Her novel "Mercy" was remaindered and filled the discount bin at Barnes&Noble's. I read Gloria Steinham's endorsement on the cover, "Some people can write a book that can change the world. Andrea Dworkin is one of therm." Then I gave the book a few minutes of leafing through. It is the kind of book written with one hand in the lap.

    The main character was an avatar of the author, Andrea One, who was physically fit and studied taekwondo from a woman sensei. The rest of the book is sadomasochistic porn. She luxuriates is rape injuries that never go away but burst open bleeding for the rest of the victim's life. She says that soon there will be rape circuses where women will be snatched into vans and whisked off to auditoriums where they will be painted pink and made to wear bikinis and raped and raped in front of a male audience. If you don't understand the "painted pink" neither do I. I saw it again somewhere in the book so it was one of her fetishes.

    So that justifies Andrea going out at night and stomping homeless men and luxuriating how their ribs break under her kicks.

    That was about all I could stand. One other point: Andrea walks past a slouching black teenager in a parking lot in New York who is idly bouncing a basketball. She imagines that it is a human head. Dworkin was one of the worst kind of racist -- the ones who call African Americans to cannibals.

    And she is still accepted as a feminist thinker.

    1. As Dr.Rookh Kshatriya calls them, "deranged feminist liars". I wish I could say they had a negative impact on our society - but I suspect that our society simply had some warped values that allowed these people to flourish in the main stream.

      Hence, their negativity did not have an impact - it was already there - and perfectly acceptable to publish.

  10. "One of the traumatized male child actors, who would have been only 15 or 16 when the sickening movie was filmed, in which he is made to eat the shit of his abuser before having his nipples burned off..."

    LMFAO. Do you also think that David Warner's decapitation in "The Omen" was genuine or that Jodi Foster was actually gang raped in "The Accused?" The nipple burning was a "special effect" (I'm sure you've heard of the term before) and the shit that the actors ate was also not real: it was actually orange marmalade and chocolate. None of the actors in "Salo" (including Sergio Fascetti, the one who later died of a drug overdose) was under the age of 16, which is actually two years above the current age of consent in Italy.

    As for Pasolini, his killer Giuseppe Pelosi was 17 and thus NOT underage in Italy. However, Pelosi has since retracted his confession and Pasolini may have actually been killed on account of his homosexuality and left-wing politics.

    1. Sounds like it is one of your favorite movies.

    2. There's no need to pout just because I proved you wrong.

      I've never seen "Salò" and don't plan to. But I took a film class a few years ago where "From the Arthouse to the Grindhouse: Highbrow and Lowbrow Transgression in Cinema's First Century" was required reading. That is how I learned that poop in "Salò" was actually orange marmalade and chocolate and that the sex was all simulated.

    3. In other words, your mind is made up, so you'd rather not be confused with facts. Got it.

    4. Now that's what I call projection!

  11. @polly - Some of the actors/actresses were under 16 - you can find this out by looking up their dobs at IMDB and comparing it to the year the movie was filmed. They were aged 14-18.

    BTW, under laws campaigned for and passed by feminists, the minimum age for porn worldwide is 18. Anything under that is legally child porn. In most of the world men get locked up for years for simply viewing pictures of naked 17 year olds. But David Futrelle, and yourself (presumably one of his transvestite sadist paedocrite readers), has no problem with a gay sex shop renting out this video as fap material, containing as it does naked under 18s 'pretending' to be anally raped, forced to eat shit and then tortured to death.

    David Futrelle himself campaigned to get the reddit 'jailbait' forum closed down, claiming that pictures of 17 year olds in skimpy underwear or bikinis was 'child porn' and catered to paedophiles.

    Also, since when did 1970's Italian legal definitions of a 'minor' or 'child porn' have relevance to what can be rented out in David Futrelle's local chicago gay sex shop?

    You haven't proved anybody wrong, You've just proved again that David Futrelle and his tranny readers are sick twisted paedocrite child abusing perverts.

    1. Polly the Apologist. Just ignore her. She is boring.

    2. This comment has been removed by the author.

    3. Pornography performance laws apply to situations where the sex is real. As in, people are actually having sex and being filmed.

      Those rules are not ironclad if the sex is simulated. It's why the ban against the 1979 film "The Tin Drum" was lifted.

    4. So, let's take your standards to their logical conclusion, then.
      "The Exorcist" has a scene when a character who is supposed to be 12 (though the main actress was 14 and the body double was 29) masturbates with a crucifix.

      "Game of Thrones" has a scene where Sansa Stark (who is supposed to be 13-14, though the actress was 15-16) is nearly gang raped by a mob.

      In the latest adaptation of "Flowers in the Attic", there's a scene where two characters (who are supposed to be 14 and 16, though their actors were 15 and 19) have sex.

      Are those child pornography, too, by your standards?

    5. Oh, after reading your newest blog post, I realize that you probably don't care about any of that, because Linda Blair, Sophie Turner, and Kiernan Shipka are female, and you only care about Hebephilia if it applies to adult men and teenage boys.

      Hebephilia with adult men and teenage girls, according to you, is the natural order of things and laws against it are ~*~*MiSanDrY*~*~.

    6. We're supposed to take the word of a man who dresses like a nun and thinks 'Salo' is high art seriously?

    7. @Polly - try actually reading it - I poke fun at the undercover sting.

      But - in your own words,"In other words, your mind is made up, so you'd rather not be confused with facts. Got it. "

      I think I'll just cut and paste that to anything you say.

      Look, I can appreciate that you are clearly a lonely person, but, you are not going to find any form of stimulation here.

      I suggest a dildo, or maybe stop being a cunt and get a boyfriend with a functional penis to have sex with.


    8. Maybe you should get a boyfriend, too, since you spend so much time thinking about gay sex.

    9. In other words, your mind is made up, so you'd rather not be confused with facts. Got it.

  12. Quantum Binary Signals

    Get professional trading signals delivered to your cell phone every day.

    Follow our trades today and gain up to 270% per day.