EGI Notes

Thursday, May 12, 2016

Derbyshire, Child Porn, and VDARE

Derb the moral turd.


First, note that Derb implicitly tries to associate himself as similar to Bukovsky as heroic “awkward squad” truth-tellers. In reality, Derbyshire, opponent of White nationalism and proponent of miscegenation, is, to borrow a phrase from another HBDer, “a pillar of the Establishment.” More importantly, Derbyshire, father of two, makes this rather remarkable comment: 
Why should it be a crime to have child porn on your computer?

Let’s see, Derbyshire, you stupid bastard: consumers of child porn create the demand for it. That demand in turn motivates scum to produce that filth for profit, often resorting to the sexual torture of young children, and always involving sexual exploitation of children. Understand, you morally obtuse turd? 

I must say: many years ago, a foreigner, observing the number of White male-Asian female couples, noted to me that “yellow fever” among White males may be sublimated pedophilia, given the neotonic nature of Asians, particularly Asian females (on average small, with muted secondary sexual characteristics). Yes, the Derb states that enjoying child porn is “weird and creepy” – but that is coming from a man who is a self-described (or, quoting his own mother) “awkward squad” and a man who is a proponent of inter-racial marriage, which most of us would consider “weird and creepy.” Despite being "weird and creepy," Derbyshire apparently believes possession of child porn should be legal, based on his comment quoted above. Derbyshire has also written: 
Added to that sadness is the very unfair truth that a woman's salad days are shorter than a man's -- really, in this precise context, only from about 15 to 20.


To put that in perspective, consider that a typical adult East Asiatrix is less sexually developed (i.e., secondary sexual characteristics) than is a typical 15 year old female of other races. 

One wonders what “Daddy Dragon” Brimelow thinks of Derbyshire’s opinions on this matter. If VDARE does nothing, says nothing, about this, then that’s a tacit endorsement of Derbyshire’s opinion. Conservative contributors to VDARE’s panhandling take note. 

Also: There are some who may accuse me of hypocrisy because I critique Derbyshire here, but have never commented on a Der Movement figure who’s been through the legal system over this issue. My rationale for not commenting on this other case is: (1) The individual in question has denied the charges and given an explanation of the guilty plea; (2) I do not have the full facts of that case so as to make an informed judgment; and (3) Unlike Derbyshire, that other individual has never publicly questioned the validity of child porn possession being a crime. Therefore, the issue here is that of Derbyshire, and not of anyone else.

Labels: , , , , , , , , ,