Error: Unable to create directory uploads/2014/09. Is its parent directory writable by the server?

David Frum and His Pro-Pedophile Protege Alex Knepper

Posted on October 8 2010 7:00 pm
Jenn Q. Public is associate editor of NewsReal Blog, in charge of The Feminist Hawks' Nest. David Swindle is the managing editor of NewsReal Blog and associate editor of FrontPage Magazine.

Some of the new evidence to be presented in this post about the disturbing views of Alex Knepper, protege of David Frum.

Editor’s Note: This article contains disturbing, graphic, uncensored descriptions of sex acts with children. The editorial team has decided to present all the evidence as-is.

“Keep it up, you little pissant. I’ll make it further than you ever will because I’m the same in private as I am in public.”

Alex Knepper to David Swindle

The sexual exploitation of children is an almost unimaginable horror, abetted by the insidious online movement to paint pedophilia as just another puritan taboo.  It should be just as unimaginable that a prominent public intellectual would allow this evil to fester in the conservative movement, but that is precisely what former Bush administration speechwriter David Frum does each time he renews his support of former NewsReal Blog contributor Alex Knepper.

Knepper’s disgusting views on sex have been thoroughly documented in posts we have written here at NewsReal Blog. We have contacted Frum three times to present evidence of Knepper’s degeneracy. In response, he snidely brushed off our documentation, instead focusing his protege’s energy on how to “fight the crazy right.” Never has Frum condemned any of this previously-disclosed material.

On September 20 RedState‘s Lexington_Concord wrote an excellent post summarizing Knepper’s pro-pedophile views and our resulting conflict with FrumForum. And yet, this story still hasn’t gotten the attention it warrants. There’s a young conservative writer on the rise– published at Big HollywoodNewsBusters, and the Daily Caller, and personally supported by former National Review columnist and former American Enterprise Institute fellow David Frum — and he’s a defender of pedophilia. (When this post’s new material was brought to the attention of Big Hollywood and Andrew Breitbart they quickly committed to not publishing Knepper anymore. NewsBusters made the same commitment, going as far as deleting Knepper’s account.  We have not yet heard back from Daily Caller but if it wants to make a similar public statement after reading this post it is invited to do so. We note that it’s been a week since Knepper’s last Daily Caller post — whereas in the same period he has published four posts at Frum Forum — perhaps the team at Editor-In-Chief Tucker Carlson’s publication already discovered the previous posts on this controversy and made the responsible decision to terminate their professional relationship. Kudos to them.)

Knepper continues to claim he’s the target of a NewsReal Blog smear campaign. This week he complained about our “bizarre, obscene allegations” and ripped into blogger Dan Riehl for repeating the charges with “No documentation, no evidence, nothing.”

What follows is a comprehensive look at the evidence.

After reading the remainder of this post, David Frum will no longer be able to smugly turn a blind eye to his protege’s depravity. Knepper’s Internet footprints extend well beyond the conservative blogosphere, and there is no shortage of proof that his defenses of pedophiles and rapists are not merely intellectual exercises, but pleas for validation of his own evil impulses.

First, a brief overview of the already publicized material depicting Knepper’s profoundly disturbing ideas about sex:

  1. Pedophiles are the new blacks — innocent victims lynched by hysterical demagogues.
  2. Rape isn’t lethal, so victims have no business calling themselves “survivors.”
  3. The Marquis de Sade, author of violent, pornographic depictions of child rape, is a “divine” figure whose writing will help people “embrace the fires of sexuality.”
  4. A 17-year-old is a woman, not a girl, and age is just a number.
  5. Online opponents should be degraded by calling them “little boy.”
  6. There’s nothing wrong or unusual about a 20-year-old man being a devoted fan of boyish pop star Justin Bieber.

With all the writings compiled together it’s hard to continue to give Knepper the benefit of the doubt.

Yet in spite of the evidence, Frum still defended Knepper when he guest-blogged at Andrew Sullivan’s The Daily Dish:

Here’s more from the young blogger Alex Knepper whom the folks at NewsRealBlog published for months … but fired as a sex pervert and all-around lying maniac after he offered a post criticizing Ann Coulter. You can see just the kind of dangerous fiend he is too.

It is apparent that Frum considers Knepper an intellectual apostate in his own image, a delightful provocateur whose pot-stirring might someday attract a bit of Web traffic.  Frum is too invested in his fetishization of heterodoxy to admit that only a degenerate would spend this much time advocating on behalf of sex offenders, downplaying the severity of rape, and peddling the same arguments as outfits like the North American Man-Boy Love Association (NAMBLA).  But like many sex offenders and their supporters, Knepper’s repugnant strategy is to defang his perversions by taking them out of the moral realm and into the intellectual arena, dragging conservatives like Frum along with him.

Before publishing further defenses of Knepper, Frum will want to review his protege’s posting history at in which the “young blogger” demonstrates beyond dispute his sexual attraction to adolescent boys.  No pharmacy stocks a more powerful emetic than these posts. We have chosen to present all the relevant evidence that we have uncovered. Again: this material is disturbing and explicit.

First, it is necessary to establish conclusively that the alias “lostpainting” at Gay Teen Forum belongs to Knepper. This can be done by visiting the first link which we found unlocking this perverted secret stash.

Thread #1: Holy shit LP. This dude just IRL Goatsee’d you.

A user with the rather unoriginal handle “lestermolester” links to David’s original rebuttal to Knepper and exclaims, “OH SNAP!”

Lostpainting responds:

I replied to that post. … log-smears

It’s at this point that you’re introduced to the signature that accompanies all of Knepper’s Gay Teen Forum posts:


This should not take Frum by surprise since Knepper once lamented in a FrumForum post:

I’m twenty years old and I can’t even say that I think that Justin Bieber is cute without being called a pedophile by some people.

More recently Knepper identified as a “Belieber” (an obsessive Bieber fan) in a post at Big Hollywood.

Later in this Gay Teen Forum thread, Knepper provides further evidence of his identity by expressing his frustration about blogging at NRB:

They rejected all but the most asinine, cliched posts. Of course they rarely generated any traffic. I’m glad to be rid of the site; it’s one of those Obama-is-a-socialist-fanatic sites. I’m usually one of the top traffic-generators everywhere I write — when I wrote for Race42008, I was a top contributor; at FrumForum, my posts generate way more comments on average than almost anyone’s posts besides Frum’s own; at the Eagle, I was far and away the most popular columnist. I have learned from this that working for mindlessly partisan sites is really, really, really not the way for me to go.

In our investigation we also began to see the evidence of our worst fears coming true. In answer to forum member “Milo” asking whether or not he actually was a pervert, Knepper confessed that he would have sex with the underage Bieber if given the chance:

Not in the I-want-to-fuck-a-ten-year-old sense. Sixteen-year-olds like Justin Bieber? Maybe.

As you’ll soon see, this claim of Knepper’s that he is uninterested in prepubescent boys — that he is merely an “ephebophile” (someone interested primarily in 13-16 year old adolescents, as though that’s not just as evil) — is simply not credible.

Thread #2: LP’s Thread of Awesome Shit

This thread further establishes lostpainting’s identity as Knepper. First lostpainting completely reproduces Knepper’s Daily Caller post here.

Lostpainting then writes,

In the past, I’ve written with NewsRealBlog (left on unfriendly terms — they had a problem with me), (left on friendly terms — was time to move on), and the American University Eagle (infamously — left on friendly terms — but I had a problem with them). I’ve guest-blogged on some sites, too, such as I have a standing offer at Hip Hop Republican that I may take up sometime. I’ve also been quoted in most major news sources (NYT, WaPo, Newsweek, US News & World Report, C-SPAN, etc).

Those who are still unconvinced can see a picture of “lostpainting” in his underwear here. It’s obviously Knepper.

Last piece of evidence. Note the AIM instant messenger handle that Knepper includes on his Facebook bio. It’s “lostpainting4.”

Thread #3: Ode to Chilfs

The preferred terminology of Knepper and his Gay Teen Forum associates for attractive children they want to victimize is “CHILF.” This is a variant of the more well-known term “MILF,” popularized by the teen sex comedy “American Pie.” A “MILF” is an attractive older woman, a so-called “Mom I’d Like to F—.” Thus, a “CHILF” is a “Child I’d Like to F—.” In this thread Knepper posts his own version of the 12 Days of Christmas translated into pedophile pornography:

On the twelfth day of Christmas,
my Pooler sent to me
Twelve Biebers jerking
Eleven Archies cumming
Ten Jesses posing
Nine Horizons fucking,
Eight boys a-milking,
Seven fags a-jacking,
Six twinks undressing,
Five naked chilfs
Four emo boys,
Three nude teens,
Two Dylicious pictures,
And a Daniel sending nudes to me!

“Pooler” is another member of the forum who from our research appears to share Knepper’s preference for young boys. “Daniel” seems to be a forum member who was 16 when this ode was posted (he has since changed his handle to “Vortex.”)  And “Dylicious” is a very young looking (but legal) member of the forum.

Thread 4: An *embarrassing* lostpainting sex story

This is the most disturbing item we discovered as it features Knepper confessing to a sex act with someone who might be below the age of consent. (We really have no way of knowing for certain yet.) If you want to give Knepper the benefit of the doubt — a practice we no longer do — then you could say that someone being “chilfy” means he only looks like a child.

Chilfy called me last night at fucking 3 in the morning, 5 hours into my earlier-than-usual sleep. He said he wanted me to fuck him. Now, I was still tired and woozy, but I wasn’t going to pass up this opportunity. So I drove over and got him.

10 minutes after that, we’re naked and I can’t fucking get it up. I just want to go back to sleep. I don’t even feel like sucking dick. I’m just…tired. I try and try and it comes up here and there but we fail at getting it into his ass.

So, we leave without getting off. He tried to fuck me but his dick was way too fucking big, especially for my tired, not-that-aroused self.

So I just drove him back at 5:00. -___-;

He said that tonight he’s having sex with a girl and he might want to go out with her and he doesn’t like to cheat. So I might lose my chilf.

He didn’t look very chilfy last night, though; he hadn’t shaven…he was all hairy. That made it more difficult to get turned on…boo.

Oh well.

Let it be known to not have sex when you’ve been awoken from a deep sleep. You can’t force yourself to be horny.

Note the line where Knepper confesses that because his sexual partner had not shaved he looked older — and that made getting sexually aroused more difficult. This is critical evidence that Knepper longs for prepubescent boys.

Thread 5: I had a dream last night that I had sex with Rylan

Rylan is another member of the forum. Knepper describes the dream:

It was really hot but totally pedo-y.

“Pedo-y” referring to pedophile, of course. Knepper elaborates on his fantasy:

The hilarious part was when I pulled down his briefs his dick was really tiny like a child’s. It was like, 2 inches hard. I was like Rylan this is so weird this feels so wrong, but he’s like — I’m sorry, I’m such a tiny person all around! And I sucked him off anyway. Was sooooooooooooo fuckin pedo

This is a naked confession of a desire to engage in sexual acts with prepubescent boys whose genitals are “really tiny like a child’s.” Responding to a query about whether he woke up having ejaculated, Knepper responds:

No but I did feel really horny and had to go jerk off to some chilfs

Later in the thread Knepper again opens the door for others to reasonably assume that he has had sex with underage boys before:

In the dream he told me that he was 15, and I gave myself the green light to suck him since I’d already decided I was good to go after James (Dr. Dillamond). Either way it’s totally societally inappropriate but still hilarious.

Not morally wrong, not exploitative to intentionally seek out someone younger and more vulnerable. Just “societally inappropriate.”  In other words, Knepper believes his views on sexual consent are superior to those forced upon him by an unenlightened society. Having sex with a 15-year-old isn’t predatory in Knepper’s book, it just clashes with the prudish social mores that cramp his style.

Thread #6: An exciting lostpainting sex story

Like all self-interested apologists for sexually deviant behavior, Knepper relies on false and bizarre moral equivalents to make his disturbing case.  When he gloated about penetrative sex with a 16-year-old boy (apparently legal in his state), one Gay Teen Forum member observed:

You just seem overly excited at the fact that you fucked someone four years younger than you.

Knepper replied:

If I were into older guys and got excited that I fucked a thirty-year-old, would you find that creepy?

The absurd contention that sex with an adolescent boy is morally equivalent to sex with a 30-year-old man is cribbed directly from the Youth Liberation Movement, a “front group for a collection of adults with sexual interest in children.”  It is not intellectually provocative or cunning; it’s evil.

Thread #7: The Cutest CHILFs

We can’t link to this Gay Teen Forum thread titled “The Cutest CHILFs” because it has been deleted by forum administrators.  The likely reason will be clear when you view the following screen capture of two seemingly naked boys embracing.  It provides our most visually shocking evidence of Knepper’s predilection for underage boys. We have only altered the screen capture to obscure the faces of what appear to be pre-adolescent boys.

And just a reminder from another post by Knepper that has since been deleted: a CHILF is someone under the age of 18.

Thread #8: Why do those of us into younger guys get judged?

Simply failing to condemn a thread about pursuing teenage victims is damning enough. The entire notion that those with pedophilic tendencies are unfairly persecuted by a cold, judgmental world is preposterous and repellent.  But Knepper didn’t just contribute to this discussion – he started it:

Seriously. It’s rather annoying to drool over David Archuleta or something — who is 18 but looks cute and boyish — and have someone be like “Ew pedo, he’s like 12,” but someone else my age (19) might be into someone who’s goddamn 40 years old and no one thinks that’s odd.

Here, again, we see evidence of the mental gymnastics required to find an attraction to CHILFs morally equivalent to an attraction to older men.  And then Knepper goes one step further, explaining that he doesn’t just find young looking men appealing, he lusts after minors.  A forum member asks:

Are your real life friends and acquaintances aware you lust for minors and have a diaper fetish. Actual question.

Knepper admits:

Lol they are aware of my chilf-lust but not my fetishes.

Three observations here:

1.        “Chilf-lust” is not some sort of inborn orientation toward children or adolescents.  It is the desire to prey upon the most vulnerable among us.

2.        Knepper sees “chilf-lust” as more socially acceptable than a diaper fetish.

3.        Knepper’s friends are apparently willing to look the other way when he expresses his desire to exploit minors.

Thread #9: What’s the Main Cause of Pedophilia?

Not only are children sexual objects to Knepper, he thinks child rape is funny. “What’s the Main Cause of Pedophilia?” asks Knepper in another since-deleted post as he sets up for the punchline: “Sexy kids.”

Thread #10: What’s the best thing about having sex with 28 year olds?

In this thread, Knepper shares nearly half a dozen more child rape jokes:

What’s the best thing about having sex with 28 year olds?
There’s 20 of them.

What’s the best part about having sex in the shower with an eight-year-old girl?
If you slick her hair back, she looks like an eight-year-old boy!

How do you make a three year old cry twice?
Wipe your bloody dick on her teddy bear

What’s black, blue, and hates sex?
The ten year old in my trunk

What’s even better than sex with a nine-year-old?
………………………I don’t know, either.

To knowingly support the man who wrote these things is a moral degeneracy.

It’s time for David Frum to take a stand against Alex Knepper.  No tent should have room for this unapologetic promoter of child exploitation.

Reminder of NRB Reposting Policy: As with all NRB posts we grant permission for this post to be republished at any publication. Please link back to the original posting.

Update: If you have additional relevant information about Alex Knepper that you think should be included here (or that we should investigative further) then please use the contact form below.

Your Name (required)

Your Email (required)


Your Message

115 Responses leave one →
  1. Error: Unable to create directory uploads/2014/09. Is its parent directory writable by the server?
    October 8, 2010

    You know, a 20 yo having an attraction for a 16 yo doesn't bother me. EVERYTHING else scares the bejeezus out of me and sickens me to death, and changes the "Bieber fever" from the confines of "What an adorable young man" to "prey of the week (weak?)" This guy is sick, sick, sick. I can't believe he continues to have a career. Look at how people vilified Andrew Sullivan for his sexcapades, and he's a consenting adult with other consenting adults! Why would ANYONE excuse or morally justify the obviously predatory and perverse ramblings of someone like this?

    This literally made me heart sick.

  2. Error: Unable to create directory uploads/2014/09. Is its parent directory writable by the server?
    October 8, 2010

    This is beyond belief disgusting…Kookoo alert anyone? CHILF? Are you serious? Promoting sexual exploitation of kids is downright immoral and gross. One must ask themselves, why would we want to encourage this behavior by allowing this lunatic to write and express his desire to nail young boys? Unheard of…and sick. This is intolerable, and if David Frum has any drop of credibility known in existence, he'd throw this guy out like the others have. Good reporting, Jenn and David!

    • August 13, 2014

      So I suppose you hate Seth MacFarlane and characterize him as being similarly worthy of moral condemnation? If not, and you enjoy the shows he creates, then you tolerate this sort of humor in one context but condemn it in another (when it comes from a young, homosexual college student). Surely the off-colored humor is a more serious indication of perversion in the older celebrity than it is in this young, barely post-adolescent college student? To me, this is indicative of the homophobic nature of this article's character attacks.

      Btw, this isn't good reporting. The authors are venting a personal conflict by attacking the character of the individual who crossed them (by definition, this article lacks the objective, fact asserting quality of real reporting). Such is the typical behavior of the narcissist when he is contradicted. Anyone with even the smallest bit of self-awareness would ask themselves what the intent of the authors who wrote this article was–why would they spend so much time and effort accumulating non-incriminating, out-of-context offensive jokes and purport them to be evidence of a psychiatric disease? And why would they take this disorder out of context and then characterize it as evidence of personal degeneration? This is prima facie evidence supporting the ulterior motives and vindictive intent of our so-called objective authors; otherwise, they wouldn't take something that the American Psychiatric Association considers to be a bona fide disease and, with substandard and insufficient evidence, assume this offensive humor to be indistinguishable from the behavior of a child predator (an assessment which I can guarantee you they are not qualified to make, anyways).

      Even if Mr. Knepper suffers from this psychiatric disorder (the evidence presented being unclear on all matters speculated on by the authors), it is biologic in origin and does not determine criminal/predatory behavior. To delve into the mental health history of an individual, esp. one as young and vulnerable as the target of this article and with such insufficient evidence, is especially mean and insensitive to the condition of the mentally ill, and cannot be construed as anything other than hateful, homophobic, and obsessive. I don't see how the characterizations presented in this article could be perceived as anything but, and I don't see why the readers/authors of this website take pleasure in gossiping about such unsubstantiated matters based on anecdotal joke evidence that's so common as to appear regularly on daytime television. The only possible purpose is to be hurtful; to gang up on the weak and attack him for his homosexuality and deviant sense of humor.

  3. Error: Unable to create directory uploads/2014/09. Is its parent directory writable by the server?
    October 8, 2010

    Alex Knepper? A degenerate? Who could have seen that coming except for a person who pointed it out in the comments before and was crapped on.

    • October 9, 2010

      Rob, you know as well as I do that most people really want to think the best of others. They don't want to see what is so obvious to those of us who have dealt with people like Alex daily.

      Maybe next time, people will listen to the person who points it out rather than crap on him.

  4. October 8, 2010

    Knepper makes offensive jokes and thinks that celebrities that lots of people fawn over are cute. Stop the presses!

    I guess it's Horowitz's mission to character-assassinate prominent gays that disagree with him?

  5. October 9, 2010

    Holy crap. You guys just dropped a hydrogen bomb on David Frum's credibility…

  6. Error: Unable to create directory uploads/2014/09. Is its parent directory writable by the server?
    October 9, 2010

    You think writing a poem about wanting to rape children is an "offensive joke" and that adults "fawning" over underage celebrities is acceptable? Would it be OK to rub one out to Dakota Fanning when she was 13?

    Let me guess, you're going to tell everyone they're "puritanical" and that sex offenders are the new boogyman, right?

    You understand that wanting to have sex with children isn’t homosexuality just as an adult male having sex with a little girl isn't heterosexuality, right? It's a sexual dysfunction and criminality in it's most abhorrent form. That you don't get that says a lot about you.

    • October 9, 2010

      If you think Knepper is a pedophile, go to the police.

      But the only "evidence" presented here is that he has no taste. That is not a dysfunction.

      • Error: Unable to create directory uploads/2014/09. Is its parent directory writable by the server?
        October 9, 2010

        Wrong. You're either a liar or you haven't read the piece. The picture above is of obviously pubescent children, the poem regarding using the term CHILFS is a nod to other pedophiles since it is they who invented the term on pedophile forums like Boychat.

        And make no mistake "Caljo81" the day I find evidence that Knepper has broke the law it will go to police, and frankly I did in fact send the page the two boy photo was on to the Center for Missing and Exploited Children which is what all decent people should do when confronted with questionable images. Decent people don't disseminate them on forums.

        If you think using terms like "children I'd Like to F%$#" (Chilf) in the context of talking about sexual fantasies or liaisons with people who look young is just bad taste you''re either extremely naive or being disingenuous.

        As I have said for months Alex Knepper body of work is little more than pro-rape and pro-pedophile propaganda, including essays he published here. It saddens me to know it took finding him doing this for supposed Conservatives to distance themselves from a man who claimed women who were date raped pretty much had it coming, but to defend him passing around photos of obvious child porn, writing poems about having sex with little boys and the rest is beyond repulsive.

        • August 13, 2014

          If those photos are of obvious child porn, then (1) you have illegally viewed said materials, and (2) newsrealblog has illegally distributed them.

  7. Error: Unable to create directory uploads/2014/09. Is its parent directory writable by the server?
    October 9, 2010

    Character assassinate? Right, because quoting someone with links to the context is *so* unfair.

    • October 9, 2010

      Calling someone a pedophile (or, "pro-pedophile") is more than just presenting a link and quotes. It's a serious accusation that requires more than fawning over Justin Bieber or sharing tasteless jokes.

      • Error: Unable to create directory uploads/2014/09. Is its parent directory writable by the server?
        October 9, 2010

        The evidence is overwhelming, far beyond your euphemistic characterization.

      • August 13, 2014

        I agree with you. The evidence here is scant, and isn't proof of sexually predatory or illegal behavior. You could compile exactly the same evidence against the creator of Family Guy, making the claim that he, too, is a pedophile. That wouldn't make the observation, based on jokes taken out of context and misconstrued, accurate, however. It also wouldn't make it a proper topic of discussion. I find the entire thing wildly inappropriate and unprofessional!

  8. Error: Unable to create directory uploads/2014/09. Is its parent directory writable by the server?
    October 9, 2010

    I'm not surprised Isaac. I thought his writing for sites like this seemed over the top and predatory in many ways. He's a sadist in the classic sense and I think he enjoys making you and others uncomfortable as much as he enjoys his other degeneracy.

    • October 9, 2010

      I've only ever seen his posts on GTF (gayteenforum), but I know what you mean about "over the top and predatory". And if you disagree with him you're either too stupid to understand what he's saying or too stupid to be allowed to offer an opinion. That his problem, you see – he's right and everyone else is wrong, which is why he will never see his attraction to children as being anything other than entirely appropriate, and when he finally does rape a child, if he hasn't already, he will genuinely see nothing wrong with it – and anyone who says otherwise is persecuting him.

      Which is precisely what he is claiming you guys are doing. The only reason I found this site is because he's linked to it on GTF in a thread entitled "Deranged cult after me by using my GTF posts". You agree with him and you're sane and rational. Disagree with him and you're stupid. Provide evidence that he's wrong and you're a "deranged cult". Hell, when he does rape a child he'll probably try and claim the child seduced him.

      Thank you for assuring me I'm not the only one who sees what a sick and dangerous deviant he is.

      • Error: Unable to create directory uploads/2014/09. Is its parent directory writable by the server?
        October 9, 2010

        I've done a lot of blogging with anti-pedophile groups and Knepper's writings have always been very similar to other pedophiles I've profiled. His reaction is exactly the same as theirs down tot he calling people who are disgusted by sexually exploiting teens and children cultists.

        His rationalization seems like part of an escalation. I once wrote about a girl his age who was on pedo forums talking about wanting to rape little girls. She was seeking validation for her desires, ad eventually we learned her father had at one time committed her. Knepper writes posts that are designed to make people sympathetic to rapists, sex offenders and pedophiles, which makes me very nervous about what he envisions himself doing.

        When I heard he was on a gay teen forums I was very disturbed. As an adult he has little business associating with teens as anything but a mentor, and reading his posts that is clearly not his agenda.

      • October 9, 2010

        Isaac, thanks for providing some further context, as well as evidence that the concerns expressed here about Knepper do not spring from anti-gay bigotry.

        • October 9, 2010

          Except Isaac has a personal hatred for Alex Knepper. Isaac Foster's insight, presuming he's the user I believe he is, is one of the worst insights you could have to our site.

          Also, Gay Teen Forum's age group is labeled as 13-25, so there is nothing wrong with Alex Knepper being on this site, in fact, there are many members older than him.

  9. Error: Unable to create directory uploads/2014/09. Is its parent directory writable by the server?
    October 9, 2010

    Thank you very much for sharing your information and supporting our case. If you have any relevant links to share or if any other members of the forum want to come forward with information about Knepper or things he has written then we'll gladly take a look.

    Understand: this has nothing to do with homosexuality. My co-author and I may be conservatives but we're both pro-gay and pro-gay marriage. So we certainly want to help gays cull the pedophiles trying to use homosexuality as a cover for their evil urges.

    I can be contacted using the contact form here:

  10. October 9, 2010

    I hope no-one is taking the jokes in "Thread #10" seriously. Those seem entirely irrelevant to that article because they are just JOKES. If you've ever made a joke about a black person, or a woman should that be used as evidence that you are racist or sexist?

    • October 9, 2010

      Jokes are not "just" jokes. They reveal what the teller finds amusing, and therefore something about what the teller values, or doesn't. Finding amusement in the rape of a three-year-old or the brutalizing of a ten-year-old shows a seriously perverted sense of humor. It shows a certain callousness toward children. In combination with the other products of Alex Knepper's mind, those "jokes" are extremely revealing.

      Those are not simply jokes "about children." They are about harming children for one's own pleasure. You might tell a relatively benign joke "about a woman"–e.g., that she doesn't have a clue what's under the hood of a car; or "about a black person"–e.g. that he has a big frizzy hairdo. But it's a very different matter to tell a joke in which the punch line is that you beat up a black person just for the fun of it. That would, indeed, reveal a racist frame of mind.

    • October 9, 2010

      I take the jokes seriously. None of them are funny, but lets deconstruct just the three year old "joke".

      Please tell us how a child screaming because his rectum has just been ripped by a rapist is funny? How is taunting a child just violently raped amusing? Is it okay that the subject of the rape was 3 but not funny at 2 or 1? Does it just get funnier as the child ages? Since when does brutalizing a toddler and doing damage that requires surgery become the subject of humor? I've got a very dark sense of humor, but this escapes me. Tell me, BlacklightVirus, have you ever had to take a raped child to the ER? Have you ever had to deal with the aftermath of a sexually abused toddler? Or had to bury one? Or perform the autopsy of a sexually brutalized child? Please explain how raping children of any age is amusing.

      These jokes are entirely relevant. They speak directly to what the author thinks is amusing. It amuses him to think about a freshly raped toddler screaming about being even MORE violated. This is such a crap way to justify saying something reprehensible. "Dude, I was just kidding about ripping off your wife's face and crapping down her neck. Get it? hahahah!" It's not funny, never has been funny, never will be funny.

      Additionally, YES derogatory jokes about blacks and women do indeed indicate racism and sexism. HELLO!!! Which part of that is confusing?

      • October 9, 2010

        Straight away you are ruling out the possibility that these were posted to provoke a reaction in which case controversy is the key element. His intention was clearly never to make people laugh, but to get a reaction. Furthermore, these are not relevant because Alex implicitly states that he finds post pubescent 16 year old males attractive, not pre pubescent children.

        • October 9, 2010

          What reaction is he hoping to get? Oooo, controversy!??? I'm not seeing your point.

          These are entirely relevant. What is the point/purpose of manufacturing controversy by posting a deranged joke about raping a 3 year old? Like anyone thinks that's okay? He's proving he knows this joke? He's heard someone tell it? Even worse, he made it up? Alex posted completely inappropriate jokes on a gay teen forum where he's hoping for….???? I don't for a moment think that 16 year old gay teens enjoy joking about raping 3 year olds or making little girls look like boys for the purpose of rape. Who exactly is he provoking here? Why is he descending to such despicable depths to seek out controversy. It's stupid. Flat out boneheaded and it speaks to his lack of understanding about what is and is not appropriate. Which, is the point of the article, so therefore it IS relevant.

          Yes, I'm ruling that out. He's after a reaction, but I question what reaction he's after and why. Why even go there. His intention without his specific explanation can not be known. Obviously he's having fun skirting the line between legal and not legal. He jokes about chilfs and admits he dreams about them and masturbates to thoughts about them. This is normalizing behavior.

          • October 9, 2010

            But little boys are so hot! Seriously read the forum and you'll see how the word chilf is used.

        • October 9, 2010

          If his intention was "clearly never to make people laugh," then they aren't just jokes. Please inform those who are saying it's wrong to be offended by "only a joke."

          If he "clearly" wasn't trying to make people laugh, but to "get a reaction," please tell us in your omniscience what kind of reaction he was hoping to get.

          And those naked boys hugging in the picture–the ones Alex calls "cute !!!"–are pre-pubescent. Moreover, his appalling "jokes" reveal that he gives some graphic thought to the idea of raping young children.

      • October 9, 2010

        Isaac, on the one hand I think you're pointing (with some justification) to how the P.C. culture has made people overly sensitive about humor that might be slightly disparaging to some particular group–although nowadays, it's only SOME groups that are protected from such disparagement.

        But really, have you ever heard the phrase "not a laughing matter"? It means there are some things that decent humans do not and cannot laugh about. Would you tell a joke about the sounds that Nick Berg made while he was being decapitated? If you did, it would tell me something quite important about your character, in and of itself.

        Here's another test: Would you associate with someone who told several "jokes" on the theme of physically assaulting gay people in malicious callousness? Would you laugh at the jokes? Would you deny that they said anything at all about the teller's character?

        Sorry to spoil your fun, but a "joke" about violently raping young children, ON ITS OWN, does say something about a person's character.

        And if you think "a comment on its own tells you nothing"–NOTHING!– why bother to comment on this issue. You're telling us nothing, right?

    • Error: Unable to create directory uploads/2014/09. Is its parent directory writable by the server?
      October 9, 2010

      Only racists tell jokes about Black people in my experience, as a Bi-racial person who "passes" I can tell you I've never met a White person who made a joke about Black people who also wasn't a bigot.

      I will put forward you will never meet an adult who makes jokes about raping children who isn't a degenerate.

      • October 10, 2010

        Yep, all of my friends are racist, sexist homophobes, you're correct.

  11. October 9, 2010

    It would appear that none of the content you refer to as "deleted" has in fact been deleted. Why do you say that it has been?

    • Error: Unable to create directory uploads/2014/09. Is its parent directory writable by the server?
      October 9, 2010

      Can you forward us the links to it?

  12. October 9, 2010

    Come on, give me a politician who isn't a pedofile.

    • October 9, 2010

      Give proof that they are… better yet, send the proof to the NCMEC and to local and federal authorities, as is your duty as a human being.

      Surely some may be (I'm sure that the pro-pedophile activists would love to have some of their own in positions of power to effect laws in their favor), but to insinuate that all are is inflammatory at best, and seems to me to serve no other purpose than to excuse the behavior or draw attention away from the discussion at hand.

  13. October 9, 2010

    I use that forum, and I've never seen him present an interest in anybody below the age of 16. 16 is the legal age, and 4 years is a pretty small age gap in reality. I actually find it amusing to think that people waste their time researching someone who happens to like people younger than himself, when you could be doing so much more good than accusing someone of being a paedophile, with the only evidence being his posts on a forum which, by the way, are about boys of the legal age, or are jokes intended to simply draw a reaction.

    Long story short, you people calling him horrific are all idiots. Good day.

  14. October 9, 2010

    I like how you don't explain what twink means, since it's the same as CHILF, at least on the forum. It's someone who looks young. Or is being attracted to someone who looks underage paedophilia now?

    • Error: Unable to create directory uploads/2014/09. Is its parent directory writable by the server?
      October 10, 2010

      Twinks are adults and CHILFS are children (just as MILFS are mothers) so stop pretending this is anything else but you claiming adults exploiting teens for sex is acceptable.

      • Error: Unable to create directory uploads/2014/09. Is its parent directory writable by the server?
        October 10, 2010

        You're lying. But let's pretend the term has to do only with age. So CHILF means someone ywho look underage. There is an adult on a teen forum POSTING CHILD PORN and talking about CHILFS and what? We can't use commons sense and figure this out.

        Let me guess. You're about to tell me that sex with children is part of youth liberation, inter generational sex is beneficial to both partners yada yada. I'm sure you've gotten back at your parents and the world with your "flame of rebellion' or whatever Knepper's groupies claim. Here's a question:

        Posting child porn on teen forums – for it or against it?

  15. October 9, 2010

    To all who are deploying the "16 is legal in certain states!" defense: legality does not define decency. And while a 20-year-old lusting after teenagers is admittedly a fair bit *less* disgusting than lusting after pre-teens, that's a far cry from demonstrating that there's *nothing* disgusting about it.

    He's an adult. The objects of his desire are not. Period.

    The ball's in your court, Mr. Frum.

    • October 9, 2010

      He is of legal age, as are they. Both are of the age considered by law to be able to be consenting to sex, so how is there any massive issue to be made out of him liking people of that age?

      Or is it now illegal to be attracted to people that are AT MOST 4 years younger than yourselves? There are many couples out there living in perfect normality who have a lot more than 4 years age gap between them, yet because of the particular ages of Alex and the people he happens to find attractive, you suddenly make a massive deal out of it.

      The fact here is that there is nothing wrong this his attraction at all, and only overly conservative idiots think so, which is what this is all about. You just need stuff to complain about, so you pick out something that is thoroughly irrelevant to anything, just so you can feel intelligent by picking someone apart based on posts he made in a forum.

      It's both stupid and actually creepy that the writer of this stalked him around to find quotes to use against him for no greater purpose than to make him look bad and publicly slander him.

      • October 9, 2010

        Engaging defenders of such fringe degeneracy in debate would be a tremendous waste of time, so here it will suffice to point out that your response completely ignores the point of my comment: that law doesn't define right and wrong.

        I love it when commenters' own words suggest they didn't even read what they're responding to.

        • October 9, 2010

          So, wait. Debating people you think are immoral is a waste of time? That makes sense.

          • October 9, 2010

            No, the waste of time is debating freaks who take fringe positions that aren't going to persuade anyone anyway and who themselves are almost certainly incapable of being persuaded.

        • October 9, 2010

          Let's see: StevieN thinks that "the rest of humanity" is likely to agree with him that there's no big deal here. I think that demonstrates my point about the futility of expecting a rational, productive dialogue to result by engaging these freaks.

          • October 9, 2010

            there isn't a big deal. if he was actively trying to seduce people under the age of 16, then it's be a problem, and a horrible one at that.

            commenting on a forum about his attraction to people of legal age is not a big deal.

            and if you wanna bring insults to the table, let's go. how exactly am I, or anyone else you group in with me, 'freaks', as you call us? are we freaks because we disagree with you conservative, stuck-up weirdos? or is there some other reason? you said it, now justify it.

      • Error: Unable to create directory uploads/2014/09. Is its parent directory writable by the server?
        October 9, 2010

        Will it still be OK when he's 40?

    • October 9, 2010

      And how, exactly, do we define 'decency'. Obviously this article if chock full of relativist ideas/phrases. I will admit, perhaps the child jokes are a bit over the top…BUT you seem unable to realize the truth, that these jokes are merely jokes. If I joke about black people, does this mean that I'm a racist? Or what about gay people? Does that mean I'm a self-hating gay? Of course not, because you people like to take everything as-is. As for the term chilf, as others have pointed out…it does not literally mean that I'd want to have sex with a child. (That being said, how do we define child? Obviously an 8 year old differs from a 17 year old.) Please don't use words such as 'disgusting' or 'indecent' unless you have a way of logically backing it up.

      • October 9, 2010

        You're obfuscating the issue by generically comparing the child-rape jokes to a "joke about black people" or "about gay people." "About" covers quite a lot of territory. Do you mean a joke "about" a gay man's lisp, or a joke "about" why Tyler Clementi jumped off a bridge? There's a difference, and I would seriously question the character of someone who thought the latter was funny.

        Likewise, you can joke "about" a child doing something silly. Or you can joke "about" injuring a child for your own pleasure. That kind of joke would in fact reveal a perverted view of children.

    • October 9, 2010

      If laws do not define right and wrong then what, or rather who does? You can't make decisions (such as firing Alex) based upon morals because morals are subjective, will differ between people, are have no standing when opposing that fact that he did not break the law.

      • October 9, 2010

        You can't make decisions (such as firing Alex) based upon morals

        Wrong! The owner of any blog that Alex writes for has every right to fire Alex based on morals (or his complete lack thereof).

        By the same token, any consumer has the right to boycott any business that goes against their personal morals, and to encourage others of like-mind to do the same. For example, I refuse to buy anything through because (as I'm sure you're aware) they refuse to stop selling child rape stories written by and for pedophiles, and I encourage others to do so. I refuse to purchase from any store that continues to sell Gavin and Yvonne Frost's "Good Witches' Bible" once they've been made aware of it's content. I encourage others to do the same.

        And I refuse to read blogs that continue to employ the likes of Alex Knepper once the owners of the blog have been made aware of the kind of person Alex Knepper is. It's their right to choose to continue his employment, but it's also the right of any of their regular readers to discontinue reading the blog. Once it becomes apparent that their readership has more morals than they do because numbers have drastically gone down, they'll get the hint.

  16. October 9, 2010

    Man, how can you keep someone around after that evidence. I want to take a shower after reading that nauseating stuff

  17. October 9, 2010

    Let's clear the air here first-and-foremost: Alex's actions are not unlawful.

    Accordingly, the only basis that criticism could be made against Alex is that his actions are unmoral.

    However, as morality cannot be defined and is open to each individual's open interpretation – it seems ridiculous to me that the publisher of this article and several of its respondents would attempt to demonise Alex for making comments they perceive as unmoral and, furthermore, that have been posted out of context.

    That is not to say that the author or those making comments are not allowed to have an opinion on the matter, but unless/until Alex does something unlawful I am of the opinion that your collective energies would be better spent on pursuing those who are actively harming children, rather than a young man making admittedly tasteless jokes on an internet forum.

    • October 9, 2010

      "Morality cannot be defined and is open to each individual's open interpretation" is perhaps the single most poisonous doctrine in America today. Without a common understanding of basic morality, civilization dies.

      • October 9, 2010

        Morality can be loosely defined as "principles concerning the distinction between right and wrong or good and bad behavior."

        What is considered "right" in some cultures/religions is considered "wrong" by others. By virtue of your assertion, we – as westerns – should be allowed to impose our morality onto other cultures if their perception of morality differs from our own?

        • October 9, 2010

          Alex Knepper does not live in another culture, he lives in this culture. If it's unfair to make judgments based on the prevailing morality of this culture, then morality itself goes completely out the window. Perhaps that's what you want?

          More specifically, Alex has worked within the micro-culture of "conservative" media or at least reasonably respectable media. Do you believe that other people who work in conservative (or reasonably mainstream) media have no right to make any pronouncements on what opinions and viewpoints are acceptable for being promoted within those media?

          If so, then nobody should ever criticize a raging homophobe blogger who writes for a pro-gay online publication. As long as he hasn't done anything illegal (that we know about), it's wrong to push our morality on him–by your logic.

        • October 9, 2010

          If morality is all so relative, on what basis are you criticizing those who are expressing their own moral view regarding Alex Knepper's expressed tastes and interests? Aren't you assuming that your own relativistic (amoral) morality is superior to the morality of those you take to task for daring to criticize –and quote! — Alex?

          "Don't judge" is a very popular refrain among young people today. Those who use it shouldn't be surprised if it's turned back on them.

          • October 9, 2010

            At no point did I say that the respondents/the author of this article are not entitled to their opinion.

            With that out of the way:

            1. There is a difference between insinuating that somebody is a pedophile, and that their actions are unmoral. As has been stated, there is no evidence to substantiate or suggest that Alex has been involved in any activities contrary to the law he is bound by.

            2. Alex is entitled to his own viewpoints, however controversial or tasteless they may happen to be, just as the author of this article and its respondents are entitled to theirs.

            3. If judgment is made on any such viewpoints, it can only be from each individual's perception of morality.

            4. There is a stark difference between insinuating that somebody is pro-pedophilia, as this article and its respondents are, and saying that somebody's actions are "unmoral."

            Moreover, I resent your implication that I am amoral – and that my own morality is superior to that of anybody else's. It is your prerogative to disagree with me, and I welcome a free exchange of opinions on this topic.

            I will ignore the assumption as to my age – as it both irrelevant and incorrect.

            • October 9, 2010

              "If judgment is made on any such viewpoints, it can only be from each individual's perception of morality."
              What is your point in saying this, if it isn't to imply that it's all rather pointless, if not illegitimate, to pronounce a moral judgment on someone else's "viewpoints"?

              But "viewpoint" is a strange choice of terminology to denote an expressed interest in violating young children. It's quite revealing that someone would think it acceptable to express that interest, and to joke about injuring children–even without evidence that the interest has been acted upon. That speaks to something called "character."

              Alex may be "entitled to his viewpoints," and to his desires–but that isn't the issue. It's whether his "viewpoints" deserve the megaphone of a conservative or reasonably respectable online publication. That was the central concern of the article.

              which in this case involves expressed desires about actions toward children)

        • October 17, 2010

          Yes. Example: stoning women us wrong, not just a "different culture."

    • October 9, 2010

      But if you make a tasteless joke, you support that which you joke about, AND it belies your true feelings on the matter: that you are in fact, racist for making a racist joke, homophobic for making a homophobic joke, or a paedophile for making a paedophilic joke.

      It just makes sense.

      • October 9, 2010

        So much sense. How could I have been so blind?

        • October 9, 2010

          I don't know. But you can mend your ways and be a good, humourless drone like everyone else if you try.

          • October 9, 2010

            Thank you for the faith you have in me. I shall not disappoint you.

    • Error: Unable to create directory uploads/2014/09. Is its parent directory writable by the server?
      October 9, 2010

      So if moralty can't be defined is it immoral for me to advocate human sacrifice as long as I don't do it? (Until I get the laws changed that is)

  18. October 9, 2010

    Sick, sick, sick.

  19. October 9, 2010

    Your disgust over exploitation of our most vulnerable is absolutely on, but makes me wonder if you relate this back to your defense of pornography being no worse than a sloppy, greasy chicken-burger at KFC. I said to you then that porn is exploitation of runaways, the drug-dependent, the poor, the uneducated — in short, the vulnerable. You said porn was just a personal decision. Guess when it is taken to an extreme, it is easier to see how wrong it is.

    Hope you have taken the opportunity to reflect on your previous position and revise it.

    • Error: Unable to create directory uploads/2014/09. Is its parent directory writable by the server?
      October 9, 2010

      Porn may be exploitative but linking legal porn to child exploitation is like linking having a mistress to being a serial rapist.

      • October 9, 2010

        Only if the mistress is doing it against her will through some form of coercion — physical, emotional, chemical, economic. Legal porn is exploitation of women who believe they have nothing else of value by men who want to satisfy their own selfish desires. We either defend all of the defenseless or we won't defend any.

        • Error: Unable to create directory uploads/2014/09. Is its parent directory writable by the server?
          October 9, 2010

          You're minimizing rape and child exploitation by likening it to drug addicts hitting bottom, and women with low self-esteem making (what we can see are) bad choices. The two are separate and to claim spank material is the same as raping a child is to minimize the suffering of a child.

          Topless photos are porn, but rather tame. Are Russ Meyer films the moral equivalent to adults having sex with children? Belly dancing is popular but it's just the ancient form of stripping – are belly dancers being exploited to the same degree as children being sexually exploited? Are the kitsch burlesque shows that were popular a couple of years ago as bad as an adult having sex with a child?

          That's the point you're making when you decide to broad brush adult sexual behavior you personally disapprove of with he predatory exploitation of children.

          • October 9, 2010

            No David, as I've said all along, the difference is in degree, but not in kind. Exploitation is exploitation. Forced sex is wrong if it is done at the point of a knife, coerced through trust relationships, or at the point of a needle or wallet. If you can see how wrong this is, how can you not see that porn also is? Substitute the terms emotionally damaged or co-dependent woman for child and you have the case against porn. Chesterton said that we usually agree on what is wrong, but we disagree on how much wrong is excusable. This is a case in which he was wrong, I guess.

            • Error: Unable to create directory uploads/2014/09. Is its parent directory writable by the server?
              October 9, 2010

              The name's Rob actually.

              But you're infantilizing women and conflating women doing something you object to with children being sexually exploited. Posing topless isn't "forced sex" and neither is paying a woman to perform unless she's literally being forced. Adults, women included, live their own lives and can make their own mistakes. Children and teens are not intellectually or emotionally capable of making these decisions which is why we make their parents in charge of them until they are 18 or married.

              Mistresses from my earlier example are often motivated by money, yet you've said you don't consider them the same as women in porn. Why? By your standards almost all sex is forced because many people engage in sex for some sort of gain, men included. It is a philosophical discussion that muddies the water of what is Black and White morality – adults shouldn't exploit children.

              • October 10, 2010

                No disagreement that adults should not exploit children, but I say that adults should not exploit adults either. Go meet a prostitute and tell me that she is not being forced one way or another to have sex. Tell me the men who use her do not dehumanize and humiliate her. Ask her what she feels when she is with those men. The idea of the porn "star" next door who is a normal, well-adjusted girl with a heart of gold is a fantasy developed by Hollywood. Their lives are tawdry and sad.

                My point is not that the acts described above are not hideous, but that moral outrage should not be selective.

                • Error: Unable to create directory uploads/2014/09. Is its parent directory writable by the server?
                  October 10, 2010

                  But moral outrage should not be diluted by comparing something evil with something that is sad. Hookers are on drugs as are many porn stars but THEY ARE NOT CHILDREN, they are adults who are responsible for their own lives. No one forces people to do drugs and hookers are often not innocent victims, but criminals. Conflating adult criminality and maladjustment to raping children is wrong.

                  I don't know why you're hung up on porn, but I don't make it so let it go. We're talking about an adult who is on a teen forum telling teens that diaper fetishes, raping children and exploiting teens for sex is normal behavior and you want to discuss some coke addict's issues with who she makes money?


                  • October 10, 2010

                    This all started (as you know) when David said that pornography was no worse than overeating. I disagreed then and pointed out the difference — one was a dehumanization and exploitation of the "product" for personal satisfaction while the other was use of a nonhuman product for personal satisfaction that hurts no one but the over-eater. When I saw the same person make a very clear exposition of dehumanization and exploitation of children, I thought it was germane to point out the parallel. If I am "hung up" on anything it is moral clarity and logical consistency.

                    It doesn't dilute the moral outrage against one when we recognize that we have a problem in our society which leads ineluctably to both pedophilia and pornography. We can lop off one branch, but another will grow in its place unless we excise the root. If we want to protect our children we need to do so from more than just direct exploitation.

                  • Error: Unable to create directory uploads/2014/09. Is its parent directory writable by the server?
                    October 10, 2010

                    No Chas THIS started when the conservative movement embraced a man who claimed rape was the victims fault, rape victims were being over dramatic and that the Marquis de Sade was a good role model for gays. When some of us pointed out Knepper was a pervert people rallied around him yet it has now been proven we were right.

                    You're argument with David is you re-packaging the Marxist tinged pseudo-Victorianism of the Feminist movement of the 1970s through 90s. Pornography is a catch all that includes the poetry of Charles Baudelaire at one time, and nude modeling. Is Betty Page and the pin-ups of the 40s and 50s an example of this grim evil you speak of?

                    Adults doing something you don't like is not the same as adults exploiting children. To link the two is to claim that women and children are the same (misogyny) and that your personal distaste with this or that means legal activity should be lumped in with MOLESTING CHILDREN. You seem like a nice guy but this is a moral weakness on your part, an inability to see evil as evil and separate from unfortunateness.

                    The idea that view porn hurts others is another wicked idea based on taking the blame from some criminal or philandering husband and putting it elsewhere. Pornography doesn't cause rape or exploitation – both those things exist sans pornography. You may make the case that American porn and adult material has devolved and become more degrading, but that is a reflection of the people buying it, not the cause.

                    But why discuss that here? What did porn do to you that you'll take time out from the exposure of a person who advocates adult child sex, and you see many of his supporters here doing the same thing, to complain about people wanting to look at porn which is something Western Civilization has partook in dating back to the Etruscans. at least.

                  • October 12, 2010


                    This is the sort of thing I meant when we exchanged emails over the weekend. You conduct yourself unprofessionally. This blog is not all about you, its about the subjects. You bring no credit on Horowitz by your behavior.

                  • Error: Unable to create directory uploads/2014/09. Is its parent directory writable by the server?
                    October 12, 2010

                    We've never exchanged emails, I'm not David. Why are you bashing him in a reply to what I've said.

                    David exposed a person who just today, in a FrumForum comment, claimed posting his sex dream about a 15 year old member of a forum so that the child can see it is acceptable. He did a good job exposing someone who would destroy the right's credibility down the road and shouldn't have had any to begin with given his stance on rape and sex ofenders.

  20. October 9, 2010

    How can David Frum still identify as a "conservative" when his main goals seem to be ridiculing other conservatives and forging ties with moral deviants?

  21. October 9, 2010

    Almost the whole of this article lies on assumptions and things being immoral, which, by the way, remains completely subjective.

    • October 9, 2010

      If morality is all "completely subjective," you have no basis to criticize what the authors have written. Go back to your sandbox.

      • October 9, 2010

        Except I'm not criticizing the author based on morality. The authors make assumptions on near every thread stating that Knepper is a pedophile because he is interested in 16 year olds that are beyond the age of consent. Morality gets thrown into the mix due to lack of evidence that anyone he has had any relationships with anyone under 16.

        • Error: Unable to create directory uploads/2014/09. Is its parent directory writable by the server?
          October 9, 2010

          If morality is subjective then you have no criticism of human sacrifice, if we could make it legal? And you have no criticism of how women are treated in Islamic countries? If America dissolved and I was made King of my little City State you'd be unmoved by my weekly pedophile hangings?

          Morality is only subjective for people who want there to be no right and wrong.

  22. October 9, 2010

    Women are treated poorly in Islamic countries, and we can try and help all we want. Who's to say that the people of Islam aren't right? There is in fact no definitive right or wrong, since they are words that can change context. Morality is based on how you as a person perceive something.

    • Error: Unable to create directory uploads/2014/09. Is its parent directory writable by the server?
      October 10, 2010

      You say "ho's to say that the people of Islam aren't right?"

      The answer is decent people with a soul.

      You go on"There is in fact no definitive right or wrong, since they are words that can change context" which I take to be an admission you will support the Kingdom of Taylor's Hold's policy of sacrificing pedophiles to Woden, the Gallows Lord, every weekend.

      But further I would assume that you agree that since there is no definitive right and wrong your criticism of other people's formulation of right and wrong is hypocritical nonsense.

      Also I take it that since you think "Morality is based on how you as a person perceive something" you think rape is morally neutral, but only wrong because it's illegal.

      • October 10, 2010

        But who are you to say who's decent? Who are you to say that we as Americans aren't immoral for pushing our beliefs on the people of Islam?

        And you not being in favor of the Kingdom of Taylor's Hold's policy and the Kingdom of Taylor's Hold's policy obviously being in favor of it shows how morality is truly subjective.

        Also, let's get back on the topic of Alex Knepper. How is he in the wrong for having consensual sex with a 16-year-old?

        • Error: Unable to create directory uploads/2014/09. Is its parent directory writable by the server?
          October 10, 2010

          In that same vein who are you to decide that I don't have the right to decide what's decent? But let's cut the Freshmen Philosophy here. What you're promoting is antinomianism, which is fine, but don't pretend you're on the high ground here. Unless you're a Aghori walking the left hand path the idea that there is no right and wrong is simply a pretension degenerates use to sound smart and excuse whatever deviancy they want to partake in.

          There are plenty of things all normal people agree is wrong. Raping infants for example, or cannibalism. Taking pleasure in suffering or eating feces. You're view I suppose is that if one doesn't break the law to do these things (if perhaps there was some sort of edible people dispensary or a legal brothel for infants) then no one should object. You really don't believe that because you have yet to agree that my hypothetical kingdoms sacrifice of pedophiles is no big deal.

          It's almost as if your entire philosophy is based around excusing the sexual exploitation of women and children.

          But as to why it's wrong for Knepper to have sex with teens:

          1) It's exploitative and predatory. 20 year olds should be having sex with adults, who they meet in college and perusing other adult activities.
          2) In many states it's illegal.

          3) Alex knepper is himself a sadist, as I've detailed before, and his public writings prove that. I put forward that Knepper is seeking out younger people so he can dominate them and because he knows they won't know how unusual he is due to their limited experience.

          And Knepper's maybe legal relationship with one teen is not the crux of the argument anyway but you know that and are using it as a strawman to deflect from the child porn he passes around. He's admitted wanting to have sex with 15-year-olds but I suppose you think that's ok to. The pictures of the two boys hugging are clearly not of 16-year-olds, but I suppose you think child porn is ok too.

          And his theories that rape is sexy, or that women are evil etc. All fine because you want people to tell you nailing 16-year-olds is acceptable. Let me guess, you've got a new babysitter?

          You're transparent.

          • October 10, 2010

            There's nothing exploitative or predatory about Alex having consensual sex with a sixteen year old? If you honestly believe that this sixteen year old isn't capable of making a rational decision on whether or not to have sex then I don't know what to tell you.

            In his state it wasn't illegal.

            If you honestly believe that Alex Knepper is out to dominate kids you're blind. The man was allowing the kid to penetrate him and giving total control to the kid.

            Also, his theories are all attempts to stir the pot, just like this article seems to be doing.

            EDIT: I just want to state that my Grandmother was 17 when she became pregnant with my 20 year old Grandfather's child. They have a three and a half year age difference (Only half a year shorter than the age difference between Knepper and a 16 year old, mind you.) Does this make my Grandfather a pedophile despite the fact that the sex was consensual?

            • Error: Unable to create directory uploads/2014/09. Is its parent directory writable by the server?
              October 10, 2010

              So you're saying adults having sex with children is not exploitative. Surprising. If 16-year-olds are so mature why can't they join the military – you do support that no?

              I've read all of Kneppers public writings and his forum postings. Including the ones about how great the Marquis De Sade is so yes, domination of another is his thing, and just by your definition a man who fellates a five year old is bottoming so thus not exploiting the child.

              You tell me why an adult seeks out teens for sex.

              • October 10, 2010

                You're going from black to white. This "child" in case is sixteen, not five. Alex Knepper is not an intimidating in the least, and the sixteen year old messaged Alex to come and have sex with him. I can see your point if Alex was having sex with a twelve or thirteen year old, however, a sixteen year old who is going out of his way to have sex with someone is perfectly competent of the decision he is making.

                Alex is into younger looking people, just how some straight people view sites that show 18 year olds, which is the lowest age at which you can join the porn industry. Alex Knepper seeks out legally of age teens because that is his personal preference. Just how some people are into nice asses, some into black guys, or some into taller people. It depends on the person.

                • Error: Unable to create directory uploads/2014/09. Is its parent directory writable by the server?
                  October 10, 2010

                  So what's your cut off for when it becomes disgusting to have sex with children? 12? 11?

                  Because frankly your arguments are straight from boychat. I get it, you think if you can convince us that having sex with teens is OK we'll forget about the 'CHILF" comments and how he's spent his whole short career claiming sex offenders were being oppressed, rape victims are crybabies etc. But claiming teens should be treated as adults is not an argument – it's a fantasy based on you seeing children as they are not.

                  If you're not a teen yourself you're probably a pedophile. I am 39, every year that goes by makes teens look younger and younger to me. The "porn actresses" you talk about are mostly in their mid 20s and at my age they look young. But using a degrading fetish genre as proof of something is nonsense.

                  16 year olds are not competent, that's why they can't vote, buy a gun or join the military. Alex Knepper's not unique, I have profiled dozens of people just like him on various blogs. He likes teens because he wants to manipulate someone who seems younger. His obsession with "CHILFS" is about his own issues with his sexuality and his internalized desire to see others punished for it.

                  Think about it. Knepper is supposedly gay but he spends much of his energy writing screeds literally designed to hurt the feelings of rape victims and finding male partners who have ill-defined male characteristics that he shares his degrading fantasies with, like diaper fetishes.

                  Do you have to be Sigmund Freud to figure this one out? Maybe someone isn't so much gay as he is an effeminate misogynist who is re-enacting both his abuse and the abuse he wants others to suffer? I know plenty of gay men and guess what? They like men, not boys.

                  I am heterosexual and speak for most when I say we like women, not girls. This is normal sexual development, wallowing in teen forums while making jokes about raping 8-year-olds is not normal. Because you don't know this I'll assume you're one of the teens Knepper is exploiting and just say when you're 25 you'll be saying exactly what I am.

                  • October 10, 2010

                    I'm 18. CHILF was taken way out of context and everyone I've talked to on GTF agrees with that. Have you ever had a friend or group of friends where you've taken a word or phrase and it turns into something different? The word twink because CHILF on GTF.

                    Also, you have a cut offs for people being able to vote, buy guns and serve in the military, so what makes the age of consent cut off any less wrong in this scenario?

                    "The "porn actresses" you talk about are mostly in their mid 20s and at my age they look young." Applies directly to the case of Alex Knepper, he isn't out there snatching children out of their mother's hands. He's having sex with sixteen year olds, which are in essence, adults. They may not be an adult in the sense that they cannot vote or carry a firearm. But they can drive, and the are certainly tried as adults in court.

                    "I am heterosexual and speak for most when I say we like women, not girls." You speak for most, which again stems back to some people liking younger women or men and others liking older.

                    And I'm a gay man and I like my men, well, as men. But that doesn't mean that someone else cannot possibly like their males as younger looking or more effeminate.

                    Lastly, I do agree with you in saying that Knepper is far fetched in both his writing and his strange fetishes. But this article is purely a mud slinging account to ruin Knepper's reputation by labeling him as a pedophile. Which has worked.

                  • Error: Unable to create directory uploads/2014/09. Is its parent directory writable by the server?
                    October 10, 2010

                    You're too old to seriously believe that an adult writing poems about having sex with children can be taken out of context. I will not humor you by pretending an 18-year-old doesn't understand that posting someone's words and raising an eyebrow about it is not mud slinging or taking things out of context.

                    "Also, you have a cut offs for people being able to vote, buy guns and serve in the military, so what makes the age of consent cut off any less wrong in this scenario? "

                    I didn't say they were wrong, indeed they are very right. Do you think high school kids should be able to buy a gun or join the military? I do not. The thing that makes people responsible enough to make those decisions is experience, and your defense of a man who is a known misogynist, a pro-sex offender (meaning rapists and pedophile) activist and someone who claims rape is no big deal proves that even at 18 some people simply don't "have enough bark on 'em" to make good decisions. If I were king I'd raise the age of everything to 21, but 18 is the age we as a society generally agree a person has to be on their own (when they graduate high school) so … there you go.

                    I didn't say people don't like younger looking sex partners, but I do say that it's madness to not judge people based on those desires. At best Alex Knepper is an emotionally unstable degenerate as can be seen by all his interactions on that public forum which I have been going through. But the reality is that even before this revelation I pointed out on my blog that Knepper uses rhetoric that comes directly from pro-pedophilia forums. It's a red flag and when you've seen a little more of the world you'll understand why.

                    Alex Knepper is an admitted ephebiphile which is a kind of pedophilia so let's stop with the crap. You know that when you hit 25 Knepper will not be attracted to you. You know from your interactions from him he's not right, but you think you're standing up for some principle by doing what?

                    I don't care if a 16-year-old has sex … with another teen. But when people in their 20s lurk around them it's exploitative and you know that. When you're 20 will you be trolling high schools for sex partners? No. But Knepper is doing the Internet equivalent and because it's legal in his state you are claiming it's right.

                    Ordering a bride from a third world country is legal, is it right?

                    Alex Knepper had a chance to mentor young gays, but instead he used your vulnerability to satisfy his desires. If i went to a forum where young girls were looking for validation, guidance and companionship (say a Pagan forum) would it be OK for me to try to bed them? Or should I offer my help to them?

                  • October 10, 2010

                    That poem is a joke, I don't know how to put it any other way. Just has Knepper hasn't seriously attempted to bed anyone from GTF, though he has acted over-the-top awkward in some of the cited posts.

                    However, in the end it's going to become a fight over legality and right or wrong and we can both agree that Knepper is downright stirring-the-pot ridiculous when it comes to his articles. So I think we've reached the end of this.

                    I can say that for the time being he hasn't exploited anyone that isn't knowledgeable of what they're doing or done anything illegal. But there's no way to argue with you about the future because there's honestly know way to tell.

                    I'll restate that I still believe that, morality aside, because I see where you are coming from, that this post is very assumption filled and an attempt at mudslinging, specifically because the title mentions David Frum who has no relevance to the points made in this article.

                    Also, I appreciate you being civil with me and the best of luck to your blog. Now it's time for me to go to sleep. Adieu.

  23. October 10, 2010

    You have potentially ruined a man for what, revenge? You have also gone into a (mostly) peaceful environment where a person is not discriminated against based on their sexuality and exploited that sense of security. It is supposed to be a safe place where people can speak their minds. I hope you feel happy with yourselves. Sure Lostpainting can be a bastard at times (no offence) but that does not give you the right to put such a hateful slur to him. Isn't there real news out there, like the War On Terror that could be reporting on, not something as petty as this? I would expect this type of this from a 12 year old, not adults. Grow up.

    • Error: Unable to create directory uploads/2014/09. Is its parent directory writable by the server?
      October 10, 2010

      You're disgusting. How many people will Knepper ruin in his lifetime with his degeneracy?

      And where were you when rape victims were being blamed by Knepper for their victimization? How many attacks on rape victims has your fellow pervert authored that you've applauded?

      Let me guess, Alex went to Boychat and called for help?

      • October 10, 2010

        What're you referring to when you say Boychat?

        • Error: Unable to create directory uploads/2014/09. Is its parent directory writable by the server?
          October 10, 2010

          Boychat is a forum for pedophiles (there is also a girlchat) serves as a sort of JournoList for sex offenders. Several national stories involving murders of children are linked tot he site as their members are the perpetrators.

          The webmaster of the site was on the FBI most wanted list for a time, two of the members moved into together in CT where they abused several children (including raping an infant while videotaping it) and many of it's members are registered sex offenders.

          Perverted Justice has a wiki that details much of this information, which is the by-product of their investigations.

          Whenever you see a bunch of pro-pedophile comments on news stories involving rape or child molestation, it is usually organized on boychat or some similar site.

          • October 10, 2010

            Thanks for clarifying that, I thought you were making some sort of slur about the people of GTF being the boychat you spoke of.

      • October 10, 2010

        What do you mean by 'fellow pervert'? You saying we're perverted as well?

        • Error: Unable to create directory uploads/2014/09. Is its parent directory writable by the server?
          October 10, 2010

          If you think that smearing rape victims is funny, the Marquis de Sade is a genius, Diaper fetishes are normal and adults should be able to exploit children for sex you are a pervert. Garden variety.

          • October 10, 2010

            Yes, but you said 'fellow perverts', therefore you're calling all of us perverts. Explain what insane breed of logic took you to that conclusion.

            • Error: Unable to create directory uploads/2014/09. Is its parent directory writable by the server?
              October 10, 2010

              Are you kidding? I Just explained it. "Teenagelover" is supporting a person who posts child porn on the web – by definition perverts. He and his fellow perverts are all people who agree with him.

              You're interjecting yourself into this so I assume you are a pro-rape, De Sade loving future pedophile. Who frequents boychat as that was something else I put in there. If you frequent forums designed to support pedophilia, think rape is no big deal, can read 120 Days of Sodom and recommend it to others and claim adults have sex wit children is OK you're a pervert.

              If you don't want to be called a duck you would waddle and quack.

    • October 24, 2010

      The man ruined himself. Others just report. You decide.

  24. October 10, 2010

    The internet is the public square. Period.

    Never ever EVER post, comment or email anything you wouldn't want to defend at a job interview. With your grandma.

  25. October 10, 2010

    I could not even read through this whole disgusting article. What makes me even sadder are the people commenting in support and claiming there is no such thing as absolute morality. It shows the tremendous lack of wisdom that permeates our society.

    It would be good to post this type article somewhere where it would get mainstream notoriety. There is no way frum can call himself a conservative with trashy people like this hanging round him.

    • Error: Unable to create directory uploads/2014/09. Is its parent directory writable by the server?
      October 10, 2010

      I'd ask these people if there's no such thing as absolute morality there are times when rape is acceptable? There answer is of course yes. There's no arguing with them, as they want there to be no morality for their on reasons.

  26. October 11, 2010

    Alex Knepper has read this article.

    And come on: it's not like Frum doesn't know about it. The spineless hack is avoiding it on purpose. What was his defense when NewsReal first exposed Knepper? That David Horowitz and Ron Paul are a far-right-wing alliance of evil.

    Please. Frum isn't going to do a thing about this. And if you're still not convinced by his two new articles since this was posted AND was read by Alex Knepper, watch him go the whole rest of the year without batting an eye. Pathetic.

  27. October 24, 2010

    Kudos to NRB for exposing this filth.

  28. January 14, 2011


    The sexual abuse of children raise the risk of heroin abuse by that child by a factor of at least 50. Details at link.

  29. January 14, 2011

    Try this:

    The sexual abuse of children raise the risk of heroin abuse by that child by a factor of at least 50. Details at link.

  30. March 21, 2011

    “16 year olds are not competent, that’s why they can’t vote, buy a gun or join the military.” they can’t vote at that age cuz old people don’t trust them to make decisions FOR OTHERS yet, but they are old enough to make decisions for themselves. They can’t join the army-that’s not about making a competent decision, we just aren’t comfortable with them dying so young.

    Another thing, when you hired Alex to write for you, were you “abusing” a poor child making him work for you? No because it was consensual, he wanted it. Even though you were the adult and he was a child, you don’t say you took advantage of his talents for money. You say you hired him. And before you say he was legally old enough to work, the precontal cortex isn’t fully developed until around age 25, so he still is developmentally a child.

  31. March 21, 2011

    I so wanna do it with Alex Knepper after reading this article. srsly stayed up all nIght readin about him. He’s really open and honest which I think is frikin hot especially he even admits when he couldn’t get it up for scx. Alex if you’re reading this, please f><# me (I'm 17 and (barely) legal). My friends think I'm cute.

Leave a Reply

Note: You can use basic XHTML in your comments. Your email address will never be published.

Subscribe to this comment feed via RSS

Copyright 2014 NewsReal Blog

The Theme Foundry