Transgressions of the Younger Man: Manufacturing Consent in the #MeToo Era

by Sean Bw Parker (May 2025)

Feminists-in-power have made the definition of rape now include every healthy heterosexual man in the country. Spatchcocked between the sexual revolution and the new puritanism, the ‘presentism’ in the case of Russell Brand includes the fact that after many months on bail he’s now been charged with rape based on the testimony of a handful of complainants from 25 years ago. This puts things firmly in the he said/she said area of post-#MeToo allegations—but since the introduction of Keir Starmer’s ‘believe the victims’ policy while at the Crown Prosecution Service in the early 2010s, the complainant testimony is seen as evidence, therefore sufficient to convict.

Regarding the Sins of a Younger Man, Russell Brand has acknowledged his licentious past, but says that everything that happened was consensual. Problem is, #MeToo hadn’t happened back then, ‘power dynamics’ weren’t so much talked about, and recollections may vary, particularly when money and media hero notoriety are offered for ‘coming forward.’ Regarding the ‘power dynamic’ myth, is there really such an obvious power dynamic when a charismatic figure, explicitly encouraged in his naughtiness by his new employers, is being offered sex and other pleasures by attractive younger females left, right and centre? Seems like it might be Brand who was the ‘vulnerable’ party from that perspective (if we must roll out the journalistic cliches).

Brand has said he ‘welcomes the opportunity to answer the charges’ in court, following the recommended rhetoric for any high-profile person in his position. This possibly demonstrates the fact that Brand seems to not realise that the British justice system is no longer about justice: it’s about pursuing, enforcing and publicising social and political agendas. Anything you say can and will be taken down and twisted to be used against you in any way other than that which you intended.

It has been—and will be—claimed that Brand’s behaviour was somehow on a spectrum between MP Damien Green’s ‘touch on the knee’ and policeman Wayne Couzens’ violent stranger rape of Sarah Everard—but this is yet another myth. There are two spectrums: one of intent, another of no intent. Couzens was clearly of ‘intent’; Green and Brand are ‘no intent.’ Dr Who actor Noel Clarke recently said in court he couldn’t remember the transgressions he had supposedly committed, thus as far as he was concerned they didn’t happen. If we ‘believe the victims,’ based on the principle of believing testimony of (often) fantasist children from the 1990s, why don’t we also believe the accused, as with Clarke and Brand? Because this would be unhelpful to the power-fem agenda being pushed from all corners of the western establishment.

Age has been shown to be far and away the strongest protective factor in people committing less crime: as people get older, their chemistry and biology changes, and they become calmer. ‘Aspirational’ men, as Brand and Harvey Weinstein surely were, are more likely to fall prey to this—and as we now see will repent at leisure. But this aspiration creates great things, discovers new worlds, builds the world’s tallest buildings, and makes brilliant, compelling films. These tall poppies must not be cut down for the benefit of collective risk-aversion—this is a deeply uncreative and demoralising route for society to take. Once the aspirational, testosterone-filled man (still not yet a fully prohibited substance) achieves many of his goals, he—relatively—levels out, becomes more ‘samed.’ But stopping the earlier process is actually tragic.

The emasculating effect of false allegations is entirely intended, and is part of the VAWG (Violence Against Women & Girls) hemisphere-wide hegemony in minimising the perceived power of white men. (We might say heterosexual men, but they’re happy to go for gays too, as in Kevin Spacey, Dan Wootton or Jonathan King. Don’t let the orientation stop the grift!)

Maybe there should be an investigation into how many British citizens were convicted of rape on the basis of consent 2010-2018, how many pleaded not guilty, and were thence imprisoned solely on ‘believe the victims’ testimony. This was the era that Keir Starmer introduced the BTV policy in order to artificially increase convictions, later fully weaponised by his Director of Public Prosecutions successor Alison Saunders—later dismissed herself over the Liam Allan disclosure scandal, following excellent reporting by Julia Hartley-Brewer and Allison Pearson.

A decade of performative grievance, starting from the time of the BTV policy’s introduction, has gone hand in hand with Diversity, Equity and Inclusion (DEI) policies, an ‘epidemic’ of mental instability and false allegations. With this in mind, balancing desires for fairness and for power would be a wise route to take for any government which doesn’t want to be seen as openly discriminatory towards its indigenous (male) population. But it’s not just the men: it’s the hundreds—and sometimes thousands—in the accused’s families and networks, all discovering the nature of how 21st-century justice works.

The degree to which due process is being abused by the political and justice class could lead misandrist feminism to be considered domestic terrorism in line with Equality Act, such is the devastating effect on citizens and their families—and in line with calls for male-perpetrated DV to be treated as such. It’s not just Russell Brand: actor and political commentator Laurence Fox has been charged with the New Culture Crime of ‘upskirting’ after sharing such a photo of race-baiting TV personality Narinder Kaur, since every new law needs a high-profile scalp. All new legal-media putsches needs their Big One (see Harvey Weinstein’s own #MeToo deterrence sentence of 23 years).

Speaking of deterrence narratives, wife of Conservative councillor Lucy Connolly was given 18 months for a social media post following fake news to which she responded, then deleted, following Axel Rudakabana’s horrifying Southport murder of three young girls. Just weeks into Starmer’s reign, the new PM’s supporting this judicial attack on free speech was the action of a desperate and panicky autocrat. Telegraph columnist Allison Pearson, after finding herself with a bevvy of rozzers at the door for a ‘Non-Crime Hate Incident’ (old tweet) has led calls for Connolly’s release.

The cancellations of Laurence Fox (perceived racism, then sexism), Dilbert creator Scott Adams in the US (racism), and journalist and presenter Dan Wootton (laughing along with Fox) through the early 2020s were barometers of media-justice intersectionality: anyone perceived not to go along with the woke progressive narrative was immediately defenestrated, dropped by their agents and employers, and savaged by ‘progressive’ media. The fallout of such behaviour however directly led to the re-election of Donald Trump based on the DEI-reliance of Kamala Harris’s Democrats. Post-wokism was to follow, but not before the VAWG cartel had attempted to draw some more scalps, whether it be Brand, Fox, Allison Pearson, Lucy Connelly or whomever a still-captured police deemed guilty before trial of Wrongthink.

Men Going Their Own Way (MGTOW) has become a real thing—the ‘juice no longer becoming worth the squeeze’ —creating legions of accidental new MGTOWs, scared of false allegations and not prepared for the identity-politicised stress that the dating scene has become. Even prisoners having relationships with prison officers (OnlyFans models or otherwise) has become a DEI issue, as underqualified and underexperienced young women had been drafted in to do what they were sold as a ‘be kind’ job at the time of Covid, but found their hormones attracted to the men living under their charge. This might not have happened so frequently in the era of Porridge.

In the post-woke independent media the term ‘evil’ is often bandied about to explain the motivations of woke progressivism, but this misses the point that politics isn’t evil, it’s different agendas: and woke was always politics dressed up as humanistic benevolence. The BBC’s diversity drive, making many of its channels unwatchable, had been revealed as a failed project, driving millions of its own licence payers away due to the corporation’s arrogant insistence on the programme. (Or maybe it was a government plan to defund and then redesign the corporation, critical of power as it had historically been?)

Laurence Fox can’t help telling the truth as he sees it; Russell Brand was a caddish younger man, taking liberties—as were those around him. For that matter, Kevin Spacey has been open about how his past drinking and ‘in the closet’ situation led to his being too clumsy in attempted seductions. The richer or more powerful you are, the more likely a media organisation—usually Channel 4 or The Guardian—will engage in a catastrophic, inhumane pile-on, based on salacity and intended to progress their narrative of social engineering. The new progressive establishment is very keen on males changing their instincts and their ways: why then do we continue to punish them when times change, even when they have moved on to another era of their own lives? It’s what Andrew Doyle described as The New Puritanism—and the backlash is likely to be equally catastrophic.

Noam Chomsky and Adam Curtis have detailed the process of ‘manufacturing consent’ in society, which means creating a problem, finding examples of that problem, then punishing that problem in order that more people behave along with the new societal line. The problem is the internet has exposed all of these machinations, the majority ‘rump’ of the population are now savvy to it—and to ‘lawfare’, having watched the soap opera that is Donald Trump. It’s the exposure of the whole process, currently being witnesses, that is the biggest threat of all.

Table of Contents