The Unz Review • An Alternative Media Selection$
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 BlogviewIlana Mercer Archive
Left-liberalism’s Homo-Eroticism
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information


Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • B
Show CommentNext New CommentNext New ReplyRead More
ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Thanks, LOL, or Troll with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used three times during any eight hour period.
Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

A Norwegian male was raped by a Somali asylum seeker. The last term—Somali asylum seeker—is something of a contradiction like the first (Norwegian man). The asylum-seeker honorific is given to practically anyone from the Dark Continent or the Middle-East who washes up on Continental Europe’s shores.

The politician, Karsten Nordal Hauken, who says he’s heterosexual, went public with details of his awful ordeal. “I was raped by a Somalian asylum seeker,” he wrote in a Norwegian newspaper. “My life fell into ruin.”

But it was Nordal Hauken, not his assailant, who proceeded to assault sensibilities with a confession that rivals the crime for reprehensibility. Hyperbole? I don’t think so.

As Hauken, a self-described left-wing feminist, tells it, he has been wracked by guilt because one night of passion has caused his Somali assailant to be returned to sender. After resting up in a Norwegian prison, the rapist is to be deported to Somalia. Hauken laments being overcome by “a strong feeling of guilt and responsibility. I was the reason that he would not be in Norway anymore … .”

And: “I see [the Somali] mostly like a product of an unfair world, a product of an upbringing marked by war and despair.” (This liberal peppers his writing with lots of “likes,” “millennial teen-talk,” as Patrick Buchanan termed these linguistic deformations.)

In his perversity, our leftist political powerbroker further characterized the light sentence given to his rapist by the Norwegian State as “the ultimate revenge,” meted out by “an angry father confronting it’s [sic] child’s attacker.” Mr. Hauken also moans that Mr. Priapus would be “sent to a dark uncertain future in Somalia,” instead of enjoying, presumably, the bright future that awaits a man with his priapic proclivities in Norway.

A somewhat shallow analysis of this sorry specter was offered up in the British Spectator. It chalks up Hauken’s confession to a simple case of “Stockholm syndrome,’ used to describe hostages who take on the perspectives of their kidnappers. Perhaps the Hauken case,” opines The Spectator’s Douglas Murray, “could be used to coin the term ‘Norway syndrome,’ an affliction that causes rape-victims to feel concern over the prospects of their rapists?”

Tellingly, The Spectator writer collapses the distinction between the reaction of this male heterosexual and that of another rape victim: “a ‘no-borders’ activist on the French-Italian border.” She “was gang-raped by a group of Sudanese immigrants but was persuaded to keep quiet about her own rape, in case it was used to undermine the open-borders cause.”

However, as far as we know, the raped woman has never publicly expressed a kinship with her gang rapists and is said to have been coaxed into silence.

Good or bad, the Norwegian Nordal Hauken has spoken openly about a reality few straight men would reveal: rape by another man. Hauken, not the female vanquished by the invaders, is the one said to feel for his violator.

Certainly Hauken shares his inappropriate feelings more promiscuously than any woman would.

Indeed, the liberal program, by and large shared by official conservatism, aims to dissolve “the constitution of man” in the service of sexual sameness. It is predicated on the imbecilic belief that biology is incidental, and that men and women are essentially interchangeable.

Egalitarianism, the goal of the Left and the Political Right, rests on the blunting of male-female differences. In the service of egalitarian sameness, the man-vs.-female biological imperatives are rapidly, if reflexively, being dissolved.

Survival, however, has a biological dimension. A submissive, effete civilization, made up of men like Mr. Hauken will not endure.


The repulsive specter of Karsten Nordal Hauken just about turning the other cheek to the man who spread both his cheeks is not an isolated case. The pale, liberal patriarchy is a pioneer in forever scrutinizing itself for signs of racism and deficits in empathy toward “The Other,” while readily accusing others like it of the same.

It’s as though liberal men derive homo-erotic pleasure from bowing-and-scraping to assailants and ceding to racial claims-making.

Could it be that left-liberalism has a powerful homo-erotic component? Who knows, but its faithful seem to be queering at a rapid pace.

• Category: Ideology • Tags: Immigration, Political Correctness 
Hide 41 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
  1. Priss Factor [AKA "Anonymny"] says:

    ‘Liberalism’, which should be called ‘illiberalism'(just like ‘Conservatism’ should be called ‘unconservatism’), has castrated white males. White boys are now like eunuchs.

    In this case, it’s like a one-man cuck. A white man as a white pussy who got fuc*ed by some black trash.

    • Replies: @Boris
  2. Old Bull says:

    “It’s as though liberal men derive homo-erotic pleasure from bowing-and-scraping to assailants and ceding to racial claims-making.

    Could it be that left-liberalism has a powerful homo-erotic component?”

    I think that rather obvious. Why else would males in particular celebrate open borders, mass immigration and multiculturalism knowing that the demographics of it will eventually subordinate their own and their progeny’s political interests to the increasing political power of the invaders?

  3. 5371 says:

    Breivik made a mistake in killing people like Hauken, who are practically dead already. He should have killed people like the Somali instead.

    • Replies: @Boris
    , @Bill Jones
  4. He should also be ashamed just for casting the state in a parental relationship with himself as a citizen.

    Under his circumstances, presuming I could find a sequence of events to replicate them and would be nuts enough to do so, I’d want the Norwegian state to take the assailant out and blood-eagle him, but not because I thought of the state as daddy.

  5. i’m starting to think it would be better if the Western half of Europe was Islamized. These people are what Nietzsche called the Last Men. At least Islam, however truncated it is as a system, offers a basic framework of civilizational self belief.

    • Replies: @Lot
    , @dfordoom
  6. tbraton says:

    Last night or the night before, I was watching the Bill O’Reilly show on Fox, and he had as a feature some guy (not the regular Jesse Watters, who does the same thing hilariously) interviewing on camera some students at some college or university. He asked each student (both males and females) whether there was any difference between men and women. Not one of them could give a straight and honest answer, such as “of course” accompanied by a simple description of what the difference was. They all hemmed and hawed and hid behind the generality that, no, there was no difference between men and women. I was astounded by the extent to which supposedly educated students could subscribe to such nonsense. The best explanation offered during the subsequent discussion was that the students were too “afraid” to give honest answers, since they were all too aware of the abuse they could be subjected to if they were to give honest answers.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
    , @Ozymandias
  7. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:

    These kids knew the difference between boys and girls. They were telling the interviewer that gender, as opposed to sexual makeup, was a matter of personal preference, so that they can’t tell, by appearance alone, which self-identified gender, if any, a particular individual belongs to. Watters was vamping as he always does.

    Remember that these kids belong to a generation that our declining culture has abandoned, leaving them largely without the means to cope in a world that has little use for them. They’re the potential Hitler Youth of tomorrow at which time their gender confusion, much as their white privilege notions, may quickly dissipate. Not that I’d care to see a reincarnation of Das Hitler Jugends but I think it’s possible. Maybe with the next generation coming of age in and around 2025.

    • Replies: @tbraton
  8. tbraton says:

    “Watters was vamping as he always does.”

    I thought I made it clear that it was not Jesse Watters: “some guy (not the regular Jesse Watters, who does the same thing hilariously) .” To eliminate whatever doubt my unclear prose created, let me say that it WAS NOT Watters.

  9. Truth says:

    This article is funny!

    Hey, but how come it’s always some right-winger “foot-tapping” in the bathroom?

    • Replies: @Michelle
  10. Lot says:

    i’m starting to think it would be better if the Western half of Europe was Islamized.

    Already happened to Albania and Bosnia, which are now home the lowest-IQ and most violent white Europeans.

  11. no, the Syndrome is general and spans most of our somewhat constricted political spectrum. It was, after all, Rush Limbaugh who a few years ago signaled GOPe acceptance of the bent Group Entitlement by having a certain well known Brit homosexual pedophile sing at his wedding. Homosex in turn is part of a broader Judeo-globalist assault on normal sexuality in general and White reproduction in particular, the NY/Hollywood MSMediated kosher Culture of Death: abortion, porn, faggotry, and feminism

  12. First, this story is real** really happened**

    you seems better to know than me, 😉

  13. Boris says:

    Could it be that left-liberalism has a powerful homo-erotic component? Who knows, but its faithful seem to be queering at a rapid pace.

    Oh noes! Am I supposed to start hating blacks and Jews now? Is that the only way to save my manhood?!?!?!?

    The fringe right is stuck in a middle school mentality: “If we call someone a ‘faggot’ enough times, then they turn into one!!” What you miss is that a bunch of racist conspiracy theorists debating the masculinity of people they dislike is about as sad and impotent a spectacle as one could imagine. You sense your impotence intuitively, by the way, as evidenced by the widespread fear of being “cucked.”

    Anyway, back to the engrossing discussions of how gay other people are…

    • Replies: @anonymous
    , @Ozymandias
  14. Boris says:
    @Priss Factor

    In this case, it’s like a one-man cuck.

    See, I hadn’t even read the comments, yet I knew the cuckfear was going to be a topic. It’s almost like y’all are predictable.

  15. Boris says:

    Breivik made a mistake in killing people like Hauken, who are practically dead already. He should have killed people like the Somali instead.

    Here we have genocide as foreplay. I’m sure 5371 has a full and happy home life, though. No reason to worry.

  16. Sean2007 says:

    Matthew 6:14-15
    14 For if you forgive other people when they sin against you, your heavenly Father will also forgive you.
    15 But if you do not forgive others their sins, your Father will not forgive your sins.

    Why do right-wing Christians hate Christianity so much?

    • Replies: @The Grate Deign
  17. @Sean2007

    One of the marks of a person needing instruction in the Christian faith is his failure to distinguish between duties that properly fall to the individual as opposed to those that properly fall to the state.

    Individual Christians are taught to forgive those who sin against them. But governments are constituted for the express purpose of exacting revenge upon evildoers (Romans 13).

    While an individual rape victim is — if he’s a Christian — obliged to forgive the attacker, the state is equally obliged to track down the perpetrator and execute him.

    Furthermore, since this is plainly the teaching of the New Testament, it’s not at all wrong for a Christian to demand that the civil government carry out its function even while telling the perpetrator that he personally forgives the offense.

    For the government to forgive any and all indiscriminately is the abdication of law. A society that can’t figure this out will fall into anarchy and will soon be conquered by these Moslem barbarians.

    • Replies: @Fidelios Automata
  18. @5371

    You think a a mentally diseased loser like Brevik did this alone?
    Brevik was a tool of NATO: the Norwegians were the first out of line in backing out of the almost universal NATO countries bombing of Libya and had to be brought back into line.
    Slaughtering the the children of the Elites will do it every time.

  19. Michelle says:

    Hee hee!!! Consensual sex is totally different, in case you didn’t know.

    • Replies: @Truth
  20. “… made up of men like Mr. Hauken will not endure.”

    Probably more correct to use ‘males’ instead of ‘men.’

  21. Truth says:

    “…live boy or dead girl…”

  22. anonymous • Disclaimer says:

    Most of Ms. Mercer’s articles, like this one, are bad enough on their own.

    That such low hanging fruit invites heroes like “Boris” is another reason to wish that she was not published among the much more worthwhile authors on this site.

  23. Boris says:

    The fruit at Unz is not low-hanging. It’s been rotting on the ground for a while.

    • Replies: @anonymous
  24. If Hauken enjoyed his “night of passion” with a Somali stranger, then I’ve got no problem with it. If, however, he’s willing to excuse being violated due to his retarded social-justice ideology, he deserved what he got. Other men may not be so forgiving, and our black asylum-seeker would have gotten would HE deserved: a one-way trip to the cemetery.

  25. @The Grate Deign

    “Forgiveness” is, a think, in the Christian sense (as that’s how I was raised) a refusal to hate an evildoer or to punish him solely for revenge. I don’t think that’s at all incompatible with the duty to get these jerks off the streets (or out of the country) so they can’t harm anyone else.

  26. anonymous • Disclaimer says:

    Have at it, then.

    But, in my opinion, the commenters who add value are those who can marshal evidence or reason to refute or question authors and other commenters. There is a lot of good faith debate here between those who you may be lumping together. You’re coming across in this thread as someone who thinks he’s in enemy territory, signaling virtue and cleverness to yourself, and perhaps to friends and family of like mind.

    p.s. Keyboard wit seldom sparkles.

    • Replies: @Boris
  27. A genuinely thought-provoking piece. I’m sharing it. Some of the commenters engage in the customary game of Christian Rationalization. This is the name I coined for the futile attempt at explaining away the endless contradictions of the Christian doctrine. I made a very concise summing up of the main contradiction:

    Two teachings from Jesus:
    (1) Love thy enemy.
    (2) Love thy neighbor as thyself.

    Your enemy, by definition, wants to destroy you, therefore to love him is tantamount to self-destroying.
    One who self-destroys hates oneself.
    To love one’s neighbor as oneself, when one hates oneself, means to hate one’s neighbor.

    This was deemed by one commenter at Unz as “faulty syllogistic logic”, but he declined to explain why. Perhaps I am luckier this time.

  28. Priss Factor [AKA "Anonymny"] says:

    White Progs are a funny-wunny bunch.

    Even though they pontificate about equality, their world-view is predicated on white superiority or at least the herculean effort on part of whites to be superior.

    Progs are sort of like vegans.

    Vegans won’t eat meat cuz they see animals as equally precious as human lives.
    But… but… but… animals kill and eat each other all the time. Animals live by feeding on other animals. And even herbivores depend on predators because, without predators, herbivores will eat up all the plants and they will die of starvation.

    So, if vegans love animals so much and see them as equally precious to humans, why do they reject the animal way? The animal way is for animals to kill and eat animals. If vegans see animals as equal to humans, shouldn’t humans act like animals and eat meat? If animals are so wonderful, the animal way must be wonderful.

    This is where veganism gets weird. Even though veganism sees animal life as equal to human life, they believe humans must be judged by higher/superior standards. You see, animals can’t help themselves since they live by beastly instinct. They are not intellectually, morally, or spiritually capable of rising above their instinct. But humans do have such ability. So, humans must rise above instinct for meat-eating and be vegans.

    So, vegan view of animals as equal to humans is contradicted by vegan view that humans must be judged by higher standards since humans are SUPERIOR in intellect and soul.

    Same logic applies to Progs. They see non-whites as equal to whites in worth. Therefore, non-whites should be allowed to come and live in white lands without restriction. Non-whites should use white wombs to produce non-white babies.

    But Progs don’t judge non-whites for their tribalism, militarism, violence, machismo, anti-gay attitudes, infantile behavior, and etc. Even though non-whites are seen as equal to whites, they are also seen as beastly folks trapped in tradition and/or instinct and cannot break out of their natural/cultural shells. So, the moral criteria that apply to whites cannot be applied to non-whites, especially savage Negroes and reactionary Muslims.

    So, Progs say whites must see non-whites as equal but only whites must be judged by higher moral standards since only whites are intellectually, morally, and spiritually capable of higher ideas and values.

    It’s like Jesus said, “Forgive them, for they know not what they do.”

    Well, Jesus died in a bad way. If whites wanna go that way, they can play the Prog game and forgive non-whites who destroy white civilization for ‘not knowing what they do.’

    Christian Westerns rose in power and wealth because they chose to be Forgiven than to be the Forgivers. They did badass stuff to gain power and wealth and then asked forgiveness from God and Jesus.

    Now, each Prog wants to play Jesus and forgive non-whites who are invading and raping the West.

  29. Svigor says:

    All those black guys with AIDS got it from hetero sex! HETERO SEX I TELL U!

    Matthew 6:14-15
    14 For if you forgive other people when they sin against you, your heavenly Father will also forgive you.
    15 But if you do not forgive others their sins, your Father will not forgive your sins.

    Why do right-wing Christians hate Christianity so much?

    I can forgive someone while kicking his ass. Like Christ did to the Shylocks Money-Changers.

    This was deemed by one commenter at Unz as “faulty syllogistic logic”, but he declined to explain why. Perhaps I am luckier this time.

    I can explain why you’re a moron; the point of the Scripture is to set a standard for healthy people who love themselves. Shyster logic “OMG what if I hate myself?” is missing the point, or just stupidity, take your pick.

    • Replies: @Brás Cubas
  30. @Svigor

    I used the words love and hate not in a meaning of natural inclination, or of feeling, but in that of conscious action, which is how the Bible uses them.

    In the Bible:

    Love = do good to someone

    Hate = do harm to someone

    You are right that healthy people like themselves, and/or are inclined to do good to themselves. That is why I don’t suppose they would consciously favor an enemy, which is what Jesus preaches.

    Anyway my point is that, whatever the individual disposition may be, there is a logical contradiction between the two commandments “Do good to thy enemy” and “Do as good to others as to thyself”.

  31. dfordoom says: • Website

    i’m starting to think it would be better if the Western half of Europe was Islamized.

    The sooner the better.

  32. Boris says:

    See, you think my analysis of “cuck” is merely an insult. I agree that it’s an insult, and I apply it with some pleasure. But it’s also true that the people who say “cuck cuck cuck” are paranoid white males who enlarge their fears in their own minds. Just as the jealous husband misreads every innocent action of a devoted wife, so they too think that society is out to get them. They are so devoted to this fear/fantasy that they subscribe to incoherent conspiracies.

    Note that this is a more charitable analysis than calling them all psychopaths, which is what the left normally does. Honestly, I’d have some sympathy for the cuck-crowers if they weren’t complete a-holes.

    p.s. Keyboard wit seldom sparkles.

    I guess not, but I’m not looking for devotees.

    • Replies: @anonymous
  33. anonymous • Disclaimer says:

    Thanks for your candor, but the additional non-substantive, broadbush name-calling (” … if they weren’t complete a-holes”) seems to confirm my assessment of what you’re “looking for.”

  34. @tbraton

    “O’Brien held up his left hand, its back towards Winston, with the thumb hidden and the four fingers extended.

    ‘How many fingers am I holding up, Winston?’


    ‘And if the party says that it is not four but five — then how many?’

    • Replies: @tbraton
  35. @Boris

    “…a bunch of racist conspiracy theorists debating the masculinity of people they dislike is about as sad and impotent a spectacle as one could imagine.”

    One does notice that you are hesitant to miss any of it, all the same.

    • Replies: @Boris
  36. Boris says:

    It can be entertaining, yes.

  37. tbraton says:

    Three things. First, the interviewer (who WAS NOT Jesse Waters) was not from the “party,” but from an organization conducting on-the-street interviews. Secondly, he didn’t ask how many fingers he was holding up, merely whether there was a difference between men and women. Thirdly, at no time did he tell the people interviewed how they should answer the question. Other than that, your quote from “1984” is spot on.

    • Replies: @Ozymandias
  38. @tbraton

    Yes, there are some easily spotted differences. I had thought the similarities would be easily spotted as well, but it would seem I overestimated.

    • Replies: @tbraton
  39. Sam Shama says:

    How does an unwilling, able-bodied male get anally raped if he wasn’t bludgeoned silly prior to the act? [was he?]

    In any case Norway ought to have at least castrated the “victim of an unfair world” before deportation, since he likely received a conquering hero’s welcome-back-home in Somalia.

  40. tbraton says:

    An analogy compares two different things which share some similarities for the purpose of making something clearer. “An analogy is a comparison in which an idea or a thing is compared to another thing that is quite different from it. It aims at explaining that idea or thing by comparing it to something that is familiar. . .Writers use analogies to link an unfamiliar or a new idea with common and familiar objects. It is easier for readers to comprehend a new idea, which may have been difficult for them to understand otherwise. Their comprehension of a new idea picks up the pace when they observe its similarity to something that is familiar to them.” I thought your analogy from “1984” was rather weak and did more to muddle than to clarify. Had you drawn an analogy to the bleating sheep in “Animal Farm,” you would have closer to the mark, and I would have left your remark pass without comment. Your choice of screen name is very apt, for I look upon your works and despair.

    BTW my favorite, Jesse Watters, was on the O’Reilly Show last night, and he did a segment interviewing young people on the street (not sure where), and he started off asking what Memorial Day celebrates. The answers were astounding. Then he branched out asking questions about various wars the U.S. was involved in, starting with the War of Independence, then the Civil War, WWI, WWII, the Korean War and the Vietnam War. There were a lot of wacky responses, such as we defeated the Russians in our War for Independence and that France was the enemy in various wars (for some reason, France, with whom we have never fought a war, was a favorite answer), but my favorite answer was given by a young black woman who said the Civil War was fought between the North and South—North America and South America. Now that segment might evoke Orwell’s Big Brother for you, but what it told me is that young Americans are incredibly stupid, just as my uneducated father kept insisting, much to my annoyance, over and over again as I was growing up. It was not until later, after I had experienced the world, that I realized my father was right. Later, I found that H.L. Menken, much better read than my father, had the same view as my father. Not that Mencken stole his idea from my father nor the other way around, for I am positive that Mencken never heard of my father and my father never heard of Mencken

    • Replies: @Ozymandias
  41. @tbraton

    Actually, the rather obvious similarity is that in both cases you’re pressured to make statements you know are untrue, as a test of your loyalty to the party.

    Sorry that your father and Mencken hold you in such low regard.

Current Commenter

Leave a Reply - Comments on articles more than two weeks old will be judged much more strictly on quality and tone

 Remember My InformationWhy?
 Email Replies to my Comment
Submitted comments have been licensed to The Unz Review and may be republished elsewhere at the sole discretion of the latter
Commenting Disabled While in Translation Mode
Subscribe to This Comment Thread via RSS Subscribe to All Ilana Mercer Comments via RSS
From the Leo Frank Case to the Present Day
The Surprising Elements of Talmudic Judaism
Analyzing the History of a Controversial Movement