Predator
Gary Mosher1, aka Inmendham, recently gained notoriety as the creator of efilism, the extinctionist worldview that motivated Guy Edward Bartkus to commit an act of terrorism by blowing up an IVF clinic on May 17 this year. What most don't know is Mosher openly advocates for CSAM, femicide/forced abortion, rape, infanticide, and animal cruelty.
And if that wasn't enough to sink the prick (just in case anyone doubts where I stand), it turns out he's also a predator who preys on underage girls.
This came to light after I stumbled upon a 20092 video of Mosher hitting on two underage looking girls in one of his Stickam livestreams, laying to rest any doubts about who and what he is.
đ˘
Morality and law prioritize the wellbeing and interests of minors when it comes to matters of sex and attraction. In practice, when it comes to anything sexual, if a person looks underage, absent definitive proof, adults aren't entitled to presume otherwise. In such circumstances adults are morally and legally bound to refrain from violating in any way the sexual barriers between adults and children3. Any adult violating those boundaries is rightfully presumed to be a threat to children.
Proving Mosher a child predator therefore doesn't require me to prove the two girls are in fact under 18 (as per New Jersey law4). I only need to establish the girls most likely are (One of the chatroom participants says they look 13 in Clip 8) and that there isn't any definitive proof showing otherwise.
From there it's a simple matter of showing Mosher violating the sexual boundaries between adults and childrenâwhich he does by, among other things, calling them âinfinitely fuckableâ, joking about using them for a shock porn video, and saying he wants to find where they live and visit them.
đ˘
NB: 1 This concerns individuals who were most likely minors at the time so I've concealed their identities and I'm not linking to the primary source. This is contrary to my usual practice and I understand how it impacts my analysis, but the girls' interests take precedence.
2 The clips are presented in the order they occur in the original stream.
CLIP 1
Mosher, just shy of 50 at the time, starts gushing over the girls as soon as they enter the room, telling them their presence enables him to regulate his emotions and complimenting them for their background color choices. These are grooming tactics, ways for Mosher to erode their defenses and cultivate their trust. Telling them how they positively impact his mood is a way to give them a false sense of agency and control. Complimenting their choice of colors makes them feel empowered and admired for making decisions that earn his stamp of approval. This is how predators suck targets into their orbit. Mosher's moving fast.
Taking his lead from the chat, âhi hot girlsâ, âyummyâ, Mosher instructs everyone, "Yes, everybody say hello to the hot girls. Yes, it's the appropriate thing to doâ. This serves the threefold purpose of normalizing and desensitizing the girls to being sexualized and objectified, preemptively shutting down opposition by recruiting others as co-conspirators in the grooming, and gaslighting everyone into believing itâs abnormal to oppose sexualizing the girls.
Japanese (the guyâs online handle) warns the girls are âdefinitely underageâ. The first part of Mosher's response is the most damning:
Japanese: âGary, theyâre definitely underage. Thatâs kind of dirty.â
Mosher: âWell so what?!â
Mosher's communicating that even though the girls look underage and even though he doesn't have any reason to believe otherwise, he's entitled to violate the sexual barriers between adults and children by speaking in a sexually charged manner.
He then resorts to DARVO: Deny, Attack, Reverse Victim and Offender.
Denial is insisting he only said hello: âYou can say hello to girls. It's not against the law to say hello to a girl in Americaâ. But he didnât just say hello. He spoke to the girls like a creepy 50 year old pedo, and sexualised them by calling them hot.
He then attacks the person warning him about the girls being underage: âGoddam you people are such fuckers. Really. Youâre pissing me off Japanese fucker. Just shut the fuck up. Go the fuck away. Go to the nerdy uptight anal pus ball shit fucker room and get the fuck out of this room.â
RVO happens when he says, âYouâre no fucking funâ. Mosher turns himself into the victim by accusing the person giving the warning of trying to stop him from enjoying himself.
The clip rounds out with Mosher further ingratiating himself with the girls saying, "Yes, girls. They do please meâ. Interspersed with pedo-like sniggers, laughing in everyoneâs face thinking heâs getting away with it.
Mosher should have asked the girls to leave when they entered the room, then booted them if they refused. Stickam permitted anyone from 14 years of age to use their services and at least one of the girls could be that young. It's unfathomably stupid for Mosher to make the choices he's making.
CLIP 2
Mosherâs hard penis quip is in response to a comment in the chat, âyou make greg pec's penis hard gary!â. Thinking about hard penises apparently reminds him of a Cristina Rad video he found sexually arousing (Corina is Mosher's pet name for Rad).
Mosher and Rad were online acquaintances back in the day, but he hoped for something more, nurturing a parasocial sexual attraction for years (knowing full well she was married). He even set up cameras to record them having sex when she visited during her American holiday. Rad was accompanied by Devchelle2 who cockblocked Mosher's advances. This pissed Mosher off no end. But it was probably a good thing as Mosher admits to being a creep when it comes to sex: âI have a memory of Corina just being inches away. We even had physical contact of a kind. Yeah. Wooo, it was something. You have to be careful there, though because I get creepy really quick when things get close. Yeah so, you have to be careful with that.â
A baseless expectation of sex (probably to be recorded without Rad's consent). Rage at Devchelle getting in the way. Being a self confessed creep "you have to be careful with". Mosher might have raped Rad had she been unaccompanied.
Back to the chatroom. Mosherâs talking about erections and sexual fetishes in front of two likely underage girls. Desensitizing targets to sexually charged discussion is a predatory tactic for the purpose of eroding boundaries and increasing the likelihood of targets being open to sexual overtures. Talking about fetishes covertly informs targets how predators like to be sexually satisfied, conditioning them to what might be expected. Itâs also a test to gauge how sexually open targets are in the moment, a way for predators to judge progress.
CLIP 3
A 50 year old man gushing over the lovely pink and blue colors of the little girl room and the little girls' blond hair. His use of little is disconcerting.
Mosher makes a point of saying he "just loves those colors". This reinforces the link between himself and the girls by having their good taste recognized by an adult male. He also compliments their hair to make them feel pretty, so the girls associate him with adult male affection and attention. Itâs easy to understand how children who lack positive adult inputs are vulnerable to this kind of approach. Even if that isn't the case here, the girlsâ juvenescent inability to discern genuine affection from predatory grooming is enough on its own to open them up to a world of hurt. So, even if Mosherâs intentions donât extend to physical molestation and he only gets off on getting away with this kind of shit, heâs damaging the girls in a way that could make them more vulnerable to other predators with more sinister urges.
CLIP 4
â3 Girls In A Boxâ references two shock porn videos from 2007 and 2008, 2 Girls 1 Cup and 1 Man 1 Jar. Mosher's joking about making shock porn with the girls. As theyâre presumably underage (possibly all three) he's joking about making child sexual abuse material (CSAM).
He's seeing how far he can push things. Seeing what he can get away with. Not just with the targets, but also with the adults in the room.
Groomers deploy sexually charged jokes to unwind tensions (targets and witnesses) and entice targets away from hesitations. Jokes are also leveraged to anesthetize fight or flight instincts. They become more effective the more a target buys into a shared sense of purpose with the predator.
Predators believe disguising predatory behavior as jokes affords them plausible deniability. That isnât how it works. "Itâs just a joke, bro" doesnât cut it as a defense. Until proven otherwise courts and the general public presume such jokes to be intrinsically predatory, because they prioritize the protection and wellbeing of minors.
It isn't just a joke, bro. Joking about using the girls for CSAM is an insidious move.
CLIP 5
Mosher latches on to the girls saying âfuck jerseyâ in the chat to reinforce their belief they have a special bond with him. Heâs effectively saying, Weâre a team. Weâre in this together. Then he jokingly (plausible deniability) invites himself into their private space (their pink and blue world), telling them heâs got to find their state. Once again testing the waters to gauge reactions, of the girls and others in the room.
If Mosher visited the girls, the law would presume the travel was for sexual activity. For what other reason would a 50 year old man visit minors he met in an online chatroom? That would land him in very hot water. See for example 18 U.S.C. 2423(b) which "has been used in prosecutions for interstate travel with the intent to have sex with minors, some of whom were contacted through computer on-line services". 2423(b) only requires intent to engage in illicit sexual conduct with a minor, even if no actual act occurs. So, due to Mosher's stated desire to visit the girls, he would have exposed himself to the risk of criminal prosecution the second he embarked on a trip the prosecution could prove was for the purpose of visiting them.
Mosher rounds out this section by saying heâd need to take back roads if he visited the girls because heâs scared of people. Bullshit. That's to avoid getting caught. Itâs Mosherâs version of Shhh, this is our little secret. How can it be a secret if heâs broadcasting it publicly? Plausible deniability, once again. As they say, the best way to hide a secret is to tell the world.
But here's a more pressing question: Whatâs he doing in private if heâs this brazen in public?
CLIP 6
One of Mosherâs favorite fantasies was being stranded on an island with his pick of â17 year old womensâ. I suspect he specified 17 as 16 is the age of consent in New Jersey (18 is the threshold for internet crimes against children).
Every straight man has thought about or articulated some version of being the only man in a remote location surrounded by young women. But this is the first time I've heard someone stress how they'd all be exactly one year older than the youngest legal age he could get away with. I guess Mosher believes specifying 17 strengthens the perception he's not interested in minors. But children not being included in that fantasy has always been an unspoken presumption. I reckon he's overcorrecting, unwittingly reinforcing how he's sexually interested in dangerously young ages.
The clip finishes with Mosher responding to a comment in the chat (âyou donât have a penis gary?â): âI donât have a penis, I have a very large clitoris. Hahahaha. What a funny jokeâ. Coupling this with talk about his fantasy, heâs continuing to normalize adult sexual banter in the minds of two girls he knows are most likely underage.
As an aside, Iâm struck by how sophomoric Mosher is. As though he's socially or developmentally delayed. Not just from the way he carries himself in this clip, but throughout the entire stream (and his content in general if Iâm honest). I'm in my 50s and joking about being on an island with 17 year olds would be a surefire way to find yourself excluded from professional and social circles. Maybe this is what happens when the real and online worlds become inverted. Well, he's not right in the head, whatever the reason.
CLIP 7
Iâm including this clip as another example of Mosher's willingness to subject the girls to sexual banter, when he has the option of removing them from the room.
CLIP 8
âYeah you are cute. You are cute, you little, you little girls, you. Hah. Girls. Jesus they have such power, man. The amazing power of the girl, you know. Ugh. The way itâs just wielded. All they do, is they have to just smile. Thatâs all they have to do. Itâs like, yeah okay Iâm having a good day now, the girlâs smiling. I mean itâs amazing power. God. Itâs like I never really wish I was a girl but Iâd just love to have that power for a day, just be some hot girl and just like wield my power to please people.â
Why, apart from being a predator, would a 50 year old man drool over two teens he has every reason to believe are underage?
This is how a predator might inform a target that what she has to freely and easily offer is uniquely valued and appreciated by him. I donât know what if any effect it had on these two particular girls, but I can envisage vulnerable kids who lack healthy adult attention and affection being drawn in by this. If Mosher isnât a predator he's sure as hell making every effort to look like one.
Everettsvlog claps back warning the girls might be as young as 13. Mosher responds: âWhatever! Jesus. Is somebody soliciting sex or something? Why do you pricks have to worry about how old they are? Thereâs nothing happening here that is obscene. Sheesh. Goddam. Fucking goddam moral police.â
Everettsvlog is, for all intents and purposes, accusing Mosher of preying on 13 year old girls. Someone protesting his innocence would typically challenge that accusation in one of two ways. Dispute the girls are as young as 13 and/or claim he isn't behaving or speaking inappropriately.
Mosher's response amounts to saying he doesn't care if they're 13, and short of soliciting sex 50 year old men are entitled to say whatever they want to 13 year old girls. Heâs dangerously disconnected from reality.
Mosher then attempts a caricature of his adversaries using a mishmash of disconnected babble: âI'm an atheist but you shouldn't look sideways at a young woman because you'll distort her perspective5, even though she came into the room kind of trying to be a girl. I mean the girls arenât in the room pretending to boys or something. Itâs not like theyâre saying, Please have more intellectual discussions.â
Mosher's resisting objections to his behavior by mocking the atheists in the room for preaching anachronistic religious morality. In other words, sexually slobbering over children carries the same moral opprobrium as flirtatiously glancing at women, and since we've done away with the latter there's no reason to not also do away with the former. This is a guy who prides himself on his capacity for logic.
â(E)ven though she came into the room kind of trying to be a girlâ is Mosher linking the primary clause to the girls in the room. It doesn't connect. It makes just as much sense as saying, âThat's a fish, even though coffeeâ. But by alluding to them as women trying to be girls he's saying they're women who look like minors, inadvertently admitting he knows they look underage.
And what of, âThe girls arenât in the room pretending to boys or something. Itâs not like theyâre saying, Please have more intellectual discussionsâ? First off, he refers to girls pretending to be boys, as opposed to women pretending to be men. Constantly betrayed by his own choice of words.
Secondly, he appears to be suggesting males join the room for intellectual discussions and females for something else. Looking at everything going on, itâs reasonable to interpret something else as being fodder for Mosher's sexual gratification. Which sounds like, They ask for it by being in the room. In other words itâs Mosher's version of It's not my fault. She came on to me by wearing a short skirt, except it's actually It's not my fault. The child came on to me by not leaving.
đ˘
âPeople are such party poopers. Fuck. God. Everybody complains about what a dark horrible person I am and I dare to say something like, Oh the cute little girls make me happy, and all of a sudden Iâm fucking evil.â
Sorry, wut? What exactly does Mosher expect to get from being a 50 year old man salivating over the cute little girls in their cute little room with their cute little blond hair? A round of beers and a welcoming parade?
đ˘
Everettsvlog's looking at a guyâs ass analogy doesnât land but the underlying point does, that it's taboo for adults to be sexually interested in minors. Thinking he can do better, Mosher shoots his shot. He describes the taboo of adults being sexually interested in minors as ludicrous, archaic, and irrational, saying it would be just as insane to be against phasing it out and replacing it with something better, as it would be to be against replacing wooden wheels with rubber tyre wheels. Heâs advocating by analogy for removing the sexual boundaries between adults and children. And replacing them with what? Easier access?
Then he calls the girls âinfinitely fuckableâ.
Infinitely fuckable.
Jesus christ.
There's no coming back from that.
Jesus. Fucking. Christ.
CLIP 9
âI don't love jailbait. The youngest girl I ever had sex with was 30 fucking years old. Alright? Thatâs the youngest woman I ever had sex with. 30 fucking years old6. Okay? So Iâm not some fucking goddam predator! Iâm just saying, cute girls are fucking cute! Theyâre fun to look at. You fucking idiots! This is not fucking complicated!â
Mosher's protesting being called a predator, not by denying it, but by doubling down. He's entitled to lust after underage girls as long as he thinks they're cute. But he isn't a predator because the youngest woman he ever had sex with was 30 years old. WTF?
Also notice how he self corrects from girl to woman when referring to his 30 year old partner, then reverts to girls when talking about the two in the chatroom. This could be nothing. Or it could be he wants to differentiate between sleeping with a woman and coming on to underage girls, as if that somehow helps him.
đ˘
Everettsvlog: âJust âcos you only fuck 30 year olds, man, that just means youâre a failed pedophile.â
Mosher: âWell I certainly was when I was 11. Yes, I failed often in my pedophilia attempts.â
Another truth said in jest for plausible deniability. However, a joke about being a failed pedophile in response to being checked for grooming only aggravates the concern. He's communicating he doesn't understand the seriousness of the matter or he does, and doesn't care. This isn't the only time Mosher has blurred the line between adult and child sexuality or provided the age of 11 unprompted7.
On July 7 2021 Mosher invoked pedophilia in the context of being an 11 year old finding other children sexually interesting: (57m01s) âPeople make this argument that it's somehow an insane abomination for somebody to think children are sexually interesting. And so it occurred to me that obviously when I was 11 years old, an 11-year-old girl was very sexually interesting to me. ⌠(58m08s) If I think back to my first amorous experiences, I don't sit there and say, Ooh, that was really disgusting. I was attracted to an 11-year-old girl. No, that wasn't disgusting. So, I'm just saying, so the argument is kind of, you know, I'm not saying we're all pedophiles.â
The first sentence can be understood in one of three ways:
1 âPeople make this argument that it's somehow an insane abomination for somebody to think children are sexually interesting (to similarly aged children)â.
2 âPeople make this argument that it's somehow an insane abomination for somebody to think children are sexually interesting (to adults)â.
3 âPeople make this argument that it's somehow an insane abomination for somebody to think children are sexually interesting (to adults and similarly aged children)â.
The full context demands the sentence reference both pedophilia and children who are sexually interested in similarly aged children.
1 is rejected because it excludes pedophilia. It's also wacko to seriously suggest anyone (apart from some hypothetical fringe) thinks children being sexually curious about their peers is an insane abomination.
2 is off the table because it excludes children finding similarly aged children sexually interesting.
3 includes both adults and children finding similarly aged children sexually interesting. This fits, but at the cost of child on child and adult on child attraction being lumped together.
Two statements more than a decade apart specifying the age of 118 and dimming the clarity between age appropriate childhood behavior and predatory pedophilia. I'll put money on something happening when Mosher was 11 leading him to blur those distinctions, affording him a way to justify and assuage the guilt of his own inclinations and/or subconsciously cope with something that happened to him. Curiously, in the July 7 2021 clip Mosher talks about sexual manipulation of children which forever changes their sexual orientation and how it's a hell of a thing for parents to bring someone into existence with âa particular orientation (pedophilia) that means he'll never have any gratification for the rest of his lifeâ9. Was Mosher talking about himself?
Also relevant is his response to being asked, "Who abused you into being a perpetrator?" (April 4 2022, 34m35s). The question, which incidentally I asked, wasn't concerned with pedophilia but the root cause of Mosher's habitual abuse of his detractors. Mosher interpreted it as asking about pedophilia, ie, he understood the question as, âWho abused you into being a pedophile?â. Two presumptions are built into that question. Abuse is the root cause of pedophilia and the person being asked the question is in fact a pedophile. Anyone who isn't a pedophile would protest the second presumption (so would most pedophiles come to think of it). Silence in the face of such a grave accusation can reasonably be understood as agreeing with the assessment, especially when the person being questioned is the one who injected the presumption when it was never there to begin with. Mosher only challenged the first presumption then babbled a bit about Michael Jackson and Peter Pan syndrome. He said nothing about the second.
All things considered, including other statements he's made in defence of his CSAM advocacy10, dodgy comments11 heâs made about 15 year olds, and this bizarre video, I lean towards Mosher having pedophilic inclinations which he possibly hasnât acted on in real life12, although I donât doubt heâs acted on them online. In other words he's a failed pedophile, at least insofar as actually molesting a child is concerned.
đ˘
âLike, my perception of beauty must age with my own wrinkled flesh. I mean come on. I mean, what? So if you go to the museum and you're 80 years old and you're looking at the David, you should say, Oh they must carve some wrinkles on him because I can not find him possibly attractive or a good definition of maleness because he's not wrinkled enough. I mean come on. Jesus Christ. There's plenty of 80 year old guys looking at the fucking 30 year old women and saying, Oh yeah!.â
Mosher's justifying his predatory behavior by saying older guys never stop finding younger women attractive, and it's unreasonable to expect him to only be attracted to women his age. But nobody's denying there are 80 year old guys who find 30 year old women attractive and neither is anybody saying he should only be attracted to women his age. He's blurring the line between appropriate and inappropriate again. Once is a misstep, twice is coincidence, thrice is intention.
All that being said, it could be Mosher can't or doesn't understand the difference between appropriate and inappropriate, between children becoming sexually attractive and being sexually attracted to children. For example, he's on record saying opposition to pedophilia and CSAM is the same kind of bigotry as opposition to adult homosexuality13. Is that deliberate misdirection or failure to understand? I don't know. I also don't care. He's a danger to children whichever it is.
đ˘
At the end of the clip Mosher delights in the girls declaring, âwe're here for gary, not anyone elses shitâ: âLook at that. They're here for me. They're here for me. Yay, I winâ.
A 50 year old man gloating about two teenage girls being enamored with him. This exemplifies the rationale for moral and legal rules against adults fraternizing with minors. They don't exist to stop minors developing sexual feelings, and as evidenced by Romeo and Juliet laws, they aren't for the purpose of banning sexual activity. They exist because minors are presumed developmentally vulnerable when it comes to distinguishing predatory from non-predatory behavior, and adult predators would have a field day without those barriers in place.
The events unfolding in the chatroom amount to prey failing to perceive being predated upon. Precisely what the rules are for. There isn't anything surprising or untoward about two teenage girls developing a crush on an older charismatic man who expresses interest in them. But there's everything wrong with that man being invested in nurturing those feelings, then running a victory lap upon seeing the fruits of his predacity.
CLIP 10
Everettsvlog lays down the gauntlet asking the girls to confirm their age.
Mosher chimes in claiming he's seen their driver's licenses. This is nonsense and doesn't require a detailed explanation for why. But I'll do it to head off Mosher's foot soldiers and the durrrr they'll spout to muddy the waters.
Believing this requires believing the girls doxed themselves to him. It also requires believing Mosher gives a shit about their ages. Neither of these are plausible. He then jokes saying they might have shown their brothers' licenses. For this to be true the girls would have had to cover the photos and names on the licenses which would make showing the IDs pointless.
Furthermore, Mosher's own behavior contradicts claiming to have confirmed the girls' ages. He behaves and responds to warnings in a way he wouldn't if he had proof positive the girls were of age.
Maybe they showed him fake licenses with their photos. That would only prove they're underage.
It makes more sense to interpret this as Mosher being full of shit while signaling to the girls heâs on their side against the others, and heâll lie to protect them. Itâs a covert way of instructing them to do the same for himââIâll lie for you so you need to lie for meâ. Grooming 101.
Now, what about the girls claiming to be 19 in the chat as the clip progresses? That may or may not be true. But saying so in the chat doesn't prove anything. Think of it another way. An adult meets someone who looks underage, who claims to be older without proof. Does that clear the way for the adult to initiate sexual advances towards them? Of course not. And why not 20 or 21? Because the girls know 19 is the highest age they might be able to get away with. If everybody squints and pretends.
đ˘
Mosher reveals details about his sexual history in the second half of the clip, which sheds light on why he's acting so recklessly towards the girls. He claims he slept with the aforementioned 30 year old women when he was 29, and that was when he lost his virginity. This takes us back to a video he posted a year earlier on January 12 200814: âI didn't get laid for the first time until I was an old man. But it was really perfect. I mean it was the best year, almost year, of my life. And you know it's like more than 15 years later and I still think about her almost every day. I mean it's terrâhorrible. But you know, great in one sense. I mean the first 10 years were horrible, but after that, you know, you start saying, Well at least I had everything, you know. So it's good to know that at least you were at one moment in your life, you had it all. It was perfect and I really did know that. I knew that complete kind of Wow this is perfect. So I mean that's a good thing. But the bad thing is you compare the rest of your life to it and you say, Oh man does this suck. So anyway yeah, I just never lucky with the, you know, I just never, nothing went right when I was a kid, and so nothing worked out. And then I went crazy and, you know, who's gonna sleep with a crazy person? At least there was nobody around here who would.â
Even as someone who's run out of fucks to give about Mosher's wellbeing, this makes me feel sorry for him. To think, there's a parallel universe where Gary Mosher found happiness with a wife and kids, and Inmendham never happened. How long 'til Elon can get us there?
The obvious implication is Mosher didn't have sex from the time he broke up with the 30 year old until at least this Stickam chatroom. I'm familiar enough with his content to say it's highly unlikely he's had any relationship or physical intimacy since then. Except for a few short months when he was 29, Mosher's been an incel his whole life. That's going to take a toll.
Knowing this makes it easier to understand why Mosher behaves as he does in the chatroom (and in general). It isn't surprising to see a terminally online man, involuntarily deprived of sexual intimacy for 49 of his 50 years, with a chip on his shoulder about the cards life has dealt, take and rationalize dangerous risks with minors. I'm not saying he gets a free pass. I'm just saying his behavior isn't incomprehensible.
The final part of the 2008 clip dovetails with the previous section about what happened when Mosher was 11 years old: "Nothing went right when I was a kid, and so nothing worked out. And then I went crazy and, you know, who's gonna sleep with a crazy person? At least there was nobody around here who would."
What made him go so crazy that he became persona non grata to women? Does it have anything to do with what happened when he was 11?
đ˘
The final section of this clip has Mosher moaning about "no girls showing up just for Gary" in his first 29 years, but now they finally do (referring to the two girls in the chatroom). In order for that to make sense he must be thinking of the two groups of girls in the same way. Mosher thinks of the girls he missed out on in his youth in a sexual or romantic way. It therefore follows that's how he views the two girls in the chatroom. Girls he knows are probably underage.
CLIP 11
"No more trash talking to the girls, okay. You be polite and nice. Just talk about how pretty the colors are, and how nice their little hair is and their little blue eyes and all that kind of crap. You say nice things or you just go to hell".
Why does Mosher single out the girls for privileged treatment? If a woman joins Mosherâs chatroom and she quickly learns itâs pretty much anything goes, and she chooses to stay, giving as good as she gets, why would Mosher want to protect her from the normal noises in there? Why would he instruct everyone to regulate themselves just for her? Iâd understand if she was someone he wanted to fuck. Or if she was a minor. Or if she was a minor he wanted to fuck.
But that would never happen, right? Right?
And whatâs with âtheir little hair and their little blue eyesâ? Skeevy pos.
How would their dad(s) react if they saw the stream?
CLIP 12
The girls tell Mosher: "GARBEAR WERE GOING TO BED. WE LOVE YOU SEE YOU SOON!"
They have a nickname for him. That shows how successful he's been in forging a connection.
âThey had to go to bed. Oohh oh oh I'm a little depressed now. My girls went away. Ahhh well, We love you, see I like that one. I like that. Yes you charmed me. You pleased me, you charmed me and you happilized me. Thank you very much.â
đ˘
ââ
đ˘
I sometimes update my posts. If you want to critique things I say, please screenshot or archive to mitigate against your efforts being made redundant or accusations that I change what I write to avoid criticism. (Last update: 2025 September 26, 08:09 JST)
Given the infinitude of online content, and the value of your precious time, thank you for choosing my tiny corner of the web.
Mosher is pronounced Moh-zha, not Mo-sha.
Two objections Mosher's supporters will raise is the livestream can be ignored because it's (1) a single incident (2) from a long time ago. (1) Finding a single incident only means a single incident has been found. It doesn't mean there aren't others. Given the nature of this kind of offending itâs more likely than not that other public and private incidents have happened. At any rate, how many times does someone need to fuck a dog before theyâre known as a dog fucker? (2) This requires specifying a use by date for analyzing internet content. Not only of content you don't want brought to light, but of all content. Furthermore Matti Häyry and Amanda Sukenick referenced this 2011 video in their book Antinatalism, Extinction, and the End of Procreative Self-Corruption (Footnote 151, p43). The correct way to tackle older content is bring it to light and let the people concerned clarify their current standing. This is what happened with Mosher's CSAM advocacy. I re-upped his 2009 video on March 31 2022 and Mosher went to great lengths confirming he stands by what he said, doubling and tripling down on his pro CSAM views. Bringing the 2009 incident to light now makes it incumbent on Mosher to justify or disavow his behavior.
I'm using children in the legal sense as defined in NJ Rev Stat § 2C:24-4(2)b.(1), ââChildâ means any person under 18 years of age.â (Link in next footnote)
New Jersey law applies because that's where Mosher lives. (This isn't doxing. He's confirmed his location many times over the years. It's common knowledge his online handle Inmendham means In Mendham, a small NJ township). In the event criminal proceedings were ever filed this presumption might shift because of the girls' location and federal law. But for present purposes, their location is unknown and federal law conforms with NJ law on salient points.
The relevant law is NJ Rev Stat § 2C:24-4, which establishes 18 as the threshold for internet crimes endangering the welfare of children (cf 18 U.S.C. § 2256).
At this point the girls write âwere 19 not that its any of your businessâ in the chat. I deal with this under Clip 10.
It's likely the case the only time Mosher has ever had intercourse was with that 30 year old. He's a literal incel. Iâll cover the details and relevance of his sexual history under the Clip 10.
Unprompted information is useful because it's typically unfiltered and authentic as opposed to calculated and rehearsed. It also reveals what's important to the speaker.
cf July 12 2010 âIt seems quite obvious that we arenât intended to start being sexually active until at least 9, 10, 11.â
I recommend watching the full excerpt from 52m19s-59m20s.
Mosher has made other statements not included in the linked video. Primary sources are listed under the video and I recommend watching them for a more exhaustive understanding.
Primary sources linked under the video.
It wouldnât surprise me if it ever came to light he has acted on his inclinations in real life.
Primary source https://www.efilism.com/dng/dn120.html 25m13s
The original 2008 video is here. The original audio degraded so it was re-upped on March 22 2011.
The "bizarre video" above is, indeed, disturbing.
Heh, I wanted to bring up his awkward meeting with Rad and Devchelle2, so I'm glad you covered it.