Does Steven Jarvis like drawings of little boys?
Friend of Jim Stewartson and Heidi Cuda seems problematic.
Steven Jarvis is a school teacher from Utah who now lives in Fort Worth, Texas. He is a friend of Heidi Cuda and Jim Stewartson from the RadicalizedPodcast. Here they are speaking his praises.
Recently it has come to the attention of the larger Twitter community that a user with the name “@KJTfromTX” has been shown to have several eerily similar attributes to Mr. Steven Jarvis. The community was tipped off to this when Jarvis used an uncredited screenshot that came from the “@KJTfromTX” account to evidence a claim in some of his writing. After some initial curiosity, it appears that both are Mormons from Utah that lived in California for roughly 5 years and now live in Texas. They have an affinity for college football and share the same list of niche political friends and enemies, including several individuals that have been canceled for a variety of reasons. (This is the tip of the iceberg, and there are many, many more connections for those who might be interested in looking for them. For the sake of brevity, I will not be getting into them here, and only offer the roughest of outlines.)
There were quite a few interesting data points that initiated some spirited debate as to whether or not these two individuals are the same person. Many fell on the side that it was just a weird coincidence. I was one such person until the following connection was made.
In a vacuum, this post is unimportant and typical of the way Steven Jarvis presents himself as a hero. Given the usual way his personal narratives evolve over time, someone might be forgiven for expecting an initial version of this tale to not involve his direct help. Something like what was found on the “@KJTfromTX” account.
For me, this is the most compelling piece of evidence that Steven Jarvis runs the “@KJTfromTX” account. There is quite a lot of other evidence that when placed together, indicates, with a high degree of likelihood, that he runs the account, but this is the easiest one to simply point at and want an explanation for. This is the connection that requires an answer.
One possible answer that was brought up was that he is trolling and creating a false positive. I was willing to entertain that very real possibility and every time I try, I am brought back to the baseline of his motivation for doing so. Why would he want to be connected to that account? What could be gained from attempting to get people to believe he is “KT” by repeating information that a reasonable person could see as compelling?
What is the point of any of this anyway? So what if he has an anonymous account to use Twitter? I am right there with you. After all, my own Twitter account doesn’t have my name attached to it. Many people don’t attach their real names to Twitter accounts. What is the issue?
“KT” is a fan of the artist “FKEY” and would love to see a boy and girl set. Not man and woman. Not male and female. Boy and Girl. What might such a set look like when drawn by this artist? Perhaps something like what I have included below.
![](https://substackcdn.com/image/fetch/w_1456,c_limit,f_auto,q_auto:good,fl_progressive:steep/https%3A%2F%2Fsubstack-post-media.s3.amazonaws.com%2Fpublic%2Fimages%2Fde8eca31-818a-407e-ab4b-28c2e34d8e27_527x415.png)
The above image is what is known as lolicon, or loli. Steven Jarvis asked about it in a previous article and we can defer to his definitions here for our purposes.
Lolicon, or loli, is not derived from lollipop, as Steven Jarvis opines. It is from Lolita. I will leave you to your own devices when discovering the tale of Lolita and why the name is linked with this style of art.
If the “English class with no books” connection is a troll to get people to believe that Steven Jarvis is “@KTJfromTX”, my question of motivation remains. Why would he want to be linked to this person? I don’t think he would, and I don’t think he is trolling by reiterating the story. I think the story shows what has become a common Jarvis trope of evolution. He often makes a small claim and then embellishes it over and over until it becomes a completely different claim.
If KT is Steven, this continues to track. KT speaks of secondhand knowledge of a book removal, but then months later, Jarvis speaks of being an active participant in the book removal. I think it is more likely that Jarvis forgot he made the claim on the KT account and made it again in an article than he did so to trick people into believing that he is KT.
For the record, I do not believe Heidi Cuda, Jim Stewartson, or anyone else over at RadicalizedPodcast, or the large portion of their supporters, think this kind of thing is acceptable. If they have read this, and they do not speak out about it, sever their ties, or at the very least ask him about this, then they are showing that this type of thing actually is acceptable, so I would like to take this opportunity to ask them to take a public position on this one way or the other.
What is the position of RadicalizedPodcast? Do you still support Steven Jarvis in light of this information? What about the readers of Jarvis’s Substack? How many different things do you have to explain away before you take inventory of all of the different concessions you’ve made to support him and realize he just might be the creep that he appears to be?
Why do you think Steven Jarvis isn’t working at a school any more?
Pedos are repugnant.
He makes Katherene Jarvis sad.
Someone needs to start a Substack about the Jim Stew crew that doesn’t stick to pesky facts and doesn’t try to make valid points. A humorous work of fiction intended only to annoy.