Archive for February, 2011
Couldn’t resist posting this work of genius :
Massively downvoted of course. One of the two reddit men’s rights moderators who persistantly refuse to ban such trolls – ignatiusloyla, made the following typicaly revealing comment concerning the image :
Really? A meme image? Give me a break.
I didn’t think the populace of r/MR had devolved enough to think that posting this type of crap was a good idea. There is enough of it in r/pics, r/funny and all those subreddits.
Have a point to make? Make the point and open a dialogue. But these meme posts are so overdone, and very ineffective at making the point.
Or maybe I am just so sick of them that I am thoroughly annoyed when I see them.
Meanwhile, it seems to be the majority view at Reddit that Paul Elam is an extremist fringe figure in the movement. I’ve had major disagreements with Paul, but nobody can deny that he’s currently taking men’s rights forward more than any other activist. His blisteringly raw and honest piece entitled ‘the scourge of rape. yea, whatever’ was predictably savaged by the concern trolls at Reddit.
Of course, what these feminist trolls understand is that if men are truly woken up to the extent that they can question even the most holy of gynocratic dogmas, then it’s only a matter of time before their intellectual free lunch is over. The shocking truth of essays like the above, presented fearlessly and with an ‘I don’t give a fuck if you don’t like it’ attitude, is exactly the kind of thing that might wake men up from their sleep.
Another gem I can’t resist posting – Krauser PUA almost decking his first Brazillian anti-English Western civilisation hating cock block :
BUENOS AIRES, Feb 25, 2011 (IPS) – An Argentine government proposal to crack down on clients benefiting from the trafficking of persons for the purposes of sexual exploitation has unleashed a heated debate between feminist organisations that support the idea and sex workers who are opposed to it.
The proposal by the Ministry of Justice and Human Rights has the support of organisations whose aim is to abolish the commercial sex trade. These groups want prostitution to be condemned as a form of exploitation, and are calling for measures like the promotion of alternative sources of employment.
The concept of going after the client has received the backing of the United Nations and the Organisation of American States (OAS), which will study it to recommend its inclusion in the national laws of each country…
…Trafficking in persons is “the recruitment, transportation, transfer, harbouring or receipt of persons, by means of the threat or use of force or other forms of coercion…for the purpose of exploitation,” according to the United Nations Protocol to Prevent, Suppress and Punish Trafficking in Persons, Especially Women and Children, which has been signed and ratified by Argentina.
“Prostitution is not decent work, because people are subjected to humiliation, and they never know what to expect in each transaction,” Altschul said. “And in the case of trafficking, it is obvious that sexual exploitation is involved.”
Many women’s rights groups thus believe that not only the clients of trafficking victims should be penalised, but anyone who pays for sex.
But the Association of Women Prostitutes of Argentina (AMMAR), which has more than 4,000 members, is opposed to the proposal and has promised to make its voice heard at the next OAS General Assembly, to be held in June in El Salvador.
“This confuses trafficking, which we condemn, with sex work, which is an option followed by some women, as consenting adults,” Elena Reynaga, president of AMMAR, told IPS.
She also complained that the “abolitionist” groups have not listened to their concerns. “They don’t respect us, they don’t listen to us,” Altschul said. “Bans only hurt us and expose us more than we already are.”
And why do feminists not respect the wishes of the sex workers they are supposedly trying to protect? Because it’s all a sham. Because feminists regard sex workers as cockroaches. It simply serves their purposes to portray prostitutes as victims, and themselves as guardian angels. The rape of the male would not be possible otherwise.
In better news, and demonstrating that South America isn’t yet completely lost to the femi-beasts, Human-Stupidity reports that Brazil has become the first country to outlaw parental alienation.
Sometimes..in fact quite often these days..I’m sadly reminded of the fact that the UK can no longer call itself a civilised nation. This happened again last week, when the British police and media decided to generate the most contrived and appalling bout of paedohysteria I’ve yet witnessed, and all so obviously on the back of an unpopular ruling by the EU that sex offenders are, indeed human, and have a human right to appeal against a lifetime’s place on the liberal progressive’s pink triangle register.
Last Friday, just a couple of days after the media had already whipped the mob into a frenzy over the EU granting a ‘charter for pedos’, I was puzzled and a little disturbed to see on the front page of the BBC, a report that a 19 year old boy had been arrested for touching other teenagers.
‘Quiet news day?’, I thought to myself. Or did the BBC have a strict quota of ‘paedo’ stories they had to publish each week, even if they seemed to involve nothing more than a young lad groping other teenies? I was a little angry that the BBC had published the lad’s name on the front page of their website, before he had even had his trial. Now he’s going to be branded a paedophile for the rest of his life, even if he is found innocent. But it was when the same story immediately started being regurgigated across other news sites, with ever more hysterical ‘facts’, that I twigged that this was clearly a contrived and carefully manipulated response to recent political events.
From the British Tablid ‘The Mirror’ :
ABOUT 50 children may be victims of a sickening sex exploitation ring operating in one of Britain’s holiday resorts.
Police yesterday revealed the youngsters – mostly girls aged 12 to 15 – are feared to have been raped or sexually abused and suspect they were lured by the gang on Facebook or other internet sites.
Detectives are interviewing 20 alleged victims, including some boys, but admit the scale of the horrific abuse could be much worse.
A 19-year-old youth was yesterday arrested as 50 police officers began a major investigation into the alleged sex attacks over three years. More arrests are expected soon
The culprits are thought to be a gang of males in their late teens preying on youngsters in the Torbay area of South Devon, dubbed the English Riviera.
More than 16,000 worried parents with children at 14 secondary schools in the area, including the resorts of Torquay and Paignton, have been sent a letter informing them of the police investigation.
A police source confirmed to the Mirror: “The inquiry is still at an early stage but the number of victims could be 50 at the top end.”
The victims, at least two of whom were children in care, are said to have been abused after getting to know members of the gang – possibly after being groomed on popular social networking sites such as Facebook or Bebo.
Detective Inspector Simon Snell, who is leading the investigation – codenamed Operation Mansfield – said: “We’re treating this very seriously. Each offence took place in Torbay but not in schools. The alleged abuse may have been going on for two or three years.
“We have spoken to 20 children but we just don’t know how many more there are. Some of these children may have been known to each other.
“There appears to be all manner of grooming that has taken place.
“We’re not sure how the victims were being groomed but we’re looking at Facebook, Bebo and the internet”….
…despite pleas for calm, Torbay Lib Dem councillor Jenny Faulkner warned schoolchildren in the area should not go out alone.
“If they are going home they should go straight there. If they’re going to after-school clubs they should go straight there.
“Don’t go about alone – go in groups of twos or threes or fours.
“They should always tell their parents where they’re going so if they’re late the parents know where they are.”
Torbay Mayor Nick Bye was also shocked by the scale of the sex abuse.
He said: “This is the first time I’ve had experience of such a serious matter.
“I’ve already rubber-stamped the costs of the additional teams of social workers working with the victims.”
And horrified parents also spoke of their fears for their children yesterday.
Sharon Houghton, 37, who has three youngsters at different schools in Torbay, said: “It’s hard to grasp what is going on.
“It is obviously very concerning and we have been given very few details about the investigation. I am now thinking I can’t let my kids go out. I want to know where they are at all times. We feel worried and in the dark about what is happening.”
Husband Ray, 58, said: “We have had three letters and I understand they are being sent to schools all over.
“It must be a serious investigation for them to be notifying so many parents. There is no smoke without fire.”
Now let’s just take a brief look at the ‘facts’ presented above in a rational manner. Those accused of the offences are aged 16 – 19 and the ‘abuse’ was going on for up to 3 years. That means that the ‘paedophiles’ were aged 13 – 16 when the offences began. The ‘victims’, according to the reports, were aged 12 – 15. The victims were all known to the offenders and, as it seems that no pedo story these days is complete without a ‘grooming/Facebook’ angle, the cop happily stresses that the teen boys met, or got to know, the girls through social networking sites.
So what we have here, basically, is not an international ring of 40 year old paedophiles abusing and raping young children, as the headlines and hysteria would warrant, but simply teenage boys meeting slightly younger teenage girls from the same town as themselves on social networking sites and then meeting up with them in real life and forming sexual relationships with them.
The reports state that some of the ‘victims’ may have been raped. Note that under British feminist law (introduced by NuLabor) a 15 year old boy having consensual sex with a 12 year old girl is guilty of rape (not just ‘statutory rape’ but actual ‘rape’).
It has always been my opinion that paedohysteria is the result of the accidental convergence of a number of contemporary social trends and forces, most of which are fairly blind. I’ve believed that the main actors are not even consciously aware that they are deliberately stoking the forces of hysteria, let alone possessing any understanding of their true sexual or economic motives. For example, as readers know, I believe that a primary driving force is the sexual fear and jealousy that middle-aged women feel regarding the availability of nubile teenage girls in a free sexual market. Another force, which Angry Harry describes particularly well, is the economic and financial interests that are at play in perpetuating abuse hysteria.
But it was always my belief that these factors all happened to co-incide in a rather blind and unfortunate way. There was nobody really ‘pulling the strings’, as it were, and consciously orchestrating the entire thing. The above story has forced me to change my mind.
Of course, I don’t know the real facts of what happened in this case, I can only go by what the media and the police are telling us. And it seems to me obvious that from these accounts, nothing more has happened than what is happening in every town and city in the Western world – teens meeting other teens through social networking sites and having sex with each other. They used to do it via the school disco, or behind the bike shed, now it’s through Facebook. The media, and the police, have deliberately portrayed this in the manner of a paedophile shock story in response to four recent events that threatened paedohysteria, and all the vested interests that certain powerful groups have in maintaining that modern day witchhunt. Those events were :
- The Asian grooming gangs scandal. Although these are also likely greatly exaggerated by the media, the threat stories like these pose is in negating the contemporary (and invented) paedophile stereotype – a white male pervert with an unnatural interest in teenage girls.
- The government’s decision to scrap NuLabor’s controversial paedophile vetting scheme that would have forced every adult in the UK to apply for a ‘I swear I am not a pedo’ liscence before going within 50 miles of a person under 18. This appeared to be a definate sign that paedohysteria was abating in the UK, and that British adults were finally beginning to behave like responsible adults again by admitting that the hysteria was getting out of hand and that children and society were being harmed as a result.
- The decision by the EU to confirm the right of sex offenders sentanced to a lifetime on the register to appeal to be removed if they can show they are no longer a danger to children. This provoked utter fury in the media – there is only one thing that approaches paedohysteria in its ability to sell newspapers to the British masses, and that is visceral hatred of Europe. The most unediffying sight I’ve seen in years was last week witnessing the leader of so-called British ‘liberalism’, Nick Clegg, defiantly asserting that he was reluctant to accept that sex offenders had rights, and that he would do the minimum possible to comply with European law in granting those rights.
- Another EU ruling the week before that had given British prisoners (rapists and paedos) the right to vote.
The Torbay ‘grooming gang’ appears to be nothing but a group of horny young lads consensually fumbling other horny teens. The way they appear to have been used so obviously as media pawns in order to maintain the sexual and financial interests of powerful groups of adults should shame and sicken every rational person in Britain.
Jacqui ‘the pig’ Smith, is famous for being the most incompetent Home Secretary in British history, as well as for being finally forced to resign on account of falsely claiming state expenses for her husband’s porn DVD rentals.
You’d think with that final humiliation, we British men would at last be spared the sight of the fat ugly clown’s face. But no, here she is again, polluting our television screens with her porker faced features. She’s actually had the temerity to cash in on her disgrace by filming a documentary ‘looking at the effects of porn in Britain today’ :
Forgive me if I am wrong, but is there not something highly questionable about the BBC paying this woman to make such a documentary? The BBC is a state funded organisation. In addition to the funding it receives from the Government, paid out of British taxpayer’s money, I and every other British citizen who own a television set are legally obliged to pay an extra tax towards it (the licence fee).
This is a woman who cheated the British tax payer by falsely claiming expenses to cover her husband’s porn viewing habits. With the payment that she is recieving from the BBC for making this documentary, she is effectively screwing me and other British men all over again, by cashing in on her original cheating and disgrace – all thanks to the disgusting BBC, an organization which I and every other British tax payer and license holder fund.
Whilst home secretary, her government criminilized the simple viewing of ’extreme porn’ (which covers beastiality and certain bondage type images) as well as harmless anime cartoons which feature sexy schoolgirl type characters. Prior to becoming home secretary, her NuLabor government had already massively increased the definition of child pornography from possession of indecent images of children under 16 to the mere viewing of ANY sexual image of a person who is, or is simply portrayed as being, under 18.
Yet one of the interesting things about the documentary is her admission is that ‘she doesn’t know much about pornography’.
Hope the bitch pig fries in hell.
Two stories this week confirmed, for me, the commonly held suspicion amongst sane people that the progressive left simply invent their reality as they go along.
Firstly, the liberal media coverage of the ‘arab spring’, culminating in the brutal assualt upon Lara Logan. I still remember watching, as an idealistic teenager, the glorious events of 1989 unfolding upon my television screen. The year the Berlin Wall finally came down, and Western democracy and freedom was ushered in across half a continent for a people that had laboured under thought control and Soviet domination for a generation and more.
Forgive me if I am wrong, but I do not remember scenes of women clad in walking black coffins shouting for the muslim brotherhood to deliver ‘freedom’ from the government. I certainly cannot recall any uncovered blonde journalists being raped by anti-government supporters whilst screaming death to Israel, the only true and lasting democracy the middle-east is ever likely to know.
Of course, what is really sickening about the fantasy world the liberal media inhabits, is the furious reaction to those who state the obvious – that what happened to Lara Logan was hardly the shock of the century.
The great Ferdinand Bardamu has written the best piece on this ‘liberal feminist denial of reality’ : (excerpt)
A rational person would realize that rapists will always exist among the human population, and that a white woman reporter would be at a higher risk of rape in a place like revolutionary Egypt and would not have sent her there. The liberal feminist says something like “Women are raped and sexually assaulted every minute of every day in every country on Earth” and sends the white woman reporter anyway, then when a gang of a couple dozen undersexed men grab and use the reporter as an unwilling cum dumpster, she feigns shock and lashes out at the rational people who said “I told you so!” See these replies of Molly’s to a commenter who contested her “rape isn’t about sex, it’s about power” femgrrl shibboleths
Meanwhile, in another corner of the liberal feminist fantasy world, an Austrian court has convicted a critic of Islamo-fascism for the crime of ‘falsely’ claiming that Mohammad was a paedophile.
Seen at the Gates of Vienna :
On February 15, 2011, Elisabeth Sabaditsch-Wolff was sentenced to a fine of €480 for “denigration of religious doctrines” by Judge Bettina Neubauer in the Vienna Regional Court. She was acquitted of the original charge of ethnic incitement.
The court based “denigration of religious doctrines” on the fact that Elisabeth Sabaditsch-Wolff had characterized Mohammed as “pedophiliac” because — according to Islamic legend — he had sex with nine year-old Aisha. In the court’s view, this was “denigrating” because Mohammed did not have sex exclusively with children but also with grown women, and stayed with Aisha until his death when she was eighteen years old. So he was not inclined to pedophilia.
I don’t know whether to laugh or cry at this. The feminist state now appears to be picking and choosing when and how they want to inflate and abuse the definition of paedophilia (the sexual preference for pre-pubescent children). Austria recently became the first country in Europe to lock somebody away as a ‘paedophile’ for looking at pictures of adults over the age of 20. Yet having sex with 9 year old girls is not paedophilia so long as you don’t pump and dump them, and so long as you spread your alpha male loving around in order that older women won’t feel left out. Under this definition, Josef Fritzel could sue anybody who has described him as a paedophile.
On a happier note, it will mean that people like the lonely Polo instructor, who was recently jailed for several years for having consensual sex with a 15 year old girl just below the age of consent, would be able to sue the police officer, and the newspapers who falsely described him as a paedophile, for slander. He might also have sufficient grounds for appealing against his barbaric sentence at the European Court of Human Rights if it is clear that he received such a harsh sentance, in part, because he was branded a paedophile by the police and the prosecution.
What happened to feminist arguments regarding ‘sexual innocence’ or ‘imbalance of power’, or ‘not mature enough to give informed consent’? Seems that this ruling pretty much confirms that such arguments are simply rationalist covers for two basic primitive fears that all women have written into their dna code – that of being impregnated and abandoned, and, certainly much greater for the older woman, the fear of living in a world in which no man looks at a female past peak nubility. The former concern has little moral weight, even when applied to teenage girls, not in a society which has granted women the right to a safe and easy abortion, as well as a welfare state that supports single mothers, and in which case has modern and effective methods of contraception. The second fear, that in a free sexual market every man would chase teenage peaches and no woman over 25 would get a look in, has absolutely no moral force as a basis for state legislation. Hypergamy, negrophilia, alpha cock hunting, all of these and other common sexual behaviours exhibited by the modern urban female leave vast swathes of the male population lovelorn and foresaken. I do not believe that this fact can ever be a matter for the state to correct through legislation. At least not in terms of criminalizing people’s behaviour. We have decided in a civilised secular society that the state has no business to regulate the sexual lives of its citizens, so long as all parties are consenting (and the point is, the court ruling above shows that the feminist/femiservative objection to men having sex with teenagers has nothing to do with consent issues).
Feminists do not have the right to criminalize men in order to correct the imbalances that a free sexual market produces. Socialism used to mean fighting to achieve dignity and equality for the working man. In the 21st century, it means creating paedohysteria, and the myth of sex trafficking, and potentially criminalizing millions of men, because otherwise, 40 year old women wouldn’t be able to get any loving. In other words, the once gloriously utopian ideal of socialism has now been degraded by feminists to mean the aged and unwanted vagina’s rape of the male.
Whilst browsing the mixed martial arts forum ‘Sherdog’ I came across the following story – a former UFC fighter jailed for a mindblowing 25 years for being convicted of raping his ex-girlfriend. I don’t have much to say about this one, except that it serves as an example of the incredibly savage sentences meted out to sex offenders in the USA. The guy is very young, he is a talented athlete, he didn’t drag a stranger into bushes to rape them, he raped somebody (if the allegation is in fact true) who he likely already had sex with hundreds of times before. This was effectively a crime of passion, and yet his entire life is now destroyed. We know that women can kill, or mutiliate their husbands or boyfriends, and will always recieve sentences far less severe than this.
Here are several points you may want to consider :
1/ Claiming that the punishment of a crime is too severe is not the same as saying that the criminal did nothing wrong.
2/ Many in the men’s rights movement think that punishments for sex offences only become men’s rights issues when they involve false accusations. This is in contrast to the general consenus over other crimes that are used to criminalize and demonise men – such as punishments for domestic violence. For example, the idea of a ‘wife beaters register’ will likely provoke fury amongst EVERY mra, yet raising men’s rights issues surrounding the sex offenders register will likely only provoke anger and accusations directed at oneself from other activists.
3/ Perhaps we should not only have some sympathy for men like Jeremy Jackson, even if he is guilty, but we should even welcome such excessively punished men into the movement upon their release? There are nearly a million sex offenders in the USA now. Perhaps the majority of them will have committed fairly minor crimes, ’crimes’ that are probably not even illegal in countries relatively free from the feminist curse. Yet they have been utterly dehumanised and destroyed. Probably raped multiple times in prison and then marked out as subhuman for life even upon release. In short, they no longer have anything to lose. If we could wake up only 10% of such men, and make them see who is responsible for the injustices meted out to them, then we would have a men’s rights movement a hundred times bigger than we currently do, and likely a thousand times more effective.
Perhaps we should learn from muslims, who actively seek converts from those men who have been broken by the criminal justice system?
CEOP is one of the leading sexual trade union pressure groups child protection societies in the UK. Like most such advocacy groups, it is populated mainly by unspeakably ugly middle-aged women, both feminists and femiservatives, together with a sprinkling of Matthew Hopkins/Heinrich Himmler gene spliced Paedo-finder General type wierdos, such as its former chief, Jim Gamble.
The video above, released earlier in the week, purports to be a warning to teenage girls of the dangers of ‘sexting’, of sending their boyfriends sexy self-shot pics taken on their mobile phones. It seems to me that the message is nothing more than ‘if you show yourself naked you’re a little slut and you deserve everything you get’ type of shaming message. Of course, teenagers should be taught how to avoid being bullied. Teenagers can be bullied by their peers for all manner of reasons. There is nothing in this video that gives the message that the bullies are at fault, as is usual and what you might expect from an anti-bullying campaign. In fact, it seems only a more high-tech, ‘progressive’ equivalent of another video I watched recently – that of a teenage couple being stoned to death in Afghanistan for adultery. Actually, the image of the sexting girl crying whilst being interviewed, with her hoodie top turned up and which then covers her face as she walks out, just before the fat ugly feminist starts speaking, seems almost deliberately intended to evoke the hijab, and to convey an Islamic message. Attractive girls are only safe if they cover themselves up.
Many of the reports into the Afghan stoning have claimed that the murdered couple were only 17 years old. Predictably, there has been little noise from feminists or their obnoxious fake child protection societies. Perhaps, in a decade or two, when feminism in Europe has become fully subsumed under Islam, we will see them release videos of teenagers being physically, and not just figuratively, stoned to death, as a warning against sexting, or any other display of sexual power that makes their older rivals so angry.
To futher understand what motivates feminist child protection charities, take a look, if you can stomach it, at the following video that is hosted on a commercial website based in America :
There are dozens of videos like this on that website, and many other websites like them, sites that make money from showing videos of children being beaten and bullied. I have never once heard any child protection group raise any concern over them. Whilst the middle-aged fuglies and peado-finder generals jet around the world organising lucrative conferences that discuss ever more draconian laws that will send any man who clicks on a single thumbnail of a sexy teen to months of shower rape, there are no demands for these ‘bitch fight’ sites to be outlawed, let alone the sick people who view them to be imprisoned. Notice, as you watch (quite legally) this 14 year old girl having her face stomped upon repeatedly, that at one point she makes a rude gesture at the person filming it. While she is lying on the ground, with the boots of the bully coming down upon her head, she sees that she is being filmed, and clearly realises that her humiliation and pain is going to end up on the internet for millions of people to laugh at and replay for years.
But wait, she’s got her clothes on, so that’s o.k.
Meanwhile, in America, being tricked by a 17 year old jailbait in a nightclub can lead to 10 years in jail for the adult. As I’ve stressed here repeatedly, and I need to keep repeating it because some MRAs still don’t get it, feminists use draconian applications of age of consent laws not in order to protect young girls from sex with older men. No, the real reason, or at least the main reason, is to deter men from approaching any girl who remotely looks like she could be under the age of consent. This is why, in the UK and the USA, the harshest sentances are meted out to men who have sex with underage girls close to the age of consent, and no mercy is shown even when it is accepted that the man believed the girl to be over age. And when the age of consent is 18, as in many states of America, no sane man should ever go near any woman who even looks under 25, for fear that she might turn out to be a ‘child’ of 17 (bear in mind that in today’s world most girls complete puberty and physical growth by the age of 16). Feminists have made a political priority of forcing law courts to dismiss as a defence the belief on the part of the man that the girl was of legal age.
This blog is in some danger of becoming an Angry Harry tribute site, but I can’t help quoting his comment regarding this story :
I have no doubt in my mind that the bartender above should not be in prison but that those officials and politicians who are responsible for implementing such a disgusting policy should be.
Sentiments that I agree 100% with, as every honest supporter of men’s rights should.
Bit late on this one, but just caught it from Angry Harry’s site : The Super Bowl Prostitute Myth : 100,000 hookers won’t be showing up in Dallas.
Although I’ve read a number of articles in the British and Irish press debunking sex trafficking hysteria, this is the first time that I’ve read one in an American publication - at least by a male writer. Not only that, but the writer, by the name of Pete Kotz, delivers his expose with real venom. The comments beneath the article have an equally angry tone, and the people who left them know exactly who to direct their anger at – the feminists and their money-making sexual trade union advocacy groups. Perhaps the worm is turning even in America. If so, the end of the sexual trade union is truly in sight.
It is clear from the article’s argument that feminist advocacy groups are creating myths and generating fear through massively inflating the number of true pimped or trafficked women (and in particular underage girls) in order to push for legislation that will criminalize, or victimize, all prostitutes – the majority of whom are ‘independent contractors’, freely exchanging their sexual power over men for financial reward. Something, as we know, that feminists hate because it lessens their own sexual power and asking price, as well as that of the mass of ordinary women who support those feminists. Feminists force these women into the victim role, and present themselves as guardian angels riding to their rescue. In reality, feminists despise all prostitutes, and see them as little more than treacherous cockroaches. Sexual scabs who have crossed the picket line.
Angry Harry makes the suggestion that we should e-mail the editors and the authors of mainstream media outlets that continue to publish these exploitative and manipulative lies over the true scale of sex trafficking. You may like to contain in your e-mails the link to my Myth of Sex Trafficking collection of resources, or Angry Harry’s The Happy Hookers of Eastern Europe.
It’s time to go on the offensive. Feminists have clearly lied and exaggerated time and time again, exploiting the real suffering of a small but tragic number of women and children in order to spread bullshit that furthers their own financial and sexual interests. This is now beyond dispute. These women are evil. They are not human. They are victimisers and child abusers. Do not show these wicked animals any respect or mercy. They deserve none.