Jessica Valenti and Register-Her.com

I fully support the intent of Register-Her.com and have advocated this type of ‘Google activism’ here before. Most of you will now be aware that the idea behind the site is to place the named and shamed false accusers and feminist bigots as high up in Google as is possible. Prospective boyfriends, as well as employers, who Google the names of these people will then be sure to discover their crime or bigotry.

Leading feminist bigot Jessica Valenti already appears on the first page of Google search results for her name.

As said, I’ve advocated the use of this type of activism here previously. For example, if you google the name of Valeria Ajovalasit, who made headlines earlier this year for attempting to sue Italian president Silvio Berlusconi for ‘offending all Italian women’, then you will see that there are no less than three pro-male sexuality men’s rights articles on the first page of results :

http://www.google.com/search?btnG=1&pws=0&q=Valeria+Ajovalasit

The articles are :

Valeria Ajovalasit (Human-Stupidity)

Valeria Ajovalasit (The Anti-Feminist)

Valeria Ajovalasit (InMalaFide)

Amongst others, this site also shows up on the first page of results (according to my browser) for a certain male feminist and boy rape apologist, as well as Marianne Hester – producer of junk feminist studies into domestic violence, writer of extreme femi-nazi books that outline her view that all sex is rape, and currently earning a no doubt generous part-time salary in her vital role as the NSPCC’s official ‘professor of child sexual exploitation’ (I’m not making this up).

What I’d love is for register-her to include a category for fraudulent feminist researchers, such as Marianne Hester and Kaffie McCullough – the woman who admitted plucking sex trafficking statistics out of her ass, and then presenting them as research findings to congress in order to have Craigs List adult ads closed down (and yes, I am on the front page of Google for her as well).

A final couple of pieces of search engine optimisation (SEO) advice for Register-Her.com :

  • It is better for each individuals profile to have their own fixed page and url rather than formed from a php? variable.
  • It would also aid ranking in Google to link to the most important individuals from the front page (for example Jessica Valenti).

See also Ferdinand Bardemu’s discussion as to whether Jessica Valenti has a foul smelling vagina.

Ugly Female Candidates ‘Repel Voters’

A former Polish prime minister has angered feminists by saying unattractive women candidates “repel voters”, just weeks before the country’s general election.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/poland/8778967/Ugly-female-candidates-repel-voters-says-former-Polish-prime-minister.html

Much praise for the politically-incorrect anti-feminist statement, but in all honesty, I doubt if it’s correct.  Certainly, New Labour and the ‘Blair’s Babes’ wouldn’t have won the 1997 British election with a landslide if this were true.  I’ve no doubt that the visages of such horrific harridans do disgust most male voters, but they are re-assuring to female voters, the mass of whom are aging and unattractive just like the candidates.  And women, unlike men, tend to vote according to the interests of their sexual organs.

Meanwhile, the same newspaper reports that ‘women in charge have less sex’.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/health/women_shealth/8783353/Women-in-charge-have-less-sex.html

Researchers at the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Healte examined the relationships between married women’s autonomy and the regularity of their sexual relations.

They found that women who were more empowered to make decisions had less frequent intercourse….

..Carie Muntifering, a co-author of the study, said: “Understanding how women’s position in the household influences their sexual activity may be an essential piece in protecting the sexual rights of women and helping them to achieve a sexual life that is both safe and pleasurable.”

The explanation, of course, is that men find powerful women unattractive.  That doesn’t mean that male attraction is related to ‘domination’, but it is related to feelings of protectiveness.  This is why men tend to find petite women more attractive  than females with the physique of a Russian shot putter.  Equally, women do not find men who are weak enough to be on the same or lower level as themselves to be attractive.  A woman’s sexual urge is related on the man’s ability to protect her, but also, in their case, to dominate her, because women seek men who can dominate other men – the Alpha Males, and a man who cannot even dominate a woman, is unlikely to be able to dominate other men.

All of which will be lost on Carie Muntifering, of course, who no doubt is using the study simply to lobby for more laws allowing women to sue or prosecute their husbands for refusing to give them enough sex.

Scientists (and Feminists) Will Soon Be Able to See Inside Your Mind

brain movie

Scientists are getting ever closer to being able to reconstruct images that a person has in their head simply by scanning their brains.

Scientists are a step closer to constructing a digital version of the human visual system. Researchers at the University of California, Berkeley, have developed an algorithm that can be applied to functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) imagery to show a moving image a person is seeing.

Neuroscientists have been using fMRI to study the human visual system for years, which involves measuring changes in blood oxygen levels in the brain. This works fine for studying how we see static images, but it falls short when it comes to moving imagery. Individual neuronal activity occurs over a much faster time scale, so a few years ago the researchers behind the current study set out to devise a computer model to measure this instead. The study shows that this new approach is not only successful but remarkably accurate.

http://www.technologyreview.com/biomedicine/38655/?mod=chthumb

The possible ethical implications of this are endless and terrifying.  I’m sure you’re already thinking of one area that feminists will demand it to be used in – identifying ‘devient sexual thoughts’.

Well bring it on, I say.  I can imagine that at some point, certain groups of men will be forced to wear some kind of brain scanning helmet, that constantly monitors their brains for deviant thoughts and images.  It will start, naturally, with sex offenders, but there will be demands from the mob for it to be applied to school teachers and anyone else coming into contact with children.  Notice I said ‘demands from the mob’, and not demands from feminists or child protection groups, as you might expect.  Actually, feminists are quite aware that most men have sexual thoughts that can’t be admitted to in the climate that they have created.  Feminists might use mantras such as ‘all men are rapists’, or ‘all men are perverts’, but really they rely on the suspicion that all men are such and such. Furthermore, they rely on the hypocritical self- denial from manginas and male cowards. When the day arrives when all men are forced to have their minds scanned, it will be the day that this puritan sexual hypocrisy that feeds the feminist rape of the male finally ends.

Male Primary School Teacher Banned for Letting Female Pupils Hug Him

I posted the following story to Reddit this morning – it currently has 178 plus votes :
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/education/educationnews/8770736/Teacher-banned-for-letting-pupils-hug-him.html

Mark Pullinger, 41, was also accused of playing with a pupil by swinging her around by her arms.

Following complaints from colleagues, he was told that he had “failed to maintain physical boundaries with female pupils”.

Although there was no suggestion of any sexual motive, he was dismissed from the school where he had worked for eight years.

The people who have created this society, the feminists, conservative puritans, and bureaucrats who have made the laws and the hysteria that are so obviously eroding society, as well as harming, in particular, both men and children, are simply evil.  Let’s be clear about this.  They are not well-meaning idiots.  They are evil child abusers acting from self-interested financial or sexual motives.

When it comes to paedohystria there is no middle-ground.  There is no position of moral neutrality.  When it comes to these increasingly insane laws, draconian punishments, and the suspicions that they breed, then if you have not spoken out against them, through sheer cowardice, then you are a child abuser pure and simple.  And if you so much as actively support them – because you are an old hag with a rusted pussy who resents the male preference for youth, or because you are a perverted beta male who wants to deflect attention away from what dark secrets your computer hard drive may contain, then you are truly beyond evil and I  hope you die a thousand slow and painful deaths.

 

The Greatest Homosexual Ephebophiles in History

I’m planning to do a big piece on ephebophilia when I get back from Germany in a couple of weeks.  The key thing to discuss is whether it exists at all – apart from the healthy male desire for beautiful and fertile young females – and whether accepting that it does exist, rather than being another feminist attempt to pathologise male sexuality, makes the issues regarding the age of consent, that I often write about here, more or less of a concern for the men’s rights movement.

I also want to conduct a poll as to the greatest ‘ephebophiles’ in history – and there’s sure been a lot to choose from.  In fact, as I’ve paraphrased George Steiner here before, it’s no exaggeration to say that western civilisation was built almost entirely by ephebophiles and Jews.

And to be fair, many of the greatest of those ephebophiles were homosexual boy lovers – men who waxed lyrical over the inspirational beauty of the beardless youth.  From Pythagoras and Socrates, Shakespeare and Michaelangelo, to Ginsburg and Morrissey, their perverted visions allowed civilisation to progress to the point where watching ‘Dateline USA’, or hacking into the phones of murdered 13 year old kids to maintain your multi-billion dollar media empire, was even possible.  So I thought it would be only right to seperate my ephebophilia articles into two – one for homosexuals and one for discussing hetereosexual ephebophilia.

So who were the greatest homosexuals homosexual ephebophiles in history?  I’ll be adding to the following list, and including more information on individuals in it, over the next week or so (and please feel free to suggest some names of your own), and then inserting a poll for you to vote on who you think was the greatest homosexual ephebophile.  I’m sure you’ll agree it’s quite a list already.  Not a bad group of individuals at all, and yet who, according to our current Anglo-American apex of world civilisation and liberal progress, must have had more of their genes in common with crabs than you or me, and who most people in the world would happily torture, mutilate, and kill if we could invent a time machine (because they’re paedos, of course, not homosexuals – thank God the liberal left have abolished homophobia!). Talk about the ‘killing your grandfather’ time travel paradox!

Pythagoras

Socrates

Plato

Emperor Hadrian (perhaps the greatest of Roman Emperors, obsessed with his adolescent Greek boyfriend.)

Botticelli

Michelangelo

Leonardo Da Vinci

Shakespeare

Lord Byron

Oscar Wilde

Tchaikovsky

Jules Verne

Thomas Mann

Saint-Saëns

Hans Christian Anderson

Robert Baden-Powell

Lawrence of Arabia

Benjamin Britten

Christopher Isherwood

William S. Burroughs

Errol Flynn

Bill Tinden (greatest pre-war tennis player, sent to prison for banging a 14 year old boy)

Graham Greene

Michael Jackson

*Note on eligibility.  Great homosexuals who have been historically recorded as having an ‘interest’ in teenage boys.  This list is not open to any homosexuals who were interested in small boys, or who expressed interest in, or committed, sexual violence against boys.

‘Domestic Abuse Incidents Double After Old Firm Match’

*’The Old Firm Match’ is the local Glaswegian football (soccer) derby between Rangers and Celtic – two teams notorious for their fierce rivalry.  This is due to them not only being far and away the biggest clubs in Scotland, but because their fanbases are split upon sectarian lines – Rangers supporters are protestant and unionist, whereas Celtic supporters are Catholic Glaswegians of Irish stock.

THE number of domestic abuse incidents reported to police after the Old Firm match yesterday was more than double the average amount of a weekend with no Glasgow derby.

Strathclyde Police said they had recorded 142 incidents compared to 67 on a “normal” weekend. The figure was also higher than the average of 107 on previous Old Firm weekend.

The rise comes despite warnings from police and prosecutors last week, who said offenders would be dealt with “robustly”.

Lord Advocate Frank Mulholland QC said figures published earlier this year showed a ” clear link” between Old Firm matchdays and a sharp rise in the number of domestic abuse cases.

http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/scottish-news/2011/09/19/domestic-abuse-incidents-double-after-old-firm-match-86908-23432612/

The Old Firm Derby is just the latest sporting event to be linked to women’s victimhood ‘issues’ such as domestic violence and sex trafficking. Every 4 years feminists stoke up sex trafficking hysterias when the World Cup is staged. Each time, their fears are proven to be completely without foundation. Last year, the BBC reported that both sex trafficking and domestic abuse will rocket during the 2012 London Olympics. The sporting arena is perhaps the sole remaining place in which society allows masculinity, and men, to be celebrated. It’s hardly surprising, then, that the gynocracy is attempting to associate and tar this last bastion of male pride with their wicked myths that demonise men.

Call for ‘More Women on the BBC’.

Former Conservative politician, and now BBC Trust Chairman, Chris Patten has called for more women to appear on Radio and television :

BBC Trust chairman Chris Patten has said there are not enough women in on-air roles at the public broadcaster.

“We should have more women on radio and television,” the former Conservative party chairman said in an interview with The Observer.

He singled out Radio 4’s Sarah Montague and Martha Kearney as being among the “good ones”.

The BBC pledged two years ago to find more women, particularly older women, to front its shows.

It later announced that Julia Somerville, Carole Walker, Fiona Armstrong and Zeinab Badawi had been appointed to front its news bulletins.

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-14963915

Personally, I switch over anytime a female presenter appears on screen, especially news readers, and especially the older token ones.  Not only does their aged physical appearance itself slightly nauseate me, all I can see in their wrinkled but ‘glamorous’ features is the smug face of an empowered rapist staring back at me.

I’m sure you’ve noticed that whenever a news story involves a sex crime, or any new ‘child protection’ legislation, the journalist presenting the story is invariably a woman.  The assumption is, I suppose, that it is sensitive to have a female covering a story that impacts upon women.  Of course, until a rape accusation is proven in court, the story involves men as much as women – it is a story about a man who, according to statistics, is likely to have been falsely accused and is experiencing his life being put through the grinder by a malicious, evil woman.  Child protection, you might think, would affect both girls and boys, but of course, it’s implicitly understood that whenever new child protection legislation is mentioned, what we’re talking about is keeping men’s hands off of nubile teenage girls.  It’s also implicitly understood, I’m pretty sure, that it’s a story for women because it is women who are pressing for men to keep their hands off of teenage girls, and on them, in a free sexual market in which men have increasingly instant access to sexual gratification.

I can’t even read books by women anymore.  If I do see a book that interests me that is written by a female author then I spend far more time researching it and checking out the personal history of the author than I do with books written by men.  I’m talking about non-fiction here, because there are probably only 5 books that I will ever read that have been written by a woman – and the author’s name in each case ends in Bronte.  And truth be told, the novels of the Bronte sisters are the only works of genius that woman are truly capable of inventing.

Wuthering Heights, in particular, is one of the greatest works of art ever produced by a human hand.  Few artistic masterpieces, be it in literature, music, art, or scupture, have come close to capturing the reality and tragedy that this novel conveys – that the individual cannot escape from being a part of the blind sweep of natural forces.  But it’s the only great w0rk that a woman is capable of – Jane Eyre, and the other Bronte novels, and other ‘great’ novels by female authors – such as those of Jane Austen – are really only inferior variations on this theme. Only Emily Bronte was able to turn the Mills and Boon formula into an unnerving literary masterpiece that genuinely says something about the human condition.  Other women have come close, but certainly no man could have written it – or arguably any novel that so removes the divide between the human and the natural (although Joseph Conrad perhaps succeeded with ‘Heart of Darkness’).  And the reason is that, in truth, women are better able to see directly their animal natures than we are able to see our own – men who have built a myriad of intellectual masks between ourselves and reality.

 

Mexican Barbarity Disproves the Sex Trafficking Lies

I recently recieved the following comment from a member of the anti-sex trafficking industry :

As a employee for an anti-trafficking organization, could you please explain how the fact that women do not need “24 hour protection by a team of armed personal bodyguards” means that sex trafficking doesn´t exist? Please, do elaborate.

Of course, the reader was probably too tired and high from trying to spend her well-earned salary to actually quote me correctly. The comment refers to a post I made previously on drug violence in Mexico, a country where over 30,000 men and boys have been murdered, increasingly beheaded and even skinned alive, and yet feminists are turning Mexican women into martyrs over the unexplained deaths of a couple of hundred women in the most violent town there during the last 20 years, and over fears that the government crackdown on drug violence could increase domestic violence.

The point I made was that this savage violence, unheard of in the modern world outside of religious or ethnic conflict, is entirely due to control over the multi-billion dollar drug trade into the USA. The ruthless gangs who fight for control have absolutely no ethical codes that we would recognise, and think nothing of beheading academics who speak out against drug violence, skinning alive police chiefs, or of kidnapping 14 year old sons of wealthy parents and brutally dismembering them when the ransom is not forthcoming. As with most organised crime, the drug barons have their toes in just about every illegal way to make money – including, of course, trafficking.

Trafficking is also believed to be a billion dollar industry, and this may also be true. That is, when we are referring to shady organisations helping the hundreds of thousands of illegal immigrants from Cental and South America cross into the USA. But most ‘anti-trafficking’ organsiations, particularly ones that are feminist sexual trade union fronts – i.e. the majority, focus near exclusively on sex-trafficking. In the case of Mexico, hundreds of thousands of poor young latinas from across the continent, supposedly promised that they will get jobs as secretarys or waitresses in the USA and who end up being forced to sexually service strangers every day for a pittance at gun point. This too is supposed to be a multi-billion dollar industry. In fact, government and police agencies in America have swallowed feminist propaganda that child sex trafficking alone constitutes a mutli-billion dollar industry that is controlled by the same drug gangsters who routinely behead their enemies :

Child sex trafficking is a multibillion-dollar industry that victimizes as many as 300,000 children in the United States each year.
“Now that’s a figure that’s as much as 10 years old,” said Truckee Police Chief Nick Sensley, who’s coordinating a new northern California task force that tackles child sex trafficking.
“So there’s a concern as to the rate of growth,” Sensley said. “Drug traffickers seeing the low risk, see the high payback to human trafficking.”
Sensley and other law enforcement agents said child sex slavery is happening in the Bay Area, Sacramento, San Joaquin Valley and in the Reno-Tahoe area. Sacramento is a hub for the crime because it’s a pass-through area between the Bay Area and Reno, and is a north to south link between Los Angeles and the Oregon border. (http://www.kcra.com/news/25676045/detail.html#ixzz1YI4jADKC)

The question is : if sex trafficking constitutes such a massively lucrative industry that rivals the profits generated by the drug trade, how is that the feminists who are successfully forcing the government to devote massive resources into curtailing whatever profits that might be obtained from sex trafficking, and in particular child prostitution, are not permanently under 24 hour armed guard – particularly in Mexico, and given that the same people who are so ruthless in preserving their drug related profits are also, presumably (and according to the feminists themselves) in control of any billion dollar sex trafficking industry?

This contradiction was highlighted only this week when a young man and woman were found hanging dead from a bridge in a Mexican border town. Both had been brutally tortured, the man had had his right arm almost severed and the woman had been practically disemboweled. Both also had their fingers and ears cut off. The reason? According to ‘Narco messages’ left by the dead bodies, they had both been criticising the violence of the drug gangs on anonymous internet blogs.

It is unclear whether the gangsters had paid nerds to hack into the computers of those who had made the offensive online comments and then traced their physical address, or had simply taken two people at random off of the street and posed them as a warning to others not to even dare make anonymous criticism on the internet.

http://edition.cnn.com/2011/WORLD/americas/09/14/mexico.violence/index.html

What is clear, is that anyone who gets in the way of the drug gangs profits, even anonymously, risks being savagely mutiliated and killed. If sex trafficking into America is a multi-billion dollar industry then feminists opposing sex trafficking would be near the top of the Mexican gangsters hit list. The fact that no feminist in Mexico or the USA has apparently even been threatened, and probably doesn’t even feel any threat, is testamant to the fact that there is no multi-billion dollar sex trafficking industry between Mexico and the USA – ditto for the rest of the world.

There is no Mexican-US sex trafficking industry because there are thousands upon thousands of poor (and not so poor) latinas (and white girls, asian girls, and black girls) already living in America who will happily and voluntarily work as prostitutes. There is absolutely no financial motive for gangs in Mexico to forcibly transport tens of thousands of women and young girls across the border, and further gain the attention of US authorities, when they are (genuinely) making billions of dollars from transporting drugs across the border.

Meanwhile one of the ruthless leaders of ‘Los Zetas’ – the most ruthless drug gang in Mexico and the one responsbible for the murders described above – has recently been arrested. Here is a photo of the face of Mexican savagery below :

los zeta

http://www.borderlandbeat.com/2011/09/first-female-zeta-boss-arrested-in.html