OUR OWN HUGO SWITZER
Spies within an organization are nothing new in history, because of that, it was not surprising when Hugo Schwyzer successfully infiltrated the sect of feminism then, well, somehow unexpectedly, he self-imploded.
What is remarkable about the Schwyzer-gate is how similar it is to infiltrating an out of the closet cult.
First you read their holy books then charismatically preach to the choir with their own gospel, (while charming the sex deprived ladies)
If it had not been for his implosion, Hugo could have had his own sect-harem for himself, unfortunately he did this on twitter,
How did Hugo infiltrate them?
This is especially interesting, this mentally unstable individual not only fooled them after reading a few “required holy books” then recited and convinced the unquestioning flock of ladies.
(as noted on the twitter implosion mental breakdown)
Just like a fake gay pastor that read a few pages of the bible and made all the sexually deprived ladies in the church tithe generously with his copious loads of charisma. Hugo managed to convince them by casting a spell of fake charm (also provided plenty of closeted lady boners along the way) but actually had utter contempt for his audience, just like Peter Poppoff.
This speaks volumes of the cult condition of feminism. Volumes, no less. From the unquestioning adoration to a confidence artist using their key gospel vocabulary to the moment these men, with their actions, expressed absolute contempt they had for their followers. It just provides us with solid schadenfreudegold. These feminists, are quick to pride themselves of their “intelligence”, their “independence from the patriarchy”, their “we don’t need men!” claims but when Hugo arrives, they just fall for the guy & make the most public tacit admission of their own collective stupidity & sexual deprivation, all on display, like a giant billboard for the world to see
Their church was infiltrated, desecrated, throughlypenetrated to the point of…all right, let’s be direct, Hugo raped their feminism in the ass with a sandpaper condom but they were tooooooslippery in their own lady boner goo to effectively act in any direction to assuage the monumental discredit of their own making. They are a church, an unquestioning closed minded gullible group of femi-nuns jerking off to their own gospel.
But how close did Hugo really get to being a successful spy? Well, he was successful at infiltrating them but wastoo mentally unstable to even have a clear objective, whatever the nebulous intent was, his reign was short lived(I honestly think he was raised by a single mother or he just burned out while looking for free risky rad-punani)
Did the feminists suspect or even imagine the possibility of such a confident charming newly annointedfeminist had infiltrated them? Most of them didn’t.
Which brings us to the obligatory question.
Do we have any spies in the MHRM?
Yes, without a doubt.
I could be a spy, you could be one, active or sleeper. White knights and radfemsposing as “allies” in blog posts, forums and chat rooms. Please, do not give me, or anybody else the benefit of the doubt, because that is how the feminists accepted Hugo; faith without critical thinking.
Spies in the MHRMare not a matter of “if” but a matter of “when” they will be identified.
My money is on the possibility that the worst spy in the very short future will be very charming and female.
OUR OWN HUGO & HER PROFILE
How will our own Hugo try to infiltrate us?
It boils down to punani& charisma. Unfortunately.
More specifically, if she is hot, she is going to be given a pussy pass. Yes, depitethe fact we all complain about this we are likely to make that very flaw if one head stops working and blood pressure is low. Remember, the unthinkable is the first thing to happen when hard-ons cloud judgement. Our own Hugo will most likely be an attractive female that will be too bright, too believable and too fucking sensual to be real then she will be given passes, too many passes and nearly no scrutiny then endless concessions then power. Just like with Hugo. Unlike feminists, our camp only experiences a fraction of the sexual deprivation feminists subject themselves to, which adds to their own nun-mentality and calcified mental illnesses (at least, in out camp, we are not against porn, thus regular wankingprovides some degree of freedom & stress relief)
Why do I think this? Because the sex appeal is the weak point for any of the two groups and unfortunately, we react positively and without question to punaniowners with a friendly attractive face, take for example Karen Straughanaka “Girlwriteswhat” who a few years ago, I ran across, I clicked on one of her her videos for the very first time and kept wanting to just watch something else because her appearance gave me too many mixed signals, too attractive to be that smart, too lesbian-looking to be helping men, in short I had the impression I was being trolled at a master level along with her then fresh face (much fresher back then, lately she has been smoking too much, she does not quite look like an extra of the “walking dead” just yet) which kept me wondering “Is this another femitheisttroll?” and, what do you know? the woman, so far, has consistently earned my intellectual respect every time she puts a video up (wel, she did fuck up the google hang outs a few times but she performed well at Ryerson).
Do I still suspect Karen will eventually turn out to be a spy? Yes I do, but much less than what I would suspect from a newcomer. So much so that I keep listening to the Honey Badger’s podcast to see if I find any cracks in their behavioror logic (found some, one of them (the most glaring) would be them moving away to have their own quasi-separatist gig, getting their own “brigade” domain & shit like that, but, since their body of work has more value overall, these antics do not warrant more importance)
Let’s not forget the most popular podcast on AVFMradio (that is, before the feed was lost, see? Karen is not the only one that fucks broadcasts up) is the “Honey Badgers Radio” and not long ago this very subject of screening possible undercover radfemscame up on one episode of “The Voice of Europe” where Paul Elamand Lucian were discussing how to screen new female potential MHRMmembers, (to weed out the radfempsychos) and the first suggestion was asking them this question
QUESTION: “Do you believe in the patriarchy?”
That is a dumb question and ineffective at best, it is as ineffective as asking a nervous jittery guy on an airplanewith explosives strapped to his chest and a trigger in his hand the following
QUESTION “You don’t believe in Islam, do you?”
ANSWER “Of course…I am…buddhist?”
A spy will do her outmostto convince you she does not believe in that tenet of their cult. That is why a simple “no” does not suffice because feminists regularly lie to build plausible deniability, they lie by nature because their movement itself is built with lies (yes lies, lies and more lies, just imagine a cunt version of the Vatican). What would make sense for MHRMfemale newcomers would be to require them to make the same enemies the members of the “Honey Badgers” have made. To require them to decry the most widely known feminists. To require them to smear the core ideas of the feminist cult and to metaphorically gore several sacred feminist cows publicly via YouTube. ( has to qualify for excomulgationfrom the “Cunt Vatican”)
In other words, they should make countless irreversible enemies in feminism.
The MHRMfemale newcomer in question has to burn all bridges with the sacred feminist cows, even as a bluff, it has to be unforgivable.
The idea of having a sleeper agent does not become less risky with a simplistic questionnaire, it is a dumb idea on behalf of Lucian, (BTW he needs to switch to a better brand of coffee). Screening sleeper agents is not reduced to asking dumb questions, it is a matter of observing the candidate’s global web presence, if they don’t have one, they need to start it & they need to be publicly decry the feminist status quo. Despite all these precautions, there still is the chance the sleeper could have agreed to smear her own bosses, her own community just for the sake of convincing AVFMgate keepers.
Documentaries have showed how easy it is to infiltrate sects,
by the same token we saw how easy it was (relatively) for agent orange to infiltrate the sect of radfemhub.Ask yourself this question,
How easy is it for our own MHRMgroup to be infiltrated?
Well, this question begs another more “fundamental” question,
Are we a sect to begin with?
Well, yes and no (honestly, I have not made up my mind based on my observations as this movement is still expanding, this beast is still growing)
But, for the sake of argument, let’s first define what a garden variety sect has as a basic structure. The most basic diagram for a sect would be
1. An elder (untouchable & unquestionable)
2. A small group of unquestioning enforcers
3. A much greater number of “flocks” of unquestioning believers
4. A few, holy unquestionable books
The flock of people will listen and obey, no questions asked. The main rule is that dissent is forbidden. So, lets apply the acid test to ourselves, or plain and simple, lets see if we are an MHRMcult.
Let’s replace this with our structure blow by blow with our own equivalent elements,
1. Who is our own elder?
He does seem to fit the bill of an elder, right? Well that is not accurate, he does encourage dissent and first principles which makes the whole “sect” house of cards collapse because a sect stops working when you are authorized then encouraged to disagree and hell just breaks lose when you are encouraged to think, because well, the flock of sheep becomes irreversibly becomes a hard task, one as difficult as that of herding cats.
Paul has a military background and so far he has asserted he wants to run this ship as a competent dictator. This is a double edge sword, either he goes crazy (Steve Jobs style, another cult no less) or he steers this ship Pattonstyle.
The man has earned respect regularly and so far, he does not seem to be requesting or accepting to be worshipped. The moment he is, I, for one, will abandon this ship, for this simple reason
Robert was a bit crazy, but that quote shines intensely.
2. So do we have enforcers?
So far, external only. Forum ban hammers and censoring don’t count. But we do have to use enforcers in some situations, especially if you consider notifying the police in the case of the bumblebitchand the money she stole.
So no, our enforcers are not similar to the proxy violence commonly used by feminists (in the Toronto riots we can clearly see the enforcers block the doors, while the “scum” girl is trying to pick up a fight by taunting expecting to trigger more proxy violence)
So now, the second to the last stop,
3. Are we a group of unquestioning believers?
Am I one? Are you, dear reader, one of those? Well this article does not comply with being “unquestioning” but yes, there is a problem with us. We have an emotional, impulsive and fervent group of guys who have been wronged by the system and/or the courts. In the wrong time and place they are pinlessgrenades, in their “gentlest” state they turn into dramatic keyboard warriors (BTW I had a mirror nearby while writing this article). The fact that some of us have been wronged does not justify being a puppet of impulses/hothead because, as we have seen, with impulsive antagonists such as big red, she was a puppet of her own impulses and ended up promoting us.
The same would happen with a male hothead at the wrong time and the wrong place. Hotheads do not make good thinkers as much as emotional thinkers are not real thinkers (I am looking at you “big red”). The number of hothead among us is what can put us much closer to to the a feminist defeat such as the one scored by Hugo.
4. The Holy books, do we have unquestionable books of dogma?
Well not really, (but we do have dogmatic impulsive dumbfucksas stated above). Regarding the “dogmatic” books, there is a certain bibliography (Warren Farell& Christina Hoff Sommerswould top the list) which would somehow have a distant resemblance to the bibliography the feminist have on their own but the main difference is, unlike feminists, we do not reject logic and mathso the books are up for questioning and the library is enriched with math, engineering, atheism, critical thinking and STEM in general (many of us have backgrounds related to those areas). Also, due to the first principles and encouragement of dissent by Paul Elamet al, the dogma organization does not work, which, as said before, just makes the “sect” house of cards collapse as the cats run amok.
In short, feminism lives in a church, takes you to its mass to listen and should just “shut the fuck up” (now I understand big red).
Whereas AVFM/MHRMis more like a chaotic airport with plenty of ideas and people arriving and leaving.
Our disadvantage is that despite the feminists being prozac-ridden loons, they have a 20+ years head start. So, unfortunately they are everywhere
In short their sects are organized like this
1. Feminist Elders : working at government/academic bodies all over the world
2. Enforcers : police, court systems and all forms of proxy violence
3. Unquestioning flock: see image above, the one with bright colors(as bright as poisonous wildlife)
4. Holy books (Jasmine France, Andrea Dworkin, Naomi Wolf to name a few…cunt-made books are everywhere)
A CULT GRADING SYSTEM
Since feminism is a cult. Could we use the informal faulty nomenclature used for other well known religious groups?
First faulty nomenclature
1. Radical fundamentalists
2. Moderate members
3. Secular members
Why is it faulty? Because members of cults will still coyly abbettheir own felons. The moment a radical goes and commits an act of hate he or she can trust a moderate or a secular to keep it quiet for them because they share the same belief system. They cover each other asses even if they say they don’t.
Same rule applies to feminists. They have their own felons, they shield them & defend them regardless of their “stance” be it radical moderate or secular or translated into radfemsex positive feminist or egalitarian feminist.
Second faulty nomenclature
1. Religious people (out)
2. Skeptics(Watson dogma)
3. Skeptics(elder Dawkinsside)
Seems pretty straight forward right? Category one looks interesting, if you are a religious dogmatic nut-job like feminists, you are “out” right?
Should we follow then the nomenclature used for Skeptics?
The answer is: NO
Why ? : Rebecca Watson.
Skepticswere infiltrated by feminists. Little matters their slogan “question everything” which means they failed to apply their own theoretical rule to feminism itself represented by pudgy princess cunt, Rebecca Watson. Rather theSGUpodcastand the Novella clan are a travesty, a group of hypocrites who have failed miserably at using critical thinking in front of the mirror of their own critical thinking since their slogan “question everything”actually is done differently in practice what their actions state is,
“question everything but feminism is off the menu”
This trumps their purported skepticismin and of itself simply because the moment you don’t question a dogma such as feminism and pretend it is “kosher” or untouchable, it no longer is skepticism, it is a thinly veiled dishonest fashionable travesty.
If you claim otreason don’t leave a little untouched area of your brain that is “off limits” such as deism or feminism. Steven Novella has consistently failed to address this because he sees Rebecca Watson as one of his daughters.
Fuck you and the whole Novella clan
Especially with Dr Novella (alleged leader of the Skepticsguide to the universe podcast in reality puppeteeredby Rebecca Watson, his wife, daughters and all other radfemsin his camp) who, at this point due to his endless concessions & special rights to his adoptive daughter, Rebecca Watson, he has earned the dubious handle “PZNovella” since he has become another feminist puppet just like PZMyers himself
So what is left? The elder Dawkinscamp seems pretty good, right? After all they are against Watson and PZNovella, aren’t they? The answer is: NO
Why? because that is where the radfemoverlap started. Let’s not forget Dawkinswas originally openly supporting PZNovella and Watson via their podcast and the sad inconvenient truth is that radfemsare throughlyinfiltrated by sleeper right wing feminists playing their cards to pass as something more acceptable, almost as if they wanted to give the impression they think on their own. The defeat of the Dawkinsside is all of the “Rebecca Clones” they shelter on a daily basis. Here is this little radfemwho happened to work with Dawkinsfor a brief period of time and was mortified to find out Dawkinsdid not want to have anything to do with Rebecca Watson especially after Elevatorgate. Guess what? The little angel calleSarah Mogliawrote an article describing how “horrible” Dawkinsis…Drumroll! a M-I-S-O-G-Y-N-I-S-T (men are horrible Sarah, unlike you, they think)
Dawkinswill eventually be overpowered by these sleepers, he cannot see due to his age and multiple occupations. He is a gardener of a poisoned garden he regards as an orchard. It is too late for him. Just wait. You’ll see.
So, what is left?
We can’t truly use neither the religious nor the Skepticsnomenclatures to weed out our own potential radfeminfiltrators simply because they fail to “question everything” out of sheer hypocrisy either forced or implied.
Well, we may use a new system, an unlikely one, based on meritocracy and also based on one of the most well known anti feminist : Karen Straughan
Don’t get me wrong, it is still fully possible for her to still be an infiltrator but given her track record so far, that appears much less likely. That is a very, very, very meaningful term. “Track record”
If we are to accept any female newcomers we must first have to accept that one of them will eventually be an infiltrator but we can delay this event by doing the following as stringently as possible
1. Person has a public track record
2. Merit-based credibility
3. She accepts the goring of sacred cows on Youtube(aka: making irreversible radfemenemies)
4. No victimhood
5. No rights or powers granted
A note on granting powers
Too many errors were made with the Canadian loon Bumblecunt.
Case in point the Bumblecuntwas given too much power, too fast (A canadiannews position??? What in the proverbial fuck, she needed 3 boxes of prozacnot more power within a website) in short, the Bumblecuntwas erroneously given too much power too fast and look at what happened. She even ran away with the money.
She was mentally unstable, impulsive and in general, a liability, Paul should have cut her loose immediately after the first red flags showed up. But why did he wait? Why the lack of determination?
Well, my money is on the honey badgers having internal conflicts behind the scenes and Paul mistakenly undestoodthe red flags given by the Bumblecuntas just general “bitchiness” among the badger ladies. All ladies are bitchy and the badgers, I would assume, are no exception but the one that had to be expelled was a true royal cunt
It should not matter how good the profile looks the first red flags should prevent any granting of powers.
Would you like to know why?
“AVFM hacked. “
That future possibility should be enough to alarm most of us.
If it is completely feasible to hack a big, well established, thoroughly protected site,just imagine how AVFMwould fare given a possible group of people with nefarious intentions, working hard at hacking AVFMwith the intent of making the MRHMmovement less visible, what chance would it stand? Remember, censorship is their favoritetool.
We should be highly suspicious of half-hearted behavior, proactive victimhoodor moodiness.
I will not leave myself out. Please apply all scrutiny stated above to me. For starters, I am not even female and my handle is a pseudonym. I am so far, mostly anonymous. Am I to be trusted? Of course not. I want all the rules stated above to be applied to me before an ounce of credit is given. At this point, I certainly do not want any powers beyond being able to submit my ideas in writing and I thank those who feature my writing.
If I earn anything I want people to question me at any given step.
Thank you for reading.
Note for all the ladies,
I am not sorry about what happened to all of you with Hugo.
When it comes to infiltration, nobody likes to be *penetrated so cynically.
Eat your hearts out Hugo ex-groupies & RADFEMHUB CUNTS!
(*pun gratefully intended) 😛
*After some light banning I am back on twitter! BTW here is a friendly invitation to all of you colorfulheaded ladies on prozac; follow me on twitter & be unhappy everyday! @ jackoutis2