Monthly Archives: September 2015


NOTE: This article was featured at the Ralphretort

DISCLAIMER 1: What follows is a mixture of speculation and satire therefore the adverb “allegedly” prefaces and applies to the article itself. (go & eat your hearts out hypocrites)

DISCLAIMER 2: I am a proud Neo-Troll & I DO NOT represent #GamerGate. Feel free to disregard everything I say based on my Troll Status. For those who stayed, read on;



Way before #Gamergate started gamers were frowned upon, almost as if staying home playing games were as bad as joining a gang or jerking off compulsively until your sight was gone, if it was not Mortal Kombat turning you into sociopathic time bomb (ready to decapitate the family dog/parrot then the mailman) it was Final Fantasy secretly turning you into a Satanic beast with a protruding joystick.

To date, 10-20 years of videogames have failed to produce a steady supply of Mortal Kombat-inspired MMA mass decapitators or Final Fantasy-themed viagra-addled Satanic cults. It has even failed to yield (at the very least) any Hallucinogen Mushroom-eating Mexican cartels full of short Mexican dudes dressed as Mario Bros ready to decapitate the blue & spiky members of the opposing cartel .

But more seriously, as years passed by, those mass imputations of malice failed to give any factual success to demagogues like Jack Thompson and are unlikely to give any factual success to commercial Feminists such as Anita Sarkeesian.

The reality is, 10-20 years ago, the fashionable accusation was that videogames would turn you into a raging psychopath or a satanist enemy of all religions. Nowadays the fashionable accusation is that videogames will turn you into a raging misogynist or an racist enemy of all minorities. The accusers used to be the hard religious right, nowadays is the hard feminist left. Same lies, different labels.

Problem is, the demonization of the gaming identity is unlikely to stop because it is just too easy for demagogues to place any amount of blame of society’s ills on a group that is rather passive and just wants to temporarily escape reality while honing reflexes/memory and having fun. Which is perplexing because there is another group of passive people who like to escape reality on a regular basis but is not blamed nearly as often or to the extent gamers are:

TV viewers.

Which begs the question, why aren’t TV viewers blamed for any fashionable form of social decay the way gamers are? Why aren’t TV viewers blamed for violence, mass shootings, atheism, misogyny, rape or racial hate? The answer is simpler than the expected;

TV watching requires much less skill than games. 

Think about it, the hypocrites that accuse gamers of malice tend not to be gamers but rather they tend to be TV viewers themselves or, in the best case scenario they just suck at videogames but consider themselves “hardcore” gamers of the candy crush saga variety. Don’t get me wrong, there is plenty of overlap of gamers that watch TV but the overlap of TV viewers that play video games? Not so much. Games require skill, good reflexes, memory and patience (AKA OCD). But TV? Just an ass to sit on.

Furthermore, as stated before, unskilled hypocrites tend to be compulsive TV viewers (who routinely binge on the leftist content offered by the networks) therefore they are very unlikely to blame themselves for the ills of humanity because, well, who wants to shoot themselves in the foot? (unmedicated retards like Arthur Chu are the exception) Besides, if you want a convenient scapegoat, that is what gamers are for, they are supposed to take it, over and over, you can almost hear the leftists telling each other behind closed doors things like;

“Yeah keep piling on them, they won’t do anything, those stupid, passive, obsessed kids are too busy with their silly little games, you can even declare them dead and won’t even flinch”



Then #Gamergate happened. So much for “passive obsessed dead kids” that were never supposed to retaliate. Put yourself in the shoes of those journos, if the dead/comatose horse you were used to regularly beat for money all of sudden managed to kick you in the face, you would also be sorely upset. It just was not expected for gamergate to be this rectally unpleasant for leftists, feminists, SJWs Kotaku et al. They failed at declaring them dead, they failed at declaring them universally male and failed to declare them universally white. In all counts, Kotaku et al have consistently failed to impose their leftist fiction upon gamers.  

Why? Well besides being delusional, impulsive and retarded, journos just failed to understand gamers themselves, because let’s be honest, gamers are the 2nd most heterogeneous mixed bag of all kinds of weirdos, you have gamers of all ethnicities religions, political inclinations, ages and languages who are all unified by a weird hobby, which, perplexingly, does not happen to be porn (that is the first) but videogames. That is precisely the crux of the matter, because unlike feminists, gamers do not qualify as a religion. Feminists tend to embrace feminism often due to past trauma and to overcompensate for an intense closeted inferiority complex the way religious people with past trauma embrace their religion. Their feminist faith gives them an identity and a sense of purpose in life but if you removed their religion, they would quickly demoralize the way Christians would without Jesus. Religions like feminism want to convince of their manufactured fiction, they want to give you unquestionably follow their list of forbidden thoughts. But gamers? None of that applies to those weirdos, they are too diverse and varied in their religions (or lack thereof) and gamers do not have a list of forbidden thoughts, quite the opposite, they welcome intellectual challenge as long as the fun the game offers more than justifies it. Gamers can embrace the weirdest of plots and concepts and as long as the game is fun enough, they will play along. But feminists? Good fucking luck challenging their core beliefs such as wage gap, denying the existence of misandry, denying domestic violence perpetrated by women, false rape accusations, college campus rape hysteria or even their own sexy Satan: the evil patriarchy. None of those concepts are to be questioned or even suggested to be up for discussion, Why? Because doing so would be reason for the code word for sin in feminism “sin = misogyny”, as a feminist your thoughts are already prefabricated, you believe in the patriarchy, men are bad. Women are good. Period. If you EVER question those “absolute truths” you will be declared a blasphemer AKA misogynist. Also like all religions feminism CANNOT withstand any satire and immediately censors humor. You just cannot have fun, you do not question anything in the church of feminism.

But gamers? Pfft! Good fucking luck keeping those weirdos from questioning things (or not poking fun at anything “sacred”) or forcing them to follow rigid rules that cannot be changed in the game because those defiant unceremonious freaks will hack, mod and repurpose whatever they can exploit. You doubt it? Look at Gamergate, Gamergate itself is proof of the nature of gamers defiantly not giving up/not giving a fuck because those crafty fuckers are precisely trained by their hobby not to give up.

Furthermore, what is truly fascinating, is how the movement mimics gamers themselves, and how the movement often goes dormant like a bored gamer playing the same game but as soon as the hypocrite journos pull a new one, what happens? Gamergate kicks into full gear like a gamer with a new game in their filthy trembling OCD hands.


Granted, some gamers do make games their identity but not to the point of games defining everything they do or seeing oppression from everyone who is not a gamer, at least not the way a feminist sees oppression from everyone that is not a woman or if a gamer is removed from games definitely is gonna get bored but is unlikely to  self-demoralize & self destruct the way a feminist would do without feminism, because, at the end of the day, to gamers, games are a hobby that need to change to stay interesting (again, just like porn) gamers are not a cult of untreated borderline personality disorder-ridden narcissists as in the case of feminism. Just consider this, gamers welcome intellectual challenge and satire as long as it is fun but religions like feminism? They hate any satire of their ideas and rely heavily on censorship, that is why feminists find everything that does not match their prefabricated ideas “offensive”, you cannot make fun of their batshit insanity without them labelling you as a “misogynist” because they “feel” people always “oppress” them, they pretend they think but mostly they just feel very intense emotions.

The essence of feminism is intense negative emotion from broken people with broken pasts but the essence of games is problem solving for entertainment while experiencing interesting emotions along the way. Very few people had a perfect childhood and nobody’s past if free of pain, there is no happiness without pain, some of us are broken by our pasts some of us are not but being a gamer does not mean you actively dwell on you past pain and go out everyday into the real world fully convinced “someone is out to get you” the way feminists do, the behavior of feminists is that of broken people but despite the fact feminists are covered in glue and cracks, they still say they aren’t broken at all. The moment a gamer puts the controller on the floor, they have jobs/school/families & lives to live, but there is no controller for feminists, they are 24/7 dedicated to their religion for broken people with an intense US VS THEM MENTALITY.

Actual Feminist Shirt


Same shirt compared with similar religions   


We have all seen their US VS THEM mentality online over and over, drama after drama, we witnessed incidents disrupting what was supposed to be a hobby to make your free time more enjoyable, always making the personal political and the political personal.The problem is that regardless of the particular feminist, they keep displaying the same dysfunctional cookie-cutter behavior, almost as if they had grown up in the same dysfunctional church of the cult of borderline personality disorder, so much so, I can guarantee this graph will keep growing.


The problem with feminists co-opting movements such as atheism or gaming is that it all boils down to a small group of pathologically vocal women with broken pasts & untreated mental disorders trying to retaliate against completely unrelated people for what happened to them in their broken pasts, namely rape, molestation and domestic abuse. They want the world to apologize to them, they want retribution and by labeling themselves as “feminists” they are telling you they “reserve the right to act erratically” & “reserve the right not to follow rules” whenever they want because of “feels” because what drives them is emotion not reason.

These people need therapists NOT a movement to co-opt so that they feel “vindicated” because once they co-opt a movement and burn it to the ground then tend to defecate on it (AKA AtheismPlus) after taking their feminist dump, they usually just move to another area to co-opt. Why? Simply because these women are very unlikely to find satisfaction with their co-opting as the source of their void is not outside, it is inside themselves. They are adults using schoolyard tactics common to abused children but these feminists are more like locusts than just children. Again, these people need therapists and medication and  neither you nor I has any obligation to tolerate these dysfunctional adults, feminism is as much as a poisoned label as their poisoned pasts, it is a broken “movement” made of broken people. See, the word “movement” is a misnomer when applied to feminism, because what it really is, well, it is a religion, but feminists themselves will fervently deny when you ask them if feminism is a religion, and get incredibly upset when you ask them to leave their “non” religion.

Here is the intense contradiction feminists drive themselves into, if you ask a Christian to renounce their Christianity what do they say? They say you are a “religion hater!”. You ask a Muslim to give up their religion what do they say? You are a “Islamophobe” You ask a feminist to give up their religion & be an egalitarian instead, what do they say? You are “oppressing them” and if you keep insisting they do what most religions do, they call you a sinner but their word for sinner is “misogynist”. The intense contradiction is that feminists mimic the replies of religious people because they would also experience a loss of identity without their religion; feminism, which just proves the point, they need to hold on to that poisoned label as if it were the last piece of debris after their “equality” ship sank. Very little can be expected from a person that clings to hate but calls it “equality”


See, feminists themselves very often share a horrific, tragic and dysfunctional past but nowadays? Many look cute, lush, welcoming and fertile, you know… just like Chernobyl. Because it does not matter how lush and fertile Chernobyl looks nowadays, it is still as poisoned and radioactive as feminists are, and the longer you stay, the higher the chances it will silently poison you. How about all those cute “moderate” and “nice” feminists like Emma Watson? They, too are like those lush trees in Chernobyl; firmly grounded in poisoned grounds. Be it Adria Richards, Zoe Quinn, Brianna Wu, Amanda Marcotte, Ellen Pao, Rebecca Watson, Chanty Morris or Anita Sarkeesian, because of their actions, they are all different faces of the same poison.

For that and many other reasons, the moment I see the word “feminist” it becomes an immediate red flag because feminism is so poisoned as a label that it has too much in common with the original swastika, both were noble at the beginning but nowadays? They are just too poisoned to “take back” and anybody that tries to salvage them is doing it out of faith not reasoning. All “moderate” feminists have the opportunity to label themselves “egalitarians” but they are extremely reluctant to leave their religion behind and cling to their poisoned label, you should always question their reluctance. That reluctance is a big red flag.



This clash feminists have with gamers is directly related to their closeted resentment with men in their own personal pasts, which is akin to a person that is a closeted KKK member that has a closeted resentment towards black people. They do not express it with words but their actions express it very clearly. I personally do not trust a woman that fervently insists on labelling herself a moderate “feminist” for the same reasons I do not trust a “moderate” KKK member. They just do not make sense, if a moderate feminist knows her label is poisoned and does not even think about using “egalitarian” instead is because either she is very ignorant or she just consistently refuses to learn because deep down, her reluctance stems from the fact she has an emotional attachment to a movement that contains hate & radicalism she partially relates to, however she will publicly sweep aside all the hate in her movement and say exactly what religious people say “but my feminism is not like that” which just sounds like “but my religion is not like that” then by saying that they just overlook all the hate in feminism. Think about it, if a KKK member says that “a little” hate does not count in their movement it is akin to a feminist saying that “a little” manhate is justified. All hate is indefensible even if they try to justify it.

You want further proof? Take any racist statement and replace the N-word with the word “cis-men” or “male gamers” Congratulations! You just made racism “progressive”. Here is one actual quote by feminists Marilyn French which flawlessly translates into KKK racism.


If Feminism is not hate, why does it translate so well into racial hate?

Feminists like Anita, who blame gamers for ANYTHING they want are not that different from the “moderate” feminists like Vivian, they share the same religion, the reason why feminists reserve the right to call themselves “feminists” is because with that label comes the right to behave like one and betray and backstab anytime they want because they are always “kinda” oppressed thus they shamelessly embrace a completely poisoned label like feminism, which, makes as much sense as embracing the “good old” swastika. Saying you are “kinda” feminist equals to saying you are “kinda” racist, not very racist just “kinda” again, just take feminist statements that contain the word “privilege ” or “white men” then just replace those words with the “n” word and you get pure racism, but feminists will not drop their hateful label because for some fucked up reason their faith in feminism is “different”. That faith-based allegiance feminists like Vivian share is one of the many bright red flags feminists show regularly.

But guess what? For feminists like Vivian all these redflags do not count, they just gloss over them or ignore them altogether. But many of these red flags were observed with the recent Gamergatepros debacle because we saw the hypocrisy of a “nice feminist”  in motion, someone who, by using the label, had reserved the right to act erratically, I am talking about the cosplayer wannabe devoid of an identity of her own; feminist “@CultofVivian” who herself displays the red flags of a lack of personality and her need to embrace feminism to have a manufactured identity with the added bizarre need to co-opt a fictitious character which further confirmed she did not have an identity interesting enough to gain traction on her own on social media, no, she had to play the parasite like most feminists do, it just happens that this one was so dim all she could think of is cosplay like a teenager with a stereotypical SJW smirk. The smirk may seem irrelevant but it happens too often among SJWs, almost as if they accidentally identified with it, it seems to be a giveaway:


Oh Vivian, you are so transparently retarded, just like your friends.

But why do SWJs give themselves collectively  away with a smirk? My conjecture is that it is a gesture of overcompensation as they try to broadcast what they lack; confidence. A smirk may also imply that since they actually are quite bitter, they don’t “feel” an honest smile would define them publicly and what they want instead is to show a mixture of contempt and imaginary victory to any comments to their dismal physical appearances because, as you can see in the pictures, most of them are either unattractive, fat, un-fuckable, godawful-boil-in-the ass-ugly or all of the above. Perhaps I am giving Vivian too much credit for her smirk, most likely she is just too retarded to smile properly. But it gets worse because someone else much worse also has a prominent SJW smirk of a different variety,


Vivian herself is a prototypical example of a “moderate” human landmine that claims to be “on the side” of gamergate but she is too ready to leave several times a month simply because she is too mediocre a hypocrite to play the part properly and deceive people well enough and unlike Anita, Vivian is too ugly, overweight and dumb to troll the trolls then use the resulting threats to bilk people out of their money via a Kickstarter. Vivian is too unattractive to garner an audience on her own without the sponsorship of a mascot and too mediocre to be a commercial feminist with a Patreon to live like a proper parasite like her fellow feminist Zoe Quinn does.

But SJWs like vivian make mistakes, they get out of character and give glimpses to who they really are, they show their deeply distorted morals and utter lack of basic human decency. This is something SJWs get wrong regularly, a sense of magnitude of what Nyberg deserves. In Vivian’s case, she outed herself with this jewel of a tweet,  


So according to Vivian’s deformed logic, we should properly address a pedophile because well, “misgendering” a pedo is much worse than the acts committed by the pedophile? Somehow Vivian managed to make herself look like closeted pedo groupie or she just coyly outed herself? Where else have we heard the same defense of predators? Oh yes! The Roman Catholic pedophile priests also have their groupies, so let’s just imagine Vivian was Roman catholic groupie of a pedo priest by the name Lawrence Murphy, then her tweet would have looked like this,

See? That is the problem with “moderate” feminists like Vivian, they are unskilled hypocrites that just give themselves away as closeted, morally bankrupt hypocrites. People like Vivian are more of a problem than a solution because by the simple fact they state they are feminists but of the “nice”variety then they expect people to buy into their bullshit mediocre acting after tweeting retarded demands for decorum towards a pedophile that only deserves a fair trial and little else. A moderate feminist is as trustworthy as a moderate KKK member, “moderate” feminists in Gamergate are a problem waiting to happen because it is not about judging them all for the actions of a few, it is about identifying their red flags as their behavior is shared due to their belief system.
image02Don’t be that indirect Vivian, you are “kinda” a fervent SJW

Unlike gamers, feminists have a religion that tells them how to behave and what to think, that is why neophytes like Vivian cannot let go of the label because as poisoned as it is, it still defines a part of her, however if you start judging gamers by the actions of a few, you will sooner or later see they do not share a common belief system and they are too varied, too different to make the same assumptions you can with feminists. Members of the cult of feminism display the red flags Vivian and many others have, they just cannot be trusted, they are just pinless grenades.  

Granted, I should not be trusted either simply because despite the rules I follow as a NeoTroll, I still am a Troll and I am the easiest scapegoat to use by anti Gamergate aggros. Nobody above the rules, nobody is off the menu. That is why I do not represent Gamergate. I only present you ideas and evidence; it is up to you to think on your own.


Hypocrites like Vivian are one step away from those “liberals” that nowadays do what “conservatives” used to do 20 years ago: blame gamers for ANYTHING they want, and the reality is that the demonization of gamers by unskilled hypocrites like her or many others to come, is unlikely to stop because they will keep switching the labels of their hypocrisy. All religions need their imaginary devil fairy tales and gamers along with porn watchers are always on the menu of easy targets to demonize. Gamers need to adapt and keep religions like feminism at bay. Feminists like Vivian want to surreptitiously convince you of their fairy tales because they need herds of sheep to fill their listen-only churches where dissent is unthinkable. Do not let them recruit you, question me, them and everybody else, question everything, because we are problem solvers not sheep in a pink church.

Besides, If feminism were a fact, nobody would defend it. Nobody is on Twitter defending gravity.


Note to all @CultOfVivian fans butthurt by this post. This Neo-Troll has prepared plenty of backups. I take great pleasure in frustrating you all every time I come back.

Go ahead, show me your sense of justice.

BTW, Fuck all of you SJW cunts.

Bring it.


NOTE: This article was featured at the Ralphretort

DISCLAIMER 1: I discourage people form contacting Nicholas Nyberg AKA @SrhButts, he already is under investigation, it is now up to the authorities to arrest him on charges of tax evasion, distribution of child pornography & pedophilia.

DISCLAIMER 2: I am a proud Neo-Troll & I DO NOT represent #GamerGate. Feel free to disregard everything I say based on my Troll Status. For those who stayed, read on;

What is #GamerGate?
Mountains of pixels have been typed on the subject but to make a short analogy, imagine MSNBC had been involved in a case of blatant corrupt journalism and kept denying all evidence of its wrongdoing. It would read as follows:

“#MSNBCGate started when a sector of the leftist leaning media (the one in charge of TV journalism) was caught red handed exchanging sexual favors for positive reviews of products which led to them being exposed colluding to push or reject products not based on quality but all kinds of bribes (besides the sexual ones). Detractors of MSNBC started a campaign named #MSNBCGate on social media. #MSNBCGate is still going to this day because those corrupt TV journalists still reject all evidence of their corruption. “

Imagine after all the damning evidence MSNBC still denied all of their involvement with corrupt practices. If that analogy is clear then this is GamerGate in a nutshell:

#GamerGate started when a small sector of the leftist leaning media (the one in charge of video game journalism) was caught red handed exchanging sexual favors for positive reviews of video games which led to them being exposed colluding to push or reject games not based on quality but all kinds of bribes (besides the sexual ones) detractors of corrupt game journalists started a campaign named GamerGate on social media. GamerGate is still going to this day because those corrupt Game journalists still reject their collusion despite all the damning evidence. Yes, to this day they still deny all of their involvement with corrupt practices.

With that in mind, watch this video #GamerGate in 1 minute

Fast forward to the present, the factions of pro and anti #Gamergate have been at war social media for over a year and their battles often closely resemble that of the men’s rights movement where anti #Gamergate members are hard left feminists falsely accusing the pro #Gamergate of anything they can, which ranges from violence, misogyny and pedophilia just to name a few, sounds familiar? Yes, we are talking about feminists here.

What if I told you there was a feminist SJW on the anti #Gamergate side on Twitter that spends his days accusing his ideological opponents of being “immoral” and constantly & falsely accuses them of being pedophiles? Sounds like a feminist right? Well what if I told you the same SJW has been found to have engaged in acts of pedophilia with his 8 year old cousin “Alice” (pseudonym)? What if I told you there is ample evidence the SJW in question boasted about his pedophile preferences online and even distributed photos of his underage cousin and possibly abused her?

Let me write it on the wall, the parents of the little girl have corroborated that Nicholas Nyberg used his underage cousin “Alice” to generate and distribute child pornography, here is the evidence,


The hypocrisy is undeniable, Nicholas Nyberg falsely accused others of being pedophiles while being a closeted pedo himself. It is just ashtonishinly hypocritical and vile. With al this evidence, who in their right mind would defend a pedophile?

Exactly. A feminist, look,

part 1

I want you to sit back and examine the sheer feminist detachment from reality courtesy of @CultofVivian. Behold her failure to be a decent human being, observe her complete lack of forethought before typing and most importantly notice how she willfully foregoes logic for the sake of her religion: feminism. (@CultofVivian, your feminist stupidity truly is spectacular.)

In the tweet above we can see @CultofVivian/Vivian, a SJW trying as hard as she can to force people to be politically correct towards a pedophilile; Nicholas Nyberg. For the sake of contrast, If Vivian was a Catholic SJW she would be requesting politeness for a pedophile priest, like this

part 2

The problem is that SJWs like Vivian get away with their politically correct delusions on social media and usually go unchallenged unless they are directly compared with the behavior of pedophile apologists in the Catholic church because the parallels are undeniable, but hypocrites like Vivian have practiced distraction techniques for years and when caught red handed they play the victim and try to claim “it is not fair” “it is different” or will use many other distractions to drive attention away from their delusions. Let’s preemptively address them,

  1. “Your comparison is unfair!”

No. It isn’t. You are just a hypocrite looking for a rock to hide under Vivian.

  1. “You are misgendering all transpeople!”

No. I am not. I am removing superficial politeness towards a SPECIFIC pedophile named Nicholas Nyberg who DOES NOT represent all transpeople just as pedophile Lawrence Murphy does not represent all Buddhists, Anglicans or any other religion.

  1. “Your wrote a hit piece on me!”

No Vivian, I only reported on your spectacular stupidity.

Most likely, Vivian will come up with DARVO  & more distraction noise but quite honestly, I will wait to debunk her lies if needed, feminists like Vivian are like Creationists, you never know what kind of illogical babble they will barf out. She will try to pretend to be the victim, she will use that tactic to claim to be “harassed”, coward clowns like Vivian wear that clown grease and roll on carrion to pass as something else just like stated on this short video courtesy of Mykery (just skip to minute 44:50).


As a Neo-Troll, I can quite safely tell you, you can verbally abuse male feminists online possibly 100 times as hard as you would with any female feminist and not a single woman will come to their aid, proof of that is the abuse I have hurled at male feminists like Arthur Chu and so far not a single female feminist has come to his rescue. Again, not a single female feminist will help a male feminist under attack. See? That is their “equality” in movement, obviously, in feminism equality means it mostly works to the service of feminist women, because, to feminists, male feminists are not people, they are objects to be used but if they ever stop being useful, they will be declared less than lepers & will become a mere hemorrhoid the hyena of feminism will bite off its own asshole.

Because as a rule, males are supposed to “take it” to “man up” to “toughen it out” but females? Those need to be coddled, to be protected somehow because exactly the same insult looks way, way “meaner” when hurled at a female both online and in real life. But, have you ever wondered why this behavior takes place where people prioritize and relate to women far more than to men? Look at homeless people and the ratio of males vs females in the western world; it is roughly 9:1 and people just feel much worse for a homeless female than for a homeless male, even if they suffer just as much, even if they are not aggressive, for some odd reason nearly all of the empathy goes to the female homeless person, seems very odd we would reduce a person’s humanity based on their appearance but the explanation is simpler than the expected, it is called Empathy Gap, in a nutshell, it means our brains will miscalculate based on appearance and “gut feelings” rather than on logic. This is blatantly reflected in the legal system where for EXACTLY the same crimes a more attractive looking person will get a much lower sentence, despite the law being the same for everyone, we often see on the news that an adult who has had sex with 14 year old minors will get a much lower sentence or just some perfunctory community service as long as she is blond, young and attractive (usually a teacher) but if you reverse the genders? The male version of the same teacher would get the full sentence for having had exactly the same sexual acts with 14 year old female minors, but the uglier he is, the worse the sentence will be. But what if he is black? Good fucking luck, because jurors will immediately go for the heaviest sentence the law allows. But of course…that would not be racist at all, it would be just a twist of destiny, right? But what if you are a young attractive female who viciously murdered another human being? You can get away with murder most of the time because the legal system will spend millions of dollars bending over backwards to give you the lowest sentence possible, even if the evidence is as damning as it can be, they will still try to give you as much empathy as possible, just like it happened with Jodi Arias.


This is especially important in cases such as Nicholas Nyberg because he has successfully used female pronouns to earn automatic empathy (avoiding the empathy gap altogether) for exactly the same crimes a male would already be in jail for, the fact that so many people defend Nicholas despite the volumes of evidence, is testament of him exploiting the empathy gap because as long as he can get away with the female pronouns, he will get far lower sentences and far less judgement or in the case of his followers, he gets full intellectual immunity simply because he has successfully managed to fool them, but this crafty and subtle appropriation of the empathy usually reserved only to females is immediately erased when we see him in his original form, like this,


Look at the hairy shoulders, look at the stubble, look at the unshaven armpits, look at the eyes that could express predatory contemplation, the word pedophile somehow fits automatically. But for some odd reason, when we look at Nyberg in his more feminine form; without the hair and without all the other male biological markers, the brain does not register him the same way, look,


See? even if we added the the word “pedophile” it would look like an “attack” or a failure at humor, almost as if the word did not match the picture and almost as if there was an immediate skepticism towards considering a female-looking individual “unflikely predatory”, as opposed to a male looking individual where the human brain just assumes the word matches an actual pedophile and he is “likely predatory”. Problem is, from the perspective of a vulnerable child, both are as terrifying and damaging.

If proven guilty, Nicholas will be declared a sexual predator of the worst kind, the one that abuses and exploits the most vulnerable human beings; children. But a predator like him has managed to camouflage itself as something else and manage to convince people he is a “she” and he is not a pedophile but a “hero” of the SJW cause, some have gone as far in their worship for Nyberg as to sending him pictures of their own children as a form of “support” which is akin to offering fresh flesh to a predator you worship.

See, this is not new, in nature, plenty of predators use these tricks to pass as something else because SJWs like Nicholas nyberg wear this victimhood camouflage just like the strategy predators use; they roll on carrion to pass as something else, to pass as a victim, to pass as dead things, or to quote youtuber Mykeru

“ [SJWs] wear contrived victimhood […] like a dog rolls in shit to conceal what they are”

The inconvenient truth is that besides the male ones, there are many cases of female & an increasing tide of transpedophiles in all societies but the empathy gap often gives extra camouflage to the ones that do not “look” like a pedophile, like in the case of Nicholas Nyberg who successfully morphed out of the features that would have made him more suspicious.

Just like predator pedo Lawrence Murphy disguised himself behind the camouflage of benevolent priesthood to pass as something else, so did predator pedo Nicholas Nyberg who disguised himself behind the camouflage of benevolent femininity to pass as something else.


Moral universalism or a sense of “moral magnitude” is less complex than what it seems; between choosing to protect a child or an adult the child wins. A person who molested a child deserves a far, far more severe sentence than that of a person who did not pay for a parking ticket. To SJW’s, universal morality is like common sense, not that common. Furthermore, they get easily confused when asked to think not just “feel”. But the more we ask for reasoning and less emotion the more SJWs fail at identifying what is universally moral, take for example this question,

Who is worse? A person that raped one woman or a genocidal war lord that committed over 20,000 war atrocities?

If you asked a feminist, they would want the death penalty for both because they would make an emotional judgement not a reasoned one. But beware, if you ever point this out the feminist will denounce you & anybody that disagrees with her as someone as “bad as rapist warlord” (See? Either you are with her or against her, US VS THEM mentality once again).

Moral magnitude seems to be as complex as quantum physics for feminist & SJWs who defend Nicholas Nyberg, despite all of the evidence, they insist on defending him and in cases such as Vivian’s distorted sense of magnitude, she even has the gall to demand a pedophile not be “misgendered”.

The problem with social Justice warriors like Vivian is that their sense of morals is more like a jenga tower, if you remove the slightest “political correctness” she collapses and starts snapping & becoming outraged.


Besides being delusional, the behavior of feminists who defend Nicholas Nyberg is just as astonishingly immoral as that of religious zealots. Just imagine asking feminists like Vivian this question;

Who deserves the death penalty; a rapist or a trans-pedophile like Nyberg?

She would possibly say something along these lines,

“Of course a rapist deserves death penalty! But a feminine SJWs pedo? Come on give him a chance! He has done so much good for the community!”

which mimics what Roman Catholics defending their pedophile priests may say,

“Of course a rapist deserves death penalty but a respectful pedophile priest? Come on give it a chance! He has done so much good for the community!”

No Vivian you got it wrong, a pedo has automatically given up all his/her rights to be properly “gendered” what you propose is akin to a Roman Catholic believer demanding people still kiss a priest in the back of his hand after he has been charged with pedophilia, Vivian, your spectacular stupidity prevents you from seeing why a pedophile is universally reviled by most inmates in the prison system, even some of the worst most violent inmates still despise pedos. What Vivian proposed is so wrong that is not even wrong, it is delusional, it is as delusional as a religious person demanding special treatment and accommodations for a pedophile priest for the sake of all his past “good deeds” for the community. That is not how it works dear delusional feminist, the moment there is enough evidence to start an investigation on charges of child pornography at the level of Nyberg, who not only shared pictures of a child but also enough information on the child’s location to effectively endanger the child. It does not matter who you are, you could be Nelson Mandela or Jennifer Lawrence, if either Mandela or Lawrence molested a child, they would automatically lose all empathy from society at large for harming a child. All is left for pedophiles is due process but not sympathy.


It is unfortunate but it has happened before that SJWs have endangered children just to retaliate against their opponents in Gamergate, case in point Lizzyf620’s children were endangered in a vile doxxing attempt to force her out of Gamergate and to be entirely honest, I for one wanted to retaliate on her behalf because we all have murderous thoughts when someone has either molested or murdered children, but instead I decided to reason and write this article. The difference is that most people do not confess to their murderous thoughts because of political correctness and their own fear to be socially “ostracized” for having thought about murder. Murderous thoughts are not “sins” we all wish for the bad guy in a movie to die the most horrific death possible and that is not labelled as a “sin” BUT the problem is not the murderous thoughts the problem is when a person acts upon such murderous thoughts, that is when lynch mobs may start. (what makes Nyberg especially heinous is that he allegedly is a criminal that has already acted upon his pedophile thoughts and urges)

The reality is that when children are murdered or harmed, we all think of retaliation towards the murderer/abuser just the way we think of the death of an evil character in a movie. That impulse aggregates with multiple individuals who not only think but are impulsive enough to act on those impulses and exert some primal form of “Social Justice” which often becomes a “Social Justice Lynch Mob”. Our current legal system is the result of the prevention of those individuals throughout history. If you want to be cynical, our legal system is an imperfect system for calculated fair retaliation or a glorified revenge system we still call “justice”. Is it perfect? Far from it but it surely is far better than letting people hang their targets from trees and setting them on fire. History is replete with cases of impulsive people who took the law in their own hands, and the problem is that lynch mobs often get their targets wrong, which begs the question; are those who accuse Nyberg of pedophilia a lynch mob?

The short answer is NO.

First and foremost the accusations have been corroborated by the parents of the child, that should be the first thing to bring up every time we speak about the Nyberg case. Furthermore, Nyberg is not the “victim” of a lynch mob because lynch mobs act on little or no evidence and can be easily manipulated by those who only seek retribution. Secondly, the amount of evidence on Nyberg illicit activities is incredibly vast, so much so the journalists and the legal department of Breitbart have poured over them as well as making them available for the skeptics to review. Again the parents corroborated the story, look at it yourself again,


To date, Nicholas Nyberg has been left alone free to play the victim and is currently under investigation and that is the way it should be. We should always let the authorities take care of these cases. Granted, despite all the evidence, there is still the distant possibility Nyberg is not entirely guilty that is why nobody but the legal system should take care of his sentencing.


First and foremost Nicholas deserves a fair trial, just like anybody else does. Due process must be followed. Secondly, Nicholas does not deserve to be called a “she” or by his female alias simply because a potential criminal like him should not be given privileges. He deserves the full brunt of the empathy gap and I encourage you all to abstain from using his female aliases because he likely uses them to obtain sympathy and intellectual immunity, if he is sentenced as a sexual predator his aliases will be proven to have been social camouflage for a predator to pass as something else. The little girl Nicholas Nyberg took pictures of and possibly molested is the victim NOT Nicholas. See, this is the problem with SJWs, it should not be necessary to remind them the basics of universal human morality but paradoxically,  they need to be told over and over, thus, few ironies in life are as pure; SJWs, who pride themselves of their superior morals fail at understanding the fundamentals of being a human being; the children are the victims NOT the pedophile. The reality is that the well-being of children is always more important than that of adults. Without children there is no future for the species.

Thank you for reading.

Good Transpeople vs Rotten Transpeople

Note: this article has been featured at

DISCLAIMER 1: What follows is a mixture of speculation and satire therefore the adverb “allegedly” prefaces and applies to the article itself. (go & eat your hearts out hypocrites)

DISCLAIMER 2: I am a proud Neo-Troll & I DO NOT represent #GamerGate. Feel free to disregard everything I say based on my Troll Status. For those who stayed, read on;

There are very respectful, very kind, hard-working, very rational transpeople, despite a life of potential rejection by the religious/moralistic part of society, they remain kind and friendly. Yes, despite all the hardships involved, they remain respectful and honest. Think about it, those often tormented but respectful transpeople, are not asking for a red carpet, because the reality is, what they want is what anybody else wants; acknowledgement for their humanity then secondarily, their identity (in their case, their re-assigned gender)

But there is a problem, a very small number of very vocal, very public transpeople are incredibly disrespectful, retribution-seeking, narcissistic hypocrites with a giant chip on their shoulder. That small minority of transpeople have habits, attitudes & behaviors that consistently smear their own community and make it much more difficult for the majority of the kind, respectful, transpeople to be given a chance by the society at large who, unfortunately, still is on the fence about transpeople.

Who are some of those poisonous transpeople? Let me give you a list of only 3 of the most narcissistic, pathological transpeople that actively defame their own community.

Biologically born male under the name Thomas Riley Peeples


Thomas/Anna openly states “hating males” on his/her social media streams also claims to be lesbian as well as espousing racism and genocide. He/She even has subreddits dedicated to such ideologies, not surprisingly he/she has a very well documented hateful & traceable online track record. Thomas/Anna even went as far as applying for a job, then when the company in question found out about his/her hateful online track record, they understandably avoided hiring such conflict-prone person but in retaliation, Thomas/Anna tried to get several people in that company fired because they allegedly were “transphobic bullies”. Thomas/Anna even had the gall play the victim by Storify-ing them.
Thomas/Anna is so hated that they included him/her in the Reddit poll of the “10 most hated people on Reddit” which was featured on a “little” high circulation site called the “Daily Dot”. Which was further confirmed even by their massively leftist audience as one of the most hated people on Reddit.
See the pattern here? Their hateful reprehensible behavior is never their fault.VeAUAqS

This one is a classic simply because despite all the evidence, Thomas/Anna has not admitted to any wrongdoing, to be honest, Thomas/Anna is so hateful I decided to troll him/her which resulted in a little saga depicted in this article (the Storify was taken down at 2K+ views unfortunately/fortunately, and no, Thomas/Anna has not forgiven me).

Based on his/her track record, the reality is far from elegant: Thomas/Anna, is a traumatized individual who grew up in a heavily religious Mormon household, was rejected by his family and now wants the internet to pay for his/her personal struggles. Thomas/Anna is a deeply troubled individual who is too narcissistic to realize his/her behavior damages the reputation of transpeople as a whole.

Biologically born male under the name John Walker Flynt 


Apparently adopted, John grew up in a privileged, rich household and almost perfectly qualified as “White Privileged Man” with the only difference that he was not cisgendered or “cis” and later in life transitioned to female. Brianna/John’s online track record has been plagued with theatrics, false claims and constant media dramas (that resemble those of Anita Sarkeesian) by displaying the same tactics of baiting the trolls for hate then using said hate to obtain donations. Problem is, John/Brianna’s track record hints at a shared pattern with these conflict-prone transpeople:

Intense Narcissism.

The inconvenient truth is that very often, as adults, people like Brianna/John seek & thrive in toxic attention because they never got enough attention as children. It would stand to reason that Brianna/John’s very rich parents provided everything financially-wise but failed to provide enough love and attention, as a result, we have an impulsive narcissistic partial adult that sees all criticism as “trans-hate” because they have never accepted accountability for their mistakes.(it seems less likely Brianna/John was molested as a child but again, rich people tend to keep their skeletons in expensive closets) Think about it, it must be hard to make progress in life when everything is either paid for or just automatically falsely labelled as “trans-hate”.

(See the pattern here? Their hateful reprehensible behavior is never their fault.)

But it must be really, really hard for narcissists like Brianna/John to accept his/her own mistakes when their default mental attitude is to say “this is not my fault” and must be especially frustrating for Brianna/John to be confronted with the reality that respect cannot be paid for, only earned. How could John/Brianna earn anything when everything from early in life was “supposed” to be paid for by his/her wealthy parents?

But most importantly, what have they done for society at large? What is Brianna/John’s track record? The reality is far from elegant; Brianna/John is an extremely mediocre, psychologically fragile rich kid with a life full of failure and refusal to be accountable for anything.

Biologically born male under the name Nicholas Edwin Nyberg 

Nicholas Edwin Nyberg AKA “Sarah” is currently under investigation for alleged charges of bestiality, pedophilia and tax evasion.
This one is, ostensibly, the worst of them all (trans or not) because a wealth of evidence suggests he/she has committed and boasted online about the crimes of pedophilia and bestiality and is very likely he/she will face charges for those very serious crimes. But what really sets Nicholas/Sarah apart is the fact that he/she constantly lambasted others for their “bad morals” despite being a closeted bestiality-pedo offender. (which is akin to a urine-soaked crystal meth addict with a collection STD’s and puss-filled open sores all over telling people who have hangnails, they are “nasty”).

But it would be unfair to say Brianna/John and Thomas/Anna are entirely different from Nicholas/SrhButts, quite the opposite, if we remove the pedophilia and the bestiality charges, Brianna/John and Thomas/Anna share many similar behaviors with Nicholas/SrhButts, namely; the tendency for theatrics, their tendency to constantly display screenshots of “attacks” on social media (& often setting off their followers against those who dare criticize them) the tendency to doxx people and most importantly, the tendency to never accept any accountability for their mistakes or morally reprehensible actions.

Again, see the pattern here? Their hateful reprehensible behavior is never their fault.

Their behavior suggests they do not care about their community, they care about themselves and nothing else. Suffice it to say that the behavior these trans-narcissists share is far more harmful for the transpeople community as a whole.

For those who were keeping track, you may have noticed the 3 people above share several behavioral patterns which can be boiled down to the following list of SJWs/Feminists/Trans-narcissist redflags:

  • Has a history of molestation/ sexual abuse
  • Sexual abuse led into Radical Feminism/Hard left/Marxism
  • Embraced feminism as a religion to cope with trauma
  • Has untreated PTSD+Erotomania+Delusions of persecution
  • Raised by single mother
  • Has daddy issues
  • Struggles with science math and STEM in general
  • Claims of oppression to compensate for inferiority complex
  • Holds a humanities degree but little or no formal scientific training
  • Has a tendency for public speaking more than actual work
  • Constantly censors language by using the word “offensive”
  • Expects nobody to get “offended” when making vicious comments when angry
  • Has an “US VS THEM” mentality
  • Has a history of conflictive relationships at work
  • Guilt-trips people with their past to gain sympathy/Intellectual immunity
  • Constantly displays screen-shots of “attacks” on social media
  • The screenshots are used by supporters to authentically attack critics
  • Claims is constantly at risk but has filed ZERO police reports

Of course, SJWs/Feminists/Radicalized Transpeople do not always exhibit all of the red flags above but their online behavior is often times very similar because they seek retribution for a giant chip on their shoulder, they want the world to offer them an apology for their past struggles. And that is something they almost always tell you, they share “their sad stories” with you. This is something very important to be aware of, they will consistently attempt to guilt trip you with stories of their past then will surreptitiously request you give them intellectual immunity. First they will blackmail you for sympathy/pity, after obtaining it, they will imply or ask you to give them a pass or else you would be “abusing them” because if you disagree, you would be “abusing them” like the people in their past. Most people don’t even notice when narcissists pull this trick, it is a very subtle, very well-practiced strategy which works very well. See, the problem is these are manipulative adults asking for endless concessions for their reprehensible, immature and harmful behavior.Why do they keep asking for sympathy with their stories? How come they keep failing at learning from their mistakes over and over again? How many chances do they deserve? How many second chances is too many? How many chances is too many?

The reality is that you are not their unpaid therapist and you have ZERO obligation to hear their often manufactured tales because they are trying to manipulate you. Remember, they had their chance to learn in childhood, they missed it and that is not your problem because they are not children anymore.

Think about it, let’s say you have religious/rightist/traditionalist leanings BUT you are still on the fence about transpeople and despite all that you are still eager to give the transcommunity a chance but then a hateful, poisonous, conflict-prone trans-narcissist like the 3 above starts making noise on social media, what do you think is going to happen? Just put two and two together; a hateful trans-narcissist is going to push those on the fence towards rejecting ALL transpeople.

Why? Because they are going to take for granted they are all as toxic as RobotAnna, Brianna Wu or Sarah Nyberg. Because that is how public perception works, fair or unfair you do not get a second chance for a first impression. That is what trans-narcissists do not stop to think about; because the people that matter are not the few thousand “progressive” ones that already are on their side, not at all, the ones that matter are the millions that are on the fence.

So what do we do? Well it may not be easy but we should not judge all transpeople for the actions of a few. Why? Because that is what anti-Gamergate pundits do, they judge Gamergate as a whole based on the actions of the worst they can find. Give the benefit of the doubt but also learn to recognize the red flags the rotten transpeople/SJWs like the ones above tend to display.


The internet is the place where all religions including feminism come to die, the internet is not anybody’s Prozac. Neither you nor I have any responsibility to carry these people’s psychological burdens, you and I are not their unpaid doctor Phil nor their Twitter-prozac. We all had our chance to learn in childhood. Their childhood is gone, they had their chance and they missed it; they are not children anymore.

If they want to guilt-trip you with stories of their past abuse they can go an tell their therapist instead, just stop them in their tracks.

I for one, do not care about their suffering because they are not children anymore and neither should you.

They had their chance.

Granted, as a Troll, I voluntarily remove all of my sympathy & empathy towards hypocrites like the ones above because they are not children anymore and neither am I, therefore, I welcome everyone to remove their sympathy & empathy towards me as well. Nobody is above the rules, nobody is off the menu.

Anna had been thoroughly doxxed by the time I added this infographic to the now defunct Storify.f8hCo1t


Note: this article has been featured at

DISCLAIMER 1: What follows is a mixture of speculation and satire therefore the adverb “allegedly” prefaces and applies to the article itself. (go & eat your heart out Chu-boy)

DISCLAIMER 2:I am a proud Neo-Troll & I DO NOT represent #GamerGate. Feel free to disregard everything I say based on my Troll Status. For those who stayed, behold;unnamed


Surprising. For a person so well known for answering questions quick and efficiently in Jeopardy, Arthur Chu never answered the question in the image above (maybe he needs money to answer efficiently?)

In any given case, I sent Arthur Chu said question several times on Twitter, people also retweeted it to him several times but I, for one, never got one of his trademark rage-filled responses (well, after several months he recently did block me so he may have seen it & rage-blocked me) but I would like to explain to you dear reader the reasons (besides my trolling of male feminists who feminists never come to help, see? “Equality”) why I started publicly questioning our dear and regretful Mr Chu.

In short, because of his publicly regretful remarks regarding rape, I, along with others, suspect Arthur Chu may have been involved in an act of rape in his past.

Why? Here is what Arthur Chu has said in regards to rape in writing and also during a CNN interview:

“I have known nerdy male stalkers and yes, nerdy male rapists. I’ve known situations where I knew something was going on but didn’t say anything – because I didn’t want to stick my neck out, because some vile part of me thought that this kind of thing was normal.”

Don’t believe me? Here’s the bizarre video

The referenced piece he wrote was for a certain hard-left site & to avoid giving them traffic here is the archived piece. Upon close inspection, the article reads like a religious mea culpa (mea culpa means “I acknowledge my mistake” in Latin but in plain English it means “yes, I fucked up”) also consider that if Arthur Chu is alluding to a “mea culpa” is because he must have indeed fucked up in regards to rape in the past. Again it reads almost as if it was a confession/testimonial where Chu openly says “I am/we are all guilty for not preventing rape and helping rape victims” and seems to hint he may have been an accessory to a rape. BUT THEN, here is the gigantic contradiction; after pontificating so much for the rights of female victims of rape, all of sudden Chu does a 180 and says that Cytherea’s rape does not count.

Yes Arthur Chu actually showed zero empathy for Cytherea.


In both media instances, it appeared as if Chu was expressing a need to give a public apology of the level “mea maxima culpa” but it seems he got cold feet at the last minute (what else can be expected from a coward like Chu but hypocrisy & cold feet?) then he did his 180 contradiction and attacked the victim of rape he was supposed to protect.

So stark was his contradiction that this second image circulated well enough on Twitter but unfortunately, he never replied to it either:unnamed (1)But before we continue, let’s recap the implication of his media appearances; we have a man in his 30’s who bizarrely gives a half-hearted quasi-confession while he speaks of his own past with intense guilt because he, allegedly, wants to “expose” one of the following:

1) His nature (the part of himself he hates)
2) Male nature AKA “Rape culture” (also the other part of himself he hates)
3)An intense need to atone for his sins
4) All of the above

I do not know about you, but I am going to choose number 4 because of the following simple logic; I have zero guilt and zero need to preemptively apologize on behalf of convicted drivers guilty of hit & run crimes because I have never run someone over (I may be a Troll but I am not fucking demented) likewise, I do not feel any guilt and have zero need to apologize for rape because I have never raped anyone. However, when it comes to Arthur Chu & his bizarre preemptive apologetic behavior, it really makes you wonder; what events took place in his past that led him to so much rape-related guilt? It just does not make sense.

Metaphorically speaking just imagine Chu in broad day light, suddenly walking up to complete strangers, he then desperately grabs them by the shoulders then falls to his knees, hugs their ankles and vehemently says,

“PLEEEEASE! Please! Please forgive hit & run drivers, I AM REALLY REALLY SORRY…for… them…”

**stops embracing the stranger’s ankles, gets up visibly embarrassed and leaves without saying a word**

Kind of desperate and confusing don’t you think? Yes, metaphorically disturbingly guilty behavior. Well, his behavior regarding rape is as perplexing as the one with drivers. As much as an innocent driver does not need to apologize for other drivers, an innocent Arthur Chu would NOT need to apologize for the rapes criminals committed.


Even more so, this bizarre behavior is not unique to Chu, quite the contrary, this is a common trait shared by many other public male feminists who have the bizarre habit of preemptively & profusely apologizing on behalf of the male gender almost as if they were apologizing for having “raped” all women. This male feminist behavior is almost as delusional as when Christians profusely apologize for having “killed” Jesus. Unlike chronologically-implausible delusions by Christians, Arthur Chu’s behavior may imply he might have some very dark, very shameful rape skeletons in his rape closet (wew…that came out darker than the expected) and is not as if people have not found a few online bones of his alleged ownership. Think about it; why would Arthur Chu apologize for a crime he has never committed? It really boils down to two choices, either,

1) Arthur Chu is fucking-honking insane and likes to self-flagellate (in his closet with a bright pink whip in front of a poster of Anita then masturbates then cries, in that specific order; allegedly) and believes he has a brain with an unusually dense mirror neuron array that makes him extremely sympathetic to victims of rape but has never commited any crimes.

2) Arthur Chu is sane but feels intense guilt because he committed/was part of a rape crime in the past.

The problem with number 1, is it makes it just too easy to declare someone “crazy” and allow them to suddenly lose all accountability for all of their actions and, by consequence, those actions immediately lose relevance because somehow they “were not his fault”

By using Occam’s razor the way we did before it would make much more sense to choose option number 2 because the simplest explanation is usually the most likely to be true. I for one, do not think Arthur Chu is insane, quite the opposite, what I do think he is an intensely hypocrite & remorseful human being with a dark past that sooner or later will be exposed not unlikemultiple Roman Catholic priests.

But let’s go back to Chu doing a 180, why is a woman like Cytherea all of sudden “unworthy” of sympathy to feminists and people like Arthur Chu? See, that happens possibly for the same reasons religious people reject women who fornicate “too much” because to the eyes of religion sexuality is “sinful” and “helps” the devil. Conversely, feminism rejects porn starts who publicize their sexuality “too much” because to the eyes of feminism porn is “misogynistic” and “helps” the patriarchy. The parallels between religion and feminism are not an accident because they are based on the same profitable exploitation of predictable aspects of the human condition, just like religion, feminism will try to regulate people’s sexuality because it too easy and too profitable to shame people for having sexual urges, all you have to do is to camouflage your exploitation via shaming tactics as “sins due to sinful human nature” or in the case of feminism “misogyny due to toxic masculinity”. Nothing sells better than guilt or rather, if you shame your audience well enough, your guilt products will sell the fastest. If the only thing your believers in your pink church can breathe is toxic guilt, sell them feminist masks.


In feminism all you have to do is repackage the Judeo-Christian concept of the “Original Sin” where no matter what you do, you will always be sinful BY NATURE, what feminism does after repackaging the original sin in a shinny pink package is to smack a big label called “Toxic Masculinity” where no matter what you do you will always be a misogynist-Rapist-Phallic-Nazi BY NATURE. Despite feminism blatant appropiation of the old worn out “original sin” concept, their guilt imitation product sells pretty well with sorry unfuckable-fucks like Arthur Chu.

In short, Arthur Chu may be so fervent an activist because he is trying to atone for his own past sins by copiously apologizing the way a sinner goes to church and tithes copiously or even worse, perhaps Chu would be more like the priest himself who fervently pontificates against all those sins he privately commits. Again the question just begs to be asked; what were those sins Arthur is desperately trying to atone for? Yet, we hit the same wall of contradiction as before when Arthur Chu is intensely regretful one minute THEN he feels zero sympathy for Cytherea’s case despite the fact that Cytherea did not receive mere “threats” like Anita, not at all, Cytherea was outright raped multiple times after a home invasion.

To top it off, after Cytherea’s rape, a thick massive wave of silent hypocrisy just coated the leftist media; how much media coverage did Cytherea’s very real rape receive in comparison to Anita’s online-only threats?

Cytherea received nearly zero coverage in comparison.

This is how dystopian things get in our reality, one hoaxer like Anita Sarkeesian gets all the sympathy from the left leaning media for mere online threats, but as soon as a porn actress is brutally raped 4 times in her own own invaded house. That? That does not count for the leftist media because for some fucked up reason, authentic assault and rape is somehow less serious than the written threats Anita gets. Not a single feminist news outlet wanted to give Cytherea’s story a shred of the airtime they gave to Anita, to the point Mercedes Carrera had to organize a charity herself to help Cytherea and Mercedes openly expressed her frustration with silent media hypocrisy in a way that has to be seen. The leftist media actively avoids talking about those “indecent” women who are not “equal enough”, Arthur and the feminist-controlled media are a hypocritical snake pit. Especially when Chu, who swears to help all women, but then he, does not care when a woman is raped multiple times? Doesn’t that make him a member of his own concept of the repudiated “rape culture”?

See, few ironies in life are as rich; feminist Arthur Chu opposes “rape culture” by indirectly supporting the rape of Cytherea. Just to rub a fistful of granulated salt inside his wound; by supporting the rejection of a victim of rape, Arthur Chu joined his own brand of “rape culture”. Arthur Chu is a rape apologist/enabler by his own feminist definition.


Even though the mythical feminist version of “rape culture” does not exist in the West Arthur Chu skewered himself in a series of rage-filled, impulsive tweets. See, with SJWs like Chu, low impulse control is a constant, people like him are in a constant internal battle against their “sinful” impulses & it only makes sense that they are gonna let all of their steam off whenever their religion does not dictate they have to control themselves. People like Chu have sn impulsive nature and the resulting lack of discipline manifests itself in bad habits such as compulsive eating, because let’s be honest, for a person with his “intellectual discipline” Chu does not seem to apply any discipline at all when it comes to not murdering twinkies or doing at least some minimal exercise, furthermore, if we ranked Arthur Chu’s masculinity from 1 to 10 we could use the following graph:CHU(5)

In short, Chu is not bed-ridden yet, but is such a fat, unattractive, unmasculine blob that he just looks like an Asian version of Rosie O’Donnell. (perhaps he feels so deeply sinful for being a man he has mind-killed all of his manliness)

It is no wonder why such a sexually frustrated, unfuckable fat-fuck is so prone to emotional outbursts on Twitter. He just has very little sexual satisfaction in his life, simply because a slob fat fuck like him, cannot naturally get laid and can only marry unfuckable women such as his ugly-as-an-infected-cow’s-cunt wife Eliza Blair, who clearly manages his recently won money but doesn’t seem to even dare fuck him more than once a year (ostensibly a true lesbian would be sexually more fulfilling than fake-lesbian Arthur)

It appears the sexual drought got so bad that it resulted in Chu creating a profile on the cheating site Ashley Madison (he even outed himself as an Ashley Madison member in his most recent Freudian slip Twitter meltdownbut all of that was pointless anyway because nobody fucks an Asian Rosie O’Donell impersonator fat-fuck like him for free & since he opposes protitution…) To top it off, he even has this extremely bizarre & heavy-handed rape-guilt vibe that automatically kills any interest from any potential groupies he might have had (way to kill all of your already scarce chances to get laid, you sexually useless waste of jeopardized adipose human meat)


Jokes aside, what is the simple, inconvenient truth about Arthur Chu? He simply is an & obese, unhappily married, sexually frustrated narrow savant desperately & falsely trying to be a feminist activist to artificially raise himself above all other “toxic-sinful” males. Yet he clearly still feels very sinful and guilty himself. Where does Arhur Chu’s seemingly closeted vast guilt come from? See, It is the mark of hypocrites to secretly do exactly what they publicly oppose. A good example of this stark hypocrisy would be priests campaigning against pedophilia while being exposed for secretly being pedos themselves. However in the case of Chu, I so far doubt he is a pedophile and rather I see his intense rape guilt as a public Freudian slip of what he is privately attracted to but feels too guilty to admit. Let’s interpret Chu’s bizarre behavior through the following speculative questions:

1) Is Arthur Chu fervently campaigning against rape because he participated, witnessed or failed to report an act of rape in his past?
2) Did he rape anyone who has not come forward yet?
3) Did he abuse a family member and so far everything is being kept “in the family”?
4) Was a female family member raped by someone other than Chu?
5) All of the above?

See, those who sympathize with Chu immediately throw themselves to option number 4 because the other 3 are just “unthinkable” to them. Not surprisingly, Arthur also finds plenty of things “unthinkable” and has to allegedly cleanse his mind daily, yes, I am not making this up, look:CHU(2)

Cleanse his mind daily from dangerous “unthinkable thoughts”???
It almost seems photoshopped, fortunately all of this Chu-wackadoo is not made up and widely archived at manyreliable places.

However the main question remains; if Chu does indeed have “unthinkable thoughts”…Are some of those “unthinkable thoughts” related to rape? Or do rape urges “invade” his mind regularly?

Just like with religious people, Arthur Chu’s behavior appears to indicate his morals ARE what keeps him from becoming those he hates…let that sink, he might be so close to becoming one of them that he has to “cleanse” his mind… Sounds familiar? We see and hear similar premises from people who desperately cling to an idea to keep themselves from the temptation they intensely desire: Alcohol, sex, drugs…See, the sad truth is that people with a fervent belief system very often do so out of a desperate need to have a fabricated form of discipline because they have failed so many times before that they are deeply and painfully aware their own discipline will ultimately fail, they have to create an external imaginary entity to fabricate their discipline (in other words their discipline is managed by the holy giant invisible man in the sky AKA “God”).

See, inner guilt is essence of worship, it is the fuel the profitable, guilt tripping engine of religion runs on, guilt motivates cult members like Chu because they want to stay away from “sin”, if your “sin” is alcohol you will try to get alcohol banned at all costs because, to you, alcohol is the “devil” and you are secretly attracted to it. Likewise, it would stand to reason Chu feels intense guilt for actions in his past that he considers “immoral” and since he may still be intensely attracted to those activities, the only choice he has is to fervently campaign against them as intensely as possible because his “devil” is what he feels attracted to, failure to do so would turn him into a “toxic male”. Just replace the word “alcohol” with the word “rape” and Arthur Chu seems to make a little bit more sense. Of course Arthur has not yet started a 12 step program for A̶l̶c̶o̶h̶o̶l̶i̶c̶ ̶A̶n̶o̶n̶y̶m̶o̶u̶s̶ erm I mean R̶a̶p̶i̶s̶t̶s̶ ̶A̶n̶o̶n̶y̶m̶o̶u̶s̶ I mean…Anonymous Chus…(that came out wrong) anyway, you get the idea, also, perhaps he has not started his club because he is not into the idea of castrating himself once and for all just yet, you know…just to prevent sexual temptation once and for all, just like Catholic priests never do.


For the sake of argument, let’s say you are secretly as gay as skittles but you are also deeply Christian, therefore you keep your gayness as closeted as possible but even worse, let’s say you HAVE TO be a very public Christian role model, so what option do you have left? You become a very public anti-gay reverend. How can someone publicly campaign against what they secretly enjoy & desire? Isn’t that intensely hypocritical? It is, but again for the sake of argument, let’s say your name isTed Haggard, and you also enjoy a little celestial crystal meth here an there in between deliciously sinful, hardcore, celestial gay sex sessions. (whether latex suits and black leather assless chaps were involved in Reverend Haggard & his escort’s sessions remains to be seen, believe me, I have been searching for those pics…allegedly)

So Haggard is quite a hypocrite right? Leaving aside the blatant unfairness to gay people, (especially when some are so blond glorious and magnificent) Ted Haggard gives us a very important template for dogmatic hypocrisy. My money is on the possibility Arthur Chu follows the same template because hypocrites like Haggard or himself do is to publicly campaign against what they may secretly desire, or as Joe Rogan put it:CHU(3)

So? We know that Arthur Chu is not dumb, that begs the question, does Arthur secretly worry dicks are delicious? Is Arthur Chu as gay as skittles? Probably not, and probably the analogy is not accurate simply because here is where we have to do some word swapping,


“Let’s say you are secretly as gay as Skittles but you are also deeply Christian, therefore you keep your gay fantasies as closeted as possible but even worse, let’s say you HAVE TO be a very public Christian role model, so what option do you have left? You become a very public anti-gay reverend, let’s say your name is Ted Haggard.”

Word Swap:

“Let’s say you are secretly as rapey as Pedobear but you are also deeply Feminist, therefore you keep your rape fantasies as closeted as possible but even worse, let’s say you HAVE TO be a very public Feminist role model, so what option do you have left? You become a very public anti-rape activist, let’s say your name is Arthur Chu.”

Clearly all of the above is just speculation and satire but perhaps, just perhaps Arthur Chu is just like Ted Haggard, perhaps he is just very comfortable publicly portraying a character while concealing his true self because it gives him a sense of publicly yet very privately, very surreptitiously “outsmarting” everyone.

To be fair, If I were as fat & un-fuckable as Arthur Chu perhaps I would also be calling bomb threats to compensate for all the years of repressed romantic explosions…

Thanks for reading.

(Part 1 & Part 2 of this series)

Just Be Rational and Jerk Off

dodge a bullet

DISCLAIMER : I am a proud Neo-Troll

Feel free to disregard everything I say based on my Troll Status.

For those who stayed; read on,

Let’s say you feel you are in love and you catch yourself thinking about marrying your current girlfriend. In that case I want you to do the following,

1. Be on your own, Grab a piece of paper and write the question:

“Do I want to get married?”

2. Put the page aside and leave the pen on top

3. Jerk off to your favorite porn (NOT INVOLVING YOUR GF).

  1. Immediately after ejaculating clean up & answer the question on the piece of paper.

Yes or No?

Why so hesitant?

See, marriage is an act of visceral and irrational motivation that tends to dissipate after ejaculation, the vast majority of men feel a certain amount of hesitation often mixed with guilt for having a “temporary change of heart”. It is not a change of heart, it is 15 minutes of temporary sanity. Let’s not forget love is a socially acceptable form of insanity but in your case, as a man, your insanity is too costly. Unfortunately you are not safe from suffering this or witnessing someone fall prey of this insanity which really is the worst job on earth.

Let me put it into perspective, let’s say you go to a job interview and you really want the job, then the company says they want you to make a down payment for your job and also get another job to pay for said down payment AND the job your are applying for, because with this job they clearly tell you they do not always pay you, rather you have to pay them to work for them, then they tell you with a straight face they are categorically not joking. Most men would just walk out right? But in this example, for some fucked up reason (unrelated to drugs) you do stay because somehow you are still interested.

Then the company states they reserve the right to terminate your job at any time with or without just reason, also upon termination you agree that most of your assets and income & some family members will be seized for a minimum period of 1.8 decades; irrevocably. Guess what? You still want the job. The reason? You just say with this big, shit-eating grin “I know that won’t happen to me, I am a winner…” then, they give you the job.

You cannot blame that “company” for giving you the worst job available to men: marriage.

After all, in the above metaphor they clearly outlined the list of “liabilities & disadvantages” and the guy still wanted to get royally fucked. And to be entirely honest, said list of “liabilities & disadvantages” is not that far from reality; most contemporary men know how low the success rate of marriage is, how most of the time men lose everything and sadly, most of us have witnessed the delusion in motion because most of us have gone to a wedding where the groom says “I do” with the same shit-eating grin.  


Sex, love and children, in a nutshell men expect a long life of satisfactions with that special woman. What really is surprising is how often both men and women who are affected by this temporary insanity will say something so noble: They want to die of old age together. Dying of old age together is the “golden unicorn marriage” & everyone who believes in marriage almost automatically believes in hunting that noble golden beast of stability peace and tranquility in old age.


Let me ask you this question, have you seen those elderly people at the convenience store? You know, the ones that spend some or most of their possibly fixed income on lottery tickets If the answer is “yes”, please also answer this hypothetical question “How often do they expect to win the lottery?” Maybe the answer could be “they expect to win with every ticket they buy” think about it, if they did not expect to win, wouldn’t they have stopped buying so many tickets long ago? Let me ask you the same question; Do you expect to win the lottery with every lottery ticket you buy? If you answer is “yes” please stop reading my article. For the rest who stayed and are not dumb beyond repair, the answer is a clear definite “NO” of course you do not expect to win the lottery with every ticket you buy because it would be too damn foolish to monstrously inflate your already very slim chances. Guess what? With marriage your chances to win are even slimmer YET you will foolishly inflate your chances and accidentally become the equivalent of one of those sad, delusional elderly people at the convenience store, even if you are young you risk becoming as sad, blind & delusional.

Now, let me make the job easier, here is where you shoot the messenger and you say “I don’t like this fucking writer” for those who already dislike me, you can stop reading now and go to Jezebel. For those unapologetically masculine men who stayed, the chances of you actually succeeding at hunting the “golden unicorn marriage” are not zero but just very low and chances are you will not give up on her but quite the opposite, she will give up on you. Those chances are very very high because the marriage packages sold by sugar-daddy state nowadays come with a big fat button labelled in bright pink boldface “divorce” said button is exclusive for women to push.

Let’s just face it, most women you were interested in marrying in the past were the ones that would have initiated divorce, had you married them. Yes most of them would have royally fucked you without hesitation. I will not sugar coat it, it does not matter how hard you work at it; statistically speaking it will always be your fault because she will initiate it. (thank you feminism)

You still want the job? All right, let me motivate you a little more, if you do the math how much does the average men pay for divorce settlements? Expensive right? Sometimes billions. Are you rich? Then congrats because you will pay dearly, just like the billionaire Bernie Ecclestone did. He paid a “meager” 1 billion for his divorce settlement. That is some expensive sex over the 23 years of his marriage. For example, just for the sake of argument, let’s be generous and say he fucked her 3 times a day for the 23 years they were married (unlikely but let’s just be generous and assume he, as a breeder, may have used some horse help, you know rich people have eccentric sex), that gives us approximately 26 thousand fucks, then, if he paid a billion…let’s just do some very simple math,  

$1,000,000,000 ÷ 26,0000 fucks = ~$38, 461 per individual fuck.

Yes. an average of $38K per shag.

NOTE: We are not using British pounds or counting pre-marriage gifts, trips, food, accommodations, cars, properties or the average cost per children. Yes, I am a Troll and a heartless bastard but I have my limits & I will not put a price on children, I only calculate the price per fuck the poor rich fuck had to pay.

How much have you/will you pay per each fuck after your divorce? Chances are, a very expensive price per fuck because men pay on average, a very hefty cost per each individual fuck before and after divorce. Here is the insult upon the injury: If marriage was not overpriced prostitution why are the men the ones that pay most of the time for nearly all divorce settlements? Wouldn’t it be more honest to pay nothing to women after divorcing them especially if there were no children?

See? Glorified prostitution.

Faced with these odds, the best thing you can do is be cynical & to be a proper clown, just properly lie to her while looking into her eyes, get the sex and leave. By all means, lie to her about marriage if needed but do not be a fool and lie to yourself; only lie to her for sex but never actually marry her; always avoid the children & the marriage. Don’t feel guilty, it is not like she was gonna spare you the ruin of divorce statistically speaking, most women you meet already have a purse with your name on it next to an engraved “D” to put your cut off balls in. (“D” as in divorce, not as in “dick” you sadistic bastards)


The prospect is bleak; most of the time you won’t stop a friend or yourself from buying a lottery ticket to win that mythical “golden unicorn marriage” because we are all that foolish at least once in a lifetime. Some of us dodge the marriage bullet, some of us bite it & pay dearly. All we can realistically do in those moments of weakness is to take a piece of paper, jerk off (away from the paper please) and take advantage of those 15 minutes of sanity .

BTW, don’t forget to share this article with a friend who may be at risk of suffering marriage (please don’t be a descriptive weirdo about jerking off, just share the link with your friends)

Lastly, next time you go to a wedding, look at the groom’s shit-eating grin when he says “I do”  & immediately think to yourself,

“I gotta go watch some Porn…”  

Thanks for reading.

The Morally Superior Mr. Chu (part 2 of 3)

Note: this article has been featured at


DISCLAIMER 1: What follows is a mixture of speculation and satire therefore the adverb “allegedly” prefaces and applies to the article itself (go & eat your heart out Chu-boy).

DISCLAIMER 2: I am a proud Neo-Troll & I DO NOT represent #GamerGate. Feel free to disregard everything I say based on my Troll Status. For those who stayed, behold;CHU(1)January 2015, late night, a young woman is at home with her husband, her 2 children and the children’s grandmother. 4 criminals break in, they subdue the adults at knife point, then rape the mother 4 times while her children were present.

If the first thing that came to your mind was that the rape victim was a “stupid liar,” most likelyyour name is Arthur Chu. See, the problem with Arthur Chu, is that despite the police reports, the witnesses, the police investigation, the rape kit, the arrests, the charges, the resulting sentenced criminals and the charity organizedby Mercedes Carrera, Arthur Chu’s first impulse was to ignore the evidence then selectively remove his empathy then the humanity of this specific female victim. He even managed to remove his feminist mantra of “listen & believe women” and just label the charity as “stupid” as the above tweet indicates.

What do feminists themselves call that imaginary concept? The one based on that low budget fringe documentary? You know…the one when men actively promote, ignore or indirectly support rape? Oh yes! They call it“rape culture.” So, Arthur Chu, who swears up and down to defend all women who suffer even the slightest form of abuse (real, imaginary or fabricated) managed to create & join his own rape culture. Yes, Arthur Chu is, by his own feminist definition, a toxic male that supports his own brand of rape culture by rejecting authentic victims of rape like Cytherea.

Few times in life can you witness this form of spectacular hypocrisy. Just think about it, when he refused to acknowledge, then blamed Cytherea for her own rape, Arthur Chu managed to behave exactly like the “toxic men” promote “rape culture.”

Congratulations Arthur Chu for ignoring Cytherea’s rape & creating then joining your own brand of “rape culture”.

Be proud.

You Narcissistic Retribution Coward.

This level of sheer, unalloyed, spectacular hypocrisy can only be offered by the kind of delusional people who live under the same Marxist-radical-left ideological roof and its inescapable haze. These people are selectively proactive neophytes who do not lack intelligence but consistently choose to stifle it with the intense haze of Marxist opium coming from their burned cult-like leftist ideology which gradually and inexorably transforms them into the kind of dense, hypocritical paradox Arthur Chu’s imitation of existence represents. Despite his potential intellect, Arthur lives in a constant illusion of free will because his ability to reason is too selective and compartmentalized by the “virtue” of his own delusional undeclared religion: feminism.

But again, weren’t all women supposed to be “equal”? What hard-left hazy delusional rules did Arthur Chu follow to come to the conclusion Cytherea was not worthy of any compassion? Judging by his behavior, he hypothetically may have followed a set of convoluted conditions & caveats such as the following

Complex “Arthur Chu’s laws”

1) The term “all women” does not always mean the entirety of all women
2) It sometimes means some very “specific” women
3) Choosing specific women and excluding some is NOT at all a form of discrimination
4) People like Arthur Chu may or may not reserve the right to ignore all rules in this irregular deformed brand of morality based on orders from above

Confusing isn’t it? Again, their brand of morals is quite convoluted so let’s just try to reduce their bizarre and metastasized morals to just one simplified

Simplified “Arthur Chu’s Law”

You HAVE TO “Listen & Believe all women” UNLESS it is “dirty” “indecent” women.

Is that it? That is how SJWs like Arthur Chu arbitrarily make those absolute “moral” decisions? At first sight, it is very odd how feminists make those exceptions with victims of rape but after a while it makes sense how said feminists cherry-pick who does and who does not deserve compassion. You know why? Sex is a currency & according to feminists, it should be “priceless” but when “indecent women” put an affordable price to it, it makes feminists feel either cheap or overpriced thus they should be “censored” to keep prices artificially “priceless.”

See, the reality is far less elegant than what feminists would like it to look like simply because religion has been doing the same with “indecent” vs “decent” women for centuries. It is called rebranding of religion with a coat of bright feminist pink on top; it is the blatant lie of the “absolute truth” of the feminist religion. Fortunately, If you are a female feminist, you automatically belong to their undeclared religion and you get to reap the benefits of becoming a celebrated victim (because we all know that by just being born a woman you are a default victim, even if born wealthy, right?) not only that but also you get extra benefits because you actively worship the right kind of god; women.

Furthermore, If you are a feminist and you experience rape, that is their feminist religious equivalent of the crucifixion. Every time a feminist is raped (Rolling Stone hoax or not), she is to be paraded like a crucified martyr that will never heal and will therefore be considered a perpetual (profitable) victim, thus feminists manage to keep a fresh, steady supply of automatically-declared cute-looking martyrs in order to get more and more tithing. I mean, “donations” (you have to give them props for being so crafty, with that many rapey-crucifixons being paraded around they do their marketing way better than the Christians who only have the same old, tired & boring one) but guess what? When you ask feminists point blank why they ignore victims of rape like Cytherea what do you get?


Why? Put yourself in their shoes, publicly saying women like Cytherea are “indecent” or “sinful” would be bad for business because their tax-exempt undeclared religion would have to be less illogical, or even worse; it would have to be honest, so, as a feminist, what you would “logically” do is to either avoid the question altogether by repeating verbatim talking points such as “not all feminists are like that!” or even start yapping senselessly “it is for equality!” then claim people are “misogynist-meanies” for not agreeing with you online/in real life (which is sort of humorous when feminists just blurt those out after a long pause during debates with@Nero on YouTube or Twitter). But leaving aside the glaring contradiction that feminists make when they declare some women “less equal,” what do hypocritical immaculate feminist princesses do when they can’t win by throwing a tantrum? Simple, they send you a fat mindless drone…for equality.

Let’s just focus on the shining overweight, social media-based white knight by the name Arthur Chu. This fat drone belongs to a neo-class of SJW white knight who, will not only slay the “dragon” but will also slay any “filthy” maidens the immaculate feminists princesses above order him to. Let’s remember, the original classic white knight in fairy tales was supposed to just slay the dragon & save the maiden and/or die trying. Period (well, besides shagging the thankful princess)

But the neo-SJW white knights variety? Oh, those ones are usually fat and/or un-fuckable mindless males in white social media armor who will slay whatever the right kind of feminist maidens dictate, problem is, to those feminist maidens anything they dislike looks like a “dragon”, for example:

Most forms of humor? They are “offensive dragons”
Your free speech? It’s a “dragon”
Intellectual diversity? Also a “dragon”

To feminists ANYTHING can be considered a “dragon” to be slain by those little neo-SJW white knights that act more like drones (and most are so Chu-butt-ugly that get to shag mostly zero immaculate princesses). The reality is that Arthur Chu knows deep down may know or at least suspect he is no hero, he is no “noble white knight”. If anything, deep down, he knows he is an impulsive, overweight unattractive man with an intense sense of guilt who is, routinely outsmarted, cajoled and used by others. Rather than a white knight in shining armor, Chu is more of a chromed mindless steam roller with terminator delusions of grandeur at best. He is just an object for feminists to use and despite the blatant contradictions he my notice in the orders he receives, Arthur won’t question any of them. He is is just a mindless drone imbued with the illusion of feminist free will.

How else could we explain the sudden complete removal of his sworn servitude to women, to social causes and even worse, denying someone else’s rape? Makes no sense. Unless, we remove Arthur Chu’s sentience and we see him as a blunt object of retribution only leads us into a far worse implication; as previously stated he will not question orders because he consistently & willingly refuses to use his very high intellect, (the one that allowed him to win Jeopardy several times).

Well, to be entirely honest, winning in Jeopardy is not a certificate of intelligence and rather what it means is that in Arthur Chu’s case, as noted before, his intelligence is very narrow & ornamental, like a roomba robot capable of very specific tasks such a sweeping the floors of a game show but other than that, Arthur Chu’s purported intelligence does not apply to his actions which are mostly led by a deformed, misplaced sense of justice fueled by intense guilt for his past. As odd as it sounds, his sweeping-Jeopardy narrow intellect is, ostensibly, useless for authentic boundless reasoning, as much as you could not ask a roomba robot to learn how to have empathy towards victims of home invasion, assault and rape. It is just to narrow to be human.

See, the insult upon the injury to Arthur Chu’s imaginary intelligence is quite surprising, even for a very public feminist like him, he made the mistake of not only very publicly opposing those who defended a woman that was raped but he also contradicted himself and committed a series of feminists capital sins such as blaming the victim as well as not believing them by default (as the feminist doctrine states via Cult leaders like Anita Sarkeesian; he failed to “always believe the victim”). But why are drones like him so easy to control? Truth is, just like other public male feminists, Arthur Chu is ashamed of his own biological existence as a male and is driven by possibly, intense shame for his past which makes him carry a cross that looks more like a “rapey” letter R.

Why? Because when it comes to “worthy” decent women (AKA feminists) he is more than eager to express intense guilt for the sins of “toxic masculinity” and rape itself. He went as far as writing an article where he expresses intense remorse to the point of even appearing on CNN to publicly call himself a coward for being a “passive onlooker” to acts related to rape. It truly sounded as if he was apologizing for being an accomplice to rape.  But it also gave the impression he did not want to fully confess to it (more on that on part 3 of this article). Was Arthur Chu trying to atone for his own past sins by apologizing on national TV? Does he secretly donate money from his Jeopardy prizes to battered/raped women shelters, perhaps the way a sinner goes to church and tithes copiously? Did he rape someone in the past? Because of all these blatant acts of hypocrisy, I have zero empathy for Arthur Chu.

Granted, as a Troll, I voluntarily remove all of my empathy towards hypocrites like Arthur Chu. He is not a child anymore, and neither am I. Therefore, I welcome everyone to remove their sympathy towards me as well. Nobody is above the rules. Nobody is off the menu. But in my humble Troll opinion, what matters here is to expose the contradictions of a public hypocrite such as Chu, because he often claims the public moral high ground yet makes convenient exceptions when it comes to victims like Cytherea despite all the evidence. Therefore, I would like to issue a very public challenge to Arthur Chu, here is my open letter/public challenge to him,

Dear Arthur Chu,

Given to the fact you very publicly refused to acknowledge Cytherea’s rape despite all the legal evidence (thus behaving in a way feminism would label as “supporting rape culture”) I took the liberty to gather the necessary public records regarding the arrest and sentencing of Cytherea’s rapists; Qumaire Rainey; Edward London; Latoine Morris & Casey Franks. (attached)

I hereby would like to publicly challenge you to provide credible, indisputable evidence showing the attached court records are in any way shape or form legally false. Allow me to remind you, should you decide to do so, you would also have to provide evidence beyond reasonable doubt to the now near-implausible innocence of the already sentenced criminals: Qumaire Rainey; Edward London; Latoine Morris & Casey Franks. Which would further imply you would be withholding evidence to the innocence of 4 young black teenagers. Furthermore, such actions would imply you not only support rape culture but also the oppression of otherwise innocent black people.

Please be advised to provide extraordinary evidence should you impulsively make extraordinary claims (as you often do) because you would be liable for perjury and/or libel. Also, be reminded your participation in game shows are ornamental & have no real value in the real world, neither legally nor academically.

You are being publicly challenged, I would suggest you avoid being a coward, do so at least once in your life.

Or what? You like to lose publicly?

Best Regards,

Jack Outis


Lemme show you a few pages from the court records. The rest are in archived form, and here is their original source.12101118