Monthly Archives: December 2015

How I rectally hurt the University of Bristol: Milo VS Rebecca Reid Debate update

DISCLAIMER 1: What follows is a mixture of facts, speculation & satire therefore the adverb “allegedly” prefaces and applies to the whole article.

DISCLAIMER 2: I am a proud Neo-Troll & I DO NOT represent #GamerGate. Truth with zero protocol will be used; get offended. Feel free to disregard everything I say based on my Troll status. For those who stayed, read on;

(EDITOR’S NOTE: this article was featured at theralphretort.com)

How I rectally hurt the University of Bristol: Milo VS Rebecca Reid Debate update

nero bristol update

Long story short:  Milo debated feminist Rebecca Reid and thoroughly sodomized her feminism on stage with a sandpaper of fact-checked logic. No surprises here.

But there was a problem: the video of the debate the University of Bristol posted had painfully low volume for dialogue, so logically, you had to crank it up. But when people clapped? It would leave you almost deaf.

Then Trolly yours fixed the audio, fucked up the colors and re-uploaded a copy of their video with zero changes (save the audio and the colors) then promoted the video here at the Ralph Retort.

The views on their official crappy volume one? 97K in 14 days. (despite the official promotion by Milo & Breitbart)

The views for my edit? 13K  in 12 days (with nearly no promotion).

Add to that 318 likes & 1 dislike. So maybe just maaaaybe that means 13k people may have understood the audio I fixed a little better. After my community service was done I almost forgot about the video.

But guess what? Two days ago  I received this demand from the University of Bristol TV station,

screenshot363

Whaaaaaaaaat? WTF? Since when does my channel have the cooties?

Why would they ask me to remove something that is indirectly helping their work?

Then it hit me: Look at the majestically blasphemous name of my piss-poor youtube channel:

screenshot364

Your Proud Trolly Channel brought to you by Trolly Yours.

So, if we put two and two together, the University of Bristol TV station got all butthurt because of the name of my channel: FEMINISM IS CREATIONISM.

Well, here’s the thing for UBTV, I would not have caused them all this rectal pain, had they done their fucking production job by cleaning the audio before uploading their mediocre edit.

But why would they have done that in the first place? Simple. UBTV’s social justice warrior interns do not like Milo and since they could not silence him in the first place, they tried to keep him as low volume as possible. Of course, that is by Occam’s Razor.

So, let’s get to the point.

MY ULTIMATUM FOR UBTV

Fuck you UBTV. I will not take the video down.

If you DMCA me, then I will re-upload it until you get tired or you get my channel banned.

If you get my channel banned, then I will  open 3 or more new ones, re-upload it to each one & promote them here.

Every time you try to censor me I will expose you on this website.

Bring it on, I can play this game all day.

I will wear you down & keep re-uploading the video to expose your hypocrisy.

Here is the video again.

Fuck you again UBTV.

PS

Unlike you UBTV, I don’t have courses to attend or schedules to comply with, so I am more likely to win this little battle for attrition. BTW, I am also used to getting banned, hence my 33 suspension victories on Twitter.

PS2

Bonus: This is the only other video on my channel, you dear reader be the judge if this is the real reason for their butthurt.

BTW dear filthy readers o’ mine: If any of you wants to mirror the video on your channel, please let me know & I will upload it to Google Drive for you.

PS3

I may, however take it down ONLY if Milo asks Ralph directly. Other than that? Fuck you a 3rd time UBTV.

Thank you for reading.

Milo Yiannopoulos VS Rebecca Reid – NOW FEATURING AUDIO

final

DISCLAIMER 1: What follows is a mixture of facts, speculation & satire therefore the adverb “allegedly” prefaces and applies to the whole article.

DISCLAIMER 2: I am a proud Neo-Troll & I DO NOT represent #GamerGate. Truth with zero protocol will be used; get offended. Feel free to disregard everything I say based on my Troll status. For those who stayed, behold;

(EDITOR’S NOTE: This article was featured at theralphretort.com)

IMPORTANT SANDPAPER

CONDOM UPDATE

TL;DR The original audio sucked, I fixed it. Video + downloadable soundcloud MP3 available below.

Dear Gender-traitor-sock-puppet-“ladies” and Cis-gendered privileged pigs of #GamerGate, it is with utter Schadenfreude that I announce Milo has, once again, given a thorough railing with a sandpaper condom of fact-checked logic to another feminist: Rebecca Reid.

The public and disgraceful nonconsensual intellectual railing was hosted at the oversized & overpriced daycare for the meekest future unemployed parasites of society  the University of Bristol.

But there was one technical problem: The debate almost had no audio and the volume was so incredibly low and puny for most of the dialogue, you had to crank it all the way up 11, but when the audience clapped? It was ferociously deafening.

The low audio was so dismal, the comment section was peppered with complaints. I then went to their “about” section on their YouTube channel, just to see who the fuck had been unprofessional enough to release such disastrous final edit. This is what I found;

UBTV is the University of Bristol’s TV Station run by UoB Students.

Yes, it shows it is run by students. Most likely Breitbart had no control over the final edit. (but should have fixed it on their “highlights” edit)

Long story short: I fixed the audio but fucked up the colors (apologies, it shows this Troll is color blind). 

I am therefore releasing the video with improved audio along with the audio-only file for you to download on Soundcloud.

VIDEO

AUDIO FILE

PS

1

Why did I do it? Because feminists bitch and demand others “do the fixing” and I am not a feminist: I hate bitching without fixing.

2

Notes for Milo: The uncompressed WAV is available should you require it for RadioNero (if you ever fucking resurrect it you majestic fagasaiyan).

Also, consider either recording your debates with your phone, or buying this small recorder to place in your breast pocket during debates or, possibly, buying this fully featured one if one of your colleagues can place it nearby before each event.

Because, If people cannot hear you Milo, you completely defeat the purpose of exercising your right to free speech.

Especially on social media as the attention spans are just too low for anything above 5 minutes: Most people will watch a lolcat video instead of trying to decipher your teeny garbled audio.

Also, for a man who pays so much attention to the detail and quality of his written thoughts, you did not pay any attention to the quality in which your spoken thoughts were broadcast in this instance. Think of your audio at Bristol as a version of you that was dressed so poorly, it almost looked like a homeless person as opposed to your actual impeccable physical appearance, compare them and you will realize both constitute quite a paradox in quality.

It is unprofessional of you to expect your audience to decipher mediocre, badly recorded audio. Plus, it will save you lots of editing and complaints from lowly, color-blind trolls with mediocre punctuation skills.

3

Bring on the heat: I can take the heat, I won’t get out of this kitchen. If I criticize Milo, I want to be questioned and criticized at least twice as harshly if not more. Besides, I am far from being a fucking femi-princess so leave your most brutal criticism in the comments section, anything goes, I will read it and own up to my mistakes. I agree, I fucked up the colors. I, agree; my, punctuation: is. mediocre.

The audio? Here’s a few notes for audio nerds,

First the applauses had to be normalized to -1dB (they were a fucking deafening drill to the ears) then it took nearly 2 hrs for RX to remove the room noise and hum at the most accurate settings then 1 hour to get the right compression with 2 different plugins applied 4 times. Finally, the whole wave was normalized to -1 dB (I originally wanted to remove much more of the annoying-as-fuck echo but that started creating metalization & artifacts). I would have done more but with every extra day, the video loses relevance and quite honestly, I did it pro bono, so fuck it. The colors? My second monitor was not calibrated. How bad do they look to you? Leave your comments below.

 

Porn is War on Women, Part 2

DISCLAIMER 1: What follows is a mixture of facts, speculation & satire therefore the adverb “allegedly” prefaces and applies to the whole article.

DISCLAIMER 2: I am a proud Neo-Troll & I DO NOT represent #GamerGate. Truth with zero protocol will be used; get offended. Feel free to disregard everything I say based on my Troll status. For those who stayed, behold;

(EDITOR’S NOTE: This article was featured at theralphretort.com)

TEACH THEM NOT TO THINK!

FEMINISTS HAVE MYSTERIOUS WAYS

As we saw in part one of this PORN IS WAR ON WOMEN series, feminists like Anita Sarkeesian have a rather dysfunctional relationship with porn because of their past sexual abuse. Problem is, feminists are a toxic Pandora’s box of contradictions. Somehow, they manage to jump from website to website only to land in the darkest crevices of the internet. Then just by “chance”, they end up watching the most fucked up porn available. After many accidental “discoveries” they find the sickest, hardest-core rape fantasy/rape-snuff video, THEN they lose their menses, stand up and yell…

BAN THIS GORY-MIDGET-CLOWN-RAPE PORN!  I MEAN! BAN ALL PORN!

Feminists actively fishing for porn that sexually offends them sounds like an anti-bacon radicalized Muslim. Hopping from restaurant to restaurant for days on end only to gorge on bacon, savoring its sinfully salty taste until he manages to find the one stale bacon strip, THEN he snaps and with mouth full of bacon he stands up & yells…

“ALLBAFF-MAAHU M-AK-FF-BA-MM-FR-GR-PTOI!”

Then he detonates his very Halal anti-bacon vest. Clarification: the proper suicidal expression is “ALLAHU-AKBAR” but the bacon bits coming from his mouth distorted the pronunciation. Apologies to all triggered stressed suicide bombers reading this.

More seriously, it does not make sense for feminists to oppose all forms of porn and to claim all of it is harmful and dysfunctional. Which begs the question: What kind of fucked up porn do they actually watch? Problem is, admitting to their fucked up porn watching habits would be in and of itself…”problematic”. But thankfully this feminist hypocrisy leads us to an even more interesting and filthier question…

How many kinds of porn are there?

Well, judging by the giant matrix of all smutty things (our dear porny internet) in my own rough estimates the surface web might contain around:

  • 70% of hetero porn (aka “vanilla porn”)
  • 25% would be lesbian porn marketed at hetero audiences (male gay porn, transporn and all other eccentric forms thrown in)
  • *5% which would be the illegal violent dysfunctional kind (child/rape/snuff and dysfunctional paraphilias mostly at deep/dark web level)

This last 5% would be a radfem favorite because it is the one to immediately blow out of proportion. That small 5% becomes 99% of all porn in order to fit their narratives. From the point of view of radical feminist demagogues, it is more convenient to claim that 99% of all online porn is “violent and dysfunctional” than the estimated 5%.

In essence, we have a loud, previously raped, sexually dysfunctional and anorgasmic minority of godawful-boil-in-the-ass-ugly radical lesbians trying to tell the world how and when to fuck. That makes as much sense as anorexic people telling the world what a “good” nutrition diet consists of. Feminism is a ghost restaurant for the sexually anorexic, good luck having a meal there.

*Note: My 5% estimate was based on the estimated  5% of actual serial rapists on campuses, but I will be glad to include more accurate estimates if you provide sources for them. BTW I found many infographs and stats on the kinds of porn available online but none of them elaborated upon how much “dysfunctional porn” is estimated to be available online. You can Google “porn infographic” then hunt down the references, however none seemed to include that category. Even worse, you’ll  find overblown estimates from hard-line Christian sites to discourage other Christians from watching porn.

VANILLA IN FLUX

flux_complete

Well first of all, Vanilla sex is NOT Vanilla porn as much as a new car is not a fucking transformer from a Michael Bay movie. Vanilla porn features sexual Olympians with above average bodies and sexual drives performing the most elaborate, acrobatic, and flamboyant sexual acts. Those then lead to some of the most the eccentric orgasms. Why the copious erotic flamboyance you may ask? Because porn follows the logic of dreams. Porn is very much like them: inspired by, but removed from reality.

The reason why Vanilla porn is so successful, is because Vanilla sex is quite mediocre. 

Vanilla porn is satisfaction and Vanilla sex is compliance. Many couples need to watch Vanilla porn to “enhance” their vanilla sexual compliance. It’s the same way a fat rhino on a treadmill would look at the poster of a pretty unicorn for inspiration. That is why Vanilla porn has brought Brazzers, BangBros or other similar well-known sites to the forefront of the internet. It is the affordable filthy ideal.

Obviously, the biggest sexual tragedy to human kind is having to have sex with a feminist. Why? Because most of them are godawfulboil-in-the-ass-ugly and/or anorgasmic thus they have a Nun-ish, prudish and deformed way of perceiving sex. Even harmless sex toys are rather “problematic” or only for “sexual deviants“, but the truth is far less elegant.

WOrPV7F

Leaving the feminist failures of human kind aside, what are the features of Vanilla porn? It mostly features vaginal, anal and oral penetration using one (or several) erect penises or their replacement, AKA sex toys. If the 3 forms of penetration take place at once, it is usually referred to as an “airtight” scene which is becoming more and more common. Alternatively, tongues and limbs can be used for anal and vaginal penetration but mostly what is used is much smaller, thinner limbs belonging to lesbian performers.  The use of mouths and tongues as improvised sexual organs or suction devices is also common, but mostly they are used for stimulation of orifices or genitals. Saliva, vaginal secretions and sperm are common and eccentrically used. Blood, nasal secretions, vomit, and excrement are (thankfully) absent in Vanilla porn.

See the contradiction? 60 years ago, nearly all of the acts above would have been considered “Toxic and Sinful“. 30 years ago? “Hard-Core”. But nowadays? Just Vanilla.

Here’s one thing that many people do not notice. There are two things Japan is almost always 10-20 years ahead of the west in: technology and experimental porn.

Therefore, today’s Japanese experimental hard-core porn is our future Vanilla Porn.

Fortunately, licking the cornea of a partner went out of fashion in Japan. Unfortunately, enemas containing living eels seems to be gaining momentum and might be in our own Western porn roadmap. And yes, I watched copious amounts of Japanese porn for science.

What is truly fascinating is how online Vanilla porn resembles another (seemingly) unrelated and distant industry that also offers massive, always available, nearly instantaneous satisfaction to a different set of physiological needs: The Fast Food Industry.

 

SWEET SWEET JUNK FOOD FOR THE GENITALS

TgAvkIQ (1) 

The human animal is a complex and paradoxical one, if the average person in the west has physiological needs, the satisfaction is immediate. Roughly like this:

  • Food? -> Junk Food/Fridge
  • A drink? -> Fridge
  • Urinate/defecate? -> Bathroom
  • Fuck? ->  Internet…

The last one is paradoxical, because instead of “Internet” it should be sexual worker or sexual partner. But given the aforementioned limited choice, high cost, and chronic mediocrity of real sex vs the beautifully obscene and lush variety of eccentric ways to ejaculate offered by the internet; online porn wins.

No wonder why online porn paved the way for the modern internet. And no wonder why sexually functional men and women prefer the internet for a quick wank-fix. Real sex is ants, online porn is satellites.

The reality is that Vanilla Porn is far more satisfying than reality when all the costs and risks are considered: The enjoyability of real sex fluctuates too much, there is no quality control, and the removal of the service is always unpredictable along with the also unpredictable risk of irreversible health problems.

Furthermore, there is the legal side of randomly becoming an ATM-sperm-donor-beast-of-burden after an “accidental” pregnancy, divorce or being falsely accused of rape then subjected to a trial by social media.

Why would you acquire an enormous debt only to become a manager of a dysfunctional fast food restaurant if all you wanted was one sexual burger?

Welcome to western marriage for straight guys. 

No. None of those risks are present in Porn (besides, stiffness in the arms is only temporary). Due to all of this, we are on the brink of a momentous and extraordinarily exciting filthy revolution: VR porn then fuck-bots.

But that is in the near future, let’s talk about our filthy present and the many shades of online porn available.

 

PORN PALETTES

9RKwqZT

As stated before, legal porn has a wide array of manifestations but the list is always incomplete and will keep growing as new “variants” of porn are created at least every 2 years. If there was an equivalent to Moore’s law for porn it would state,

“Pr0n’slaw is the observation that, over the history of online porn, the number of porn weirdness combined with paraphilias found in online communities and ecosystems, doubles approximately every two years”

That is to say that as technology progresses, so will porn weirdness. Many, many, maaaaany forms of porn are considered to be a paraphilia or overlap with several other paraphilias.

So far 549 paraphillias have been classified and the number of porn varieties that overlap, combine or modify one or several paraphilias just saturates the mind. (If internet porn had a body it would look like a sentient, omnivorous Chinese cuisine cookbook from hell that was high on meth+ PCP+Viagra, constantly churning out new untested porn recipes)

BTW the 549 number is just a place holder for what may very be a much higher number in offline reality. Yes, there may be legal sexual things so dark and filthy, that some of the people who exercise them may not be proud to share with the internet just yet. Just be patient, one of the X-Chans will eventually release those dark sexual Krakens, possibly as revenge porn.
But why are paraphillias important? Well because they are considered “mental disorders” and that is a key word for feminist radcunts to salivate like Pavlovian hounds at the opportunity of declaring all porn a “mental disorder”.

Let’s say you have developed (or were born with the potential for) the somehow “classy” paraphilia called Agalmatophilia (i.e. you exclusively want to sexually ravage polyester mannequins with untold polyester lust)

Is there a victim to your “weird” preference?

No. None.

red

Agalmatophilia vs as seen by RadNuns

Of course, the feminists would have a hard time convincing a polyester mannequin about suing the owner of the mannequin for “repeated, nonconcensual sandpaper condom-based polyester rape”. But that is where the feminists would want a “catch-all” law to avoid making themselves a laughing stock again (if doing more so were even possible) and make all porn illegal.

Remember, being a feminist means feeling life only but not thinking about it, it is all about impulsiveness and lack of reasoning. Being a feminists means demanding laws be passed with zero accountability for their repercussions, or as Nicholson put it,

NICHOLSON.png

But, which ones in the growing list of paraphilias truly are on the verge of being illegal? Which ones are not?Well that is where things are very flexible, (perhaps too flexible) if we are talking about two consenting adults. They can do as much as they want to themselves and to each other as long as they do not murder anybody (this unfortunately includes extremes such as self harm to name just one). However, this “flexibility” has to be calibrated with the laws of the country in question and the field of classification of mental disorders. That area of study requires the dispassionate reasoning feminists consistently lack.

Precisely because of that, feminists fail to understand the nature of porn; understanding human sexuality requires focus on reasoning and separation from emotion. But the act of dispassionate reasoning happens to be anathema to feminist dogma.

Any precise, granular reasoning is not to pass through their emotions. This puts them in a prison with no walls; their passion prevents them from observing or understanding their own mistakes, as well as objective reality as a whole. Even if it is in their best interest to understand it.

 

PORN-RAPE CORRELATION

hurry2 !

 

So what does porn do to men? Contrary to the church of feminism and its gospel, porn is more likely to be a deterrent to sexual “deviancy” because it works as junk food on its clients. It is immediate, it is easy to obtain and usually its users become “addicted” to it. That being said, it is more of a compulsion than an “addiction”, as much as you don’t have an “addiction to washing your hands” you rather have a “compulsion to wash hands” by the same token. “Porn Addiction” should be referred as a “compulsion to jerk off to porn”.

But the inconvenient truth about men who jerk off to porn on a regular basis,  is that they often get tired, they get headaches, penisaches and to top it off, they also get the post ejaculatory munchies. These “munchies” are somehow reminiscent to the munchies experienced by pothheads and the result is that, men who jerk off to porn, tend to gain weight. So in a nutshell, contrary to what Anita and her acolytes believe, porn does not beget sexual violence, quite the contrary possibly it prevents it. By the same token nothing gets mellower than males who jerk off to porn and are also potheads.

This mellow effect porn has on men works against Anita’s cult. Why? Because contrary to the tenets of the feminist religion, ever since the migration of porn from filthy & slippery movie theaters into living rooms in the early 80’s via Betamax and VHS tape-filth (then DVD then online porn ). The rates of sexual assault have been plummeting in the western world. The lack of access to online porn seems to increase sexual assault in other more traditional cultures. Almost as if the more religiously repressive the culture becomes, the more fucked up “unwanked” celibate men get, like crazy cows nobody milks.

Along with the fact that legalizing porn has also resulted in a perceived correlation in the reduction of sex crimes in several countries. However, the causation is still a matter of disagreement in many fronts. In short, online Porn may reduce rape but if you ask a feminist? That is always “problematic” or a “lie”. No, to them the only solution is to yell,

BAN ALL PORN!

The predictable accusation from feminists  (just like Anita who claims videogames cause sexual violence) would be that without porn, men would naturally rape. The simple answer is that would be unlikely, possibly because the estimated ~5% of the male population who were born/raised as serial rapists are very similar to serial killers: They are a very small percentage of criminals that terrify the confused masses. And no, you cannot teach them “not to rape”

But unlike serial killers, it would stand to reason the borderline sexual psychos (not the 5% serial rapists) would  just stay home, watch fucked up porn and jerk off and get fat on Doritos. Furthermore, if the porn-rape correlation is true, then that would be bad news for Anita, Why? Because videogames would also REDUCE not increase sexual violence with the borderline psychos.

But what do feminists do? Instead of seeing the benefits of massive quantities of fat and mellow gamer-porn-watcher-wankers along with the a few of the 5% of psycho-wankers getting also fatter everyday (thus unable to effectively chase and rape their victims) feminists are still outraged porn exists so pervasively.

Granted, many feminists are so fat that even the aforementioned fat mellow wankers would catch them. But again, why would they? Feminist godawfulboil-in-the-ass-ugliness renders them unrapeable. Even raping a desk would be more satisfying. Or like Natasha Leggero put it,

 

This is the end of part 2

Part 3 will deal with the filthy & “problematic” future of porn so stay tuned but if you are a feminist, you may give yourself a rectal fissure.

PS

Dear feminists: Stop clenching.

I hereby make these templates available for meme purposes, do with Anita the Nun whatever you please.

Feel free to treat her like an object because it is just a png file. 

Dear Readers: Share this article! Go! #UpsetAllAnitas !

Thank you for reading.

sub 2

BLANK

Porn is War on Women, Part 1

DISCLAIMER 1: What follows is a mixture of facts, speculation & satire therefore the adverb “allegedly” prefaces and applies to the whole article.

DISCLAIMER 2: I am a proud Neo-Troll & I DO NOT represent #GamerGate. Truth with zero protocol will be used; get offended. Feel free to disregard everything I say based on my Troll status. For those who stayed, behold;

(EDITOR’S NOTE: This article was featured at theralphretort.com)

PORN IS WAR ON WOMEN

westboro feminists
(If feminists were slightly less dishonest.)

 

See? A catchy and inflammatory title like the one used for this article would have been very effective for a feminist website. Deceiving and pulling the emotional strings of an audience is a very effective strategy used by rad fems like Anita Sarkeesian, Zoe Quinn, Jessica Valenti and many others. It’s all about pulling the visceral strings of your audience through lying via emotional manipulation. It’s all about politics and religion painted in pink: Feminism.

Feminists consistently use this strategy, but not because they are authentic victims themselves. They do it for profit, for clicks, and for personal gain. Why? Because rhetoric from demagogues requires the infusion of dark and strong preemptive emotional noise in the title (hence the whimsy title for this article and the prestigious lady above). Once the audience drinks the double espresso emotional noise? Their outrage, is wide awake & ready to be exploited or pitted against any given target. In many ways, feminists and the Westboro Baptist Church (WBC) share strategies.

Furthermore, feminist demagogues persistently and obsessively claim there is an ongoing “war on women” which, plainly speaking means:

“Men are the enemy”

Which, very fittingly, mimics the WBC when they say,

“God is your enemy”

But again, saying there is a “war on women”? Wew…Those feminists really knocked it out of the park with that one! The problem with the exacerbated rhetoric of “war on women” is that, like all lies, it breaks down when we compare it with objective reality. Let’s compare actual historical acts of war with the alleged “war on women” used by feminist demagogues. In the real history of the world, these are common almost universal actions against the enemy:

Actual War
1. Killing the enemy
2. Enslaving the enemy
3. Keeping the enemy as prisoners of war

Therefore an actual “war on women” would look like this
1. Killing women
2. Raping women
3. Keeping women as prisoners of war

The problem with extraordinary claims like “war on women” is that they need to be presented with extraordinary evidence but, alas, feminists do not have any.

But, just for the sake of argument, let’s imagine this was an actual debate with someone like the stereotypical feminist “Big Red”. What would be the first thing she would say when shown the comparison above of what an actual war on women would look like? Perhaps the first thing she would say would be something along these lines:

screenshot131

“SEE?! Men have always killed and raped women throughout history & they also ASS-whipped them in dungeons! THIS IS PATRIARCHY!!! IT IS WAR ON WYMYN..!”



OK, that’s enough.

Let’s use our patriarchal powers to silence the yelling, red, radcunt above from continuing her tirade. It would just be unrelated to historical facts and quite honestly, she gives the impression of spitting too much while speaking.

Let me explain: History shows women were not the target of war, men were. In an ideal world, high-profile feminists would recognize that men are the primary victims of their own death but instead, they publicly say jewels like this:

Hillary.png

No. It is not a meme, nor a mediocre attempt at satire. It is an authentic quote completely within the context of feminism. If even high-profile feminists have these vast lapses of basic human decency and common sense (despite the fact they have a lot to lose), very little can be expected from the average feminist (who have much less to lose). In essence, the above quote is, just like feminists, disconnected from reality and misanthropic at best.

Objective reality is far from their dogmatic and delusional feminist view of reality. Throughout history, “killing women” was never a priority. The main goal was killing the ones wielding the weapons.

KILLING THE MEN.

If we compare actual war with the purported “war on women” the comparison completely breaks down. War does not feature “filming the enemy for sexual entertainment” War does not give anybody “safe practices” or “safe words” to stop the battle whenever needed.

No. War is about killing the enemy and the enemy has overwhelmingly consisted of male armies. Save exceptions like the Mongols, the vast majority of male armies had nearly zero interest in killing the women and the children. Quite the opposite, they were either enslaved or just let go. Again, we are talking about vast majorities, not exceptions. Feminists have the bad habit of bringing up one or two historical exceptions (such as the Amazons or other warrior women) to build their fake historical narratives around feminism. These only contradict their other narrative, which is that women are always the victims. The reality is that Female warriors were rare exceptions in the vast seas of male blood throughout human history. But again, just for the sake of argument, let’s consider the following:

Was ever filming sexual intercourse a war strategy?
Is porn an act of war at all?
How does porn rank then?
Is porn a number 4?

How about 7?
If so, what kind of porn qualifies as an act of war?

The answer is: None.

That is why feminists are laughable.

However, the Wikipedia page of feminist views on porn makes as much sense as an assembly of Radical Muslims trying to agree on how to follow a pork-only cookbook.

Why do feminists like Anita Sarkeesian dislike sexuality and porn so much?
Why do they have the bad habit of comparing it to sexual assault and/or war?

Well, here is the unkind & honest truth:

Feminists reject porn because it reminds them of their own past sexual abuse.

As delusional as they may be, feminists vicariously re-live their own harm through someone else’s pleasure i.e. porn. It makes as much sense as an anorexic that hates food more and more every time she sees a junk food ad. But what the anorexic does not say is that she was once force-fed against her will. Or, in a more literal way, it makes as much sense as anti-porn feminist that hates sex more and more every time she sees a porn film. What the anti-porn feminist does not say is that she was once penetrated against her will.

It would therefore stand to reason that Anita Sarkeesian’s rejection of male sexuality stems from her own personal sexual abuse and how she remembers it regularly. She may even be aware she cannot impose her trauma upon others but, like most sociopaths, she may also believe she provides a “service to society” thus anything goes for the sake of “girls like her”. Notice how the ego of a feminist always gets in.

Feminists are aware of this dysfunction but are too narcissistic to address their unhealthy daily excessive retrieval habits, how they remember their own rape on a daily basis and how porn causes them to keep remembering their own rape (despite the fact it would make more sense for them to avoid it, instead of “stumbling upon” it so often online, you got to wonder how they manage to “find” the “sickest” porn on their own). This excessive retrieval leads them to narcissistically and falsely conclude that just because sexual intercourse on the screen is personally hurtful to them, it should be banned for everybody else. Or, as they may put it if they were honest:

Ban ALL PORN because my broken sexuality dictates reality FOR EVERYONE!!!

 

No. It just does not make sense for sexually broken individuals to be allowed to dictate someone else’s sexuality. They live in a delusion where they truly believe that their past sexual abuse defines sexual reality for everyone else. Thus they successfully exercise a form of sexual solipcism where one personal event of a crime falsely defines rules for society as a whole inside their sexually solipsistic heads. This is a broken process and a painfully narcissistic contradiction, but instead of acknowledging they have a serious psychological problem, they chose to let their untreated PTSD fossilize and try to enforce the limitations of  their mental disorders upon society. The result? Sexually broken feminists like Anita Sarkeesian trying to regulate the sexuality of male gamers in the western world. Sounds familiar? Let me rephrase it:

Ban ALL SEXY VIDEO GAMES because my broken sexuality dictates reality FOR EVERYONE!!!

Imagine a victim of a hit and run who now wants all drivers cars and highways banned because they are all part of a “war on pedestrians”.

It makes no sense. Blaming others for your own personal trauma does not work. Saying is “not their fault” does not help either, because it is a lie feminists tell themselves too often. They say “It’s not my fault” not only to the crime that happened to them but to each and every one of their subsequent actions. They see the world through their trauma, a distorted, feeling-only, broken world where their everyday interest is making a drama out of their lives. To stay as far as possible from objective reality they blame other people for their problems. Feminists also falsely believe that they have the higher moral ground. They live in a misery of their own daily making and they actively rationalize convoluted excuses to be royal, unbearable, radcunts.

But…

Do feminists even realize they are as irrational and impulsive as Salafi Muslims? They don’t. They are a radcunt version of the Westboro Baptist Church or Salafi Muslims, take your pick.

Oh, and they also hold anti porn signs at rallies that nearly say…

“Women hate men…erm…porn!”

Just like the Westboro Baptist Church, you only have to swap the word “I” and use another word like “God” or a group such as “women” to validate a personal statement and make it look as if it applied to a collective. It has much more punch to say…

“Women are tired of porn objectification”

than just saying,

“I am tired of porn”  

They justify their narcissism by using a collective. It is all about manipulation of the language, just like avoiding calling a male they dislike “rapist” and instead call them “rape apologist”, which carries nearly the same punch minus the legal repercussions. See? They are cunning radcunts after all.

 

This is the end of part 1

Part 2 will deal with Porn itself so stay tuned but if you are a feminist, you will experience rectal suffering. 

PS

I hereby make these templates available for meme purposes, do with Anita the Nun whatever you please.

Feel free to treat her like an object because it is just a png file. 

Go ahead, #UpsetAllAnitas

Thank you for reading.

PORN IS WAR ON WOMEN (copy) TEMPLATE

 

 

DOAX3 Boycott: The Sin of Game Boobs

DISCLAIMER 1: What follows is a mixture of facts, speculation & satire therefore the adverb “allegedly” prefaces and applies to the whole article.

DISCLAIMER 2: I am a proud Neo-Troll & I DO NOT represent #GamerGate. Truth with zero protocol will be used; get offended. Feel free to disregard everything I say based on my Troll status. For those who stayed, behold;

(EDITOR’S NOTE: This article was featured at theralphretort.com)

DOAX3 Boycott: The Sin of Game Boobs

THE ILLUSION OF BOOBS

illusion of boobs

Why do women have breasts?

Well if you look at other primates, their boobs are mostly deflated unless they have a baby to feed. However, young female human beings have prominent boobs that barely deflate before age 40. Perplexing, isn’t it?

screenshot188

Circled in red: Female gorilla with deflated breasts.

The simplest explanation is that, unlike the other primates, our species can get pregnant all year long. So, in a nutshell, permanent boobs are a permanent signal of fertility or, in plain English, boobs are sexual organs women use to attract those they want to fuck. Then a woman gets pregnant and those boobs switch from fuck-mode to baby-mode. This begs the question…

Why do men look at boobs?

Because it is the other side of the same coin. Women have permanent sexual signals on their chests to attract & choose the men they want to fuck and men permanently look at those signals to stand a chance to fuck those women. The reason why boobs are so relaxing (so much more than weed itself) is because they are the perfect placebo. That pleasure of staring at beautiful, firm, semi-conical female breasts is, in and of itself, an incentive for fertility. Human breasts make you feel relaxed because their purpose is for you to, sooner or later, be attracted enough to the woman to speak to her then convince her to fuck. Why? Because in purely biological terms, the purpose of boobs is for women to attract then choose a man who can ejaculate inside them to get pregnant.

Why are boobs great for business?

Because straight men, lesbians and bisexual women can look at them for hours and hours and don’t get tired of seeing them bounce or be mildly deformed and warped by exotic handling or elaborate devices. Time itself seems to warp and dilate around female breasts. Make no mistake, my cis-pig brothers & gender traitor lesbi-sisters, boobs are an amazing evolutionary confirmation of nature’s simplicity that boils down to the following sentence…

“If you want fat to look sexy, just add a nipple”

Of course, mother nature did not tell me that. It’s just biology and how excessively well people react to two very simple looking adipose appendages with a crude, multi-dispenser in the middle whose ultimate purpose is, to nurture a child.

But that function of feeding a child may also be one of the reasons why breasts are so relaxing to look at, because human infants evolved to look at them while being nurtured and taken care of. It’s possible that this leftover of evolutionary infant relaxation is the reason why adults find human breasts so relaxing, but at the end of the day, boobs are just that; mere glorified feeding devices.

Yes, despite the worldwide fertility worship rituals around computer screens surrounded by shrines of protein-soaked tissues, boobs are just glorified lactation devices people sexually worship (even at work).

If a person is willing to regularly put their job on the line for the sake of staring at those glorified lactation devices, then we know boobs have magnificent power for advertising. In fact, boobs are cynically and routinely used for ads on branded bras, body painting, Red Bull nipple tassels…the list just saturates the mind.

With that amount of power, it is not a surprise online porn (and even forms of animated porn) are so successful. But what truly was a surprise was a game that combined all of these factors. The gaming company TECMO took advantage of the opportunity of extrapolating the animation of bouncing boobs, which is pervasively used in Japanese Hentai anime, into their video game series called Dead or Alive (clever boys) and its latest release DOA Xtreme 3 (or DOAX3 for short).

But with all great boob power comes great intellectual irresponsibility from leftist SJWs. Despite the fact DOAX3 itself does not qualify as porn or even hentai, (it just qualifies as a harmless sexually suggestive game which the ESRB already contemplates in its ratings) SJWs will predictably object to it like Creationists objecting evolution because of its alleged “unfair” portrayal of imaginary women. Thus, TECMO became their default planned Piñata.

Despite the fact TECMO is legally entitled to make money with their work, TECMO has opted to forego the battle with the SJW mobs and avoid releasing the DOAX3 in America and Europe (thus losing not only money but angering the fans of the game) simply because TECMO prefers to forego the profit instead of dealing with plenty of SJW Zealots ready to make empty complaints where imaginary characters are being “objectified & abused”.

That absurd ideological implication of imaginary characters being “abused” makes zero sense in factual reality, but if that were the case, Walt Disney owes a public apology and a multi-million dollar settlement to Peter Pan’s Tinkerbell because she was nonconsensually “objectified”, abused, de-dusted and even worse, sexually assaulted;

Behold the horror

Oh wait, Tinkerbell can’t receive that settlement, because just like videogame characters, she does not fucking exist.

 sub 2

THE LEFTIST NUN MENTALITY

It just does not make sense to listen to a vocal, godawful-boil-in-theass-ugly minority of radical feminists to preclude a company like TECMO from lawfully making money with their game DOAX3.

Banning someone else’s legal work just because of someone else’s puritanical prudish ideologies camouflaged as “progressive” leftist activism? Anita and her acolytes are Neo Nuns.

But this is not something new, the left has been trying to play these tricks elsewhere, for example, most likely you have heard average feminists open their big mouths to say the classic,

“Her body, her choice”

To assert a woman can do whatever she wants to do with her body and be a proud “whore” if she wants to be, unless it is a porn star, because those are the wrong kinds of “whores” and they should obey feminists because when it comes to porn starts the phrase changes to,

“Your body, our choice”

Logically, this fails spectacularly in practice (look at the pervasiveness of online porn) that even feminists realize their implied demand is intensely retarded and since they won’t pay female porn stars a cent, they have to shut the fuck up and to this day, Porn remains, for most intents and purposes, legal.

This has not prevented commercial feminists like Anita Sarkeesian to open their wide basking mouths to try to extrapolate the same,

“Your body, our choice”

But instead Anita tries to apply it to videogame characters, but in her retarded Bell-Hookian mind, the game character’s choice is not “its own”, it instead belongs to feminists.

 

 

PROPERTY OF FEMINISM2

PROPERTY OF FEMINISM

See? Anita is trying to claim the ownership sex-negative feminists have consistently failed to obtain with porn stars. But in her case, she is trying to do it with imaginary characters. Why? Because,

Videogame characters did not choose to be ‘objectified’ 

Anita’s proposal breaks down even worse with the “sin” video game characters like the ones in the DOAX3 boycott represent against her religion. Why? Because the illogical claim that imaginary characters did not “choose” to be objectified can be taken to its ultimate consequences with many other elements of feminists’ lives.

Why? Because feminists do something way worse, not to fictional characters but to living beings. Feminists need to return their cats to the forest because those cats did not “choose” to be pets. Same applies to their dogs dressed up as human babies: They did not “choose” to be ridiculed by women with broken maternal instincts.

Also, all of their fucking plants did not “choose” to be captive, same applies to their lame vegan “progressive” tofurkey sandwiches because tofu did not choose to be turned into human excrement.

See? Following their delusional logic only resulted into the imaginary “oppression of tofurkey” because saying a fictional imaginary character has “agency” to decide about her imaginary sexuality is so wrong that is not even wrong, it is just retarded & delusional.

But why do feminists do this?

Why do feminists try to claim ownership over the fictional creation of game developers? In a nutshell, because often, feminists are sexually dysfunctional and want toxic attention ONLY for themselves.

Very often feminists have a history of past sexual abuse which goes untreated and leaves them psychologically broken, this usually leads to eating disorders (compulsive eating, anorexia bulimia) and a cluster of many other personality disorders that go untreated for years (borderline personality disorder, narcissism, delusions of persecution among many others)

But none of their poor mental health matters because the feminist religion has a perfect imaginary scapegoat for their own real mental disorders:

 DA PATRIARCHY

DA PATRIARCHY!

(AKA the testosterone-addled Satan)

This belief in the fictional patriarchal satan (similar with the one above with phallic red-dildo-like horns allegedly) leads them to avoid psychiatric treatment for years until their cluster of disorders along with their PTSD becomes fossilized.

However broken, they still have a need for broken sexual attention from men or women and since feminists tend to be godawful-boil-in-the-ass-ugly, they naturally don’t get any normal attention, and instead they seek attention of the toxic variety. How? Simple they hate anybody more attractive than them

Women who are not broken? “Whores!”
Women who are prettier? “Whores!”
What about all those slimmer and sexie..? “WHOOOOORES!!!”

Then, when it comes to videogame characters that are far sexier and relevant than what the feminist will ever be in her whole broken fertile life, well, it just makes sense they lose their radical menses over them and want them banned. Of course, to be fair, we could also analyze this  by #Occam’s Razor,

BY OCCAMS

bpYjFm5

THE WARPED HORSESHOE

 

But this goes beyond leftist Zealots, this covers the extreme right because for some fucked up reason, the ends of the horseshoe where republicans are on one side and the democrats on the other are so close that they could touch each other. They both want sex to be regulated and are puritanical as fuck.

Weren’t they supposed to be diametrically opposed? But neither realizes or wants to admit they are that close.

With cases like DOAX3, where the left behaves like anorgasmic nuns desperately trying to ban dildos because they make their floors goopy and the extreme right doing nearly the same and trying to ban all Porn: They just mimic each other’s prudishness.

If the horseshoe theory had a more accurate shape reflecting the shared prudishness of both wings, the horseshoe would look more like a warped horseshoe. Or more like a heart-shaped horseshoe where both ends are just one in front of the other nor distant but they overlap.

This overlap would represent both the religious and leftists Zealots trying to ban all “problematic” games like DOAEX3.

The leftists are the new puritans of the 21st century not different from the people who tried to ban all “problematic” comic books in the 1950’s because they allegedly had “satanic” themes or “incited” crime, which only mirrors the claims by anti video game pundits like Jack Thompson or commercial feminist Anita Sarkeesian.

Make no mistake, the left is the new religious right worshipping the new politically correct god: women.

 

THE MEDUSA EFFECT

Is this trend of worshipping women new? Has it happened in the past? Did people become delusional enough to give women rights but no responsibilities?

Hardly. Toxic female sexuality has always had a level of harm attached to it, not by the woman but by those she manipulates to her advantage. So we could say boobs are dangerous.
Yes, viking boobs may have been sharp enough to take an eye out, but to be honest despite the fact modern boobs are not as sharp, they are still dangerous for other reasons, if you are polite you may say,

“I wonder how a pair of fleshy appendages can be a risk to anyone?”

If you are less polite you may say,

“LIES! Those are just fat bags!”

The reason for boobs to be dangerous is the legal implications of even looking at them without “permission” which is always a grey line because, if the owner of said boobs is wearing clothes specifically designed to display them, it would make sense for them to be seen. But the owner can always complain you are not looking at their boobs but that you are “oggling” at them, but in other circumstances, she does not complain at all. See, the confusing double speak and the plausible deniability feminists like to play is best explained with a simpler principle;

“It is only oggling when unattractive men do it.”

If the feminist is attracted to a particular man, she will make sure she displays and exposes her breasts to the man in question and she will not complain. Why? Because there is no need to be as hypocritical: she wants to fuck that guy she likes.

So, if a young man can be charged with sexual harassment if the feminist in question finds him unattractive enough, her boobs are by virtue of her uncertain behavior toxic boobs.

So what choice do young straight men have to satisfy the healthy need to look at visibly fertile women with fertile looking bodies and non toxic boobs?

Are there any safe boobs to look at left on earth?

Of course, videogame DOAX3 boobs and Porn boobs. (clearly not only boobs but you get the idea) But the problem lingers, when men in the west approach feminists and women on the left it is just a minefield.

Why? Because everything a man does can be misconstrued for leftists purposes, look

  • If you pay attention: You are paying too much attention (creep)
  • If you ignore them: You are a misogynist (privileged & cis gendered therefore almost satan)
  • If you speak to them: You are a “creep” (TRANSLATION: “Creep” in the feminist language is code word for “rapist”)

See the pattern? It is the feminist goal post.

For most men this is confusing because women who use this strategy constantly make men scratch their heads and say

she doesn’t make sense!

The explanation for this moving goal post behavior is simpler than the expected:

She is doing it on purpose to get attention, not to make sense.

They are narcissists that do not need to make use of what they complain about, they just want to complain to get the attention. Just like the SJWs that fervently complain about games they do not even buy or play.

SAFER BOOBS FOR EVERYONE

SAFER BOOBS

 

 

TECMO sets a precedent for companies emulating the behavior of young Japanese “herbivore men” who avoid courting women and dating altogether. But instead, TECMO has opted out of courting Western puritanical SJWs.  

TECMO’s discouragement to make money from their own work stems from a simple decision:

The neo-nuns of the left are not worth the trouble.

Again, this replicates Japanese male gamers, who forego actual sex and instead go for Porn boobs or game boobs. But it goes beyond Japanese gamers because, just like TECMO did, more and more western male gamers may also start saying,

“that juice is not worth the squeeze”

But even if male gamers are gradually withdrawing from society, that will not be enough for commercial feminists like Anita Sarkeesian. It is not enough that male gamers are becoming more and more reclusive just like their Japanese counterparts. It is not enough more male gamers stay in their proverbial basements owned by the parents, just playing games with bouncing boobs or watching Porn. No that reclusive male behavior is also “problematic”

NO. THEY HAVE TO BE PROSECUTED BECAUSE MALE SEXUALITY ITSELF IS “PROBLEMATIC” & SINFUL

To feminists like Sarkeesian, it will never be enough. Those losers and their “sinful” hobbies with bouncing boobs have to be prevented, have to be extinguished because that is on the agenda of the left.

The left has a long list of “problematic” freedoms to ban. Why? Because in the leftist war against free speech, the first target is comedians then you and me.
By the same token, in the leftist war against sex, the first target is games like Dead or Alive Xtreme 3, then Porn then your sexuality then mine.

Do not let the left or the right take your legal freedoms away. 

Thank you for reading.

PS

armene

Explanation of the picture above: Female breasts are considered frontal quasi-buttocks and the female mouth a frontal quasi-vulva. Hence the deep throat penetration common in Porn, which is, an emulation of vaginal penetration. Even labia (latin for lips) are replicated by the fleshy human female lips often enhanced by red lipstick, which only signals a quasi-engorged labia ready for copulation. Possibly, this duplication of buttocks and labia is a result of sexual mimicry in anthropoids, almost as if human nature wanted to double down on human fertility. Yes, this time I am not trolling you.  

#AlisonCrime: Have you seen this dead couple?

DISCLAIMER 1: What follows is a mixture of facts, speculation & satire therefore the adverb “allegedly” prefaces and applies to the whole article.

DISCLAIMER 2: I am a proud Neo-Troll & I DO NOT represent #GamerGate. Truth with zero protocol will be used; get offended. Feel free to disregard everything I say based on my Troll status. For those who stayed, behold;

(EDITOR’S NOTE: This article was featured at theralphretort.com)

 

#AlisonCrime: Have you seen this dead couple?

zero_top_BANNER

 

 

 

STEVEN POLK: THE LIAR

Steven Polk, the compulsive liar, the thief, the scammer, the traitor, the coward that cries crocodile tears on cue. The man that who pretended to be an online female cancer survivor for over 5 years and almost got away with it. Fortunately, by a series of fortuitous events, his lies were exposed. He did however, get away with $10,000 of unlawfully obtained money after he pretended to be a woman whose house had burned down. His actual house reportedly did burn down but instead of asking for help using his real identity, he pretended he was a woman in need for help, THEN the money started pouring in. If only he had been a smarter not ot have turned around exactly when the local press took the photo that unmasked him, I am talking about this photo,

screenshot18

Steven Polk AKA the real Alison Prime

After the photo above appeared on the local newspaper his whole 5-year old Twitter scam was up. Granted, there is very little to like about a the liar-thief-scammer-traitor-coward-that-cries-like-a-bitch, but then he had the wonderful idea of giving the two, now legendarily infamous extended interviews to TheRalphRetort.com. That was when the tank of pig manure hit the plane’s turbine.

As astonishing as it sounds, Steven Polk managed to spend over 3 hours trying to lie over and over only to get caught red handed only to start lying again. However, from that stream of poorly concocted lies coming from Steven’s yeti-like ass, there was one bold-faced lie that stood out like a sore bleeding thumb: Steven claimed the woman whose photo he had been using for at least 5 years was dead. He also claimed she had given him full permission to use her image, for anything he wanted, fraud included in his case.

It just sounded like a poorly concocted lie and it became more logical to consider either of the following two choices,

A) The woman is actually dead but never gave him permission to smear her name.

B) The woman and her boyfriend are alive but they do not know what Steven Polk did.

Let’s assume she is dead and her image has been used for fraud. If she is dead, her family will want to sue Steven Polk. If she is alive, she will be pissed and sue for unlawful impersonation, which carries a sentence of up to 3 years in jail and a $10k fine in the state of California but could be more depending on the state. Add to that a few extra years for the charge of fraud and possibly tax evasion.

There is a slight chance the woman was an orphan (or has a criminal record and wants to stay out of the social network limelight) but that does not mean the boyfriend(s) would not care. How about her extended family? What if she was married? How about her friends and acquaintances? Most likely they would care about preserving her memory if she actually is dead. Or as they say,

Speak no ill of the dead *

*Don’t get me wrong, as a troll I am perfectly OK with people making fun of evil dead people and, if after I die I qualify as one, so be it. But the woman in the pictures? Who knows? Maybe she was a nice person or maybe she was a bitch but her family would still care about her memory. But the gall Steven Polk had to piss on the suffering of cancer patients and use it to scam people? Even for a Troll of my ilk, that is pretty low.

BASIC IMAGE FORENSICS FOR TROLLS

Let’s keep it simple and fast. We want to make sure we do not ever fall for the trap of a fat dude like Steven posing as a woman again. How? Well the solution is to upload suspicious photos of “alleged women” to  two main photo forensics websites that streamline the detection of fakes. How? Well let’s just start with a practical example: Hamburger Radfem Randi Harper is well-known to be not only godawful-boil-in-the-ass-ugly but a landwhale fat-fuck (also as blue). Add to that pig-nosed Harper has the bad habit of photoshopping her Piñata-like body to look falsely slim. Obviously, for this basic test we needed an untouched photo of Piñata-hamburger Harper. I was unlucky enough to have found this recent, seemingly unedited photo of Harper. For reference, here is the archived original from her desperate fan Joshua (yes, there are men THAT desperate).

ORIGINAL FROM JOSHUA_

Oh, you desperate supplicant Joshua

 

 

 

 

Now that we have a picture that appears to be close to what we were looking for: Almost untouched and copied only a few times, (possibly only from Joshua’s phone to Twitter servers). This is important because the more a picture is saved and re-saved, the more it starts degrading especially in the .jpg format.

HARPER CONTROL

As you can tell, there are two main image forensics tests : TEST 1 AKA “ELA” and the TEST 2 called “Noise Analysis”. So in a nutshell the ELA test should look moderately rather dark with originals. But the more degraded the copies of the file get, the darker it gets, one last thing about TEST 1 ELA, whenever you modify the edges of an image, the more purple-ish red-ish it gets.

The last one is the TEST 2 Noise Analysis in a nutshell that one should look as grey as possible, the more modifications are made to a file, the more colorful noise it gets. (note on Harper’s space-invaders dress: unknown why it appears to have generated minimal noise) Of course, I am oversimplifying it. Now that we just saw what an original should look like, let’s look at a modified picture where her face and body look nearly the same,

 

HARPER MODIFIED

I apologize for hurting your eyes with Hamburger Harper’s quarter-tonner appearance, she looks very similar at first sight (almost identical) but as you can tell, the image says MODIFIED, now you can see that on the TEST 1, the background became darker while modified objects are getting very very noisy and purple-redish.

One last thing; bear in mind we are about to use the same tests with the dead Alison pictures to see if they were modified or not. But first, we need to see the extreme effects of multiple copies of a heavily photoshopped picture that has been copied to oblivion. In short, we need something fake as fuck and super degraded. I think I got the perfect  example,

 

 

THE FAKEST FAKE

TROLL SAMPLE

Now let’s look at the extreme effects of both photoshopping and image degradation due to multiple copies. Look at the darker and noisier samples my avatar causes, it is so degraded almost comes black. Now if you wanted to read more on this and get technical you can go to this  site with moderate tools for detection  or a more complete site with more tools  but I suggest you leave that for later.

Disclaimer: Yes, my twitter photo is fake as fuck. This trolly Troll is guilty as charged. My avatar is as an amalgam of 10-15 photos of different random guys I photoshopped to obtain a profile nobody could claim ownership of. With this picture Twitter keeps letting me open accounts (33 so far), and even though they do not last open very long, I enjoy the ride. That is the price to pay in this trolly line of business. Plus, it always puts a smile on my face when a feminist says “I am not that ugly and should go out more” or when gay guys hit on my profile. If only they knew they were talking to a ghost.

HUNTING FOR THE RED DEAD WOMAN

DEAD FEMALES 0

As you can see above, Steven Polk had a lot of fake profiles at different sites, so I had to go to each one and collect all of his fake pictures. Then I had to sort out the ones he used the most often which happened to look like the same woman. Why? Because Steven had a hard time creating new convincing-enough fake pictures so he had to search for look-alikes of the woman he was portraying to give variety to his scam. Problem is, he was kind of blind and some of his chosen fakes did not even look like the main one at all. But as you can see above, he had 4-5 favorites that looked very similar, almost as if they were pictures of the same woman. Those five “favorites” were uploaded to the photo forensics sites to check if they had signs of heavy photoshopping. Why? Because it would have been pointless to have gone on a goose chase after a ghost like myself.

 

AVOIDING THE RED HERRING

Here you have the five favorite stolen profile pictures Steven had in his online accounts forensically analyzed at a very basic level. One last thing, all of the 5 images came back with “NO METADATA” meaning things like the date they were taken or model of the camera were absent. Usually this means the file is a screenshot or a copy too degraded to have any metadata left. Look at the TEST1 and TEST2 results to look for signs of photoshopping,

 

sample 1

The photo above is very degraded but does not appear to be heavily photoshopped.

 

 

sample 2

Also very degraded but the woman looks very similar to the one above. Notice the cartilage of the nose looks different because she is pressing on it and smiling, not impossible to do on photoshop or Z-brush, 3DsMax or Maya but again, something that good would have cost the money Steven did not seem to have.

 

sample 3

A few interesting points, look at the point and shoot camera she is holding, either that photo was taken before smartphones came out or she just has a fetish for old bulky cameras.

Also, the eye color looks different so she may not be the same woman, despite the similarities.

 

 

sample 5

This is where things are getting interesting, there does not seem to be many signs of heavy photoshopping on the male’s face nor her warped breast during the boob grab. Overall, there seems to be a chance this is a real picture of a couple/fuck-friends.

 

sample 4More interesting details: She has longer hair so perhaps this photo was taken after the boob grab one. Notice the wine and the cup in the background, notice her finger nails and his more formal attire. It does not look like they are getting married but looks a little more than just  fuck-friends. Almost as if the relationship had progressed and they went out to a restaurant instead of just Netflix&chill fucking. If that is the case, we may now have two families interested in suing fraudster Steven Pollock. (SIDENOTE: If only I had had access to Facebook’s internal face recognition database to cross-reference the couple.)

 

 

WAS “THE RED DEAD WOMAN” A COMPUTER RENDER?

 

DEAD FEMALES 3

 

The first problem was the chance the photos were fake, either photoshopped or computer renders. However, a photoshop is far cheaper than a render and a professional render that cannot be told apart from a real photo could cost several thousand dollars. Logically, since Steven relied mainly on 4 repetitive pictures, he did not seem to have the budget for professional renders.

However, If those 4-5 repetitive pictures are renders, then he is an expert in 3d modeling. But that begs the question, why would an expert stop at only 4-5 photos? An expert would have produced at least 1 or 2 near perfect fakes per month. Things do not add up when we consider the possibility of renders. So far, evidence suggest that the 5 main pictures were not computer renders nor photoshop fakes. It seems more likely Steven stole the pictures from a real person.

MILDLY INTERESTING DISCOVERY: While batch-downloading the photos from Steven Polk’s social networks, one of the files featuring the couple was originally named,

kara_and_steven1.jpg.

There is a chance that Steven Polk re-baptized that woman as “Kara” in his delusions, or perhaps, just perhaps, “Kara” could be a clue to her actual name.

DEAD FEMALES 2

Unfortunately the subject’s ears were covered in most photos. Visible ears would have been more convenient, as they tend to facilitate identification. However, to further the possibility that the 5 subjects in the pictures are not renders, we can see a couple of subtle biological features that are possible but very hard to achieve on a computer render. Case in point; the Lesser Alar Cartilage AKA the side of her nostril appears to deform similarly in photos 1, 2 and 3. Furthermore, if this is in fact a dead woman, some of her dental record appears to match (at least visually) look at the space between the canine and the premolar. That space seems extremely similar in pictures 1 and 3. The gif below illustrates the possibility that we may be talking about the same woman,

 

mouth comparison

Possible Dental Match of Subjects 1 & 3 

HUNTING THE YETI LIAR: STEVEN POLK

 

Let’s push Steven Polk lies to their ultimate consequences.

We either find the living woman or the dead woman’s family will sue Steven Polk for damages.

Let’s also find the strawberry-blond male in the picture below. If we find him, we may find her. 

PLEASE SHARE THE INFOGRAPHIC BELOW ON SOCIAL MEDIA with any of these 2 tags

#FindTheDeadAlison 

#FindTheDeadAlisonCouple 

 

Thank you for reading.

 

 

 

infographic-dead-couple

 






PS

For reference, here are the 5 original “subject” images used. Feel free to make your own searches; drag them to the google search bar or at karmadecay.com. Or perform your own image analysis at the cited sites: site one or site two.

 

karaandsteven1

me_again_2_by_alisonprime

me_again__but___current_by_alisonprime sent_to_queenie who_nose__by_alisonprime

 

 

 

 

Stoya The Idiot Leper #IDoNotStandWithStoya

DISCLAIMER 1: What follows is a mixture of facts, speculation & satire therefore the adverb “allegedly” prefaces and applies to the whole article.

DISCLAIMER 2: I am a proud Neo-Troll & I DO NOT represent #GamerGate. Truth with zero protocol will be used; get offended. Feel free to disregard everything I say based on my Troll status. For those who stayed, read on;

(EDITOR’S NOTE: this article was featured at theralphretort.com)

THE LEPPER_stoya

 

Stoya The Idiot Leper

#IDoNotStandWithStoya

 

 

It is likely you have heard of the Stoya story. If not, in a nutshell she is a porn actress who accused a male porn actor of having raped her. However, her original accusation of rape did not involve the police; she only accused him on social media on November 28 2015.

accusation-stoya

After Stoya started her personal crusade against Deen, a total of 8 more women have made similar accusations against James Deen. All of them on social media, none is reported to have gone to the police.

As a result, several major agencies dropped Deen as a performer. See? Even the porn industry complies with the feminist religion, even if they do not want to accept it. The fact they disowned their former feminist golden boy is a tacit admission they are afraid of feminism retaliating against their industry. Porn is not the Queen, it is a mere concubine in her majesty; Queen feminism and her Queendom.

This bears resemblance not only with Bill Cosby’s case but also with Jian Gomeshi’s case. In both cases the media decided right from the beginning that both men were guilty until proven innocent. This was based on public appeals of emotion on behalf of women, not facts. Also, in the case of Gomeshi, the press RUSHED to disown their own former feminist golden boy. In that regard, Stoya’s case is not different, the trial by social media has already concluded James Deen is guilty. No real trial needed.

Now, as you may have noticed, the left was also quick to publicize these accusations almost as these women were not the same porn starts the left constantly derides or ignores. Why would they make the exception with Stoya?

Simple. Snakes like to sleep in the same feminist pit. 

Stoya is one of those odd yet marketable feminist in porn, who is well-connected with other feminists such as feminist pundit Laurie Penny or feminist singer Amanda Palmer. In essence, Stoya is “the right kind of whore” in the eyes of feminists simply because she has similar political leanings. Unlike porn stars like Cytherea, Stoya’s rape accusations were taken at face value despite the fact they were solely made on social media.

Compare that with Cytherea’s case. Her house was broken into; she was gang-raped by thieves who were convicted after she pressed charges. Did the media report on her case the way they reported on Stoya’s? No. That is when it pays off to sleep in the right snake pit, like Stoya did. See, there is something “interesting” about the way the extreme left takes rape accusations on social media:

They are acts of faith not legal facts.

We have seen the same behavior with “acceptable” feminists like Anita Sarkeesian, who makes extraordinary claims of rape threats on social media but rarely goes to the police. Yet everybody “believes” her without credible evidence.
This has the interesting implication that if the woman is telling the truth unless proven otherwise, then the accused male is guilty until proven innocent. Either the woman is telling the truth all time and the male is guilty all the time OR the male is innocent until proven guilty and she is not telling the truth until proven otherwise. It is either one or the other. You can’t have your cake and eat it.

Let’s however, play devil’s advocate today and imitate what the left does, we will assume James Deen is telling the truth and as a result Stoya HAS TO be lying.

But since we are playing by the rules of the left first we have to assassinate the character of those we dislike. However we are gonna do something different, instead of only smearing Stoya’s character we need to smear James Deen’s character as well. Why? Because he is innocent until proven guilty but quite frankly, he is an asshole.

 

 

 

 

WHAT KIND OF PERSON IS JAMES DEEN?

 

napiervsdeen

James Deen is a narcissistic, impolite and ungrateful jerk who prides himself of being a “star” despite the fact he is shorter than Tom Cruise’s 5′ 7″, but even worse (for his line of business) his penis is quite short at only 6 inches.

Compared to many black actors in porn, James Deen is a short-dicked-diva with an ego too big for his short penis. But this contradiction begs the question: if James Deen is so short and meaningless by porn standards, why is he so popular?

Exactly. James Deen also slept with the snakes in the feminist pit. He even called himself a “male feminist”.

The reality is far from elegant: James Deen is mere training wheels for the average upper-class white Twilight-generation grown up feminist. The one who is still goopy in between her legs after reading Fifty Shades of Grey while listening to Bieber songs.

Those young feminists are biologically adult women with the mind of a child and the libido of a bipolar Chihuahua in heat. With that kind of demographic, it makes sense James Deen became the training wheels attached to the average feminist’s first tiny BDSM-wannabe pink porn bike.

Yes, despite the fact James Deen is only slightly more masculine than Justin Bieber, he managed to attract the kind of feminist audience that is growing bored of lesbian porn and looks for something much less challenging than an actual man. Because to those feminists, anything manly HAS TO look like “toxic masculinity”, hence why they opt for mediocre things like Deen.

This combination of low-challenge looks and a functional penis is the closest feminists got to finding their own proverbial feminist porn unicorn:

A female lesbian feminist born with a penis.

But let’s not forget, despite all these negative features Deen is innocent until proven otherwise. We still have to do what feminists do: “believe the victim” and since Deen is the legal victim here, let’s assume Stoya lied. But why would she? Well, first let’s apply the same question to her for “equality”:

 

 

 

 

WHAT KIND OF PERSON IS STOYA?

borderline

Professionally speaking, word in the porn industry is that Stoya is not mentally sound of mind enough to do reliable business with. That carries a lot of weight when it comes to being hired or ignored in the porn industry. Hence why Stoya is an “independent”.

Or more specifically, Stoya is an “independent feminist producer” which in plain English it means she is fickle, moody, bossy, unreliable, unprofessional, a nightmare to work with and does follow rules (Do you mean ‘does not follow the rules’?). Why? Because she refuses to work for “The Patriarchy”. Perplexingly, independent female producers are not that hard to find in an industry that is allegedly dominated by said “Patriarchy”.

But what truly prevents Stoya from getting work with major players is her erratic behavior in her own personal life. Why? Because she cannot separate her personal matters from the professional ones. How erratic you might ask? Stoya has been known to have threatened her semi-serious partners with either killing herself or saying they raped her if she does not get what she wants.

This happened to high-profile ex-partners like musician Marilyn Manson, who opted to just  let her go and to this date, refuses to comment on it.

James Deen also had to go through the same blackmail sessions where Stoya would hang herself from a balcony and threaten to commit suicide on the spot if James broke up with her.

But even worse, when a concerned James Deen told her he would call 911, the hanging Stoya would refuse and threaten to instead charge him with rape if he called first responders. (See? Stoya seems to consistently avoid the authorities and the resulting scrutiny)

Deen finally put an end to the relationship and Stoya kept playing the same game of cry-wolf & threats but instead of using a balcony, she used text messages (and allegedly, Deen still has those texts on his phone).

After they broke up, Stoya begged Deen to come back to her and even hired him for a scene not one, not two but five weeks after the alleged rape took place.

What apparently made Stoya snap and make the false rape claims on Twitter is that she found out Deen was planning to buy a house with his current girlfriend. According to the leaks,

 

Stoya was never raped by Deen. Stoya falsely accused Deen as retaliation for breaking up with her.

 

All of these claims were leaked by a veteran industry insider, here is the excerpt, judge by yourself,

“I know that Stoya posted a scene with James and Dana Vespoli on her website, Trenchcoat X, the morning before her tweets that began this mess. Then, later that day, she learned from Conor Habib that James and his current girlfriend are buying a house together, and that’s when all hell broke loose.
I know that the reason James broke it off with Stoya is he got tired of her threatening to kill herself, and alternately, him. The night it came to a head she was hanging from his balcony over a fatal drop threatening to let go. When he decided to call 911, she told him she would claim assault and rape if the cops came.
When he didn’t want to foot the bill to ship her things back to New York, she again threatened rape. She used the phrase “all I have to do is say it. Who’s going to believe you?” I’ve seen the texts.
This isn’t new. She did the same thing to Marilyn Manson. Just ask Tony Ciulla, his manager. Unfortunately, neither of them can or will go on the record because, again, men. Not allowed.
I know that for months after they split, Stoya was texting James begging him to stay in her life and take her back. “You’re my heroin,” she would say. He still has those texts as well, and is resisting the urge to release them because he’s such an asshole.
I know that five weeks after they split, Stoya HIRED James to shoot this scene with HER, that she directed. Because she was that upset about the “rape.” Please watch this scene unfold and draw your own conclusion as to their dynamic”

 

 

Again, there are too many inconsistencies with Stoya’s version of the events, the dates don’t add up and she never went to the police. If we put two and two together, Stoya is a mediocre liar and avoided the police for fears of being caught red-handed. Thus, Stoya was lying from the beginning to force Deen to take her back and she only made the rape claims as retaliation for him settling down with someone else much better than her.

Stoya is a dangerous, mentally ill liar.

But this begs the question, Why is Stoya trying to gain sympathy from those who feel utter contempt for her? Doesn’t she realize the leftist media only feigns sympathy because she means clicks? They will eat her alive as soon as it becomes profitable or as soon as she doesn’t toe the party line.

If Stoya expects to be thrown a leftist bone, she is the deluded one here because to date, not a single ex-porn star has successfully transitioned to Hollywood or TV. Why? Because the leftist industry won’t hire ex-porn stars for fears of feminists themselves boycotting the production.

Because what the left does not tell Stoya and all the other “feminist porn actresses” is that they are branded for life. They are and will always be “filthy porn lepers”.

Stoya is a mere porn leper with hipster dreams of grandeur licking the leg of the left for supplicant approval.

 

 

 

A TRADITION OF FALSE RAPE AND TRIAL BY SOCIAL MEDIA

combined-liars

 

The pattern of vindictive feminists using social media for retribution instead of going to the police seems to match Stoya’s case. The same applies to each and every one of the other 8-10 women who accused Deen; they did not press charges when the events took place and instead, waited until now to mob him on social media. Here’s the worst part, despite cameras recording detailed evidence and people on set becoming automatic witnesses, these women still got away with crying wolf. Are witnesseses or video evidence part of the average sexual encounter?

No.

Therefore, the average man can be falsely charged with rape too easily by any woman who seeks retribution.  This trend of “trial by social media” is more of a “witch hunt by social media” where the purpose is personal, egotistical retribution not authentic justice.

Stoya’s actions have also had a divisive effect on an already fragmented industry. Currently, those men and women who publicly oppose Stoya’s claims and demand due process for Deen are being called “traitors” and being boycotted.

As blatant as it sounds, the ones supporting Stoya have gone as far as calling due process “useless” while Stoya’s business partner has publicly claimed that damaging Deen’s income with rape claims belongs to “the court of public opinion” and things like “burden of proof  and innocent until proven guilty etc.” really don’t count. Yes, it is not satire, they actually oppose due process.

Because of all this, I, for one #IDoNotStandWithStoya just the way I did not #StandwithJackie.

Because what Stoya is doing is not too different from the lies propagated by the media with cases like the Rolling Stone’s Jackie Rape Hoax. Jackie’s false story was blatantly inconsistent from the beginning and just like religion fairy tales, it was taken at face value. The fact checking? That came later from outside sources.

Because of hoaxers like Jackie or Stoya, authentic victims of rape do not receive the help they need and men’s lives are destroyed.

This behavior suggests neither the media nor feminists truly care about authentic victims of rape. Quite the opposite, their irresponsible behavior only damages the credibility of authentic rape victims who will be met with far more scrutiny and skepticism than the necessary.

No. Feminists like Stoya don’t care about authentic victims of rape.

See? “Equality”.

Thank you for reading.

 

 

Randi Harper: Proud Feminist Animal Abuser

DISCLAIMER 1: What follows is a mixture of facts, speculation & satire therefore the adverb “allegedly” prefaces and applies to the whole article.

DISCLAIMER 2: I am a proud Neo-Troll & I DO NOT represent #GamerGate. Truth with zero protocol will be used; get offended. Feel free to disregard everything I say based on my Troll status. For those who stayed, behold;

(EDITOR’S NOTE: this article was featured at theralphretort.com)

dog-intoxication

Look at the image above and examine the expressive eyes of that intelligent and noble result of human-guided evolution. It is not difficult to infer that the noble animal does not like what it is going through. It must be extremely unpleasant for it to be slathered in a substance that must hurt its olfactory system. Look at the thin uncolored areas around the eyes, notice how close the reckless owner gets to chemically burning the corneas of an animal that cannot know the difference. It might even try to lick the pungent poison from its eye. That is the insult upon the injury, since a dog’s sense of smell is so acute that they perceive scents that are imperceptible to us. Just imagine how intense the strong smell of hair dye (which is stout even for humans) must be for a dog.

It may not be news to you, but it bears repeating: Randi Harper likes to routinely expose her dog to toxic chemicals in order to dye its fur. What was news, at least to me, was how long she has been abusing her pet. It’s been at least 4 years. While researching another article, I had to look for a screengrab of Randi Harper’s face. As a result of that endeavor, I  accidentally came across a video recorded in 2011. In the background, I noticed this:

focussimple

It appears that (at least since 2011) Randi Harper has consistently been using the same hair dye she uses on her radical, retarded, pig-like, godawful-boil-in-the-ass-ugly head to dye her dog’s fur. Let that sink in. Imagine the number of times per year the poor animal is exposed to those chemicals. Let’s also consider this:

Would a commercial feminist like Randi Harper agree with the idea consent is irrelevant”?

No. Most likely her reptilian brain would kick into high gear and immediately look for the implication that lack of consent means “rape.” Well, that’s the problem. Harper is just too retarded to figure out that consent is a far more complex concept than just sexual consent applied to humans.

Technically speaking, Harper herself has never and will never obtain permission from her dog to potentially cause it severe or terminal health problems through the repeated and neglectful use of hair dyes specifically formulated for humans (NOT dogs).

The animal is under her care and animals cannot give consent to anything, (it is even doubtful many smaller dog breeds would survive in the wild without human intervention since bigger ones don’t fare that well against their cousins). It is just reprehensible to routinely expose the animal to toxins with potentially harmful side effects. Why? Because it is unknown if a product intended for humans could cause a dog terminal diseases such as skin cancer. This hypocritical, bipolar, crystal meth-addled, landwhaleish, pig-faced feminist has been abusing one of her 3 dogs for at least 4 years, and guess what? She has faced zero consequences from animal rights groups (makes you wonder if feminists give themselves extra leeway when it comes to reporting or condemning their own SJW “whaleroines”). Look, the video is still up:

 

Skip to minute 39:40

 

If Harper could see her toes, she would notice she that has just shot herself in the foot. But, that’s wishful thinking, since she would miss over and over as stray bullets would only hit the floor after going through her thick layers of Dorito-blubber. The reality is that if the video above confirms Randi’s 4 years of animal abuse, it has also provided evidence to:

  1. Her consistent and extended contempt for the law.
  2. Her mental health problems.

If there was doubt before about how long she had been doing this, we now know it has been going on for at least 4 years. What is even more concerning, is how frequently a radfem like her dyes her hair, because it would result in the dog being exposed to hair dyes every time (ostensibly, more than 3 times a year, without even counting “retouching the roots“) Hamburger Harper changes her hair color in a lark. As evidence suggests, she clearly buys more than enough for her and her dog every time:

mass-qty

The second point is far more disturbing than the expected. You see, toddlers have to be taught that animals are not toys. The first time they see a baby rabbit, a guinea pig, a kitten, or a pup, you have to explain to them what they are looking at, then hold their hand so that they touch the animal without pulling, squeezing, or tossing it across the room. A toddler has no prior context and has to be told to treat animals with respect because it is a living creature, because it also experiences pain, because toddlers have to be guided to develop their nascent empathy. If properly supervised, toddlers usually learn the difference between a toy and a living pet in a few weeks.

Randi is at least 30 years late and has not learned what a toddler learns in a few weeks under adult supervision. She is actually treating her dog like a toy, despite the fact she is a woman in her 30’s, she lacks the empathy to treat the animal with respect. This is a regretfully common abomination of deformed human maternal instincts seen more often in elderly women (affected by the empty nest syndrome) who start dressing up their small dogs in baby clothes (far more often than the younger women who display similar behavior). It looks disturbingly benevolent, at best.

But in Randi Harper’s case? She is far more dysfunctional, as she’s treating her pet dog like the disembodied head of a doll while using bleach to play with its tangled and forgotten hair. How long before the animal has to be taken to the vet? Or even worse, left to suffer untreated simply because Randi is expected to follow her nature and avoid accountability and any publicity for harming her dog?

Again, the animal is being tortured and cannot give consent for any of this. But as feminists routinely do, they favor double standards so long as they can benefit from them. In Randi’s case, she endlessly complains about women and children being prevented from giving any consent, but when it comes to a creature that cannot give any consent to anything? She’s OK with it. She even abuses the dog then brags about it on social media. Why not? After all, to herself, she is “untouchable”…

See Harper’s unbearable mendacity?

A pet is far more vulnerable than a human child because they cannot verbally communicate what they go through with abusive owners. But look at Harper, the one who grandstands and claims to be an “anti-bullying” advocate…a bastion for “equality” who paradoxically enjoys abusing both people online and her pets offline. This begs the question, can a woman with this kind of well-documented drug and legal problems, as well as severe mental health issues, be a good mother? And most importantly:

Did Randi Harper’s abusive treatment of her dog extend to comparable forms of abuse against her own children?

See? Even the question above is “reprehensible” for feminists, but if a father had been caught performing the same dyeing experiments on the family dog? Feminists would have lost their menses and they’d be very quick to question the well-being of that fathers’ children and start a trial by social media. But with a mentally ill, drug-addled landwhale radfem like Harper? For some fucked up reason, the same question is just “misogyny”.

In the poisoned garden of feminism, double standards are the fertilizer.

But since I do not give a fuck about feminists and their feelings, I will state the following: Based on Randi Harper’s well-documented erratic behavior and drug use, I doubt she has been a functional mother to her children. I would also question Randi Harper’s present ability to be a functional mother and I would like to invite her children to publicly expose her on social media as soon as they turn 18, if they deem they suffered abuse from Ms. Harper.

 

MESSAGE FOR RANDI HARPER’S CHILDREN

Remember, the best revenge against your abusive mother would be telling the truth about her. Everything.

Just reach out, your mother has made plenty of enemies.

They will gladly help you share your story or even help you sue her.

 

MESSAGE FOR RANDI HARPER’S EX-FRIENDS

OR DISGRUNTLED FAMILY MEMBERS & EX-ACQUAINTANCES

Remember, the best revenge against Randi Harper 

would be telling the truth about her and causing her to lose her income.

Again, plenty of her enemies will be glad to receive tips from you.

We are listening, just send us a tip, even if anonymously.

 

THE POSSIBLE REPERCUSSIONS

patron5k

Randi Harper’s Patreon $5K monthly income? Gone

The UN-like invitations? Gone.

The expensive trips? Gone.

The money to gorge at expensive restaurants? Gone.

Mass sympathy from the left? Silently withdrawn…then. Gone.

Obviously, the hypocrisy of the left would force them to doubt that Harper has perpetrated any abuse against her children. They would first react with incredulity, then disappointment, then anger. But remember, they are hypocrites by nature, so they would not express their discontent publicly. That would be tacit acceptance that they were financially supporting child abuse, so they would quietly and veeeery slowly withdraw their financial support so that Harper would go from $5K a month, to $4.1K, then $3K…until she panicked and started apologizing publicly. Then she would try to do as much damage control as she could, but if her children’s accusations are serious enough, she would eventually have to look for a real job and perhaps even face charges. It would be in Breitbart’s best interest to help spread this story, of course, hypothetically speaking.

See? There is no need to lie about hypocrites like Harper, all that is needed is encouragement for those who have been harmed by her.

Come forward, the truth is salt to a hypocrite’s wounds. And in Randi’s case, she is a giant slug. All we need is a giant plate of salt.

Thank you for reading.

TRANSLUG

PS

Feel free to circulate the infographic below to PETA and other animal rights groups on both Twitter and Facebook. Perhaps this time, they will take notice.

infographic

Milo Yiannopoulos VS Rebecca Reid – NOW FEATURING AUDIO

final

DISCLAIMER 1: What follows is a mixture of facts, speculation & satire therefore the adverb “allegedly” prefaces and applies to the whole article.

DISCLAIMER 2: I am a proud Neo-Troll & I DO NOT represent #GamerGate. Truth with zero protocol will be used; get offended. Feel free to disregard everything I say based on my Troll status. For those who stayed, behold;

(EDITOR’S NOTE: this article was featured at theralphretort.com)

final

 

IMPORTANT SANDPAPER

CONDOM UPDATE

Dear Gender-traitor-sock-puppet-“ladies” and Cis-gendered privileged pigs of #GamerGate, it is with utter Schadenfreude that I announce Milo has, once again, given a thorough railing with a sandpaper condom of fact-checked logic to another feminist: Rebecca Reid.

The public and disgraceful nonconsensual intellectual railing was hosted at the oversized & overpriced daycare for the meekest future unemployed parasites of society  the University of Bristol.

But there was one technical problem: The debate had almost had no audio, the volume was so incredibly low and puny for most of the dialogue you had to crank it all the way up 11 but when the audience clapped? It was ferociously deafening.

The low audio was so dismal, the comment section was peppered with complaints. I then went to their “about” section on their YouTube channel, just to see who the fuck had been unprofessional enough to release such disastrous final edit. This is what I found;

UBTV is the University of Bristol’s TV Station run by UoB Students.

Yes, it shows it is run by students. Most likely Breitbart had no control over the final edit. (but should have fixed it on their “highlights” edit)

Long story short: I fixed the audio but fucked up the colors (apologies, it shows this Troll is color blind). 

I am therefore releasing the video with improved audio along with the audio-only file for you to download on Soundcloud.

VIDEO

AUDIO FILE

PS

1

Why did I do it? Because feminists bitch and demand others “do the fixing” and I am not a feminist: I hate bitching without fixing.

2

Notes for Milo: The uncompressed WAV is available should you require it for RadioNero (if you ever fucking resurrect it you majestic fagasaiyan).

Also, consider either recording your debates with your phone, or buying this small recorder to place in your breast pocket during debates or, possibly, buying this fully featured one if one of your colleagues can place it nearby before each event.

Because, If people cannot hear you Milo, you completely defeat the purpose of exercising your right to free speech in spoken form.

Especially on social media as the attention spans are just too low for anything above 5 minutes: Most people will watch a lolcat video instead of trying to decipher your teeny garbled audio.

Also, for a man who pays so much attention to detail and to the quality of his written thoughts, you did not pay any attention to the quality in which your spoken thoughts were broadcast in this instance; think of your audio as a version of you that was dressed so poorly, it almost looked like a homeless person as opposed to your actual impeccable physical appearance and both constitute quite a paradox in quality. It is unprofessional of you to expect your audience to decipher mediocre, badly recorded audio. Plus, it will save you lots of editing and complaints from lowly, color-blind trolls with mediocre punctuation skills.

3

Bring on the heat: I can take the heat, I won’t get out of this kitchen. If I criticize Milo, I want to be questioned & criticized at least twice as harshly if not more. Besides, I am far from being a fucking femi-princess so leave your most brutal criticism in the comments section, anything goes, I will read it and own up to my mistakes. I agree, I fucked up the colors. I, agree; my, punctuation: is. mediocre.

The audio? Here’s a few notes for audio nerds,

First the applauses had to be normalized to -1dB (they were a fucking deafening drill to the ears) then it took nearly 2 hrs for RX to remove the room noise and hum at the most accurate settings then 1 hour to get the right compression with 2 different plugins applied 4 times. Finally, the whole wave was normalized to -1 dB (I originally wanted to remove much more of the annoying-as-fuck echo but that started creating metalization & artifacts). I would have done more but with every extra day, the video loses relevance and quite honestly, I did it pro bono, so fuck it. The colors? My second monitor was not calibrated. How bad do they look to you? Leave your comments below.