Category Archives: Uncategorized

The Unreal Multiple Personality Case Of NSA leaker Sarah Leigh Winner

EDITOR’S NOTE: Feel free to checkout Jack’s site

The Unreal Multiple Personality Case Of NSA leaker Sarah Leigh Winner

We have had our share of traitors here at the RR. First, it looks like they are reliable and you give them access to sensitive information, then all of sudden, they betray you and leak lots of sensitive info.


After the dust settles, you feel stupid and angry then you start going over the traitor’s past behavior searching for the red flags you did not see.

That’s probably what the NSA administration felt after Airforce Intel Linguist, and anti-Trump Sarah “Reality” Leigh Winner leaked classified documents to news outlets. They probably felt even more stupid after they went over her social media in search for clues of her online behavior (or other potential leaks) and found a red sea of red flags about her multiple mental illnesses.

After the first 20 minutes of researching her, you realize this traitor’s head was truly damaged goods, barely held together with superficial athletic glue. Her mind was by all intends and purposes broken and barely put together to function as a translator. And like most broken leftists, she used the internet as an unpaid therapist to “heal” herself.

It’s impressive how so many mentally ill leftists use social media to “heal themselves” through an “online community” while leaving plenty of traces of their ill mind on social media. All you have to do is read between the lines like we are about to do.




As the Ralph elaborated upon, despite her security clearance, this Texan by the birth name of Sarah Leigh Winner had a full-on anti-Trump, #hard left, pro #BLM, #PetaGreenPeaceVeganPsycho twitter account.

While going through her social media, her Instagram page also came up. Unlike her twitter, it appears she tried to kept her Instagram “healthy” and free of politics. Fortunately, despite all of her efforts, her insanity still leaks through.

But first, here is a few approximate stats of her Instagram account:


  • Total account duration: ~2 years 1 day (Account was opened on June 2 2015 active until her incarceration around June 03 2017.)
  • Total number of posts: ~450
  • Average number of posts per day: 0.6
  • Posts featuring selfies: ~70
  • Posts featuring animals: ~100
  • Posts featuring objects/locations:~110
  • Posts featuring food:~160
  • Posts featuring herself interacting with people:10
  • No stated partners, no stated family members.
  • Most of the pictures featuring people were only of herself.


A few conjectures based on her types of posts:

  • Selfies = Narcissism
  • Animals = Failed maternal instincts (AKA “I am too broken to be a real mother but look! Here’s my cat-baby!” just like most feminists)
  • Food = Narcissism (AKA “look! I eat well to look good”)
  • Location = Status (AKA “look! I can afford to go here and there”)
  • Featuring other people = *Unclear

Here is the weird thing: 10 people is a pretty low number. No boyfriend or girlfriend nor any public statements of her love for a public significant other. Granted, she may have avoided personal life posts due to her government job, yet other people working in the military do post about their partners (more often the ones that do, are heterosexual which may imply she is not.)

It is clear is that Sarah needed a public commitment via Instagram (perhaps to prevent her self-destructive behavior or to nurture her narcissism or both)
Was her Instagram a simple shrine to her need for affirmation and narcissism or a suicide prevention plan? Hard to say.

Also worth mentioning is the fact she appears to have been raised by a single mother: Billie Winner-Davies which more often than not, results in children lacking in a positive role model.

Going back to her social media, one of her Instagram posts was a true treasure trove. In it, she casually confesses to many of her mental illnesses and past tribulations. She even specifically elaborates on how she had to “rebuild” herself from her mentally ill ashes.


Sarah was “broken phoenix” or, in other words, instead of rising anew from her ashes like the pink progressive anti-Trump Phoenix she intended to be, all Sarah managed to do was to come back with a mind that was mangled, lame and unable to fly away from her trauma. Also, she came back as a fucking traitor.

Despite excelling at school and speaking 3 languages, Sarah failed to control her own impulses. Just like Arthur Chu, Sarah is a narrow savant, able to memorize and retrieve vast amounts of declarative information and display limited forms of intelligence, but lacks the ability apply her knowledge to her own problems.

Add to that her dumb incredibly childish legal name change from Sarah to “Reality” which sounds like the kind of name choice a 5 year old girl high on “my little pony friendship is magic” would choose. I am not making this up, she actually legally changed her name to “Reality”.

Granted, some people change their names for practical legitimate reasons (marriage, a name that is too difficult/long to spell, funny sounding etc)
However, an adult changing his/her name for “personal private reasons” usually raises red flags about their psychological state.
When you hear “personal reasons” it is best to look at their behavior for clues of mental state;

  • Is it being done due to a change in their belief system?
  • Is it being done due to a sex change?
  • Is it being done because they want to “erase” their “past self”?
  • Is it a combination of all of the above?

In Sarah’s case, she appears to have changed her name following a break-up and the resulting mental breakdown circa 2013. Besides her mind, the mental breakdown appears to have led to a deterioration of her body (as it happens with most people who become self-destructive after losing their faith, be it a relationship or a religion)

This is what Sarah herself wrote about her mental breakdown:

The #catalyst for change was a huge collapse within my personal life, and learning what it meant to just be Re, by myself. I adopted a cat, and joined a crossfit gym

All right, there is a lot to “read” between her lines let’s go over it:

“being Re” WTF is that?

Is that some kind of personal “Yolo” mantra shit? Did she really have that much of a problem understanding reality?

Furthermore, did her mind really detach itself so badly she had to validate herself by using the word “Reality” as her legal fucking name?

Did she have it tattooed so that she did not forget what “reality” was? Oh wait, no need for tattoos when you go for a legal name change.

Also, let me get this straight, after her mental breakdown, Sarah had no reason to live or she was so overcome with her intense maternal instincts or both?

Was it due to these two pressure that made her decide to change her name to “erase” her past and adopt a damn cat and a dog (like the many cat-feminists with advanced toxoplasmosis)? So many questions…

Well, too bad she did not erase her bat-shit insane OCD, as she elaborates upon it as follows:

In November 2014, my life was miserable. I had so many #fitnessgoals but my happiness was completely based off bringing that number in the scale lower and lower. Paired with an eating disorder largely based off of OCD, I could count on one hand what foods were “safe” to eat. It’s silly, but I remember snow storms in which certain stores and locations were closed, and those foods weren’t available. Or worse, when gyms would close.

WTF NSA!??!!
Not only did this Texan mental patient have OCD but was also anorexic as well suffering from paranoia in winter?
How did this go unnoticed during the psychological evaluations NSA? Wew… let’s continue and see if this gets any worse,

reezlie#throwback from November 2014 on the left, versus today, right. #weight is just a number, and that’s what I wanted to share with you today. November 2014, in that picture, I weighed 118 lbs, and today, while I didn’t weigh myself, would probably weigh in around 155. While there isn’t a huge difference in my #appearance my life vastly different than it was just over two years ago.

If weight “is just a number” why elaborate upon it at all?

It is clear that Sarah was very conscious about her followers and wanted to document her physical changes. In other words, like most feminists, Sarah was retarded at #HumbleBragging when #FishingForCompliments.

Granted, she did bulk up mostly due to her OCD and resulting obsession with the sport and dieting. But this begs the question, why the need to bulk up?

Why the need to appear muscular and “strong” while remaining so psychologically weak and fragile dear Sarah?

Was it to appear outwardly “armored” and convince herself she was protected?

Why the need for protection and so much overcompensation?

Usually, whenever some women suddenly take up self-defense classes or body-building it is a subtle give-away they are trying to convince themselves they are not “weak” following a traumatic event.

So it would stand to reason Sarah wanted to overcompensate for past trauma with her obsessive dieting and athleticism.

Almost as if she wanted to make it public “she wasn’t weak anymore”. So much so, some noticed she even registered to compete at the Crossfit games but seems she either got distracted or arrested before she could compete, hard to say, traitors have busy lives.

It appears that Sarah was the perfect example of a person with her priorities upside down (like most feminists). She had a broken mind but instead of fixing it first, she went for the aesthetics and got a toned body first. Her choices made as much sense as someone having a broken arm going for a manicure instead of going to the hospital.

Granted, better diet and exercise can result in better overall health but her very poor mental health should have been her top priority, not fucking Crossfit. To top it off, she even elaborates on how her anorexia fucked up her body before she went into Crossfit:

It took over a year working with different therapists and nutritionists, and just time itself to repair a damaged metabolism so I could physically digest other foods again, if I was psychologically ready for them.

Mhhh…Upon closer inspection it seems there was a therapist for her eating disorder but it is unknown she was receiving counseling for her OCD and possibly other mental illnesses she was not willing to disclose on social media. Let’s continue:

It’s the rush of teaching cycling, and seeing people get better every week, and the yoga of self acceptance.

“yoga of self acceptance” WTF?! OK, hang on, are you telling me that now LuluLemon works with Doctor Phil? Fuck, these lefty hipsters have no creativity to lie about their need for a group/cult to fit in.

In simpler terms, it could be inferred that Sarah was jumping from cult to cult (Yoga to crossfit and others) to find a sense of purpose she lost during her break-up.

Let’s continue with this broken piece of feminist work:

It’s looking at these photos side by side and wondering what the woman on the left would have felt if the scale that day said 155. Your Story is your Medicine. Love.

Oh I see, “that woman is no longer me!” “I am a different person now! For reelz!” right?

Seems very hard someone like Sarah could get more toddler-like and transparent with her personality disassociation.

“Your story is your medicine” WTF?! Of course that a fucking Instagram post is not “Medicine”. Telling strangers personal stories while letting your narcissism be caressed by their emojis does not count as “therapy”.

On a more serious note, let’s analyze that last line again:

“wondering what the woman on the left would have felt if the scale that day said 155.”

Here we can clearly see Sarah had a fixation with her “past” self and her “present” self. Couple that with constant references to different “realities” and her more than unfortunate and blatant name choice and you get the picture:

Sarah struggled with the reality of her own mind, her body and reality itself.

Furthermore, it seems we really do have a person that not only had a proclivity towards narcissism, body dysmorphia, anorexia-bulimia, OCD and split personality. It only boggles the mind to imagine all the other personality disorders/ mental illnesses pertaining to the perception of reality she did not “feel” comfortable to parade on social media. That is a mouthful, considering how flexible feminists are when parading them on social media.

So, considering all of the above red flags, let me get this straight: You have a person with clear indications of multiple personality disorders + OCD + eating disorders + chronic leftism and you STILL GAVE THEM high security clearance?

WTF NSA?! Srsly…

Perhaps the NSA has waaaaaaay too many feminists promoting other feminists in Human Resources. At least, the name change for such a blatant choice should have, at the very least have raised a red flag during the initial HR interviews indicating this woman was not right in the head.

Her name choice was so simplistic as a toddler pretending to be someone else by wearing a damn towel as a cape. Sarah’s name change to try to “redefine” herself was a mere puerile, delusional and desperate attempt at regaining a sense of identity at age 23-25 and none of this raised a red flag for the NSA?


Sarah’s desperate name change points at a mentally ill and unstable person that should never have been given a security clearance or hired at all.

Worst part is, Sarah still lived in an imaginary world despite her poor choice for name change. This irony is so rich that it looks like a bad teen fantasy. How unfortunate for Sarah that her life was an illusion, her persona was a rushed fabrication and her life story sounds like cheap Twilight-level fantasy for soccer moms.

To top it off, like most feminists, she went to the internet to get some free group therapy sessions at the Instagram Asylum.

Oh lefties like Sarah, never learn that using the internet as their own prozac is as wise as using a chainsaw to trim a hangnail.

Sarah never understood the nature of her dumb reality, not even after her blatant name change.

Thank you for reading.


BONUS 1 !:
Here is the archived treasure trove in all its mentally ill glory before it is taken down:

#throwback from November 2014 on the left, versus today, right. #weight is just a number, and that's what I wanted to share with you today. November 2014, in that picture, I weighed 118 lbs, and today, while I didn't weigh myself, would probably weigh in around 155. While there isn't a huge difference in my #appearance my life vastly different than it was just over two years ago. I still love #bodybuilding #benchpress #cycling #running and #yoga #everydamnday and that's never going to change. But my #bodyimage has done a complete 180. In November 2014, my life was miserable. I had so many #fitnessgoals but my happiness was completely based off bringing that number in the scale lower and lower. Paired with an eating disorder largely based off of OCD, I could count on one hand what foods were "safe" to eat. It's silly, but I remember snow storms in which certain stores and locations were closed, and those foods weren't available. Or worse, when gyms would close. It was a parallel universe where only two things mattered. The #catalyst for change was a huge collapse within my personal life, and learning what it meant to just be Re, by myself. I adopted a cat, and joined a crossfit gym but didn't do #crossfit because from a bodybuilding perspective, crossfit is what stupid people do in fail videos on YouTube. But I learned to love #olympiclifting …And maybe love crossfit too, over time. But it was a rocky start! It took over a year working with different therapists and nutritionists, and just time itself to repair a damaged metabolism so I could physically digest other foods again, if I was psychologically ready for them. It's still hard being in the same type of communities that I was in, but now I can more easily define what different passions mean to me. #success is the #strength to #bench 185lbs and #deadlifting 265, but also the #endurance to run #halfmarathons throughout the summer. It's the rush of teaching cycling, and seeing people get better every week, and the yoga of self acceptance. It's looking at these photos side by side and wondering what the woman on the left would have felt if the scale that day said 155. Your Story is your Medicine. Love.

A post shared by Reezle Winner (@reezlie) on


Why Twilight is popular with retarded teen soccer moms / feminists.

*(Cheapest pun. I regret nothing.)



DISCLAIMER 1: What you just read 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 anybody but myself. Truth with zero protocol will be used, so get offended. Feel free to disregard everything I say based on my Troll status.


Evergreen State College: Welcome to the North Korea of the Mind

EDITOR’S NOTE: Feel free to checkout Jack’s site

Dear Reader,

Imagine being born and raised in North Korea.

Imagine being taught from an early age that you have to secretly report anybody suspicious.

Anybody must be reported so that they can be punished or killed. Anybody, even your parents.

Imagine witnessing the daily abject poverty. The famine. The acts of daily cannibalism.

Imagine being deeply grateful for it all.

Imagine your daily blind gratitude to those who rule you by harming you.

Imagine waking up every morning to the most perverse pseudo celestial sadomasochistic theocracy on earth.

And imagine spending your whole life living that perverse nightmare but never noticing it is a perfect lie.

Because to you, it would just make sense to love those who harm you.

The worst part?

Being born into a life of slavery in North Korea would be better than being a hard-left North American student at Evergreen College.

Why? Because unlike young North American Intellectual slaves, young North Korean slaves’ intellectual poverty would be the result of the complete removal of knowledge, not the illusion of it.


98-99.% of North Koreans do not have access or do not even know what the internet is, while 99.9% of Evergreen College students have access to it 24/7.

In a world of pervasive internet access filled with data and opposing points of view, the willful ignorance of the North American Evergreen college intellectual slaves is truly unforgivable.

Furthermore, exposing a North Korean intellectual slave to the free world, to knowledge and the internet, may eventually liberate their minds. The North American intellectual slaves, on the other hand, already live in the free world but are immune to knowledge.

Let that sink in. The left has succeeded at manufacturing the equivalent of intellectual anorexics in a world full of intellectual nourishment.

Instead of engaging in the pursuit of truth, hordes of leftist North American College students are instead willfully embracing the illusion of knowledge.

The source of their indoctrination can be traced to their “professors” who have made these young people invulnerable to knowledge while giving them the false entitlement to intellectual immunity.

These hordes of leftist North American College students will not only refuse knowledge that opposes their narrative but they also vehemently believe their ideas to be untouchable.

Make no mistake, the left is burning the eyes of young minds with the red-hot branding iron of Marxism.

The hard-left “professors” themselves are deeply invested in teaching young minds the illusion of knowledge in campuses all across the US. They want to make their discipleship as blind as themselves, all in the name of “progress”.

Even worse, these “professors” are actively manufacturing hordes of intellectual slaves immune to knowledge in the free world without the need of an actual dictatorship.

That is in and of itself as perverse as it is impressive.

Think about it. It’s fascinating how already blind Marxists professors scorch the eyes of younger minds with something much worse than ignorance itself: the illusion of knowledge.

And nobody in Academia seems to care unless, of course, they disobey orders and are called “racist”. That is when they blow the whistle, like it happened to Professor Bret Weinstein.



As dystopian as it sounds, American campuses like Evergreen college have become centers of glorified ignorance, where imaginary facts have to comply with a leftist narrative.

The events at Evergreen are just the beginning of the pervasive glorified tribalism take over called “Black Lives Matter”. Its aim is segregating and dividing the American society while camouflaging itself as “progress”. BLM is just the beginning of many, many tribalism-based groups trying to divide America starting with its youth.

Why? Because there is no better way to fuck up a nation than making sure they live a future of dysfunctional tribalistic division.

What is even more spectacularly dysfunctional is the following: unlike starving North Korean slaves, the North American left is cannibalizing itself while still alive.

While North Korean intellectual slaves are forced to embrace ignorance in a dictatorship devoid of choice, the North American Evergreen State College intellectual slaves do so of their own volition despite the fact that they live in a free world full of choice.

Again, it is impressively perverse.




Look at these “students”, and remember that their minds are worse than their sense of fashion. You know you truly have fucked-up-in-the-head people when they look as if a Jehovah Witness on acid told them what to wear.

It looks almost as if these North American intellectual slaves sat down and asked themselves:

“Is there anyway we can fuck up all of our future employment choices in one single picture?”

The intellectual poverty of North Koreans is the ultimate consequence of totalitarian isolation, whereas the dire intellectual poverty of Evergreen students is the result of too much freedom and wealth.

The vast majority of North Koreans are intellectually poor because all choices have been removed from their lives, yet Evergreen College students are willfully blind despite having access to knowledge and money.

These “progressive” kids are far from being financially poor. The young intellectual slaves at Evergreen are not like young slaves in North Korea, born into poverty, but the offspring of well-off American parents able to pay the expensive tuition at Evergreen College.

Let that sink in. Parents are paying large sums of money for their children to be forced into dire leftist intellectual poverty.

Granted, no parent is perfect. But, if we judge by the picture above, clearly these children the ultimate consequence of skimping money on condoms. Look at them, even in their present form they still manage to look like deformed sperm:

But after that regrettable series of bad sexual decisions that led to their birth, why would their parents have the perverse need to screw up their already below average minds with “education” of the Evergreen variety?

I mean, if you know you already gave birth to a dumb, shitty-looking kid, wouldn’t it be in your best interest to invest money in their many plastic surgeries instead of furthering their pre-existing genetic retardation with the lifetime burden of “college education”?

Add to the genetic injury of their existence the insult of their “special” names. Nothing says “I hate this expensive walking unwanted pregnancy” more than choosing a weird-ass name for your shitty-retarded-lefty kid. My money is on most of these young neophytes bearing weird-as-fuck-Zulu-clickety-click names.

Levity aside, judging by their behavior, it would stand to reason that a higher IQ would predispose children not only to choose STEM over humanities but also to detect the bullshit of leftism in Academia. Furthermore, you would be hard-pressed to find radical activists and protesters from STEM faculties simply because STEM students tend to have real homework and little free time for activism. Humanities? Those tend to have lots of free time while “studying” for their worthless humanities degrees.


The evidence suggests that young leftists tend to have low impulse control, gravitating away from abstraction and towards emotion.

As a result, it would stand to reason that the psychological children/intellectual slaves at Evergreen were not bright enough to qualify for STEM courses to begin with and instead chose touchy-feely humanities that require no real effort.

Couple that with the fact that Evergreen State College has an acceptance rate of over 98.9%, and you have the confirmation that these young students are fucked for life.

Still, you have to hand it to Evergreen for taking the money from dumb wealthy parents’ hands, all the while making their children even dumber. That is merciless capitalism at a 98.9% rate. How “progressive” of them.

If the lives of these wealthy Evergreen students were not already doomed to be hard, with their godawful-boil-in-the-ass-ugly faces, their wealthy parents wasted more than enough money to give their godawful-weak-as-a-prolapsed-pink-sock-double-espresso-retarded minds a lifetime of failure with their radical “higher education”

Problem is, their failure points at a much greater problem in America: The soaring Stupidity Index of young North Americans.

These Evergreen students would have had a much brighter future as used condoms.


Thank you for reading.


Recommended: “Dear Reader” by Michael Malice.

Bonus: Besides rednecks (EDITOR’S NOTE: I am offended.), this trailer also applies when lefties do not use condoms and spread their offspring into campuses:

Recommended Movie:

Have a Bitter Christmas you 2016 Sore Democrat Losers!

Holy Pepe!

Aren’t Democrats the Sorest Losers!

You 2016 Sore Democrat Losers really are the salty gift that keeps on giving and it truly is a pleasure to rub so much daily salt into the countless wounds of your bleeding leftist ego.

You Dems never expected to lose the 2016 election and every time you hear the words “President Trump” your ego tears another wound and bleeds a little more. Especially this holiday season when we, the Alt-Right & Pro-Trump people, will keep sticking our fat and salt-covered fingers into the countless gaping wounds of your ego without any of your consent.

Let’s get started!

Here is a Christmas song for you all 2016 SORE DEMOCRAT LOSERS!



Suffer you weak, narcissistic Democrat bitches!


Note: Spread this video!

Make those #2016SoreDemocratLosers even saltier!

Thank you for reading & sharing.


PS: Here is a little wallpaper for you all TRR readers.

Merry Christmas!




DISCLAIMER 1: This article 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 anybody but myself. Truth with zero protocol will be used; get offended. Feel free to disregard everything I say based on my Troll status.

(EDITOR’S NOTE: Feel free to checkout Jack’s site)

Meet the Feminist Behind Youtube’s Censorship: Susan “icky” Wojcicki (Part 2 of 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 anybody but myself. 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: Feel free to checkout Jack’s site)

Welcome to part 2 of 2 of this series on the blatant censorship spearheaded by radical feminist and Youtube CEO Susan “icky” Wojcicki.

As you may remember, on part 1, we saw how YouTube has been enforcing their SJW-based censorship on videos that do not conform to their leftist views and how they have been blatantly ignoring the virtually unanimous user backlash against their policies.

We also learned how all of these actions were orchestrated by Youtube’s feminist CEO Susan “icky” Wojcicki.

On this part 2, you will get a clearer understanding on what kind of radical feminist Susan Wojcicki is, how she managed to get a job she is abysmally unqualified for and how hard Silicon Valley leans to the left.









The current Youtube CEO Susan “icky” Wojcicki spoke at a hard-core feminist gathering called The 2015 Grace Hopper Women in Computing Conference”

Said feminist conference is characterized for being hell-bent on artificially increasing the number of females in coddled 1st world technology jobs. But like most western feminist organizations, it is also conveniently uninterested in those physically demanding, high mortality, dirty jobs where women are also conveniently absent but men aren’t.

The 2015 Grace Hopper Women in Computing conference is the modern equivalent of clique of high-class Victorian women complaining about the repetitive types of fabric for their daughter’s Sunday dresses while the slaves pick the cotton elsewhere.

See, the thing that about Susan “icky” Wojcicki and most western feminists is that they conveniently refuse to understand those biological pesky biological facts that go against their leftist narrative.

Facts such as the “Scandinavian Paradox” which causes most feminists’s feelings to rectally bleed pink every time is brought up.

Why? Well, it is in Scandinavian countries like Sweden, where women truly have the freedom** to study whatever they want without any financial or social obstacles, they consistently choose occupations that involve social interactions such as nursing while almost entirely avoiding STEM occupations.

Yes, women in those Scandinavian countries refuse to compete against men despite having no obstacles to do so. In essence, those Scandinavian women are living proof feminism is a lie. But feminism is obsessed with brainwashing people with that 50-50% gender ratio in the workplace.






Images from: Brainwash-Hjernevask – Chapter 1: The gender Equality Paradox

Hjernevask = “Brainwash” in Norwegian

Logically, this biological facts over their feminist narrative has confused the fuck out of the government ideologues in those very Scandinavian countries.

And what do these ideologues do? They pour millions into pointless recruitment campaigns to train and hire more women to attain that 50-50% unicorn-like feminist ideal on all occupations.

The result? The artificial ratio goes up a couple of points for 1-2 years then women go back to their preferred occupations and this biological phenomenon has been statistically documented beyond reasonable doubt since 1986. These facts were clearly explained in the outstanding Norwegian documentary series “Hjernevask” AKA “Brainwash” 

The above documentary series was so successful and accurate that it resulted in the several Scandinavian governments closing down the Nordic Gender Institute.

Why did they close it? Not out of acceptance to biological facts mind you. Rather, it was mostly because of the international shame it caused when those Scandinavian ideologues were exposed as frauds.

BTW, here are the seven parts of the documentary, all legally available on Vimeo. All of them highly recommended for later viewing.

As you would expect, North American feminists are twice as retarded as the Scandinavian ones and are actively trying to replicate the failure of the Scandinavian Paradox in North America.

Just like Scandinavian ideologues, Susan “icky” Wojcicki and all the radfems at The 2015 Grace Hopper Women in Computing conference, are not concerned with facts, they are all hell-bent on artificially increasing the number of women in STEM fields, not because of logic but because of the utopic compliance with a 50-50% gender equality unicorn from the Scandinavian Paradox.

Unlike most engineers working for Google, Susan “icky” Wojcicki is not concerned with facts, she is concerned with her own ideology. Just like Twitter’s Jack Dorsey or even worse, Facebook’s Apex Radfem: Sheryl Sandberg.
In light of all this, it is clear that the current YouTube CEO: Susan “icky” Wojcicki is a mediocre, ideologically-driven feminist YET she somehow managed to get the CEO job.

This begs the question:

Why would the founders of Google, Sergei Brin and Larry Page give Susan Wojcicki so much power?


Simple. It all started in a small enclosed space in her house.





**Provided that a Syrian refugee does not rape & kill them them first.




Let’s tackle the question head on:

Why would Sergey Brin give the job of Youtube CEO to an ideologically-driven radfem such as Susan “icky” Wojcicki?

Well, in layman’s terms, it was Sergey’s cock the one that made that decision, not his brain.

Let me explain, it all started here, in this Garage circa 1997-98. Back then, Sergey Brin was just a middle class aspie student at a Standford University and one of his professors, Stanley Wojcicki, kinda offered both the garage and his 2 daughters to Sergey.

Unfortunately Sergey was, shall we say…so much of an unfuckable aspie that even those god-awful-boil-in-the-ass-ugly-horse-faced sisters passed on the offer.

Instead, one of those horse-faced daughters (Susan) married another guy then rented the garage to Sergey (because Susan and her husband, could not make ends meet with her useless humanities degree).

Then Google started gaining traction and the aspie-duo Brin-Page changed the world.

A few billion dollars and a few years later, (circa 2007) Sergey was stupid enough to marry the second of those horse-faced female abominations: Anne Wojcicki

Obviously, being a billionaire did not preclude Sergey from letting his cock make a few key decisions for him, such as cheating on his horse-faced wife with an ok-looking Chinese-Jewish Google glass employee.


The result? The wife took off (as of 2016 their divorce was in a limbo) and the Google Glass project was “mysteriously” cancelled. The company keep saying they will bring it back but they are just glorifying an act of cheating on behalf of Sergey Brin.

Oh yeah, forgot to mention, both Sergey and the Wojcicki’s are Jews of two very different varieties.

That kinda matters when it comes to getting so many favors.



It is not a secret that inside Google there are many different tribes and among them there are members of the Jew tribe, however, within the Jew tribe there still are classes of Jews, some are excellent, some are parasite-like.

For instance, Sergey Brin comes from a very successful and intelligent Jewish variety that had to flee the Soviet union because Jews were being discriminated over there but the Wojcicki’s? Those are mere Polish Jews of the mediocre parasite-like variety.
See, after immigrating to the USA, (when Sergey was only a child) Sergey grew up as a narrow savant with amazing intelligence but with poor social skills.

Then around 1997-98, Sergey and another unfuckable aspie-dork with a weak and defective larynx (Larry Page) set up the first Google mini server at the Wojcicki’s garage in California.

It was at that time that the father, Stanley Wojcicki, kinda offered both the garage and his daughters to Sergey and he was dumb and sexually desperate enough to marry one of those horse-faced female abominations: Anne Wojcicki.


This was a serious problem, especially considering the fact that women in the Wojcicki tribe are naturally born with congenital defects making their faces resemble those of female horses was not the real deal breaker*.

The deal breaker was the lack of talent despite them being Jews.

(Also, Sergey truly has a mediocre track record of giving power to talentless feminist idiots within his company (such as Marissa Mayer, who single-handledly killed Yahoo with her feminism)

The reality is that the Brin-Wojcicki marriage was a tragedy.

Why? Well because a fortunate billionare Jew that can easily afford any woman in Israel, somehow managed to chose the ugliest, barely-human-looking Jewish woman available then reproduce with her.

Let that sink in.

A billionaire with an IQ well above 130, managed to make one of the poorest, most retarded choices a man can make: To damage the genetic future of his own children.

That truly was a tragedy to all Jews.

His marriage to a member of the genetically defective Wojcicki family was a genetic disservice to all Jews on earth.

In fact, Sergey Brin and Anne Wojcicki got married in 2007, had two foal-faced children, then divorced in 2015.

So Sergey Brin managed to fuck up his own genetic future not once but twice.

Nobody wants little foal-faced Jew children, even if they are rich. Too bad that those much needed abortions never took place.

However, during those 7 years, the Wojcicki’s managed to milk plenty of money and power from Sergey Brin while Anne funded her own company 23andme (with Sergey’s money). Also, Susan managed to snatch the role of Youtube CEO.

Not bad for a pair of genetically defective female parasites of the Wojcicki variety.


*That is what paper bags are for.


So let’s answer the original question once and for all:




Why would the founders of Google, Sergei Brin and Larry Page give Susan Wojcicki so much power?

Answer: Because Susan “icky” Wojcicki is the Jewish sister-in-law of one of the Jewish Google founders; Sergey Brin.

Susan Wojcicki did not earn her Youtube CEO success, she was handed down “success” by her brother-in-law Sergey Brin.








Radical feminists like Ellen Pao (Reddit), Adria Richards (SendGrid) or Marissa Mayer (Yahoo) have managed to consistently divide and polarize the communities they were supposed to unite.

Susan “icky” Wacicki has also started diving and polarizing hers despite the fact she was supposed to save Youtube.

See, the problem with Youtube is that despite the fact of being a wildly popular platform, it does not make enough money. (hence why putting a radical feminist at the helm will only make things worse)

Youtube is used massively because it is “free” but despite its world-wide user base, it struggles to pay its own bills through its advertising business model.

It just keeps growing and growing and with so many non-paying customers, storage space will eventually become limited due to mounting costs (after all, there is so much “free” space for 4k/8k videos and beyond shot from so many mobile phones).

Youtube really is a paradox that needed an engineer-marketing genious to make it profitable, not an impulsive radfem like icky-Wojcicki.

Her latest changes to the platform have alienated a fair number of youtube users because the new youtube guidelines and policies are starting to resemble those of Twitter.

Why? Simple, both icky-Wojcicki and Twitter’s Jack Dorsey think alike: all the way into the far left.

Now, if we see what Twitter is doing to its own platform, we can see that by “sanitizing” and mass-banning people “with the wrong kind of ideas” Dorsey is pushing those users and their audiences right into the arms of their competition. In other words, Twitter is quite effectively feeding their own potential replacement: Gab.ia


The equivalent of this for Youtube may be Wojcicki’s current obsession with “sanitizing” her platform by mass-banning people thus directly feeding its direct competitor: Dailymotion.



Will dailymotion welcome all of youtube rejects? Hard to say.

For starters, unlike Youtube, Daily motion does not have the near-bottomless budget Youtube has, yet, it is far more lenient in it’s policies, you know, like Youtube used to be.

Perhaps Netflix, Microsoft, Twitch or even a brand new platform would be able to capitalize from what Wojcicki is irrationally and impulsively banning.
This Orwellian trend is very unlikely to stop, quite the opposite: mark my words, the next item on icky-Wojcicky’s list is to pre-sanitize the Youtube comment’s section via automated tools and an AI will censor you before any human sees your “problematic” comment.

Then, as the AI progresses, in 5-10 years time, your videos will eventually be pre-banned before any human sees them.

Mark. My. Words.

However, as of the time of this writing, there were two possible outcomes for Youtube under Susan Wojcicki’s power:

A) Slow burn

Youtube becomes fully Orwellian, any resemblance of free speech is squashed by AI censoring algorithms then it dies or Google sells it. Whatever happens first.

B) Sudden Death

Wojcicki truly fucks up, runs Youtube into the ground then is replaced by a real engineer CEO.

To be honest, my money is on A.

Susan Wajcicki is to Youtube what Marissa Meyer was to Yahoo:

The most “Progressive” form of Cancer for a Corporation: Feminism.

Because #FeminismIsCancer.



Thank you for reading.





Meet the Feminist Behind Youtube’s Censorship: Susan “icky” Wojcicki (Part 1 of 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 anybody but myself. 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: Feel free to checkout Jack’s site)






The purpose of a religion is to infect a community.

First, a religion embraces the group, then it extends and metastasizes within it in order to exterminate anything that it finds “offensive”.

Religions use the ancient “Embrace, Extend & Exterminate” approach.

Unfortunately, both the Google corporation and the YouTube community have already embraced a religion that also aims to extend itself and exterminate anything that it finds “offensive”.

That religion infecting YouTube is called feminism and it has a leader:

YouTube’s current feminist CEO, Susan Wojcicki.


In February 2014, almost inexplicably, a mediocre, uglier than a horse feminist with a worthless humanities degree became YouTube’s CEO:

Susan “Icky” Wojcicki

Then things started to change in YouTube for the worse.

As of August 2016, YouTube had drastically changed its guidelines. They’ve consistently been demonetizing videos that are arbitrarily deemed “offensive”. This effectively has censored hundreds of prominent YouTubers by taking away their income simply because they did not agree with the “popular” feminist opinion.

Then YouTube started recruiting “YouTube heroes” or, in other words, hordes of SJWs ready to mass-flag anything that would match their new feminist guidelines.

The reality is that “Demonetizing” is a short, euphemistic way of saying:

“If you offend feminism, we won’t pay you, no matter how hard you work or how many people like you”.


A prime example of this censorship by “demonetization” was a YouTuber with “only” 4 million subscribers: Philip DeFranco

YouTube’s initial response to the uproar?

Among others, they managed to directly respond to a certain Patricia Hernandez  (rape-obsessed Radfem) who works for an “insignificant” corrupt website called Kotaku.

YouTube followed their tepid response to the uproar with this incredibly dishonest video:

You can see the video above has regressive progressive undertones smeared all over it: it features politically correct minorities (a gay feminist man and an innocent-looking female feminist) using “proper language”.  Which falsely represents the thousands of male engineers building YouTube every day.

The result to the above travesty?

DeFranco did not buy their lies nor did the audience.

Look at the staggering number of dislikes. It almost looks as bad as a feminist-Ghostbuster-trailer-train-wreck:

Despite the many efforts to downplay the backlash, people still rejected their lies.

But allow me to rub some salt and add a little color to the bland, grey and politically correct dislike ratio on their video. Allow me to just highlight how much universally panned their false explanation was.

Behold the beautiful honesty of 84k red dislikes:


Firstly, a few relevant things about the video:

It is full of jump-cuts. The explanation for the heavy editing of a meager 3-minute video is that either they are retards in front of a camera (despite the fact they work for a video company) or it was heavily scripted.

My money is on the latter.

Secondly, we have a feminist by the name Zindzi McCormick who holds a humanities degree from one of the hardest-leftists schools in the US: Brown University.

Yes, the same Brown university with actual safe spaces featuring cookies, coloring books, Play-Doh, blankets and photos of puppies for its triggered “adult” students.

These details may seem trivial but critical decisions such as drastically changing guidelines, responding directly to redfems at Kotaku, placing leftists without STEM training in positions of power, making them appear on heavily scripted videos and YouTube’s management outright ignoring the audience’s backlash are not “coincidences”.

Not at all.

Those events are part of a cancerous trend coming from YouTube’s main feminist source: YouTube’s CEO Susan “Icky” Wojcicki.

Point in case, look at the sheer number of dislikes and just put two and two together. The audience is clearly not buying their lies YET YouTube’s management is hell-bent on enforcing them. What would be the reason?

Exactly. Narrative over facts.

If your audience is unanimously against your new rules, wouldn’t it be in your best interest to change them?

One would think so. But YouTube management won’t be looking at facts objectively anytime soon.

At least not as long as there is a feminist narrative to obey and Susan “Icky” Wojcicki is the one hell-bent on enforcing them even if it means burning YouTube to the ground (just like Ellen Pao did with Reddit: she wanted it to be hers or to have it burned to the ground).

At least, that is what corporate feminists do. They #BurnItForEquality and Susan “Icky” Wojcicki is one of them.



Susan “Icky” Wojcicki’s narcissistic motivations became crystal clear in 2015. She attended a “little” feminist conference called “Grace Hopper Women in Computer Celebration 2015”, when she was still fresh from her YouTube CEO promotion.

When addressing the audience, out of all the fascinating engineering feats that influence YouTube massive viewership, out of all the technologies developed by Google, she chose to open with this (skip to minute 6):

“Let me start with a story of my own life…”

“let me talk about myself with little girls as an excuse.”


This strategy Wojcicki used was reminiscent of another radfem by the name Adria Richards who used the same “what about the girls!?” moral panic tactic to broadcast her narcissism (along with her Joan of Arc delusions) to get two innocent men ejected from a conference just because she heard a joke unrelated to her. Then she proceeded to publicly boast about it.

Feast your eyes:


Adria’s dishonest actions escalated incredibly fast, to the point of one of the men getting fired, the Anonymous swarm getting involved until the toxic bitch got fired. It was so chaotic that the whole drama event became known as #DongleGate and was preserved on the dankness of Encyclopedia Dramatica.

Just like Adria’s, Susan’s narcissism was not subtle at all, it was a vulgar act of self-promotion through a perfunctory and apocryphal “heart-warming” anecdote.

But since we all know personal stories get old pretty fast, Susan had to take her feminist narcissism to the next level.

See, when a radfem says that:

“Girls are discriminated in STEM fields!”

They are not really talking about the “girls”, they are talking about themselves and how they remember their own inferiority complex while growing up. They do not care about present day “girls”, they only use them as an excuse to talk about themselves.

By the same token, Susan “Icky” Wojcicki was not really talking about her daughter, she was publicly engorging her narcissism by using her own child as an excuse, as a mere shield.

Then she went on to saying that her actions and decisions are instead motivated by her “altruistic” need to help little girls like her daughter, who could not even use the computer at home because her evil brother had “conquered it”.

Right…because according to feminism, her son has to be “evil” and her daughter is the default “victim”.

Men are default abusers, her infant son included.

(plus Wojcicki is rich enough to buy at least 10 computers to each of her children)

That is how low feminists go. They use their OWN children as an excuse to peddle their feminist religion.

And despite all these lies, nobody called her out.




See, here is the other problem with wealthy feminists in the tech industry such as Susan “Icky” Wojcicki:

They want to have it all without sacrifice.

Wojcicki is so deeply invested in the feminist narrative of “having it all”  that she publicly claims to make a daily effort to be home every day at 6 PM to have dinner with her 5 children, (yes, she cynically took maternity leave 5 times in the last 17 years) in her own words:

“I try, because I found that if I’m home for dinner, I can get the scoop from my kids on the day.
After my kids go to bed, I check email. It’s about having that balance,”


Here is the inconvenient truth: 

Susan “Icky” Wojcicki is a failed part-time mother at best and her children have been raised by highly paid strangers.

There is no “balance” in her life. 

“Getting the scoop” means she is a mediocre mother and only gets a mere fraction of her children’s lives.

Feminists like Susan Wojcicki, are faithfully invested in a feminist religion of ideals while they turn a blind eye to the glaring facts of their reality: Their children are not truly theirs, they are flesh and bone trophies raised by strangers and offered to the religion of feminism.

That is the saddest part: Children tend to pay the price of a greedy feminist mother who wants to have it all. Those children usually grow up wealthy yet neglected.

Women cannot “have it all”, men can’t either.

Nobody can, because being “Jack of trades, master of none” also applies to parenting.

Furthermore, despite Wojcicki’s net worth of at least $350 million, (versus Sergey Brin’s 38.2 billion, which proves how much of a talentless parasite she is) she is painfully aware how much of a mediocre mother she is.

She knows she missed meaningful, invaluable parts of her children’s lives all because of her obsession with work.

Imagine you are a wealthy dysfunctional mother with a misplaced sense of purpose who has been brainwashed by her university and social group.

How would you deal with your mediocre mother guilt?


By overcompensating vicariously.

In other words, Wojcicki’s brand of corporate predatory altruism where she recruits “YouTube Heroes” to mass-flag content is just a desperate attempt to make up for her mediocre role as a mother.

In a nutshell, this Icky-Wojcicki witch is censoring YouTube to overcompensate for her own guilt.

Furthermore, despite their name, YouTube Heroes are not “heroes”, they are a mere glorified online lynching mob using “reporting forms” instead of pitchforks and nooses empowered by a failed rich mother with a misplaced sense of guilt.

It is just fascinatingly retarded how a mediocre feminist mother such as Susan “Icky” Wojcicki can use her job to try to convince herself she did not fail at motherhood.

What a double-espresso feminist retard.

The fact that radfems like Adria Richards and Icky Wojcicki are moved by a deep need to regulate, censor and suppress male behavior and any non-leftist ideas because “men are evil and women are good” should have prevented them from working in the tech industry. Instead, the opposite happened.

Both Adria Richards and Susan Wojcicki were given power by virtue of being women not by earning it. And nobody in those conferences called them out on it.

Why? Simple. Silicon Valley AND Google itself lean hard to the left which explains why tech conferences often are such blatant feminist snake pits.

This is the end of part 1 of 2.

On part 2 we will finally see how Susan “Icky” Wojcicki managed to snatch the YouTube CEO position and her many connections in Google. Stay tuned.

Thank you for reading.

The Problem With Trusting

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 anybody but myself. 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: Feel free to checkout Jack’s site)

The Problem with Trusting the Site

It is the year 2017.

The site has become permanently unreachable and all of the evidence it contained is forever lost.

SJWs, radfems, political pundits, hate mongers and all kinds of hypocrites laugh their asses off because all the incriminating evidence against them is lost.


The scenario above is hypothetical but not implausible. Nothing online is too big to fail, not even Google.

The inconvenient truth? The site does not stand a better chance than Google itself.

See, that is the problem, we have delegated the preservation of evidence to an unknown 3rd party in a collective glorified act of faith. The moment  goes offline, so does the evidence.

If you disagree, please tell me the names of the people who run Also, while we are at it, please tell me who pays their bills.

I do not know about you but so far, I haven’t found:

  • Who is behind
  • How they obtain their money
  • How long they plan to operate

I think their claim of being able to operate their site on donations alone is bullshit. Especially when their “donate” link leads not to their own campaign but to a campaign for an animal shelter at fundrazr. Perhaps they own the site but it does not seem like. Look,


Furthermore, their social media presence both on Tumblr and Twitter is sparse at best, so clearly their main focus is maintaining their site with money from an unknown source.

Furthermore, a site with their speed and data needs is expensive to maintain and as the data they keep grows, so do their costs. See, the most perplexing thing is they do not seem to profit from their traffic via ads. Look, this is their very cryptic response to potential advertisers in their FAQ:

Will advertising appear on the archive one day ?

I cannot make a promise that it will not. With the current growth rate I am able to keep the archive free of ads. Well, I can promise it will have no ads at least till the end of 2014.

Clearly the FAQ has not been updated in at least two years so either their costs are incredibly low regardless of the escalating size of the data or they suck at lying and have no future in politics. Also, notice the personal way to address the question via “I” and not “we”.

Also, perhaps I suck at googling the answers to the questions above but if Denis Petrov exists, he, like most people in the Czech Republic, seems to like to keep things private and also make lofty, unrealistic promises about the still uncertain future of his site.

denis petrov

Again, nothing, absolutely nothing online is too big to fail, not even Google. So the lofty promises stated by of keeping the archived sites “forever” are either a failed attempt at humor at best or just plain retardation/delusion. Look:

How long the page will be stored ?

Virtually forever. We have a lot of free space and alhough the archive grows with time, the storage and bandwidth get cheaper.

Once the site goes under, what will happen to all those incriminating tweets, infamous blog posts and all that evidence that people never bothered to save themselves and instead used

Exactly. We will experience regret.

By using so indiscriminately, we ALL have been building on sand.

My main beef is that those who regularly use (including myself) is that we have become so lazy, that we often not even bother to screenshot anymore and instead become excessively reliant on

A single point of failure makes it easy for a system to fail, and for us users of, it is just a matter of time.

Think about it, if all of your archival evidence hinges upon a single point of failure called, then we have a system waiting to fail.

An let’s not forget that after failure, the first emotion is either anger or regret. Then we almost automatically exercise this predictable and hypothetical form of regretful day-dreaming by using expressions like:

“I should have done X Y or Z”  

It is almost as if we took for granted we could time travel and correct the past with our pointless and retarded

“I should have done X Y or Z’s”

Surprisingly, we never complain about our own pointless hypothetical dreams after the data is lost but we do complain when hypothetical dreams happen before said loss of data.

In other words, we enjoy romanticizing regret after the loss but we actively disregard warnings that would prevent such regrets.

The article you are reading is, in and of itself, likely to be labelled as just “paranoia” instead of being taken as what it actually is intended be:

A warning.

Many, many us have lost data at the personal level: A hard drive that failed, a broken BluRay, a memory card that stopped working and the list goes on.

Nearly all those who have experienced irreversible data loss, have entertained those romantic regretful thoughts featuring the back-up that never took place. Then we tell ourselves:

“That was so stupid, I should have done a back-up.”

How come most of us agree that keeping only one unique copy of our personal data is just stupid but when we actively keep only one unique copy at we believe it to be “less-stupid”.

Keeping one copy of your evidence in foreign hands is not only an act of blind trust but also an act of glorified ignorance.

Problem is, glorified ignorance is still ignorance. Why? Because common sense is the least common of all senses. I am guilty of it and possibly most of those who have used are guilty of the same crime:

Trust itself is a fashionable intellectual crime.


This begs the question, what is trust in and of itself?

Answer: Most likely, trust is the acceptance of lack of evidence as imaginary fact based on faith.

For example, when you board a plane, you trust the pilots to be real pilots. You almost never go he extra mile and check their backgrounds and their qualifications because it would just be too impractical and time-consuming to vet them. Why would anybody want to go to the trouble of vetting a pilot just in the veeeeery unlikely case they ever wanted to crash the airplane intentionally, because, who the fuck would ever have an airplane death wish in which they wanted to take the whole plane full of passengers with them, right?

Instead, you trust the airline with your life.


Don’t tell me that is not an act of faith. Every time you trust someone to drive you to a place, you trust them with your life because you do not expect them to be suicidal.

After all, who would have time to vet pilots, bus drivers or even uber/taxi drivers. Nobody has time for that.

Besides, there are better, more important things to do in life such as: porn, swearing, weed and beer. (in that order preferably)

Life, however, seems to be filled with perplexing acts of trust that should not take place yet they do.

In our societies, believing something plausible with little or no certifiable evidence is called “trust” but believing something implausible, retarded, absurd  and delusional with zero evidence is instead called “religion” (all religions including feminism)

When faced with lack of verifiable data, we go by mostly instincts or sometimes statistics then we exercise all the necessary kinds of exotic rationalizations and mental gymnastics to justify our decisions. Possibly because of that, instead of running a background check on the pilot for the plane we will board, we just trust them like a little lazy toddler with diabetes type 2, raised by an ignorant double-espresso retarded radfem mom (just to make the toddler in the metaphor is extra-retarded).

With this kind of broken logic where people blindly trust others with their lives, it only makes sense people would not give a single fuck when trusting someone with something much less valuable than their own lives: Their data.

We blindly trust not with our lives but with our data. This level of trust is just fascinatingly idiotic. We even trust companies like google with our passwords, our photos, our thoughts and our personal data and when asked “why” people just say:

“Why not? I trust Google”

It is almost as if people were willing to instantly sodomize the bloated, rotting carcass of an anthrax-ridden elephant without ever wearing a condom and when asked why, people would just say:

“Why not ? I trust the elephant” 

Granted, to date, Google is not a rotting, agonizing creature with anthrax, (that would be Twitter) but the fact remains: We should not trust companies with our data or, at the very least, we should not trust only one company with our data.

Only using for archival purposes is just a blind act of trust based on ignorance.

Want proof? Look at their FAQ:

archive is faith

The above FAQ is nebulous at best. But since the service is free, why wear a condom while sodomizing the dead elephant right? Or…who is the elephant here? Are we the ones getting the bareback treatment without even noticing? Make sure you check your underwear in the morning.

But more seriously.  Why are they so confident they will outlive the universe with their idiotic promise to keep the archives “virtually forever”?

If what they wanted was to instill fear in the hearts of their enemies with teenage-like hyperbole, they mostly failed like retards. These people are supposed to be professionals and are supposed to use language accordingly.

But, are these people a spin-off of Wikileaks? Unlikely, also it is very unlikely is a honeypot site set up by the FBI (that idea would be too Alex Jones-ish) but one thing is certain: It is a single point of failure.

So how do you fix the single point of failure?

Simple: Redundancy.

Those who regularly backup valuable data know of the 3-2-1 rule which goes as follows:

The accepted rule for backup best practices is the three-two-one rule. It can be summarized as: if you’re backing something up, you should have:

  • At least three copies,

  • In two different formats,

  • with one of those copies off-site.


Relaying solely on clearly is just #3 “one copy off site” thus it does not fully comply with the 3-2-1 rule .

By only using we are preparing to fail via our failure to prepare.

The solution to this problem is not only having a RAID array at home for one of the two formats but also using other forms of redundancy online to expand the last “off-site copy”.

My suggestion for coders out there is to perhaps consider writing a simple google chrome extension that will:

  • Backup the page in question to at least 3 archival sites besides
  • Upload a personal copy of the zipped file on to at least 3 cloud-based storage solutions such as one-drive/google-drive/dropbox.
  • Copy a text-based version of the site to at least 3 pastebin sites
  • Force the user to save a local copy of the zip file generated by containing the archived site.

Yes, there is a zip file at I am talking about the damn personal copy almost nobody ever fucking touches, the one on the top right hand corner that appears immediately after the page is saved/visited:

download your own copy






Just in case it wasn’t clear.

this one

Granted, placing your trust in online giants like Google or Microsoft is not too smart but forcing the user to build copy redundancy sure beats the present and flimsy trust-based act of faith we exercise by only saving the one single copy at

You will bitterly remember me and this post when goes offline.

After all, regret is one of the hardest emotions to forget.


Thank you for reading.



  • If you have more verifiable info on the inner workings of I will be more than glad to read your also verified sources on the based comment section because, so far, their FAQ leaves too many questions unanswered.
  • Yes, most of the links used for this article were from, just to make sure the article contradicts itself or makes the point clear. Or maybe, just maybe, trolly yours is lazy as f@ck.

Kotaku is dead. Let’s Defile Its Corpse While Still Warm.

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 anybody but myself. 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: Feel free to checkout Jack’s site)

Kotaku is dead. Let’s Defile Its Corpse While Still Warm.


Death brings us mourning or joy.

Kotaku’s death IS A REASON FOR JOY.


It is a warm summer night in the cemetery. The last 2-3 mourners have left, the dirt is still loose and the Kotaku corpse is still warm.

After all these months of seemingly endless wait, we Gamergaters can finally come from our basement shadows to consummate the last disgrace upon your corpse Kotaku.

We, the basement-dwelling, white, cis-genedered, gamers will at last satisfy our lowest carnal ambitions because tonight your impure dead flesh Kotaku is ours and ours only.

Yesss…the night is young and we have at least 6 lustful hours before full-rigor mortis sets in, but fear not, for we have brought an electric blanket and a pink chainsaw.

After we have amputated your head, right hand and lower torso for portability and convenience, let’s express two rites of delicate mockery upon your remains Kotaku: Let’s urinate then defecate into your now exposed windpipe. All of us will take turns, one by one, there will be no end as there is no bottom.

Now while we impatiently smear your portable body parts with vaseline and our indescribable gamer-animal lust, let’s remember your last and darkest hours dear infamous Kotaku. Let us whisper it into the ears of your now severed head to bring you those hurtful legal memories.

Remember how you struggled and suffered for months against Hogan’s giant throbbing and salty organ of defense powered by Thiel’s legal Viagra team?

So much uncertainty at at such an expensive price for so many months, at least for you, because Hogan’s legal viagra team was already paid upfront.

Oh Kotaku, you never stood a chance against Hogan, he was pure viagra salt and you? You were a mere journo slug pointlessly squirming before meeting its inescapable demise.

Oh Kotaku, the best part of your public disgrace is how all of your internal inhabitants, those parasites you called employees started having recurring nightmares where they had to go back to their barista jobs, or even worse, look for a real job.

You are dead Kotaku, Univision will only disassemble you and your little parasites. They will be slowly fired one by one and they will have to go back to their barista jobs, for them even if they close their eyes the nightmare will never end.

Oh, and all of those credit cards? They are about to get more overdrawn than ever before.

Oh Kotaku, you gave them that glimmer of imaginary hope then Hogan poured his manly liquids all over it, then you Kotaku, gave your parasite-journos that sense of false hope over and over only for Hogan to keep cum-boarding water-boarding their false hopes while still relentlessly thrusting and legally shushing them.

Univision is only the last insult in the form of false hope for your journo-parasites.

Hogan legally gagged you then covered your mouth while still thrusting, and there was nothing you could do to stop Hogan’s metaphorical persistent and massive legal penetration into you Kotaku.

Do you remember that last sound? It was the sound of your rectum bursting courtesy of Hogan’s 35th 14” sand paper condom.

But your rectal implosion is not what caused your demise dear Kotaku, it was your own greatest engorged king leech: Nick Denton.

Because, let’s call a spade a spade, who would in their right mind try to defend themselves in court by making light of pedophilia? Yes that was Denton. Denton offered your then still intact rectum to papa Hogan on a silver platter with a big side dish of sand as lube dear Kotaku.

You Kotaku were a mere sexual offering provided by your own parasite King Nick Denton. Even straight prostitution would have been more dignifying dear Kotaku but instead, Denton made your death not a simple insult but a public disgrace along with your sibling sites.

After all, you were just one of many casualties in the Gawker public disgrace, you Kotaku and your sibling sites were just one of the many casualties of Hogan’s legal Nanking-like grape fruit field.

But unlike Nanking, you deserved every single nonconsensual thrust dear Kotaku.

Now, it is clear why your corpse is a little too rectally loose but do not worry,  for we, the overweight, always sexually deprived, always high of redbull and doritos dead gamers  have brought plenty of sandpaper condoms and plenty of many other dead Pro Gamergate members to gang-bang your body parts.

See, the thing is, since we gamers are all dead, we all know the ride never ends.

But in your case dear Kotaku, us riding your dead ass is what will never end.


May you never rest in peace and forever be in disgrace you clusterfuck of SJW parasites AKA Gawker / Kotaku et all.


Fuck you Kotaku. 

Thank you for reading.

main defiler closer




Since you are garbage, and all this trusting we are giving to your sorry dead ass would cause too much friction or even fire, I brought a fire extinguisher, oh…wait you are still all wet in Hogan’s legal bukkake…never mind, we will sodomize you with the extinguisher, enjoy the metal rough edges in your dead ass Kotaku.


We may burn you when we are done with your carcass but that may never happen.



“Ow! Ow! It never ends!”

Why The Feminist Wonder Woman Film Will Bomb

eva wahlstrom boxing


Doesn’t domestic violence upset you?


What is more upsetting is that I punched Eva. She is so weak she can’t punch me back and I’ve enjoyed every minute of domestic violence I have inflicted upon her all these years.

Look at poor little Eva’s face, all swollen and deformed. You can tell she did not like it when I forced her look at the camera with that child-like face of hers.

To be honest, I have zero regrets about punching Eva. She was asking for it.

I actually quite enjoy beating her up because it gives me long-lasting erections.













Now, look at these guys:


see no efect


By the way, I also punched all of the guys above. Yes, my erections were even stronger.

See? There is this raw and impulsive concern for injuries sustained by a woman. But guys? Nobody panics.

Maybe you are still upset I said I punched Eva, but possibly, you realized what I meant when I said I also punched the guys.

Truth is, I lied to trigger your empathy gap.

I lied because I have never met Eva Wahlstrom, she is a professional boxer and her black eye was a result of fighting another woman. I never punched any of the guys either*.

See, I lied to see how you would react, most likely many of you reacted as expected but will not confess to it.

Human nature is sometimes more predictable than what it seems. We instinctively react to injuries sustained by women with a level of concern very  similar to the concern we express with injuries sustained by children. However, the injuries sustained by men rarely have the same effect on us.


We all have this immediate concern, this protective reaction when it comes to women getting injured. But when it comes to women trained by men like Eva? Those give us a mix of concern and admiration for their learned resilience for their resolution to imitate men. Her injuries are testament of her discipline and resistance as a modern warrior.

See, that is the problem with the feminist Wonder Woman film, she will never look as authentic as real female warriors like Eva Wahlstrom.



mma warriors

The appearance of wonder woman in Warner Brother’s “Batman V Superman” was ornamental at best and a waste of money driven by feminist ideology at worst. In a film world of fantasy you really have to work hard to lose credibility as fantasy and the Wonder Woman Character is one of those examples. Even as fantasy, Wonder Woman played by Israeli actress Gal Gadot failed to live up to any female MMA warrior.

Even little 6 year old  girls can see the stark differences between a female MMA fight punch and one by the Gadots Wonder Woman. One is real the other one fails to even convince a child.





The main reason for movie studios to produce superhero films is because of money and the main reason for studios to use actors instead of cartoons is because people have an easier time imagining themselves as part of that fictional world with actors dressed in goofy suits.

It is like children that want to wear a spiderman costume on Halloween to feel like spiderman and superhero movies are an extension of that, whether adults want to admit to it or not, it is the rule of the hero’s journey and how audiences place themselves behind the hero.

Logically little girls will want to dress up like Wonder woman for halloween but the problem is the big girls who have never become adults, those are the one that end up cosplaying like retards and believing the lie of women being “powerful” without even training like a man. The logic works for children but it should not for Tumblrettes.

In principle, female characters like wonder woman use actresses like Gal Gadot to pitch the message of “relatability” to childish female audiences to make money but the problem is, solo female superhero movies have a bad track record of bombing at the box office.

By the way, the Hunger Games is a work of fiction based on a book not a superhero movie. Feminists love to mix them to try to give themselves imaginary validity but to date, solo female superhero movies have been financial failures, 2004’s Catwoman was a clear example:


2004’s Catwoman is what happens when you let your investment be controlled by feminism: You lose your money.

Everything from casting a “brown-minority” actress to the costume design was a social justice-driven failure waiting to happen. The movie did not even make its production money back.

Here is the problem, some of the decisions made with  the Wonder Woman movie truly resemble the decisions made with the feminist Catwoman fiasco.

Both made the mistake of casting the wrong actress for the role. On one hand Halle Berry was cast because she was brown, and on the other Gal Gadot was cast because she is from Israel. If you put two and two together, let’s assume the producers also have strong ties to Israel so they may have made that decision based on their patriotism not sound capitalism.

This is not the only mistake they have made, the production of this feminist film has been a collection of dumb ideological decisions from its very beginning.





It is not a secret the Wonder Woman project has had a lot of false starts and lots of directors attached to it. It makes sense, it takes a lot of overpaid people to polish a feminist TURD before the studio realizes a feminist TURD will always stay fecal, but WB is a specially deaf and blind kind of studio, so much so they green-lit this feminist TURD.

The people attached to direct at some point ranged from Marvel’s Avengers Joss Whedon , Karyn Kusama (“famous” for directing the fecal Aeon Flux) to Kathryn Bigelow (Hurt Locker)

They finally managed to convince Michelle McLaren (famous for directing TV series such as Breaking Bad and Game of Thrones) but she ultimately quit the gig last minute by citing the classic “creative differences” But the real reason behind her leaving? Simple,


McLaren reportedly wanted to direct something as epic as Game of Thrones but the studio doubted she could pull it off and got cold feet. Wew…Warner, for a studio pretending to be pro-women that was truly condescending and anti-woman but true.

If the woman does not have the chops, she does not get the job so eat your heart out Jezebel writers. Too bad that WB’s decision only proves the following feminist-unfriendly point: Female directors are expensive movie studio niche-pets that do not reliably make money at the box office.

BTW, remember Bigelow’s Hurt locker? Good movie but female directors don’t make money reliably and it made so little money at box office that the studio had to go suing torrent sites and its users. Yeah great business model, get money via settlements. Seems Wonder Woman producers will have to do the same to recoup some of the millions they will lose. If only they had chosen an actress that looked the part…


Look at those “wonder” spaghetti arms. Look at that anemic and leathery neck. Let’s not sugar coat it, Wonder Woman is not supposed to be anorexic and Gal Gadot was miscast. There are so many attractive and well-built unknown trained actresses that could have been cast for a fraction of the money paid to anorexic Gal Gadot. To top it off, Gal Gadot is a terrible role model for little girls who may end up with a higher tendency to developing eating disorders.

Casting anorexic Gal Gadot was at really makes you wonder how delusional the producers were to think something along these lines:

“Yeah let’s make wonder woman sub-standar, no wait… Let’s make her frail, rickety and anorexic…yeah that anemic Gal looks like a wonder…”

Granted, they forced her to train and eat but again, it does not matter how much you polish an anorexic TURD like Gal Gadot, the TURD stays anorexic. There are many many other problems though…




Another giant problem superhero solo movies and female characters in general have is that they lack both physical and character flaws therefore they lack even imaginary credibility or, in other words, they suffer from the “black widow effect”.


As a result we have female characters that dress stupidly for fights, wear perfect make up regardless of the battle and on top of that, the male characters take far, far more simulated damage than any female character.

Here is the inconvenient truth: Feminist Movie directors are afraid of simulating damage to an actress because it hurts the sensitivities of the feminist audience and also hurts toy sale$. People do not want to see women suffer because they look like children.

It is a curse because if you make the female character realistic, you lose money. Male characters can get shot in the head in full screen but female characters always get shot off-screen.

The result is female characters that look superficial even when compared with imaginary characters like Ironman or Captain America.

Let that sink in, female characters are so weak that they even look fake in a fantasy world.

Female characters need to be “grounded” by the male sacrifice on-screen otherwise characters like Black Widow will turn into full sailor moon characters. They are too flawless and often success and empowerment is given to them, they do not earn it.

Wonder woman will suffer from exactly the same “Black Widow” effect because you can tell the studio is somehow playing it safe to try to make some of their money back out of their feminist TURD garbage fire.

However, just for the sake of argument, imagine if the studio had had the balls to portray a true MMA-like wonder woman, one without feminism, one true female warrior that earned her success instead of being “empowered” Imagine a Wonder Woman without feminism.



sense of consequence


You will never see a wonder woman with realistic battle wounds (even wounded game characters like Tomb Raider’s Lara Croft look more realistic) or a realistic battle suit. Obviously, the suit they designed is specifically made to sell toys but it would also be obsolete in battle, a realistic suit for battle inspired by the Greek would look like a male soldier’s but if you start going that way, the presence of a female like Gal Gadot also becomes obsolete. The character really is a nightmare for any director.

The truth about female characters like Wonder Woman is that they are glorified Sailor Moon characters for children in the bodies of adults: Feminist women.



Feminists want wonder woman to “win” but what they forget is that enormous pressure they directly put on any given female director.

They already know full well female driven superhero movies have a dismal track record at the box office (AKA things like the fecal Berry’ Catwoman) plus, female directors do not reliably make successful movies and instead are niche-pets of the industry. To top all of that off, they put all that pressure on a pet-niche female director? That is either sadistic or more likely just delusional.

Feminists truly seem to hate their own female directors judging by all the weight they put on those tiny female director shoulders.

A sound business decision would have been contacting a competent mangina with a track record of printing money to direct their feminist fiasco, someone like Joss Whedon.

The guy is a complete feminist drone that sympathizes with Anita, but to be fair, he knows how to make money. That is exactly what business is all about, you put the ideology aside and you take people’s money but the studio still went with a female director.

Why would a studio douse their money with feminist gasoline?

Answer: Sheer Feminist Stupidity AKA narrative over facts.

Furthermore, after the partial failure of Batman v Superman, it was in Warner’s best interest to produce a box office hit not a bomb.

Warner Brothers decision of  producing a feminist box office bomb like Wonder Woman is almost as dumb as Sony Pictures producing a feminist fiasco like their feminist Ghostbusters.

This is what is truly baffling about Warner Brothers: they are working on feminists acts of faith, not sound business decisions.

They know the odds are stacked against ANY female director they choose yet they still decided to throw their dollars to the garbage fire of feminist movies. These rich DC people are not only delusional but stupid.



Thank you for reading

*it is Mercedes Carrera the one that takes care of my erections instead.


Why Professor Gad Saad is The #BasedGadfather with Academic Balls of Steel

Gad Saad diversity_corrected


Let that sink in. The diversity that counts is the one academia condemns: Intellectual Diversity.

The bearded man above is Canadian professor Gad Saad. You should take note because he makes more enemies per day  than you or me in our whole lifetimes.

Unlike many others in academia, he has mastered the art of making enemies by telling the truth about several religions such as: Feminism, human sexuality, organized religion and gender politics.

Overall, he is an atheist to the religion of feelings and subjectivity. An Atheist, Lebanese, Jew, Evolutionist, Academic that won’t lie to spare your feelings. He dresses in black. He is based. He has earned the respect of millions.

His powerful nickname? The GAdfather.


Not only is he knowledgeable, articulate and charismatic, the GAdfather also has the balls of steel needed to make many, many enemies in so many different fields of dogma on a daily basis that could hardly be counted. All by telling the truth with zero politically correct protocol both in person and in social media.

In many ways, he is far, far more based than based mom CH Sommers and Milo because he is neither gay nor an elderly lady. He does not have those shields at his disposal.

Let me give you a brief example of how based this man is. During the recent events at Depaul University where Milo was assaulted and his speech disrupted by Black Lives Matter criminals, the GAdfather minced no words and immediately condemned their criminal actions, behold:


 First he directly blasted Black Lives Matter criminals:















 Then he directly blasted his own leftist academic colleagues for not condemning the actions of BLM criminals



 Then he directly blasted DePaul Authorities:




 Then he told DePaul authorities they had no balls:




 Then he started blasting BLM sympathizers:






 Then this hateful witch radfem came into the scene:






 She kept insisting…






And insisting with her sheer stupidity… 






Until the GAdfather exposed her







Then he succinctly told her to GTFO





And remarked her sheer idiocy  


Despite the fact radfem Lisa Marr is a LAW librarian she was so cynically hateful and opposed to free speech that she earned her own featured article here at theralphretort




But the GAdfather is not vulgar, mind you, most of the time he is quite the opposite, he is a gentleman and possibly one of the most civil human beings you can encounter.

The stark difference? He just won’t lie to spare your feelings. That in and of itself is unalloyed blasphemy to feminists and SJWs.

Granted, he still is part of academia right? So it would at least stand to reason that he has to match one of the following three categories:

  1. Knowledgeable but boring and often socially inept (STEM)
  2. Charismatic but their knowledge is either lacking or ornamental (Humanities)
  3. So knowledgeable and charismatic that they should not be teaching (CEO/Mass Media Host)


Problem is, professor Saad does not quite fit any of the three categories above simply because usually academics in category 3 tend to be hypocritical enough to skillfully lie and avoid making too many enemies even if tenured or working for mass media conglomerates.

Professor Saad is in fact tenured yet he keeps telling the truth about us human beings without mincing words and with little regard to the customary politically correct hypocrisy that characterizes academia.

His academic honesty has cost him plenty opportunities because the leftist mass media, either tries to censor him or avoids him altogether.

Again, as mentioned in category 3, because of his charisma and knowledge, he should instead be working in media producing documentaries.

But his delivery is a catch 22, he is so honest that the average leftist media outlet either tries to excessively censor him or avoids him altogether to prevent hurting the feelings of their leftist audience.

Quite a paradox to be so good and honest yet not marketable enough despite being a marketing professor. However, professor Saad’s talent has caught the attention of people like Joe Rogan.

That was when professor Saad truly hit a massive form of online alt-mainstream simply because Joe Rogan does not care that much about lying in order to spare feelings either. Plus, Joe’s censorship is so minimal that is negligible when compared to the draconian censorship of old media TV stations.

Add to that the fact that Joe Rogan’s new media audience is so massive and internet-based, he does not have to censor academics like Saad, at all (besides, Joe is far more outrageously vulgar in his own right)

Suffice it to say that Joe Rogan liked professor Saad knowledge and delivery so much that he has become a regular and every time he is featured, Gad’s audience grows exponentially. You really have to like someone to have 3-hour conversations torturing your bladder, three times over two years.

To top it off, what makes Professor Saad remarkable is that he delivers the information in a fascinating mix of both layman and academic style full of real humor and the end result is that audiences rarely ever doubt what he meant. Perfect match for podcasting.

His class resembles his podcast appearances. It covers the evolutionary roots of consumer behavior, which include subjects as varied as human mating, sexual signaling, dark side consumption (pathological gambling, compulsive buying, eating disorders, pornographic addiction), intra-sexual competition (which includes male-on-male violence), among countless other “triggering” topics.

Suffice it to say that if feelings shaped objective reality, he should have been fired long ago. His evolutionary psychology knowledge is evolutionary poison to the regressive creationist mindset of feminists.

If Milo is the “gay sandpaper condom of fact checked truth” then Professor Saad is “the giant barbed jackhammer of fact-checked evolutionary truth who reams the whole excavator arm of knowledge up the rectum of leftist academic hypocrisy with verbal sand as lube.”

In perspective,


Legend says the direct language used during his class has deflowered and prolapsed too many feminist “feelz” to count. Not a single drink was ever bought.

Add to that he is Lebanese-Canadian, Jewish and on the bronze side of the skin color palette and you have a very difficult target for feminists to hit without sounding either racist or antisemitic.

“White privileged man”? Good luck with that. He is straight and cis-gendered but other than that he is part of a protected minority made of SJW teflon.

Did I mention the language used in his class is a nightmare for feminists? It is truth without protocol. This makes you wonder what kind of people feminists need to be in order to be automatically upset by the truth.

If you attend it and you happen to be a feminist/SJW, you will very likely experience immediate & intense metaphoric rectal discomfort because professor Saad  openly rejects the need for trigger warnings and will only give you one single quasi-trigger warning per semester along these lines:


(It is not a joke, he actually offers one per semester. That is it.)

This begs the question: If he is so brutally honest why hasn’t he been fired by the largely leftist academia?

The answer is simple. He is too precise and talented.

See, here is the thing about the GAdFather, he exercises the precise professional separation of feelings from facts. Plus he does not have much competition. To most, what he does in a semester is career suicide. To him? Just business as usual.

Also, look at him, to be fair, he looks like a tanned & sexy jewish papa smurf with tons of academic swag, who would have the heart to fire him?

Plenty of SJWs would want to, I know, but by looks alone, he looks like Ron Jeremy had been designed by Pokemon artists. The GAdfather is adorable-looking erudite “truth-savage” who hit the ovarian lottery both in looks and intelligence.

sexypapasmurfBTW, if you go to his TL, every photo of him looks like #Gadporn, and no, I did not invent that term, he did. How many academics would do this?



Jokes aside, stating facts is a sin to the religion of feelings and feminism and in that regard, Gad Saad is sometimes reminiscent of  antitheists of Christopher Hitchen’s caliber.

For all these reasons and many more, you should buy his his book the consuming instinct.




Look at the cover, look at that bright red giant price tag attached to a sensual nude female. Look at her bright & red everted lips suggesting beautifully engorged labia.

It is a cover that is 100% unapologetically stating women and their sexuality are the original source of advertising.

It really is a great enjoyable and brutally honest read about what makes us biologically human & I cannot recommend it enough.

Click here to buy his his book:

The Consuming Instinct

In conclusion, the man is objective and as a result, his humor is so outrageously honest that is a delight to hear him explain things.

See, here is the things about human beings like Gad Saad, he finds comedy where others can’t because he THINKS about life which is the antithesis of those feminists and SJWs who see mostly life as a tragedy. Why? Because they “feel” everything. Or, as Horace Walpole said:




Compare the behavior of  feminists vs Gad Saad’s and you will soon realize that feminists are so unhappy and bitter simply because their thoughts lack quality while men like Gad Saad are the living opposite of theirs.

The lives of feminists are too often a public display of wilful emotional misery and impulsiveness. Marcus Aurelius got it right almost 2000 years ago.

aurelious -quality

Thank you for reading.



Here is a collection of some of the best of Professor Gad Saad has produced to date

*Subscribe to his youtube channel, (he destroys plenty of SJWs and their feels on a regular basis)

*All of his appearances at the Joe Rogan Experience:










*Watch the 15:00 mark, he manages to tell a few academics how intellectually dishonest they are to their faces, at their university. Gloriously unapologetic and #BasedGadFather is the barbed jackhammer of fact-checked truth.




*His presentation at Concordia TEDx (I know TED sucks but he got away with offending them)












DISCLAIMER 1: What you just read 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 anybody but myself. Truth with zero protocol was used; get offended. Feel free to disregard everything I said based on my Troll status.

For those who stayed, once again thank you for reading;

(EDITOR’S NOTE: Feel free to checkout Jack’s site)

Feminism is Murder – Feminists Tried to Murder Dean Saxton


3-name (copy)

As you saw on the video above,  Preacher brother Dean Saxton exercised his right to offensive free speech, he offended a lesbian feminist and she retaliated the way radical religious people do: She tried to murder him by hitting him over the head with a baseball bat. This criminal’s name is Tabitha Renee Brubaker.


The reaction from the corrupt leftist-feminist media? They are falsely portraying Tabitha Renee Brubaker as the “victim” because she was “silenced” and she is “only a 19-year-old kid”.

Let that sink in, the “virtuous” predatory left is actively trying to portray the attempted murder of an innocent US citizen by a lesbian feminist as “justified”.

When did the attempted murder of “offensive” men become “progressive”?

Welcome to Feminism: The invisible pink Sharia law we all live in.



1-name (4rd copy)

When faced with the black and white situation of attempted murder, witnesses and Tabitha’s arrest, feminists do not have much ground to stand on.Tabitha is a criminal. However feminists, as the hypocrites they are, may predictably be quick to defend the actions of their murderous sister Tabitha Renee Brubaker by telling lies like the following:

“look at her, she looks like a kid!”

The truth is convicted criminal Tabitha Renee Brubaker is no “child”. She is 19 and clearly, she is old enough to attempt murder.

Another predictive lie feminists attempt to use about the victim, brother Dean is that:

“He was asking for it”

Sure, as if that was also acceptable when rapists say the same about their victims. See the blatant double standard?

Alternatively a 3rd lie feminists could claim is that:

“He was only hit over the head with a baseball bat, he did not even bleed that… much..”

Allow me to state convicted criminal Tabitha Renee Brubaker aimed her blow to Dean’s temple, had she not missed, Brother Dean would now be concussed, vegetative or dead.

Some of the worst traumatic head injuries happen after impacts to the temple/temporal lobe and often result in memory loss, impaired vision, speech problems, epilepsy or death.

Tabitha Renee Brubaker’s intent was murder, just like Valerie Solanas tried to kill Warhol.

3-name (copy)

Kudos, to those spectacular feminist hypocrites working in media and justifying their own brand of “progressive” murder.

NOTE TO REGULAR READERS: For those who don’t know, brother Dean is a Christian preacher who pushes free speech to its ultimate consequences: He is extremely “offensive” to specific liberal people.

He uses a megaphone to say in real life what would normally be said online by trolls like me. He is “offensive” but brother Dean did not break the law before, during or after the event took place. He was cowardly assaulted and could have ended up dead.

NOTE TO YOU RETARDED LEFTISTS: I am a full-on anti-theist, I reject Brother Dean’s religion along with all the others including your feminist religion. But it does not matter how much I dislike Christianity, Brother Dean’s right to free speech must be defended.

It does not matter how “offensive” he is, no verbal offense justifies the murder of an innocent human being, we no longer live in the bronze age you regressive retards.

Learn the difference you leftist neophytes: Offensive free speech is NOT hate speech, therefore offensive free speech is 100% legal. Your feelings do not decide what is illegal, law does.

Even if you don’t like the message, you must support free speech as a principle otherwise we all lose it. It is one of the fundamentals of western civilization.

VOLTAIRE Free Speech




See, here is the greatest paradox in this situation: The criminal perfectly matched the behavior of radical Muslims who try to murder those who offend their religion yet  the radical Muslim murderous behavior came from a “progressive” lesbian feminist and the victim was the religious man.

The insult upon his injury was that these progressive feminists started wildly cheering after he was hit with the baseball bat. Almost as if they were yelling their god was the greatest, just like radical Muslims do after someone is beheaded.

Again, feminists were cheering the attempted murder of an innocent man in broad daylight just like their Radical Muslim counterparts.

You just can’t make these things up.

Judging by the behavior of its members, feminism is a radical religion. You would have expected the religious man to be the “aggressor” the “predator” because “men are evil” and “women are always good”  according to the religion of feminism.

Well, at least that is on paper because in practice, it is the opposite and feminism is a murderous religion.




See? You have to understand the innate “virtuous predatory-victim” mindset of the regressive left. To them, it is a matter of “switching” from victim to predator whenever convenient.

First they attack THEN they accuse others of being the aggressor. Their nifty hypocritical tactic is called DARVO (Deny, Attack, Reverse Victim and Offender roles) or just DARVO-flip for short.

Feminism is a form of socially fashionable “virtuous predatory-victim” one that can switch back and forth from victim to predator whenever it is convenient.

In the case of convicted criminal Tabitha Renee Brubaker, despite the fact that the assault took place in broad daylight, plenty of witnesses testified and the criminal was effectively arrested and charged, “somehow” she is now the victim. To top it off, the leftist media falsely claim she was “silenced”. Why would they lie so blatantly? Answer: Because it is convenient to turn one of their  predators into a false victim.

1-name (3rd copy)

That level of psychopathic disconnection from reality and the ease to justify the crimes committed is not different from what the leftist media has done in the past, because as long as the perpetrator is female, the left will try to justify her actions to levels of insanity. Even if it is first degree murder, they will try to excuse it or bend over backwards to avoid the death penalty. Just like it happened with murderer Jodi Arias. They will do DARVO-spins all day until they get what they want.

This is delusional levels of DARVO-spinning being done by the leftist media are so blatant that they should be condemned and rejected but instead? They regularly get away with it. It is just incredible how the regressive left media blatantly equals hurt feelings after verbal insults with a justification for murder.

1-name (4rd copy)

Imagine if the were roles reversed:

A 19-year-old male preacher hit a lesbian in the head with a baseball bat.


The left would lose their radical minds and demand  that 19 year old’s head on a pike.

See, if you want to turn the “progressive” regressive left into raging pack of radical Muslims, all you have to do is offend them enough. As a result, their hot-heads become hotter than usual and all of their “progressive” and  “civilized” clown grease melts away until their hyena faces are visible.

But these feminist predatory hyenas will not stop acting even without their clown grease. Just put two and two together, if you were a predator what would you do to try to pass as a victim even after being caught red-handed?

Exactly. You would roll on carrion to try to smell like a victim.

Tabitha Renee Brubaker is hyena and the leftist media is actively trying to roll this hyena on carrion to portray her as a victim. Convicted criminal Tabitha Renee Brubaker is an impulsive wannabe murderer. She will offend again, next time give her due process and put her in jail. No double standards.




Think of all the people the regressive left people find “offensive”: Milo, Sargon-Carl-Benjamin-Sargon, BasedMom-CH Sommers, Atheist Richard Dawkins, Phil Mason-Thunderf00t, BasedGadFather-GadSaad, TheHoneyBadgers, Antifeminist-Lauren Southern and many many other public libertarians.

But do you know what libertarians truly are for the regressive left?

Simple. They are targets for physical assault & murder.

The inconvenient truth is that the left is a “progressive” and glorified lynch mob driven by emotion not reason. The moment they are upset enough they will jump for assault or murder. Their civilized behavior is just a facade.

After their true selves commit the crime, they will DARVO-spin the blame and claim they were “the victims” and “had no choice”.

People like Milo Sargon and BasedGadFather Professor Gad Saad are possibly the ones at the highest risk at this point because despite the fact they do not go to the level of offense Brother Dean goes, they do aggregate many more enemies everywhere they go both IRL and on social media. They just have much greater audiences than that of Brother Dean and what you have is a ticking pinless grenade painted in regressive pink.

Think of this scenario: Milo is at a conference at a University, security fails again, he gets hit over the head with a baseball bat by a Black Lives Matter or a lesbian activist. The lesbian activist puts him in the hospital or murders him then blatantly claims Milo was the “bully” on national television.


Does that ring the bell?

Let me jog your memory:


During a rally, Donald Trump was interrupted in mid-speech by anti-Trump activist Thomas DiMassimo who tried to climb the stage but fortunately was is stopped by security. The result in the leftist media? CNN blatantly excused and downplayed Dimassimo’s actions to the point of giving him air time to falsely claim Trump was the “bully” but not himself despite being the opposite. Dimassimo was the offender yet he DARVO-flipped the guilt to instead accuse Trump of being a “bully”


As we have elaborated upon before, the prime target for murder by the regressive left most likely is the one man who has offended them the most to date:

Donald Trump.





Make no mistake, even if they hypocritically portray themselves as “religions of peace”, the regressive left is a religion of violence just like radical Islam.

What matters is not what you say but what you do. Your behavior counts, and the left’s behavior shows the signs of being as criminal and murderous as radical Islam itself.


Thank you for reading.

















DISCLAIMER 1: What you just read 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 anybody but myself. Truth with zero protocol was used; get offended. Feel free to disregard everything I said based on my Troll status.

For those who stayed, once again thank you for reading;

(EDITOR’S NOTE: Feel free to checkout Jack’s site)

Black Lives Matter is Violence: Milo assaulted at DePaul University

Black Lives Matters is Violence: Milo assaulted at DePaul University



While giving a talk at DePaul University, Milo was interrupted  by Black Lives Matter Criminals who, not only invaded the stage and stopped the event, they also physically assaulted Milo Yiannopoulos himself then made direct assault threats against him while still on stage.

These Black Lives Matter Activists have once again, ratified EVERY single negative stereotype about Black People in America: Impulsive, violent and Criminal behavior all executed by these parasites ON STAGE.

The real victims? Decent Black People like math major Katie Danforth, who tried to stop these Black Lives Matter Parasite-Criminals from disrupting the event, all in vain. Look, she was almost assaulted too:

Honest, law-abiding and hard-working Black people like her will be too often unfairly lumped together & judged by the actions of Black Lives Matter Criminals like these. One of them has already been identified, his name is Edward Ward. If you know the female suspect’s name, notify the police.

attractive people (corr)

Too many things went wrong at this event. But please, remember that the only viable course of action is the legal one: We need to expose these Black Lives Matter Criminals and their complete disregard for the law WHILE separating them from decent black people like math major Katie Danforth. That distinction truly matters.


distinctions matter (corr)


Here is the video evidence:



(Skip to 10:40 to see Katie)

Thank you for reading.













DISCLAIMER 1: What you just read 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 anybody but myself. Truth with zero protocol was used; get offended. Feel free to disregard everything I said based on my Troll status.

For those who stayed, once again thank you for reading;

(EDITOR’S NOTE: Feel free to checkout Jack’s site)

Feminism Is Instinctive Hate


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 anybody but myself. 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: Feel free to checkout Jack’s site)

Behold the essence of feminism:

Lisa Marr’s Impulsive irrational and instinctive hate.



Feminism is Instinctive Hate.


Yes, radfem Lisa Marr managed to express the sheer irrationality of the religion of feminism in one single tweet after based Professor Gad Saad condemned the events at DePaul University where Black Lives Matter Activists physically assaulted Milo.

On the left, we have the original tweet where Lisa Marr implies she cannot reason and can only let her instinctive hate dictate her deformed version of reality.

On the right, we have what her KKK-Nazi counterpart would instead say about black people. Same hatred, different label.


Just for the sake of angering radfem Lisa, here is again a version of herself hating her very own Black Lives Matter friends;


Just let that sink in. For people like Lisa, your hate dictates your reality. Forget the law, forget reason, forget objective reality, the only thing that counts is your instinctive hate. She is free to hate anybody with zero accountability.

See, feminism is a form of “virtuous” predatory hypocrisy and since “nobody has it worse than women”, hypocrites like Lisa can always conveniently become “the apex victim-predator” and everybody else becomes fair game to prey upon. A victim that can easily become a predator whenever convenient is the essence of the religion of feminism.

As a feminist, you become a “virtuous apex victim-predator” at will.

But how can someone like Lisa get this retarded? What does a willfully ignorant radical feminist like Lisa do for a living?

What could her occupation be that keeps her so far removed from objective reality, from learning, from books and knowledge itself?



Oh…she is a library technician…

Granted, she hates Milo but if she works for a Law Library, at least she must have some basic idea of what free speech is, right?



Let that sink in again, a law library technician that sternly opposes free speech and publicly says,

“Disturb anything and everything if you are angry”

So let me get this straight, the more outraged you are, the more justified you are to assault people? To riot? To burn cars? To start lynch mobs? To murder people? Where does it stop Lisa?

Oh yes, wherever your rage and hypocritical convenience dictate it. It would not be surprising to hear this from an impulsive criminal in jail but a library technician openly endorsing criminal behavior?

You are a  L-A-W  LIBRARY  TECHNICIAN Lisa Anne Marr.

Out of everyone else, you should be the first to support Free Speech not oppose it.


You cannot make feminist fecal matter like this up. It does not matter how many years a radfem like Lisa spends working for an organization whose main purpose is to spread knowledge about the law, she will forever remain a willful radical neophyte. Lisa is a creationist-like parasite painted in pink.

Lisa Anne Marr is another feminist neophyte like Melissa Click in the leftist Academia. You are an academic parasite and a shame to Law Schools Lisa Anne Marr.

lisa_and Melissa


Just like Melissa Click, Lisa needs to conveniently distance herself from questioning her belief system because the core of feminism precludes her from even entertaining that thought. Melissa’s & Lisa’s minds at their core, are not too different from the center of this diagram.

inside her head

If her hate dictates her actions, let’s take Lisa’s instinctive hate to its ultimate consequences.

How about a TERF version of Lisa that hates transexuals?


Or how about a version of Lisa that hates Latinos?


How about a Radical Muslim version of Lisa?

allahu lisa

It always escalates quickly with radicals… 

See? Saying that you instinctively hate someone extends to all radical groups and they all want to believe their hate is the “right brand”.

But you may wonder how a person like Lisa that “only” hates Milo can be portrayed as someone that hates a whole group of people? Wouldn’t that be “unfair”?

Of course it wouldn’t simply because hateful bigots like Lisa Marr do not follow reason and can easily extend their hate to whole groups of society depending on their mood.

I mean, it’s not like feminists ever hate 49% of humankind, right? After all, we all know all feminists are “man lovers” and they never hate anybody with XY chromosomes. Right? Unless Milo had the wrong kind of XY “privileged” chromosomes…

Think about it. Why would a feminist hate a gay man like Milo? A member of a minority feminists often swear to defend? Isn’t that a cardinal sin against the foundations of the PC dogma?

See, the explanation for Lisa’s hatred for Milo is far less elegant than what one would expect. It would stand to reason that Lisa sees someone like Milo like another “white privileged man” and by her radfem “logic” he is not a “real” member of a minority that is easily discriminated against. Amazing how Milo himself predicted that feminists would turn against white gay men.

The impolite truth is that feminists are not reliable because their dysfunctional reptilian brains lead their actions and gay men should not have chosen them as allies.Feminists are glorified hyenas ready to eat each other whenever the chips are down or it becomes “convenient”.

When your logic hinges upon emotional convenience, you are anything but a feminist pinless hate grenade ready to detonate against anybody that “deserves it” and your hateful behavior is always “OK”.

See? When someone as retarded and impulsive as radfem Lisa Marr lets her hatred lead her life and actions, they see no problem with their behavior. Would you like to know why?


To feminists, their hate is “justified” therefore their brand is an “acceptable” form of hate. Just the way the KKK, Hezbollah or other radicalized hateful groups justify their actions.


If their brand of hate is justified, all kinds of racist hateful people can say exactly the same about their own racial hatred, any group that hates another group based on their ethnicity or gender can claim the same justification.

Can we then say that a “little” hate does not really count in the feminist community? Of course not because Radical Muslims, Neo-Nazis or the KKK can easily lie and say the same about their own hate.

The simple answer is that all hate is indefensible.

But retards like Lisa Marr are unable to be intellectually honest and admit that even a small amount of hate is still indefensible.

But wait, these contradictions just continue because there are other groups who also allow their instinctive hate dictate their perception of reality.

Groups that radfems like Lisa openly endorse. Would you like to know who these people are? Exactly, radicalized groups like Black Lives Matter.

What an amazing irony, radfems like Lisa Marr endorse hating gay men like Milo just the way the KKK hates their beloved Black Lives matter friends. To top it off, the hate BLM activists have for white people is not different from the hate KKK members have for black people.

It is just a different hypocritical label.

Same hate, different labels, all of them indefensible. But these people will remain willfully ignorant for as long as they can because it is convenient. Just like the KKK, BLM or ISIS, Feminists are the worst humankind has to offer: Hypocrisy and hate combined.

In view of this, it is no longer surprising radfems like Lisa Marr agree and endorse impulsive and unlawful behavior perpetrated by BLM radicals. They sleep in the same radical bed.

Logically, an incompetent hypocrite like Lisa Marr would only get offended after caught red handed endorsing criminal behavior. Guess what she did? Exactly, Lisa played the victim and did a DARVO-spin (Deny, Attack, and Reverse Victim and Offender) to spin the accusations against her towards other people, look:




No Lisa, people who defend free speech are not “wolves” you are the hyena rolling on carrion trying to pass as a victim. Despite all this, I defend your right to free speech because the more you barf your stupidity, the more it will be exposed and the more you will discredit feminism.

Feminists like you Lisa do these classic Feminist DARVO-spins too often and too predictably. They shovel their fecal feminist statements and expect people to just accept their hate but as soon as they get any blow back, they instantly turn themselves into little damsels.

Feminists on the internet are like members of the KKK playing the victim as soon as people reject their hate. This image depicts Lisa Marr’s behavior and the unalloyed hypocrisy of feminist behavior in general.

lisa shoveling

If you shovel excrement on others, don’t be surprised when you get defecated on, you spectacular hypocrite Lisa Anne Marr.

Thank you for reading.





Why The Feminist Ghostbusters 2016 are Trying Too Hard to be Men


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 anybody but myself. 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: Feel free to checkout Jack’s site)

Why The Feminist Ghostbusters 2016 are Trying Too Hard to be Men

headerhey mom

The above line is not as bad as the mother actually forcing the girl to grow up fat, become a lesbian and embrace feminism. If the girl in question was born neurologically lesbian and predisposed to be obese, well, her life would at least suck a little less without feminist indoctrination.

Problem is, feminist fiascos like the feminist Ghostbusters are an extension of feminism: The lowest bar possible for your female children. Feminism is fashionable mediocrity while forcing girls to imitate men.




the dike busters FINAL

Does it surprise you that only by swapping the heads of the actresses with male heads their “femininity” is almost entirely removed?

The reason is simple: It wasn’t there to begin with.


the dike ghostbusters

Just the heads and the logo. Nothing else was touched, there was no femininity to remove. The director of this fiasco; Paul Feig, took care of that.

The subtext from the poses the actresses were instructed to adopt is not difficult to understand, the retarded mangina director, Paul Feig, wanted to make them look “powerful” yet all he managed to do was to remove their femininity and turn them into fat ugly lesbians.

Most feminists should have found that photo “offensive” because it states that women need to be more like men, to imitate them, so that they can be BETTER than men.

As usual, feminists do not think things through:

If you have to be like a man to distance yourself from men, you are doing it wrong.

If you do not want to look like a man, do not act like one.

The picture above was planned by marketing purposes, it was not taken just by “accident”, someone sat down with the director and carefully (yet stupidly) planned how to present these “weak” women as something that looked “powerful”.

Let that sink in, if you sit down and from the get go you consider femininity a liability, it only makes sense they decided to remove it by instructing the actresses to strike the pose above. They shot themselves and feminism in the foot.

But reasoning itself does not count because according to the religion of feminism, being girly and feminine is not enough to compete AGAINST men, it has to be removed.

That is the purpose of feminism in the metaphor of the feminist Ghostbusters, women are supposed to COMPETE against men not “collaborate” or “work alongside” or “partner” with men. Not at all, feminism wants women to compete AGAINST men. Period.

Why? Because being a lady is “boring” and women want to be men. That is the subtext feminists do not tell you about this picture. Put two and two together, if you liked the many, many, astoundingly beautiful expressions of femininity, why would you want to leave it?
Simple, feminists tend to have much higher levels of testosterone and being as godawful-boil-in-the-ass-ugly does not help their case. For example, this unshaven wild boar is supposed to be a “lady” according to modern feminism:


If you looked like a fat manly and ugly lesbian in any dress, you would also reject femininity. Being a lady is an art and a discipline that takes many years to master hence why it is rare to see a true lady in the western world nowadays, but when you see one, she is like authentic art; incredibly pleasant to look at.



I get it, Helen Mirren is a raging feminist but despite her feminist Alzheimer, the woman knows how to dress with class and be a lady. But if you want a real adult lady, someone who needs no help from feminism, Margaret is the role model. Granted, her politics were flawed but she truly worked hard and achieved what most feminists can’t even dream of.  All without playing the victim or leaving the art of femininity behind. Did I mention Margaret Thatcher despised feminists?


Feminists on the other hand are too lazy and too mediocre to grasp the artistry of femininity or even imagine the absolute reach of passive female power. A well trained, very feminine woman can completely outsmart and dominate a very powerful man. She can even make his decisions and have none of the accountability. Look at some of the first ladies married to some of the most powerful men on earth. Sometimes those male heads of state are mere instruments controlled by a female puppeteer.

But being a real lady is too much of a tall order for most feminists simply because it requires genetic beauty and discipline. A true lady is a unicorn and the feminists are mere fat rhinos. It does not matter how much it tries, a rhino stays a rhino. Granted, unicorns do not exist so dames are more like a beautiful bonsai tree and feminists more like hairy wild boars. They are both alive but that is as far their similarities go.

Feminists see themselves as “liberated unicorns” but most of the time they are glorified godawful-boil-in-the-ass-ugly fat lesbians crying “sour grapes” over what they will never be able to achieve due to their chronic genetic ugliness: The art of being a lady.

Problem is, if the Ghostbusters need to tell people they are “ladies”, they aren’t. Being a lady is just like being powerful, to quote Thatcher again,

thatcher effect2





role models

The second thing you can see in the picture is the lack of fitness in two of the actresses which roughly translates as the following commercial feminist mantra,

“Fat lesbian women are the OK because America needs more mediocrity”

What does a fat lesbian feminist eat? Exactly, the same junk a fat 8-year-old child eats.

There is very little difference between the trashy diet a neglected child has and what a fat and ugly feminist eats. Why? Because feminists are not real adults. They are children living in the bodies of adult women.

If you doubt this assertion, just browse the photos of most fat feminists on social media and you will soon realize they tend to “collect” pictures of their unhealthy diets almost as if they were trophies on their road to chronic and terminal disease:

“Look! These are the cakes that gave me diabetes type 2!

And I have no insurance! Weee! Porky GirlPower!”

The more the food pictures, the less likely you will be to see that many selfies, but you may come across fat feminists hating their scales instead of their own lack of discipline.

scale smashing

Therefore choosing 2 fat actresses for the Ghostbusters role made some sense because the physically fat and mediocre female audience would relate to the physical mediocrity and compulsive eating habits of those actresses.

Eating excessively is something children may do if neglected by the parents, they gain weight often to cope with the stress of being ignored and to replace the pleasure they do not get from life. Fat feminists mirror this and overeat to falsely cope with the stress of being ignored by men and women and eat to replace the pleasure they do not get from orgasms.
Granted, the other two actresses are not fat but those characters cater to the other half of the American feminist demographic: the bulimic-anorexic-anorgasmic and bipolar feminists.


In a way, the female Ghostbusters offers the worst women as a whole have to offer to humankind: mediocrity and childishness at all costs while force-feeding these lies to a new generation of little girls.

But be careful, because if you ever tell something like this to a feminist mother they will do something “unexpected” from an adult: Throw a tantrum.

Even if the feminist is a middle-aged woman, it is very hard to tell the difference between their tantrums and a child’s.

What kind of example is it for a child to see her mother embrace feminism, eat compulsively and throw tantrums if ever criticized? It is a recipe for mediocrity and unhappiness for those children.

You doubt it? Well it has already happened and the result of single mothers confusing and making their children as broken as possible with feminism is called: Tumblr. Those are mostly 3rd wave feminists.



Yes, the above could be satire but often they believe these things.

The little girls taken to the movies by their feminists mothers are prone to emulate the mediocrity and stupidity of those characters on the screen. Fat, insecure unattractive women trying to use false humor to downplay their intense feminist mediocrity.
Feminism is the false art of childish mediocrity disguised as achievement.

Those post-feminist Ghostbusters little girls will grow up to be even more confused and frustrated than their Tumblr counterparts and will become the 4th wave feminists, many of them morbidly obese and likely to be outlived by their elders.
The reality is that your children should outlive you not the opposite way around. You want both your male and female children to thrive, to grow ambitious and achieve a percentage of those ambitions, the greater those ambitions the greater the potential crash and the learning from failure. High ambitions are better than no ambitions.

Feminists are a group of social failures teaching the newer generation of girls to get as fat & as mediocre as possible to blame men for their own failures just like their  feminist mothers do.

Those feminist mothers are teaching their female children how not to have ambition.

Besides, those godawful-boil-in-the-ass-ugly feminist mothers complaining about the art of femininity are like 2-foot midgets hating both basketball and the tall players.

Thank you for reading.




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 anybody but myself. 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: Feel free to checkout Jack’s site)

the imaginary intelligence








Yesterday, a fat, broken, hateful and misanthropic gay man told me all women are animals. I believe him.
He had a broken childhood just like me and he says we, men, should unite and hate all women, no exceptions made. I believe him.
I want to follow his example because he knows what is good for us united men against women. 
I believe him because our hate is justified. I am proud to hate all women.

Now let’s compare:

Yesterday, a fat, broken, hateful and misanthropic lesbian feminist told me all men are animals. I believe her.
She had a broken childhood just like me and she says we, women, should unite and hate all men, no exceptions made. I believe her.
I want to follow her example because she knows what is good for us united women against men. 
I believe her because our hate is justified. I am proud to hate all men.

Surprised? In the first paragraph I pretended to have let a broken misanthropic person decide my future and as a result, most of you filthy readers immediately assumed I lacked intelligence. Plain and simple.

The same applies to feminists. Fundamentally, they lack authentic intelligence because they let hateful people direct their actions.

The fact that the first paragraph looks so “offensive” and the second so “acceptable” is the tacit admission of both the disconnection of feminists with reality and the empathy gap.

If you let broken dysfunctional people dictate your thoughts, sexuality and life you are either like them or lack all the intelligence required to be aware of it. Let me clarify:

The intelligence of feminists is a lie.

This is not hyperbole, I seriously take the intelligence of any given woman as a complete lie as soon as she mentions/admits to her feminism (yes, including Christina Hoff Sommers*)

Their intelligence is imaginary and religiously-narrow at best since they make too many exceptions where to apply it based on their emotions. Because of this, feminists actively neglect what makes us human:


You cannot rely on a person whose intelligence depends on their feelings, that is unprofessional at work and blatantly religious in everyday life.

Our species is here today because people throughout history put their emotions aside and let their reasoning do the problem solving. Emotions are very useful but ineffective for problem solving.

Equations don’t solve themselves even if you feel “triggered” and their complexity causes you to stomp your feet and cry like a toddler.

It doesn’t matter how much you emote and yell at equations, they ain’t gonna solve themselves. (hence why feminists are too retarded for STEM and instead go for gender studies hoax-degrees).

Emotions are great when you are growing up because they let you relate to your family members but emotions don’t put food on the tables of grown-ups. Adults put food on the table by solving problems with dispassionate reasoning, not impulsive childish emotions.

The equations life presents to us daily require dispassionate reasoning not dogmatic emotion-driven lies like feminism and religions.

Authentic reasoning is not finding what your feelings often falsely tell you about objective reality. Objective reality stays whether you like it or not, whether you believe in it or not, whether we live or die. It just stays.

Author Philip K. Dick put it best:

Yes, that jewel of human reasoning comes from a man who struggled with mental illness for a good part of his life. Maybe he was crazy enough for you to disregard him at face value or for you to consider the possibility he may have been close to the mark.

Let that sink in, a mentally ill man like managed to try to ascertain reality as a whole while feminists still struggle with their child-like emotions on a daily basis.

It does not matter how crazy Dick may have been, he still managed to reason that quote about the nature of reality better than what feminists can ever hope to achieve in their whole emotionally radical lives.

The credibility of imaginary things like religions and feminism needs to be “defended” but real things do not need any defense, nobody is defending gravity on Twitter.

Glorified fairy tales like religions and feminism need to be “defended” against satire while objective reality welcomes it. We can joke all day about the earth being “flat”, but feminism being for retarded women? Oh! That is sooooo offensive!

Authentic reasoning is finding the truth about objective reality based on evidence whether or not your feelings are hurt, wounded or obliterated by it. What matters is not what you want objective reality to be, what matters is what IS.

You reason based on evidence then you share your ideas, sometimes others correct you, sometimes you correct them but you do not close the door to reasoning and learning because of “feelz”.

Reasoning through intellectual humility means you always leave the possibility of being wrong on the table, whether you like it or not.

However, what you often find with feminists is the opposite of reasoning: They get “offended” then they burst into a fistful of intense and impulsive emotions that won’t take a no for an answer.

You have to believe in what they believe or else you are a “misogynist” which is code word for “blasphemer”. To them, doubting feminism is “doubting and offending all women”. Getting offended is their universal get out jail free card, just like religions do.
But would you like to know what both religions and feminism really want?

Exactly. Intellectual immunity.


And when it comes to the biggest comfiest “safe space” there is, you cannot top the intellectual immunity feminists and religions fervently seek. Let that sink in, immunity instead of humility. Yes, intellectually, there is zero humility in their sweet sought-after immunity.

You can see the undeniable traces of this narcissistic feminist need for intellectual immunity whenever comments or ratings are closed by default on any YouTube or Tumblr blogs or on social media products in general used by feminists. A perfect example is Anita Sarkeesian’s videos:
What this “comments closed by default because of my feelz” feminist policy implies is their overall refusal to admit the possibility of being wrong.

Feminists obey one master and it is not reason, it is their emotions.


Have you noticed? To feminists, what their emotions falsely tell them about reality “cannot” be wrong. To them, it is an absolute truth.

Closing the comments sections does not help their case at all because when they do, they remove the possibility of someone (much better than a filthy troll like trolly yours) persuasive enough telling them they may be wrong thus they remove the possibility of learning.

Feminists can’t even entertain the thought of being wrong or as master Aristotle put it,


Aristotle the mark of an educated mind


The mind of a feminist is not educated and is too often predisposed to aggregate neural atrophy. Just read and compare a teenager feminist vs a elderly one. Teenage feminists sound exactly as retarded as elderly feminists in their 70’s.

Just like a religion, feminism is the refusal to learn and belief is the death of intelligence. Again, a life without learning is pointless and I for one, want my ideas and “feelings” to be questioned debated or torn to pieces because as a troll that is what I do and I certainly do not want any special accommodations because I give none.

Whether I like it or not, on the Internet, we all wear metaphoric sandpaper condoms and it is our intellectual duty to be ready give or to bend over and take all manners of corrections in all of their grits, girths and calibers.

But feminists? Oh those get hurt, molested and/or raped even by mere text so much they even close the comments sections in fear of one of those words being “phallic”….oh…see? somewhere on the Internet there is a feminist crying and taking a shower for that word I just typed.

But more seriously, this feminist refusal to even entertain the thought of being wrong is what propels filthy trolls like me or well showered and decent people like the many libertarians “e-celebs” to do what we do: we oppose the imposition of feelings over facts in all of its forms and the religion of feminism is one of them.

Because, just like Creationism, feminism opposes objective reality.

Feminism wants you to listen and believe NOT to ask questions. Thus feminism is, in and of itself, the anti-thesis of human reasoning because their understanding of reality is shaped by emotion which is precisely the same flawed model religions follow: Feelings over facts

Anita listen and believe


Is is because of all this that I encourage you to be judgmental and offensive about any given woman and her likely narrow intelligence as soon as she admits to her feminism online or IRL.

Be judgemental, be disrespectful, be harsh towards her feminism and herself because if there is one thing her narrow intelligence will not touch is her pink belief system.

If you are unnecessarily “PC” and only disrespect her feminism but not herself, she will still not know the difference and will automatically take the same personal offense.

The reason for this is simple: in her mind, She IS feminism thus she has no real personality of her own. Without feminism she is like a Christian without Jesus. Without feminism, she has no identity left.

The same happens with religious people, they take offense on behalf of their religion because without it, they would have no identity. Hence why feminists and believers avoid questioning their belief system at all costs, because doing so means emotional self-harm.

This is the way Feminists avoid critical thinking and automatically mimic the behavior of religious people. Questioning their own religion? That is off-limits.

A feminist will shine zero light of reasoning on that dark object of ignorance that dictates her thoughts based on emotion: Her feminism.

This feminist refusal to question and reason their own belief system mimics what creationists do with their religion: Feminism is Creationism and it deserves no intellectual respect.

Thank you for reading.

PS: Challenge me on the comments section, I invite you.


*”If it’s any consolation for those wounded CH Sommers fans, I also consider the intelligence of any given person as a complete lie as soon as they admit to their religious faith. Feminism is just another religion after all. BTW, CH Sommers must have been an extremely shaggable lady in her young years, too bad sex must have been terribly boring, back then, she was a hardcore feminist.

Why The Regressive Left Wants Trump Assassinated


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 anybody but myself. 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: Feel free to checkout Jack’s site)


Imagine the following hypothetical case scenario:

During a rally, Hillary Clinton is interrupted in mid-speech by an anti-Hillary supporter who tries to climb the stage but fortunately he is stopped by security. The result in the leftist media? There is an outpour of sheer outrage and the leftist media immediately calls the rusher a “would-be-assassin” Hillary supporters are outraged and want the rusher in jail or dead. The the amount of air time dedicated to this single event just dwarfs any other news for several weeks.

Let’s go back to reality, do you recognize this guy?





Let me clarify then:


Let’s compare the hypothetical Hillary case above vs what happened in reality:

During a rally, Donald Trump was interrupted in mid-speech by anti-Trump activist Thomas DiMassimo who tried to climb the stage but fortunately was is stopped by security. The result in the leftist media? CNN blatantly excuses and downplays Dimassimo’s actions to the point of giving him air time to falsely claim Trump was the “bully” but not himself despite being the opposite. Dimassimo was the offender yet he DARVO-flipped the guilt to instead accuse Trump of being a “bully”. (skip to 1:40)


Notice how Thomas DiMassimo blatantly flipped the roles and accused Trump of being a “bully” despite the fact DiMassimo himself was the aggressor. This hypocritical political trick is called DARVO (Deny, Attack, Reverse Victim and Offender roles) or just DARVO-flip for short.



See where this is going? If a mentally imbalanced leftist wants to assassinate Trump, he would only be more motivated to commit the crime if he sees how DiMassimo was promoted and nearly congratulated by CNN.

This is not an accident, it is by design.

The leftist news outlets are perfectly aware of the powerful influence they have on the public. A case in point is the fact that whenever sensational coverage of a violent crime takes place, it increases the chances of other mentally imbalanced individuals trying to emulate the crime. It is called the copycat effect.


blue diffusion


So the old leftist media/CNN gave the floor to Thomas DiMassimo (who happens to be a trained actor from a wealthy family, no less) However, whether he was acting or not, it would still stand to reason Dimassimo’s actions were intentionally amplified by CNN to provide fertile ground for potential copycat crimes. Or, in plain English, CNN made Dimassimo a role model for future would-be Trump assassins.

Can it get worse? Of course, but it would require a news corporation with an audience much larger than CNN harbouring people who blatantly state they want to assassinate Donald Trump.

Well, the bad news is Facebook has done just that not once but several times. Facebook has allowed pages that display blatant calls to action to assassinate Donald Trump over and over . Not only have said pages been left untouched by Facebook for weeks at times, but Facebook has gone as far as claiming a page with calls to action for Trump’s assassination “did not appear to violate Facebook guidelines”.



facebook refusal


It was so blatant, the only thing missing was this,

like this-assass

Just for the sake of argument, how long do you think a Facebook page with calls to action to assassinate Hillary Clinton or Bernie Sanders would have stayed up? Not even an hour.

The actions by the Facebook corporation are unlikely to be an accident, just like CNN’s, their actions are by design. In psychology this effect is called “diffusion of responsibility” and what it means in plain English is that people in lynch mobs feel much less guilt than when they commit the crimes alone.

You have to give credit to Facebook, they are throwing their own brand of blue diffusion of responsibility mixed in with the copycat effect (brought to you by CNN) all of that without really getting their hands dirty. They are just conveniently slow to take down the pages to allow the assassination message to “inspire” the right kind of copy-cat psycho.

Think about it, if you owned a massive corporation such as Facebook and you leaned hard into the left, wouldn’t it be in your best interest to do as little as possible to take down those pages?

Guess what? Twitter is no better:

screenshot4 screenshot5 screenshot6 screenshot7 screenshot8 screenshot9


See? Indirectly advocating for the assassination of another human being is “progressive” by both CNN and Facebook standards. But if you ever bring up these facts and implications to leftists, they may snap at you, then do a DARVO-flip and accuse you of wanting to kill Hillary/Bernie while foaming at the mouth like a progressive chihuahua with rabies. For some odd reason, things tend to escalate very quickly into violence with “peaceful” progressive-regressive leftists.


Based on the video evidence, the behavior of the regressive left is analogous to that of radical religious groups.

You doubt it? Look at this video depicting that radical Muslim-like behavior perpetrated by leftists:

For example, if someone criticizes the prophet Mohammed, the most common radical Muslim reaction boils down to something like this:


Let’s compare it with the anti-Trump transexual activist’s spitting behavior:


A few notes on the video: Notice the well rehearsed taunting by the man with the red mask:


Then the perfectly timed question by the bald man on the right:

“Did you touch a woman or what?”

Too bad their blatant DARVO-flip provocation failed, otherwise it would have resulted on the radical left claiming to be the victim or mobbing the Trump supporters. You have to admire the balls of steel it takes not to punch someone who spits in your face bronze age style.

See where this is going? Radicals of all religions (including all feminism and all political parties) will behave like hyenas if offended enough. Verbal offence justifies violence and murder, just like in the bronze age and let me tell you, nobody has offended them more than Trump.

Remember the “Assassinate Donald Trump” Facebook pages? Possibly this was their radical reasoning before setting them up:


Hard to tell radical Muslims from regressive leftists apart from the line above. Right?

Possibly, the reason why regressives behave so similarly is because they are using their reptilian brains to act and falsely think with their emotions.

They paint their violent actions with a thin veneer of political justification, just to feel less shame later. All you need is a large enough number of radicals (in this case leftists) for their mob hyena-like behavior to become predictable.



escalation is for progress.png

The rule of thumb with the human animal is that verbal aggression escalates into physical aggression.
Usually, human beings will go through the following stages before escalating into full-blown violence:

  1. Verbal accusation is made to an intruder AKA “You are from another tribe and you want to predate our tribe”.
  2. Verbal accusation is made louder, then other members of the tribe loudly voice their support then circle the intruder.
  3. Verbal accusations multiply then someone takes a “test-bite” at the intruder/prey and often the circle becomes a lynch mob.

But before the mob jumps from verbal to physical there need to be a “test bite” which is a kin to the behavior of Hyenas, wolves or sharks. If the intruder/prey does not react to the “test bite,” then the whole pack usually understand that as a green light to mob the intruder. With the human animal the “test bite” can be as simple as a shove or a blow with the hand or an object, for other member of the human pack to emulate the test bite.

Let me show you how leftists follow these stages in their “progressive” escalation, look:

Here is a few things you may have missed from the video:

1) Verbal accusation is made to an intruder

“Don’t you video me!!!”

“She is with Shapiro’s, we don’t want you video taping us! “

Which roughly translates into “you are from another tribe and you want to predate our tribe”.

2) Verbal accusation is made louder, then other members of the tribe loudly voice their support. Then HE SHOVES his voice cone against the reporter which qualifies as assault AKA he took the “test bite.” (which covers stage 3)

Interestingly, the “test bite” was done first by the balding black girl (“don’t you video me!”) then confirmed by the man with the voice cone. Then something fascinating happened.

The man with voice cone says:

“I can put it in front of your camera and speak to you like this as much as I want”

Then he reiterates the above 6 times, each time louder THEN says this at his loudest twice:

“You are here to incite violence against black and brown bodies!”


For those who missed it, he said the following around ~6-7 times:

“I can put it in front of your camera and speak to you like this as much as I want”

Yes, 6-7 times. Why? Because he was stalling and thinking how to reverse the physical assault accusation against the Breitbart reporter.

Then he does a perfect DARVO-flip on her by saying:



Then his tribe starts to cheer louder every time preparing to escalate.

You have to give some credit with the guy with the cone: He is an extremely competent hypocrite doing DARVO-flips. The reason why he had to do the flip is because he could not physically assault a woman as easily and he was trying to rile up women of his tribe to take more test bites at the intruder from the “Shapiro Tribe”.

Now let’s watch an actual “progressive” “test-bite”:


Yes the “test bite” shove, failed because:
1) The intruder was too muscular AKA “too alpha”
2) The aggressor was too beta.

Once again, the escalation process failed simply because the “shover” was too much of a weak bitch (and being beta as fuck did not help his coward-raised-by-a-single-mother-chronically-pussified case).

But the shove was an undeniable invitation to mob the intruder that would have resulted in almost certain escalation into a lynch mob.

Here is the thing about lynch mobs, since everybody takes a bite, nobody feels too guilty about it. See? There you have it again: diffusion of resposibility for “hyena-like progressive mob justice”.



CNN, Facebook, Twitter, BlackLivesMatter radicals, and the regressive left as a whole are starting to show signs of being in high desperation mode. The more desperate they get, the worse their impulsiveness. Desperate and impulsive people tend to do incredibly idiotic things.

Judging by the “progressive” increase of violent incidents perpetrated by the left the closer we get to the election day, it would stand to reason events like the ones in the videos above will only multiply. More and more Facebook/Twitter pages will likely be created with calls to action to assassinate Trump.

Granted, Trump’s victory is not certain but it’s far from unlikely, either. The prospect of losing the election truly angers the leftists. But would you like to know what would anger them the most?

Trump winning by a landslide.

How could that happen? Simple, if a terrorist attack takes place right before election day, a lot of people on the fence would vote for Trump instead of Hillary/Bernie.

Never underestimate the power of paranoia.

Even people who dislike Trump would consider voting for him should a terrorist attack take place before the elections. The closer to election day, the higher the chances of him getting a landslide victory.

Another Belgium-like attack 1 or 2 weeks before election day would make Trump’s victory likely. A terrorist attack on American soil? It would make Trump’s victory nearly certain.

Unfortunately, this landslide victory would also increase the chances of his assassination not by terrorists but by the regressive left.

Here is the “Trump 2016 Landslide Win” Hypothesis:

The closer to election day the terrorist attack(s) takes place, the higher the chance of Trump winning due to paranoia WHICH would lead to a much higher likelihood of an assassination attempt perpetrated by the radical left. One would lead to another.


Logically, the leftist media would play a major role in fanning the fires to prevent Trump from winning or actively inciting copycats to try to assassinate Trump. Murdering someone just because they are “offensive” is carbon-copy radical Muslim behavior perpetrated by the regressive left and is indefensible.

Please report all Facebook pages containing calls to action to assassinate Trump.

Let’s be civilized and not behave like radical Muslims.

Thank you for reading.



I really hope I am the one being paranoid and nothing happens but history says otherwise. Another major terrorist attack on American soil is not a matter of “if” but a matter of “when”. After all, 9-11 was 1.5 decades ago.

Seems there are more people seeing these patterns…

Why The Feminist Ghostbusters 2016 is a lie and Paul Feig is the Patriarchy


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 anybody but myself. 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: Feel free to checkout Jack’s site)



Let’s address the elephant in the room: The 2016 Feminist Girlpower Ghostbusters movie is a feminist lie because a patriarchal man is directing it, not a woman.

This is fact is conveniently ignored by most feminist outlets, because frankly, feminists feel intense shame for this humiliation to their noble ideals.

How could they not? Sony had one job and got it wrong: Sony failed to live up to the feminist ideal of women being fully independent by chaining the whole production to the decisions of a patriarchal white male.

Sony pictures could not give the most important role in the movie to a female director which only confirms that, contrary to their claims, Sony executives did not trust the project and their money to women.

Instead, we have a white patriarchal male director by the name Paul Feig using and abusing women as his highly glorified puppets to obey his every patriarchal whim. How objectifying patriarchal and humiliating to all feminists on earth.

Paul Feig is the embodiment of the patriarchy controlling and objectifying all the women in the Girlpower Ghostbusters production. He decides what is done with the professional lives of all the women he commands. He controls them just like the patriarchy does.

*Did you like my impersonation of an outraged radfem Jezebel writer?

Me too but at this point I am done imitating Jezebel.

Let’s get real.

See, the reality of a project like the Girlpower Ghostbusters is that it is a fabrication, the women working for it have been merely “empowered”.

Their false “power” is ornamental. It is a fabrication to give their bird-brained female audience something to cheer for. This ornamental power is like feminism itself: False power given to women by men.

In this case, Paul Feig is the one giving false power to feminist toddlers living in the body of adult women. The partial adults working for Feig are so gullible, many do not even notice a man is directing their professional lives and the rest pretend not to.

This movie is an exercise on the contradiction of the one thing feminists want to liberate themselves from:


Now, these women are submitting to exactly what they are supposed to reject: Male control. But why do the women in the audience cheer for a feminist lie like the Girlpower Ghostbusters?

In other words, why do feminist lies like this work?

The answer is very simple, feminism is a religion and like most religions it sells imaginary facts for real money.

Think about it, the imaginary fact sold by the Girlpower Ghostbusters is that women can make their own successful movies AND Sony expected real money from this feminist lie.



Problem is, Sony is far less crafty than most religions and failed to understand the basic concept of marketing and demographics: The vast majority of the Ghostbusters fans are within the fans of sci-fi demographic and at least 66% of them would be males in their 30’s and NOT feminist millennials.

Furthermore, the female fans of the original Ghostbusters list themselves as conservative and republican-leaning, so a leftist feminist fiasco like this is unlikely to appeal to them.

By polarizing and alienating this giant size of their potential market, the producers of this feminist fiasco reduced their chances of making their money back to possibly less than half. To top it off, the producers and the director even secretly bragged their target market for this film would be the same as for movies like Bridesmaids, not males.

However, this major oversight could have been temporarily camouflaged by using another convincing lie AKA a superficially good-looking trailer.

Guess what? Sony failed to even do that and instead spectacularly succeeded at creating the most disliked trailer in youtube history to date:

trailer 1

For those keeping track, if the demographics of men in their 30’s was imaginary, wouldn’t the feminist millennials have changed the tide and instead have made the trailer the most liked one in history? Correlation is not causation but in this case, it seems Sony executives screwed themselves with sand instead of lube.


Now, it would make financial sense that Sony would try to save their already invested money and either create a better lie in the form of a much better trailer, or do some re-shoots, right? Well, trailer number two seems to be headed in the same derided and fecal direction. Behold its excremental glory:



In case you were wondering, this is the like-dislike ratio for the second trailer, it seems it is doing even worse than the first one.

trailer 2

Why would Sony release it via Comicbook. com? Hard to say. Maybe it was either shame or just a bleak attempt at “testing the waters”, almost as if they did not already know they are charting the same old sewage waters of their own making.

See, here is the problem with polishing this Girlpower Ghostbusters TURD. It does not matter how much they try to make it shine, it will stay fecal.

This is simply because the source material appears to be a giant unfunny TURD itself and the different agencies in charge of making these trailers are failing miserably at crafting a convincing lie by creating the illusion of quality and humor where there is likely very little or none.


But why would the producer Amy Pascal and the director Paul Feig make a movie against their own profit?

Simple: feminists favor narrative over facts and, as it has been pointed out before, the people behind this film are supremely arrogant.

Hang on…Feminists making idiotic financial decisions based on ideology and not money? Does that sound familiar?

Let me illustrate:

leigh and sony2


FEMINIST NARRATIVE:“Male gamers don’t have to be your audience”

OBJECTIVE REALITY FACT: Yes they do, take their money.

FEMINIST NARRATIVE:“Male Ghostbusters fans don’t have to be your audience”

OBJECTIVE REALITY FACT: Yes they do, take their money.

Neither Amy Pascal, nor the feminist fans nor the feminist media will accept their failure when the Girlpower Ghostbuster’s fiasco bombs. They will instead start blaming anything that looks or sounds male for their own idiotic feminist driven decisions.

That lack of accountability is the mark of feminism; it makes women who embrace it perpetual toddlers in the body of adults. Feminism, in and of itself, mimics a perpetual form of childhood. When you do not let children learn from their mistakes, they are doomed to never grow up and forever blame others for their flaws. Feminism is a prison with invisible walls.

To make matters worse, the leftist media does exactly that with feminist toddlers every time they publicly blame someone else for their failures. The same happens with the failure of projects like the Girlpower Ghostbusters, which the press blames on “sexism”, “misogyny”, or their own version of Satan: “the patriarchy”.

The leftist media and feminists themselves also have the bad habit of flinging feminist excrement at people who openly and frankly say the feminist Ghostbusters project is so excremental that it does not even deserve a review (as we have previously seen here at


There is a small chance the movie will not bomb but that would require it making 700 million or more at the box office so that it can break even or turn a small profit.

Chances are, it will bomb spectacularly and the patriarchy will be hilariously blamed for it.


Moral of the story: When feminism shoots itself in the foot, it uses a shotgun and runs out of toes in one single shot.


Thank you for reading.

NOTE: Make sure you circulate this offensive overweight and sexist pink logo of the Girlpower Ghostbusters on social media. (Or click here for the much worse version with very, very offensive ghostly neon nipples)

Feminists may or may not have some metaphorically adverse rectal reactions to it.







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


I am a proud Neo-Troll & I DO NOT represent anybody but myself. 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: Feel free to checkout Jack’s site)




Despite the scandals, most politicians at Hillary Clinton’s level are already extremely wealthy. If they mismanage their country, they normally face minimal consequences and they nearly always get to retain their wealth

In the corporate world, this safety net against mismanagement and accountability is called “the golden parachute”. However in the political world that parachute is more of a “fortress” where politicians can easily retreat to avoid any accountability for their often downplayed gross negligence.

Let’s call a spade a spade. Donald Trump would have as much as a “golden fortress” as Hillary in case either of them got elected. In the case the economy crashed while either of them was in command, neither would face direct consequences. (not impossible but very very unlikely for them to end up in jail or destitute)

However, there is remarkable difference. Unlike Trump, Hillary has, by virtue of her gender, many, many more avenues to avoid accountability.

Let’s not forget that the “patriarchy is against all women”, and she can always invoke that feminist mantra and say she failed because of the patriarchal system made by men. Perfect plausible deniability of any responsibility for feminists. Or in plain English feminist can always say

“it wasn’t Hillary, it was the patriarchy”


When the patriarchy is to blame for Hillary’s bad decisions, you have a recipe to bankrupt a country. Despite all this, her followers are incredibly eager to exculpate and downplay all of Hillary’s flaws.

Look at what is happening right now. Despite the mail server scandal, the ongoing email probe and the mounting evidence on her blatant disregard of  laws, Hillary’s supporters STILL bend over backwards to defend her in full stubborn mode.

The leftist media is also guilty. After Romanian hacker ,Marcel Lehel Lazar AKA “Guccifer, easily hacked into then exposed Hillary’s laughably vulnerable email server , NBC delayed reporting on it for more than a month.

Just put two and two together: Why would NBC delay such a profitable story and forego all that advertising money? Most likely, they intentionally sat on the evidence to avoid damaging Hillary’s chances of winning the election.

Wealthy politicians are often shielded from repercussions from their actions, because their followers often lie on their behalf and make excuses for their behavior. This abdication of responsibility only worsens when it comes to female feminists in power.

But it could get much worse (in orders of magnitude worse) if the American people elect a woman or a member of a minority. Why? Because those de facto victim status automatically take away accountability from that woman/minority member.

Hence why with politicians, the last thing you want is to give them even more avenues to avoid accountability. Gender or race are some of the widest avenues to achieve plausible deniability.

This de facto plausible deniability makes it incredibly easy for supporters of the woman/minority member to dismiss valid criticism as mere “discrimination”. Just the way Muslims disregard valid criticisms as “Islamophobia”

That false “discrimination” blanket statement is almost always absent with white straight men, because almost always, the first thing that comes to mind when criticizing a white male is:

“Yeah, he fucked up”

As opposed to what comes to mind when criticizing a woman/minority members:

“Yeah, that woman/minority member fucked up but I’d better don’t say anything because don’t want to be accused of discrimination…”


Thank you for reading




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


I am a proud Neo-Troll & I DO NOT represent anybody but myself. 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: Feel free to checkout Jack’s site)







You have to wonder the genuine reasons Hillary Clinton wants to become the next president.

It can not be about the money, she is already extremely wealthy. It is also unlikely she is perusing it because she wants to “make America great again”. First, because that slogan is already taken and second because her “democratic” socialism is unlikely to help the ailing American economy.

The country is already up to it’s neck in debt, and expecting companies to pay more taxes to feed their socialist beast is shamefully absurd. Companies are far more likely to flee to foreign countries, with much lower tax rates, before Hillary tries to exponentially increase them. Expecting companies to foot the bill for feminist socialism is just as delusional as feminism itself.

So no, Hillary is unlikely to have America’s best interest in mind. By Occam’s razor it would make much more sense that she is doing it because she wants power to compensate for her intense and fossilized inferiority complex (like most feminists in their 70’s do).

Most women who embrace feminism do so to cope with past sexual assault trauma and/or overcompensate for an intense inferiority complex.

Think about it; most women who embrace feminism do so to cope with past sexual assault trauma and/or overcompensate for an intense inferiority complex.  That should tell you what you need to know about Hillary.

Do not mistake her for a noble person. Hillary is a feminist and therefore a hypocrite. She wants power: plain and simple.

What most likely motivates her is a need for recognition. A need for status. Just put two and two together. She needs this much validation and prestige, because deep down she knows she is just a tiny inhabitant of the giant shadow her husband (that still to this day) casts over her.

Just look at her last name, she is even a parasite at that level. How do most people remember her?

Exactly, “Bill Clinton’s wife”.

She is a glorified appendage that never earned recognition of her own. Her husband’s last name “empowered” her. Why did she change her last name all those years ago? Why would she serve the patriarchy by becoming Bill Clinton’s property?

Simple, she was “empowered” by her parasitical nature. She is a hypocrite, she adopted and kept that last name because it gave her the recognition and power she could never earn on her own. She is a feminist parasite.

Make no mistake, Hillary Clinton is a careless a parasite on so many levels that she doesn’t even try to be a competent liar or care about covering her tracks. Giving near absolute power to an ardent corrupt feminist like Hillary would be suicide for the American economy.

Here is the thing about power, you either claim it yourself or someone gives it to you out of guilt or pity. The inconvenient truth is that Feminists were “empowered” by men. Power was given to them out of guilt/pity but they never earned it.

That in and of itself is the summation of feminism and Hillary’s life. She has been given possibly countless concessions and opportunities because of collective pity towards feminists. Feminists have the bad habit of painting the word “PARASITISM” in a bright euphemistic shade of feminist pink to make it look like their imaginary “empowerment” word.

If success is given to you, it is not success. It is a lie.

Same applies to intellectual respect and success in life through hard work. Both have to be earned.

That is why most feminists are a public refutation of intellectual honesty. They lie to themselves and then to everybody else about their true intellectual capabilities. They even go as far to publicly perform the following most spectacular form intellectual dishonesty and DARVO (Deny, Attack, and Reverse Victim and Offender):

White feminists are the authentic product of privilege YET they have the gall to accuse all white men of “privilege”.


Last time I checked, intelligence was not a penis but if it were, feminists would also have that chronic form of penis envy.

Judging by her actions, Hillary Clinton believes laws do not apply to her and her pigheaded democratic followers are a public demonstration of true ignorance, just like Islam.


Thank you for reading.




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


I am a proud Neo-Troll & I DO NOT represent anybody but myself. 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: Feel free to checkout Jack’s site)


A powerful man in his 50’s had a wet dream that involved a 6 year old girl. He knew the girl’s father and as appalling as it sounds, he convinced the father to allow him to marry the 6 year old girl. 3 years later, the man in his 50’s sexually molested the 9 year old girl with the intention of getting her pregnant. Despite all this, he faced zero consequences for his acts of pedophilia. Quite the opposite, that pedophile is actively revered and celebrated around the world.

Would you like to know his name? That pedophile’s name is the “prophet” Mohammed and the victim of his pedophilia was Aisha.

Allow me to clarify: the Islamic prophet Mohammed was a blatant pedophile who molested a girl by the name Aisha when she was only 6-9 years old.

How can a pedophile be revered instead of reviled? Simple, most Muslims refuse consider Mohammed accountable for his criminal acts because they believe Mohammed did so many good things for the Islamic world that molesting Aisha at 9 years of age, “simply should not” count.

In plain English a pedo like Mohammed gets a pass because he was “too virtuous”.

But wait, it gets worse, once you start talking to Muslims in civilized, non controversial ways (disclaimer: you manipulate them into trusting you) you then preface your upcoming question with a direct criticism of the crimes depicted in the bible (of course that they love agreeing with you when you harshly criticize the bible, as a result they often assume you are on their side) then, when their guard is down, you very smoothly ask them something along these lines:

“OK, you clearly know much more about Islam than me, please tell me the truth of what happened between Muhammad and Aisha because plenty of people like to hate on Islam and claim Mohammed had sex with her when she was only 6 or 9, is that really true?”

Usually 3 things will happen:
1) They avoid the question
2) They try to change Aisha’s age to 12
3) They say Mohammed cannot be questioned. End of the story.

Point 3 is especially interesting, because if you are skilled enough, you feign innocence then bring up the verses where Aisha’s age is clearly stated when she was molested by Mohamed  immediately after you bring up the fact that Mohammed himself decrees that having sex with girls who have not yet menstruated is “acceptable” (Qur’an 65:4) .

Then you state that pedophilia is a horrible crime and should be punished, then they are forced to agree with you but then…they go back to giving Mohammed a pass.

Why? Because he was ” too virtuous”.

See where this is going?

It does not matter how much evidence you bring up, most Muslims cannot be persuaded about Mohammed being a pedophile. They may agree with you that modern pedophiles must be punished but their pedo-Prophet Mohammed? He gets a pass.

You could spend hours speaking in the most tactful of terms and show them the best of evidence but they inescapably go into FULL UNPERSUADABLE mode after going through the “triple R” stages which go like this:

  1. Refuse the validity of evidence of their chosen leader’s crimes
  2. Refuse to assign any accountability to their chosen leader
  3. Refuse to be persuaded

As a result of adopting the triple R , Muslims usually go into full UNPERSUADABLE MODE.


See, the inconvenient truth is that for “unpersuadables” what counts is belief not reason. They have already made up their mind and they may entertain perfunctory discussion with you for ornamental reasons. They just pretend to think to avoid looking entirely dumb in conversations. Make no mistake some are very dumb but some even hold Phd’s and doctorates.

In the case of the ones with higher education, it is just fascinating to notice how, deep down, they are aware their belief makes no sense yet they just consistently decide not touch that dark object of faith in their otherwise bright minds. Theirs is an act of willful, selective ignorance.

It is a fascinating contradiction because many of them have higher than average IQ’s but choose to be selectively dumb when it comes to their faith. Thus they willfully choose to make their  intellect ornamental. Theirs is a matter of faith not reason and evidence.

Many of these examples of otherwise (almost mentally sane) people who actively choose to refuse all evidence and become unpersuadable are depicted in Will Storr’s Book “The unpersuadables: Adventures with the enemies of science”



One needs to be careful when dealing with unpersuadable Muslims who went through the triple R stages. See, after prodding them with questions they get secretly angry and as a result they usually go into full DARVO against you (Deny, Attack, and Reverse Victim and Offender) or in plain English they will spin anything you say as “discrimination” or “Islamophobia”



Religions like Islam are not alone in their unpersuadable behavior, quite the opposite, those who closely resemble Islam are feminists themselves. It only suffices to swap Mohammed’s pedophilia with Hillary’s private server scandal then you get comparable (if not equal) levels of unpersuadable behavior.

Just for the sake of argument let’s do some brief word swapping:

A powerful woman in her 60’s had a wet dream that involved being above the law and deleting confidential and classified emails at will by illegally using her own email server, she knew the right IT experts and as appalling as it sounds, convinced one to install the little server in her basement.

A few years later, the woman in her 60’s had illegally deleted over 32K private emails and nearly 2.1K Classified State Department emails all with the intention of being above the law but faced zero consequences for her acts of corruption.

Despite all this, she faced zero consequences for her acts of corruption. Quite the opposite, that corrupt feminist is actively revered and celebrated around the world.

Would you like to know her name? That woman’s name is the “Democratic US President Candidate” Hillary Clinton.

But wait, it gets worse, once you start talking to Democrats in civilized, non controversial ways (disclaimer: you manipulate them into trusting you) you then preface your upcoming question with a criticism of the flaws & crimes on the Republican side (of course they love to agree with you when you harshly criticize the other side, after this they assume you are on their side) then you very smoothly ask them something along these lines:

“OK you clearly know much more about the democratic party than me, please tell me the truth of what happened between Hillary Clinton and the email server because plenty of people like to hate on feminist democrats and claim Hillary illegally deleted over 32K private emails and nearly 2.1K Classified State Department emails, is that really true?”

Usually 3 things will happen:
1) They avoid the question
2) They try to change the server’s location.
3) They say Hillary cannot be questioned. End of the story.

Point 3 is especially interesting, because if you are skilled enough, you feign innocence then bring up the laws on federal government record keeping where it is clearly illegal to delete classified emails without authorization and how the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA) expressed concerns about Hillary Clinton’s violations of those federal laws. Then you state that corruption is a crime and should be punished, then they agree with you but then…they go back to giving Hillary a pass. Why? Because she is “too talented”.

See where this is going?

It does not matter how much evidence you bring up, most democrats cannot be persuaded about Hillary Clinton being a corrupt politician.
They may agree with you that corrupt politicians must be punished but their crooked-Feminist Hillary? She gets a pass.

You could spend hours speaking in the most tactful of terms and the best of evidence but they will inescapably go into FULL UNPERSUADABLE MODE  after going through the “triple R” stages which go like this:
Refuse the validity of evidence of their chosen leader’s crimes
Refuse to assign any accountability to their chosen leader
Refuse to be persuaded

As a result of adopting the triple R , democrats usually stay into full UNPERSUADABLE MODE.




It is impressive how fervent both Muslims and Democrats get when you openly criticize their respective chosen leader, they just cover their ears and no evidence will suffice. That is when you realize you are not dealing with rational adults.

First they expect you to agree with them or else they label you as “hateful” because disagreeing means you either are an “Islamophobe” or just a “misogynist”. But what truly is fascinating is how both Muslims and Democrats DARVO you like clockwork.

Why do these fervent democrats mimic their radical Muslim counterparts?

Do they even realize how religious it is to demand lack for accountability for Hillary?

To the democrats, the email scandal or the Benghazi attack controversy or any amount of evidence against Hillary Clinton is refused and falsely labelled as “blasphemous-misogyny”

All of the above regarding Islam and the Democratic party boils down to the following two parallels between Muslims and democrats:

*Regardless of evidence, if you accuse Mohammed of pedophiia you are DARVO’ed and they accuse you of blasphemy/islamophobia.

*Regardless of evidence, if you accuse Hillary of any crime you are DARVO’ed and they accuse you of hate/misogyny.

When your chosen leader cannot be held accountable for his or her flaws you have a perfect dictatorship with DARVO as a side dish.


Thank you for reading








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 anybody but myself. 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: Feel free to checkout Jack’s site)


Dear feminists & SJWs,

It has come  to my attention most of you fervently believe that offensive speech is hate speech.

You are mistaken.

In most of the western world, hate speech is illegal but both subjective forms of free speech (offensive and non offensive) are 100% legal.

Objectively and legally speaking, hate speech is entirely separate from “offensive” free speech.

This fact upsets you because it takes away your ability to lie when you falsely claim to be “offended”.

Dishonest people like you are an imitation of the past and like them, and you will fail.

Why? Because you imitate religion.

You will repeat history because you are willfully ignorant of it. Organized religions have a long track record of finding atheists “offensive and hateful” and saying things like this caused atheists to die,

God is not great because it is a lie for profit.

Ideas like the one above got millions of people killed (and to this day still does) because their “offensive” ideas “offended” someone religious just the way you feminists & SJWs get offended. Just like religious people, deep down, you too desire to murder “offensive” people.

See, religions worship glorified fairy tales for money. You are not different, you are not even original because you worship your glorified emotions for attention and money.

Your emotions are another glorified fairy tale.

Unfortunately for you, I am an atheist to your religion of emotions as well as all the other religions. Thing is, I am not alone and there’s plenty of trolls worse than me.

I am your “Satan”, I am  your enemy and it would be in your best interest to dox me and hopefully get me permanently put in jail or killed due to my “offensive” ideas.


Oh, I am such a mongrel, please allow me to introduce myself.

My online nom de plume/guerre is Jack Outis.

I am a proud online Neo-Troll & writer formerly for and from time to time for Please allow me state beyond reasonable doubt the following:

  • I am proud of targeting hypocritical psychologically fragile adults of the feminist/SJW variety.
  • I am proud of asking them about their past mental break downs.
  • I am proud of asking them about their past sexual abuse/molestation.
  • I am also proud of telling them I do not care about their suffering after they have confessed their past struggles.

Let me clarify, I am especially proud of “harassing” them until they suspend my disposable Twitter accounts (40+ suspension victories so far and many, many more to come).

Why do I do this? Because each suspension represents a victory to me. Because I want you to know your censorship is ineffective. Because the internet is not a place for thin-skinned princesses. Because the web is the place where religions, including feminism and your glorified emotions come to die.

Here is the rotten cherry on top: I do all of the above “abuse” with mere text and images and by using Socratic questioning, none of them illegal.

What I do works because my targets are too narcissistic to stop reading thus they willingly increase their pre-existing psychological damage. I just provide the offensive content and they do the rest of the work. In a way, I only give them emotional barbwire as rope for them to hang themselves, metaphorically speaking of course.

See? Cynicism is more offensive than lies because by your belief system, I should not be proud of what I do, yet I am. I am truly proud of trolling adults and following my rules. (hence why the use of “neo-troll” term, granted, sounds a little pretentious but it is not as if trolls were supposed to be that virtuous to begin with…)

It is very unlikely to shame someone for what they are proud of, isn’t it?

Worst part is, I do derive both physical and intellectual pleasure from trolling.

This is not a turn of phrase nor hyperbole, I do get noticeable dopamine surges from planning then writing offensive comments and prose like the one you are reading. Then the dopamine release only increases when the text and images elicit a raw and visceral response from the target of my harassment or, when I witness the random collateral idiots getting offended by my content. Be it on social media or in the comment section, I take great pleasure in getting a rise out of unsuspecting, impulsive people.

When I experience this satisfaction from offending people, my heart rate increases, my pupils dilate, my attention span increases as well as my overall alertness. At first I thought it was just the placebo effect or the combination of writing and caffeine but I have run some tests and purposefully eliminated all caffeine for a week before crafting then releasing previous provocation pieces to rule out other factors. Same results. My observations appear to be near conclusive: I consistently get dopamine/adrenaline surges out of offending people online and I derive great satisfaction from it.

Please tell me dear feminists & SJWs,

Do you find my observable behavior “pathological”?

How about “hateful”?

How about “predatory”?

Do you think I am worse than a rapist, a pedophile or Hitler?

Oh, I too have enjoyed being called all of those endearing nicknames.

See, when my target resorts to calling me those colorful adjectives, they reduce themselves to the equivalent of a raging anthropoid flinging their own excrement at me. This visceral reaction is the tacit confirmation my provocation worked and just puts a big grin on my face. Think about it, using adjectives is often an unmistakably expression of raw emotion. The more extreme the adjectives, the more upset they are likely to be and the bigger my grin*

Disturbing isn’t it?

But wait, it gets worse, every time I choose an adult target, I always plan to make them suffer the curse of their own emotions and publicly ask for help to manage them. I want them to be subject to their own lack of emotional discipline and suffer intense self-inflicted despair. Again, I enjoy witnessing how they use all the emotional barbwire I freely provide, some swallow it whole, some hang themselves with it, some swallow it again once the tip has come out (human centipede style, if you will).

But take heart, I am an equal opportunity troll, I target men, women and transpeople. Rest assured all of you are my potential targets dear SJWs/Feminists. Let me show you how much I care about “equality”.


the jack.png

If you are my target, it would only be fair I would be yours. Right? See, I came to terms with my eventual unmasking either by people like you or acquaintances of mine. It is not a matter of “if”, it is a matter of “when”.

I am sure you will eventually find out my other personas and make me pay for my persistent offensive behavior be it in jail or by killing me.

But this begs the question, what do you do if jail fails? What if I get a few years of mandatory ban on the use of any communications technology other than a landline?

What if I adopt another anon persona after I am allowed to access the web?

What if you catch me and we start the process again?

What do you do with other  “recidivistic” trolls like me?

What do you do with the troll who stays a troll even after you have taken away his/her income and possessions and instead goes public?  

What do you do with public trolls?

Look at my online track record , look at my writing, at the images I produce and you may eventually entertain the idea that most of it is possibly deliberate. If you ever reach such conclusion (provided you emotions allowed you to think) you may have the following , much worse epiphany:

My trolling is an act of will.

Why would anybody in their sane mind, dedicate the time and effort to such pointless “offensive” and “hateful” endeavour?

See what I did there? Keep reading and I’ll let you conclude whether I am compos mentis or not.

The first thing you may notice is that I follow some rules. Why? Because it would defeat the purpose of emotionally manipulating others if mine were at the helm. Don’t you think? My bad, I meant to say:

“Don’t you feel ?”

As you can tell dear feminists & SJWs, I am a prime target for your brand of social justice and it would be in your best interest to disclose my private information so that I dearly pay the consequences of my online behavior. I should lose my job, savings and possessions so that I stop trolling. Right?


But…what if it doesn’t work?


See? Everything terrible and problematic. 

Or, is it?

Do emotions dictate your reality?

See? Dear SJWs and feminists. How do you explain you get offended so often and other men and women do not?

Are you wrong? 

Are they wrong?

Are they worse than insensitive?

Are they “defective”?

Are you “defective”?

Emotional people like you live in a comfortable delusion because If everything is “terrible and problematic” then nothing is. Let me explain, because this distinction is a different matter altogether.





Rape victims often become feminists. They use feminism as a false coping mechanism against hurtful past memories. Hence why on social media, I have the good habit of “cutting to the chase” and I just ask them point-blank who raped or molested them in the past. I then assure them I do not care about their suffering because they are not children anymore.

I am serious, I truly do not care about an adult’s past sexual abuse be it male, female or trans.

Would you like to know why dear SJW /Feminist readers?

Exactly. Magnitude.

An adult feminist with intense rape memories and PTSD (medically diagnosed or more often self-diagnosed) does not even rank when compared with the suffering children with cancer endure.

Oh I know, after reading the above you really want to yell this:


Well, too bad because I just did.

See, the magnitude of the suffering a tiny human being with no experience, no context, no ill will and no past offenses has to endure in a losing battle against cancer must be respected.

Because of that a child with cancer has all of my respect because neither you nor I or any other adult will ever suffer as much as them because we, as adults have the advantage of many years of context and experience, but children with cancer do not.

Hence why I blatantly tell “depressed” feminists like Cara Santa Maria things like this every time I have the opportunity:




See, deep down, most of you are painfully aware that adult feminists & SJWs cannot even compete with the suffering of children with cancer, because they deserve all the compassion and you do not.

This loss of your entitlement to compassion angers you because when compared to them, your suffering just does not count. It doesn’t even rank.

To you, that is one of the biggest “disadvantages” of being an adult because you fear facing the fact that in objective reality, human suffering has a very clear magnitude.

In short, I do not care about your suffering. But allow me to illustrate the point thusly:

Were you raped or molested in the past?

If so, was it a family member?

The world does not owe you an apology and neither do I.

I assure you, I do not care about your suffering.


See? Intense emotions are an obstacle for reasoning. Your emotions aren’t real or else, I would not be able to write this because I would “feel” for you.

To you, what I do is immoral. To me it is merely amoral. To you, my actions describe my thoughts. To me, my thoughts dictate my actions. To you, I am a time-bomb. To me, I am mere text. To you, I am “defective”. To me, I just think you lie like all the other “offended” religions do.

Your emotions belong only to you, I do not feel them, I do not relate to them and by all intents and purposes, they an elaborate lie you use for guilt tripping people to steal compassion from those who truly deserve it.

In short, your emotions are a delusion.

How am I doing?

Do you already hate me?

But wait, it gets worse, because emotional people like you are so willfully ignorant that you only see the surface of the horror the internet truly is. Do you feel I am the worst the internet has to offer? Well, then, you are mistaken again. Very superficially so. Allow me to elucidate why.







deep web.png

Western commercial feminists tend to blatantly appropriate the suffering of the women in the 3rd world as bargaining chip via advertising to get free money and keep it for themselves instead of giving it to those 3rd world women.

Western commercial feminists show us the surface of the problem via advertising, then claim women in the west suffer exactly as much as women in the 3rd world. Yes, western feminism is an elaborate commercial lie (just like religions that pocket the money to themselves) because they do not show how much women in the 3rd world truly suffer. Why? Because it would be bad for business.

How could you extort money from people by showing that someone has it much worse than you?

People would give the money to 3rd world women not western feminists. Their feminist view of the world is conveniently superficial. The superficial world cannot be “sanitized” because the world as a whole cannot be “sanitized” either. By the same token, the internet mimics the world itself.

The internet has a surface that cannot be “sanitized” because the cores of the deep web, the darkest ones, the ones you and most people do not know about, cannot be cleansed. The deep web is where true crimes against humanity regularly take place. Here is a subset of that reality for you to easily digest dear hypocrites.

The deep web should be your main concern dear feminists & SJWs, not the surface of it. But that would be too much work for you.

Wouldn’t it?

Furthermore, have you considered that the social decay western countries like the USA experience regularly may have to do with the “anger” trolls express?

How would your “offended feelings” and online demands for censorship stop the average unemployed teen with anger issues and access to a smart phone from ever trolling again?

Would your grievances give that teen a job?

Would it give that teen better parents?


A better past?

Better memories?

Add to that the inconvenient truth the problem with the surface internet is not the trolls, the problem is people themselves and their minds. Hypocrites create cynics and a cynical mindset is the soul of the troll mindset.

Hypocritical people like you create trolls like me.  The moment you sanitize the internet, trolls like me will either smear it further or move to the much worse deep web.

See? Don’t be surprised your emotions only let you see the surface, that is the price religions like yours pay: Willful ignorance camouflaged as imaginary intelligence.

You hypocrites tell yourselves that your bad habit of “getting offended”, your censorship and “social justice” is for “a good cause” almost as if you truly believed your actions are always “altruistic”, right?

Well you are mistaken again. Your willful ignorance leads you into repeating history.



If have made it this far, many of you must have by now thought about a way to “altruistically” make me pay for my “hate”. Right? I am sure some of you may have even entertained the thought of inflicting all kinds of physical punishment, included but not limited to:

  • Assault
  • Blunt force trauma
  • Torture
  • Maiming
  • Or even the “right” kind of “altruistic” murder. Right?

Why not? Let’s take your potential altruism to its ultimate pathological consequences. Let’s show the world your true sense of justice, the one that leads to unlimited righteous retribution.

Look at the image above, it’s not like lynch mobs ever get their targets wrong. But why stop there? Let’s pretend you are given full unlimited power to regulate the internet dear SJWs and feminists. Here is how it might play out:

  • First, you would disclose all identities of trolls like me.
  • Then you would attempt to cleanse Facebook Twitter and the like.
  • Logically, you would struggle to come to terms with the suicides of those random teenagers falsely accused of being trolls by real trolls.
  • For each suicide you would become accustomed to telling yourself the following mantras:

“That suicide was not my fault. I do this for a good cause. It’s for the children”

“That other suicide was not my fault. I do this for a good cause. It’s for the children”

“Last week’s suicides were not my fault. I do this for a good cause. It’s for the children”

  • Lastly, you would struggle to pass laws to prevent the thousands of now public trolls from becoming even more offensive than past public trolls like Milo Yiannopoulos.
  • After passing a few laws, you would realize the problem constantly multiplies itself but much worse not on the surface web but in the deep web.
  • In short, all of the above would fail over and over and over again while getting worse on the deep web end.

Make no mistake dear SJWs and feminists, I have given a fair amount of thought to the eradication of problems like me and I keep coming back to square one:


The problem is not anonymity, the problem is not the trolls themselves, the problems is the human mind.

See, trolling is a form of honesty.

Just like people, trolls are an amplification of what people truly think in the privacy of their own heads: Hate, racism, envy, greed, viciousness, misogyny, misandry, misanthropy, crime, you name it.

They are all forms of honesty facilitated by the amplification of anonymity.

Your online grievances cannot prevent people from entertaining hateful thoughts in the privacy of their own minds and people like you only motivate trolls like me to express such thoughts in writing. The more you try to suppress it, the worse it gets. Would you like to know why this is so hard to understand to your feelings?

Because only human actions should be limited by laws, the human mind should be limited by nothing.

Freedom of thought is a concept short-sighted hypocrites like you tend to struggle with simply because you are afraid of your own “hateful and offensive” thoughts.

You don’t get to choose what freedom of thought happens in people’s heads because both good and “bad” freedom of thought come from the human mind. Freedom of thought has zero boundaries.

Freedom of thought cannot be suppressed or contained because people would have to be eradicated.


In other words, even if all forms of online anonymity were eradicated, the problem would persist by virtue of the troll mindset because we are all hateful, greedy and offensive in the privacy of our own heads.

You are like me and I am like you dear SJWs/Feminists, the only difference is that I am cynical but anonymous about it.


See where this is going?

We could keep shutting down sites, networks or even complete areas of the web and the problem would keep happening. The problem is not the sites or the web, the problem is the people.

People generate hate, people generate the “mean” side of the web and as long as you have people, you will have “abuse”. For each head you cut off from the hydra 3 new ones will regrow just like it happens with online piracy.

But wait, you are also part of the problem dear SJWs/Feminists, because by sheltering people you only create an endless list of fresher ever more vulnerable targets for trolls like me. You quite literally are serving them on a silver plate for us to consume. See? You are not that noble.

No, banning trolls like me is an idea destined to fail because it is too superficial to see the real source of the problem. You could take trolls like me down but for each one like me there will be 1,000 worse ready to go public and take my place and unlike me, they usually have zero rules to follow.

There is even the potential risk that being a public troll becomes a reason for pride just like in cases like Andrew “weev” Auernheimer. or even public trolls like Milo Yiannopoulos.

So what do we  do with trolls like me?

Even more importantly, what do you do with public trolls?

What if the troll stays troll even after unmasking them?

What if they take pride in going public?

See, the problem is not the anonymity, the problem is offensive troll minds like mine.

Aren’t minds like mine the reasons for all of your concerns?

What do you do to suppress the minds of trolls like me?

What can we do to prevent minds like mine to ever happen again, to eradicate them from the genome?

Remember dear feminists and SJWs: As long as you do not eradicate the source, “cleansing” the internet from trolls is an idea doomed to fail. However, there is chance you could be successful.

Would you like to know how?

Simple. We both know some truly violent things have to be done for the greater good of the world because absolute altruism should always be taken to its ultimate consequences.

Why? Because it feels right.

But take heart dear feminists & SJWs, you may not be alone in your journey…




Thank you for reading.

*Granted, on occasion offending people also gives me an erection but I blame Mercedes Carrera for it. Besides, the inescapable oxygen the internet breathes/smells as salty as porn itself.