Cam Whore Strangles Herself, Dead Man To Blame

I don’t even know how to describe the many levels of bullshit I see in this story…  Are females ever responsible for anything??  How is it that a female can strangle herself, die in the process, and it’s still somehow the fault of a man, somewhere out in cyberspace?

And then they call her “intelligent”…

Woman dies while performing ‘degrading’ webcam sex for perv

Disability worker Hope Barden, 21, was moonlighting as a webcam girl to make extra cash when pervert Jerome Dangar, 45, paid her to strangle herself —  then watched as she suffocated in March 2018 without calling for help.  But Dangar — who police said encouraged Barden to perform increasingly dangerous sex acts during their three-month relationship — will never face charges after he was found dead in his prison cell on April 15 this year.

They’re making this cam whore out to be some wonderful young woman – “beautiful and intelligent” – and such a poor, poor victim of some guy whom the author of the article, “Ebony Bowden” of the New York Post, calls a creep and a pervert.  Let’s see – she was performing autoerotic asphyxiation on herself for money, but somehow, that’s not perverted?  Maybe I’m a bit straight-laced or something, but I don’t think I’ve ever even heard of someone doing that until now, and I bet you haven’t either.  I’m going to say that this qualifies as a perversion of sexual reproduction.

And as many in the comments section of the Fox News reprint of this article asked, what was he supposed to do, exactly?  He would be oblivious to her her real name and location – that would be a safety thing.  Is there a toll-free hotline on the website you’re supposed to call if your cam whore strangles herself?  Seems a bit unreasonable to charge him with manslaughter for this…but then, unreasonable treatment was all this guy was ever going to get.

Oh, and by the way – they were not in a three-month “relationship”.   A cam whore with a regular customer does not amount to a “relationship”.  Boy, just imagine where they could go with that, regarding common-law marriage and “palimony“.  You paid a cam whore to flash you?  She now gets half your shit!

Of course, he died in his prison cell – of what, we’re not told – and the consensus seems to be that the only tragedy about his death was that he couldn’t be charged for this.

“We are sorely disappointed that this case can no longer bring any legal justice for Hope.”

“The death of Dangar ultimately prevented prosecutors from charging him in connection with Hope’s death as a result of sexually related role-play,” Detective Inspector John Quilty from Staffordshire Police said. “Hope was a 21-year-old woman and her death was tragic,” he added.

Why is his death not tragic?  Why should he be charged with her death?

Because vagina!  That’s why.

Barden’s mother said her daughter — who worked as a disability carer but became a webcam girl to earn extra money — was “beautiful and intelligent” and called for better regulation of the industry.  “Anyone with daughters or other relatives involved in this terrible industry must be aware of the risk of harm,” Kate Barden said in a statement released through Staffordshire Police.

Better regulation of the industry…  Okay, what did this grieving mother have in mind, in the way of regulations?  I mean, she must have some good ideas – after all, it’s not like she raised a girl without teaching her the dangers of suffocating yourself for money, right?  Well I can think of a couple of ideas: maybe that aforementioned emergency hotline, for the stupid ones…or perhaps cam whores should be notified that a lack of oxygen can lead to death, and they probably shouldn’t do it upon request.  Beyond that, what?  Should they check up on all the cam johns and make sure none of them are “creeps” who might leave a poor damsel in distress to suffocate?  Well, I guess if cam whoring becomes no-creeps-allowed then the poor little floozies are not going to be able to make that extra money, and they’ll need a check from the government…oh wait, right – they just don’t want any creeps who won’t call the number that doesn’t exist when the girl on the other side chokes to death.  Boy, this is all starting to make sense now!

He was separately convicted of possession of extreme pornographic images in January 2019 and jailed for 15 months.

So what’s “extreme pornographic images” in England?  Is it child porn, or something else?  I ask because it seems I read somewhere that they’re effectively outlawing porn in the UK, unless it’s taxed, so I don’t really know how far the anti-porn forces over there have gone, and what kind of smut this guy might have been locked away for.  If it was anything less that child porn, I’ll be that being charged with manslaughter for what some stupid cam whore did to herself probably wasn’t a surprise when he got the news.  Maybe he killed himself, or maybe some white knight cuck in prison killed him..?  I guess we’ll never know.  Going by the spin in this article, I guess it doesn’t matter either.

So, the moral of the story?  Well there are a few, actually:

  1. Men are always responsible for the actions of women – even women of unknown identity and location.
  2. Stupid women are “intelligent”.
  3. A woman strangling herself for money isn’t perverted, but watching it is.
  4. Even if there was nothing you could do to save her, you still should have done something.
  5. A woman needs air to survive.

Tee-hee.

 

US Military vs. Incels

We have arrived at a point when even the most paranoid estimates of incel persecution have been surpassed by reality.  Wonder no more about why young guys are always so worried that they’ll never get laid – not only is it degrading, discouraging and frankly mind-rotting, but it now gets you branded as a military combatant!

https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2019/06/leaked-us-air-force-briefing-discusses-4chan-and-the-threat-of-incels/

https://taskandpurpose.com/air-force-joint-base-andrews-incels-threat-brief

At least one Air Force base is on the lookout for a sinister new threat: angry men who can’t get laid.

Okay, all you Elliot Sodini wannabes: you have their attention.  No, they’re not going to help you get laid – at best, they’re going to take you out with a drone strike.

tempsnip

For the Air Force’s part, these Twatter posts that the Gateway Pundit reposted took the words right out of my mouth…

Have they developed any countermeasures? Are we thinking bombing? Drones? Seems like air superiority won’t be a problem.

Small Diameter Deep Basement Penetrator.

Low collateral damage weapon that can be dropped by most drones, or even hand thrown.

Render the basement uninhabitable and the incel is defeated

I won’t believe the Air Force has declared incels a threat until they’ve claimed they require the F-35 to effectively fight them.

Are we totally sure — hear me out — that incels aren’t just mistaking drag queens for Stacys?

…but it’s not like we assume that this is limited to the USAF.  I guarantee you, it comes from the Pentagon (and from the SPLC before that) and you’ll find similar briefings in all of the US Armed Forces.

One of my first impulses was that this may be the result of the Soetoro Administration turning America’s military brass into a sorority – after all, if you know anything about the female thought process on reproduction, you know that they understand two kinds of men: tall, sexy, swaggering bad boys, and creepy loser incels who must be killed (even the bull dykes in the military process it this way).  It’s really not a stretch to think that some of this childlike mentality will have seeped into official policy, as it inevitably would.  On the other hand, new names I didn’t recognize – Brian Isaack Clyde, Scott Beierle, Christopher Wayne Cleary – seem to indicate that what I said a year ago about the Incel Revolution being underway was pretty much correct.  Even I can’t keep up with the incidents coming down the pike.  I’m going to have to get a list going I suppose.

Of course, the tradcucks and white knights of all political stripes are more than happy to throw de-selected men under the bus, on behalf of the women targeting them (also of all political stripes).  Even Infowars, which is supposed to be against all forms of tyranny, couldn’t care less about incels being profiled and persecuted – in fact, they’re all for it.  Again, as Alex Jones was a ladies man when he was younger (according to him), he won’t even recognize the insidiousness of this.  It all goes right over the heads of everyone who has never lived it.

First they came for the _______, and I said nothing, because I wasn’t a _______.

Then they came for the _______, and I said nothing, because I wasn’t a _______.

Then they came for the incels, and I cheered that on because, needless to say, I sure as hell wasn’t ever one of those losers.  I mean in retrospect, that persecution is one I can still live with.  Oh if only it had stopped there…

But then they came for the _______, and I said nothing, because I wasn’t a _______….

So if you thought that the Incel Revolution was going to make anything happen in your favor, the way Islamic terrorism has worked out for the radical Muslims as they take over the world…no, you thought wrong.  You see how it’s shaping up?  With every step “forward” that you think the more brazen incels take with their events and attempts, all incels move two or three steps back.  The Lagomorphocracy is all queued up and ready to ratchet up the countermeasures.

There’s only one way you can avoid the consequences of the incel attackers’ actions: don’t be an incel.  If that’s not an option…go into hiding.  Ghost in plain site, don’t tell anyone anything about yourself – not even things that they could ascertain your incel status by deduction – and beyond that, just….I dunno.  Good luck!  You now have the most powerful military on earth after you, and unlike other belligerents, you’re one they actually want to destroy.  So yeah, good luck.  Oh, and as tempting as it may be to thank “Becky & Stacy” for this…just don’t.  Go into hiding.  We’ll see you on the other side.  Maybe.

“Send Bachelors And Come Heavily Armed”

Apparently, the lives of MGTOW and incel men still don’t matter, as much as at any point in history.

This statement was made by an Oregon state senator, in response to the current crisis – the Democrats trying to get an economically suicidal cap-and-trade bill passed, with the Republicans walking out after negotiations broke down (there were actual negotiations with a Commiecrat super-majority?) and denying the Democrats a quorum, which prompted the Oregon governor (a typical blue-state switch-hitter) to send the Oregon State Police to arrest them and bring them back.  Now they’re shutting the Senate down due to a “possible militia threat” from right-wing groups (which is just the Democrats playing drama queen victims – tomorrow you’ll see some gay couples burning their own houses down and claiming it was the Bundy family).  In this situation, contrary to the Dems’ claims that Republicans have decided to “turn their back on their constituents who they are honor-bound to represent here in this building,” they’re doing exactly what their constituents want them to do, by stopping the bill any way they can – in this case, by not being in the building.

Anyway, there’s the back story – now let’s get to what’s important to us.

One Republican senator named Brian Boquist said, “Send bachelors and come heavily armed … I’m not going to be a political prisoner in the state of Oregon. It’s just that simple.”  Good on him!  Well, except for the part about the bachelors.

What he’s saying is a reference to the age-old policy of favoritism for married men over bachelors.  Some may say that he’s not serious, but on some level, he probably is.  A look at his bio shows that he himself is married, and customarily speaking, if imply that a particular demographic is basically cannon fodder, and you’re not in that demographic yourself, then that means you probably mean it.  Now if this were the Mormon state of Utah, where bachelors above the age of 27 are considered a “menace to society”, he probably would have said, send bachelors and bring us arms – we’ll have target practice!

Ah, isn’t it interesting?  Look at how many demographics are getting their day of recognition and respect in the 21st century…  Females, racial minorities, Muslims, sexual deviants, so-called refugees, homeless people…  We’re all supposed to drop everything and apologize to them for being better of than they are, or apologize for what someone who looked like us in one way or another did to someone who looked like them, decades or centuries ago.  But have you noticed that one group still isn’t getting respect from anyone?  Men without women.  Whether by choice or by circumstance, there have always been and will always be a certain number of men who will fly solo.  They’ve always been frowned upon, not because they are a burden on society or some kind of nuisance, but for the same reason that weaker, isolated animals (and especially human children) are attacked by stronger, more popular and more established members of their own species: it’s the natural behavior found in a tournament species, and in humanity, it becomes a predator-prey paradigm.  You might have been able to chalk all forms of bigoted oppression up to the same phenomenon, but for some reason, in spite of all the “progress” that humanity makes as it becomes so “enlightened” or whatever, single men are still excluded from humanity’s reforms against that kind of jungle rule…

Ironic isn’t it?  Still a the back of the line, with women, and in broader society.

You’ll notice that when it comes to such reforms, a given demographic will only get an edge in the game of identity/grievance politics when they have enough numbers to matter, but even as incel’s and MGTOW’s numbers increase well into the millions, they still aren’t getting traction.  Is it because they’re not playing the identity politics game, or is it because the purveyors of identity politics (liberals and socialists) have no utility for single men, owing to their inherent ruggedness and independence?  As with all things, I guess we’ll find out.  Or we won’t.

In the mean time, I don’t need to tell anyone, of those who would read this blog, that humanity is no closer to accepting MGTOW or incel men than they ever were.  Hostility toward unattached men is on an upward trajectory, and guys like Elliot Rodger, who make examples of themselves, are not helping matters…yet matters are cultivating those kinds of rouges.  It’s a vicious cycle, and unless you have a female to mate with, you’re caught right in the middle of it.

I guess that’s one thing that female validation is still good for…  Is it worth it?

Nah.

Welcome to 1984: You’re a “Hate Agent”, and Your Social Credit Score Sucks

Yes, you!  You’re a hate agent just for clicking on this blog.

https://www.breitbart.com/tech/2019/06/13/exclusive-facebooks-process-to-label-you-a-hate-agent-revealed/

I know, this isn’t facebook, but no person who reads this blog with any regularity has any illusions about how we all have a “social credit score” that the not publicly acknowledged, and is standardized across all platforms of the Silicon Valley technocracy.  We also know that use of the acronym MGTOW is considered a hate group by the Southern Poverty Law Center (a unit of the Democrat party) which has become the go-to agency for what is considered hateful and outside of the Overton Window, just like Webster’s has become the go-to for definitions.  Don’t think WordPress is any different – they’re all about it, I promise you.  When you write the acronym MGTOW, or even click on too many links with MGTOW, these all set off triggers in the almighty algorithm, and that information is fed into your social credit score.  Even private conversations are monitored by the Borg, and fed into the algorithm.

Oh, and in case there were any doubt…the people running this stuff are all authoritarian Marxists.  By now, the fact that left-leaning ideologies and control-freakdom go hand-in-hand is self-evident, as is the fact that these people do not have your best interests at heart.

Facebook monitors the offline behavior of its users to determine if they should be categorized as a “Hate Agent,” according to a document provided exclusively to Breitbart News by a source within the social media giant.

The document, titled “Hate Agent Policy Review” outlines a series of “signals” that Facebook uses to determine if someone ought to be categorized as a “hate agent” and banned from the platform.

Those signals include a wide range of on- and off-platform behavior. If you praise the wrong individual, interview them, or appear at events alongside them, Facebook may categorize you as a “hate agent.”

Facebook may also categorize you as a hate agent if you self-identify with or advocate for a “Designated Hateful Ideology,” if you associate with a “Designated Hate Entity” (one of the examples cited by Facebook as a “hate entity” includes Islam critic Tommy Robinson), or if you have “tattoos of hate symbols or hate slogans.” (The document cites no examples of these, but the media and “anti-racism” advocacy groups increasingly label innocuous items as “hate symbols,” including a cartoon frog and the “OK” hand sign.)

Facebook will also categorize you as a hate agent for possession of “hate paraphernalia,” although the document provides no examples of what falls into this category.

The document also says Facebook will categorize you as a hate agent for “statements made in private but later made public.” Of course, Facebook holds vast amounts of information on what you say in public and in private — and as we saw with the Daily Beast doxing story, the platform will publicize private information on their users to assist the media in hitjobs on regular American citizens.

Breitbart News has already covered some of the individuals that Facebook placed on its list of potential “hate agents.” Paul Joseph Watson eventually was categorized as “hateful” and banned from the platform, in part, according to the document, because he praised Tommy Robinson and interviewed him on his YouTube channel. Star conservative pundit Candace Owens and conservative author and terrorism expert Brigitte Gabriel were also on the list, as were British politicians Carl Benjamin and Anne Marie Waters.

The Benjamin addition reveals that Facebook may categorize you as a hate agent merely for speaking neutrally about individuals and organizations that the social network considers hateful. In the document, Facebook tags Benjamin with a “hate agent” signal for “neutral representation of John Kinsman, member of Proud Boys” on October 21 last year.

Facebook also accuses Benjamin, a classical liberal and critic of identity politics, as “representing the ideology of an ethnostate” for a post in which he calls out an actual advocate of an ethnostate.

In addition to the more unorthodox signals that Facebook uses to determine if its users are “hate agents,” there is also, predictably, “hate speech.” Facebook divides hate speech into three tiers depending on severity and considers attacks on a person’s “immigration status” to be hate speech.

Here’s how “hate speech” — both on and off Facebook — will be categorized by the platform, according to the document:

Individual has made public statements, or statements made in private and later made public, using Tier 1, 2, or 3 hate speech or slurs:

3 instances in one statement or appearance = signal
5 instances in multiple statements or appearances over one month = signal

If you’ve done this within the past two years, Facebook will consider it a hate signal.

Other signals used by Facebook to determine if its users should be designated as hate agents include carrying out violence against people based on their “protected or quasi-protected characteristics,” attacks on places of worship, and conviction of genocide.

I also happen to know, anecdotally, that Facebook even busts people in private groups for posting images that have been flagged as being unfriendly to…well, in the case I know of, Islam.  You have to ask: why is the left so in love with Islam?  Do they think that Mohammad was a prophet?  No, it’s because Islam is proving to be a potent wrecking ball against civilizations that are not communist, and thus, need to be torn down, in the eyes of Silicon Valley’s critical theory Communist freaks.

 

The Gold Digger vs. The Silver-Tongued Devil

Am I wrong for not feeling sorry for this woman?

 

…You can see that he lives a very different life than what I’m living…

So it’s okay for her to go after him for his money, but not the other way around, eh?

Wouldn’t it be funny of that last text that he sent was actually the truth, and this was all a big ruse by the gold digger?  Well, probably not, but that would be quite a plot twist.

Assuming this guy is one of them, it’s funny how there are some guys who figure out how to hypnotize females and steal their hearts and their money, instead of getting a real job and living a legitimate life – I mean, for females to do that is practically a centuries-old tradition, but it amazes me when a man is able to pull that off, even if he is a total bad boy.  They say that females are excellent readers, right?  Pfffft…  The only thing they can sense a mile off are incel genes.  If the guy is a tall, sexy, swinging-dick bad boy – not necessarily even ostensibly rich, although that helps – these females can’t find their asses with both hands.  They become hypnotized, and can be lead like lambs to the slaughter…but boy they sure know how to smell beta genes from around the block.

It’s all about attraction, and lack thereof.  That’s how this world works.

Females In The Military

They seem to be dropping like flies…

https://www.foxnews.com/us/navy-reviewing-procedures-after-female-recruit-18-dead-boot-camp

We already know what their made of on the beat…

But, we’ve got to push diversity, right?  We have to make every effort to prove basic biology wrong, even if female MMA fighters get beaten half to death.

But, alas…they ain’t crying to guys like us for rescuing, now are they?  They’re trying to prove something to us.

By all means, ma’am…go right ahead.

Wait – if my country’s army is the one stupid enough to have females on the battle field, and that causes them to lose the war…what does that mean for me?

Ah, I must remind myself: my country’s army goes around the world, fighting all of these ‘little’ wars everywhere, with no clear beginning or ending, no clear or steady declaration of the belligerents, and no clear objectives that spell out what things are supposed to look like when it’s over…it’s just a bunch of never-ending occupations and never-ending fighting with a mutating collection of makeshift militias in Muslim countries where the Geneva Convention is meaningless.  Meanwhile, the current Congress fights the president tooth-and-nail to prevent less than 1/100th of the annual defense budget from putting up a barrier on our border where there is a full-fledged invasion is underway.  “Defense”…  Ha.  Ha ha.

Just another day in Clown World…

Muslim “Sociologist”: Females Like Violent Husbands

The terms Muslim and sociologist in the same sentence is freakish enough to be an article all itself, but anyway…

https://www.infowars.com/muslim-sociologist-gives-instructional-video-on-how-to-properly-beat-your-wife/

Now before we react, let’s ask dispassionately: is he wrong?  Do females like violent men?

Many have come to the conclusion that females prefer violent men because those are the kinds of men who are never incel, and conversely, all incels are never those kinds of violent, alpha men.  The thinking goes that if females always go for men who beat them, they must like the beating.  Maybe…but then again, isn’t that kind of like saying that smokers like lung cancer and emphysema, and drinkers like car accidents and cirrhosis of the liver?  Or, do they hate the side-effects, but withdrawal from the buzz is not an option?

I’ve looked at this issue for a while, and I’ve come to the conclusion that is more of a matter of females taking the bad with the good – that is, they don’t want to be beaten by their males the males who own them, but they’re willing to deal with it, in order to secure the genes of males who are violent and dominant generally.  The biological goal for the female is to get a male who beats up other, less attractive males – restraining himself when it comes to her – and sires offspring with her in the form of sons who will do likewise against less attractive males in their own peer group; that’s the ideal, but it doesn’t always work out that way.  Often times, she will also become the target of his angry, uncontrolled fists…but if she can’t find the rare ideal, what else is she going to do?  Accept the genes of a more docile man, who can’t defend himself against the “real men”, and have sons who will become genetic failures in the face of the same circumstances, producing no grandchildren for her?  That’s simply not an option for the human reproductive imperative.  Thus, you could say that [gasp] “violence against women” from their romantic/sexual partners is merely a nasty side-effect that they’re willing to deal with, in order to secure the genes of generally violent and domineering men, in order to have violently-successful offspring.  And just when you thought humanity was past that kind of thing…  Nope, it’s the same as it was in the stone age: violence = success.

So, was it wrong for western civilization to give today’s behaviorally-ballistic females full sexual autonomy, and control over their own reproductive destinies?  After all, the reason that we’ve shifted back to the stone age model of reproductive success is because western culture decided to put females in the driver’s seat of reproductive choice and protocol, right?  You can be the judge of all that.  All I’m doing here is stating the not-so-obvious, yet undeniable: for better or for worse, the result is the devolution of the species.  Cavemen are able to reproduce, civilized men aren’t.  This is how females want it.  They’re the ones in control now.