Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Pay attention at the 0:14 mark for a coy cryptogram carefully inserted into this Trump campaign ad.

That’s Sam Hyde and Pepe, two Notorious A.L.T. figures in the flourishing shiv-right rebellion.

Reader plumpjack writes,

a Donald Trump campaign app ad that subtly features Sam Hyde and Pepé. just a coincidence, right?

from DS:
“An ad like this is not done at random. Each frame is composed carefully. They had to select the tweets being featured by hand.

It doesn’t seem like the media has caught on to this like wink at the Alt-Right yet, but our friends at TRS were quick to notice.

It’s interesting to see what’s going on regarding Trump and the Alt-Right; the Glorious Leader himself has never made any open references to us, all the while Clinton made a whole speech on the subject. Instead, he makes all these small references, with plausible deniability. These are enough to whip the Jewish media into a frenzy, however, but they look completely unhinged conspiracy theorists when reporting about it.”

Let’s face it, popularizing a cute frog as the avatar of unauthorized crimethink was a brilliant marketing coup. At once serving as a potent, open air symbol of resistance to the equalist leftoid hivemind while sabotaging the enemy leftoid agit-prop machine reduced to ponderously assessing the risk level of a cartoon frog. Win-win. Alinsky would be proud if his psy ops weren’t being used against him and his schlock troops.

Crazy-Eyed Hillary

Hillary’s id emerges for a romp in this video: a scolding, entitled, screeching, mentally unhinged, hysterical, stilted, crazy-eyed sociopathic harridan with late stage parkinson’s.

Yeesh. Dat awkwardly artificial pitch change at 0:10. This is the look of desperation. Scott Adams on the clip: “the election is over“. Hillary’s voice and mannerism are crypt-onite to straight White men. I can’t listen to her for more than 30 seconds before I want to punch a hole in the wall. She’s distilled post-menopausal evil.

harridanofoz

The “Calais Jungle“, a decrepit third world outpost established in Calais, France by their traitorous elite and housing disgusting “””refugees”””, has a secret to divulge. (It’s not much of a secret to enlightened Chateau guests.)

Volunteers in the Calais Jungle have been accused of sexually exploiting refugees and even child migrants.

The Independent has discovered a serious row has broken out among some unpaid charity workers at the camp in northern France, with some believing forging sexual relationships with adult refugees is natural in such circumstances, while others say it breaches all usual codes of conduct.

Wait for the twist ending.

One man who raised the alarm was later subjected to a barrage of online abuse.

Have you guessed it yet?

The man wrote: “I have heard of boys, believed to be under the age of consent, having sex with volunteers. I have heard stories of men using the prostitutes in the Jungle too.

“I have heard of volunteers having sex with multiple partners in one day, only to carry on in the same vein the following day. And I know also, that I’m only hearing a small part of a wider scale of abuse.”

Sex with underage boys? Multiple migrant partners? Maybe you’re thinking this is a homosexual meeting place.

The man added that the majority of cases in question involved female volunteers and male refugees – which he claimed risked the objectification of women volunteering in the camp.

Bleeding heart (and bleeding bush) Frenchwomen are lining up to fuck the rapefugee dregs of humanity….in a romantic setting that looks like this:

calais-sex-camp

Contrast: There are White beta males at this very moment paying for dinners and nights out in glittering cities to impress unenthusiastic dates, while women make pilgrimages to the Calais Sex Camp to volunteer as eager holsters for penniless, smelly migrant meatsticks. The Crimson Pills don’t get harder to swallow than that.

PS LMFAO at this revealing betaboy blurt:

He wrote: “Female volunteers having sex enforces the view (that many have) that volunteers are here for sex. This impression objectifies women in the camp and increases the risks.”

How cucked, craven, and pusillanimous do you have to be to reinterpret women’s freely choosing raw dog refugee sex as some nebulous patriarchal assault leaving an “impression” that “objectifies women”. NO DUH IT LEAVES AN IMPRESSION. Just not the impression that this micropeen of a male thinks it leaves.

His comments prompted accusations of sexism and misogyny from female members of the group. One commented on the post: “I find this attitude incredibly patronising and paternalistic with added sexism and racism.

“There is a serious point in here among all the moralistic bullshit but I find it very off-putting. I find the assertion that women choosing to have sex encourages rape quite frankly disturbing.”

She’s right, of course, but her rightness is self-damning.

Weak beta males have a studied aversion to placing any blame for women’s ill-conceived romantic choices on women themselves. To do so, in the beta male mind, would mean having their puritanical romantic idealism dashed against the rocks of the bitter reality of primal female desire. The weak beta male suffers his morbid prostration to the pussy pedestal gladly, and is loathe to have it detached from his pursed lips. For if the day comes that his precious pussy pedestal is gone from his life, he’ll have no celibate space to retreat to for self-pitying comfort, and will be forced to deal with women as they are, not as they materialize unsullied in the brainscape of his sentimental daydreams.

tl;dr it was a big mistake to give women the vote.

This story had me laughing. A little boy who didn’t know any better drew a picture of his fat mom looking like a blob.

blob

But the turning point came in February 2014 when her son Thomas proudly came home with a picture he had drawn at school.

Meryem added: “It was a family portrait with all members as stick figures except for me who he’d drawn as a round blob.

“It really upset me when I saw it but I didn’t have the heart to tell Thomas, I just went upstairs and cried.”

That, combined with an incident on holiday when Meryem couldn’t take part in activities because she was too out of breath, inspired a change.

She said: “My children called me ‘fat’ because they couldn’t fit their arms around me when giving me hugs. It was very upsetting.”

😅 Obesity destroys quality of life. Obesity kills romance dead. Obesity will not escape the merciless judgment of children. Not even a mother’s own son. A son who, by the way, has earned a Shiv of the Week accolade for his expert artistic rendering.

Can a child fat shame if he doesn’t know he’s doing it? He sure can. The shame burns the same — maybe even burns worse — when it’s unintentional. Is a fat mom going to rationalize her son’s fat shaming as “insecurity”, or as being “intimidated by strong fat women”? Will she oink in protest that her little boy isn’t a “real man” who “loves curvy women”?

Haha, no. She’ll cry herself to sleep and then, like this mom, push away from the table and lose a hundred pounds, slimming down to human form. Realtalking kids who shame without remorse can save lives.

The photo evidence suggests not all is well in the world headquarters of the high functioning gypsy-ant person alliance.

cuckedbychannowa4chantroll

@CuckedByChanNowA4Channer

That body language is horrible. Zuck looks gay sticking his butt out, smiling like a special needs kid, and pecking at his wife’s nose. Chan looks….is repulsed too strong a word? Icked out?

I’m all for Cuckersperg blowing his billions on quixotic doomed quests to “promote equality for all children in the next generation.” Yeah, good luck with that bud. May as well air drop wads of your cash in the African jungle. It’ll do about as much good. Meanwhile, you starve your putative borg heirs of your billions, so there’s that, which is nice.

PS Gotta hand it to Zuck, the low T manlet really lives down to his betaboy image placing his wife’s name before his.

ZFG Putin

Long live the King!

putinzfg

A True Word On Sexual Consent

A couple of serial rapists are profiled by The Daily Fembeast because they had accounts on the Real Social Dynamics seduction arts forum. The bitter feminist cunts smelled chum in the water and are working double time to smear good-natured ladies’ men through guilt by remote association with a few random bad seeds (whom I’d never heard of until I read the article).

Since PUAs and consent are in the hivemind news, I figure this a good time to recap the Chateau crib sheet on what does and doesn’t qualify as sexual consent. Stripping out all romantic context (sometimes a woman’s breathlessly whispered “no” really is a surreptitious arousal-amplifying invitation to the man to continue resisting her coyness), the legalistic basics of hookup look like this:

If a girl is drunk and she says yes to sex- it isn’t rape.
If a girl is sober and she says yes to sex- it isn’t rape.

If a girl is sober and she says no- it is rape.
If a girl is drunk and she says no- it is rape.

Fleshing out the above basics to conform more closely to the reality on the ground that hookups take two to tango, here are the additional by-laws governing the validity of rape accusations should a sexual congress occur:

  • If the girl and man are sober and the girl angrily says “no”- it is rape. (the vast majority of (white) men can tell, and will heed, when a girl is sincerely uninterested in further intimacy)
  • If the girl is blackout drunk and the man is sober- it is rape, if the rape was initiated while the girl was unconscious.
  • If the girl is drunk but conscious and situationally aware and a willing participant, and the man is sober- it isn’t rape. (this is a not uncommon occurrence for the simple reason that it takes more drinks and a longer time for men to reach happy drunkenness; thus an early-evening sexual intimacy can start with the girl more drunk than the man but wind up a couple hours later with the man equally as drunk as the girl)
  • If the girl is so drunk she can’t give consent AND the man is so drunk he can’t know whether or not the girl consented- it isn’t rape. (sorry, femcunts, the drunkenness sword cuts both ways)
  • If the girl is sober and the man is too drunk to understand or give consent- how the fuck is his johnson working?? and why is she sticking around at his place when she could easily leave while he’s in a stupor on the floor?

The mythological rape culture that feminists secretly wish would come to fruition is actually a projection of their desire to see a world in which women are exempted from personal responsibility and men bear all the burden of any female regret for romantic trysts that don’t end in two kids and a house in the suburbs.

This is why feminists (of the lite or heavy genus) strive so mightily to protect women’s prerogatives to drink like Russian poets and slut it up like two dollar street whores. Feminists don’t want women to even THINK about the necessity of taking a modicum of personal responsibility for limiting their alcohol intake or curbing their skank signaling; to admit to that much would, in the feminist worldview, concede that the sexes are innately biologically different (they are regardless of heated denials to the contrary) and that men aren’t the only sex capable of transgressing moral norms. As CH previously wrote,

if you are a woman who is afraid your inner slut might escape to have sex under the influence with a man at a party who is also under the influence, it’s up to you to refrain from drinking a lot or attending that party. The responsibility to remain sober — or at least avoid getting lights out drunk — should not rest solely with the man.

If feminists are truly interested in not being treated like morally undeveloped children under the law, they will agree to my definition of rape. But since feminism is about power dynamics and not at all about fairness or justice, they will never agree.

In a female sexuality-liberated market it’s a secularist sin worthy of livelihood destruction to advise women to stop drinking like they’re fraternity pledges trying to prove something. But if feminists are truly interested in decreasing the incidence of late night drunkenness rape (aka morning after regret rape) they’ll counsel women to be careful how much they imbibe while out on the town. Since they don’t counsel that, and in fact advocate the opposite that women should be free to drink as much as they want in sexually charged public venues, it’s obvious feminists aren’t really interested in reducing rape rates.

The sticking point for feminists, of course, is that “stopping short of drinking to oblivion” and “dressing a little more modestly than a ghetto hooker” harkens the return of a “patriarchal” culture that “places demands” on women. Well, yes. Demands are placed. It’s called adulthood. Maybe feminists could live up to their female empowerment bloviating and leave the childishness of immunity from moral agency behind.

%d bloggers like this: