Tag Archives: rape

Men’s Rights in Modern Society


by Ellis Riker Halford

We live in a world full of prejudices and inequality, where racist and sexist parties like Britain First can exist and where people will back these parties. In a world that has these many different types of prejudices, we call the people opposed to them ‘Egalitarians’ or ‘Feminists’ or ‘Humanitarians’, but do they actually fight for true equality?

Read more

Obama, hear us! Find out what Ted Kennedy wants, and do exactly the opposite of what he asks


David Davis

When old GramscoFabiaNazis such as the “Kennedys” go to die, they are like elephants in a way, or worse: elephants are not known to repent in regard of their pasts sins, for we do not know if they understand the concept of Sin (the Bishop, when asked his opinion about sin, famously said: “I’m against it”) but at least elephants might not be considered essentially evil.

But “Ted” Kennedy (I honestly thought he’d been shot dead? – or was that all the others?) says he wants his dying wish to be an incubus on the American People. Well. That’s kind of like his grandfather.

Old Joe Kennedy, who used to try to shag his sons’ girlfriends, was against us in 1940. Of course you all remember: don’t deny it.

I may be “the babyboomer that the left lost”, being born in 1952, but I still can’t get this Kennedy thing. I will never figure out what the fascination with them was. The men didn’t even look like some object that a woman would like to be shagged by. Sacks of potatoes full of money, with penises attached to one end.

So what went on about them with all you Americans then? I’d just love to understand how and why you all got taken in by this bunch of shysters.

And as for the “Jackie” thingy –  (whatever her name was? Onassis, or was that afterwards?) A walking female skeleton+collagen-binders, wearing clothes and spending money at the same time? What  _were_  you thinking when you elected that? What did you think other nations would think of you and us? Deeply embarrassing and almost unexplainable. Bad. Fail.

PUNTERPOINT…. A new concept for working towards human relations …


David Davis

The “Home” “Secretary”, who is described as a “Jacqui” “Smith”, has proposed that the ordinary and normal kind of prostitution, which is to say that men pay women for

(1) sex

and

(2) other (possibly related conditions, such as fetishism and wearing rubber suits or football shirts and things)

(3) or what must be totally non-sexual things in my view – such as what I believe is called “oral”, “golden shower”, “anal”, “69”, all that strange stuff in the Karma Sutra, and suchlike,

is to be discontinued. It is proposed by this droid and its people that it will be an offence for the man to offer reward for this sort of stuff. Now, as is the case with all “serious” crimes today, it is proposed and factored in that the following will happen, charge or no: the man will be of course named, shamed, hung, drawn, quartered, and then fined, so that his house can be torched, his wife can leave him, the local mob who read the News of the Screws can come round and throw bricks, and generally indulge in the sort of behaviour that Peter Ballz-a-Gotte can film for reality TV.

The idea is to make it an offence for a man to pay for sex with a woman “who is controlled by another for gain”. Well, there are some ways round this one, which will of course nullify the desired effect of the new legislation:-

(1) He could use an “independent escort”. Legally, the onus would be on the State to prove that the girl in question was not indepedent” – hard I would have thought, but they can threaten and push him about and get his DNA while they are about it, and probably manage to ruin his life I guess, which will create another single mother out of his wife/girlfriend, which will please the state-clientariat.

(2) All women who want to go “on the game” can set up as independents. Yep, that will really help to look after them, won’t it. I offer the idea of http://www.punterpoint.com to anyone brave enough or brazen enough to set it up. Perhaps the Russians would be interested, which will do a lot for the government’s statistics about “organised crime”, taking a chunk of it totally offshore, so that JS can say that “it has decreased”.

http://www.punterpoint.com , or http://www.punterpoint.ru if that’s what it is, can help “punters” get in touch with independent women, in the obvious way. Either a woman can put up her pic etc, giving contact details, or else a punter could put up a “want it now!” like on ebay, specifying his particular requirements (there could be a menu even) and his rough location.

This would have two beneficial effects:-

(A) It would fall within the legal area of the legislation, in that the woman undertakes that she is not “trafficked” or “being controlled”. Hard to do if all done in cash……..ah……………THAT’S what they want all our banking and mobile phone and internet records…..!!!!! Ho Ho Ho HO Ho ……..

(B) It would cut out the middlemen of what I believe are called “Parlours” (or, in Blackpool, “Houses” – it sounds much cosier!) and also the blokes called “Pimps”, whatever those chaps do. The real price of the various “services” would quickly settle at what the Market thinks they are worth. Stuff may become cheaper, or not – I have no idea but it’s worth a try.

(C) It would be a defence for the man, when his computer is seized, to show that he was looking for uncontrolled, untrafficked women!

The disadvantage is possibly for the women who would no longer be able to work in “Houses”: I would guess that a “House” offers some measure of protection and security against crazed, drugged, violent or obsessive “punters” (who could be barred and certainly kept out) in return probably for a cut of the dosh.

Let’s see what the reaction is to this one: if the “Jaqcqui” “Smith” (wish I could spell its name) comes out against this too, then we’ll know that the whole gamut is nowt to do with “protecting women” and everything to do with CRIMINALISING HETEROSEXUAL SEX ASKED FOR BY MEN IN PARTICULAR , and moving along the road to where the State authorises sex for procreation of “resources” only, on its terms – regulating in all respects when and with whom it takes place.

We shall truly have become their Farm Animals. Forget about banning or regulating cigarettes, alcohol, and driving: forget about being able to fantasy-act your fetishes (animals don’t have them so far as we can tell) – this one here, the human thing, sex with whom you want, when you want, providing yours around you allow it, is the really big stuff of Fabianazi control….you’ve really got people by the balls….(sorry.)

So, now, I think that people who might be actually interested in making the whole game safer for everyone involved, seeing as it will go on regardless (unlike drugs which are mmuch less natural and less intuitive as forms of behaviour) might like to tell the “Jaxcqui” “Smith” (I can spell “Smith” !!!! ) to go and see these people here and talk to them, about these issues here. I guess they know what they are going on about.

And, here’s what Iain Dale said, nearly three days ago now. I read it then – wish I’d said something earlier – l’ésprit de l’escalier….