Silicon Valley Entrepreneur Is Target Of Public False Rape Accusation

Joe Lonsdale, the wealthy Silicon Valley entrepreneur whom the New York Times skewered recently, appears to be innocent of the charges of rape his ex-girlfriend brought against him. Assuming his records of the email correspondence between himself, his then-girlfriend Ellie Clougherty, and his then-girlfriend’s mother are correct, this is simply a case of a crazy woman seeking revenge against a man who had dumped her.

You might be thinking that calling her “crazy” is a smear.  No: she wrote, “I was taken away from my parents and locked up in a nearby mental health hospital, against my will.” (Emphasis hers) “Looking at a bowl of spaghetti literally began to terrify me.”



The New York Times, which used to be a great paper─don’t get me wrong, I’ve written for it twice and I’d write for it again given the opportunity─went full McIntosh with its almost baseless smear against Lonsdale, entitled, “The Stanford Undergraduate and the Mentor.”

The dishonest reporter meant to convey the impression that Lonsdale was a Stanford professor preying on a student, when in fact Lonsdale met Clougherty a year before he took a “volunteer” position─I would guess this means “unpaid”─as a “mentor” for a course at Stanford she was taking. He even checked to make sure he wouldn’t be evaluating her.

Having said that, it’s important to make three points:

1. Feminists passed rules prohibiting student-faculty relationships so that a male faculty member couldn’t get away with harassing uninterested female students.

Yet now 99% of the time, the people using these rules are jilted female students seeking revenge against faculty members they freely dated. It can’t be “harassment” after the fact.

Feminists continue the trend to make the word “harassment” meaningless, as well as the trend to treat women as infants. After all, a woman willingly falling in love with a man is hardly “harassment,” and a university student is an adult.

Nobel laureate James Watson, who helped discover the structure of DNA, married an undergraduate and some 47 years later they are still happy. I don’t have psychic powers, but I had lunch with them and left thinking that’s the kind of marriage I want.


I know a woman who met her husband when she was a graduate student and he a professor.  If they had not been married, the company they later worked for might not have reached the stage where it could be sold for $2 billion.

2. These rules prohibiting relationships may even be illegal, at least at public universities: they prevent two people from becoming romantically involved, even platonically, even when one is not grading the other, based on some vague idea of “unequal power.” But women never want mates who have “equal power.” They have always wanted to “marry up.”

According to feminists, this is rape, because of the “unequal power” the two have.

According to feminists, this is rape, because of the “unequal power” the two have.









3. I thought nothing could or should get in the way of love, or does that only apply to relationships 95% of the country views as degenerate?

The comment at 4:36 of this Huffington Post Live interview reveals the real agenda: It is a sin for an older man, especially a successful one, to have a relationship with a younger woman. (These days, one might have to leave one’s job if one said that about homosexuality, like the CEO of Mozilla.) The problem is, younger women like it and men like it, so they have to outlaw it. Catharine “All Sex Is Rape” MacKinnon has won. Oh, and for the record, Lonsdale was 29 and Clougherty 21, (1/2)x+7.

Getting back to Lonsdale, months after the alleged “rape,” Clougherty called him “the boyfriend every girl dreams about but doesn’t think actually exists.”  “It makes me so happy to think there’s someone like you in the world I can love and think about,” she wrote nearly a year after the alleged “rape.”

Her own friend signed an affidavit saying that the girlfriend tried to get her to lie and say that the relationship with Lonsdale was abusive, something the friend never saw: “I feel bad about testifying that my long-time friend is not being truthful.”

Incidentally, I’m not sure why it should be illegal for a relationship to be non-physically abusive. An adult woman has legs. She can walk.

I’ll mention only in passing that the mother begged Lonsdale to take her daughter back, because even though I believe that the mother was heavily involved in the daughter’s love life (“Joe really really really seriously likes me,” Clougherty texted her mother), I can’t back that up so well with the email records. But it seems likely that the daughter would have told the mother that Lonsdale had hurt her if he had.

The rape of the word rape

Those of us in the know are now sick of the fact that any woman, no matter how crazy, can say 40 years later that she was raped, despite having told no one in the intervening time period and despite having maintained a cordial or even loving relationship with the alleged rapist after the alleged rape.

“I really love how much you care about me and like I told [redacted] in Rome, the love I feel for you is deep…, and I think I secretly want to take care of you more than you do me,” Clougherty wrote a few months after their trip to Rome, where she claims she lost her virginity.

Feminists have raped the word “rape.”  “If I said no, he would slowly convince me/make it look like he was going to die if I didn’t climb on top of him.” Yes, that’s what Clougherty thinks is rape or abuse: her climbing on top of him.  Fortunately, this time feminists have taken on not some broke undergraduate, but a millionaire who can afford a legal Dream Team.  Lonsdale’s lawyers should help the falsely accused University of Virginia fraternity and the falsely accused Columbia University student.

Like the vast majority of public rape accusations, all signs point to this being false. Still, this false rape allegation will follow him and other accused parties around for a long time. Stanford banned him from the campus for ten years, denying the next Mark Zuckerberg or Steve Jobs a chance to easily meet and learn from him.

MIT removed the physics lectures of Dr. Walter Lewin─accused of “harassment”─from its website, denying future Stephen Hawkings around the world the opportunity to learn from a distinguished scientist.  The allegations of prostitutes are drowning out Bill Cosby’s message to the African-American community about how it can thrive.  How much progress in science, how much economic progress, will feminism retard?  Feminists have nearly reached Moscow.

Will you join our march to Berlin?

Don’t break up by email, guys.

Don’t break up by email, guys.

Read More: Are Transsexuals Who Sleep With Straight Men Guilty Of Rape?

145 thoughts on “Silicon Valley Entrepreneur Is Target Of Public False Rape Accusation”

  1. Feminists continue the trend to make the word “harassment” meaningless, as well as the trend to treat women as infants.

    Whatever word feminists choose to use… it becomes worthless.
    “Equality”, “Rape”, “Harassment”, “Sexism”, “Marriage”, “Women’s rights”, “Sexual orientation”… everything becomes poisoned, expanded and redefined until it loses all meaning and means the opposite. Even “woman” is now redefined.

    1. That would mean that the Baby Boomers resulted from a massive crime wave of rape by the U.S. servicemen who returned from the Second World War.

      1. Yeah, we all know they just got back from their rape vacation of patriarchally oppressing Innocent communists/nazi/Japanese who killed millions of people. Then, they came home to bring their new rape techniques. Of course.
        Feminists, those who see rape and violence of men under every rock,a nd behind every corner. Any straight, white or black (but usually/mostly white) male who even looks at a woman
        Essentially, if you are white, straight, and male, any thought you have is grounds for prison in the next decade.
        We know your guilty, because you have lived, and/or are still breathing.

        1. I can just imagine how those men must have felt after surviving 15 years of economic depression and war when the economy started to pick up: Damn this shit, let’s pork these American broads and make some babies so that life starts to feel normal and worthwhile again.

        2. Idk man that “Street Harassment” Video showed us what Feminists think of Black Males. They hate our Alpha.

        3. “Essentially, if you are white, straight, and male, any thought you have is grounds for prison in the next decade.” Bravo! Nostradamus could not have done better!

        4. Hollering at some fat chick, “Mmm,mmmmm, nice ass,” is as far from alpha as you get… and yet that’s all I basically see them doing. I’ve yet to meet a black man with game.

      2. If it comes down to rewriting history with less baby boomers then you just won me over as an anti-rape advocate. Shame on them for creating baby boomers! Shame! That’s why I get annoyed with the “Greatest Generation” title. I always think, “If they’re so great then why were their kids such pieces of living shit?”

        1. Actually that’s a good question. It isn’t that I don’t admire and appreciate my parents’ generation — but when you start attacking mine (technically I’m a year older than boomers) just remember who raised them. But in part it was the women, most of whom got to stay home during the kids’ formative earliest years and then made sure the men got grinding hours long work when they returned.

        2. What is this? Folks here have been taken to task for blaming blacks, Jews and others but Baby Boomers are blamed for every ill on the planet to the cheers of all you alleged red pill alphas. It’s beyond stupid. First of all there were 76 million or so children born in the USA between 1946-64. However what most people think of as Baby Boomers are those of us born in the first decade of that era. In reality we are several sub generations. Those born in the last five years have little in common with those of us born in the first five socially and culturally. Additionally most of us were either black or white, the massive influx of asians and hispanics was to come later. Within those groups there are various sub strata. I belong to perhaps the largest group, whites from a blue collar background, lower middle to middle class. In some ways we are the last normal generation of Americans. Most of us came from two parent homes. We hashed out our differences in hours and hours of unsupervised play and just hanging out in the neighborhood. Guys I grew up with were in some ways the last of the real men. Now what did we encounter as we grew up? Forced integration and the beginnings of quotas and feminism in the workplace. The end of the industrial economy, two horrific recessions in 1974-75 and 1981-83. Want to know why the northern states are a sea of blue in Presidential Elections? This is the linchpin. Yes lots of us, particularly in the yuppie class are major assholes, but again I and millions of others did not come out of that type of environment. Really it gets hard to have any kind of intelligent discussion on any major issue anywhere in cyberspace, including here. The WWII generation was a fine one, perhaps a tad overrated but mostly they were hard workers, good and dutiful parents, and they did win a brutal bloody war. They spoiled us to a degree because after a depression and a world war the prosperity that followed was completely unexpected. Everything has gone to shit, beginning in the 60’s and 70’s. I take personally very little blame for it, I had to navigate the new reality as best I could like so many others. Really I’m tired of this shit. You have no idea how old school some of us were and are. A big FUCK YOU to the idea of Baby Boomers ruined the world.

        3. “Everything has gone to shit, beginning in the 60’s and 70’s”
          “A big FUCK YOU to the idea that Baby Boomers ruined the world.”
          So which is it?

        4. Are you that one dimensional? Were all the gut wrenching social and economic changes in the 60s and 70s initiated by me? By my cohorts born between 1946-1964? Is that what you are saying? There are lots of good posts and lots of good posters on this site. Some of them probably hate baby boomers as much as you do. On this issue it is the promotion of shit poor history. You know the ironic thing? I’m not a big fan of my generation. We were just too numerous and came to adulthood in too much of a tumultuous time to blame us for anything and everything. I’d take the guys I grew up with, fought with and against over the drivel that passes for manhood today. Of course I don’t consider sites like this representative of today’s men, even if a lot of you think a certain generation all by itself ruined the world.

        5. Jesus calm down. No I’m not that one dimensional. But in the context, using the word ‘boomer’ has a connotation that we all know and agree on. Of course no one is condemning some Navy Seal somewhere simply because of his birthdate. To save time, ‘Boomer’ has taken on its own meaning. If that doesn’t include you then why are you reacting so strongly. Boomer=narcissistic, leftist, spoiled a-hole who turned the world upside down to generate personal tingles. That’s who we’re addressing, the typical leftist boomer, and we both know it so don’t try to generate synthetic emotion out of it, like a…..hmm…..boomer.
          “I’m not a big fan of my generation”
          Okay we agree.

  2. The real shame is that she won’t be prosecuted because she’s “crazy.” Somehow we can manage to prosecute and convict crazy murderers, but crazy women false rape accusers? They’re really victims. So we continue to allow them to walk free and attend prestigious universities, ala Jackie Coakley, ranting about their craziness to fellow students and any national news outlet that will listen. Men, if you want this to stop, you must fight back. If cleared of a false rape charge, the correct response is not to say, “phew that was close, now I’ll make a public statement about the real victims of rape.” Fuck no!!! The correct response is, “now you’re going to pay bitch, because I’m bringing my own charges and smashing your face with the hammer of justice.”

    1. Three reasons why men never retaliate like this,
      1)They have been brainwashed to white knight and see women as victims, even when they themselves are the victim.
      2)They believe that retaliation will never put the woman behind the bars, but will instead destroy their reputation more and attract more feminist wrath.
      3)They know they are alone. The corrupt justice system will never treat them fairly, and the common man will never support him. MRA’s have no real power to help him. He knows no one will stand for him

  3. You over in America should legalize rape. It’s not so bad actually, but knowing women, it would only be a matter of time before something as trivial as “cooking” or “cleaning” became the hot media topic

    1. No thank you (assuming you are not being facetious). Making it legal to commit violence against other human beings will only create chaos. Besides, why would we wish to physically, psychologically, or emotionally destroy our women? Feminists have already done enough damage to them.

      1. Reality check. It already is legal to commit violence against other humans. Women murder millions of unborn babies every year.

      2. Don’t take anything anyone says on here at face value. Heh. It would only affect a minority of women anyways, the attractive ones.

  4. “Looking at a bowl of spaghetti literally began to terrify me.”

    Clearly a sinner who lives in fear of the Flying Spaghetti Monster.

    1. Maybe she’s afraid of the meatballs of the flying spaghetti monster…that would certainly explain a lot 😉

      1. If only she hadn’t been so rude to the waiters, they would have never put the pubic hairs on the meatballs…

  5. Women are increasingly getting more fucking insane and incoherent with every passing day. There was a reason why women behavior was heavily regulated and controlled in the past. Now we see why.

    1. Yes and politicians keep handing women bigger and bigger guns to use against us. Thanks to the divorce industry, marriage is Russian roulette with five bullets.

        1. That’s why I went with the Judge, rather than the Colt Paterson.
          Bearing in mind that even if everything goes as well for you as it can, you’ll still spend a lot of time picking shot out of your scalp and suffer hearing impairment from all the damned noise.

        1. Because God has rules.
          You can’t tell someone not to engage in frivolous sex, etc and them not get angry about it;-) I’ve seen many times where a man will be at least semi religious, but will get with a hot woman who is not nearly as devout as he. She basically shames into giving up his beliefs in exchange for her attention(and sex). Next thing you know he becomes lax and he speaks out against religion to please her. Paul called it in 1st Corinthians 7:32-33:
          32 I would like you to be free from concern. An unmarried man is concerned about the Lord’s affairs—how he can please the Lord. 33 But a married man is concerned about the affairs of this world—how he can please his wife— 34 and his interests are divided.

        2. Because the bible contradicts itself… so therefore CANNOT be the word of god… so therefore is just a propaganda tool for the church. And all the kiddy fucking isn’t all that great for the sincerity stakes.
          Think about this, if the snake in the garden of eden was just trying to help eve gain knowledge and god was, like, “Fuck that, stay ignorant, bitch,” who’s really the bad guy. ‘Cause from my perspective everyone’s reading back to front and God is a fucking cunt.

        3. The point completely flew over your head. Stop tipping you fucking fedora. Everyone here already knows that funddie Christians are lunatics and that a literal interpretation of the bible is retarded. It doesn’t then follow that religion is useless . Religion is the only thing that prevents the masses of society from turning into a bunch of nihilistic degenerates that destroy civilization.
          Religion provides moral authority. Morality means nothing to people if you don’t have the authority to back it up. No moral authority equals no enforcement of morality which equals no moral code and therefore behavior by the masses equals no social cohesion which is only possible by a common morality enforce by everyone. No social cohesion means that no society with large population is possible, which means no civilization is possible in the long term.
          Religion is innate to human nature and isn’t going anywhere so demonizing it is a completely futile.

        4. “Religion is the only thing that prevents the masses of society from
          turning into a bunch of nihilistic degenerates that destroy
          You have toooooooooooooooooooo much faith in your kiddy porn religious bigots.

        5. Let’s just break this all down without hyperbole, or assumptions:
          You: Religion gives masses a moral code. Without it society would crumble. [paraphrasing]
          Me: Firstly Christianity is just the same as Judaism, except they added a Part II, along with a new prophet, Jesus. And Islam is just the same as Christianity, except they added a Part III, along with a new prophet, Mohammad. So, essentially, all the wars and bloodshed over the years are due to sequels to “The Word of God.” Imagine how everyone would laugh now-a-days if some tribe tried to bring along Part IV. Anyway…
          Secondly, if the book is the word of God, then it would be impossible to dispute a single word, a single line. There literally would be not a single argument about interpretation. Makes sense, right, since he was able to create the universe in 6 days and all, it would be a fucking walk in the park to write some indisputable passages to guide the little people he created in his image. And yet… reality kinda fucking squashes all that.
          Thirdly, according to what the Bible DOESN’T say, it’s okay to smoke crystal meth and watch porn on the internet. I haven’t read it in a while but I really can’t remember any passage telling you not to do those things (and many, many other modern day activities). Funny that, you’d think God would have anticipated such things to, as you so naively state, help “give the masses a moral code. [so] society would[n’t] crumble.” [para-paraphrasing]

        6. Massive starwman argument. I never said that i believe in the bible “as the word of god”. In fact i never even mention the bible yet your entire argument is bases on what YOU THINK it says and means as if it had any relevance to my argument or the concept to religion as a whole. It doesn’t.
          I’m not even to bother unpacking the rest your stupidity as it all irreverent to my argument. I’m just going to say that your entire comments make a bunch a false assumptions about me and the concept of religion as a whole and leave it at that.
          Now just do everyone at ROK a favor a please hang yourself as it is apparent that you are just a dumb troll with no life at all.

        7. LOL. Typical response when someone’s argument gets fucked up beyond all recognition (or FUBAR, as they said back in WWII).
          I win. You lose. ‘Cause I smart, you dumb.

        8. Uh, what about, “Religion, which you think is the moral fiber holding society together is run by immoral (note: pedophile) cunts.”
          Or what about… the entire paragraph I wrote demolishing the misconception that religion holds society together – which you couldn’t handle reading because it was too troooooothful?

        9. Still no facts cited. Thanks for proving everyone here that you are a troll. Bye.

        10. Notice how he plainly ignores those arguments that I brought up because he can’t answer them? Yep, that’s a typical religious person for you. They argue like women and duck their heads in the sand every time they get hit with logic and facts.

        11. “Notice how he plainly ignores those arguments that I brought up because he can’t answer them?”
          I ignore them because they are complete strawman and your opinions you hold and not actually argument against anything i said. Your “arguments” were just sophistry(look it up). The fact of that matter is that you never have refuted the premise of my argument an therefore I’m still the winner here. Atheism is nothing more than a childish teenage rebellion against human nature and reality itself. Nothing more. Religion is a fact of human nature and will never go away no matter how much you cry about it. Deal with it.
          “They argue like women and duck their heads in the sand every time they get hit with logic and facts.”
          Yet you have yet to present any. Just your opinions and starwman argument you call “facts”. Done trolling yet? You are just wasting my time.

        12. Notice how he writes a whole passage to try and hide the fact that he is STILL not addressing those things I discussed as my reasoning why religion doesn’t hold the moral fabric of society together? Almost makes you feel sorry for him. Expect yet another retort refusing to address any of the issues I brought up (since he doesn’t want to admit I’m right). 😉

        13. “Expect yet another retort refusing to address any of the issues I brought up”
          This is what, the third fucking time i told I’m not waste time out my life to address stupid strawman arguments. Go fucking lose your virginity of something. Jeuse Christ you so fucking annoying.

        14. And you notice how my prediction was 100% correct. The christian once again refused to address any of my “issues” that I brought up concerning how religion does not hold the fabric of society together. This is text book christian avoidance, it helps maintain their false reality. And you also notice how the christian has been resorting to name-calling in the hope that I would bite. This is a classic female technique when they’re hit with an argument they cannot retort.

        15. I’m not even christian or even religious which i said what for the third fucking time now. Your entire argument was a strarwman(look it up) i never even held to begin with, hence my refusal to answer it. Complete waste of time. You are to moronic to even realize that strawman arguments are inherently invalid because they are logical fallacious. (Go look up logical fallacy)
          “religion does not hold the fabric of society together.”
          And what is your proof of this statement? Because you say so? Where is the empirical evidence for this statement?
          Empirical evidence that religion is good for society:
          If religion is a net benefit to society as whole even for people who are not religious then it logical follows that without religion society is worse off and we can see this now in the general decline of the western world that has abandon religious values altogether.

        16. That is your response? That is the best you “enlighten” atheist can do against empirical evidence? Really?

        17. Why should I try harder, you ignore everything I say and try and dismiss it as ‘strawman.’ You notice I’m not even trying to convince you of shit, never was, tbh, I already know your type, I’m just making an example of you to everyone else, pointing out your female arguing techniques.
          P.S. Thanks for making such an ass of yourself. Nicely immortalized on the internet for others to laugh at for years to come.

        18. ROFL!!!! You done crying like a little girl yet? You lost. Get over. Atheist are a bunch of beta males.

        19. And as you can now see, the christian is trying her best to antagonize me once again with name calling. As everyone knows from previous attempts at this female tactic this will not work, since everyone knows the christian has STILL not addressed any of the points I made on how religion does not hold the fabric of society together.
          It’s almost fascinating to watch, seeing how many times someone can bang their heads against the same wall.

        20. Literally not possible, since I presented my arguments and you failed to refute even one single claim. Logic isn’t your strong point. LOL.

        21. I did actually and used three sources of empirical evidence to do so. You have yet to respond to it. Give up already. Mommy isn’t here to protect you. You lost. Deal.

        22. Oh, missed those links before.
          Before I tear them to shreds let me just point out that they, firstly, aren’t empirical and, secondly, do not relate to what I was talking about. Let me recap the arguments which you don’t want to acknowledge: 1. the religious wars are due to arguing over sequels to the word of God. 2. The Bible contradicts itself so CANNOT be the word of God. 3. The Bible isn’t written for the modern day world so doesn’t mention any modern day activity e.g. smoking crystal meth.
          Now, your first link (yeah, this is going to be a long post, and I know you’ll just dismiss it, but who gives a fuck, it’s fun annoying dumb people): The gist of the argument is found in this line, “There is no significant example in history, before our time, of a
          society successfully maintaining moral life without the aid of religion.” Well, the Inca’s were religious… and killed an estimated 50,000 people to please their Sun God. The Egyptians may or may not have been peaceful, a lot of bullshit has been written about them e.g. slavery, so no comment there. The Romans kept people in check not through Church, but through force and imprisonment (i.e. fear). In fact they kept their masses calm by providing them entertainment, in the form of Gladiatorial battles to the death (oooh, moralistic). Hitler was Christian. I can go on. Basically for every “moral” you can throw at me I can easily throw 10 examples of immorality found in these “moral societies.
          Now, onto link #2: wow, what a link, Forbes no less. Intimidating. Okay, so the gist of this link is relating to health benefits, namely, and extra 7 years of life gained by attending church once a week. Let me clear my throat… BULL-FUCKING-SHIT! Seriously? This is what you’re trying to peddle as “empirical evidence?” 7 fucking years gained from going to church for one hour once a week? Are you seriously that fucking dumb? No need to dismiss this, that statement alone is Monty Python worthy.
          Link #3: Cites zero evidence, just fluff. But, surprisingly, is the most solid argument: that meditation and STARING AT A SUNSET and other such activities helps calm you down and center yourself. Agreed. So does LSD or, better yet, DMT. There’s tribes in the Amazon that drink LSD-style tea once a fortnight to center themselves. Note: no Bible, no speeches, just getting high.
          So, to recap, your links are worth shit and don’t even slightly address what I was talking about. Good job.

        23. “” Well, the Inca’s were religious… and killed an estimated 50,000 people to please their Sun God.”
          No proof.
          “The Egyptians may or may not have been peaceful, a lot of bullshit has
          been written about them e.g. slavery, so no comment there.”
          No proof
          “Hitler was Christian. I can go on. Basically for every “moral” you can
          throw at me I can easily throw 10 examples of immorality found in these
          “moral societies.”
          No proof.
          “g. Okay, so the gist of this link is relating to health benefits,
          namely, and extra 7 years of life gained by attending church once a
          week. Let me clear my throat… BULL-FUCKING-SHIT!”
          So you are going to dismiss an argument just because you don’t like what it says? Also where is your proof that this is bullshit? Exactly.
          “Cites zero evidence, just fluff.”
          LOL. okay then. Ignore what you don’t like. Standard atheist practice.
          So in short you just made up a bunch of ad-hoc rationalization as an excuse to dismiss imperial evidence about the benefits of religion. Good Job. LOL!!
          Here is some more evidence to support my claim: -
          - one has 149 references and sources cited, but i’m sure you are just going to dismiss that as well by claim that heritage is just a think tank. LOL)
          - one cites 99 sources, which i’m sure you are just going to dismiss as well)
          -Then there is this video:
          -Oh then there is this:
          ^^It is pretty obvious that christian made science today what it is, or are you going to deny that fact as well? Are you seriously going to claim that science doesn’t contribute to the well being of society? Knock out blow landed. =)
          As we can see science overwhelmingly supports my position that religion is an overall good thing to society. So my question is why are atheist so anti-science for? LOL.
          It amazing in all of your responses to me you have yet to cite one source to back your claim that region is bad and evil. We are all still waiting.
          Now watch Floyd respond with a bunch insults and ad-hoc rationalizations in a emotional futile attempt to save his frail ego from the reality of his flawed position.

        24. Dude, for all your posturing you seem to lack the grasp of the concept of refuting claims. Fact is you have YET to refute even one of my claims and yet provided extremely bullshit links (which I refuted quite easily, something you have 100% failed to do).
          The way a debate works is someone gets a statement e.g. Dumb shits are unable to see when they are beaten, and either backs up those claims with statements, links or “empirical evidence” (seriously, look up the definition of empirical, you use that term a lot and yet have no concept of what it means. LOL). Then the other person refutes those claims and makes a bunch of their own.
          The way Christians and women work is by ignoring EVERYTHING they can’t answer and throwing curveballs. And despite the fact you claim to not be a christian (and I assume a woman) that’s exactly the way you argue. Kinda gay, don’t you think?
          Lol at the inevitable fag response.

        25. ” Fact is you have YET to refute even one of my claims and yet provided extremely bullshit links”
          1)You have yet to refute any link i posted. Or even read any of them for that matter.
          2)You have yet to prove any of your claims with any evidence whatsoever which makes your claims invalid with in a debate. NOT ONE source has been cited by you this entire fucking time.I have repeatedly ask you for evidence of the your bullshit claims and i have yet to see any in you time wasting 50 responses you made to me.
          3)Dismissing links you haven’t even read as “extremely bullisht” is a childish feminist tactic and just proves your lack of intellectual honestly and integrity. The fact of the matter is I without a doubt proven my claims to be true with empirical evidence. You are just a coward making excuses for why you can’t even read a single link or refute an single argument i made and just hides behind insults like a child does. Pathetic
          “The way Christians and women work is by ignoring EVERYTHING they can’t answer”
          Um dumbass, You just ignored my entire previous response here. Way to go and proving youself an hypocrite and a liar. Good job. ROFL!!!
          You just proved everything i just said you would in my last comment. You moron. Add-hoc rationalizations aren’t arguments or refutations. You argue like an SJW cuckold omega male . You know you already lost the argument and just want the last word in you just keep responding with hot in the futile hope that i will just fucking quit so that you can “feel” like you won the augment when in fact you lost form the very beginning. You are just a narcissist. Go seek mental treatment for you mental illness. Now go craw back under your tumbur rock where you came from you mental challenged retard.
          For now one I’m just going to dismiss you for troll that you are. Don’t even bother responding to me anymore as i will not see it.
          Lol at the inevitable fag response.

        26. LOL, someone’s mad they can’t refute any of my claims. Check out how angry she’s got that I won’t let her off the hook?
          God, this bird reminds me of Bard from that Simpsons episode with the electrified cupcake – you know, the, “Is bart smarter than Lisa’s Hamster,” test.
          Note: 100% of my arguments STILL unanswered.

        27. At this point we all know that the christian has admitted defeat. The job is done and she’s been made to look like an ass. So I can continue kicking this dead horse, or just ride off into the sunset.
          So, to recap, this was fucking easy to do, just don’t get distracted by the fluff they will throw at you when they can’t answer your assertions. That’s is. Nothing else to it.

        28. Trust me, people will read this thread, maybe not today, maybe not tomorrow, but someday, and they too will LOL watching you make an ass of yourself by continually ignoring the issues I posted about. Do you honestly think posting links after links of shit you were unable to write yourself due to a lack of critical thinking is the way to address a debate? Especially when you’re unable to even find a link relating to what I’m talking about? Come on, it’s unbelievably easy to neg my first claim, I even gave you a wide opening, “Imagine how people would laugh if they wrote a chapter 4.” Well, dumbass, that was a gift you were unable to cognitively register (I assume to either a lack of IQ, or lack of education); Mormons are, essentially, chapter 4, and people laugh at them all the time. Why did you not know that? You could have LOL’ed till your heart’s content at me “not knowing that.” Of course I already had my rebutal prepared but, alas, you is too dumb to even try to pick apart anything I say (note: I just gave you an ironic gift again to LOL at, but I doubt you’ll spot it… again).
          Keep them coming, you’re soooooo fucking dumb it’s a blast making fun of you.

        29. Well the most obvious response is that old saying, “There’s no cure for stupid.” Pretty apt here, dontcha think?
          You really want to go on trying to better me? After you’ve failed for so long? Go for it, it doesn’t detract from the fact you STILL haven’t been able to answer my original assertations.

        30. My last reply to you ever:
          “That which can be asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence.” – Christopher Hitchens.

        31. Thing is, what you have in front of your fingertips is Google. That old saying of leading a horse to water applies here. If you were at all interested in potentially re-evaluating your beliefs based on a new perspective you would have willingly (and happily) checked out any points you weren’t sure about.
          If I had provided links (to shit that, frankly is common sense and common knowledge to anyone with even a below average IQ) you would have dismissed it, since it was never in your prerogative to learn and evolve. 50 years from now they could find out and prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that Jesus was in fact an alien from the future who was sent back in time to fuck up this world… and you’d still scoff at the idea that religion isn’t a “binding force,” rather than just an outdated tool for totalitarian control of the masses.
          Before you scoff (as you will) at this reply, understand, your type of person is a disease to society. You’re the reason the media can get away with shit like 9/11 and the Boston Bomings and all the shit they do. And, yes, I already know your response, “LOL. Grab your tinfoil hat. Conspiracy nutter. Fool. Dumbass. Bet you think the moon is hollow too. LOLOLOL.” And yet… who’s the naive one? The person who believes something they hear, based on blind faith? Or the person who investigates media claims and either accepts or refutes them?

        32. Oh yeah, and the irony of that quote is astounding, since Christopher Hitchens was talking about God/religion. You are either extremely dumb (I mean that seriously), or you’re deliberately trying to fuck up your side of the argument since, in reality, you agree with me.

        33. “Oh yeah, and the irony of that quote is astounding, since Christopher Hitchens was talking about God/religion.”
          Yet another assertion with no evidence. LOL keep proving he point jackass. But no he wasn’t you intellectually dishonest prick. He was talking about idiots like yourself who makes assertions(you used that word several times) without backing them up with evidence. It called Hitchens razor because it can be used to shave ANY baseless assertion like the ones you have made. If Hitchens were arguing with you he would have said the same thing.
          “If I had provided links (to shit that, frankly is common sense and
          common knowledge to anyone with even a below average IQ) you would have
          dismissed it, since it was never in your prerogative to learn and
          OH THE IRONY!! I actually DID provide links to back up what i said, and YOU ACTUALLY DID dismiss it!( to quote you from an earlier comment “extremely bullshit links”) The hypocrisy is extreme with you.
          You were never were to be taken seriously this entire time as now you have just prove yourself a intellectually dishonest troll who just wants to annoy people.
          No go watch more Alex Jones you loser.

        34. Spider58x i understand your message.
          The bible is a set of moral rules – a codex, made by man with the supernatural element of god, so it can have power over masses.
          People today ignore the fundamental moral substrate and just see the fluffy Jesus decorum.
          PS. Also you’re getting to angry at trolls.
          Chill bro.

  6. The trend of false rape claims will grow and grow until there are serious consequences for a woman proven to be lying.
    Politicians have no motivation for making that happen. So what will?

    1. What will happen is the courts would be so backlogged with false rape accusations that they won’t have enough resources to pursue it all. Then maybe, a slight chance they might wake up.

    2. It will happen when the MAJORITY of men protest about this injustice. White knights and beta men, most probably will learn the hard way when the hammer of false accusation strikes on their head.

  7. Hey feminists! You want equality? Here are some suggestions:
    Prison time equality (because women serve on average less time than men. That’s not fair. Women should be serving equal time jail sentences)
    Judicial equality (because Men on average win custody cases less often. That’s not fair. Women should withdraw from custody cases more often to make it fair)
    College equality (because more Women are going to college. Women should therefore leave college to make it fair for Men)
    These are just three i can think of…any takers, ladies?

      1. Very good point. It insinuates that men somehow ‘owe’ the state regardless of whether or not the men have an alliegance or have a ‘relationship’ with the state. If I were to ‘divorce’ myself from the state then what would the state do? Divorce rape me by forcibly DRAFTING me to continue serving it.

    1. You missed the biggest one life span equality. Men should be given preferential treatment in medical care and medical research until men live as long as women.

    2. Well since “their’ government is saber rattling against Russia, I want to see a military draft where women get drafted too.
      Each draftee will have her neck and jaw measured. If she has a thick neck and/or a man-jaw, she can go serve in combat, as she obviously has enough testosterone in her system for the task.

      1. No. You are wrong!
        For at least the past 100k years, if not since the first gendered species, males have died in battle. Literally, we are still the only ones sent to war.
        I demand that a full female battalion is formed, with it’s own air craft carrier group (all women), and special forces HR team (hehe) be sent in immediately. This should include every single slack jaw feminist!
        Then, highly publ;icize the first false accusation of rape internationally.
        I guarantee that all nations on earth will defintely get their peace, and humor, on due to “women running the world.”
        Oh yeah, lest I forget, they don’t get to come back to happy marriages and children after they deploy. Instant loss of kids, victorious or not!
        These, and every other “privilege” we have should be “checked” at the door like the good PC cathedral demands.
        Wait to watch not a single women get up to pick up said privilege.
        Why are we still hearing from these whoremongers?

      2. I don’t think it would be a good idea putting them in combat because all the equipment and resources would be put to waste. Plus if they’re captured they would reveal to the enemy all our tactical strategies.
        Believe me I would like them risking their lives in combat in the name of equality, but the bad part of it is that it would put our military in jeopardy.

        1. They can be taught to make inane statements about white-gold or blue-black dresses in the event of capture to leak disinformation to the enemy.

        2. Better yet, send them into battle wearing those white-gold or blue-gold dresses and tell them the enemy will be so confused and distracted by the whole color controversy thing that they’ll lose the battle.

      3. If something happens, chicks will be subject to the draft; a reauthorization was snuck into a bill 3 or 4 yrs ago apparently. Age range would be 18-36 if draft was ever implemented.

    3. “…(because women serve on average less time than men.”
      If memory properly serves, men serve 63% longer sentences for committing the same crime. Imagine if the sexes were reversed. One can already hear the international outrage were this the case. Yet since it is men on the receiving end of this bigoted action it is barely spoken of outside the so-called manosphere.

    1. “judicial rape” is what men endure whenever they get f’d over in courts.
      We need a public defense fund for things like this.

      1. or we create an NGO/Non-profit and protest every alimony and custody case right outside the courtroom while holding signs with “Penis Power” written on them

    2. The problem with child support is how it is implemented (although since government is essentially incapable of making anything other than politically-based decisions the practice should be abolished). Fro example, when the man is forced, essentially at gunpoint, to pay this from a court order he still has to pay tax on income he never receives. The receiver of said income, the woman, does not despite being the recipient.
      Additionally, the woman does not have to prove how it is spent. For all one knows she can simply spend it largely on herself while insisting on payment increases to further her parasitic behavior.
      A wife can even cheat on her husband yet be rewarded with the above. It does not require a lively imagination to envision the perverse incentives this type of system creates.

  8. This sounds like a case of extortion to try to get the guy to marry her. Soon we will see old washed up past the wall cum dumpster threatening to accuse a rich guy she fucked back in the day of rape if he doesn’t put a ring on her finger.

    1. The accusation seems only to occur *after* the guys *get rich* some years/decades later.
      I don’t find any used-up cumdumpsters suing the wino they sucked off in an alley for some reason, unless they saw the Enquirer a few years later when buying condoms & lube at 7-11 on the way to the streetcorner employment and said to themselves, “that wino sure looked alot like Bill Co$by, hmmm”

  9. Did anybody read the letter she wrote him? In the second paragraph of this article, the link is “she wrote” in red. This chick is a looney tune and no judge on Earth should take her word for anything.

  10. Heaven has no rage like love to hatred turned, nor hell a fury like a woman scorned. No doubt exists that all women are crazy; it’s only a question of degree.

  11. I hate radical feminists. Feminazis would only be satisfied if it achieved its goal of converting all men on this planet to homosexuality.

  12. “”These rules prohibiting relationships may even be illegal, at least at public universities: they prevent two people from becoming romantically involved, even platonically, even when one is not grading the other, based on some vague idea of “unequal power.” But women never want mates who have “equal power.” They have always wanted to “marry up.” “”
    I’m glad someone has pointed this out clearly because this goes to the heart of what feminists are trying to do. Feminists know full well that women are hypergamous, and that men need power and status to attract women. By focusing on unequal power – what marxist’s call ‘domination’ – they are deliberately targeting the basic mechanisms of heterosexuality not with a view to making it more equal, or better for women, but simply to impede its progress. On the one hand the added risk may exciting for women who find men prepared to play with fire, but the benefit is one direction only, as this adds even further insecurity to the business of ‘pursuing’ of women. As the author makes clear it is effectively criminalising what could be seen as a particular variety of hypergamy, or simply heterosexuality, the fact that men prefer younger women, and women prefer older men in general, a fact that feminists being generally middle-aged in mind even before they’re middle aged in body simply hate. So effectively while its fine for Stephen Fry to marry a small boy in a relationship so unequal in age and power that seems to hearken back to greek pederasty for hetersexual coupling, men and women need to be the same age, same status, completely sober, practically get ongoing written permission. All of this is literal feminist heterophobia and should be re-classified as a variety of hate. While feminism exists and operates in this way heterosexuals should be entitled to legal status as a protected group

  13. Great fucking article, the emails really drive the points home. How these Feminazi’s gonna dispute this ?

    1. Usually it’s with some form of you don’t know how a woman is going to act after being traumatized like that. So if things don’t add up to her acting like something really happened like you’d expect, then the acting like nothing happened is strange behavior, which validates (or proves without doubt to them) that something did happen to her.

  14. Women want to be combat soldiers and be surrounded by men and can’t even handle themselves on a fucking date. Women want to be in elite units and special forces yet plates of sphagetti , tweets and “manspreading” bothers them.

      1. “The divine law indeed has excluded women from this ministry, but they endeavor to thrust themselves into it; and since they can effect nothing of themselves, they do all through the agency of others.” ~ Saint John Chrysostom

  15. Important article and the author has duly noted esteemed credentials but I can’t help but ask WTF is up with his being the proprietor of an overtly feminist company?
    “JDF is is co-founder of Peren Linn Fashion, a company that makes math-themed clothing for women and girls.”
    Are you fucking serious?? I have no problem profiteering off of gullible simps and nothing fills me with greater schadenfreude than a stupid cunt being taken for her sugar baby dollars – but this is not what the author’s business prototype is doing. Just what we fucking need, someone bolstering YOU GO GRRL culture.

    1. Thanks for the comment. It’s not a feminist company, although anyone is welcome to be our customer.

    2. In case it’s not obvious, this is my first time posting and I have been unable to delete the repeat messages.

      1. Thanks for the reply. While it’s certainly a net win to have prominent writers proliferating the redpill message, we seem to have divergent views on what constitutes feminism. It’s hardly controversial to assert that only an infinitesimally small number of women can muster even a cursory understanding of basic mathematics. Per our limited academic resources, I find it unethical encouraging women to have any involvement in STEM fields. Even the most innocuous mainstream research on IQ and sexual dimorphism consistently proves that women have no innate aptitude for these disciplines. Our universities are too impacted as it is. There is no logical reason to extend valuable admission space to a less qualified demographic at the expense of markedly superior male students. Purveying coy, novelty, math t-shirts that foster fleeting female pseudo-interest in STEM is anathema to industries that are male dominated for a good reason.
        It’s time to start laying out some heavy societal truths and begin the process of ushering women back to more appropriate feminine life goals. There’s little good that can result from women fraudulently struggling through graduate level STEM programs where they’ll emerge as inferior perimenapausal scientists/engineers with little redeeming value for any prospective suitors.
        While we’re clearly of different mindsets on this issue, it doesn’t negate my respect for the rest of your life’s work. I look forward to reading any of your future submissions to ROK.

  16. Tenured innovators and scientists deserve a free pass if anyone does especially when it comes to playing the field, where they should have a ROYAL PASS to breed with whomever they fancy. When on the lecturing circuit, the hosting towns and universities should offer up a PARTY PLATTER of the finest intelligent women given exclusive invitation to meet with the honorable and most cerebral visiting sire. The same way that sports stars are thrown parties with roomfulls of the finest eye candy cheap ho’s and groupies in the fancy hotels when playing their away games.

  17. I noticed something strange in my life. I assure you the following is 100% true.
    1: I am happy. I am honestly content. I pursue my passion, work because I choose, go to school and have 3 different sources of income. Life’s pretty good.
    2: Women are starting to pay more and more attention to me. I’m starting to feel bad cause it’s obvious what they are after.
    3: When I actually speak openly with one, she gets upset and cannot fathom why I choose to stay single. Despite the fact that I am clearly happy, they see me as someone who needs help.
    Then I read an article like this and I question why in the hell anyone would even deal with a female without covering their ass legally. Then I question why any man would risk losing everything he has ever worked for his entire life via marriage.
    I’m pretty sure I am the sane one here.

    1. to have children is the only reason a guy should get married. Even then, he needs to cover his ass.

    2. Are you a betting man? Look at it this way, marriage is a 2:1 bet, a 50:50 chance of working out. Its a favourite if its a race horse. However you are putting 50% of your net worth on a 2:1 bet with present western divorce rates. You wouldn’t put half your wedge on a horse race, would you? All you have worked for over how many years can be taken from you in legal fees and a divorce settlement. And you will settle to avoid the ensuing shitstorm.
      And remember what Charlie said about hookers, “I don’t pay them for sex, I pay them to leave!”

    1. I’ve seen this pic somewhere before…. oh they must have photoshoped out the cocks, north, south, east and west of her demure features…..1,000 cock stare alert…..

  18. When is the world going to recognise feminists for what they really are, a Hate group with more rights than the KKK and the American NAZI Party. These people have such a severe case of Penis envy that however much revenge, hate, bile and absurdly false academic arguments they make about Male dominance. Will not fill the bottomless pit they have created for themselves, or resolve the feelings of envy, and that envy is of being born Female and not Male.
    There are reasons why certain fields of study, and endeavour are dominated by men, and that is because women are not interested in participating in them! From the founders of Aviation, to the personal computer revolution, women are just not interested in participating or innovation. There are some obvious exceptions such as Marie Curie, but they are the exceptions that make the rule.
    Women are often repulsed by these men (& who hasn’t known girls to publicly ridicule nerdy guys). Paul Allen to the best of my knowledge is still unmarried, and one of the Wright brothers remained single for his whole life.
    Criticising Men in the computer game industry for Male Domination is as absurd as begrudging Black Male atheletes for dominating the 100 yard dash. No one is stopping them from competing, however any sane rational observer will note that they simply can’t compete.
    When are we (as Men) going to unite and stand up for ourselves, and persue those who are continuing to encroach on our rights and liberties. I hope this man takes the first step and sues her, before he dies the social death (and professional) of a thousand cuts.
    If we do not act and act soon, we will be come chattel, to be manipulated until we are no longer useful, and no longer men.

Comments are closed.