Remember me
[Forgot password?] [Register]
[Login]
menu

Ramifications of the Harvey Weinstein verdict

[1]

[Reply] #1
03-25-2020 02:44 PM
Joined: 03-24-2019
Posts: 154
offline
Aussenseiter
Aussenseiter
Regular
Rep: 0

PREFACE


In a world of thirst, where masculinity has been crushed under the brutal high heel of matriarchy, where psychologically destroyed men actually believe they can get laid by promoting a feminist agenda, there are two very distinct types of white knights:

There are white knights
And then there are white knights who are willing to defend the honor of whores who literally had sex with Harvey Weinstein
Because surely, there is a class of white knight that bows down and worships women, who exists only to follow their every command, and though this strategy has never yielded sex for him, perseveres onward - but who would draw the line at defending the honor of a woman who would literally have sex with Harvey Weinstein.

Then there is the Super Saiyan mode of white knights: the white knight who will actually, literally defend the honor of a whore so vile, so greasy, so completely debased by a blind and cruel drive for power, that she would actually, literally have sex with Harvey Weinstein.

Shockingly - or perhaps not - neo-Nazi white knights are of the latter category, and have mounted their mighty steeds and rode out onto the internet in droves to defend the honor and alabaster skin of women who actually had sexual intercourse with Harvey Weinstein.

You cannot argue in favor of the Weinstein verdict without explicitly arguing in favor of the destruction of all traditional European sex norms in favor of revolutionary Jewish norms. The idea of ceding such massive ground to Jews because it feels good to celebrate one Jew being sent to prison is insane to me.

The fact that if they are pressed on their white knight agenda, these people will revert to claiming they simply hate Jews, as they are handing over the entire mechanism of the judicial system to a Jewish feminist witch-hunt machine, is beyond my ability to grasp.

Jews: What would it take for you to support us in a complete takeover of the legal system where we have total power to throw any man in prison on fake sex charges?

Neo-Nazis: Just put one fat Jew in prison.

Jews: You sir have got yourself a deal.


__________________

(((Joel Stein))) wrote: As a proud Jew, I want America to know about our accomplishment. Yes, we control Hollywood.



You wait for a signal, whilst your people wait for you!

Edited 03-25-2020 02:47 PM by Aussenseiter
[Reply] #2
03-25-2020 02:46 PM
Joined: 03-24-2019
Posts: 154
offline
Aussenseiter
Aussenseiter
Regular
Rep: 0

The Precedent Set by an Utterly Extraordinary Rape Conviction


The neo-Nazis appear to be making the argument that Harvey Weinstein was prosecuted on charges of being a Jew who defiled Aryan women. In fact, he was prosecuted for being a man who had “non-consensual sex” with his girlfriend between sessions of consensual sex.

They are openly lying about the nature of the case, which in fact only involved two women, both of who admit to having had “consensual” sex after the alleged “non-consensual” sex. Apparently, these neo-Nazis are counting on their followers having very low information about the case itself.

The precedent set by this affects all men, not simply Hollywood Jews.


__________________

(((Joel Stein))) wrote: As a proud Jew, I want America to know about our accomplishment. Yes, we control Hollywood.



You wait for a signal, whilst your people wait for you!

[Reply] #3
03-25-2020 02:55 PM
Joined: 03-24-2019
Posts: 154
offline
Aussenseiter
Aussenseiter
Regular
Rep: 0

This is the summation of what happened at the Weinstein trial:


  • Two women who engaged in sexual affairs with Harvey Weinstein in exchange for career advancement said that at points during the sexual affairs, they had sex which was not “consensual.”
  • Jessica Mann (the main witness and accuser) claimed that while Harvey Weinstein was her boyfriend, he raped her in a hotel room in 2013. She remained his girlfriend until 2018. There was an entire history of sweet and flattering emails she sent him presented at the trial. She received all of the benefits of being the girlfriend of a high-powered Hollywood mogul, and would regularly email him asking for favors, all of which he fulfilled. She only broke off the relationship when the metoo scandal began (after which point he was obviously no longer able to provide her with professional favors).
  • Mimi Haleyi (a secondary accuser whose claims were also dealt with at the trial) claimed that Harvey Weinstein forcibly performed cunnilingus on her after she went to his New York apartment “some time in 2006.” The visit came after he had gotten her a job on a TV show. She then admits to traveling to his hotel room to have consensual sex with him two weeks later. She continued to send him flatting emails and work with him and spoke well of him for years after the alleged “oral rape.”
  • Due to the fact that the alleged things happened 7 and 14 years ago, respectively, there was no evidence of the crime. (Of course, there couldn’t be evidence for “I was telling him ‘no’ and I didn’t like it,” since neither of the women claims to have physically resisted.)
  • Neither of the women ever reported the alleged things to the police, and did not discuss them publicly until Harvey Weinstein was being pilloried by the media.
  • [*]Harvey Weinstein was convicted for rape for both of these cases and sentenced to 23 years in prison.


__________________

(((Joel Stein))) wrote: As a proud Jew, I want America to know about our accomplishment. Yes, we control Hollywood.



You wait for a signal, whilst your people wait for you!

[Reply] #4
03-25-2020 02:57 PM
Joined: 03-24-2019
Posts: 154
offline
Aussenseiter
Aussenseiter
Regular
Rep: 0

Things that were new about this:


  • There was no evidence presented beyond the claims of the women. There were no other witnesses. The only thing that Weinstein was convicted on was their word alone, about events that took place years before, and which they had never mentioned until this scandal broke in the media.
  • The women admitted to having “consensual” sex with him after the alleged rape, with the main accuser literally dating him for five years.


__________________

(((Joel Stein))) wrote: As a proud Jew, I want America to know about our accomplishment. Yes, we control Hollywood.



You wait for a signal, whilst your people wait for you!

[Reply] #5
03-25-2020 02:59 PM
Joined: 03-24-2019
Posts: 154
offline
Aussenseiter
Aussenseiter
Regular
Rep: 0

What this means:


  • The word of a woman is now absolute proof of a crime (again, this has never happened before in all of recorded history, not simply in the West, but in the entire world)
  • Any woman can accuse you of rape, because she regrets having sex with you, she’s angry at you over something else, or for any other reason at all, and there is no possible way to defend yourself. The fact that she was your girlfriend doesn’t matter, the fact that you have proof of a five-year-long friendly sexual relationship where you did an entire list of good things for her doesn’t matter. She admits all of that. What matters is that one time, during your otherwise happy relationship, she felt unhappy, and for that you have to go to prison.
  • The bottom line: any woman you’ve ever had sex with can now call the cops and say that it was rape. It doesn’t matter if it happened 7 or 14 years ago. It doesn’t matter if she was your girlfriend at the time. Nothing matters other than the fact that she is saying you did something bad.


We now have an entirely new definition of sexual relationships, where if you have sex with a woman, she has complete and total power to call the cops and have you sent to prison for decades, and you are left without any possible form of defense whatsoever. This now applies retroactively to any woman you’ve ever had sex with.

Feminism was a mistake.


__________________

(((Joel Stein))) wrote: As a proud Jew, I want America to know about our accomplishment. Yes, we control Hollywood.



You wait for a signal, whilst your people wait for you!

[Reply] #6
03-25-2020 03:27 PM
Joined: 01-03-2014
Posts: 9,827
offline
Nerise
Nerise
Legendary
Rep: 111

stfu


__________________

[Reply] #7
03-25-2020 11:50 PM
Joined: 06-04-2015
Posts: 599
offline
colorles
colorles
Regular
Rep: 15

Aussenseiter wrote: What this means:


  • The word of a woman is now absolute proof of a crime (again, this has never happened before in all of recorded history, not simply in the West, but in the entire world)
  • Any woman can accuse you of rape, because she regrets having sex with you, she’s angry at you over something else, or for any other reason at all, and there is no possible way to defend yourself. The fact that she was your girlfriend doesn’t matter, the fact that you have proof of a five-year-long friendly sexual relationship where you did an entire list of good things for her doesn’t matter. She admits all of that. What matters is that one time, during your otherwise happy relationship, she felt unhappy, and for that you have to go to prison.
  • The bottom line: any woman you’ve ever had sex with can now call the cops and say that it was rape. It doesn’t matter if it happened 7 or 14 years ago. It doesn’t matter if she was your girlfriend at the time. Nothing matters other than the fact that she is saying you did something bad.


We now have an entirely new definition of sexual relationships, where if you have sex with a woman, she has complete and total power to call the cops and have you sent to prison for decades, and you are left without any possible form of defense whatsoever. This now applies retroactively to any woman you’ve ever had sex with.

Feminism was a mistake.



i don’t agree with a lot of the things you say, but this post hits the nail on the head

[Reply] #8
03-25-2020 11:55 PM
Joined: 06-04-2015
Posts: 599
offline
colorles
colorles
Regular
Rep: 15

because women dont lie amirite



let’s make something clear: I have as much love for girls as I do for anybody. its the legal and social system that allows and promotes insanity like this, that is destroying entire generations of men AND women

Edited 03-25-2020 11:56 PM by colorles
[Reply] #9
03-26-2020 01:24 AM
Joined: 03-24-2019
Posts: 154
offline
Aussenseiter
Aussenseiter
Regular
Rep: 0

colorles wrote:

i don’t agree with a lot of the things you say, but this post hits the nail on the head



Excellent, but...


Don’t give me the credit, Andrew Anglin wrote this and a bunch of other material on the issue.


__________________

(((Joel Stein))) wrote: As a proud Jew, I want America to know about our accomplishment. Yes, we control Hollywood.



You wait for a signal, whilst your people wait for you!

[Reply] #10
03-26-2020 01:38 AM
Joined: 03-24-2019
Posts: 154
offline
Aussenseiter
Aussenseiter
Regular
Rep: 0

Andrew Anglin wrote:
Let’s establish that feminism invented the concept of female sexual innocence that is being used to defend women who had sex with Harvey Weinstein.

Female Sexuality: The Historical and the Modern Interpretation
All throughout history, women were considered fundamentally sinful and driven by lusts. It was believed that women had to be controlled by men or they would become unhinged and go into a sexual frenzy, using the power of sex to destroy the men around them.

All of ancient Greece held this view. Throughout the classical Greek epics and plays, women are portrayed as scheming whores, who use sex to exploit men to get them to do their bidding. The same is true for all Greek philosophers, who believed women were morally debased and almost purely driven by lust. A lot of it is more extreme than anything I’ve ever written.

In 391 BC, Aristophanes actually wrote a play about women taking over the government, called “The Assemblywomen," in which the women establish communism and base every element of the way the government operates on ugly women being able to have sex with attractive men.



Romans held the same view as the Greeks, and although they were the first white civilization to establish “rape” as a serious crime, they viewed it as a property crime, and viewed the woman as equally responsible.

And of course, fundamental licentiousness was the primary view of women presented in the Bible. In the very first story, the sinful woman Eve tricks the thirsty man Adam into doing her bidding. And her bidding is simply to fulfill a perverse curiosity by engaging in open rebellion against God for the sake of this perverse curiosity.

[url=https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Fall_of_Man_(Rubens)][/url]



Literally, the foundation myth of the Christian faith is “women used their wiles to lead men away from God, which led to all evil in the world."

The rest of the Bible continues with this concept of women, with prototypes of female whorishness including, but not being limited to, Princess Jezebel, Prophetess Jezebel, Gomer, Rahab, Salome, and Potiphar"s wife.

“Issue” means “ejaculation." Weinstein’s accusers were primarily mad that his flesh was not like the flesh of asses and his issue was not like the issue of horses.



Then throughout the Middle Ages, women were viewed in these terms. Women’s sexual drive became associated with demonic possession.

Shakespeare portrayed women as power-hungry tricksters who used sex to gain power over men.

Even in the enlightenment, this view was maintained. German idealist philosophers such as Friedrich Nietzsche and Arthur Schopenhauer wrote about women as if they were wild animals.



I think you get the point: there was no “female innocence theory” until the modern period. If it is true that women are innocent of sexuality, no one knew this until after the feminists told them so. Any man, throughout all of history, would be equally amused and aghast at the idea that a man could be so cucked as to claim that a woman who went to a man’s hotel room alone was “raped."

The “fundamental female innocence” theory was, ironically, presented as a part of feminism and women’s empowerment. The basic problem was that women were claiming they needed to be liberated, and in order to be liberated, they had to establish:


    [1]That they were oppressed
    [2]That the oppression was unjust
    [3]That abolishing traditional gender roles would not lead to a collapse of society


So, traditional gender roles, which were established for the purpose of protecting women from themselves and protecting society as a whole from the behavior of women, were portrayed as wrong under the premise that women did not actually need to be controlled, because they were not fundamentally driven by passion and a lust for sex and power, that they were actually the embodiment of innocence and men simply invented the charges of wanton lusts, and held them up since the beginning of civilization, out of pure meanness.

It was then decided by women that in fact, women were fundamentally sexually innocent, and any awareness of sex was inflicted on them by men. You’ll note that the neo-Nazi we are analyzing actually says that a man is evil for calling a woman who has sex for money a “whore."

Female innocence of sexuality is blatantly at odds not just with the entire conception of female nature throughout history, but with the biology that that conception was based on. What I will agree with white knights on is that women are physically less strong than men, on average. (I am not sure that I agree that a 60-year-old obese Jew could physically overpower a physically healthy woman in her 20s, but that’s neither here nor there.) Women are also significantly dumber than men. They score only a few points lower on IQ tests on average, but in practice they are largely incapable of completing any complex task. Because of this vast difference in physical and mental prowess, a woman naturally uses her sexual advantage over men to get what she wants.


__________________

(((Joel Stein))) wrote: As a proud Jew, I want America to know about our accomplishment. Yes, we control Hollywood.



You wait for a signal, whilst your people wait for you!

Edited 03-26-2020 01:51 AM by Aussenseiter
[Reply] #11
03-26-2020 02:01 AM
Joined: 03-24-2019
Posts: 154
offline
Aussenseiter
Aussenseiter
Regular
Rep: 0

More wisdom from Anglin:

Andrew Anglin wrote: Basically, a woman can now come at you seven years after you had a sexual encounter with her and say, “we started having sex and I was consenting, then about five minutes in I stopped consenting, and then two minutes later I started consenting again” - and you are a rapist and have to go to prison for decades.

We are officially completely off the rails here.

Heterosexual sex is now de facto illegal, because any time you engage in it from this point forward, the woman can go to the police - years later, or whenever - and say that she didn’t consent to it, and you have to go to prison.

Retards and faggots and retarded faggots are saying “yeah but Harvey Weinstein is a grotesque Jew so he deserves this." These people are apparently too dumb to understand the obvious fact that this is the entire point of this whole circus: you had to have a grotesque figure that disgusted everyone in order to set this precedent.

They literally passed out pictures of the guy naked to the jury, even though it had absolutely nothing at all to do with the case.

There is no way you ever could have set this precedent with a handsome or even remotely normal looking man. You also couldn’t have done it if the women were not attractive.

You had to have these two elements:


    1.Absurdly repulsive man, and
    2.Exceptionally attractive young women


But now, you have a precedent.

And the precedent does not say “it has to be a filthy fat kike and a fertile young shiksa."

The precedent is:

  • A woman who was involved in a years-long sexual relationship with a man decides that at some point, one time they had sex wasn’t consensual.
  • The man has to go to prison.


This absolutely means that any ex-girlfriend you have can call the cops and say “yeah, we were in a relationship for five years, but this one time when we had sex I didn’t consent to it, so he is a rapist."

She doesn’t have to present any evidence.

All she has to do is get on a stand and cry.

And you have to go to prison.


__________________

(((Joel Stein))) wrote: As a proud Jew, I want America to know about our accomplishment. Yes, we control Hollywood.



You wait for a signal, whilst your people wait for you!

Edited 03-26-2020 02:10 AM by Aussenseiter
[Reply] #12
03-26-2020 02:13 AM
Joined: 03-24-2019
Posts: 154
offline
Aussenseiter
Aussenseiter
Regular
Rep: 0

He continues to knock it out of the park.

Andrew Anglin wrote: It doesn’t matter if you didn’t know she didn’t consent. It doesn’t matter that she sent you emails talking about how much she loved you after the alleged rape. Nothing at all matters other than that she said there was this one time that you had sex and it wasn’t consensual.

And you have to go to prison.

Literally, any woman you have ever had sex with can call the cops, right now, and say that this sex was not consensual and you have to go to prison. She doesn’t need any evidence. It is like the Nuremberg Trials, where “eyewitness testimony” is enough to convict you.

Look, Man

I don’t know what to tell you.

This is the situation that we are now all in.

Jew lawyers are all now going nuts saying that they’re going to start mass prosecuting new cases they couldn’t prosecute before.

After the verdict came down, Manhattan District Attorney Cyrus Vance Jr. said:

This is a new day. Rape is rape whether the survivor reports within an hour, within a year or perhaps never. It’s rape despite the complicated dynamics of power and consent after an assault. It’s rape even if there is no physical evidence.



This is the new reality we live in.

And I don’t know how anyone is supposed to deal with it.

So I’m going to advise nothing.


__________________

(((Joel Stein))) wrote: As a proud Jew, I want America to know about our accomplishment. Yes, we control Hollywood.



You wait for a signal, whilst your people wait for you!

[Reply] #13
03-26-2020 09:14 PM
Joined: 06-04-2015
Posts: 599
offline
colorles
colorles
Regular
Rep: 15

the only advise is to be really careful who you choose to associate with. it’s insanity, but it’s reality

[1]

New Reply
Name (guest):

For faster posting and no restrictions: [Login] [Register]

Message:


 
 

[More Options] [New Topic]
Moderated by: Phobetius, Zeroextra, - FS -, Admins, Superusers [All moderators]
The Lounge Forums ©Silicon.dk ApS 2012 - Privacy Policy - Disclaimer - FAQ - Contact