Man accused of assaulting 3 young girls says he is a “Trans-age” 9 year-old

I can’t quite believe that this excuse hasn’t been used before now.

A 38 year old man by the name of Joseph Roman, is accused of sexually assaulting 3 girls between the ages of 6 and 8. His excuse?

He is a 9 year old boy trapped in a man’s body.

No. I’m NOT making this up.

www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/breaking/ct-web-sexual-assault-case-denied-bail-20180124-story.html

I found this story in the Chicago Tribune, and as soon as I read the title, I began searching the story to make sure that the guy hasn’t been given any sort of benefit of the doubt. Thankfully, he has been denied bail – yet I wonder: for how long will this hard-line approach last?

And how long before some SJW-types begin to defend, or at least sympathise with him?

I’d like to say that that would never happen. In reality though? I know someone, somewhere is thinking it.

Check out this article from The Daily Mail –

www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-3356084/I-ve-gone-child-Husband-father-seven-52-leaves-wife-kids-live-transgender-SIX-YEAR-OLD-girl-named-Stefonknee.html

I need to say this: No, I don’t believe that Stefonknee can be compared to this absolutely sick S.O.B who has raped and sexually assaulted three girls. Certainly not in a sense of any wrong-doing. I’m merely trying to get the point across, that people like Stefonknee, clearly need to be helped by professionals who can assist in giving him the therapy he needs; and not by some progressive ideologues promoting the idea that it’s normal for a married man with SEVEN kids to suddenly decide to dress-up and act like a 6 year-old-girl.

It’s not helpful to anyone involved, particularly his children, who are faced with a Father-less future, all because he doesn’t want to “be an adult anymore”.

The more that people promote the idea that “you can be whomever you want to be”; that it’s perfectly normal for grown men to say they are a 6 year old girl, the easier it becomes to ignore the root problems that these people are facing; much to the detriment of the individual concerned, and to their family.

Particularly where children are involved.

It also becomes easier for people like Joseph Romans to latch onto this way of thinking, and use it for more nefarious ways than to just escape reality. For that, you can thank  progressive-types, who are far more concerned with not offending people than with accepting reality in a biological, and psychological sense.

Joseph Romans has latched onto the idea that all Trans-related issues will be treated with sympathy and acceptance; regardless of the reality. That no matter what: you are who you are, and nobody can tell you any different.

Romans is a psychopathic- peadophile, using the good (if not completely mis-guided) intentions of progressives, in order to excuse or at least explain what he has done to these poor girls; and I’m glad that the Judge in this case has so far seen through this.

But I’m not too sure, that if this kind of situation occurs again in the future, that it will always be the case.

“But I’m really the same age as them your honour. We were just playing Doctor. Every child plays that game…”

You just know that this sort of excuse is going to be used by someone in the future to explain their crimes.

I just hope that progressives don’t start to be reeled in by people like Joseph Roman, for fear of offending them.

Stefonknee clearly has psychological issues; issues which I sincerely hope he can get help with in order for him to face up to reality, and to overcome them for the sake of himself and his family. After two failed suicide attempts, (one before his transition and one after) and the trauma being felt by his wife and children, it’s clear that this help is needed sooner rather than later.

Facing up to our fears and problems, especially with professional help, is the most assured way of defeating them. However, hiding from them, and allowing people to believe that they don’t exist; is only going to hurt those involved in the long-run.

Sometimes you have to run the risk of offending people by telling them the truth, in order for people to be able to heal and face up to their issues. Coddling people, and enabling them to live in a bubble of self-made reality, is only going to hurt them in the long-term.

And will be exploited by some.

RANT OVER

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Advertisements

The Presidents Club – Why Great Ormond Street are WRONG to return their donations

www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/presidents-club-dorchester-hotel-men-only-charity-groping-sexual-harassment-what-happened-london-a8175256.html

The Presidents Club Charity Dinner, (see link above for report) is one of the hottest talking points this week; and the fallout from it is only going to get worse as the week goes on, as the names of Celebrity attendees will undoubtedly be released.

David Mellor, who is the Chair of the Presidents Club, is already stepping down from the Department of Educations board, and I would expect several more high-level resignations and “apologies” very soon.

Since the news broke of the charity-grope-fest, a number of charities have decided to return donations received in order to disassociate themselves from the Presidents Club, including Great Ormond Street Hospital.

The charity, who have received £530,000 from the Presidents Club between 2009-2016, have stated:

“due to the wholly unacceptable nature of the event we are returning previous donations and will no longer accept gifts from the Presidents Club Charitable Trust.”

I have to say I’m utterly perplexed at the sheer amount of virtue-signalling on display.

Are they really saying, that the reason they won’t accept money raised to help dying children, is all down to ethics?

Who gives a damn where the money comes from?

By not accepting it, they are simply gambling with the lives of sick children, all for the fear of offending a handful of the public who might call them out for accepting donations from a “less-than-reputable” source.

Let me tell you something Great Ormond Street:

Children’s health is not something to be politicised or used as a tool with which to appear virtuous.

Ask any parent, this question:

“Would you accept something which could, or would, help ensure your child did not die, from anyone; regardless of their prior actions?”

You would get a resounding YES every single time.

Hell, I’d accept the help of the Devil himself, if it meant that one of my children didn’t die.

To Great Ormond Street I say this:

You’ve done amazing work over the years. You’ve helped save countless lives of children and ensured that the lives of the children who couldn’t be saved, were at least made a bit more comfortable and dignified.

Don’t fall into the trap of pandering to fashionable trends of disassociation and what some elements of society deems to be virtuous.

By all means, call out the Presidents Club for what happened at the Dorchester Dinner.

By all means, call out their behaviour.

But take the money they have raised, and put it to good use. You are a charity set up to save the lives of children, so please continue to do so.

By ALL means.

I have left a link to Great Ormond Street Hospitals Charity page here, so please donate anything that you can.

RANT OVER

 

 

 

 

TERF War – Why Feminism is cannibalising itself

If I can take away one thing from the Women’s March 2018, it was how much more ridiculous Feminism has become with the idea of Intersectional Feminism.

Feminism on it’s own is a complicated affair; though, as a white, cis-gendered man, I’ve no doubt that this is how it will seem to me. Because of my “privileged and masculine” outlook on such things, I’ve always pretty-much assumed that all Feminists think along the same lines; men are bad, women are good etc..

Not so much apparently.

https://twitter.com/MsBlaireWhite/status/955116908012912641

Do me a favour?

Type “White Feminism” into the search bar on Twitter, and you’ll be greeted by a slew of Feminist in-fighting and outright hatred of the idea that white women have their own version of Feminism that excludes and delegitimises minorities.

As much as the organisers of the Women’s March told us that the event was all about women across the world standing up against misogyny and creating a voice for ALL women, it turned out to be nothing more than an anti-Trump protest, and a huge act of self-cannibalisation, eating it’s way to the very heart of Feminism.

It also showed just how radical today’s Feminism has truly become, and how far removed from any semblance of sanity it really is. It’s no longer about the rights of women as a whole; uniting all women equally under one banner in order to fight the Patriarchy. Now, it has become all about finding the most oppressed group of women possible; the ultimate “Sacred Cow” if you will, with which to spearhead the entire movement. That group is currently the Trans community, particularly Trans-women.

And some Feminists aren’t too pleased about it.

This was taken from the Vancouver Women’s March and shared via the Twitter account of Lauren Southern (check out her YouTube channel here https://t.co/4IPrESDJO9)

Known as TERFs or Trans-exclusionary radical feminists, this particular brand of Feminism stems mainly from the “Second Wave” and is the based on the belief that only women born with a vagina and XX chromosomes are “real” women.

Hardly a ground-breaking thought process, right?

Having thoughts like this are obviously going to get you into a lot of trouble with the Identity Politics Brigade. Activists of the “old guard” of Second Wave Feminism, such as Germaine Greer and Julie Bindel, who both hold the view that Trans-women are NOT real women, have both been no-platformed by Student Unions and cast aside as TERFs by today’s Feminists.

Regarding Transgenderism, Bindel wrote in 2004:

“I don’t have a problem with men disposing of their genitals, but it does not make them women, in the same way that shoving a bit of vacuum hose down your 501s does not make you a man.”

Quotes like this are more than enough to earn you “banishment from the ranks” by today’s “call-out Queens”, and it will only get worse; as long as identity and one-upmanship play a part in an ever-changing, ever-devolving movement like Feminism.

Munroe Bergdorf; a Trans-woman, and one of the louder critics of “old-fashioned Feminism”, has recently spoken out on Twitter asking women to attend the Women’s March in London, and adding:

“I also want to stress that if you do attend, it is CRUCIAL that you do with an INTERSECTIONAL mind-set. Centering reproductive systems at the heart of these demonstrations is reductive and exclusionary.

Not all women have reproductive systems, not all women have a vagina, not all women’s vagina’s are pink. Think about your message, use your voice for ALL women. Not just yourself.

TIME IS ALSO UP on white feminism, TERF’s and any other branch of feminism that seeks power for some rather than equality for all. Tick-tock.” 

Inclusive indeed.

To say that Feminism is beginning to implode is a complete understatement if you ask me. I’m certainly no Feminist (not by a long-shot), yet I have a certain amount of respect for the Germaine Greers and the Julie Bindels of this world, even if I disagree with practically all of their arguments. At least they have the BALLS to fight for women’s rights without the need to rely on identity politics and race-shaming; balls that this new generation, for want of a better phrase, has castrated itself of.

White women need not speak.

Women with vaginas need not speak.

Women with reproductive systems need not speak.

Women who question the validity of Trans people need not speak.

Unless you are near the top tier of the victim-hood pyramid, you might as well throw away your pussy hat, sit still, be a good girl, and listen.

Shush now!

The REAL women are talking.

 

RANT OVER

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

No confidence in UKIP’s Henry Bolton – should we be surprised? Should we even care?

Henry Bolton, Leader of UKIP and “former” boyfriend of  the alleged racist and Meghan-Markle-hating Jo Marney, has received a unanimous vote of no-confidence by his party.

https://news.sky.com/story/ukip-leader-henry-bolton-loses-no-confidence-vote-11217393

I’m not too sure how to feel about this one.henry bolton

I really couldn’t give a damn about Henry Bolton; he comes across as a sleazy little rat who’d sell his own Granny in order to get ahead in life. You just have to look at his choice of girlfriend to know what kind of guy he is.

But hey – you can’t judge him by his partner’s actions, or the people he associates himself with though, can you?

I say yes, you can to a degree – if you associate yourself with racists and altogether shitty people, then you’re pretty much going to be a shitty person yourself. You might not be racist, but you know that the people you call friends are and, by not disavowing them, you become guilty by association.

Unless you’re Hilary Clinton that is, and God knows if you say something along the lines of “enabled her husband by standing by him” the Left will have you for it…

I think the fact that UKIP’s ruling body have put in a no-confidence vote is a step in the right direction for the party; the less it’s associated with racism, the better.

To be honest though, it’s probably too little too late.

I’ve never been a UKIP voter, and probably never will. The party did have some ideals that I agreed with, and still do to this day: Brexit, self-government and common-sense policies regarding immigration. I seriously considered voting for them when Nigel Farage was the Gaffer, but ultimately, let my vote fall with the Tories to act out the will of the people.

The least said about that, the better eh?

For me, and probably a lot of people in this country, UKIP would have been a lot more credible as a party if not for the “guilty by association”  position it put itself in.

So now that the vote is in for Bolton, what now? He’s so far refusing to budge as Leader, but I think we all know he and UKIP are probably toast. Bolton was never going to be able to live up to Farage in the eyes of UKIP voters; (Paul Nuttall found this out the hard way) and certainly never stood a chance with the rest of the country. The party itself however, have never been able to shake themselves free of the tag of being “slightly racist” or “not as racist as the BNP, but still: racist”. 

What little chance UKIP had of being taken seriously as a party, evaporated when Nigel Farage stepped down.

So, Henry Bolton, I have some advice for you:

Step down.

Do it now and you’ll have time to nab yourself a new girlfriend, just in time to see the party ultimately disintegrate into nothing more than a distant memory.

I’m sure Hitler will have some long-lost 25 year old relatives around somewhere?

RANT OVER

 

 

 

Cathy Newman gets schooled by Jordan Peterson

If you are searching on YouTube for the following terms: “car crash interview” or “feminist fails” or “Interviewer tries to make someone look bigoted and fails dramatically” then look no further than this video.

The video shows Professor Jordan Peterson, a Canadian Professor of Psychology at the University of Toronto, being interviewed by the “absolutely lovely and completely non-biased, un-snobbish, non-ideologue”, Cathy Newman on Channel 4.

The debate, which covered such topics as The Pay Gap (myth) and the Patriarchy (another myth), showed exactly why an Interviewer needs to do their homework on the guest they are interviewing. If she had done, Newman would have known not to use her tried and tested technique of twisting someone’s answers into a negative context; all the while painting the person as the “sexist monster” she needs them to be in order to push a false narrative.

Professor Peterson is a highly skilled orator and an absolute master in the art of knowing his subject matter to a tee, and he absolutely showed it in this video.

Not once did he lose his temper, or raise his voice to assert his position on a topic; instead, using his ability to remember every single detail of his previous answers to swat away the ridiculously twisted assertions of Newman.

It was like a cat toying with a mouse.

Constantly being rebutted and corrected after giving false representations of what Professor Peterson was saying, Newman looked hopelessly lost and began fumbling over her questions, to the point where it looked like Peterson seemed to feel embarrassed for her.

Finally though, Peterson decided to move in for the kill and absolutely skewered Newman with this statement.

The way Newman completely floundered was comical, leaving Peterson to exclaim:

“Ha! Gotcha!”

From that point, the interview was over.

So, let that be a lesson to anyone who wants to try and make sweeping generalisations about someone by claiming false facts and twisting statements.

Always make sure you do your homework, and never turn up to a battle of wits unarmed.

Class dismissed.

 

RANT OVER

 

A lack of transparency – Politicians Ignoring the electorate

Angela Rayner, Labour MP for Ashton-under-Lyne has blocked me on Twitter.

 

220px-Official_portrait_of_Angela_Rayner_crop_2

 

No, I didn’t harass her. I didn’t use foul-language. I didn’t threaten or abuse her in anyway shape or form.

I simply asked her a question. This one:

@AngelaRayner blocking @rantsen_things on @Twitter

Hardly what you would call an abusive Tweet?

My question was in response to her blocking another Twitter user; someone who simply asked if Ms. Rayner sympathised with Ester McVey, the new Secretary of State for the DWP, who was branded a “stain on humanity” and someone who “should be lynched” by Labour Shadow Chancellor of the Exchequer John McDonnell.

Johnmcdonnellmp

Just so you all know; I’m fully aware that everyone has the right to block anyone they want, for any reason, on Twitter. Any abuse including threats of physical harm, death threats and so on shouldn’t be tolerated, whether the recipient is a man or a woman.

But blocking people for asking a question?

Come on Angela, you’re an MP after all. You’re job is to be asked questions by the public. Just because a question might show up some partisan hypocrisy in you, doesn’t mean you should run away from it.

It’s got to the point now with MPs that they can have an opinion on a matter; state it; and then simply ignore or block out completely, any sort of discerning voice. Nobody is allowed to question or disagree with anything that a politician says anymore, and that’s just wrong.

ignore

You’re elected by the people. For the people.

It’s your duty to be held accountable for the things you say and the opinions you hold. It’s not your job as a “voice of the people” to ignore the voters, for fear of looking bad in their eyes.

What kind of example does it set for people; especially young voters, when the very people they elect into positions of authority, can’t even answer a simple question about a subject involving abuse and ridicule?

It’s Orwellian at best.

Should you be asked to put up with abuse? Absolutely not.

As a Politician, should you be able to answer a reasonable and polite question with regards to your refusal to condemn someone who has made horrifically abusive comments?

The “Ayes” have it.

RANT OVER

Man avoids jail for sending indecent images of a child “as a joke.”

I like a joke as much as the next person.

I personally think you can make a joke out of pretty much any situation, no matter how harrowing it might be to someone. Comedy allows us to make light of tough situations in order to help people move on from them. It also allows us to ridicule the more extreme and harmful aspects of society, such as Terrorism, in order to stop it from gaining traction and spreading fear. (Charlie Hebdo were good at this before they became “cucked”).

There’s only one subject that I can’t find funny.

I’ll let YOU decide which one of these two situations I just find myself laughing about.

Let’s start with Count Dankula.

He is being charged with a hate-crime. An anti-semitic hate-crime at that. And “what did he do?” I hear you say.

“As a joke”, he decided to prank his girlfriend by teaching her pet Pug to salute whenever it heard the phrase “zieg heil”, and also taught it to act excited whenever it heard the phrase “Gas the Jews?”. The point, he says, was to turn the dog from what his girlfriend calls “the cutest thing ever” into “the least cutest thing ever” which, as he claims (and all non-Nazis would also claim) is a Nazi. After posting the results on YouTube, the Count recieved a HUGE amount of backlash from people acusing him of “normalising Nazi-ism” and “hating Jews”, something he vehemently denies.

Check out this video from Gavin McInnes who interviews Count Dankula about the whole thing, and pay close attention to what he says about how he has been treated since the video was released.

It’s extreme treatment for such a ridiculous reason if you ask me.

For his “crimes” Count Dankula is facing a year in Prison. A year in prison for a victimless act which was plainly a joke and only be seen to be a joke.

Nobody was hurt or traumatised by his video; in fact you could argue that the only people hurt were The Count and his partner, who had to put up with a tonne of abuse from the online community and neighbours alike, all the while being dragged through the mud by the Police and the Justice system.

Hate-Crime my arse.

And now:

Sahil Sharif.

www.chroniclelive.co.uk/news/north-east-news/sahil-sharif-indecent-images-child-14142252

This guy’s idea of “a joke” is somewhat different to Count Dankula’s.

According to Chronicle Live Mr.Sharif thought it would be funny to post an indecent video of a child to his friend.

Har-dee har-har.

When caught, he was also found to have another video and an indecent image on his I-pad. When interviewed by the police, Sharif’s reply was:

“I’m not a paedo. They’re just jokey images.”

Peter Doherty, who was defending Sharif, said:

“Mr Sharif doesn’t have an interest in children – there’s no sexual gratification whatsoever.
“He thought they were jokey images. He knows that’s not the case now.”

“Jokey images” of children being sexually assaulted and degraded. Forgive me for saying, but I smell bullshit.

Sahil Sharif ended up getting a 26 week prison term which was suspended for 24 months and ordered to sign the Sex Offenders Register for 10 years.

Whoopty-doo.

 

So, two totally different jokes, two totally different crimes, and potentially, two totally different punishments.

Firstly, ask yourself this:

If one of these two guys deserve to see the inside of a prison cell, which should it be?

If your answer isn’t Sahil Sharif then you have some serious issues.

Who were the victims of Sharif’s “joke”?

That would be the children. The kids who were abused and assaulted in order for peados to get their rocks-off. The physical and psychological damage will be forever; there’s just no way for these poor kids to forget and move on.

The damage is permanent.

Sure, he didn’t make the videos, but he sure as hell shared them with someone. THAT is a crime.

Some might disagree, but for me, the line gets drawn at joking about videos of sexually abused children.

I mean, what was the joke anyway?

“Look at these kids getting sexually abused! LOL”

I just don’t see it.

 

The fact that Count Dankula is being charged with any sort of a crime is a joke in-itself, never mind a Hate crime. However, if he ends up going to prison or receiving anything short of a full pardon and apology, then it will be nothing short of a joke.

An extremely unfunny one.

Oh, and for those of you who say: “You can’t make jokes involving Nazi-ism!”

Take a look at this and tell me you can’t.

RANT OVER