Feminazi Judge Adds 6 Months to Boy’s Sentence for Fleeing in Terror

A 20 year old boy who had just been convicted under a feminist rape law fled the court in terror upon receiving the unexpected verdict. After police thugs abducted him and returned him to the court the feminist judge, James Tindal, slapped an extra 6 months to his already insanely long 7-year sentence calling the boy a “coward” for fleeing such a horrific fate.

What has this world come to in terms of man-hating that a judge punishes a boy for cowardice? Utter piece of shit, and that’s without me getting started about the original sentence.

This entry was posted in Hypocrisy, Men's Rights, News, Paedohysteria. Bookmark the permalink.

32 Responses to Feminazi Judge Adds 6 Months to Boy’s Sentence for Fleeing in Terror

  1. VII says:

    A competition has already been created to see who can go the most seconds on this blog without vomiting. High risk sport, enter under your responsibility:


  2. Yure says:

    You should comment the original sentence. What did the “rape” amount to? Was it the original definition of forced penetration or was it something really small and bogus (like most times)?

    • holocaust21 says:

      I doubt anyone knows. It is likely to be the standard British feminist definition of rape i.e. sex without consent or capacity to consent. Make of that what you will. Quite likely the girl is lying, or if not, she is at least a vindictive sociopath. The laws are so corrupt no one really knows or cares whether allegations are true or not, whether the definition of a crime is sensible or whether punishments are proportionate.

  3. A Voice For Men says:

    We repeat in the MRM: sex with minors IS NOT a Men’s right. It is not, no matter how much some like holocaust21 say it is.

    The legislation on underage sex is different in each country, but in the vast majority of countries sex with a under 18 is a crime, which in some cases, AND ONLY IN SOME CASES AND WITH LIMITATIONS, is decriminalised at 16 or 17.

    But it IS NOT a Men’s right.

    Paul Elam says it clear.

    • holocaust21 says:

      Is TOO a Men’s right! So there.

    • theantifeminist says:

      Actually, the age of consent is 18 only in the USA (and not even in more than half the states) and a handful of mostly Muslim countries. Out of the 200 or so nations in the world, perhaps less than a dozen have the age of consent of 18. Although FEMINISTS have been busy introducing further age of consent legislation everywhere over the last two or three decades, even now the only ‘limitations’ are usually those with power over the ‘child’ such as teachers. The first country to raise the age of consent to 16 (from 13 and before that 12) were the suffragettes in Britain. They did it in the same Parliamentary act that made prostitution illegal and restored homosexuality as a criminal offence punishable by hanging. These were the same suffragettes who later handed out white feathers to traumatized 15 year old boys who had been sent back home after lying about their age and fighting on the front in the First World War. The first MRA – Ernest Belfort Bax – raged against these Suffragette/feminist attempts to raise the age of consent, calling it their ‘obsession’.

      A Voice for Men is a troll site that betrayed Ernest Bax, as well as Angry Harry and all who went before. I hope you never sleep soundly you utter frauds that campaign for the right of men to beat and rape women, yet willing sex with a horny teenage girl (or even looking at a picture of a naked 17 year old) is taboo and nothing to do with men’s rights.

      Oh, and is Paul Elam wanking over that e-mail he got one time from three English 15 year old schoolgirls and posted about it within minutes of receiving it (as a ‘perk of the job’)?

      • Made in Malta says:

        The age of consent In Malta has been Lowered from 18 to 16
        Maltese youths can vote, marry, and bang legally at 16

      • holocaust21 says:

        OMG WTF I did not know they lowered the AOC in Malta! I’m almost not inclined to believe it, though another site says it happened too: https://www.maltatoday.com.mt/news/national/86436/age_of_consent_for_sex_officially_lowered_to_16#.W_lTmpzLcTs

        I don’t know if it’s actually been ratified though. I’d have thought the feminist groups all across Europe would unite in hatred against such a bill. And how does it make sense that they squeezed in lowering the age of consent into some feminist “Gender Domestic Violence” and “Protecting Minors Online” bills?

      • anon says:

        “And how does it make sense that they squeezed in lowering the age of consent into some feminist”

        I have not seen any difference between feminists and antifeminists on this issue. Both hate it equally and a minority supports it. Now almost every anti-feminists are the biggest enemies, I don’t see what sense it makes to be an anti-feminist, it has only served to make people reject us as reactionary misogynists.

        There are currently more feminists in favor than anti-feminists, what does that mean? I’m the only one who realizes that this antifeminist narrative doesn’t work?

        The last time it was raised in the UK refusal to lower the age of consent to 14 were the conservatives who were opposed with disgust.

        Anti-feminism was a political stance who become a personal obsession of TheAntiFeminist (the pun is in the name) for years that has become a snowball rolling down who dragged you and others into extreme anti-feminism, the rest of the anti-feminists simply reject TAF because anti-feminism is antisex with minors.. BUT He’s will deny this because is emotionally attached to feminists. It’s like someone who hates something so much or someone who can’t ultimately shuns it because they’ve already become part of it.

      • holocaust21 says:

        The official act in which the age of consent was lowered: http://www.justiceservices.gov.mt/DownloadDocument.aspx?app=lp&itemid=29057&l=1

        The name is: “Gender-Based Violence and Domestic Violence Act, 2018”

        Anon, to answer your points. Feminism is a term that a lot of women get behind because at its most basic supports a sort of “I’m a woman, I’m a victim against an evil male patriarchy” narrative. I do think that man-hating mindset feeds into raising the age of consent. We definitely see it being mostly feminists who feed all round rape hysteria and anti-feminists are against it. I think the reason why you see anti-feminists supporting the age of consent is because mostly they are either too scared or too stupid to admit that it should be abolished. Besides, I’m not aware of any anti-feminists actually raising the age of consent, mostly anti-feminists just use paedophilia accusations as a means of smearing their leftist opponents.

        But whatever most feminists or anti-feminists tend to support surely anti-feminism that is against the AOC is the best ideology? What good would a world be where there is feminism but no age of consent, and so only women can bang little boys? If a man tried to bang a girl or a “woman” then, in such a society, she could easily accuse him of rape and he’d be locked up for the rest of his life regardless.

  4. The Six Million Dollar Jew says:

    The mentality of A Voice For Men puzzles and fascinates me. All he need do is enter worldwide ages of consent in his favourite search engine. It simply is not true that 18 is the age in the vast majority of countires, unless you have a very odd definition of what the vast majority means.
    One could AGREE with this person about sex with minors and still see with ones own eyes that 18 is not the vast majority of the world and certainly not the vast majority of people. China alone detroys that with an AOC of 14 and not, repeat not, only for young people close in age.
    AVFM needs to simlpy look at the data with a calm and unprejudiced eye.

  5. Your Feminist Bakery says:

    Internet sexists complain of oppression and violence towards them: ‘They treat us as if we were women’.

    ‘Enough of calling someone misogynist just because he uses misogynist websites and reproduces his speech,’ says holocaust21.

    This morning hundreds of people again flooded the blog with complaining messages about the persecution they suffer for their political ideals.

    The user WomenAreScum wrote that ‘There is no right that, just by promoting a hate speech that calls for rape is equality, people lose respect for you in this way’. The user Nathan Larson aka ILikeRapeLittleGirls says he is right and added a personal experience: ‘The other day I was walking down the street with my “I Fuck my daughter aged 4” t-shirt and a recently tattooed nazi cross on my forehead when a foid started calling me a rapist piece of shit Is this normal?

    The different misogynist groups on the internet believe that political tension is to blame. One of their spokespersons, who uses the pseudonym ElliotRodgerLives, says that ‘We can’t be attacked in this way, we have the right to say whatever we want until we can get those foids and manginas into a gas chamber’.

    Finally, Incel1488 argue ‘There is only one thing that hates more than women, blacks, leftists, Muslims and fags: The intolerant.

    • holocaust21 says:

      None of what you claim we said is true, but I decided to post this anyway since at least your piece was entertaining. It seems the feminist trolls are getting slightly more intelligent!

  6. theantifeminist says:

    I’m surprised these trolls have the time to stop fapping to the kind of child porn that they tried to post to Eivind’s blog the other week, and actually leave these troll comments.

    BTW @Holocaust21 – I was reading Eivind’s blog – the reason I said you might be a ‘real paedophile’ is because you referred to me several times as a ‘paedophile advocate’, even when I firmly stated to you that I was no such thing, and you even listed me next to Tom O’Caroll, who most certainly is.

    I tried replying to you on Eivind’s blog but for some reason can’t. To briefly answer your question as to why we can’t build a movement. Yes, it’s fear. You may as well ask whey there is no democratic movement in North Korea.

    • holocaust21 says:

      So yeah, such is the power of the word “paedophile” that you desperately had to prove that you weren’t a paedophile by calling me a paedophile. Well, I think this pretty much explains why all the other men are frantically calling other blokes paedophiles then 🙂 In fairness though, I had to desperately prove that I wasn’t a real paedophile by criticising you for trying to spot paedophiles and oust them. So touche!

      Regarding the fear thing though, you’d have thought that Amos Yee might have made a dent. But maybe he just didn’t try hard enough. He didn’t get the whole world to hear the fact that he’s a paedophile supporter. On the other hand, the whole world has now heard of Milo Yiannopoulis and his feminist bashing, so he’s made his dent, and Jordan Peterson is just about there now too, and will hopefully do better as Milo seemed to collapse under the weight of his own internal contradictions (in fact, despite him advocating that age of consent laws are ridiculous, he’s now making some book claiming that he’s a child sex abuse victim of priests. What a twat).

  7. theantifeminist says:

    Well if you want to call both yourself and myself a ‘paedophile activist’ and put me next to Tom O’Caroll (who not only is a real paedophile and a real paedophile activist, but a pro feminist), then I’m not sure why you get upset if you get described as a paedophile in return. Such is the power of the term paedophile and the fear it generates I guess, even to those who identify themselves (and others) as ‘paedophile activists’.. 🙂 If you think I’m being a paedocrite in claiming you’re something I’m not, then I understand that, but all I was doing was saying – ‘If you want to identify as a peadophile, great, I’m not one’. I don’t know anything about you other than your blog but I doubt if you’re any more or less of a ‘paedophile’ than me or Eivind. However, this attempt of yourself, Eivind, and Tom Grauer to ‘defuse’ the accusation of ‘paedophile activist’ by embracing it (together with real paedophile activists such as O’Caroll), seems terribly misguided to me.

    I’m afraid of the term paedophile in so much I’ve spent ten years on a blog trying (admittedly vainly) to distinguish between real paedophilia (the obsessive preference for pre-pubescent girls) and the normal, universal male sexual attraction to teenage girls (of any age). I understand the logic of trying to ‘defuse’ the term ‘paedophile’ or the accusation of us being ‘paedophile advocates’ but it seems that you and Eivind (under the ‘inspiration’ of Tom Grauer) are doing it in a very clumsy manner, as well as not respecting the wishes of others who have stood shoulder to shoulder with you for years. Amos Yee is a brave guy and talks a lot of sense, but he’s an aspie paedophile and a feminist who agrees with the #metoo movement. Such people are genuinely surprised when they get beaten up in shopping malls or kicked off YouTube. I would also distinguish between him and Milo or Jordan Peterson.

    Maybe I am a coward, but personally I’m not prepared to die on my sword for people like Amos Lee, or ‘gally’ or ‘feldmarshall’, who would rather hate or hurt me or you or Eivind than the feminist creatures who are responsible for their misery. That to me, is not building a movement, and I can’t think of any more degrading way to sacrifice oneself to a political cause. Obviously there is a crossover between male sexualism and the persecution of real paedophiles simply because feminists have distorted the meaning of terms such as paedophilia in order to criminalize normal male sexuality. However, I really don’t see the point of choosing to put the hopes of limiting further raises in the age of consent (as I and another stated above, the age of consent is still 16 or even lower in most countries in the world), with those who want to see sex with 5 years olds made legal etc. (I don’t mean to suggest I don’t want the age of consent lowered below 16, just that realistically even a real movement could only hope to limit further legislation in the next decade or more).

    To sum up, maybe the reason men are going around accusing each other of being ‘paedos’ is because feminists have distorted the meaning of paedophilia to cover normal male attraction to teens which every man on Earth (apart from real perverts) shares. If you think the answer is to identify as a ‘paedophile activist’ that’s fine, but I have a right not to be identified in such a manner, and I don’t think that makes me a paedocrite.’ Again, it seems an act of submission rather than defiance. I still believe my philosophy to be right and one that sticks to the truth. Attraction to teens is not paedophilia, it’s not ‘ephebophila’ (or Eivind’s new term ‘akryphilia’ or whatever – Jesus wept) it’s just male sexuality, healthy and normal. Please stop forcing labels such as ‘paedophile advocates’, ‘ephebophiles’, ‘MAPS’, ‘Akryphiles’ (Jesus wept), on to the rest of us, or you and Eivind will be having a competition to see who is the last ‘male sexualist’ in a movement of one. Similarly, putting feminist anti-porn attitudes and such rubbish at the core of the ‘manifesto’.

    • holocaust21 says:

      Well dude I dunno what to say. You’re obviously sensitive to it but I wasn’t really thinking when I called you and everyone else a paedophile activist. You’ll be called a paedophile anyway by certain other groups, so me adding fuel to the fire shouldn’t make too much difference. But I’ll keep in mind that you are definitely NOT a paedophile activist 🙂

    • kukumi says:

      MAP is a sociopolitical term, not really a clinical one. And, when I mentioned hebephilia and others, I linked to an article on Reason.com, where it’s explained that cronophilias are about life stages, not fixed ages. And hebephilia/ephebophilia aren’t clinical terms, they do not refer to pathology. Out of all chronophilias, only pedophilia (and nepiophilia, by extension) are considered sick. There’s plenty of psychologists, philosophers and social workers who are more liberal who would agree that attraction to adolescents, pubescent or not, is widespread, too common to be considered sick. That being said, hebephilia and ephebophilia were never meant to be used as clinical, pathologizing terms. They tried to do so, indeed, in 2011, but academia opposed to it, practioners opposed to it, people in the forensic field opposed to it and the proposal to pathologize hebephilia was defeated. And I made it clear in the original text that hebephilia and ephebophilia aren’t illnesses. And I think that the pedophilia’s days in the DSM are numbered too.

      A chronophilia doesn’t have to be a minority behavior to be considered as such. It’s like heterosexuality: it’s the most common form of sexual attraction. Hebephilia is probably the most common form of sexual attraction in men, I can concede that. What I tried to say is that a chronophilia doesn’t need to be something minoritary to be considered such, so much that teleiophilia (attraction to adults), mesophilia (middle-aged) and gerontophilia (elders) also exist. None of those imply illness or minority. It’s just like heterosexuality.

      I think you are inclined to think that the term “chronophilia” is negatively-charged, which would make “hebephilia” negatively-charged as well. Neither is true. They are just neat names put onto things, not value tags. They just exist because we need to have a name for those things, just like how we named heterosexuality. How would you call them?

  8. 42546146 says:

    According to all the male sexualists (except holocaust) that I have found, vegans are assholes, tofu makes you fag, vegan children become autistic (Eivind Berge facepalm) etc.

    In fact, a few weeks ago I was reading a guy who said that teenagers were ok, feminists are the culprits of pedohysteria etc. and I thought I’d send him a message to invite him, and then he say that “tofu makes you fag”. How do you want me to have something to do with people like that?

    Another who writes in favor of going out with teenage girls in Incels.me, then says he eats meat because he likes it, that’s even an argument? so is ok too if he kills kids if he likes it, right?

    That pseudoscientific (I think is from antivegan hysterics of the alt-right) crap that vegan chidren become autistic is the same crap that vaccines make you autistic.

    How come people so smart and moral for that are so idiotic and immoral in another?

    I think they think that fucking teenagers is like eating animals: “a natural need and a human right threatened by left-wing feminists.”

    Don’t understand the difference between doing innecesary harm (exploiting animals) and doing no harm (fuck willing teenagers).

    But they don’t reason, they just think ‘eating tofu makes you a fag’ and they eat meat and milk full of female hormones, what an irony!

    And a lot of insults, I’ve been insulted everywhere, and for no reason, I just say ‘vegan’ on Tom Grauer’s blog and a fool (who looks like one of the alt-right) who supports rape (literally rape because all women “deserve it”) and racist goes and insults me a random garbage, that free.

    I think it was the same cretin who said that being against raping women is something that only “vegan butchers” are against.

    Why are all those who admit their attraction to teenagers directly idiots? or people who believe that by admitting something taboo they can then do as they please.

    Even without this, this attraction brings together the worst of the human race: pro rapists, pro child sexual abuse, pro killing and enslaving women and children etc.

    Why? Because only who are so abnormal and reject social norms can go to the supreme taboo and admit their attraction to minors, so 99% are amoral cretins.

    According to Nathan Larson you have to rape prepubescent girls just because your genes and instinct ask for it, just like your genes and instinct ask for eating a hamburger to recharge your sperm to rape more prepubescent girls. No matter the rights of children, women and animals, only theirs, the (white?) human male. So they are right, tofu makes you fag.

    I don’t write anymore because I’m mentally exhausted, I think I’ve already made it clear, this shit sucks.

    • holocaust21 says:

      You could start your own blog and website and your own cult call it “Vegan Bangs Teens” 🙂

    • theantifeminist says:

      I’m not a vegan but I’ve been a vegetarian since early childhood. I was also active in the animal rights movement as a young teen. Meat eating and the slaughter and suffering beyond imagination that accompanies it is certainly an abomination. The reason why I’m not vegan is firstly health fears, as well as I really don’t see the need. I buy only free range eggs etc. It seems veganism, especially when it becomes a cult, is crossing into the same kind of warped virtue signalling ‘rights’ path as that which created the ‘child protection’ industry. How do you justify refusing to eat eggs if the hens weren’t mistreated? Oh, because the hens are not ours to ‘exploit’ etc etc. Isn’t that line of reasoning familiar to somebody opposed to high age of consent laws? The same left-wing animal rights loons think it’s more important to bring in laws against bestiality and even viewing bestiality videos, while millions of animals die horrific deaths for burgers and sausages to be swallowed down and turned into human excrement every second.

      • 234143411 says:

        I’m going to write some long texts, because since they consume me time, I only ask you to read them carefully, the minimum that deserves someone who uses time in you is respect. I say this because most people misunderstand what I say or simply ignore my text, and as you will see my time is limited. I have no problem writing this if it serves a positive purpose.

        It would be good to use you for my pleasure if you have not been “mistreated”? you, like all sentient animals have interests that deserve to be respected, such as freedom (we all want not to be used by others) as well as preserving life (which you understand and that’s why you’ve taken the step of being a vegetarian).

        I do not defend sex with teenagers because they have not been “mistreated” for my sexual enjoyment (that argument is used by real child molesters (of real children), in this case it is not a feminist trick) but because they are beings who deserve the same rights that I have as an adult: the right to sexual agency, the right to make one’s own decisions (freedom) etc. There is no moral difference between an adult and an teenager (a young adult) so their discrimination is immoral, the same with humans (animals) and other animals.

        That one crime (or immoral act) is worse or better than another does not take away what it is: something equally reprehensible. If bestiality is an abuse because animals cannot consent then it is logical and coherent to ask for its eradication, it doesn’t matter if it is even more aberrant to turn a pig into Vienneses sausages. Murder is worse than rape and that’s why we don’t say “well, instead of pursuing acts of rape, let’s use the time to prevent murders” which unfortunately seems to be what holocaust, the RoK and Paul Elam guys and all those people are asking for.

        Prohibiting (and punishing with jail even more) the mere possession of data is disgusting, including child porn and bestiality videos, period, in that I agree 100% with each and every one of you. But most vegans believe in what the feminist society says and directly most are hard feminists, why? A vegan is someone who has an ethic about exploiting animals, nothing more, can be an ignorant imbecile in every other aspect.

        Of course I will never join any “anti-zoophile” or “anti-pedophile” campaign (neither the real nor the feminist definition), because I know they do it with oppressive intent because they obey feminism and not really to protect any animal or human child, although most believe they are actually saving children and animals.

        Yes, we talk about consent, rape, sexual abuse and all those things like feminists. Feminist narrative? or simply empathic narrative? That line of thinking has nothing to do with riffraff like the child protection industry, that makes me an anti-speciesist and anti-ageist, which are noble struggles no matter who says otherwise.

        If veganism is now full of feminists and other cultural marxists, it will be because feminism has kidnapped it like a thousand things before: socialism, ecologism, atheism, etc. If a vegan attacks male sexuality/underage/teenage sex has nothing to do with veganism but with the incoherence of defending some rights and attacking others, if you see it that’s just another incoherent asshole, that’s what happens.

        One could say that atheism is a scourge to male sexuality because they have been for years with their narrative of “child sexual abuse” in religions, but if I don’t believe in any god I am an atheist and atheism suige being equally valid. The same with veganism.
        If this modern “veganism” sucks then we ignore the word “veganism” and its movement BUT simply don’t use for our pleasure other beings just because haven’t been lucky enough to be born homo sapiens like us, okay?

      • 234143411 says:

        About the “free range eggs” I thought like you did years ago, but I’ll explain why I changed:

        It’s just bacause that we wouldn’t have to eat eggs (or milk or anything) for health reasons and for not having any reason to do so.

        Eggs are the period of a hen, nothing more and nothing less, would you eat the period of a human woman? The egg only has proteins and cholesterol, it has nothing that you need for your body than the proteins that have plant foods such as nuts and seeds, tofu, seitan and so on. In fact with a small amount of nuts and seeds I get all the protein I need, and without cholesterol.


        ““It is the position of the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics that appropriately planned vegetarian, including VEGAN, diets are healthful, nutritionally adequate, and may provide health benefits for the prevention and treatment of certain diseases. These diets are appropriate for all stages of the life cycle, including pregnancy, lactation, infancy, childhood, adolescence, older adulthood, and for athletes.”

        You would see it right to have human women on “free range” farms to put their period? the slavery of a lifetime is worth it for a omelette? the only thing that changes is the size of the cage or the “free range” of the concentration camp, those hens when they are already burst from laying so many eggs will take them to the slaughterhouse, it is even less cruel to kill them directly without slavery. If you don’t care about females, the male chicks are crushed or gassed because they can’t lay eggs, they are killed because they are male!

        Do you think that’s fair? the injustice and oppression that you live for being a heterosexual man justifies ignoring the other injustices?

        the only reason is the species, it’s just speciesism, we have been educated to see other species as different and do not deserve the same value as us.

        Just as we are now being educated to see teenagers as different, not as equals who deserve the same rights. And they also educate us to hate men as oppressors of women. Feminism is wrong because discriminates by gender and age!

        Anyway I tell you again that a position is right or wrong regardless of who defends them, no matter if each and every vegan is anti-human anti-male feminist scum etc. If the ethics of veganism (using animals is wrong) is right, then it is right, and it is your moral duty not to exploit those who don’t exploit you.

  9. A. Different Anon says:

    An article demonstrating the state of affairs in Australia:


    ‘Judge Phillip McCann also criticised Crown prosecutors on Thursday over their handling of David Robert Fallon’s case, after he was found to have had images of young girls on his laptop and storage devices earlier this year.


    He said the naked images of the 17-year-old were clearly offensive and that the girl in question had been exploited.

    But he said many of the other images in his possession were not offensive and not pornographic.

    “It seems to me that the Crown’s submission predicates that innocent photographs of any female in her bathers or underwear or gym gear are potentially pornography. In the sense of sexualised and offensive,” he said. “This is an impossible proposition to accept.”‘

    • GivenUpOnSociety says:

      Words cannot express how PATHETIC these weak, spineless men– by which I mean ALL MEN, these days– come across when they use the language of feminism: “sexualised”– what the fuck does that mean?

      What a pathetic word!

      Men DESERVE their fate, to make do with miserable, tired and ageing femihags, because it was MEN who let feminism happen.

      You make your bed and LIE in it!

  10. theantifeminist says:

    I remember there was recently a Dutch ‘pedo party’ (even though they only wanted Dutch law to go back 10 years to where it was – porn from 16 and an age of consent of 12) that campaigned in the elections there but quickly got shut down. One of their other manifesto pledges was to make it illegal to eat meat.

  11. Stop Feminism! says:

    You have to make a post about this or something to denounce this evil feminist:

    “It was after 1996’s Beautiful Girls that Portman grew reluctant to accept roles where her character was a sexualized youngster. In an interview with Guardian feature writer Simon Hattenstone asked if Portman was aware that because of them she was a “paedophile’s dream”? Portman nodded a bit uncomfortably, stating that it “dictated a lot of my choices afterwards ‘cos it scared me…it made me reluctant to do sexy stuff, especially when I was young”.”

    “And there’s a surprising preponderance of that kind of role for young girls. Sort of being fantasy objects for men, and especially this idealised purity combined with the fertility of youth, and all this in one…so I definitely shied away from it.”


    “During the 2018 Women’s March in Los Angeles, she spoke about the “sexual terrorism” she experienced that began when she was thirteen years old after the release of Leon: The Professional. She told the crowd; “I understood very quickly, even as a 13-year-old, if I were to express myself sexually, I would feel unsafe. And that men would feel entitled to discuss and objectify my body to my great discomfort.” She drew attention to the #MeToo movement stating her first ever piece of fan mail, was a rape fantasy between her and the male fan, and that her local radio station created a countdown until her eighteenth birthday when she would be legal to sleep with.”


    • holocaust21 says:

      Shame that. Leon: The Professional was a good movie and I’ve previously written about it here: https://holocaust21.wordpress.com/2016/11/03/leon-a-truly-antifeminist-movie/

      I guess it will soon be illegal to possess or something. Natalie Portman is certainly one fucked up narcissistic bitch. She makes her multi millions by sexualising herself and then complains about it? What next, will we have Hitler conquering the world, killing all the Jews, and then complaining about it?

      Why women think it’s such a great thing to become a man-hating feminist is anyones guess.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.