These are pictures of noncontiguous parts of the first page of the New York Times' website:
________________
How dare the New York Times exploit even a discussion of nuclear war to say that I'm a bad person?
Also, everyone should be condemning "Split" as a horrible movie that reinforces stereotypes and public fears about mental illness. Yet, the article about it says that it's been the #1 movie for three weeks.
I'm going to be evicted from my apartment, because I said that there are illegal, hidden cameras in the apartment. Everyone around me in my nonvirtual life is treating me as if it's a delusion that the cameras are in the apartment. The New York Times is one of many media sources that has my phone hacked and that sees me in my apartment from tapping the signals from the illegal, hidden cameras. The New York Times is one of many media sources that has attacked me, ridiculing me every day since I moved to the apartment last year, with distorted references to what it sees in my apartment. The New York Times and other media sources have seen the ways that I have attempted to have even a shred of privacy in this totally degrading situation, how I turn the lights off and use my own bathroom in the dark, how I have a radio next to the toilet so that I can turn it on to cover as much as I can of toilet noise. No matter what I've done to cope with the voyeurism, the New York Times and other media sources have victim-blamed me for it, even though my being sexually harassed since 2010 by the New York Times and other media sources, corporations, celebrities, and many politicians and other people and institutions is what misled the people who started the videotaping in the bathrooms of a homeless shelter in Vermont in 2011 to think that there was nothing wrong with criminally invading my privacy and the privacy of every other homeless person at that shelter. Anyone who has a fundamental framework of morality would say that the conglomerate should have realized when the voyeurism in a place where people have a reasonable expectation of privacy started that the sexual harassment should stop, but it only got worse, as the conglomerate exploited the voyeurism to call me a slut and victim-blamed me for it so that I was subjected to voyeurism again and again, in homeless shelters, psychiatric units, gyms, and even my own home when I was finally able to obtain an apartment in 2013 after being homeless from 2011 to 2013. The conglomerate continues to ignore that hundreds of people have also gotten victimized by the voyeurism that the conglomerate has encouraged, and for which it has never taken responsibility.
All it would take is one person to tell the people whose information I have provided that it's not my delusion that there are hidden, illegal cameras in my apartment. That would stop my being evicted twice in a row because of objecting to being victimized by voyeurism in two apartments in a row.
Yet, "Split" is the #1 movie, although I don't know how it could be more obvious not only from statistics but also from how I have had to live for 7 years that the labels of mental illness predispose people to be targeted for horrible abuse much more often than they predispose people to commit horrible abuse.
Copyright, with noted exceptions, L. Kochman, February 6, 2017 @ 10:11 a.m./No code, and every other page and policy I have published about similar issues. I have said before that I publish copyright times to clarify the chronology of when things happen. I wrote code policies in 2011 because the conglomerate attacked me for every word that I wrote, but the policies are a weak defense against such vicious and trivializing people who have so much power.
