May 14, 2017
I wrote this at my phone a couple of days ago:
That's the address of a New York Times article from May 11, 2017.
This is a picture of part of the article:
The conglomerate wants child molestation to be legal, so it made sure that he advanced politically and was elected.
Marine Le Pen was also able to advance because of the conglomerate's exploitation of her name; is that accurate to say?
Sure, I'm the joke. That's me; joke of the century. Unlike the conglomerate, I'm so TRIVIAL, willing to jettison all principle for my own selfish ends, and that's also why I deserve to be HOMELESS. That's what both the self-righteous and the evil are saying about me, isn't it?
Of course it's being portrayed as a feminist issue.
Feminism is so suddenly fashionable, because year after year I'm pursued by rich and/or powerful men, which partly has only happened because they haven't succeeded at sleeping with me. It's so FEMINIST, what's happened to me. "No doesn't mean no; it means hard to get." The essence of feminism. Is the sarcasm evident, or should I spell it out?
Lots of dirty old ladies out there. People don't talk about female sex offenders, unless they're saying "Lucky teenage boy," which they shouldn't. Setting aside the dubious questions of teenage age, there are women who molest children. It's a sex crime for which women are not stymied by their lack of physical size. Also, they are much less often suspected and people are even less willing to arrest and punish them than they are to arrest and punish men.
Female equality to men starts with recognizing that we are all human in all of our aspects; the positive and the not positive. Men can physically impose their will more frequently, and also the world has been male-dominated for so long that men have the advantage socially, financially and politically, but that doesn't mean that the things that propel evil behavior are not as much a part of human nature for women as they are for men.
You can't equalize the genders by portraying women as naturally morally superior to men. If women are going to have the rights that men have, they also have to have the responsibilities that men have. I have said that since 2010.
Sure, it has nothing to do with me, and his ability to be elected had nothing to do with the conglomerate's agenda.
Dear G-d, please no. Not the Obamas.
For everyone who doesn't know what "the Clinton White House" means, those are the years 1993-2001. Ms. Pisar must have worked there during some or all of those years, which were before the conglomerate happened and before anyone famous had heard of me. However, it can't be a coincidence that the New York Times asked to interview her for this article.
The years 2010 to 2017 are fraught with journalistic failure. The failure to be accurate. The failure to be ethical. The failure to to be honest. The failure to be empathetic. The failure of distorting the news to promote bullying and crime. The failure to respect boundaries. The failure to recognize the fundamental principles of decency. The failure of deliberately hurting society. The failure of encouraging the worst of people. The provoking of hysteria.
Also, what about the conglomerate's 7 years of accusations that I'm a manstealer?
The President of France destroyed a marriage and that's all right because he met his future wife when he was 15 and she was 39 and the conglomerate wants everyone to accept child molestation as being normal? Suddenly, it's feminist to be a homewrecker? It's feminist when you say it is? It's feminist when a man wrecks someone's marriage? All it means is that he knew what he wanted and had the courage to pursue it? Is that what you're saying?
I'm a bitch and a slut who deserves to be illegally videotaped, to be harassed, to be threatened, to be homeless, even though I have never tried to break up anyone's relationship, and have strenuously protested when people wanted to break up their own relationships to date me, and the President of France is a brave, smart mf? Is that what you're saying?
She's still the object; do you not recognize that? She's not all that threatening to sexist convention. It has nothing to do with her thinking that she has the right to make the decisions for her own life, which is the crux of the conglomerate's hatred of me. She was a female pursued by a male, and it seems that she was quite passive about being the object of his pursuit. He called her every day? She couldn't change her phone number? She felt that they needed to have long conversations about it?
"Mais non!"
"Mais si!"
"Mais non! Stop calling me or I'll get a restraining order. I'm a married woman and you're getting on my nerves!"
"Mais-"
"Non!"
La Fin.
Copyright, with noted exceptions, L. Kochman, May 14, 2017 @ 9:41 a.m.
