Train departure

Everybody jump on the rape train – Daily Mail’s Jennifer Smith is the conductor

Someone just emailed me a link to a Daily Mail article by Jennifer Smith reporting on the “torrent of death threats and sexist remarks,” (apparently one comes with the other) that was allegedly unleashed on journalist Carolina Criado-Perez after she advocated for images of women being placed on British bank notes. A man and a women have been arrested and will soon be charged. They either tweeted something offensive, or threatening, or sexist, or something else altogether. The article did not say if the woman or the man threatened to rape Criado-Perez.

It is really hard to tell what precisely is alleged given that Smith did not cite the content of any of the tweets.

That is correct. An entire article in Daily Mail about criminal proceedings against people for making illegal tweets, only it did not include, you know, the tweets. To make matters worse Smith rambled through her piece never quite making up her mind whether the tweets were actual threats, or offensive or sexist or all three. She just kind of traded the terms back and forth like she was in a creative noun contest, and to make sure readers were confused as to what actually happened. That tends to happen when you don’t tell them what actually happened. Or when you are making it up as you go along.

The article was also replete with other forms of confusion, not all of which was Smith’s fault, but which she could have clarified a little more by bothering to ask the right questions. For example, this passage:

Detectives ruled there was insufficient evidence to prosecute one suspect, while another who is accused of sending offensive messages to Stella Creasy MP will avoid sentencing as prosecution ‘would not be in the public interest’.

Hmm, what could be in the public interest here? Maybe not prosecuting people who have not committed crimes? Maybe not turning satire or internet taunting into a legitimate rape threat only to find out that things like actual criminal codes and the like will get in your way if you want to prosecute someone?

Yeah, public interest. That’s the ticket. The public isn’t interested in it because it is pure bullshit.

The story is not a new one. It goes back several months before the Crown started to showboat the latest feminist outrage with the current witchhunt. Typhon gave it a brief treatment in a video back on August 1.

It is really hard to add anything here to what Typhon just pointed out. It is just a lot of obscure allegations about tweets that can be found by the millions all over the internet, and which are aimed at everyone and their brother. It is a part of modern life in the age of the internet. If you speak up about anything, someone will tweet you badly for it.

Most of us just get over it.  Feminists play it like a cheap violin. You can bet your ass some woman will be on a £100 note now that the feminists have figured out how to damsel their way into it.

It is time to add to the lexicon, and we might as well give credit where it is due. This technique of using damseling to achieve goals that are quite likely stupid or worthless, like choosing people to be on currency because they have a vagina, or raising a cool $160,000 to make YouTube videos about video games that you don’t even play can only be called one thing. A Sarkeesian.

I know, it is awkward, and it presents challenges. Am I really going to find myself typing words like Sarkeessianed, or Sarkeesianing? Well, yes, I am, because this is how third wave feminists are going to find support for their pet projects now that governments are starting to figure out just how much they cost. And now that white knighting and woman firsting is all the social rage, it will deliver in spades.

Want to raise a quarter mil to study the incidence of sexist remarks in Quentin Tarantino movies? Just start blogging and tweeting your intentions. When the inevitable jokester tweets that Tarantino should rape you, get the screen shot and tell your tearful story to Jennifer Smith. She’ll announce your KickStarter and the next thing you know you will be taking notes on Django Unchained from your cabana in Antigua.

Do the Sarkeesian. You could laugh right in the face of your most avid supporters and blow their money on cocaine and Stoly. They won’t even know the difference.

In this day and age, this is what we call being oppressed.


  • Bewildered

    Being oppressed has become a badge of honour !

    • Mr. Sungame

      Of course it has.
      Honestly it has been for almost 50 years now.

  • MrScruffles

    “They either tweeted something offensive, or threatening, or sexist, or something else altogether. The article did not say if the woman or the man threatened to rape Criado-Perez.”

    Given the continuous expansion of UK Law Enforcement powers, and coupled with the ease of which UK police are able to obtain gag orders, they didn’t necessarily have to issue a threat at all to be arrested and dragged through the court system.

  • SockfulofSand

    You can bet your ass some woman will be on a £100 note now that the feminists have figured out how to damsel their way into it.

    There already is.
    The Queen.

    • Mr. Sungame

      The Queen is only in power because of Patriarchy!
      Come to think about it… that is probably the only time it’s actually true too.

      So of course she doesn’t count when you look at the females on the notes.

  • Robert St. Estephe

    Histrionic personality disorder seems to get worse when you get two of HPD-sufferers together: a fake advocate/fake victim matched up with a fake journalist.

    Can’t these professional scammers be led toward a productive career where they actually get something accomplished (street cleaning, for example) rather than letting them take unearned pay from just mouthing familiar crap-headed babble and balderdash?

  • allyp_pt

    “A Sarkeesian.”

    Lol’d SO HARD!!!

  • MGTOW-man

    It is hard not to be pessimistic about our future. If only our predecessors would have paid attention to their inner voices telling them—but which they couldn’t perhaps quite put a finger on it— that something is wrong with this picture!

    It will get worse too. The only thing “good” to come of this worsening (if one is allowed to call it good) is that more and more people will join the ranks of MHRA’s due to the chaos, meanness, and punishment—for things we had nothing to do with and in fact changed for the women instead.

    There is no pleasing them. They’ll never be satisfied. They can’t actually BE men—not that they REALLY want to be. .

  • Mickster66

    It’s like feminism is one big false rape accusation.

  • UKMan

    Ironic that the feminist icon to appear will be Jane Austin – don’t her books revolve around women snaring suitable husbands?

    I read somewhere that a female icon was already on the cards with Bank of England – this was just a well timed PR stunt to secure a career in the lucrative feminist greivance industry.

    The fact that the Queen appears on all our money was conveniently forgotten.

    • Cylux

      It was Jane Austin on the £5 note, oddly enough. The BoE releases a few years in advance who’s going to be on what note come when, and it was about 2008 when they released who would be replacing Charles Darwin on the Tenner and who would be replacing on the fiver. Carolina Criado-Perez of course campaigned for a women to go on the tenner, so that when the BoE made it’s press statement regarding the fiver it could look like a compromise had been reached while not actually doing anything different from what it was actually going to do anyway.

    • Phil Davies

      Don’t forget, we also have “Betty Batter” on the £5 note?

  • Isaac T. Quill

    I’m Just relieved that any journalist at the Daily Mail has come anywhere near admitting that females can commit rape and even be threatening… moderately criminal even.

    Quote:” A man and a woman are to appear in court after sending threatening messages on Twitter to a woman campaigning for females to appear on banknotes. ” ….. says Jennifer Smith.

    Hell – come next year she may even mention women and agency in the same sentence …. and it won’t be about size zero models or getting a cleaner or Au pair in. P^)

  • prince_tybalt

    How the fuck do you do an article about someone’s publicly available 140 character tweet, and not include it in it?

    • The Real Peterman

      Isn’t the tweet on the public record now that it’s involved in a criminal proceeding?

      • Isaac T. Quill

        Yup – and don’t forget that USA law does not apply in the UK (Not the 51st State).

        Once legal proceedings are in the offing, UK media is semi gagged on what they can report. If the tweets are to be, or could be used as evidence, they now form part of court papers which can’t be published.

        Given the Hyperbole around journalist Carolina Criado-Perez and her self reporting and activities, there is a high level of interest from the public … so repeating tweets and linking then to speculative wording such as “A man and a woman are to appear in court after sending threatening messages on Twitter to a woman campaigning for females to appear on banknotes.”, well it’s a no no!

        There is no clear link from the court appearance to the alleged activity … but why would Journalists such as Jackie Smith and Carolina Criado-Perez let such realities get in the way of a well spun story?

        So many Feminist Journalists are making allegations of being contacted offensively via electronic media and always leaving the distinct impression lying about that it’s the Boys being mean to the Girls. When one media outlet has the story they all have to have it to retain market share and readers. Some call it the Mills and Boon Effect. Once one media outlet is doing a Bodice Ripper they all have to do one. If one paper is getting into 50 shades of grey they all need to be as colourful as possible to satisfy the media munching habits of the Emotively Obese who feed endlessly.

        Funny too how they keep ignoring findings on the issue of Cyber abuse and Harassment, such as the ECHO (Electronic Communication Harassment Observation) findings … which finds that 50% of cyber abusers are women, and just how nasty they can be, as well as the issues found to be of higher significance to men :

        * Electronic sabotage such as spamming and sending of viruses by one individual
        * Theft of my identity by one individual
        * One individual has impersonated you online
        * One individual subscribing me to services without my knowledge or permission
        * One individual purchasing goods and services in my name without my knowledge or permission
        * One individual sending or posting hostile material, misinformation and false messages about me
        * One individual tricking other users into harassing or threatening me (e.g. by posting messages)

        Odd how such facts and findings get missed!

        I do wonder why Smith and Criado-Perez find it so hard to find Facts and Figures in support of their published fears that all women will be raped by Twitter? Could it be that when the facts are looked at, you keep finding them Nasty Girls and the damage they is doing to men… and it just aint fitting their editors demands?

        The none stop damselling claims of alarm and distress are significant, as is white knighting by Police Officers, Crown Prosecution Service and various people seeking promotion via the Legal Hoopla Business which has become so very female centric and dominated in the back room admin.

        I keep wondering when these femme fatal journalists are going to do some “research” on a story, and not just blow hot air in the hope it inflates, conflates and even expands perceptions of competence or even professionalism. They do need to try and establish some form of a public quasi professional persona before claiming sex discrimination and seeking a tribunal settlement prior to maternity issues kicking in. You need to be able to claim lost career and opportunity to force a settlement over litigation – the bigger the fibs the bigger the settlement.

  • comslave

    Because Sarkeessian .

    There, fixed it for you.

    • Seele

      Comslave, it seems like “sarkeesian” is going to pass into the English language. Examples:

      She sarkeesianed her way into a promotion.

      She was never bullied; she just sarkeesianed it.

      Take no notice of her complaints, she’s a sarkeesian.

      This essay makes no sense, the points it raised sarkeesian each other.

      This is not a real charity; it is a sarkeesian for making money.


  • tallwheel

    Luckily, Sarkeesian already ends with “an”, like “American” or “Freudian”, so we can just use it like an adjective as is. Use like “Freudian slip”. ex. “Sarkeesian damseling”

    • Fredrik

      Hmm. Good point. We could reverse nounify the apparent adjective to “sarkees,” reverse singularize the apparent plural to “sarkee,” then verbify it to “sarkeese,” and from there the sky’s the limit. As in,

      Her bid for money and attention was blatantly sarkeesian. I can’t believe that such an obvious sarkee actually worked. Truly, she has raised the bar for sarkees, in terms of how much you can insult the public’s intelligence and still get paid. No one can sarkeese like she can. I wouldn’t want to get into a sarkeesing contest with her; I just don’t have the requisite narcissism, greed, and amorality to perform so sarkeesingly.

  • numbCruncher

    There’s no need to be so sarkeestic… 😉