You are currently browsing the category archive for the ‘children’ category.

I’m very happy to see some gains for Dylan Farrow.

(“The low buzz of controversy that’s hummed beneath the filmmaker’s career for 25 years is becoming a roar.”)

As I have written here before, I believe her. And more people do too now, and the awareness of her case and story and the problems regarding the problematic investigations, the disappearance of evidence, the behind-the-scenes manipulations by Woody, and the fact that she was wrongly disbelieved simply because Allen is one of the biggest names in Hollywood is all being rethinked by some people, who are also asking themselves if she isn’t telling the truth and going up against an enormously powerful but nevertheless guilty pervert.

Dylan Farrow on speaking out against Woody Allen: “I thought things would change”

She recently tweeted: It’s Sunday. Four years ago, at the Globes in 2014, Woody Allen was awarded the Cecil B. DeMille award for lifetime achievement. Four years ago I decided enough was enough and wrote an open letter detailing the abuse I sustained at the hands of Woody Allen. /1 I thought it would make a difference. I thought things would change. I learned quickly (and painfully) that my optimism was misplaced. His time wasn’t up. /2

Dylan Farrow, along with her brother Ronan, has continued to speak out against Allen, most recently in a December 7 LA Times op-ed entitled “Why has the #MeToo revolution spared Woody Allen?”


You can see that this is a very divisive case that polarizes people just by reading the comments to every article that comes out on her case. Vox had a very good article with a long recap and recent developments on people’s perceptions of the case:

Why Woody Allen hasn’t been toppled by the #MeToo reckoning — yet

One of the reasons that people are easily polarized, and that the above article doesn’t mention is that the overwhelming majority of the people are never going to read in-depth all that happened with the case – all the documents, all the testimonies published, all the articles, all the comments, etc. And this makes a huge difference. If you just read one or two articles – which is the most most people will ever do – there is so little information. It’s like a jury that doesn’t sit through an entire trial, but just is given a few paragraphs of information and is then asked to make a decision. Of course, it’s going to be biased or a big guess – even if in the right direction.


“Dylan linked her argument to the way that Weinstein and other powerful sexual assaulters in Hollywood had been protected:”

Although the culture seems to be shifting rapidly, my allegation is apparently still just too complicated, too difficult, too “dangerous,” to use Lively’s term, to confront.

The truth is hard to deny but easy to ignore. It breaks my heart when women and men I admire work with Allen, then refuse to answer questions about it. It meant the world to me when Ellen Page said she regretted working with Allen, and when actresses Jessica Chastain and Susan Sarandon told the world why they never would.

It isn’t just power that allows men accused of sexual abuse to keep their careers and their secrets. It is also our collective choice to see simple situations as complicated and obvious conclusions as a matter of “who can say”? The system worked for Harvey Weinstein for decades. It works for Woody Allen still.


Indeed. Many people who say they are against child abuse and sexual violence are in actuality, frauds. They are never taken to task on their beliefs and attitudes that support these violence systems.



And, good news:

Anonymous hackers take out darkweb child porn sites – and leak 381,000 email addresses

That is a lot of addresses! Just horrible.

“Troy Hunt of HaveIBeenPwned says that 21% of the addresses used match information from previous leaks – suggesting they are people’s ‘real’ email addresses, rather than ‘burner’ addresses used to conceal people’s identity.”

And which leads us the very same question this commenter asked:

Rich Rochy Rochester

Shame the FBI/CIA don’t bother doing the same. Good on them.

Indeed, why is it that an anonymous hacker had to do this? Where was the police? Although I know there are some police units that do this kind of work, nothing on this magnitude, insofar as what I have seen reported. And why don’t the military take out child porn sites? And as another commenter, Rico Bobby, replied:

Because it would implicate their bosses.. and themselves

And not only that, their main job is committing mass murder of innocent poor people of color abroad.

In any case, great job by these hackers and thank you, from me.


Look at this case (Gay parents fight for custody with surrogate in Thailand – The Telegraph UK). Not only at the case, but also how it’s framed by Western media.

It’s about two grotesque homosexual pigs who wanted to use a Thai woman as a mule for carrying a baby that they were then going to take away from the mother at the end – that is, surrogacy:

“The gay couple went to court today in a high-profile custody battle in Thailand with a surrogate mother who is trying to keep the child after discovering their sexual orientation.

Gordan Lake, an American and Manuel Valero, his Spanish husband – both 41 – have been unable to leave the country with Carmen, the baby girl, for over a year because the surrogate has refused to sign the documents that allow the infant to obtain a passport.”

She claims she was never told the baby was to be given to two homosexual pigs. Quite possible if you ask me. What’s my position on surrogacy? There may be some very unusual case of surrogacy where I may even consider it perhaps acceptable. But anything involving homosexual pigs is not it.

So, without more info, here’s my guess. Since all of this surrogacy business is about money, I can well imagine the “agency” lied to the Thai woman (or never told her, which amounts to the same) about who the baby was for.

Then that mother, who does not have the mind of a pig, discovers to her horror that her beautiful baby girl is to be given to two deformed and perverted men, who hate having a healthy relationship with a woman, and who would deprive the girl of her real mother and of a step-mother as well.

The Telegraph then reports that the  Thai mother gave birth, but now thinking of the well-being and the human rights of the baby, refused to sign off the baby.

So the homosexual pigs stole the baby from the surrogate mother and went into “hiding” – whatever that means. An underground Thai network of baby smugglers?

The couple has been living in hiding with Carmen and Alvaro, their two-year-old surrogate child for 14 months fearing the baby will be taken from them.

They criminally stole the baby from its real mother. Who did not want to part with the baby. But the case is even more complicated, because this Thai woman just carried the baby, since the egg for the baby came from an anonymous woman!

All because these turds of homosexuals refuse to go deal with their profoundly deformed psychologies and treat their sexuality problems.

But there’s more:

The case is complicated by the fact that Thai law does not recognise same-sex marriages and also by a new law that bans commercial surrogacy, which took effect after baby Carmen’s birth.

Thailand had been a popular destination for foreign couples seeking surrogacy services, partly because of loose regulations and low costs compared with some other countries.

In other words, as other people have remarked, the rich West has now gone beyond treating third world people like dogs merely for cheap labor, they must now colonize the wombs of these unfortunate women, and make them into mules for carrying the babies that they are too perverted to conceive through a healthy man-woman relationship.

Lastly, look at the framing by the wealthy Western media – who’s portrayed as the victim? The two privileged homosexual pigs.

The paper reports Gordan Lake alleges they never lied to the surrogate mother. Lake said:

…he and his husband were always the “intended parents”.

“We’re the people that wanted to have a child,” he said. “We just want to go home and we just want to be a family. A normal boring family.”

Well, we have news for the homosexual pig. A normal, boring family doesn’t use poor women in Thailand as mules to carry their fabricated babies. A normal, boring family doesn’t rip off a baby girl from the woman who carried her. It doesn’t engage in criminal activity in a third world country to steal babies.

And look at the argument they are presenting:

The couple’s lawyer, Rachapol Sirikulchit, said he was confident they will be awarded custody and take the baby with them to Spain, where they live.

“Baby Carmen has the right to be with her biological father, who supports her financially and has cared for her since she was born,” Mr Sirikulchit said. “The priority is to consider the benefit for children and that they have the right to live with their biological parent.”

In other words, money. Come buy children from the wombs of poor women and take them away to do whatever your perverted mind decides.

I hope the Thai government will not be bought by these two gay turds. Alas, as we all know, money does speak loudly in a poor country. And women and children have no fundamental human rights if there’s a gay or lesbian pig wailing about something they want. In Western liberalism, is there a right for a baby girl to have a mother? Never if homosexual pigs are involved. All that matters is that she be given things (money), which the two homosexual pigs have.

A new chapter of how nasty neo-colonization is: now at the level of a poor woman’s womb.


End of the afternoon. She starts complaining she’s tired and wants to go to sleep. To sleep? After napping for three hours in the afternoon! Is she coming down with a cold? I suggest that we sit down and I make her some drawings. She is much more intent on going to bed but I succeed in convincing her.

“What shall I draw you? A pretty doll? Sit here beside me and I’ll draw you a doll. We start with the head, the eyes, the hair. This is her dress, her arms, her legs, her shoes. Now let’s add some white socks with  a little lace on top. Isn’t that nice?”

She looks on without saying anything.

“There, done! What shall I draw you now?”

“Spiderman,” deadpans the three and a half year old.

“Spiderman!” I chuckle silently surprised at her request. That’s what she had been thinking all along. “OK, Spiderman it is.” So I begin drawing Spiderman from memory, his suit a blue and red blur. “Is his suit blue or red?”

“Blue,” she says.

“Let’s color it blue then.” I can’t picture his face mask very clearly. I draw something like a red mask around the eyes. I thought there was red in there somewhere. To change from all the blue, I make his hands red.

“No, they are also blue,” she corrects me.

Well, too late now. Doesn’t look bad with the red contrast. Spiderman is done. On to the next one. “So what now? A dog, a teddy bear?”


Enter your email address to follow this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

%d bloggers like this: