has been sentenced to life in prison [should have been death]
four-year-old Gavin, three-month-old Niall and three-month-old Noah in 2014-15
"she said she feared the brothers would grow up to abuse women, as she had been" [this is an attempt to manipulate by a mentally ill person. they default to playing the victim.]
"She also said she was depressed, and admitted she was jealous of the attention her husband paid to them, but not her or their now-eight-year-old daughter Hailey." [so she murdered the boys but not the girl]
"47-year-old Joseph Pilkington, also pleaded guilty to a misdemeanor charge of sexual imposition, for having sex with Brittany when she was underage. He had been her mother's long-time live-in boyfriend, and had raised Brittany as her step-father. He then impregnated her in 2009, when she was 17. They eventually married." [lol jerry springer shit. she SEDUCED her mom's BF. very likely has borderline personality disorder among other things.]
"The criminal investigation didn't begin until Gavin died in April 2015. Because of that investigation, Hailey and Noah were removed from her care. But when they were returned in August 2015, she killed Noah less than a week later."
"Her defense team had argued that she had suffered repeated sexual abuse and beatings as a child, and had also suffered lead poisoning, which may have left her brain damaged. "Brittany's brain is broken," attorney Kort W. Gatterdam said before sentencing on Tuesday. "And no one ever helped her."" [the only help for a woman like this is feet first into the wood chipper.]
For anyone who watched the Legion show remember this is what Sidney did when using her superpower to swap bodies with her mother while still something like 14-16.
She took on the image of her drunk and passed out mother, climbed in the shower with her mother's date, had sex with him, and then when wondered why he had "turned her to face the wall".
BECAUSE YOU WERE STANDING UP IN A SHOWER YOU STUPID FUCK!
Best part is the whole show ends with a massive time travel mission to prevent all the bad shit that happens to David/Legion from happening and even though they succeed it means absolutely for anyone else because none of them are affected by David/Legion until the very start of the series and by that point Sidney and everyone else are already massive fuck ups because of the above mentioned scene and other events that still happen!
lol jerry springer shit. she SEDUCED her mom's BF.
Wow. The helpless 37 year old man bears no responsibility for sticking his dick in the 17 year old girl he raised since he was nine. That's what you're going with?
I'm sure he was a totally upstanding guy up to that point, because no man has ever actually abused a stepdaughter. That's just lies told by evil women!
I'm not saying the woman isn't culpable for murdering her children. Everyone is ultimately responsible for their own actions, and life in prison is the least she deserves.
But this horrific tragedy didn't just drop out of the sky. It's a symptom of a diseased and dying society, and your amused "lol wimmen amirite?" attitude is just part of the sickness.
The helpless 37 year old man bears no responsibility for sticking his dick in the 17 year old girl he raised since he was nine. That's what you're going with?
She seduced him. And no, I am not "going with" the retarded straw man position you built of calling him helpless and having "no responsibility".
I'm sure he was a totally upstanding guy up to that point
He didn't murder anyone, dumbfuck. But your NPC programming has commanded you to see him fucking a LEGAL 17 year old girl [Ohio's age of consent is 16] as somehow worse than her murder of multiple helpless children.
And yes, men are vulnerable to seduction from scheming, evil women. If a hot, fresh cookie is jumping into your mouth begging you to eat it, it takes a lot of willpower not to bite down. The cookie bears more responsibility than you do.
because no man has ever actually abused a stepdaughter.
If he abused her, why did she seduce him and marry him and have numerous children with him? I didn't see any allegations from her that he abused her. Are you just assuming that without evidence because your NPC programming activated again? Why don't you get your emotions under control and start using logic and reason instead.
I'm not saying the woman isn't culpable for murdering her children.
LOL. The fact that you felt the need to point that out just shows how twisted and detached from reality your comment is.
But this horrific tragedy didn't just drop out of the sky.
So is she responsible for the murders she committed, or are you going to argue that she's just an innocent victim of her circumstances like a libtard? She didn't murder her children because she was "abused", although she may very well have been abused. Child abuse is very common. I'm sure 99.999% of child abuse victims do not go on to commit murder. Ergo, one does not cause the other. She is just a mentally ill psychopath who is trying to play the victim, and you're falling for it because you're a simp.
your amused "lol wimmen amirite?" attitude is just part of the sickness.
No, you are part of the sickness. You are a simp and an NPC. Your brain is broken and has been subverted by forces you don't even understand. I could hardly call you a human in anything but the most technical sense. People like you - weaponized NPCs who have succumbed like zombies to emotionally-driven propaganda - are what is truly wrong with modern society.
He didn't say she is not responsible for her crime. Just called you out on what I agree is a bad frame of a 36 year old man fucking his girlfriend's underage daughter.
Is he not responsible for that? I don't care if he seduced him. Are we not responsible for things even if a woman is being sexy? The moment a 14 year old winks at you, all social contract goes void?
There is no mutual exclusivity in terms of responsibility. There is no shortage of things everyone is responsible for, or any rule saying that overlapping responsibilities cancel out one another. She has proven to be a dangerous psycho as an adult and we are talking about the same person at age 14. I am sure her life is a trail of failed responsibilities and evil choices given the audacity it takes to play victim in a scenario where you've murdered your own children.
Still, nothing about that changes the responsibility of a 36 year old to avoid sexual contact with her as a 14 year old. In fact this story is like a real-life hyperbole, like a scary tall tale parents would tell their sons on a camping trip to scare them from growing up to be promiscuous.
I don't care if he seduced him. Are we not responsible for things even if a woman is being sexy?
That is indeed the case with a very large percentage of the world. I don't personally agree, but obviously reasonable people can disagree about sexual responsibility.
While I expect men to have a reasonable degree of self control, a seducer can quite easily break through a reasonable degree of self control. We all know "don't stick your dick in crazy" yet men do, in fact, stick their dick in crazy all the time because crazy girls tend to be good seducers.
When a man fails to resist seduction, it is a failure of weakness, not a failure of malice or intent. I see weakness as a far lesser problem than malicious intent. It's the same issue when you have a malicious scammer and a stupid scam victim. Neither are sympathetic. The scammer is worse.
He didn't say she is not responsible for her crime.
His argument in substance was to deflect her responsibility by trying to shift it to the father, purely because his creep factor is triggered. I reject that nonsense.
There is no mutual exclusivity in terms of responsibility.
There is for murder. She was solely responsible for her murders.
And why do you keep saying 14? Nothing in the article said there was evidence he was having sex with her at 14. It said 17.
What evidence, exactly, would satisfy you? Certainly nothing I have to say, but I'll try to explain why I'm so sure of it.
She's a psycho. Likely has BPD and other mental illnesses. Women like that are highly likely to exploit their sexual power to accomplish anti-social ambitions like "I'm going to steal my mother's boyfriend away".
Psychos are not generally born, though some people are more vulnerable, they are made through bad parenting. Women with BPD and other serious mental illnesses like this woman, generally got that way because of trauma in early childhood from bad parenting, which usually involves abuse, but can also come from neglect. The father didn't come into her life until she was older.
The fact that she committed murder shows she is an aggressor in personality type, not passive/submissive.
If the father was the aggressor, the odds of collapse of their little relationship would be far higher. The fact that they stayed together for many years and had a number of children, AND that she is crazy, tells me that he basically put up with her crazy, meaning she counterbalanced that with seduction and emotional manipulation.
If the father had been the aggressor, he would have tired of her soon enough and sought another victim as opposed to settling down for a prolonged period and having kids.
The fact that he was given a wrist slap plea deal to a misdemeanor was a tacit admission they had no case against him, which means they had no proof he was the aggressor. If it wasn't a high profile case he would have had the charges dropped. It's a Big Lie in US courts that the younger woman can NEVER be the aggressor, when in truth it is more often than not the case.
There's more, but that's some points off the top of my head. I don't expect you to understand or agree, but there are a lot of factors I am considering based on having a lot of knowledge regarding women in general and crazy women specifically. I have a high degree of certainty that I'm right.
Quite immaterial. Being a psycho or not has no relation whatsoever to your claim that "she seduced him".
The father didn't come into her life until she was older.
This has no relation whatsoever to your claim that "she seduced him".
The fact that she committed murder shows she is an aggressor in personality type, not passive/submissive.
Again, this crackpot pop psychology has no bearing whatsoever on your claim that "she seduced him". She sure knew how to be an aggressor against helpless infants. There is no evidence that you've presented that she knew how to be against a grown man.
If the father was the aggressor, the odds of collapse of their little relationship would be far higher
A collapse, by for example murdering his children? This once again is just an assertion that you're throwing out there.
If the father had been the aggressor, he would have tired of her soon enough and sought another victim as opposed to settling down for a prolonged period and having kids.
It's funny that you make up an entire backstory, motivations and all sorts of actions based on a headline. What you made up in no way relates to your claim that "she seduced him".
The fact that he was given a wrist slap plea deal to a misdemeanor was a tacit admission they had no case against him, which means they had no proof he was the aggressor. If it wasn't a high profile case he would have had the charges dropped. It's a Big Lie in US courts that the younger woman can NEVER be the aggressor, when in truth it is more often than not the case.
Whatever US courts do in no way relates to who in this specific instance was the "aggressor" as you say.
I don't expect you to understand or agree, but there are a lot of factors I am considering based on having a lot of knowledge regarding women in general and crazy women specifically. I have a high degree of certainty that I'm right.
I don't doubt that you do, as always. However, you have presented no evidence at all, let alone anything that would demonstrate your outright assertion that "she seduced him".
If you're going to be close minded, argumentative, and hostile, that's the last time I ever put any effort into explaining anything to you. Duly noted to just ignore you next time you hit me with a dO yOu hAvE a SoUrCe bRo??
It's not "closed-minded" to point out that you made an argument that you could not back up. And yes, if you're going to claim that "she seduced him", you need to back it up with receipts, not with "if not he would have tired of her".
"DUUUH you disagree with me therefore you are an NPC.." Brilliant.
He didn't murder anyone, dumbfuck. But your NPC programming has commanded you to see him fucking a LEGAL 17 year old girl [Ohio's age of consent is 16] as somehow worse than her murder of multiple helpless children.
Now who is making a strawman? Did I ever say what he did was worse?
fucking a LEGAL 17 year old girl
Legal is not the same as moral.
The cookie bears more responsibility than you do.
Fucking pathetic. The first step in being a decent man is taking responsibility for your actions, not blaming them on a "cookie jumping in your mouth."
Is this the kind of manliness you think will save western civilization from degeneracy?
If you can't stop yourself from fucking your own stepdaughter, you shouldn't be around children. Ever.
If he abused her, why did she seduce him and marry him and have numerous children with him?
Where is the accusation she seduced him?
Also, try looking up Battered Spouse Syndrome.
I didn't see any allegations from her that he abused her.
Maybe you should have read another article about it.
That abuse came at the hands of her mother’s boyfriend, Joe Pilkington, who later married Brittany.
Now I know you're just going to say she's lying, and maybe she is.
I just find it far less likely that she had a nice, healthy childhood and then suddenly decided to seduce poor, defenseless Good Guy Joe because of spontaneous pure evil.
So is she responsible for the murders she committed, or are you going to argue that she's just an innocent victim of her circumstances like a libtard?
Hey! Remember ten minutes ago when I wrote this?
Everyone is ultimately responsible for their own actions, and life in prison is the least she deserves.
What part of that was so difficult for you to comprehend, unemotional logic and reason guy?
Are you just butthurt about having your "women are evil, men are their victims" beliefs challenged?
men are to blame for everything, it is "manly" to put the blame for everything on men
I don't think I will, simp.
“She had a monster in her life, from the age of 9,” said Kort Gatterdam, one of her defense attorneys. “Being shown pornography, being raped, being raped repeatedly.”
Defense lawyers can say all kinds of made up bullshit at sentencing. If any of that was true and supported by the flimsiest of evidence, he would not have gotten a wrist slap misdemeanor. That same dumbfuck lawyer also claimed that his psycho client killed her kids because of lead poisoning. He was clearly just pulling shit out of his ass without any basis in fact or evidence.
Now I know you're just going to say she's lying, and maybe she is.
She didn't say it, did she? That article is also wrong, the father didn't get convicted of sexual battery, the other article correctly stated he only got a technical misdemeanor.
I just find it far less likely that she had a nice, healthy childhood
It's likely her mom was horrible, hence why she's so crazy. But by age 9 her mind was already formed. She didn't become crazy after that, she already was. There's no reason to believe the father made her that way.
Pay no heed. You're talking to a bit of a crazy person who also once said "you can't rape a prostitute". Other than that, he's OK, and he provides some welcome dissent on some topics.
EDIT: I mistakenly thought this was about Imp1. For dekachin, he's just a jerk with no other point than being a jerk, at least on the topic of women. I don't think he hates women as much as he is the stereotype of a "Republican who doesn't care about anything but his wallet".
I just find the "women are evil" delegation bizarre. How did they get that way?
That is what I'm trying to figure out. He says he had no bad girlfriend experiences, and that his mother is saintly, so it's anyone's guess. My hypothesis is that Imp is actually a woman who cut off her breasts, and now has a mutilated body - her only consolation being that she's not a woman because women are evil (FUCK YOU WOMEN).
Did they have abusive mothers? Absent mothers? A psycho girlfriend who ruined them for life? No interaction with women at all?
I think there may be a more prosaic reason. People read stuff online and think it reflects reality. You go out and all you read is "men screwed over in rape proceedings" and "women talking about how she wants to kill all men". The same mechanism poisons the minds of women into becoming feminists, and believing that men are "misogynsts" and that rapists are everywhere.
Or is their definition of "decent woman" limited to some unattainable submissive anime waifu that doesn't exist in the real world?
For him, one who has a cock I think.
It would actually be an interesting study.
He is a source of endless fascination. Particularly his rationalizations.
People read stuff online and think it reflects reality. You go out and all you read is "men screwed over in rape proceedings" and "women talking about how she wants to kill all men". The same mechanism poisons the minds of women into becoming feminists, and believing that men are "misogynsts" and that rapists are everywhere.
Agreed. The Internet made it easy to create bubbles of like-minded people, and ( bubbles + confirmation bias ) - dissent = ideological death spiral.
But Imp1 is a different category. Genuinely ill.
I knew a guy who was always unstable, then got into drugs and I think full blown schizophrenia.
He would talk about how he was receiving mystical knowledge from somewhere, and paranoid that shadowy forces were trying to get him because of it. He could not be reasoned out of his ideas, he just knew these things.
He eventually ended up in the psych ward of a state prison.
But even he was capable of talking about other things. Imp1... I've never seen anybody so completely obsessed with a single idea that every topic has to be made about that idea. Not only is it unhealthy, it's just freaking boring.
Agreed. The Internet made it easy to create bubbles of like-minded people, and ( bubbles + confirmation bias ) - dissent = ideological death spiral.
At some point, you're so self-brainwashed that you don't even need to stay in your bubble. Send Imp out in the real world, which is complex, and he'll still explain everything in terms of "women are trying to kill men".
Quite sad. Reminds me of the Nietzsche quote that he'll never forgive Christianity for what it did to Blaise Pascal. That is my view on the internet.
He would talk about how he was receiving mystical knowledge from somewhere, and paranoid that shadowy forces were trying to get him because of it. He could not be reasoned out of his ideas, he just knew these things.
This indeed sounds very familiar. And I just told him that he would die in a mental hospital (or worse) if he didn't fix himself up. However, the difference being is that just receiving it from somewhere, he picks up every straw he can grasp onto to support his pre-conceived notions.
But even he was capable of talking about other things. Imp1... I've never seen anybody so completely obsessed with a single idea that every topic has to be made about that idea. Not only is it unhealthy, it's just freaking boring.
He's often boring, but he can also be funny. Particularly when he tries to defend his crazy.
The one thing I don't understand is that his crazy had led him to make many bad predictions. If that were me, I'd re-evaluate. But he just plows on, making new predictions even crazier than the ones before.
Brittany has a daughter, now about eight years old, being raised by a foster family. Her caretaker in court read a statement that said in part, when the little girl gets scared she talks to herself and says her brothers are always with her.
o_o not that I would want hollyjood slimeballs to exploit the girl's suffering, but this is the kind of stuff top shelf horror films are made of. Psychopaths like this lady and the damage they do is so fuckin real and down to Earth. Way scarier than a cgi monster that could only exist in my life as some easily btfo'd video game enemy.
Of course, but there is something extra evil to be an organization whose entire purpose is devoted to children and then exist only to make their lives worse
He had been her mother's long-time live-in boyfriend, and had raised Brittany as her step-father. He then impregnated her in 2009, when she was 17. They eventually married.
Mom and live-in boyfriend. Unmarried and living together (not good!)
raised Brittany as her step-father. [Probably generous way to describe it]
Mom had murderer by a prior relationship, unknown if married or not. Either way, broken-home.
Messed up decisions lead to generations of messed up or dead family. The murderer's unfortunate daughter will probably have kids just as messed up.
So you "predicted" something that happened years before your predictions. And even then, you were obviously full of it. Of the many feminists (unfortunately) having kids, how many are killing them?
No, even your after the fact predictions are somehow wrong.
Feminism birthing trannies isn't a new belief, its older than you because it was a talking point back when I was an MRA.
Most of your stuff is right in broad strokes, your details are just wacky. This however is the rare case where the details are accurate, though even this was a talking point 15+ years ago in feminist circles and I recall at least one actual case back then too.
By definition, mutilation is a disfiguring wound. Circumcision is literally that, on a genital.
Can men not get raped either because the "better known" version is penis forced into vagina? Not be victims of domestic abuse because the "better known" version is drunk husband physically hitting a woman?
I don't like circumcision either. It's also NOT the same as the better-known genital mutilation, which is what happens to little girls in the Middle East, rendering them unable to get aroused AT ALL.
Why would it need to be 'the same' to be referred to as mutilation? Mutilation is mutilation.
has been sentenced to life in prison [should have been death]
four-year-old Gavin, three-month-old Niall and three-month-old Noah in 2014-15
"she said she feared the brothers would grow up to abuse women, as she had been" [this is an attempt to manipulate by a mentally ill person. they default to playing the victim.]
"She also said she was depressed, and admitted she was jealous of the attention her husband paid to them, but not her or their now-eight-year-old daughter Hailey." [so she murdered the boys but not the girl]
"47-year-old Joseph Pilkington, also pleaded guilty to a misdemeanor charge of sexual imposition, for having sex with Brittany when she was underage. He had been her mother's long-time live-in boyfriend, and had raised Brittany as her step-father. He then impregnated her in 2009, when she was 17. They eventually married." [lol jerry springer shit. she SEDUCED her mom's BF. very likely has borderline personality disorder among other things.]
"The criminal investigation didn't begin until Gavin died in April 2015. Because of that investigation, Hailey and Noah were removed from her care. But when they were returned in August 2015, she killed Noah less than a week later."
"Her defense team had argued that she had suffered repeated sexual abuse and beatings as a child, and had also suffered lead poisoning, which may have left her brain damaged. "Brittany's brain is broken," attorney Kort W. Gatterdam said before sentencing on Tuesday. "And no one ever helped her."" [the only help for a woman like this is feet first into the wood chipper.]
For anyone who watched the Legion show remember this is what Sidney did when using her superpower to swap bodies with her mother while still something like 14-16.
She took on the image of her drunk and passed out mother, climbed in the shower with her mother's date, had sex with him, and then when wondered why he had "turned her to face the wall".
BECAUSE YOU WERE STANDING UP IN A SHOWER YOU STUPID FUCK!
Best part is the whole show ends with a massive time travel mission to prevent all the bad shit that happens to David/Legion from happening and even though they succeed it means absolutely for anyone else because none of them are affected by David/Legion until the very start of the series and by that point Sidney and everyone else are already massive fuck ups because of the above mentioned scene and other events that still happen!
Wow. The helpless 37 year old man bears no responsibility for sticking his dick in the 17 year old girl he raised since he was nine. That's what you're going with?
I'm sure he was a totally upstanding guy up to that point, because no man has ever actually abused a stepdaughter. That's just lies told by evil women!
I'm not saying the woman isn't culpable for murdering her children. Everyone is ultimately responsible for their own actions, and life in prison is the least she deserves.
But this horrific tragedy didn't just drop out of the sky. It's a symptom of a diseased and dying society, and your amused "lol wimmen amirite?" attitude is just part of the sickness.
She seduced him. And no, I am not "going with" the retarded straw man position you built of calling him helpless and having "no responsibility".
He didn't murder anyone, dumbfuck. But your NPC programming has commanded you to see him fucking a LEGAL 17 year old girl [Ohio's age of consent is 16] as somehow worse than her murder of multiple helpless children.
And yes, men are vulnerable to seduction from scheming, evil women. If a hot, fresh cookie is jumping into your mouth begging you to eat it, it takes a lot of willpower not to bite down. The cookie bears more responsibility than you do.
If he abused her, why did she seduce him and marry him and have numerous children with him? I didn't see any allegations from her that he abused her. Are you just assuming that without evidence because your NPC programming activated again? Why don't you get your emotions under control and start using logic and reason instead.
LOL. The fact that you felt the need to point that out just shows how twisted and detached from reality your comment is.
So is she responsible for the murders she committed, or are you going to argue that she's just an innocent victim of her circumstances like a libtard? She didn't murder her children because she was "abused", although she may very well have been abused. Child abuse is very common. I'm sure 99.999% of child abuse victims do not go on to commit murder. Ergo, one does not cause the other. She is just a mentally ill psychopath who is trying to play the victim, and you're falling for it because you're a simp.
No, you are part of the sickness. You are a simp and an NPC. Your brain is broken and has been subverted by forces you don't even understand. I could hardly call you a human in anything but the most technical sense. People like you - weaponized NPCs who have succumbed like zombies to emotionally-driven propaganda - are what is truly wrong with modern society.
He didn't say she is not responsible for her crime. Just called you out on what I agree is a bad frame of a 36 year old man fucking his girlfriend's underage daughter.
Is he not responsible for that? I don't care if he seduced him. Are we not responsible for things even if a woman is being sexy? The moment a 14 year old winks at you, all social contract goes void?
There is no mutual exclusivity in terms of responsibility. There is no shortage of things everyone is responsible for, or any rule saying that overlapping responsibilities cancel out one another. She has proven to be a dangerous psycho as an adult and we are talking about the same person at age 14. I am sure her life is a trail of failed responsibilities and evil choices given the audacity it takes to play victim in a scenario where you've murdered your own children.
Still, nothing about that changes the responsibility of a 36 year old to avoid sexual contact with her as a 14 year old. In fact this story is like a real-life hyperbole, like a scary tall tale parents would tell their sons on a camping trip to scare them from growing up to be promiscuous.
o_o
That is indeed the case with a very large percentage of the world. I don't personally agree, but obviously reasonable people can disagree about sexual responsibility.
While I expect men to have a reasonable degree of self control, a seducer can quite easily break through a reasonable degree of self control. We all know "don't stick your dick in crazy" yet men do, in fact, stick their dick in crazy all the time because crazy girls tend to be good seducers.
When a man fails to resist seduction, it is a failure of weakness, not a failure of malice or intent. I see weakness as a far lesser problem than malicious intent. It's the same issue when you have a malicious scammer and a stupid scam victim. Neither are sympathetic. The scammer is worse.
His argument in substance was to deflect her responsibility by trying to shift it to the father, purely because his creep factor is triggered. I reject that nonsense.
There is for murder. She was solely responsible for her murders.
And why do you keep saying 14? Nothing in the article said there was evidence he was having sex with her at 14. It said 17.
She did? I'm sure you can show me the evidence.
What evidence, exactly, would satisfy you? Certainly nothing I have to say, but I'll try to explain why I'm so sure of it.
She's a psycho. Likely has BPD and other mental illnesses. Women like that are highly likely to exploit their sexual power to accomplish anti-social ambitions like "I'm going to steal my mother's boyfriend away".
Psychos are not generally born, though some people are more vulnerable, they are made through bad parenting. Women with BPD and other serious mental illnesses like this woman, generally got that way because of trauma in early childhood from bad parenting, which usually involves abuse, but can also come from neglect. The father didn't come into her life until she was older.
The fact that she committed murder shows she is an aggressor in personality type, not passive/submissive.
If the father was the aggressor, the odds of collapse of their little relationship would be far higher. The fact that they stayed together for many years and had a number of children, AND that she is crazy, tells me that he basically put up with her crazy, meaning she counterbalanced that with seduction and emotional manipulation.
If the father had been the aggressor, he would have tired of her soon enough and sought another victim as opposed to settling down for a prolonged period and having kids.
The fact that he was given a wrist slap plea deal to a misdemeanor was a tacit admission they had no case against him, which means they had no proof he was the aggressor. If it wasn't a high profile case he would have had the charges dropped. It's a Big Lie in US courts that the younger woman can NEVER be the aggressor, when in truth it is more often than not the case.
There's more, but that's some points off the top of my head. I don't expect you to understand or agree, but there are a lot of factors I am considering based on having a lot of knowledge regarding women in general and crazy women specifically. I have a high degree of certainty that I'm right.
Quite immaterial. Being a psycho or not has no relation whatsoever to your claim that "she seduced him".
This has no relation whatsoever to your claim that "she seduced him".
Again, this crackpot pop psychology has no bearing whatsoever on your claim that "she seduced him". She sure knew how to be an aggressor against helpless infants. There is no evidence that you've presented that she knew how to be against a grown man.
A collapse, by for example murdering his children? This once again is just an assertion that you're throwing out there.
It's funny that you make up an entire backstory, motivations and all sorts of actions based on a headline. What you made up in no way relates to your claim that "she seduced him".
Whatever US courts do in no way relates to who in this specific instance was the "aggressor" as you say.
I don't doubt that you do, as always. However, you have presented no evidence at all, let alone anything that would demonstrate your outright assertion that "she seduced him".
If you're going to be close minded, argumentative, and hostile, that's the last time I ever put any effort into explaining anything to you. Duly noted to just ignore you next time you hit me with a dO yOu hAvE a SoUrCe bRo??
It's not "closed-minded" to point out that you made an argument that you could not back up. And yes, if you're going to claim that "she seduced him", you need to back it up with receipts, not with "if not he would have tired of her".
This is something you can only understand if you've been the target of the advances of a teenage girl.
How does you having been targeted by the "advances of a teenage girl" prove that this guy was "seduced" and did not rape the murderess?
Show me the evidence.
"DUUUH you disagree with me therefore you are an NPC.." Brilliant.
Now who is making a strawman? Did I ever say what he did was worse?
Legal is not the same as moral.
Fucking pathetic. The first step in being a decent man is taking responsibility for your actions, not blaming them on a "cookie jumping in your mouth."
Is this the kind of manliness you think will save western civilization from degeneracy?
If you can't stop yourself from fucking your own stepdaughter, you shouldn't be around children. Ever.
Where is the accusation she seduced him?
Also, try looking up Battered Spouse Syndrome.
Maybe you should have read another article about it.
Now I know you're just going to say she's lying, and maybe she is.
I just find it far less likely that she had a nice, healthy childhood and then suddenly decided to seduce poor, defenseless Good Guy Joe because of spontaneous pure evil.
Hey! Remember ten minutes ago when I wrote this?
What part of that was so difficult for you to comprehend, unemotional logic and reason guy?
Are you just butthurt about having your "women are evil, men are their victims" beliefs challenged?
Okay.
I don't think I will, simp.
Defense lawyers can say all kinds of made up bullshit at sentencing. If any of that was true and supported by the flimsiest of evidence, he would not have gotten a wrist slap misdemeanor. That same dumbfuck lawyer also claimed that his psycho client killed her kids because of lead poisoning. He was clearly just pulling shit out of his ass without any basis in fact or evidence.
She didn't say it, did she? That article is also wrong, the father didn't get convicted of sexual battery, the other article correctly stated he only got a technical misdemeanor.
It's likely her mom was horrible, hence why she's so crazy. But by age 9 her mind was already formed. She didn't become crazy after that, she already was. There's no reason to believe the father made her that way.
Boring.
Good night, and good luck.
Pay no heed. You're talking to a bit of a crazy person who also once said "you can't rape a prostitute". Other than that, he's OK, and he provides some welcome dissent on some topics.
I just find the "women are evil" delegation bizarre. How did they get that way?
Did they have abusive mothers? Absent mothers? A psycho girlfriend who ruined them for life? No interaction with women at all?
How do you get through life without knowing at least one decent woman?
Or is their definition of "decent woman" limited to some unattainable submissive anime waifu that doesn't exist in the real world?
It would actually be an interesting study.
EDIT: I mistakenly thought this was about Imp1. For dekachin, he's just a jerk with no other point than being a jerk, at least on the topic of women. I don't think he hates women as much as he is the stereotype of a "Republican who doesn't care about anything but his wallet".
That is what I'm trying to figure out. He says he had no bad girlfriend experiences, and that his mother is saintly, so it's anyone's guess. My hypothesis is that Imp is actually a woman who cut off her breasts, and now has a mutilated body - her only consolation being that she's not a woman because women are evil (FUCK YOU WOMEN).
I think there may be a more prosaic reason. People read stuff online and think it reflects reality. You go out and all you read is "men screwed over in rape proceedings" and "women talking about how she wants to kill all men". The same mechanism poisons the minds of women into becoming feminists, and believing that men are "misogynsts" and that rapists are everywhere.
For him, one who has a cock I think.
He is a source of endless fascination. Particularly his rationalizations.
Agreed. The Internet made it easy to create bubbles of like-minded people, and ( bubbles + confirmation bias ) - dissent = ideological death spiral.
But Imp1 is a different category. Genuinely ill.
I knew a guy who was always unstable, then got into drugs and I think full blown schizophrenia.
He would talk about how he was receiving mystical knowledge from somewhere, and paranoid that shadowy forces were trying to get him because of it. He could not be reasoned out of his ideas, he just knew these things.
He eventually ended up in the psych ward of a state prison.
But even he was capable of talking about other things. Imp1... I've never seen anybody so completely obsessed with a single idea that every topic has to be made about that idea. Not only is it unhealthy, it's just freaking boring.
At some point, you're so self-brainwashed that you don't even need to stay in your bubble. Send Imp out in the real world, which is complex, and he'll still explain everything in terms of "women are trying to kill men".
Quite sad. Reminds me of the Nietzsche quote that he'll never forgive Christianity for what it did to Blaise Pascal. That is my view on the internet.
This indeed sounds very familiar. And I just told him that he would die in a mental hospital (or worse) if he didn't fix himself up. However, the difference being is that just receiving it from somewhere, he picks up every straw he can grasp onto to support his pre-conceived notions.
He's often boring, but he can also be funny. Particularly when he tries to defend his crazy.
The one thing I don't understand is that his crazy had led him to make many bad predictions. If that were me, I'd re-evaluate. But he just plows on, making new predictions even crazier than the ones before.
I archived them all. The story is real.
http://web.archive.org/web/20210512023938/https://abc6onyourside.com/news/local/woman-admits-to-killing-her-kids-will-serve-at-least-37-years
Nuclear war is a mercy.
o_o not that I would want hollyjood slimeballs to exploit the girl's suffering, but this is the kind of stuff top shelf horror films are made of. Psychopaths like this lady and the damage they do is so fuckin real and down to Earth. Way scarier than a cgi monster that could only exist in my life as some easily btfo'd video game enemy.
Have I got a movie for you.
It's about a true story of unimaginable domestic abuse, called An American Crime.
Don't watch it if you don't want to feel horrible about humanity.
Okay maybe I take back my above comment, maybe I want movies where the kids are safe and the dog always comes back and such...
Yeah, there's a reason escapist entertainment is far more popular.
I mean, this is an end result of the narrative that all boys will be bad men by default, isn't it?
She blamed innocent victims of wrongdoings. Clearly, she is an abuser.
A better outcome would have been for someone to kill her years before, to prevent her from growing up to become a murderer.
These fucking things really should disclose the years this even happened. This is 3 fucking years old
"I mean it's just another abortion" -reddit, probably
Feet first.
Family courts failing the children. Tragic.
the purpose of family court is to destroy men, children are just the cover story
Anyone whose ever dealt with child support learned that first hand.
The wellbeing of the child means nothing to the government. They just want the money so they can swipe their cut.
Everyone's well-being means nothing to the government.
Of course, but there is something extra evil to be an organization whose entire purpose is devoted to children and then exist only to make their lives worse
Islam is right about women. The older generation of women is needed to beat some sense into the younger generation.
Death penalty
imp did you meme yourself into godhead
Mom and live-in boyfriend. Unmarried and living together (not good!)
Mom had murderer by a prior relationship, unknown if married or not. Either way, broken-home.
Messed up decisions lead to generations of messed up or dead family. The murderer's unfortunate daughter will probably have kids just as messed up.
Many such cases.
u/AntonioOfVenice
I believe that's another conspiracy theory of mine proven right.
Which was?
I said that feminists would lose the ability to care about their own male children due to the constant radicalization of that ideology.
Are you bragging about the fact that you were wrong?
I wasn't wrong?
Tell me what you think you were right about.
She killed them because she thought they would grow up to be rapists. It's textbook feminism.
So you "predicted" something that happened years before your predictions. And even then, you were obviously full of it. Of the many feminists (unfortunately) having kids, how many are killing them?
No, even your after the fact predictions are somehow wrong.
Honestly for once this is the kind of shit you'd say and its real.
Did you see my latest post? The trans ideology was birthed from male genocide feminism.
I'm getting proven right a lot lately.
Feminism birthing trannies isn't a new belief, its older than you because it was a talking point back when I was an MRA.
Most of your stuff is right in broad strokes, your details are just wacky. This however is the rare case where the details are accurate, though even this was a talking point 15+ years ago in feminist circles and I recall at least one actual case back then too.
how is this not an imp1 post?
By definition, mutilation is a disfiguring wound. Circumcision is literally that, on a genital.
Can men not get raped either because the "better known" version is penis forced into vagina? Not be victims of domestic abuse because the "better known" version is drunk husband physically hitting a woman?
Why would it need to be 'the same' to be referred to as mutilation? Mutilation is mutilation.
Hey look, a circumcision NPC. Haven't run into one of those in a while.
He's not an NPC when he acknowledges that he doesn't like it. And even if he were, what's the point of just throwing an insult in someone's direction?