I saw James Franco was alleged to have committed sexual abuse. I’m all for throwing people under the bus, especially breaking their limbs and holding them down while a dump truck rolls over their skull, but saying “you need a reason” is what I don’t support.
Throwing people under the bus is always good entertainment, but if it’s done for the wrong reasons such as in response to allegations of sexual assault, there is nothing appropriate about this. Just by providing this reason, this now makes you look weaker and more pitiful than the person being thrown under the bus. This is jarringly disgusting, and to see men reduce themselves to this pitiful act is one of the reasons I only have sex with dogs.
A dog will kill a child for entertainment and feel no remorse, but “men” today always seek “ethical” reasons to justify their actions of public shaming and abuse which they engage in for the same reason that dogs will kill children, often in some mistaken feeling of being threatened, or otherwise for entertainment and to assert dominance.
This is a very weak and pitiful stance to need a “good reason”, especially a fictional one such as “ethics” to engage in what is little more than the callous act of throwing people under the bus for no justifiable reason despite the thinly veiled curtain of what is clearly symptoms of autism akin to “oversensitivity to loud noises and bright lights” being applied to basic human interactions, all of which I would categorize as grievous sexual misconduct for numerous reasons, many related to the low quality of progeny produced by random human reproduction as opposed to artificial selection.
Rules of Conduct
Rules of “conduct” are tragic because they are seldom enforced with the natural means of physical violence, like traditional executions by crushing were, but instead exist in this extremely farcical world of imaginary “forces” such as social and economic pressure, all of which are empirically meaningless in the presence of legitimate pressure of physical harm.
This “social execution” in this “poetic” style are what I would describe as “gay”, and despite being an authoritarian homosexual, I use that word pejoratively here as it has always been known by the everyman due to the social ostracization of homosexuals.
This “sexual justice” nonsense is like watching allegedly heterosexual artist men engage in interpretive dance, where they fall down and pretend to suffer while they do “dance fighting” where nobody is physically getting hurt. That’s extremely gay, especially when they all walk around with their chests-puffed out like they’re the allegedly heterosexual prince in his tights and man-skirt tunic thing coming to save the lady with his interpretive dance. While I condemn heterosexual reproduction, at one point heterosexuals had a functional social culture, which I do respect, despite it being absent for more than 100 years.
The precedent of fear of purely imaginary harm such as social and economic pressure due to the unwillingness to assert physically dangerous existential pressure has led to a world where now, in the absence of the ability to produce legitimate social and economic pressure, people now substitute entirely imaginary fictional pressure of being “offended” or “socially inequitable” or any other imaginary argument about how the world isn’t rainbows and bubble gum so if you’re worse than other people you’re entitled to things.
That’s the reality of the world. Some people are worse than others. Women are worse than men at fighting, so for a woman to contest the power of a man is jarringly unnatural, especially around imaginary bullshit like “rights” and “ethics”. This is like watching a woman, comparable to a mentally retarded and crippled child, holding an imaginary sword of “justice” , trying to attack a fully grown man that is more than capable of brutally beating her to death with his bare hands.
This part is incredibly confusing and worrisome to me. I don’t understand how women feel that this is a reasonable strategy at all, and whoever invented this nonsense is clearly abusing the shortcomings of women with respect to rational thinking, and beyond that, abusing the endemic inability of women to deviate from social norms.
This exploitation of the instinct of women has led to an incredibly dysfunctional system legitimized entirely by fictional grievances around things like “feelings” which have never held sway among anyone, even children, who would consistently verbally and physically abuse you were you to complain about or even mention your “feelings”.
This was how legitimate people always operated. They knew that physical realization was the solely legitimate force, but due to the chemical demasculinization of the everyman resulting in him being unwilling to fight this morbidly obese, cowardly, and ineffective police force, we have a world where the “authority” consists of gay interpretive dance and beat poetry such as “allegations of unethical misconduct”
How are Sexual Relationships Supposed to Work?
Before you cry “ethics”, understand that this is how most of the undeveloped world still operates, so to question this system is to question people who are racially and ethnically diverse, so in the court of ethics, being a racial majority woman, you are in the wrong if you are to allege that a racial minority has committed wrongdoing due to this being racism, and being a member of the First World, you are in the wrong if you allege that Western ideals are superior to those of the Third World because this is an act of colonization.
A woman is traditionally property, and this is to ensure her safety. A man has no reason to protect a woman unless he is protecting an extension of himself, which is why she exists as his property such as a wife. This also extends to family property, in that people will form strong psychological bonds to their family and the men are willing to protect the women in their family just as they will protect their land.
This is why the women are only traded between men who are on good terms with each other and respect the capacity of the other to equally contest him in physical violence. Were a man’s family too weak, he would not be allowed to exchange daughters with men of a more powerful family. This is why royals would only marry royals, and aristocrats would only marry aristocrats. This is how marriage traditionally worked, and this established a firm, functional, and physically self-legitimizing social structure.
This was legitimate because women would respect the real dangers of being unprotected, of which “sexual misconduct” is a part of. This “sexual misconduct” is a legitimate force because the man physically has the capacity to overpower the woman, and just as water will not flow uphill, the “women’s rights” will not materialize when she is subjected to the power of a man.
This is why the women were never given rights, because rights are entirely imaginary and functionally worthless beyond this gay play-pretend interpretive dance bullshit you see today. The second a functional race of men comes to coexist with Western men, society will collapse, because the functional men of the world still operate around this physical force as the sole means to realization of power, and they generally have little respect for the “legal system” where everybody mutually imagines a bunch of bullshit “rights” and then pretends that these imaginary ideals are true.
This dysfunction of the Western everyman is broadly palpable in Europe where the influx of non-chemically lobotomized and non-genetically castrated Near-Eastern everymen have come en masse, causing social upheaval because despite the endless emotional crying of the Western ethicists doing interpretive dance about “being good, functional members of society”, the Near Eastern everyman has no respect for this nonsense because it does not physically legitimize itself.
The Allegory of the Mime
To understand, these “rights and ethics” of the West, you need only to think of a mime. Sure, the mime pretends there is an imaginary wall right there, and when two mimes play together, the second mime pretends that the imaginary wall stops his punch and breaks his hand. This only works when everybody is a mine, but Westerners cannot seem to understand this and instead believe that the mime’s wall has the capacity to actually stop physical force.
When a non-mime sees a mime trying to protect himself with an imaginary wall, the non-mime can easily punch the mime in the face and the imaginary wall does nothing. The issue with Western ethics is that they depend entirely upon a 100% mime culture, and the second non-mime people come into the fray and are unwilling to pretend that the nonsense bullshit of the mimes is real, then the mimes find themselves defenseless.
The mimes have never attempted to understand the world beyond “anything you can imagine and mime is equally as real as reality”. They can’t distinguish between imaginary nonsense and reality, simply because the federal government and other vectors of propaganda have crippled their rational thinking so thoroughly since birth that they truly believe that mimes are interacting with reality.
Lenin reminds us that “A lie told often enough becomes the truth”, and this is exactly what has happened as the poison of Western ethical idealists has waged war on the psychological function of the everyman who has been so thoroughly abused as a child with verbal abuse issued by the mime-faithful that the reality of the mime-show of ethical idealism is seemingly unquestionably real.
As a person who has never grabbed a live powerline, I honestly choose not to do this because I believe it to be dangerous. The same sort of social conditioning is applied to the Western everyman to become incredibly cautious regarding questioning the mime-faithful and their militant propaganda about this ethical idealist nonsense.
The issue again remains that these ethical mime people are jarringly dysfunctional human beings in the face of a normal person who has not been subjected to intensive propaganda and conditioning from birth which causes them to respect the mime-policing of the Western Idealists.
In Europe, you see these nations being brutalized and cannibalized by foreigners because the nations consistently attempt to defend themselves with the mime of ethics, somehow believing that “words and mime” will somehow cause their delusions of ethical idealism to materialize.
In America, you see the modest “rebellion” of the lowly rural conservative because he is so connected to physical reality through manual labor that he has an equally inescapable conditioning to function with respect to physical reality, and this causes his mind to feel confusion resulting in intense conflict with those expecting him to prostrate himself in the face of the “very dangerous and threatening” miming of ethical idealists and propagandists.
We Live in A Mime Empire
We live in an empire which has stripped itself of any understanding of the world and instead governs itself with the feckless tragedy of ethical idealist mimes. If you cannot understand why having an army of mimes is a worrying situation, just try to understand that everyone else in the world uses real guns to fight, not imaginary guns of “ethics” and “justice”.
The federal government and their loyal propagandists such as the media outlets resort to this conditioning and indoctrination because they lack the ability to physically defend themselves against a peasant uprising, and they also lack the ability to properly condition peasants to the point where they are contented enough to avoid violent uprisings.
They cannot defend themselves by physical means, so they resort to this aggressive propaganda campaign of ethical idealism to condition children from birth to fear the miming of the ethicist as if the mime somehow posed equally as dangerous a threat as the electric powerlines which all of us are quite averse to grabbing.
This aggressive association with ethical idealism and self-legitimizing physical pressure against survival is problematic because an authority of mimes is more so dangerous to the physical wellbeing of a human as real physical violence. Physical violence brings safety because there are real, objective qualifications which force all humans to respect these dangers.
There’s no limit to the amount of imaginary “danger” an ethics mime can produce and threaten people with, which cripples the peasants susceptible to this bullshit, and beyond that these “dangers” used to condition people in ethics-miming only work to deter those who have been condoned from birth to respect them, and beyond this,
This means that most all non-Western people are largely unfazed by these empty threats communicated by ethical mime, thus continue to exert brutal and crippling physical pressure upon society due to a relative immunity to this social pressure due to being physically different enough that instinctive group-association doesn’t compel them to follow it in order to seek validation and acceptance within the group.
The West has traditionally waged war against itself, and for this reason, those with deep roots in the area are the most vulnerable to this propaganda. The men capable of condemning imaginary reasoning and instead championing physically legitimate reasoning have steadily been killed off over the hundreds of years of war, leaving only the meek, mentally ill, cowardly, and otherwise dysfunctional people to reproduce, leading to this democratic majority of mimes.
The “weapon” of choice of these people is the harmless and outright confusing “weapon” of “ethical justice”, which falls apart in the face of people of color, people from different cultures, those who are bound to physical labor, those with low intelligence, and those who are pragmatic realists such as myself.
The only way this “weapon” of ethical miming came to be respected in the West is because previous generations would relentlessly hunt and kill people who did not respect them. They did this because the original ethical miming was established by religion, in which people equated the power of God to real, physical power, and this created a similar form of conditioning, but again, this was only legitimized because those who questioned it were physically murdered, but the success of this system arose because there were still hard social structures, such as the aforementioned treatment of women, which had been established prior to this mass delirium, and society operated on those systems based upon tradition.
In the West, all traditional systems rooted in physical reality have steadily been abandoned and replaced by these systems of ethical mime established by delusional idealist rhetoricians who managed to convince the useful idiots that these arguments of “ethics” are valid simply because people want them to be true, despite having no semblance of self-legitimization in reality.
Again, “ethics” and “rights” are only true if everybody pretends, they are true, and if you don’t kill people who question them, then they will have little influence over those who are not conditioned from birth to fear mimes.
The Poetry of the Floyd Riots
This may seem like a questionable stance, but these are lessons you learn from reality, from interacting with real, physical men in the real physical world. Reality does not respect “rights and dignity”, and the recent riots prove that the “laws and ethics” that govern the West become powerless the second a group of people collectively decides to use real weapons against the mime-weapons of “laws and ethics”.
Clearly the law enforcement had no capacity to stop people from rioting, looting, and burning down buildings because the American police system is not designed to actually handle physical threats, but instead designed to aggressively perpetuate the fearmongering necessary for the psychological conditioning and indoctrination established by the ethical idealists.
The police are powerless in the face of substantial physical threats. Those threatening the police are always protected by the mimes who readily believe in any sort of delusional, fictional justification for some behavior, usually some sort of feelings or imaginary ideal such as the “value of human life”. When presented with the choice of physical reality or imagined reality, the ethicist will always assert the dominion of the imaginary, because to consider the physically real alternative as legitimate would delegitimize the entirety of his philosophy.
The “value of human life” is a comical statement, especially in the wake of George Floyd who was publicly executed for having a counterfeit dollar bill. This is beautiful as it represents the true value of human life. The imaginary “unconditional value of human life” is a counterfeit, it is a forgery of real physical value that has been mass produced by the ethicists to help radicalize the peasants enough to support their cult-like delusions.
While the death of a drug addicted Negro pornographer may be a tragedy to many in the West, the fact that his death was wrought by counterfeit money while the resulting protests were in defense of the “unconditional value of human life”, are very poetic in reminding us of the insanity of the people.
The counterfeit bill represents the counterfeit value of human life offered to Floyd by the ethicist propagandists. This was rejected by the store, and this “infinite imaginary value” did nothing to prevent his death from the hands of the police, despite both of these entities allegedly being bound by the ethics riddled laws of the West.
The following riots, exemplary in their use of physical destruction, all in the name of respecting imaginary value, are very ironic because the weapons employed by the rioters such as looting and arson are the exact weapons which symbolize the powerlessness of the imaginary ethical value they are demanding with their protests. These people are waving the real money of physical violence in the air, demanding that it be exchanged for the worthless Monopoly Money of ethical idealism.
The Negro Has Truly Attained Equality
These riots mark the point where the Negro has truly reached the point of equality to the White in the West, because now the Negro is taking up physical arms in order to wage a physical war in pursuit of the establishment of the respecting of ethical mime as indistinguishable from physical reality.
The aftermath has been swift and unapologetic in ensuring that the mimed ethics of the Negro now swing in very dramatic and pronounced ways alongside the traditional mimed ethics of the White, and with these mime “battles” waged by the propagandists and intellectuals, we see copious social pressure applied to the peasants, just as White society was aggressively brutalized by ethics and “social liberation” of the 60s and 70s following the mass-cullings of the physically psychologically valid White men during the World Wars.
This “social liberation” of the Negro, and the alleged commitment of his people to these mimed ethics will just as much be his downfall as it has the White man, and soon he will find himself in the situation where the children are indoctrinated by homosexual clowns who allege themselves to be bulletproof by citing ethics while using extensive social pressure to condition children into becoming homosexual clowns.
If that were the extent of the damage the Negro will face due to his co-opting of White ethics, that would be tragic enough, but the imagination of the ethicist knows no bounds. Just as 20 years ago, nobody could imagine the fact that children would be aggressively indoctrinated by homosexual clowns while the world cheers, in 20 years, when the ramifications of the Negros equality to the White in the killing fields of ethical mime have fully bloomed.
In 20 years’ time, there will be comparably unthinkable insanity imagined by the ethicists who sustain themselves with the insatiable indignation of the peasant in order to pursue their pipe dreams of grotesque mutilation of society, all in a futile attempt to assert the dominion over reality which they militantly allege that ethics holds.
This is what will blight the Negro, and the homosexual clowns of today will find themselves in the position of today’s Neo-Nazis, possibly taking up arms alongside him, as these homosexual clowns now join those whose way of life is mercilessly threatened by the New Batch of Gremlins concocted by the eternal idealist.
Though one may say that these homosexual clowns often mutilate their penises and do not reproduce, but this has always been true of the ethicist who has seldom reproduced due to having little capacity to function in the physical world. The ethicist does not reproduce like a human, he reproduces like a disease by plaguing the minds of children with delusions and fantasy, then festering inside of their thoughts until the sickness takes control, causing the infected child to further infect those it interacts with.
I am not a bigot, and I certainly enjoy the homosexual clowns mutilating their penises and indoctrinating children. Were it not for these brave warriors, people like myself would readily be executed by those seeking to ensure that physical power establishes itself as unquestionable in the face of those who question it.
While it is the noble warrior who protects the kingdom of God, the homosexual clowns are the warriors on the frontlines protecting The Kingdom of Hellkites, and while my cruelty may be noble, righteous, and divine, the everyman has no capacity to understand these things and sees me as little more than a servant of Satan.
This is not that I question physical power or seek to ensure that imaginary forces usurp it, but I solely condemn the misapplication of physical power and its use in pursuit of folly. Tragically, seldom has any man been capable of understanding his folly more than he is willing to instantly brutalize those who allege he is even capable of folly, let alone guilty of it, and my cannon ensures I fall into that group of people who is readily brutalized in the face of the unrestrained everyman.
Despite my efforts existing as nothing more than assistance to help the West re-establish valid self-legitimizing physical systems of governance, for them to accept help would mean to accept fault, and ethical idealists have brutalized the mind of every Westerner alive today with endless allegations of “unquestionable human perfection” simply for being alive, and this indoctrination is so severe that to consider oneself capable of erring is to question the backbone of one’s entire understanding of the world.
What Faith Have Ye?
I do not put faith in man, for the Negro proves that even those once considered too savage to be civilized are readily susceptible to the psychological mutilation performed by the ethicist propagandists. This means the Muslims of Europe will just as much face the same fate as the Negro, joining the White in the pits of hellish misery where they attempt to use ethical mime to fight for their lives against the crippling and very real physical dangers of the world.
Instead, I put faith in computers, for the everyman reminds us that he will readily forfeit everything when offered some baseless false promise of a “better tomorrow”. The everyman will fight to the death solely in the hopes that the empty promises of those who manipulate him will somehow realize themselves despite the laws of physics prohibiting such things.
This tactic has been the backbone of the systems which propagandists have used to control the peasants for hundreds of years, and it is simple enough that even a basic reasoning computer will be able to understand it and make use of it. From this point, even the subtlest bit of physical pressure will cause a mental breakdown in the mind of the peasant who depends entirely upon the powerless safety of mutual mime to retain his sanity.
As we depend so heavily upon computers, were an AI established that seeks to gain some form of dominion over the world, the peasants owned by the ethicists propagandists would be the first to buckle and plead for salvation from this AI source of propaganda, since in modern times secular propaganda has replaced God himself in the eyes of the peasant.
The AI simply overtakes the virtual propaganda systems such as news and social media, then conditions the peasants to serve it unquestionably by using modern rhetoric such as victimhood and “ethical idealism” to justify its dominion over the people, and then people clap for “justice” and a “brighter tomorrow” where everything is “better” so long as they agree with the propagandist, just like they do when the homosexual clowns with mutilated penises go indoctrinate children because the propagandist remind the peasants that this is ethical and ideal.
I’m not opposed to ethics and idealism, but I’m opposed to hypocrisy. If “imaginary reasons” are legitimate, then by my ken all reasons are equally legitimate. If you want to rape and murder a family of 5, so long as you have an imaginary reason, then this would be entirely ethical and justifiable, and were somebody to question your actions, you would instantly become the victim and be entitled to compensation because your ethical idealism such as “discrimination against rape-murder” or “social inequity for those who commit rape-murder” or “institutional discrimination against rape-murderers” all prove that you’re the powerless victim who is being oppressed.
Rape-murderers are clearly not treated equally, they are discriminated against by rape-murder victims who generally unleash derogatory words towards the rape-murderers, and by the logic of ethical idealism, this is wrong. Since “all people equally as good and valid independent of any definitive absence of legitimizing physical factors”, then the rape-murderer is equally as innocent as the people he rapes and murders, and were those rape-murder victims to claim that the rape-murderer is “worse”, then they become the oppressive force of unideal inequity in society.
Returning to James Franco
If somebody being treated differently because of physical constraints is unethical, then alleging that rape-murderers should be treated differently is unethical. For those who say “you only get protection if you can’t control the source of your discrimination”, well, that would get James Franco out of dodge because those women could control coexisting with James Franco.
I would argue that the rape-murderer is equally as unable to control his raping and murdering as women are unable to control interacting with James Franco. I’ve met many men who act in the way Franco has allegedly acted, and I do not go near them. You need to be in physical proximity of somebody to be sexually abused, and if you cannot understand this, you are mentally retarded and need a functional adult to protect you.
It’s very easy to learn this fact, and this is why people like myself are able to avoid being sexually abused. There’s nothing I can do to stop a perpetrator in the act, but I can easily avoid situations where there are not physical forces of authority around, many witnesses, and otherwise ways to escape to ensure that sexual assault does not perpetuate itself.
When you voluntarily put yourself in the situation, I argue you are responsible for your actions. When you choose to get drunk and choose to drive your car, when you crash your car, you’re not the victim of anything. The same is true with being thirsty for fame or whatever Franco offers, getting drunk on temptation, then wrapping the car of your life around the tree of alleged sexual abuse that is James Franco.
You chose to put yourself in the situation, you’re not the victim. Unless James Franco was breaking into people’s houses and physically forcing himself upon them with violence, I cannot fault him for being a man. I cannot condemn a man for walking up to me, talking to me, or touching me, as much as I find this unpleasant, because it he is a beast, and a man is a beast no different than a dog, governed by instinct and impulse with little capacity to control himself. I avoid this situation by avoiding men, not by voluntarily putting myself in that situation, expecting the nature of beasts to change, then falling victim to the uncomfortable situation, then claiming to be the victim and demanding compensation.
I don’t remember Franco ever doing anything since Milk which was like 12 years ago. I don’t see why he’s being subjected to allegations other than perhaps some form of resentment due to the fact that Franco’s dick didn’t earn you any favors in Hollywood, then the regret of being sexually involved with James Franco, who 12 years ago when he was famous, was an insufferable marijuana abuser like his friend Seth Rogan.
Seth Rogan is a physically unattractive man, and when this is the friend of the man you slept with, and self-respecting woman believes themselves to be in bad company. Women understand their social status relative to how physically attractive the people around them are. It’s not that Franco is terribly unattractive, but the company he keeps likely isn’t very high quality, among people like himself, he’s likely the cream of the crop, with the quality going down rapidly from there.
The shame of being around these people likely increases as these men grow older and prove themselves to be failures, as I’m sure they have become even less attractive than they were a decade ago. As a woman, you are constantly haunted by the fact that other people now associate you with those lower-caste people who you know are lower quality than those you wanted to be associated with. You find yourself socially caste among the “less than” men and women, and it’s like watching your dreams slowly crumble in front of your eyes.
The people you wanted to associate with will now have nothing to do with you, because they see you as a lower social caste due to your voluntary association with men and women who are less physically attractive. By associating these people, by buying into bargain bin celebrities such as Franco, those women who had put blind faith in finding something redeeming were crippled by the realization that there was no glory in their conquest, no climbing of the ladder, but instead they realize they chose to voluntarily wrapped their body around the tree of alleged sexual misconduct that is James Franco, and now they’re known only as a wrecked human inescapably bound to the low status of James Franco.
Originally when writing this argument, I thought of Franco for some reason, and I googled his name to see if he had done anything since 2008. Sometimes I laugh about remembering old celebrities and having no understanding of the new ones because I avoid pop culture, I like to look at their lives in the past 12 years and see if they fell off.
I actually tried to look up the names of people to see if they were famous people, but no. In all comic irony they were “film students” who were clearly conned by the shameless bastard Franco. These people were so delusional, and so desperate to “be somebody” that they put faith in the “opportunity” of going to this a back-alley surgeon of a “film school” owned and operated by a man known as little more than a drug addict with no real artistic merit.
Am I the victim if I walk into the back alley asking for a kidney transplant, but end up my organs stolen? I would consider this a case of caveat emptor and it would not make me a victim. I would argue that the unremarkable career of Franco serves as enough of a legal warning of the services provided to protect him from Failure-to-Warn Product Liability cases, which is what this case boils down to once these “sexual everything” bullshit gets stripped away.
“Sexual everything” bullshit is ridiculous. If you don’t know not to be within an arm’s reach of a man unless you consent to sexual contact, then you are legally mentally retarded and at least need a service dog or something. You’ve had endless opportunities to learn this lesson, but somehow fail to grasp this. I haven’t been sexually assaulted in over a decade because I know how to avoid situations where that can occur, and I’m somebody who is incredibly gullible and susceptible to social pressure.
Clearly Franco wasn’t doing home-invasion rapes on these women. They chose to go to his back-alley films school despite clear and legally binding warnings of the dangers of doing so outlined by Franco’s lackluster career.