Paul Elam exposes Christina Hoff Sommers

I've always been suspicious of Sommers for a long time and now Elam seconds what I've always thought about Christina Hoff Sommers.

Model confesses she was paid to set up Bill Cosby

In her own words:

“I wasn’t going to send this email to FYM, but, the feeding frenzy on Bill Cosby’s character made my response necessary. In 1982, I had a photographer named Choice. Choice was contacted by a casting agent, I was told to meet the client at the Ritz Carlton for lunch in New York in the summer of 82’. This client wanted to talk to628x471 me about a film project. I arrived at the Ritz Carlton at 11:30 AM. Two male clients arrived; a Caucasian male (late 30s) and an Asian male (early 50s). They indicated that I’d be perfect for a film project.

I was told the project paid $5000 cash. I thought that was strange, who pays $5000 cash for a modeling job? The job was to meet Bill Cosby and to try to seduce him; it would be apart of the script. I was confused by this job request? They told me I would be recording the session to see if I was successful and believable? My response to them… I would like to meet Mr. Cosby first and discuss the script. They said no, it wasn’t necessary to meet him. They said it was a spontaneous casting call? I have never in my life heard of a spontaneous casting call.

Fuck Ted Cruz

I have received word that Senators Ted Cruz,Mike Lee and Marco Rubio have voted against legislation that would required women to sign up for Selective Service. They have no problem sending your sons,nephews and other male relatives to die but god forbid one of their little cunt angels gets her hands dirty. Women want more of a free ride from men,at men's expenses, and these buttheads are more than happy to hand it to them. Fuck these assholes. As it stands we are not endorsing anyone.

Rolling Stone is sued for false rape story

Jackie Coakley
Judge: Jackie Coakley not covered by patient-counselor privilege in defamation suit
College Fix Staff •January 28, 2016

Jackie Coakley can’t hide her secrets any longer.

The student at the heart of Rolling Stone‘s discredited gang-rape story has been ordered by a federal judge to turn over her communications with the magazine and author Sabrina Rubin Erdely, and even her counseling communications with the University of Virginia, though they won’t be made public.

UVA Associate Dean of Students Nicole Eramo is suing Rolling Stone for $7.5 million, claiming its portrayal of her and her interactions with Coakley are defamatory. Judge Glen Conrad earlier signaled he would force Coakley, who is not a party in the case, to turn over some communications that are relevant to Eramo’s claims against the magazine.

(Though Coakley is still identified only as “Jackie” in the litigation and mainstream media coverage, her full identity has been public for months and her status as a gang-rape victim is in serious doubt, so The College Fix has decided to fully identify her going forward.)

Conrad wrote in his memorandum opinion that Coakley’s claimed privilege for being an alleged rape victim doesn’t protect her because federal restrictions only apply to the admissibility of sexual-behavior evidence at trial, not their relevance in discovery, which is what Eramo is seeking.

It is “reasonable and proportionate” for Eramo to obtain Coakley’s communications with Rolling Stone, Erdely and “Eramo/UVA” as evidence of defamation and negligence by the magazine, especially because it has already turned over its communications with Coakley, Conrad wrote.

Perhaps the most notable part of Conrad’s ruling is his dismissal of Coakley’s claim that her counseling sessions with Eramo and Emily Renda (another UVA employee) are protected by “patient-counselor privilege” – a legally dubious claim that nonetheless became a PR nightmare for the University of Oregon in a countersuit against an alleged rape victim suing that school.

Virginia law on the privacy of sexual-assault victims provides an explicit exemption for court orders, Conrad wrote:

The court is unaware of any authority that holds that [the relevant law] creates a patient-counselor privilege, and the court declines to do so in this case. In addition, the statutory language permits disclosure of protected information in response to a court mandate, which provides further support for the court’s finding that the statute does not establish an evidentiary privilege. Even assuming that the court could find that this statute establishes a patient-counselor privilege, it appears that Jackie may have waived such privilege by voluntarily disclosing the contents of her communications with Eramo and UVA to defendants.


Communications between Coakley’s pseudonym “Haven Monahan” and her friend Ryan Duffin, as well as Monahan’s communications with anyone else Coakley gave Rolling Stone before its article was published, must be turned over:

One of the main issues in the defamation action is defendants’ due diligence in relying on Jackie as a source for the Article. Plaintiff argues that defendants could have interviewed Ryan Duffin and others about Jackie’s story and her credibility as a witness, but failed to do so. As such, these communications are relevant and proportionate as they will help resolve the question of what the defendants could have discovered about Jackie’s story and credibility if they had interviewed Jackie’s friends.

Only Coakley’s communications about the Rolling Stone article before her last public comment to The Washington Post Dec. 5, and not the “details of her alleged assault,” must be turned over, Conrad ruled:

The crux of the dispute in the defamation action is defendants’ portrayal of Eramo and Jackie’s communications with Eramo/UVA . The specific, graphic details about what may or may not have occurred on the night of September 28, 2012 have no bearing on these issues.

Source

Paul Elam exposes actress Souad Faress as a false rape accuser

Souad Faress
Souad Faress is named in this article

If I were the accused I would sue this bitch for everything she is worth. I'm not going to name the accused because he is the real victim in all this and has his face plastered all over the media. So let's plaster Souad Faress' photo all over the place with the caption "This is what a false rape accuser looks like". Thanks to Paul Elam for making this video exposing Souad Faress for the criminal she truly is.

Simp wimp

Mancard revoked

AVFM versus Roosh

If you've been following the manosphere as of late there is a feud between Dean Esmay of A Voice For Men versus Roosh from Return Of Kings. The funny thing is that A Voice For Men is joining with feminists to bury Roosh on alleged rape charges. Roosh has denied said charges and stated he only engages in consensual sex. He even said Anonymous got involved persecuting him. I've been waiting for Anonymous to fuck the pooch and they did. Anonymous is now synonymous with organized online bullying and terrorizing people. Anonymous demands redemption from others but will they make right what they did or are they just bullies too? No better than those they condemn. Anonymous is busted. Getting back to Esmay,Roosh is right,Esmay is not much of an MRA. From what I hear Esmay tried game and got shot down that is why he is pissed at Roosh. I wasn't there when Esmay was using game so I can't critique him but I do know that game minus confidence is a guaranteed way to get shot down. I don't know if this is the case but it is the most common mistake men make. Esmay did the same things others did from the British House of Commons to the Governor of Texas Greg Abbott to the feminists that Esmay agrees with. They all persecuted Roosh. Esmay could have critiqued Roosh independently but to join forces with feminists is treasonous to me and Roosh is right in calling out Esmay on it. Esmay is a confessed liberal Democrat. That alone should place him on the list of misandrists because the Democrats are in reality the Femocrats. If you have doubts look at their support for Hillary Clinton. I've had my differences with A Voice For Men especially with Paul Elam who once told me to mend fences yet he is the biggest bridge burner in the manosphere. Esmay made the following statement: And every MRA I know views him Roosh as a crackpot, a loon, a con artist and snake oil salesman, and a self-serving liar and weasel...
Source How presumptuous of you Esmay. I have to say I back Roosh on this one. Roosh has stayed consistent while A Voice For Men goes through editorial changes every three months. Don't only that but A Voice For Men diplomats are a bunch of rude dumbshits who go to other MRA websites and act like they own the place. They did that at Antimisandry. Roosh,on the other hand,has welcomed those of us who are MRA's and he doesn't censor people,unlike A Voice For Men,which has turned into an echo chamber thanks to the current management at A Voice For Men.

Bill Cosby's accusers exposed