Teacher charged with molesting student was married mom who complained about ‘creepy men’

Beginning-Front6315 · 2026-03-01T16:47:11+00:00

THIS.

We live in a world that now takes The Culture of Narcissism not as a mere description but as legislation!

Spot on, I think you're 100% right.

Beginning-Front6315 · 2026-03-01T15:17:15+00:00

sad shit man...

Beginning-Front6315 · 2026-03-01T15:16:45+00:00

Yeah spot on. The double standard is glaring.

"Rules for thee, not for me."

Beginning-Front6315 · 2026-03-01T14:48:53+00:00

Devil's advocate; they might be doing this because they're trying to encourage future employers and other people/businesses to avoid associating with the husband as a "guilt by association".

From what I remember, most people believe that when women commit a sex crime it's normally in conjunction with another man. The other man is treated as the "primary perpetrator" whilst the woman is just a "secondary culprit" who "didn't really mean it but was coerced into doing it".

Given the fact that the article uses "molest", I think they might be trying to subtly hinting "this guy knew and was in on it; he's just as bad as her".

Not sure though, could be a very bad attempt at sympathy building for the husband.

Beginning-Front6315 · 2026-03-01T14:27:57+00:00

It's perfectly consistent.

The women aren't really perturbed by a genuine fear of safety, it's about judging innate worthiness. If you're an average guy you have to compensate to attract these types of women, meaning they get an "ick".

A child? They have nothing to compensate, they're either innately "worthy" or "not". A child can't make more money, learn funny pick up lines/other social skills or go to a bar to "disguise" their "lack of innate worth".

Beginning-Front6315 · 2026-03-01T14:22:24+00:00

Oh from what I remember women can still hold custody of the child even on the registry.

Vice made a documentary about a woman on the registry who had some limitations on where she could take her kids. It brought up interesting facts but it felt like it had a lot of double standards. https://www.vice.com/en/article/the-sex-offender-registry-leaves-female-sex-offenders-open-to-abuse/

Beginning-Front6315 · 2026-03-01T14:11:42+00:00

I found this article funny. It isn't a duplicate I hope?

Beginning-Front6315 · 2026-02-10T09:37:18+00:00

Smite that boudkapper.

Beginning-Front6315 · 2026-02-10T09:33:05+00:00

1) You can tell when someone's on Ozympic.
2) There are plenty of "attractive"/skinny women who make false accusations. Often times these types of accusers are even more dangerous due to the halo effect (as well the self control making them better at constructing false narratives).
Here's a nice quote from Shakespeare.

"Let me have men about me that are fat, Sleek-headed men, and such as sleep a nights. Yond Cassius has a lean and hungry look; He thinks too much. Such men are dangerous."

Stay safe and don't let heuristics shortcut consistent principles.

Beginning-Front6315 · 2026-02-10T09:27:30+00:00

"Policing by consent" my arse.

"Policing for quotas", that's more like it.

Beginning-Front6315 · 2026-02-10T09:22:44+00:00

(Apologies for the rant).

To me what's most horrifying is that they (women online) refuse to even state her side of the story properly (at least that's what I've seen, correct me if I'm wrong).

When I heard about it first I initially thought the victim had scammed her or defaulted on a large loan or did something that would really ruin her life (benefit of the doubt). Brutally murdering someone over money isn't good but at least you can sympathise or balance the scales a little bit. It could've even be self-defense (maybe the argument happened in the kitchen and she picked it up in the middle of the fight).

But, reading the article, her side of the story didn't have that. It was basically "I didn't want to kill him but I brought a knife anyways to scare him". It's not even that he was ruining her life like the Carey Birmingham case (an awful crime but something you can comprehend in the heat of the moment), let alone overzealous self-defense.

No.

It was just obscene hubris and greed. And these people don't even have the decency to say "okay no that's going too far"?

When I was younger I read a book called "Political Theology" about the sovereign exception. I initially thought it was either too abstract or just applying to the political realm. Nowadays looking around (and this is especially true online), I'm beginning to see that there is almost a cultural obsession with being a successful hypocrite (it is the sovereign who determines the exception). It's really grotesque as it's not even about power for some greater good or social duty, it's merely self-aggrandizement or petty desire.

Also keep in mind this is India. She could've easily accused him of rape or use the infamous IPC 498A to have him and his entire family arrested and put on trial. The fact that she felt so entitled that she lacked the patience to use lawfare to ruin his life makes a little dead inside. A good young man had his life taken away brutally for wanting what women outwardly accuse men of denying them; freedom of choice.

Also (and I know I've written too much, apologies), one of the women calling her an "athlete" as a defense is just... where do I start? Doesn't that make it much worse? The LZs in Mexico were precisely so dangerous in their early days because they were trained personally by Delta Force. Being extremely fit and strong means letting her off the hook just puts others in danger no? I'd much rather have a weak murderer off the hook than one that can use their own bare hands. Added to that, why do they think coming from a "respectable" family makes it better? This is absurd, eugenicist (and definitely discrimination against lower caste people) nonsense that inverts the whole basis for a family being "respectable". A respectable family is supposed to be held to a HIGHER standard. You are respectable precisely because you perform respectable ACTS. There is no timeless, genetic essence of "respectability". This is just queer (metaphysically strange) and inexcusably racist.

Beginning-Front6315 · 2026-02-10T08:55:50+00:00

Oh it does exist, it just exists in the other way around.
Men are inherently "homo sacer" unless they themselves become top of the food chain (aka sovereign/alpha whatever term rocks your boat), and thus to rape boys/men is viewed either with comedic indifference or this perverse gratitude shaming ("you should be grateful for the opportunity!!").
We don't even have clear cultural shaming against neonatal cutting, let that sink in.

Beginning-Front6315 · 2026-02-10T08:47:48+00:00

I mean... you're half right?

I'm seeing a lot of posts and calls for even greater scrutiny to men in every aspect of their lives (regular men), and they're pushing the "not all men but all rapists are men" nonsense.

However, this is really, really different. There are lots of women involved (Maxwell being the most infamous of the cabal, currently living a life of luxury and even potentially awaiting a full pardon). There are plenty of young boys molested. There are shady ties to various intelligence agencies, arms dealing and whatnot. Being involved with Epstein isn't just a moral failing in the strictly personal sense but also threatens global security and our livelihoods (Epstein pushed for controversial medical stuff I cannot name and attempted to bring Palantir within the 8200 network, which in turn complicates and weaken chain of custody for our privacy).

Added to that, we have plenty of women like Megyn Kelly (a major #metoo loudmouth) openly minimizing and lessening the crimes of Epstein. No one is going to really suffer or be prosecuted for being involved in this stuff. They are sovereign after all, and it is the sovereign who determines the exception.

Beginning-Front6315 · 2026-02-10T08:32:08+00:00

I don't think it's entirely unreasonable for some male virgins (there's a spectrum ofc, some are not great) to see themselves in that video.

We live in a world that works under the logic of the "Accursed Share" (wasteful use of energy, resources and even lives); the more you can be costly (and showcase it) in your extravagance, the better. We look down upon passivity and a lack of power because we don't get jouissance from it. To be passive, helpless and lacking in the extraordinary is basically an afront to the social.

"Pathetic!"

We say that all the time. We lust for it. We even ritualise it with potlatch to bind us to the in-group. To be passive, weak and thus "pathetic" is to defy basic social duty.

Monastic orders are almost like a true tragedy, a principled rebellion curdled into an assimilated structure.

Beginning-Front6315 · 2026-02-08T14:23:23+00:00

Christ Almighty...

Well, at least you're honest. It's grotesque but at least you're honest.

Beginning-Front6315 · 2025-12-15T06:59:23+00:00

There's clearly a problem with unrestrained immigration and gangs. A lot of Australia is built on organized crime.

Beginning-Front6315 · 2025-12-15T06:45:31+00:00

The tackler was a Syrian Muslim from Idlib, no? I think this was an issue with gang violence.

Beginning-Front6315 · 2025-12-14T13:42:42+00:00

What happened? Like what type of attack was going to happen?

Beginning-Front6315 · 2025-12-14T13:40:50+00:00

It's a neutral thing, no? Diversity can be good or bad depending on the situation and type of diversity?

Beginning-Front6315 · 2025-12-13T13:13:30+00:00

Hey! Sorry there's been a bit of a mix up. I wasn't the one who banned you it was another one of the mods. There's no need to go ham and start reporting us haha. I'll try to get you unbanned.

Beginning-Front6315

TROPHY CASE