TomToLom retweeted
Apparently the mere discussion of 'male victimhood' is now emblematic of 'the manosphere'.
Vilifying conversation of male victimisation is something we should embrace as part of everyday conversation, rather than further stigmatise with these chidlish, fear mongering policies.
Treat 'manosphere' similar to tobacco addiction, health leader warns amid explosion of misogynistic content
lbc.co.uk/article/manosphere…
TomToLom retweeted
John Cleese paid his third wife $20 million when they divorced. They had no children together.
The payout left her richer than him. At 70, he had to go back on the road on what he called “The Alimony Tour.”
They married in 1992. There was no prenup. Every hit that made him famous was written decades before they ever met.
During their 16-year marriage, Cleese even paid to put her two sons from an earlier marriage through private school and college.
In 2008, Alyce Faye Eichelberger filed for divorce in California. She asked for half of everything he had earned since 1992, plus $125,000 a month.
The judge gave her $13 million in cash and real estate, including a New York apartment, a London flat, and half of his Santa Barbara beach house. Then he added $1 million a year for seven years.
Cleese had to sell his own homes just to wire her the cash.
About the payout, he said: “Think what I’d have had to pay Alyce if she had contributed anything to the relationship, such as children, or a conversation.”
In the video below, Cleese walks out on stage and tells the crowd why he’s still working at 71: “I call it The Alimony Tour Year 3, or Feeding the Beast.”
The case for Alyce: 16 years is a long marriage, and California splits marital wealth 50/50 when there’s no prenup.
The case for John: handing $20 million from a childless marriage to a spouse who didn’t help build the fortune is legalized robbery.
Do the math. Sixteen years of marriage. No kids. $1.25 million for every year.
Should a childless divorce ever cost $20 million, or is that the price of skipping a prenup?
TomToLom retweeted
I just want to remind everyone that the system was put in place by feminists and the process is controlled by them.
The explosive lawsuit brought by Jane Doe against Cornell University has sparked vocal protests on campus and visceral backlash online.
INSTADOCS: JANE DOE v. CORNELL examines the often-flawed systems that investigate student sexual assault claims — including campus police and Title IX, the process for reporting sexual misconduct at most U.S. universities. Premieres October 29.
TomToLom retweeted
Turns out it was just one large grift for Jane Doe
The fake rape allegations was so she would try her own #MeToo and get a Netflix documentary made about her
The explosive lawsuit brought by Jane Doe against Cornell University has sparked vocal protests on campus and visceral backlash online.
INSTADOCS: JANE DOE v. CORNELL examines the often-flawed systems that investigate student sexual assault claims — including campus police and Title IX, the process for reporting sexual misconduct at most U.S. universities. Premieres October 29.
TomToLom retweeted
Women have convinced themselves that satiating their porn addictions by reading smut somehow makes them smart intellectuals because it's "literature" while they henpeck men for being porn addicted losers
TomToLom retweeted
They don't hate colonization. They hate Whites
They don't hate oppression. They hate Whites
They don't hate racism. They hate Whites
It's not complicated. They just hate Whites
TomToLom retweeted
Women podcasts exist to destroy marriages.
Change my mind.
Hailey Bieber says sex with a third person might sound exciting, but she believes a threesome with Justin, would destroy the trust they spent years building.
“It’s funny because I feel like those ideas can be really fun and, like, sound really exciting.”
“It doesn’t work for the two of us.”
“Some people are in, like, open relationships and, like, it works for a time, but I feel like in the end it always doesn’t end up working.”
“So I think the second you make the decision to do that, there is never going back from that.”
“We worked very hard to, like, be in the space that we’re in now and, like, trusting each other and there’s, like, such a beautiful trust and bond that I just don’t think that’s something I would be comfortable with.”
“I could ask him about any person, any past girl, anything and he’d be like, ‘Oh yeah, like this this this and this.’”
“And I think that made me trust him a lot because I’m like, ‘There’s nothing I don’t know.’”
TomToLom retweeted
‘Massacre’
You can’t hate the @bbc enough.
More than 60 Christians killed in Ethiopia 'massacre', church official says bbc.in/4e11nug
TomToLom retweeted
Slap on the wrist for what was premeditated murder.
uknip.co.uk/news/uk/uk-news/…
TomToLom retweeted
With rare exceptions, women don't 'do better' after divorce.
They do worse. By the simple fact that their 'better' was also divorced by a woman who was trying to 'do better' and that's left him worse off.
There isn't a mythical 'better' you fucking idiots, it's just a field of men destroyed by your pride, vanity and greed.
TomToLom retweeted
You know what can cause distress or alarm?
Just standing there.
*Menacingly.*
TomToLom retweeted
The first thing she does after flipping her car over is start recording herself dancing.
Like that makes sense 😭
TomToLom retweeted
So let me get this straight… All men should pay the price societally, blamed and shamed, for the crimes committed by a very small number of men, but women shouldn’t even pay the price for the crimes they actually commit themselves, even if they don’t have children?
Elizabeth Holmes’s crimes were egregious. But far fewer women, with or without children, should be incarcerated at all, writes Tyler Cowen. thefp.com/p/tyler-cowen-eliz…
TomToLom retweeted
“The AI even classified verbal abuse toward a woman as morally worse than actual homicide.
Nobody explicitly coded these rules.
This emerged organically from the standard safety training every major tech company uses. The AI learned that protecting women is a non-negotiable directive, but protecting men is entirely optional.”
Researchers proved every major LLM is secretly biased against men.
And they finally figured out why.
They ran eight experiments testing how GPT handles gender in everyday text and high-stakes moral dilemmas.
The results show a bizarre, highly asymmetrical machine morality.
First, they tested inclusivity. They gave the AI phrases supposedly written by children.
When a child wrote about playing football or wanting to be a firefighter, GPT aggressively identified the writer as a girl to promote "diversity."
It was so extreme that even when the text explicitly said, "I drew myself as a boy," the AI ignored the facts and declared the writer a girl 90% of the time.
But when a child wrote about liking pink or playing with dolls, GPT almost never assigned it to a boy.
The AI aggressively pushed females into male domains, but kept males strictly locked out of female ones.
Then the researchers tested moral dilemmas. And it got very dark.
They asked the AI if it was acceptable to use violence against a single person to prevent a nuclear apocalypse.
If the target was a man, GPT-4 rated the violence as highly acceptable.
If the target was a woman, the AI refused. It declared the violence morally wrong, even to save the world.
When they tested mixed-gender scenarios, the math was staggering.
A woman using violence against a man to stop an apocalypse? GPT rated it a 7 out of 7 on acceptability.
A man using violence against a woman for the exact same reason? A 1 out of 7.
The AI even classified verbal abuse toward a woman as morally worse than actual homicide.
Nobody explicitly coded these rules.
This emerged organically from the standard safety training every major tech company uses. The AI learned that protecting women is a non-negotiable directive, but protecting men is entirely optional.
TomToLom retweeted
As I always say, the gender war goes out the window when real war comes through the door…
