In another fine example of the unholy union between feminism and the plutocracy, some bossy, bitchy drama queens at Kellog’s have gone out of their way to ask British girls aged 16 to 24 which words they feel undermine their “strength as a female” and which they would like to actually ban from the English language! Yes, because what the world really needs is kids with little to no knowledge of the world telling the adults what words they should and should not be able to use.

According to the survey, which is part of a Special K advertising effort, young girls these days become hysterical and hormonal whenever someone uses words like “bossy” in their sacred presence. Said one precious young flower…

“Every time people call me a ball-breaker i feel really bad about myself because it suggests that breaking men’s balls is somehow a bad thing and it, like, you know, makes me feel guilty about breaking so many balls.”

According to some highly strung, over the hill haddock called Nicola Roberts…

“It is a strange thing that in a modern society we still have room for language that holds strong women back,”

…she said while weeping into her cheesecake. And it is indeed strange – strange that strong women would be held back by mere language. But then, i suspect that in typical feminist fashion our stale chicky-babe has a definition of strength that includes being a weak-minded pussy who can’t tolerate any degree of resistance and who hides under the table every time there is a thunder storm.

The survey also revealed that today’s high maintenance princesses would like instead to be described with bright, shiny adjectives such as “confident” and “courageous.” You will notice that the feisty young things do not state that they would like to be confident and courageous, only that they would like to be described that way. The former, you see, would entail the kind of hard work that today’s girls feel is beneath them — what they want is to be labeled Wonder Woman while acting more like Scooby Doo! Yes, i just compared today’s girls to a cowardly, cartoon dog. But that’s cool, because today’s manipulative young bitches don’t include “dog” or “bitch” on their list of words that should be banned by Big Sister. I also noticed that, funnily enough, these kiddies don’t seem to object to words like “cunt,” hence it must be okay to call the UK’s women “cunts.” Fancy that, when i finally get my OBE i can say to the Queen, “Thanks very much, your cunty majesty!”

More hormonal hysteria here.

She’s done this before, of course, with that misbegotten It’sAllAboutWomen thing. You remember that one — the one with the speech in which Watson, despite years as something akin to an actress, shook and stammered so much that we thought she would fall off the podium.

Well, this head on a stick apparently feels she’s been out of the headlines for too long, so she’s back with more feminist cowpats to fling at the few people who still care what this young has-been has to say.

This time, the attention-getting device is that feminist favorite — sexual assault in Universities. Really, feminists are so obsessed with sexual violence that i sometimes think that at least half of them must have subscriptions to the kind of adult website they like to complain about…

Anyway, at the 71st United Nations General Assembly in New York City, the once-famous midget and Ill Will Ambassador whined that not enough rapes are happening in her neck of the woods, and that this is leading her to spend too much money on you-know-what. “Why couldn’t the rape figures have been that wonderfully high when i was still in university?!?!?” she complained bitterly.

She also added that “The safety of women… is a right and not a privilege. As opposed to the safety of men and boys, which is all just a big joke. ”

More worrying is that 10 universities around the world, including the once-respectable University of Oxford, have promised to go full-retard SJW and start doing everything possible to lock up as many young men as possible. Cambridge, for example, is considering making the uttering of the word “fish” a sexual offense punishable by 6 months in the stocks or five minutes in a gender studies class, depending on how bad a mood the administration is in that day.

Feminist blitherings here

Back in December of 2014, Mark Pearson was walking through Waterloo Station when he passed the profoundly unattractive sixty-something Souad Faress, who was on her way to a rehearsal after having taken a class on how to lie about being raped. According to Faress, Pearson, ignoring all the hot young crumpet on offer, shoved three fingers up her vagina and kept them there for 2-3 seconds. Weird thing to do, and not only criminal but also in very bad taste. The problem is, there were no witnesses, no forensic evidence, and the security cameras showed there was absolutely no way he could have done what she says he done!

The cameras take a photo every second, and show that the guy spent less than one second near her! Not only that, but he appears to be holding a newspaper in one hand and has the other hand on the strap of his bag! So, to have committed the crime, he would have had to put away the paper, gotten past the rancid old ferret’s pants, kept his fingers inside her vagina for 2-3 seconds, then grabbed the newspaper and run off – all in less than one second! Unless this guy is The Flash, there’s no way that happened.

But wait, it’s possible that some other dude assaulted Faress because, as we all know, women never lie about this kind of thing. Problem is, there’s no mention of any camera footage showing that being done by anyone else, either! On top of that, Faress claims she yelled when the attack happened and that people all around her froze to see what was going on. But again, those pesky cameras show no such thing happening, they just show her looking back at the guy. And why was she looking back? Because, according to her, he had not only sexually assaulted her but also bumped her shoulder! Could this be what it all comes down to? Is Souad Faress such an evil woman that she decided to frame the guy for rape for the unforgivable crime of having bumped into her sacred female person? It wouldn’t surprise me, especially given that during the police interview she seemed more concerned with the shoulder incident than the so-called rape…

As is usually the case with such dirtbags, Souad Faress’s name has been kept out of the newspapers in order to encourage other women to make false allegations against innocent men. This is why there is a question mark after the title of this post – said mark does not refer to the supposed assault, which is clearly bullshit, but to the identity of the perpetrator of the false accusation. The one source naming Faress is an anonymous web post cited by Paul Elam in one of his videos. I’m sure it wouldn’t be the first time someone got things wrong while doxxing a dirtbag, but Faress does fit the description of the perpetrator of this crime and she hasn’t issued a denial. So, far as this little piggy is concerned, it looks as if Souad Faress is – probably – a lying piece of scum and should be locked up for her crime. That is highly unlikely to happen, given that Faress is not only a woman but also a minor celebrity in the UK. She has, apparently, been doing some long running radio show called The Archers, has appeared in one-off roles in many TV shows, and has a small role in the upcoming season of Game of Thrones. Put femaleness and celebrity together, and a person can get away with just about anything – just ask confessed child molester Lena Dunham, or confessed man-rapist Amy Schumer, or confessed man-basher Rhonda Rousey…

Article on the matter

Elam’s video

Anonymous post revealing name