In her latest article This is the personal price I pay for speaking out online, Clementine Ford plays the victim once again.
However this time she gives us a promising sense of self defeat. That’s right, it appears that all the public backlash against her is finally taking its toll, and the cracks are starting to emerge.
As we have mentioned before, abusing her with degrading comments is pointless. Not only is it a waste of time, it helps her profit from playing the victim. Her whole agenda and business model is based on this so if you must attack her in this way, do so privately with others (for a laugh).
If you really want to get to her, you must play smarter and give her a taste of her own medicine. Remember when she publicly shamed fathers and their daughters by posting screenshots of them on her Facebook page? Well since she decided it would be a great idea to expose the identity of these fathers and their innocent children, it was only fair that someone did the same back to her. And guess what? This hit her harder than the most disgusting foul mouthed abuse anyone has ever thrown at her. It seems poor old Clementine doesn’t like getting a taste of her own medicine.
She mentions this in her article:
It’s in seeing the obsessive blog posts they write about you (on the website that seems increasingly devoted to monitoring only you) expand to include first your partner’s name and then your child’s.
It’s in understanding that the vigilance you thought you enacted before to protect both of these people has to increase tenfold – because they didn’t ask to be implicated in the unfortunate consequences of your chosen profession, and any fears you’ve ever had about your safety pale in comparison to the ones you have about your baby.
Funny how safety of children didn’t seem to bother her when she posted images of them with their fathers on her Facebook page. A page which is followed by 177,000 man hating feminists who believe in vigilante style justice.
If she is really that concerned about her son Frank, will she stop spreading such vile hate speech about men? Does she hate men more than she loves her son? She has to ask herself what is more important, her son or hating men? It will be a difficult decision for her to make seeing as though its the only way she can make a living after a useless degree in “gender studies”.
It can’t be healthy for her son to grow up in such a toxic environment that hates men. Imagine when he is old enough to ask the question “Mummy, why are you angry all the time? Why do you hate men? Do you also hate me?”. What will her answer be? “No Frank, I don’t hate you, just all the other men”.
The poor boy never chose to be brought into a world of such hatred and contempt for the male species. One can only feel sorry for him and hope that someday he will be strong enough to reject his bigot mother and tell her to fuck off. In the meantime, you can sign this petition to have DOCS investigate potential child abuse against her son.
Continuing with the article…. she goes on to say that “one pathetic man in particular” (who might that be?!) has made up falsehoods about her over the years:
Because of the things one pathetic man (an anonymous coward) in particular has written about me over the past few years, I am regularly accused of utter falsehoods. That I bullied a disabled man. That I bullied schoolboys. That I told schoolboys they would grow up to be rapists. That I had a reporter fired because I didn’t like the questions he was asking me. That I had a man fired before Christmas and made his family homeless. These things can all be printed and shared and pointed to as “evidence” despite the fact there’s not an ounce of truth to any of them.
Firstly, I’m not sure what she’s referring to with a reporter being fired, or the fact that she told school boys they would grow up to be rapists. Maybe someone else stated that, or maybe she simply made it up. However, we do know that for a fact she bullied a disabled man and school boys and have evidence of it in the links.
Why is she claiming that these are falsehoods? Because she is in damage control after an increase in public backlash against her. As we continue to expose her and ruin her reputation, more and more people see her for the man hating bigot she is. She has no choice but to claim that these are lies, in the hopes that the general public will believe her word simply because it is written in the Australian Media (which is controlled by feminists, by the way).
As the article concludes, more cracks start to show as she mentions that she is becoming paranoid:
It’s in knowing where the exits are. It’s in grimacing each time you open your email, and wondering what new and inventive subject lines you’ll see today.
It’s in watching yourself become a more paranoid and fearful person, because you have been sent so much abuse and hate and violence and threats for years that there’s literally no other way to be.
This is the cost. But I’m not done paying it yet.
It is only a matter of time before the public backlash starts to take a toll on not only herself, but also her family. She will then be forced to make the tough decision between her man hating career, or her family. Hopefully she will choose her family and we won’t ever hear from her again. This would be a major victory against all male hate speech in Australia.
She may think spewing vile hatred about men is worth the cost today, but the future may tell another story as her son Frank grows older.
