- Joined
- Mar 31, 2023
That is the biggest structural support to the argument that transwomen are real women. Transwomen do their damnedest to dodge all accountability like real women.
Liz Fong-Jones / Elliot William Fong / @lizthegrey - 'Consent accident' enjoyer, ex-Google employee, nepotistic sex pest, Robert Z'Dar look-alike who wants authority over the Internet
- Thread starter 0 0
- Start date
-
🔧 At about Midnight EST I am going to completely fuck up the site trying to fix something.
- Joined
- Dec 29, 2022
Don't forget that this guy's out there too, and might come forward given the chance in a public trial:
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21053930 (https://archive.ph/87pMM)
- Joined
- Feb 16, 2016
I dunno about anyone else, but combine a severe personality disorder prone to lying, clonazepam lying around like candy in its lair, dog hair where it ain't supposed to be, and someone accusing him of rape...which he responds to not by claiming it's categorically false, but instead coming up with the slimiest term imaginable: "consent accident".
To me that adds up to a sexual assault at minimum. There's no other way to interpret "consent accident", that's Liz's words, and nobody else's we can find. HE accused himself of committing a "consent accident". He, and he alone, set the bar there. It can get worse, but it's not getting better.
The dog-hair catalyst and the clonazepam revelations taken together paint a rather more serious picture though, after all, logically the presence of dog hair where it ain't supposed to be triggering a rape accusation smacks of memories not present as a logical conclusion...a sign of being roofied, something you can use clonazepam for.
But that's all juuuuuuuuuust a theory.
To me that adds up to a sexual assault at minimum. There's no other way to interpret "consent accident", that's Liz's words, and nobody else's we can find. HE accused himself of committing a "consent accident". He, and he alone, set the bar there. It can get worse, but it's not getting better.
The dog-hair catalyst and the clonazepam revelations taken together paint a rather more serious picture though, after all, logically the presence of dog hair where it ain't supposed to be triggering a rape accusation smacks of memories not present as a logical conclusion...a sign of being roofied, something you can use clonazepam for.
But that's all juuuuuuuuuust a theory.
- Joined
- Dec 28, 2014
And for some reason Elliot felt it necessary to throw in the detail that the victim knew he had dogs. So the victim wakes up not remembering last night. . .and there are dog hairs. . .who has dogs?
Hmmmm.
- Joined
- Aug 23, 2022
Freudian slip towards ol' blockhead?
- Joined
- Aug 3, 2016
How unpleasant do you have to be for a "consent accident" to be at most the fourth most disturbing thing about you?
Also, I know it's just his side of the story, but I really don't buy the "withdrew consent after the fact". I will paint a few hypotheticals.
The most damning words from LFJ for me: "She genuinely believes that I have sexually assaulted her. And I considered her a friend and am genuinely sorry for what she's going through, but feel that a blameless perspective would try to examine how the miscommunication happened".
This lays out:
1. He acknowledges that actions that reach sexual assault (and beyond?) undeniably happened
2. Her accounting of these events has led to the loss of LFJ's friendship
3. The burden isn't on LFJ to understand why his partner felt violated - it is the partner's responsibility to understand why LFJ violated her.
4. He expects her to be "blameless" after she just genuinely experienced sexual assault.
Even if his story 100% checks out, the confirmed data points peg him a few standard deviations creepier than your average troon, and also rapist-brained.
Also, I know it's just his side of the story, but I really don't buy the "withdrew consent after the fact". I will paint a few hypotheticals.
I want to note, LFJ says that they were "friends" for 8+ years, but mentions they were socializing the last few days. He also mentions that dog A, service animal, had just passed. Dog B she apparently didn't know about.
a) Partner is conscious, consenting. Lines crossed during "play", safe word is used. Elliot ignores this development, finishes while enjoying the appearance of their partner having a horrible time. Upon being told that wasn't cool, he decides that he wasn't told during sex.
b) Partner let LFJ into the house, didn't intend to play. Gets sleepy, medication kicks in, maybe some alcohol, and they are basically passed out. LFJ gets handsy and she rouses, to find that LFJ is engaging her physically in days-old clothes covered in dog-hair. Maybe the dog hair is a contributing factor to her reaction, but it was abrupt and jarring for her, and she has a visceral reaction, telling LFJ that it was unwanted and please leave.
Honestly, it is an incredibly uncharitable telling of events for LFJ's friend. Couple that with the complete eradication of any opposing perspective of the story, and I don't see a lot to candidly believe.
If it was a true accident, the proper way forward would be to reassure and comfort your partner (that you were friends with for almost a decade) and let them know how it happened despite good intentions. If it was a true accident, you would not go online to share your own actions that cast you in a _strongly negative_ light as you tell the world your sexual assault accuser is wacko and withdrew consent retroactively - to avoid "the spread of rumors". It sounds a lot more like gaslighting his rape victim to me. To our knowledge, there were no public accusations, so they were probably just asking mutual friends for support/advice, word got to LFJ, and he decided to make his chess move.
a) Partner is conscious, consenting. Lines crossed during "play", safe word is used. Elliot ignores this development, finishes while enjoying the appearance of their partner having a horrible time. Upon being told that wasn't cool, he decides that he wasn't told during sex.
b) Partner let LFJ into the house, didn't intend to play. Gets sleepy, medication kicks in, maybe some alcohol, and they are basically passed out. LFJ gets handsy and she rouses, to find that LFJ is engaging her physically in days-old clothes covered in dog-hair. Maybe the dog hair is a contributing factor to her reaction, but it was abrupt and jarring for her, and she has a visceral reaction, telling LFJ that it was unwanted and please leave.
Honestly, it is an incredibly uncharitable telling of events for LFJ's friend. Couple that with the complete eradication of any opposing perspective of the story, and I don't see a lot to candidly believe.
If it was a true accident, the proper way forward would be to reassure and comfort your partner (that you were friends with for almost a decade) and let them know how it happened despite good intentions. If it was a true accident, you would not go online to share your own actions that cast you in a _strongly negative_ light as you tell the world your sexual assault accuser is wacko and withdrew consent retroactively - to avoid "the spread of rumors". It sounds a lot more like gaslighting his rape victim to me. To our knowledge, there were no public accusations, so they were probably just asking mutual friends for support/advice, word got to LFJ, and he decided to make his chess move.
The most damning words from LFJ for me: "She genuinely believes that I have sexually assaulted her. And I considered her a friend and am genuinely sorry for what she's going through, but feel that a blameless perspective would try to examine how the miscommunication happened".
This lays out:
1. He acknowledges that actions that reach sexual assault (and beyond?) undeniably happened
2. Her accounting of these events has led to the loss of LFJ's friendship
3. The burden isn't on LFJ to understand why his partner felt violated - it is the partner's responsibility to understand why LFJ violated her.
4. He expects her to be "blameless" after she just genuinely experienced sexual assault.
Even if his story 100% checks out, the confirmed data points peg him a few standard deviations creepier than your average troon, and also rapist-brained.
- Joined
- Oct 19, 2019
No, I can fix them.
- Joined
- Mar 31, 2023
You know it. Just thinking about that face puts me mentally in the masonry aisle at Home Depot.
- Joined
- May 30, 2019
I don’t think it’s a bad question and I don’t think you’re asking in bad faith, so here’s the thing about the “consent accident”:
As others have said, to date, nobody has found the original accusations or found the accuser. What was found was Elliot addressing (publicly, on Twitter) some sort of accusation that had been made against him of sexual assault, which he chalked up as being a “consent accident” due to the person having a severe phobia of dogs and finding dog hair on their clothes, leading to them revoking consent for the sexual encounter (despite knowing full well that Elliott owned a dog) after the fact.
And to be fair, considering the type of people Elliot socializes with, it’s definitely plausible that somebody did, in fact, have consensual sex with him and then later regretted it for whatever reason and declared it was now “sexual assault”. So yes, it is true that we have no hard evidence that Elliot raped anyone, and it’s all speculation based on his own actions and explanation.
That said:
- Elliot himself claims to have been sexually assaulted by Richard DeVaul a.k.a. Dr. Headcrash, a former fellow Google coworker who is into the same hypnosis and BDSM fetish scene as Elliot is. Elliot even referred to this guy as “my rapist”, except then mentioned that he wouldn’t be pressing charges supposed assault happened during hypnosis. So apparently when Elliot doesn’t like what happened in a sexual setting, it’s rape but when somebody else does, it’s a “consent accident”.
- There is also a 2019 post on Hacker News where another former Google coworker says of him, “Liz had a fanatical hatred of ‘Rape Jokes’. Rape was not a joke to Liz. Rape was a fantasy that Liz was all too happy to describe in great detail.” He also mentioned that after a trans friend tried to basically date rape him, he went to Elliot for advice and Elliot painted him as the bad guy for not wanting to have sex with this trans friend.
So the assumption that Elliot is downplaying the context of his “consent accident” is isn’t coming out of thin air, he has a documented strange relationship with the concept of consent.
- Joined
- Jan 9, 2023
A thought that has been bugging me about this deviant is how he's employed as a "field CTO". When I broke into the C-suite, I had to sign a employment contract with a moral turpitude clause that gave my overlords the ability to fire me if I went whacko. Under my contract, Dong-Be-Gone would have been canned for just his Twitter alone. His henchman "Kat" would also have been actionable. How the VC firms permit this kind of public lunacy is mind-boggling to me, since in my time VC firms were really focused on optics.
- Joined
- Dec 28, 2014
Speculation would just be random guessing. Elliot's own statements leave few other reasonable inferences.
- Joined
- Dec 16, 2019
I have to look at pictures of capybara after looking at that face. Capybara heal all wounds. Here's one riding a caiman. I think everyone here needs it.
Last edited:
He Found Captain Winky
kiwifarms.net
- Joined
- Aug 10, 2022
Sadly there has become a different set of standards in which troons are judged on. It’s like everyone knows they are degenerate sex pests but C-suite is actually afraid that anything but straight acquiescence troon insanity will bring the wrath of the dangerhair journos like Taylor Lorenz or Cuck Collins and the Democrat machine that has decided the troons are useful idiots
Eden Seeker
kiwifarms.net
- Joined
- Feb 24, 2023
I got the feeling calling the guy "rapist" was part of the whole pretend hypnosis play thing, and the play was actually consensual - which is why Elliot's not pressing charges, instead choosing to take up real victims' space with his fetish shit.
The world of venture capital unironically involves astrology and divination in business decisions pretty often. Not everyone does, but it's a whole thing. I guess they just don't need to filter for rational human beings because they are parasites producing no added value.
- Joined
- Oct 27, 2021
This shit, if even remotely true, makes me feel old and annoyed. IME, VCs of any rational and reputable ilk, are quants - this is why/how they became reviled for taking controlling interests in companies, draining them dry, then folding them (or foisting them off on turnaround funds, who did more of the same).
I've never met a finance person who referred to astrology or other esoterica, or even had a passing - even ironic - familiarity with them, and God forbid using them in business. And as someone who at points has enjoyed those areas, if in a somewhat tongue-in-cheek or hedged way and only personally, it never would have occurred to me to introduce them into an analysis of whether to take a position or not. I'd have been canned if I had.
...so you're telling me that the current way to sell my soul is to do everything that is traditionally taboo? ...can't say I quite believe you, but I'm amused by the idea.
- Joined
- Mar 30, 2023
Fortune telling is just psychology in disguise, no matter if it's a good psychic helping you come to terms with your troubles or a bad one that's tricking you into giving them every penny you own. I wouldn't be surprised if astrology and divination is used, but only as a tool to manipulate the market to your preferences.
WonderWino
kiwifarms.net
- Joined
- Dec 17, 2019
I wonder what these people making business decisions based on astrology would do if it was pointed out that hitler frequently consulted a personal astrologer for his major decisions, and we all know how that ended up turning out. It would be hilarious to point out to some troon venture capitalist or CEO that they're acting literally like hitler. The mental gymnastics that would come out of that would be a sight to behold i'm sure
Marc
kiwifarms.net
- Joined
- Nov 10, 2022
Fixed. A woman is more than the sum of her failures to be a person.
- Joined
- Nov 21, 2020
- Joined
- Dec 31, 2018
To pick one recent example: read about WeWork.
This one is probably good enough to get started:
